CHAP. V. RITES AND CEREMONIES OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. "The Questions which have lately sprung up from Complements, Rites, and Ceremonies of Church Actions, are in truth for the greatest part such silly things, that very easiness doth make them hard to be disputed of in a serious manner." Hooker's "Ecclesiastical Polity." "We were not like women and children, when they are affrighted with fire in their clothes; we shook off the coal indeed, but not our garments, lest we should have exposed our Church to that nakedness, which the excellent men of our sister Churches complained to be among themselves." Bishop Jeremy Taylor. "If amidst so much that is admirable in the character and conduct of the first Reformers, we might be permitted to allot the meed of praise to any particular part, I should have no hesitation in assigning it to that singular moderation and discernment, which distinguished the Reformation from all other Revolutions→→→ which overcoming the common infirmities of our nature, by which men are apt to run from one extreme into its opposite, controlled the spirit of innovation in the moment of reform, rejected nothing without authority, and when it abjured the usurpations of the Church of Rome, discarded only its corruptions, and left all that had the stamp of Christianity behind; like the fire, which separates and consumes the dross, but preserves and refines all that was pure in the ore." Taylor's "Why are you a Churchman.” OBJ.-" Fourthly, 1 dissent from the Church of England on account of her pretended right of enjoining unscriptural Riles and Ceremonies, because I consider that the Scriptures do not only contain all things necessary for Salvation, but also all things simply, and in such a manner, that it is not only unnecessary, but also unlawful and sinful, to do any thing according to any other Law." Q. 62.-By what arguments do you prove the right of the Church of England to decree Rites and Ceremonies? To do this, it will be necessary, first, to show the original end and intention of all Ritual and Ceremonial observances-secondly, to prove, that (although they become an obligation and duty when they have the force of a law, as commanded by the Church, which alters their nature, yet) being in themselves but indifferent, it is not necessary that the Scriptures should have predetermined and commanded them-thirdly, that as human authority (when lawfully exercised) is sufficient of itself for the determination of all things indifferent, therefore, if Church Rites and Ceremonies be few in number, plain and unexceptionable in their nature, and significative of the end for which they were appointed, it is not sinful nor unlawful to adopt them in the Church, even if they have not been determined and commanded by Scripture, and that having been once adopted or instituted by the authority of the Church (if Scripture be silent respecting them) antiquity and universality of institution and practice are a sufficient law for their constant observance. Now, in the first place, there can be no doubt but that the original intention and end of all Church Ceremonies was the maintenance of order and decency, as well as because they were reasonably supposed to excite respect for, and attention to the performance of religious worship, or (as Dionysius has observed) "a hand to lead, and a way" to direct.* Words being common, are but slightly heard,' but little attended to, and but seldom remembered; but if accompanied by visible Ceremonies, those very Ceremonies, from their strangeness and novelty, and their difference from ordinary actions, make a much deeper impression, and being observed with greater attention, the remembrance of them is far easier and more permanent. Hence we find that no nation, ancient or modern, has ever permitted the performance of any public Ecclesiastical or civil action of importance, (if requiring the presence of witnesses,) without the introduction of certain solemn Ceremonies, the remembrance of which might be more durable than the remembrance of mere words could possibly be. It was upon this principle doubtless that the Romans, in making a bondsman free, thought it insufficient for the master to present his slave in the court, and taking him by the hand, to say in the hearing of the public Magistrate, "I will that this man become free," but they required him also to perform several Ceremonies, as, to strike him on the cheek, to turn him round, to shave off the hair of his head, and then the Magistrate himself to touch the slave thrice with a rod, to give him a slap, and present him with a white garment; it was for similar reasons, that amongst the Jews it was not considered sufficient for any one, who wished to make himself a perpetual servant, to testify so much in the presence of the Judge, but the Ceremony of boring his ear σε Χειραγωγία καὶ ὁδός.” Dionys. p. 121, * through with an awl was added; for the same reason, Abraham thought it insufficient for his servant to show the religion of an oath, by naming the Lord God of Israel, but he required of him likewise the Ceremony of "putting his hand under his thigh"* whilst he swore; we also read that in matters of redeeming and exchanging, (although a man's word is a sufficient token to express his will and consent in contracts, bargains, and conveyances, yet) it was the custom in Israel, in establishing all cases of that nature, to require a man to pull off his shoe, and give it to his neighbour, which was considered a sure witness. Having, therefore, shown the end and intention, and, consequently, the necessity of Ceremonies, I will proceed to prove, secondly, that it is not necessary for the Scriptures to have predetermined and commanded them. Now if Ceremonies be in themselves indifferent matters, (which indeed they are, until Church authority has made them obligatory,) it is by no means necessary that all Ceremonies used in the Church should be contained in the Scriptures; we find this to have been the case even in the Jewish Church, although their Ceremonies were minutely and distinctly determined and commanded in Scripture: thus the Gileadites had no commandment in Scripture to erect the altar alluded to in the twenty-second chapter of the Book of Joshua; nor had the women of Israel any commandment to mourn annually the memory of Jephthah's daughter; nor had the Jews any commandment for their Feast of Dedication, never spoken of in the Law, and yet solemnized even by our Saviour Himself; nor for their Ceremony of Odours used in the embalming of the dead, which Ceremony was performed upon the sacred body of our Saviour; nor for their division of the Paschal Supper into two courses, between each of which the President was required to take off all his garments, excepting his Feast Robe, and to wash the feet of those who were with him; nor did the Scriptures any where command the Jews never to lift up their hands unwashed in prayer, nor to fast on every Festival day until the sixth hour; nor did it appoint the hour for daily sacrifices, nor the Jewish Order of Burial, nor their Rites of Marriage. Now if the Ceremonies of the Jewish Church were minutely and distinctly prescribed in the Law, and yet no mention was made in that Law of these and similar Ceremonies, all of which were lawfully observed by them, how still less likely is it that the Scriptures should mention all the Ceremonies of the Christian Church, respecting which that minuteness was purposely disregarded, it being evident from the general tenour of the New Testament that nothing is spoken of the Christian Church in it, but what was actually necessary to be spoken; it is, therefore, unreasonable to appeal to the Scriptures in such a case, or even to urge the Apostolical age as a pattern for all succeeding ages to follow. It is true, that Church Ceremonies are in substance See Josephus; also Acts x. 9. Gen. xxiv. 2.. + John x. 22. G g frequently alluded to, and that many reasons for them may be collected out of the Apostolical Epistles,-for example, that they should not be scandalous or offensive to the Church of Christ, that they should be decent and orderly, and that they should tend to Christian Edification, and to the Glory of God,*-but as some Rites and Ceremonies may be more available for those purposes at one period than at another, we cannot be guided by the Apostolical ages. Thus, many Ceremonies which were then suitable and convenient are now unfit, as the holy kiss, the 'Ayama, or Feasts of Charity, and other Rites and Ceremonies now abolished even by our Dissenting Brethren themselves, whilst, on the contrary, they (as well as we) have adopted many Ceremonies which are not mentioned in the writings of the Apostles, and consequently not of Divine, or Apostolical institution, as Baptizing in a basin, the receiving of women to the Lord's Supper, or the celebration of that Sacrament at any other time than in the Evening, (as do the Wesleyans,) or the using one prayer before the Sermon, and another after, or even the preaching upon a Text, or in a pulpit. As it has been proved, therefore, that Ceremonies are profitable and necessary for the Christian Church, and yet that it is not necessary that the Scriptures should have predetermined and commanded any of them, I hasten to prove, in the third place, that as human authority (when lawfully exercised) is sufficient of itself for the determination of all things indifferent, (in which Church Rites and Ceremonies are included,) therefore, that if those Ceremonies be few in number, plain and unexceptionable in their nature, and significative of the end for which they were appointed, it is not sinful nor unlawful to adopt them in the Christian Church, even if they have not been determined and commanded by Scripture, and that having been once adopted, or instituted by the authority of the Church, antiquity and universality of institution and practice is a sufficient law for their retention and constant observance. Now it will be my purpose hereafter to prove that the Ceremonies of the Church of England are few in number, plain and unexceptionable in their nature, and significative of the end for which they were appointed; and that they have Antiquity and Universality of practice in their favour; for the present, therefore, I will be contented to prove, first, that we do not necessarily sin in the observance of every Ceremony not commanded in Scripture, and, secondly, that human authority is of itself a sufficient law for the determination and institution of Church Ceremonies, and of all matters of an indifferent nature. In reply to the first, it may be observed, that if it be a truth that we sin in every action not commanded in Scripture, it is a truth that appertains not to the Christian Church only, but was in force from the beginning of the world, because as such it cannot be restrained to any particular time; and, therefore, that Seth, * 2 Cor. x. 32; xiv. 20. 26; Rom. xiv. 5. 7.. Enoch, Noah, Shem, and Abraham, who lived before any syllable of the Law of God was written, siuned in every action of their lives; moreover if it be a truth, it is equally true in infancy and in old age, and therefore every Parent necessarily causes his children to sin as often as he requires them to do any thing before they arrive at years of discretion sufficiently mature to understand the Scriptures, and Masters cannot lawfully command the obedience of their servants, until they justify their errand to them from Scripture; in fact, if it be true that we sin in every action not commanded in Scripture, we are bound to condemn all opinions as false which the Scriptures do not teach; in other words, to condemn, be ignorant of, and discredit the knowledge of all arts and sciences, and every thing proposed to us by sense, experience, and art, because we do not find them, perhaps, in Scripture. If indeed the Law of Nature were abolished, (upon which grows in particular the choice of good and evil in the daily occurrences of life) the case would be materially altered; but the Law of Nature is not abolished; and yet if every thing done by any other law than Scripture be opposed to Scripture, and unlawful to be done, every thing done according to the Law of Nature (if it be not strictly commanded by Scripture) is sin, and, therefore, every man who acts according to that law, or as common discretion and his own judgment direct him, necessarily sins against his own soul, because he happens not first to have the sacred Scriptures for his warrant. Therefore, according to this opinion that the Scriptures do contain all things lawful to be done, and that whatever is done by any other law than Scripture is opposed to Scripture, and unlawful to be done, every one who does that which the common necessities of life urge him to do, sins against his own soul, and, therefore, such an opinion cannot be a true one, because by making all things sin which we do by the light of nature, and by the rule of common discretion, without thinking at all upon Scripture, is evidently calculated to put a stop (as it were) to the whole lives and actions of mankind, and to produce nothing but misery in the world. Because, therefore, all things which are neither commanded nor forbidden in the Word of God are indifferent in their nature, (for it is not the Scripture's setting down such things as indifferent, that makes them indifferent, but their not setting them down as necessary,) all Church Ceremonies must be considered as things indifferent, until the force of a human law makes them otherwise; now, although it be certain that we ought not to do that which the Scriptures forbid, yet it does not follow that we ought to do nothing which the Scriptures do not command us; and, therefore, we do not necessarily sin in the performance of every action, or in the observance of every ceremony, not commanded in Scripture: for if the Jews (whose law was indeed in this respect so full and perfect, that although all meats were indifferent to |