and it may be easily inferred that if it be lawful to set days apart for humbling themselves before God with sasting and prayer without any particular divine Commandment it must needs also be lawful where there is sufficient occasion to appoint the like for the Service of God with Religious praise and thanksgiving with joy and gladness of heart 5. They had also the Feast of Purim established by the Letters of Mordecai Esth 9.21 when the Jews ordained and took upon themselves to do after this writing vers 27. after which Esther and Mordecai wrote with all authority to confirm these days of Purim vers 29.31 and it is expresly declared that the Decree of Esther confirmed these matters of Purim vers 32. The Feast of Dedication was appointed by Judas Maccabaeus and his Brethren and the Children of Israel 1 Mac. 4.59 to be observed annually for eight days in remembrance of the cleansing of the Temple from the profanations of Antiochus and the restoring the liberty of the performing the Service of God therein and at this Feast was our blessed Saviour himself present at the Temple Joh 10.22 23. And that the Feast of Dedication was that Feast appointed by Judas Maccabaeus though some ancient Christian Writers did otherwise interpret it is proved by Junius Buxtorf but especially and very largely and fully by Mr. Selden De Syned l. 3. c. 13. Sect. 7. c. Ibid. Sect. 12. Divers other Feasts are mentioned in the various Jewish Kalendars as may be seen in Scaliger and in that Kalendar exhibited by Mr. Selden which I shall not insist upon Yet it may be considered that Scasiger divideth the Jewish Feasts into the Legalia or Feasts appointed by Gods Law and Politica or such as were established by their own consent and that those of this last sort were some of them appointed before the time of Fsdras and some after of both which he undertaketh to give particular instances De Emend Temp. l. 7. and it is thought by Mr. Thorndike that the Feast of the Wood-offering expressed in the Jewish Kalendars Of Religious Assemblies c. 8. is referred unto in Neb. 10.34 and Chap. 13.31 both which places speak of the Wood-offering at the time appointed But the instances above mentioned are sufficient to manifest that it was lawful under the time of the Jewish Church to appoint days of Religious Solemnity to be annually observed though they were not enjoyned by any divine Institution Wherefore I forbear to insist upon the seven days feast which Solomon kept before the Lord immediately before the Feast of Tabernacles 1 King 8.65 2 Chron. 7.9 10. and of the seven days feast in the time of Hezekiah added to the seven days of unleavened bread 2 Chron. 30.23 Now it seemeth very reasonable that Christians whose mercies from God are greater than the Jewish Church enjoyed should also make use both of weekly and other set times for the Service of God it being prophesied of the Gentile Church under the Gospel Isa 66.23 That from one new Moon to another and from one Sabbath to another shall all flesh come to worship before the Lord. 6. After the Coming of Christ as the Disciples of John fasted oft so our Lord declared that his Disciples should fast after his departure This duty was asterwards practised by the Apostles and enjoyned to all Christians 1 Cor. 7.5 and was in part exercised in the stationary days of the ancient Christians two days in the week And besides other times Eus Hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the time of our Lords passion which Eusebius calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is evidently asserted by him though he misunderstand some words of Philo to have been observed by the Christians in the days of Philo and that is from the time of our Saviours death and to the observation of the Passion time those words of Tertulli in do manifestly refer notwithstanding the divers conjecture of learned men where he declareth the Christians appointing jejuniis Parasceven Advers Psye c. 14. Cont. Cets l. 8. and what Origen writeth of their observing the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which probably includeth more than a single day 7. There is abundant testimony also of other solemn days of Religious joy besides the Lords days to have been observed Tert. de Idol c. 14. among which Tertullian mentioneth the whole fifty days from Easter to Whitsontide with which he saith no Religious Solemnity of the Gnetiles could compare and Origen undertaketh to justifie the Festivals of the Christian Church at Easter time and Whitsontide Orig. Ibid. and such like besides the Lords days not to be contained under the Apostles censure upon the Galatians for their observation of days and times And before their time the observation of some annieversary remembrance of eminent Martyrs is expressed in the Martyrium S. Ignatii published by Bishop Vsher from ancient Manuscripts which he judgeth to have been written by Philo Gaius and others who were present at this Martyrdom who write Manifestavimus vobis diem tempus ut secundum tempus martyrii congregati communicemus althletae glorificantes in ipsiusee merabili sancta memoria Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum To the same purpose are the words of Cyprian Cyp. Ep. 34. n Martyrum passiones dies anniversaria commemoratione celebramus and this is the sense also of Tertullian his oblationes pro defunctis pro natalitiis annua die facimus for both the Phrase and thing of these ancient oblations De Cor. Mil. c. 3. did particularly intend an honourable memorial and Communion with the person And when Eusebius giveth an account of the change of the Empire under Constantine from Heathenism to Christianity he saith they then had great respect to the Lords day De Vit Const l. 4. c. 23. and honoured the days of the Martyrs and celebrated the Festivals received in the Church And I suppose it needeth no proof that the Apostles and Evangelists had the chief place among the Christian Martyrs who were the principal Testisiers of Christ and the particular days wherein a pious remembrance of them was celebrated to the glory of God are frequently mentioned after the end of the third Century and are expressedin Constit Apost l. 8. c. 33. And though the particular Festivals of the Apostles were according to the practice of the Church in several parts of the World celebrated at very different times as may appear by comparing the practice of the Western Church with the Constitution of Alexius Comnemus which concerned the Eastern or Greek Church and with the several Arabick Kalendars two of which are exhibited by Mr. Selden de Syneder l. 3. c. 15. Yet in all these Churches as also in the Syriack as appeareth from the Rubricks for the Lessons on these days in the Syriack Testament and also in the Aethiopick and Egyptian Churches as appeareth from the Computus Aethiopicus De Emend Temp.
Prayer prophesying and singing were frequently thereby performed as is evident from 1. Cor. 14. And I yield it most probable though even Protestant Writers do herein differ that the ancient Roman Jerusalem and Alexandrian Offices were called the Liturgies of S. Peter S. James and S. Mark because of their certain early use in the Churches where they presided though it is not certain that they were composed by them this being mentioned by no ancient Writer of the first Centuries Nor do I doubt but the Liturgy or Anaphora of S. John and that of the twelve Apostles are suppositious which with the former are related by Gabriel Sionita Gab. Sionit de Ritib Maron to be exhibited amongst the Syriack Offices for of these we have no mention in any ancient Ecclesiastical Writer unless the words of Epiphanius Epiph. Haer 79. expressing all the Apostles with S. James the Brother of our Lord to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is chief Dispensers or Stewards of the Christian Mysteries might allowably be racked to speak them all Composers of Liturgical forms Allatius de Liturg. S. Jacob. according to the violence offered to those words by Leo Allatius But if it can yet be proved that at least since the ceasing of the frequent distribution of the miraculous gifts of the Spirit the Church of Christ hath in all Ages used and approved forms this will be as considerable a testimony in behalf of Liturgies as can reasonably be required 9. That forms of Prayer were of use in the Church about 1300 years since is acknowledged by them who plead most against them from Conc. Laod. c. 18.3 Carth. c. 23. and Conc. Mil. c. 12. and that they have continued from that time downward cannot be denied In the fourth Century there is frequent mention in some parcels of Liturgy in the Writings of the Fathers and there are so many testimonies that S. Chrysostom S. Ambrose and S. Basil were framers of Liturgies that I do not see how any can rationally doubt of the truth thereof But that these Liturgies have undergone divers alterations in succeeding Ages is both apparent and is very reasonable to be imagined And he who shall compare the Greek Copy of S. Basils Liturgy with the Syriack or its version both which are represented together by Cassander Cassand Liturgie will find them so vastly different from each other that he must either conclude great alterations to have passed upon them or that they never were originally the same But from these I shall now look back into the more early times of the Christian Church where for the most part I shall only briefly mention the testimonies which have been fully produced by others 10. It is not probable Euseb de Laud. Constant autemed that Constantine the Emperour would have composed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 godly Prayers for the use of his Souldiers if such forms had not then been used in the Christian Church De Vit. Const l. 4. c. 19 20. Eusebius accounting this an admirable thing that the Emperour should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a teacher of the words of Prayer But Eusebius in another place giving a particular account of some expressions suited to the Souldiery in those set forms of Prayer which he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the constituted Prayers doth a little before that declare Constantines own practice that he would take Books into his hands either for contemplating the holy Scriptures or for the expressing with his Court 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prayers that were constituted and appointed and this Eusebius there calleth his ordering his Court 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the manner of the Church of God and this is a manifest evidence of forms in the Christian Church in his time Orig. Hom. 11. in Jerom Cont. Celsum l. 6. Origen manifestly citeth a piece of the usual Liturgy an hundred years before Constantine saying Frequenter in oratione dicimus Da omnipotens da nobis partem cum prophetis c. We frequently say in our Prayers Give O Almighty God give us a part with the Prophets c. and in his Books against Celsus he declareth Christians to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers which were ordained or constituted S. Cyp. de Orat. Dom. Cyprian sufficiently intimateth the use of some forms in the Carthaginian service in his time by describing the entrance or beginning thereof the Priest saying sursum corda lift up your hearts and the people answering Habemus ad Dominum We lift them up unto the Lord. And the that considereth that Tertullian plainly intimateth a form of abrenunciation in Baptism De Cor. Mil. c. 3. and that they had set Hymns then appointed for particular times and hours upon their stationary days Albasp Observ l. 1 c. 16. as Albaspinus interpreteth him Adv. Psych c. 13. will think it not improbable that what he mentioneth of the particular heads of Prayer in the usual Assemblies of the Christians should have reference to some constant forms by them used Tert. Ap. c. 39. and their use is favoured by the expressions of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Justin Martyr and Ignatius And many have thought V. Dr. Hammond in 1. Tim. 2.1 that the Apostle had a special eye to the composure of such forms of Prayer agreeably to what the Baptist and our Saviour prescribed to their Disciples in commanding Timothy the Governour of the Church that among the things which concerned his behaviour in the Church of God Ch. 3.15 first of all prayers intercessions supplications and giving of thanks be made for all men c. For though the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may either signifie that Prayers be put up to God or that they be composed in this place it may well intend both And it is thought by S. Augustine Aug. Ep. 59. that these various words of the Apostle Prayers Supplications Intercessions and giving of thanks did direct to a comprehensive fulness of all such Prayers in the fixed models of the publick service of the Church when the Communion was administred and that the publick offices of the Church were accordingly composed De Vocat Gentium l. 1. c. 4. and the same sense is also favoured by Prosper 11. Since the reformation the Saxon and other Lutheran Churches have their Liturgies the Bohemian had its Liber Ritualis and the Palatinate it s Agenda as Vrsin stileth it by which the right order of its publick administrations Vrsin Praef. in Apolog. Catechis might be vindicated from the Calumnies of detractors And the Churches of France Holland and others have their forms for the publick service of God And after the Order at Geneva had established a form of publick service for the Lords day with some appearance of a liberty of variation which some relate not to have been so manifest in their practice as in their rule which was Dominico die mane
l. 7. and Computus Copticus in Scaliger they did not only allow and observe such days as lawful but they appointed and owned them as conducing to the honour and advancement of Christianity being piously and religiously used 8. Amongst the Protestants the Bohaemian Church Rat. Disc c. 3. and those of the Augustane Confession are very much agreeable to us in the observation of Festivals Conf. Boh. c. 15. Conf. Aug. c. 15. Conf. Helv. c. 24. and their approbation of these days not only as lawful but as useful and requisite is contained in their publick Confessions and the Church of Switzerland alloweth several such days with a Maximopere approbamus and the Dutch Church observe the Nativity of Christ and some other Festivals as appeareth from their Canons ratified by the Synod of Dort Indeed the Church of Geneva and that of Scotland which from 1560. till 1617. did herein follow it did not admit of any of these days but this was so little pleasing to Calvin the most eminent Minister of Geneva that he writing concerning the day of our Lords Nativity which was not there celebrated saith Calo Ep. Hallero Sancte testari possum I can in a sacred manner proiest that this thing was transacted when I neither knew of it nor had any such desire and he further declared that it was his endeavour that it might have been there observed Wherefore the laying aside all these days was even in his eyes the defect and blemish but not the perfection and bâ—â—â—ty of that Church 9. Besides all these arguments from authority to prove the allowableness of Festival days for Religious exerciss it may be considered that if it be both lawful and good when we have received some eminent mercy from God to set some hours or some particular day apart to praise and magnifie the goodness of God there is the same or greater reason to give allowance to the observation of these stated Christian Festivals For I think no man can deny that not only the benefits flowing from the great actions of our Saviour but even the advantages accruing to us from the Apostles and Evangelists by their faithful preaching the Gospel of Christ and giving testimony to his Doctrine and continuing stedfast therein unto the death is to us more valuable and advantageous than any temporal benefit whatsoever because our enjoying the knowledge of Christ and being Christians which is the fruit of the Apostles and Evangelists making known the Gospel to the World is a greater priviledge than any outward advantage in the World And the benefit of holy exercises and of being employed in glorifying God is so excellent that the use of particular times appointed for that purpose ought not be rejected by pious men though some men do abuse those means which they should emprove 10. But it is here objected that the fourth Commandment saith six days shall thou work and S. Paul blameth the Galatians for observing days and times and months and years Concerning which places waving divers other things which might be answered 1. Let the Objectors consider whether themselves would be willing to admit this to be the sense of either of these Texts That it is not lawful to set apart any day of the Week either for praying fasting or for praise and thanksgiving if this sense be allowed they must then condemn not only the instances abovementioned both of Jewish and Christian practice but they must also deny them that liberty which the prophet Joel commanded them to exercise Joel 2.15 sanctisy a Fast call a solemn Assembly and thereby render Gods command of none effect but if this sense of these Scriptures ought not to be admitted then cannot the Religious observation of Festival days be thereby condemned 2. These words six days shalt thou labour never were to the Jews a Precept of such an unlimited and unbounded sense as to admit of no other use of any day but in labour Indeed isoth idleness and negligence were here condemned and those days allowed and appointed for labour in this restrained sense or with this exception Vnless some reasonable and accountable occasion require the contrary The reason of this restrained sense will appear necessary because the solemn days of Gods appontment under the Jewish State ought to be observed even upon any of those six days though they required strict rest as the day of atonement did and because it was also lawful upon a providential occasion to employ a day in voluntary mourning for a sick or dead friend 2 Sam. 3.31 33 35. Ch. 12.16 17 or in rejoicing for the Circumcision of a Child or such like cause and it must be still acknowledged lawful for a Child Servant or Subject to employ a day upon the command of his Father Master or Soveraign in attendance upon their persons much more might the Jews keep a Fast or observe a Feast when Esther required and signal providence directed them thereto August Conc. Adimant c. 16. 3. The observing days and times condemned Gal. 4.10 concerneth wholly the Jewish solemnities as S. Aug. and S. Hierome observe and the scope of the place demonstrateth the observing which is opposite to Christianity Hier. in Loc. Thus he who keepeth the Jewish Sabbath out of Conscience to the Moisaical Law doth so far oppose Christianity and return to Judaism this being a shadow of good things to come Col. 2.16 17 and is condemned by S. Paul but he who Christianly observeth the Lords-day acteth for the advancement of Christianity and the honour of Christ and is not in this place blamed by the Apostle And so he who observeth the new Moons out of respect to the Law standeth charged with Judaizing but he who setteth apart any day for Christian exercises acteth as becometh a Christian for as he is the best Christian who is most frequently exercised in these practices so he cannot be blamed who especially upon some days engageth himself to these duties So that the difference between our observeing the Christian Festivals and the Jewish is answerable to the difference between Judaism and Christianity 11. As to that Objection against the observation of the days of the Annunciation or the Conception of our Saviour the Nativity Passion and Ascension of our Lord that these days are at least the less allowable because the Lords day is particularly appointed for the worship of God and the honourable memorial of the great undertaking and actions of our Saviour it may be sufficient to observe 1. That this argument seemeth equally to oppose the setting apart any other Portion of time besides the Lords day to be purposely and particularly employed for the Religious worship of God which would greatly prejudice the exercise of Religion or at least the insisting upon this objection will not allow Christians to engage themselves to glorifie God for Jesus Christ and to admire the grace of Christ upon any other day because this would require some other time to be
designed for these Religious actions 2. That though the Jewish Sabbath had a peculiar respect to their deliverance from Egypt Deut. 5.15 Yet for that mercy which was far inferiour to what Christians enjoy by Christ they observed also other yearly solemnities especially the great Feasts of the Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles Wherefore though the observation of the Lords day as it is one day in seven encludeth a testimony that we worship God the Creator who made the World in six days and rested the seventh and as it is the first day of the Week it containeth a a professed owning and honouring of Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour who accomplished his humiliation and began his exaltation on that day yet this doth by no means exclude the lawful use of any other time directed either by voluntary choice or Ecclesiastical or political laws for the advantage of piety in the worship of God and the more solemn observance of those great actions of our blessed Lord which ought evermore to be had in remembrance CHAP. V. Of the particular Offices in the Liturgy SECT I. Of the direction for Communicants receiveing the Lords Supper 1. THE first particular office according to the order of the Book is that for the Communion at the end of which the Rubrick requiring every Parishioner to communicate at least three times in the year is disliked because many persons may not be duly qualified to receive Presbyt Excep p. 21. and therefore this Rubrick was desired either to be left out or to be altered to this sense that the Communion should be thrice in the year administred if there be a convenient number to receive Now because this exception is thought considerable whereas indeed the Rubrick is herein not only justifiable but very commendable I shall endeavour to clear this whole matter by these considerations 2. Cons 1. To receive the holy Communion is a very great Christian duty and cannot be neglected without grievous sin and the displeasure of God This may appear by observing that God strictly required all his Sacramental Institutions to be received when he appointed Circumcision he declareth concerning the uncircumcised Manchild that that Soul should be cut of from his people he hath broken my Covenant Gen. 17.14 When he ordered the use of the Pass-over he said the man that is clean and not in a journey and forbeareth to keep the Passover the same soul shall be cut off from his people because he brought not the Offring of the Lord in his appointed season that man shall bear his sin Num. 9.13 and even this person who was unclean was bound to keep the Passover in the next following month Num. 9.10 11. Under the New Testament those words Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God are by the general testimony of Antiquity to be understood concerning Baptism and the Pharisees are condemned for rejecting the Counsel of God against themselves being not baptized of John Luk. 7.30 Now the reason why God was so greatly offended at the neglect of these Sacraments is expressed to be because he accounted this to be a disowning or dis-esteeming his Covenant of which his Sacraments were a sign and seal Gen. 17.14 and because Gods appointment and institution therein was not obeyed Num. 9.13 Luk. 7.30 Wherefore because the Lords Supper doth exhibit the New Testament in the blood of Christ and the partaking thereof is particularly commanded by Christ it must upon the same reasons be as evil and dangerous to neglect this Sacrament as those other And if it be further considered that this is a special Ordinance of eminent Christian profession shewing forth the Lords 〈◊〉 till he come 1. Cor. 11.26 and exhibiting the Communion of the body and blood of Christ the right partaking of this Ordinance must needs be concluded to be a principal action and service of Christianity whether we consider the duty performed or the benefits which may be thereby received 3. If the practice of the Apostolical and Primitive Church be consulted the three thousand converted on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost was given Act. 2.42 did all continue stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of Bread and Prayer And the receiving the Communion was esteemed so high a part of the Christian service in their publick Assemblies Act. 20.7 that their assembling was called their coming together to break bread Conc. Ant. c. 2. The Council of Antioch determined them to be cast out of the Church who were present at the reading of the Scriptures but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a disorderly manner went away and received not the Eucharist Can. Ap. 9. and the same was decreed in the Canons of the Apostles and much to the same purpose in other Councils which as that of Antioch were embraced as part of the Code of the Universal Church Agreeably hereunto it was Ignatius his desire for the Ephesians Ign. Ep. ad Ephes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they all of them jointly and every one of them particularly should meet together and partake of the same bread Among the Protestant Churches Syn. Petricor Sect. 5. 1587. the Polonian Synod consisting of members who owned three distinct confessions did unanimously declare that all Pastors ought to teach and accustom their auditors that as oft as the Lords Table is prepared in the publick Assemblies for the faithful they should not neglect every one of them to come unto it And the vehement expressions in the Geneva Catechism and in Bucers Censura against them who neglect to come to the Lords Supper might be here added with other testimonies of the same nature Only it must be here observed that Non-Conformity hath run its changes at such a variance as if both the extreams were to be preferred to the middle way The Author of the Admonition esteemed this direction for the Communicants receiveing to be too large T. C. Reply p. 117. and that too much was done in directing them to Communicate but both Mr. Cartwright the chief opposer of the Liturgy in Queen Elizabeths time Alt. Damasc c. 10. p. 727 728 and the Author of the Altare Damascenum who was the most violent censurer thereof in King James his time thought that too little was done herein for both of them would have all who are in the Churches Communion forced even by civil punishments saith the former and statis temporibus omnes adigendi sunt saith the latter to receive the Lords Supper and both of them condemn them who abstain from the Lords Table out of fear as guilty of superstition and that they ought not to be born with But now again the Chanel is altered and the stream is returned to the other side But by the invariable rule of the will of God which is an unerring guide it is the duty of all Christians to attend upon
them but even to urge them to approve and allow what is really sinful and is rightly so esteemed by them 20. But the main objection to be here considered is that S. Paul Rom. 14.1 c. commandeth to receive them who are weak in the Faith but not to doubtful disputations Commiss Papers p. 70. and alloweth no judging or despising one another for eating or not eating meats and for observing or not observing days and hence it is urged that no such things indifferent ought to be imposed but to be made the matter of mutual forbearance Now it must be granted that Christian Charity requireth a hearty and tender respect to be had to every truly conscientious person so far as it may consist with the more general interest of the Church of God yet it is manifest that the Apostle is not in this Chapter treating about and therefore not against the rules of order in the service of God But in order to a right understanding of this place I shall note three things 21. First that these directions given by the Apostle in the beginning of this Chapter so far as they give allowance to the different practices therein mentioned have a peculiar respect to those times only of the first dawning of Christianity when most of the Jews who believed in Christ did as yet zealously retain the Mosaical Rites abstaining from certain meats as judging them unlawful and unclean Rom. 14.2 14. and observing Jewish days and times out of a peculiar esteem for them v. 5. and yet this for a time was in this Chapter allowed and indulged by the Apostle But afterwards the Rules and Canons of the Church severely condemned all Christians whether of Jews or Gentiles August Ep. 19. Conc. Gangr c. 2. Conc. Laod. c. 29. who observed the Mosaical Law and the Rites and distinction of meats contained therein out of Conscience thereunto yea S. Paul himself vehemently condemned the Galatians who were Gentiles for observing such distinctions of days out of Conscience to the Law Gal. 4.10 11. and passeth the like censure upon the Colossians who distinguished meats upon the same account Col. 2.20 21 22. Wherefore we must further observe that in the Apostles times and according to the Rules they delivered to the Church The Gentile Christians were in these things with others prohibited the observation of the Law of Moses and its Ceremonies though many of them as the Galatians and Colossians were prone to judge this to be their necessary duty Act. 21.25 Gal. 5.2 The Jews among the Gentiles who did not yet understand that the Law of Moses was abrogated were allowed to observe its Rites and to practise according to the Jewish Customs Act. 21.21 24. Gal. 2.12 13. Act. 16.3 But the Jews who lived in Judea and S. Paul himself when he was there were obliged or enjoined to observe the Mosaical Rites though they were satisfied that the binding power of the Law was abrogated Act. 21.24 Gal. 2.12 Now in these different practices allowed determined and ordered by the directions and rules given by the Apostles as temporary provisions for the several sorts or different Churches of Christians the Apostle requireth the Romans to receive and not to judge one another 22. 2. When the Apostle commandeth them to receive them who are weak in the Faith he thereby intendeth that they ought to be owned judged as Christians notwithstanding these different Observations v. 1. And when he commandeth that he that eateth should not despise him that eateth not and that he that eateth not should not judge him that cateth v. 3. he forbiddeth the weaker Jews to condemn the other Jews or Gentiles as if they were not possessed with the fear of God because they observed not the Law of Moses and prohibiteth those others from despising or disowning these weaker Jews as not having embraced Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 3. signifying here so to despise as withal to reject and disclaim as Mar. 9.12 Act. 4.11 1 Cor. 1.28 because they observed the Rites of Judaism And to this sense are manifestly designed the Apostles Arguments whereby he enforceth these Precepts V. 3. For God hath received him v. 4. to his own Master he standeth or falleth for God is able to make him stand v. 6. he acteth with Conscience to God and v. 10. Why dost thou judge thy Brother or why dost thou set at naught thy Brother We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ So that the main design of this part of this Chapter is this To condemn them who press their own practices or judgments in things unnecessary as being the essential and necessary points of Religion and Christianity and thereupon do undertake to censure all those who differ from them in such lesser things as having no true Religion or inward relation to or Communion with Jesus Christ though they live never so conscientiously and act according to the best apprehensions they can attain Aug. Exp. prop. 78. ad Rom. To this purpose S. Austen expounded these words Non ferre audeamus sententiam de alieno corde quod non videmus Beza in Loc. and Beza saith upon them Rudes non debent ut extra salutis spem positi damnari And this which is the true intent and scope of the Apostle in that place doth in no wise impugn the use of Ecclesiastical Authority in appointing what is orderly and expedient about things indifferent but he will by no means allow that lesser things should be esteemed the main matters of Religion and Christianity to which purpose he layeth down that excellent Rule in v. 17. The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost 23. 3. The considering the Apostolical practice in making Decrees at the Council of Jerusalem in S. Pauls setting orderly bounds to the use of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit in the Church of Corinth or limiting the exercise thereof to avoid confusion and his not allowing S. Peter Barnabas and other Jews to practise without controul what agreed with their present apprehensions under those circumstances but was the way to disadvantage the peace and welfare of the Church and his giving commands for order and decency with things of like nature do evidence that it is a great misunderstanding of the Apostles Doctrine in this place to conceive that he condemneth the establishing useful rules for the order and edification of the Church though they do not always comply with every particular persons apprehension 24. But if it be further objected that if those things may be commanded or enjoined which some persons though through mistake judge unlawful either they must practise against their own judgments which would be sinful or their being conscientious will be their disadvantage which is not desireable To which I answer 1. That if in some particular things certain persons through meer mistake accompanied with humility and designs of peace should judge things
execution of discipline which I have in the former Section noted to be hindred in the effects thereof and not helped by divisions and separations is desireable and would be advantageous to the Church Yet here we must observe 1. That some mens rigour would make the rules of Communion overstrict and severe which was the ground of the Schism of the Novatians and Donatists and as some have anciently related of the Meletians also and it is not desireable that the Churches authority should be acted by such heats 2. That real defects in this particular though they are not to be approved of are no sufficient ground for separation since such blemishes were mixed with the beauty of the Apostolical Churches themselves as is manifest from almost all the Apostolical Epistles and particularly from the first Epistle to the Corinthians in which divers miscarriages were taxed and yet unity was strictly commanded and dividing severely rebuked Yea this very discourse at sometimes will not owne P. 126. that this thing solely of it self is sufficient to justifie a separation and the Congregational Churches in England in the Declaration of their Faith and order affirmed Of Institution and Order of Churches Sect. 21. the Church-members upon offences taken by them having performed their duty private admonition and relating it to the Church ought not to disturb any Church-order or absent themselves from the publick assemblies or the administration of any ordinances upon that pretence but to wait upon Christ in the further proceeding of the Church 19. Last Plea Another thing only touched in that discourse but which is the main ground of mis-apprehensin is that there is saith he no Evangelical obligation to local or external Comunion P. 256 257. with any particular or parochial Church of this Nation because every man may relinquish it by removing his habitation which plea floweth from want of a right sense of the Church Catholick For every Christians obligation to keep Communion with the Church is founded in his being visibly a member of Christs body which includeth his visible fellowship with the whole Church which he entreth upon by Baptism and from hence he standeth obliged to communicate with that regular fixed part of this Church where he resideth and from which he hath no warrantable or necessary cause of separation In this respect our Parochial Assemblies are of like nature with the Jewish Synagogal Assemblies unto which they were not obliged by any special Synagogal-Covenant but partly from Gods general command of their assembling themselves together and partly from their Religious profession and circumcision engaging them to Communion with the whole Church of the Jews and thereby to their Synagogal-Communion Hereupon under that dispensation it was the practice of our Blessed Saviour whose example should not be over-looked by us to attend upon these Synagogal Assemblies and the Religious worship of God celebrated therein as appears Luk. 4.16 At Nazareth where he had been brought up as his custom was he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day 20. And can it enter into the heart of any Christian to imagine that the holy Apostles who in their travells could not be fixed in any particular Congregation did not stand bound by the duty of Christian Vnity to join themselves in Communion with the particular fixed Churches or Assemblies of Christians where they came as S. Peter at Antioch S. Paul at Jerusalem and divers other places though such Churches were founded by some of the other Apostles And upon this account of the Vnity of the body of Christ the Primitive Christians when they went abroad into other Regions and distant parts of the World did with a Religious care seek the Communion of the Churches where they came and not to make separate Assemblies Yea this is a thing so far acknowledged by our English Independants themselves though they can talk at another rate where it serves their interest that in their publick Confession of Faith at the Savoy they say Conf. Ch. 27. Sect. 2. All Saints are bound to maintain an holy fellowship and Communion in the worship of God which communion though especially to be exercised by them in the relations wherein they stand whether of Families or Churches yet as God affordeth opportunity it is to be extended to all those who in every place call upon the name of the Lord Jesus 21. But the conditions required in any particular fixed Christian Assembly embracing the Christian Faith and Worship in the place of our residence to make it our duty upon the account of the Christian Vnity to join therein are these two 1. That our communicating therein doth not oblige us to join in any action or profession which is sinful This is acknowledged on all hands and needeth no further proof because the Christians duty of keeping in Communion with Christ himself doth require it 2. That the Assembly we join in doth not maintain an unwarrantable separation from the Communion of the established Church for here to join in Communion is to join in separation and is like Barnabas and the other Jews joining with S. Peter Gal. 2.14 who all walked contrary to the truth of the Gospel in withdrawing from the Communion of the Gentiles at Antioch and the communicating with such a separating Assembly would be a breach of that Apostolical command of avoiding them who cause divisions Rom. 16.17 And we may observe that the joining in needless separations being a sin against the commands of Christ which require Christian Unity and Communion can not be warranted by any authority upon earth because that authority can not dispense with the commands of Christ but ought to be subject to them and therefore as S. Peter's practice and countenance Theod. Hift. l. 4. c. 22. Aug. Ep. 166. did not excuse Barnablas and the other Jews so neither could the indulgence of Valons the Emperour or his Predecessor execuse the different Sects by them tolerated from being guilty of Schism and the breach of Christian duty in their divisions and separations 22. Another notion of Schism there is A fourth Notion of Schism which condemneth separation where ever Communion is lawful but assumeth that whereever any thing unlawful or strongly suspected Mr. H. Tract of Schism p. 2 5 8. is required in order to Communion there to hold Communion would be to join in conspiracy and separation is then both lawful and necessary Concerning which notion granting that separation is necessary where any thing unlawful is required in order to Communion I can not admit for truth that if any thing suspected be so required separation becometh lawful thereby For if by suspected be meant whatsoever the person who maketh the separation doth suspect as evil by this rule he who through carelessness of enquiry or prejudice and want of Charity is needlâ—sly suspicious about any form of service or way of Church-Administrations will be allowed to separate and to be therein free from
direct others Now I suppose they who object this place would not from hence infer that in the publick Prayers of the Church there was no Minister who expressed the words of Prayer with which the rest joined in affection This is indeed most properly to pray sine monitore but this could not be practised in publick Prayers save only in the use of a known form in which they should all conspire with one heart and voice and according to this sense in which it is most fairly understood if it be referred to the publick Prayers of the Church this place is a considerable testimony for the use of set forms 6. But it seemeth to me very probable which I leave to the consideration of others that these words peculiarly concern the Stationary days of the ancient Church These days were the fourth and sixth days of the Week in which the Christians attended the publick Assemblies of the Church Albasp Obs l. 1. obs 16. beginning very early in the Morning and continuing till three a Clock in the Afternoon and these were accounted the chief days of Christian supplication and humiliation and the observance of them was esteemed the most effectual means to obtain Gods blessing and favour On these days besides their joining in publick Prayers which Tertullian intimateth to be performed about the hours of nine twelve and three a considerable portion of the days was allotted for their exercising themselves in private Prayers and inward and fervent supplications humbly performed upon their knees with fasting and tears in the place of publick Assemblies with regard to what was needful either to themselves in particular or to the publick welfare of the Church or Empire Of the ordinary use of these retired but solemn supplications and devotions in the Christian Church there are as I suppose divers sufficient testimonies 7. Tertullian who in his Book De Oratione De Orat. c. 13. hath peculiar respect to their Stationary days speaketh hereof Quid amplius referunt isti qui clarius adorant nisi quod proximis obstrepant imo prodendo petitiones suas quid minus faciunt quam si in publico orent Cyp. de Orat. Dom. v. Pamel in Cyprianum And S. Cyprian requireth them who are gathered together in the Assemblies with the brethren and do celebrate divine Sacrifices with Gods Priest that they would avoid indigested and tumultuous speaking and setteth before them the example of Hannah who prayed not by loud petition sed tacite modeste intra ipsas pectoris latebras precabatur That there were such Prayers used in the Jewish Church appeareth from the example of Hannah and of the Pharisee and Publican To understand this Phrase of Tertullian concerning such Prayers in the Christian Churches is most agreeable to the literal sense of these words sine monitore quia de pectore and to zephyrus thus paraphrasing upon it We do not conceive Prayers dictated by a Priest but all the Christian Assembly as if we all conspired together to express our desires with sighs and groans out of the very seat of our minds and spirit So that he understandeth this place of that inflamed devotion kindled from a fervency of inward heat which needed not the help of the wind without to blow it up or of those active desires which received not their efficacy from the breath or voice of another but from the inward motions of the soul 8. After these are produced the Council of Laodicea Can. 18.3 Conc. Carth. c. 23. and Conc. Milev c. 12. as if they gave the original to set forms of Prayer when they only established some sanctions concerning them The Laodicean Canon enjoineth the use of these services Morning and Evening The Canon of Carthage in one part of it requireth that quascunque sibi preces aliquis describit whatsoever Prayers any one shall transcribe for himself he shall not use them till he hath conferred with the understanding brethren Now tramcribing properly here intended supposeth a form and care is taken by this Canon that no Copy for the publick use of the Church which could then be only had by transcribing should be received until it was carefully examined V. Medes Christian Sacr. Sec. 3. The other part of that Canonrequireth that at the Communion where Christs offering up himself to the Father is commemorated their Prayers should always be directed to the Father This doth not suppose that there were no forms then in use but might well be intended either to put a stop to what was then entring or to regulate what was amiss in any of their set forms especially considering that in the vast territories of the Carthaginian jurisdiction various forms of Prayer were about that time used some of which were composed by Hereticks as is evident from S. Augustin Cont. Don. l. 6. c. 25. who was a member of that Council The Canon of Milevis declareth against the use of any other forms than those established by the Council but we may as well conclude from our Act of Vniformity as from any of these Councils that it gave the first Original to forms of Prayer because they are thereby established And thus having viewed these chief objections I may well conclude that the evidence for the great antiquity of set forms remaineth inviolable 9. The argument against the lawfulness of set forms because they limit the use of gifts needeth not much consideration since it is manifest that by the will of God bounds and limits were to be set even to the use of the extraordinary gifts of Gods spirit that the Church might be edifyed 1 Cor. 14.26 27 28 30 33. Whereas now no such miraculous emanation of the Holy Ghost can be pretended nor doth the establishing a form for the publick Offices of the Church deny the liberty in due place of using other Prayers according to the practice of our and the ancient Church 10. It is further objected that forms of Prayer are disadvantageous to piety and devotion and the Non-Conformists oft plead experience as a testimony that they are the cause of much deadness in mens spirits and the hindrance of the lively exercise of Religion Here on the other hand others by experience assert the advantage of set forms to promote devotion when attended without prejudice and with a Religious design of joining in Gods worship To discern the truth in this difference it may be useful to consult the judgment of such persons as are least partial in this Case and yet are able to make a true estimate of damage or advantage and then especially to consider the evidence of reason which may be produced 11. The Leyden Professors declare concerning set forms Synopl Purior Theol. Disp 36. Sect. 33. non tantum licitas sed valde uâ—â—les esse contendimus We defend against any persons that they are not only lawful but exceedingly advantageous and this they assert not only because every Christian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers upon
Dionysius of Alexandria speaketh of a Communicant in his Church Eus Hist Eccl. l. 7. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may properly render it standing at the Lords Table and the testimony of Justin Martyr above produced giveth a very probable intimation of the same gesture But when as the ancient Churches had two stationary days in a Week that is the sourth and sixth days with which the seventh day was also joined at Caesaria as is manifest from S. Basil upon which the holy Communion was administred it is probable Basil Ep. ad Caesariam that as upon those days they prayed kneeling so they did in the same gesture receive this Sacrament in attendance upon which they thought an humble gesture of adoration to be very suitable this Sacrament being accounted by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the dreadful mysteries 5. Albasp Obs l. 1. Obs 15. Indeed Albaspinus undertaketh to assert without any proof that the chief reason why anciently they stood in their Prayers upon the Lords days and the Pentecost was because upon those days they received the holy Communion and it was requisite they should use none other than a gesture of Joy upon that day in which they communicated in that Sacrament But besides the improbability of supposing daily Communions where we have no testimony thereof from Easter to Whitsunday this observation is very plainly contradicted by Albaspinus himself in his very next observation Obs 16. where he declareth that the Eucharist was constantly celebrated upon the stationary days and yet upon those days he yieldeth that the ancient Christians did pray kneeling Conc. Trul. c. 90. and this his conjecture is also contrary to what is asserted by the sixth general Council by Zonaras and Balsamon upon the twentieth Council of Nice and by S. Hierom Austen Hieron Prooem in lib. 1. Com. in Eph. Basil and other Fathers who unanimously assert that their joyfulness to the wonder of the Gentiles for the Resurrection of Christ and their professing themselves to be risen with him and to expect resurrection by him was the cause of their standing gesture at those times in their Religious Prayers But that the most humble gesture was not thought inconsistent with the Eucharist may appear Gr. Nazianz Orat. in Gorgon Besides the testimonies above produced from what Gregory Nazianzen relateth of his Sister Gorgonia who privately fell down prostrate before the Altar with the Sacrament in her hand 6. Wherefore kneeling at the holy Sacrament or receiving it in a gesture of Prayer and Religious Worship unto God was no way disallowed as unlawful by the Primitive Church but our practice herein is but a building upon their Foundations who themselves used a gesture of Adoration or the same gesture with that of Prayer 7. Obj. 4. Kneeling is a gesture which hath been grosly abused by the Papists in worshipping the Host according to their Doctrine of Transubstantiation and to that end it was enjoined by Honorius the third Ans 1. NO sinful use of any gesture though it be in the most manifest idolatry doth render that gesture unlawful in Religious service to God as was shewed in the former Chapter Though the Israelites sate down to eat and drink when they had offered Sacrifices to the golden Calf Ex. 32.6 it was still allowable in the days of Samuel to sit down to feast upon the Sacrifices of God 1 Sam. 9.13 22. And though the discumbing or reclining gesture was anciently used in Idolatrous Feasts Amos 2.8 Ezek 23.41 and so continued in some places very common till the times of Christ being designed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit or rather discumb in the Idols Temple 1. Cor. 8.10 Conc. Ancyr Can. 51 and for some hundred years after as appears from the Council of Ancyra yet Christ himself made use of this gesture at the Jewish Passover according to the Custom and Canons of the Jewish Church 8. Ans 2. Though it be true that many Papists but not all do receive and adore the Host kneeling yet the Decree of Honorius so oft insisted upon is herein mistaken and misapplyed That Decree commandeth that the people cum elevatur hostia salutaris se reverenter inclinet Decret Greg. Lib. 3. Tit. 41. c. 10. idem faciens cum eam deferat Presbyter ad infirmum which words speak not the gesture of communicating or at the time of receiving the Sacrament but only concerns their behaviour as spectators when the Host immediately after the Consecration is elevated or when it is carried abroad to the sick And though the old Gloss supposeth that kneeling was thereby at such times enjoined which the practice of many in that Communion cannot admit Espencaeus a more learned man than the Author of the Gloss Espencaeus De Adorat Euch. l. 2. c. 16. accounteth that Decree rather to prohibit kneeling and to direct as the words se reverenter inclinet may import a standing gesture with expression of reverence And Espencaeus telleth us in the same place that in 1555. the kneeling gesture had not obtained in the Church of Lyons and that when some endeavoured to obtrude it upon that Metropolis a stop was put to their proceeding by the Royal Authority and in the same place in that Book purposely written for the adoration of the Sacrament he declareth that it is not much material in what gesture it is performed whether sitting standing lying or kneeling 9. Ans 3. They who will lay aside all gestures grosly abused must upon the same account reject all those which are in this Sacrament ordinarily received in the Protestant Churches both standing and sitting as well as kneeling That standing was a gesture used in the Romish adoration of the Host by many of the ordinary sort of Papists is evident from Espencaeus now cited Sacr. Cerem lib. 1. Sect. 2. Cap. 1. f. 22. And if he who is elected Pope be not Bishop or Priest at his Priestly Ordination he receiveth the Sacrament standing for then as their Book of Ceremonies informs us Ordinator communicat electo stanti in ipso cornu de corpore sanguine Christi Ibid. c. 2. f. 28. and the same gesture is used by him at his Episcopal Ordination Communionem sumet sub utraque specie stans c. and as this is the gesture of the Pope in that great solemnity of the Popes being invested with his Papal dignity V. Durand Rat. l. 4. c. 54. n. 45. so upon the great Mass upon Christmas day if the Pope himself celebrate the Mass the Deacon who attendeth upon him receiveth it at the Popes hand in a standing gesture Diaconus slans inclinato capite ex ejus manibus de Corpore Christi communicat Ibid. Lib. 2. Sect. 1. Cap. 14. calamo slans sanguinis partem sugit and in the same gesture the consicient Priest usually receiveth 10. Sacerdotal Par. 1. Tract 4. c. 35. But because sitting is most