252

The Presbyterians would expunge

que vel minus seu voluerit, seu potuerit. It is evident that something he thought of precept, and something of counsel left unto free devotion therein.

CHAPTER VII.

m

AN ANSWER TO THE OBJECTIONS OF THE PRESBYTERIANS FROM PRETENCE OF SOME ANCIENT ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS, IN THE TM 65TH, 66TH, AND 67TH PAGES OF THEIR GRAND DEBATE IN 4TO.

HERE first is published by our brethren the sum of their desires: "It is desired that nothing should be in the Liturgy, which so much as seems to countenance the observation of Lent as a religious fast;" i. e. it is desired, that what hath been part of the religious observance of this renowned Church of Christ, the Church of Brittany, as is most probable, ever since it was a Christian Church, from the days of the Apostles unto this present time, (except if at any time Christianity itself hath for some years here been overrun with paganism,) both before the corruption of popery, and under it, and ever since the Reformation, should now at their instance, as men that have brought unto us new light, be wholly expunged; that whereas there stands now in this Church's public service of God no less than twenty-five leaves +99 relating to the religious observance of Lent, care now be taken that nothing should be left which may continue, yea or countenance, they add also, or so much as seem to countenance that part of our Church's service of God. As for the testimonies cited by us, they pronounce them to be to little purpose; for they deny not the custom of observing Lent, either fewer days or more, to have been as ancient as those authors, viz. St. Chrysostom, St. Cyril, St. Austin, and St. Hierome; nor do they deny it so anciently by St. Hierome, there cited to that purpose, to have been witnessed a tradition apostolical; and by how many more, they may if they please see in this treatise. What exceptions now against Lent are made in their own conceptions and words, we, esteeming such of less weight, therefore shall speak to, but in the second place; we begin first to examine, what they lay pretence to in antiquity.

m [P. 31, sqq.]

all notice of Lent from the Liturgy:

253

Where first they begin with Tertullian, "Si omnem in totum devotionem temporum et dierum et mensium et annorum erasit Apostolus, cur Pascha celebramus annuo circulo in mense primo? cur quadraginta exinde diebus in omni exultatione decurrimus? cur stationibus quartam et sextam Sabbati dicamus, et jejuniis parasceuen? Quanquam vos etiam Sabbatum siquando continuatis, nunquam nisi in Paschá jejunandum, &c.; and excusing that rigour of their fasts, Quantula est apud nos interdictio ciborum? duas in anno hebdomadas xerophagiarum, nec totas, exceptis scilicet sabbatis et dominicis offerimus Deo; which words of your author for so much as you english not to your reader, as neither any that follow, we shall not trouble ourselves to do it by syllables. Out of the same author you subjoin, Neque de cætero differenter jejunandum ex arbitrio, non ex imperio novæ disciplinæ, pro temporibus et causis uniuscujusque; sic et Apostolos observasse, nullum aliud imponentes jugum certorum et in commune omnibus obeundorum jejuniorum; this is your strength from Tertullian. Now beside much which you omit in those chapters, which is for the Paschal fast against you; what one word is there in what you cite, for you against the Paschal fast of Lent? By Lent we understand that which is mentioned in the Common Prayer Book; for that only your request mentions, and desires to be removed. Now Lent, as there you may discern by our prayer to God, and services, is indeed a religious fast properly so 500 called, an anniversary fast, forerunning in our Common Prayer Book, and in our observance, the feast of Easter; now what word can any man discern in all this of Tertullian, that can make aught against such anniversary religious fast before Easter? If any thing could have been made, either you or your printer, we cannot tell which, would have done it, by changing as we see a very material word, itaque jejunandum, into neque jejunandum. But let that be the printer's mistake; yours are greater, to think any of that which 'you do produce from Tertullian helps your cause. For you here granting us what cannot be denied, that the Psychici here with Tertullian are the Catholics; then Tertullian here mentions, first as a practice common to the Catholics and the

254

their authorities considered;

Montanists, that they did both celebrate annually Easter; and that forty days after (Tertullian says fifty) the Church spent in a holy joy or exultation, viz. from Easter to Whitsuntide: secondly, that the Church did observe two weekly stations, Wednesday and Friday (on which the Church of England hath her public Litanies enjoined in all churches): thirdly, that the Catholics did especially exercise on Good Friday fasting, and, sometimes at least, continued on Saturday: fourthly, that other fasts were not to be prescribed by new schismatical teachers, whereof Montanus was then head: and fifthly, as for the nullum aliud, &c., ye have wholly left out that to which it refers, certos dies a Deo constitutos; which you would not let your reader know that the Catholics (as you confess they were that spake) did plead, that they had certain days of fastings appointed by God; that no other yoke (viz. by teachers only such as Montanus was) was to be imposed, of fasts in common to be observed; for as to their governors, Tertullian doth acknowledge in the chapter before what you cite, that it was received in custom with the Catholics, that they which had the rule over them did, beside those fasts constituted by God, indict occasional fasts: sixthly, that the Montanists' and Tertullian's society, as to their fasting, took to a singular way themselves, different from the Church and Catholics, for which they were here contested with; and that new way was of two weeks chosen at their own pleasure and kept in their Montanist congregations, observed in dry or hard diet: seventhly, that this new way being taught by Montanus as a doctrine from God, different from the certain days appointed the Church by God, as the Catholics there contend, was justly chargeable with that which St. Paul blames in the Galatians, "observing days and 501 times," viz. besides what was appointed by God, as the Lord's day and those they mentioned, certos dies a Deo constitutos. These are all the propositions, which are contained in all you cite from Tertullian.-Now what one word is here against the religious fast of Lent before Easter, as observed in our Common Prayer Book? One would think the whole allegation had been gathered by some one of your adversaries, for the Church of England against you. For tell us, we pray you, that we may run through all the seven; First, is it your

Tertullian, who is shewn to be against them;

255

society, or the Church of England, that observes annually the feast of Easter, and fifty days after from that feast unto WhitSunday, in exultation and joy, viz. spiritual, for Christ's resurrection and ascension? Secondly, are the weekly Wednesdays and Fridays by you or by the Church of England rather regarded? let her litanies on both days, and her customary fasts on Fridays witness. Thirdly, fasting specially exercised on Good Fridays, is this the thing which you allege for yourselves against the Common Prayer Book of the Church of England, and against the religious fast of Lent before Easter? Fourthly, is the Church of England's public observance of the fast of Lent, the prescription of fasts by private schismatical teachers, such as Montanus's was? whose authority in requiring fasts is more like Montanus's, the Church of England's, or any private men's within her? Fifthly, as to the nullum aliud, viz. præter certos dies a Deo constitutos et in evangelio determinatos, illos in quibus ablatus est sponsus, whose prescribed fasting days, the Church of England's religious fast of Lent, or other men's indicted fasts, are more likely to be meant by the Catholics in Tertullian, saying "that they had certain days constituted by God, and determined in the Gospel, those, viz. in which the Bridegroom was taken away"? Sixthly, whether doth the Church of England in her observing the religious fast of Lent, or others in separating from the observance of that fast, more resemble the Montanists' different singular ways? Seventhly, the certain days appointed by God, in which the Bridegroom was taken away; beside which, for teachers to press a fixed annual fast, any other, without the authority of lawful governors, was charged by the Church as observing of days and times and months and years; are, I say, those days more likely to be the 502 public religious fasts before Easter which the Church of England observes, or some other you can shew us?—This is all you have, but much more you might have brought from Tertullian to the same sense; as that the Catholics objected to those new teachers, novitatem, de cujus illicito præscribunt, "they object to them novelty, against the unlawfulness whereof they prescribe;" they the Catholics prescribe also against the Montanists, constituta esse solennia huic fidei

r Cap. 1.

scripturis, vel traditione majorum; nihilque observationis amplius adjiciendum ob illicitum innovationis.

The next author you allege is a fragment of Irenæus's Epistle in Eusebius, which how much it makes against you, and for the religious Paschal fast of Lent, I have shewn you through the whole fifth chapter of this Appendix: where I have considered that passage of Irenæus, both in itself, and in relation to you; whither I refer you, and the reader.-To Socrates (with Sozomen and Nicephorus) we shall speak in the last place, because there is much laid on him.

And now consider the rest of your helps to expound St. Hierome, who calls the fast of Lent a tradition apostolical. To this you say, citing Regaltius', a modern critic, that St. Hierome and others, calling it an apostolical tradition, did it with respect to Christ's forty days; and what then, we pray you? is that against the religious observation of the fast of Lent in our Common Prayer Book, where our Church thus prays, "O Lord, who for our sakes didst fast forty days and forty nights: give us grace to use such abstinence, that our flesh being subdued unto the spirit," &c.? so that what St. Hierome and the other Fathers you say did respect, the same doth our Church and our Common Prayer Book respect, viz. Christ's forty days' fast; and how is your objection against the Common Prayer Book helped by that? To what you say, that they did not intend themselves any such thing as any fast of forty days, how apparently false that is found to be, you may read, for St. Hierome, in the forty-second and forty-third pages of this Discourse; and for the rest in the rest of the Discourse. Next you teach us how to expound St. Hierome by that in his Epistle ad Lucin." Unaquæque provincia abundet in suo sensu, et præcepta majorum leges apostolicas arbitretur. If this were as you mean, whether do the observers of the religious fast of Lent, or you who dissent, defer more to præcepta majorum, the precepts of our ancestors? Secondly, St. Hierome doth not here say that such precepts in several provinces were to be held pro traditionibus apostolicis; to the obedience of wholesome customs ecclesias- 503 tical, whiles they are not retracted by those who rule over us,