The Account Audited and Discounted, Exercitation 2 · Section 17-18 – Section 19
Sect. 17, 18. We have done with the firſt undertaking, &c.
That foreign, is well rendered by Superſtition, by the Romanists, and by the learned and ever renowned Maſter Calvin, may eaſily be made good, from the definition of Superſtition, given by the School-man, which is juſtified above; and by the deſcription of it, by Mr. Calvin, which is this, [Vox ipſa Superſtitio, &c. The word Superſtition may ſeem to be ſo called, becauſe not contented with the manner (of Worſhip) preſcribed, it heaps up a ſuperfluous heap of vain things.] Calv. Inſtit. l. 1. c. 12. n. 1. For Will-worſhip partakes of the definition, it is a vice contrary to Religion, in the exceſs, and is an addition of ſuperfluous and vain Worſhip. And I ſaid not Superstition and Will-worſhip are all one, (as he charges me to ſay;) but clearly otherwiſe, [Superſtition or will-worſhip, p. 157. n. 6.are more general then, foreign, for Daemonum cultus, which is but one ſpecies of Superſtition.] They differ as genus and ſpecies; all Will-worſhip is Superſtition, but all Superſtition is not Will-worſhip, ſtrictly taken, as was diſcourſed above, ad. p. 41. n. 1. But if Will-worſhip be a ſpecies of Superſtition, they that interpreted the word ſo, did but call the Species by the name of the genus, which is very ordinary. And that Superſtition is more general then foreign, is evident, becauſe that's but one ſpecies of Superſtition; there are many more given by the School-man, and himſelf above. But now we ſhall hear him diſtribute wil-worſhip into ſpecies. [The truth is, n. 7.that the general Will-worſhip, as that comprehends all worſhip uncommanded by God, hath ſeveral ſpecies under it, Jewiſh out-dated; and ſo now uncommanded Worſhip; Heatheniſh forbidden, and ſo uncommanded Worſhip; and finally, Chriſtian acceptable, yet not commanded acts, or circumstances, or degrees of Worſhip.] Here we have three ſorts of VVill-worſhip, Jewiſh, Heathen, Chriſtian: The firſt uncommanded, the ſecond, forbidden, the third not commanded. But, firſt, the Jewiſh out-dated Worſhip is forbidden, (ſo the Doctor ſaid above p. 19. n. 32.) and ſo agrees with Heathen Will-worſhip. 2. The Chriſtian, is no VVorſhip, but acts, or circumſtances of Worſhip commanded, and then it is no VVill worſhip: upon this, he brings all to two ſpecies. [VVill-worſhip, will-deviſed VVorſhip may be of two ſorts: (as the generical word VVorſhip may) either true or falſe, Heathen or Chriſtian: and as the one is ill, ſo the other is certainly good.] But, firſt, Worſhip is either true or falſe, true, when commanded by God; falſe, when deviſed by men; that's VVill-worſhip; and will he divide falſe-worſhip, into true or falſe, Chriſtian or Heathen? 2. Are Chriſtian or Heathen, the ſame with true or falſe? the one ill the other good? Is there no good VVill-worſhip among the Heathens? no bad, among Chriſtians? ſo it ſeemes by the Doctors words. 3. He gave us above ſix, (if not ſpecies *He calls them ſix ſpecies of VVill-worſhip. p. 97. n. 14.yet) notions of VVill-worſhip, ad p. 96. n. 6. and now he brings them, firſt, to three, then to two, as if he were confounded, and knew not where to fix: And to ſpeak properly, VVill-worſhip hath no ſpecies, (though Superstition have) onelyonly there may be ſome particulars, as there are of falſe-worſhip, which the Doctor may call Individua, if he pleaſe, but not ſpecies, as ergo, VVill-worſhip is Heatheniſh, Jewiſh, or Chriſtian, this is, not a diſtribution into ſpecies, but in adjuncts, or ſubjects. Now true it is the Doctor takes VVill-worſhip in a good ſenſe, for true and lawful Worſhip, but I take it in an ill ſenſe, for falſe worſhip, and the Doctor muſt not beg his ſenſe, nor I mine; both muſt prove it, or relinguiſh it. And now let the Reader judge, who is in the right: I ſhall but propound this argument, and leave it to him; [If worſhip be therefore onelyonly true, becauſe it is commanded by God; then all worſhip not commanded by God, deviſed by men, is falſe: But the Autecedent is moſt certain, the conſequence alſo undeniable, to any reaſonable man: let who will make out the concluſion.] But hear again, [The falſeneſs conſiſts in its being deviſed by mans will, p. 158. n. 10not ſimply, but in oppoſition to Gods, i. e. when it is forbidden;] this we accept of, and ſay, all worſhip deviſed by mans will, ſtands in oppoſition to the will of God, and is forbidden: the Negative part of the ſecond Commandment, is, [God will not be ſerved, by any worſhip not preſcribed by himſelf,] and no addition may by man be made to the rule of worſhip. The Doctor hath ſo long dream'd of uncommanded Worſhip, in contradiſtinction to forbidden Worſhip; as if VVorſhip uncommanded by God (the ſame with deviſed by men) were not forbidden; when as it is therefore forbidden, becauſe not commanded by God, as I am forced, by the Doctors importunity to repeat too often. No ſays he, [VVhat is forbidden, is more then not commanded.] It is ſo in the ſecond Table, but in the firſt, of worſhip not commanded, and forbidden, is all one. The Doctor therefore ſuppoſes, what is not to be granted, when he ſays, n. 11.[That worſhip which is ſuppoſed not to be forbidden, is reſolved not to be falſe.] He muſt ſay, that worſhip deviſed by men, which is not forbidden, is not falſe: but that implies, that ſome worſhip deviſed by men, is not forbidden; which now he may ſee (if he will) to be falſe. [Gods not commanding (he ſays) implies his permiſſion, and ſo a liberty allowed by God, &c.] If this were true, the Heathens, and Turks VVorſhip were all lawful, for they are not commanded, ergo, permitted: He will ſay, [They are forbidden, which is more then not commanded.] This is not to be ſeen in that former propoſition: but I cloſe with him, and ſay, All worſhip not commanded, is forbidden. I conclude this Section, with a memento to the Reader, to take notice how much the Doctor hath forgot himſelf, to plead for VVill worſhip, worſhip deviſed by men, which both is contrary to his own aſſertions heretofore; and preſently again, (he pleads not for new ſorts or kindes of Worſhip, not commanded by God) and to his preſent deſigne, which is not (at leaſt openly) to plead for will worſhip, but will-rites, ceremonies, circumſtances of Worſhip. But juſt it is, that they which forget the truth, ſhould forget themſelves.
Sect. 19. Another reaſon is, that among the Jewes, &c.
IN this Section, p. 160. n. 3.the Doctor plainly confeſſes, that [his deſigne, in his former Tract of VVill-worſhip, was not to plead for any new kinde or parts of VVorſhip, but to juſtifie the uſe of uncommanded ceremonies and circumſtances, and ſuch are dayes of VVorſhip, &c.] And I propound the queſtion; [not about a rite or circumſtance or degree of commanded worſhip, but of worſhip it ſelf, &c.] Who would not think we were both agreed? But then I ask, why hath the Doctor many times aſſerted, that I muſt and do ſtate the queſtion of uncommanded rites and circumſtances; when I profeſs oft to the contrary, that [the queſtion is not about a rite or circumſtaace of worſhip, &c.] It may be ſaid, where's then the difference? n. 4.[VVhy (ſays the Doctor) ſhould he miſpend and laviſh out his pains, delight in this impertinent ſeverity, arraign and triumph over a poor innocent Tract, that never attempted in the leaſt, to bring any new kinde of worſhip into the Church?] I ſhall ſhew briefly wherein we differ. 1. The Doctor confounds rites and ceremonies, with circumſtances of Worſhip; ſure I am amongſt the Jewes, So with Papiſts, Ritus colendi Deum. Salmeron ſupra.all their Ceremonies were parts of Worſhip, (though all circumstances were not) hereupon ſome Divines have thought and ſaid, any ceremony ſignificant, is eo nomine, made a part of Worſhip. 2. It does appear, (and will more hereafter) that the Doctor does maintain ſome VVill-worſhip to be good and lawful, that is, will-deviſed worſhip, not circumſtances of Worſhip onelyonly. And this was the cauſe of my undertaking to confute that Tract of his, and I hope I have not (to others, at leaſt) miſpent and laviſht out my time and pains. As for foreign, p. 162. n. 10ſomething hath been ſaid above. I ſhall adde onelyonly this, that at firſt it ſignified the Divine law onelyonly, foreign, never being uſed for Eccleſiaſtical; but in proceſs of time, the Eccleſiaſtical Canons were graced with that title: and the uſurpation of more power to the Church then was meet, in matter of doctrine and worſhip, brought in by this miſapplication, much Suporſtition, becauſe the Authority of the Church was held Divine, by the Spirit of God infallibly guiding her, as Papiſts now ſpeak: Divinarum Sanctionum, that is, Eccleſiaſticall, ſaid the Doctor, p. 83. n. 4.in Engliſhing the words of Pope Leo: But the Doctor wiſely waves the defence of thoſe words of his; [we may juſtly conclude thoſe actions juſtifiable, becauſe not prohibited, and not onelyonly ſo, but alſo acceptable, and and the more acceptable for this voluntarineſs.] I anſwered (in this Section) in VVorſhip, it will not juſtifie a man, that it is not forbidden in particular, but rather that it is condemned becauſe it is not commanded. To which I now adde, that the Doctor deludes us, by general termes, actions, performances, &c. when he ſhould ſay, worſhip is juſtifiable, becauſe not prohibited, and not onelyonly ſo, but more acceptable, for the voluntarineſs. And being by me pointed to this miſtake, he ſayes nothing to it.