Theologicall questions, dogmaticall observations, and evangelicall essays, vpon the Gospel of Jesus Christ, according to St. Matthew Wherein, about two thousand six hundred and fifty necessary, and profitable questions are discussed; and five hundred and eighty speciall points of doctrine noted; and five hundred and fifty errours confuted, or objections answered: together with divers arguments, whereby divers truths, and true tenents are confirmed. By Richard VVard, sometimes student in the famous vniversities of Cambridge in England: St. Andrews in Scotland: and Master of Arts of both the kingdoms; and now a preacher in the famous city of London.

VERS. 4, 5, 6. For God commanded, saying, Ho∣nour thy Father and Mother: [Verse. 4.5 6.] and he that curseth Father or Mother let him die the death. But ye say, whosoever shall say to his Father or his Mother; It is a gift by what∣soever thou mightest be profited by me. And honour not his Father or his Mother, he shall be free. Thus have yee made the Commandement of God of none effect by your Tradition.

[Sect. 1] §. 1. Honour thy Father and thy Mother.

[Quest. 1] Whether, is the Father or Mother more to be honoured and loved?

[Answ. 1] First, Children can never honour and love pa∣rents, (that is, either Father, or Mother) enough, because we are imperfect in our Obedience to every precept.

[Answ. 2] Secondly, I conceive that a vertous Father is more to be honoured and loved, then a vitious Mother, and contrarily, a vertuous Mother more then a vitious Father: because there is Tantundem & aliquid amplius, a naturall Relation to both, but a spirituall Relation onely to the vertuous and godly. We are commanded principally to love our heavenly Father best, and caeteris paribus, to love those best next him, that are neerest unto him in love, and most like unto him in purity.

[Answ. 3] Thirdly, if we speake properly, positively, and without any Relation to any thing, understand∣ing the Question thus. Whether the Father In quantum est pater, as hee is the Father, or the Mo∣ther, as she is the Mother, be more to be honou∣red and loved? then with the Schoolemen I an∣swer, that the Father is more to be loved and ho∣noured then the Mother: And the reason hereof is this, because when we love our Father and Mo∣ther, Qua tales, as they are our Father and Mother, then wee love them as certaine principles of our naturall beginning and being. Now the Father hath the more excellent cause of beginning then the Mother: because the Father is Principium per medum Agentis, Mater autem magis per modum Pati∣entis & materiae. And thus if wee looke upon Fa∣ther and Mother, Secundum rationem generationis, then we must confesse that the Father is the more Noble cause of the Child then the Mother is. If the learned Reader would see this prosecuted, let him read Thomas 2.2. q. 26. Art. 10. And Arist. ethe••. lib. 8. And Anton. part 4. tit. 6. Cap. 4. §. 8. And Aurtum opus pag. 60 b.

[Answ. 4] Fourthly, if we speake of that love and ho∣nour which is due unto parents, according to their love towards Children; then we answer that the Mother is more to be beloved then the Father, and that for these reasons, viz.

I. The Philosopher saith, because the Mother is more certaine that the Child is hers, then the Fa∣ther is that is his: he beleeves it is his Child, but she is sure that it is hers.

II. Because hence the Mother loves the Child better then the Father doth (Arist. lib 9. ethic.)

III. Because the Mother hath the greater part in the body of the Child, it having the body and matter from her, and but only the quickning ver∣tue from the Fatherh 1.1.

IV. Because the Mother is more afflicted for the death of the childe, than the Father is, and doth more lament the adversity thereof, than his Father doth. Solomon saith, Prov. 10. A wise Son rejoyceth his Father, but a foolish Son is a heavinesse to his Mother. From whence some say, that Fathers in regard of their naturall constitution of body, which naturally is hot and dry, do more re∣joyce when their children are promoted unto honour, than the Mothers do; but Mothers, in regard of their naturall constitution, which na∣turally is cold and moist, do more mourn and lament for the losses and crosses of their chil∣dren, than the Father doth. But I will neither trouble my self to prove this, nor perswade my Reader to beleeve it, but leave it to the Philoso∣phers and Schoolmen to be decided and dis∣cussed.

V. Because the mothers part is more labori∣ous, toilsome, and painfull, than the Fathers is: and that in these three regards; to wit,

First, Portando, it is painfull to the Mother to breed her childe, and to bear it so many moneths in her womb.

Secondly, Pariendo, the pain is most extreme when she brings it forth into the world.

Thirdly, Educando, her care, pains, and trou∣ble is great, in the nourishing nursing, and bring∣ing of it up: And thus the Mothers part is pain∣full, and heavie, even from the very conception of the childe. And therefore in these regards she is more to be loved and honoured than the Fa∣ther is.

Whether are parents or children more to be [Quest. 2] beloved? that is, whether ought a man to love his Father better than his childe, or his childe better than his Father?

First, Ex parte objecti, the Father is to be belo∣ved [Answ. 1] more than the childe: for that which hath the greater shew of good, is more to be beloved, because it most resembles God, the chiefest good: now children love their parents sub ratione princi∣pii, because they took their beginning and being from them, which hath the shew of a more emi∣nent good, and like unto God. And therefore in this regard, Parents are more to be lovedi 1.2.

Secondly, there is another degree of [Answ. 2] Love, that is, Ex parte ipsius diligentis, in regard of the party loving, and thus that is most to be loved, which is most neer; and in this respect children are more to be beloved than parents, as appears by a fourfold reason given by Thom. 2.2. qu. 26. Art. 9. and Egidius Romanus. lib. 2. de regimine principum. part. 2. cap. 4. And both of them have these reasons from Aristotle, lib. 8. Ethic.

I. Because parents love their children, as being parts of themselves, but parents are no parts of their children: that is, a childe is a part of the father (because he issued out of his loyns) but the father hath no part from the childe; and therfore a man hath a neer relation to his childe, than to his father. And therfore that love where∣with a father loves his childe, resembles that love wherewith a man loves himself.

II. Because parents are more certain of their children, than of their parents: a childe cannot know its parents, but by hear-say, and some cer∣tain signs of affection, education, and the like; but parents by and by have knowledge of their children: And therefore by how much the more

certain parents are of their children, by so much the more strongly do they love them.

III. Because a mans childe is neerer unto him than his father is: now love imports a certain union, it being nothing else but a certain uniting and conjoyning power of the person loving, with the party beloved. And therfore a mans children being more neer, and closer knit and united unto him, than his parents are, are more beloved of and by him.

IV. Because men love their children longer than their parents; for a father begins to love his childe by and by by, as soon as he is born; but children love their parents after a certain time: now by how much the longer love is, by so much the stronger it is. Anton. part. 4. tit. 6. cap. 4. §. 7, & Aureum opus. pag. 61. a.b.

[Quest. 3] How are parents to be honoured?

[Answ. 1] First, by obeying out of hand what they enjoyn.

[Answ. 2] Secondly, by speaking reverently unto them.

[Answ. 3] Thirdly, by rising, or standing up, when they come by, or into the room.

[Answ. 4] Fourthly, by accompanying them when they travell.

[Answ. 5] Fifthly, by bowing, and inclining our selves unto them, when we come before them, or unco∣vering our heads.

[Answ. 6,] Sixthly, by a willing performance of any ser∣vice unto them, though it seem base and homely.

[Answ. 7] Seventhly, by honouring, promoting, and pre∣ferring them, if it lye in our power.

[Answ. 8] Eightly, by giving them the upper hand, whe∣ther we walk, or sit. Ʋmbertus in expositione regulae, ex Anton. part. 4. tit. 5. cap. 10. §. 11.

[Answ. 9] Ninthly, by supplying their wants, and reliev∣ing their necessities, if it be in our power.

[Quest. 4] Why must we be thus carefull to love, honour, reverence, relieve; and obey our parents?

[Answ. 1] First, because the very light of nature doth teach it, and the brute creatures have a care of their Sires, and progenitors in their age. When the yong Cranes perceive that the old ones moult, and are featherlesse, they take care to feed them, and to keep them warm, untill either they recover their feathers, or lose their lives. Now it is a shame for men in naturall affection to come behinde birds or beasts.

[Answ. 2] Secondly, children must love, honour, releeve, and obey their parents, because they have both the precept and president of Christ for it. For here in this verse he commands children to ho∣nour their parents, and in his life he did so him∣self; for he was obedient to his parents, he took care of his Mother after the death of Ioseph her husband, and recommended her to Iohns care, when he himself was corporally to depart from her. And therefore who dare disobey such a Pre∣cept? who will not follow such a President?

[Answ. 3] Thirdly, children must honour their parents, because it is profitable for them For

I. Such shall have a long life, Exod. 20. Ho∣nour thy parents, that thy life may be prolonged.

II. Such shall have loving, obedient, and tender children. Yea

III. They shall by blessed both with tempo∣rall, spirituall, and eternall blessings, if together with their earthly parents, they love, honour, and obey their father which is in heaven.

§. 2. Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, [Sect. 2] Corban, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be pro∣fited by me, &c.

What is the sense and meaning of these words? [Quest. 1]

For the understanding of this verse, [Answ.] it is to be observed, that although Gods Law enjoyned ho∣nour and relief towards parents, yet if they had bound themselves by this oath Corban, that they would not help nor relieve their parents, the Pha∣risees then taught, that the children were dis∣charged from that duty of providing, relieving, and taking care for them. Hence their Talmud saith,k 1.3 Every one ought to honour his father, and mother, except he have vowed the contrary. And it is evident, that the Jews did often, by solemn vows and oathes binde themselves, that they would never do good to such, or such a man, (Philo Iud. de speci∣al. leg. p. 595) Now this helpeth the exposition of this difficult place. By the gift that is offered by me, thou maist have profit: which words being con∣sidered according to the form of the oath Corban, will be thus rendred, By Corban, if thou receive any profit by me; to which words must be annexed the execration implied (which was usuall in the Jewish oathes, as Genesis 14.22.) Then let God do thus, and much more to me. And so the sense will be thus; By Corban thou shalt receive no profit by me. This exposition is as agreeable to the scope of the place, as it is to their form of swearing, and plainly sheweth how the Pharisees, by their Traditions, transgressed the Command∣ment of God. For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and thy mother. But the Scribes and Pharisees said, Whosoever shall say to father or mo∣ther, seeking relief, By Corban, thou shalt receive no profit from me, he was discharged. Vide Drusium de tribus sect. lib. 2. cap. 17.

Cui bono? To what end did the Scribes and [Quest. 2] Pharisees teach this unjust and wicked Doctrine?

For the understanding hereof, we must know, [Answ.] that the Priests, Scribes, and Pharisees, being gi∣ven to covetousnesse, that their oblations might be the greater, and better, they covered over their impiety with a curtain, and vail of Religi∣on, saying, That it was better to offer unto God those things which were to be given to parents, than to confer them upon their parents: and they gave this double reason for it, viz.

First, because God is the chief and principall Father, according to that of Esaias, O Lord, thou art our Father. But we must here remember, that this is to be understood, when parents do enjoyn that which is contrary to God; that is, if our earthly Father bid us do any thing which our heavenly Father forbids us to do; then we must obey the Lord, because he is our chief and prin∣cipall Father: but in those things which God commands, we must say (or think we hear the Lord say) That Obedience is better than Sacrifice. And therefore when the Lord commands us to re∣leeve our parents, we must do so, because therein we obey our God; and not say, O but it is a bet∣ter deed to spend that (which I should expend upon my Father) in sacrifice and oblations unto

God, for in so doing we disobey him: yea we ho∣nour and please the Lord better in honouring and releeving our indigent and aged parents, than in offering up any outward sacrifices.

Secondly, the Priests confirmed this their Te∣net by this reason, because it would more profit and benefit their parents, to offer that unto God, which they should give unto them, than if they should really receive it. The Pharisees held, that if children should say to their poor parents, The gift which I have promised, and will offer up unto God, will benefit you more, than if I should give it unto you; that then they were not bound to feed them, or supply their necessitiesl 1.4. But we must not neg∣lect an ordinary duty, in hope of a miraculous or extraordinary successe; we must not offer that up that in sacrifice, which should feed our parents, in expectation that they shall be fed from hea∣ven, or miraculously be sustained without meat: for they stand in need of relief, but not the Lord of oblations. And therefore those things which ought to be administred to the necessity of poor parents, should not be offered up unto God, who in this case would say, I require not your Sacrifices; that is, I never commanded, that a man should take necessary food, and provision from his pa∣rents, to give it unto me.

Concerning the adorning and beautifying of Churches (a question betwixt us and the Papists) we affirm, That the Churches of Christians, and places of Prayer, ought decently to be kept; yea and with convenient cost and seemly beauty to be built and repaired, and Church vessels, with other necessary furniture, to be of the best, not of the worst: but yet it followeth not, that such immoderate and excessive cost should be bestow∣ed upon Idols, to garnish and beautifie Idolatry, and poor people in the mean time to want: And this we prove by this Argument from this place.

[Argum.] Our Saviour Christ here reproveth the Scribes and Pharisees, because they drew the people to be good unto the Altar; and to bestow largely up∣on them, and so leave their parents helplesse. And he often doth inculcate that golden saying, I will have mercie, and not sacrifice, it being better to succour the living Temples of God, which are the bodies of his poor children, than to bestow superfluous cost upon dead Temples of stone. Willet, Symps. s. 485.

[Sect. 3] §. 3. Thus have ye made the Commandment of God of none effect by your Traditions.

[Quest. 1] What did our Saviour here tax in the Scribes and Pharisees?

[Answ.] Two things; namely,

I. That they honoured and observed their Traditions, more than the Commandements of God. And

II. That many of their Traditions were di∣rectly contrary to the Commandements of God.

[Quest. 2] Who are in both these particulars like unto the Pharisees?

[Answ.] The Church of Rome: For

First, the Commandements of that Church are much more honoured and observed, than the Commandments of God: for it is there taught that the Romane Church authoriseth the Holy Scriptures; that is to say, that the ordinances of men authorise the Commandements of God.

Secondly, in the Romane Church they teach things absolutely contrary to the word of God: For,

I. God saith, Exod 20. Thou shalt not make the likenesse of things which are in the heavens, or in the earth, thou shalt not bow downe before them, &c. But in the Church of Rome, they paint the Trinity, and kneele before the Images of Saints.

II. God saith by his Apostle, 1 Tim. 3 2.4. That a Bishop should be a husband of one wife only, and that his children should be subject to him in all reverence. But the Romane Church willeth, that a Bishop have neither wife nor children.

III. God saith by his Apostle, 1 Cor. 14. That it is better to speake five words in the Church, in a tongue understood of the people, then ten thousand in an unknowne tongue: But the Pa∣pists are commanded to serve God in an un∣knowne tongue, and to pray in latine.

Notes

• h 1.1

  Arist. de gen animal. lib. 1.
• i 1.2

  Thom. 2.2. qu. 26. art. 9.
• k 1.3

  Talmud. Hierosol. tract. de votis. c. 10.
• l 1.4

  Carthus. s. p. 130. b. medio.