An Apology for the Discipline of the Ancient Church, Part 3 · Section 6 · Excerpt 1
The words of the Letter.
IF there were no news amongst them of any Romiſh Rites or humane inventions, as Matrimonial Bands, Marriage-Rings, ſigne of the Croſſe, white Surplice, Quiriſters ſinging, Funeral Sermons, Idol-ſureties of God-fathers and God-mothers, &c.
The Reply.
Romiſh Rites are of two ſorts; either ſuch as are uſed by the Church of Rome, and were of Ancient uſe in other Churches; or ſuch as are meerly Romane, taken up and uſed in the Romiſh Church, after it began to degenerate and was corrupted. All thoſe that are of this kinde we have exploded, not only becauſe there might be ſuperſtition in them, but alſo becauſe they were ſuperfluous, burdonſome, and full of vanity and folly. Thoſe of the firſt kinde, (and ſuch are thoſe of which you ſpeak) becauſe we have found them of perpetual uſe in the Catholick Primitive Church, we yet retain.Hook. Eccl. pol. lib. 4. Sect. 3. ad 10. Now whether every Ceremony be to be aboliſhed, becauſe it is in uſe among the Papiſts, be pleaſed to conſult with Mr. Hooker, and he will reſolve you that it is not. And indeed if this were not true, we might not kneel and lift up our hands and eyes at our prayers, nor enter reverently into the houſe of God, nor put our hand on the book when we take an oath, nor ſit in our Pues in the Churches when we hear, nor preach upon any portion of Scripture, becauſe the Papiſts do ſo. Evident then it is that Ceremonies are not to be excluded, quâ Romiſh, but as they have ſome other vitiouſneſſe adherent to them.
2. Oh but theſe are humane conſtitutions; that may be granted, and yet the Rite nere the worſe, nor the leſſe to be regarded. About this point, read again Mr. Hookers three firſt books of Eccleſiaſtical policy, and he will ſatisfie any man that liſts not to be contentious.Synod. of New Engl. cap. 1. The diſtinction is your own; there are ſome things eſſential, and ſome things circumſtantial in Religion; what is of the eſſence of it, is immutable, and muſt be preſcribed by the word; but what is circumſtantial is circumſcribed with general limitations, according to the nature of the things themſelves and civil Church cuſtome; ſo that if there be no errour of man concerning their determination, the determining of them is to be accompted as if it were divine. It lies now upon you to ſhew where the errour lies, and that the preſcriber had not an eye to thoſe general limitations in Scripture, before you caſt out theſe humane conſtitutions, and explode them as inventions of men.
But now let us go on, and examine Qui viri, what kind of men theſe were, who brought theſe Rites into the Church; they were no men of yeſterday, they were not any way infected with the Romane leaven. They were the Primitive fathers, and ſome of them Apoſtolical men; men who hazarded their lives for Chriſt. Theſe were the Inventers of thoſe Rites you ſpeak of, as I ſhall now ſhew you by induction of particulars, being guided by your own thread.
1. Matrimonial Bands.
'Tis a Rule of Zanchy, that ſince there is nothing clearly preſcribed about Matrimonial Rites in the Word of God;Zanch. de sponſalibus. Theſ. 4. …itus hi petendi ſunt ex conſuetudinibus Eccleſiaſticis, & constitutionibus, quae nihil cum verbo Dei pugnans contineant. You muſt ſhew then that in the publication of theſe Bands there is ſomewhat repugnant to the Word of God, or elſe this cuſtome may be well retained. And you have no reaſon at all at this time to except againſt them, ſince you know that there is an Act of Parliament extant at this time, made by your own party, that before the ſolemnization of marriage, the parties names who are to be joyned in wed-lock, ſhall be openly proclaimed either in the Market, or in the Church three ſeveral times. It ſeems by this Act, the ſelf-ſame reaſon which prevailed with our fore-fathers, prevailed with them, viz. that thereby all clandeſtine marriages ſhould be prevented; divorces upon pretences of former Eſpouſals by contract voided, and the ſurreptitious ſtealing away of Orphans and children without the conſent of their Parents, hindred. When therefore you finde fault with this cuſtome and conſtitution, you finde fault with you know not what, and reprehend you know not whom.
2. Marriage Rings.
If you think this to be a Popiſh Rite, you are very much deceived. For it was uſed before the Romanes were Chriſtians, and yet is nere the worſe for that neither. For the Jews though prohibited ſome, yet were not forbidden to be like in nothing to the Nations; for that was impoſſible. Among the Romans the Ring of marriage was uſed,Pliny Hiſt. lib. 33. cap. 1. Tertull. Apol. cap. 6. and it was firſt of Iron, and afterwards of gold. Whence Tertullian commending the temperance and modeſty of the old Romane Matrons, ſaith, Aurum nulla norat praeterquam unico digito, quem ſponſus oppignoraſſet pronubo annulo. Among the Romans jus annuli, right to wear a Ring, belonged not to every man; at firſt it was conferred upon men of honour; this then might be one cauſe of continuing this cuſtome, that whereas marriage is honourable, the husband by giving the Ring, ſhewed that he had beſtowed honour upon the woman, ſhe every whit as honourable as he was; ubi ille Cajus, ibi illa Caja. But then the bed muſt be undefiled, and that it be ſo kept, ſo often as ſhe looks upon her Ring ſhe may well be admoniſhed; for by this pawn given and received, ſhe pledged her faith and fidelity to keep her ſelf onelyonly to one. This will be never done, except their love be endleſſe and continue, of which the Ring is an apt ſymbol, for a circle knows no end. Whether then we conſider the honour done to the woman by her husband, or that mutual love and fidelity in heart and minde agreed on betwixt the married couple, this harmleſſe Ceremony needs not be caſt aſide with a ſcoft.
3. The ſigne of the Croſſe.
This is a Ceremony at which you are wont to be affrighted, as the Devils of old. But you muſt know that this was a Rite uſed in the Church, many ages before Popery was heard of. There was a two-fold kinde of Croſſe uſed by them, either tranſient or permanent; the tranſient was made with the motion of the hand, but left no ſigne behind. This was of common practice in the Primitive Church, as appears to any man who hath ever read Juſtin Martyr againſt Tryphon the Jew, and his ſecond Apology; and uſed after Baptiſme, is evident in Tertullians Apology, in his book de Corona Mil, & de reſur. carnis, in Cyprian de lapſis, and other fathers. But till Constantine the great carried it with enriched gold and pearls for his Standard, I read not of a permanent Croſſe erected; after his time the erecting of theſe was frequent in all Chriſtian Kingdomes; ſo that the Papiſts were not the Authours of either, but abuſed both. And that the abuſe of any thing ſhould take away the uſe of it, ſeems to me unreaſonable. We have it in no other eſteem than the Ancient Chriſtians; we carry it in our flags, and on our coyne; we glory in it as a Badge of Chriſtianity, we ſigne our children with it after Baptiſme: But to give the ſame honour to it as unto Chriſt; to pray to it, to burn incenſe before it, we utterly reject as ſuperſtitious errours, and ungodly vanities. Let the Papiſts anſwer for this their foreign, as Thomas calls it; we have it in no other uſe & honour than what we may juſtifie; and if you are deſirous to ſee upon what grounds, I refer you to Mr. Hookers Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 65. a Tract that was never yet anſwered. And to Dr. Mortons defence of the Ceremonies of the Church of England, becauſe it were over-long and needleſſe to tranſcribe them. The ſumme of which yet I ſhall be ready to give you, if you ſhall require it at my hands.
4. White-Surplice.
To this Ceremony I anſwer I ſee not why that veſture ſhould be more excepted againſt, than I ſhould that a Miniſter ſhould preach or officiate with a black cap on his head, a Cloke, or a Gown; for I know there is Scripture equally to be alledged for both. But for fuller ſatisfaction for this I refer you to Maſter Hooker! Eccl. Pol. lib. 5. Sect. 29.
5. Quiristers ſinging.
To this I have anſwered before:
6. Funeral Sermons.
This is the firſt time I ever heard any exception againſt them; that the dead were decently compoſed I know, and that the Church carried them to their graves, foreign, Saint Chryſoſtome hath taught me,Chryſ. Hom. foreign. Naz. foreign. and that Conſtantius was brought from Nicomedia where he died, to Conſtantinople where he was buried in that ſolemn manner. But I never heard before that it was not lawful to have a Funeral Sermon, in which the vertues of the man might be propoſed as an example to the living, by which alſo we might ſhew our love to the party deceaſed, which nature requires of us: then to do him that honour that is fit for his perſon; and laſtly to comfort the living with the hope of the reſurrection, to which end, that office appointed for the burial of the dead eſpecially tended.
For which purpoſe let any man of a reaſonable judgment, conſider whether it be more convenient to bring a dead Corps in a dumb ſhow to the grave, and cover it with earth, then to hear thoſe Leſſons and Pſalms ſounded in their ears, that may put them in minde of their eſtate and condition both now and hereafter. At that time our hearts ſoftned with mourning are become more malleable, and the Leſſons then heard and exemplified by the ſight of our departed brother, may make the deeper impreſſion. Say then there were no more but this in it. viz. a diſcharge from the imputation of rudeneſſe and incivility (which Chriſtianity teacheth no man) to thoſe bodies which ſhall have their part in the reſurrection; yet I ſee no cauſe why theſe exiquies ſhould be ſo caſt aſide, reviled, imputed to us; David himſelf followed the Beire of Abner, and lift up his voice and wept at the grave of Abner, and the King lamented over Abner and ſaid, dyed Abner as a fool dieth? 2 Sam. 3.31, 32, 33, 34.&c. where we have not a dumb ſhew, but words of commendation expreſſed over the dead. I never conceived that the mourning for Jacob at the threſhing floor of Atad was a ſilent ſpectacle; ſeven dayer it continued, Gen. 50.10, 11and there they mourned with a great and very ſore lamentation, inſomuch that the Canaanites called the place Abel-Mizraim. Now that ſuch mournings may be accompanied with words, is evident by the Lamentations of Jeremy, which was compoſed as it were a Funeral Sermon for the good King Joſiah. For Jeremy lamented for Joſiah, 2 Chr. 35.25.and all the ſinging men and ſinging women ſpake of Joſiah in their Lamentations to this day, and made them an Ordinance in Iſrael, and behold they are written in the Lamentations.
God never ordained that his ſervants ſhould be laid in their graves with the burial of an aſſe. And the fear that ſome men conceive that we be thought to pray to or for them, over whom, or near whoſe Hearſe, or toward whom we thus pray, is a mormo fit to ſcare children. When 'tis ſufficiently teſtified even by the prayers ſet out to be then read; that we pray not for the dead, but comfort the living with hope of the reſurrection, and expectation of the conſummation of all things.
7. Idol-ſureties of Godfathers and Godmothers.
Of the antiquity and benefit of theſe ſureties, Godfathers and Godmothers, I have ſaid ſufficient in my Catechiſme, pag. 11. whether I refer you. But now I wonder why you ſhould call them Idol-ſureties; If you had only noted them for their idleneſſe and careleſſeneſſe, in that they take ſo little care for the Religious education of thoſe, for whom the Church accepts them as ſureties, I would not have gain-ſaid you, but lamented it. But that you make them Idols is unſufferable; for what is an Idol? it is nothing in the world, a meer invention and fiction of mans brain ſet up to be an object of adoration; and were theſe brought in for any man to worſhip? what child was ever encouraged to adore his Godfathers and Godmothers? But to make the beſt of it, the calmeſt meaning of this odious word can be but this, that many have given theſe an higher eſtimation than they deſerve. So you have done to many things, to Preaching, to Ruling Elders, to your Combinational Church, to your Miniſterial Pulpit; and yet I know it would ſound very harſh in your ears, if we ſhould fix the name of Idol before them. How would you ſtorme to hear of Idol-preaching, Idol-Elders, Idol-Combinational Church, Idol-Miniſterial-Pulpit? And yet there is as much reaſon for the one as the other. For if the eſtimation of any thing beyond that it ought, will preſently make it an Idol, you have made Idols of all theſe, and ſo are equally guilty of Idolatry with us.