gouerne the church the King the Realmes nay Iesus himselfe If obiection be made that the most Reuerend Arch Bishop Cranmer the Right Reuerend Bishop Ridley Father Latimer and other learned and Holy Martyrs were burned into ashes for their constant profession of the doctrine and discipline of this reformed Church Answeare must be made that the Holy Mother Geneua hath better doctrine and discipline then Cranmer Ridley and Latimer ever knew The doctrine and displine of faithfull Geneua are all substance they are all gold Oh if that Religion were here administred euery presbyter shall be greater than a Monarch and euery Iustice of peace aboue the Presbyter And were not this an Excellent Reformation when the Children of the Church her Subordinate Members shal be made such Transcendent Princes A daring phantastique superstition The Honour of Iesus exalted farre aboue all Heauens must be nullified to make Schismaticall Puritans Kings Imperious Holines See a strange wonder here is Lucifer-like pride in deede The Deuills were cast out of Heauen Esay 14. 14. for their pride because they would not belieue in the Sonne of God the Confirming Mediator of Angells so the Schoolemen And shall sly Professors then be spared seeing they will not Bow at the name of Iesus which is a signe that they doe not belieue in the Redeeming Sauiour If a Lawieâ— shall industriously write against the law is it credible that He is a Religious Obseruer or a lawfull Professor of the law Where is the good Conscience the Necessary Subiect of the higher Powers mentioned at Rom. 13. 5 This stands at the Barre and alleageth Gods Heauenly law All knees shall bow at the name of Iesus and t is baffled with an Outery A Reformation A Reformation To bow at the name of Iesus is Superstition To bow at the name of Iesus is Superstition The good Conscience desireth a pacificall dispute but the violence of aspiring Spirites will not endure to feare the truth therefore I desire the Christian Reader to obserue the plea of a good conscience Thus The tie of Gods law and of the Kings lawes deriu'd from Gods is Obligatory to binde all good Subiects vnto Obedience First the text binds all Christians in faith to belieue and in manners to Bow at the name of Iesus which I haue proou'd at handling this Question Whether Bowing at the name of Iesus be a duty of the text To second the text our dread Souereigne Lord the King hath foure lawes to humble his Subiects in faith and manners to Bow at the name of Iesus The first is the 20th article of our Reformed faith which is the Authority of the Church to ordaine Rites and Ceremonies whereof Bowing at the name of Iesus is one though it be commanded by God originally yet in application to reforme Non-conformists t is the Churches Canon Then by the Doctrine of our Reformed faith T is plaine that we must bow at the name of Iesus Because our Church-Authority hath decreed this Bowing as you see according to scripture The second is the 34 Article which is the Traditions of the Church and bowing at the name of Iesus being vniversal is more necessary then those being particular and express'd thus Whosoeuer through his priuate Iudgment willingly and purposely doth openly breake the traditions of the Church c. ought to be rebuked openly that others may feare to doe the like as he that offendeth against the Common order of the Church and woundeth the Conscience of the weake Brethren Then t is plaine by the testimony of Orthodoxe faith that all must bow at the name of Iesus Sub paenâ publicae redargutionis vnder paine of open Rebuke The third law is the 6th Canon of our Church The words are these Whosoever shall here-after affirme that the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England by law Established are wicked Anti-Christian or superstitious or such as being Commanded by lawfull Authority men who are Zealously and godlily affected may not with any good conscience approue them vse them or as occasion requireth subscribe vnto them let him be excommunicated ipso sacto and not restored vntill he repents and publiquely revokes such his wicked errors Then by vertue of this Canon he that writes against Bowing at the name of Iesus should be taught better manners He should be deliuered to Satan by his Diocesan for to tame his fleshly and diuision-making faction in the Church to teach him and his priuate friends Canonicall obedience And t is very good reason so to doe for transgressing the 18th Canon which is the 4. law The words are these When in time of Diuine seruice the Lord Iesus shal be mentioned due and lowly Reverence shal be done by all persons present as it hath beene accustomed Testifying by these outward Ceremonies and Gestures their inward Humility Christian Resolution and due acknowledgment that the Lord Iesus Christ the True and Eternall sonne of God is the only Sauiour of the world in whom alone all the mercies Gracâ—s aâ—d promises of God to mankind for this life and the life to Come are fully and wholy Comprisâ—d And then is not he very worthily excommunicated that scornes to Bow at the name of Iesus sâ—ing the finâ—ll end thereof is to testify his Humble Cristianly Râ—solute aâ—d due acknowledgement of his faith that the Lord Iesus is the Sauing King of the Catholique Church And is this Christian Reader Idolatry to be cried downâ— To Bow at the name of Iesus is Idolatry To Bow at the name of Iesus is Idolatry Is this Religious Bowing to bee bâ—fled with an outery A Reformation A Reformation Vnreasonable Aniâ—als Wilfull Gainesaying Humonsts He that peremptorily and impenitently teacheth against this Revâ—rend Honorable Bowing at the name of Iesus â—oâ—es not the Lord Iesus and St. Paulâ— would haue such an obâ—â—inate sinner rewarded according to his great stomackâ— Thus If any man Loue not the Lord Iesus let him be Anathema Maranâ—atha 1. Cor 16. 22. Lâ—t him be accursed with a bitter curse with the Greater Excommunication I must not say that M. Prinâ—s heart doth not â—oâ—e the Lord Iesus only God is the sâ—archer out and the dâ—â—ceâ—ning 〈◊〉 of the secret court of conscâ—encâ— But t is very certâ—ine tâ—â—t M. â—rinns daring phansy hath most vnsuffâ—rably dishoâ—oâ—red the exalted the most honoured and the most gloriâ—â—s naâ—â— of Iesus His Appendix â—s wiâ—tnesse which is a contradictorious suppose Ignoratio Elenchi a â—aâ—e supposaâ—â—â— That bowing at the name of Iesus is nothing His suppositious prooffes to defend this Erroneous despightfull Hypothesis are two Thus bowing at the name of Iesus is neither a duty of the text nor an arbitrary harmelesse and decent Ceremonie If you will see Mr Prinne in full view of his colours you must obserue these foure questions First whether bowing at the name of Iesus be some thing Secondly whether bowing at the name of Iesus be a duty according to the letter of Phil. 2. 10 3ly whether bowing at
Read or write still they are the same letters And then seeing that one not more learned than a writing Boy nay then a Reading or spelling child can assure the doubting Questionist that there are no more no fewer and that only These are the letters of Philip. 2. 10. how dares a Professor be so bold as to say that to bow at the name of Iesus is not a duty of the Text according to the letter After the substance of the letter examine the signification of these words whether Iesus signifies any person else at Philip. 2. but the Lord Iesus not Ioshua who is called Iesus only twise in the new Testament once at Acts 7. 45. and once at Heb. 4. 8. Nor doth this Iesus a literall personall name signifie Iustus who is called Iesus Coloss 4. 11. And as for Iesus the sonne of Iosedecke Agge 1. 1. he is not read in the new Testament nor is Iesus the sonne of Sirach in any text of the Gospells or Epistles So here is no ambiguity for t is perspicuous not is here any error for t is Certaine that the Lord Iesus is only Iesus written read and vnderstood at Philip. 2. It is manifest that this is true by Mr Prinnes Quotations by these Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian St Cyprian loco 10 20 30. St Hilarie loco 10 Greg. Nyssen loco 20 St Ambrose loco 10 20 30 c. St Cyrill of Alexandria loco 10 Fulgentius loco 20 and Iohn the 2 Pope Therefore let no man doubt but that only the Lord Iesus is literally this proper personall name Iesus written at Philip. 2. The 2. word in the text is knee Euery knee at which Mr Prinne doth stumble The letters are visible enough in his owne English Bible for substance one and the same for number all equall with these EVERY KNEE and for posture not dislocated And what kind of knees all creatures haue this is not written in the letter expressely litterally but those knees which the creatures haue they shall bow and they shall bow every one their owne knees and that without proxies for every knee sayth the text shall bow all Angelicall all infernall and all corporeall knees The knees of things in Heauen of things in the Earth of things vnder the Earth St Paule writes here true literall divinitie Mr Prinne will grante this of all tongues in Heauen because they shall all confesse that Iesus is the Lord For it is the tongue that confesseth and so he may say as truly that Angells other spirits haue knees for the same Author hath iustified it in one and the same Philip. 2. The 3. word is bowing which Calvin calls externall adoration in vs at Philip. 2. we must glorify God in our Bodie and spirit 1. Cor. 6. for that end He bought vs with the price of his vnvaluable life Calvin sayth that now in this life we must bow at the name of Iesus not only inwardly but outwardly in his Commmentaries on Isay 45. Rom. 14. Philip. 2. the same say Musculus Aretius Bullinger Marlorat Zanchius c. And rather at the name of Iesus than at any other name of God because God in his 2. person named Iesus only humbled himselfe and died the death even the death of the crosse A good Lecturer may finde this divinity in the very letter of Philip 2. Must all knees bow at the name of Iesus Must all knees Then I pray you obserue with me hence this Doctrine All Christian knees in the Militant Church must bow at the name of Iesus Is this true doctrine All knees must bow But when Then when they must honour Iesus And now is a time and appoynted by the Lord to worship Psal 95. no worship neither inward nor outward God by scripture hath denyed to be given to Iesus God hath not said that we must worship him only at the last day The Prophet Isaiah hath not writ it nor St Paule but the letter of the text is expresse that he hath allready merited all Honour and that every knee shall therefore bow at the name of Iesus And is the time of our Christian life too sodaine a time as that now we must not worship him The 24. Elders haue proclaimed the contrary Reuel 5. Obserue this vse Did Iesus die for vs What Did Iesus die the death of the Crosse was Iesus so cruelly so despightfully so disdainfully handled for his Church Then in time of divine service let Iesus haue giuen to him knee hat for a free will offering nay more Giue him heart and soule and body euen all Decent well order'd honour Iesus thought that his life was not too much to saue miserable sinners and therefore 't is an odious ingratitude to denie him knee-honour at the time of holy worship seing by his promise he is in the midst of them that are gathered togeather in his name Iesus to praise and magnifie him for all blessings conferr'd on his People But Master Prinne never thought of this and therefore he disputes as followeth Obiection To bow in the name of Iesus is not to bow at the name of Iesus But the letter of the text is euery knee shall bow in the name of Iesus Thus all the Fathers hereafter quoted Thus all the Translations but Bezas Thus all the Expositors on this Epistle but those who follow Beza Thus all our English Translations but Geneuas which is Beza translated The new translation is In the name of Iesus so all ancient English writers who quote this scripture Solution 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The praeposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies in or at so Petrus Gillius Albiensis Grammer learning doth teach thus much And t is very rationall and as vulgar as true In Grammar we say in a place or at a place In a bill or a bond Mr Seriuener writes in or at the dwelling house of c. at in or on the 25. of March which shall be in An. Dom c. Thus in and at a place in at a time are promiscuously vsed So speaking of the time when Iesus is repeated to put vs in remēbrance of bowing at his name we doe truly and properiy say In the time or at the time of divine service when Iesus is mentioned every knee shall bow The 18th Canon is the same in sence according to either of the acceptions At Michaelmas Terme and in or at some other terme all Lawiers will follow their owne vocation and not continue bold and ignorant Immodalists in expounding Philip. 2. and other scriptures But howsoeuer remember that in Michaelmas terme or at Michaelmas terme aut eo circiter I thus answeard a lawier translated into a Pastor or Dr. of the Church that in a place and at a place in a time at a time are not formally differing expositions But stay Mr Prinne is in another error he saith that all the Fathers write in the name of Iesus every knee shall bow But
yet this is not true Christo Iesu Domino nostro c. omne genu curuetur so Irenaeus l. 1. c. 2. adversus Haereses pag. 51. Every knee must bow to Iesus Christ oâ—r Lord. Donatur Iesu vt Caelestia terrestria inferna genua Electant so S. Hilary l. 9. de Trinitate pag. 135. God gaue Iesus this honour that all knees in heauen earth hell should bow to him But yet let Puritans bow in the name of God in the name of Iesus if they will follow the Fathers any expositors but Beza and his followers Let them bow in the name of Iesus who doth hinder them Beza translates at the name of Iesus Iunius and Tremellius in the name of Iesus These traÌ„slations are quiet enough in the same testament A Schismatique cannot make them differ St. Hieromes translation is in the name of Iesus the translation of S. Chrysostome St Cyril c. Surius Binius and Crabbe in their collection of Councells render the Fathers speaking Every knee shall bow at the name of Iesus The difference is so litle that a Schoole-boy scornes so silly an Argument But what doth not our Church translation the last render every knee shall bow at the name of Iesus Consule Textum Read And doe not our Ancient English writers say at the name of Iesus What say you to Queene Elizabeths 52. Iniunction which saith that our Church hath heretofore beene accustomed to bow at the name of Iesus before that Iniunction was made Doth not Mr Prinne knowe that Bishop Andrews Dr Boyes Mr Hooker are ancient enough to be his Tutors in Divinity O but they are not Non-conformists And shall Non-conformists put downe our Church doctrine and discipline Away rather with such Lawlesse and Headlesse fellowes to Amsterdam or to New-England In the causall sense of these translations in the name and at the name of Iesus it is thus In the name That is in the power and authority of Iesus we bow And hence you may obserue the originall Efficient of bowing to make it a very lawfull bowing At the name of Iesus That is Iesus is Finis cui the all glorious Person for whose honours sake we bow to testifie that he is worthy of all praise Thus the end of bowing at the name of Iesus is to good purpose necessary and noble The authority of Iesus is lawfull therefore bow The honour of Iesus is the greatest honour therefore they that loue his honour will bow at the name of Iesus And are the authority and honour of Iesus nothing among Hypocriticall Outside-conceptists This imperious daring generation doth provoke authority to punish and honour to reject such ignorant coniecturall Divinity Objection The letter doth not signifie the name Iesus but only his power or person For Iesus is the Genitiue Case and the genitiue case denotes only power or person not Iesus his particular name And the text Isay 45. 23. Rom. 14. 11. saith Euery knee shall bow to me Solution To bow to Iesus his name and not to his person no rationall man can be so ignorant How basely doth Mr Prinne iudge of our Church-worship To bow to Iesus his person without a name what is this but to take away his name from his person And take away his name and how then is his person signified or honoured The Iewes did acknowledge Iesus his name with scorne these were open and profess'd enimies They bow'd their knee mock'd him vilified his name and crucified him The Puritans are sly sirs They will say nothing but holinesse they will doe nothing but holinesse they are professed PuritaÌ„s no where but in CoÌ„veÌ„ticles If ChamelioÌ„s had a religion they are such Chainglings then a rationall man may say with safety enough that there are the Puritans They are holy in their owne conceipt They will not bow to IESVS Not to his name nor to his person Grace hath no knees The time of Glory hath knees in every thinge Glory shall bow Grace must be vnreuerend and vnmannerly this is their holinesse Here obserue Mr Prinne that Iesus his name cannot be the Genitiue case Why Only power or the person of Iesus is put in the Genitiue case This is easily to be refelled Thus. In nomine Iesu What part of speech is Iesu A Nowne and a Nowne Substantiue Of what case Of the Genitiue Why Because Iesu is the latter of two Substantiues Nomine is the former Iesus is the person here signified in the Genitiue case this M. Prinne vnderstaÌ„ds But what Nowne else but Iesu signifies this person in the Genitiue case It is against Puritanisme to answere Is it possible if hee did honour the person of Iesus but that thereby hee must honour the name of Iesus For that which is honour'd as the Quo by which Iesus is signified to be honoured is his name Iesus That which is honoured as the Quod as the thinge to be had in all honour by our soules and bodies by our hearts knees this is Iesus his almighty persoÌ„ because he hath deserued more theÌ„ our knee-honour by suffering all disgrace So here is one reason more then Almightinesse why we must bow at Iesus his name More then the reason at Esay 45. 23. Rom. 14. 11. Holy and Reverend is the name of the Lord. Thus the Psalmist But Iesus Quâ Iesus deserued more than by any other Attribute of his is signified For all say that greater is the worke of Redemption restitution saluation than of creation I will tell Mr Prinne one answere more to this argument Because Aristotle saith cap. 2 pag. 4. lib. de Interpretatione that oblique cases are not nownes Yet in a cadency they are nownes though only the nominatiue case be the originall instituted nowne This I haue said because Mr Prinne may remeÌ„ber that he did learne that Sophistry-argumeÌ„t at Oriel Colledg when he was there a Freshman You know the law Thou shalt not take Gods name in vaine You must not say that Gods name is not honourable that it is not to be honoured And is not Iesus God Semper vt Deus a Creaturis Colitur D. Cyril Thesauri lib. 8. pag. 99. The creatures must worship Iesus as God And thus the psalmist psal 98. psal 71. psal 28. psal 19. These are St Cyrills Quotations Obiection The letter of the text is that every knee must bow at that name which is aboue every name But the name Iesus is not aboue every name For it is not aboue these names Mediator Saviour Christ Lord Sonne of God Lambe of God Emmanuel God c. For all these doe signifie Christ so well so properly so really as Iesus doth Solution All these names are the names of Iesus They doe signifie Iesus well and properly Mediator signifies the office of Iesus that he is the only reconciler of God and man Saviour is the interpretation of Iesus Matth. 1. Christ signifies Iesus to be the anoynted of the Lord. Psal 2. Lord signifies Iesus to haue dominion
Iudgment seat that he only is Iudge and therefore we must not Iudge one an other at the 11. vers that we worship him because he is the Lord. And Philip. 2. teacheth the merit of Iesus rewarded How that every kneeshall bow at the name of Iesus Therefore the Church hauing learned her duty that now Iesus is to bee acknowledged to be the King farre aboue all dominion Principality and Power she bowes the knee with all humity and reverence to manifest her bounden duty and to testify that it is Gods command that he be more honoured in the name of Iesus than in any other name of his This is the reason of vayling and bowing the knee at the exalted name Iesus 'T is easy to be deduc'd from Philip 2 and more than at Esay 45. and Rom 14 and therefore wee must bow more than is requir'd by these texts But how that can be see the vncouering of the Head and bowing of the knee not only at praier but at reading and preaching our faith which is in the Lord Iesus Philip 2. teacheth that we must be humble in the practice of grace and how we must be humble That we must bow at the name of Iesus That text teacheth the Philippians that all knees must bow And then ought not that Church and euery Church collect this doctrine That the knees of the Church vniuersall must bow at the name of Iesus Saint Paule did not teach the Philippians that they should not bow till the last day but his words are that they should be presently humble verse the 5. Neither did hee teach them that their knees were Angels knees which doe now bow in Heauen Revel 4 but that all things must bow their owne knees and therefore the militant Church must bow her knees at the name of the Lord Iesus The Diuils doe bow for they haue their bounds which they cannot passe It were answere sufficient to deny that all creatures bow in the same particular or proper way And that they must only bow at the last day the 15 scriptures which M. Prinne hath alleadged doe not proue Rom. 14 6 9 10 11 12. doe not teach that all creatures must only bow at the last day Nor Eph. 1 20 21 22. nor Revel 1 7. nor Revel 5. from ver 8 to the end of the chapter nor Revel 20 11. 12. 13. nor Matth. 28. 18. nor 1 Cor. 15. v. 24 25 27 28. nor Heb. 2. 7 8 nor 1 Pet. 3 22. nor Ioh. 17. 2 nor Acts 10. 36. nor Coloss 1. 17 18. nor 1 Cor. 8 5 6. nor Esay 45 22 23. nor Daniel 7. 14. Not one of these nor any other Scripture saith that the Church and all other creatures must bow at the name of the Lord Iesus only at the last day It is a common saying that a Puritan will not sweare and why he should falsify these 15 Scriptures no man can giue any Godly Christian reason And he hath not only falsified the Scriptures that all creatures shall bow at the name of Iesus only at the last day but also the Fathers and others These Clemens Alexandrinus Irenaeus Tertullian St Cyprian Origen Athanasius St Hilary Theophilus Antiochenus St Basill Nazianzen Greg. Nyssen S. Ambrose St Hierome St Cyrill of Hierusalem St Chrysostome St Augustine Theophilus Alexandrinus Primasius Sedulius Rhemigius Beda Haymo Anselme Theodoret Theophylact Oecumenius Paulus Orosius Leo Chrysologus Fulgentius St Damascen Isidor Hispalensis St Bernard Pope Caius Surius Iohn 2 Pope Synod of Francford vnder Adrian Alexander Alensis Aelredus Aquinas Peter Lombard Gorran Bruno Salmeron Estius Glossa Ordinaria Lyra Calvin Musculus Bullinger Marlorat Zanchius Gualter Olevian Beza Aretius Hyperius Hunnius Tyndall Dr Fulke Mr Cartwright and Dr Airay on Philip. 2. 10. Iunius Ferus Luther Konigstein Sarcerius Avenarius Matthaeus Chrytaeus D. Boyes Cutbert Tonstall B. Babington D. Whitaker Mr Perkins Mr Charke D. Willet here are 80 Authors aut eo circiter And is it not a shamelesse boldnesse to falsify so many a signe of a brasen face of an impudent Scribler He saith that bowing is only at the last day and that bowing at the name of Iesus is subiection but not adoration But Mr Prinnes Authors say that bowing at Philip. 2. is adoration so S. Hierome and Oecumenius in Phil. 2. Omnes hominem simul adorent in Deum assumptum and Primasius hath the same words wee must altogether adore the humanity of Iesus assum'd vnto his Godhead This Bowing is a figure intensae vehementis adorationis of that perfect and earnest adoration when Angells bow to Iesus D. Chrysost hom 32. in 1 Cor. 12. T is follicitae humillimae adorationis indicium Theophilus Alexandrinus in Epist. 2. Pascali in Bibliotheca Patrum 387. Margarinus Bowing c. is a token of a solicitous and most humble praier Adorabunt te in te orabunt so St Cyrill of Alexandria lib. 2. cap. 2. in Hesaiam this bowing is adoration and invocation Humilis subiectio adoratio so Sedulius in Philip t is subiection and adoration A bowing with invocation so Rhemigius In in vocatione nominis Iesu Haymo T is bowing in time of Prayer Evidens signum subiectionis humilitas veneratio so Anselme in Philip. 2. T is an evident signe of subiection humility and worship In hoc nomine deitatis tota adoratur maiestas Chrysologus ser 144. To bow at the name of Iesus is the adoration of the whole Maiesty of God because Iesus is the one and only God therefore wee must bow so Fulgentius in his 10 answere to the Arians obiection T is reverence so Peter Lombard T is reverence or adoration so Thomas Aquinas T is divine worship which by a synecdoche is called bowing with the knee so Salmeron T is the glory of Christians so St Bernard in his ser de passione Domini pag. 57. Obtemperare agnoscere adorare haecomnia genuum flexione hoc loco significantur Sic parte è contraria genua non flectere est aliquem non colere habere Deum Dominum so Avenarius de Christi exaltatione pag. 625. To bow is to obey acknowledge to worship Iesus not to bow is no worship nor hauing him for their Lord God T is reuerence which Angells and men ought to giue c. so Konigstein in Postilla in Dominica Palmarum So then according to the essence of Bowing t is not only subiection to Iesus at the last day Mr Prinnes Authors haue said this though M. Prinne saith that they teach bowing to be nothing but subiection at the last day 2 This bowing is inward and outward worship this St Hieromes notable full place teacheth although M. Prinnes marginall note doth seeme to proue the contrary These are his words Haec spiritualiter exponentes non statim iuxta literam orandi consuetudinem tollimus qua Deum genu posito suppliciter adoramus fixo in terram poplite magis quod ab â—oposcimus impetramus Legimus enim Paulum in littore sic
the text and he hath no explication of the severall kinds of Ceremonies which he ought to haue had for his private friends sake that they might vnderstand how that no ceremony is a duty of the text Certainely a necessary an vniuersall ceremony is a duty of the text as a thing considered bowing at the name of Iesus is both a dutie and Ceremony sed formaliter for seuerall respects as it t is a ceremony t is not a duty as t is a dutie t is non ceremony as you shall learne hereafter He is not only confus'd in handling the name Iesus and in the substance of Appendix but also in his Method Let an vnderstanding man obserue his manner of dispute and hee cannot but affirme that he is altogether vnworthy to teach or to contradict the Learned and Conforming Professors of of our Church His method is neither essentiall nor demonstratiue and then it 's not necessary Ti 's fit that it be knowne what it is It is a Delemma whose two generall parts are grosse mistaks First he chargeth Bishop Andrewes Mr. Adams the Sorbonists and Rhemists that they teach that bowing at the name of Iesus is nothing els but a duty of the text The opposition of the 2 parts doth warrāt me thus to write Then He saith that Zanchius Mr Hooker Dr. Boyes and Mr. Widdowes defend this assertion that bowing at the name of Iesus is but an indifferent innocent harmeles Ceremony yet all these Bishop Andrewes c. Zanchius c. doe teach that bowing at the name of Iesus is both a duty and Ceremony which how this can be he is not able to vnderstand He is so ignorant that he cannot tell whether all things haue their perculiar times Hence it is that he confounds the time of divine seruice with the time of swearing and blaspheming with any sinfull time when Iesus is named He hath not learned the difference betweene a categoricall and an exclusiue sense and therefoer he is not a sham'd to inferre because the Councell of Basil enjoyned Canonicall persons to bowe at the name of Iesus therefore only they did bowe at the name of Iesus He is so wilfull in his opinion that he denies in the despight of the Councell of Nice and Ephesus that either Primitiue Church or any Reformed Church ought to bowe at the name of Iesus He perceiues not that in or at the time when Iesus is named every knee shall bow are promiseuosly read So it seemes that he is not a Grammarian Notwithstanding all this ignorāce he so earnestly disputs as if he would talke him selfe out of breath or else what meanes his zealous Tautologie The argument of Souereignty is disputed six times at handling the meaneing of the text The argument of preferring one name of Iesus before another is repeated 8 times six times in the third question twise in the fourth The Arg of bowing only to the name Iesus and not to the persō is disputed six times The argument of preferring one person of the deity before the other is twise disputed The argument that Iesus is the name only of Incarnatiō c. is disputed 5 times That Iesus is not Iesus to the Deuils c. is disputed at rhe second and third Question That bowing is only Metaphoricall is disputed foure times That Lord is the name aboue every name disputed thrise The metaphoricall sence of bowing he hath separated from the letter of of the text and makes that to be the only manner of bowing at the name of Iesus Philip. 2. 10. But he must Vnderstand that there is a reall bowing and more morall then to be only metaphoricall as it appeares at the end of his arguments answear'd concerning the meaning of the text where he hath confounded an exclusiue with a compar'd sence Thus bowing at the last day c. is the only principall and therefore t' is the only bowing at the name of Iesus hence he hath falsified 15. scriptures many primitiue fathers others the nūber of them is but fourescore Istos modos dicēdi Per se per accidēs those naturall accidentall manner of speeches he confounds Thus some doe abuse Bowing at the name of Iesus as papists Ignorant Protestants Therefore t is no harmeles ceremony And he is so decent so trimme in his arguments cōcerning the decency of bowing that he confounds Coordination and Subordination with contrarie opposition Thus Bowing with the heart and bowing with the knee which are subordinate doe differ therefore they are so contrary as two contrary masters To read bow to heare and bow c are Coordinate duties yet these with him are so contrarie as that they cannot be done together without confusion Now behold the strang learning of a monstrous learned Immethodist Is he not rare for dispurations being so ignorant of modalities Is he not excellent to teach our Chutch being so braue a Babe in vnderstanding Againe his Appendix is vaine and Idle For in what the holy Ghost doth seriously cōmend Iesus that he neglects to remember The Holy Ghosts reason why all knees shall bow at the name of Iesus is because Iesus tooke on him our nature and then did so humbly demeane himselfe that he died the death of the Crosse to saue his Enemies Ro. 5. 8. For this cause God honored Iesus so much that he commands every knee to bow at his name This is the scope of the text and then is not Mr. Prinne vaine and idle in his conceipt to suppose argumenrs to contradict the good iust meaning of the Holy Ghost who is that True teacher that God is the Iust rewarder of Iesus his the greatest Humility Is it not vaine and an idle conceipt for to thinke better of Mr Prinns arguments to cause no Bowing at Iesus his name then of the Holy Ghosts dictate which is Iesus his merit revealed to be and Gods Exaltation of Iesus the causes why every knee shall bow at the name of Iesus It is vaine and idle to fight against God this is the opinion of Gamaliel a Dr. of the law Act. 5. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. yet so vaine and so idle the younger Lawier is that he would rather that his arguments should be beliued then the most credible truth of the Holy Ghost Here is a strange oppositiō A Christian may and ought verily to beleiue that a man should not dare thus to dispute against the Holy Ghost What may be thought to be the cause that a man should grow so bold as to question the Holy Ghost for his doctrine Certainely the mystery of iniquitie is working a new worke Thus. If this name Iesus were disrespected not so publiquely magnified as t is by the outward mans Bowing in or at the time of divine service then doubtles the Pure Holy doctrine and discipline of Elect Geneua shall be taught every where to reforme this Church of Great Britaine Doe but dishonour the head of the Church and then regenerate Geneuaters shall