The account audited and discounted: or, a vindication of the three-fold diatribee, of [brace] 1. Supersition, 2. Will-worship, 3. Christmas festivall. Against Doctor Hammonds manifold paradiatribees. / By D.C. preacher of the Word at Billing-Magn. in Northamptonshire.

Section, 3. [And hence it may appear, that some are too short, in defigning the Species, or kindes of Supersti∣tion, &c. First, the learned School-man, who makes but three kindes of it, &c.]

HEre I am first charged, for wronging Aquinas, [saying, he makes but three kindes of Super∣stition, whereas it's evident, he makes four:] It's true, in the conclusion, he makes four, but in the body of that Article, he reduces them all to three; or rather, he makes but two, 1. when worship is given to the true God, but in an undue manner; 2. When it is given to a Creature; and that (sayes he) may be divided into many species, and he reduces them to three; Idolatry, Divina∣tion, and vain Observations, Ligatures, &c. Now it's evident, that the School-man is confused enough, in designing the Species of Superstition; and the last, of Ligatures, spells and vain observations, &c. may very well be reduced to Divination, as done by assistance of the Divel: as the Doctor (if I mi∣stake not) hath somewhere refer'd them. But this is but a strife of words; certain it is, he is not di∣stinct enough in this designation, nor hath disco∣covered

all the Species of Superstition, which the Doctor himself hath yielded, some whereof, will not fall well under any of those which Aquinas hath assigned, unless, they may be referred to his cultus indebitus; For thus they may be ranged; Superstition is of two sorts; first, when Worship is given to a creature, which is due onely to the Creator; or, second, When Worship is tendered to the true God, but, non prout debet, indebito mo∣do; in an undue manner; and of this, there are many Species, as Aquinas confesses: Now that Aquinas is short in his distribution, I prove thus from himself; [If Superstition be a vice contrary to Religion in general in the excess; then accord∣ing to the general Rules of Religion, there may be so many kindes of Superstition; But the first is his own definition: ergo,] The consequence is proved, because Superstition may extend as far as Religion: Now Religion in general, considers, either the right object, to whom Worship ought to be tendered, God alone, in the first Command∣ment: or the right way, how God will be worship∣ped, and that is, in there particulars: first, The right meanes, (as some call instituted Worship) in the second Commandment, his own prescribed Wor∣ship: or, 2. The right manner of tendering it, with all reverence: or, 3. The right Time espe∣cially, his own designed Day: and so the kindes of Superstition vary, according to these Rules of Re∣ligion. Aquinas himself; Art. 1. there in Corp. thus concludes, it, [Superstition is a vice opposite to Religion in the excess, not because it exhibites more to the Worship of God, then true Religion, but because it exhibites Divine worship, to whom it ought not, or in that manner it ought not.] And that manner is threefold as I have said. But it's no heeding what Aquinas sayes, in designing the kinds

of Superstition, who was himself drowned in the Romish Superstition, which he would be tender to touch upon.

A second mistake charged upon me, is, in refer∣ring Idolatry to the first Commandment, as some Divines do; But (sayes he) [Those Divines must needs be those, that put the first and second Com∣mandments into one (as Aquinas did, and I hoped the Diatribist had not been of his perswasion) else those words, Thou shalt not make to thy self, &c. being supposed to make a second Commandment, no Divine can be so irrational, as to deny Idolatry to be prohibited there.] I could answer, first, That the Doctor may well be placed among those Di∣vines, who put the first and second Commandment into one, as was shewed above. But I say further, this will prove but a strife of words: For if Ido∣latry be taken strictly, for the worshipping of an Idol, or Image, so it belongs to the second Com∣mandment: but if it be taken, for the Worship of Heathen Gods, &c. as often it is, then I hope the Doctor will not deny but Idolatry may be found in the first Commandment. Is not Polytheisme Idolatry? is not, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the worshipping of Daemons, or Angels, Idolatry? not against the second Commandment, for that prohibites onely Idol, or Image-worship, (sayes the Doctor;) but Angels and Daemons may be Worshipped, without any Image. Shall we take the Doctors own for∣mer thoughts of this matter; He told us, a good while ago, [That the Heathen Idolatry, was the worshipping of the many false Gods first, and then of the Images of them.] Mark here, two sorts of Idolatry, whereof the first, is not the second, and therefore not in the second Commandment, but in the first, or none. And when I said Divination, (which is a consulting with the Divel) is the worst

kinde of Idolatry, as worshipping the Divel, the worst of Creatures, instead of God; I hope the Doctor will not deny it to be Idolatry bad enough; I demand, against what Commandment? not the second, for that he sayes) prohibites onely Image∣worship; but those that use Divination, do not alwayes Worship the Divel in an Image: and therefore that Idolatry is not forbidden in the se∣cond, but in the first Commandment. I suppose then, the Doctor doth mistake, with Aquinas, (ra∣ther then speak truth with me) when he sayes, [He supposes Aquinas was in the right in this, that made it a Species of Superstition, not of Ido∣lotry; and so it must more fitly belong to the first Commandment, and so must Illegitimate Worship, be∣ing an offence against the due maner of Gods Wor∣ship.] But, first, Divination, may be a Species of Idolatry, and of Superstition too, if Idolatry be (as it is) a species of Superstition; 2. How he can say, [So it must more fitly belong to the the first Commandment,] I do not well understand, for he said just before, [If Divination be Idolatry, sure that must be forbidden under the second Command∣ment.] Unless he will have it belong to both Com∣mandments, the first, as it is Superstition, the se∣cond, as it is Idolatry; which I see not how he can well say; thirdly, [That Illegitimate Worship, be∣ing an offence against the due manner of Gods Worship, must also belong to the first Command∣ment,] is neither agreeable with the truth, nor with with Aquinas, who makes the Species of Supersti∣tion, to respect the Object of Worship, cui non de∣bet; and 2. the mode or manner of Worship, to the right Object: the first whereof must needs belong to the first Commandment, and the other, to other Commandments. These are indeed but niceties, but such as the Doctor is pleased to exercise

us with; and do not a little concern himself.

It is confessed by the Doctor, [That it was an error in Amesius, to understand by the word Su∣perstition, no more but the tendering of undue Worship to God, and also that he confined it to the second Commandment, when in all reason it be∣longed to the first.] But is it not as bad an Error in the Doctor to confine it to the first, when sure, it may be extended to the second? Is it not Super∣stition, to Worship the true God, by an I∣mage? then Superstition belongs to two Com∣mandements: But is it not Superstition to use ridiculous Ceremonies in Gods Worship? that's against the third Commandment. And is it not Superstition, to be scrupulous to defend a mans self against his enemies on the Sabbath? that's against the fourth Commandment. Then it is equally an Error in the Doctor to confine Super∣stition to the first, as in Amesius to confine it to the second Commandment; and the Truth is, it ex∣tends to many, even all the four first Command∣ments. Quod erat demonstrandum.

The next of my mistakes is,] That I affirm of that Species of Superstition, undue Worship tender∣ed to God, that it is, properly Will-worship;] Which is but one Species of Superstition. Sure I am, Amesius understood it so, of new kindes of Worship instituted by men, against the scope of the 2. Commandment; and this most of our Divines call (in a strict sense) Will-worship. But I rather agreed with Aquinas here, that undue or Illegiti∣mate-worship may refer to more Commandments; the third and fourth: it being possible, and too frequent for men, to Worship God unduely, in those Commandmets: But if we restrain the se∣cond Commandment to the matter of Worship; then that Worship which is materially of mens

addition, may more properly (with the Scripture, and best Divines) be called Will-worship, and is but one Species of Superstition; as was said above.

Yet another injury is done by me; that of Aqui∣nas, his Illegitimate-worship, I give this gloss, [Not commanded of God, but instituted and ap∣pointed by men.] But how will this appear? By the words of Aquinas himself, which having cited at large, he says, [nothing is more destructive to my pre∣tensions, had it been considered.] Let's hear his four∣fold gloss upon them, (that I may never cite Aqui∣nas more in this matter) thus he sayes, [1. That Illegitimate-worship, is, in Aquinas Vitiated-worship, and so more then uncommanded, that is, prohibited; Illegitimate signifies, not without, but against Law.] And here he empties his Note-book about that word: But I say, let it signifie that which is forbidden by Law; so say I, is all Ʋn∣commanded Worship; as was proved afore by the Doctors own Confession; therefore Illegitimate-Worship, and uncommanded, are all one; and that in Aquinas his sense, is Vitiated-worship: secondly, [The superfluity of Worship (says Aquinas) Viti∣ates the Worship of God, when any thing is assu∣med, which neither by Divine, nor Ecclesiastical appointment, belongs to the glory of God, &c.] The Doctors gloss is this, That the Superfluity of it consists not, in being Super-added to Gods com∣mands onely, but to the Churches appointment also; and so that which is ordained by the Church, though not by God, comes not under the stile of Superfluous or Illegitimate.] By this I see, where the Doctor learned his old Divinity, even in the Romish Schools (wherein most of his Size, spend their first studies, scorning all our own Common∣place men, medulla's, and models of Divinity.) For

how readily does he shake hands with Aquinas in the Authority, of the Churches appointment, as in other things not a few: But will the Doctor stand to this, [That the Churches appointments of Worship (of that Aquinas and we speak) are not Superfluous, nor Illegitimate?] I hope he will not joyn with Aquinas and the Church of Rome in this; yet he dare go far with them, even to call Ec∣clesiastical appointments, Semi-divine at least, as shall appear hereafter: see p. 83. n. 4. Divinarum Sanctionem, &c. But thirdly, [That what tends to the glory of God, or subjecting a man to God, is neither superfluous nor Illegitimate, so it be or∣dained by the Church,] It's one thing what men intend by their appointments (who doth not pre∣tend the glory of God and that subjection? Papists and Heathens doe so, sometimes) and another to tend really to those ends. Now certain it is, no ap∣pointments of Worship by men, can tend to the glory of God, &c. Which he hath peremptorily for∣bidden: And one thing more; The Doctor seemes to restrain this Lawfulness, [To the Ordi∣nation of the Church,] as if private or particular persons appointments, to those ends, were superflu∣ous and Illegitimate; which I suppose he will not grant, viderit ipse, yet Aquinas restraines it onely to the Church, the holy Church of Rome. 4. The School-man makes Worship of God Illegitimate, as well by the pravity, as the superfluity of it: How may that be? Two wayes, one whereof is (which the Doctor takes notice of.) That the Mi∣nisters publike using any Ceremony, contrary to the custome of the Church (such is his sitting at the Sacrament, and the like) is a pravity, and that's worse then a superfluity in the Worship of God.] Here is scarce any minute part of sound Doctrine, in this, (to return him his own words.) For, first,

It savours rankly of the Romish usurpation, that no Ceremony may be used publickly by a Minister contrary to the Custome of the Church: second, That it is a pravity, so to do; which may rather go for a Superfluity at most. 3. That it is a pravity, worse then superfluity of Worship, to use a Ceremo∣ny in publique; whereas Super-added Worship, is far worse, then using a new Ceremony, not ordained by the Church: 4. That he charges this pravity upon me, or others for sitting at the Sacrament; But, first, we are speaking of Wor∣ship, not of a rite or gesture of Worship, such is sitting at the Sacrament. 2. How does he know, that I sit at the Sacrament? I may perhaps stand, or kneel, for ought he knows, according to the custome of the places where I come; and may defend my practise, by the Authority of Saint Ambrose, cited to me, p. 232. But thirdly, suppose I do sit; I shall not fear to profess my Judgement, that I think it neerer to the first Institution of the Supper, then his kneeling; and why people should not conform rather to Christ himself and his Apo∣stles, then to the custome of a Church, I know no reason, but, [The Statutes of Omri are kept,] and the like. But this I will say, if the Doctor or his Church, institute and command kneeling, as a special, more special and better Worship of God, then sitting, I believe, they would be Superstitious enough; and injurious to Jesus Christ, as preferring themselves before him, as if he were less humble, or less devout in his sit∣ting, then they in their kneeling, And now I hope, the Doctor will never cite Aquinas more, in this matter.

That the barbarous Ceremonies of Baals Priests, &c. should be an excess against the third Com∣mandment, a taking Gods name in vain; he can∣not

yet digest, [Because it is by Christ rendered, forswearing ones self.] But that is proved the Do∣ctors mistake, against the stream of the best Inter∣pretors: [Nor did Baals Priests, ever use the name of God at all, and so, not in vain.] Sure those Priests accounted Baal for a God (they cal∣led the true God, Baali sometimes, but God for∣bids it) and Elias bad them call upon their God; Then, those Ceremonies used, were part of their Worship (ridiculous enough if they had been offer∣ed to the true God) and being in Worship, and false, they must be against some Commandment: Not the first, that forbids other Objects of Worship, be∣side God. Not the second, that forbids onely Idol or Image Worship (says he.) Not the fourth, that respects onely the Due Time of Worship; ergo, against the third or none. The Doctor passes by the ridiculous rites and gestures of Papists in their Worship, as loath to offend them, with charge of excess, or Superstition; though not bold enough to defend them. As for dedicating of Holy-dayes to Saints by Papists, and comparing it with Jero∣boams Feast, he does not like it; [They are, he says, neither fitly paralleld, nor appropriated to Pa∣pists, when such dayes were dedicated to the me∣mory of Martyrs, long before the name or errors of Papists were in the World.] But on which side is the wrong, in this charge of dedicating of dayes? Jeroboams? or Papists? Jeroboams, I hope he will not say, for that is proved Superstitious above. If he think I have wronged Papists in that parallel: Let him stand out and justifie their Superstition, in that matter, which all, even the Church of England did condemne. 1. That dedicated to the Saints,

and to their Worship, and not to God. 2. That made parts of Worship. 3. That some were no Saints, but wicked men, and some no men at all. 4. Their Number, &c. Jeroboam was a Saint to them. And now I hope it might well be appropria∣ted to Papists? For those dayes dedicated to the memorial of Martyrs, were nothing like these of Papists; they were but occasions, or Circumstan∣ces of Worship; but Papists (as the Doctor his Christmas) make them parts of Worship, &c. And this may satisfie, what is largely said, in num. 9.10, 11. Onely this may be added to the num. 11. That I do not charge the Doctor with that excess, of the Jews scrupulosity on their Sabbath: but onely bring it as an instance of Superstition in the fourth Commandment.

Notes

• p. 49. n. 7.
• p. 49. n. 2.
• Of Idola∣try, Sect. 65. p. 42.
• So he says, n. 3.
• To wor∣ship the true God by an I∣mage is it not a sin against the manner of his Wor∣ship.
• p. 49 n. 3.
• p. 50. n 4.
• p. 50. n. 5.
• n. 6.
• De Illegi∣time cul∣tu: Tit. Articuli.
• p. 51. n. 7.
• p. 52. n. 8.
• This is the Do∣ctors Language here: dedicating holy dayes to Saints: and dedication of Holy-dayes. n. 8, &. 11.