The Divine Right of Church Government and Excommunication, Religious polemic · Chapter 1 · Question 3
QUEST. III.
Whether Ceremonies have any Divinity in them?
ALL means of worſhip deviſed by men pretending holineſſe, byArg. 4. Againſt humane Ceremonies, becauſe they uſurp the eſſential properties of Divine ordinances. teaching, exciting our dull affections to Devotion, as if they were powerfull means of grace, and did lay a band on the conſcience, when as yet they be no ſuch thing, and want all warrant from God, and are contrary to devotion, are unlawfull.
But humane Ceremonies be ſuch: Ergo,
The Propoſition is certain: I prove the Aſſumption by parts: 1. Whatever holineſſe be pretended to be in Ceremonies; yet God onelyonly ſanctifieth people, offices in his houſe, as the ſons of Aaron, Altars, Temples, Veſtures, Sacrifices by his expreſſe inſtitution, as we are taught, bLevit. 20. 8. Exod. 20. 11. 16, 17. Exod. 29. 29. 33. 36, 37. Exod. 40. 9. cap. 2. 10. cap. 26. 1, 2, 3. cap. 27. 1, 2.yet are Ceremonies holy; their Author be the Apoſtles ſucceſſours. 2. Their end to honour God. 3. Their matter is not civill or naturall. 4. Their ſignification myſticall, is Religious. 2. They be means of teaching and stirring up the dull affections to the remembrance of duties, by ſome notable and ſpeciall ſignification, whereby the beholders may be edified; and ſince to ſtir up the minde, as a memorative object be the word of Gods due property, or the works of Providence and Creation; would not a Prelat in his Epiſtle to his under-Paſtors, ſpeak Peter-like, as, 2 Pet. 1. 13. I think it meet, ſo long as I am in this Tabernacle, to ſtir up your dull mindes, by way of remembrance to your Chriſtian duty, by Croſſing, kneeling to Gods board and Altar, and Surplice; To be memorials were due to Phylacteries Commanded in the Law, to minde heavenly duties, Numb. 15. 38, 39. Deut. 22. 12. And the twelve ſtones ſet up by Gods ſpeciall Commandment, Ioſhu. 4. 2, 3. to be a memoriall of their miraculous entry into the holy Land, and Manna Commanded to be kept in the Ark, as a ſign of Gods feeding his people with Chriſt the bread of life, Joh. 6. 48, 49. 51. are Ordinances of God, to call to remembrance duties and ſpeciall mercies: And Sacraments do ſignifie as tokens ordained of God, Gen. 17. 11. Gen. 9. 13. Heb. 9. 8. The Holy Ghoſt thus ſignifying, that the way to the holieſt, was not yet made manifeſt: So Heb. 8. 5. Heb. 10. 1. And ſo muſt it be here ſaid. The holy Prelats thus ſignifying, that Croſſing ſhould betoken the childes dedication to Chriſts ſervice: So aHooker, Book 3. p. 129.Hooker: Actions leave a more deep and ſtrong impreſſion then the word. What blaſphemy? that Croſſing and Surplice leave a deeper impreſſion in the ſoul, then Gods Word, the power of God to ſalvation, Rom. 1. 16. And mighty through God to caſt down ſtrong holds in the ſoul, 2 Cor. 10. 4? I wonder if Croſſing Capping; kneeling to ſtocks, can bring every thought Captive to the Obedience of Chriſt. 3. It is eſſentiall to the word to teach, and make wiſe the ſimple, Pſal. 19. 7. Pſal. 119. 99. Prov. 6. 23. And Ceremonies are made Symbolicall and Religious teaching ſignes, yet is the ſtock called a Doctrine of lies, Jer. 10. 8. Habac. 2. 18. Though it teach and repreſent the ſame Iehovah that the Word teacheth, Iſa. 40. 18. So it is not a living teacher, becauſe it repreſenteth a falſe god, or not the true God: for the true Iehovah ſaith, To whom will ye liken me? But now the ſtock by mans inſtitution took on it, without a warrant from God, to repreſent God. Now if God had warranted the ſtock to be an image repreſenting God, as he warranteth the Temple, the Ark, Bread and Wine, to be images and repreſentations of the true God Ieſus Chriſt, the ſtock ſhould be a Doctrine of truth, and not of lies; ſo Surplice is a Doctrine of lies, not becauſe what it teacheth is a lie, for what it teacheth is Scripture, Iſa. 52. 11. That theſe who beareth the Veſſels of the Lord, (that is Paſtors) ſhould be holy: but it is a Doctrine of lies, becauſe it repreſenteth Paſtorall holineſſe by humane inſtitution, without all warrant of the Word of God. And when Paul calleth holidayes Elements, Gal. 4. 6. He meaneth that they ſpell to us, and teach us ſome truth, as aEſtius, 1, 3. diſt. 37. S. 14.Eſtius ſaith, That holidayes do teach us Articles of Faith: To which meaning, bPalud. m. 3. d. 9. q. 1. art. 2.Paludanus, cCajet. in 3. q. 25. art. 3.Cajetan, dVaſquez to. 3. de Ado. diſp. 103. c. 4.Vaſquez ſay, God may well be painted in ſuch expreſſions, as Scripture putteth on God, as in the likeneſſe of a Dove, as a man with hands, eyes, ears, feet, all which are given to God in Scripture. 4. It is eſſentiall to the Word to ſet down the means of Gods worſhip, which is the very ſcope of the ſecond Commandment; and therefore the Iews waſhings and Traditions are condemned, becauſe they be Doctrines of men, appointed by men to be means of the fear or worſhip of God, as Math. 15. 9. Mar. 7. 8. Iſa. 29. 13. Hence we owe ſubjection of Conſcience to Ceremonies, as to lawfull means of Worſhip. 1. Stirring up our dull ſenſes: And 2. as lawfull ſignes repreſenting in a Sacramentall ſignification, holy things: 3. As teaching ſignes: 4. As means of Gods fear and worſhip: Whereas God (as eAinſworth, commu. of Saints.Ainſworth obſerveth well) in the ſecond Commandment forbiddeth all images and repreſentations: 2. All ſhapes, Exod. 20. 4. Temniah. 3. Forms of figures, Tabuith, Deut. 4. 16. 5. Any type of ſhadow, Tſelem, Ezek. 7. 20. 16, 17. 6. Any pictured ſhape, Maskith, Levit. 26. 1. Any Statue, Monument, Pillar, Matteſebah, any Graven, or Molten Portraict, Hoſ. 13. 2.
5. We are obliged to obey the Word, Exod. 20. 7. Prov. 3. 20, 21. Prov. 8. 13. Ier. 6. 16. Ier. 5. 7. 2. We owe to the Word belief, Luk. 1. 20. Love, Pſal. 119. 49. 81. Hope: 3. And are to expect a reward therefore, Pſal. 19. 11. Rev. 2. 7. 10. 27, 28. Gal. 4. 11. Rom. 6. 23. Coloſſ. 2. 18. Hebrew. 11. 25. Pſal. 34. 9. Pſalme 58. 11. Then if Decency be commanded, and order, in the third Commandment, Ergo, this, and that orderly mean of Worſhip, as Surplice; But can we ſay, I hope in the Surplice? O how love I croſſing and Capping? can we believe in Ceremonies, as means of Gods worſhip? 6. The word is Gods mean to work ſupernaturall effects, to convert the ſoul, Pſal. 19. 7. To work Faith, John 20. 3. To edifie, Act. 20. 32. To ſave, Rom. 1. 16. The obedience to Gods word, bringeth Peace, Pſal. 119. 165. Comfort, v. 50. Gen. 49. 18. Iſa. 38. 3. But Ceremonies, being apt to ſtir up the dull minde, muſt be apt to remove Naturall dulneſſe, which is a ſupernaturall effect, and ſo to bring, Peace, joy, comfort: Organs are now holden by the ſame right, that they were in Moſes-Law, then they muſt ſtir up ſupernaturall joy: There muſt be peace and comfort in practiſing them: Hear how this ſoundeth, This is my comfort, O Lord, in my affliction, that thy Surplice, Organs, and holy-dayes have quickened my dull heart. Now what comfort, except comfort in the Scriptures? Rom. 15. 4. Ceremonies be innocent of all Scriptures.
What joy (a proper fruit of the Kingdom of heaven, Rom. 14. 17.) can be in ſapleſſe Ceremonies? yea, obſerve, 1. Who truly converred from Popery, who inwardly humbled in ſoul, doth not abhor Ceremonies, by the inſtinct of the new birth? 2. What ſlave of hell and prophane perſon call not for Ceremonies? 3. Who hath peace in dying, that Ceremonies were their joy? 7. All Lawfull Ordinances may by prayer be recommended to God for a bleſſed ſucceſſe as all the means of ſalvation, Pſal. 119. 18. Matth. 26. 26. Act. 4. 29, 30. 2. We may thank God for a bleſſed ſucceſſe, which they have by the working of the ſpirit of Grace, 2 Cor. 2. 24. 1 Cor. 1. 4, 5. 2 Theſ. 1. 2, 3. Epheſ. 1. 3. 3. We are to have heat of zeal againſt prophaning of word, Sacraments, Prayer, or other Ordinances of God: But what faith in praying, Lord work with Croſſing, Capping, Surplice? For where the word is not, nor any promiſe, there be no Faith, Rom. 10. 14. What praiſing can there be for Ceremonies working upon the ſoul? What zeal (except void of knowledge and light of the word, and ſo but wilde-fire? Gal. 4. 17, 18. Phil. 3. 6. 2 Sam. 21. 2.) can there be, though the Surplice be imployed to cleanſe Cups, and Croſſing be ſcorned? If the ſubject be nothing, the accidents be leſſe; if Surplice be not commanded, nor forbidden, the reverent or irreverent uſage thereof, cannot be forbidden, nor commanded, true zeal is incenſed only at ſin, and kindled toward Gods warranted ſervice. 8. I take it to be Gods appointment, that the Spirit worketh by a ſupernaturall operation, with his own Ordinances, in the regenerated, but we deſire to know how the Spirit worketh with Ceremonies: Formaliſts are forced by theſe grounds to maintain the Lawfulneſſe of Images: So 1. They be not adored: 2. If they be reputed as indifferent memorative Objects, and books to help the memory. But 1. It ſhall be proved that at firſt, Papiſts did give no adoration to Images, nor doth Durandus, Hulcot, Pic. Mirandula acknowledge any adoration due to them, but proper to God▪ before the Images as objects. 2. We may liken God and Chriſt to a ſtock, ſo we count it indifferent, to make, or not to make ſuch an image, yet likening him to any thing is forbidden, Iſa 40. 18. Alſo we eſteem it Idolatry interpretative, to take Gods place in his word, and to make any thing to be a mean of grace, except Gods own Ordinances: Againſt all theſe Formaliſts have diverſe exceptions.
As 1. Our Ceremonies (ſay they) do not respect the honour of God immediatly, and in themſelves, but by accident, and as parts of Divine worſhip by reduction, as it containeth all the adjuncts of worſhip.
Anſ. Such Logick was never heard of: 1. If he mean a Surplice in the materials, to wit, Linnen and Croſſing Phyſically conſidered, as ſeparated from their ſignification, do not tend immediatly to the honour of God, but as an adjunct, he ſpeaketh nonſenſe, for ſo Bread, Wine, eating, drinking, Water in Baptiſme do not immediatly reſpect the honour of God, but only as they have a Morall conſideration and ſtand under Divine inſtitution. But yet ſo the materiall of worſhip is not the adjunct thereof, but the matter, as the body of a living man is not one adjunct of a man. If he mean, that Ceremonies in a Morall (not in a Phyſicall) conſideration do not immediatly reſpect the honour of God, but reductively, and by accident. Let him ſhow us, if the Surplice doth not as immediatly, and without the intervening mediation of any other thing, ſignifie and ſtir up our mindes to the remembrance of Paſtorall holineſſe, as eating all of one bread, doth immediatly ſtir up our mindes to the remembrance of our Communion of love, that we be all one body in Chriſt, 1 Cor. 10. 16. 2. If he mean Ceremonies as ſuch ſpeciall materialls, to wit, Surplice, &c. as ordained of man, who may ordain another Ceremony, doth not immediatly reſpect the honour of God. 1. This is to beg the queſtion: 2. A white garment upon a prieſt of Jupiter Sacrificing to that Idoll ſhould immediatly reſpect the honour of Iupiter, though the Prieſt might honour Iupiter with garments of white Roſes, or ſome other like device, while he officiateth. So bowing of the knee in prayer doth immediatly honour God, though I may pray ſitting or ſtanding. 3. It is a dream that the honour of the ſubject is given to the adjunct, yea, and properly is the adjunct, and agreeth to the adjunct, as Surplice hath the very Office and place of Gods word and Sacrament…, to teach and ſignifie, and yet they are but adjuncts, if a mans Coat, or his Hat, or Shooes could diſcourſe and reaſon, as only the man can do, in reaſon we ſhould ſay the Coat is the man.
2. They ſay, God forbiddeth efficient and operative means of worſhip, and grace in the ſecond Commandment, or means immediate which worketh by vertue in themſelves, or wrapped in them, for ſo the word and Sacraments are means of grace and worſhip; yea, the Sacraments be exhibitive ſeals, and therefore we owe to ſuch means ſubjection of conſcience immediatly, both to the things inſtituted, and particular means of admonition, and to the duties admoniſhed or called to our remembrance by them, for they have vertue reſiding, and inherent in them, by divine inſtitution to work upon us. But God forbiddeth not, in the ſecond Commandment, means that teach occaſionally, as Objectum a quo, therefore we owe ſubjection of conſcience to the things admoniſhed, but not to the particular means of admonition, therefore we are tied in conſcience to Ceremonies only collaterally and propter aliud, they be only externall objects or occaſions. For whoever (ſaith he) expected that men ſhould be ſtirred up by Ceremonies, as by cauſes, or any otherwayes, but as by ſenſible objects, as we are by the ſight of the creatures, or other memorials? therefore (ſaith he) they are not means, by the which grace is wrought by the power of God wrapped in them, but reſident in God himſelf, that freely giveth the grace, by the right uſe of them: ſo D. Burges.bBurges Rejoinder c. 3. Sect. 9. p. 279. And in a Treatiſe of kneeling, c. 18. q. 4. p. 57.
Anſ. All cometh to this, Ceremonies taketh the place of Word and Sacraments, but cannot fill the chaire, and diſcharge the office ſo well as Gods Ordinances doth: A Clown taketh on the Crown, and uſurpeth the Throne, and cannot do Regall Acts, with ſuch grace of Royall Majeſty, as the Lawfull King, what, is he for that no uſurping Traitor? 2. He will not have Ceremonies to be cauſes of worſhip, but occaſions ſo do Papiſts ſay: Images (ſaith cVaſquez 3. p. To. 1. de ador. 103. c. 4. Cum nos eas form as quibus Deus apparuit d… pingimus, nolumus aliud quam biſtoriam illam, & effectum ob oculos pon…re.Vaſquez) do only ſet before us the Hiſtory and effects of God. Bellarmine, Suarez (as all know) do ſay, That Images cannot ſo repreſent Iehovah; as he is in himſelf, or deſcribed in his word, nor can the Idoll or Image of▪ God repreſent God, as a cauſe, but onelyonly as an object externall and occaſion, and yet God forbiddeth it, Iſa. 40. 18. Hab. 2. 19. 20. 2. Gods word to the reprobate is a ſealed Book, and is, as if you would teach letters, to a new weaned childe, Iſa. 29. 11. c. 29. 9. It worketh by no inherent vertue wrapped in it ſelf, but though it be mighty, yet is it mighty through God, 2 Cor. 10. 4. Ioſhuahs twelve ſtones, the Phylacteries, the Manna, the Rainbow, did only, (as dAquin. 12. q. 102. art. 6. ad. 7. Et idco per aspectum hujus ſigni induccbantur in memoriam ſuae legis.Aquinas ſaith well) worke upon the ſenſes and memory. The word it ſelf doth but work morally or objectively, and is not a cauſe having the power of God wrapped in it. If Surplice work only as an occaſion, the Preachers, Napkin, the bands of women doth ſo excite the memory and the affection: 3. All our Divines teach, that the Sacraments are exhibitive ſeals, but not of themſelves, or by any vertue inherent in them (as Papiſts ſay) but by the power of God, which worketh by the right receiving of the Sacraments, and the Sacraments Actu Primo and eſſentially are only ſignes, which worketh objectively and occaſionally, as you ſay your unhallowed Ceremonies do: 1. becauſe they are Sacraments eſſentially, whether they be received by Faith, or not, and they are exhibitive ſeals only to believers. 2. Vnbelievers ſhould not prophane the Sacraments by their unworthy receiving of them, if they were not Sacraments to them only ſignifying, and if they were exhibiting ſeals to them, then ſhould they receive them worthily, which is againſt what we ſuppoſe: 3. The Fathers, as aJuſt. Martyre Dialog. cum Tryph. ante medium.Juſtine Martyr bIrenaeus l. 4. c. 30.Ireneus cEpiphanius hereſ.Epiphanius dChryſ. hom. 27. in Gen.Chryſoſtom eAmbros lib. 1. de Abraham cap. 4.Ambroſe prove, that Circumciſion, in its nature, except to believers, did only ſignifie Grace.
5. Here be a moſt vilde diſtinction, That we owe ſubjection of conſcience to the thing admoniſhed, but not to Surplice, or to ſuch means and particular admoniſhers, but only collaterally: But …. is the Church ordaining Ceremonies a collaterall Miſtreſſe over the conſcience, & who is the other collaterall judge here? who but Chriſt? 2. We owe this collaterall ſubjection of Conſcience to the Image of We owe ſubjection of Conſcience, collaterall only to the word.the Trinity: for though we owe not ſubjection of Conſcience to the image, as ſuch an admoniſher, or ſuch an exhorting object; ſeeing the Word of God may alſo admoniſh us of God, yet we owe ſubjection of conſcience to the thing admoniſhed, to wit, to the bleſſed trinity. 3. Neither owe we ſubjection of conſcience to the word, as written with ink on paper, nor to the ſound of the word Preached; yea, nor do we owe ſubjection of Faith to the Word as the Word; but only collaterall: when we ſay, (I hope in the Word, (I believe the Word,) I rejoyce in the Word of God) we take the Word, for Objetum quo, and God for Objectum quod, for the word is not the formall object of any ſubjection of Conſcience; I owe to the Word, not a ſubjection of Conſcience collaterall or coequall with the ſubjection that I owe to▪ God, but only ſubordinate as to a mean, and to the Word for God, and becauſe it is inſtituted by God; but I owe ſubjection of Conſcience to God ſolely, independently, and onelyonly; yea, ſubjection of Conſcience is not due to the Word for its manner of working, and not due to the Ceremonies; becauſe they work not as the Word of God doth (as no wonder, they being but hay and ſtubble) but ſubjection of Conſcience is due to the Word, becauſe God is the Author of it, and ſpeaketh in it himſelf, as is clear, Ier. 13. 15. Amos 3. 8. Heb. 2. 3. Hear, for the Lord hath ſpoken, and it is to be received only, and in Conſcience yielded unto, as it is the Word of God, Iſa. 1. 2. 1 Theſſ. 2. 13. Now becauſe we cannot receive the Surplice, Croſſing, Capping, as the Surplice of God, and as the Croſſing of Chriſt; therefore are we not to ſubmit at all to the Doctrines which theſe unlawfull teaching means doth bring to our memory, becauſe they have no warrant of Chriſt, to ſpeak or ſpell us the very language and minde of God, which God hath ſpoken in his word by his holy Prophets and Apoſtles: Yea, though croſſes and afflictions work only upon us, as occaſions, and externall objects; yet are we to ſubmit our Conſcience to them, as to warnings, becauſe they be ſent as Gods Meſſengers appointed by him, as Mic. 6. 9. Hear the Rod, and who hath appointed it. 4. Ceremonies foreignwork (ſaith Burges) as ſenſible objects, and as other Creatures; yea, but he is far wide, the Creature doth book (as the word is, Pſal. 19. v. 1.) the glory of God, and that which may be known of God, is made manifeſt in them: and God hath manifeſted (foreign) theſe things by the Creatures, Rom. 1. 19. But Ceremonies are not books of Gods writing, God hath not written nor booked this upon a Surplice (Be holy, ye who bear the Veſſels of the Lord) he hath written it in Iſaiahs book, c. 52. 11. And we ſubmit to the teaching of the Creatures, though they work not upon the ſoul, as the Word and Sacraments do, becauſe God hath appointed ſuch books to teach us; Erg…, we are in no ſort to ſubmit to the Devils books, Printed by Prelats, or to their Ceremoniall Volumnes, becauſe God hath written nothing upon them; and here by the way, I ſay it is unlawfull, yea▪ and Hypocriſie to be devouter then God will have us, as to enlarge the Phylacteries, and make them above Gods meaſure, Numb. 15. 38. To be humble by a mean not appointed of God, Ioh. 13. Or to do what God only ſhould do, as to make Annointing Oyl beſides Gods Oyl, Exod. 30. 31, 32, 33. Or to ſet a threſhold and a poſt, beſide Gods own threſhold, Ezek. 43. 8. is preſumption.
Laſtly, Gods ſpirit worketh not with Ceremonies, and ſo theyThe ſpirit worketh not with Ceremonies. are as the offering of Swines blood, and the ſlaying of a man; and ſo Abomination to God, Iſa. 66. 1, 2. The holy spirit is merited to us by Chriſt, Ioh. 16. 14. He ſhall receive of mine, and ſhew unto you: But who can ſay that the grace of joy in the holy Ghoſt, wrought by the droning of Organs, and the holineſſe taught by Surplice, is a work of the ſpirit merited by Chriſt as our High Prieſt? 3. God hath made no promiſe that he will work by Ceremonies, for the ſpirit worketh not without the Word; ſo then I might reſiſt the working of the ſpirit, and not ſin againſt the Word; and this is Anabaptiſts Enthuſiaſme: If God work not by them, they be vain and fruitleſſe; and the Idol is unlawfull for this, that it profiteth not. Alſo, the ſpirits action is either naturall or ſupernaturall here: If naturall, it is a naturall work, and a naturall ſpirit, and to be rejected: If ſupernaturall, we may deviſe means to produce ſupernaturall effects, mens Ceremonies can produce ſupernaturall joy, comfort, peace, and acts of grace purchaſed to us by Chriſts merit; this is a miracle.
3. They ſay, All this may be ſaid againſt your Circumſtances of time and place, for they are appropriated to Religious uſes, and not for that made holy parts of Divine Worſhip. 2. Time and place, are new things as our Ceremonies are. 3. Spirituall ſignification maketh Ceremonies ſo much the better, but hindreth them not, but that theyBurges, rejoynder, c. 1. S. 15. p. 57, 58. may be Rites of meer Order: Burges.
Anſ. Time, Place, Pulpit, Table-cloath, are new, Phyſically, often, not new Morally, or Religiouſly, they have no Spirituall influence in worſhip. A civill declamation hath the ſame time, place,(b) Ammes, his freſh ſuit againſt Ceremonies, ib. pulpit with a Preaching; for then, if for application, you call them Religious, as D. Ammes ſaith well, An hill whereon a Preacher Preacheth, a Iudge perſwadeth a Law, a Captain ſpeaketh to his Souldiers, is both a Sacred, a judiciall, a Military hill, 2. Signification ſpirituall, maketh Ceremonies capable of being ordered: for Surplice wearing, and Croſſing, being Doctrinall, as teaching ſignifying, ſtirring up the dull affections, as doth the Word and Sacrament, they require order and decency: Now things of meer order, requireth no ordering, as time & place require not other time & place to circumſtance them right. 2. This is that which Papiſts ſay (as cSuarez, tom. de legib. lib. 4. cap. 1. n. 10. Praecepta Eccleſiaſtica feruntur quatenus convenienti… ſunt ad bonos mores, ut res ſacrae cum debito honore fiant; conſequenter vero interdum habent ſignificationem moralem, quae homines excitat ad virtutem & spem gloriae.Suarez) that by conſequent only, they have ſignification putupon them.
Now fourthly, The place, Matth. 15. where Chriſt reprovethThe place, Matth. 15. touching Traditions of the Elders diſcuſſed. the Traditions of Phariſees, as Doctrines of men. The Jeſuit Vaſquez his Anſwer is their Anſwer: Vaſquez, Tom. 2. in 12. diſp. 152. cap. 4. That Chriſt reproveth them not becauſe they kept the Traditions of the Elders; Sed quod in falſis praeceptis Divinae legi contrari isputarent eſſe ſummam Religionis: Becauſe they believed all Religion to ſtand in their Traditions, which were contrary to Gods Law, and for their own, omitted Gods Commandments. And Suarez, Tom. de legib. lib 4. cap. 2. He reproveth what they added, Tanquam nova, as new things: Corduba, Ad. victor. rel. 1. de poteſtate Eccleſiae, q. 3. Prop. 6. But Chryſoſtom, Hom. 32. in Matth. Thinketh better that they had no power to make Laws; yea, dJanſe…ius, Concord. Evange. p. 120. Becanus the Ieſuit, in opuſc. to. 2. de. Analog. vet. et New Teſt. cap. 1. q. 7. n. 13, 14, 15. reckoneth out three cauſes, why Chriſt reproved all the Traditions of the Phariſees▪ 1. Becauſe they ſought vain glory in ſome of them, Matth. 23. v. 5. 2. They ſought gain of others of their Traditions, Matth. 23. 14. …3. They preferred ſome of them to weightier matters of Gods Law. Anſ. None of theſe toucheth the point in this text, becauſe the Tradition of waſhing hands, is reproved by Chriſt for want of a lawfull Author, and ſo the matter of it alſo was unlawfull; for Chriſt calleth it a Doctrine of men.he condemneth the Laws written in their forehead.
But this expoſition is falſe: 1. They brought in Traditions at firſt for vain glory, to be called Rabbi, Matth. 23. 7, 8. Ergo, they thought them not at firſt of Religious neceſſity: 2. Mark ſaith, cap. 7. 5. Why walk not thy Diſciples according to the Traditions of the Elders? Therefore the externall practice, and not the internall opinion of neceſſity and holineſſe is condemned, as is clear. And when the Phariſees ſaw ſome of the Diſciples eat bread with unwaſhen hands, they found fault. The challenge was for an external omiſſion of an outward obſervance, which may be ſeen with the eyes; Ergo, theſe Traditions are not condemned by Chriſt, becauſe they were contrary to Gods Word, or impious; but in this, that they were contrary, becauſe not Commanded; for in the externall Religious act of waſhing hands, there was no other impiety of a wicked opinion objected to Chriſts Diſciples: for if the Phariſees eye had been ſatisfied in that the Diſciples ſhould waſh before they eat, they would not have contended with Chriſts Diſciples, about the Piety of theſe Traditions, nor about any inward opinion, that they added under this Reduplication as new, as Suarez ſaith: But the Church which cannot erre, including the Jewiſh Pope, the High Prieſt, can adde nothing as new contrary to Gods Law; nor is there any queſtion betwixt the Phariſees and the Lords Diſciples: Whether the Traditions of the Elders, ſhould be eſteemed the marrow and ſum of all Religion, as Vaſquez ſaith; But only anent externall conformity with walking in the Traditions of the Elders, or not walking, as is moſt clear in the Text: It is true, Chriſt objected they accounted more of mens Traditions, nor of Gods Commandments, as Papiſts and Formaliſts do: But that was not the ſtate of the queſtion betwixt the Diſciples of Chriſt and the Phariſees. 2. Chriſt rejecteth theſe Traditions, by an Argument taken from the want of a lawfull Author, while he calleth them Precepts of men, oppoſed to the Commandments of God, and while he ſaith v. 13. That every plant not rooted by his heavenly Father, ſhall be rooted out; Yea, and Chriſt expreſly proveth their worſhip vain, becauſe they taught the fear and worſhip of God, by the precepts of men, and not by the word of God; and Ceremonies are the precepts of men. 3. Mar. 7. 10, 11, 12. He alledgeth their corrupt and falſe expoſition of the fifth Commandment, in ſaying, It is a gift whereby Parents may benefit, which Children offer to God, though they help not their Parents in their poverty; & neceſſity, & ſo you free them from obedience to the fifth Commandment of God, by ſetting up your falſe gloſſe (ſaith Chriſt) which is a human tradition. Then to Chriſt this is a good argument, your corrupting of the fift Cōmandment with your falſe gloſſes is a rejecting of Gods 5. Commandment; why? becauſe it is a doctrine of men, and one of the Phariſees Traditions: For whether they placed operative ſanctity in preferring mens Commandment to Gods or not; none can deny but Chriſt reaſoneth againſt theſe evils, becauſe they were mens Traditions, otherway Formaliſts ſhall be forced to ſay, that if the Phariſees have eſteemed them Arbitrary, and of no operative ſanctity, mens Commandments had not been vain worſhip; Chriſts Argument from Iſa. 29. ſhould prove nothing, for falſe gloſſes and corrupting the fifth Commandment is not vain worſhip, becauſe it is a doctrine of men; for Doctrines of men as only coming from men, and eſteemed Arbitrary, are not vain, ſaith Formalists; yea, except they be contrary in the matter to Gods Law, and proffered or equalized in the opinion of ſanctity to Gods Law, they are not a whit vain, becauſe they come from men, or are doctrines of men. 4. Chriſt defendeth his Diſciples practice in abſtaining from externall not-waſhing; Ergo, he eſteemed the externall waſhing unlawfull: But if the Diſciples abſtinence was becauſe of the impiety of waſhing, and the opinion of ſanctity put upon waſhing, otherwayes Lawfull; he ſhould have defended his Diſciples in a thing unlawfull; for to diſobey the Elders and Church-guides, who ſate in Moſes's chair, and were to he obeyed, Matth. 23. 2, 3. in an externall indifferent act of waſhing not contrary to the waſhings commanded in Moſes Law, and ſo negatively conforme to Gods Law, is Lawfull, as Formaliſts and Papiſts both teach; but Chriſt defended his Diſciples in their non-obedience externall, for they were not challenged, for denying the opinion of operative holineſſe to theſe Ceremonies: Chriſt who commanded obedience to ſitters in Moſes his chair in all things Lawfull, would have obeyed himſelf, and cleared his Diſciples in ſo far, as they ought to obey, or not to obey. 5. Vaſquez ſayes, Theſe Traditions were unlawfull, becauſe they were invented, Sola voluntate hominum abſque ratione, by the ſole will of men without reaſon. But ſo are Popiſh Ceremonies, for if they can be proved by the word of God, and the light of nature, they are eſſentiall parts of Gods word, and not accidentall, nor left to the Churches will. 2. It is good then the Ieſuit confeſſeth the Church from ſole will, and ſo the Pope and Prelat can make no Laws, but either Scripture or natures light muſt warrant them, and ſole will cannot rule them: 3. They had as good reaſon in generall from Moſes his writings, and the Law-waſhings, as Pope and Prelats have for their Traditions. But ſaith Vaſquez, Chriſt complaineth of theſe traditions, becauſe they held them to be, Summam Religionis, the marrow of Religion, and took no care of Gods Law. Anſ. That will no more prove them to be vain worſhip, and that the Diſciples were to be juſtified in their non-conformity to theſe Church waſhings, then that Gods Diſciples, and ſound believers under the Old Teſtament ſhould abſtain from keeping Gods Sabbaths, his new-Moons, and from offering Sacrifices, becauſe the people placed all holineſſe in theſe of old, and neglected works of mercy and juſtice, Iſa. 1. 11, &c. Jer. 7. 4, 5, 6. But (ſay Formaliſts) Chriſt condemneth them becauſe the Phariſees thought, eating with unwaſhen hands defiled the conſcience, and meat defiled the ſoul, when the eaters did not waſh as the elders commanded: Whereas Chriſt ſaith, It is not that which goeth in at the mouth, which defileth the man, but the wickedneſſe that cometh out at the heart. Anſ. It is true, and I think Phariſees believed meat eaten contrary to the Elders Traditions, defiled the conſcience, as is clear, Mat. 15. 16, 17, 18. And that alſo Chriſt condemneth, as a Doctrine of men, and of ignorant men, and ſo doth non-conformity to your Ceremonies pollute the conſcience as a breach of the fifth, and ſecond Command as you ſay.