Diatribe triplex, or, A threefold exercitation concerning 1. Superstition, 2. Will-worship, 3. Christmas festivall, with the reverend and learned Dr. Hammond / by Daniel Cawdry ...

OF SVPERSTITION.

Section 1.

IN a just and Methodicall order of Translation, the Discourse of Superstition should pre∣cede that of Will-worship arrow_forward ; that being more generall, this last a Special under it. Which that we may discover, we shall (before we de∣bate it with the Doctor) enquire, and (as well as we can) resolve, what Superstition is; And this cannot so well be found, by searching into the Monuments of Heathen Authors, Latine or Greeke, (which is the Doctors way) from the Names and senses by them given; (they being apt to misleade themselves and us, in this search,) as by the judgement of Divines, the matter belonging to Religion, the chiefe and last of all Arts: They that never knew what true Religion meant, are all judges of Superstition, which is the worke and worker thereof, in the excessive part.

§. 2. Superstition, in the generall notion of it, is not unfitly defined, by the learned Schooleman,

A vice contrary to Religion, in the excesse,

(as profanesse is the other

contrary, in the Defect.) Not that a man can be too Religions indeed, in the commanded arrow_back worship arrow_forward of God, with respect, or in order to the formall vertue of Religion; but (as one explaines himselfe) in order to the Acts, or externall meanes of arrow_back worship arrow_forward , superadded by the wisdome, or will of man;

when a man tenders arrow_back worship arrow_forward , either to whom it is not due, or not in that manner, which he ought.

Now, in Religion, or arrow_back worship arrow_forward of God in generall (as distinct from Justice, or Charity in the se∣cond Table,) foure things are considerable, according to the foure Commandments of the Table. 1 A right Object, God alone; 2 a right Matter, commanded arrow_back worship arrow_forward ; 3 a right man∣ner, with all due Reverence; 4 a right Time, his owne appointed Day: and answerable Super∣stition may extend to the whole first Table, when there is a Ni∣miety, or excesse in any of these. For the Discoverie where∣of, we must observe, that the Commandements of God, having every one of them, a Negative, and an Affirmative part, (expressed or understood) the Duties of Reli∣gion doe stand in the midst, as vertues, between two extremes: As e. g. there is a double errour against the first Commandement, one in the Defect, that's Atheism, having no God at all;

the other in excesse, that is Polytheism, ha∣ving too many. 2 In the second Commande∣ment, there is, first a Defect, not observing Gods prescribed arrow_back worship, than an excesse, in adding and observing devised arrow_back worship. 3 So also in the third Commandement, there is a Defect, in want of Reverence due to the Di∣vine Majesty (which is sometimes partly cal∣led profanesse) and an excesse in additions of Ridiculous rites and ceremonies or gestures, and the like. 4. In the fourth Commande∣ment, there is a Defect, in observing no Time, when Gods designed Sabbath is neglected, and an excesse, when men institute other Holy Dayes and Times, as Jeroboam did, 1 King. 12.32.

He ordained a Feast, — like unto the Feast that was in Judea.

Thence it is apparent, that in this generall sense, there may be Superstition, in, or against all the Com∣mandements of the first Table, in the exces∣sive part; and it were easie to observe, that many (Divines especially) doe call the exces∣ses of any Commandement, by the name of Superstition.

§. 3. And hence it may appeare, that some are too short, in designing the Species or kinds of Superstition; As first the learned Schoole∣man; who makes but three kinds of it,

Ido∣latry, Illegitimate arrow_back worship, and Divination.

The first and last whereof, are referred by Di∣vines to the first Commandement; and the o∣ther,

illegitimate or uncommanded wor∣ship, to the second: For Idolatry, properly so called, is either the arrow_back worship of a false God, instead of the true; or of many, or other Gods with him: And Divination, being a consult∣ing with the Devill, is a giving of that ho∣nour to him, which is due onely to God, and so the worst kind of Idolatry; So he limits Superstition, only to two Commandements. But I find another Reverend Doctor, restrain∣ing it to one Commandement, viz. the se∣cond, when he designes it thus.

Superstition is (a vice) whereby undue arrow_back worship is ten∣dered unto God.

Hee means that arrow_back worship to be undue (which the Schoolman called illegitimate) which is not commanded by God, but instituted and appointed by men: But this limits it onely to the second Com∣mandement, which is more properly called, VVillworship, and is but one Species of Su∣perstition: Whereas there may be Superstition against any of the four first Commandements. For instance: The worshiping of many Gods, by the Athenians, and other Nations against what Commandement was it? Surely against the first; yet this by the Apostles is called Su∣perstition, Act. 17.22. I perceive you are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, too Superstitious:

He means (saies our Doctor) they worshiped more Gods than other people.

And the Worshiping of Angells, Col. 2.18. with the true God, is

an Excesse against the first Commandement, yet by the Doctor himself, is called, that crime of Superstition. Again, when Baals Priests used those barbarous Ceremonies in their arrow_back worship, leaping and cutting them∣selves; and when Papists use as many and more ridiculous Rites and gestures in their arrow_back worship; this is an Excesse against the third Commandement, yet who would not call these Superstition? as taking Gods Name in vain. And lastly, when Ieroboam made a Feast day of his own head, and Papists dedi∣cate Holy daies to Saints; yea when the Iewes were so scrupulous in observing their Sabbath, that they would not stand up to de∣fend themselves, were not these Excesses of Religion, against the fourth Commande∣ment? yet justly called their Superstition.

§. 4. Superstition then, in this generall notion, as an Excesse of Religion, hath as many species, or kinds, as there are Com∣mandements of the first Table; But it is no easie matter, to discover all the kinds and waies, whereby it is committed in particular; or when we have found them, punctually to determine to what Commandement they doe belong. And therefore the courteous Reader will easily pardon us, if we be not so logi∣cally accurate, as we would be in setting down the particular kinds. We shall labour to expresse some of them, as we find them held

out by Divines and others, upon severall oc∣casions. There may be therefore 2. Heads of Superstition.

§. 5.1. Negative, when men abstain from somethings, under a notion of Religion, or arrow_back worship of God, which are not forbidden by God, but left free, and indifferent: either not forbidden, or, if once they were, now anti∣quated, or outdated, as our Doctor saies: And of this sort was that, Col. 2.21.

Touch not, tast not, handle not; which was Super∣stitious Negative willworship.

§. 6.2. Positive, when men of their owne hearts and Heads, set up waies of Religion, to arrow_back worship God by, which he never comman∣ded; And this, (as was said) may be com∣mitted, against any of the four first Comman∣dements. This distinction, the Doctor ownes, (of Negative, and Positive Superstition,) and makes use of it against others hereafter, thus:

In things indifferent, it is as crimi∣nous and superstitious, to place piety in the Negative, as in the affirmative; in not kneeling as in kneeling, in abstaining scru∣pulously from ceremonies, as in using them as scrupulously.

Thus farre then we have his consent, for more waies than one, for men, at lest Protestants to be superstitious; which hereafter he does almost deny: Sect. 47, 48. of which in its place. Now this Positive Superstition, may be exemplified, in many particulars.

§. 7.1. In that which is properly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, rendred by our Translators, by Superstition: Act. 25.19. and elsewhere; And this may be, either when men arrow_back worship many Gods, or onely one (with the true) and for this the Athenians are called too su∣perstitious, Act. 17.22. or else, when they have

an excesse of fear, or being afraid of God, when they need not, as thinking them∣selves bound, as from God, when God nei∣ther commands, nor forbids; Of this kind, is the doing or abstaining Religiously (i. e. upon pretence of Divine precept, or prohi∣bition) from those things, which the word doth neither command, nor interdict.

They are the Doctors own words, Sect. 46. below. Onely he is short, in short expressing, Religi∣ously, by pretence of Divine precept, or prohibition, for it signifies also, a pretence of worshiping God thereby: When men have a slavish fear, or hard opinions of God, then they are justly called Superstitious.

§. 8.2. That which is more strictly call∣ed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Willworship, which is, the placing the VVorship of God, in those things which are the meer inventions, and instituti∣ons of men; never commanded by God: The Papists can give us instances enough; In the Sacrifice of the Masse, in habits, Eremiti∣call and Monasticall life, Pennances, Pilgri∣mages, &c. which they esteem, and practice,

as speciall worships of God, and are by the re∣formed Churches, stiled justly Super∣stitious.

§. 9. 3. When men institute any rites or ceremonies, for the service of God, which are ridiculous (as the Baalites did) or un∣beseeming the simplicity of Gospell- arrow_back worship; This is no better, than Superstition, and a taking of Gods Name in vain. The Church of Rome can afford us good store of these. These, though they be not VVorships invent∣ed by men, yet are Additions to the arrow_back worship commanded by God, and so an Excesse in Religion, and justly branded as Supersti∣tion.

§. 10.4. When men put Holinesse upon things, which God hath not sanctified by their own consecration; as in Daies, Chur∣ches, Vestments, &c. Jeroboam was deeply guilty of this Superstition. First in consecra∣ting Chappells and Priests, for his Golden Calves, in Dan, and Bethel, and then in con∣secrating an Holy Day, and Annuall Feast, unto his Gods,

like unto the Feast in Judah (of Gods appointment) the month which he had devised of his own heart: 2 King. 12.9.32, 33.

or as the word is, created, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 An ordinary misdevotion, in the Church of Rome, and in some of late amongst our selves: Though the Doctor grudge to grant it the name of Superstition, as we shall hear at Sect. 50.

§. 11.5. The placing of perfection in an high degree, in some states and conditions of life which God never placed in them. As in that store house of superstition, the Church of Rome, in voluntary Poverty, Virginity, Celi∣bate and voluntary Martyrdome, when God doth not command, or call unto them. And this last of Martyrdome, the Doctor seemes to make the highest degree of perfection, in his Tract of VVillworship. Sect. 44. For either he must mean it of voluntary Martyrdome, when a man ambitious of it, shall rush into it, (as many in the primitive times did) with∣out a call from God, and then it is so farre from an higher degree of perfection, that, in the judgements of the best Divines, it de∣serves not the name of Martyrdome: Or else he must intend it of Martyrdome, when God calls a man to suffer, and then it is a duty, (or at most, but a priviledge) rather than any state of perfection.

§. 12.6. When men think by their owne, uncommanded arrow_back worship, and services of God, either to merit pardon of their sinnes, against other Commandements; as shee Pro. 7.14. &c.

I have peace offerings with me, this day have I paid my vowes,

which were free willing offerings, as not commanded;

Come let us take our fill of love,

&c. q. d. though I have runne into debt, by my former whoredomes, I have now satisfied God with

freewill-offerings, and have quit the score. Or to purchase Glory, at least a greater de∣gree of Glory for themselves, and to super∣erogate for others, by doing something not commanded, as Papists plainly do. How near the Doctor comes to this kind of Super∣stition, we shall shew anon, VVillworship, Sect. 50. &c.

§. 13.7. When men place more pleasing of God, and expect more Acceptation from God, for services or arrow_back worship uncommanded, than for those cōmanded by God. The Apostle intimates some such conceit in men, 1 Cor. 8.8. when he saies,

meats commend us not to God; for neither if we eat, are we the better (in our selves, or better accepted with God) neither if we eate not, are we the worse (or are lesse, and lesse accepted with God)

yet such as abstained from some meats, had such thoughts of themselves. And this shall be ma∣nifested to be the opinion and expectation of the Doctor, for his voluntary arrow_back worship ( arrow_back worship not commanded by God) to be better pleasing, and to find better Acceptance from God: Tract of Willworship. Sect. 16.19. and here Sect. 52.

§. 14.8. Lastly (to adde no more) the placing of more virtue and efficacie, in things, than either Nature, or the Institution of God hath placed in them: This is acknow∣ledged to be an Excesse, and so Superstition by

the Doctor, sect. 45.

The placing of more virtue in some things, than either Natu∣rally, or by the rule of Gods word, or in the estimation of purer ages of the Church may be thought to belong to them, is guilty of a Nimiety.

His instances given, are very per∣tinent and considerable.

1. Placing virtue or force in the signe of the Crosse,

which is done, not onely by Papists in crossing them∣selves to scare away the Divell, but also by many ignorant, and ill-taught Protestants, who require crossing of their Children in Baptism, as thinking them not well baptized, without.

2. The womens parvula evange∣lia. 3. opus operatum,

the common Super∣stition of all naturall men, and Hypocrites. Concerning which, his judgement is good.

The doing of which, is either groundlesse, and then it is folly: or else it fastens some promise on Christ, which he hath not made in the Gospell, &c. But why he should add, In the estimation of the purer ages of the Church,

I do not well understand, but shall consider in its place.

§. 15. Having thus made way for our de∣bate with the Doctor, by shewing the Nature of Superstitiion; we shall now enter the lists, and consider what he saies about it. And to his first Section, wee say: It may be true,

that some may unjustly be charged with the crime of Superstition, by ignorant or mali∣cious

defamers of others best actions.

But it is as true, that some that think themselves

assured in conscience that they are farre e∣nough from the guilt of it,

may justly be charged with it. Commonly those that are most Superstitious, are most confident of their Innocency, and piety; Many of the Ro∣mish Proselytes, doe think they are farre e∣nough from this crime, in their highest will∣worships, and rather to deserve Commendati∣on from men, and more Acceptation from God, than blame from any. And no marvaile, if they understand Superstition, in the same sense, that the Doctor does, in this discourse. That is,

§. 16.

Superstition in latine, is most clearly, superstitum cultus, the arrow_back worship of some, departed from this world, supposed to have life in another.

Sect. 2. That the Heathens so defined it, is true, and that the worshiping of such then, and by Papists now, is one kind of Superstition, we have already granted; as being the Worshiping of Creatures, with, and besides the Creator, which is Ido∣latry against the first Commandement. But the Doctor will not say, (I think) that this is the onely superstition to be found in the World, either then, or now. For he grants 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an Excessive fear of the Deity, to have been another kind of Superstition a∣mongst the Heathens; and other kinds also

among Christians, as wee shall heare anon. Some there are (and they no mean ones) that derive it from super, and sto, or statuo, as su∣pra statutum, some arrow_back worship instituted by men, above the statute law of God; But wee rather rest in the definitiion of the Schoolman;

Superstition is a vice contrary to Religion, in the excesse;

which may extend to the other Commandements, whereas this limits it to the second.

§. 17. The Greek word for Superstition, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; though it seems to come nearer the Doctors sense, of superstitum cultus, yet the Etymology of the word, does not import so much; but rather a slavish fear of a Deity, by imagining it, Cruell, Tyrannicall, &c. as the Doctors words,

dreading the Gods, as so many Tyrants, sect. 13. a cowardly trem∣bling fear; a care & fear of evill spirits,

sect. 9. For though the latter part of the word signifies daemons, or Spirits departed, yet the former part does not signifie arrow_back worship, but fear: not that fear, which in Scripture, is often put for the whole arrow_back worship of God, but a slavish fear of that God whom they wor∣ship; whereupon they (not knowing, or not contented with prescribed arrow_back worship) devise some way of arrow_back worship of their owne heads, to please and propitiate their God; which may well be called Superstition, or willworship; the one against the first, the other against the se∣cond Commandement.

§. 18. The Doctor from the 4. Sect. to the 10. having delivered the many senses of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; he saies,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 referres to the three first, Poeticall Gods, Angells, or Dead-men, or indeed any thing, but the one Supreme God.

This clears what I said before, that this word and arrow_back worship is rather Idolatry against the first Commandement, which forbids the arrow_back worship of any God but the one true God, or any others with him, which is Polytheism, than that kind of Su∣perstition, which is the giving of false, that is uncommanded arrow_back worship, to the true God, a∣gainst the second Commandement.

§. 19. But he adds, Sect. 11.

VVhen Paul tells the Athenians, Act. 17.22. they were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, hee meanes they wor∣shiped more Gods or Daemons than the Ro∣mans, &c. or were more devout, more pious, in their worships than any others.

If (say I) they were so called, because they worshiped more Gods, then they were Polytheists against the first Commandement; If, because they were more devout or pious (impious rather) in worshiping the true God ignorantly, in a false manner, then their sinne was against the second Commandement; and in both it was Superstition, in severall kinds.

§. 20. What Festus meant by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Act. 25.19. is not much materiall; its like he spake it with scorn enough, not of

Pauls onely (as the Doctor seems to limit it) but of the whole Jewish Religion; (for so the words may import, and are so translated by ours.) But to make the latter part of the verse, to expound the former;

of one Iesus that was dead, putting him under the vul∣gar notion of a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or dead Heros, and so meaning the arrow_back worship of him by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is,

I doubt, a strain of the Doct∣ors Criticism; compounding things, which are in the Text distinct. For Festus saies,

they had many questions, both concerning their own Religion (Superstition) and also, concerning one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive,

but not a word there, of arrow_back worship of him, as a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Heros: which may the better be beleeved, be∣cause hee was accused of questions of their Law. cap 23.29. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and chap. 24. where Tertullus laies in his charge against Paul, there is not one word of this, but o∣ther grievous crimes, Sedition, Seducement, profanation of the Temple, &c. v. 5.6. But the Doctor having taken liberty (as oft he de∣lights to doe) to vary from the common Translation of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, their, rendring it by (his) and of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, reading Religi∣on; to qualifie, at least, Superstition; he goes on to make his Comment sutable; that

Pauls Religion was, in worshiping of Iesus as a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or dead Heros: Whereas

Paul affirmed him to be alive,

not in part, as those departed Daemons were supposed; but in the whole man, as raised from the dead.

§. 21. What Epicurus Doctrine was, or what Heathens thought of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, wee are not much Sollicitous; The Doctor having shewed a great deale of Reading and Learning, for many sections to∣gether, from the 14. to the 27. to little pur∣pose, except to cloud the businesse now in hand, to lead us away, in a mist of his owne making, from the true and proper sense of the word, amongst Christians. Yet it seemes the Heathens did often take the word in an ill sense, & branded Religions which they did not like, by that name. Plutarch taxes the Jewes for their Superstition, in two things remark∣able: 1.

That they were tyed by their Su∣perstition, as with a net; that when they were invaded,

they would not rise from their seates, on their Sabbath day, which was an Excesse against the fourth Commandement, and grosse Superstition. For necessity was priviledged to break the Sabbaths Rest. 2.

Their killing and sacrificing their Chil∣dren to Moloch,

which being a horrid su∣perstition, was (as the former) intended as a arrow_back worship of the true God, and yet was inter∣preted no better, than sacrificing to Divells, Psal. 106.37. as all Idolatry was by the A∣postle

1. Cor. 1••.12. which though in o∣ther respects, it was against the first Com∣mandement, grosse Idolatry, so in making it a arrow_back worship of the true God, (when

hee commanded it not, neither came it into his heart,

as somewhere he saies) it was a kind of Superstition, against the second Commandement. And in a word, the Ety∣mologist speakes fully our sense.

The word among the Heathens is taken for a good thing, but among Christians for impiety.

Sect. 23. cited by the Doctor.

§. 22. From that large discourse about the word, at last, Sect. 27. the Doctor comes to apply it to his purpose, and to dis∣cover three inconsequences, in our customa∣ry use of the word, Superstition.

First that it is inconsequent, that Superstition simply and abstractly taken, should be re∣solved in all Authors, to signifie somewhat which is evill, that since particularly, which is false arrow_back worship.

But, (with his fa∣vour) this is not the question between us; but, whither in the Scripture, and Ortho∣dox Divines, commenting upon that word, it doe not alwaies signifie something evill, and particularly, excessive and false wor∣ship. What the Etymologist thought of it, as the common opinion of Christians, wee newly heard: And this is the more pro∣bable,

because even most of the Popish Com∣mentators doe take the word in an ill sense, and render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by Superstition; without any pretence of a good sense of it; which, no doubt, they would be glad to hear, to colour, and cover their own Will∣ arrow_back worship, and Superstition. The Doctors reasons for his opinion, have been conside∣red afore, but briefly now again;

1. Those that use the word, to expresse their owne arrow_back worship, conceive it to be a creditable word, or else would not call it by that name.

No doubt, but Heathens did think well of their own arrow_back worship: But it being a false arrow_back worship, it was never the better for that. And it is observable, that in all the Doctors former large discourse, hee brings onely Heathens, to shew the meaning of the word (bad enough sometimes) but not one Divine, Greek or Latine Father, or any Moderne writer, Papist, or other, who take it in a good sense; which was not, I believe for want of good will, but something else. 2. His next reason is

when Saint Pauls Religion was called by that name, Act. 25.19. it appeares not that Festus did use that word as an accusation, or in an ill sense, but in generall to signi∣fie Pauls Religion, &c.

Something hath been said to this above, Sect. 20. and now

we adde; It appears rather to signifie some∣thing ill, in his opinion; For Festus was not a man of so much Religion, or had any such esteem of the Jewish Religion, as to give it any credit; and therefore spake of it, as of a Superstition, as men use to call all, not of their own Religion, by way of de∣famation, as the Doctor saies, Sect. 24.3. The third reason is,

Saint Paul himself, Act. 17.23. saith of the Athenians, they did arrow_back worship the true God though ignorant∣ly taking him for a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

And is not worshiping of the true God, ignorantly, with their own devised arrow_back worship, a Super∣stition justly to be condemned? was it not grosse Idolatry, and sinfull Superstition in the Israelites, to arrow_back worship the true God, in the Golden Calfe? 4.

He calls them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, more Religious than other men, not in relation to any vitious rite, but to their worshiping the unknown God, which wor∣shiped others not.

But this, as it begges the question, so is it against the text it selfe.

I perceive that in all things you are too Superstitious,

both in their worshiping of so many false Gods, (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) and a God in their ignorant arrow_back worship of the true God, and in their vitious rites of wor∣ship. And this sense, the Doctor himselfe gave, Sect. 11.

I consider and behold you

in all things (or in all that I see in you) as men more superstitious than others,

though the word imports, too Superstiti∣ons, too Religious; which is a Nimiety or Excesse in Religion, and so justly called Superstition, in an ill sense, unlesse the Doctor thinke, that to arrow_back worship many false Gods, and to arrow_back worship the true God igno∣rantly, be worthy the name of true Religi∣on, which the Apostle there censures, by the name of Idolatry, ver. 16.

Hee saw the City 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, given to Idolatry, or full of Idolls.

And the vulgar rendring the word, ver. 22. by Superstitiosiores, too Superstitious, cannot intend it in a good sense; yea the Doctor Sect. 31. grants that Superstitiosus in the Positive, signifies Ex∣cesse more then in the Comparative.

§. 23. The second Inconsequence (hee saies) is this:

That the use of Ceremonies, or rites in the arrow_back worship of God, if not distinctly prescribed, either by the exam∣ple or precept of Christ, should be called Superstition, and for that condemned.

But I beleeve, this is a mistake; None that I know, make such a consequence; but rather thus: That what rite or ceremony soever, is made a part of arrow_back worship, without such example or precept of Scripture, is Superstitious, and therefore condem∣ned.

§. 24. The third inconsequence, is a worse mistake;

That men on pretence, and in the name of Piety, should abstain from some observances (indifferent) as Superstitions, either because commanded by lawfull au∣thority, or abused by Papists.

For the first charge, I beleeve hee cannot give an instance of any one understanding Christian, that ever did abstaine from observance indifferent, be∣cause commanded by lawfull authority? but rather because they were thought not indiffe∣rent, but obtruded on them as parts of wor∣ship. For the other, that they have been used by Papists, is not all, but that by them they have been abused, and accounted parts of arrow_back worship, and may easily return to be so ac∣counted by others.

§. 25. We acknowledge this assertion, that

Superstition may, and doth in some authen∣tick writers, sacred especially, signifie a Nimiety, or Excess in Religion.

What saies he to it? First he confesses

Superstitiosus may denote such excess, but so also doth Religiosus, but then Superstition denotes it no more, than Religio.

Agreed, for Religi∣on it selfe is sometimes taken for Superstition, when it is applyed to a false Religion: And all such Excesse in arrow_back worship not prescribed, is a Nimiety, and culpable, what ever A. Gellius dreamed, as an ill Judge of Super∣stition.

§. 26. If so used by some Authors, yet hee can say much against it, as 1.

That some, not of the meanest antient Heathens did it, on the ground of Epicurean Divinity.

Wee professe we regard not, what the best of Hea∣thens say in matter of arrow_back worship, who never knew, what true arrow_back worship of God meant. 2.

For Christian writers, the use of a word in that sense, is so slight and casuall, that not sufficient to fasten an ill character upon it,

&c. It is no slight or casuall thing, as hee makes it; for all Divines that speake of this matter, do generally condemn it, as a thing of ill name and fame, even Papists themselves: and its proved by this Topick, by most of them, because it is an Excess in Religion, and illegitimate arrow_back worship. 3.

That those that come home to the point, are so few and mo∣dern, and of so small authority, that scarce worth producing,

with slighting and skorne enough spoken; But why then doth not the Doctor in all this discourse give us the names of those many, Antient, Authentick Fa∣thers, &c. that take it in a good sense? Hee u∣ses not to be so sparing, where he hath such plenty of Authorities. 4. The last is some∣thing nearer the question; which supposing it to be taken in an ill sense, for excesse, &c. saies,

Then it must be reduced to these two sorts, as consisting either in the degree, or in the number of Actions, in quality or quan∣tity,

wee consider what hee saies to both.

§. 27.

First, in the first kind, hee denies there is any such excess; There is no possi∣bility of being Religious in too high a de∣gree, praying too fervently, too often, &c.

But what saies hee to the arguments of the great Schoolman, who proves Superstition to be an excess in Religion? and withall shewes how he meanes it.

Not because Superstiti∣on does yeeld more to divine arrow_back worship, than true Religion; but because it exhibites Di∣vine arrow_back worship, either to whom it ought not, or in that manner it ought not.

We say (as afore) in prescribed arrow_back worship, there can be no Excess of degree: The want of the highest degree there is a Defect; A man cannot pray too earnestly (what ever he may doe too of∣ten) for that is naturall and prescribed wor∣ship: But if a man shall tender to God, devi∣sed arrow_back worship, the least degree here is too much: As for too often praying, the Euchitae were unjustly condemned, if this was not a fault: Yes (saies he)

their fault was not their excessive practice, but the laying that obli∣gation upon themselves and others.

And why not both these? For God having prescribed all men Callings to be waited on; hee that shall pray continually to the Interruption thereof, sinnes as well, as he that prayes not at all. But (saies hee)

the fault is the

neglect of the duties of our calling, not the excesse of devotion.

We say the neglect of their Duties, is caused by the Excess of this constant, uncommanded Devotion: and so one sin is the cause of another. As for their laying it on themselves or others as an obliga∣tion, its true, thats a fault; but suppose they had layd no such obligation, but onely thought it a matter of greater perfection, more pleasing, and acceptable to God; had not this been Superstition also? His supposi∣tion of

separating that Excess, from these neglects or omissions, and then it would not be criminous, to pray continually,

is not feisable in this life; unlesse hee could find a man, that had no Calling to labour in. If any man might have been allowed to pray or serve God continually, Adam in innocencie might have been the man; and yet he was set to a calling, to dress the Garden.

That the frequency of prayer could not be Superstiti∣ous, unless the arrow_back worship and institution it self were Superstitious,

which he collects from Sa••nt Austin, shall give us a double inference; First that an institution of arrow_back worship (by men) may be Superstitious: 2. That hee seemes to contradict himself; For in arrow_back worship com∣manded, as prayer is, a man may be Super∣stitious, if he pray constantly, and neglect his calling; which latter he cannot but doe, if he doe the former.

§. 28. If the Excess be in the extension, as taking in too many rites and ceremonies, into the service of God, when he saies, 1.

By this it is granted, the rites and ceremonies themselves are not superstitious, but onely the multitude.

But first, we shall say, that multitudes of rites and ceremonies, are preju∣diciall to the simplicity of Gospell arrow_back worship, and therefore either are, or will be quickly Superstitious. 2. Wee say further, that rites and ceremonies, be they never so few, if in∣troduced as parts of arrow_back worship, are Superstitious, and will arrow_back worship: as certainly in the old Law, the least rite and ceremony prescribed by God, was a part of arrow_back worship, whither they were sig∣nificant or not: and so they would be now, if any such be found prescribed: but if made parts of arrow_back worship by men, they were Super∣stitious; as will not be denyed of many rites in the Church of Rome. 3. Though some rites and ceremonies must necessarily be in Re∣ligion, yet they are such as pertain to Order and Decencie, 1 Cor. 14.40. which yet are not left to the wit and will of man, to ap∣point what, and as many as shall seeme decent or orderly to them; but are determined partly by the generall precepts of God; partly by the nature of the things themselves, & partly by circumstances which occasionally offer them∣selves; and are rather called circumstances of arrow_back worship, as time, place, gesture, which are

mon adjuncts of Religious and civill affaires, (instanced by himselfe) than properly Re∣ligious, in ecclesiasticall rites and ceremo∣nies; much lesse to be accounted parts of arrow_back worship,

§. 29. Our Divines, though they doe allow some rites or ceremonies, (or rather circumstances) in arrow_back worship, such as before; yet they do condemn significant Ceremonies, in the Church of Rome; unlesse they be such, as either Christ hath appointed, as in the Sa∣craments, or such as naturally signifie such a thing; or such as the Scripture gives instan∣ces of; as lifting up the hand in taking an Oath; or the Eyes to Heaven in prayer, &c.

§. 30. Of this kind, are those three sorts of significant ceremonies specified by him;

1. When it naturally signifies the thing, or floweth from it, as lifting up the eyes to Heaven, signifies zeale. 2. When custome hath made it significative, as kneeling sig∣nifies humility. 3. When it is set to signi∣fie something else, either matter of doctrine, as standing between Easter and Whitsun∣tide to signifie the Resurrection, or matter of fact, &c.

These and such like, as they have degenerated into Superstition, so in themselves, they are not any parts of wor∣ship; which they would be, if taught or practised as necessary, or making the obser∣vers more Religious than others, or more ac∣ceptable

to God, &c. But their significant ceremonies are Superstitious, when neither in their nature, nor by any instituted of God, they are instituted by men to signifie some grace to be procured from God, in the use of such ceremonies: of which sort the Church of Rome hath many.

§. 31. But herein the Doctor is again mis∣taken, that he saies,

The sole reason why the old Jewish ceremonies are interdicted us Christians, is, because the observing of those who foreshewed Christ, and teaching the necessity of them, would be the denying of Christ to be come.

This indeed, was our reason, but not the sole one; just such an an∣swer Bellarmine gives to an argument from Christian liberty against imposition of new Ceremonies by men:

Christ (saies he) would have us free from old ceremonies of Moses, because they were figures of the new Testament, and so to cease when the thing is come: But it followes not, we must have no ecclesiasticall Ceremonies or lawes, because we have not those.

To which the learned Chamier replyes:

There was ano∣ther cause of abrogation of those ceremonies (though Bellarmine conceald it) viz. be∣cause they did load the Conscience, with a yoake of multitude of Ceremonies: and this is common to those, and to the Traditions of men.

But we say further, 1. The false A∣postles

did acknowledge Christ come in the flesh, joyning Circumcision, &c. with him; and yet are blamed for observing of them: 2. Or was it the teaching of them onely as ne∣cessary, that procured their blame? Nor that onely, but for putting the yoke of them, upon the Disciples necks, when Christ had taken it off, Act. 15. Gal. 5. 1 &c. 3. Unlesse obser∣ving of them, and teaching them as necessa∣ry, be one and the same thing, here are two causes of their interdiction to Christians: And if so, then I ask, whether, if he had ob∣served some Jewish Ceremonie which did not foreshew Christ to come, (some such there were) but significant onely of some things past, (though they had not taught it necessa∣rie) the Apostle would not have blamed them for that, as Superstitious? or had they devi∣sed any new rites and ceremonies, &c. would not the Apostle have blamed them for that also, as too Superstitious?

§. 32. But the Doctor gives his vote, to the old Rule;

Ceremonies must be few and wholesome.

Few, for many reasons, which we approve as good. But then at last, in a manner grants, they may be many,

if they be wholsome, not onely negatively, as harm∣lesse, but positively as tending to edificati∣on, and then little reason to accuse them of excesse: for then more probably help devoti∣on, then encumber it.

But this is to unvote

the old Rule in part: For if they be Salu∣brious, wholsome, no matter how many they be: yea, "if but negatively as harmelesse, which is a dore wide enough to let in most of the Romish Superstitions; what harme is there in many of them? good innocent Ceremonies, as some have called them: But if positively for edification (as all willworshipers thinke of their own inventions) is that a plea to beare men out, in the multitude of Ceremonies, ad∣ded to the arrow_back worship of God? And suppose them few and wholsome, in the judgement of men; if they be imposed as parts of arrow_back worship, or efficacious to procure grace, or Acceptance from God; are they not too many, be they never so few, and thought never so wholsome? Lastly, who shall be the Physitian to judge of their number and salubrity? not every private man, to be sure, Sect. 55, 56.

he is not al∣lowed to be a competent judge,

of indecency in them, much lesse of the number or whole∣somenesse of them. Who then? the higher pow∣ers, Sect. 55. whether Ecclesiasticall or Civil, he expresses not; But if men, or any number of men, may be competent Judges in the wor∣ship of God, will not the Wisdome and wit of man expatiate here, and grow wanton? One man or Church, thinks, this is very whol∣some, for edification and devotion; another as wise as he, will adde another, till the Church have a yoake put upon her neck, as

heavie, or heavier than the Iewes. Who knowes not the multitude of wholsome Cere∣monies of Rome, came in at this door.

§. 33. This question of a competent Iudge in such matters, is the matter to be resolved, because the Doctor makes so many distincti∣ons about these wholsome Ceremonies, that vulgar wits are not capable of them:

You distinguish of such Acts, wherein that ex∣cess is supposed to be: that they are either ordinable, fit, or proper to that end, the service of God, or inordinable, unfit, &c.

What ordinary man (who yet hath a Con∣science to be satisfied in the arrow_back worship of God) is capable of these distinctions? Hee confesses

there are great store inordinable, unfit, un∣proper, of these in the Church of Rome?

Yet they are not of the Doctors opinion; but think them all, both fit and necessary. But yet he hath a salve for such.

In this case, though any one may be a Nimiety, and that a fault, yet still this not the fault of Super∣stition; but rather of folly and vanity, &c.

And I pray what is Superstition, but folly and vanity, in the arrow_back worship of God? Are not Idols and all false arrow_back worship called vanities, and fol∣ly?

many such like things ye doe; Mar. 7, 8, 9. full well ye reject the Commandement of God that ye may keep your own Tradition: In vain do they arrow_back worship me.

Let the Doctor shew his dislike of such, as he will, yet if men

may be Iudges, what are fit for number and wholesomness, every after-comer will thinke himselfe as wise, as he that went before, till they have loaded the Christian above the Jew. Besides, as the learned Chamier well ob∣serves; there may be many mischiefes in a few, if the Authority to institute them be in the Church, or any man, or men:

For sup∣pose they be but few now, yet we must consi∣der, how many they may be hereafter; seeing the Authority is given to every succeeding Church or Pope, to constitute ceremonies or ecclesiasticall lawes, as they shall think fit; and so the yoake never certain, but alwaies growing;

as experience tells us: To passe this: if Superstition be so named, because it is Super statutum, above the Sta∣tute Law of arrow_back worship; or because it is an Ex∣cess of services added to the arrow_back worship of God; certainly these unfit, improper Ceremonies may well be deemed such, and the Doctor need not grudge the child the name of Superstition. As for those that charge such trifles, (they are to the Doctor, belike, but trifles)

with the title of Superstition, and then extend it to those things which have no such fault, and so run the circle.

Let them for me, see how to get out. I onely still say, what ever deserves the name of Superstition, is a Nimiety and Ex∣cess in Religion; and what ever is an Excess in Religion, is Superstition: Let's hear where∣in the Doctor is pleased to place it.

§. 34.

The placing of more virtue in some things, than either naturally, or by the rule of the word, or in the estimation of purer a∣ges of the Church, may be thought to be∣long to them: as in the crosse, &c.

We spake something in generall to this, but now wee shall assume, of all those Ceremonies of the Church of Rome, unfit, improper, &c. and of all superadded parts of arrow_back worship what ever; They do place more virtue in them, than ei∣ther naturally, or by the rule of the word be∣longs to them; ergo they are Superstitious. The Assumption I prove thus: They place in them virtue to please God by them, to pro∣cure more acceptance from God, and his blessing upon them; which neither naturally, nor by the rule of the word, the institution of God, they have in them: ergo. more might be added, but I forbear.

But what meanes the Doctor to adde, to his disjunction,

or in the estimation of pu∣rer ages of the Church?

Had the purer a∣ges of the Church (after the Apostles) any power to put virtue into things, which they had not, either naturally, or by the Rule of Gods word? If he denies this, the addition was superfluous: If he affirm it, hee begges the question; For we say, the purest Church hath no Authority in matters of Religion, to put virtue or efficacie into them, but God onely, in Nature, or by his institution, in the

word: Or if any, the Purest Church, shall take upon her to doe it, I shall make bold to adde the Doctors words, in part.

The doing of such, is either groundlesse, and then it is folly; or else it fastens some promise on Christ, which he hath not made in the Gos∣pell.

And what is that but a lye, and an Ad∣dition to the word: a Nimiety, or excesse of Religion, as he calls it, that is, sinfull Su∣perstition, and that would impure the purest Church.

§. 35. The Nimiety must be

an excesse of fear, or being afraid of God, when wee need not; as thinking our selves bound, when God neither commands, nor forbids; ab∣steining religiously, &c.

Wee take what hee grants, this is one kind of Superstition, (as we noted above in stating of the question, at Sect. 7.) but not the onely; there are many more. And I like the Doctors reason well, here;

because such a man addes to the Com∣mands of Christ (as the former to the pro∣mises) annexed to the Christian Religion, those things which belong not to it, and so is an exceeder in the fear and service of God, &c.

And this is Superstition. Sect 47. And this he confesses

is a culpable and cri∣minous excesse, not in doing what God com∣mands not (for that may be innocent e∣nough) but in affirming God to command or forbid, what he doth not, &c.

True, in

things left indifferent and free by God, hee is not guilty of this kind of Superstition; if he doe them, or abstain. But yet he may, of a∣nother kind: that is, if he place more virtue in them, (in doing or abstaining) than ei∣ther naturally or by the rule of the word, is due to them, (as he said before.) But in mat∣ter of arrow_back worship it is not so; For there, it is a Ni∣miety and excesse, to doe what God hath not commanded, as wee have often said.

§. 36. When as he concludes,

That this way of dogmatizing; or imposing as ne∣cessary such things as the Law of Christ hath not made necessary, is the speciall and onely kind of Superstition, which he be∣leeves, any kind of Protestants to be guilty of;

it is a great mistake. For 1. he granted another kind. Sect. 45.

In placing more virtue in things, than naturally, or by the rule of the word, belongs to them.

2. All Willworship devised by men, and added as parts of Gods arrow_back worship, hath been proved to be an Excess in Religion, and so Superstiti∣on; besides the rest, which we have noted a∣bove. As for his addition,

of observing ominous, inauspicious events, unluckie daies, &c.

they fall under his first kind of Su∣perstition, Sect. 45. Placing anl putting more Virtue in them than God in Nature, or by his Institution hath put into them. Which though they be not properly Excesses of the

Christian Religion, (being common to Hea∣thens, and not properly arrow_back worship) yet are they Excesses in Christians, that use them, and a kind of Superstition, call it Religious, or Civill, as he pleases.

§. 37. And now wee are come to another consideration, of the last way, that he sup∣poses, may be called Superstition; and that is,

Because men place holinesse in some ob∣servances, amongst us, which (what ever may be said of it in thes••••) in hypothesi or application to the particular cases, is gene∣rally very false, or impertinent.

Wee shall consider what he saies for it.

§. 38. 1. He askes,

what is meant by ho∣linesse? reall inherent holiness, or onely sepe∣ration from common uses?

The latter onely, we would answer: Separation to holy, from common uses: that is, such a separation to holy uses, that the things may no more be ali∣enated to common uses: this is proper holiness.

§. 39. But then the onely inquiry will be,

By whom, and how farre any thing, is thus separated; either by ¹ Christ, or ² the A∣postles, or the ³ universall Church, in pu∣rest ages, or the ⁴ particular Church (and rulers thereof) wherein we live, or ⁵ if free, by our own Act.

He tells us here, by whom the seperation is made, but not a word, how far, or in what difference, a thing seperated, by the severall Authors, is

made holy, or whither it be equall in all. That a thing made holy, by a private per∣son, is equally holy with that, done by a particular Church; and so upwards, that of the generall Church, equally with that of the Apostles, and that of the Apostles equall with that of Christ himself: this would first have been resolved. Hee seemes to make the difference of the Holiness, from their severall Seperations, to be onely graduall; but wee suppose it to be specificall, at least, betweene the Seperation of God or Christ, and that of the Church (to say nothing yet of the Apostles.) And withall, wee say, we desire a proofe, that any but God, or Christ, or his Apostles guided by his Spirit, can make any thing properly Holy: Now to make a thing properly holy, is not, to separate it onely to holy uses from common, (as the Doctor de∣fines it. Sect. 50.) but to make it, 1. a part of arrow_back worship, 2. to be efficatious to work and convey holiness, to him that rightly uses it: 3. to make the service & person, more accepted. 4. To give a ground of expectation of a Blessing, upon some promise thereof in the word, &c. In this sense none but God alone, can Sanctifie and Seperate any thing, to Ho∣ly, from common uses. All which the Doctor either takes no notice of, or takes as granted, others may doe. For he saies,

The way to discern, whither we exceed

(that is, be Superstitious) in any of those afore, and place more holiness than is due to them, is to account them holy, in a degree proportioned to the authority of him that se∣perated them.

Wee shall speake something considerable to this. For 1. The difference between Christ and his Apostles, and the rest is not well, or not distinctly laid out: For the Apostles authority was also Divine, by Christs commission. 2. Then it followes, that the Authority of the Apostles, in their Sepe∣ration, differed much from that of the Uni∣versall Church, & the rest, as much as Divine & humane. 3. The precept or example of the Universal Church (as it cannot be demonstra∣ted ever to have concurred, in making any thing holy, there never having been an Oecu∣menicall Councill, truly so called, so) cannot make any thing properly holy, with the re∣spects afore said; but onely improperly, with respect to holy things or duties, so made by God: e. g. In times or places seperated, by God or men; there is this difference (besides those above) that Time or Place, sanctified by God, require holy duties, to till them up. But seperated by men, they are to wait upon Holy duties. In the first, the duties are ap∣pointed for the Time, or Places sake: In the other, the time or place, are appointed for the Duties sake: but this is to make any Time, or any Place, when and where

those duties are performed, as holy as all other times or places, that is, the one no more Holy than another. We therefore deny, that either the Universall Church, or any parti∣cular Church, or any private man, can make any thing properly Holy: which the Doctor doth not at all undertake to prove. Onely thus he goes on;

If that which is thus se∣perated, be by Christ himself, I shall count it holy in that degree, and my selfe obliged by virtue of Divine precept, and so of the rest; and then I offend not.

But 1. I suppose the Doctor will account himselfe obliged to an Apostolicall institution, by Divine pre∣cept also: I had thought Apostolicall and Divine, had been both one with the Doctor; but I perceive he makes them differ, and yet differences Apostolicall from Ecclesiasticall; as if the Apostles were neither Divine, nor Humane; but something between both. 2. By this distinction of his, the Papists may ex∣cuse their grossest Superstition, in placing Holinesse, in things, times, places, &c. by borrowing the Doctors answer;

They may say, they account them holy, but either by the authority of the generall, or particular Church of Rome,

and that is no Supersti∣on, saies he, say they.

§. 40. But he goes on,

If my voluntary oblation, I perform as a voluntary oblation, and onely expect that God that hath promi∣sed to accept such, will accept it; all this while I am not blameworthy.

But 1. what meanes he by his voluntary oblation? If his willingness in tendering commanded arrow_back worship, he cannot doe that arrow_back worship aright, without respect to the command: If voluntary arrow_back worship of his own, without a command, he hath no promise of acceptance, and so can expect none. Yea, he may rather expect, or fear punishment, threatned in the 2^d. Commandement, to such arrow_back worship. 2. The Dr. may remember, that Sect. 45. he blamed that for Superstition,

when virtue is placed in some things, which na∣turally, or by the rule of the word, does not belong to them,

and gives the reason Sect, 46.

because that addes to the promises of the Gospell, and fastens a promise on Christ which he hath not made.

Now how will hee free himselfe from Superstition, in his volun∣tary oblation, that is, his uncommanded arrow_back worship, unlesse hee can shew a promise in the Gospell, for such acceptance. For naturally there is no such Virtue in a Willworship; and Institution hee cannot plead; for that were a Contradiction; viderit ipse. But hee saies still;

In case of resolution, and vow, adde that respect in my performance, which is due to such, and I am not blameworthy.

If hee meane, that his resolution and vow, makes his voluntary oblation more accepted; he addes to his Superstition, to second Will∣ arrow_back worship with a vow, and so profanes his vow, as well as the arrow_back worship of God. If he meane, that his vow is a further degree of arrow_back worship; what will hee answer to the Papists, who make vowes of single life, and povertie, &c. to be a speciall arrow_back worship of God; which he rejects. If he say, their Vowes are of things unlawfull, but mine of things lawfull: I grant this difference, but then say, that in making those vowes, or things vowed to be parts of the arrow_back worship of God, they both a∣gree, and both are Superstitious.

§. 41. It is not then

the straining of these any degree above their ranke, as elevating an ecclesiasticall constitution into a Divine precept,

&c. That onely makes him faulty, and that perhaps (saies he) capable of the title of Superstition. For if either the Church or he, place divine arrow_back worship, accep∣tance (more acceptance because not com∣manded) or more perfection, &c. in such performances, it is, and will be Superstition still what ever they think. Besides, in devised arrow_back worship, it is not enough to free from guilt of Superstition, to say or think, I account this or that holy, onely by the Authority of the Church, and not of Christ; For who∣soever is the Author of such Holinesse, he

places more in it, than God allowes, and so must needs be Superstitious.

§. 42. Obj. Papists and other Superstitious persons have don so, and so the thing is Super∣stitious, and must be forborn, Sol. 1.

The ill use of a thing will not corrupt a thing commanded or an innocent thing.

True, but we suppose your voluntary oblation, not to be a thing commanded, but to be a thing for∣bidden, as all Willworship is: and therefore to be forborn. 2. He saies,

there is nothing to oblige me to abstain, from that, which they have Superstitiously used, unlesse danger of being thought Superstitious as they, or making others be so; which is not Superstition, but scandall.

To be thought Superstitious, when I may avoid it, is a wrong to my credit; to cause others to be so, is a wrong to their Soules: But these are not con∣sequent of that we speake of, that is, of Will∣ arrow_back worship, which is one of the worst kinds of Superstition; tendering that to God, as wor∣ship, which he commanded not.

§. 43. And now the Doctor may be plea∣sed to review, and if he will recall, his bitter, false, uncharitable conclusion, Sect. 57, 58. unbeseeming both his piety and gravity; For now it will appear (and shall doe more here∣after) that the charge of Superstition upon some men, is no Mormo, nor yet unjust; but what is avowed by himself and party, to be

their opinion and practice; and what is pro∣ved to be really Superstitious, according to the true Notion of the word Superstition, a∣mongst Reformed Orthodox Divines: which if it be not sufficiently yet mani∣fested, shall more fully be made good, in the following Exercita∣tion of Willworship.

Notes

• Aquin. 22. q. 92. a. 1.2.
• Dr. Ames. in medul. on second Command∣ment: Aquin. ibid.
• Superstition is that which adds humane indeavours to divine precepts. Vrsin. in 2 precept. More then is ap∣pointed by the law of God. D. Fulk in Act. 17. s. 4. Worship without Gods com∣mandement. M. ••erk. on the second Com∣mand.
• Ibid a. 2. in corp.
• D. Ames. Medul. on the second Comman∣dement.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• Sect. 11.
• Will wor∣ship. sect. 20.
• So called by Plu∣tarch. sect. 19.
• Sect. 29.
• The wor∣shiping of these (as a∣mongst Papists) is most properly called Su∣perstition: Sect. 3.
• Ridicu∣lous cere∣monies turn it in∣to evill: willwor∣ship, sect. 25.
• See infra. sect. 34.
• Sect. 1.
• Sect. 2.
• So the Dr: in sect. 3.
• For fear of venge∣ance: as sect. 24.
• Sect. 12.
• Sect. 17, 18, 19.
• Sect. 27.
• Vulg. super∣stitiones Act. 17.22.
• See Quaer. of divorce. sect. 58. Blaming this in a∣nother.
• Superstition was made matter and reproach to the Ro∣mans. sect. 22.
• Than o∣ther men, is the Doctors gloss; it may as well signi∣fie, more than is meet, and thats too Religious in the ex∣cesse.
• Sect. 28.
• Sect. 29.
• Sect. 30. 31.
• A. Gellins. Sect. 32
• Sect. 32.
• Sest. 33.
• Aquin. 22.9.92. a. 1.
• Sect. 34.
• Sest. 35.
• Sect. 36.
• Sect. 36:
• Cham. Tom. 3. l. 15. c. 16. sect. 8, 9.
• Sect. 38.39.
• Sect. 42.
• Sect. 43.
• Sect. 45.
• Sect. ••4.
• Sect. 47: 48.
• Sest. 49
• Sest. 51.
• Hoe thought and said so, in his first Que∣re, sect. 22. The A∣postles Doctrines and insti∣tutions, are so owned by Christ himselfe, that what is truly A postoli∣call, is immediately and by necessary consequence, divine and infallible Sect. 52.
• Sect. 53.
• Sect. 54.