essentiall and necessarily to be performed in this Sacrament are all vnder that expresse commandement of Christ saying Do this c. beginning first at these words Christ tooke bread and when he had blessed it he brake c. All which circumstances deliuered by Precept the Church is tyed to obserue Vpon this occasion it were no great difficulty to shew how the Church of Rome at this day hath degenerated from ancient Rome by transgressing the commandement of Christ who said Do this c. and by doing contrarily in diuers weighty obseruable points and circumstances there commanded by Christ as namely first Christ tooke bread gaue thankes and blessed it Ergo the consecration that Christ vsed was in prayer and not in these foure words This is my body Secondly Christ taking bread brake it and as is confessed took diuerse parts out of one loafe and set not before them as it were so many breads diuers wafers Thirdly Christ gaue it vnto them saying c. Ergo they heard what he said and his words were not vttered or rather muttered in an vnaudible voice Fourthly Christ commanded them saying Take Ergo he spake vnto them in a knowne tongue and not in a language they could not vnderstand Fiftly Christ gaue saying Take Ergo doubtlesse for the point is confessed from the light of Antiquity so they tooke it as he gaue it namely with their hands and had it not put into their mouthes Sixtly Christ that said to them all present Take said also Eate Ergo the vse of the Sacrament was propounded to be eaten and not to be onely gazed vpon and persons present were Actors and not Spectators onely Seuenthly Christ likewise tooke the Cup giuing it vnto them saying Drinke you all of this Ergo the Communicants did equally participate of both the Elements as being the pledges of both the Body and bloud of Christ not dismembring the Seale of the Couenant nor defrauding the faithfull of their complementall right Lastly Christ expressed the speciall end of the Eucharist Do it in remembrance of me which is as S. Paul doth interprete it Shewing the Lords death Ergo it is vnproperly called a Sacrifice Propitiatory seeing that the death of Christ is thereby onely Commemoratiuely shewne and not operatiuely and corporally executed herein Thus we finde that how many actions haue bene mentioned concerning the Institution of Christ so many preuarications and transgressions haue bene committed by the now Church of Rome which the ancient mother Romane Church would haue condemned as sacrilegious if they had bene practised by any Church in her time But you call vpon vs to consider your next Exception SECT XI The second Accusation vsed by the Non-conformists against Kneeling is from the Intention of Christ by foure pretences Their first pretence is from the nature of a Banquet Christ ordained this for a banquet whereat we are to act the part of the Guests of Christ in imitation to resemble our Coheirship with him in his Kingdome now it suteth not with a Coheire or Guest with Christ to kneele at the Table and it is contrarie to the Law of Nature to Kneele at a Banque twhich is a Gesture of inferiority and abasement and we may not lose our fellowship with Christ to sit thereat whereby Christ would represent vnto vs our Banquet in heauen Our Answer We acknowledge this Sacrament to be the most gratious Banquet that euer was ordained for the sonnes of men But how As a bodily Banquet trow yee No for if our Sauiour had meant to haue furnished out a bodily Banquet he would haue bene more plentifull in other varieties than in Bread and Wine But it is a mysticall Banquet for the replenishing of our soules spiritually with the body and bloud of Christ which we feed vpon Non dente sed mente non per fauces sed per fidem that is Rather with the minde than with the mouth as the Fathers speake And therefore you are not to require or expect therin the very forme and fashion of an ordinary banquet where it will become men to talke eat and drinke to inuite and pledge one another and how then can you exact of vs the manner of Sitting And for any of you so to speake of familiaritie and holding it vndecent for adopted Coheires with Christ to kneele as the receiuing of this Sacrament I thinke it can hardly be heard euen of some of your owne fellowship without some horror of mind For seeing that the Right of our adoption is the same in vs without the Sacrament which it is in the receiuing thereof then by your Argumēt it must be held an Indecorum in any Christian to be seene praying any where vnto Christ the Son of God vpon his knees SECT X. Their Reply It is one thing to be a Coheire and another thing to act the person of a Coheire at other times when we present our selues in supplication then take we vpō vs the persons of suters so we humble our soules in prayer but at this Banquet we represent the persons of Coheires as we shall be at the great Supper in heauen and now it is our office to giue resemblance hereof Our Answer We haue indeed such kind of Similitudes in Scripture to shadow out vnto vs the happie fellowship of the Communion of Saints in heauen as the calling it a great Supper wherein All things are prepared namely that either the infinit loue of God would or the omnipotencie of the same loue could prouide for the eternall enioyment of the faithfull in Christ Iesus who talketh furthermore of Sitting eating and drinking in his Kingdome But to tell vs that this Supper of the Eucharist was propounded to be an expresse and proper Type and Similitude of the heauenly is more than I thinke any Ancient learning euer taught For the immediate mysticall obiect of this Supper is the body and blood of Christ the words of Christ pointing it out This is my body and This is the new Testament in my blood But how Of his bodie and blood as glorified in heauen No but as Crucified and shed on the Crosse which is expressed sufficiently by Christ calling it blood shed for you And the end of this Sacrament is set downe thus In remembrance of me Now Remembrance is not of things to come but only of things past to wit the worke of Redemption by his Passion in his body and blood whereof Saint Paul hath made a plaine Comment As often as you eate of this bread and drinke of this Cup you shew the Lords death till he come Which Comment was taken from the Analogie of the Sacrament with the thing signified thereby for the bread broken betokeneth his bodie Crucified for vs the wine powred out resembleth his blood shed and separated from his bodie Can you find in all these any one Type of the Celestiall ioy which is signified else-where by the promise of eating and drinking in the
places In quibus nullum corpus aut reliquiae Martyrum conditae probantur wherein there was neither body nor relikes of Martyrs knowne to be kept notwithstanding say they insomnia inanes reuelationes the Dreames and vaine reuelations of some to the contrary Againe they that forbad the setting vp of Altars in High-wayes where neither the bodies nor reliques of any Martyrs were reserued did thereby authorize them where such kinde of Reliques were extant Euen as our Church in forbidding exercises of Religion in priuate Conuenticles cannot be said thereby to prohibite religious Assemblies in the houses of God SECT VIII Their second Instance from the former Councell And the same Councell decreed Can. 15. that solemne request should be made to the Emperour that all Reliques and Monuments of Idolatry might be vtterly destroyed Our Answer Namely all such Statues and Altars which were immediate Instruments of Idolatry and then brought into publique abuse euen as our most godly and gracious Ezekias and other his Maiesties most religious Predecessours haue done SECT IX Their third Instance concerning Pagan Ceremonies from Councels In the second Councell of Brac. Can. 73. Christians are forbidden to decke their houses with Bay leaues and greene boughes because the Pagans did vse to do so and that they should not rest from their labours those dayes the Pagans did and that they should not keepe the first day of euery moneth as they did Our Answer The Canon forbiddeth Christians to vse the wicked obseruations of the Kalends namely Festiuall daies dedicated to the Heathenish gods and to rest from labours the dayes wherin the Gentiles vsed to do to wit in the daies of the celebration of their Kalends which they performed in all lasciuiousnesse and likewise to decke their houses with laurell and greene boughes that is at the same time with the Pagans as if therein they ioyned together in obseruing and solemnizing their Paganish pastimes and worship And of this prohibition they gaue this reason in the same Canon Omnis haec obseruatio Paganismi est All this kinde of custome doth hold of Paganisme because the outward practise of Heathenish Rites performed iointly with the Pagans themselues could not but imply a consent in Paganisme Obserue I pray you what I haue said performed ioyntly to wit at the same times after the same vndistinct manner and in the same Common-wealth The Canon then altough it were necessarie for them yet how shall it concerne our Church whose practise of Ceremonies is sufficiently knowne euen vnto the Papists themselues to differ as much from theirs both in respect of place persons time yea and of opinion concerning our Ceremonies as doth the annuall course of the Sun from the monthly motion of the Moone as may partly appeare from that which hath beene said already and will bee made more evident in the sequele of this discourse SECT X. Their fourth Instance concerning Paganish Ceremonies from Councels The Councell of Affricke Can. 27. ordained that Christians should not celebrate the Feasts of the birth-daies of Martyrs because that was the manner of the Heathen Our Answer The words of the Canon are these We are to make request to the Emperour that these Feasts which are held in many places against the Lawes of God drawne from the errours of the Gentiles so that Christians euen now are compelled to celebrate them may be prohibited especially seeing that they are not affraid to commit such things euen vpon the birth-dayes of Martyrs and that also in sacred places The very repetition of this Canon may be a sufficient Confutation of your Obiection whereby it is euident that the fathers of that Councell do no more prohibite the Feasts of the birth-dayes of Martyrs than they doe the holy places of Christian worship But the things they condemne are heathenish profanations contrary to the Law of God which notwithstanding were at that time frequently vsed aswell in the sacred places of Gods publike seruice as vpon the Festiuall dayes of holy Martyâ— SECT XI Their fift Instance concerning Paganâ—sh Ceremonies from Tertullian Tertullian is large and vehement in the point We may giue nothing saith he to the seruice of an Idol neither may we borrow any thing from the seruice of an Idol If it be against religion to sit at table in an Idols temple what is it then to be seene in the habit of an Idol And againe No habit or apparel is esteemed lawfull among vs that hath beene dedicated and appointed to so vnlawfull an act Thou that art a Christian must hate these things the Authors and Inuentors of which thou canst not but hate Our Answer Tertullian indeed is so large and vehement in this point that there is lesse need either for you to be vehement in vrging this Obiection or for vs to be large in refutation thereof seeing that his owne words doth afford you a plaine answer where he saith that he speakes of habits that were then dedicated and appointed vnto the seruice of Idols But what Gouernour in our Church doth command you to go to the Masse-Priesâ—s and to take his breaden Idol and to adde Reuerence vnto it or who vrgeth you to put on the very same Romish Surplice now vsed at their Masse Furthermore that wee may giue vnto our Opposites their due right we shall hereafter shew that the comparison betweene Papists and Pagans is not altogether so equall when we come to scanne this very point SECT XII Their sixt Instance from Fathers concerning the abolishing of Heathenâ—sh Ceremonies In another place Tert. affirmeth that Christians might not wash their hands or lay aside â—heir cloakes before prayer nor sit vpon their beds after prayer because the Heaâ—hen vsed so to doe Our Answer Tertullian doth not condemne any of these Ceremonies meerely for the resemblance sake which they had with Pagans in such Acts but for the superstitious opinion wherewith they were infected by attributing both an efficacie of Sanctification and consequently a necessitie of Obseruation vnto them Let vs aduise with Tertullian in these points for he will shew first concerning washing that the Christians whom hee condemneth who were the Hemerobaptists or as some thinke the Catharists of those dayes had this opinion in washing that although their liues were neuer so beastly or bloody yet they might be cleansed by the onely Ceremonious washing of their haÌ„ds therfore Tert. confuteth them saying Quae ratio est c. What reason is there for you to thinke that you may speake vnto God with washed hands hauing had sordid and filthy minds The spirituall cleansings which are necessary are from murther witchchraft and from Idolatry which you haue conceiued in your minds but finished and executed with your handes I tell you although Israel should wash her body in euery member and part thereof yet verily doe her hands remaine vncleane and polluted with the blood of the Prophets And therefore this Ceremonie is but vaine So Tertullian
Kingdome of heauen Neither can it be to any purpose to say that in giuing vs his body blood in this Sacrament we haue bequeathed vnto vs all the benefits of his death and passion and Consequently all the ioyes of immortalitie which may be prefigured by our eating and drinking at this Table for Signes and Types are resemblances of immediate obiects and not of obiects remote and consectarie as for example Baptisme is the Lauer of Regeneration a Sacrament and Signe of our new Birth whereby we haue entrance into the Kingdome of grace and so consequently we haue interest in the Kingdome of glory as Christ teacheth Except a man be borne againe by water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of heauen signifying contrarily that the new borne shall enter into heauen yet is not Baptisme a Type of the celestiall and triumphant estate of Gods children but of our new birth by sanctification in the Church militant This will appeare as clearely in the Sacrament which we haue in hand for the benefite of our redemption by the body and bloud of Christ hath many dimensions and euery one of infinite extent Look downe into the profundity of the bottomlesse pit we are redeemed from death diuell and the eternall torments of hell Secondly looke vpon the Latitude besides and about vs in which respect we are redeemed from the thraldome of sin and both from the morall world of wicked Reprobates and the materiall world of this earth the one reserued for the fire of hell neuer to be consumed and the other to be consumed with the fire of the last day Lastly look vp to the altitude and height of our Redemption and it reacheth vnto the euerlasting ioy and glory of Gods Kingdome All these in euery degree infinite benefites are merited for vs by the royall purchase of Christ through his passion yet the bread and wine are onely the symbols and signes representing vnto vs his body and bloud but not those other consequents thereof Except you will say that we haue likewise herein Types of our deliuerance from hell and separation from the world of earth earthly and carnall men and so forth By all which this your so glosing and specious an Argument of a Type of Coheirship proueth to be but an Image and Type of a selfe-pleasing conceit SECT XI Their second Pretence to proue the intention of Christ. That whereupon the Supper is placed is called a Table 1. Cor. 10. You cannot be partakers of the Table of the Lord and the table of deuils The Communion booke commandeth vs to prepare our selues for the Lords Table and Christ noteth this Table to be a resemblance of our heauenly societie telling his disciples saying You shall eate and drinke with me at my Table in my Kingdome Therefore must we still retaine our prerogatiue of our Coheirship of Sitting because this is a Table-gesture according to the Country wherein we liue Our Answer Your former fancy hath taken that impression in your braynes that now whatsoeuer you look vpon doth seeme vnto you to be of the same colour and to make for the manifestation of your former pretence And therfore now the Table of Christ must needs inferre the like Table wheresoeuer the Sacrament is administred and this Table must inforce a Table-gesture of Sitting and this Table-gesture must resemble the Coheirship of the faithfull with Christ in the Kingdome of heauen and all these you hold to be essentiall points of this Supper But if I might be suffered to pose you from point to point according to this our methode I thinke that you would not be so farre in loue with your owne conceit First A Table Christ had an artificiall one for so the Passeouer required and the place afforded but let vs suppose the woman driuen into the Desert as it is in the Apocalyps that is the Church or any part thereof to be in distresse in a Wildernesse where no Table can be had do you thinke that the Grasse or ground as it did in the miraculous Banquet of the feeding of fiue thousand with fiue loaues and two fishes may not serue the turne Secondly you exact that there be vsed at this one Table a sitting gesture for all the Communicants as though without sitting they could not be Partakers of the Table of the Lord But suppose which happeneth yearely in many parishes within this Kingdome that a thousand and sometimes two thousand Communicants are assembled may not I as Andrew said of the fiue loaues and two fishes for the satisfying of fiue thousand people say of one Table What is this for so many Can you prepare one Table to containe thousands to sit one with another for resemblance of our ioynt communion in heauen Or if not will you haue vs thinke that Christ doth exact of his faithfull a circumstance of Impossibility Be you rather perswaded that if the bread and wine being set on one Table shall be distributed to some thousands of people although placed in Seats separated from the Table yet is each one of them Partaker of the same Table of the Lord. And this is not infringed but established rather by the Text which you haue alleaged You cannot be partakers of the Table of the Lord and of the table of diuels For by the Table of diuels is meant euery Altar whereupon there was offered any sacrifice vnto Idols where the Heathen people were made partakers of those sacrifices not by sitting at the Altars but by receiuing part of those sacrifices and Libamina which were immolated and offered vpon such Altars As for your resemblance of Coheirship and fellowship with Christ in his Kingdome by thus sitting at one Tâ—ble in receiuing of the holy Communion I haue proued that it is but your priuate and peâ—tinacious figment And for further euidence we are to enter into consideration what person it was that Christ did sustaine at the celebration of his owne Supper was it of a Lord or else of a Seruant The Tenure of the first Institution runneth thus He tooke bread brake it and gaue it vnto them Likewise he tooke the cup and gaue it vnto them These are Acts of Ministration which he put vpon his Apostles and all other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments saying Do this c. If any could possibly doubt hereof Christ himselfe would resolue them who saith a little after I am among you as him that serueth And I trust that you dare not affirme that CHRIST in his ministration of this Supper of Grace was a Type and Figure of himselfe in the estate of his Coheirship which is in his Kingdome for so shall you confound things infinitely distant Ministration and Dominion estate Militant and Triumphant Lord and Seruant Earth and Heauen Let vs therefore compose our minds vnto a Christian moderation and thinke that we are at this Feast both Suters in prayer for remission of sinnes and Congratulators by
imitation of the gesture of Sitting at the Celebration of this Communion then it doth to other circumstances of time places persons sexes and the like SECT XVII Our third Confutation of the Non-conformists concerning the intention of Christ is taken from the Non-conformists themselues by their owne confession of the libertie of Sitting You your selues multiply many Testimonies telling vs that M. Bullinger maketh it an indifferent thing whether the Church receiue it sitting or comming to the Table but the most agreeable to the Institution saith he is Sitting And M. Fox speaking of the Primitiue Church saith that the Communion was administred either sitting at Supper or else standing after Supper and in Eusebius Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria Anno 157. writeth of the manner of one that stood at the Communion-Table also Doctor Fulke affirmeth out of Gregory Nazianzen Anno 380. who saith of the Communion Table that it was set that men might come round about Lastly M. Iewell writeth that in Basil in his time euery man was bound to take the Communion standing This which you vse in your bookes as an Obiection against vs we make bold to returne as an euident Conuiction against your selues because now you cannot but see your feet in that stocks which is called a Dilemma For if that we as you haue said are bound to the gesture of Sitting by the example of Christ how commeth it to passe that you now allow of a bond of the Primitiue Church for the gesture of standing Can you so easily suffer standing to shoulder sitting out of his due place But if that you can so willingly admit of standing why were you already so instant in pressing vpon vs the necessitie of sitting or are you now so vehement in excluding all indifferency of kneeling Consider I pray you whether there be not the like Analogie betweene kneeling and sitting as there can be betweene sitting and standing This Argument we haue drawne as was said from your owne Obiection and so are you out-shot in your owne Bowe SECT XVIII Their third Accusation against the gesture of Kneeling at the receiuing of the holy Communion from the example of the Primitiue Church The Primitiue Churches for sundry hundred yeeres vsed to receiue it standing for Tert. who liued Anno 180 reporteth thus as the Custome of his time and Tradition receiued from the Apostles that it was vnlawfull to Kneele vpon the Lords day or vpon any other day betweene Easter and Pentecost and Anno 127. it was decreed in the Councell of Nice that none might pray kneeling vpon the Lords day the reason is commended out of the Canon Law because on this day is celebrated the ioyfull remembrance of the Lords resurrection Our Answer This Custome of the Primitiue Church in standing at the time of publike prayer for the testifying of their faith in the Article of the Resurrection was then held most requisite when as yet that Fundamentall Article of Christian faith was generally impugned and gain sayed by some Iewes by diuers Heretiâ—ks by all Pagans which occasioned the Primitiue Fathers in those ages to ordaine that all Christians for the better manifesting of euery mans professioÌ„ herein should vse that publike gesture of standing But afterwards when the faith of the resurrection had generally taken root in the hearts of men theÌ„ this Ceremony of standing in prayer did by little little vanish in some places together with the cause therof First then in this example of the Primitiue Church we see a gesture of standing as a Ceremony Ecclesiasticall Secondly the end thereof for a ioyfull remembrance of the Lords Resurrection which maketh the Ceremonie to be significant Thirdly that this was applyed to Gods publicke worship These considerations may serue for an ample Confutation of your former generall Positions wherby you condemned our Three Ceremonies to wit Surplice Crosse and Kneeling because forsooth they are Ceremonies of humaine inuention of mysticall signification and appropriated to the seruice of God Now therefore if you allow of the foresaid practise of the Primitiue Church why haue you formerly impugned it If you do not approue thereof why do you now obiect it But more of this hereafter Our second Inference needeth no dilatation which is briefly this that the example of the Primitiue Church in changing the gesture of Sitting into Standing doth demonstrate the liberty that the Church hath in altering and changing all such kind of Rytes SECT XIX Their fourth Accusation against the Gesture of Kneeling at the receiuing of the Sacrament is from the opinion of the necessity thereof as well by the learned as by the vnlearned 1. Of the vnlearned Many people in the Land thinke that this gesture of Kneeling is necessarie Our Answer The errour of the people if there be any such is to be imputed vnto two sorts of Ministers the one kinde are too idle or too ignorant that they either cannot or else care not to instruct their people in these points the other sort are too busie who falsly impose vpon the Church an erronious opinion of the necessity of these Ceremonies which she in their owne knowledge hath alwaies abhorred in the Romish Professors and disclaimed and renounced among her owne But it may be the principall errour is the iealousie of the Accusers who vse to suspect an errour in many in stead of a few or for ought that I know of any that holdeth this gestures as essentiall vnto the Communion SECT XX. Their taxation of the Learned Yea and the learned as it is in the Communion booke of King Edward the sixt say that the vse of kneeling is to auoide profanation Our Answer Are you then of opinion either that Sacraments cannot be prophaned or that the Church had not reason to preuent or auoide the prophanation of this Sacrament of the Eucharist If that the Sacraments were not subiect to profanation then should they not be Sacraments For Gods most glorious Name is subiect to mans blasphemy Mans holy life to infamy Godlines to scorne Truth to slander and all sacred things vnto the prophanenesse of godlesse men otherwise neither things could be said to be Sacred nor godlesse men profane As for the wisedome of our Church in this case she perceiuing the blasphemous mouthes of the Papists to vilifie the Sacrament of our Lord Iesus administred in our Church with the ignominious names of Bakers Bread Vintners Wine prophane Elements Ale-cakes and such like reproachfull termes did hold it fit that we by our outward reuerence in the manner of receiuing of the Eucharist might testifie our due estimation of such holy Rytes which are consecrated to so blessed an vse as is communion of the body and bloud of Christ and that thereby we might repell the staine and ignominie which such virulent and vnhallowed tongues did cast vpon them Be you contented by the way to be put in mind of your owne ignorance by confounding an Accidentall and an Eâ—sentiall
necessity together whereas you ought to haue distinguished them and acknowledged that as it is necessary for the Patiâ—nt to take some receipts of physicke not as essentiall as his daily food but accidentall because of his present infirmitie So may we say that the Gesture of Kneeling is not prescribed as a necessarie forme of receiuing the Communion for then should we condemne not onely the present but also the primitiue Churches but yet as necessarie for the reforming of the prophane and irreligious behauiour of many in these wrâ—tched dayes wherein we liue SECT XXI Their fift Accusation against the Gesture of Kneelâ—ng at the receiuing of the Sacrament is from the fiâ—st Inuention thereof as being Antichristian The vse of Kneeling in receiuing the Sacrament grew first from the perswasion of the reall presence and Transubstantiation being neuer inioyned to any Church till Antichrist grew to the full height there being no action in all his seruice so Idolatrous as this It was appointed by Honorius the third anno 1220. Our Answer There are three things considerable in our custome the first is a gesture of outward Adoration the second is this kind of gesture which is Kneeling the third is to know whereunto the Adoration is directed First therefore that in the daies of ancient Fathers there was vsed an outward Adoration at the receiuing of holy Sacraments by bowing of the body is so knowne a truth that the Non-conformists themselues will acknowledge it otherwise I should haue alleaged to this purpose Cyril of Ierusalem Catech. mystagog 5. ad recens baptizatâ—s pag. 546. Ambrose lib. 3. desp S. c. 12. Greg. Naz. de obit Greg. August in Psalm 98. Nemo carnem illam manducat priusquam adorauerit Chrysost. ad Pop. Antioch hom 61. Adora Communica Which Testimonies although they do not all iustifie the Popish manner of Adoration whereby the Papists adore in an opinion of Transubstantiation the Element of bread as the very person of the Son of God yet do they euince an outward Humiliation of the body to God and vnto Christ at the receiuing of these pledges as from the hands of Christ which the words of Cyril in the place aboue cited do explaine who speaking of taking the Cup saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bowing thy selfe after a manner of Adoration and worship saying Amen Here you haue a gesture of Adoration I say not to the Cup but at the receiuing of the Cup vnto Christ by relation of a gift from a Giuer I say againe vnto Christ for that Adoration was directed vnto him vnto whom the oration and prayer was due in saying Amen In the next place after we haue learned that there was a gesture of Adoration vsed we are to enquire concerning this gesture of Kneeling Is not this a gesture of Adoration which is often both commended and commanded in holy Scripture If then the Adoration of Christ in receiuing of this gift be lawfull Shall the more humble gesture make the act of Adoration lesse lawfull The third point remaineth which is to vnderstand aright whereunto or to whom this Adoration is to be directed without danger of Idolatry This is taught vs by our Liturgie according herein with the most ancient Liturgies of the Primitiue Church Sursum corda Lift vp your hearts to wit vnto the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ that gaue his Sonne and vnto Christ himselfe the Lambe of God that sitteth vpon the Throne that gaue himselfe for our redemption by his body and bloud Now to come to the point and for the present to grant that some wicked Pope had inuented Adoration by Kneeling yet are wee notwithstanding discreetly to distinguish of colours lest that for want of due circumspection we call Blacke white and white blacke To this purpose I shall expedite this doubt by certaine demands I aske then first whether euery Inuentiâ—n is to be condemned because the Authour thereof was some euill Pope He that should affirme this must consâ—quently deny the vse of a Gunne because the Inuentor thereof was a Fryar or the wearing of a Coate because the Taylor happily was a Theefe Secondly I aske shall we condemne the gesture it selfe because it is Kneeling To affirme this were consequently to condemne not so much the Inuention of man as the Ordinance of God who often requireth in his worship the act of Kneeling Thirdly I aske must we therefore refuse this gesture because it is for Adoration To affirme this were consequently to disallow the ancient custome of bowing the body for that was a gesture of Adoration Fourthly I aske ought we to abhorre this gesture of Kneeling onely as it was applyed by the Pope for a Diuine Adoration of the Hoast it selfe This we confesse to be indeed a Popish Inuention and as execrable an Idolatry as Christendome hath euer seene and to condemne this onely is fully to iustifie our Church which doth as much detest that abhomination as any Aduersarie of that Romish Synagogue As for Honorius whom you fancy to haue bene the first Inuentor of the foresaid manner of Adoration by Kneeling it is more then my bookes do teach me sure I am that you will witnesse Zepperus saith Honorius decreuit vt cum eleuâ—tur hâ—â—tia sâ—lutaris quâ—sque se reuerenter inclinet Which words to incline reuerenth do notifie vnto vs rather the bowing of the body that the bending of the knee albeit I will not contend about the fiâ—st Authour of this Adoration whether Honorius or Innocentius for it is not materiall SECT XXII Their sixt Accusation against the gesture of Kneeling is taken from the Popish Abuse thereof The gesture of kneeling in the act of receiuing is notorioâ—sâ—y knowne to haue bene of old and to be still abused to Idolatry by Papists by whom it is dâ—ilâ—y vsed in the worâ—â—ip of their breaden god aâ—d that vpon an Iâ—â—latrous intent that the bread is become God yea and one of their strongest Arguments to iustifie that their Idolatrous conceit of Transubstantiation is because else the Church â—â—ould commit Idolatry in kneeling before the Elements Our Answer And it is as well knowne that Protestants in Kneeling at the receiuing of the consecrated Elements do not â—buse them to Idolatry but do as much hate the Romish Moloch to wit that their breaden god as doth any Non-conformist knowing and professing that truth which Theodoret a thousand two hundred yeares since published in expresse termes saying that Bread after the words of Consecration doth remaine still bread both in forme in figure and in substance Whereby the infatuation of the Romanists appeareth to be palpably grosse the rather because they can haue no colour of euasion as I haue shewed else-where SECT XXIII The seuenth and last Accusation vsed by the Non-conformists against the gesture of Kneeling is a pretence of Idolatry This gesture is used as a part of Gods worship becâ—use it is hel◠〈◊〉 a reliâ—ious Aâ—â—ration by all men Our Answer
If you could demonstrate that this gesture is either vsed as a proper part of Gods worship or else that it receiueth from vs that Popish Adoration which you pretend then might you with one breath iustifie your opposition against the Church and condemne her imposition of such Rytes vpon you but that in proofe this as likewise the rest of our Ceremonies are not maintained or obserued in our Church as essentiall parts of worship but onely as circumstantiall and conuenient adiuncts and appendices we haue already bestowed an whole Chapter And as for our manner of Kneeling heere questioned we make no doubt to vindicate it from all crime of Idolatry yea or the least suspition thereof SECT XXIIII The first Reason of the Non-conformists to proue our manner of Kneeling Idolatrous because before a Creature To adore God in or before any creature without warrant of the word of God is Idolatry Our Answer This Position may not run current without all exception for to exclude from the act of the Adoration of God or of Christ all these Prepositions of by in before onely in respect of the creatures were consequently to forbid vs to pray by or with our tongues the Instruments of Adoration or In the Temple the house of God and the place of the solemne Adoration or yet either directly against vs Before the Table of this sacred Banquet and Supper called the Lords Table or else vpwards Before the heauens aboue towards the Celestiall seate and Sanctuary of God Therefore except you will compell vs to Adore God with our lippes and eyes shut you must admit of some limitation and by some distinction shew when or how a man may adore by in or before a creature without Idolatry whereof we are to say more in the Sections following SECT XXV Their second Reason to proue our fore-said Gesture of Kneeling Idolatrous because there is in it a Relatiue worship Because all relatiue Adoration of God before a creature with respect vnto it is Idolatry But the reuerence vsed in the receiuing of the Sacrament is a relatiue adoration of Christ with respect vnto the Sacrament for they say they do reuerence to the Sacrament which is Idolatrous Our Answer We expected that you would at least haue endeuored to proue in our manner of Kneeling a Popish kind of relatiue worship which is as in their Câ—ucifixe to fastâ—n our diuine Adoratâ—on vpon the Creature that it may so by a representatiue relatâ—on be conueied vnto the Creator whereof we are to speake in the Section following But in stead of worship by representatiue relation to Christ you speake onely of a Relation from God vnto the Crâ—ature telling vs of a relatiue Adoration of Christ with respect vnto the Sacrament which is extremely different as you may iudge by your owne Actions For do not you your selues allow a relatiue Reuerence and that iustly in reading the word of God a Reuerence in praying vnto God a Reuerence in religious hallowing of the Lords day a Reuerence in entring into the solemne place of Gods worship which is the house of God and haue not all these a relatiue respect betweene God and his Creatures for the Scriptures which are but lines of Incke are Creatures yet such as are called holy Scriptures and are Signes exprâ—ssing vnto vs the Truth of God The words of mans voice are such Creatures which by ancient learning are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Signes of things signified thereby and being vsed in prayer vnto God do present our Humilitie thankefulnesse and Adoration vnto him The Sabbaoth day is as all other dayes a Creature of God and yet is set apart and appropriated by GOD vnto his Adoration and commanded in that regard to be hallowed of vs which is in a respect that we haue from God vnto it The solemne place of Gods worship where-soeuer it bee is a Creature of God and hath reference vnto God as an house to the owner thereof Now shall these be vsed with a Religious Reuerence and with a relatiue respect and shall onely the blessed Sacrament of our Lord Iesus Christ bee Celebrated without any such Reuerence Procul hinc procul este But I know you cannot be so profanely-minded toward this Sacrament because you are not ignorant that this is the whole Argument of thâ—t Chapter of S. Paul 1. Cor. 11. telling them of the visible Iudgements of God vpon many of the Corinthians thus Many of you are sicke and many are asleepe that is dead but why ob hanc causam for this cause saith the Apostle to wit because they came so profanely vnto it as if they had come to the heathenish Bacchanals or to their owne Domesticall Tables For thus he saith Haue you not houses to eate and drinke in but you come hither not discerning the Lords bodie As if he had said do you come so homely vnto this spirituall Banquet ordained for the refreshing and replenishing of your soules which you are to partake of with hope of remission of your sinnes in this life and of a blessednesse both of your bodies and soules in the Resurrection of the iust through the vertue and price of your redemption by the death of Christ in his body Crucified and blood shed for you SECT XXVI Their first Confirmation of the aforesaid pretended Idolatry by relatiue worship in Kneeling Yea there hatâ— bene fâ—unâ— in aâ—â— ageâ— the roote of Idolatry if not grosse Idolatry it selfe to â—iue to the signe that shew of outward Reuerence and Aâ—oration which is duâ— to the thing signified and to the giuer himsâ—lfe Our Answer What a sinister supposition is this as though that the Reuerence due to Châ—ist were giuen vnto the Sacrament of Christ this we confesse were true Idolatry You may not thinke much if our Church do now sharpen her Censures and Coâ—rections against you who thus multiply your Caluâ—niations against her especially in this branding her with no lesse heynous a Crime than Idolatry which is as being the most vile of all other called in holy writ not onely abominable but also abomination it selfe It will therefore concerne you to make good your godlesse aspersion by some manner of reason for this which you deliuered in the last place is rather a reproofe of your supposed guiltines than any proofe thereof Sâ—CT XXVII Their sâ—cond Confirmation of the pretended relatiue Idolatrous worshâ—p Else why is it not vsâ—d in Baptisme as well as at this Sacrament excâ—pt that with the Idolatrous Papists we wiâ—l say that it is of greater dignitie thâ—n the Sacrament of Baptisme Our Answer Nay rather seeing that you know the doctrine of the Church to esteeme both the Sacraments of equall dignitie for as much as they proceede from the same authoritie of our Sauiour and are ordained for the same end euen to be seales of faith concerning the promises of saluation vnto vs Why do you make such an odious obiection and not rather
you that the Romish Church alloweth a worship of Images without relation vnto any person whose Images they be You are chargeable to shew that this superstition may be iustly imputed vnto vs. It is manifest that you cannot for the worship which you call into question is onely relatiue and this of Bellarmine is professedly giuen to Images and to signes without any relation at all SECT XXXIIII The second absolute and direct Romish worship of the Sacrament Idolatrously It is the Romish profession to adore the Sacrament namely the corporall substance contained therein as the very person of the Son of God in the proper substance of his bodily presence which we iudge Idolatrous not onely by an Accidentall possibility but by an absolute infallibility For first that the worshippers do adore the bread with diuine honour in stead of Christ himselfe which possibility the Doctors of the Romish Church do coÌ„fesse may happen to their Adoration of the Eucharist by reason of many possible accidents as if he that consecrateth haue not had a true Ordination or in consecrating of the Sacrament haue not a right Intention or in vttering the words of Consecration faile in his syllabicall pronunciation or if the formes of the Sacraments themselues by vnfit admixtion or putrifaction lose their perfection In all these for euerie one of them is possible possibilities it may fall out that the Romish worshippers do adore with Diuine honour the element of bread in stead of the Son of God which what is it but at least an Accidentall Idolatry but yet true Idolatry They haue in this case no other colour of euasion than to tell vs that when they kneele downe to adore this Sacrament they do it with an implicite and inward conceit of the minde saying If Christ be present then I adore thee c. But this is a most miserable shift to make Adoration which is the highest honour homage which man oweth properly to God vnto an Hypothetical beleefe if Christ be there The truth of God telleth vs that whosoeuer coÌ„meth to God He must beleeue that God is that is honour him with a Diuine faith that he is wheresoeuer he is adored But in Ifs and And 's that is in fallibilities there can be no Diuine faith Ergo this Suppositiue faith is meerely supposititious because it is impossible that the Ielousie of God should admit of a doctrine or Religion whereby it must necessarily happen sometime that the creature should be worshipped with honour properly due vnto the Creator himselfe This be spoken of the possibility How much more Idolatrous must they appeare to be when as by necessary consequences from Scripture iudgement of ancient Fathers and the aduocation of the perfectest Senses of man it may be infallibly proued that that which they adore as Christ himselfe remaineth still in figure forme and substance the same Bread that it was before Consecration This inferreth such an infallibilitie of their Idolatry that it is impossible but the Popish Adoration of this Sacrament must be Idolatrous From which kind of Idolatry whether possible or infallible you will free vs before we conclude this cause Hitherto haue we shewne what kinde of worship in receiuing the Sacrament ours is not namely not Popish whether you consider the Relatiue kinde of worship by making the Sacrament an obiect of Adoration In quo or per quod or else the absolute manner of Adoration by worshipping the Sacrament tanquam obiectum quod adoratur We are now to shew what is the obiect of our Reuerence in receiuing the Sacrament SECT XXXV The Relatiue Reuerence which is vsed in our Church in respect of the Sacrament is without note of Idolatry First if our Relation be made from the Signe to Christ the thing signified then is the Sacrament obiectum à quo significatiuè the Signe mouing vs to that Sursum corda to lift vp our mindes from the earthly obiect of Sense Bread c. to the body of Christ the spirituall obiect of faith vpon his Tribunall Seate in Heauen Wherein as hath bene proued out of your owne Witnesse there can be no shadow of any Idolatrous Adoration Or secondly our relation may be taken from Christ to the Sacrament as betweene a giuer and his gift and so in Kneeling downe we take this holy Sacrament as the mysticall pledge and seale of the body and bloud of Christ the price of our Redemption apprehended by faith Whereas therefore the deuout Communicant is vpon his Knees praying to the blessed Trinitie to be made a welcome partaker of so heauenly a Feast and praysing the supreme Deity for these Royall tokens of his grace this respect and relation being a reuerent taking of this so inestimable a gift as from the hands of Christ according to his owne Ordinance cannot come within the least suspicion of Idolatry SECT XXXVI This our former relation of Reuerence betweene a Giuer and his Gift is illustrated by a Similitude We were ready to illustrate our former Reuerence by the comparison of receiuing a gift from the hand of earthly Maiestie but we perceiue that the Non-conformists are ready to preoccupate SECT XXXVII The Non-conformists preuention vnto our Comparison There is no proportion betweene the Ciuill reuerence giuen to a King or to the gift which we râ—ceiue from him and this religious reuerence to these bodily things for there is far more danger of Idolatry here then there Our Answer This obiection noteth onely a danger of Idolatry but this is to feare where no feare is for although there be not a Proportion of equality betweene a Ciuill and Religious reuerence yet is there a proportion of similitude and the one doth singularly illustrate the other in this case For as a Ciuill gift ought to be taken with a Ciuil reuerence from the hand of an earthly Soueraigne so must a Spirituall gift and the Instruments thereof be receiued with a Spirituall and Religious Reuerence as from the Maiestie of Christ who instituted and ordained it for vs. And as the Ciuill reuerence vsed in receiuing the gift of the King doth not derogate from the dignity of the King but rather establish it because the whole reuerence redoundeth to the King so this our religious receiuing of holy Rytes doth magnifie the Author but no way deifie the gift And doubtlesse none can be so simple as seeing any Subiect reuerently taking any grant or especially gift from the hand of an earthly King by the token of a Ring or if you will be a rush as to imagine that worship to be derogatiue to the Royaltie or Maiesty of the King SECT XXXVIII Our second ground of Confutation is taken from the Testimonies of their owne Witnesses requiring of Communicants Reuerence in receiuing any such Ordinances of God We are not ignorant that many Protestant Authors are most frequent in condemning the gesture of Kneeling at the receiuing of the holy Communion but how as it is vsed Idolatrously of Papists in
a sacriligious opinion that the Element of bread which they adore is the very person of Christ but not as it may be vsed religiously by Orthodoxe and godly professors For better demonstration whereof it will be our office to produce their owne choicest Witnesses all of theÌ„ exacting of CoÌ„municants an outward reuerence and some allowing also of this kind of Reuerence which is by Kneeling First M. Caluin chalking out as it were the right line of true Decencie saith Sed operaepretium est c. It will be worth our labour to define what is to be vnderstood by that decorum and Decencie which Paul commendeth Indeed the end of Decencie is partly that whilest such Rites which are vsed may gaine veneration or reuerence vnto sacred things we may be thereby holpen and exercised vnto Deuotion partly that also modestie and grauitie which ought in all actions to be especially regarded may most shine in them But that must we account to be decency which shal be so fit for the reuerence of holy mysteries as is meet for the exercise of godlines or els coÌ„uenient for ornament nor can this be without profit but will serue for the admonishing of men with what modestie religiousnesse and reuerence they ought to handle holy things To this end we are forbid by the Apostle to mingle our profane drinkings with the holy Supper of the Lord that women come not without the couers of their heads and many other things we vse as namely our praying vpon our Knâ—es with our heads bare and we administer the Sacraments of the Lord not sordidly sed cum aliqua dignitate but with a kind of Dignitie You that haue excepted against vs for Kneeling to auoide profanation do you see how instantly and vrgently M. Caluin requireth an outward Reuerence in the handling of such sacred Rites Secondly Bâ—shop Iewell falling vpon the same subiect saith Neither do we onely adore Christ as very God but also reuerence the Sacrament and holy mystery of Christ his body and blood and as Saint Ambrose teacheth Baptismum Christ vbicunque est veneramur That is we worship Baptisme wheresoeuer it is had and according to the Councell of Athanasius Dominica verba attentè audiant fideliter adorent Let men diligently heare and faithfully reuerence the words of God Briefly we worship all other like things in such religious wise vnto Christ belonging but these things we reuerence as holy and as appointed and commended by Christ but we adore them not with any diuine honour as Christ himselfe Doe you not now see a Reuerence due vnto the Sacrament without Adoration that is to say a Religion void of Idolatrous superstition namely by Relation from the giuer to the receiuing of the gift Thirdly Zanchie labouring likewise to remoue two contrary Vices as the deadly enemies of Gods worship the one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Contempt or neglect of due worship the second is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 false and superstitious worship to the end he might establish that golden meane called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the true sincere worship of God He against the former Monster of Contempt of holy worship out of the Apostles doctrine 1. Cor. 11. whereby were condemned the vnreuerent commers to the Euchaâ—ist collecteth saying The Sacrameâ—ts are to be vsed with outward Signes Tokens of honor reuerence not in regâ—rd of themselues but in respect of Christ by whom they are instituted for God himselfe when he forbad in his Law the worship of any Images of mens making yet taught he that his owne Images to wit his Sacraments the signes of heauenly things should not be handled without some honour and reuerence For as the word of God although it must not be adored yet ought it to be handled and hearkened vnto with Reuerence so are the Sacraments worthy of Reuerence which the Apostle perswadeth vnto when he teacheth that men must eate the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Dignè worthily For although this worthinesse consisteth in the mind of a man which is indewed with faith and Charitie yet may it be also referred to an externall Reuerence seeing that they among the Corinthians that came irreuerently vnto the holy Supper were grieuously chastned of the Lord as the Apostle teacheth in the same place Fourthly M. Beza is alledged as although commending both inward outward adoration when these fearefull Ceremonies are celebrated yet that for the auoiding of danger or else suspition of Idolatrie he held it dangerous to vse the Gestâ—re of Kneeling in the Act of receiuing It is true and so it may be very requisite in those places and times whereof he spake and his exception is onely that it might be dangerous by some Consequence But M. Beza saith not that the gesture of Kneeling in the act of the receiuing the Sacrament is Idolatrous in it selfe No but the flat contrary Genâ—culatio denique cum Symbola accipiuntur Speciem quidem habet piae Christianae venerations ac proinde olim potuit cum fructu vsurpari Do you not obserue that he condemneth not the gesture in it selfe which saith he might haue bene profitably vsed in former times namely before that it was Idolatrously abused in the Popish Chuch Which Testimonie as it cannot preiudice our Church which is now so seuered from Poperie euen in this point of Adoration that Papists themselues do know and confesse it so doth it iustly condemne your condemnation of the act of Kneeling by iudging it to be in it selfe directly Idolatrous If you shall persist to tell vs that Beza was of your Iudgement then must you grant that with the same breath he defended a commendable Idolatry seeing that he iudgeth the act of Kneeling to be in it selfe a profitable gesture euen in the receiuing of the Sacrament Fiftly to the same purpose and somewhat more expresly P. Martyr I do not contend saith he that Ceremonies should be euery where the same but yet we ought to prouide that they be not against the word of God yea they should as much as may be be reduced vnto edification and decencie Therefore it is no matter of difference whether we receiue the Sacraments sitting or standing or Kneeling so that the Institution of Christ it selfe be preferred and occasion of superstition remoued This his Position conteineth in it these two suppositions the first is that Kneeling at the receiuing of the Communion is not an act of superstition it selfe Secondly that it may possibly be vsed now without danger of Superstition And is not this also a plaine contradiction vnto your former assertions I make no quetion but all other the Authors who haue spoken absolutely for outward Reuerence in the vse of sacred Mysteries would not haue bene more vehement in condemning the Idolatry and sacrilegious manner of Kneeling of the Papists then they would haue bene at the least equall and indifferent to admit of our custome of Kneeling
if that they had beheld the decent integritie that is vsed therein All this while we haue kept aloofe off we come at last to parly with the Non-conformists themselues SECT XXXIX Our third Confutation of the Non-conformists and iustification of Our selues is from the confession of Bellarmine excusing Protestants from the suspition of Adoration euen because they hold the matter of the Sacrament to remaine Bread This our Iustification I confesse is against their will for it issueth out of an obiection which the Non-conformists haue made to accuse and condemne our Church The Non-conformists Obiection And Bellarmine hauing said that we whom he calleth Caluinists and Sacramentaries do not adore the Sacrament neither saith he should any man maruell at that seeing they do not beleeue that Christ is really present but that the bâ—ead in the Eucharist is indeed nothing else but the bread that came out of the Ouen Our Answer Do you not remember Iosephs Cloke which his Mistresse caught hold of to draw him to her lustfull bed who notwithstanding afterwards in a complaint vnto her husband turned the same Cloke as a witnesse against Ioseph to conuince him of folly notwithstanding it was indeed and in truth a full demonstration of her owne filthinesse and dishonesty And see you not how wittily you do imitate that fact of Iosephs Mistris by obiecting to the Church of England the speech of Bellarmine which in true construction may be a sound and euident Argument for her iustification Seeing that Bellarmine so great an Aduersary confessing that Protestants do not adore the bread euen because they beleeue it to be bread doth consequently acknowledge that they by their receiuing of this Sacrament cannot possibly be guilty of the Romish maner of Adoration of the outward Elements What needeth therefore so great an outcry in the eares of simple people to the slander of the true Church of Christ by associating her as afterwards ye do with the Synagogue of Antichrist in an Idolatrous reuerence I alwayes expected that as often as you take from the mouth of Bellarmine such kind of speeches as this obiecting that we thinke the Sacrament to bee nothing else but bread that came out of the Ouen you should haue shewne your selues zealous Aduocats for the common cause by controlling the Iesuits impudencie according as M. Iewell might haue instructed you in his Answer against the like scoffe of M. Harding in vilifying of our Sacrament Whereas M. Harding saith he vniustly defameth vs as reckoning the Sacraments of Christ nothing else but Tokens let him vnderstand that we both thinke and speake reuerently of Christ his Sacraments as knowing them to be the Testimonies of Gods promises and instruments of the holy Ghost and as we make not the Sacrament of Baptisme bare water notwithstanding the nature and substance of water remaineth the same still so we make not the Sacrament of Christ his body and blood bare bread and wine for as Saint Augustine saith Videndum est non quid sint sed quid significent We must not regard so much what they are namely in substance as what they signifie to wit according to the new nature that they haue of a Diuine Sacrament SECT XL. Our fourth Confutation of the Non-conformists and Iustification of our selues issueth from the Non-conformists owne Practise First by their Intentionall Reuerence You would account it an extreme iniurie to be censured as contemners or profaners of these holy mysteries or not to celebrate and receiue them reuerently with the truely religious affections of your hearts and mindes which you professe will be the dutie of euery worthy Communicant that shall rightly discerne in this Sacrament the Lords body This being granted which without impietie cannot be denyed it ministreth vnto vs an Argument whereby you may bee confuted as I suppose without all contradiction Fist I may reason thus That manner of Reuerence which it is lawfull for a Christian to conceiue in his mind the same is as lawfull for him the case of Scandall excepted to expresse in his outward gesture of bodie But it is lawfull for a Christian to conceiue such a Relatiue Reuerence as from the sight of the Sacrament being Obiectum à quo to raise his thoughts to a contemplation of the mysticall and spirituall obiect of faith signified thereby and vpon the vnderstanding of the mysticall euen the body and blood of Christ really albeit not corporally exhibited vnto vs in this Sacrament to receiue these visible pledges of our redemption by the death of Christ as the Obiectum propter quod with all holy and reuerent deuotion of heart and mind Therefore it is lawfull to performe a sensible and bodily reuerence at our outward receiuing thereof The infallibilitie of this Consequence ariseth froÌ„ the difference which is betweene the inward and outward Reuerence for the inward reuerence is the formall part and very soule of reuerence and farre exceedeth the bodily which is but onely the materiall Where therefore the materiall and bodily forme of Reuerence is acounted Idolatrous there the Intentionall and formall much more because the worship is in it selfe and Act indifferent and so may become either religious or superstitious by the vse or abuse thereof according to the intention and mind of the Agent euen as we may discerne in this one word Aue vsed in salutation for many came to Christ and said Aue O haile Master and did honour him the Iewes also bowed to him said Aue dishonoed him The difference of these two consisted not in the out ward gesture which was the same both sorts Saluters but from the diuerse Intentions the one kinde performing their salutations in ciuilitie but the other in mockery Euen so the gesture of Kneeling is an act indifferent in it selfe being vsed as wel of Children to their Parents as of either religious persons to God or sacrilegious vnto Idols but the formall distinction of each one proceedeth from the mind and affection of the Actor for that which is in childreÌ„ pietie in subiects loyaltie the same is in the truely religious deuotion and in the superstitious and sacrilegious Idolatrie Vpon these Premises wee inferre this conclusion that if there bee in you an inward relatiue reuerence of soule in the receiuing of this blessed Sacrament from a respect had betwixt the Doner God and this holy Sacrament being so precious a pledge of our saluation then can it not be vnlawfull to giue some expression of this your religious intention by the same visible reuerence in one or other outward gesture of the body especially being to participate of the Sacrament the seale of mans redemption both body and soule And indeed the bodily parts of man are nothing else but the Organs and Instruments of the affections of his soule If therefore that godly Indignation which the Publican had against his sinnes be shrewing as it were his owne heart commanded his hands to Knock on his breast If Hope
lifteth vp pure hands in prayer vnto heauen in confidence of Gods promises If holy Faith moued the womans hand to pull Christ by the hemme of his garment in beleefe to be healed by some vertue from him If Charitie stretched out the Samaritans hand to Bynd vp the wounds of the distressed man that lay halfe dead by the way If Deuotion towards God in Lydia charged her eares to giue Attention to Gods word If Contrition for sin powred out of Peters eyes bitter teares of repentance shall not the vertue of Humilitie haue some power to make demonstration of it selfe in an acknowledgement of so vndeserued mercy as is to be partaker by faith of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus by some significant gesture of bowing the body at the receiuing thereof answerable to the religious affection of your mindes Thus much of the Intentionall Reuerence SECT XLI The second Practise of the Non-conformists for our iustification is Bodily And this is either Accidentall in respect of the Communicants or Proper in the manner of communicating The Accidentall is their Bodily presence communicating with vs in this Sacrament notwithstanding our manner of Reuerence This shall be my Reason Idolatry is set downe in the booke of God as a necessary cause of Separation from all Idolatrous worshippers for what affinity is there betweene God and Belial Which one cause although it were onely might iustifie our departure out of the Romish Babylon To this purpose your Witnesse Zanchie giueth this Thesis Idololatriae crimine inuoluuntur qui cum Idololatris ipsorum Idololatrijs communicant Contrarywise the materiall breaking of bread that is the communicating in the blessed Sacâ—ament is a principall note of Vnion in one Faith and Religion seeing that this Sacrament it selfe is a mysticall signe of the vnion of the faithfull among themselues from which it hath receiued the Appellation to be called the Communion Notwithstanding you haue the grace to abide in the womb of our Church and to liue in one Brotherhood with vs in a publique profession of one doctrine and worship of God in Prayers and Psalmes and in the Communion it selfe And now deliberate with your selues I beseech you whether you by this your manner of calumniating and traducing of the Churches practise to call it Idolatrous haue not bene the Authours of Schisme to the Separatists and Apostates of these times vnto whom you haue giuen their first bane euen this suspicion of Superstitious worship in our Church whereby their hearts are so poysoned and their braynes intoxicated that now no Antidote of your making can be able to cure them Take therefore vnto you the mindes of discreete and Christian hearts either to be that you seeme or to seeme to be that you are as glorifiers of God with vs in our Church so for our Church that therefore you do not dishonour her that is your Glory and your Crowne seeking as she hath done many worthy Martyrs of Christ and holy Saints to breed and bring you vp in the syncere faith of Christ vnto your assured hope of eternall glory Thus much of our iustification by your Accidentall practise of consent in Communion with vs in this Sacrament SECT XLII The third Practise of the Non-conformists is from their Bodily Reuerence at the receiuing of their food both Corporall and Sacramentall First of their Corporall You your selues are knowne to be so reuerent in praying vnto God as that in saying grace before meate you vse to vncouer your heads and you do well but look now to the act is it not an act of Reuerence Why else are you vncouered And is it not an act of Spirituall worship wherefore else do you pray And is not the outward obiect whereupon you look meate euen the creature of God how else can you desire God to blesse These his creatures And is not this your Adoration of God relatiue and respectiue arising betweene the Gift and the Giuer otherwise why should you haue reference in prayer vnto God for his blessing vpon your meates And lastly will you say for this Interrogatiue must needs conuince your consciences that this your Adoration is according to the Popish opinion by a personall representation in giuing any part thereof to the creature by adoring either It or In it or By it How then should you iustly condemne that Romish Church of Superstition Nay do you not acknowledge that the respect which you haue from the meate to God is as from the gift vnto the Giuer and that Gods gift is an obiect propter quod for which you pray and render praise vnto him And why then do you infame our Church as if she were Idolatrous which teacheth you in these and all other points of Adoration how to auoide all Idolatry Surely he that cannot distinguish betweene these two to wit Reuerence to God at the receiuing of his Sacrament and reuerence to God in the Sacrament receiued may when he would warme him at the fire burne himselfe in the fire Thus much of your practise in Reuerence at receiuing your corporall food SECT XLIII Our fift Confutation of the Non-conformists and iustification of our selues is from the proper practise of the Non-conformists in their outward Reuerence at the receiuing of this Sacrament You may remember the whole passages and very paces we haue gone that we might perswade you to allow and imbrace our outward gesture of reuerence in receiuing of the blessed Sacrament some taken from Reasons from Confessions of your owne Witnesses from your owne Practises not onely Intentionall but also Reall and this both Accidentall and Proper and this as in an outward and visible reuerence in receiuing as well Corporall as Sacramentall food All these foure hauing bene manifested it remaineth onely that we proue the last concerning the bodily Reuerence perfoâ—med by your selues at the receiuing of the Sacrament it selfe I need not vse many words you receiue this Sacrament with your heads vncouered and would I thinke hold it a prophanenes not to giue some outward semblance of vncouering your heads at the receiuing thereof This being your generall practise I do not see how you may iustifie your owne heads and condemne your knees by whatsoeuer pretence you can make Will you say that kneeling vncouering being both practised about the same act the one gesture can be more subiect to Idolatry then the other I appeale to your owne Witnesse who coÌ„demning the peoples adoration of Images doth ioyntly abandon these three gestures Genuflectionem Capitis apertionem Corporis inclinationem Kneeling on the knee vncouering of the head and bowing of the body where and whensoeuer they are applyed vnto a false adoration as being contrarie to the second commandement Thou shalt not worship c. Or will you hold it reasonable to say as some are thought to answer that you in the celebration of this Sacrament beginning with prayer and thankes-giuing were vncouered and that now it is but continuata
actio a continuing of the same gesture at the administration and participation thereof either because of the publique Psalmes then vsed in the Church or for that you are exâ—rcised in a diuine meditation about the Analogie between the elements of bread and wine and the body and bloud of Christ signified thereby by as reall an applying of the same body and bloud of Christ to your soules for the nourishment thereof as you haue a reall and substantiall incorporation of the bread and wine into your bodies that you are presently ready to proceed in other prayers so that being vncouered you cannot be said so much to put off as to keep off your hats nor to be made kneele but to be found kneeling at the receiuing of this Sacrament He that condemneth in his own conscience an other mans direct vncouering of the head at the receiuing of the holy Sacrament as superstitious being himselfe vncouered and shall notwithstanding excuse his owne gesture because of the former pretence of a continued action or spirituall meditation This man shall be but as S. Iames calleth him a Paralogizer and deluder of his owne soule because no act is called gooâ— nisi ex integra causa that is whâ—n it is good in euery part but it is euill ex quouis defectu that is vpon any one defect Therefore the continuance of the same gesture caÌ„not maâ—e that action good wherein any part thereof in respect of the obiect is condemnable in it selfe because if the reuerence at the receiuing be vnlawfull I ought in my behauiour as well to haue declined that which ought not as to haue practised that which ought to haue beene performed especially where for God is a iealous God there could be the least iealousie of Idolatry The nature of due reuerence will more clearely appeare by a sight of the contrary If any Tenants seeing their Lord riding with his seruants some before and some behind yet but meanely furnished for their attendance should be disposed to laugh and iest at them exercise the same scoffe vpon their Lord approaching would it be any tollerable satisfaction to say when they should be called in question that they did but onely continue their laughing and iesting Or will you hereupon suspect that you haue erred in being vncouered and hereafter make amends with couering your heads This would be but an hiddie and giddie retractation by which you must needs contradict the custome as I suppose of all the reformed Churches in Christendom whereof one of your own choicest Witnesses testifieth saying De hâ—c membro inter omnes pios constat reipsa enim hâ—c comprobant cùm ad Sacramentorum participationem reuerentèr apertóque Capite accedunt hà c ratione protestantes aquam illam Baptismi panem vinum Coenae non amplius esse res profanas sed sacras per quas Christus seipsum suamque gratiam coÌ„municat eóque esse reuerentia dignas c. It is a thing granted saith he of all godly men and indeed testified and approued of them by their comming to the participation of the Sacraments Reuerently with their heads vncouered protesting thereby that the water of Baptisme and the bread and wine in the Lords Supper are no coÌ„mon but sacred things whereby Christ doth communicate himselfe and his graces vnto vs and that therefore they are worthy of this reuerence Euen as saith he the word preached although it is not to be adored yet must it be reuerently handled is the word not of men but of God and so likewise the Sacraments in the administration of them aâ—e worthy of reuerence whereunto appertaineth the saying of the Apostle commanding vs to eat and drink that cup 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worthily which worthinesse and dignity although it doth properly consist in the minde indued with faith anâ— loue yet may we not without cause referre it vnto the externall reuerence whereupon it was that they that came to the Lords Supper irreuerently were seuerely chastned by the hand of God 1. Cor. 11. You see how exactly this your choice and venerable Witnesse hath pleaded for an externall gesture of reuerence by vncouering the head at the receiuing of such holy Rytes which he maketh to be the same in the case of worship with the bowing of the knee You will peraduenture reply if the case standeth so concerning vncouering our heads why are we then condemned for irreuerence and why is Kneeling required Shall I tell you I can conceiue but three reasons hereof the first is because diuers of you are thought to be vncouered not with any intention to expresse your reuerence at the receiuing of this Sacrament because you condemne those that performe any reuerence by kneeling therefore yee are vrged to kneele that thereby you may manifest your vnanimity of one iudgement with our Church Secondly the order of kneeling hauing bene established by the Church and being as hath bene proued a Ceremony indifferent it is lawfully exacted and ought to be performed by you for expression of vniformitie Lastly because that women also who because of their sex may not be vncouered might shew the deuotion of their soules by their bodily representation of kneeling this gesture is required for an vniuersality of Conformitie To conclude be you exhorted but to permit your internall reuerence to become visible by bodily gesture or suffer your knees to be answerable to your heads in outward reuerence and then may we all ioyne the hands of true fellowship and godly vnion in the participation of this holy Communion and a more acceptable Thankesgiuing in the Eucharist vnto the Trinity in one indiuisible Vnitie whereunto be ascribed all glory and prayse for euer Amen FINIS Gal. 1.8 Psal. 45.5 Psal. 12 2.6 a Col. 2.21 b Act. 25. v. 10.12 c Danaeus Isag de Tradit cap. 29. * These other Testimonies ensuing are cited and expressed in this Treatise throughout d Caluin e Zanchy f Bucer Zanc. and others g Caluin h D. Rainold i Chemnis k B. Iewell Zanchy Chemnis l Bucer m P. Martyr Beza n Bucer o B. Iewel p Caluin q B. Iewell P. Martyr r Caluin B. Iewel Zanchy Zepper P. Martyr s Bucer P. Martyr t P. Martry loc comm pag. 1086. u Bucer Gal. 2.14 Abridg. Linc. part 1. pag. 44. M. Hy M. Pag Heb. 12. Luc. 2. Act. 15 10. Heb. 3. Caluin Inst. l. 4. c. 10 § 30. Matt. 28.19 Mar. 16.15 Abridg. Linc. quò supra Hy. disp 1. Reg. 5.3.4 1. Reg. 8.17.18 M. Hy M. Hy. Exod. 3.18 Exod. 8.8 M. Hy. Exod. 12.13 M. Hy. Gen. 4.4.5 Abridg. Linc. implyeth pag. 44. Vers. 31 and more expresly 1 Kin. 23.10 Leuit. 18.2 Infra cap. sect 2. 3.4 â— c. M. Hy. Bas. lib. de fide Cy. Epist. 74. ad Pomp. Amb de voca gen lib. 2. Aug. Tom. 9. col 478. Idem Tom. 9. col 1089. Idem Tom. 7. con Donat. li 2. ca. 6. col 365. Idem Tom. â— Epist. 73. Aug.