The Account Audited and Discounted, Exercitation 2 · Section 20-21 – Section 22-23
Sect. 20.21. A third ground of the abuſe of the word, &c.
I Said the 18. and 23. verſes of Col. 2. might eaſily be reconciled, the one reſpecting a new deviſed Worſhip, the other the reviving an old outdated Worſhip. p. 163. n. 2.To this he ſayes, [The worſhip of Angels in the 18. verſe is much more then will-worſhip, in the Diatribiſt notion of it, for uncommanded, will deviſed worſhip, pronounced unlawful, becauſe not commanded: but Angel worſhip is forbidden.] Enough hath been ſaid of the difference of uncommanded and forbidden worſhip, above. Heatheniſh forbidden, and ſo uncommanded worſhip: his own words. p. 157. n. 7.I adde now, to the preſent anſwer, firſt, If Angel VVorſhip be forbidden, I hope that will imply, it is not commanded; and upon that notion was unlawfull, that it was a will-deviſed worſhip, but more becauſe it was forbidden, by the firſt Commandment. 2. So ſay I of theſe abſtinences, they were both not commanded, (but will-deviſed worſhip) and alſo forbidden by the ſecond Commandment. (For I cannot be flouted out of that anſwer.) 3. Let it be obſerved, that the Doctor plainly juſtifies uncommanded worſhip, deviſed by the will of man; making any worſhip lawful that is not forbidden: whereas (as hath oft been ſaid) the uncommandedneſs of worſhip, makes it ſinful and falſe: all worſhip being indeed forbidden, that is not commanded by God. n. 8.And yet the Doctor ſayes, [the fault of Angel worſhip, reſults from the unlawfulneſs of the *See my 23. ſ. Of VVill-w.matter, which is forbidden in the firſt Commandment not from the voluntarineſs or uncommandedneſs of it.] This fallacy he would often put upon us, to make the fault lie upon one, when it lies upon both. 1. That it is not commanded. 2. That it is forbidden, that Worſhip which is not commanded, being ever forbidden.
I cited words from Maimonides, brought by himſelf, and ſeeing no more cited by him, I thought fit to make uſe of it againſt him: The words are general, n. 3.[That the errour that brought in the greateſt part of Idolatry, was, that men conceived and taught, that vain Worſhips, and Superstitions, were the will and pleaſure of God.] Here the Doctor demands, [what I mean by vain Worſhips? n. 4.doth he mean bare will deviſed Worſhip, uncommanded, which have no other crime in them but their uncommandedneſs?] I anſwer, I do mean will deviſed, uncommanded Worſhip; but I do not ſay, it hath no other crime, then the uncommandedneſs: for I know, it hath another fault, that it is forbidden. And that thus, the Affirmative part is, [God muſt be Worſhipt onelyonly with his own Worſhip:] then, all will deviſed Worſhip is ill, becauſe it is not commanded. The Negative part is, [No man muſt preſcribe Worſhip to God:] then all will deviſed Worſhip is forbidden: ſhould I teach the Doctor theſe principles? And theſe were the faults as of Angel Worſhip, ſo of thoſe Abſtinences, taught as Worſhip; and of any will deviſed Worſhip, what ever. What confuſion, what injuſtice is in this? If Clemens did miſapply and confound theſe two texts, v. 18. and 23. p. 165. n. 6.he was cited by himſelf, & proved what I intended, that he thought them both as one. I argued, ad hominem there, rather then ad rem: But ſee how this great Admirer of the Fathers, can throw them by, when they do not pleaſe him, or fit his new notions. I need not pretend his reading of the text was true, but his Interpretation I may juſtifie, that by foreign, &c. Humility in the 18. verſe, he underſtood the ſame with foreign, and Humility in the 23. verſe. The difference onelyonly being this, that what the Apoſtle expreſt by two words in the one, he underſtood the ſame, in the compoſition of them in the other: and ſo do moſt Modern Divines underſtand them.
The Doctor ſeems to diſtinguiſh of two ſorts of uncommanded worſhip; p. 166. n. 8.one that is uncommanded, but not forbidden; the other that is uncommanded, and alſo forbidden: Thus he ſayes, [A ſpontaneous abſtaining from meats, ſometime, being in it ſelf perfectly lawful, and ſo likewiſe Celibacie, or Virginity, in him that can receive it; there is no pretenſe from the uncommandedneſs of either, or both of theſe, that they ſhould be deemed culpable, or made parallel to the other ſort of uncommanded Worſhip, where the matter is under Interdict, the Worſhip of Angels, &c.] Where theſe things are obſervable. 1. That before, the Doctor ſeemed to make any Worſhip not forbidden, lawful: but now hath found a Worſhip uncommanded which is alſo forbidden. 2. He ſeems to make abſtinence from meat and marriage one ſort of uncommanded Worſhip, by oppoſing to it another ſort of worſhip forbidden: either then, the Doctor makes that abſtinence a ſort, or part of worſhip, or he does not: If he do, then he contradicts himſelf, who had ſaid. [He pleads not for any new kinds or parts of worſhip, but for the uſe of uncommanded ceremonies and circumſtances.] p, 160. n. 4. But abſtinence from meats and marriage, are neither ceremonies, nor circumſtances; ergo, they are new kindes of Worſhip, which he hath oft diſclaimed: If he do not make it a kind or part of Worſhip, how does he oppoſe againſt it another ſort of uncommanded worſhip. 3. I have ſaid and proved, all uncommanded worſhip, is under Interdict, is forbidden; and ſo unlawful. As for Faſting from meats, n. 9.ſometimes, or Virginity in them that can receive it, no body rational ſpeaks againſt it. But to make theſe parts of Worſhip, and ſtates of greater perfection, preferring virginity to honourable marriage, (as Papists and the Doctor does) is juſtly by our Divines cenſured as ſuperſtitious, and will worſhip. And the Doctor might have ſpared his pains, in proving that which none denies, in his 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. numbers: but he delights, upon all occaſions, to ſhew his Reading.
OnelyOnly one thing is to be taken notice of, as remarkable, (ſayes the Doctor,) n. 11.[Alcibiades lived auſterely, uſing nothing but bread and water, as before, ſo when he was in priſon: this courſe of auſterity, and ſevereſt abſtinence was no way diſliked, &c.] When as Attalus diſwades it, upon ſuch realons, as ſerved not onelyonly at that time, but always, (except when God calls to faſting and humiliation.) As 1. [That he did not well not to uſe the good creatures of God.] Which needed no other Revelation, (as is pretended) but what he had from the Apoſtle, 1 Tim. 4.3, 4. where he makes it a part of the Apoſtacie of after times, [To abſtain from meats which God hath created to be received with thankſgiving of them which believe, and know the truth; for every creature of God is good, &c.] I conjecture the Doctors evaſion: He (with Papiſts) will ſay, it's meant onelyonly of them that abſtain from meats as unclean: it is indeed meant of ſuch, but not onelyonly. For it's appliable alſo to thoſe abſtinences, Col. 2.23. which did not intend thoſe onelyonly, that abſtain'd from ſome meats, as unclean, (if at all) or impoſed that abſtinence as neceſſary by Divine command, (as the Doctor gloſſes it) but of thoſe, who placed Religion and the Worſhip of God, in thoſe auſterities ſpoken of, in not ſparing the body, that is, in afflicting and macerating the body, Abſtinentiam induxerunt (Encratitae) ingrati exiſtentes ei qui omnia fecit, Deo. Irenae. l. 1. c. 30.by ſuch auſterities: as thinking it a ſervice acceptable to, and more rewardable by God; as the Doctor does. Now to ſuch it might be ſaid, [You do not well, not to uſe the good creatures of God, who created them to be received with thankſgiving, &c. and you ſhew your ſelves unthankfully to God, and unnaturally cruel to your ſelves.] That's the ſubſtance of Attalus firſt argument. 2. The other is, [That in ſo doing he would leave an example of ſcandal and stumbling to others, by weakning them, by like abſtinences, making them unfit for ſuffering.] And I doubt not, but this and other like auſterities, was the occaſion of that Monaſtical and Eremitical ſeverity, which was after taken up, and is ſo frequent in Popery. Thoſe firſt holy men (charity bids me think) did onelyonly uſe them as exerciſes of Mortification, placing no Religion, or greater acceptation, or reward in them: but after times, did all theſe, as we ſee in Popery. And the Doctor is near the brim of this pit, when he pleads ſo much, for voluntary Auſterities, as uncommanded Worſhip, as more commendable, acceptable, rewardable, p. 210. n. 27.
That which remains in this Section of his, is but to note two things. p. 168. n. 151. That he ſtill goes on with the conceit of the Gnoſtick abſtinences, in his gloſs on 1 Tim. 5.23. True it is, the Apoſtle in 1 Tim. 4.1. &c. Propheſies of ſuch as the Gnoſticks were, and the Romaniſts now are, with this onelyonly difference, that the one ſort abſolutely condemned marriage in all, the other in their Votaries and Clergy onelyonly: Vid. Eſtium in locum.But the very Papiſts themſelves Interpret that text of the Manachees (ſometime after) and of Ebion, near to, or in the Apoſtles times; and of Saturninus, and ſuch like; and at laſt of their ſucceſſours, the Gnoſticks: But the learned and reverend Maſter Cartwright, hath given the reaſon, [That the text might not be thought to ſmile at them, On Rhem. Teſt. in locum.and condemn them in forbidding marriage (as alſo meats) to ſome ſort of people, they ſeek out ſome others to faſten it upon; as ſometimes theeves and murderers, pretend to ſeek out the committers of that fault, that themſelves may not be ſuſpected.] And mark how Eſtius puts it off from Rome; [It's manifest the Apoſtle ſpeaks of them, who ſhould altogether, or abſolutely condemn marriage, as evil and unlawful: and ſhould reject ſome kind of meats, as unclean.] No doubt the Apoſtle ſpeaks of ſuch, but alſo of any, that ſhould do the like, in a leſſer degree, which Papiſts, for certain do; not onelyonly preferring Caelibate before it, as a ſtate of greater perfection, but alſo defaming of marriage, with reſpect to ſome ſorts of men, at leaſt: witneſs thoſe haſe gloſſes of ſome of their Popes, to be ſeen in Doctor Hall, Honour of Married Clergy, l. 1. ſ. 4. The Doctor indeed does not comply with them in defaming of marriage; but he does in this, making Caelebate a more perfect ſtate, and in the dedicating of it to God, &c. as a Will worſhip, that is, a part of Worſhip deviſed by the will of man, as is evident afore. 2. The other thing obſervable (and we ſhal meet with it often again) is, that he changes the ſtate of the queſtion, by changing the word, n. 16. See ad p. 151. n. 6.from uncommanded Worſhip, [to uncommanded Performances (ſuch were virginity, or faſting.] Whereas he made both of them Worſhip, a little before, n. 8. [Another ſort of uncommanded Worſhip,] as there appears.
Sect. 22, 23. You muſt (ſayes he) obſerve theſe things, &c.
THeſe two Sections of mine, are wholly waved by him, which yet concerned him to anſwer very much, and me and the Reader to have ſatisfaction therein. It is generally believed, that foreign, in the 18. ver. and foreign, in the 23. Vid. Eſt. in locum.ver. are both one, a voluntary in worſhip of Angels, and voluntary Worſhip, in thoſe abſtinences: Papiſts are herein, better Interpreters, then the Doctor. The Apoſtle therefore, condemns both the Worſhip of Angels, and theſe abſtinences made worſhip by men, becauſe they are but Will worſhip. The Doctor confeſſes the former, the Worſhip of Angels, to be, [That crime of Superſtition. ſ. 20. &c.] and to be called [Will-worſhip, or what we pleaſe; including an impious mistaken kinde of Humility. Sect. 23.] Such then were theſe abſtinences, if reaſon might prevail with the Doctor. It will be expected that he give an account of theſe Sections, in his next.