An Account of Cawdrys Triplex Diatribe, Chapter 5 · Section 13
Sect. 13. Mr. C. his diſtinction of voluntary. Spontaneous. A work of love. The Teſtimony of Socrates. Worſhip true or falſe. Nothing unlawfull which is not forbidden. Voluntaryneſs no way forbidden. The ſecond Commandment.
TO my laſt reaſon [becauſe things done in the ſervice of God are not therefore ill becauſe ſpontaneous, but on the contrary, that when out of a pious affection a man ſhall do any thing elſe beſide what God hath commanded by any particular precept, this action of his is ſo much more commendable and acceptable to God,] he thinks it ſufficient to diſtinguiſh of voluntary either as it denotes the manner or the efficient cauſe of worſhip; in the firſt reſpect that is voluntary, ſaith he, which yet is neceſſary, viz. commanded by God, in the ſecond, that onelyonly which is done by the will of man contradiſtinguiſht to the will of God.
But this diſtinction is very far from anſwering my reaſon. For of the ſecond, it is, he knowes, that I underſtand the word, and that I might prevent all want of this or the like diſtinction, I ſpeak moſt plainly, uſing the word Spontaneous, not voluntary, on purpoſe to denote that which was done by mans will on his own accord, without any command of Gods; for ſo ſure Spontaneous ſignifies (however the Diatribiſt here confounds it with voluntary, and ſo involves, in ſtead of extricating, mixes, when he went to diſtinguiſh) that which is ſuâ ſponte from a mans own incitation, not from any external impellent, whether command or puniſhment attending it, for this indeed being done thus freely, is perfectly a work of love, and that renders it ſo extremely greatefull, and rewardable by God. I ſhall give you the deſcription of it in the words of Hiſt. Eccl. l. 5. c. 22.Socrates ſpeaking of Eccleſiaſtical rites; foreign, Seeing no man can ſhew any written command for this, it is manifeſt that the Apoſtles left this to every mans judgement and will, that every man might do good, neither by fear nor of neceſſity.
When he addes, that in worſhip deviſed by man the will bears all the blame, and then the more voluntary; the more abominable] I anſwer, that worſhip is either falſe or true, bad or good, Heathen or Chriſtian, His rule is perfectly true in unlawful wicked worſhip, all the blame thereof lyes on the will of man, but it can have no place, where the worſhip is lawfull, for then no blame is due at all, but the more free it is, tis ſo much the more commendable. Now it is of lawfull and Chriſtian worſhip that we here ſpeak, as he knows well enough, or elſe it were not imaginable we could take it in a good ſenſe, and of this he muſt needs underſtand us alſo; or elſe he could not make all the blame of it in mans will or deviſing, as he doth.
And that a worſhip in itſelf, and materially lawfull, i. e. whilſt it is abſtracted from the conſideration of Gods commanding it, or not, ſhould by not being commanded by God, become unlawfull, this is to confound things moſt diſtant, forbidding and not forbidding; For the Law and Will of God being the rule, in agreement with, or oppoſition to which, lawfull and unlawfull conſiſts, it is as impoſſible that any thing ſhould be unlawfull in reſpect of Gods Law, which is not forbidden by it, as that any thing ſhould be lawfull which is forbidden.
When therefore he proceeds, affirming (but offering no proof) that the voluntarineſs of an action is the foreign or irregularity of it, firſt, this is a begging the queſtion; 2. 'Tis ſet in ſuch terms, that it hath not the leaſt appearance of truth in it, for how can the voluntarineſs be the foreign or irregularity, unleſs the Law forbid voluntarineſs, which certainly it no way doth, as was formerly evidenced from hence, becauſe there is no univerſall negative command in Scripture, prohibiting all acts and degrees of acts, beſide what are in particular commanded.
That there is no ſuch, ſufficiently appear, by the one inſtance, which here he thinks fit to mention, that of the 2d Commandment, which, ſaith he, forbids all things, i. e. all worſhip and all degrees of that worſhip, beſides what are particularly commanded. Which though it be as far from all appearance of truth as any thing affirmable by any (for what word is there in that Commandment, which can ſound that way? Certainly none, unleſſe every ceremony deviſed by man and every degree whether of charity or devotion, which is not particularly under precept, be preſently metamorphoſed into a graven image) hath not yet any the leaſt proof to back it, and ſo ſtill is the meaneſt begging of the main queſtion imaginable. And ſo having more largely ſpoken of this before, this is ſufficient alſo to be ſaid here in the vindication of my laſt reaſon.