hoc acceperunt sacramentum ita nunc dâ—sponam is saith Marlorat in 1. Cor. 11. It appeareth thirdly by the practise of the Apostolicall kirks observing still this gesture howbeit other circumstances of time and place and other things which fell out occasionally at the first supper are not regarded Their practise may be a commentarie to the precept Do this that wee may take up what is comprehended under it Howbeit Christ had not said Hoc facite Do this his example in setting down the patern and put in practise by the Apostles afterwards is equivalent to a precept Christi Apostolorum exempla sunt nâ—strum exemplaâ—â—exemplar autem rei faciendae probat rem esse praeceptam necessariam Christ himself after hee was sitting at table in Emâ—us with the two disciples Luke 24. 30. hee took bread blessed it brake it and gave to them This place is interpreted by sundrie ancients and moderne of the breaking of the sacramentall bread which may be granted without any vantage to the Papists for communicating in one kinde because the example is extraordinarie and by the Hebrew phrase of breaking of bread synecdochically may bee meant the whole supper M. P. thinketh likewise that it is like this breaking of bread was sacramentall but saith hee the sitting was onlie occasionall But there was no occasion to hinder him to use another gesture when hee come to that action Yee see then in the judgemeut of all the interpreters who expound this place of the sacrament of the supper that Christ celebrate this sacrament while he and his disciples were sitting and used no other gesture but that which they had used at their ordinary eating before It is obiected that the Apostle in the rehearsall of the words of the institution 1 Cor. 11. maketh no mention of sitting I answer that the Apostle rehearseth not all that was requisite for the celebration of the supper His chief purpose was to correct the abuse of the Corinthians that is their not staying upon other For the Lord that night he was betrayed said to all his disciples conveened together Take ye eat ye drinke ye all of this Illa coena Christi omnes commun ver accumbentes habuit That supper had all sitting in common together saith Chrysostome rebuking such as neglected to communicat with the poore Oâ—â—umenius hath the like This is not to eat the Lords supper he meaneth that supper whâ—ch Christ delivered when all his disciples were present For in that supper the Lord and all his servants sate together Hierom in 1 Cor. 11. The Lords supper ought to be common to all because he deliverâ—d the sacraments equally to all his disciples that were present It was not the Corinthians fault that they sate â—t table but that neither at their common meats nor at the Lords table would they sit together but sorted themselfes in factions and companies saith D. â—ilson in his book of obedience And again Saint Paul as Chrysistome thinketh brought the table and supper where the Lord himself was and â—t which his dâ—scâ—ples sate for an example to shew them that that is rightly judged to be the Lords supper quae omnâ—bus simul convocatis concordiâ—er communâ—ter sumitur which is received in common and with one consent of all assembled together The Apostle saith not I deliver to you here all that I receaved of the Lord but I have received of the Lord that which I have delivered unto you The Apostle presupposeth a lawfull minister a table and sitting at the table and rehearseth only Christs actions and his words uttered to communicants sitting at that table together bidding them all eat drink c. conveened together Not yet all his actions and words as giving of the bread blessing of the cup either severally or conjunctly with the bread and the precept to drink all of it Ipsi et am Evangel stae mutuo inter se supplevâ—sse leguntur quae ab eâ—rum aliquo vel aliquibus sunt omâ— ssa The Evangelâ—sts themselses supply mutually what is omitted by any of the rest saith Innocentius 3 in the Decretals There was but one action saith Casaubon which consisted of the holy and common banquet and from the nobler paâ—t was called the supper of the Lord. Totam illam Corinth orum actionem quae sacro communi convivio constabat a potiori parte vocat coenam dominicam The love-feast then and the Lords supper went together the love-feasts in these times preceeding and the Lords supper immediately following For as Estius a professour in Doway reasoneth It is likely that in imitation of Christs example at the first supper they celebrat after the love-feast Next they stayed not upon other at the commoun supper which could not have beene if they had communicated together before as the Greek fathers conceave who are of the other opinion Thirdly the Apostle putteth them in minde of triall before and good behaviour If these abuses had fallen forth after the Apostles exhortation had not beene so pertinent Fourthly this opinion is confirmed by the custome which was observed after in many Churches even till Augustinus dayes Willâ—ts in his synopsis pag. 677. In the end of those feasts they used to râ—ceave the sacrament Cornelius a Lapide a Professour in Lovane affirmeth likewise that the love-feast preceeded the holy supper Agape haec tempore Paule fiebat ante non post sacram synaxin Druthmarus who wrote about the yeare 800. saith that the Apostles celebrated after meat as Christ did Feâ—â—runt autem Apostoli multo tempore similiter post alium elbum dominicum fumentos D. Bilson saith likewise by Saint Pauls words it should appear the communion was distributed to them after meals but saith he to us it is all one whether before or after at their banquets and feasts it was ministred and even served at theâ—r tâ—bles â—s Augustine noteth epist. 118. And againe Because these brotherly repasts did either end or begin with the Lords supper they could not devide themselfes each from other and disdaine the poore at theâ—r common meat but they must offâ—r the same abuse at the Lords supper which was mâ—nistred to them as they sate at theâ—r tablâ—s immediatly before or afâ—er their usuall and corporall refreshings M. P. a la â—e champion for kneeling thinking it likely that Christ ministred the sacrament at Emaus hath this observation Hereupon I thinke together with the institution it selfe after supper were grounded the love-feasts by continued occasion whereof the disciples might possiblie for a time use sitting in the very act of receiving D. Downame Bishop of Derrie confesseth sitting to receave the sacrament to have beene used in the Churches in the Apostles times I passe by the names of Table and Supper and breaking of bread and the opposition made by the Apostle betwixt communicating at the Lords table and sitting at the tables of Idols which may
not uniforme among themselfes in the words uttered at deliverie of the elements If we may sit or stand or kneel in time of prayer then kneeling is not enjoyned in regard of prayer but some other thing intended But as I have said we are not direct by the act to lift up our hearts or pray and therefore I need not as yet to insist upon this pretext Giving that in the conclusion these words In remembrance of so mysticall an union â—e answerable in the narrative the meditation and lifting up of our heart then by meditation and lifting up of the heart is meant not prayer but remembrance And what is that to say to kneel in remembrance that were to kneel for a memoriall But suppone it were thus when we remember and as he addeth consider to remember and consider is not to pray Shall we kneel whensoever we are put in minde of that mysticall union And what is meant by this mysticall union It may meane as well a materiall conjunction as they call it or corporall union of the body of Christ with the bodies of the Communicants by touch in the mouth swallowing downe to the stomack and mixture with the bodies of the communicants as spirituall with the soule O Lord let thy bodie which I have taken and bloud which I have drunken câ—eave uutâ— my guts and enâ—rals saith a Romane missall But the spirituall eating of Christs flesh and drinking of his bloud and the mysticall union between Christ and us wrought by it is as well done out of the sacrament as in it saith Master Downe Wee are not united with Christ by receaving his flesh into our mouthes but by faith which may be done without ever participatâ—ing the sacrâ—ment That the Reader may perceave the better how the act is contrived let him read it without the two lies closed within the parenthesis seeing the act is whole and entire without them and he shall see that it may passe among Papists and Lutherans not one word or syllable sounding against a reall presence in the signes and that we are directed to kneel not in regard of any prayer but in due regard of so divine an action or mysterie as is the sacrament or sacramentall receaving of Christs bodie and bloud Wee may also consider the intent of the Church of England or rather of their prelats and adherents that wee may take up the better the intent of our act For conformitie with them is intended At the first Kneeling was left free in the dayes of King Edward the sixt The Papists making a stirre for want of reverence to the sacrament at the second reviewing of the booke of common prayer Kneeling was enjoyned upon this reason That the sacrament might not be prophaned but holden in a holy and reverent estimation this was done by the directours and contrivers of the booke partly to pacifie the Papists partly because their judgement was not cleare in this point They could not see every thing throughly at the dawning of the day Yet it was not altered but by a staâ—ute 1. Elizabeth that second booke of King Edwards was confirmed Doctour Burges bringeth in a passage to explaine the matter which saith he is left out by negligence of the printer But it is more likely that it hath beene done of purpose by such as were directours Doctour Mortoun saith That their Church thought it fit by outward reverence in the manner of receaving the eucharist to testifie their due estimation of such holy rites to stop the mouths of blasphemous Papists vilifying the sacrament with the ignominious names of bakers bread vintners wine profane elements ale-cakes But Doctour Ames in his reply to Doctour Mortoun answereth That it was not so much for the stopping of the mouths of Papists but that some close dissembling adversaries did hinder the worke of reformation so much as they could and that they have done so ever since and do so still to this day It may be such pretended the scoffing of Papists buâ— what matter of any glosse if kneeling be directed that the sacrament be not prophaned but hold in reverent estimation Then the sacrament is prophaned belike if wee either sit or stand and kneel not Master Huâ—ton saith They kneel to put a difference betweene the ordinarie bread and wine and these sacramentall to which they give the more reverence because it is more then ordinarie bread and wine What more plaine They say not they kneel to God that the sacrament may not be prophaned but holden in reverence c. But simply they are enjoyned to kneel that the sacrament be not prophaned c. And suppose they were it were no better shift then the Papists use when they say they dedicate temples to God in honour of this or that Saint And yet wee kneel not to God but in prayer and thanksgiving which are not compatible with the act of receaving eating and drinking of which more afterward A bare kneeling can not be presented without some signe of extraordinarie presence or apparition Some of their formalists pretend they kneel because of the prayer uâ—tered at the deliverie of the elements The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy body and soule unto everlasting life I answer That it is already proved that kneeling is enjoyned for the sacraments fakâ— Next Christ prayed not at the deliverie of the elements but in an enunciative forme uttered the word of the promise This is my body This cuppe is the new testament 2. The word of promise is the speciall clause of the charter The sacramentall signes are like seales hanging at the charter If at any time therefore the word of promise should be uttered then specially when the seales are delivered The Evangelists Matthew Mark Luke and the Apostle Paul repeat precisely and constantly that word so that any man may perceave the sacramentall forme of words ought precisely to be observed and uttered in the name of Christ without change into a prayer in name of the Church The sacramentall forme of words is observed in baptisme why not here Our formalists forbeare to to utter the word of promise to the Communicant They say They have uttered it before It is not enough that they were uttered before narrâ—ivâ—ly or 〈◊〉 in rehearsall of the words of institution For this sacrament is an imitation of Christ not a recitall of his words and actions It is to doe as he did and not to report what he did saith Mouline The rehearsall of the words of the institution leâ—terh us see what warrant wee have to celebrate such an action and in generall of use I read and wine But it can not bee said demonstratively of this bread and wine in particular set on the table that it is the body and bloud of Christ till it be first sanctified by prayer and thanksgiving to that use and after delivered to the communicant with command to take eat and assurance
or have warrant to baptise but pastours or ministers It is necessitas medii then that driveth them to such courses The English service book permitteth in privat baptisme to omit the doctrine concerning the institution and use of baptisme and also to spare the Lords prayer if the time will not suffer That booke supposeth likewise that some things essentiall to this sacrament may bee omitted in the privat ministration through feare or haste in such extremitie Is this reuerent using of the holy things of God or is it sure worke that forceth them to flie to a conditionall baptisme The case of baptisme and circumcision is not alike for the Lord appointed a precise time for circumcision to wit the eight day which in no casâ— they might prevent suppose the infant should die in the meane time It might have beene delayed if there were some urgent occasion to hinder as in the wildernesse for many yeares because they behoved to be in readinesse to remove according to the moving of the cloudy rollar But Moses had no urgent occasion therefore the Lord chastised him and Sephora circumcised the childe Moses being sicke Her example was not imitated by the Jewes themselves after and the Church of God was yet in families When synagogues were erected and places for the publike service of God circumcision was ministred onely in publike as some thinke and so it is an this day in the synagogues where a synagogue is to bee had Others hold that the Lord committed not the act or office of circumcision to the priests or Levits but that the infants were circumcised at home the family and nighbours being conveened because present remedy was to be provided for curing of the wound Barraillus the Jesuit saith that circumcision required not either a peculiar place or a peculiar minister Suarez saith that at this day he that is called the circumciseth circumciseth indifferently in the house or the synagogue But it is not so in baptisme as it cannot be ministred but by a lawfull minister so likewise only in the publicke assembly The make of circumcision was permanent and by it the circumcised might bee easily discerned whither they were counterfite professours or not But it is not so in baptisme The paschall lambe was eaten only in families and small societies conveened in some chamber on parlour and might not be eaten in publick assemblies But who dare affirme that the Lords supper howbeit it be the sacrament answerable to it must be celebrated after the same manner Different is the case betweene the sacraments of the old law which belonged to one nation and the sacraments under the Gospel belonging to the whole Christian world The Lords supper is the sacred banket of the whole Church assembled together saith Bullinger in his Decades and therefore saith he the Apostle requireth the Corinthianâ— to assemble together to partake of this supper 1 Corin. 1â— 32. It is a finew of publicke assemblies a hadge of our profession a band of love and representation of 〈◊〉 communion and fellowship which is and ought to bee among the members of the congregation It is not a part or two or three but the whole body of the congregation which is compared to one bread when the Apostle saith We that are manie are one bread and one body for we are partakers afore bread Corin. 10. 17. Because it is not possible to us to celebrat a sacramentall union with the whole Church militant the Lord hath appointed us to keepe a sacramentall communion with some particular congregation or visible Church The Doctour borroweth an absurd answer from Bellarmine and the Rhemists that were have sacramentall communion with the whole militant Church howbeit it be not so visible as with any one particular Church and his reason is because wee are partakers of the same sacrament I reply with Master 〈◊〉 answer to the Rhemists Although all the faithfull even those that never receaved the sacrament by faith communicate with Christs body yet doe they alone communicate sacramentally which have their communion sealed by the outward action of eating of one sacramentall bread And that the Apostle meaneth of these that in one congregation or Church eat together and not of the communion of us with those that receave the sacrament in another Church it is evident for that he placeth the seal of this communion in eating all of one bread and of one table Whereas they that communicate in another congregation communicate not of one table or bread with them that are so removed no more then they that celebrated the passeover in divers houses were partakers of one lambe or kid It is the same sacrament in spece or kinde but not in number Wee communicate in one fruit or effect because we all receave the same Christ but that is a spirituall not a sacramentall communion saith Chamier For it was never heard saith he that these in Jerusalem communicate sacramentally with those in Alexandria Otherwise what needed the bishop of Rome to send the eucharist to other bishops when they come to Rome The Lords supper then should not be celebrated but in the assembly of the faith for united together in one bodie of a Church A companie conveened apart from the rest to communicate with the sicke person is not unied by themselves into the body of a Church farre lesse three of foure asttake the English service booke meaneth to be a number sufficient seeing they allow the communion to bee ministred to three or foure in the Church and in the time of plague sweat or such other like contagious sicknesses the minister may communicate with the person diseased alone Ergo coena Domini non est privata sed publica nulli privatim danda Et quoniam non est publicus vel generallis catus quandò quatuor aut quinque cum agro communicant nihil dicunt quia not apud agros coenam instrui pâ—sse si alis quoque simul coenent saith Bullinger That is Seeing it is not a publicke or generall meeting when three or foure communicate with the sicke they say nothing to purpose who say that the supper may bee celebrated beside the sicke if others also communicate Suppose a companie of the faithfull in a family be called a Church Rom. 16. 7. because the whole family consisting of Christians and frequently exercised in religious exercises resembleth in some sort a Church and may be called ecelesiola as it were a little Church Yet it is not that Church which hath the power and right to use the sacraments and censures for then every family in a Christian commonwealth might celebrate the sacraments at home So howbeit the name be communicated for the greater commendation of such a family yet the definition doth not agree And yet that place may be applied to the Church which used to conveene in Aquila and Priscilla's house In that same chapter Gaius is called the host of the whole Church See
and warrantable WE have the exemple of Christ and his Apostles at the first supper to warrant the communicants to sit in the act of receaving No man ever doubted of it till of late two or three wranglers hath called that in question which hath been holden as an undoubted truth in all ages After the ordinarie washing of their hands they sate downe to the first course of the paschall supper to eat the paschall lambe with the unleavened bread then they rose againe to the washing of their feet Thereafter they sate downe againe to the second course of the paschall supper and did eat of a sallet made of sowre hearbs which they dipped in a composed liquour as thick as mustard This second course was a part of the paschall supper as Scaliger and others of the learned prove out of the Jewish writers and not their common and vulgar supper M. P. yeeldeth to this because the paschall supper was a sufficient meal of it selfe and therefore they needed no other supper It is clear that they sate howbeit not upright yet leaning on their elbowes at the paschall supper Scaliger citeth out of a booke set forth before Christs time entituled Kiddâ—sh pesach a canon for twice washing and that kinde of sitting at the eating of the paschall supper The Evangelists likewise make mention that after they rose and Christ had washed their feet they sate downe againe Now while they were eating after this sitting downe to the second course of the paschall supper and consequently while they were yet sitting Christ took bread and gave thankes c. that is he instituted and ministred the evangelicall supper Matth. 26. 26. Mark 14. 22. Yea the very close or conclusion of the second course or whole paschall supper was changed by Christ into the evangelicall supper Luke and Paul relate that Christ tooke the cup after supper The consecrating breaking and eating of the bread had interveened betweene the second course and the taking up of the cup. Therefore they might well say After supper he tooke the cup. Yea they might have said also after supper hee tooke the bread to wit after both the first and second course of the paschall supper but then it must be meant immediatly and without any other action interveening because Matthew and Marke say While they were eating Hear Baâ—radius a Jesuit Howbeit the whole Sacrament was instituted after supper yet it was instituted in the end of the supper while as they were sitting and eating for they did eat other meat till the time of the institution of the heavenly food and therefore Matthew and Marke say That the Sacrament was instâ—tute while as they were eating for they were yet eating when the Lord tooke bread blessed and brake Quamvis autem totum sacramentum post coenam institutum fuerit in ipsius tamen coenae fine institutum est cum adhuc discumberent mâ—nducarent Nam manducarunt cibos alios quousque ad institutionem caelestis cibi ventum est Ideoque Mattheus Marcus aiunt manducantibus ipsis effectum sse hoc sacramentum Adhuc enim manducabant cum Dominus accepit panem benedixit fregit Baronius the Cardinall collecteth that they were sitting becaâ—se Matthew and Marke say they were supping or eating Vnde quod dicit Matthaeus coenantibus autem iis accepit Iesus pâ—nom benedixit quod Marcus ait manduoantibus illis accepit Jesus panem benedicens fregit idem est acsi dixisset recumbentibus illis Chrysâ—stome likewise that whâ—le they were eating and drinking Christ â—ooke bread The collection is so cleare that none either of the ancient or moderne Writers Popish or Protestant did call it in question In steed of many testimonies therefore I coâ—tent me with the old hymnes M John Mair on Matth. 26. bringeth in an old hymne to this purpose as followeth Rex sedet in coena turba cinctus duodena Se tenet in manibus Se cibat ipse cibus And the like we have in the Romane Rituall In supremae nocte coenae Recumbens cum fratribus Observata lege plenè Cibis in legalibus Cibum turbae ducdenae Se dat suis manibus But it is likely say some when Christ gave thankâ—s that he and the Apostles kneeled I answer There is no likelihood at all What the Naucratits did at their idol feasts on the birth day of Vesta or Apollo Cumaeus is â—o matter It is noted as singular in them and not accordiâ—g to the custome of other Ethnicks It was the custome of the Jewes to sit in time of blessing the bread and cup at the paschall supper The words which they used were sooner uttered then they could conveniently change sitting in kneeling and rise againe We never read that the Jewes kneeled when they blessed their meat Christ sate when he brake bread and gave thankes at Emaus When hee sate with the multitude which hee fed with five loaves and two fishes he blessed the bread P. granteth that Christ and his Apostles used the same gesture in blessing and giving thanks that hee did in receiving Suppose they had kneeled in time of the blessing before the breaking of the bread it would not follow that they continued kneeling or received the elements with that gesture All agree ancient and modern that they were sitting when Christ spake to them Haec verba nempe bibite ex eo omnes dicuntur solis Apostolis qui tum ad mensam cum Christo sedebant saith Bellarmine Becanus and others as ye may see in the testimonies cited in this and the chapter following The Naucratits after they had supplicated upon their knees sate downe againe upon their feasting beds as Atheneus reporteth We prove also by collection from some circumstances and the forme of the celebration that they sat They neither stood nor kneeled Therefore they sate They stood not for the beds upon which they sate leaning on their elbowes were so neer to the tables that they might reach to it so that they could not easily stand betwixt It were ridiculous to alledge that they stood upon the beds And Christ when he had ended sayeth to them Arise let us go hence If they had beene standing hee could not say to them Arise It may bee gathered likewise that they kneeled not 1. If there had beene a change from sitting which was the ordinarie gesture at the Paschall supper into kneeling a gesture of adoration at the Evangelicall supper some of the Evangelists would have made mention of it for they make mention of other changes 2. If there had beene such a change then kneeling should have beene institute and all have sinned that have not kneeled since the first supper which our opposits dare not affirm To what end should the change have been made if not that that gesture might be observed afterward 3. The form of celebration could not comply with the gesture of kneeling for Christ spake in
the Lords supper 2. part page 24. translateth Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reverenced and disputeth against adored as not agreeable to his meaning And so Bilson expoundeth Theodoret and to this purpose alledgeth the glosse of the Canon law In hoc sensu possumus qâ—am libet rem sacrâ—m adorare id est reverenâ—iam exhibere Ana. stasius saith Dominica verba attentè audiant si leliter adorent 1. venerantur saith the glosse Adore plenitudinem scripturae I adore the fulnesse of the scripture saith Tertullian Doctour Burges is forced to construâ— the word adored in this sense when he would give a right sense to some words of Iewell The sacraments in that sort in respect of that which they signifie and not in respect of that which they are of themselfes are the flesh of Christ and are so understood and beleeved and adored but the whole honour resteth not in them but is passed over from them to the things which be signified saith Iewel His meaning is saith the Doctour that no more is or may be done respectively to the sacrament then that which wee call veneration that which in strict sense we call adoration or divine worship is reserved to God Chrysostome meaneth spirituall reverence in 1 Corin. 11. and therefore he useth emphaticall speeches of ascending up to the gates of heaven even the heaven of heavens like eagles saith Doctour Fulk 〈◊〉 followeth not that they kneeled in Augustines time because the Ethnicks objected that Christians honoured Bacchus and Ceres The reverene carriage of Christians at the participation of the sacrament all bread and wine was sufficient to be an occasion of the mistaking Averroes the Arabian Spaniard about 400 yeares since objected That Christians adored that which they did eat It may be that in his time they kneeled and gave just occasion to Averroes reproach But his time is not within our date In a word looke how old they can prove kneeling we shall prove reall presence Doctour Purges hath found out a place which was never found out before wherâ—â— hee confidently concludeth that the communicants kâ—eeled in Tertullâ—ans time for faith he the people shunned to take the sacrament when they might not kneel in the act of receaving or partaking of it and therefore forbore to come to the communion table on the station dayes because it behoved them the stand on these dayes Tertullian saith he inviteth them to come and take the bread standing at the table publikely and to reserve and carry it away with them and receave it at home as they desired kneeling and so both duties should be performed the receaving of the eucharist and the tradition of standing on these dayes observed Tertullians words are Similiter de stationum diebus non putant plerique sacrificiorum orationibus interveniendum quâ—d statio solvenda sit accepto corpore Domini Which last words he translateth because station or standing is then to be performed in receaving the body of the Lord whereas he should â—ranstâ—te because the fast is then to be brocken after the receaving of the bodie of the Lord. For the word statio in Tertullians language is taken for fasting both in this place and in his booke De corona militis cap. 11. and in his booke De jejuniis cap. 2. 10. 14. as Pamelius hath well observed upon that place and after him Baronius in his annales In his booke De jejuniis he bringeth in for illustration Moses persevering in prayer till the going downe of the sunne when the people was fighting against the Amalekits Nonne statio fuit sera saith he Did Ioshua dyne that day saith he that he fought against the Ammorits that commanded the sunne to stand in Gibeon and the moone in Askalon That God gave such authority to Sauls commandement concerning fasting till even that Iâ—nathan for tasting a little hony was scarce delivered at the instant request of the people Tantam authoritatem dedit edicto stationis Saulis ut Ionathan filius c. H. bringeth in such exemples for the custome their owne sect of the Mountanists had brought in which was to keep these fasts till evening whereas the custome of the Church was to keepe them only to the ninth that is our third houre afternoone In the 2. and 14. chapter he maketh mention of weddensday and fâ—yday appointed for these fasts Cur quartam sextam sabbathi stâ—tionibus dicamus speaking of the custome of the Church at that time The meaning of Tertullian in the place above cited is They were in an errour who thought that if they had receaved the sacrament their fast should be broken which should have continued to the set houre For saith he dâ—th the encharist lose that service which wee have devoted unto God or rather doth it binde us more to God Nonne solennior erit statio tua si ad aram Dei steteris Shall not thy fast bee the more solemne if thou stand also at the altar of God thâ—â— is the communion table Accepto corpore Domini reservata as Iunius readeâ—â— id est stationis officio not reservato that it may answer to the other member both are safe participatis sacrificti excâ—utio offâ—cii both the participation of the sacrifice â—nd performance of thy service id est jejunii saith 〈◊〉 his answer to the theologues of Burdeâ—ux 〈…〉 his answer to the bishop of Everâ—ux he saith That Tertullian would remove that scruple that after they had communicated their fast was broken they thought aâ— si participâ—tio euch aristiae jejunium abrumpere◠〈◊〉 if the participation of the eucharist had broken up their fast Ambrose giveth the reason wherfore these set fasts were called Stationes quod stantos commarantes in eis inimicos insidiantes repellimus because standing and staâ—ing in them wee repâ—ll our enemies lying in wait for us meaning spirituall enemies The metaphore is borrowed from souldiers who behoved to fast so long as they were in statioâ— Metaphora à militiâ—m sumpta quod quamdiu in statione erant jejunare 〈◊〉 oportebat See Pamelius upon both the places Doctour Burges finding that Tertullian lib. 2. ad uxorem maketh mention of jejunia fasts after hee had made mention of stationes concludeth in his owne fancie that stationes were not fasts whereas he might have seene stationes distinguished à jejuniis in the former place also but by the one he meaneth of such as fasted at any time of their owe free accord by the other the set dayes of fasting Iejunium est indifferenter cujuslibet Diâ—i abstinentia non perlegâ—m sed secundum propriam voluntatem statio statutorum dierum vel temporum And this difference Pamelius acknowledgeth he hath out of Rabanus Maâ—rus The very phrase it selfe solvere stationem might have guided him aright For what more frequent a phrase for breaking of a fast then solvere jejuniums We denie not that they stood both these dayes and other
if he so doe the bread shall be a pledge of his body and the wine of his bloud Christ said not This is my body take eat but Take eat this is my body or actu continuo bad them both take and eat The promise is annexed to the commandment as conditionall and hath no effect otherwise but if the condition be performed It is a receaved action among the Divines Elementa extrausum non sunt sacramenta The elements out of the use are no sacraments And sacramenta perficiuntur usu If the elements after the blessing be not delivered shal they be sacramentally Christs body and bloud or if delivered and not eaten It fareth with the sacramentall elements as with pawnes and pledges in contracts and bargans A ring may bee set a part to bee a pledge in matrimonie yet it is not actuallie a pledge without consent of the other partie but only a meere sing A stone chosen out from among many to bee a signe of a march is not actuallie a march stone but in the use when it is set with consent of parties in the march to that end There was never a sign without the use wherefore it was appointed to be a sign Never a march but that which divided land nor a banquet but in eating and drinking saith Chamier So the elements are sanctified and set a part by prayer and rhanksgiving to this use but are not Christs bodie and bloud actuallie till they be receaved and used Panis nunquam est signum corporis Christi nisi in edendo nun quam vinum sanguinis nisi in potando And therefore this holie ordinance is properly defined a sacred actâ—on consisting of so many rites By a figurative kinde of speach it is true the bread may bee called the sacrament of Christs bodie because it is appointed to that end as when Isaac said to Abraham Where is the sacrifice that is the lamb or the ramme appointed for the sacrifice but not properly Now the Formalist presupponeth that the sacrament is made alreadie before hee come to deliver the elements and therefore hee sayth hee uttereth other words at the deliverie So yee see they place such vertue in uttering these words This is my bodie in the rehearsall of the institution as the papist doth that they thinke the read alreadie Christs bodie and therefore absurd to utter these words againe at the deliverie to the Communicants for then they should seeme to consecrate again So grosse poperie is the ground of omitting the comfortable word of promise at the delivering and snbstituting a prayâ—r or ministeriall blessing as P. calleth it in the rowme of it and such a prayer as presupposeth the bread already to bee Christs bodie and therefore they say The bodie of the Lord prâ—serve thy bodie and soule Heere also is a wil-worship for howbeit prayer bee of it selfe a pure of Gods worship instituted and allowed by God yet to pray unseasonablie and out of time at the will and device of man when you should bee serving God in another forme it is wil-worship neither is there necessitie of this a prayer alreadie preceeding And surely this their prayer is a senselesse one like that old prayer Anima Christi sanctificaine which is directed to Christs soule whereas wee should direct our prayers to his person not to his humanitie by it self Let it bee observed by the way that the words of the institution are rehearshed in the English service book and among the rest these ords This is my bodie to God in a continuall tenor with the prayer begun before just according to the order observed in the Canon of the masse when the priest offereth his sacrifice which is an horrible abuse of the words of the institution which Christ uttered to the Communicants and not unto God I dare bee bold to affirme the sacrifice of the masse had never enâ—red in the Church if the word of promise had beene uttered at the deliverie of the elements to the Communicants in an enunciative forme or demonstratively as Christ did Thirdly if in regard of prayer then if Christs sacramentall speach be uttered without addition of a prayer the Communicants must not kneel Christs forme of speach then must be thrust out that prayer and with it kneeling may enter in Fourthly suppose the prayer might be substituted in the roome of the word of promise kneeling should not be enjoyned nor urged more precisely at that bit of prayer then at other prayers Yea it is superstition to urge kneeling at one prayer more strictly then at another and absurd in my judgement to enjoyne it at all in any They may as well enjoyne any man to lift up his eyes to knock on his breast to bow the head or crouch as to kneel as they doe in the popish service which hath made it the more ridiculous for kneeling lifting up of the hands or eyes knocking on the breast are naturall expressions and adumbrations of the inward motions of the soule and proceed ex abundantia interni affectu as saith Chamier and therefore ought not to be extorted by injunctions for that were to command men to play the hypocrits and like comedians to counterfite outward signes of such inward motions as perhaps are not in them so vehement as to stir them up voluntarily to such expressions Yea some of them may serve for ejaculations as the lifting up of the eyes to knock on the breast and to bow the head which bowing is finished in one instant saith L. All undecent and unseemly gesture in prayer ought to bee forbidden but no gesture ought to bee commanded in speciall but left free Fiftly that prayer above mentioned is but a short ejaculation and sooner ended then the Communicant can addresse himself to his knees Sixtly that prayer or short wish is ended before the Minister offer the bread to the Communicant and bid him take it and yet the Communicant is enjoined to continue still upon his knees Nor is kneeling enjoined to them by statute or their service book in regard of mentall prayer for none such is enjoined what suppose kneeling were enjoined in respect of prayer also for if also or principallie for reverence of the Sacrament it is sufficient for our purpose for to adore any other thing but God or with God are both idolatrous Master Paybodie saith Concerning prayer I do freely confesse that in as much as it is but an occasion and not the principall exercise of the soule whither it be mentall or vocall in the sacrament all busiâ—esse I do neither deeme it the principall respect of lawfull kneeling neither have I reason to deeme it the principall respect upon which the Church enjoyneth it And againe Suppose there bee no prayer used in the time of receaving I think never the worse of the gesture of kneeling No wonder hee say so for hee layeth down a ground that any of the gestures may be used in any part of Gods worship
we may kneel before the elements having them in our sight or object to our senses as ordinarie meanes signes and memorial to stirre us up to worship God and our Saviour pag. 88. 92. what fault were there then to lift them up to be seene Seeing then they kneel before such a signifying object and are tyed to kneel the signification of the object doth not help but rather be wrayeth that they give that respect unto it as by it to transmit the outward signe of worship mediatly to the thing signified or to God which L. confesseth to bee idolatrie hypocrisie and a mixture of worship and yet this is at the least their worship For if they used them onely as active objects to stirre them up they would not kneel before them in the meane time more then when they are stirred up by the word or works of God by a toad an asse or a flee And therefore it is not to the purpose that he so often harpeth upon the use of stirring and moving D. B. saith plainly That objectum à quo significativè is medium per quod a means by which and that by the sacrament they tender adoration to God Doctour Mortoun saith The adoration is relativâ— from the signe to Christ. If it be from the signe it must first be carried to the signe as a meane of conveyance unto Christ saith Doctour Ames in his reply But D. L. in his solutions saith there is a great difference between images which are the inventions of men and the workes of God and the sacraments But say we in the case of adoration there is no difference If the historicall use of images be lawfull as some now maintaine quid obstat praesentia imaginis saith Vazquez what doth hinder you at the sight of a crucifix to fall downe before it and worship Crist. And if the use of images to this end be forbidden so are also the creatures Wee esteeme more indeed of the workes of God then of the workmanship of man Wee owe reverence at the hearing of the word decent and comely usage in the participation of the sacrament which we owe not to images howbeit this reverent use be not properly a spece of adoration Gods word and workes are ordained by God for our instruction and so are not images But God never ordained them to this end that in them by them or before them we should adore him or any other thing wee are put in remembrance of by them They are not commanded to be used either in or out of the time of divine service in modo statu accomodato ad adorationem Wee may and do use the word and sacraments for meanes occasions instruments to stirre us up to worship God but it followeth not that wee should or may worship God by kneeling before them The generall Councell holden at Constantinople anno 750. in condemning images speaking by the way of this sacrament hath these words Ecce igitur vivificantis illius corporis imaginem totam panis scilicet substantiam quam mandavit apponi ne scilicet humana effigie figuraâ—a idololatria intro duceretur Behold therefore the whole or only image of that quickning body the substance of bread which he commanded to be set before them least if it had a humane shape idolatrie might have beene brought in The brazâ—n serpent was set up upon a pole that these who were stinged with the firie serpents looking upon it might be cured Yet saith Vazquez God commanded them to looke upon it standing upright without any adoration or signe of submission The people of God had their sacraments yet they kneeled not before them nor yet heard they the word either read or exponed kneeling When they heard the law of the passeover they bowed not their head howbeit it might bee finished in an instant saith L. and farre lesse kneeled but after they had heard Gods workes are the booke of nature to teach us many things concerning God But wee must not therefore fall downe before the sunne or moone every green tree an asse a toad when they worke at the sight of them upon our mindes and move us to consider Gods goodnesse wisedome power For then wee should fall into the horrible errour of Vazquez who doubted not to averre that not onely an image or any holy thing may be worshipped in the same adoration with God but also any thing in the world the sunne the moone the stirres a stock a stone a straw Doctour Lindsey in his solutions to shunne this absurditie saith To bow downe when we have seene the workes of God when we have heard the word and when we receave the sacraments to adorâ— him when by his workes the word and sacraments we are taught to adore is neither to bow downe to an idol nor to worship God in an idol He durst not say When we see the workes of God when wee heare the word of God as he should have done if he would have showen the difference betwixt the word of God the workes of God and images Nor yet doth he say When we have receaved the sacrament as he said of the other two When we have seene the workes of God when wee have heard the word of God But now hee affirmeth boldly that we may bow our knees to God before his creatures if wee use them onely as meanes and instruments to stirre us up to worship God pag. 94. That this errour grounded upon the significant object may be the better perceaved consider that the booke of nature is like the booke of grace If I were reading and meditating upon a passage of scripture I am then considering what is read When I have ended that worke if I finde my selfe moved to pray or give thankes I pore not still with the eyes of my body and my minde upon the booke but turne my selfe to a wall or a chaire or a bed or any other thing casually placed before me yea perhaps before the booke it selfe but casually as before any other thing I am not then gathering leassons or instructions for that exercise is ended So when I am beholding a tree an asse or toad and considering in them the goodnesse power and wisedome of God I am reading upon the booke of nature I am contemplating and gathering profitable instructions I cannot still be contemplating and in the meane time adore kneeling in prayer or praise for that were a confusion of holy exercises Nor yet after my contemplation and preparatorie worke for worship is ended must I tie or set my selfe before that asse to â—d or tree to kneel for then I should kneel for a greater respect to that creature then to any other beside for the time before which I might have kneeled casually without respect And so the moving object shall participat of the externall adoration my kneeling being convoyed by it to God to whom it is directed by my spirit or affection as Vazquez hath descrived the
out of the hand of the minister not out of Christs owne hand Multum interest inter actionem Filii Dei perse per ministrum Illa enim est actio immediatè producta à divino supposito ista ab humano Bellarm. de Missa lil 2. cap. 4. Yea the Apostles at the first supper adored not on their knees when Christ himselfe ministred the sacrament howbeit upon occasion and at other times they adored not did they adore God the Father upon their knees for the benefite they were receaving The inward benefite Christs body and bloud are receaved by the soule not by the body by the godly only not by all that receave the sacrament by faith embracing Christ present by his spirit in the soul. The godly under the law receaved the same gift the same spirituall food and drink and yet kneeled not The D. pag. 113. saith that in the law they had but the shadow of the gift a popish speach whereas the Apostle saith the same food If the clearer revelation make the difference which is without ground or reason then adoration is not in respect of the gift The godly take eat and drinke Christs body and bloud by the act of faith and beleeving Now the act of faith or beleeving is not an act of adoration as the schoolmen acknowledge nor is it expressed outwardly by kneeling In a 〈◊〉 fidei non potest apprehendi aliqua submissionis nota propria religionis exhibenda ipsi excellentie Dei sicut nec ratio sacrificii aut laudis saith Vazquez Never man yet adored upon his knees if his principall work was actuall beleeving desire Christ short ejaculations of the soule and the acts of other graces concurre as concomitants to remove impediments that faith may put forth its act with greater strength which is the principall worke of the soule in the act of receaving the elements All dispositions which are required unto right receaving can not distinctly and solemnely bee expressed at the same time by outward gestures except wee would use divers gestures together saith P. 195. The principall therefore must be considered Next wee receave eat and drinke Christs body and bloud as soone as we are effectually called and beginne to beleeve and as oft as we heare the promises of the Gospell read and exponed and doe beleeve Christs body is as farre absent from us at the receaving of the sacrament as at the hearing of the word The symbols when they are added to the word while the mystâ—râ—s are celebrated I doubt not saiâ—h Pâ—ter Martyre serve very much for assurance for thâ—y sâ—ale the promise tamen illa Christi nobis praesentiam magis constituere quam verba aut promissiones constanter pernego That is but that they make Christ more present to us then the word and sacraments doe I utterly denie The Formalist speaketh as if Christs body were present in the sacrament or as if wee had never receaved Christs body till wee receaved this sacrament or never but when we receave this sacrament Whereas Augustine saith There is no doubt but every one of the faithfull is made partaker of the body and bloud of Christ when in baptisme he is made a member of Christ as ye may see in Gratians decree Againe he saith Credere in eum hoc est panem vivum manducare to beleeve in him is to eat the living bread The glosse saith Christ is eaten spiritually by faith without the sacrament We are united with Christ and made members of his body before we come to this sacrament and doe not receave his body of new at every communion as if wee had lost it since the former and yet there is but one body receaved at all the times The celebration of the Lords supper is not a new institution of the testament but a repetition of the same This sacramâ—â—◠〈◊〉 authentike instrument of the testament and as of as it â—s ministred the same authentike instrument is 〈◊〉 over â—gain See this illustration in Bellarmine and â—â—â—anus Wee are said then to take eat drinke Christs body and bloud at every celebration of the holy supper because wee put forth our faith in act at that time and renewing the act of faith wee take eat and drink by beleeving that same body and bloud which before our faith being strengthened by the outward signes and seales to that end and so grow in faith and by faith in union with Christ The holy mysteries do not beginne saith Jewel but rather continue and confirme this incorporation Whitaker saith Familiarâ—â— loquendi modus est ut fieri dicatur quod factum obsignaâ—ur That is It is a familiar kinde of speaking to saâ—â— that thing is in doing which being already done is sealed and confirmed Thirdly the manner or forme of receaving a 〈…〉 be answerable to the manner of the offering the nâ—ture of the gift and the will of the giver If a King call his nobles to a banket it is his will that they sit at table David and Jonathan sate at table with King Saul as you may see 1 Sam 20. Such as were called the Kings friends or companions for the originall word signifieth as well the one as the other Sociuâ— â—s amicus I take to have sitten ordinarily with Kings as Zabud 1 King 4. 5. and Hushaâ— the Archite who is called 2 Sam. 15. 37. Davids friend and 1 Chron. 27. 33. by the same translaters the Kings companion Such an one was Daniel to the Babyloniah Emperour as the Apocrypha historie of Susanna reporteth cap. 14. 1. To this Christ alludeth Joh. 15. 15. when he saith to his disciples at table Hence forth I call you not servants but I have called you friends Abraham for his faith was called Gods friend Jam. 2. 23. By the same reason all the faithfull are preferred to this dignity As wee are friends and fellow-heires with Christ so hath hee instituted this holy feast the onely feast in the Christian Church to assure us of our preferment and fellowship with him Howsoever then otherwise and at other occasions wee behave our selves as supplicants we are now according to our Lords will and pleasure to observe that externall forme of a feast which he hath left to his Church and to act thereat in our outward carriage the persons of guests and friends And therefore howbeit the inviter be a great person the manner of invitation is familiar and our not acceptance the more offensive Chrysostome declaiming against such as were present and did not approach to communicate saith The King table is here the King himselfe is present Why standeth thou yawning If thy garments be cleane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sit downe and participat In the English booke of common prayer there is an exhortation to bee made to the people when they are negligent to come to the table where we have these words Ye know how grievous and unkinde a thing it is when a man hath prepared a rich
the rubrick of confirmation in the booke of Common prayer as Parker hath well observed In that rubrik it is said That confirmation is ministred unto them that are baptized that by imposition of hands and prayer they may receave strength aâ—d defence against all tentations to sinne and the assaults of the world and the devill Bellarmine maketh imposition of hands and prayer but one sensible signe in confirmation howbeit the Papists have no right imposition of hands Master Hutton saith that imposition of hands is one of the externall meanes by which the holy Ghost is given and howbeit that prayer hath the chiefe force yet imposition of hands hath some also otherwise saith hee what needed Peter and John to have travelled to Samaria they might have prayed in Jerusalem for the holy Ghost to the Samaritans Downame likewise saith that grace is conferred to the baptized for confirmation by imposition of hands In the prayer after the laying on of hands wee have these words Wee make our humble supplication unto the for these children upon whom after the example of the Apostles wee have laid our hands to certifie them by this signe of thy favour and gratious goodnesse towards them Ye see then they make imposition of hands a certifying signe of Gods favour and a meane whereby grace and strength against tentations and assaults is conferred Is it not then made a sacrament derogatorie from baptisme and the Lords supper as if by baptisme we were not certified of Gods favour and entred not to Gods armie as well as his family Our Christian valour and courage to resist the devill and professe the truth is a fruit of that regeneration and sanctification which is sealed to us in baptisme Let him be a athema who saith that baptisme is given to the remission of sinnes and not also to the help of grace Concilium Melevitanâ—m Is not the Lords supper a confirmation of our faith and often cel brated for that end Because the example of the Apostles is alledged wee answer that imposition of hands mentioned Act. 8. was extraordinarie The Apostles by imposition of hands might conferre the gifts of tongues prophesying healing which Philip the Evangelist had not and therefore Peter and John were sent to Samaria for that end For they had need of some to prophesie and to have the Gospell in these times confirmed to them by such wonders The effects of this imposition of hands were sensible to these that were present And therefore Simon Magus would have bought with money that gift which the Apostles had Strength against tentations is a grace invisible and given onely to the faithfull whereas the gifts of tongues prophesying healing might have beene given to the unregenerat The bishop of Spalato saith That the imposition of the Apostles hands was but temporarie and for a sensible effect which was to cease and that it was not a stable and constant sacrament of the Church nor was it properly sacramentall The confession of Wittenberg hath the like saying Of a temporall and personall fact of the Apostles a generall and perpetuall sacrament cannâ—t be ordained in the Christian Church without the speciall command of God And so saith Suarez also in 3. tom 3. disput 33. sect 4. Their laying on of hands then in imitation of this extraordinarie example of the Apostles is apish As for that imposition of hands mentioned Heb. 6. 1. I will let passe the different interpretation of Divines who thinke some that it was that extraordinary whereof wee have made last mention others that it is that which was used in ordination of ministers I will give that it was an ordinarie laying on of hands upon the faithfull But as it is joyned with baptisme in that place so it seemeth to be that imposition of hands which was used in the end of baptisme when the minister prayed for persons baptized that the Lord would increase and continue his graces with them The Apostle there opponeth the doctrine of the beginning that is the catatheticall doctrine of repentance from dead workes faith resurrection from the dead and eternall judgement to the doctrine of perfection The converted Jewes and Gentiles behooved to be catechised in these grounds sufficiently and tried before they could be baptized and have hands laid upon them These were called Catechument till the time of their baptisme Others apply it to the children of the faithfull and thinke that when they come to age and were fit for the communion they were after triall in the grounds of religion admitted with imposition of hands into the societie of communicants in ecclesiam adultorum as Paraeus calleth them But wee finde that imposition of hands was used after as a ceremonie in the end of baptisme even in the baptizing of infants Yet this laying on of hands upon the baptized was as Augustine saith gestus orantis the behaviour of him that prayed for or blessed any particular person a gesture used both under the old and new testament As ye may see when Jacob blessed the sonnes of Joseph Genes 48. when Moses laid hands upon Josua Num. 27 Such as had power laid hands on these that were to bee admitted to an office in the Church Acts 6. 1 Tim. 4. The teachers and prophets at Antioch upon Paul and Barnabus when they were separated for the worke to which the Lord called them Act. 13. Yea the elders who were admitted to be Counsellers in the great Synedrion and the Rabbins who were promoved to their degree of Doctourship were admitted and promoved with imposition of hands So it was used in actions both civill and religious and in religious it served to be an indicant signe of the particular person whom they were to pray for or blesse For when they were to blesse or pray for moe they lifted up their hands Levit. 9. 22. Luke 24. 10. See also Drusius If it was only the gesture of him that prayed according to the forme of the Jewes and did neither signifie nor seal the grace which was prayed for it could not bee a sacrament Bellarmine acknowledgeth that the imposition of hands at the receaving of penitents which was called Impositio manuum reconciliatoria was not a consecration imprinting a character but a ceremonie furthering prayer or a prayer upon the person If it was no more at there-entrie it was nothing els in the entrie Seeing imposition of hands was but the gesture of him that prayed it might have beene either used or omitted which our Doctour pag. 98. confesseth And should be omitted say we seeing it hath beene so abused as to make it a sacrament without precept or institution and without a promise Farther seeing it is but a gesture of prayer it may be re-iterat if it were in use Manus autem impositio non sicut baptismus repeti non potest quid enim est aliud quà m oratio super hominem saith Augustine In the Catechisme before confirmation
it is said That there are but two sacraments generally necessarie to salvation What then So will the Papists confesse that confirmation is not necessarie to salvation otherwise they would minister it to the baptized at the point of death The English booke ordaineth that the childe shall be brought to the bishop by one that shall be his god-father or that every childe may have a witnesse of his confirmation This the Papists observe in their confirmation Thus also is a token that of old that which is now called Confirmation was but an appendicle or closure of baptisme from which being afterward separated it must not want the god-fathers it had when it was the appendicle of baptisme In the prayer before the laying on of hands they pray that the childe may be strengthened with the holy Ghost the Comforter The Papists say the Comforter promised by Christ was bestowed in the sacrament of confirmation The Papists say that in confirmation they receave the sevenfold grace of the holy spirit wisedome counsell strength knowledge understansting godlinesse feare They crave the like in the prayer before the laying on of hands But what suppose confirm 〈…〉 sacrament may not every pastour minister it It appertaineth to the captaine say they to take up the roll of the souldiers and furnish them with armour the shephard should marke his owne heep c. As if every minister were not a captaine in the Lords armie and a sheep-hard feeding the flock concreded unto him Bonaventure confesseth such similies force not but institution only maketh necessitie Our first reason then against them is the want of institution or exemple in scripture that bishops had this charge and not presbyters We now suppone only not grant that there were such office bearers in the Church Peter and John were sent to Samaria not only to lay on hands but to advance the worke begunnely Philip. Durandus saith it is not clear whither they laid on 〈◊〉 as bishops or as presbyters Augustine 〈…〉 is the authour of that booke entituled Quest veteris novi testamenti saith they did it as priests But the truth is they did it neither as bishops or priests and therefore neither the one nor the other succeeded unto them in it For it was extraordinarie and extraordinarie effects followed it The second reason bishops and presbyters as themselves confesse are equall in the power of order If the power be equall who can hinder them to put it in execution Hath Christ given them a power which they may not exercise Suarez the Jesuit saith If presbyters have sufficient power by vertue of their ordination to minister this sacrament it were no reason that they should be wholy hindered What God hath instituted the Church cannot inhibit saith Tilenus If presbyters had not had that power by vertue of their ordination neither Pope nor bishop might give them commission or licence to doe it saith Spalato But so it is that by dispensation of licence from the Pope the Papists grant they may Our third reason presbyters may impose hands in ordination of ministers therefore they â—ay also in confirmation So reasoneth Armachanus Our fourth reason they may celebrate and minister the Lords supper therfore they may doe this also So reasoneth the authour of that epistle ad Rusticum Narbonensem Our opposits are forced to confesse that this is not proper to bishops by vertue of their office but reserved to them for the dignitie of it Hierome saith that this was reserved to them not by necessitie of any law but for the honour of their priesthood Yet not in all places but multis in locis The authour of that epistle to Rusticus saith it was the custome in the orient in Illyricum in Italie in Africa and in all places in the Apostles time that presbyters did confirme In the decretals it is said that simple priests at Constantinople according to the custome did minister the sacrament of confirmation Turrianus reporteth that the Grecians reprove the Latines because they inhibit the priests to annoint the foreheads with chrisme as yee may see in Suarez The bishop of Spalato complaineth that bishops are so rigid that they will not permit the parish priests to confirme the rather because they come seldome to visite their parishes and thinketh howbeit they refuse the priests may as for himselfe he might have suffered the priests in his diocie confirme but he gave them not that libertie because he saw no necessitie of such a ceremonie and that it was not worthie the name of a sacrament If there were any moment in it should the bishops honour or lordly bishoping bee-preferred to the utilitie of it for the people Hierome saith If the holy Ghost should come downe only at the prayer of the bishop these were to bee lamented who in prisons or castels or farre places being baptized by priests and deacons die before the bishop visit them If it were a matter of moment saith Master Calvin wherefore doe bishops suffer so many halfe Christians in their diocies They betray by a tacite confession that it is not a matter of such moment as they pretend Beda is plaine that confirmation as also many other things was not permitted to priests for the arrogâ—ncie of bishops â—althasav Lydius saith It was untolerable superstit on that the priest might anoint the breast and the shoulder but it behoved all to abstaine from the forehead except only the bishop Seeing this subject is already treated upon at large in another worke and both the sacrament it selfe and the bishop who callengeth it as proper to himselfe are bastards I will in fast longer upon this point In their book of commâ—â— prayer it is required that these who are to bee confirmed bee able to answer the quâ—stions of a little catecatâ—â—me that with their own mouth and consent they may â—atifie and confirm openly before the church what the godfathers and godmothers promise in their name and promise to endeavour to observe and keep such things as by their own confession they have assented unto Is not this plain mocking of God to require publick profession before the Church of children who cannot give a serious confession of their faith howbeit they can utter some few words of a short catechisme like parrets They require that they bee of a perfect age but that is not observed or else by perfite age they meane onely years of discretion as they call them in the same place that is when they come to the use of reason that they can discern somewhat betweene good and evill or as Hackwell interpreteth when reason beginneth to break up Is this a fit time for publick profession of their faith or to make them capable and fit for the Communion whereof notwithstanding they do not partake many years after Eucerus in his censure censureth sharply this pretext of catechising M. Parker telleth us that for all