or any other gesture and so he carpeth not onely our former order vvhich he preferred before any other at Pert Assembly but also Christ himselfe as not vvise enough to consider vvhat gesture vvas most decent for so holy an action If another more commodious and better form could have been devised out of all doubt sayth Hospinian Christ vvould have instituted it and the Apostles vvould have recommended it to the Kirkes and therefore vvilleth that if any thing be found different either in the nature or proper sence of words or in rite or external ceremony from this rule that it be amended according to the same as the most excellent most holy most uncorrupted most absolute and most certain rule If therefore there be any gesture that shall put this rule out of rule I say it ought not to be esteemed agreeable either to pietie decency or charity let be to be preferred before other gestures The Doctor laieth down for a ground that by the table of section 1 the Lord 1. Cor. 10.21 is not meant a materiall table or the symbolical and externall part onely but the body and blood of the Lord because the Apostle sayth the Corinthians could not partake both of the table of the Lord and of divels VVhereas a man may be partaker of both the materiall tables and drinke both of the materiall cup of the Lord and the material cup of divels It is evident notwithstanding of the Doctors wrangling that the Apostle meaneth also of a materiall table and the Sacrament by a kind of trope called Metonymia subjecti is denominate from the materiall table whereat the communicants did participate of the elements The Apostles speaketh not of a natural but a morall partaking of the Lords table A man might not lawfully sit at the materiall table of the Lord and drink of the materiall cup and sit also at the materiall table of divels in the Idols chappels and drink of ther materiall cups for that we may do which we may do by Law or right Now the communicant in sitting at both the materiall tables professed fâ—llowship both vvith god and the divell as Paul speaketh for the two materiall tables were symboles of two contrary professions as Aretius in 1. Cor. 10.21 sayth for he that eate of the meate of the sacrifice partaketh of the sacrifice and he that participateth of the sacrifice participateth of the religion vvhereunto it belongeth he that participateth with the religion communicateth with the Idol and false god vvhose religion it is The table of divels vvas a materiall table in the Idols chappell whereat the Idolater feasted See Beza Tilenus Caietanus VVillets Novv if the table of divels from vvhich the cursed feasts vvere denominate vvere materiall tables then the table of the Lord compared vvith them vvas also materiall And Beza out of the same verse vvhich the Doctor hath alledged concludeth that in the primitive Kirk there vvere materiall tables and not altars The Christians offended their weake Brethren by feasting on the things sacrificed in private houses but in feasting in the temple there was both scandall and error The Apostle findeth fault both with the one and the other In a word all such metonymicall speeches do import the verity of the subject The cup of the new Testament doth import that there was a materiall cup. To partake of the Altar doth import that the Israelites had an Altar I conclude with the ground laid down by Paraeus from whatsoever rite the Sacrament is denominate it is Sacramentall and necessarie He inferreth that Sacramentall breaking of the bread after thankesgiving is necessary to the integrity of the Sacrament and I inferr upon the same ground that a materiall table is necessary seeing the Sacrament is denominate metonymically from a table and called the table of the Lord to distinguish it from other materiall tables His reason to prove kneeling more decent then sitting is because it is a religious gesture and more conform to other section 2. and 3. customes and fashions we use at the table of the Lord which we use not at other tables as we choose the day light rather theÌ„ the night a sacred place such as is the temple a reverend order such as to receive before meat because it it not a common supper but the Lords supper The answer is very easie Are not all these circumstandes and the same carriage observed for the hearing of the word the day light the sabboth day the temple Next all these customes are not in themselves simpliciter more decent for in the time of persecution the night was as decent as the day and a desert or a cave as decent as a Kirk for expediencie maketh decencie in these things 3. In the primitive Kirk they communicated daily and yet as decently as on the Sabboth day 4. The Iewes were more tied to sacred times and temples for celebration of their Sacraments and keeping of their feasts then we are and yet they sate even at the paschall supper the noblest feast that they had 5. None of these customes or circumstances do overthrow the table and take away the right use of it but kneeling taketh away the right use of the table and turneth it into an altar or cup-boord but so doth not sitting VVhether is a gesture that maketh a table no table more decent for a table or the gesture that preserveth the use of the Table and all the rules of the feast Our sitting applied to a holy purpose is sanctified for the time as all our actions are holy when they are done according to Gods will and with a respect to his glory He sayth that the gesture of the body is morall voluntary and changeable and should be applied according to the nature of the action It is true the gesture is changeable according to that facultie in man which the Philosophers call Locomotiva but it is to be ordered by Lawes both in civill and religious affaires VVe grant that our maniers and gestures must be composed according to the use use of the table and not according to the matter or form but all table whatsoever be their mater form and use do require a table-gesture never one doth admit kneeling Men use not to kneele no not at the table of Exchange The table of exchange doth differ in use from the table appoynted for feasting and therefore no wonder that they differ in the table gestures But the table of the Lord agreeth with the feasting table in the analogicall use and end Christ himselfe hath taught us how to use the Lords table and with what gesture VVe are silent we sport not we take nothing before we are commanded and instructed at this table as we do at other tables and feasts because in so doing we should dicturb that holy action but sitting is so farre from disturbing that it makes us more fit to attend to the commandement and instructions given us VVe sit with our heads
vncovered at this table which we do not at common tables but we do it for veneration and not for adoration VVe sit with our heads uncovered when the word is read but not when it is preached to distinguish between the voyce of God and the voyce of man At this holy action the words the symboles the rites are all divine and Christs own words rites and symboles his voyce soundeth through all the tables of the world the symboles are the Princes seales and our celebration is nothing else but a repetition of the first institution and the authentike instrument written over again VVe use not kneeling civilly wheresoever we use the uncovered head but kneeling is the gesture of adoration both in civill and religious uses The uncovering of the head doth noth spoyle us of the liberties and prerogatives of a table sociall admission to it and familiar entertainment at it nor breaketh not the order and frame of the institution but kneeling is guiltie of all these enormities as I have sayd If commodity make custome and custome make decencie section 4 then kneeeling must be condemned as an undecent gesture The Doctor measureth the time of the celebration by his own form when he dispatcheth the communicants with some few words and not by the institution But make the time of celebration never so short yet kneeling is more painfull then any other gesture and consequently not so decent because not so commodious To what purpose serveth all this discourse seeing kneeling is not urged as a table-gesture but as a gesture of adoration Swarez sayth that kneeling which is a note of adoration may be made an act of a penitentiarie for the pain which is joyned with it But we consider not now the pain but the purpose of it in this argument For never man yet thought that kneeling was the fittest table-gesture neither have we ever heard any nation never so barbarous use it He sayth kneeling is more universally received in the reformed Kirkes then sitting If he meane of the Lutheran Kirkes that universalitie is not to be regarded The best reformed Kirkes as they have abandoned the opinion of the bodily presence so have they the gesture of kneeling yea all the Lutherans do not consent to the adoration of Christ in the Eucharist as Illyricus and his followers because they say Christ is to be adored onely where it is his will to be adored As for the Anglican Kirk I deny that the body of that Kirk doth approve kneeling howsoever they be compelled by their Kirk representative to practise it If we should follow examples we must look to voluntaries It is no great commandation of kneeling that it was practised 400 yeares under the Antichrist and howbeit we wer not able to designe some time when another gesture was in use it will not follow that it was in practise in all ages before VVe are not bound to shew the behinning of every corruption VVhilest the husband man was sleeping the evill one did sow his tares among the wheat which he perceived not till they were growen up Yet we will be more liberall and for further satisfaction we use to give an instance of an other gesture which was in use to wit standing at the act of receiving for the space of 500. yea an thousand yeare after Christ and they cannot produce one expresse authentike testimony of kneeling for the space of 500 yea of a 1000 yeare after Christ. And to testifie ancient standing we have yet the custome of Christians in the Orient Honorius it seemeth ordained not kneeling at the elevation of the Masse but a reverend inclination of the body howbeit aftervvard it turned to kneeling But vvhether Honorius ordained kneeling at the elevation and whether kneeling in the act of receiving went before kneeling at the elevation or followed after is not prejudiciall to our cause seeing both vvere bred under the Antichrist and no authentick testimony can be alledged of the gesture of kneeling for a 1000. section 5 Yeares section 6 He admitteth standing on the Lords day and other dayes wherein they did not kneele in time of publick prayer but yet upon other dayes saith he as they might pray kneeling so they might communicate kneeling But he doth not produce so much as one example out of all antiquity The examples alledged by us for standing in the act of receiving are generall and for every day as well as for the Lords day The example alledged by himself doth not specifie any day The testimony of Dionysius Alexandrinus and the vvords of Tertullian are confounded in Perth assembly through the Printers fault which by the vvay I vvish the Reader to mark The ancient Kirk changing sitting into standing judged sitting not necessarie It is true Neither do we hold it absolutely necessarie and as for the change vve are not to imitate them herein for they adulterated the forme of the institution many wayes mixing the vvine with water giving the communion to Infants taking the Sacrament home to eate it in their private houses as may be seen in the most ancient vvriters VVe ought to take heed not vvhat any hath done before us sayth Cyprian but vvhat Christ vvho vvas before all did vve must not follow the custome of man but the truth of God And if it be not lawfull sayth he to break the least of the Lords commandements farre lesse is it lawfull to violate so great commandements belonging to the Sacrament of the Lords Passion and of our redemption Calvin findeth great fault with them and sayth that the ancients went neerer the Iudaicall manner of sacrificing then Christs ordinance and the course of the Gospel vvould permit And a little after he saith that if vve think this supper the supper of the Lord and not the supper of men let us not move a naile bredth from it for any authority of mē or prescriptiō of yeares And Tossanus saith that the changing of ceremonies in the Lord supper instituted by Christ and heaping up of other ceremonies divised by mans vvill-vvorship vvas the beginning of error anent the supper and vvas no small occasion of superstition The ancient Kirk judged not standing the fittest gesture for prayer for if they had so judged then they vvould have enjoyned standing at prayer upon other dayes as vvell as upon the Lorde day They stood on the Lords day not because it vvas the fittest gesture for prayer but for signification to signifie their joy for Christs resurrection but kneeling they judged the fittest gesture for prayer as may be seen in the questions attributed to Iustinus The ancient Kirk standing at the receit of the Sacrament ye see then judged not the gesture of prayer the fittest gesture in the act of receiving the Sacrament CHAP. III. Kneeling agreeth not best vvith pietie THe Doctor will now prove kneeling to agree best with pietie But if it agree not best with the decencie of a table but overthroweth the
right use of it how shall it agree best with pietie That gesture agreeth best with pietie that agreeth best with the order and rules of the institution For he cannot be devout sayth Ambrose who presumeth to do otherwaise then the author hath set down The consideration of the giver the gift the manner of donation section 1.2.3.4 and receiving is not plainly set down by the doctor The name of gift is ambiguous as may be seen in Casaubonus For the Fathers sometime called the inward grace of the Sacrament the gift and sometimes the symbolicall part and sometimes they called it the gift somtimes giftes If we were to receive a gift if it were both a morsell of bread out of gods own hand immediatly we ought no doubt to adore and so his similitude of a subject receiving a benefit out of the princes own hand may illustrat the matter very well But at the Lords supper we receive the elements of bread and wine not out of gods own hands immediatly but out of the hands of the Minister who is our fellow-servant 2. Our union with Christ participation of his body and blood is not begun at the Lords supper nether is it proper to it but common to the word and to baptisme By the ministerie of the word and the Sacrament of Baptisme we are made partakers of Christ and his benefites if we have the hand of faith to receive Origen sayth that which we are presently speaking to you is the flesh of Christ. And in another place we are sayd to drinke the blood of Christ not onely by the rites of the Sacraments but also when we heare the word And Hierome sayth howbeit the words of Christ to eate his flesh and drinke his blood may be understood in the mysterie yet more truly the speech of the scriptures is the body and blood of Christ. Augustinus sayth there is no doubt but every one of the faitfull is made partaker of the body and blood of Christ when in Baptisme he is made a mēber of Christ. Chrisostome sayth that in Baptism we adore the body of Christ. VVe receive then the very same benefits in the vvord and Baptisme which we receive in the Lords supper Our union with Christ is begun by faith faith is vvrought by the ministery of the vvord and confirmed aftervvard by the same vvord and strengthened also by the ministerie of the Sacraments vvhich are seales and pledges to us of our union vvith Christ. 3. These benefites are common to the Sacraments of the old Lavv and the nevv they had the same substance of the seales that vve have did eate the same spirituall food and drink the same spirituall drink that vve do 1 Cor. 10.3.4 Augustine saith that vvhosoever in the Manna understood Christ did eate the same spirituall meat that vve do And yet the people of God in gathering the manna hovvbeit not ministred to them by the hand of men did not kneele The Paschall Lamb vvas the same to the people of God that the Lords supper is to us and yet they sate at the Paschal supper 4. The invvard grace is not given to all the communicants but to the godly onely neither do the godly ever find comfort at the instant of receiving the seale Then according to the Doctors ovvn vvords the action of donation not being perceived at the instant it is then to be acknovvledged vvith thankesgiving vvhen it is felt aftervvard But all the communicants participate of the Sacrament even the vvicked Novv the Lord in setting dovvn the order of the institution had respect to the Sacramentall manner of donation vvhich is common to all and not to the spirituall vvhich is proper to fevv Even the very vvicked eate the body and blood of Christ Sacramentally and vvhen the godly eate spiritually yet they participate not pure spiritualiter as Cajetane speaketh meerely spiritually but Spiritualiter Sacramentaliter And this maner of donation vvith solemne testification vvhich is not purely spirituall but spirituall and sacramentall is common to the godly both under the Lavv and under the Gospell to Baptisme alsvveill as the Lords supper The Apostle 1 Cor. 11. condemneth all manner of unworthy receiving vvhether by hypocrisie when we come without faith and repentance or by prophannes when we come like drunkards and factiously But sitting the Apostle did never condemne but rather approved as the ordinary table-gesture The wicked howbeit they partake not spiritually of the Lords body yet they are guiltie in respect of abusing the seales as Chrysostome sayth he that polluteth the Princes purple robe offendeth the Prince himselfe As for our manner of receiving the common manner is sacramentall and according to that which is common to all should our carriage be The Godly receive also with faith spiritually but as I have sayd not purely spiritually but Spiritually and Sacramentally Faith is accompanied with humility it is true but humilitie is an habit of the Soule and not an act of adoration Faith is accompanied with hunger and thirst it is true but hunger and thirst is not the prayer of the Soule but a provoker of the soule to pray as hunger and thirst provoketh a man to cry for meat and drink Faith is accompanied with joy and joy resolueth in desires it is true but desires are not formallie prayers and praises Faith is accompanied with all other Christian graces For every Christian grace is accompanied with the rest But this concomitance of the habits of other graces which is all times in a Christian doth not import their actuall vvorking at all times Faith is the chiefe vvorker in the act of receiving the rest do assist if there be need but ought not hinder the meditation and application of faith VVhen there do arise any short ejaculations of prayer or praise they are onely occasionall as the cōmunicant doth find himselfe disposed and Faith for to vvork Next they are subtile and swift that there is not that agility in our hompish bodies as to follow with our gestures these swift motions ending perchance in twinkling of an eye Thirdly they are secret between God and the Soule therefore ought to be concealed rather then expressed by gestures of vvorship In a word seeing the manner of our receaving is not purely spirituall but spirituall and Sacramentall the spirituall must not disorder the Sacramentall manner set down by him that is the instituter VVe are bound to heare the word vvith Faith and Faith must be accompanied with humilitie and other Christians graces There vvill arise also from hunger thirst joy desires vvishes mentall ejaculations of player and praise but the hearer must not for all that cease from hearing and fall dovvn to vvorship Is there any thing here required but the like vvas required under the Sacraments of the old Law and is required at the hearing of the vvord The secret and hid covenant made betwixt God and Man is
made at the time of effectuall calling The first solemnization section 5.6.7 of it is made at our entrie in the bosome of the Kirke vvhen vve make personall profession on our part and the Minister in Gods name admitteth us as the mouth of the congregation This is sealed by Baptisme Thereafter the vvord preached to all the members of the congregation is presumed to be delivered to beleevers and penitent persons and Faith and repentance is presupposed into the hearers vvhen the promises of the Gospel ar made unto them So that after their first entry Faith is presumed in the hearer as vvell as in the communicant Next the Sacramentall vvord is generall as the vvord Preached is This is my Body vvhich is broken for you This is the new Testament of my blood vvhich is shed for the remissions of the sins of many It is not delivered in the singular number for thee Peter or thee Paul no more then then the vvord preached The seales and elements are received severally and the Spirit vvorketh severally The word is uttered generally as the Sacramentall word is but the Spirit vvorketh by it severally If a man should kneele for the severall vvork of the Spirit then he must knâ—ele as vvell at the vvord as at the Sacrament As for the severall receiving of the seale it is so received severally at that it must also be received conjunctly vvith other communicants that is that the communicants sitting at one table communicate together and distribute among themselves The severall receiving of the outvvard seales must not break the order of conjunct receiving communicating enjoyned by Christ an actuall remembrancâ— of Christs death passion must not burst forth in vocall thankesgiving in the very act of receiving That as the communicating was conjunct so the thankesgiving may be commoun and that the conjunct communicating be not intertubed VVhen the history of the Passion is read we are in actuall remembrance of Christs death but we burst not out in vocall praises VVhen the seale is received it is received from the hand of men and it is no more but the outward seale grace is not inclosed in it as a plaister in a box or liquor into a vessel The kirk in the time of Novatus was gone froÌ„ the right form of administration and therefore their example is no good argument to prove severall thanksgiving And we read of nothing that was answered then by the coÌ„municants but AmeÌ„ He that delivered sayd The body of the Lord he that received sayd Amen Novatus vvhen he delivered sayd these words to the communicant Sweare to me by the body of the Lord that thou wilt not return to Cornelius in stead of these words the body of the Lord and likewise the receiver answered in place of Amen I will not return to Cornelius Now for a custome of saying Amen at the receiving as a particle of confirmation of the words uttered by the Minister to wit the body of the Lord vve cannot conclude kneeling for they sayd Amen standing But as I sayd before we are not to look to the formes of the ancieÌ„t kirke For the very Papists themselves have thought shame of some of them and the posterior ages abolished many of them Let it be remembred here also that all the D. discourse may be applied to the Sacraments of the old Law as well as of the new For there in their Sacraments the covenant was solemnized and they received the seales and actuall remembrance of the benefits received and to be received was required but kneeling was not required The comparing of the Sacraments of the old Law and new Law and of the word of God with the Sacraments together with the order of the institution may furnish answers to al the Doctors arguments This Sacrament is called the Lords supper partly for honor section 8 of the first institution partly to poynt out to us the liberalitie of the spirituall supper as suppers were more liberall then dinners of old The spirituall part is called a Feast or supper metaphorically it is resembled by the symbolical part It was not necessarie that the symbolicall part should be like coÌ„mon Feasts or suppers in all poynts There are as many poynts in it as may serve to resemble the spirituall supper To which symbolicall representation of a supper a table-gesture and specially sitting was most correspondent and agreeable and so Christ and his Apostles used it Piscator sayth it is evident in that the disciples did eat of the bread and drink of the cup sitting together at table that this action had speciem convivij the shew or semblance of a banket yea that it was a banket indeed but a sacred one And Mornaeus sayth the like It is true the Doctor sayth the name of supper should not diminish the estimation of it but on the other side say I no ceremonie should be brought in to take avvay speciem convivij the semblance of a banket or supper but when the communicants receive severally kneeling as if there were no table not onely is that semblance of a banket or supper which the Lord instituted taken away but all forme of banket or Supper that ever was used in any part of the world As for the giving and receiving at this supper we have spoken already The washing of the Disciples feet and Christ his sitting at section 9 table are not rightly matched together His washing of their feet before the last service of the Paschall supper was an extraordinarie example to teach his Disciples humilitie but his sitting at table was not a thing extraordinary but ordinary usuall He sate with them at the Paschal suppers before according to the custome of the sacred Feast and not to teach them humilitie so did he at the Eucharisticall supper VVe never reasoned after this manner The Apostles sate at table with Christ therefore we may sit now with Christ. Christ is not bodily present now that we may sit with him To ask if we would sit at table suppose Christ glorified would come down from heaven and sit with us were a question not worthy scanning But we reason after this manner when Christ was bodily present the Apostles kneeled not but sate at table farre lesse when he is not bodily present should we kneele That he was then in the state of a servant will not help their cause For howbeit he vvas in the state of a Servant yet upon singular occasions he was adored If I would discourse Rhethorically upon the present occasion they had to move them to kneele then any man would grant that the occasion of adoration was singular and yet they kneeled not for other weightie reasons and causes It is also untrue that the Doctor sayth that he carried at this time onely the forme of a Servant and Minister of the externall element for he carried also in open view the person of a Lord in that he did institute the Sacrament VVe yet
reason further from the example of Christ and his Apostles not respecting adoration directed to Christ bodily present and we say that Christ directed not his Apostles to adore and worship God the Father for the benefit of redemption when they were in the act of receiving Christs familiar presence should not have with holden them from directing their prayers and praises to God if it had bâ—en a thing requisite no more then when they kneeled in their prayers to God at other times no doubt notvvithstanding of Christs familiar presence in the carriage of a Servant And Christ should have taught them so to do if the reasons hitherto alledged by the Doctor were good All his reasons are as good for the first supper as for the rest of the rest of the suppers which have followed since The words of the institution served to teach the Apostles as wel as us that he was their benefactor testator adopter redeemer and feeder Again the form that Christ instituted he appointed it not for that night onely but to be observed to his comming again therefore the different state of Christ in humility or glory did not alter it And even after his ascension when he was in the state of glorie the Apostolicall Kirkes as we have sayd sate at table The rules of the institution and precepts generall particular admit no other gesture but a table-gesture Seeing these rules precept are perpetuall to be observed whether Christ be in the state of glorie or humilitie it is evident that it was Christs vvill that after his glorificatioÌ„ also we should coÌ„tinue the table-gesture and the semblance of a supper till his comming again when we shall sup with him in glorie section 10 VVhen the Apostle saith Shew forth the Lord death till he come again the Doctor saith he meaneth not verball preaching made by word but reall preaching acted by taking eating drinking This is a Iesuiticall exposition very familiar with the Doctor throughout his book The Rhemists so expound the words 1 Cor. 11.26 that this commemoration is nothing els but the representation of the death of Christ made by the elements the action But D. Fulk answereth that even according to the judgement of the Fathers the Lords death must be shewed not onely by the action but also by words that may stirre us up to remembrance and thankfulnes Although saith he a long sermon as we take a sermon is not necessarie yet at least a summarie and briefe declaration of the institution and use of the Sacrament is necessarie And therefore saith VVillets the Sacraments cannot rightly be Ministred unles there be a declaratioÌ„ shewing forth of the Lords death not onely in the visible action of breaking distributing but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death with an exhortatioÌ„ to thankfulnes Pezelius saith that to annunce or declare is not to expresse by similitude of fact but to inculcate the death of Christ his benefites to teach the right use of the SacrameÌ„t This annunciatioÌ„ agreeth with the Hagadah that is the declaratioÌ„ which was made at the passover according to the coÌ„mandement Exo. 13.8 thou shalt shew This precept was giveÌ„ not to be performed coÌ„fusedly by al but according to good order comelines therefore at the paschall supper one made the declaration expounding every coremony in the own place the meaninge of the Lamb of the bitter hearbs so forth of the rest This hagadah declaratioÌ„ of the Iewes saith Casaubonus answereth to annunciate 1 Cor. 11.26 But admitting the Doctors interpretation what would he inferre He would inferre that this Sacrament is called Eucharist not onely for the thankesgiving wherewith it beginneth endeth but because the action itselfe is an actioÌ„ of thankesgiving for as it is a memoriall of his praise so it is a testimonie of our thankfulnes It is true indeed that the name of Eucharist is attributed not by scripture but by the Fathers to the action yea to the elements themselves But it is unproper appellation to call the bread of the Sacrament Eucharist that is thankesgiving And therefore Iustinus calling it so must expound it again by more proper speech saying panis Eucharistetheis the bread whereupon thankesgiving was made so likewise the action of giving receiving eating drinking if at any time they be called Eucharisticall it is unproper speech For properly thankesgiving standeth in words and no other but verball thankesgiving is propâ—rly Eucharistia And from that which is properly thankesgiving it should seeme most reasonable that the vvhole action is denominated Eucharist or thankesgiving And Casaubonus saith that the Sacrament is denominated both Eulogia and Eucharistia from a part of the action to wit the proper thankesgiving and blessing The actions ar properly a representation and consequently a memoriall of Christs death and Passion but not properly a commemoration of his death and Passion VVhen verball commemoration is made of Christs death and Passion it is not formally a rendring of thankes farr lesse is the representation VVe kneele not when verball commemoration is made of Christs Passion should we kneele at the representation The Iewish passover was to the People of God a memoriall of their by-past deliverance and a type of the spirituall deliverance to come yet neither for the action not nor for the declaration made at the action did they kneele To divine worship sayth Cyrillus belong sacrifices hymnes prayers praises and thankesgivings adoration and worship sacred devotions priesthood temples altars offrings confessions solemnities VVhere ye may see thankesgiving and adoration are distinguished from the rest All these particulars belong to Gods honour in generall but they are not adoration or praise in particular honor is more generall then praise or adoration He that adoreth honoreth but every one that honoreth adoreth not The last Section containeth a conclusion of his former discourses which are answered CHAP. IV. Kneeling standeth not vvith Charitie OF the gift the giver the manner of donation and receiving section 1 and of the requisites of Faith hunger thirst joy humilitie in the communicants vve spake before The Pastor ministring the externall element representeth section 2.3.4 Christ ministring the spirituall food to the soule Our sitting at table and communicating with the pastor doth resemble the soule admitted to the spirituall table and Christ dining and supping with it Apocalypsis 3.20 Eating and drinkinking represent our union with Christ as food to our soules but do not represent our fellowship with him as of guests with the master of the Feast This is represented by a Table-gesture VVhen I eate a great mans meat set before me or reached to me his meat is united to me and turned in the substance of my body and that may be done without a table wheresoever I eate his meate But when he admitteth me to sit at his table he maketh manifest the fellowship whereunto he hath assumed me at that
VVhat was this but to corfirm one superstition with another for wherefore should we kneele at these words more then at the rest of the articles of our faith or confortable passages of scripture VVhē he was afterward in Zurich writing against Gardiner he was forced to defend his former treatise through the importunitie of his adversarie he was driuen to utter such speeches As the papists worship their absent Saints in their images so do we worship Christs body being absent in the sacrament And again as the nobles Citizens reverēce the Emperour in his purple robe his seale howbeit they know he is not contained in them so do we in the Sacrament worship Christs body being absent Yet this much we may perceiue that he could never throughly digest it for in the same part vvhere the Doctor doth cite him he doth twice vvish that all kinde of externall adoadoration vvere abolished whether prostration of the body or kneeling And when he was in Zurich In his defence against Gardiner he affirmeth plainly that it was without any vvarrant of Gods word yea against the example of Christ and his Apostles But not willing to insist long in scanning mens testimonies I proceed VVe compare not the brasen Serpent vvith the bread in the section 8 Sacrament It is the ordinance of God and of perpetuall use even to his comming againe according to Christs commandement howbeit the Papists have made an Idol of it The ordinances of God should not be abolished when they are abused polluted by men but ought onely to be restored to their right use VVe compare the brasen Serpent with kneeling in the act of receiving If Ezekias brake in peeces the brazen Serpent which was reserved for 700 yeares as a monument of Gods mercie because it was polluted with Idolatrie Farre more should kneeling in the act of receiving be abolished seeing it is but the invention of man and hath been abused to the vilest Idolatrie that ever was the worship of the bready God The brasen Serpent had no state in the worship of God and yet Ezekias would not be curious in the carefull keeping of it but brake it in peeces Kneeling hath state in the worship of God and cannot be hid from the eyes of men therefore more dangerous then the brasen Serpent Constantine the great closed up the temples of Idols Iulian opened them again therefore Theodosius demolished them section 9 It is true the Doctor saith that there is great difference betwixt an Image and the workes of God the word and the Sacraments But yet it is Idolatrie to give Gods worship to any creature whatsoever suppose to an Angell of heaven It is lawfull to bow down if there be not some other just impediment when we have seen the workes of God when we have heard the word received the Sacraments c. But the Doctor frameth his words after this manner To bow down when we have seen the workes of God when we have heard the word when vve receive the Sacraments he sayth not when we have received as he sayd of the other two and as he should have done Or else if he had spoken to his purpose he should have have said after this manner It is lawfull to bow down when vve see the workes of God heare the word or receive the Sacraments which he vvould be loath to do He doth the like in the two examples following vvhen the fire fell down and consumed the sacrifice of Elias the people fell on their faces and cried the Lord is God And the infidell or unlearned Christian convinced by the Prophets in his conscience falling on his face adored God saying God is among you Here the Principall cause of their falling down vvas God saith he but the miraculous vvork of the fire and the word of the Prophets vvere instrumētal causes vvhereby they vvere vvakened and stirred up Even so vvhen vve fall dovvn at the Sacrament the principall cause that moveth us sayth he is God to vvhom vve kneele but the Sacrament is the instrument vvhereby vve are taught and admonished to fall dovvn at that time and in that place If the Doctor had said of the first tvvo that at the same time and in the same place they fell dovvn also he had said to the purpose But he doth altogether suppresse the circumstance of time and place in the tvvo examples And the truth is that the people fell on their faces after that the fire had consumed the burnt-offring and the vvood and the stones and the dust and licked up the vvater that vvas in the ditch 1 King 18.38.39 And the infidell or unlearned Christian is brought in upon supposition in case such a thing fall out falling on his face and adoring God after that the Prophets had ended their Prophecying For he is brought in speaking vvhich could not be done vvithout confusion if the Prophets vvere prophecying in the meane time So his examples do not serve his purpose nor his comparison in generall of the Sacraments vvith the vvord vvorkes of God For if vve should fall dovvn at the time and place vvhen vve see the vvorkes of God and feele our selves vvakened and stirred up by them then shall vve fall dovvn before the vvhole host of heaven and every thing that creepeth on the earth Or vvhen vve heare the vvord if every man as he findeth himselfe vvakened and stirred up should fal dovvn and vvorship hovvbeit he joyn not speaking vvith it like the infidell or unlearned vvhat a confusion vvould be brought into Gods service Next I say suppose it vvere granted that the people fell dovvn in the meane time that the fire vvas vvorking the vvork vvherefore it vvas sent there is a difference betvvixt the customable beholding of Gods ordinary vvorkes the Sacraments and a miracle For as Augustine saith of the sacred Scripture the Serpent the Sacraments they may be honored as matters religious but vvondred at as matters of marvel they may not be The infidell or unlearned if he had fallen dovvn in the mean time and spoken it had been but his rudenes not yet vvell understanding the order of the Church VVhat men do either amazed vvith the Majestie of God in a miracle or of ignorance being but nevv couverts to testifie their conversion before the congregation as vvitnesses doth not helpe the Doctors cause Thirdly suppose they had fallen dovvn in the mean time yet their falling dovvn vvas not for adoration of the fire or the vvord but of God Kneeling at the Sacrament is for reverence of the Sacrament as vve shal make manifest But as I haue sayd their falling dovvn vvas not in the meane time of the vvorking of the fire or the prophesying of the Prophets and so serueth not the Doctor to the very pretence of falling dovvn at the Sacrament He denieth that they bovv their knees at the Sacrament for the religions respect and reverence vvhich they cary to the Sacrament but to
Christ for the religions respect reverence that by it they are taught to giue to him I see men make no account vvhat they deny providing they can insnare simple people and bring them to the doing of the act The Doctor sayd othervvayes at the pretended assembly and the act penned by him and some others vvhen it vvas reformed the copie vvhereof subscrived by the clarke come in my hands speaketh as I have already alledged It is there ordained that vve kneele in reverence of so divine a Mysterie to vvit as is the Sacrament or holy communion vvhereof mention is made in the vvords immediatly preceeding And the vvords follovving in remembrance of so mysticall an union as vve are made partokers of thereby to vvit by the mysterie declare that by the vvord mystery is meant the Sacrament The like speech he hath in this book that the communion of the body and blood of Christ is offered to us by the sacred mysteries vvhich are given at the table It is an usuall tearme of the ancients to call the Sacrament sometimes mysteries in the plurall number sometime mysterie in the singular number as the Doctor doth also varie the tearm in this book And in the English Confession the bread and vvine are called the heavenly mysteries of the body and blood of Christ. To kneele then in religious reverence of the Sacrament is to adore it For all religious kneeling is a gesture not of ordinary and common reverence but of adoration Seeing therefore the publick intent of the inforced act is Idolatrie vvhatsoever be the private intent of the communicant he is guiltie of Idolatry in kneeling A man may go to Rome and take the Sacrament at the Antichrists hand if private intention will save him from the guiltines of Idolatry Our conformitie with our neighbour Kirk doth also manifest the intent of our act The disputers against Mr. Rogers Mr. Hutton D. Cowel and D. Spark prove out of their vvriters that the reverence of the Sacrament is intended I vvill onely set down Mr. Huttons words Our bowing at the Sacrament saith he is an outvvard reverence meet to be performed because of that holy action in hand namely our religious communicating partly to stirre up in others a more religious estimation of those divine seales partly to remove all prophane thoughts of Epicures and contemners partly to put a difference between the ordinary bread wine those Sacramentall to which we give more reverence because they are more thē ordinary bread wine That book of cōmon prayer wherto they are tied by the statute of Q. Elisabeth giveth also to understand that kneeling at the communion is enjoyned upon this ground that the Sacrament might not be profaned but held in a reverent and holy estimation amongst us I heare that our men have put in another word to colour the matter In reverence of God and of so divine a mystery but that will not help the matter For God wil be the totall onlie object of adoration he will have no compartner he will have it to be directed to him alone immediatly But what if by the word mysterie be understood the action of celebration that will not help the matter For the action of celebration is nothing else but the mysticall rites and ceremonies employed about the elemēts giving receiving eating drinking I may not kneele in reverence of the mysticall rites more then of the mysticall elements I may not lawfully adore actions more then substances No action never so mysticall or holy is the right object of our adotation Seeing therefore we kneele in reverence of the Sacramēt it is in part the object of our adoration vve are sayd as properly to bow before it as the Papist to bow before his image Yea suppose a thing situate before us vvanting life be not the object of our adoration as a vvall or a tree yet are we said properly to bow before it in our vulgar language howbeit speaking Greeke we would not use the vvord Enopion to that purpose David or Daniel may be justly sayd to bovv toward the Temple they being farre removed from the sight of it or toward the Ark the Ark being out of sight in the holy of holies The elements are not onely in our sight but are also the object of our reverend vvorship as the crucifix is to the Papist And admit that the speech were not proper to say we bow down before any dead element the doctors phrase is sufficient for us For we may not bow down toward a creature as the object of our adoration Yea and further we may not bovv by direction and ordinance novv under the nevv Testament tovvard any place or creature there to vvorship God as the people of old did tovvard the Ark vvhere God manifested himselfe by a singular manner of presence sitting betvyixt the Cherubins It is manifest then that the publick intent of the act is Idolatrous seeing the elements are made an object of our reverent kneeling Yet let us examine the Doctors private but pretended intent 1. If vve kneele onely to Christ at that time and place vvhen the elements in the sight and use of them as instrumentall causes vvaken and stirr us up to give that bodily worship then at what time and in what place soever vve are moved and stirred up by any creature work of God word Sacrament type figure monument to acknowledge our dutie of bodily worship to God we should give it in that place at the same instant time For the Doctor did except onely Images and Idols as not fitt to teach us any thing of God and consequently that we should not bowe before them But of this purpose we spake a litle before See also Perth Assembly 2. If I kneele onely in regard of the pretended prayer of the soule and yet in the mean time of my kneeling which is an externall worship I perform an other action of divine service I confound two parts of externall worship I am praying and in that regard as is pretended kneeling and in the meane time I am beholding with mine eyes the mysticall actions hearkening with the eares to the audible words receiving the elements vvith my hands eating and drinking vvith my mouth and so one person at one time is 〈◊〉 two sundry parts of externall vvorship For these actions are not the actions and gestures of prayer and adoration The diuers kindes of Gods vvorship should not be confounded vvith other but specially none of them ought to be confounded with prayer and adoration for eschewing of Idolatrie Did ADAM eate of the tree of life the people of God eate of the Paschall supper or the manna the Priests eates of the things sacrificed of the presence bread or other holy meate and adore in the mean time also The Lord would have externall adoration superceeded during the use of the meanes the vvord the Sacraments both for eschewing of Idolatrie lest vve adore the meanes and