The sinfulness of worshipping God with men's institutions as it was delivered in a…

USE I.

For Information in two particulars.

1. That indifferency in the […] is not sufficient to justify a Tradition at Worship: for what though the thing it self be not a sin to be done civilly; yet by being made a commandment, which borrows its Authority from men, and so thrust into the Worship of God as a part of it; it how becomes a piece of vain Worship: what can be more indifferent ⟨p. 22⟩than washing one's hand in order to eating our food; the thing hath no harm in it at all; yea, it may sometimes occasionally be a point of cleanliness and good manners to do it, when the not doing it would be offensive to our own and others Stomachs: but if this once come to have Religion put upon it, and it must be accounted a Note of greater Sanctity in them that do it, and a Token of unholiness in such as neglect it, exposing them to scandal, now Christ will by no means admit that his Disciples should practise it: Had it been only a civil custom of the Nation, he would never have found fault with it, such as was offering them water to wash their feet, he therefore reflects on him: Luke 7. 44 but he censures and condemns this, and good reason, for it is vain, a man can get no good by it, nor do God any honour with it; it therefore doth not serve to any end or purpose at all, but wholly falls short of the very design of Worship: a plea therefore from, indifferency in the thing is vain, for the excusing, much more for the warranting of any Tradition, which by the commandment of men loseth its indifferency, and is tied as a burden on mens Consciences.