Anſw. No, but she is to rest in the use of those Seals God hath appoin­ted: For all signs of mens devising cannot teach or stir up true de­votion, but delude, and nourish Superstition. Besides, to do any thing which doth derogate from the Seal of Kings, and their Prero­gative therein, we know how dangerous it is in the Common­wealth; so certainly, to joyn Seals with God's Seals in his Church, is a Point will hardly be answered. It beseemeth us to acknow­ledge God so wise, in the Signs that he hath chosen, as to hold it pre­sumption for any to imitate him in devising of the like: For ex­ample, none might devise an Oyl like his, nor an Altar besides his; Exod. 30 38. Lev. 17.3. Lev. 10.1. none a fire like the fire that he hath chosen; yea, in his works them­selves, he is not magnified as he deserveth, till we confess, None is able to come after him; and till we say, Who is able to do the like? Exod. 3.14. A­gain where man deviseth new signs, the signs of God are vilified, as if they were from an Humane Spirit; yea, as if they were lesse fit and convenient: And whereas Man is carnall, blind, and impotent, and yet a lover of his own devices (no lesse than Pigmalion of his own Picture); if he should be suffered to in­vent new Signs, they would be carnal and not spiritual; dead, having no Power; dark, veiling the brightness of the Sacraments: and yet more loved and delighted in, than the Sacraments themselves. Calr. opusc. de Neces. R form. pag. 59. Joseph. Antiq. lib. 15. cap. 8. Aegesip. lib. 2. cap. 13. For example, a Temple built on Garezim (like the Temple of Jerusa­lem) overtopped the Temple; And to what fame arose a Temple which Orias built in Heliopolis, like to that of the Lord's in Jury?

What our heavenly King delivereth his People must be marked with no other form or print save that which is framed in his Word, and in his own Sacraments: And however God permitted the an­cient [Page 10]Fathers to fail in heart in some particulars, against thei [...] ge­neral Doctrine; yet they ever disallowed and abhorred the chang­ing of signs instituted by God, and the devising of others determi­ned to signify the same thing, that was sealed by the Sacraments. The memory of the Barsamani and Semidalitae is abhorred, Danes. in Aug. de haer. cap. 64. Concil. Braca­rens. 3. cap. 1. Conc [...]l. Con­stan. 6. in Trullo cap. 99. Aug. de haeres. cap. 28. Can. Apest. c. 3. Decret. par. 3. dist. 2. cap. 1.2.3.4.5.6.7. Concil. Const. 6. in Trullo. cap. 32. Lamb. Dan. in Aug de haer. cap. 28. & 64. Concil. Antisi­odorens. can. 8. for that instead of Bread they used Meal, even as others are utterly condem­ned for bringing in Orapes instead of Wine: The Ar [...]mans added sodd meat to the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper: The A­quarli changed Wine into Water: The Artotyritae added Cheese to the Bread in the Supper, upon an imitation of ancient times, when the fruits of the Earth, and the fruits of the Cattel were wont to be offered to the Lord: Others added Hony to the Wine in the Supper, and some Milk: But all these are condemned, because they are not in the Institution.

Q. These Hereticks and Sects condemned, brought in their devised signs as parts of the Sacraments, which is a thing to be condemned: But what say you of signs devised by humane Authority, and an­nexed to the Sacraments, not as parts, but for signification only?

A. Signs annexed to the Sacraments for signification, to declare or teach what God promiseth to man, or what duty man oweth to God, are parts of the Sacraments, no more than some of the for­mer; and the Reasons brought to condemn them, do cashiere and cast out these also.

1. For if he be not devout but presumptuous who administreth o­therwise than he hath received of the Lord, then must all strange signs be abandoned which hath not been seen and approved of God: The charge of the Lord to his People is this, Ye shall do my Judgments and keep my Ordinances to walk therein; Lev. 18 4. Deut. 27.26. Gal. 3.10. Deut. 6.13. Mat. 4 10. Deut. 12.32. Deut. 4 1.2. Zanch. d. Scrip. q. 8. prop. 1. Co. s. 2 A [...]g. Exod. 12.24.43. & 27.21. & 29.9. & 30.21. Deut. 4.1. the meaning is plainly this, Ye shall observe all mine Ordinances, Moral and Ceremonial, and them onely; as the words of this Law is explained by the Apostle. All things which are written in the Book of this Law. And him thou shalt serve, is expounded by our Saviour, Him onely thou shalt serve; more expresly the same Commandment is repeated in other places: What things soever I command you observe to do it, thou shalt not add unto it, nor diminish from it; To what might they not add? neither to the Law Moral nor Ceremonial, as the Word sig­nifieth, and all Circumstances of the Text do convince: For in the former of those places, Israel is exhorted to hearken unto the Sta­tutes and Ordinances of the Lord; under which two words (often [Page 11]joyned together) are comprised all duties of the Law moral and ce­remonial: And thereupon immediately follow these words, Deut. 4.8.40. Deut. 5.1. and 6.1. and 12.1. Mal. 4.4. Lev. 18.5. and 19.37. and 26.22.18.22. Deut. 4.1, 2. Exod. 25.9, 40. and 27.19. Ye shall not add unto the Word (or things) which I commanded unto you. The same is more clear in the second place: for having recited many Precepts Ceremonial, and some few Moral; he concludeth, Whatsoever I command you to observe, take heed to observe it, &c. And Moses himself faithfully in this performed the charge of God; for having received a Commandment from him to make all things pertaining to the Tabernacle, according to the pattern shewed in the Mount, he presumed not to add one pin to that was shewed him, but strict­ly followed his Sampler in every point. Exod. 39.42, 43. And if Moses durst not challenge authority of himself to ordain Sacramentall Rite [...], and an­nex them to the holy Ordinances of the Lord, how shall we be assu­red that the Church hath any liberty herein? what reason can be gi­ven why that should be warrantable in this age of the Church, and in that unlawfull? If the Church will presume to claim any such Prerogative, it is necessary she produce the Charter wherein the Lord hath confirmed such a Priviledg unto her, which before he de­nied to that his Faithfull servant, with whom he was pleased to speak familiarly, and in most friendly manner. The worthy Reformers of Religion, who lived in the Church of the Jews after the dayes of Moses, knew no such grant, for they kept themselves precisely to the Law of the Lord by the hand of Moses, not turning there-from in any thing, without special and extraordinary inspiration. David gave to Solomon his son, 1 Chron. 28.12.19. the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit, of the Courts of the house of the Lord, of all the Chambers round about, &c. And Hezekiah set the Levites in the house of the Lord, 2 Chron. 29.25. with Cymballs, with Psalteries, and with Harps, according to the commandment of David, and of Gad the Kings Seer, and Nathan the Prothet, for so was the Commandment of the Lord by his Pro­phets. Ask the Scripture whether ever the godly Kings among the Jews had any such Authority to bring in any special Action or Ce­remony into the service of God without special warrant; Search the Scriptures about this matter, and if they answer [Nay] to this demand, let us take heed to our selves, that we presume not beyond commission. Cut off those places before cited; the Papists grant, the perfection of the Word of God may well be concluded: Our Writers do substantially prove the sufficiency of the Scripture in matter necessary to Salvation, because we are forbidden to add ought [Page 12]to the Word written (for of that the Te [...] is meant), or to take ought from it; and by the same reason, the sufficiency of the Scriptures in matters Ceremonial, is established; for thse places must be un­derstood of Ceremonies no less then other things. Descrip. q. 8. prop. 1. Zanchius thus urgeth this argument; And lest any Papist (saith he) should except and say, Neither do we think it lawfull to add to those things which pertain to Internall, and so to Spirituall piety and worship of God; but onely the Controversy is of external Ceremonies; I pray you, consider of what things the Lord speaketh in that Chapter, Deut. 4. Of what Ceremonies, sacred Rites, and Judicial Laws; for in the Hebrew, it saith thus, Hear now, O Israel, the Statutes, and the Judg­ments. That word Hachukim doth properly signify Ceremonious Rites of worship: Therefore the Lord would teach, that nothing is to be added, not onely to the Moral Precepts, and internal wor­ship, but also to the Ceremonial-Rites and Institutions; which may be further confirmed against our Adversaries, by the Authority of the vulgar Translation, Interpreting it in Deut. 4.5. Ceremonies; And the Opinion of Stapleton, Relect. prin. fid. doct. cont. 4. q. 3. art. 3. arg. 10. Answ. to the Adm. pag. 30. who making answer to that place alledged by our Divine, to confirm the perfection of Scripture against un­written traditions; saith, It is especially to be understood of the Ceremonies. This is acknowledged by D. Whiteg. God (saith he) in the old Law to his people, prescribed perfect and absolute Laws, not onely Moral and Judicial, but Ceremonial also; neither was there the least thing to be done in the Church omitted in the Law; And therefore for them at that time, and during that State, it was not lawfull to add any thing, nor take any thing away, no not in Ce­remonies and civill Laws. Bill. de Pont. Rom. l. 4. c. 17. The Jews (saith another) had a Pre­scription of particular Rites, most fitly agreeing to the Polity of their Church and Common-wealth. But what? hath God left no greater liberty to the Church in the time of the Gospel, to ordain significant Ceremonies; than was before given unto the Synagogue of the Jews? No surely, both the Jewish and Christian Church are tyed to the direction of the Scriptures, without which they might not presume to do any thing in these matters: How can these pla­ces be alledged with truth of reason against our Adversaries, to prove the perfection of Scripture in opposition to unwritten Tradi­tions. If the Church have authority now to ordain Ceremonies without direction of the Word, which then she had not: easily might they reply, That that Injunction did not concern us at this [Page 13]day, seeing more liberty is given to us touching the Institution of external Rites pertaining to the worship of God, then was granted to the Jews. And if we may add without warrant of the Word, what, and where they might not: Surely the Scripture was a per­fect rule to them: In another manner than it is to us. Zanchius therefore objecting in the name of the Papists, That if these places must be understood of the Ceremonial Law, then it pertaineth not to us, inasmuch as the Ceremonial Laws are now changed: ma­keth answer, That that Precept doth pertain to us, which is mani­fest (saith he) if you consider the end of the Commandment; What end? That we should obey those things, and those things onely that God hath commanded, adding nothing, detracting no­thing. Therefore when the same God hath by his Son given Pre­cepts concerning Ceremonies of the New Testament, and willeth us simply to obey them; the force of that Precept remains, Thou shalt add nothing, diminish nothing. Matth. 28.19, 20. Moreover Christ himself plain­ly commandeth the same, Baptize them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe whatsoever I have com­manded. What is this, but ye shall not add or diminish. Again, what is that that the Apostle saith, I have received of the Lord, what I have delivered unto you: but that it is not lawfull to add nor dimi­nish? Then he concludes, Therefore the force of the Precept in Deuteronomy, Zanch. de se­cundo praec. tit. de ext. cult. q. 1. Tam igi­tur nobis non licet addere his vel detrahere quam eriam non licebat Ju­daeis addere vel detrahere de illis. of not adding or diminishing any thing in the Pre­cepts of God, doth remain perpetual, even concerning Ceremonies, and holy Rites, and pertains to us. The Jews had liberty in cer­tain matters of order pertaining to the service of God, as we now have. In matter of Ceremonies we are tyed to the Word of God, as they were. We have no Ceremonies but two, the Ceremonies or Sacraments of Baptism, and the Lords Supper; and we have as certain direction to celebrate them, as they had to celebrate their Ceremonies; and fewer and less difficulties can arise of ours, than of theirs; we have no special hour, place, or manner of celebrati­on assigned for them; the like may be said of many Jewish Cere­monies, What hour had they for their ordinary and daily Sacrifices? Jun. et Trem. in act. 13.15. was not it left to the order of the Church what places were appoin­ted in their several dwellings to hear the Word of God Preached continually, when they came not to Jerusalem. The Word was commanded to be Preached, but no mention made in what particu­lar method, what manner of place, Pulpit, Seat, or Chair they should [Page 14]have, and yet they had these: they had also forms of Burial and Marriage, though nothing be commanded concerning them: The liberty of the Christian Church standeth in freedome from the bur­then of Jewish Ceremonies, Beza annot. in act. 6. not in power to ordain new Rites at her pleasure, when those which God himself instituted are abolish­ed; for then should our condition in the time of the Gospell be far worse in many respects then theirs was in the time of the Law: for whereas it is the vertue of a good Law, Arist. ad The­od. Ra. 1.3. to leave as little undeter­mined, and without the compass of the Law, as may be. If we have no Word for divers things, wherein the Jews had particular direction; there was greater perfection in the Law given unto them, then in the Word which is left to the Christian Church. Again, Calv. opus. re­spons. versipel. pag. 413. the Ordinances of God, which are ever behovefull, are not so burthensome, as are the unprofitable inventions of men; it is far better to bear the yoak of God, then to be in subjection unto the meer pleasure of sinfull men. And then, If the Church of the Jews was to admit of no Ceremonies, but what was prescribed unto her of the Lord; whereas the Christian Church is to stand to the Arbi­trement of her Guides and Governours: the Bondage and Infancy of the Jewish, Bel. de effect. Sac. l. 2. c. 32. Bell. de Mon. l. 2. c. 13. arg. 9. resp. & pont. r [...]m. lib. 4. cap. 17. Chrysost. hom. 52. in Matth. cited by D. Whitak. de sc. q. 9. c. 14. is much to be preferred before the liberty and ripe­ness of the Christian Church. It is replied, that the adding and diminishing spoken of, doth not mean addition of preservation, but addition of corruption; like as the fraudulent Coyner of Mo­ney doth not corrupt the Kings Coyn, either by adding baser metral unto it, or by clipping any silver from it, and in both kinds he is a Traytor. How little doth this differ from the Jesuites gloss upon this Text: God commands (saith he) nothing to be added to his Precept to corrupt it, but not some things which may perfect it. Can humane devised Rites preserve the Ordinances of God from corruptions; or rather are not all such additions manifest corrupti­ons? When God hath given to Moses particular determinations of all symbolical Rites pertaining to his worship, had it not been an addition of corruption in him, if upon his own head he had annexed any devised significative Rites unto them. Bellarmine, himself grants, it had been; when in his third answer, he labours (but to small purpose) to put this difference betwixt the state of the old and New Testament; Petitur prin­cipium, quia et hoc ipso con­traria est quae­libet nova lex quod divina additur; quan­dequidem iste sibi addi vetat. Tilen. de pot. l. 4. c. 17. not. 11. vise Lubbert. de Pap. Rom. l. 8. cap. 10. That in the one, all Rites pertaining to the worship of God, were particularly determined, but not in the other. And when the Jesuite confesseth in his first answer to that Argument ur­ged [Page 15]by our Divines, against humane Laws binding Conscience; Jun. ani. in Bel. de Pont. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 17. that it is unlawful to add to the things commanded; As, to sacri­fice two Lambs, when God hath commanded onely one; doth he not grant by necessary Consequence, that when God hath appointed that Baptism should be administred with Water, it is unlawfull to add thereto Oyl, Cream, Salt, Spittle, and such like? Moreover, to give Man Authority to add Rites of Information to the holy Or­dinance of God; what is it but to prefer the folly of Man before the Wisdom of God, as though his sacred Institutions must borrow reverence or defence from humane Forgeries:

Doth not this Distinction open a wide gapp to let in manifold Abuses into God's Worship, under the colour of Addition of Pre­servation? Doth it not much impaire the perfection of Scripture, when Rites Sacramental, tending to preserve the purity and due re­gard of Christ's Institutions, shall be esteemed lawful in the imme­diate Worship of God, when they find no footing to stand on in the Word of God: D. Lambard. l. 4. dist. 3. c. 1. D. Sp. pag. 32. D. Cov. against Per. pag. 123. D. Whitg. Ans. Adm. pag. 32. Preserve, or keep carefully that which is committed to our trust. 1 Tim. 6.20. Cajet. interprets this place thus; Inhibetur addi­tio, etiam pra­textu Custo­dien di man­data Dei. See. Calv. in Mat. 15. The Synagogue of Rome doth not maintain her Addition to be of absolute necessity, or essential parts of the Sacraments, but instituted of the Church for signification and pre­servation; and yet they are justly censured as unlawful, and contra­ry to the Authority of the Holy Scripture. The Lord chargeth that we do not add, that so we may preserve it.

This Argument might here be shut up, but that to prevent some Objections, it is good to enquire what is an Addition to the Word. The Patrons of significant Ceremonies say, An unlawful Addition to any of Christ's Sacraments is onely that which either participates therewith in all or at least in the chief and proper ends thereof, or is added for Complement thereof, as necessary, and so, unchangeable. To add to the Word, is to ordain somewhat as a thing absolutely necessary, and pertaining to the Essence of Worship: Those add to the Word,

• 1. Who teach or decree any thing, either in matters of Faith or Ceremonies, contrary to the Word.
• 2. Those that make any thing necessary to Salvation not contai­ned in the Word.
• 3. Such as put any Religion or Opinion of merit in any thing that they themselves have invented, besides the Word of God.

Last of all, They add to the Word, which forbid that thing for a thing of it self unlawful, which God doth not forbid; and [Page 16]make that sin which God doth not make sin.

But in all these definitions, that is left out which Moses meant specially to comprehend, which is, not to do more nor to do lesse than he had commanded: Every unlawful Tradition is contrary to the Word, which forbiddeth all such Additions. But as the Word contrary in strict sense, is opposite to that which is besides the Word, it reacheth not (with the other particulars added to it,) to express what is an Addition prohibited. The Lord Jesus is the sole Doctor of his Church, whose Office it is to teach by word and sign, and therefore whatsoever is devised by Man to instruct by outward resemblance, and to admonish by striking the senses by way of Re­presentation; that is an unwarrantable Addition. God is the on­ly Sealer of his Promises, Tho: Aquin. pag. 3. q. 60. Cajetan. ibid. Cerimonalis lex perfecta in Sc. traditur in libris Mosis, ubi nulla Ceremonia ne minutissima quidem praeter­missa est. Wh. de Sc. q. 6. cap. 14. Quod uni Ju­daeorum populo per Mosen dili­gentersatis prae­scripta essent, &c. Jansen. cond. cap. 120. and Signifier of his Will, by things sensi­ble in the Sacrament, and by words similitudinary in the Scripture; to him it appertaineth to determine what signs must be used to signi­fy. In the time of the Law, when signs reigned, none were law­ful but such as were shewed in the pattern upon the Mount; much more in the time of the Gospel, when shadows are abolished, what God hath not instituted is to be abandoned; Moses durst not add of his own head to those signs that were appointed of the Lord, though to ends inferiour; as profitable onely to signify, not to ex­hibite; as matters of expediency to explain and declare what was represented, not of absolute necessity: And what had been pre­sumption in him, is intolerable in us, being delivered from the Pe­dagogy of the Law: In those things God hath precisely determi­ned; in those actions, the whole form whereof God hath of pur­pose set down to be observed, we may not otherwise do than exact­ly as he hath commanded. Herein, what is not expressed, or by good consequence enjoyned, is to be held unwarrantable: In this case, the devising of new Rites to signify the truths taught in Scrip­ture, or sealed in the Sacraments, cannot be deemed less than an un­lawful Addition; Babing. in com. 2. pag. 95. upon this ground our Divines have cast Images out of the Church, not onely for teaching ill, but for teaching at all; because God alloweth no Teacher but himself, nor means of teach­ing but his holy Word and Sacraments. And when the Son of God hath instituted the Sacraments, and he hath commanded them to be administred in certain Rites, instituted of himself; It is a very hard Question (saith Chenmitius) whether Man be permitted to add others over and above, Exam. Conc. Trid. part. 2. tit. de. rit. Bapt. under any pretence Dr. Willet reasoneth thus [Page 17]against the Rites of Popish Confirmation: Willets Cont. 14. q. 1. par. 5. pag. 719. Col. 2.17. All of them are super­stitious, having mystical and typical significations and shadows, which agree not with the Nature of the Gospel; for all sha­dows are now past, the Body being come: It is contrary to the Rule of the Gospel there should be such Types, Shadows, and Sig­nifications brought into the Service of God. Id. Cont. 12. q. 8. Arg. 1. pag. 504. Therefore we dare not allow of these descriptions of unlawful Additions before-mentio­ned, not onely because they cannot be justified by Scripture, as all good Expositions Theological must and ought; but also the whole current of Scripture plainly sheweth it to be too strict, as may ap­pear in part by that which hath been already said, and remaineth to be proved more at large hereafter: Unde jus prodit, interpretatio quo (que) procedat. Decret. Grego. lib. 5. Tit. 39. cap. 31. Innocent. 3. Quis legum Aenigmata solvere idoneus esse videtur, nisi is cui soli Le­gislatorem esse concessum est. Cod. lib. 1. Tit. 14. leg. 9. & 10.11. & Tit. 17.

2. As in matters of Faith, so in matters of Ceremonies signifi­cative pertaining to the Worship of God, an Argument doth hold from the Negative, to disallow what is not found in the Scriptures expresly, or by good consequence: As to say, such a thing is not expressed or revealed in the word; therefore it is no matter of Faith, nor such as a man is bound necessarily to believe: such a sign is not warranted by the Scripture, therefore it is not to be used in the Worship of God. Jer. 7.31. & 19.5. Thus the Prophet Jeremiah reasoneth more than once against the idolatrous men of Judah, who burned their Sons and Daughters in the fire to Baal; The Lord did not command you, he spake no such thing, neither came it into his mind, Therefore this ye ought not to have done. The thing he reproved was not onely not commanded, but forbidden, and that expresly; yet the Prophet chooseth rather to charge them with the fault of making a Law unto themselves, Hook Eccle [...]. Pol. lib. 2. Sect. 6. than the crime of transgressing a Law which God had made. For when the Lord himself had once precisely set down a form of executing that wherein we are to serve him; the fault ap­peareth greater to do that which we are not, than not to do that which we are commanded: In this we seem to charge the Law with hardness only, in that with foolishness: In this we shew our selvs to be weak and unapt to be Doers of his Will, in that we take upon us to be Controllers of his Wisdom: In this we fly to perform the thing which God seeth meet, convenient, and good, in that we pre­sume [Page 18]to see what is meeter and convenienter better than God him­self: For these and such like Reasons, though the sin of Judah was directly prohibited; yet it pleased the Lord by his Prophet to repre­head it, for that he commanded them not so to do. From these pla­ces some Divines do prove the perfection of Scripture against the Papists; Dr. Reynolds. thes. Gatak. of Lots cap. 7. S. 16. Others, that in the Point of God's Worship, the Argu­ment holdeth from the Negative for the Substance of it: And by the same Reason we may conclude, that no Ceremony significant may be admitted in the Worship of God, which carry not the stamp of divine approbation; for the ground of the Prophet's Argument will bear all alike. The purpose of God was to teach his People, both unto whom they should offer Sacrifice, and what Sacrifice was to be sacrificed; therefore no Sacrifice is to be offered which God hath not commanded: The Lord hath determined how he will be served; therefore upon our own Will and Pleasure we must not add any thing unto it for Substance, or take ought there-from: And the Lord also hath appointed and determined what outward Signes shall be used to teach, signify, or represent by Analogy or Proporti­on. Therefore, no Sign is to have place in his Worship, which cannot shew descent from above: Numb. 15.38.39. The Lord, expounding the Use of the Fringes that he commanded the Israelites to make in the bor­ders of their Garments, saith, It shall be to them for a Sign, that they may look upon it; and remember all the Commandments of the Lord, and do them; and that ye seek not after your own hearts, and your own eyes, after which you use to go a whoring. Therefore he willeth, that for ever they remember all his precepts, even those that concern Ceremo­ries or external Worship; and on the contrary, he will not that ei­ther in Ceremonies or external Worship they hear their own heart, or institute those things that seem good unto them in their own eyes, Nibil oporteat in rebus divinis facere, sine Dei Verbo. Bell. de Sacr. lib. 1. cap. 19. or follow them; Nay, in the Worship of God, to follow that which is pleasing to us, is to run a whoring from God, because we follow them in the heat of adulterous Love. It may be some will answer, that Ceremonies of absolute necessity, wherein the Substance of God's Worship consisteth, and which absolutely binds Consci­ence, must be instituted of God; but not those that are appoint­ed onely for signification, and as things in themselves free and in­different, because these may be profitable to put men in mind of their duties to cherish Faith, and recall from sin. But what ground is there in Scripture for this distinction; where is the liberty gran­ted [Page 19]in the one, denied in the other kind of Ceremonies▪ Sicut owne au­rum quodcu [...] (que) fuerit extra templum non est sauctificatum. Wh [...]t. de Pont. q. 1. c. 3. & 8. q. 2. c. 2. & q. 4. c 1. S. 2. Orig. in Matth. Hom. 25. In Philo­sophy no distinction is to be allowed, which Reason doth not con­firm: In Theology, what hath not evident foundation in the Scrip­tures themselves, what is not native and taken out of them, is to be held counterfeit and adulterate: The Rule is, where the Law di­stinguisheth not, we must not distinguish; it is not sufficient there­fore so to distinguish, unless it can be shewd (which yet hath not been done) that the distinction hath footing in the Word of God. The Papists and Lutherans do in this manner plead for the Use of Images in their Churches; Images are Lay-men's Books, by them they are put in mind of the Death and Passion of Christ; they may see more at once represented by them than they can read in many hours. What Answer do our Divines return unto them but this, That the Word and Sacraments were appointed of Christ to teach, Conc. Seno. sense. Harm. Conf. Helver. cap. 4. fol. Synt. Tom. 2. l. 6 7. 19. in secundo praec. Par. in Gen. 28.18. De secundo praec. tit. de Imag. c. 15. resp ad Arg. 9. & 10. Faith cometh by hearing, not by seeing or gazing. Jew. art. ador. div. 10. Mart. in 1 Reg. 7. Gualter in Heb. 2.18. and that to add to them is presumptuous against the Lord, in [...]urious unto his Ordinances; that teaching to the Eye is sufficiently per­formed by the Sacraments, and that the Lord, for Instruction of his People, commanded his Ministers to preach, not to paint. Faith, saith Zanchius, is to be promoted; but by what means, such as God hath ordained, viz. The Word and the Sacraments: God would have us to be taught divine things, and all men as well vulgar as o­thers to know things belonging to their Salvation; But whence or of what Instructors? Of those that he hath given to be Teachers unto us, not of those that do please our selves: He hath given un­to us the Book of the Creatures, whence we may know many things of God: He hath given us the Book of the Scripture, which he would have continually to be read, and to be explained in the Church; What canst thou desire more? He hath given Sacra­ments, Glasses of divine mysteries: He hath instituted us a Mi­nistry, and [...]arged us to exercise our selves daily in the Law of God; Ought not these Books and Teachers to be sufficient for us? Now, a significant Ceremony is an Image, or a Representa­tion to teach by striking the sense; and what is said against Ima­ges, must necessarily hold against them also; so that either we must take part with the Lutherans and Papists against the Worthies of our Church, or acknowledge the former distinction to be vain, and of none effect. Nay, let this distinction be of any weight, and the Papists must be acquitted in their Oyl, Cream, Salt, Spittle, Crosses, Lights, Tabers, and the rest of their rotten Customs, wherewith they [Page 20]have besmeared and defiled the Ordinances of God; for none of these be held by them to be of absolute necessity.

A second Answer there is given to this Argument, of no more strength than the former, viz. That to devise Signs of spirituall things is unwarrantable, but not to ordain Ceremonies that shadow forth some moral duty which Man oweth to God: But this is barely spoken, not proved by any passage of holy Writt, and may as easily be cast off as it is brought forth. The Scripture doth not teach it lawful for Man to devise mystical Signs appropriated to the so­lemn Worship of God, to represent moral duties; when it forbid­deth by any devised Sign of that Nature to shadow forth spiritual duties, and what we learn not thence in matters of this kind, we dare not receive. When the Lord was pleased to instruct his Church by Types and Figures; he himself appointed not onely those that did prefigure Christ, but such also as served by their sig­nification to teach moral duties: All mystical Rites the Lord him­self precisely prescribed, Exod. 25.9.38.39. & 39.42.43. 1 Chro. 28.12.19. 2 Chro. 29.25. 1 Chro. 24 19. 2 Chro [...].8.14. laying a strict charge upon Moses, to make all things according to the pattern shewed him; which Rule was religiously observed by all religious and worthy Reformers of Religion afterwards, not one adventuring without special direction from the Word of God, to add any thing thereto, or alter ought therein.

Again, Duties moral and spiritual are parts of God's inward wor­ship; and Ceremonies, ordained to teach either of them by mystical Representation, are parts of his outward Worship and Service; and so the matter is one, whether the Sign doth shaddow forth a morall or spiritual duty; for it is not the particular good thing signified by the Sign, but the Institution of it to that end, that makes the Worship true or false: If it be appointed of God, it is true Wor­ship, let the signification be moral or spiritual; if of men, it is false Worship, whatsoever it be set a-part to represent or teach, in our intention in the solemn Worship of God. In defence of Images it is objected, that Paulinus Nolanus Bishop commanded the Histo­ry of the Old and New Testament to be painted in his Church, and that to this end, that the People might be drawn from surfetting and drunkenness, when they met together to banquet in that place, being busied in viewing and beholding Images: See Jewel's Apol. par. 5. cap. 3. div. 1.2. Our Divines re­ply, that the Authority of man ought not to seem any thing against the plain and manifest Word of God; and Nolanus and his follow­ers [Page 21]did offend the more grievously, Martyr. part. 2. c. 5. S. 23. that they adventured to do that which the former Fathers did alwayes disallow: whereby we see what the judgment of Ancient and Modem Divines is, touching Images setup in the Church, to represent or put in mind of Moral duties. And if Images must be abolished; significant signs of mens devising, by the same reason, remain under condemnation: for they are Images, that is, certain figures having relation to the exemplar, or certain pictures with relation of representations.

3. No Act, Ordinance, nor Institution, contrary to a general Ne­gative Commandment, is lawfull, unless that Act, Ordinance, or Institution be in special warranted by the Word of God; for the Scripture should not be sufficient to make the man of God, that is, the Minister or Prophet, perfect to every good work, if an Act in special might be lawful without particular approbation, which is in general condemned as unjust and evill. If we find, that holy men of God did some particular things, 1 Sam. 7.17. 1 King 18.32. D [...] 2.5, 6, 7, 13, 14. which were generally forbidden in the Law; as Samuel built an Altar at Ramath, Elias the Prophet on Mount Ca [...]mel; when by the Law it was not lawfull to offer any Sacrifice, but before the Lord, in the place which he should chuse. We must know, they did this by special direction, and extraordi­nary instinct. The Lawyers say, Generi per speciem dero­gatur. Sext. de lib. 5. tit. de regulis Juris 33. Digest. l. 50. tit. 17. regul. 80. That a particular doth derogate from the general: And in these places, where a special fact doth not agree with a general Precept, there the Scripture is not repug­nant unto it self; but by the special, it is derogated from the gene­ral. But though it was lawfull for them that had such an extraordi­nary Commandment contrary to the Law, at what time it pleased God after that manner to make known his pleasure, to do what was so required of them; yet now the reason is not like, since God speaketh unto us by his Word, according to which we must walk and worship him, and affordeth not that special priviledg to us, that he did to them. For God is free, subject to no Law; Zanch. de se­cundo praec. he comman­deth us, not himself; he prescribeth a general Law, not to himself, but to us, which it is never lawful to transgres, unless there be pecu­liar warrant from God for it. But the use and institution of Cere­monies, signifying resemblance in the solemn worship of God, is contrary to a general Negative Commandment; for the second Commandment forbidding the making of any graven Image, or the likeness of any thing in heaven above, or in the earth beneath; doth also prohibit all outward forms devised by men for Religious use [Page 22]in the service of God: It being a thing peculiar to the Lord, to prescribe how his will and worship shall be taught, as what worship shall be given unto him. By the letter of the Precept onely, the making of graven Images, or Similitudes; and the adoration of them is condemned; but under that particular, we are charged to forge nothing of our own heads, in Ceremonies, or Rites significant, but to be content with those Ceremonies, and that outward Worship which God is pleased to prescribe or appoint; whether they be Sacraments, Sacrifices, or other holy things: This to be the scope of that Commandment, is made evident many wayes.

First, by the exposition that is given thereof in other passages of holy Writ: It is an unquestionable truth, that the true meaning of every Precept is to be collected out of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles; and what we find in them commanded or forbidden, is to be referred to some one or more of these ten Commandments, though it be not expresly mentioned in any one of them. Now then in the Law we read, That Moses was commanded to do all things according to the pattern shewed in the Mount, without allowance to add one pin for resemblance or shadow upon his own head.

To what Commandment can this charge be referred, but to the second: And must it not then condemn all significant Ceremonies forged by men unto themselves for the service of God; Nadab and Abihu are smitten with death, Levit. 10.1. Numb. 3.4. Lev. 1.7. & 6.12. & 9.24. Pisc. obs. in Lev. 10.2. for presuming to offer with strange fire, which God commanded not; whence Divines observe, that the external worship of God is precisely to be exercised according to the Prescription of God; and that we may not depart one hair breadth from his holy Institution upon any good intent; this their fact was contrary to the second Commandment; and is it not ma­nifest then that we are thereby enjoyned, neither to alter what God hath instituted, nor to devise of our own heads what he never ap­pointed. What Precept did Ahaz transgress in commanding an Altar for burnt offering to be made after the pattern of the Altar at Damascus, but the second? or by what reason can it be reduced un­to it, unless we shall acknowledg that all things appointed by God in his service, must carefully be observed without addition or de­traction, and that all devices of men for worship, and instruction, are utterly unlawfull.

Secondly, The words of the Commandment do shew no less; [Page 23]for the former word Pesel doth signify any thing hewen, graven, Deut. 7.5. & 2.3. Deut. 7.25. Esay 16.17. Hos. 13.2. Ezek, 8.10. Deut. 27.15. Esay 30.22. Numb. 12.8. Psal. 17.15. cut or carved; which is translated by the Greek, an Idoll; the Caldee Paraphrase, an Image; and the Thargum, called Jonathans, an Image or figure; under which name, all other sorts are implyed, as Molten or Painted Images, or the like. The other word Tema­nah, is in signification, a similitude or figure, and is opened by Moses, by Semel, and Tabinth, words of the same signification, Deut. 4.16. So that all Portrai [...]ures, Shapes, Resemblances, and Forms of things, Natural, or Artificial, Real, or Imaginary, devi­sed by man for Religious use, worship, or instruction, are forbidden both by the scope, and letter of the Commandment. And if the words were not of that large signification, yet seeing all vices of the same kind are forbidden where one is expresly mentioned; when material, cut or carved Images are prohibited, there all repre­senrations, material, aerial, real, imaginary, proper, and tropical, are condemned; For it is not the matter of the thing, but the form or application that is against the Precept, which is one and the same in representations of what kind soever, in Pictures, proper, Meto­nymical, and Metaphorical: It matters not whether the Image be a thing truly existent, formed of any visible matter, Brass, Wood, or Stone; or whether it have no other being but in the mind of men. If it be an Image devised by men for Religious use, it commeth un­der the sentence of the Law: Martin de Sac. tract. 5. cap. 6. if we ask the consent of learned In­terpreters, they generally agree herein. Thus they reason against the Image of the Crucifix stamped upon the Popish hoast: the ma­nifest Law of God disalloweth all Images made for the cause of Re­ligion, after what sort soever; but Christ crucified set before our eyes in the Word and Sacraments, is life and Salvation. When our Adversaries alledg in defence of Images, That Solomon in his Temple erected Cherubims on the Mercy-seat, where God was worshipped: To this our Divines answer, Abbot against Bishop. tract of Imag. SS. 8. Will. Cont. 9. q. r. Art. 2. also the second Answ. That these Cherubims were erected by the special Commandment of God, who had pre­scribed both the form of them, and the place where they should be set. For God commanded Moses to make the Ark, and the Pro­pitiatory or Mercy-seat, which was the Cover of the Ark, according to the fashion that he had shewed him: withal, he appointed him to make two Cherubims, one at the one end of the Mercy-seat, and the other at the other end; so that with their wings stretched out, they should cover the Mercy-seat. According to this Command­ment [Page 24] Moses did, but what was done with these Cherubims which Moses set up, it is uncertain; but this is most sure, that Solomon by vertue of the same Commandment, 1 Reg. 8.5, 6. and to observe that which by Moses was prescribed, made two Cherubims to stand in the same place, as the other did, and to the same use. Inasmuch then as God had by the Law directed in what sort this should be done, Solomon needed no further special direction for the doing of it, but had Tres­passed against God, if, being appointed to build an house unto God, he had not done it according to such rules as the Law before had li­mitted for the doing of it. It is fitly answered (saith Martyr) That God gave the Law, Com. places, part, 2. cap. 5. S. 26. not to himself, but unto us; so then we must follow the same, neither may we bring him into order; if he other­whiles would do any thing of special Prerogative, he must be suffer­ed to do after his own will, but we must obey the Law that is made. Those special Precepts of God (saith Ursinus) did as much derogate from the second Commandment concerning Images, Ursin. tom. de Imag. pag. 43. as that singular Commandment in times past given unto Abraham concerning the offering of his Son Isaac, may be said to have detracted from the sixth Precept of the Decalogue. Tert. de Idolat. Of old, Tertullian returned the same Answer to the like Objection; ‘Well and good, (saith he) one and the same God, both by his general Law forbad any Image to be made, and also by his extraordinary and speciall Command­ment, willed an Image of a Serpent to be made; If thou be obe­dient to the same God, thou hast his Law, Make no Image; but if thou have regard to the Image of the Serpent that was after­ward made by Moses, then do thou as Moses did. Make not any Image against the Law, unless God command thee, as he did Moses.’

They add further, that they were types of spiritual things; which now have not place in the Church of God: Certainly (saith Mar­tyr) these Images had some figurative meaning: Ubi supra. But they were not set forth, as an example for us to follow; and seeing they were external things, and had the Word added to them, they were (after a sort) Sacraments of those times: and it is only God, and not man, that can make Sacraments. And in Conclusion, they shut up their Answer with this, Martin. de 2. praec. pag. 166. Martyr. ubi supra. That we must attempt nothing without the Com­mandement and Warrant of God: For it is to be noted, That So­lomon and Moses, which made the Cherubins, durst not make any other, they only made that, which was commanded unto them by [Page 25]God: They painted not upon the Walls the acts of Abraham, nor the doings of Adam, Moses, or o [...]hers of the Fathers. By all this they sufficiently declare, That, in their judgments, the erecting of Images in the Temple for signification only, without speciall War­rant from God, is a breach and violation of the holy Law and Com­mandement of God. U [...]s. tom. 2. de divis. decalog. Fulk Rejoyn. against Mar­tial. Perk. Arm. aurea. Martin. ubi supra. Lumb. l. 4. dist. 1. T. Aquin. pag. 3. q. 83. a [...]t. 1. Jewels Apol. Angl. pag. 37. And in their Expositions upon this Com­mandement, they teach, That it condemneth all counterfeit means of Gods Worship, and requireth the observation of Rites and Cere­monies prescribed by the Lord; in which only we ought to rest: For it becomes us not to think our selves wiser than God; who would not have his Church to be instructed with dumb signs, but with the lively preaching of the Word: The Sacraments are Images in the eyes of all the Learned, and unlawful by this Commandement, had not God himself commanded them. What? Are they unlawfull only as seals, and not as visible signs of God's Will and Pleasure? Yes; as signs also; for a sign signifying by resemblance, and an Image, are equivalent, and in largeness of sense but one; and a sign is a sign from him that hath a power to institute it. The affirmative part enjoyneth obedience to all the Worship appointed by God; all which was significative, Heb. 8.5. & 8.1. But by the nature of the affirmative, we learn: Therefore we may conclude, that the insti­tution of significant Ceremonies, is directly contrary to the Moral Law of God; and, without his warrant, is utterly unlawful.

The quality of the Negative. Nullum enim signum sensi­b [...]l [...] potest esse causa gratiae, nec illam in­fallibiliter sig­nare, nisi ex Domini insti­tutione. Bell. de Sac. l. 1. c. 11. Atqui in Sa­cramentis sig­nificare gra­tiam est eid [...]m Sacramentali­ter conferre. Chem. de Sac. l. 3. c. 8.4. Whatsoever is not of faith, is sin: But significant Ceremonies not approved of God in his Word, cannot be instituted or used in faith. Man hath a twofold light given him for his guidance and direction, Natural Reason; and Super-natural Instruction; and what cannot be determined by the former, must be warranted by the other; otherwise it is unlawful, and consequently not of Faith: But natural reason cannot determine what Ceremonies significant are meet and fit to be used in the solemn Worship of God: For man hath neither power nor authority to bless, nor liberty to annex any such forged or devised signs to the holy Institution, nor wisdom to discern what is fit and acceptable in that kind. He that is of authority to institute a sign to be the teacher of my understanding, and an inciter of my devotion, must be able to give vertue inherent, or assistance to that which should be the cause of such effects; else is the sign vain and fruitless, the deviser idle and presumptuous. Now, man of himself can give no power to any Symbolical sign of [Page 26]hi [...] devising, H [...]r. Con­ [...]ess. W [...]tte n. breg. tit. de consecrat. aquae salis. M [...]rtyr. Com. Places. p. 4. c. 9. Sect. 5. [...]un. de cult. Sanct. l. 3. c. 7. n. 12. to produce such effects: For the vertue of things comes either from the Word of God put forth in the first Creation, or from his after-institution, or from the Churches [...]mpetration; which obtaineth by prayer those effects of things to which they serve by God's Creation and Institution; not any creating or new conception of things to supernatural uses: So that what force or vertue to ends or purposes supernatural, God hath not p [...]t into the creature, that, man by his institution, cannot communicate unto it. Things natural, have indeed by creation an aptness in them to represent spiritual; and some agreement with them: But the de­termination of them to this purpose, the blessing of them in this use, is from Him only that gave them their first being. Man cannot give any blessing to his devises; Zepp. de Sa­c [...]am. l. 3. c. 12. Greg. 2. Nor hath he any warrant to begg Gods blessing upon them: for God will not be effectual by Tradi­tions or humane Ceremonies, but by the order and mean [...] appointed by Himself; M [...]tth. 15.8. according to that, They worship me in vain by the Pre­cepts of men: Therefore such humane ceremonies can work no true devotion, no motions of heart pleasing to God, no confirmation of faith, or serious repentance [...] but only have an opinion of wisdome in voluntary worship. Col. 2.23.

Again: What understanding is there in man, to assure him that he may lawfully annex signs of his own devising to the Word and Sacraments, which God hath ordained for the full instruction of his Church? Levi [...]. 10.1. Deut. 1.18. & 17.3. 1 Reg. 16.14. 2 Reg. 17.26. God hath disallowed the institution of new rites not commanded: as Achaz and Manasses building new Altars in the house of the Lord, are reprehended for it. And is there any wit of man that can devise how we should follow them in that kind; or in general do as they did; and not incurre the same rebuke? As the sin of the Angels that fell, and the Sodomites, was one in kind, though different in its special nature; So is the sin of building an Altar, and devising Sacramental rites in the worship of God. Is it not our duty to acknowledg God so wise and gracious in the signs that he hath chosen; as to hold it presumption for any man to imi­tare him in devising of the like? Are not the Sacraments the seals of the heavenly King? and can any new print be added to the seal of a King, without high Treason? What Master of a Family in his house, What Prince in his Dominion, would grant power to any one, to change, alter, or reform any thing upon his own plea­sure? The signs which the Lord hath instituted for the instruction [Page 27]of his Church, are sufficient, and do better serve for the purpose than any that man can devise: Therefore it is needless to forge any other; yea, it is a vilifying of the wisdom of God. It is easie to shew, that the godly Learned in all Ages have disliked the devi­sing of new signs; howsoever, who men they have failed in some particulars, and ignorantly gone against what in general they sound­ly taught: He is too partiall, as will not acknowledg this in the Fathers themselves, who did substantially maintain the perfection of Scripture, and the necessity of celebrating Divine Mysteries ac­cording to the precise institution delivered unto them: and yet gave more power and vertue to vain inventions, and urged the ne­cessity of Traditions, further than the Truth would permit; or can stand with their own doctrine and positions truly laid down in other places of their Writings. It is well known, the Papists have mi­serably cor [...]upted the Simplicity of Gods Ordinances, by their sin­ful, vain, and idle Ceremonies; yet some sparkles of this truth doth shine amongst them: Bellarmine would prove, that the Jews did not only desire a corporal sign of the true God, De Eccl. trimuph. l. 2. c. 13. Sect. At hoc. because then they had no need to make a Calf; for they had a Cloud and a Pillar, which did lead them better than the Calf, which must be carried: In this reason, though weak and simple (for humane vanity doth many things both needless, and unlawful; else had their Oyl, Cream, Salt, Spittle, Ag [...]us Dei, never been devised) this truth is contained, That where God hath ordained signs profitable and sufficient for the in­formation of his Church, Si populo Ch istiano Apostoli Caere­monias vel Ri­tus divinitus traditos impo­nere noluerunt; quis, oro, sanae mentis obtru­det illi adin­ventiones ad­inventas hu­manitus. Confess. Hel. vet. cap. 27. Con [...]. Wit­temb. tit. de Baptis. Calv. opusc. pa [...]. 59. It is needless and vain for men to devise and constitute others, or more, for that end and purpose. Again, the Ceremonies which were ordained by God himself, for the in­formation of his Church by their signification, are now ceased; and cannot be continued without sin: and what warrant then hath any man, upon his own will and pleasure to institute or ordain sig­nificant Ceremonies in the time of the Gospel.

When the Church was an Infant, kept under the Rudiments of the Law, she was to be taught onely by those shadows and figures that God prescribed: And now, in the brightness of the Gospel when all figures, shadows, vail, adumbrations; whether signifying things present or to come, be done away: Shall we think the light of reason sufficient to direct, without the guidance of Scripture in m [...]tters of Rites and Ceremonies, appropriated to the solemn Wor­ship of God for the Instruction of his People? Were the old fi­gures [Page 28]taken away, Whit [...]k. de Pont. Rom. q. 7. c. 3. Art. 6. Idem. cont. Dura. l. 9. Sect. 59. p. 826. Rainold. Conf. with H [...]rt. c. 8. d. 4. p. 50. lin. 30. Visin. tom. 2. tit. de Imag. 1 Cor. 11.23. Mat. 28.19, 28. Acts 10.47. Whitak. cont. Dur. Lib. 5. Sect. 21. & l. 10. Sect. 21. & l. 8. S [...]ct. 65. that there might be place for new? Were Divine abolished, that Humane might succeed? Well then, may our Ad­versaries triumph over the Forces that are sent forth against their Superstitions; burdensome, Jewish, vain, and heathenish Rites and Customs. Our Writers dispute thus against them: We must have no other signs in Baptism, than such as the Scripture warranteth; They alledge that of the Apostle, What I have received of the Lord, that do I deliver; That of our Saviour, Go and Baptize, teaching them to observe whatsoever I command you; That of Peter, Can any forbid Water that these may not be Baptized; And generally, the pra­ctice of Christ and his Apostles: But if Cerimonies significant be lawfull, which have onely Warrant or Approbation from the will or wit of Man; then must all these reasons stoop to the Oyl, Cream, Salt, Lights, and Spittle, in use amongst them; for all these have as much reason and shew of Wisdom to Warrant them, as any other can that are simply of man's devising: And, what Understanding or Judgment can man have of himself to discern how, or by what means God will be Worshipped? None at all. For the Scripture testifieth that every man is brutish by his own knowledge, Jer. 10.14, & 51, 17. nor more able to discern what in this case is fit and acceptable, than a blind man is to judge of Colours; Isa. 8.20. Jer. 8.9. that there is no light in them that speak not according to the Scripture, no wisdom in them that reject the Word of the Lord▪ There is a certain light engraven in the hearts of men by Nature, whereby they know somewhat concerning God; as, that there is a God, that he is wise, just, good and bountiful, the Governour of all things; and they discern some things pertaining to justice, equity, temperance, honest commerce and dealing with men: but they are utterly ignorant how, or by what means God will be served, what he will bless for the Instruction of his People. We see and know by experience, That is most perillous, unprofitable, and disallowed of God, that doth best sort with our vain concepti­ons: Carnal Observations, Col. 2.23. such as, Touch not, taste not, handle not; have a shew of wisdom in voluntary Religion, and carry a glorious shew of holinesse to our seeming; when the Word of God disco­vereth them to be fruitless, distastfull, odious. Whence grew the first contempt of God's Ordinances, the pollution of holy things with carnall Customs, that are according to this World; and not according to godlinesse; the corruptions of the Truth with manifold Superstitions and Idolatries; but from a fond admiration of Rites [Page 29]and Customs devised by others, or taken up upon our own Heads; which being once admitted into the Worship of God, did multi­ply and increase till they had obscured, if not clean covered and a­bolished the simplicity and glory of God's Ordinances, (as bad weeds overgrow the Corn) and secretly stollen the heart away from all due reverence and respect to the word of Life, and seals of our Salvation. For as a man is blind, carnall, impotent; and yet a Lo­ver of his own devices: So are the signs devised by him, dark, vailing the brightness of the Gospel; carnall, not spirituall; dead without Power; and yet better affected, more delighted in, than the Sacra­ments themselves. No sooner was the sign of the Cross added un­to Baptism, and made a sign like to the Lord's; but it presently be­came greater than the Water which was Christ's sign, and that in the Eyes of them who so advanced it. Moreover, admit Reason for an Umpire in this matter, and Images cannot be kept out of the Church: for no means is more profitable to inform the mind, con­firm the memory, and move the affection, than is the sight of a Picture artificially made, cut, or carved; if a man may believe himself, or give credit to his immagination: If the Will of God be not unto us instead of all reasons, we shall be hardly drawn to dislike that manner of teaching or worshipping. A man that is en­lightned with the knowledge of God's Will, and the mystery of Salvation; may lawfully in his meditations make use of diverse Creatures or things, that are apt and fit to represent Spirituall things unto him: but he must not take upon him to determine them to be used as signs for such an end and purpose; for having no promise of God to come by that course, he can expect no blessing from God in that practice, but the contrary: Seeing therefore man is himself ignorant and unwise, neither able to receive the things of the Spirit, nor discern that which pertaineth to the King­dom of Christ; (nor yet being enlightned with the knowledge of the Truth according to godlinesse, to devise any fit or acceptable means whereby God should be worshipped, or his People taught in the wayes of holiness): It followeth, That in the worship of God, signs not approved of him in his Word, cannot be instituted or used in Faith, and consequently are to be held unlawfull.

5. Christ Jesus, the great Doctor of his Church, Mat. 23.8, 10. Joh. 4.25. Acts 1.3. being called of his heavenly Father to teach to us perfectly, and at once, the whole Counsell of God, and the things that did pertain to the [Page 30]Kingdom of God to the end of the World, was faithfull in all his House, as was Moses; and made known unto his Disciples what­soever he received of his Father. Heb. 3.2, 5. But Moses prescribed the form of God's worship in every particular Ceremony significant; and brought in none, Joh. 15.15. no not one into the Church, which the Lord him­self did not institute, giving charge to the Church of the Jews, That the [...] should neither add thereto, Exod. 25.9, 38, 39, 40, & 27 19, & 39, 42 43. Deut. 12, 32. nor take ought therefrom. There­fore our Saviour Christ also taught his Disciples what Ceremonies significant ought to be used in the Church of God, to whose Ordi­nance nothing must be added, from whose Institution nothing ought to be diminished: The old Testament was indeed delivered unto one People only of the World; The Commission of the Gospel was, Go teach all Nations. But the liberty of Instituting Rites significant was no greater to the Christian Church, Vis. Jun. Ani­mad. in Bell. lib. 4. de pont. Cap. 17. than to the Church of the Jews: They had a prescription of particular Ceremonies, most fitly agreeing to the polity of their Church and Common-wealth, and dispensation of those times: So, hath the Christian Church also: to which we are as precisely bound, as ever was the Church of the Jews to the Ordinances appointed for that time and state, as hath been shewed before; in Circumstantiall matters concerning Time, Place, and Order of divine Service; And several Christian Chur­ches have liberty according to the generall Rules of Scripture to constitute what is most agreeable to the condition of the Country, and doth best tend to Edification: And in these things the Jews had Authority no less than the others. In Ceremonies and Rites significant annexed to the Worship of God, the Jews were tyed to the written Law of Moses and the Prophets; nor may any thing be attempted lawfully by the Christian Church in things of this Nature, more than was or ought to have been by them. Though men be as different almost in Nature as in Nations and Languages, yet must they of necessity submit themselves to the use of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, which two Ceremonies onely are commanded by Divine precept; and are to be received of all Christians, that in truth and soundness professe the Gospel. And seeing Christ Insti­tuted no signs but these, the Apostles commended no other to the severall Churches planted and dressed by them: What necessity is there, that difference of People to which the Gospel is now preach­ed, should inferr a liberty of inventing new Signs or Rites never seen or allowed of Christ? Those that God prescribed for the Jews [Page 31]were fit for that Time, and for that People, none else might be de­vised; those that Christ hath ordained for all Churches are sufficient; most fit for them; what shall be brought in besides and annexed to them, doth want both his Approbation and Blessing: As Moses was faithfull in the House of God as a Servant, both in thing: re [...]ll and rituall, as some distinguish; So was Christ also, as a Son, Nei­ther did his faithfulness stand in removing the Law of Jewish Ce­remonies, and disburdening all Christians from the use of them; but in prescribing Laws and Ordinances, whereby the Church is to be ordered and instructed untill his second coming, and that as particularly and expresly as Moses had done unto the Israelites. To stand upon comparison betwixt Moses and Christ in perfection or reall faithfulness, (as some call it) is not to this purpose; for his perfection is one thing, his faithfulnesse another: and whom He did exceed in perfectnesse, He did every way equalize in faithfulnesse in the House of God: He did not onely teach a more excellent Do­ctrine than Moses, but more full and perfect: He did not onely an­tiquate what Ceremonies were to be shadows of good things to come, and figures of man's Redemption by his Sacrifice upon the Crosse; but he ordained also, with what visible Signs and Tokens his Church should be nourtured, and assured of his love and favour [...] As he died to bring Life to mankind, raised up himself from Death, ascended, entred within the Vail, and hath taken possession of the heavenly Mansion; for us: So did he give direction to his Apostles, and in them to all Churches, by what Statutes and Laws his People should be Governed, by what Signs and Ceremonies they should be taught and confirmed in Faith. Do we then leave nothing to the Arbitrament of the Church? Nothings but what was left to the Power and Authority of the Jewish Church: for we have a Canon as perfect, a direction as exact and particular as ever they had. Many honourable witnesses of God's truth have judiciously obser­ved, That Christ in holy Scripture hath not singularly and specially prescribed concerning externall Discipline and Ceremonies; for that he foresaw these things were to depend upon the occasions and op­portunities of times, which must be determined by generall Rules given for direction in these cases; whose Judgment we imbrace with reverence, & acknowledg consonant to the words of wholesome Do­ctrine, so it be understood according to their true intent and mea­ting, Of matters meetly accidentall, circumstan [...]iall, or naturall [Page 32]concerning Discipline or Worship: But thence to infer a liberty to ordain in substantial matters of Discipline & significative Ceremo­nies whatsoever shall seem good in our own eys, without the appro­bation and warrant of Gods Word, is more than the Learned grant, or the Truth it self will permit: As touching the Church (saith Mar­tyr) she altereth not her form. Loc. Com. part. 1. c. 11. Sect. 12. It is alwayes one manner of Common wealth, & nothing is hid from the understanding of God the Author of the Laws. The Lord of the house was not inferiour to the servant in fidelity: What our Saviour Christ heard and saw of the Father; that he manifested to his Disciples, charging them to teach the Church to observe it: What they received of the Lord, that they delivered in great simplicity, without any addition of new doctrine to his Doctrine, or of devised symbolical signs to his Signs; never once intimating in their Epistles or Writings, any liberty that the Church should have to multiply Rites or Ceremonies for mysticall signification, and to annex them to the holy things of God. And when we can neither hear from Moses, Christ, nor his Apostles, that the forging and inventing of such observations is allowed be­fore God; what warrant can we have to bear us out therein? If Cities and Towns-Corporate plead Immunities and Exemptions from the Law, and assume to themselves authority to make Decrees of this or that sort: being impleaded by the King's Attorney for it; either they must shew their Charter to warrantize such Privi­ledges, or incur Censure for their sawciness and presumption: So they that challenge priviledg to devise significant Rites in the Worship of God, and annex them to the Signs which God Him­self hath established, must either shew their Charter signed with the authentique Seal of the Court of Heaven, or be cast in Judg­ment when they be impleaded at his Barr.

6. If God be the only Teacher of his Church to instruct it by Word and Sign, then no Ceremonies significant may be admitted into the solemn Worship of God for doctrine and instruction, but such as bear his stamp, are marked with his Seal, are warranted by holy Scripture: For the chaste Spouse of Christ, who knowes the voyce of her Beloved, will not acknowledg unwritten Traditions for the Word of God: But God is the only Teacher of his Church both by Word and Sign. Jam. 4.12. Matth. 23.8. Act. 3.32. As the doctrine which is taught must be from above, so the means whereby it is taught must be of God: both he that teacheth new doctrines, and he that deviseth strange [Page 33]means to instruct the people of God in the knowledg of the truth according to godliness, doth run upon his own head. Mic. 7.16. Hos. 14.1. It is a truth without controversie; That as to forgive sins, receive into favour, and bless with spiritual blessings in Jesus Christ, is proper to the Lord alone; so it is his peculiar, Esay 7.14. & 38.7. to institute signs and seals of his Covenant and Mercy. For none can sign a Lease, who hath not power to let and demise it: nor annex a seal to any promise, that hath not authority to make it, and to confer the good promised. Jewel. Treat. of the Sacr. But it seems as lawful to devise new seals of Divine promises, as Symbolical signs of spiritual duties: seeing to teach the way to heaven, and to prescribe what service man should perform to God; doth belong to him that hath Power and Soveraignty of life and death, who is able to save and to destroy. And if we may be bold to invent signs to teach man his duty; and link them to the means of God's Worship, so long as they signifie no other thing but what the Scripture teacheth. Bellar. de Sacr. l. 1. cap. 24. Sect. de Sacr. Why may we not bring in signs also to assure us of the truth of Gods promises, when nothing is thereby assured and sealed, but what is promised in the written Word. As the Duty taught, and the Promise confirmed, are both from one Supream; so the sign of Instruction, and the seal of Confirmation, do challenge the same authour, require the same authority. This will the bet­ter appear, if we shall consider, That signs do not become seals by any special institution; whereby they are distinguished from signs in regard of the efficient cause, but in respect of the thing that they are appointed to sign or signifie: Signs of Divine promises are seals, true or false; vain or behooveful, even from this, that they are determined to signifie such a thing, whether the Institution be of God or Man. Signs of mans duty, be signs only, from what authour soever they have their ordination. The reason is, because du­ties are only taught, not assured as duties; but promises represented by signs are thereby sealed. What is a seal, Basting. Cate. q. 66. of the Sacram. but a sign sealing up a thing promised; or a print whereby a thing promised by Covenant is signed. Therefore if the Church may not presume to add new seals to the promises of God, but is bound to rest contented with them that are commended unto her by the Lord himself, She may not devise symbolical signs in the worship of God, for the instruction of her children in the wayes of holiness. It may further be added, That a sign is a visible word: and therefore if no voyce must be heard in the Congregation but the Lords alone; no teaching signs [Page 34]must be admitted in his worship, but such as he hath licensed to speak and stand in place. Syntag tom. 2. l. 6. c. 38. Polanus saith, Those things are impious, which are directly opposed to the Commandement of God; of which sort are many Traditions of the Papists; as, the abuse of the Lords Supper, the Mass, Invocation of dead men, worshipping of Images, the law concerning Single life, Festival dayes dedicated to Saints, Images made for religious uses, that is, that they might serve for the use of Religion, either that they might be worship­ped, or that holy things might be represented by them, or that God be worshipped by them: For God willeth not this end of Images, but will have all men taught by his Word; Monumenta autem quibus res divinae representantur sunt sola Sacramenta, non picta, aut ficta, aut sculpta, sed administrata et usurpata legitimè In the Book of Homilies, Hom. for Whit­sontide, part. 2. Fulk against Rhem. in Luc. 24. Sect. 5. all humane devised signs are condemned in Baptism, be­cause no signs should burden the Church, save those which the Lord hath left, which are not burdensome. D. Fulk demandeth of the Rhemists, How is the sign of the Crosse a convenient me­moriall of Christ's death, which is not ordained of Christ, nor taught by the Apostles to be such? Cont. Bell. de cult. Sanct. l. 3. c. 7. Lambertus Danaus is resolure; It is blasphemy (saith he) to think that any outward thing may be made a sign in the Church of any thing that is spiritual; unlesse it be expresly ordained in the Word, and commanded by God him­self to be used to that end. Bucer condemneth them that devise any sign for religious use: And this the Schoolmen themselves saw and taught: It pertaineth only to the signifier to determine what signs must be used to signifie.

7. The Scripture is the sole and sufficient Rule of all immediate worship, Levit. 10.1. Jer. 7.31. Deut. 12.31, 32. Col. 2.23. internal or external, moral or ceremonial, as it is evident by the whole tenour of Gods Word, and the general Confession of all Protestant Divines. The Lord never left it to the will and ar­bitrament of man, to worship him as seemed good in his own eyes: But in all Ages of the World, and states of the Church, he still pre­scribed how he would be served. The duty that Adam owed in the state of Innocency, must be paid according to the prescription: he was taught in what he should shew his obedience, what time he should set apart as a solemn day of rest; the like may be said of all the worship he was to perform. After the Fall, Was any worship al­lowed, which was not commanded? We read not of any express Commandement that the Fathers had to offer Sacrifice, or to ob­serve [Page 35]the difference of clean and unclean beasts. But without que­stion, they received particular instructions from the Lord, touching these things, either by the inspiration of his Spirit, or some Word, or both: For the Scripture saith, God had respect unto Abel, and his sacrifice: But sacrifice and burnt-offerings could not please him, Gen. 4.4, 5. Psal. 50.9, 10. Heb. 11.7. Heb. 11.6. if they had not been offered in faith and obedience. Again, By faith Abel offered a greater sacrifice then Cain; without which it is impos­sible to please God. But faith presupposeth revelation, and obedience a Commandement. In other Ages of the Church it is most clear and evident, that the Lord shewed to his Church the whole form of worship, wherewith for that time he would be served, unto which they might not add; from which they might not detract the least jot or tittle. The Prophets, our Saviour Christ, the Apostles, Levit. 10.1. Jer. 7.31. & 28.14.47. & 12.30. & 29.26. & 31.20. Exod. 20.5. & 10.26. & 12.30. Judg. 10.10. 2 Sam. 16.19. 2 Reg. 10.18, 19, 21, 22. & 17.33. & 21.28. 1 Chr. 28.19. 2 Chro. 30.23. Jer. 8.2. Mal. 3.14, 15. Rainold. in­cens. Apoc. tom. 2. p. 244. do sharply reprehend all Rites devised by man for religious use, though carrying never so great a shew of wisdom, humility and care: which they would never have done, if will-worship had not been unlawful, and displeasing unto God. To spend many words in the confimation of this Point is superfluous, since it is a truth generally received by all Protestant Divines, That Ceremonies are unlawful, when they be imposed, urged, or used with opinion of holiness, necessity or worship. But to prevent mistaking, it will be expe­dient here to shew, what Worship is, and what warrant each part thereof must have from God. The Hebrew word, Habad, which signifies to Serve, is commonly used for all that service, good and bad, which is given either to the true God, or Idols: which two kinds of worship as they agree in one common nature of Worship or Service, so do they in their general or common nature, though they be opposite in their special nature, objects, and adjuncts: contraries we know must consent in some third, as vertue and vice, hot and cold, black and white: the same is to be held of Divine worship true and false. For service comprehending under it worship true and false, as the parts thereof, at least analogical; of necessity the common nature of worship must agree to them both, else how could the service of Idols, or false-worship of the true God, be called Worship: This hath been wisely observed in other cases not unlike, by our learned Writers against the common Adversary. Bellarmine would prove, That the offering of Incense and sweet Odours, is not a Sacrifice in the New Testament; because it is not offered by the Priest only, nor only to the Lord. Our Divines reply, That there are many Sacrifices, to which that definition of Sacrifices cannot [Page 36]agree, viz. prophane Sacrifices which are offered by them that are no Priests; to devils, and not to God; after a manner devised, not prescribed by God: and therefore seeing that of Sacrifices some be holy, and some prophane, in the definition of a sacrifice in general, those things only are to be put, which are common to both kinds. In like manner, when there is a true and false worship; an holy and prophane service, those things only are to be put in the defi­nition of worship, which agree to both kinds. Divine worship taken in that latitude of sense as to comprehend the service of God true and false, (for to speak of the worship of false gods, is imper­tinent) is an action or work commanded by Divine Authority, instituted by man, or devised upon our own heads, whereby God is worshipped, his promises are sealed; or obedience to his Will is taught. Zanch. de re­demp. in se­cundum prec. Par. dradiaph. pag. 90. All actions that man performeth unto man, are not parts of civil worship: but every act that man performeth directly or immediately to God, is a part of Divine worship, and ought meer­ly to concern his glory: For it is impossible to conceive how the creature, who is infinite degrees inferiour to the Creator in excel­lency, and altogether unable to return the least good back again to Him for the infinite blessings he hath received from him, should perform any act immediately unto him but worship. A work commanded, is not large enough to comprehend the whole nature of worship, but doth distinguish true worship from false, as the up­rightness of the heart doth sincere worship from hypocritical and counterfeit. To say Man is a reasonable creature alwayes enjoy­ing sound health, is not the definition of Man, but of a sound man; because there be many subject to infirmities and diseases, who yet be men: So to define Worship to be a work commanded of God, is to shew what lawful and holy Worship is, Esay 29.13. Matth. 15.9. not what worship in general: For many things are worship which God never required. That Worship is true which God commandeth: that false, which man deviseth: that sincere that proceedeth from an honest heart, a good conscience, Psal. 78.34, 35. and faith unfained: that hypocritical, which cometh from an halting, divided, double heart, or is performed by the outward man alone: But truth and sincerity being speciall ad­juncts of worship appointed and commanded of God, cannot come within the definition of worship in general. And as the means that God hath appointed to seal his promises or teach obedience, be acts of divine service: So the means that man shall devise or in­vent [Page 37]of himself for that end and purpose, must needs be worship also. If God be worshipped when obedience is taught by the preaching of the Gospel, or his promises sealed by the use of the Sacraments: When the same duty is taught by visible signs, or the promise confirmed by new devised seals, he is worshipped and ho­noured: for every action whereby God is worshipped, is worship; and every work whereby obedience is taught, is obedience or ser­vice. From hence it appears, that the definition of essential wor­ship, to be, [That which is necessarily required to God's service, so as that the contrariety thereof must needs displease him] is too short, as that which agreeth not to all worship, but only to that which is true and ordained of God: For we know, many Traditions, Cu­stoms, and Ceremonial observations are obtruded upon the Chur­ches as worship, the contrary whereof would please, and not dis­please God. Were not the precepts of men reprehended by the Prophet Esay, the Pharisaical washings taxed by Christ, Esay 29.13. Matth. 15.9. Mar. 7.7. Col. 2.23. and other Ceremonial observations condemned by the Apostle Paul, as mat­ters of worship, though false and erroneous? How could there be any will-worship, if all worship were necessarily required of God? Neither are those Ceremonies only to be reputed essential parts of worship, that be urged with opinion of Sanctity, Necessity, Effi­cacy, whether true or false: but those signs also that are devised to be means of spiritual instruction by their notable and mystical signi­fication: It being a part and means of his worship, to teach his worship. To place the worship of God in Faith, Hope, and Love only, and not in external Rites and Ceremonies, is contrary to Truth and Reason: For then the Ceremonies of the Law, & the Sa­craments of the New Testament must be reputed no parts of Gods essential worship, which is most absurd. Calv. Inst. l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 9.12. The Papists are accused by the Learned of our side, to place the Worship of God in their vain Traditions and Observations. What worship do they in end, only accessary and accidental, as some call it? No, but essentiall and substantial: and yet they speak of Rites and Ceremonies, which by the Canons and Constitutions of that Synagogue, are not main­ained to be of absolute necessity to salvation; as they plainly pro­fess, and our Divines acknowledg: Whereby it is not hard to ga­ther, what is meant by essential or substantial worship; that it stands not only in internal duties, but also in external Rite; and Cere­monies which are acknowledged to be of no absolute necessity.

[Page 38] Now the better to conceive what warrant every part of Gods ser­vice must have from the Scripture, three things are to be distingui­shed in it.

The first is the essential worship it self, whether concerning mans duty, or the means of his Instruction.

The second, the natural Ceremonies, or voluntary compositions or gestures of the body, as are with moderate deliberation used to shadow forth the hidden motions, affections, and dispositions of the mind, that are begotten by the consideration of Gods excellent Greamess, Majesty, Goodness, Love, &c.

The third, is the circumstances, and order of performance (which is by some called accidental, or accessary worship), such as con­cern time, place, person, and manner of performance; all which are required in the celebration of Gods worship. Thus Divines make a difference (and that necessarily) betwixt the substance of worship, and the things annexed to it as necessary circumstances. And as we must distinguish the substantial means of worship from the external testifications of inward devotion by natural Ceremo­nies; so must they be distinguished from bare and naked circum­stances of time, place, and manner of celebrating divine Mysteries: for circumstances are meetly accessaries to worship, no parts there­of, if we speak properly, according to the ordinary acceptation of the word, 1 King. 19.18. Hos. 13.2. Ezek. 18. 6. in Classical Authors. But the gestures of the body made, and purposely framed to shadow forth the hidden affection of the Soul, are external acts of adoration and worship. The true wor­shippers of God are distinguished from Idolaters by this, that they had not bowed the knee to Baal. Kissing, bowing to an Image, is con­demned as a service of the Idol; and the whole worship of God is oft-times signified by the terms of kissing, Psal. 2.12. Esay 45.23. Phil. 2.9, 10. Ephes. 3.24. Joh. 4.20, 21. 1 Reg. 8.54. Ezr, 9.5. Deut. 4.19. Psal. 95.5. Matth. 17.4. Matth. 2.1, 11. bowing, kneeling, ado­ring, falling down before him. In the old Testament, the worship of God is noted by this word, Carah, which signifieth the bending of the knees, or hams; Kadad, which signifieth to bow, or nod the head; Sagad, almost of the same signification; Schaphel, Schachah, and Shacack, which signify to bow the whole body, and sometimes to fall flat upon the ground. In the New Testament, Gods Wor­ship is noted by these words, [...], which signifieth to bow the knee; and [...], which is to worship by kissing, and casting down himself at the knees of another. What? that to adore, is to give honour with the gesture of the body, aswell as with the mind [Page 39]or words: Priscianus, and Nonnius, derive the word Adoratio of Ador, which signifieth fine flower, or corn whereof fine Cakes were made, which the Romans used in their Sacrifices. Valla derive it of oro, but yet he saith, Adorare nihilominus sine ore sieri, not, sine flexu genuum ac gestu corporis.

It implyeth in it three acts; first, An apprehension of the excel­lency of that which is adored.

Secondly, An act of the Will, desiring to do something to testi­fy our acknowledgment of this greatness, and our subjection and in­feriority.

Thirdly, An outward act expressing the same.

The two former are internal, the last is outward, bringing that to light that was hid in the heart; but the Hebrew, Greek, and La­tine words, signifying adoration, do note an external humiliation, and either a prostration of the whole body, or of some part, viz. the head, or the bending of the knee, or kissing of the hands, to shadow forth and express the internal affection of the heart, which is the Soul and life of external worship. But if it be demanded what warrant these things must have from the Word of God, the answer is direct.

First, The actions of worship it self, whatsoever are not prescri­bed and appointed of God, they are forbidden; for concerning them, nothing may be added, diminished, or changed, but all things must be done according to Divine Institution.

Secondly, Natural Ceremonies or Signes (as they are called), Bell. de sacr. l. 2. c. 29. sect. secund. part. Quaedam sunt ab ipsa natura, &c. which are but inward demonstrations of the secret disposition of the heart, are sufficiently warranted by the light of Nature, and the Word of God, though they be not required as absolutely necessary, nor particularly prescribed, as be the substantial means of worship. And though no precise gesture be of absolute necessity in any part of Gods worship; yet are these Ceremonies so far Divine, Calv. Inst. l. 4. c. 10. sect. 30. that it is not in the power of any Church in the World, altogether to prohi­bite them.

Thirdly, Arbitrary Ceremonies concerning time, place, and man­ner of celebrating Divine Mysteries, are in the power of the Church, to be ordered as she shall judg to be most convenient, and tending to edification; provided that all her Ordinances be squared accor­ding to the general rules of direction hid down in the Word of God, and nothing be done contrary to the integrity of Doctrine, the [Page 40]simplicity of Christian Religion, the edification of the Church, good order, and the rules of love: and in all this, nothing is affir­med, but what is taught and maintained by Protestant Divines against the common Adversaries of Gods Grace and truth; but signs signifying by proportion annexed to the solemn worship of God, are parts of his worship, not accessary, but substantial; proper, not accidental, in the sense before explained. Cont. Faust. l. 19. cap. 16. et Tract. in 10.80. et de Trin. l. 3. c. 4. For Ceremonies significant are visible words (as Augustine calleth the Sacraments) teaching Doctrine true or false, as in signification they consent or dissent from the Word of God; and of necessity the Doctrine taught by Word, and Sign, must agree in one common nature. What is it to say the Sacraments are visible words, Ursin. tom. 2. ad Flac. Sect. resp. pag. 1433. but that they are Signes, Imagēs, Similitudes, Types, visible Anti-types of the Word; or that the Sacraments as Signs, do represent that to the eyes, which words bring to the ears?

Now the publick reading of Scripture for the edification of the Church, is acknowledged to be a part of Gods Worship; so is the Preaching, Ut enim voca­lis oratio est cultus, quia est signum menta­lis; ita adora­tio erit cultus, quia est sig­num internae adorationis. Bell. de sacr. l. 2. c. 3. prop. 5. explaining, and applying of the Word; the text being the same for substance with the exposition; And if to teach by word be a worship of God; to teach by sign, whether significative by the appointment of God, or declaratory by the invention of man, is worship also, when they teach one thing in use publick and re­ligious.

Again, all Actions whereby spirituall Duties are taught in Gods solemn Worship, are Acts whereby God is Worshipped, and all Acts whereby God is Worshipped in his solemn Servivce, is Wor­ship; as all Actions whereby he is obeyed, is Obedience. But significant Ceremonies do teach spiritual Duties in the Worship of God; and consequen ly God is Worshipped by them, and they are Worship. Moreover, the Jewish Ceremonies Instituted by God, and Ceremonies significative devised by Men, and annexed to the solemn Worship of God, do agree in the same common nature and use; both appropriated to the Worship of God, both outward shadows of mystical signification to teach spirituall Duties: But the use of Jewish Ceremonies in the solemn Worship of God, was a part of his true and immediate Worship and Service: Therefore others also must be a part of his Worship; for agreeing with them in common nature and use, they must needs consent in the common Nature of Worship, though they differ in their Adjuncts, [Page 41]true and false, as they dissent in their speciall Institution; the one taking their Originall from God, the other springing from Man's brain. The commandment of God, and the speciall instituted sig­nification of a Ceremony, makes it not barely to be Worship, but true and approved Worship; and the same thing practised to a like end, without Divine approbation, must needs be Worship, but false and erroneous: Incense offered to the true God according to his prescription to an holy end, was an holy Sacrifice, pleasing and acceptable; Incense offered to Saints without direction from God, is a Sacrifice also, because both these are one in the common nature of a Sacrifice, but false and profane. Circumcision, absti­nence from Blood, and other legal Rites observed according to the prescription of the Law, was an immediate Worship of God; but now to abstain in like manner, and for the same end, is Superstitious. Now, to take up the use of legall Rites, is Will-worship; because they are not required at our hands: A thing in it self indifferent, being commannded of God for some speciall end and purpose, be­comes a necessary and immediate part of his Worship, though it was not so before; but if any man upon his own head shall use it to such ends to which it is not appointed, or with the same opinion of holiness and necessity; he stands guilty of devised Worship. Martyr speak­ing against the popish Addition of Salt in Bap­tism; saith, So then that which is added to Bap­tism, is self-worship; and no lawful and sincere Admini­stration of Bap­tism. Martyr. Com. pl. part. 4. cap. 8.5. In Institutions which are means to an end, the respect of the end is al­so required to the end; but a right end not so. It had been simply indifferent to offer a Lamb speckled or unspeckled in Sacrifice, had not the Lord determined they should bring one without spot for an oblation; but if to the same end for which God ordained it should be without spot, any man had presumed to ap­point or offer a Lamb without spot; in so doing, he had forged a Worship unto himself: This is no new piece of Doctrine, but what hath been acknowledged, and is maintained by our Divines against the Adversaries. Lastly, signs Sacramentall are parts of God's Worship: But significant signs by analogy or propor­tion, are Sacramentall; as shall be showed in the next Argu­ment.

8. No signs Sacamentall are warrantable or lawfull, but what are Instituted of God, and approved in his Word; Paul saith, Hereceived of the Lord, what he delivered to the Church of Corinth, touching the, Sacrament of the Lords Supper, 1 Cor. 11.13. which must be understood of all other also: The Baptism of John, was it from Heaven or of Men? It was not from Men, but God: He is the Ordainer of all Sacraments, new or old; Our Divines maintain [Page 42]against the Romanists, Gen. 9.13, & 17.19. Willet Con. 24. q. 4. Arg. 2. Divinum et in­tegrum non es­set misterium, si quicquam ex te adderes. Chrys. homl. 7. in 1 Corrinth. Bell. de Sacr. l. 1. c. 9.14. & de Script. l. 4. c. 5. Christus in Ecclesia solus potest Sacra­menta constitu­ere. Mald. in Matth. 26.11. Zepper. de sa­cra. lib. 1. The Sacra­ments were or­dained to move, lead, and in­struct our dull and heavy hearts, by sensi­ble Creatures, that so our neg­ligence in not hearing or marking the Word of God might be a­mended. Jewel's Treatise of the Sacra­ments. That the Sacraments are expresly comman­ded of God in holy Scripture, and that in the Institution of a Sacra­ment there must be express mention of the material parts thereof, as it was in the Institution of Baptism and the Lord's Supper; yea, the Papists themselves acknowledge that Ceremonies Sacramental, must be Instituted by Authority, divine, not humane; though they refuse to be judged in this by the Scripture, and fly to unwritten Traditions, which blasphemously they make to be one part of the word of God, in authority equal to the holy Scripture: But signs appointed to signify by analogy or proportion, & annexed to the solemn Worship of God, are Sacramental. The antients define a Sacrament to be, A visible sign or form of an invisible Grace, A sign not naturall, but voluntary; not indicant, but analogicall; teaching or shadowing by representa­tion: So they call a Sacrament, a visible Word, as in Scripture they are termed Signs or Memorials. In modern Writers, the name Sa­crament is given to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; to the Altars, Sacrifices, Cherubins, Lights, and all Ceremonies or­dained for signification in time of the Law; as well as to the Rain­bow, Manna, the Rock, the Red-Sea, Circumcision, and the Pas­chal-Lamb: Some of which were instituted to teach Man his Du­ty, as others to seal and confirm the Promise of God, or if all of them were seals of some spirituall Promises, they were all Signs of some spiritual Duty, and Sacramentall in both respects. Whence we may conclude, That the common nature of a Sacrament doth agree to signs determined by representation to teach any duty that man oweth to God (his absolute Soveraign, and mercifull Father in Christ Jesus) whether Supernaturall or Morall. The Precepts con­tained in the Book of Life, are, and do set forth the mind of God unto us, no lesse than the Promises made therein; nor can any reason be given, why the representation of some spirituall Duty [for all Duties that man is to perform unto God in Christ are spirituall Du­ties,] by a mystical Rite, should not as properly pertain to the na­ture of a Sacrament; as the shadowing or sealing of some spirituall Promise. Quanquam ne professi [...] qui­dem fidei. Nam attendendum non tantum quid velit qui profitetu [...], sed [...]tiam quid [...]ptum sit ei, apud quem opertet professio [...] [...]s; [...]. Ch. de Sacr. lib. 1. cap. 8. ursin. tom. 2. pag. 1630. What the Word doth bring to the ear, that the Sacrament [Page 43]doth exhibit to the other senses: The whole Scripture doth testi­fie, That from the beginning of the World, the Lord did intend this in Instituting Ceremonies, that they should represent those things to the Eyes of men, which his heavenly Word doth offer to their Ears. But commandments are part of the Word as well as Promises; The Will of God manifesting what he will do for us, is a mystery; so is it prescribing what Service he will have from us, and a visible, corporal, material element determined to teach either of them, or both, is a sign Sacramentall and mysticall, expressing some sacred mystery to the Eye, Note: plac="marg" Signa cum ad­res divinas ad­hibentur Sacra­menta vocan­tur. Aug. de Doctr. Chr. lib. 3. cap. 6. & ad Max. Ep. 5. as the Word doth to the sense which receiveth the Voyce. We know no more what Service God will have a Christian perform unto his Highnesse, then we do what good he would have men to expect from him by a lively Faith; and it seems altogether as lawfull for man to devise signs for the confirmation of his Faith, as to admonish and teach his Duty. What difference can be made betwixt an addition to the means of instru­ction appointed of God, and to the means of our assurance pre­scribed by him: The commandments and the Promises are so knit together, that it cannot be conceived how a sign should be appointed to teach man his Duty, and not to assure him of some good from God in the use thereof: For [...] Will is made known by Co­venant, wherein he freely bin [...] [...]elf to bless us upon condition of sincere and faithfull Obedie [...] [...]s he obligeth us to be obedi­ent to his Commandments that we may be blessed; and the signs added to the Word do teach both, as in the Word it self both parts are published. Again, it is one proper end of the Sacraments by striking the senses by outward representative Elements to teach the understanding, help the memory, stirr up the affections, and excite devotion: But for this end also are significant Rites devised, unless we shall confesse them to be vain, idle, fruitless, absurd and sensless; And thus agreeing with Sacraments in their nature and end; of neces­sity they must be confessed to be Ceremonies Sacramental: The Scripture doth not so distinguish betwixt Signs & Seals, or signs sig­nificative & obsignant; as to make the one Sacramental, not the other: rather under the name sign it expresseth the nature of a Sacrament, which consisteth in the analogy & proportion which is betwixt a sign determined to signify, and the thing signified. The signs which it hath pleased God to add to his Covenant, are not bare, naked, empty sha­dows, but lively Seals of divine Grace Promised, & effectual Teach­ers of man's duty; signs of man's duty, Signs and Seals both of God's [Page 44]speciall favour and mercy in Christ Jesus, ursia. Catech. q. 65. explic. 1. Gen. 9.12. By the Sacra­ment man is bound to God; and by the same, God vouchsafeth to bind himself to man Jewel's Treatise of the Sacrament. See 1 Cor. 9.2. 2 Tim. 2.19. Apo. 7.2, & 9, 4 Matth 27.66. Vis. Ursie. tom. 4. pag. 1614. & 1668. Ursin. pag. 1673. and in both respects Sa­craments: Some signs are ordained meerly to assure and confirm unto us the Promises which God hath been pleased to make; Some both to teach visibly what the Lord requireth and commandeth in his holy Truth, and to confirm our Faith in what he hath promised in his holy Word; but all are Sacraments in each respect, and what is a Seal, but a visible sign annexed to a Promise to testify or assure it: And how can a sign be added to it but, it must testify or confirm? Even from hence that it is set to the Promise by him who hath Au­thority to make it, and Power to make it good, it is a Seal: So that the Word Seal doth rather note the speciall nature and end of some Signs as they are referred to the Promises ratified & assured by them, than express the common nature of a Sacrament. In orthodox Writers a Sign of God's Promise, and a Seal of his Will and Pleasure; are put for one and the same: And whether we look to the truth of the thing it self, or the Arguments which are brought to prove the lawfulness of devising symbolicall and analogicall Signs; we shall find it as lawfull to devise Signs obsignant of God's Promises, as significative of his pleasure and man's duty: For to be a Teacher of the Understanding, and Exciter of Devotion, requireth power su­pernaturall, no less than to be [...] [...]firmer of the heart; and he that hath Authority to ordain means [...]mal for any of these ends, can blesse them for all; he that ca [...] appoint them for any one, can do it so none, they being all supernaturall; exceeding the power of any Creature: Man hath as much power to seal what he cannot be­stow, as to teach by his own Sign, that which he cannot blesse to that end. The Institution of means serving for the spirituall Instruction of the Church, pertaineth to him that blesseth them; to him it belongeth to ordain Seals of his Promises, that can confert the Grace promi­sed, and both these are peculiar to one alone, the Lord of All. The arguments that are alledged to demonstrate the liberty of the Church, to Institute and devise significant Ceremonies, do speak for power to ordain Signs obsignant, if they conclude any thing at all. Solomon [they say] built a brazen Altar, and set it besides the Altar of the Lord, offering thereon burnt Offerings: 2 King. 18.22. Apo. 6.9. H [...]b. 13.10. Matth. 23.19. with Job. 17.17 Exod. 24.4. Here is a humane Invention, a new Ceremony, having necessary relation to Worship in Sacrificing: And was not the Altar, appointed for Burnt-offering, an essentiall part of God's Worship in time of the Law? was it not a Type and Sign obsignant of Christ and his Grace? was not this Altar erected [Page 45]by Solomon for the same principall and speciall end and use, Jun. Innor. in Exod 24.4. Par. in Gen. 12.7. Mart. loc. com. part. 4. cap. 12. Sect. 21. Polan. Synt. tom. 2. lib. 9 cap 36. Fulk against Rhem in Mat. 23.19.8.7. Biza Epist. 8. Zepper. de Saer. l. 2. Maldon. in Jo. 20. Rhem. in 1 Tim. 4.14.18. Martyr thus reasoach a­gainst the Po­pish Consecra­tion of Holy­water; It is not the condition of men to insti­tute Sacra­ments at their own pleasure, because that is proper to God alone, and to none besides him; for Sacra­ments be In­struments of the Holy Ghost. Mart loc. com. p. 4. c. 9. Juni. Annot. in Exod, 25. Assunsta adve [...]atem re­run figuran­dam [...]nt coas­sun [...]pta, non propter siguram rerum sed prop­ter Naturam fi­gurarum. for which God hath ordained the Brazen Altar to be erected? An Al­tar was a principal Instrument of divine Service (saith Martyr). The Altar in the Temple was a figure of Christ's only singular true Sacrifice once offered, and never can be sacrificed again, saith Fulk our of Augustine.

Now, if the Church, in the time of the Gospel, may take upon her to devise new significant Signs in God's Worship, from this Example of Solomon, and that such as be in kind different from them that are instituted of him; She may challenge Power to ordain Signs, to ordain obsignant Sign; of Christ, and his Grace, essentiall parts of God's immediate Worship, and in their proper and pecu­liar ends, one with Baptism and the Lord's Supper; as that Altar served to the same purpose that the other did, which was builded by the express Commandment of the Lord. Again, it is very usu­al with Writers, protestant and Popish, to call external Ceremonies signifying holy things, by the name of Sacraments, Sacramentalls, or Sacramental Actions.

It is objected, If signification be a principall part of a Sacra­ment, then all the Moral Signs used in the Levitical Worship; as namely, Bells, Lavers, Lights, Candlesticks, and other Ceremonial Instruments, even unto the very Snuffers of the Tabernacle, should (things taking their denomination from the principal parts) be pro­perly deemed Sacraments: And the like may be said of Hog's Flesh, from touching the Corps of the dead, from Linsey-wolsey Apparel, and a hundred such others, whereby diverse Moralities are signified, but no Sacrament implied; but this nothing infringeth the strength of the former Reasons. For the Cerenionies of the Law were either taken to figure out the Truth of things, or co [...]flu­med for the Nature of the Figures, not for the Figure of things; which were onely annexed to the Figures, but of themselves did not figure o [...] point out any spiritual things: Of this sort were many things pertaining to the Tabernacle, Ark, Altars, and Sacrifices; which did not by themselves typify any thing, but onely pertain to the material constitution of the Type: And amongst them are the Snuffers and Tongs of the Tabernacle to be reckoned; for it can­not be shewed that of themselves they were ordained to represent any mystical Promine or spiritual Duty, but did onely belong as ne­cessary Ornaments to the Service of the Tabernacle. Therefore [Page 46]we may exclude them from the number of Sacraments, and yet hold the common Nature of a Sacrament to consist in proportion betwixt the Sign determined to signify, and the thing signified. Secondly, amongst the Signs here degraded, as unworthy the Name, and not participating in the Nature of the Sacraments; such are mentioned as did seal and assure spiritual promises, Psal. 119.105. Prov. 6.21. 2 Pet. 1.19. Rev. 4.5. and not barely teach or sig­nify moral duties; The Gandlesticks and Lights, did they not sig­nify the light of the Divine Word, and Holy Scripture, by the pow­er of God's holy Spirit enlightning the Church of God? The wash­ings in the Law, did not they seal the purging away of Sin by the Blood of Christ, Heb. 10.22. Psal. 26.6. and that we being sprinkled in our hearts from an evil Conscience, and washed in our bodies with pure water, might draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of Faith? The High-Priest was a Type of Christ, Exod. 28.2. our Mediator, and the Bells of Gold that were placed upon the Ephod did shaddow forth the Voice of Christ, which was to be heard of the People in his Teaching and Instruction. Wherefore, if a Sacrament be a Sign of God's Grace or free Promise, the Lavers, Lights, Bels, Candlesticks used in the Levitical Worship may truly be called Sacraments: Heb. 9.2. And by Antho­rity from the Apostle, Heb. 8.5. & 9.24. calling things that pertained to the Service of the Tabernacle, Examples, Shadows, and Figures of heavenly things; worthy Divines have not spared to call them Sacraments: Thus writeth Augustine, De Catech. rud. c. 20. Ideo multis Sacramentis visibilibus onerati sunt, quo servili jugò premerentur in observationibus ciborum, & in Sacrificiis ammalium, & in ali is innumer abilibus, quae tamen signa erant rerum spi­ritualium ad Dominum Jesum Christum, & ad Ecclesiam pertinentium. Thirdly, we find the Name Sacrament given to those Signs pertai­ning to the Levitical Worship, which of all others (if in truth that Title may be given unto any) might most properly be called Moral, by signification of Man's spiritual Duty and Obedience: The Shew-Bread, Exod. 25.30. & 39.36. 1 Chron. 9.32. & 23.29. called in Hebrew, Bread of faces, or of presence; be­cause the Loavs or Cakes were to be set before the Face or in the Presence of God continually; and, the Bread of ordering and dis­position, because they were disposed in certain order and time: In Greek, Mat. 12.4. Mar. 2.26. Heb. 9.2. the Bread of Proposition; and, in a contrary order, The pro­position of Bread or Cakes; Did it not signify the Office of the god­ly, that they should stand continually before God, receive his Com­mandments, and sanctify themselves to his Obedience: As the Ark signified the presence of God in his Church, so his Table with the [Page 47]twelve Cakes, signified the Multitude of the faithful presented un­to God in his Church, continually serving him; It may be, this placing of the Shew-bread before the Ark might signify, that the Lord hath his Church continually in his sight, and doth take care thereof: But the principal thing taught thereby was, the sincerity and purity of them that walk in the Light, and present themselves before God: What duty soever Man oweth to God, it is to be performed by vertue of the Coveuant that he hath made with Man; and so the Signs of God's Promise do imply Man's Duty, and the Signs of Man's Duty do imply God's Promise, though some do sig­nify the one; some, the other. And from this we learn, Sacramenta­sunt v [...]sibilia signa, qu [...]bus doctrina illa declaratur & obsignatur. Mart. de Sacr. l. 1. c. 2. q. 8. what is a Sacrament in general, viz. A Sign Analogical of God's Will and Pleasure; whether teaching what he requires, or representing and fealing what he promiseth: True Sacraments are Signs and Seals instituted of God to signify his Will, and confirm his' Promises: But divine Institution is to be removed from the definition of a Sa­crament in general, as that which doth distinguish true from false, and not explicate the common nature of the thing.

The distinction that some make of Signs moral, signifying the spiritual Obedience which Man oweth unto God, and mystical or sacramental, representing and confirming the Promises of God, is not to be received: For Signs teaching to the Eye by representation, what the Word bringeth to the Ear, are Sacraments signifying the same thing that the Word doth, as hath been shewed before. But Signs analogical must be distinguished from negative Precepts, for­bidding the use of this or that in it self indifferent. Jewishabstinence from diverse Mears legally unclean, to shew that they were separa­ted from other Nations, to be a peculiar People unto the Lord, can­not properly be called a Sign signifying by resemblance; For God in that Law seemeth not so much to respect the Nature of those li­ving Creatures prohibited to be eaten; Act. 1.15, 16, 17, 28. Juni. Annot. in Lev. 11. but by this external Sign he would have his People to be discerned and separated from all other People. And if this figurative commanded Abstinence should be deemed sacramental, what errour is therein committed? As by such Abstinence the Israelites professed themselvs to be the peculiar Peo­ple of God, separated from all idolatrous Nations round about them; so did the Lord by this Commandment signify and assute, that he had taken them to Covenant, and made choice of them to be his pe­culiar [Page 48]Treasure. The reason whereby this commanded Abstinence is urged, doth confirm thus much, Lev. 11.44. I am the Lord your God, ye shall there­fore sanctify your selvs, and ye shall be holy, for I am holy; neither shall ye defile your selves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the Earth: For I am the Lord that brought you up out of the Land of Ae­gypt to be your God.

These figurative Ordinances then were Signs of the Covenant, teaching what duty man owed to God, and assuring back again what favour they had with God: And when the Apostle, speaking of Levitical Service, Heb. 8.9, 10. which stood onely in Meats, and Drinks, and di­verse washings, and carnal Ordinances, imposed on them until the time of Reformation, Beza in Heb. 9.10. calleth them figures for the time then present; doth he not in effect say they were Sacraments? The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evill, is called a Sacrament, or a Sacra­mental Precept, K [...]cherm. The­ol. lib 2. c 2. Polan. Synt. lib. 6. cap. 44. Chaimer. pan­strat. tom. 4. lib. 1. cap. 7. Si ne (que) propter se, ne (que) ex suanatura, certe & propter aliud & ex In­slitutione. by many excellent and worthy Divines, as it did signify to Man, that he should have experience of good, so long as he continued in Obedience, and of evil or misery if he did disobey; and as it was a Sign whereby he was admonished of his mutability, and tried in his Obedience: But if forbearance of the Tree of Knowledge was an Act Sacramental, much more Abstinence from such Me [...]ts as by the Law were forbidden unto the Israelites. Nor shall we need to fear the force of the Jesuite, insulting over Protest­ants by this Objection; viz. If Sacraments be onely Signs, then the Crucisix is a better Sign to signify the death of Christ than the Sacraments. For we acknowledge our Sacraments not bare Signs of God's Promise, or significations of Man's Duty; but holy Seals of what he promiseth to us, and we by stipulation promise back a­gain unto him. And this the Jesuite himself doth and cannot but acknowledge, howsoever impudently against Conscience he im­putes unto us his own device for our Doctrine: But we may further tell this Romish Proctor, that a Crucifix made to teach by propor­tion or resemblance, that Christ dyed for our sins, or that God gave his Son to suffer death for our Redemption, is a Sacrament, or a sa­cramental Sign, signifying by special Representation, though false and erroneous, because it is devised by man, not ordained by God: The greatest Defenders of mystical Signs, distinguish them into mo­ral and sacramental; which differ (say they) from the former, both as the Sacramental are significant by special Representation, and as they are obsignant by ratifying and applying of God's Cove­nant [Page 49]of Grace unto us: And from this we may gather, that Spiritu­al sigus, which signify, by representation, the promise of God (as the Crucifix doth) are Sacramental, else is the distinction it self faulty, and the difference which is made betwixt signs Moral, and Sacra­mental. And yet we make not Signification the principal part of those special Sacraments of the Old or New Testament, which it pleased God to add to his gratious and free Covenant; but Spiri­tual signification is so proper to the Sacraments, that whatsoever sign is ordained to signify and represent any such promise, it is thereby made a Sacrament. The Cherubims in the Law, are called Types, and Sacraments of those times; in all reason, the Crucifix is in that sense to be deemed a Sacrament of these times; but vain and false, because it is destitute of Divine approbation. And what advan­tage hath the Jesuite gotten by this wise dispute? he hath notably discovered their impudent boldness, in preferring their own sinfull devices, before the sacred O [...]nances of God; and their notorious presumption in attempring [...] which they cannot but acknowledg to be proper to the Lord alone.

9. Experience testifieth, that signs significant devised by men, have been the seeds, sparkles, and instruments of divers errors, Whitak. de Sc. q. 6. c. 14. arg. ult. Calv. opusc. de Necess. refor. pag. 59.60. su­perstitions, and Idolatries; but they never did, or shall do, good in the Church of God. The bravery and excess that is seen in Popish Temples, doth affect, move, and draw the eye, but is of no worth to true Piety, devotion, and motions of mind, pleasing to God. It hath been shewed before, and is further to be proved afterward, that no true Piety or sincere devotion of mind can be stirred up in us by humane Traditions.

10. And lest this truth confirmed by so many Arguments out of the Word of God, should yet be cast off upon suspition of novelty, or not rellish savourly to some palats for want of the sauce of hu­mane Authority; It shall not be amiss to produce the testimonies of worthy Divines, to shew what hath been their Judgment in this point. Calvin saith, Nulla doctrina, In Matth. 21.25. vis. Calv. resp. ad versi­pell. opusc. pag. 413. In Tim. 4.14. SS. 18. nullum sacrum signum debet in­ter pios admitti, nisi à Deo profecta esse constet; nec est in hominum arb [...] ­trin, quicquam excudere. Fulk against the Rhemists, ‘The true Church of Christ submitteth her self to the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles in all things, and is content with those Ceremonies which Christ and his Apostles by his Commandment have left un­to us.’ Dr. Raynolds speaking of Popish significant Rites, hath [Page 50]these words, Censur. Apoc. tom. 2. prael. 243. Simplicius multo veteres, quanquam et ipsi nimium pecca­runt o [...]usmodi mysteriis excogitandis, ut omnes propemodum ritus in Sa­cramenta converterent; non quin possint omnia, quae uspiam oculis usur­pamus, merito suggerere nobis ansam earum rerum meditandarum qua faciunt ad pietatem; sed, quod magna religione cavendum est in ecclesia, ne convertamus in morem Sacramentorum interpretationibus hujusmodi, ut permisceamus instituta humana cum institutis ipsius Christi, at (que) ita ho­rum authoritatem communiamus commentis hominum. In Heb. 8.5. Paraeus saith, Quicquid etiam Sacramentis divinis ornatus, vel perfectionis, vel signi­ficationis augustioris gratia [...]ffingitur, qualia sexcenta circa Baptismun [...] et Eucharistiam habet papatus, exorcismos, sal, sputum, chrisma, &c. id totum tanquam inane et evanidum oraculo hoc improbatur. Synopsis in 12. Con [...]. q. 8. Non potest ul­les homo insti­tuere Caeremo­n [...]am, adquam s [...]queretur gra­tia Sp. Sancti. Bell. de Sac. l. 2. cap. 24. Dr. Willet speaking of the Ceremonies and Rites of Baptism, saith, ‘It is con­trary to the rule of the Gospel, that there should be such types, shadows, significations, brought into the service of God, as the Papists make in Baptism; for seeing we have the body which is Christ, all such shadows ought to [...] bolished; In one Sacra­ment they ( sc, the Papists) have forged and found out many, as their Chrism,’ Oyl, Salt, Spittle, &c. None of those Ceremo­nies were used when Christ himself was Baptized; which notwith­standing had been most fit, considering the worthiness of his person, which was Baptized; neither did Christ give any such thing in charge to his Disciples, but biddeth them onely Preach and Baptize In the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Nor yet were any such Ceremonies in use in the Apostles times. Act. 10.4. St. Peter saith, Can any man forbid Water, that these should not be Baptized. He calleth not for Oyl, Salt, Spittle, or any such thing, but Water onely. And a little after he produceth the witness of two Martyrs against these Ceremonie. Act. and Men. Hauk. 1. Ex­am. Ann. 1555. Thomas Hauks, ‘I deny (saith he) in Baptism all things invented by man, as your Oyl, Cream, Salt, Spittle, Can­dle, Con [...]uring of Water.’ John Denly, holy Martyr. The Eu­nuch said to Philip, Act. and Mon. Denl. answ. to art. 6. Anno. 1555. [...]nsti. l. 4. c. 10. sect. 23. See here is Water. We do not [...]ead, he asked for any Cream, Oyl, Spit [...]le, Conjured Water; for it seemeth that Phi­lip had Preached no such thing unto him. Calvin saith, Unde colli­gimus, partem reverentiae quae illi defertur, in eo esse positam, dum in eo colendo simpliciter quod mandat, nullas nostras miscendo inventiones se­quimur. That he speaketh of devised symbolical s [...]gns, it is evi­dent by the instances he giveth in that, and the two Sections follow­ing. [...]oc com. p. 4. [...]. 4. sect. 4. Martyr, ‘Seeing God is altogether the wisest, he hath no [Page 51]need that we should by our imagination, or endeavour, prepare Instruments for him. And afterwards in the same Chapter; Sect. 16. Neither can they easily escape, which imbrace exorcisms, but that of one Sacrament they make many, seeing they make so many Signs, which they will have to be accounted holy; adding Oyl, Spit­tle, Exsufflations, and such like.’ So as one Sacrament of Bap­tism doth degenerate into many. Neither must they be heard, when, to the intent to mock the simple, they feign a difference between Sacraments and Sacramentalls, which is altogether sophistical; for distinctions are to be received gladly, but those to be such as are ta­ken our of the very nature of the things, because they bring much light to Controversies; but those distinctions which spring out of the brain of Sophisters, onely for the shifting off of Arguments, are altogether to be refused. Conses. Wit­temb. tit. de Caerem. Eccl. The Judgment of the Church of Wittem­berg is thus set down in the Harmony of Confessions, Nec licet vel veteres ritus legis restaurare, vel novos comminisci ad adumbrandam ve­ritatem Evangelio jam patefactam et illustratam: quales sunt, interdiu accendere cereos, ad significandam lucem Evangelii; aut uti vexillis cru­cibus, ad significandam victoriam Christi per crucem; quod genus est universa panoplia vestium Missalium, quam aiunt adumbrare totan [...] Pas­sionem Christ [...]; et multa id genus alia. Multo minus licet instituere Cae­remonias aut sacra, quorum meritis expientur peccata, et accipiatur reg­ [...]um coelorum: Nam de priori illo genere Caeremoniarum et Sacrorum, Christus ex Esaia concionatur; Frustra, inquiens, colunt me, docentes do­ctrimas, pracepta hominum: et Paulus, Nequis vos judicet in cibo aut po­u [...], aut in parte diei festi, &c. The Church of France and the Low-Countries, Sect. 17. ad Confess. Sax. Obs. 1. Tom. 4. de [...] Bapt. lib. 5. [...] cap. 16. sect. 27. Annot. maj. in Jo. 4.23. in their observations upon the Confession of the Church of Saxony, write thus, Ac perinde ne mysticos quidem ullos, alioqui non impios; ut qui, &c. Sed in hoc capite (saith Cham. speaking of Popish Rites in Baptism) merito damnamus, qui ea addiderunt, quibus mysteria af­finxerint, prop [...]ias (que) significationes; et quidem eorum affectuun [...] qui per­tinent ad aquam Baptismi, &c. The Judgment of Bezd is well known, and more than once uttered by himself; Sacramentis (saith he) pront divinitus sunt ab unico nostro legistatore ordinata, quicquam vel detrahere, ac multo magis novas figuras vel umbras ullas in Ecclesiam invehere, [...]efariam esse audaciam, ex verbo Dei omnes [...], tam expresse damnantis, et ignem externum olim altari suo inferre prohi­bentis, affirmanus. Haec nostra est de Spirituali cultu divino sententia, his Christi verbis consenta [...]a; nisi forte sublatas, licet divinitus institu­tas, [Page 52]Mosaicas figuras et umbras arbitramur, ut alia ab hominibus il­larum loco substituerentur. De cult. Sacr. l. 3. c. 7. n. 12, 13. Junius assenteth unto the former; Quod si ad usum instituere non potest quisquam, profecto ne (que) ad significatiorem homo legitime potest adhibere, nisi humano et irrogante instituto, ne in priva­to quidem, quanto minus in Ecclesia Dei et publica administratione ipsius. Danaeus is of the same mind. Cont. Bell. de cult. Sac. l. 3. cap. 7. It is Blasphemy to think that any outward thing may be made a Sign in the Church, unless it be ex­presly ordained in the Word, and commanded by God himself to be used unto that end. Eccles. l. 3. cap. 5. Junius again professeth his Judgment in this matter; Res autem alias, ac non necessarias, ne (que) ordini convenien­tes, si volet quisquam instituere; eum non pervicaciter velimus oppugnare, sed tria tamen cum animo suo expendat cupimus. Primum qua authorita­te exemplove adductus, sanctam Dei Ecclesiam et simplicitatem mysterio­rum Christi (Cujus solius vocem agnoscunt et sequuntur oves, quia solum audiri mandavit pater Jo. 10.27.) circumvestiendam esse puter humanis traditionibus quas repudiat Christus. Secundum, quem ad finem res suas adsui divinis judicet oportere: nan [...] si ut cum alii [...] conformetur, aequius foret alias Ecclesias tis conformari quae verbum Dei accedum proxime ex consilio Cypriani, quam has se illis adjungere; si ut h [...]nesti­ora sint omnia, quid simplicitate Christi honestius, quid honestate simplici­us? si voluntatem, Esto sane: at illud Tertulliani cogitandum, Volunta­tem Dei esse necessitatem summam, nec Dei Ecclesiam in divinis rebus vo­luntatibus humanis obligari. Tertium, quis tandem eventus ex huma­nis traditionibus consequatur, ut diuturna oste [...]dit experientia.