Against Human Ceremonies in Gods Worship, Part 2 · Chapter 3 · Section 3

Against Human Ceremonies in Gods Worship · Part 2 · Chapter 3 · Section 3

p. 230SECT. 4. The judgement of Protestant Divines concerning significant Ceremonies.

1. THe Rejoynder was not so large in the former section, about one Divine, but he is as brief, in this, about many. For first in generall, he would perswade us with wordes, that the Def. in answering fower testimonies, had answered all, in one worde: that no Protestant Divine (except Beza) hath spoken absol…tely against signes symbolicall and meerly significant ▪

Which kinde of rejoynding, had had some sense, if mere denying of a conclusion, were a sufficient answer to an argument drawn from diverse testimonies alleged for the proof of it. But yet not trusting to this kinde of answering, he adventureth, to clear the particular allegations: which was more then the Def. would undert…ke. One would have expected, that here he should have answered, that which is so pertinēt to the purpose, found in the Abridgement, pag. 32. because he put it of before (pag. 247.) with a tale of boy, and promised after to shew, that it is nothing to the purpose. The allegation is this: To them that say Images may stand in Churches, as helpes to stirre up devotion, and to put men in remembrance of good thinges (with whome the Def. and Rejoynder consent) it is answered (by P. Martyr, Gwalter, Lavater, Vrsine, Polanus, and others) that the Lord himself hath appointed p. 231meanes enough to doe that; and that no meanes may be used to that ende, but suche as he hath ordeyned. This certayne was to the Rejoynder as it were a noli me tangere: that no meanes must be used to stirre up devotion, and to put men in remembrance of good thinges, but onelyonly those which God hath ordeyned. He was therfore contented to passe it over without medling with it. And he that with …is answers to the other allegations, may thinke that the be…ter way for him, had been, to deal in like manner with all. This will appear in the examining of them, one by one.

2. In the first place, therfore, we exspect his answer to that which is founde in the Harmonie of Protestant Confessions, generally approved, by Reformed Churches. About which he is very brief, as his cause required. The Divines of Witenburge (sayth he) and those of France, and the Lowe Contries: viz. that they speake onelyonly of those significant Ceremonies, which serve to shadow out the Mysteries of the Gospell, or to supplie the office of true Sacramentes. Now (for the present) we will not stand muche upon those phrases, shadowes of the Mysteri…s of the Gospel, supplying of the true Sacraments office. It shall be sufficient, to reci…e the wordes which he hath so easily and often answered. The Wittenburge Confession (sect. 17.) sayth thus: It is not l…wfull, eyther to restore the olde Ceremonies of the lawe, or devise new, to shadow forth the trueth allready layd open, and brought to light, by the Gospell: as in …he daylight to set up c…ndels, to signifie the light of the Gospell▪ or to cary banners and crosses, to signifie the victorie of Christ, through his Crosse. Of which sorte, is all p. 232that Massing attire, which (they say) doeth shadow out the wholle passion of Christ, and many other thinges of that kinde etc. The other wordes are these: No Mysticull rites (that is, which cary some mysterie, or signification, in them) though not otherwise impious (as namely suche as should be partes of Gods doctrine, or kindes of Sacraments) but onelyonly suche lawes as pertayne to order and decencie are lawfull. Let any man that undetstandeth English, and reason, judge, if these wordes ought, or can be interpreted, onelyonly of (I knowe not what) mysteries of the Gospell, or Ceremonies supplying the office of true Sacramentes, further then our Argument doeth importe. If not, then the Rejoynder granting the premisses, denieth the conclusion as he did before.

The Confession condemneth banners by name and Crosses, signifying the victorie of Christ through his Crosse: Our men defende the signe of the Crosse, signifying that Christians shall not be ashamed, to fight manfully against Satan under Christs Banner. The Divines of France and the Lowe Contries, (with the Confession) reject all Ceremonies, that cary some mysterie or signification in them: Our question is, whether humane Ceremonies of mysticall signification, be lawfull? If these testimonies be not plaine enough, I knowe not what is plaine.

3. Peter Martyr (on 1. King. 8) is the next witnesse of whome the Rejoynder sayth, that he speaketh of Exorcisme, oyle, spittle, and exsufflation, to all which the Papists ascribe operation, and to that ende doe consecrate some of them, by prayer. Beside (sayth he) Martyr did approve these p. 233our Ceremonies as lawfull, and bowing of the knee at the name of Iesus: so that he wondereth Martyr should be alleged in this cause. Now therfore let us hear P. Martyr himself speak:Cum Deus fi…. sapienti simus, non opus habet, ut nostro cogita tu, vel industria illi paremus instrumenta (ad fidem in nobis excitandam) Quod etiam quisquam Artifex, in sua facultate, minime ferret, sed ipsemet vellet suo arbitratis sibi deligere. Magna est it aque audacia horum hominum, qui Deo velint organa praescribere, quibus, ad nostram salut emoperetur. Signa mult… plicant, quae sacra esse volunt, adhibendo oleum, sputum, exsufflationes, et alia h…jusmodi. Quo circa unum Baptism… Sacramentum, in multa de gene…at. Nec audiendi sunt, quando ut simplicibu… illudant, distinctionem inter Sacraementa & Sacramentalia confingunt, qua omnino Sop…istica est. The most wise God needeth none of our help to devise meanes to excite faith, nor would the meanest Mechanie endure to &c. See before, how bold then are these men who will praescribe to God wherewithall to help forward our salvation.

They multiplie signes which they will leave to be sacred as oyle, spittle, exsufflations etc. & that one Sacrament of Bapt. is much degenerate. Nor are they to be heard when to abuse the simple they use to distinguish betwene Sacrament and Sacramentals meer Sophistrie. As for operation, we have ofte shewed, that many Papists ascribe no more of that, nor no other wise, to many of their Ceremonies, then the Def. and Rejoynder doe allow of in ours. Consecration by prayer, may as well be used about a Surplis, as about a Churcheyard. It is playne by the wordes, that P. M. doeth condemne all meanes instituted by man, for the stirring up of our faith: which are in the Def. and Rejoynder his language, mysticall morall ceremonies, serving for aedification: saying that no Carpente…, or Mason would be so dealt with in his occupation, as the institutors of suche mysticall Ceremonies doe deal with God. He accounteth humane sacred signes in Religion, to be humane Sacraments: and will not admitte of suche distinctions, as the Rejoynder hath multiplied: Sacred properly, and reductively, rightly, or abusively sacred, simple or double sacred. Sacramentall, or morall, reductive, or analogicall Sacramentalls, etc.

p. 234Yet we denie not, but the same P.M. being somtime perplexed in the case of England, did suffer his affection to cary him so farr, that he seemeth to make some of our Ceremonies, in some case, tollerable. But then any man may perceyve wavering in his wordes: as when (in his epist. to Hooper) he requireth five conditions in suche Ceremonies, 1. that the Churche hath libertie to ordeyne them: 2. that the worship of God be not placed in them: 3. That they be few: 4. Not burdensome. 5. Not a hinderance to better thinges.

The two first of which conditions are the very question: viz: whether the Churche hath any suche libertie, and whether all suche Ceremonies be not part of worship:Quid pro sunt in Baptismo, Exorcismus, consecratio aquae, cereus sal, sputum, oleum, v…stis candida, nolae, etc. Nunc ad Baptismi ornatum, additamenta illa pertinent? Num igitur sunt prudentiores Iesu Christo, qui instituit Baptismum, tanta cum simplicitat…, & puritate, quique melius novit quam …mnes simul homines, quae illi conveniant ornamenta? Qua est hac arrogantia, adji…ere institutioni Iesu Christi Gal. 3.Gal 3 and for the two last, experience teacheth, how burdensome our Ceremonies have been, and are still, to many good mens consciences, and how muche good hath been hindered, by the urging, and practizing of them.

4. Sadeel is put of, with the like shift, of consecration, necescitie, efficacie Sacramentall. Now these terms have been sufficiently unmasked before, in the first part. Let Sadeel here onelyonly be heard, and he will tell his owne meaning. The exorcisme holy water, taper, salt spittle, white garment, the little bells, &c. what good do they do in Baptisme? Do they indeed being added to Baptisme ad at all to its ornament? but what are these devisers of such things wiser then Christ Iesus who instituted Bapt. with such simplicity and purity as knowing better then all men besides what ornamēts suite best with his owne ordināces? what arroganice is this to ad thus to Christs institutiō? p. 235Gal. 3. the unction added to Bapt. we allow no more thē that of Confirmation. Bec. it belongs to God onelyonly to appoint Sacramēts The old pastors of the Christiā church did more then was mete accomodate themselves to Iewes and Gentiles whence many cere: cr…pt into the Church but Experience shewes God blessed not such Counsel. Chrismae so… unctio Bapt. adhibita, non magis novis probatur, quam Chrisma Confirmationis▪ quia unius est Dei constituer… Sacramenta. Veteres Ecclesia Pastores plus aequo sese voluerunt, tun… Iudaeis, cum Et buicis accō modare. Vndê multa Caremonia in Ecclesiam irrepferunt. At experientia declaravit, Deum non be nedixisse hi…c consolio. etc. adverb. Mon. Burd…g, …rt. 1… ▪ 13.In these wordes 1. all humane addition to Gods institutions are absolutely condēned. 2. Those that undertake to adde suche Cerem. are censured of intolerable arrogancie, as presuming to be wiser then Christ. 3. Lights, and white garments, are by name condemned, which onelyonly offend, in theyr mysticall signification upon mans will. 4. Chrisme or oyle in Baptisme is esteemed a Sacrament, though the Papists denie it conferreth grace, as the Sacraments. 5. The first bringers in of Ceremonies (onelyonly significant) into the Churche, are taxed for departing from the simplicitie of Gods word, as therin finding rather the curse, then the blessing of God upon their presumptions.

5. Daneus is the next (whoe maketh it blasphemie, to thinke, and teache, that any outward thinges (of humane institution) may be made a signe, in the Churche, of spirituall thinges) the first answer is, that this was spoken in opposition to Bellarmines consecrating of creatures to signifie, and worke supernaturall effects. Whiche is very true: but this must be added: that in this sētēce, he toucheth only the signification, not the operation of those Cere. as any that readeth his wordes, may observe. The second answer is that Daneus (elsewhere) alloweth some significant Cere. But the Rej. should have doen well, to name the place or places, which he meant by elsewhere. For we cannot by conjecture finde it.

p. 236This I am sure of, that it is not Isagoge, p. 3. l. 3. c. 11. where he sayth, that the teaching under the law was … signes, & earthly figures, as a Schoolmaister speaketh to young children: but under the Gospell, open, and man…fest, as one dealeth with growen men. They then that thrust in significant Ceremonies, what doe they but confounde the most wise dispensation of God, and make a mingle-mangle of those thinges, which he hath separated asunder?

6. Polanus (misprinted, or uncertainly printed in the Abrigement) is sayd to allow some significant Ceremonies, as feasts, Fasts, Gestures: and his definition of Superstition, is thought to make onelyonly against Ceremonies Sacramentall, not Morally significant. The onelyonly way therfore is, to set down his wordes, out of which his judgement about this pointe may appear of superstition, he sayth thus (Syntag. l. 9. c. 3.) Superstition stands in chusing worship to God, or exceeds measure therein. True religion worships the true God in a manner prescribed by the word: false, (that is to say Superstition) worships God otherwise then he wills or enjoynes. In another place whatsoever perteines to Gods worship must by him be required. Againe it is a foolish ill zeale of the popish clergie to use such playerake apparrel in Divine service and by apparrel to be distinguished from laicks, that difference and variety was in the old Testament typicall, but the substance being come, what meane they to require types any more?Superstitio est in eligendo cultu Dei, vel modum excedit in colendo. Vera religio colit Deum verum, modo verbo Dei prascripto: falsa (i.e. superstitio) v…rum Deum aliter colit, quam ipse vult & mandat. lib. 8. c. 1. Quicquid ad cultum Dei pertinet, a Deo mandatum esse aportet. lib, 9. c. 38. Inopta est foreign Cloeicorum Papistorum, qui vestitu theatri… in sacris utu…tur, et vestitu laicis distingui volunt, Illa defiintio & varieras, erat in V. T. …ypica: veritate autem ixhibita, quid amptiu… typos reguirunt?

p. 2377. The next witnesse is Mr. Perkinse, on Gal. 3. but (by varietie of editions) uncertaine what verse of the Chapter was designed.

The Rejoynder therfore guesseth, that the wordes upon v. 2. or rather 1. were intended, where Mr. P. condemneth the setting up of Images, to be lay-mens bookes. To which he answereth. 1. That he also doeth blame the same. 2. that Mr. P. in some persons and places, preferreth dipping, before sprinkling, in Baptisme. Now for the first of these, if the Rejoynder when he writ these wordes condemne (with Mr. P.) suche images or pictures as are lay-mens bookes, it is wonder, he forgot, or changed this judgement, before he came to the seventh section of this very Chapter, where he doeth defende them. And this is plaine, that if images be to be condemned, as they are lay mens bookes, or teachers, then all humane signes, ordeyned to be lay-mens teachers, in religion, are also to be eondemned with them.

The second is an affected flim-flam. For dipping (upon just occasion) rather then sprinkeling, is no more a humane Ceremonie…, in Baptisme, then drinking a convenient draft of wine rather then slight tasting is an humane significant institution.

But yet (howsoever the Rejoynder upon conscience of the consanguinitie, betwixt Images, and significant Ceremonies did suppose this first verse of the Chapter to be meant by the Authors of the Abr.) I thinke rather that they intended the foure and twentie verse, where M.P. doeth distinguish betwixt Ceremonies significant, and those of Order, and sayth that the former sort were p. 238alsolutely abolished, but the other onelyonly in respect of their speciall determination.

8. Maister Merbur…e was cited (out of a Manuscript, (as it seemeth) as giving the same judgement of significant Ceremonies. But in his later time, he crossed not so muche others, as himself in blotting out this sentence I leave therfore his name under that blotte, and other like, wherwith he soiled himself in his later times.

9. D. Witgift him selfe, is brought in (by Abr.) dissliking any praescript apparell, should be used in Gods service, for significat…on. Def. pag, 291. To this the Rejoynder answereth 1. that in the same place. P. Martyr is alledged, as approving white apparell, for Ministers (who are compared to Angels) to use in signification of their office, because Angel app…ared in white: which should have put him (at the least) out of our Bill. But it followeth not, that therfore all testimonies of Martyrs, must be put out of our Bill, because he varieth from them, in this. In the other places, he speaketh from good groundes of Divinitie: but this reason of his, hath no more force in it, then if from the picture and apparation of Angels, it should be gathered, that no Minister should wear a black night-cap, a black tippet, or a blacke hood, which our Canons doe commande: or that every Minister should have sixe winges fastened to his body, with certain, vizard faces, like unto the faces of Lions, Eagles, and open, because Angels have so appeared, Isa. 6. Ezech. 1.

p. 239It is answered 2. that we should beleive the sayd D. Whitgift in this, that our Surplices are not appointed for any morall signification. But we cannot beleiv, whatsoever one Prelat sayth of our Ceremonies, (for to avoyd the dint of Argument, though it be against the common profession of our Churche, in the very Service-book,) is presently to be beleived.

The 3, answer is, that D. Whitgift did use, defend, and urge, significant Ceremonies, which is true, with shame and all: but many a man, upon the racke of an Argument is brought to confesse that, which other while he is woont to denie. Finally this consequence is denied: D. W. did not approve of the Surplice for signification: ergo of no significant Ceremonie: the reason of which consequence is given in the Abridgement (p. 35.) because no good reason can be given, why the Churche may not injoine a prescript apparell for signification, as well as any other Ceremonie.

Thus the Rejoynder hath tried what he could say to those testimonies, which the Def. had omitted, in this place: and doeth so please himself therin, that he beginneth a plaudite to himself, saying that he hath openly whipped the Repliers friends: he meaneth the Authors of the Abr. who were wonte to be his reverend friends also. But this whipping of his, is just as if a man should whippe thornes, and prickes, with his bare handes, getting more gashes therby, then he dealeth or giveth blowes. It is not safe so muche as to handle sharp edges muche lesse to whippe them, with naked fingers.

p. 24010. Now we must hear, how the Rejoynder doeth say for the defence of those answers which the Def. gave to four… Divines, chosen out by himselfe to answer, of whome, Calvin is the first. Of whome it is said, that he condemneth onelyonly suche Ceremonies, as are subs…ituted to the very office of Sacraments. Where if he meaneth part of the office of Sacraments,Si Isayat sua sponte Loc f… cisset merito irris…s stusset. Nihili sunt ea symbola, quae Deum Anthorem non habēt. Quod diligenter notandura est adversus Papistas, qui manes Ceremonias pro veris Sacramentis obtrudunt. Ipsit haec regula a… ponenda est: Si presiciscuntur a Deo ea …mplects debemus: sin minus intrepidè repu diare licet, imo sine Dei contumelia non r…cipiuntur: quiatum ejus aut bovitatem sibs usurpant mortales. he and we consent about Calvin but if he meane the wholle complete office of Sacram. then he wrongeth Calvin. For upon Lev. 4.21. his meaning cannot be, that all the olde Ceremonies of the Iews, had suche a complete Sacramentall office, as Circumcision, and the Passover had. VponUpon Isa. 20.2. speaking of Isays goeing barefoot for a signe of future captivitie (which was not the full office of a Sacrament) he sayth: If Isaie had done this of himselfe he might well have been laughed at. Those rites are of no worth which have not God for their author, which we are carefully to note, against the papists who obtrude upō us empty ceremonies for true Sacraments. This rule is for them: if they come from God we are to embrace them, if not, to scorne them, nay they cannot be received without dishonour to God, when therin mortal men take upon them the authority of God. And upon Mat. 21.25. he hath this doctrine: no sacred signe ought to be admitted among the godly, unlesse it be shewwen to be of God, Doctrina est utilis▪ nullum sacrum signum deberae inter pios admitti, nisi a Deo profecta esse constat, nec esse in hominum arbi…rio quicquam … udere.nor is it in mens choyse to mint any thing. But the Rejoynder affirmeth, that Calvin doeth expresly allow Symbolicall signes, as excercises, and incitements of pietie. The Place he meaneth is Inst. lib. 4. c. 10. sect. 14. where ther is no expresse allowance at all, of mere humane Symbolicall signes, but onelyonly of some Ceremonies, p. 241to helpe the ruder sort of people in their unskillfulnesse. Now this kinde of Ceremonies Calvin himself in the 28.29. sect. of the same chapter, doeth manifestly declare, to be matters of mere and necessarie decencie. The end of decencie is, Decori finis est partim ut dum adhibentur ritus, qui venerationem rebus sacris concilient talibi…s adminiculis ad pietat… excitemur. Illud nobit decorum erit, quodita erit ad sacrorum mysteriorum reverentiam aptum ut sit idon…um ad pietatis exercitium, &c.that (while suche things are used which purchase respect to holy things we be stirred up to piety. That is a Decoium which so makes for the reverence of holy things that is that it be a fit exercise of Godlines. This being considered, and withall, that the Rejoynder in his great Charter, (cap. 1. … 16.) dureth not build his mysticall Ceremonies upon that decencie, which Paul doeth appointe, and Calvine onelyonly admitteth, it is plaine, that Calvines exercises and incitementes of piette, are not his more humane … Ceremonies.

11. The second witnesse, whome it pleased the Def. to take notice of, is Zepperus, or rather, sundrie Protestant Synodes, by Zepperus divulged, as he sheweth in his praeface. Now his wordes are set downe before in the 1. and 2. …ection of this chapter: so that here we are onelyonly to consider what the Rejoynder hath to say against, or upon them. And first he flesh to his olde muse of Ceremonies efficient of grace, in Poperie. But this muse-hole hath been formerly stopped. And if it were open in other assaults, yet Zepper hath sufficiently provided for it here. For beside that he directed his censure of Cerem. (in a great part) against the Lutherans, who denie all efficacie that the Rejoynder denieth, he sayth plainely that by these humane mysticall Ceremonies, God will nor sti… up devotion, faith, and repentance, in the heart of Christians not at blancke crosse to p. 242our Def. and Rejoynder his tenet. For the releiving of that weak shift, the Rejoynder (in the second place) affirmeth, that Zepper (cap. 16.) doeth allow of dipping, and thrice dipping, in Baptisme, as an humane Ceremonie stated in Gods worship to signifie the Trinitie, and our Lords resurrection on the third day. Now in the 16. chapter, ther is no one word of these matters (which kinde of misciting or misprinting the Rejoynder useth to make a great matter of in others) but in the 12. chapter, I finde suche a fonde allegorie of thrice-dipping meerly related out of Augustine, but no allowance of the same. Nay, if the matter be well considered, I thinke the Rejoynder himself will scarce allow of it. For 1. ther can be no better reason given for placing of a mysterie in thrice dipping for Baptisme, then in dividing of the bread to be receyved in the Supper, into three partes, as the Papists doe for a mysterie, among other of their massing toys. 2. This thrice-dipping for mysterie, is so mingled with the true Mysterie of Baptisme, that (to all appearance) it is made a part of that Holy Sacrament 3. For man to institute an outward representation (as an Image) of the Holy Trinitie, is a very great praesumption, against the second Commandement. Christ himself never appointed any suche mysticall reall signe neyther can that incomprehensible mysterie be fitly represented by any suche triplicitie as is of mans making. 4. To invocate the name of the Father, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost over the baptized, and then by thrice redipping, or sprinkling, upon mans pleasure, to signifie they are three Persons, is as if one should light a p. 243candle, for the manifesting of something, and then put a bushel over it, for signifying of the same thinge. 5. How can the same three at one and the same time, signifie three Persons, & three days? Can men give manifold disparate senses to one and the same Ceremonies, as literall, allegoricall, tropologicall, and anagogicall? 5. Why may not as well three Crosses be made upon the Baptized; for the same mysteries? 6. It could not be of any moment, for those auncient Byshops, sometime to dip thrice, for signifying of the Trinitie, and some time once, for signifying of the Vnitie. Seing Trinitie and Vnitie are not to be separated in the solemne signification of them, and Heretikes are not confuted with humane signes.

12. Iewel is the next in order. But for so muche as neyther his wordes are quoted, nor the place where they may be founde noted, (on eyther side) but onelyonly according to one English Edition, which I have not, I cannot say muche of them: Yet this I may truly say, that the Rejoynder is put to hard shift, in opposing of the Repliers answer, when he distinguisheth betwixt graces, and duties, actually performed. For these two are expressed by the same name, of the Apostle Paul, 2. Cor. 8.1. I doe you to wit of the grace of God, bestowed on the Churches of Macedonia etc. But it seemeth that humane mysticall Ceremonies are of like nature unto those olde legall Ceremonies, which onelyonly signified what men ought to doe, but gave not grace to doe it: so that they are to be referred unto the killing letter.

In searching also for the place, in my latine copie of p. 244Iuel,Sacramenta Domini, multit…din… quadam supo…stitio sarum & puerilium Ceremoniarum commacu laru…t Pontificij, eisque sanctiones ejusmodi addidot…, etc. I founde these wordes Act. 1. pag. 23. The Papists have blurred Christ Sacraments with a number of Superstitiou… and Childish Ceremonies, and have added such like Sanctions to them. Now if by the superstitiousnes, and childishnesse, which is found in the Popish Cere. before their multitude, and before their sanctions binding consciences to them, he did not mean their mysticall signification, upon humane institution, I would willingly learne of the Rejoynder what his meaning was?

13. Beza was by the Def. granted to speak for us. But the Rejoynder (having now exercised hmself unto confidence in suche elusions) will needs have it, that Bezas phraze onelyonly, not his meaning doeth make for us. Let us therfor hear his reasons. 1. Beza (sayth he) condemneth all Symbolicall rites, Graevis…ime a veterihus toties peccatum esse dico, quoties ullas Sacramentales. i.e. verum spiritualium significativas Ceremonias in Dei Ecclesiam introduxerunt. Ritus omnes symbolycos semol ex Ecclesia Christiana, in quam nullo unquam jure inve… potuerunt, profligari op…r…ere, nec eti manentibus, suam Ecclesia nativā pulchritudiné restitui posse existimo.which he calleth Sacramentall, that is signifying spirituall graces, not duties. Now Bezas wordes (ep. 8.) are these: I affirme that so often as the ancients brought into the Church any Sacramentals i. e. Significative ceremonies of Spirituall things so oft they greivously offended. Withall I thinke that all symbolical rites should be once profligited out of the church whereinto by no right they could ever enter nor as long as they remaine can the Church have her native bewty restored. Here is no mention at all of graces, but only of spirituall thinges: and yet the Rejoynder would perswade his reader, that he sayth not spirituall duties, but graces. His glosse is naught. Spirituall thinges comprehend so well spirituall duties, as graces. How this reason will be excused, I cannot guesse: except perhaps it p. 245be answered, that humane Ceremonies doe signifie duties as they are carnall, and not as they are spirituall. It is further to be marked, that Beza there speaketh of of suche humane significant Ceremonies, as were in common use amonge the ancient Fathers. Now the Rejoynder will not say that they had in common use, so many humane Sacraments, as Beza noteth them to have had significant Ceremonies. 2. The second reason, by which the Rejoynd. would prove that Beza meant not simplie to condemne all significant Ceremonies, is, because he alloweth some Feast-days, confesseth the Surplice and kneeling to be in their nature indifferent, and sayth that the Crosse might sometime of olde have had lawfull use. For the former of which, if the wordes of Beza, had been noted, more might be sayd. In the meane time, let this suffize: If Beza did allow of some humane Feast-days, it may better from this place be gathered, that he did not account them significant of spirituall thinges, then it can from them be gathered, that in this place he did not condemne all suche significants of mans making. Neyther doeth he affirme a significant Surplice to be indifferent. And as for kneeling, that is more excepted against for other causes, then for instituted signification.

But in the last, ther is odde dealing. For wheras Beza sayth of the Crosse, ut olim aliquis fu…rit usus ejus etc. which is as muche as to say though this were granted, that there was some use of it of olde, the Rejoynder make…h him to say that ther was of olde a lawfull use of it.

p. 246It is enough for any man, to read over Beza his eyght and twelf Epistle, for understanding not onelyonly of his meaning, but also of his reasons.

14. Because the Def. made Beza a singular man, in opposing all humane mysticall Ceremonies, the Replier added out of Bellarmines observation (de effectu Sacram. l. 2. c. 30.) that at least Calvin, Barentius, and Chemnitius were of the same minde. Now concerning Calvin, enough hath been sayd before. For the other, marke what the Rejoynder hath to say.

The question (sayth he) in that place of Bellarmine disputed, is of Ceremonies meritorious, and binding the conscience, out of the case of scandall. And is this all? Surely then the Rejoynder had no reason to object unto the Abrigers, and the Replier, abusing the Reader. For (to omitte that which in the first part of our Dispute, hath been answered, concerning merit & binding) any one that looketh upon Bellarmine, de effect. Sacr. l. 2. cap. 30. may see, that he divideth the controversie betwixt us and the Papists, into sixe heads, the fourth is about binding the conscience, and the fift about merit, but the third is whether the Churche may appoint new Ceremonies? The Afirmative of this question Bellarmine proveth, from the Feast instituted by Mordechay, and that of Dedication, Nostra propositic solum assarit, contra Haeriticos, …icere Ecclesiae …ns…ituer… novas Ceremonias, non ad just…ficandum a pec…at is mortalibus, sed ad alios fines. cap. 31.instituted in the Machabees time, etc. which are the Def. and Rejoyners cheif arguments for significant Ceremonies. And professeth plainely (as our men doe) Our Proposition is no more but this against heretiques, that the church may appoint new Ceremonies not indeed to justifie us from mortal sins but to other ends. On p. 247the Negative part, Bellarmine nameth Calvin, Brentius, and Chemnitius. Now the Rejoynder to darken all, confoundeth the third, & fift question into one hoche-poche. Who then doeth abuse the Reader? Of Calvin, enough hath been sayd before as also of Brentius, under the title of Witenberge Confession, Chemnitius onelyonly (being altogether passed over by the Rejoinder though he was not onelyonly propounded by the Replier, out of Bellarmine but also in the Abridgement, pag. 32,) is here to be represented, in his owne wordes. Yet concerning Brētius first, a few wordes may be needfull. The words of Wittenburge Confession (before cited) are plaine. It is not lawfull, to devize new Ceremonies, to shadow forth the trueth already layd open, and brought to light by the Gospel: as in the day light to set up Candles, to signifie the light of the Gospel, or to carry banners & crosses, to signifie the victorie of Christ, thorough his Crosse. Of which sort is all the massing attire. Of this Confessiō Brentius was the penman: and therefore Bellarm. citeth the same as Brentius his sentence about Ceremonies. The Rejoynder answereth 1. that Bellarm. sayth onelyonly that Brentius reproveth the hallowing of water, oyle. &c. consecrated to signifie and worke supernaturall effects: because the mysteries of faith should not now be shadowed out. De cultu Sanct. l. 3. c. 7. Whiche to be nothing so, the very words of Bellarm. will shew. for neyther out of Brentins, nor against him, doeth Bel. make any mention of consecrating suche thinges to worke, but onelyonly to signifie spirituall effects.Primo benedicuntur ad significando ispirit… ales … ut. Nam cinaris aspersio significat poenit… tiam, &c. First they are blessed to signifie spirituall operations. For the sprinkling of the ashes signifieth poenance, &c. Nor p. 248doeth the reason of Bre…tius of adumbration hinder, Neque ob…at r…tio Brentij de adumbratione. Nam istae significa…i…tes on sunt proprie …d…mbration…s, sed repr…sentationes externae I…rum praes…nt…um …nvisibilium, & spiritu alium, vel etiam re…um praeteri…a um, quae utilisitmae sunt …d affectū oncitandum.for those significations are not properly adumbratious, but outward repraesentations of praesent invisible things, and of things spirituall. Or els of things past, most usefull to stir up the affection. Hence it is plaine, that Brentius is opposed by Bellarm. for houlding the Proposition of this our third. Argument, that his reason is ours: and that Bellarm. his answer, so well as his tenet, is that which the Def. and Rejoynd. doe maintayne against us. 2. A second answer, or rather objection, is used by the Rej. that Brentius allowed Lutherun Crosses, and Images, as being a Lutheran. Now it is well knowen, that Brentius at the first did write as became a grave Divine: but after broke out into the Vbiquitary faction, siding against those whome he called Zwinglians and Calvinists. That which we allege, was written in the name of the Churche of Wittenburge, & so praesented unto the Counsell of Trent, out of his and others best judgement. If eyther out of securitie, or out of faction, he did, and writte otherwise, after, it ought not to be put in ballance against this Confession. It is no great mervayll, if a Lutheran doeth crosse his owne Doctrine, even about Ceremonies.

For in the same kinde they have Luther himself for their example:Nemo (sayth Calvin 2. Def. de Sacram. …rius quam Lu…herus covectus …st in illas nugas, quo… tam…n pr… temporis infirmitate, …tinui… Quod tantâ vehementiâ usus est, loudabile est, quum ita exigeret necessitas. Quod non ab…usit … … predis, ignosetinus. No man did more hardly inveigh against those triffles then Luther did, and yet reteined them for the times sake. That when occasion required he was so vehemente we commend him, but that while he contended against them, he submitted to the them, we pardon in him.

p. 42Something like was the case of Chemnitius, whose words the Rejoynder thought good to passe over in silence. They are these (de ritib. Sacr. ad Can. 13.) When Christ himselfe so instituted the Sacraments that he required them to be used with such and such rites, Cum ipse filiu Dei Sacramenta ita instituerit. ut ea certis institutis ritibus praeceperit administraeri, valde ardua est questio, an hominibus permissum sit, alio… praeterca, et quidem mult…s ac varios ritus quocunque confilio supperadder…: quasi Ceremoniae illae qua in administratione Sacramentorum Divinitus institutae sunt, non satis sunt vel idonea, vel sufficientes Institutioni Divinae sicut nihil detrahendum, ita etiam nihil addendum est, Quod vero bratendunt, per illos ritus ab hominibus additos multa pié & utiliter significari, moner…, & doceri, ad illud responderi potest, figuras propriat esse Veteri… Testamenti, quae vero in Novo Testamento Christus mo…eri ac doceri voluit non umbtis, sed luce Verbi, tradi ac proponi voluit Et de Verbi, non antem de figuratum ab hominibus inventarum, efficacia, habemus prom … nem: quos ve… ritus ve…bo adhiberi voluit, eos ipse instituit. etc.it is a very hard question whether it be lawfull for men to add other and that so manyover and above. As if what rites Christ himselfe prescribed were either not enough, or not fit enough. In divine institutions as we must take nothing from, so we must adde nothing to them. But whereas they say by such rites many things are proffitably signified, we answer that belonged to the State of the Old Testament, but what Christ in the New Test. would have learned, must be taught with the light of the word, not by shadowes. And we have a promise of the force of the word; but not of the efficacie of shadowes devised by men. And what rites he would have used by the word, those he himselfe appointed, etc.

Ther was some cause, why the Rejoynder did not care to insist on these wordes. For Chemnitius maketh it a very hard thing to justifie humane significant Ceremonies in Gods worship. The Rejoynder sayth, it is as easy as to justifie writing by Characters. Chemnitius maketh them additions to Gods Institution. Nothing lesse (sayth the Rej.) no more then a Cabinet, wherin a Iewel is kept, is an addition to it. Chemnitius judged them repugnant p. 250to the New Testament. The Rej. sayth, that there is manifest allowance for them, and authoritie left unto men for instituting of them: (as forsooth) in those words of Order, Decencie, and Aedification.

15. The Replier added unto the witnesses aforesayd, Iunius & Daneus. But concerning Daneus, we have already considered what the Rej. had to except. Iunius onelyonly remayneth: whose wordes were quoted out of his animadversions upon Bell. de cultu Sanctorum, lib. 3. cap. 7. an. 12. Heer the Rej, rouseth up himself, as if he had gotten a great advantage, putting on suche confidence, or rather forth suche shews of it, as if it had been meer folly in the Repl. to make mention of Iunius. His rejoinder therfore is to be considered in all the parts of it. 1. First, he concludeth that the Repl. is no wise man, in not telling them, to what objection, or assertion Iunius doeth there answer: because (forsooth) the Repl. himself had sayd, it was no wisdome for any man, to take up an answer made to an objection, before he considereth the assertion against which the objection is made. As if it were all one to consider the assertion, and to tell them what it is. Is not this a fine consequence? 2. He attributeth unto the Repl. a Sophisticall wit, in concealing, that the assertion of Bell. by Iunius opposed, was, that the Churche may of her power, consecrate creatures, to signifie, and worke supernaturall effects, &c. But from hence nothing can be gathered, for the advantage of the Def. and Rej. except it appear, that Iunius did onelyonly speake of the working, and not distinctly of the signifiyng, which Bell. would have given unto those Ceremonies: whiche how false it is, shall praesently p. 251appear. 3. He noteth a shamefull falsification of Iunius his wordes, in the translation of them. Iunius his wordes are: Homo non potest creaturas ad significationem adhibere. The Translation is: Humane Ceremonies cannot be lawfully used for signification. Where is that great falsification, which drew from the Rej. Are you not ashamed? or can you not blush? The Rej. his owne translation of the same wordes, is: No man-can lawfully applie thinges to signification. He must discover the mysticall difference betwixt using for signification, & applying to signification, before he can cast suche shame upon the Repl. & none upon the Rej. 4. To shew Iunius in his owne posture, and the mis-reporting Repl. in his owne colours. The Rejoynder translateth that wholle passages of Iunius, and noteth upon it, first, that Iunius speaketh of consecrating ceremonies. To which I answer, that in the wordes, as they are by the Rej. translated, he expresly condemneth all applijnge to signification. And if consecration were included therein, I hope the Rej. will not disavow consecrating of Churches, Churche-yardes, Altars, &c. Secōdly, he observeth, that Iunius doeth professedly sever the poynt of signification, from that of efficacie. As if the Repl. had confounded them, and not rather distinctly insisted upon …ignification onelyonly which Iunius doeth as distinctly and professedly condemne, as efficacíe, Nay it is the Rej. his common fault, that where the Papists speake of efficacie and signification, and our Divines distinctly answer of both, he will have no answ…r, no not those of Calvin, Brentius, Chemnitius, Daneus, nor this of Iunius, to belonge unto signification distinctly, p. 238and by it self. In the third place, he telleth us, that Iunius in the two next annotations, doeth allow voluntarie significant Ceremonies. Let it therfore be considered, that Iunius in the thirteenth annotation, insinuateth at the least his doubt, whether any voluntarie significations can proceed from good: a bono, si forte. 2. He sayth they proceeded from simplicitie, and turned to superstition. Which phrases of his, he so interpreteth other where, that it may easily appear, he did not allow that which here he calleth simplicitie. For cap. 5. annot. 15. he calleth it vanitie, in opposition to the simp…icitie of Christ. And in the second booke, de reliquijs & imaginibus, cap. 27. annot. 29. he calleth it plainely simple superstition. In the fourteenth annotation, he mainteyneth this assertion:In rebus divinis, & sacris ad Ecclesiam pertinentibus, mul te adumbrationes in Ecclesia recte adhibentur, nisi quas instituit Deus. In divine things no shadowes are rightly used in the Church but what God hath instituted. But (sayth the Rej.) he doeth by name allow standing in prayer, on the Lordes dayes, as a significant Ceremonie, as also holybread: annot. 10. Wheras Iunius testifieth plainly, in the 9. note, immediatly before, how he did onelyonly excuse, as comparatively tolerable, suche ancient Ceremonies of the Fathers. Primum suit tolerabile: Patrum simplicitatem piam excusamus. So that Iunius being seen in his owne posture, and the reporters in their colours, let the Reader judge, where is the cause of shame and blushing?