Christ be not really present in the Sacrament there is no reverence due to the Elements or Sacrament History of Presbytery p. 2. He must mean by his real presence a corporal presence as Papists * Fox Acts and Monuments p. 1416. in one Volume our godly Martyrs learned †Scottish Oath or Confession of Faith commanded by King James King James and many others understood and do so understand the phrase else he speaks not ad rem to the purpose For if he mean a spiritual presence so Christ is in the Sacrament of Baptism and in all his Ordinances and yet he saith not that there is such a bodily reverence due to it or them as he and his party plead is due unto the Elements in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper And what he means by his Reverence Bishop Prideaux knew right well he meant kneeling in his former Books put forth in his time who in his Fasciculus Controversiarum loc 4. Sec. 3. q. 6. p. 241. saith thus That kneeling is Godfry Goodman Bishop of Glocester preached at Court the 5. Sunday in Lent for the real corporal presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Supper which made no small stir but that was taken up as Heylin saith Cypr. Anglic. l 2. Yet whatsoever he was taught to say by Bishop Andrews and Laud he was and lived and died a Papist and so declared himself as Heylin himself confesseth in his Cypr. Anglic. l. 4. p. 446. injoined only as a thing indifferent and is received of our men as a gesture of the highest reverence due to so great a mystery Mark it he saith 't is received of our men as a gesture to so great a mystery and a gesture of the highest reverence he spake or wrote not his own but their sense And that which they call reverence Bishop Sparrow plainly calls adoration For in his Rationale p. 273. he saith That 't is the duty of people to receive kneeling for it is a sin not to adore when we receive this Sacramen And Dr. Kellet in his allowed Tricennium p. 637. 654 655 620. saith That the presence of Christ in the Sacrament is such as the Eucharist it self must be adored and that if any desire proof that the Eucharist is to 〈◊〉 adored he adviseth him to read taken with the peoples in forâ— of form of the Crucifix may in the eating or handling and that the people of the cup of a silver pipe and that sitting â—â— Communion 〈◊〉 of the * But did the Apostles and the Primitive Christians who kneeled not prophane the Sacrament and sin against God by so doing or was the Sacrament then not so worthy as 't is now or rather were not men then more Christian than now Lords-Supper and that not only the Eucharist it self but also the very Altar upon which it lies must be adored What Laud thought of this matter you will see in the next particular and I doubt not but you 'l find him of the same judgment and as superstitious as they and one of those whom Bishop Prideaux meant by our men And Dr. Sutton †Dr. Sutton ' s Godly Meditations c. 33. p. 179 and p. 182 a Prebend of Westminster pleads for kneeling at receiving the Sacrament upon such a moral account as if God our Maker were more present in the bread and wine than in the water in Baptism and in any other Ordinance for he urgeth Psal 95. 6 O come let us worship and fall down and kneel before the Lord our Maker as if God by the Prophet in that place of Scripture did call upon all the members of his Church to worship fall down and kneel before him in the bread and wine at the Sacrament in a religious state put before them in the act of receiving and so make Christ and his holy Aposâ—les and all others that use not that gesture transgressors And the learned Papists holds That if the Elements bread and wine in the Sacrament be not turned really into Christs body and blood kneeling at receiving them is not lawful but that 't is Idolatry if any created substance remain there So Aquinas 3. q. 75. Hardings Answer to Bishop Jewels Challenge fol. 111. a. Bellarmine de Sacramento Eucharistia l. 2. c. 8. 〈◊〉 â— cap. 13. a 5. cap. 24. q. 6. Of the same mind were Scotus and Durand and therefore they removed the bread out of the Sacrament as Bishop Jewel shews in his Sermon upon 1 Cor. 11. 23. p. 52. What many of our men have written in favour of Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation may be seen in Laudensium Autocatacrisis p. 107 108. and the Supplement thereunto c. 3. p. 34 35. ART II. That Christ is really more present on the high Altar or Communion Table as on his Dr. Pocklington Altare Christianum c. 24. p. 175. vide p. 8. hujus Throne or Chair of State than in the Pulpit or Font c. and that therefore more corporal bowing or more bodily reverence is due to the Altar or Communion-table than to the Pulpit or Font. THis I renounce because it is contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England contained in the declaration after the Communion-service concerning kneeling which saith That by kneeling no adoration is intended or ought to be done either unto the Sacramental bread and wine there bodily received or unto any corporal presence of Christs natural flesh and blood for the Sacramental bread and wine remain still in their very natural substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians and the natural body and blood of our Saviour Christ are in heaven and not here it being against the truth of Christs natural body to be at one time in more places than one For if bodily reverence or adoration be not due to the Elements which are signs of Christs body and blood as broken and shed for us then certainly they are not due to the Table or Altar on which they are but set and if it be Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians to adore the Sacramental bread and wine then much more it is Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians to adore or bodily to bow purposely to the high Altar or Communion-table on which they are but set Now that this corporal bowing purposely to the Altar or Communion-table is religious and adoration I prove thus by our own men Aris Dei adâ—eniculari est adorare sacrosanctum altare To bow to Gods altars is to adore the holy altar saith Dr. Kellet in his Tricennium p. 644. Papists say there is a Worship due to the Cross ratione contactus because Christs body touched it and therefore they adore it but they call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reverence or honour So A B. * Aquin. 3a parte q 25. a. 4. c. A. B. Laud in his Star-Chamber Speech p. 47. A B. Laud's Injunctions to Merton-Colledg
of Godfry Goodman Bishop of Gloucester was accused of it in Court and Convocation and declared and professed it by his last Will and Testament as Dr. Heylin shews in his Cypr. Angl. l. 4. p. 416. 'T is said of Dr. Theodore Price Bishop of that though he lived like an Atheist yet he died like a Papist Prin ' s Epistle to K. Châ—r I before his Quench-coal p. 42. England be so absolutely directly and cordially Papists that it is all that 1500 l. per Ann can do to keep them from confessing it This and much more may be seen in Dr. Heylin's Cypr. Angl. l. 4. p 392 408. Doth not A. B. Laud p. 36. of his commended Relation of his Conference with Fisher say thus The Church of Rome and Protestants set not up a different Religion And doth not Dean Potter iâ— Charity mistaken p 62 say thus That the most necessary and fundamental Truths which constitute a Church are on both sides unquestioned by fundamental points of faith we understand these prime and capital Doctrines of Religion which * But what are those a Bishop and a people or a Pope and the multitude of Professors of Christianity as Bishop Sparrow intimates in his Rationale upon the Common-prayer Book p. 89. Bishops Curates and people committed to their charge make up a Church make up the holy Catholick Church But did not the Church of England before A. B. Laud altered the Prayer for the Fifth of November say That Papists Religion is Rebellion and A. B. Laud held that Bishops are essential to the being of a Church as Heylin shews in his Cypr. Anglic. l. 1. p. 54. l. 4. p. 400 401. their faith is faction Which cannot be said of Protestants Religion or Faith truly without great slander though Dr. Heylin as they say most wickedly standers all the first restorers of the Reformed Religion with it Doth not the Church of Rome hold such points of faith as do destroy the foundation and those not only questioned but denied by real Protestants Doth not the Church of Rome hold this Doctrine as a point of faith for denying or not believing of which they have put many thousands of Protestants to death viz. That the body and blood together with the soul of the Lord Jesus Christ is truly really and substantially in the Sacrament of the Eucharist and that there is made a turning of the whole substance of the bread into his body and of the whole substance of the wine into his blood which turning the Catholick Church as they falsly call themselves doth call Transubstantiation If this be denied see the 18th Article of their Religion set down in the 14th Article of this Book And doth not our Vide Bull Pii 4 bound up with the Council of Trent super forma juramenti professionis sidei Church of England hold the truth in this point against the Church of Rome that this their Doctrine is false and doth destroy the humane Nature of Christ and consequently destroy all the Articles of our Creed which concern Jesus Christs humane nature and consequently our Salvation And is not this a fundamental point of faith that true believers persons are justified before God by the righteousness of Christ imputed to them and applied by faith alone Is it not the main drift of the Apostle to prove and settle the Romans and Galatians in this truth That believers persons are not justified before God by their own good works even of that Law of which câ—meth the knowledge of sin Rom. 3. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the Law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight for by the Law is the knowledg of sin Yea doth not the Apostle say that if he shall teach justification of our persons before God by our own good works he should frustrate the grace of God that is overthrow the Gosâ—el of Jesus Christ for if righteousness come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 21. And could these great Grandees who imposed and took subscription to the Book of Homilies upon and from others be ignorant of what the Church of England holds therein especially this Whosoever denieth this Doctrine THAT FAITH ALONE JUSTIFIETH is not to be accounted a Christian man nor a setter forth of Gods glory but for an adversary to Christ and his Gospel and for a setter forth of mans vain glory that 't were the greatest arrogance and presumption of man that Antichrist could set up against God to affirm that a man might by his own works take away and purge his own sin and justifie himself Homily of Salvation of Mankind p. 16 17. Now because some of our English conforming Divines have by their Preachings and Writings said that most of these ensuing false Doctrines I Heylin in his Introduction to his Cypr. Angl. p. 36. S. 36. have renounced all which the Church of Rome holdeth and maintaineth are the Doctrines of the Church of England and thereby induced many persons to believe and allow them I have to prevent the growing mischief of this grand deceit and to vindicate the Church of England from these calumnies and to inform the ignorant and inconsiderate that have subscribed assented and consented to the Articles of Religion and Homilies of the Church of England but never throughly read and considered them spent as much of my time with my pen as could be spared from my fork and rake this Harvest whiles many great Conformists to the Ceremonies and Government enjoy their Plurality of Benefices besides their great dignities but labour not in the Word and Doctrine much less preach or write against these gross Popish Doctrines but rather preach or print them to the great dishonour of God especially of Jesus Christ the increase of Popery and Atheism and the great grief of those godly Christians that are Protestants indeed and in truth as well as in profession Antichrist professeth the Creed as well as these men yet by his superinduced Doctrines and practices he overtbrows it So these men of long Name may profess subscribe and assent to the Doctrine of the Church of England and yet by superinduced Doctrines contradict and destroy it for they give not an internal assent to it as was observed before out of Mr. Fowler ' s Free Discourse p. 305. And whether those men do not play the Hypocrites lâ—t the world judg The Pope of Rome in divâ—ding Rome unto 25 Priests the fatal squarâ—-root of the number of the Beast 666 laid the foundation of his Iâ—olatrous and tyrannous Kingdom long before his Supremacy was perfected yea claimed He arose out of the earth as grass by little and little insensibly so possibly may a Pontifex Maximus with such a number of such Priests in time â—o elsewhere especially if rulers and ruled are willing to be ridden by them Of all Beasts tâ—e two horned Beast is the most dangerous to be ridden by next that which is most like him as
necessary and edificative of the whole flock of Christ but are only made or said to be so by the will of man carrying a real appearance of evil and are scandalous to Papists and Protestants and establish such modes of Religious worship as are most conformable to the Gospel-rule and primo-primitive practise and not too like to and inductive of the Government and form of worship of the Apostatical and Antichristian Church of Rome I verily believe they would have more dutiful Sons and good Friends than now they have and the Church and Kingdom would have more peace and prosperity to which God of his great mercy incline their hearts However I beseech them to let their moderation be known to all men And I intreat all people without making any tumults upon any pretence whatsoever in their own places and callings quietly to endeavour and earnestly expect and pray for an amendment of what is amiss in Church and State to fear God and honour the King and submit to those that are in authority under him And so God keep you all Septemb. 29. 1673. R. R. B. D. The particular Doctrines renounced are these I. THat the Bread and Wine in the Lords-Supper after the Priests pronouncing these words with intention This is my Body and this is my Blood are turned or transubstantiated into the substance of Christs Body and Blood II. That Christ is really more present on the high Altar or Communion-Table as on his Throne or Chair of State than in the Pulpit or Font c. and that therefore more corporal bowing or more bodily reverence is due to the Altar or Communion-Table than to the Pulpit or Font. III. That mens persons are justified or accounted righteous before God for their own good works that follow Faith either in part or in whole and not for the merits of Jesus Christ alone IV. That Faith that doth justifie Believers persons before God is a bare and naked assent to the truth and that so and as an act habit or work in us it justifies V. That the persons of true Believers in Christ are not justified before God by the righteousness of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ imputed to them on Gods part and apprehended and applied by Faith alone on their part VI. That mens foreseen faith repentance good works c. were the true causes moving God to elect them to eternal Salvation VII That men unregenetate or in the state of nature have by their own free will power sufficient of themselves to turn themselves to God to believe in Jesus Christ repent and do good workâ— acceptable to God when they will and also finally to resist the efficacious grace of God in converting an elected sinner to himself VIII That truly regenerated persons cannot be certain of their eternal Salvation but may totally and finally fall away from the acts and habits of saving Grace before they die and be eternally damned IX That the corruption of our nature commonly called Original sin which remaineth in truly regenerated persons after Baptism is not properly sin X. That meer men in this life since Adams fall can perfectly fulfill Gods whole Moral Law and also voluntarily do good works besides and above Gods Commandments which they call works of Supererogation which are as they say greater and holier than the works of the Moral Law and do merit remission of sin and eternal life not only for themselves but also for others XI That unregenerated mens own good works do make them meet to receive grace from God or as the School Doctors say deserve grace of congruity XII Thâ—t the good works of â—â—regenerated men do ex condigno merit at Gods hands eternal life XIII That there is a place after this life called Purgatory wherein the souls of believers dying since Christs Resurrection are purged from sins by penal satisfaction which were not purged in this life so fully as they ought that they may enter into Heaven XIV That the Pope of Rome successively or the Papacy is not the Antichrist of which the Scripture writes XV. That it is lawful to set up and suffer Images of the Sacred Trinity of God the Father of God the Son or Crucifixes Of God the Holy Ghost or of Saints departed this life which have been worshipped in Temples or Churches where Gods people do usually meet to worship God XVI That those Books which are commonly called Apocryphal Scriptures as Tobit Judith c. are the pure word of God and in all things agreeable thereunto XVII That the Pope or Bishop of Rome is the supreme Head of the Universal Church of Christ above all Emperours Kings Princes Pastors People and Churches The Articles of Lambeth The Doctrine of the Churches of England and Ireland Arminianism is not the Doctrine of the Church of England Notes taken out of King James his Declaration against Vorstius King James no friend to Arminianism A Renunciation OF SEVERAL Popish Doctrines BECAUSE Contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND IN general I renounce and detest all Popish false Doctrine and all Popish Superstitious and Idolatrous Worship and practises and the real appearances thereof and in particular I renounce and detest these that follow ARTICLE I. That the Bread and Wine in the Lords-Supper after the Priests pronouncing these words with intention This is my Body and this is my Blood are turned or transubstantiated into the substance of Christs Body and Blood This I renounce because it is contray to the Doctrine of the Church of England which Article 28th faith thus Transubstantiation or the change of the substance of bread and wine in the Supper of the Lord cannot be proved by holy Writ but is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture overthroweth the Nature of the Sacrament and hath given occasion to many Superstitions The Body of Christ is given taken and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and spiritual manner and the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith And Homily of the worthy receiving the Sacrament it saith thus It is well known that the meat we seek for in the Supper is spiritual food the nourishment of our souls an heavenly refection and not earthly invisible meat and not bodily a ghostly substance and not carnal p. 200. It 's also contrary to the Church of England's declaration concerning kneeling at the end of the Communion-service The Sacramental bread and wine remain still in their very natural substances therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians and the natural body and blood of our Saviour Christ are in heaven and not here it being against the truth of Christs natural body to be at one time in more places than one This declaration is not only against the Papists Transubstantiation but also fully against the Lutherans Consubstantiation viz. That Christs body and blood is really and corporally in the bread and wine Both which
erroneous opinions destroy the humane nature of Christ and consequently all those Articles of our Creed which concern the bodily part of his humane nature and depend upon the verity thereof Besides Transubstantiation is also contrary to Canonical Scripture Mat. 26. 29 But I say unto you I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the Vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom Where 't is clear that the wine which he drank and gave to his Disciples and which they did drink was naturally the fruit of the Vine and not the natural blood of Christ but called his blood Sacramentally because it did by the institution of Christ signifie or represent the blood of Christ as Circumcision by a like Sacramental phrase is called the Covenant Gen. 17. 10 11 This is my Covenant which ye shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee every man-child among you shall be circumcised and ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you Lo here Circumcision which is properly but a sign of the Covenant that was made between God and Abraham and his seed as 't is called in the 11th verse is yet in the 10th verse figurative or if you will Tropically called the Covenant because 't was a sign of it by Gods special appointment and so these words This is my body and this is my blood Mat. 26. 26 28. are to be understood If the bread which he did eat and the wine which he drank and gave to his Disciples and that they did eat and drink had been Christs body and blood corporally and naturally then Christ and his Disciples did eat his natural humane body and drink his natural humane blood which is not only blasphemous to be spoken against Christ and slanderous against his holy Apostles but also improbable to be done and directly against Gods word Gen. 9. 4. But flesh with the life thereof which is the blood thereof shall ye not eat and if not of beasts then sure not of man And 't is contrary as well as Consubstantiation to Act. 3. 21. The Heavens must contain him that is Christ until the times of restitution of all things If Christ be corporally according to his humane nature in Heaven than he is not corporally present in the Sacrament of the Lords-Supper for his body is not cannot be in two * The Papists Decrees Decr. p. 3. Dist 2. c. 44. say thus Corpus Domini in quo resurrexit uno loco esse oportet The body of our Lord wherein he rose must be in one place proper places distant the one from the other as Heaven and that Sacrament are at one and the same instant of time That he was not in two places at one time while he was here on earth read Mat. 28. 5 6 And the Angel answered and said unto the women Fear not ye for I know that ye seek Jesus which was crucified he is not here for he is risen and he said come see the place where the â—ord lay Read also Mark 16. 5 6 They went into the Sepulchre c. And Luk. 24. 6. is the same relation and demonstration and vers 12. is one circumstance more Peter ran unto the Sepulchre and stooping down he beheld the linnen clothes laid by themselves but found not Jesus there And vers 23 The women found not his body in the Sepulchre And vers the 24th Certain men went to the Sepulchre and found it as the women had related but him they saw not Read also Joh. 20 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. and there you 'l see more of Christs Resurrection and that his body was not in the grave Thaâ— his body cannot be in two proper places at once is also evident because every body is circumscribed with his own proper place Christs body is a true humane body as our bodies are and therefore cannot be in two proper places at one and the same time and the proper place of Christs proper body cannot be a little bit oâ— bread or wafer but his proper place is and must be proportionable to the quantity or extension of the parts of his body and to affirm that Christs natural humane body is in Heaven and in the Sacrament too properly and circumscriptively is to affirm that his body is properly in a thousand places at once To affirm that Christs body is essentially substantially and truly present in the Elements of the Sacrament of the Supper as Dr. Laurence with Papists doth doth necessarily imply a contradiction to wit Court-Sermon p. 18. that his body is a true humane body and that it is not a true humane body which two Propositions cannot be true of the same subject at the same time Idem non potest esse non esse God hath absolute power as Thomas Aquinas speaks truly over the whole nature of the creature but not so as that he should cause it to be and not to be at once The object of Gods power as the Jesuits confess is whatsoever implies not a contradiction in it self now that the self-same body should sit down and not fit down should be visible and not visible shoâ—ld be divisible and not divisible should be here and yet elsewhere should be one and yet many are manifest contradictions saith Bishop Hall in his no peace with Rome Sec. 18. p. 658. of his Works Moreover it is contrary to 1 Cor. 11. 26. As oft as ye shall eat this bread not Christs real body and drink this wine not Christs real blood of his body ye shew forth the Lords death till he come and therefore he is not come corporally which he is and must be if he be in that Sacrament corporally under the forms of bread and wine And besides this Doctrine of Transubstantiation overthrows the nature of the Sacrament as the Church of England saith truly for where there is no Element or sign there can be no Sacrament and there is no Element if the bread and wine be turned into the substance of Christs body and blood Ergo it 's false Finally It hath been the occasion of much Superstition and Idolatry as the Church of England saith in her 28th Article for from hence proceeded the reservation of the transubstantiated bread for sundry * There is a Minister in place that I know who useth to keep some of the Sacr mental bread and gives it to sick persons to cure them superstitious purposes hence the adoration of the bread injoined even as God himself hence carrying the Wafer-god about in pompous Processions hence the Popish Feast called Corpus-Christi day Yea hence I mean from Christs real or corporâ—l presence in the Sacrament came kneeling or adoration at receiving the bread and wine at the Sacrament of the Lords-Supper as may be gathered from Dr. Heylin's words who saith thus That both the Lutherans as well as the Catholicks knew that if
creatures of God and therefore are not corporally to be adored or religiously worshipped or reverenced For not only Dr. * Omâ—â—s cultus religiosus Deo debetur Bell. Enter T. 2. l. 6. c. 5. p. 263. Ames but also A. B. †A. B. Usher Sum of Ch. Relig. upon 2d Com. p. 229. Vsher informs us That all religious worship and reverence is to be given to God alone and not imparted to those things which are not God at all And Bishop * Ser. upon 1 Cor. 11. 23. p. 50. Jewel saith that adoration belongs only to God but is given to the Sacrament without any warrant from Gods word Christ that best knew what ought to be done therein when he ordained and delivered the Sacrament appointed not that any man should fall down to it or worship it St. Paul that took the Sacrament at Christs hands and as he had taken it delivered it to the Corinthians yet never willed adoration * Nor kneeling at receiving it or godly honour to be given to it The old Doctors St. Cyprian Chrysostom Ambrose Jerome Augustine and others that received the Sacrament at the Apostles hands and as it may be thought continued the same in such sort as they had received it never made mention in any of their Books of adoring or worshipping of the Sacrament It is a very new device and as is well known came but lately into the Cburch about 400 years past Honorius being then Bishop of Rome commanded the Sacrament to be lifted up and the people reverently to bow down to it If the Sacrament for which you say the Altar or Table is to be reverenced be not adorable or religiously to be reverenced then certainly the Altar or Table is not religiously to be bowed to as you do but the Sacrament I have proved above is not religiously to be adored worshipped or reverenced Ergo the Table or Altar is not so religiously to be adored worshipped or reverenced 2. If the holy Table set Altarwise be therefore religiously to be reverenced because Christs body and blood is thereon Sacramentally corporally I have proved above he is not thereon then I say 1. That the Font should be so reverenced adored and bowed to because therein his body and blood is Sacramentally present too as Bishop * Bishop Jewel's Reply to Harding art 5. d. 10. p. 21. Jewel shews out of St. Augustine and others No man may doubt saith Augustine but that every faithful creature is then made partaker of Christs body and blood when in Baptism he is made the member of Christ And if A B. Laud's reason be good the * Star-Chamber Speech p 47. and so in relation to the Throne where his body is usually present Font is more to be reverenced than the holy Table because Christ is more usually present there than on the Table for the Sacrament oâ— Baptism is there more often administred than the Sacrament of the Lords Supper is on the Table and is for any thing I see as holy as the Table yea more holy by his reason 2. If the Archbishops reason in the Margen be good then should we much more bodily bow to or do reverence to the Pulpit for there Christs body and blood is mostly Quando * St. Jerome in Psal â—47 audimus Sermonem Domini caro Christi sanguis ejâ—â— in auribus nostris funditur that is when we heaâ—â— the word of God the flesh and the blood of Christ iâ— poured into our ears saith St. Jerome upon Psalm 147. quoted by Bishop Jewel in his Reply to Harding Art 12. D. 5. p. 337. and St. * Quest 1. Interrogo p. 7. Augustine saith Interrogo vos c. I demand of you this question my brethren answeâ— me Whether think you is †He means in dignity greater the body of Chrisâ— meaning thereby the Sacrament saith Bishop Jewel or the word of Christ if ye will answer truly this must we say that the word of God is no leâ—â— than the body of Christ Which is directly contrary to A. B. Laud's assertion and reason of it And St. Jerome upon Psal 147. saith Ego corpâ—â— Basilius saith Christ called his flesh and blood the whole mystical Doctrine of his Gospel which he published in his dispensation in the flesh Epist ad Caesarienses quoted by Bishop Jewel Reply to Harding a. 14. d. 8. p. 375. Credere in eum est manducare panem vivum August Tract 26. in Johan Jesu Evangelium puto quamvis quol Christus dicit qui non manducat mean carnem c. possit intelligi de mysterioâ— tamen verius corpus Christi sanguis ejâ—â— sermo scripturarum est Joh. 6. 53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of God and drink his blood ye have no life in you That is except ye spiritually feed on Christ by faith which may be done as well in hearing and receiving the worâ— preached as in receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper administred ye have no spiritual life in you That is I take the body of Jesâ—â— to be the Gospel Although these words of Christ he that eateth not my flesh c may be taken of the Sacrament yet in truer sense thâ— word of the Scripture is the body of Christ And * In Exod. Hom. 13. Origen saith Quod si corpus Christi utâ— inimitantâ cautela quomodo putatis minoris esse periculi verbum Dei neglexisse quam corpus ejus If ye take such heed in keeping the Sacrament which is called his body how can ye think there is less danger in neglecting the word of God than there is in neglecting the Sacrament which is called his body If saith Bishop Jewel the Sacrament were in deed and really the body of Christ and so our very Lord and God thus to compare it with the creature and to make it inferiour unto the same as St. Augustine St. Jerome Origen and other godly Fathers do it were great blasphemy This also is directly contrary to A. B. Laud's Doctrine these things and many more Quotations ye may see in Bishop Jewel's Reply to Harding Art 21. D. 10. p. 451 452. Besides the bread and wine are consecrated by the word of God and prayer and therefore cannot be more eminent than the word of God The less is blessed of the better Heb. 7. 7. 3. If the Altar or holy Table be to be bowed to more than the Pulpit because 't is Christs Throne his Mercy-seat and Chair of State then it will follow that the Pulpit is as adorable or to be bowed to as much as if not more than the holy Table For 1. the Pulpit is called the Tribunal of the Church 2. Though I find not in any ancient orthodox Author that the Communion-table is called a Throne either of God or man Cyprian l. 4. Epist 5. quoted by Dr. Pocklington Altare Christianum c. 8. p. 44. yet I find in * Athanas in Epist
ad Vitam solitariam agentes Athanasius that the Pulpit is called Thronum a Throne and that which you call Altar is called mensam ligneam a wooden board for so learned †Jewel Def. of Apol. 3 d. part c. 1. d. 3. p. 315. Bishop Jewel Englisheth Athanasius his words 2. The Pulpit is more like a Throne than the holy Table is for a Throne is an higher and more eminent seat than others a Pulpit is a Chair on high with a Canopy over it And such Dr. Pocklington †Altare Christianum pag. 44 46. tells us was the Pulpit and the Chair that St. John sate in when he ordained Bishops which he calls a Throne and that Bishops did sit in their Throne in the Presbytery and that there was the holy Altar Be-like then the Bishop sate cheek by jole as in commission with God Almighty as your Dr. Sutton scoffingly speaks in his * Dr. Sutton ' s Meditat. upon the Sacram. c. 33. p. 179. Meditations upon thâ— Sacrament against those persons that sit and dâ— not kneel at receiving the Sacrament Yea he siâ— above God Almighty if what Bishop †Rationale pag. 378 379. Sparroâ— saith be true for he saith That the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Throne or seat was higher thaâ— others and right under it stood the Altar oâ— holy Table the Propitiatory Christs Monument and the Tabernacle of his Glory the shop of the great Sacrifice 2. The Pulpit may more properly be called Gods Mercâ— seat than the Communion-table or Altar is 1. Because in the Pulpit God usually proclaims his mercy to all penitent and believing sinners and induceth them to accept of mercy in Christ 2. Faitâ— comes by hearing the Word preached ordinarily and by it also iâ— Faith confirmed and increased but on the Lords-table the mercy oâ— God is not first given or wrought but only signed sealed and confirmed as it is also at the Font in Baptism 3. The Pulpit is more like a Chair of State than the Altar is For 1. The Pulpit is like a Chair of State with a seat in it and Canopâ— over it and therein Christ by his Ambassadors sits or stands anâ— speaks to his people and declares his Law and Gospel but on thâ— Table or Altar Christ is represented not as sitting in his Chair oâ— State and Exaltation but as in his low estate 〈◊〉 Humiliation as crucified or dead as on his Cross rather 1 Cor. 11. 26. than as on his Chair of State 2. There is no similitude in the Table or Altar to a Chair oâ— State 3. Though Subjects use to give civil worship to the Chair oâ— State of their Prince yet 't will not follow that men should oâ— lawfully may give religious worship honour or bodily reverence to Christs Chair of State be it Pulpit Font Pew Table Heaven or believers in whom he reigns For all religioâ— reverence of the creature is forbidden in the seconâ— Dr. Ames Bellar. Enar. T. 2. l. 6. c. 7. p. 273. Commandment say Mr. Perkins A. B. Vsher Dâ— Mayer Dr. Aries and many others 4. Dr. Ames saith That God is not more in 〈◊〉 Temple made with hands separated from the company of Believers than he is elsewhere since the Legal Temple was taken away 5. Mr. Hildersham saith There is no holiness inherent in oâ— adherent to the places of publick Worship that by the * Hildersham upon Joh. 4. Lect. 33. p. 139 142 143. death of Christ all religious difference of places is taken away no one place is holier than another and that 't is †Bishop Sparrow makes the Church like the Temple part of worship and will have people that pray in private to look towards the Temple Rationale 386 387. Judaism and a denial of Christ to be come to hold that one place is holier than another as is evident by Joh. 4. 21. and that our houses and chambers are as holy places as the Churches are I pray read the whole Lecture it shews the superstition of the Papists and of our men that follow them it may enable you to answer their arguments and avoid their sin 6. No place is made so holy by the Ordinances or services of God therein or thereon celebrated or performed as therefore to make them the objects of religious adoration or reverence 1. Because the Ordinances and services of God cannot make the place where they are performed God 2. Because the Ordinances or services of God themselves are not cannot be the objects of religious adoration or divine reverence without the special command of God And though we do shew outward religious reverence when we pray to God and when God by his word and by his Ambassadors speaks to us in publick and private yet we do it not to them but immediately to God And therefore I conclude that the holy Table or Altar though separated to an holy use cannot be made so holy by reason of the Sacrament of Christs body and blood being consecrated or standing thereon as to deserve to be religiously adored or reverenced with godly honour and therefore the Archbishop's reason to prove that the Altar is the greatest place of Gods residence upon earth namely because 't is there hoc est corpus meum that is Sacramentally for to hold that 't is there transubstantially or consubstantially I have proved is directly contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England and to the truth of Christs humane body this is my body is an insufficient and weak one And if it should have been good it would prove that the Paten in which the Sacramental bread and the bowl in which the Sacramental wine is put yea and the Priests fingers that break and deliver the bread are to be bodily and religiously reverenced as the greatest places of Christs residence here on earth for there 't is more nearly said Hoc est corpus meum they immediately touch the Sacramental body of Christ the holy Table or your Altar doth not for there is the cloth betwixt them And besides it would follow that the Font the reading-Pew and thâ— Pulpit yea the whole Church yea every private house in whicâ— either of Gods Sacraments or other of his Ordinances are used foâ— Christ is there spiritually present should be religiously reverenceâ— with godly bowing to them because there 't is this is my body or thâ—â— is my blood or this is my word Moreover this seems to justifie Papistâ— in their calling the Cross on which Christ was crucified the holy Cross if not in their adoring it and Christ before a Crucifix ratione coâ—tactus by reason of its touching Christs body or resembling it Buâ— this I do but hint by the way 7. 'T is forbidden to worship God in or by or through an Image for the Israelites in Aaron's time and Jeroboam's and Ahab's times are condemned not for worshipping the Golden Calf or Calves 〈◊〉 a God but for worshipping the true God in by or
said to Moses Thou shalt see my back-parts Exod. 33. 23. Sometimes he turns again shewing his face to the people passing by because St. Paul saith Videmus in aenigmate we see through a glass darkly 1 Cor. 13. 12. When the Priest passeth from one corner of the Altar to the other the Clerk which serves him removes also with him because the Lord said Where I am there shall also my servant be Joh. 12. 26. The Massifying Bishop stands at the right horn of the Altar because it is written Deus ab austro veniet God shall come from the South These things are to be seen in Bishop Durand's Rationale in the Books of Pope Innocent the third of the Mysteries of the Mass in Gabriel Biel upon the Canon of the Mass in Tollet of the Instruction of Priests in Hugo de Sancto Victore in his Mirrour of the Church Who but the Popes instituted in the Church the making of the sign of the Cross to fright away the Devil who but Pope Honorius not above 500 years since instituted kneeling which some call adoring at receiving the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Which saith Bishop Jewel William Bishop Jewel Serm. upon 1 Cor. 11. 23. p. 51 52. Bishop Jewel's Reply to Harding art 8. d. 1. pag. 283. where he pleads against adoration of the Sacrament that there is neither commandment of Christ nor any word or example of the Apostles or ancient Fathers for it but that 't was lately devised by Pope Honorius about Anno 1226. but after Transubstantiation as Vitiâ— Degeneâ—â— saith pag. 109. Durand and John Dunce Scotus perceiving could not be justified without great peril of Idolatry they removed the bread and wine out of the Sacrament and turned them into the body and blood of Christ and so brought in Transubstantiation which destroys not only the nature of the Sacrament but the body and blood of Christ too All Papists that I have read as * Aquinas 3. q. 75. a. 2. O. Contrariatur venerationi hujus Sacramenti si aliqua substantia creata esset ibi quae non possit adoratione latriae adorari Aquinas Vasquez †Bellar. de Sacramento Eucharistiae l. 2. c. 8. a. 2. cap. 13. a. 5. cap. 24. a. 6. Hardâ—ng's answer to Jewel's Challenge fol. 111. a. Bellarmine and some others say as Durand and Scotâ—â— do that to kneel at receiving the bread and wine at the Lords-Supper as Papists did if Christs body and blood be not corporally present under them is Idolatry Upon this account I find the learned Frenchman * Dall Apol. c. 20. and Dr. Heylin saith thus The Lutherans held with the Catholicks that Christs body was really in the Sacrament else they knew that there was no reverence due to the Sacrament History of Presbytery p. 2. Yea he saith This prayer the body of the Lord Jesus Christ preserve thy body and soul unto eternal life was left out of King Edward's second Liturgy because 't was thought to savour of Transubstantiation Cypr. Angl. 25. A B. Laud in his Star Chamber-Speech pag. 55. saith very well of Communion Tables standing Altarwise thus That if it advance or usher in Superstition and Popery it ought to stand so in none Dallaus saying to this purpose That this viz. their kneeling at receiving the Elements in that Sacrament were ground enough if there were nothing else to separate from the Church of Rome All our learned and sound Divines maintain against the Church of Rome That it is Idolatry to kneel purposely before a creature in a Religious state or state of worship put before a man that we may not do the needless works of Idolators that 't is scandalous to do needlesly as Idolators do that a publick declaration of a mans good intention in doing a needless action that appears evil or is otherwise scandalous frees not that action from being actively scandalous That it 's impossible to adore God in or through an image and set give no religious positive reverence that is worship to the image To give the appropriate signs significative of our agnition of the Divine excellency to any thing that is not God is Idolatry Nay though these appropriate signs were used without devotion by the party towards the supposed object and were intended only by other men to be directed thither or only were interpretable to be so directed it were Idolatry notwithstanding saith Dr. Henry More in his Mystery of Iniquity c. 10. p. 32. Idolatry is committed saith he when we perform some rite or ceremony that is to say some external religious action appropriated to the signifying our acknowledgment of divine eminency before or rather unto that which is not God Where by before or unto I understand saith he an intended direction by our selves or others or at least by interpretation of custom of the religious action as to an object we would * If this and what Bishop Prideaux Fasc cont loc 4. S. 3. q. 6. p. 241 be true I see not how Catholicks or Lutherans or Dr. Heylin himself can free themselves from Idolatry â—â— injungitur ut indifferens recipitur a nostris ut gost is summae reverentiae tanto mysterio debitus For is not kneeling received and done by them as to an object they would honour thereby and is not kneeling a purposed and an accustomed sign of our acknowledgment of Divine excellency in Gods house and in Gods worship there honour thereby for that is the only thing whereby the action becomes Idolatry for there will always be a necessity of performing our religious rites before or towards something or other by way of circumstance of place which might be without the least guilt or suspition of that crime Wherefore it is the intended and accustomary application of the appropriate signs of the acknowledgment of the Divine excellency unto an object where the Divine excellencies are not that is to any thing that is not truly God which is this hainous sin of Idolatry saith Dr. Henry More in his Mystery of Iniquity c. 10. p. 33. For saith he as a woman that renders or gives up to one that is not her husband what is appropriate to her husband to wit the use of her body let her fancy what mental restrictions or directions of her intention she will in the act is questionless a downright adulteress so whosoever applies the appropriate acknowledgments of the Divine excellencies which is religious worship to that which is not God let him mince it as well as he can with mental limitations and restrictions if he once pass this religious worship upon this undue object he is thereby without all controversie a gross Idolater Ibid. Again he saith Whatsoever is interposed betwixt God and us by way of object in our worshipping is not an help but an hinderance to the perfection of that worship Ibid. c. 14. p. 50. To worship before an image and to worship an image are in sacred Scripture all