A DISCOURSE Concerning the WORSHIP of GOD Towards the Holy Table OR ALTAR LONDON Printed by J.G. to be sold by James Good Bookseller in Oxon 1682. A Treatise shewing That the Adoration or Worship of God in his House towards the H. Table or Altar is neither Idolatry Superstition or Will-worship but on the contrary agreeable to the Scriptures and warranted by the Practice of the Saints in all Ages THey that go about to evince a Truth To remove prejudice and to demonstrate unto the apprehensions of such as have strongly opposed it before as an error will find it a hard task yea altogether impossible unless he can first perswade them to dispossess themselves of one Principle which is usually deeply rooted in the hearts of such as are already prejudiced with an ill opinion of this Doctrine to be evinced That is because they would not be thought to be so Impotent in Judgment as so long to have believed and maintained an Error or out of a self-conceit and opinion of their own infallibility that whatsoever they have once held must needs be Truth resolve absolutely and unmovedly to defend it never considering the connexion between the premisses and conclusion of their Adversaries Arguments or rather what agreement the whole Argument hath with the conclusion which they have formerly hardened themselves to defend unalterably therefore I intreat the Reader that he will for the time at least make himself a Third Person and degage himself from both Opinions as if he were Ignorant of both that so he may be a free and impartial Judge not weighing how my Arguments comply with his private perswasion but what necessary connexion there is between my Arguments and the Cause or Conclusion I have undertaken to prove The Order in handling whereof I will observe this Order 1. I will explain the Question and state it 2. I will prove it 3. I will clear it from all Objections and Aspersions But first Obj. from the word Altar I will remove one Objection against the word Altar What have we to do with Altars If Altars we must have Priests and Sacrifices too for these are Correlates and so we shall have Judaism up again Resp I grant the Antecedent Resp It doth not infer Judaism but deny the Consequent An Altar a Priesthood a Sacrifice I grant that this will infer Judaism I deny For those Altars Priests and Sacrifices were but Typical shadows of the true ones and therefore not so properly called but in reference to the true ones otherwise Christs offering himself was not a true and Real Sacrifice nor he a true and Real Priest nor his Cross a true and real Altar but this to be false is apparent by Scripture Hebr. 7. The Apostle makes a distinction of a double Priesthood one Typical the other Real that after the Order of Aaron this after the Order of Melchisedeck that to be abolished this to remain for ever that had no perfection this had of this Order was our Saviour a Priest so called for this very reason because he offered himself a Sacrifice for Sin so Corinth the 9th and 10th he plainly disparageth the Sacrifices of the Law and makes our Saviours the only true and proper Sacrifice Therefore I invert the Argument thus we have an Altar a Sacrifice and Priesthood Ergo we abolish the Jewish Ceremonies for they were not such properly but typically these are so truly as being the substance of those Shadows Communion Service Besides our Church in the Prayer immediatlye before the Consecration calls our Saviours suffering on the Cross a full 1 Cor. 5.7 perfect and sufficient Sacrifice And 1 Cor. 5. Christ our Passover is Sacrificed c. For he indeed is the true Paschal Lamb of which the other was but the Type therefore the Church also calleth that Feast still and ever did Festum Paschatis and not the Feast of the Resurrection Pet. 2.5 Again Alms and Prayers and Praises are Sacrifices Hebr. 13.16 Prayers Psalm 141.2 They are called the Calves of our Lips And what more frequent than the Sacrifice of Praise These are called Spirituall Sacrifices in which respect we are called an Holy Priesthood This I speak to vindicate the word that it might not seem so odious which the Holy-Ghost himself still useth in the New Testament Obj. I grant that there are Spiritual Sacrifices and Priests and Altars viz. the Altars of Hearts but what is all this to the Communion Table Or though we allow Christ to be a Priest and his offering himself a true Sacrifice and the Cross a true Altar yet why should the Communion Table the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and the Ministers of the Gospel be called by these Names By what I have before proved Resp it appears that these words do not necessarily infer Judaism but the contrary and so that part of the objection is satisfied To the other Quaeri what reason we have to call the Holy Table an Altar Ministers Priests Sacraments fitly called a Sacifice the Sacrament a Sacrifice I answer they are so and so called in Scripture and Ancient Fathers and all Churches to this time until some Mushroom Novil Puritans sprang up that out of Ignorance and blind Zeal would have suppressed them That they are so I prove thus If the Sacrifices of the Law and Paschal Lamb were such and so called by reason of the reference they had to the true Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross not yet exhibited then may the Sacramental Commemoration of this Sacrifice already exhibited be much more fitly so called The force of this Argument stands thus If the Shadow may be called by the name of the Antitype then much more may the true real and lively Commemoration of the thing it self already in act Now Sacrifices were but so called because they were Shadows the Sacrament is a true real exhibition and lively Commemoration of the Sacrifice it self and that by vertue of Christ's own words Do this as oft as you do it in remembrance of me Do this do what This ye have seen me do What 's that He took Bread gave Thanks brake it said this is my Body Take Eat He took Wine poured it out said drink ye all of this this is my Blood which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins c. Mark it what was the breaking of his Body in the Bread the pouring out of his Blood in the Wine was it not a Sacrifice sure it was for it was for the Remission of Sins Now no Remission without Blood no Blood without a Sacrifice so the Apostle argueth to the Hebrews Again he saith not which shall be but which is broken and poured out as already done when as yet he was not Crucified which argues that this Sacrament was instituted in memory of Christ's Sacrifice already done though instituted before it was done Again do this in remembrance of me Sacrificed for you of me broken for you
of my Blood poured out for you that is of my Sacrifice for your sins For for what else could our Saviour be remembred or what else do the Elements represent or commemorate but that Sacrifice Thus then you see that as the old Jewish Sacrifices were Typical Sacrifices so the Christian Sacrament is a memorative Sacrifice And that one and the same thing might be both a Sacrament and a Sacrifice none will deny that considers the Paschal Lamb was both Yet that was but a Typical Sacrifice and a Typical Sacrament this both a true Sacrifice and Sacrament For although that Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross was performed once for all yet the Commemoration of it was to be often iterated in the Church till Christ's second coming Again why should we not as well call it a Sacrifice in memory of Christ's which it signifies as a Sacrament in token of his which it Seals or in token of a Covenant which it ratifies The Scripture I am sure no where calleth it by the name of Sacrament Sacrament the word not found in the Bible for there is no such word in the Bible And therefore they that will have a Proof out of the Scripture for every thing they say 'T is a Seal to the Covenant and therefore a Sacrifice and give no respect to the Custom and Language of the Church must desist by their own principles from the use of this word for they can have no Authority for it but the constant and unanimous tradition of the Church Moreover God never made Covenant with man but with Sacrifice For a Covenant since the fall was always made for the redintegration of our peace with God violated by sin Now there was no peace that is no Covenant renewed where there was no first remission of sin past and no remission of sin without satisfaction of Justice no satisfaction without the blood of a Sacrifice viz. Christ's Sacrifice For that is the ground of our Covenant with God and therefore wheresoever it is renewed that Sacrifice is withall commemorated in vertue whereof it was at first made and ever since renewed Besides as in Sacrifices God in token of Covenant and Attonement with man did as it were eat with him and Feast him at his own Table eating and drinking having been always esteemed tokens of Peace and Friendship For the Sacrifices were first presented and given up unto God consecrated unto him in Recognition of his Lordship over all Creatures then afterwards Slaughtered and Offered part whereof was consumed the other part was for the Sacrifice to Feast withal in token of Reconciliation with God so also is the Sacrament a Foederal Rite of our Address unto God to renew a Covenant The Bread and Wine are first Consecrated and made the Body and Blood of Christ that is a memorial of that Sacrifice which is the ground of our Covenant and then are given as meat from Gods Table to be a Sacrament sealing unto us his Reconciliation in vertue of his Sons Sacrifice there commemorated You see then that this Sacrament is how it is and why it is a Sacrifice Now if it be truly a Sacrifice Holy Table may fitly be called an Altar the Holy Table may fitly be called an Altar For as the Cross was the Altar of our Saviours Sacrifice corporally offered so is the Table the Altar of his Sacrifice mystically offered in the Supper And as a Cross did suit to his Body so a Table to the Bread As he did not institute any Carnal Body and Blood to be the memory of his Sacrifice but Bread and Wine so he did not institute a Cross for an Altar but that which was proportionable to the signs which he instituted As in the Old Law it was not necessary that the Type should in every thing be so Analogal as to have a man Crucified for a Sacrifice and a Cross for an Altar to represent the Sacrifice of Christ but a Beast for the one and a Table for the other so neither is it necessary in the New Testament the substantial Body of a Man should be the sign of Christ's Sacrifice or a Cross of an Altar for the memory thereof And this I have the more fully enlarged to answer those who will perchance confess our Saviours Cross to have been an Altar but not our Tables Furthermore Table and Altar promiscuously used what great material difference is there between an Altar and a Table that we are so scrupelous were not the Altars of the Old Law Tables else what means the promiscuous use of these words Mal. 1.7 Ye offer polluted Bread upon mine Altar mark it and ye say wherein have we polluted thee The answer of God by his Prophet is in that ye say the Table of the Lord is contemptible That which in the beginning of the Verse is called an Altar in the end is called a Table Obj. The word doth not infer Popery What 's this but by little and little to bâ—ing in Popery underhand when we begin to use their Language for so Popery came in and got head at first Resp No such matter Let the Papist take away their Doctrine of Transubstantiation or Corporal presence and we shall not differ from them in the use of this word for it is not theirs but the Speech of the Scripture and the Primitive Church The Papist may with as good reason say that the Table is transubstantiated into a Cross as the Bread into the Body For if our Saviour by those words This is my Body did mean to exhibit substantially that once offered Sacrifice even that very Body Crucified every time the Eucharist should be administred and so to make it a propitiatory Sacrifice for the Quick and Dead then it is necessary that he should mean also to turn the Table into the Cross For that was the real Altar of his real Sacrifice And therefore if they will have the true Body and Blood litterally understood to be then Crucified and Offered I see not how they can avoid the inferring of a true Cross whereinto the Table must be likewise turned For a Table was not the Altar of Christ's Bodily Sacrifice but a Cross I know no reason why I should imagine the same Indentical Numerical real bodily Sacrifice and not the same Indentical Numerical real Altar The same Numerical Sacrifice say they was offered on the Cross nay his Crusifying was his Sacrificing but no Crucifying but on a Cross therefore if his Numerical Sacrificing be there his Numerical Crusifying is also there if his Numerical Crusifying then his Numerical Cross These things do necessarily result one from another and all joyntly shew the absurdity of the Popish Error But now because they mix falshood with truth shall we relinquish the truth Because they make the Sacrament a real Corporal Sacrifice shall not we hold it to be a commemorative one as Christ teacheth us Because they say in the Sacrament Christ is Bodily shall we therefore
washed from the pollutions thereof with water so in our second or new birth they that were born into the Church and made Members of the same were washed from the pollutions of their Sins by the Sanctifying of the Holy Spirit who in Holy Scripture is frequently Signified under the name of Water John 7.38 39. Now though our blessed Saviours death and blood-shed be the ground of that Sacrament yet it is not his Blood that is represented by the water but the Sanctifying of the Holy Spirit whence our Saviour said to Nicodemus Vnlhss a man be born again of Water and of the Spirit c Besides Baptisme is the Sacrament of our Initiation the Lords Supper of our Conformation Baptisme might be Administred to Infants the Lords Supper only to men of Ripe years By Baptisme we have only the beginning of our Spiritual Life by the Lords Supper we have our Conservation in it and Continual food and nourishment This is the Commemoration Representation Exhibition and Application of that one most perfect Sacrifice of our Lord once offered upon the Cross So that upon this Table is prepared God's Heavenly Banquet for our Souls our Manna the Bread of Life in Comparison whereof all Earthly Feasts and Dainties are but poor Course and despicable From hence we drink the Cup of Salvation and Heavenly Benediction yea we eat and drink the very Body and Blood of our Saviour in a Mistery Whence the Antient Fathers are wont to call them Reverend and Dreadful Mysteries the Viands of Immortality the earnest of our Inheritance and the place in Reference thereto The Holy Altar the Sacred Table the Seat and Throne and Chair of Estate of our Lord Christ Jesus Thus I hope I have proved this Table to be the Highest and most Honourable part of the Church and therefore the fittest towards which our Devotions to God should be tendred Now I shall prove it to be Consonant to Scripture and approved by the Constant practice of the Saints in all Ages Perhaps you expect some place of Scripture containing this Proposition in express terms But this Demand were unreasonable For if we should believe no more than what we have express words of Scripture for in the New-Testament Then we shall be never able to prove our Baptizing of Infants The Analogy of the H. T. a Rule in many things or our substituting the Lords day in place of the Jewish Sabbath which are two points of main Consequence and yet we have no Rule given expresly concerning them in the New-Testament Nor was it needful for in such things where God hath not given or prescribed to us any new Rule to guide us In Tithes he hath refered us to the Analogy of the Old This the Apostle teacheth us where he proves the due of the Ministers miantainance under the Gospel from the Analogy of the Old Law Do ye not know that they that Minister about Holy things live of the Holy things of the Temple 1 Cor 9.13 and they that waitat the Altar are Partakers of the Altar even so hath the Lord Ordained that they that preach the Gospel would live of the Gospel But where hath God Ordained that but in the Old Law whence the Apostle proveth this for what need God give a new Commandment concerning Tithes in the New-Testament while the Reason and Ground of the Commandement first given doth as much concern us as them It was reason that they who waited at the Altar should live of it It is as much reason that they who Preach the Gospel should live by it God hath reserved to himself the Tithes to bestow upon his Ministers in the Old-Testament for their maintainance and it was not needful he should give any new Command for Tithes under the Gospel seeing he never abolish't them that he hath not abolish't them is plain because he hath not abolish't the cause for which he did at first Ordain them viz the mainitainance of his Ministers as the Apostle here shews Thus you see the folly of those that will admit of no proofs out of the Old-Testament for any thing even there where is the same ground and reason which the Apostle confutes here by his own practice and by citing a place out of Deuterinomy 25.4 Thou shalt not muzzel the mouth of the Oxe which treadeth out the Corn. which saith the Apostle God spake altogether for our sakes that are Ministers of the Gospel And whence arose the Auncient practise of the Church in Baptising Infants I Pedo Baptiand the Lords day but from the Analogy of Circumcision or the Hallowing of every first day in the week as one in seven but from the Analogy of the Jewish Sabath By the same reason it was not necessary for God or Christ in the Gospel to give us any new rule for the manner of our worship of him in his house Euseb line 3. line 14 Ir. line line 3. line 3. or to specify the place towards which we should Adore him in express words having therein left us to the Analogy of the Old Law there being the same reason to tye us to worship God towards this place that there was to tye the Jews to worship him towards the Altar I might alledge to this purpose a place out of Clemens a man of the Apostolique age and whose name saith St. Paul was written in the Book of Life in his true and genuine Epistle to the Corinthians We p. 52. where he saith ought to do all things rightly and orderly which our Lord hath Commanded us to Celebrate our oblations and Lyturgyes at appointed times for he would not have these things done rashly and out of order but at set times and hours He hath likewise defined by his most High will where and by whom he would have these things performed But where I pray do we find any of these things Specified by God unless he hath left us to the Analogy of the Old-Testament For the only reason that moved the Jews to worship toward the Ark was the Memorial of his Name that is The same Reason ties us to worâ—ship God towards the Altar that tied the Jews to worship towards the Ark. of his Special presence The whole Temple was the Place of Gods Special Presence but the Ark was as it were his Front or Face where he did most chiefly testify his Presence Simil. as the whole Chamber where the King manifests himself to his Subjects is called the Presence Chamber but the Chair of Estate doth most principally represent the Kings Person But first I will shew that places in the Old Testament set a part for Gods Worship were places set a part for the Memorial of his Name and therefore Sacred and also that God did promise a special Exhibition of his presence and blessings in those places This I prove out of Exod. 20.24 where God after the promulgation of the Decalogue forbidding the People by Moses to make with him gods of Silver
or would not hear him any where else Or that Solomon thought God could not or would not hear any prayer but what was made in his Temple certainly he did not For the reason why he beseeched God to have respect unto the Place which he had made and to hear the Prayers of those that prayed in it or towards it was only this because it was built for the Memorial of Gods Name for the place of his special presence and God had promised to place his Name there And mark Gods Answer 2 Chr. 7.14 2 Chr. 7.14 If my People shall humble themselves and Pray c. Then will I hear and forgive Now mine eyes shall be open and mine ears attent to the Prayert that are made in this place Would you know the reason why God would hear in this place rather than in another Though God did not abridge himself of hearing in anyother place It is expresly set down in the next Verse For now I have chosen and Sanctified this house that my Name that is my Memorial or special presence might be there for ever and my Eyes and my Heart shall be there perpetually Is there not the same reason for Gods presence in our Churches as in their Temple if they be as much Sanctified to this end viz. Gods Memorial or Name to Inhabit in as that was And to what other end were these ever Consecrated Now unless you can shew this promise of Gods meeting and blessing men by a peculiar manner in all places where he recorded his Name was proper to the Jews or hath been since reversed by God then certainly our Churches have as much of Gods special presence as the Temple And God will there meet with us and bless us especially and we are to adore God as much towards our Memorial as the Jews towards theirs Thus I have proved the Lawfulness of Adoration towards the Altar out of Scripture Now for the Opinion and Pratise of the Church That it was the Opinion and Practise of the Old Church 1 Kings 8.22 2 Kings 19.14 2 Chr. 7.3 is apparent by what is said Hezekiah in his distress went into the Temple and their Prayed towards the Place of his presence Viz. the Mercy Seat and therefore compellates God by this Title Thou that dwellest between the Cherubims Might not the King have Prayed at home was not God present in his house or had he confined him between the Cherubims No but Hezekiah knew that God had more especially promised his Presence in this Place and therefore here he comes and prostrates himself before Gods Memorial How the Christians Esteemed ever and reverenced their Churches Vid. c. And how highly they regarded their Altars Chrisost Hom. 20. In the Second Epistle to the Corinthians Optatus in his 6th Book describing the Dignity of the Altar illustrates it from this Viz. That it was the Seat of the Body and Blood of Christ Alexander Bishop of Constantinople falling down at the foot of the Altar besought God that he would subvert the furious Plots and Endeavours of the Arrians the next day Arrius as he was exonerating nature withal voided his Guts and Bowels Nazians Or. p. 1. or in some 25. tells That his Sister Gorgonia being Sick applies her self to the chief Physitian of all mortals and casting her self down before the Altar and Invocating him who was Honoured upon the same she recovered her former health By which Examples it may seem that God by his miraculous benefits hath confirmed this Reverence Tertull tells how penitents after they are restored to the Church at their entrance into it were wont to cast themselves down before the Priests from whom they were to receive absolution and to bow themselves submisly before the Altar of God c. God cares not for any complements He requires the Heart Object and the Inward Devotion thereof and so our Saviour teacheth us to serve God John 4.23 The hour cometh and now is that they that worship the Father must worship him in Spirit and Truth This Text is much abused to prove that God in the Gospel allows not of External or Bodily worship or Service but requires this of the Spirit only and consequently to make this the main difference between Gods worship under the Old-Testament and the New Now first I will shew the absurdity of this meaning which they give of the words and then declare the true sense This sense is inconsequent from our Saviours Words The absurdities of the Puritance exposition for he did not speak any thing to the woman about Bodily worship but only about the place of worship and the Object For her question to our Saviour perceiving him to be a Prophet was about a main controversy between the Jews and Samaritans who were bitter Enemies about the Place of worship They mistake the Scope so whether Mount Gerizim or Jerusalem were the place appointed for Gods worship This you may see is nothing concerning the manner of worship whether it should be Outward or Inward But our Saviour in answering waves the question and tells her that was not so material a controversy but that there was a greater Question than that about the place Viz. about the object of their worship for you saith he worship you know not what but we Jews know what we worship After which follows the words cited But the hour cometh c. This is the first absurdity it hath not Consistance with the contest Secondly They add to the Letter Their interpretation addeth to the very Letter of the Text For our Saviour saith not we must worship him in Spirit only there is no such word This exclusive particle our Saviour useth not So that though he might mean that we must worship him cheifly or Principally in Spirit yet it follows not but we might worship him with our bodies also Subordinately for the Principal doth not exclude the Subordinate but include it And none dare say that outward worship is opposite to inward This is the Second Absurdity they add to the letter what our Saviour never said or thought Thirdly This Exposition is directly contrary to the words For our Saviour saith God must be worshipped in Spirit and Truth but God is not nor yet can be worshipped in Truth without Bodily worship for his worship is not true 'T is conerary to the Doctrine and practise of Christ and of all Christians in all Ages unless it be entire and Universal as hath been shewen and entire it is not without the Joynt-worship of the Body Fourthly This Exposition contradicts the Ordinances of the Gospel expresly together with the practise of our Saviour his Apostles and the Church in all Ages For the blessed Sacraments are External Rites and Services Baptisme wherein we make our first Stepulation with God to become his Servants The Eucharist which is substituted in place of those Bloody Sacrifices of the Law to be a Rite and mean of our Address to
a Minister about Holy Things or one that attends about holy service Neh. 10.36 Esay 61.6 Jer. 33.21 and therefore Scripture it self gives this interpretation of their names in very many places For though there were diverse Offices in the Jewish Hierarchy as the High-Priest the Priests the Levites Nethemims Porters Singers c. yet were they all Ministers about Holy Things though some in a higher others in a lower rank For the Levites Ministred immediately to the Priests the Priests to the High Priest and he immediatly to God as in our Church the Deacon whose name signifies a Minister Ministers to the Priest and the Priest immediatly to God Therefore Priest Levite Ezr. 7.24 Nethemims c. are all sum'd up in this name of Ministers see Joel 1.9 and 13. where they are all called Ministers of the Altar So Joel 2. Ezech. 46.24 c. Thus you see what the Hebrew word signifies which we turn Priest and what the Greek word Priest signifies which we would not have the Clergy called by and yet it is the very word given them by the Holy Ghost in the New-Testament viz. Elders Now I pray The Dignity of the Priests if they who waited on the Altar were called Ministers of God or of the Sanctuary or of the Holy Things why may not we of the Gospel be so called that is Priests for that the Interpreters ment when they translated the Hebrew Cohen which word likewise signifies a Prince to intimate the great Dignity of that Function which consisted in Ministring unto God about Holy Things And of no less Dignity is the word Priest or Elder And therefore these terms were premiscuously given to the Jewish Clergy and an Elder with them sometimes signifies a Prince So the Elders of the People of the City of the Congregation fignifies Rulers and Governours To be God's Ministers is to be the Peoples Elders We are the Ministers of God not men 2 Cor. 6. 4. 1 Cor. 4. 1. 2 Cor. 3. 6. Rom. 13. 6. for we are not the Ministers of men but of God and so we are stiled Ministers of Christ Ministers of the Spirit God and Christ set us on work he sends us forth to him we Minister though for you When we administer the Holy Word the Sacraments we are not therein your Ministers but his Dispensers or Stewards For we do it not at your appointment or command or by your Authority but by Gods from whom we have our Calling and Commission As the King is not his Subjects Minister though he doth administer Justice to them and therefore he is called Gods Minister Angels likewise Ministring Spirits to God even then when they are sent out for the good of them who shall be Heirs of Salvation Psal 103.21 104.4 For though the material Object of their Ministry or that whereabout their Ministery is conversant be men yet the formal Object or he in reference to whom this Ministery is executed is God Hence ye Priests ye Ministers of his that do his pleasure and he maketh his Ministers a flame and Daniel saith of them thousand thousands Ministred unto them Thus you see then whose Ministers we are Gods Dan. 1.10 not mens Secondly What a Dignity this is it is no less than what is attributed to Kings and Angels You see likewise that what the Interpreters translated Priests signifies that which you call us Ministers and the executing of their Office Ministring or Ministration As also that the word Elder Luk. 1.23 that the Holy Ghost calls us by is all one with the word Priest And therefore if you be so much against the Jewish terms you should rather call us Priests than Ministers but indeed we are both and the Holy Scripture useth both words promiscuously as well in the Old as the New Testament For we are Elders in respect of the people Ministers in respect of God and we Minister to God about Holy Things unless you will say that our Gospel is not so Holy as their Law our Preaching as their Expounding our Prayers and Service and Sacraments wherein is the Body and Blood of our Saviour are not as Holy as their Incense Oblation and Sacrifice for about these things are our Ministers conversant Now I come to the main Question concerning Adoration or Worship of God before or towards the Altar in our ingress into his house or at any other time when we shall approach thereunto Where first I will shew you what is meant by Adoration or Worship Secondly what is meant by the House of God 1. By Worship What is meant by Worship I do not understand here in the Latitude of the word the whole Act of Religion the whole Duty of Man which sometimes is generally so called the Worship of God the Fear of God nor yet only or primarily the inward Reverence and Devotion of the heart but in special the outward expression of Reverence and Humility in the posture or gesture of the Body not excluding but implying the inward worshiping of the mind In this sense the word is often taken in Holy Scripture as in the second Commandment Thou shalt not bow down to them Gen. 24 26.48.5 Rev. 19.10 nor Worship them So Saint John fell at the Angels feet to Worship him but the Angel refuseth it and biddeth him worship God that is give the outward Worship that he was ready to do to him to God to whom alone it was due For had not the outward Worship been an Act of Religion in regard of Saint John's intention and inward Reverence the Angel needed not to have refused it for outward Worship if it be only Civil is such as one man may give to another a Subject to his Prince much more to an Angel You see then the Holy Scripture by the name of Worship doth oftentimes mean in special the outward Adoration of the Body in visible gestures and so do I here Now this Act of outward Worship I make a part of Religion which that you may the better conceive I will tell you the Nature and Parts thereof For it is not generally believed that outward Worship is due unto God and consequently that it is part of Religion Religion Religion the Nature and Parts which is derived from a word that signifies binding Implies three things 1. An Act of Duty 2. The Object of that Act God 3. The Bond or Tye imposed upon us for the performance of such a Duty to such an Object The Object of Religion is God most Infinite most Glorious most Excellent and Perfect and therefore our Act of Duty in reference to such an Object ought to have three Properties 3 Properties of it 1. It must be an universal Act or Act of the whole Man 1 Vniversal of Soul and Body Soul and Body of all the Faculties of the Soul and of all the Members of the Body All are to concur in this Act of Duty to God and that for these
is it makes the weak offend in doing that without faith and know ledge which the strong do withfaith and knowledge But do these weak ones imitate us there in and Worship God in this manner They had rather run to New England than make a legg towards the Altar in the Old How are they then offended I 'le tell you they are vext at it they Rail upon us for it they Calumniate us for Idolaters they Scoff at us as Superstitious and Foppish and thus they are offended Again there is a great deal of difference between Adoreing God towards the most fitting place in his House which I have already proved a necessary part of Divine Worship and a thing indifferent which in its own nature may prove a Scandal as the Eating of meat Sacrificed to Idols and the like For then we should do no part of Divine Worship least some should imitate us to do it amiss We should not come to the Lords Supper because some that are ignorant come thither only for fashion because they see others do it and understand not what it is and wherefore They think it lawful for them to do as their betters and wiser do and so they Eat unworthily and ignorantly which others do worthily and in faith and so offend in and by others knowledge What then Is the Sacrament and the Eating thereof a Scandal No what 's the reason because in it self it tends not to make men offend by unworthy receiving 2. It is no matter of indifferency 3. Because those that are ignorant and weak are so wilfully having means to be better instructed and informed So is it in this case this Worship of God I have proved a thing Necessary not Arbitrary 2. In it self it tends not to make any offend either by Worshipping the Table or the place we worship towards For then God should have done all in permitting and approving such Worship amongst the Jews whom he would by no means put upon any ocoasion of committing Idolatry to which they were to prove of themselves 3. There are none but have means to be better instructed therefore if any be offended God forgive them and send them more wit The Ignorant may be seduced or misled to worship the Table The Ignorant may be seduced or place it self or to tye God to one place more than another Answ This Objection is partly answered in my discourse of Scandal Now I say 1. A good and necessary Duty must not be omitted because some may make ill use of it 2. 'T is a thing very unlikely that any should think we Worship the Table when we Bow before it and so imitate us in that any more than they should think when we put of our Hats coming into the Church that we Adore the Stones or Walls It was the Ancient reproach of the Gentiles to the Christians that they worshipped the Sun because they Adored God towards the Altar which was set at the East end of their Churches As also that they Eat mans flesh and drank mans blood because they did Eat and Drink the Body and Blood of Christ in the Holy Sacrament Should the Christians have left of these Duties because malice or ignorance might make such constructions thereof But what if it be granted some ignorant men will Adore the Table To what purpose serve we that are Ministers but to instruct them better and to inform them how and in what manner they ought to serve God both in Body and Soul what else is our Errand what the end of our Preaching Is it not to teach men the difference between Good and Evil Right and Wrong and to do Bonum vene Those that may be seduced are to be better instructed Obj. 3. This opens a dore to Popery They tend to bring in Popery and lead us unto other things that are Popish and Superstitious Answ 1. T is not Popish in it self There is not the least Popery in this 2. There is no just fear of bringing it in by this 1. The Papists do not Adore God before the Altar but the Host and Crucifix set upon the Altar and make that the Immediate and formal Object of Adoration viz. Their God Almighty in a Box or piece of Wafer-Cake which they say is the true Body and Blood of Christ Moreover when they Adore Images they say They do not Adore them but those whom the Images Represent Image worship and put them in mind of Now they grant that they Adore the Image relatively or transitively though not ultimately or cheifly and therefore they Worship the thing represented in and by and with the Image This I speak because some say the Papists have as good excuse for their worshipping of Images as we have for our Adoration before the Altar Whereas we utterly disclaim any kind of Worship to the Altar any ways we make it no Object of our Worship either Relative or Transitive We make it no Representation of God we Worship not God in it nor by it nor with it but only towards and before it because it is the fittest place for us to tender our Service of God towards being the place of his Memorial in a special manner and consequently of his presence We disclaim all Popish destinctions and in no wise make the Table the Object of our Worship Nor herein is our Protestation contrary to our Action for if the Action in its own nature were Idolatrous it had been so in the Jews 2. Neither doth it introduce Popery For the Lutherans Not apt to Introduce it who are bitter Enemies to the Papists and the Papists to them do observe this sacred Rite Nay the Papists love and like us the worse for it For they basely belying us say we Adore the Table which they do not but God who is upon it and so accuse us of worse Idolatry than we do them as if we worshipt a Table and made that our God But they Slaunderously and Malitiously traduce us against their ownâ— knowledge To Idolize the Table we abhor and detest and no man of common sense except blinded with malice and prejudice as they are will believe them You see how far this is from bringing in Popery The truth is This vaine fear begets the other extream this vain fear makes us to run into almost as great an absurdity for we are all for extreams Because men will not be Superstitious with the Papists therefore we must be Prophane Sacrilegious and Irreverent with the Puritans Because the Papists Worship God falsely therefore we must not Worship him after a true and due manner agreeing to his Word Because they Superstitiously adorn their Churches therefore we must let them lye like Barns Stables nay rather Sties I am ashamed to think that Christians People of worth and fashion should esteem the Church though never so squalid ugly and deformed the Windows broke the Roof untiled and Leaking the Walls hung with Cobwebs broken patch't and ill-favoured the Holy