communicated in the evening after they had refreshed themselves with commoun meats upon other dayes also it is likely then they also sate Alexander de Hales in the second part of his tractat concerning the masse sayeth the Pope communicateth sitting in rememberance that the Apostles at the Lords supper communicated sitting The Waldenses who are justly called the pure seed of the ancient kirk and have continued since the dayes of Pope Sylvester or as some thought from the dayes of the Apostles sayeth Rainerius the inquisitour their enemie celebrated the communion sitting See Master Fox first volumn pag. 209 edict 1610. and their apologie against one Doctour Augustine which is extant in Lydii Waldensia Luther exponing the epistle upon Saint Stevins day sayeth Christ so instituted the Sacrament that in it we should sit at the Sacrament but all things are changed and idle ordinances of men are come in place of divine ordinances Zuinglius in expositione sidei Christianae setting down the form of celebration used at Berne Zurick Basile and other neighbour townes reporteth that they communicated sitting The kirks of strangers at London in Alascoes time communicated sitting so do other kirks in the Low-countries even to this day In Pol such as adhered to the confession of Helvetia communicated sitting as we may see in consensus Poloniae By the gesture of standing is pretended more reverence and thereby the gesture of sitting is indirectly taxed and that lively representation of our familiar societie with Christ taken away seeing it is not the usuall and ordinarie gesture at civill feasts As for kneeling in the act of receaving First wee have not a warrant from the example of Christ and his Apostles or the practises of the Apostolick kirks after and therefore they who receave adoration they are secure they have the example of the Apostles whom wee read not to have adored prostrate but as they were sitting they receaved and did eat They have the practise of the Apostolicall kirks where it is declared that the faithfull did communicate not in adoration but in breaking of bread sayeth Calvin Institut lib. 4. cap. 37. sect 33. Beza in his dispute against Iodocus Harchius So like as when the Lord truely to bee adored as God and man at table did institute this holy supper that the Disciples arose to the end that falling upon their knees they might receave that bread and wine out of his hand And so like as the Apostles were ignorant how to deliver to the kirks the manner how to celebrate these holy mysteries it is known well enough that the love-feasts could hardly or scarce at all admit geniculation The Waldenses in the apologie above-mentioned say that Christ gave the Sacrament to his Disciples and his successours for a long time made no reverence meaning adoration This holy action is denominate the LORDS table and the Lords Supper The use of a table is not only to set meat on it but also for the guests or persons invited to sit at and about it and to partake of the meat set upon the table Wee require not of necessitie an artificiall table of tymber a Bul-hyde or a plot of ground may serve in time of necessitie and answereth analogically to a standing table as the plot of ground did whereabout the multitude sate in rowes by fifties and fifties Mark 6. Neither do wee stand upon the fashion whether it bee long or round but wee require that the Communicants alwayes sit table-wayes so that they may observe the form of a feast or banquet For in that this holy action is called a supper it is imported that it was celebrate in the forme of a feast or banquet as Piscator observeth in his observations upon Matth. 26. Wee do not require all the formes used at commoun feasts but these which Christ the institutour and Master of the feast thought sufficient Kneeling is not a gesture sutable with the forme of a banquet or use of a supper table The termes supper and table of the Lord very familiar with the Apostle Paul seeme to require sitting rather then standing kneeling or passing by sayeth Alasco Kneling is not a gesture which hath beene used at feasts or banquets but rather a gesture of supplicants Plessie in his fourth book of Eucharist sayeth that of old this holy Supper was celebrated in the forme of a banquet whereat they did sit a footestep whereof remaineth among the Benedictines If these termes the Table of the LORD the Supper of the LORD and breaking of bread had beene retained and other new names not invented as Sacrament Eucharist then might easilie have been perceaved how harsh it were to use these phrases They brake bread together kneeling they compassed the table of the LORD kneeling they celebrate the Supper of the LORD kneeling which seemeth not so harsh when wee say they receaved the Sacrament or Eucharist kneeling Therefore the ancient Doctours sayeth Mowline on the LORDS Supper part 1. pag. 8. had done better if they had hold themselves to the tearmes expressed in Gods word c. The distribution of the elements by the communicants amongst themselves admitteth not kneeling in the act of receaving Can the communicant bee both adoring GOD upon his knees and at the verie instant bee reaching the elements to his brother likewise kneeling and adoringe Yee have heard out of Calvin before that the faithfull in the Apostolical times did not communicate with adoration but breaking of bread as if adoration and breaking of bread could not consist together But so it is that the Communicants ought to distribute and reach the elements to other Christ reaching the cup to his Disciples commandeth them to divide it among themselves Luke 22.17 This cup which hee commanded them to divide was the Evangelicall cup or which is all one the last paschall cup changed into the Evangelicall Luke applieth Christs protestation that he will drink no more of the fruit of the wine c. to the cup which hee commanded them to divide amongst themselves but that protestation is applied to the comâ—â—â—on cup by Matth. and Mark who make mention only of this cup in the verses immediatly preceeding the protestation If Christ was to drink incontinent after this protestation of the comâ—â—â—n cup how could hee protest that hee would drink no more of the fruit of the wineâ— When the Schoolemen would prove that wine was one of the elements at the Evangelicall supper they can not finde a proof in all the Evangelists but in this protestation Christ in this protestation alludeth to the canon or custome of the Iewes forbidding to taste any thing after the last cup which was called the cup of praise Now the last cup was the Evangelicall or communion cup or the last paschall cup changed it into the Evangelicall Further Christ gave thanks when he took the cup in his hand which he coÌ„manded them to divide and therefore Luke maketh no mention of this thanksgiving when hee maketh mention of
the cup the second time because hee had made mention of it before Luke then by way of anticipation bringeth in Christ protesting in the 17. verse that the protestation of not drinking more may bee joined with the protestation of not eating more preceeding in the 16. verse therefore when hee cometh to the order of the institution verse 20. he omitteth the protestation and thanksgiving which are recorded by other Evangelists because hee made mention before of them verse 17. and 18. This anticipation or inversion of order in the Evangelist Luke was observed by Augustine and Euthymius Baâ—adius and Suarez Iesuits Mewshius observeth other inversions in the same chapter Christ gave â—ot the cuppe to every one out of his hand which had been sufficient for dividing of it â—f no further had beene intended To drinke of one cuppe representeth fellowship in one commoun benefite but not that communication of mutuall love and amitie which is represented by reaching the same cup to other The guests at ciâ—ill banquets of old intertaining other courteously reached a cup of wine to other which cup they called philotesia metonimically because it was a symbole of love or friendship which name any man may justly impose upon the cup of the holy supper of the Lord sayeth Seuekius antiquitarum convivialium lib. 3. cap. 10. If there were no more but reaching the cup from one to another it were sufficient to exclude kneeling for what reason were it to kneel at the receaving of the bread and not at the receaving of the cup Were it not also absurd to see the communicants reaching the cup to other and the Minister to walk along to give every one the bread Analogie requireth that the bread should bee distributed among the communicants as well as the wine Christ said in the plurall number Take yee eat yee as well as drink yee divide yee and nor take thou eat thou therefore not only Piscator Tessanus and Hospinian but also Estius a popish writer upon the 1 Cor. 10.16 gather that they divide the bread as well as the cup. Beza sayeth that the manner of their sitting could not permit Christ to give every one the bread Mouline on the Lords supper 2 part pag. 97. maintaineth that Christ could not deliver the bread to every one of the disciples hands especially considering that the parties lying half along upon beds at the table tooke up more rowme then they do now adayes This distribution of the bread as well as of the cup is confirmed by the custome observed afterward Master Paybodie pag. 92.101 104. acknowledgeth that the Communicants at the first supper did communicate the bread and cup one with another as also in the Apostles times pag. 95. Bullinger in the place above cited reporteth that in the Monastries of S. Bennets order c cathedrall kirks they communicated upon Maunday-thursday panem azymum frangentes calicem invicem propinantes in tatum vetexis coenae vestigium preferentes that is breaking unleavened bread and reaching the cup to other This was a footstep of the order observed universally before upon the anniversarie day called the day of the Lords supper which is now called Maunday-thursday Frier Rainerius reporteth that the Waldenses participate mutually as was done at Christs supper Bullinger in his 6. decad sermon 9. that the supper of the Lord is then rightly celebrated when the communicants distribute the bread and the cup among themselves Gualter homil 118. in Marcum setting down the best form of celebration requireth that they break the bread to other and distribute the cup. Tindall in his tractat upon the Lords supper requireth that every man reach and break to his neighbour The latter confession of Helvetia which is approved by many reformed kirks and by our owne recommendeth this breaking of bread The Lords supper was denominate breaking of bread from that rite or ceremonie of the breaking of the bread Acts. 2. it is said the disciples continued in breaking of bread and Acts. 20 that the disciples conveened to break bread which is clearer then the former speach and importeth that the disciples or the faithfull themselves brake bread Estius a popish professour in Doway writing upon 1 Cor. 10.16 sayeth that in the primitive kirk they had the breaking of bread which was first done by the Presbyteriâ—â— and deacons and after them in smaller pieces by the faithfull to whom it was given that they might distribute the same among themselves The Apostle 1 Cor. 10.16 sayeth The bread which we break is not the communion of the body of Christ that is the bread we break distribute and eat For the breaking alone by the Minister is not the communion of the body of Christ. The Apostle rehearsing the words of the institution sayeth not Take thou eat thou but in the plurall number take yee eat yee Yea Durandus Rational lib. 4. cap. 1. sayeth that the apostles celebrated as Christ did The breaking of the bread serveth for two uses first for the representation of Christs sufferings as also the pouring of the wine represented mystically the effusion of his blood Bullinger sayeth decad 5. serm 7. Wee break the bread of the Lord with our own hands for we our selves are to bee blamed that hee was bruised our sins wounded him wee crucified him and wee believe that not only hee suffered for others but specially for our selves Gualtor in his homil 295. on Matthew sayeth That every one when they break the bread acknowledgeth themselves to be the authours of his death and passion The other use is for distribution and reaching to other to testifie mutuall love and amitie If two should drink out of one cup and yet not teach to other it might well be thought there were no great kindnesse betweene them To divide the bread and to eat together in token of love and benevolence was a custome observed in the orientall countries and yet still in sundrie countries of the West Serranius in Iosuam cap. 9. Of this use the reader may finde more in Bullinger Decad 5. and Gualter 118. in Marcum Zuinglius in his exposition of the Christian faith reporteth that some sitting together casuallie and participating after this manner were reconcealed who before had beene at variance and that this fell foorth often If none must give the sacramentall bread but the Minister because hee acteth the person of Christ who gave his own bodie by the same reason they may not reach the cup to other as the Apostles did at the first supper where they represented the faithfull and communicated not as Pastours but as disciples as guests as other Christians as all our divines hold and among the rest Musculus cited by Doctour Lindesay pag. 59. This Doctour confesseth the cup may bee reached from one to another the Minister still acting CHRISTS person in his own place pag. 61.62 If none but the Minister must give the elements because hee representeth Christs person then might not the Deacon in
geniculis non aderara see pag. 52 and 49. The ancients in these times thought kneeling not sutable with such an action as the participation of the Lords supper because it was an action of joy and delight Yee see then howbeit they kneeled other wayes upon the station dayes because of their fasting and mourning yet at the end a little before their dissolving they stood at the commâ—un table Now the reason why these dayes were called station dayes was not according to his observation so called because of the gesture of standing but only by way of allusion to militarie stations and watches at the gates of Princes palaces that as they stayed in their watch whether sitting or standing so the Christians stayed in the kirk mourning and praying in these times of persecution for peace and safetie to the kirk till the third houre after-noon at which time they communicate It was the custome of the kirk for a thousand year to stand upon the Lords day and yet the Lords day was not one of their station dayes which should have beene if the gesture of 〈◊〉 only should make a station day as Doctour Burges would have it It is grosse ignorance in the Doctour to affirm that the station dayes were these dayes wherein they stood in prayer and at all the solemne worship of God and to denie that they were set dayes of fasting Further is nothing more evident then that Tertullian in sundrie other passages speaketh of stations or station dayes as dayes of fasting Where as in the Re-examination it was given and not granted that they stood on these dayes in time of divine service or prayer now being induced by the observation of Albaspinaeus Wee denie that they stood in time of prayer upon these dayes and therefore the argument is the more forcible for us that notwithstanding of their humiliation and kneeling upon these dayes of mourning and fasting yet at the end when they were neare dissolving and ending their fast or station they stood at the table of the Lord and receaved the Sacrament standing Howbeit this was not the right gesture yet it is clear they kneeled not when they received the Sacrament Tertullian maketh no mention of receiving the Sacrament in their houses kneeling For a thousand years they stood even in time of prayer upon the Lords day and therefore it can not bee imagined that they kneeled when they received the Sacrament But say our opposits they used the same gesture in the receaving the Eucharist which they thought fittest for prayer I answere they thought nor standing the fittest gesture for prayer but kneeling and stood upon the Lords day to signifie their joy for Christs resurrection which was a conceat taken up by them not known to the apostle for they kneeled not for the like reason betwixt Easter and Pentecost and yet wee see in the 20. of the Acts the Apostle Paul kneeled The custome yet observed to this day in the orientall kirks to communicate standing notwithstanding that other custome hath ceased declareth that they intended never geniculation in the act of receiving If ever kneeling in the act of receiving had been in use among them it had not beene left off considering mans pronnesse to idolatrie and superstition It resteth then that kneeling is only found in the kirks which were subject to the pope Howbeit this idolatrous gesture prevailed under the reigne of the great Antichrist yet there wanteth not faithful witnesses to stand out against it as the Waldenses and the Picardi If at any time wee should not seeme to have communion with Antichrist we should most of all at this holy supper which setteth foorth our communion with Christ and his kirk Yee see then suppose that kneeling in the act of receiving were indifferent yet in respect of the scandall the danger and inconvenients fall upon it we ought to oppose it But we are now to prove that it is not indifferent but idolatrous and therefore a hainous sin whether we consider it as it is injoined by the act of the pretended assembly at Perth or as the action may bee considered simplie in it self Wee are directed by the act of Perth to kneel in reverence of the Sacrament which is idolatrie for we are directed to kneel in due regard of so divine a mysterie to wit as is the Sacrament or as is the receiving of the body and bloud of Christ to wit in the sacramentall manner Yee may also take up the intent of the act by the intent of the English prelats and their adherents for conformitie with them is intended Doctour Mortoun sayeth that their kirk thought it fit by outward reverence in the manner of receiving the Eucharist to testifie their due estimation of such holy rites Master Hutton sayeth they kneeled to put a difference between the ordinarie bread and wine and the sacramentall to which they gave the more reverence because it is more than ordinarie bread and wine Some of the formalists pretend that they kneel because of the prayer outered at the deliverie of the elements but that short bit of prayer or wish is ended before the minister offer the bread to the communicante and bidde him take it and yet the communicant is injoined to continue still upon his knees Nor is kneeling injoined to them by statute or their service book in regard of prayer but in regard of the Sacrament it self Master Paybodie pag. 334. doth freely confesse that their prayer is not the principall respect of their kneeling nor the principall respect upon which their kirk injoined it And pag. 299. suppose their bee no prayer used in time of receaving hee thinketh never the worse of the gesture of kneeling Doctour Mortoun and Master Hutton as yee have heard professe they kneel to testifie their due estimation of such holy rites and more reverence to the elements then ordinarie bread and wine Now to testifie more reverence to the elements by kneeling is to testifie by adoration which is idolatrie Neither are wee directed by the act of Perth to pray in the act of receiving but to use that kinde of gesture in the act of receaving which becometh meditation lifting up of the heart which also may bee done without prayer But prayer can not consist with the act of taking eating and drinking Wheresoever the publict intent of a kirk is to kneel for reverence of the Sacrament every communicant following her direction is an idolater interpretativè and so to bee construed both before God and man whatsoever bee his own private intent If any man receave the Sacrament upon his knees at Rome or any other popish kirk whatsoever bee his private intent hee must bee interpreted to kneel according to the intent of that kirk But setting aside the act of the assemblie at Perth which is only a null and pretended assemblie we shall consider the action it self wee will prove that it can not be done but for reverence of the Sacrament or sacramentall elements
time and place where wee crave or receive the benefite more then the diversitie of the benefite it selfe that is the ground of adoration but Gods excellencie as wee said before They consider not that these three things ought to bee distinguished blessing or sanctifying the creature or meane GOD hath appointed either for our temporall or spirituall life before the use of it the use it selfe and thanksgiving after the use the blessing before meat the use of meat in receaving eating drinking and thanksgiving after blessing before the reading preaching or hearing of the word the act it selfe reading hearing preaching and thanksgiving to GOD after blessing before the receaving the sacramentall elements the receiving and participation it selfe and thanksgiving after They ask if humilitie and reverence bee not requisite in the act of receiving the sacramentall elements I answere Yes in all religious exercises hearing of the word reading of the word c. But it followeth not that there should bee humiliation upon our knees because humilitie of minde is required nor adoration because reverence is required Is there no reverence nor humilitie but in kneeling before dead and senslesse elements Humilitie is an habit adoration is an act The act of humilitie is immanent whereby any one resteth content with his owne ranke and doeth not conceat greater worth in himselfe then there is specially in comparison with GOD. Adoration is a transient act whereby a man goeth out of himselfe as it were to direct some homage and worship to GOD. Reverence is commoun to all the parts of GODS worship and is not a distinct kinde of worship as is adoration The pretence of reverence can not bee a sufficient reason for the altering the ordinance of Christ and the opinion of reverence hath often beene the dame and nource of manifold superstitions sayeth Bishop Mortoun upon the Lords supper pag. 63. Seeing kneeling in the act of receiving the Sacramentall elements eating and drinking is idolatrie and can not bee used but idolatrously it followeth that kneeling in the act of receaving brought not in artolatrie or bread-worship as some mistaking counterfoot works of old writers for genuinâ— have imagined The corrupting of the doctrine with the opinion of the reall presence the receiving in at the mouth from the hands of the priest and many other superstitious conceats together with the worshipping of images brought in kneeling But it was ever idolatrous from the first beginning and birth of it and can not possibly be purged of idolatrie FINIS OF FESTIVAL DAYES THE observation of festivall dayes hath been rejected by our kirk from the beginning of theâ—â— reformation in the explication of the first head of the first book of discipline in the assemblie holden anno 1566. where the latter confession of Helvetia was approved but with speciall exception against these same dayes which are now urged In the assembly holden anno 1575. the assembling of the people to preaching and prayers upon festivall dayes wâ—â— censured An article was likewise formed to bee presented to the Regent craving that all dayes heretofore keeped holy in time of papistrie besides the Lords day be abolished and that a civill penaltie bee inflicted upon the observers By ordinance of the assembly in Aprile 1577. Ministers were to bee admonished not to preach or minister the communion at Easter or Christmas or other like superstitious times or readers to read under the pain of deprivation The pulpits have founded from time to time against all shew of observing these dayes But at the pretended and null assembly holden at Perth a number not having power to vote presumed to bring in a contrare practise Our first reason against these holy festivities God hath only power to sanctifie a day and make it holy that is to separate it from commoun use to holy exercises yearly God hath given libertie to man to work sex dayes No man ought to bee compelled to keepe them holy but when GOD himself maketh exception as he did by the yoke of some anniversarie dayes by the law The second reason None appointed holy festivities under the law when the times were more ceremonious but God himself The dayes of Purim were called simply the dayes of Purim not the holy dayes of Purim or feast of Purim No peculiar sacrifice was appointed nor any holy convocation of the people injoined The ordinance required but fasting joy and sending of portions to other The memoriall dayes of the dedication were called the dayes of dedication not the feast of dedication They were not holy dayes or festivall solemnities consisting of Hookers three elements praises set foorth with chearfull alacritie of minde delite expressed by charitable largenesse more then commoun bountie and sequestration from ordinarie works The times were corrupt when these dayes were appointed As for Christs conference in the porch of the temple in the dayes of dedication it proveth not that hee honoured that feast as they call it with his presence only the circumstance of time is pointed at when Christ had this conference Christ come up to the feast of the tabernacles before and stayed in Ierusalem In the mean time the dayes of dedication fell foorth and hee went away immediatly after his conference The third reason Neither Christ nor his apostles appointed festivall dayes to bee observed by Christians but rather inhibited the observation of them and changed only the old sabbath into the first day of the week The anniversarie solemnities were not changed but altogether abrogated The apostle having occasion to teach upon this subject condemneth observation of dayes ceremoniall or of ceremoniall nature They were a rudimentarie instruction of old which beseemeth not the state of a Christian kirk and cleare light of the Gospel Yea the very dayes of Purim and the dayes of dedication were of a ceremoniall nature saith Doctour Mortoun in his defence pag. 64. To celebrate the memorie of a particular act of Christ at a set time in the year with cessation from work sermons gospels epistles collects and hymnes belonging therto with joy and gladnesse without admitting a fast at any time is not to observe a day morallie but ceremoniallie If there had beene other festivall dayes which might have beene observed by Christians the Apostle having so fair occasion when he was treating of the observation of dayes hee would not have spoken so generally but directed Christians to the observing of these If other dayes had bene dedicat to Christ then the Lords day they should all have beene called the Lords dayes but the scripture maketh mention of one day called the Lords day Socrates in his historie sayeth Hee is of the opinion that as many other things crept in of custome in sundrie places so did the feast of Easter prevaile among all people of a certain privat custome and observation If the Apostles had appointed it they had agreed upon the day seing they were directed infalliblie by the Spirit Our fourth reason If it had beene the will of
THE RE-EXAMINATION of two of the articles abridged TO WIT Of the communicants gesture in the act of receaving eating and drinking And The observation of Festivall dayes Printed anno 1636. TO THE READER YEE have here good Reader the re-examination of two articles abriged to wit concerning the Communicants gesture in the act of receaving and observation of festivall dayes for the information of such as either have not leasure to peruse greater workes or are of weaker iudgement The other three articles bishopping private baptisme and private Communion are not pressed and therefore it was needlesse to proceed any further Accept of this information without preiudice of your standing to the liberties of the Kirk Wee need no other exception against all the five articles but that they were not concluded by pluralitie of voices of such as were authorized with lawfull commission and consequently not by a generall assemblie But a number of Barons pretended bishops and ministers usurped the place of voters and carried the businesse I passe by terrours circumveening and unformall proceeding howsoever others take libertie to practise and reason contrare to the order established in former times as if wee had never had a kirk yet let this be your iudiciall defence But because that alone is not sufficient to uphold your conscience yee have here as much as may serve to confirme you in the trueth and to settle your iudgement in the matter it self OF THE COMMUnicants gesture in the act of receaving BY the second head of the first book of discipline drawn up in the first year of publick and universal reformation wee may perceive that our first reformers preferred sitting not only to kneeling but also to standing and passing by because they approached not so near to Christs action and rested upon sitting not only because of the abuse of kneeling in former times as is alleadged but because most agreeable to the patern which reason serveth for all times Yea Master Knox in his admonition to England printed anno 1554. ranketh kneeling among the superstitious orders which profane Christs true religion and in a letter directed from Deep to Mastresse Anna Lock anno 1599. he calleth the crosse in Baptisme and this kneeling diabolicall inventions In the generall assemblie holden anno 1562. it was ordained that the order at Geneva that is of the English Kirk at Geneva where Master Knox had been sometime Minister bee observed in the ministration of the Sacraments And anno 1564. Ministers are referred to the order set down before the Psalmes in Meeter which order is the order of Geneva mentioned in the former act This order was ratified by act of Parliament anno 1567. and 1572. An act was likewise made anno 1567. that in times coming the King at his coronation give his oath to maintain the true religion then professed and in speciall the due right ministration of the Sacraments then receaved This act was ratified anno 1581. and again 1592. No other gesture then sitting was used til the meeting above mentioned Wee are then to defend the gesture of sitting and to impugne kneeling in the act of receaving Wee have the example of Christ and his Apostles at the first supper to warrant communicants to sit in the act of receaving After the ordinarie washing of their hands they fate down to the first course of the paschall supper thereafter they rose again to the washing of their feet then they fate down again to the second course of the paschall supper Now while they were eating and consequently while they were sitting Christ institute the Sacrament of the supper and this is acknowledged by Baronius the Cardinall in his annalls an 34. num 44. The Iesuit Baradas in concord Evangelist tom 4. lib. 2. Ancient and modern writers popish and Protestant have receaved this collection as certain truth It was the minde of the whole church of old as we may see by the Ecclesiasticall hymnes where Christ is brought in sitting with his disciples at table when he institute the Sacrament Whereas some alleadge that Christ and the Apostles kneeled I answere there is no likelihood at all Christ fate when he brake bread and gave thanks at Emaus He blessed the bread when hee fate with the multitude which hee fed with five loaves and two fishes Wee never reade that the Iewes kneeled when they blessed their meat Master Paybodie granteth that Christ and his Apostles used that same gesture in blessing and giving thanks which they did in receaving Bellarmine acknowledgeth that they were sitting at table when Christ said unto them Drink yee all of this We may gather from some circumstances and the forme of the celebration that they fate for they could not stand upon beds or between the tables and the beds for their neerenesse to the table 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 If there had beene such a change then kneeling should have beene institute which none of our opposits have ever maintained for to what end should the change have beene made if not that that gesture might be observed afterward Christ spake not prayer waies to the apostles and the elements were carried from hand to hand and divided by the Apostles among themselves which is not compatible with kneeling when man is directing worship to God Wee conclude then with Master Mouline writing on the Lords supper 1 part pag. 136. that the apostles continued sitting at the table to the very end of the action It is true Christ and his apostles sitting were not altogether upright as ours but as a man may stand upright or stand leaning so he may sit upright or sit leaning The Hebrew doctors call it sitting in beds the English translators expresse it by sitting and not by lying Doctour Mortoun confesseth it was a kinde of sitting gesture Master Paybodie pag. 69. protesteth that he holdeth the gesture of sitting at the Lords table in it self lawfull and commendable What a madnesse is it then to drive poore soules from a sure to a dangerous and doubtsome way The example of Christ and his disciples sitting at the first supper is exemplarie for examples in setting down a patern serve ordinarly for direction in times to come if there be not some singular occasion to hinder him that setteth down the pattern to do otherwise Bishop Mortoun in his late work of the institution of the Sacrament sayeth that Christs example should bee a rule for us to observe except in some circumstances which only occasionaly and accidentally happened therein and therefore taxeth the Iesuits making light of Christs example as if the example of Christ were no argument of proof at all Mowline in his heavenly alarum pag 56. sayeth Christ and his apostles sate at the table without any kind of adoration and
that the first institution was given for a patern whereunto wee ought to conform Now the washing of the disciples feet the putting off and on of Christs upper garment were ended before they sate down to the second course of the paschall supper and consequently a good space before the institution of the last supper Time and place are commoun circumstances to all actions The particular time and place when Christ instituted this Sacrament were occasionall They might not eat the paschall supper but at evening and therefore the Evangelical supper which was to succeed to it behoved to bee celebrate that night seeing Christs suffering was so neer at hand They behoved to eat the paschall lamb in a chamber in Ierusalem and consequently the supper behooved to bee instituted in a chamber after the paschall supper The number of such as did eat the paschall lamb behooved to consist of few betwixt ten and twentie and therefore they behooved to bee so few that night at the institution of the supper Their manner and kinde of sitting was a form observed among the Iewes at their commoun feasts and at the paschall supper Put the case that they stood at the first Passeover in Egypt as it can not bee prooved it were then extraordinarie and for that night only to signifie their hastie departure out of Egypt Sitting was the ordinarie gesture used at all religious feasts The Heathnicks sate at their feasts made of the remainder of the sacrifices offered to their idoles Amos 2.1 Cor. 8.10 to professe their communiâ—â— and societie with their idoll or fellowship with devils as the Apostle calleth it 1 Cor. 10.20 Our Lord instituting his supper to bee the only religious feast to bee used in the Christian kirk observed the same gesture which was used at the paschall supper and other religious feasts Christ might easily have changed sitting into kneeling and very commodiouslie seeing they fate upon beds yet would he retain the same gesture which they used at the paschall supper Time and place are meere circumstances and the particular time and place were then only occasionall But the gesture is more then a meere circumstance as Master Paybodie pag. 34. confesseth This supper was institute in form of a banquet to represent not only our spirituall nuriture but also our societie and familiaritie with Christ who is to sup feast with us The Polonian Baroun Ioannes Alasco maintaineth further that our sitting eating and drinking at the communioÌ„ table is a figure and representation of our sitting at the heavenly table So doth Musculus upon Matthow 26 and Aquinas part 3. quest 60. make the Lords supper a type and fore-shewing sign of our glory to come Christ himself expresseth our peaceable fruition of the joyes of heaven by sitting with Abraham Isaac and Iaakob in the kingdome of Heaven Matth. 8.11 and by Lazarus resting in Abrahams bosome Luke 16. that is sitting at the heavenly table and leaning upon Abrahams bosome after the same manner that Iohn lay on Christs bosome when hee fate at this table Iohn 16. and Christ himself at the institution promised to his Apostles that they should eat and drink at his table in his kingdome and sit upon twelve thrones Luke 22.30 Yea this Polonian Baroun affirmeth that they have slender affection to the glory of Christ or our eternall felicitie that would abolish out of the kirk that image of our eternall felicitie in the celestiall glory to come which is so much recommended to us by Christ himselfe by the symbole of sitting at a banquet to the unspeakable comfort of all the faithfull We see that at civill banquets the time the place the number of persons and other things are variable but no other gesture hath beene used but sitting after one form or other according to the custome of the nation Even when men are invited by a king to a feast they are honoured with sitting in token of his familiar intertainment It appeareth by the practise of the Apostolicall kirks observing still this gesture albeit other circumstances of time and place and other things which fell foorth occasionally at the first supper were not regarded that the gesture of sitting is still to be retained Christ himself Luke 24 30. sitting at table in Emaus tooke bread blessed it and brake it This place is interpreted by sundrie ancients and modern writers of the ministration of the Sacrament And Master Paybodie himself pag. 86. is of that same judgement The apostle 1 Cor. 11. maketh not mention of sitting because he presupposed a lawfull Minister a table and sitting at the table and rehearseth only Christs actions and his words uttered to communicants sitting at the table Nor yet all his actions and his 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 His chief purpose was to correct the abuse of the CorinthiaÌ„s for not staying upon other for the Lord that night hee was betrayed said to all his disciples conveened together Take yee eat yee c. The love-feasts and the Lords supper went together the love-feasts in these times preceeding and the Lords supper immedialy following Doctor Bilson in his book of obedience pag. 653. sayeth that whether they went before or after they could not divide themselves each from other but they must offer the same abuse and disdain of the poor at the Lords supper which was ministred to them as they sate at their tables immediatly before or after their usuall or corporall refreshings Master Paybodie pag 86 and 94. thinketh that together with the institution itself after supper were grounded the love-feasts by continued occasion whereof his disciples might possibly for a time use sitting in the very act of receaving Doctor Downam in his second sermon pag. 61. confesseth sitting to receave the Sacrament to have been used in the kirk in the apostles times Sitting in the act of receaving was continued at sometimes in the Christian kirk eveÌ„ to our times Mornaeus in his first book of the masse 1 cap. and 5 reporteth that the Monks of St. Bennets order communicate sitting for three dayes before Easter Bullinger in his book de origine errorum pag. 46 reporteth that not only in their monastries but also in cathedrall kirks they communicate sitting upon that day Now it was the custome of old not only for the Monks but also other Christians to communicat upon this day and no doubt after the same form The two thousand souldiours who were reconcealed to the Emperour Mauritius about the year 1590. by the travell of Gregorius bishop of Antioch receaved the Sacrament sitting upon the ground as Euagrius reporteth lib. 6. cap 13. Doctor Lindesay in his defence pag. 53 54. alleadgeth the like done by the Scottish armie at Bonnokburn in the dayes of King Robert Bruce Socrates in his historie lib. 5. cap. 23. reporteth of the Egyptians who dwelt near to Alexandria and the inhabitants of Thebais
upon the analogic betweene the outward signes and rites and the things signified take eat drink mentally and spiritually by faith Our desires in the meane time are not prayers Prayer is more than desire it is a manifesting of our desires to God The soule may send foorth short ejaculations like darts in every ordinance and these ejaculations may bee incident to all our actions even civill let bee religious even when wee are eating and drinking our ordinarie meat drink But a set and continued prayer can not consist with other actions In suddaine ejaculations no other gesture is required then that wherein the motion of the Spirit of God shall finde them If mentall prayer might bee permitted it is secret before the Lord and the signes of it before men should bee concealed Thirdly What necessitie is it to pray kneeling in this act more then at other prayers at which yee doe kneel It is clear then yee kneel not in regard of that pretended prayer but because yee are before such a creature The like may bee said of thanksgiving Ejaculations of thanks may agree with the proper exercise of the Soule in the time of receaving eating and drinking as it may also with our ordinarie eating and drinking at our tables but not a set thanksgiving which should require the attention of all the powers of the soule and can not bee done without diverting the Soule from the exercise proper for the time Prayer is a craving our taking eating and drinking is not a craving but a receaving Thanksgiving is properly directed to God so is not our act of taking eating and drinking The Sacrament was called the Eucharist by the Ancients not for the act of taking eating and drinking but for the thansgiving preceeding which was but a part of the action The showing foorth of the LORDS death by the act of eating and drinking is but only a representation The showing foorth by word is only a declaration oâ— commemoration Representation or commemoration are to men and not GOD resemble preaching and not prayer or thanksgiving The celebration of the action it self is a profession of thankfulnesse before man for a great benefite but not thanksgiving directed to God God is honoured by preaching prayer singing swearring praising and not by adoring only To honour is more generall than to adore It is yet objected that in the act of receiving wee receave an inestimable benefite Ought not a subject to kneele when hee receaveth a benefite from his Prince to testifie his thankfulnesse I answere If wee were to receave a gift suppose but a morsell of bread out of Gods owne hand immediatly we ought no doubt to adore upon our knees but not if by the hand of the creature The person who receaveth the gift from the King is supposed to receave it immediatly from the king or suppose hee kneele receaving from his servant mediat civill worship is not a rule for religious adoration which should bee directed to God immediatly Now wee receave the Sacrament out of the hand of the Minister not out of Christs owne hand 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 Nor did they adore God the Father upon their knees for the benefite they were receaving The inward benefite Christs body and bloud is not the outward object is receaved by the soule not by the body by the godly only not by all that receave the Sacrament by faith imbracing Christ present by his Spirit in the soule Now the act of faith or believing is not an act of adoration nor is it expressed outwardly by kneeling Wee receave eat and drink Christs bodie and bloud as soone as wee are effectually called and begin to believe and as oft as we believe the promises of the Gospel when wee heare them read or exponed CHRIST bodie is farre absent from us at the receaving of the Sacrament We are united with Christ and made members of his bodie before wee come to the Sacrament and doe not receave his bodie at everie communion as if wee had lost it since the former and yet there is but one bodie received at all the times Wee are said then to take eat drinke Christs bodie and bloud at every celebration of the Lords supper because wee put foorth our faith in act at that time and renewing the act of faith wee take eat and drink by believing that same bodie and bloud which wee did before our faith being strengthened by the outward signes and seales to that end and so grow by faith in union with Christ. Further the manner or forme of receaving a gift should bee answereable to the manner of the offering the nature of the gift and the will of the giver If a King call his Nobles to a banquet it is his will that they sit at table Howsoever then otherwise and at other occasions wee behave our selves as supplicants wee are now according to our Lords will and pleasure to observe that externall forme of a feast which hee hath left to his kirk and to act thereat in our outward carriage age the persons of guests and friends as hee calleth us Iohn 15.15 Therefore howbeit the inviter bee a great person the manner of invitation is familiar to assure us of our preferment and fellowship with him howbeit there bee great inequalitie betweene us and him Againe if wee should kneele because wee are receaving a gift by this reason wee should kneele when wee receave any gift or benefite from GOD As for example When wee are eating and drinking our ordinarie meat and drink If yee will say the one is holy the other commoun then yee confesse yee kneele because of the holinesse of it and that is idolatrie If yee will say yee receave a greater gift then when yee receave your ordinarie food that is not more but that then is a greater motive Yet if it be called a gift then whensoever or whatsoever gift yee receave yee ought to kneele God deserveth thanks for the least of his benefits because bestowed upon us by so great a Lord and for his owne excellencie which is the reason upon Gods part that moveth us to adore him It is frivolous which is alleadged that what we crave upon our knees wee may receave upon our knees For wee crave our dayly food rayment and other necessars upon our knees and yet wee receave them not nor use them upon our knees It is as frivolous That what wee crave of GOD upon our knees in publict worship wee may receive upon our knees For wee may crave in the time of publick worship upon our knees things necessarie for this temporall life and so wee doe when in the Lords prayer wee pray Give us this day our dayly bread By this kinde of reasoning what I crave in private worship upon my knees I may receave upon my knees But it is not the diversitie of the
The first reason shall bee this The communicant is tied whether by direction of others or his own resolution all is one to kneel with reverence before dead and senselesse elements when they are presented to him by the hand of the Minister Wee can not kneel to God in prayer but there are many things before us by casuall position neither can wee choose to do otherwise But if wee bee tied to kneel with reverence when wee are to doe any religious exercise suppone prayer before such a creature suppone but a tree and is not likewise tyed when wee pray before any other creature our gesture of adoration can not bee without respect to the tree God himselfe never appointed any creature to bee an object to the eyes of man when hee was to adore him upon his knees but only directed his people to kneel toward a certaine place where hee was present himselfe in an extraordinarie manner or bound himselfe by promise to heare from thence as was the Arke and Temple where the Arke was The Sacramentall bread is not a place of Gods extraordinare presence or of the existing of Christs manhood substantiallie or of promise to heare us from thence It is idolatrie sayeth Perkinse to turne dispose or direct the worship of God or any other part thereof to any particular place or creature wiâ—hout the appointment of God and more specially to direct our adoration to the bread or the place where the bread is The uncovering of our heads is a gesture of reverence onely and that only amongst some nations but not of adoration Kneeling is a gesture of adoration either civill or religious amongst all nations I will not kneele civilly to everie one to whom I uncover my head civilly Every one that standeth with his head uncovered in presence of the king is not adoring as he is who is presenting his petition to the king upon his knee in their sight Further our heads are no otherwise uncovered in the act of receaving then in the rest of the time of the celebration when wee are not neare the elements The Scripture is read the words of Christ which he outered at the institution are still and often repeated his actions which are divine and holy are reiterated and sometimes we are singing psalmes But adoration upon our knees can not consist with such varietie of actions The people 1 King 18. fell on their faces after the fite had consumed the burnt sacrifices and the wood and licked up the water and not in the mean time for it is not likely that they fell down till they had seene what the fire had wrought What suppose they had fallen down in the meantime that they saw the fire fall down upon the sacrifice Is it any wonder that men amazed with Gods majestie in a miracle fell down as astonished to worship God Charles the fift after his farewell to the wars saluted the Spanish shore in such an affectionat and prostrat manner as his meanest vassall could not ordinarly have saluted either him or it without just imputation of grosse idolatrie Doctour Iackson 〈◊〉 If there come into the kirk one that believeth not and one that is unlearned and hear one after another prophesie and finding himself convinced and the secrets of his heart made manifest were it any wonder if he fell down on his knees c. 1 Cor. 14. yet if he fell down before them ordinarly were it not idolatrous When it is said 1 King 8.54 that Salomon kneeled before the altar of the Lord when hee prayed at the dedication of the temple The altar is not set down there as the object toward which hee directed his countenance when he was kneeling but only as a circumstance of the place where hee was when he prayed at that time Hee kneeled upon the brazen scaffold which was over against the altar and spread his hands towards the heavens not towards the altar And suchlike 2 Chron. 6.13 it is said That he fell down upon his knees before all the congregation of Israel that is in their sight and presence and spread foorth his hands towards heaven It is not said that hee turned his face towards the altar They turned their face ordinarly to that part where the Ark was the place of Gods extraordinarie presence which therefore in Scripture is called sometime God sometime the Lord of hostes the king of glory the face of the Lord. Doctour Burges pag. 7. sayeth that the altar was not alreadie dedicated but was in the doing Likewise Micha 6.6 when it is said Wherewith shall I come before the Lord and how my self before the high God meaneth that they bowed themselves before the high God sitting between the Cherubins not towards the Altar When they had offered their oblations what if they had bowed towards the place where the Ark was when they were offering to God when wee are in the act of receiving eating and drinking wee are receiving and not offering They pretend the sacramentall elements are only as objectum à quo significative that is an active object moving them to worship the thing signified or God Put case that were true it will not helpe them Durandus Holcot and Picus Mirandula and other papists professe that they adored the prototype or samplar before the image which put them in minde of the samplar and spake in as abstract a manner of their worship as the formalist doeth when hee pretendeth the purest intent hee can in the manner of his adoration And yet were accounted by other papists good catholicks Vasquez proveth that these Doctours made the image obiectum quod the verie object passive of adoration and that both the samplar and the image were adored together For they used the same respect to the images that other catholicks used they uncovered their head to them they bowed towards them kneeled before them and kissed them And this hee defendeth to bee the right manner when the image and samplar are adored with one adoration the inward motion and submission of minde being carried to the samplar and outward signe of submission to the image being transmitted by the spirit or in thought and desire to the samplar This Iesuit reporteth that in the time of the seventh synod their were some enemies to images who were content that images were brought into the kirk not only for decorement but also to stirre up the remembrance of the samplar that before them they might reverence only the samplar but exhibite no signe of honour or submission before the image for that they said was idolatrie and therefore they would neither kisse them nor bow before them but standing upright before them being stirred up to the rememberance of the samplar they were carried only in their minde to it These were called semiprobi as wee would say mangrels Yee see then that taking the image only as objectum à quo significative as instruments and meanes to stir up their remembrance these mangrals would not kneel before