well as Habits and make it as unlawful to use a Church as a Surplice he therefore cautiously begins it with Some of them But yet however he gives us a reason for it viz. Because the appropriation of it to the Religious act speaks something of Religion and Homage to God in it Elsewhere he expresseth himself after the like manner We think they civil usages must not have any thing of the nature of Worship in them but may as well be used in meerly Civil actions as in Religious Duties If there be any thing of Homage to God in them they are Worship which must have an Institution But First What doth he mean by appropriation doth he thereby understand that what is for the present appropriated to a Religious use and Service cannot be omitted nor altered nor upon any reason whatsoever be applied to any other use This our Church doth not hold (a) (a) (a) Homilies Sermon of good works pt 2 Sermon of Prayer pt 2. Article 34. Is it that out of a Reverence to Divine Ordinances it is not fit that the things used in or at Divine Worship be prostituted to vulgar use that what are Churches for an hour or two on the Lord's day be not Stables all the week after nor the Tables and Plate used in the Lord's Supper be employd in the service of the Taverns This we agree to and think our selves well able to defend against any arguments we have yet seen to the contrary 2ly Doth appropriation necessarily imploy homage to God may not things be thus separated for Order and Uniformity for Gravity and Decency for Reverence and Respect to the Solemnities of Religion And may not this Reverence and Respect we shew to the solemnities of Religion and the Devotion we shew in external Worship redound to God himself Indeed what are all the outward acts of Reverence but expressing of Homage Veneration and Adoration to God I do not think the Holy Psalmist forgot himself when he said Come let us Worship and fall down and Ps. 95. 6. kneel before the Lord our Maker Or that our Author himself said amiss when he maintains that Nature Pag. 29. teacheth us to Worship God in the most decent manner we can For though Adoration be to be given to God alone Pag. 13. Jean's answer to Hammond Pag. 21. yet Reverence as our Author distinguisheth is due to all things relating to him and to that Worship we pay to him And as there are several Acts of Worship due to God So there are some things due to his Worship by which his honour is advanced and devotion furthered But for this I refer him to what Case of Indifferent things Pag. 29. was said otherwhere which he was pleased to take no notice of But to bring all to an issue I shall now consider the several arguments and instances I produced to prove that things indifferent though not prescribed may be lawfully used in Divine Worship This I proved from the old Testament and New from the practice of the Primitive and Modern Churches and from their own Concessions 1. The instances I chose to give from the Old Testament were David's Temple the Feast of Purim and the Synagogal Worship To these he answers at once that they are answered long since by Dr. Ames in his Case examined Pag. 25. Fresh Suit And perhaps may be answered by him after the manner he defâ—â—â—â—â— the objection taken from the second Commandment which our Author himself Pag. 27. gives up But 〈…〉 â—â—guments are of force I suppose we shall find it in our Author And he first begins with Davids Temple of which he saith David indeed design'd Pag. 26. a Temple for God without a command But God checked him for it for this very reason 2. Sam. 7. 7. and though he approved his generally good intention yet he restrained him as to his Act as may be seen in that Chap. This being matter of Fact the Text must determine it and from thence I observe 1. That God had at no time given a command concerning building a Temple So in the Text quoted in all the places with all the children of Israel spake I a 2 Sam. 7. 7. word with any of the tribes c. saying why build ye not me an house of Cedars 2. David in designing it went upon rational grounds 1. as God had given him rest and so it became him to do it in point of gratitude and because he had an opportunity for it 2. From comparing his own house Vers 1 with God's See now I dwell in an house of Cedar but the Ark of God dwelleth within curtains 3. It was no rash act for it seems he had at that time Vers 2 made ready for the building having it a long time before in his thoughts Of this see Dr. Lightfoot Temple c. 40. 1 Chron. 28. 2. 3. 1. From all which I infer that neither David in designing nor Nathan in approving what he design'd thought it absolutely unlawful to do what was not commanded in the Worship of God or that what was not commanded was forbidden This must be granted by our Author that saith God approved his generally good intention now what was his intention generally but to do somewhat in honour to God and for the solemnity of his Worship Thus much Mr. Pool doth yield The design being pious and the thing not forbidden by God Nathan hastily approves it Now if he approved it because not forbidden by God then they did not think that what was not commanded was forbidden nor doth that of our Author appear to be reasonable that God checked him for it because it was without a command 2ly Supposing that particular Act condemned yet it is not reasonable to suppose it to be for the general reason given by our Author that nothing must be done without a command but because in a matter of that consequence the Prophet did not advise about it and that he did too hastily approve it as Mr. Pool saith But 3ly It 's evident that the particular Act was not condemned 1. Because God commended him for it thou didst well (a) (a) (a) 1 Kings 8. 17 18. So Mr. Hildersham Though the Lord would not let David build him an House yet he commends his affection for it c. (b) (b) (b) Lect. on Joh. Lect. 28. 2. God rewarded him for it for upon it it was promised (c) (c) (c) 2 Sam. 7. 11. 1 Chron. 17. 10. He will make thee an House So Mr. Pool For thy good intentions to make him an House he will build thee an House 3. He presently gave order upon it for the building such an House and as a mark of approbation and a further reward of David's good intention did both reveal what he would have built and how (d) (d) (d) 1 Chron. 28. 19. And appoint his immediate Successor for the building of it (e) (e) (e) 2 Sam. 7.
the secret Language and Discourse of every Devout Christian at this Holy Feast and with these kind of Meditations he refreshes and delights himself So that from the whole we may conclude that the Lord's Supper is in its own Nature truly and properly a Feast though vastly different from Common and Ordinary Feasts throughout even in those things wherein it seems to be like them As to the several Names and Phrases by which the Nature of it is described they are figurative and borrowed from Civil Entertainments but although it hath received the same names and is represented by Phrases that properly sute to Ordinary Feasts yet the Lord's Supper differs in its Nature from Civil Banquets as much as Heaven and Earth Body and Spirit differ in theirs As to the Bread and Wine which we see and tast they are only Signs and Types of the true Spiritual Feast and serve to raise our minds to and whet the Appetites of our Souls after Celestial and Heavenly Enjoyments Thus much may suffice to inform us what the Nature of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is considered barely as a Feast 2. For a further Discovery of its Nature we are to be minded that it is a Feast upon a Sacrifice for Sin wherein we are particularly to Commemorate the 1 Cor. 11. 26. Death of Christ by way of expiation for the Sins of the World 3. It was Instituted in Honour of our Lord our great Benefactor and Redeemer where we meet to preserve an Eternal memory of his Wondrous Works to bless and praise him and speak good of his Name And thus partaking of the Lord's Supper is a proper Act of Christian Worship performed to our Saviour It 's the Worship of God manifested in our Flesh and of our Crucified Lord who submitted himself to a Vile and Tormenting Death for the sake of us Vile and Miserable Sinners 4. The Lord's Supper is a Mysterious Rite of Religious Worship which as it respects God the Father hath the Vertue and Efficacy of a Thanksgiving and a Prayer as the Sacrifices under the Law had For our desires and affections may be signified by Actions as well as Words and by Ceremonies as well as Speech And with respect to this Notion and End of the Lord's Supper it was Anciently Stiled the Liturgy and the Eucharist which last name as it was given to it in the most Ignat. Ep. ad Ephes Justin Mar. in Dial. eum Tryph. early Ages of the Church so it still retains the same among all the Christian Churches to this day 5. The Lord's Supper was Instituted to be a Foederal or Covenanting Rite between God and all worthy Communicants Where by permitting us to Eat and Luk. 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 24. Drink at his Table he signifies that we are in a State of Peace and Friendship and in a Covenant-relation with him and we by coming to his Table and Eating and Drinking in his presence do own him to be our God and Saviour and in effect plight our troth to him and Swear Fidelity and Allegiance to him we take the Sacrament upon it as we ordinarily say that we will not henceforth live unto our selves but to him alone that Dyed for us and gave himself for us an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for a Sweet Smelling Savour 6. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was Instituted for this further end viz. to be a means to Convey and Apply to us the Merits of that Sacrifice which Christ offered for Sinners on the Cross and as a Pledge to assure us thereof 7. It was instituted to be a Sacred Bond of Unity and Concord among all Christians to engage and dispose us to Love one another as our Lord Loved us who thought not his Life too dear nor his Blood too much to part with for our Sakes This is a short and so far as it serves my present design a full account of the Nature of the Lord's Supper If the Reader desire to see these things which I have but touched upon more largely proved and explained let him for his satisfaction consult those two excellent Discourses among many others that pass under these names viz. 1. The Christian Sacrifice 2. Discourse of Religious Set forth by 1. Dr. Patriâ— 2. Dr. Sherlock Assemblies Howsoever by what hath been said it appears that the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is of a complicated Nature and Instituted for various ends that it is vastly different both in its nature and ends from Civil and Ordinary Feasts And therefore I conclude that we are not at this Religious Feast to guide our Selves by the Rules of Common Table-Fellowship but by more Religious and Spiritual Considerations Which leads me to the second thing proposed for the Resolution of the present Case 2. That the Nature of the Lord's Supper doth not absolutely require and necessarily oblige us to observe a Table-Gesture in order to a right and worthy Receiving of it The Reasons that I shall offer for the Proof of this are these 1. If the Nature of the Sacrament considered as a Feast necessarily requires a Table-Gesture then the Nature of the Sacrament considered as a Feast equally concludes for all other Formalities which are either Essential to all Civil Feasts whatsoever or to all Feasts as they obtain among us For if Sitting be necessary purely because the Nature of a Feast requires it then all other Circumstances which the Nature of a Feast requires will be equally necessary too But our Dissenting Brethren will by no means allow of this nor think themselves obliged to observe all other formalities though equally sutable and agreeable to the Nature of a Feast as Sitting is Though for what good reason I am perfectly in the dark For 1. As they omit many things at the Sacrament that are as agreeable to the Nature of a Feast as the Table-Gesture is So they observe several Modes and Circumstances which are not agreeable to the nature of a Feast as the Custom of our Country standeth For instance at our Common and Ordinary Feasts it 's very sutable and agreeable to Laugh to Talk and Discourse together to Congratulate one anothers welfare to enquire of the State of absent Friends and Acquaintance to Sit with the Head Covered to Eat plentifully and Drink Frequently to Carve and Drink to one another It is further necessary and convenient that at such Feasts the Guests should be well attended with Servants and Waiters who are not allowed to Sit down at the Table with â—hose who are Invited It 's agreeable that the Guests should if they please help themselves and their Friends where they like And yet these and many other things of this Nature though very sutable to and commonly practised at our Ordinary Feasts are not allowed of nor practised by nor urged as necessary to be observed at the Sacrament by our Dissenting Brethren But why they should plead for and urge the necessity of a Common Table-Gesture
use the hours of Prayer onely as necessary circumstances of Humane actions or such without which the light of Nature or Common usage shews the thing cannot be done or conveniently or Pag. 1. Pag. 14. comelily done as he saith Or rather did they not use them as they found them instituted and observed in the Jewish Church And not for his Thus and the reasons given by him Will those reasons justifie those very hours of the day or the just number of three hours Or however how will they Justify the Prayers used at those hours But whatever exceptions he had against the time he it seems found nothing to say to the Service which yet was pleaded as well as that Case of Indifferent things P. 11. But he saith There is nothing of Religion in the time If so as is granted then it 's in the power of a Church to institute and determine it where there is no other Religion in the Time than as it 's thus separated to the Service of God Lastly he saith The Apostles might have changed the Hours of Prayer if they had pleased How might they have changed them Might they do it as Apostolical Persons or as Private Members of the Jewish Church As to the former I find not they did exercise any such Power within the Jurisdiction of the Jewish Church nor that they had any Commission so to do As for the latter I deny it For if it lay in the power of Private Members of a Church to alter the Hours in which the Church is to assemble it is in their power to Dissolve the Assembly and there could nothing but Confusion issue from it I must confess he seems to be at a perfect loss what to say as to this matter And it appears so when he dares not so much as touch upon the Prayers used in those hours and applies his Thus to St. Paul's using Circumcision and Purification as if they also were necessary circumstances of Humane action or such without which the light of Nature or Common Vsage shews the thing cannot be done c. which were things of pure Institution at the first and what though peculiar to the Jewish Church the Apostle complied with them in for a time The next instances produced in proof of the Proposition were Washing the Disciples feet Love-Feasts and Holy-Kiss which he joyns together and of which he saith 1. It 's impossible to prove that they were any more Pag. 12 15 16 19. than Civil usages c. 2. They were not used in Worship Whether it is impossible to prove the first or no doth not rest upon our Author's authority and yet that is the Case of Indifferenc things P. 13. only thing which he hath thought fit to confront what I produced in proof of it That they were Civilrites is granted but that they were used by Christ and the Apostles as no more than Civil is I may safely venture to say impossible to prove First Because there is the reason of the thing against it as they were instituted and used for Spiritual ends and in token of Christian Humility and Charity as I then shewed Secondly Case of Indiff p. 9. 12. Because of the great Difference there was betwixt them when used as meerly Civil and as used by our Saviour and the Apostles What this was as to washing the feet I then shewed where he might be Satisfied and to Hor. in Joh. c. 13. 5. Buxtorf I may add the Learned Dr. Lightfoot It appears further they were not meerly Civil from the Character given to the kiss of Charity being called the Holy Kiss But This was saith he because the Apostle commanded Christians to use it in a Sober Temperate Chast Or holy manner But if this was the reason then all Kisses and all Feasts would be holy But now Holiness stamps somewhat peculiar upon the thing it 's applied to and signifies that by Some act end or use it 's Separated from the rest of the same kind And for this reason was it more likely the kiss was called Holy from its end use and signification as it was a Testimony of that Holy and intire love which was or ought to have been amongst Christians rather than in respect of the manner for what reason was there for that when it was betwixt persons of the same and not a different Sex Besides if it was a meer Civil rite and design'd for no Religious end could we think the Apostle would require it and close his Epistles so frequently with it Lastly it appears they were not used as mere Civil Rites because they were used in Religious Assemblies and some of them annexed thereunto Of this he saith he can never Pag. 16. prove that while Our Saviour was Worshipping his Father he stept aside to wash his Disciples Feet Or that the Primitive Christians were either Kissing or Feasting one another in the Time or Act of Worship as Praying c. It would have become our Author rather to have removed the proofs given of this than to call for more which if he had considered he would have expressed himself with more caution and reverence That washing the Disciples feet had a Spiritual signification I have shewed and so was not unfit for a Religious Solemnity and that it was used in such the Apostle shews Joh. 13. 4. for a further account of which I leave him to the Learned Exercit. 16. n. 22. 24. Casaubon How and when the Holy Kiss was used and how it was called the Seal of Prayer and reconciliation I then shewed and is so fully proved by Dr. Falkner that Libertas l. 2. c. 1. §. 3. there needs no more to be added till that at least be refuted That the Love-Feasts were joyned to and used at the same time as the Lord's Supper not only the Apostle's discourse upon it sheweth but also the change of Names and the giving of one to the other doth confirm it For Theophylact supposeth that the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. 20. calls the Love-Feast by the name of the Lord's Supper And on the contrary Tertullian declares that from hence Apel. c. 39. the Lord's Supper came to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It were easy to heap up Authorities in this kind but that is done to my hand by such as write upon this Custom V. Vines on the Sacram. c. 2. p. 25 c. After I had proved that things Indifferent though not prescribed might be used in Divine Worship from the practice of the Jewish Church and that of Christ and the Apostles I further confirm'd it from the incapacity we should be in of holding Communion with any Church if it were otherwise whether Ancient or Modern But our Author doth endeavour at once to overthrow it For saith he that every particular Christian must Case examined Pag. 21. practise every thing which the Churches practise which he hath Communion with or be concluded to have
of the same thing they cannot both proceed from the nature of the thing but one or t'other must necessarily arise from the disposition and temper of those who are conversant about it Now I have shew'd that Forms of Prayer are in themselves real advantages to publick Devotion and that they are so there are many thousands of good Christians can attest by their own experience and therefore if our Brethren do not experience the same the fault must lie in their own prejudice or temper and there is no doubt to be made but would they heartily indeavour to cure their own prejudice and to dispossess their minds of those groundless Piques they have entertain'd against our Liturgy would they but peruse it with impartial eyes consider the contents and labour to affect their minds with the sense and matter of it they would quickly find the same experience of its advantageousness to publick devotion as those blessed Martyrs did who compos'd it us'd and at last died for it and valued every Leaf of it as an inestimable treasure and as we should consent in our experience so we should also in our communion and with one heart and one mouth glorifie our Father together FINIS CERTAIN Cases of Conscience RESOLVED Concerning The Lawfulness of Joyning WITH Forms of Prayer IN Publick Worship PART II. VIZ. IV. Whether the common wants of Christian Congregations may not be better represented in conceiv'd Prayers than in Forms V. Whether there be any warrant for Forms of Prayer either in Scripture or pure Antiquity VI. Whether supposing Forms to be lawful the imposition of them may be lawfully complied with LONDON Printed by J. C. and F. C. for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street B. Tooke at the Ship in St. Paul's Church-yard and F. Gardiner at the White Horse in Ludgate-street 1684. CASE IV. Whether the common Cases and Wants of Christians can be so well express'd in one Constant Form as in a Conceiv'd Prayer IT is objected That not onely the Cases of particular Christians but the common Cases of Christian Societies and Assemblies are subject to infinite Changes and Alterations that they have many times new Judgments to be humbled for new Blessings to return thanks for new Dangers to deprecate and new Hopes to pursue and sollicit which the Composers of our standing Forms could not foresee and for which by consequence they could not provide sutable Petitions and Thanksgivings besides which particular Churches may at one time be more pure and reform'd and at another time more deprav'd and degenerated and certainly such different states require different Confessions and Prayers and therefore to sute and adapt one common Form to common Cases and Necessities which are so very variable and alterable seems as vain an attempt as 't would be to make a Coat to fit the Moon in all its changes whereas were the publick Prayers left to be conceived and worded by the Ministers sufficient provision might be made for all these alterations and changes by their varying their Confessions Petitions and Thanksgivings according as the common Cases and Exigencies of their People vary and therefore since conceiv'd Prayers are most fit to represent the publick Cases and Necessities they think it very unlawful that the publick Prayers should be perform'd by a Form In order to the full and plain resolution of this Case therefore I shall lay down these following Propositions 1. That the common Cases and Necessities of Christians are for the main always the same and therefore may be more fully comprehended in a Form than in an extempore Prayer for publick Prayers ought not to descend to particular Cases and Necessities because they are the Prayers of the whole Congregation and therefore ought to comprehend no more than what is more or less every man's Case and Necessity They ought to confess sin in no other particular instances or aggravations than such as are justly chargeable upon a Congregation of Christians nor to petition or return thanks for any other Mercies but what a Christian Congregation may be supposed either to stand in need of or to have receiv'd because the Confession Petition and Thanksgiving is in the name of the whole Congregation and therefore ought to comprize nothing in them but what is the common Case of all and what every one may truly and sincerely joyn with Now as for these matters of Prayer which are common to Christian Congregations they are for the main always the same the same sins and aggravations of sin which were fit for a common Confession of Christians one thousand years ago are for the main as fit for our common Confessions to this day and the Mercies which we need and receive in common now are for the main the same with what all Christians before us have needed and receiv'd in common As for instance the Mercies which in publick Prayer ought to be petition'd for are such as all Christians have a common need of and ought to have a common concern for such as the forgiveness of our sins the peace of our Consciences the assistance of Divine Grace to deliver us from the power of sin and Satan and make us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light redemption from Death and Hell protection and success in all our honest Concerns and Undertakings and the dayly supply of our bodily Wants and Necessities and in general the preservation and direction of our Governours the peace and welfare of our native Country the prosperity of the Church the propagation of the Gospel and the success of its Ministers in the work of the Lord. And these were the main matter of the common Petitions of Christian people a thousand years ago and will be so a thousand years hence Since therefore the matter of publick Prayer is for the main always the same I can see no reason why so far as it is the same it may not be more comprehensively express'd in a Form than in an extempore Prayer which depending on the present invention and memory of the speaker it is impossible almost but of so many particulars some should be many times omitted or at least not so fully and distinctly express'd as it might be in a well-consider'd Form the Composer of which hath much more time to recollect the matter and may supply whatsoever was omitted at first upon a second or a third revisal and I dare appeal to any impartial Judge whether in our Churches Litany how meanly soever our Brethren may think of it there be not a much more distinct enumeration of the main particulars of publick Petitions than ever he met with in any extemporary Prayer 2. That such alterations of the common Cases and Necessities of Christian Churches as could not be forâ—seen and provided for at the first forming of their Liturgies may for the most part be provided for in new Forms when they happen for so our Church we see hath done in all such new Cases as are of
again For now comes another Exorcising or Conjuring of the Devil And this being also concluded the Priest takes Spittle out of his Mouth and touches therewith the Ears and Nostrils of the Infant And in touching his right and left Ear he saith Ephphatha i. e. Be opened Then touching his Nostrils he saith for a savour of sweetness no doubt mighty sweet Another Conjuration of the Devil followeth in these Words Be packing O Devil for the judgment of God is at hand And now the Priest will make you hope again that he hath not forgotten his main business For he asks the Infant whether he renounces the Devil and all his Works and all his Pomps of which he makes three Questions and the God-Father distinctly answers to them But alas he is thus soon gone off from his proper Work again for now you have him dipping his Thumb in Holy Oyl and Anointing the Infant with it in his Breast and betwixt his Shoulders in the figure of a Cross saying I Anoint thee with the Oyl of Salvation in Christ Jesus our Lord that thou mayest obtain Eternal Life Amen Then next he puts off his Purple Robe and puts on another of a White Colour and falls in good earnest to the great business for having askt three more Questions out of the Creed and received the God-Fathers Answers and this other Question Whether the Infant will be Baptized and received the God-Fathers answer to that he pours Water thrice upon the Childs head as he reciteth over it our Saviours Form of Baptism doing it each time at the naming of each of the three Persons And now that the Priest mayn't conclude less wisely than he began comes the Chrism or Holy Ointment in which dipping his Thumb and Anointing the Infant upon the Crown of his head in the figure of a Cross he thus Prayeth O God Omnipotent the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who hath regenerated thee of Water and the Holy Ghost and who hath given thee Pardon of all thy Sins Anoint thee with the Chrism of Salvation in the same Christ Jesus our Lord to Eternal Life Amen And next after the Pax tibi and the wiping of his Thumb and the Anointed head he takes a White Linnen Cloath and putting it on the Childs head useth this Form Take the white Garment which thou maist carry unspotted before the Tribunal of our Lord Jesus Christ that thou maist have Eternal Life Amen And Lastly He puts into the Childs or his God-Fathers hand a lighted Candle and saith Receive the burning Lamp and keep thy Baptism blameless keep Gods Commandments that when the Lord shall come to the Wedding thou maist meet him together with all his Saints in the Celestial Court and maist have Eternal Life and live for ever Amen Concluding all with this Form Go in Peace and the Lord be with thee Amen And as if there were not fooling and ridiculous doings enough in this Office of the Common Ritual there are divers other added to them in the Pastorale For instance the Ceremony of blowing thrice in the Childs Face is here to be done Crossways And after the Conjuration following to which two more are here added the Priest Crossing his Forehead saith I Sign thee in the Forehead in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ that thou maist trust in him Then he Crosseth his Eyes saying I bless thy Eyes that thou maist see his Brightness Then his Ears saying I bless thine Ears that thou Which Crossings are also prescribed by the Ritual in the Office of Adult Baptism but with a variation of the Forms maist hear the Word of his truth Then his Nostrils saying I bless thy Nostrils that thou maist smell his sweetness Then his Breast saying I bless thy Breast that thou maist believe in him Then his Shoulders saying I bless thy Shoulders that thou maist bear the Yoke of his Service Then his Mouth saying I bless thy Mouth that thou maist Confess him who Lives and Reigns God with the Father c. Again The Child here receives the Sign of the Cross in his Right-hand the Priest saying calling him by his Name I deliver thee the Sign of our Lord Jesus Christ in thy Right-hand that thou maist Sign thy self and drive away the Enemy on all sides from thee and maist have Eternal Life c. Here also the Priest is to lay his Robe on the Child in the Figure of a Cross with a many dire menaces tormenting the Devil before his time Here also the Ave Maria is added to the Pater Noster The Infant likewise hath this Benediction pronounced over him before his going to the Font The Benediction of God the Father ✚ Almighty and of his Son ✚ and Holy Ghost ✚ descend and abide upon thee and the Angel of the Lord keep thee until thou comest to Holy Baptism As if the poor Creature were in mighty danger of being carried away by the Devil before he could be Baptized notwithstanding all the past Conjurations and dreadful doings that had been made with him and all the Crosses together with the holy Oyl and holy Spittle bestowed on the Infant And lastly to name no more additions though there are divers others the Flax wherewith the anointed places are wiped is ordered to be burnt over a Pond of Water If those who are unacquainted with our Churches Office of Baptism would after the Reading of this of the Romish Church consult ours they will immediately acknowledge that no two things can well be more unlike than are these two Offices And the like as was said may be seen in the rest as those may perceive who if they understand sorry Latine will take the pains to compare theirs with ours And whereas we asserted the same thing of their and our Forms of Morning and Evening Prayers we might particularly instance in the Litanies Our Litany which I think if comparisons may be allowed is the choicest part of our Service is more than any other part of the Liturgy condemned by Dissenters as Savouring of Popish Superstition But as nothing but great Ignorance can make any man think it really doth so so I am perswaded that the meer comparing it with that of the Romanists might incline the most prejudiced to call it a most Protestant piece of Devotion For they shall find Invocations of Saints and Angels to pray for them the greater part of the Popish Litany Next after the Holy Trinity St. Mary is there invoked first by name then as the Mother of God then as the Virgin of Virgins Next to her three Angels are invoked by name Then all the Angels and Arch-Angels together Then all the holy Orders of Blessed Spirits Next John the Baptist Next all the Patriarchs and Prophets Next St. Peter and all the other Apostles and Evangelists by name Then Altogether Then all the holy Disciples of our Lord. Then all the Holy Innocents Then the Protomartyr St. Stephen and Ten other by Name Then all the Holy Martyrs
Lord Jesus Christ whereunto you are now called through the mighty operation of his Holy Spirit Amen I received Yesternight from you Dear Brother S. and Fellow-Prisoner for the truth for Christ's Gospel a Letter wherein you gently require my Judgment concerning the Baptism of Infants which is the effect thereof And before I do shew you what I have learned out of God's Word and of his true Infallible Church touching the same I think it not out of the matter first to declare what Vision I had the same Night whilst musing on your Letter I fell asleep knowing that God doth not without cause reveal to his People who have their Minds fixed on him Special and Spiritual Revelations to their Comfort as a taste of their Joy and Kingdom to come which Flesh and Blood cannot comprehend Being in the midst of my sweet rest it seemed to me to see a great beautiful City all of the colour of Azure and white four square in a marvellous beautiful composition in the midst of the Skie the sight whereof so inwardly comforted me that I am not able to express the consolation I had thereof yea the remembrance thereof causeth my Heart as yet to leap for Joy And as Charity is no Churle but would have others to be Partakers of his delight some thought I called to others I cannot tell whom and whilst they came and we together beheld the same by and by to my great Grief it vaded away This Dream I think not to have come of the illusion of the Senses because it brought with it so much Spiritual Joy and I take it to be of the working of God's Spirit for the contentation of your Request as he wrought in Peter to satisfie Cornelius Therefore I Interpret this Beautiful City to be the Glorious Church of Christ and the appearance of it in the Sky signifieth the Heavenly State thereof whose Conversation is in Heaven and that according to the Primitive Church which is now in Heaven Men ought to measure and judge the Church of Christ now in Earth for as the Prophet David saith The Foundations thereof be in the Holy Hills and glorious things be spoken of the City of God And the marvellous quadrature of the same I take to signifie the universal agreement in the same and that all the Church here Militant ought to consent to the Primitive Church throughout the four Parts of the World as the Prophet affirmeth saying God maketh us to dwell after one manner in one House And that I conceived so wonderful Joy at the Contemplation thereof I understand the unspeakable Joy which they have that be at Unity with Christ's Primitive Church For there is Joy in the Holy Ghost and Peace which passeth all Understanding as it is written in the Psalms As of Joyful Persons is the dwelling of all them that be in thee And that I called others to the fruition of this Vision and to behold this wonderful City I construe it by the Will of God this Vision to have come upon me musing on your Letter to the end that under this Figure I might have occasion to move you with many others to behold the Primitive Church in all your Opinions concerning Faith and to conform your self in all points to the same which is the Pillar and Establishment of truth and teacheth the true use of the Sacraments and having with a greater fulness than we have now the first fruits of the Holy Ghost did declare the true Interpretation of the Scriptures according to all verity even as our Saviour promised to send them another Comforter which should teach them all truth And since all truth was taught and revealed to the Primitive Church which is our Mother let us all that be obedient Children of God submit our selves to the judgment of the Church for the better understanding of the Articles of our Faith and of the doubtful Sentences of the Scripture Let us not go about to shew in us by following any private Man's Interpretation upon the Word another Spirit than they of the Primitive Church had lest we deceive our selves For there is but one Faith and one Spirit which is not contrary to himself neither otherwise now teacheth us than he did them Therefore let us believe as they have taught us of the Scriptures and be at peace with them according as the true Catholick Church is at this day And the God of Peace assuredly will be with us and deliver us out of all our Worldly Troubles and Miseries and make us Partakers of their Joy and Bliss through our Obedience to Faith with them Therefore God commandeth us in Job to ask of the Elder Generation and to search diligently the memory of the Fathers For we are but Yesterdays Children and be Job 8. ignorant and our days are like a Shadow and they shall teach thee saith the Lord and speak to thee and shall utter words from their Hearts And by Solomon we are Prov. 6. commanded not to reject the direction of our Mother The Lord grant you to direct your steps in all things after her and to abhor contention with her For as St. Paul writeth If any Man be contentious neither we neither the 1 Cor. 11. Church of God hath any such custom Hitherto I have shewed you good Brother S. my Judgment generally of that you stand in doubt and dissent from others to the which I wish you as mine own Heart to be comformable and then doubtless you cannot err but boldly may be glad in your Troubles and Triumph at the hour of your Death that you shall die in the Church of God a Faithful Martyr and receive the Crown of Eternal Glory And thus much have I written upon the occasion of a Vision before God unfeigned But that you may not think that I go about to satisfie you with uncertain Visions only and not after God's Word I will take the ground of your Letter and specially answer to the same by the Scriptures and by infallible reasons deduced out of the same and prove the Baptism of Infants to be lawful commendable and necessary whereof you seem to stand in doubt Indeed if you look upon the Papistical Synagogue only which hath corrupted God's Word by false Interpretations and hath perverted the true use of Christ's Sacraments you might seem to have good handfast of your Opinion against the Baptism of Infants But forasmuch as it is of more Antiquity and hath his beginning from God's Word and from the use of the Primitive Church it must not in respect of the abuse in the Popish Church be neglected or thought not expedient to be used in Christ's Church Auxentius one of the Arrians Sect with his Adherents was one of the first that denied the Baptism of Children and next after him Pelagius the Heretick and some other there were in St. Bernard's time as it doth appear by his Writings and in our days the Anabaptists and Inordinate kind of Men stirred up
by the Devil to the destruction of the Gospel But the Catholick truth delivered unto us by the Scriptures plainly determineth that all such are to be Baptized as whom God acknowledgeth for his People and vouchsufeth them worthy of Sanctification or Remission of their Sins Therefore since that Infants be in the number or scroll of God's People and be Partakers of the Promise by their Purification in Christ it must needs follow thereby that they ought to be Baptized as well as those that can Profess their Faith For we judge the People of God as well by the free and liberal Promise of God as by the Confession of Faith For to whomsoever God promiseth himself to be their God and whom he acknowledgeth for his those no Man without great Impiety may exclude from the number of the Faithful But God promiseth that he will not only be the God of such as do profess him but also of Infants promising them his Grace and Remission of Sins as it appeareth by the words of the Covenant made unto Abraham I will set my Covenant between thee and me saith Gen. 17. the Lord and between thy Seed after thee in their Generations with an everlasting Covenant to be thy God and the God of thy Seed after thee To the which Covenant Circumcision was added to be a sign of Sanctification as well in Children as in Men and no Man may think that this Promise is abrogated with Circumcision and other Ceremonial Laws For Christ came to fulfil the Promises and Matth. 5. not to dissolve them Therefore in the Gospel he saith of Infants that is of such as yet believed not Let the little Matth. 10. Ones come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven Again It is not the Will of your Father which Matth. 19. is in Heaven that any of these little Ones do perish Also He Matth. 18. that receiveth one such little Child in my Name receiveth me Take heed therefore that ye despise not one of these Babes for I tell you their Angels do continually see in Heaven my Father's Face And what may be said more plainer than this It is not the Will of the Heavenly Father that the Infants should perish Whereby we may gather that he receiveth them freely unto his Grace although as yet they confess not their Faith Since then that the Word of the Promise which is contained in Baptism pertaineth as well to Children as Men why should the sign of the Promise which is Baptism in Water be withdrawn from Children when Christ himself commandeth them to be received of us and promiseth the Reward of a Prophet to those that receive such a little Infant as he for an Example did put before his Disciples Now will I prove with manifest Arguments that Children Matth. 28. ought to be Baptized and that the Apostles of Christ did Baptize Children The Lord commanded his Apostles to Baptize all Nations therefore also Children ought to be Baptized for they are comprehended under this Word All Nations Further whom God doth account among the faithful they are faithful for it was said to Peter That thing which Acts 10. God hath purified thou shalt not say to be common or unclean But GOD doth repute Children among the Faithful Ergo they be faithful except we had rather to resist God and seem stronger and wiser than he And without all doubt the Apostles Baptized those 1 Cor. 1. which Christ commanded But he commanded the Faithful to be Baptized among the which Infants be reckoned The Apostles then Baptized Infants The Gospel is more than Baptism for Paul said The 1 Cor. 1. Lord sent me to Preach the Gospel and not to Baptize Not that he denied absolutely that he was sent to Baptize but that he preferred Doctrine before Baptism for the Lord commanded both to the Apostles but Children be received by the Doctrine of the Gospel of God and not refused Therefore what Person being of reason may deny them Baptism which is a thing lesser than the Gospel For in the Sacraments be two things to be considered the thing signified and the Sign and thing signified is greater than the Sign and from the thing signified in Baptism Children are not excluded who therefore may deny them the Sign which is Baptism in Water St. Peter could not deny them to be Baptized in Water to whom he saw the Holy Ghost given which is the certain Sign of God's People For he saith in the Acts May Acts 10. any body forbid them to be Baptized in Water who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we Therefore St. Peter denied not Baptism to Infants for he knew certainly both by the Doctrine of Christ and by the Covenant which is everlasting that the Kingdom of Heaven pertained to Infants None be received into the Kingdom of Heaven but Rom. 8. such as God loveth and which are endued with his Spirit For whoso hath not the Spirit of God he is none of his But Infants be beloved of God and therefore want not the Spirit of God Wherefore if they have the Spirit of God as well as Men if they be numbred among the People of God as well as we that be of Age who I pray you may well withstand Children to be Baptized with Water in the Name of the Lord. The Apostles in times past being yet not sufficiently instructed did murmur against those which brought their Children unto the Lord but the Lord rebuked them and said Let the Babes come unto me Why then do not these Rebellious Matth. 10. Anabaptists obey the Commandments of the Lord For what do they now a-days else that bring their Children to Baptism than that they did in times past which brought their Children to the Lord and our Lord received them and putting his hands on them Blessed them and both by Words and by Gentle Behaviour towards them declared manifestly that Children be the People of God and entirely beloved of GOD But some will say Why then did not Christ Baptize them Because it is Written Jesus himself Baptized not but his Disciples Moreover Circumcision in the Old Law was ministred John 4. to Infants therefore Baptism ought to be ministred in the New Law unto Children For Baptism is come in the stead of Circumcision as St. Paul witnesseth saying to the Colossians By Christ ye are Circumcised with a Circumcision which is Colos 2. without hands when ye put off the body of sin of the Flesh by the Circumcision of Christ being buried together with him through Baptism Behold Paul calleth Baptism the Circumcision of a Christian Man which is done without hands not that Water may be ministred without hands but that with hands no Man any longer ought to be Circumcised albeit the Mystery of Circumcision do still remain in Faithful People To this I may add That the Servants of God were always ready to minister the
a Table for us and set before us the bread of life we will not come and feed upon it with joy and thankfulness THE END A Catalogue of Books and Sermons Writ by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury Viz. 1 SErmons Preached upon several Occasions in two Volumes in Octavo 2. The Rule of Faith c. 3. A Sermon Preached on the 5th of November 1678. at St. Margarets Westminster before the Honourable House of Commons upon St. Luke 9. 55 56. But he turned and rebuked them and said ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of For the Son of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them 4. A Sermon Preached at the first General Meeting of the Gentlemen and others in and near London who were Born within the County of York Upon John 13. 34 35. A new Commandment I give unto you that ye love one another c. 5. A Sermon Preached before the King at White-hall April 4th 1679 upon 1 John 4. 1. Beloved believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether they are of God c. 6. A Sermon Preached before the King at White-hall April 2d 1680 upon Joshua 24. 15. If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse ye this day whom ye will serve 7. The Lawfulness and Obligation of Oaths A Sermon Preached at the Assizes held at Kingstone upon Thames July 21. 1681 upon Heb. 6. 16. And an Oath for Confirmation is to them an end of all Strife 8. Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Mr. Thomas Gouge November 4th 1681 with an account of his Life upon Luke 20. 37 38. Now that the Dead are raised even Moses shewed at the bush c. 9. A Persuasive to Frequent Communion in the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Preached in two Sermons upon 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28. For as oft as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come c. 10. A Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Benjamin Whichcot D. D. and Minister of St. Lawrence Jewry London May 24th 1683 upon 2 Cor. v. 6. Wherefore we are always confident knowing that whilst we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. Sold by Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill and William Rogers at the Sun against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet Advertisement of Books THE Works of the Learned Dr. Isaac Barrow late Master of Trinity College in Cambridge Published by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury in two Volumes in Folio The First containing Thirty two Sermons preached upon several Occasions an Exposition of the Lord's Prayer and the Decalogue a Learned Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy a Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church also some Account of the Life of the Authour with Alphabetical Tables The Second Volume containing Sermons and Expositions upon all the Apostles Creed with an Alphabetical Table and to which may be also added the Life of the Authour Sermons preached upon several Occasions by the Right Reverend Father in God John Wilkins D. D. and late Lord Bishop of Chester Never printed before Printed for William Rogers at the Sun against S. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet THE CASE OF KNEELING AT THE Holy Sacrament STATED RESOLVED PART I. Wherein these QUERIES are considered I. Whether Kneeling at the Sacrament be contrary to any express Command of Christ obliging to the observance of a different Gesture II. Whether Kneeling be not a Deviation from that example which our Lord set us at the first Institution III. Whether Kneeling be not Unsutable and Repugnant to the Nature of the Lord's Supper as being no Table-Gesture The Second EDITION LONDON Printed by J. C. and Freeman Collins for Fincham Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. THE CASE Whether it be Lawful to receive the Holy Sacrament Kneeling THe Resolution of the most weighty and considerable Doubts which may in point of Conscience arise about this matter and do at present much influence the minds and practices of many honest and well-meaning Dissenters will depend upon the Resolution of these following Queries 1. Whether Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Holy Sacrament according to the Law of the Land be not contrary to some express Law of Christ obliging to the observance of a different Posture 2. Whether Kneeling be not a deviation from that example which our Lord set us at the first Institution 3. Whether Kneeling be not altogether Unsutable and Repugnant to the nature of the Sacrament as being no Table-Gesture 4. Whether Kneeling Commanded in the Church of England be not contrary to the general Practice of the Church of Christ in the first and purest Ages 5. Whether it be Unlawful for us to receive Kneeling because this Gesture was first introduced by Idolaters and is still notoriously abused by the Papists to Idolatrous ends and purposes 1. Whether Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Sacrament in Obedience to the Law of the Land be not a Transgression against some express Law of Christ which obliges us to observe another Gesture For satisfaction in this Point our onely recourse must be to the Holy Scriptures contained in the Books of the New Testament wherein the whole body of Divine Laws delivered and enacted by our Blessed Saviour are collected and recorded by the Holy Ghost And if there be any Command there extant concerning the use of any particular Gesture in the Act of Receiving the Lord's Supper we shall upon a diligent enquiry be sure to find it But before I give in my Answer I readily grant thus much by way of Preface Whatsoever is enjoyned and appointed by God to be prepetually used by all Christians throughout all Ages without any alteration that can never be nullified or altered by any Earthly Power or Authority whatsoever When once the Supreme Lawgiver and Governour of the World hath any ways signified and declared that such and such positive Laws shall be perpetually and unalterably observed then those Laws though in their own nature and with respect to the subject matter of them they be changeable must remain in full Force and can admit of no Change from the Laws of Men. It would be a piece of intolerable Pride and the most daring Presumption for any Earthly Prince any Council any Societie of Men whatsoever to oppose the known Will of the Soveraign Lord of Heaven and Earth In this Case nothing can take off the Force and Obligation of such Laws but the same Divine Authoritie which first passed them into Laws Thus much being granted and premised I return this Answer to the Question proposed God hath been so far from establishing the unalterable use of any particular Gesture in the Act of Receiving that among all the Sacred Records of his Will there is not any express Command to determine our practice one way or other We are left perfectly at our
libertie by God to use what comely Gesture we please either Sitting Kneeling or Standing And if the Law of the See the Case of Indifferent things Land did not restrain our libertie we might use any of the forementioned Gestures without the least violation of any Law of God This perhaps at first sight may seem very strange and false to many of our Dissenting Brethren who have been taught to believe otherwise and it may be to judge Charitably their Teachers and Pastours have in this particular been imposed on themselves by the Writings and Assertions of other Men whose Persons they have had in great admiration But yet I am so secure of this Truth that I challenge all the World to produce the Chapter and Verse wherein any Command is given for the use of any particular Gesture at the Celebration of the Lord's Supper That Popish Principle of believing as the Church believes and swallowing all for Gospel which she affirms to be so though very mischievous in its consequence is not so Popish that is so ill as to pin our Faith on the Sleeves of particular Men and relying barely on the word and credit of any one Man whom we highly esteem of what Party or Perswasion soever For this is to create a Pope to our selves and make every Man whom we phansie infallible this is to make two more than six and the Authority of one Man outweigh the Authority of the Church that is a Society of Men who are nothing near so liable to deception I don't desire therefore to be trusted by any means in the matter under present consideration and therefore I would have the Reader to observe this Rule Trust no Mans Eyes or Judgment where you are able to use your own but follow the example of the Bereans so highly commended Acts. 17. 11. by St. Paul upon this very account that is to make an ingenuous enquiry into the Truth of things to search the Scriptures whether these things be so as I say and assert If this course were generally followed it would go a great way towards the composing those differences and curing those divisions that at present are on foot amongst us occasioned by several Tenets and Opinions about matters of Religion By this means a great many which pass for Divine Oracles and Doctrines would appear to be no other than the whimsies and inventions of Men. With this cautionary advice I might fairly dismiss this Question as being fully Answered and leave all my Readers to disprove me if they can But because some may pretend they have not Leisure and others want of Skill and others are not enduced with Patience enough to search and examine this matter throughly as it ought I will yield all the Charitable assistance I am able towards their relief by doing the work to their hands My Business then at present is this to Collect and Present to your view all those places which relate to the Sacrament and are most likely to inform us what our Lord by his Institution and Appointment hath obliged us to And certainly if there be any Command which tyes us up to the use of any particular Gesture Sitting suppose or Standing and not Kneeling we shall find it in one or other of the Evangelists who give us a perfect Narrative of the whole Mind and Will of Christ in all matters necessary to Faith and Salvation Let us therefore bring them under a strict examination St. Matthew gives this account of Mat. 26. 26. the whole matter As they were eating Jesus took Bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to the Disciples and said Take eat this is my Body And he took the Ver. 27. Cup and gave Thanks and gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it For this is my Blood of the New Testament Ver. 28. which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins But I Ver. 29. say unto you I will not Drink henceforth of this Fruit of the Vine until that day when I Drink it new with you in my Fathers Kingdom And when they had Sung an Hymn Ver. 30. they went out into the Mount of Olives Much to the same purpose is the account which St. Mark gives of this matter And as they did eat Jesus took Bread and blessed and Mar. 14. 22. brake it and gave to them and said Take eat this is my Body And he took the Cup and when he had given Ver. 23. Thanks he gave it to them and they all Drank of it And he said unto them This is my Bloud of the New Ver. 24. Ver. 25. Testament which is shed for many Verily I say unto you I will Drink no more of the Fruit of the Vine until that day that I Drink it new in the Kingdom of God And Ver. 26. when they had Sung a Hymn they went out into the Mount of Olives And this is the sum of what Saint Mark delivers concerning the Lord's Supper Saint Luke with very little variation thus describes the matter And he took Bread and gave Thanks and brake it and Luke 22. 19. gave unto them saying This is my Body which is given for you this do in Remembrance of me Likewise also the Ver. 20. Cup after Supper saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Bloud which is shed for you This Evangelist indeed makes mention of another Cup which our Lord took and after he had blessed it he said to his Disciples Take this and divide it among your selves and withal told them that he would not Drink of the Fruit of the Vine until the Kingdom of God should come which Cup plainly refers to the Passover as will appear to any one who will consult and compare the 15 16 17 and 18. Verses of See Dr. Lightfoot on Mat. 26. 26. Horae Heb. Talmud the fore-mentioned Chapter and is supposed to be that Cup wherewith the Jews were wont to begin the Paschal Feast which they Blessed or Consecrated in this Form of words Blessed be God who Created the Fruit of the Vine And whereas our Lord saith he will Drink no more of the Fruit of the Vine his meaning is that he would never Celebrate the Feast of the Passover with them any more after that time but their next Festival Meeting should be in Heaven and this is very consistent with our Lord 's Drinking another Cup after this which he Consecrated to another use and signification in the Sacrament Ver. 20. And this is all the light this Divine Writer affords us concerning the outward Rites and Ceremones which our Lord used himself at the Institution of the Sacrament and established for the use of all Christians in all succeeding Ages As for St. John he makes no mention at all of the Institution of this Holy Feast by our Lord. All that can be collected from his Writings relates to the Passover or according to the Learned Dr. Lightfoot to
what past John 13. from Ver. 1. to 31. vid. Hor. Heb. Tal. p. 300. and Mat. 26. 6. between Christ and his Disciples at a common and ordinary meal in Bethany and that for this reason among many others judiciously urged by him because the Disciples thought when our Lord had said to him Ver. 27. That thou doest do quickly that he had given order to Judas who kept the bag to buy those things that they had need of against the Feast viz. the Passover and therefore all those passages and that discourse related by St. John in the foregoing Verses of that Chapter were transacted at an ordinary and common Supper And indeed this seems to be the great end and design which St. John proposed to himself in writing his Gospel and which throughout he constantly pursues viz. To add out of his own Knowledge several remarkable passages especially such as tend to demonstrate the Divinity of our Saviour as had been omitted by the other Evangelists in their History of the Birth Life Actions and Sufferings of our Blessed Saviour There is another passage in St. John's Gospel which in the Judgment of John 5. 53. many Learned Divines both Ancient and Modern hath respect to the Lord's Supper though not at that time instituted when those mysterious words were uttered by our Saviour Except ye Eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and Drink Ver. 54. his Blood ye have no life in you Whoso Eateth my Flesh and Drinketh my Blood hath Eternal Life and I will raise him up at the last day For my Flesh is meat indeed and Ver. 55. my Blood is drink indeed He that Eateth my Flesh and Ver. 56. Drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him Now all that can be inferr'd from these words as they relate to this Holy Feast is onely thus much that it 's highly necessary for all Christians who have an opportunity to do it to partake of the Lord's Supper as they would partake in the merits of his Sacrifice and the Efficacy of his Death and his Sufferings and that none but such as do receive the tokens and signs of his Body broken and Blood shed for their Sins shall be owned and rewarded by him as his Friends These are all the places that we meet with in the Gospel let us now see what is delivered in the Acts and other Writings of the Apostles and Divinely-inspired Authors Among all their Writings there is but one place which gives any account of the History of the Sacrament and Institution of it and that is in the 1 Epist to the Corinthians Chap. 11. where St. Paul declares that what he delivered to them he received by immediate Revelation from Christ himself viz. That the Lord Jesus the same night in which Ver. 23. Ver. 24. he was betrayed took Bread and when he had given Thanks he brake it and said Take eat this is my Body which is broken for you this do in Remembrance of me After the Ver. 25. same manner he took the Cup when he had Supped saying This Cup is the New Testament in my Bloud this do as oft as ye Drink it in Remembrance of me For as often as Ver. 26. ye eat this Bread and Drink this Cup ye do shew or shew ye the Lord's Death till he come There are several other places wherein the Holy Sacrament is mentioned 1 Cor. 10. 16 21. 1 Cor. 11. 20. Acts 2. 46. Acts 20. 7. and described by several Names and Titles sutable to the nature and ends of it which for brevity sake I omit and desire the Reader to consult at his leisure and I would not put him to that trouble if they did contain any thing that made against Kneeling or that lookt like a command for the use of any other Gesture Let us now look back a little upon the places forementioned and see what our Lord hath ordained and appointed to be of perpetual use in his Church The Apostles and Disciples of our Lord at the Institution of the Sacrament were the Representatives of the whole Church and are to be considered under a double capacity Either as Governours and Ministers entrusted by Christ with the Power of dispensing and administring the Sacrament or as ordinary and lay Communicants If we consider them as Governours and Stewards of the Mysteries their Duty to which they are obliged by the express command of their Lord is to take the Bread into their Hands to bless and consecrate it to that mysterious and Divine use to which he designed it to break it to give it to the Communicants as he gave it them And so in like manner to Take the Cup to bless it to give it to their fellow-Christians That which they were obliged to do by the command of our Lord considered as private Men and in common with all believers was to take and receive the Consecrated Elements of Bread and Wine to eat and Drink and to do all this in Commemoration of his wonderful Love in giving his Body to be broken and his Blood to be shed for the Sins of the World And what the least Syllable or Shadow of a Command is there here in all this History for the use of any Gesture in the Act of Receiving Since then the Holy Scripture is altogether silent as to this matter its silence is a full and clear demonstration that Kneeling is not repugnant to any express Command of our Lord because no Gesture was ever Commanded at all And this hath been ingenuously Confessed in writing by a A Manuscript of an unknown Author cited by Mr. Paybody p. 48. great Enemy to Kneeling and a great Advocate for Sitting That the Gesture of Sitting is but a matter of Circumstance and not expresly Commanded But the Scotch Ministers Assembled at Perth affirm Object that when our Lord at the Institution Commanded his Disciple to do this he did by those words Command them to use that Gesture which he used at that time as well as to Take Eat Drink c. The Force of their Argument lies in this if it have any force at all Our Saviour Sate at the Passover as the Scriptures plainly inform Mat. 26. 20. Mar. 14. 18. Luke 22. 14. us and it is to be supposed he continued in the same posture when he instituted and Administred the Sacrament which was at the close of the Passover therefore Do this relates to and includes the Gesture amongst other things But this is a miserable shift which tends to Sink rather than Support their Cause For first If our Lord did Sit when he Administred Answ I the Sacrament which we will suppose at present yet there is no reason in the World to incline us to think that he intended by those words Do this to oblige us to observe his Gesture onely and not several other Circumstances which he observed at the same time Since Christ hath not restrained and interpreted these words Do
and the Churches succeeding excluded it out of their Congregations and gave it no Entertainment for the space of 1200 years That Kneeling to receive the Sacrament was not used at the Institution of the Lords Supper nor after in any Age of the Church before the time of Honorius the Third about the year 1220. So also another great Champion for sitting writes Didoclavius maintaineth saith he that which none of our opposites Gillesp Disp against Eng. Pop. Cer. p. 191. Altar Damascen 784. lib. 1. c. 1. are able to infringe viz. That no Testimony can be produced which may evince that ever Kneeling was used before the time of Honorius the Third He further observes from the History of the Waldenses That bowing of the Knees before the Host was then onely enjoyned when the opinion of Transubstantiation got place By the Practice of the Church in the first and purest Ages I conceive they mean thus much That from the Age wherein the holy Apostles lived down to that wherein Transubstantiation was set on foot or that wherein Honorius the Third enjoyned the Adoration of the Host Kneeling in the act of Receiving the Lords Supper was never heard of nor used or as one Author expresly asserts it till the year 1220. Howsoever for sureness sake and in order to the clearing of this matter under our present Consideration I think it will be requisite to fix the time wherein Transubstantiation was first broacht as well as when it was establisht or imposed as an Article of Faith and so too wherein the Adoration of the Host was enjoyned whereby the just bounds and limits will be known beyond which we are not to pass to fetch in Evidence and consequently all extravagancy will be prevented on our part and all cavilling if possible on theirs As for the Time then which we enquire after I think we may safely relie on the judgment of a very Learned Prelate of our own which he delivers after this manner The word Transubstantiation Histori Transub Papal Josian Ep. Dunelm Edit 1675. p. 53 54. is so far from being found in the sacred Scriptures or the Writings of the ancient Fathers that the great Patrons of it do themselves acknowledge it was not so much as heard of before the twelfth Century Nay that the Thing it self without the Word that the Doctrine without the Expression cannot be proved from Scripture is ingenuously acknowledged by the most Learned Schoolmen who endeavour by other Arguments Scotus Durandus Biel Cameracen Cajetan c. therefore to defend it and allow it to be brought in by the Authority of the Pope and not received in the Church of Rome till 1200 years after Christ The first Authors who mention this new-coyn'd word Transubstantiation are Petrus Blesensis who lived under Pope Alexander the Third about the year 1159 and Stephanus Eduensis a Bishop whose Age and Writings are very doubtful The Pope who first establisht this An. Dom. 1215. An. Dom. 1217 or thereabouts monstrous Doctrine by his own Arbitrary power as an Article of Faith was Innocent the Third And his Successor Honorius was the man who decreed Adoration to the Host The first Council which took notice and approved of the Papal Decree for Transubstantiation was that assembled at Constance which condemned A D. 1415. Wiclif for an Heretick because among other truths he had asserted this That the substance of the Bread and Wine remains materially in the Sacrament of the Altar and that in the same Sacrament no accidents of Bread an t Wine remain without a Substance and for this Opinion they ordered his Body to be taken out of his Grave and burnt to ashes Thus things stood till the year 1551. when the Council of Trent publisht it to the world for an infallible Truth and imposed the belief of it upon all under the pain of an Anathema As for the Doctrine of Consubstantiation and the Corporal presence of Christ at with and in the Sacrament it was started long before that of Transubstantiation and was much disputed among learned men He who first broacht it in the East was John Damascen in the days of Gregory the Third And about About the year 740. an hundred years afterwards it was set a-foot in the West by the means of Paschasius Radbertus a Monk of Corbie and one Amalarius a Who wrote de Ecclesias Officiis de ord Antiphon c. contemporary with Amalarius Fortunatus Ar. bp of Triers who wrote de Sac. Baptis ad Carol. M. Deacon of Metz. The former taught that Christ was Consubstantiated or rather enclosed in the Bread and Corporally united to it in the Sacrament for as yet there was no thoughts of the Transubstantiation of Bread The latter gives Amalar. de Ecclesi Offic. lib. 3. c. 24. vid. lib. 3. c. 35. it as part of his Belief That the simple nature of the Bread and Wine mixed is turned into a reasonable nature viz. of the Body and Bloud of Christ Moreover he in another place confesseth that it was past his skill to determine what became of his Body after it was eaten When the Body of Christ is taken with a good intention it is not for me to dispute saith he whether it Amalar. Epist ad Guitardum MS in Biblioth Coll. S. Benedic Cantabri Cod. 55. cited by A. Bp. Vsher Ans Jesuits Chall p. 75. Rabanus Maurus John Erigena Wala Strabo Ratramus or Bertramus be invisibly taken up into Heaven or kept in our Body until the day of our burial or exhaled into the Air or whether it go out of the Body with the Bloud or be sent out by the mouth c. For this and another Foolery of the three parts or kinds of Christs Body he was censured by a Synod held at Cressy wherein it was declared by the Bishops of France That the Bread and Wine are spiritually made the Body of Christ which being a meat of the Mind and not of the Belly is not corrupted but remaineth unto everlasting life From whence we may learn as also from the Writings of several Learned men of that Age who opposed these Dotages of the Corporal presence that the Western Church had not then adulterated the Doctrine of the Sacrament but followed the pure and sound sence of the Ancient Fathers and condemned these Whimseys and gross conceits of the carnal or Oral eating of Christ in the Sacrament Nay in the year 1079. when Hildebrand called Gregory the 7th came to the Papal Chair the Bishops and Doctors were divided in their Opinions concerning the Corporal Presence some maintaining Berengarius his opinion who denied it and some following that of Paschasius as appears from the Acts of that Council writ by those of the Popes Faction which was called on purpose to condemn Berengarius Moreover it 's recorded that Hildebrand himself doubted whether what we receive at the Lords Table be indeed the Body of Christ by a substantial conversion For three
de Sacramentis lib. 2. c. 3. * * * A Monk of Corbie who wrote against Berengar and liv'd about the year 1074. Algerus a stout Champion for Transubstantiation And †††Coster Enchirid p. 353. edit 1590. Coster another Popish Writer is so far from saying the Pope introduced it and that after Transubstantiation took place that he resolves it into an ancient Custom continued from the Apostles times Seeing then upon the whole matter it appears by the confession of some who oppose Kneeling that Honorius did not institute or ordain that Gesture in the Act of Receiving seeing the Decree which he made and which others appeal to doth not at all relate to this matter but onely to the Adoration of the Host at the Priests elevation of it seeing no other Pope is alledged as the Author of this Custom seeing Kneeling was never any instituted Ceremony in the Church of Rome nor is there any Canon or Decree or Rubrick extant which requires the use of that Gesture seeing the Pope himself and the Priests who celebrate use another Gesture in the Act of Receiving seeing their own Writers look on it as an ancient Usage derived to them from the first and purest Ages it follows that what is pretended and supposed in the Question is without all Warrant and Proof viz. that Kneeling in the Act of Receiving was first brought in by Idolaters And now to close up all I will appeal to any man of sense and understanding whether this be not a very silly and extravagant way of Arguing Kneeling in the Act of Receiving is sinful because it was first introduced by Antichrist and the man of sin and that after the Doctrine of Transubstantiation was started and took place in the world and yet after all when you come up close to them and enquire into particulars they are not able to date the original of it nor name the Authors who first invented it and set it up At this rate of talking it were the easiest matter imaginable to evince that Sitting and Standing were equally unlawful with Kneeling For it is but affirming boldly that they were first brought in and used by Idolaters and then the work is done effectually And if such slender Objections must drive us away from the Lords Supper we shall never communicate as long as we live But besides the folly of such Arguments I think it 's a very wicked thing for men to invent and urge them as the Case stands with us at present For what is there more desired and wisht for by all good Christians than Brotherly Love and Concord than that we may all meet together with one accord in one place and with one mind and one mouth glorifie God in the publick Churches What more talkt of now adays then Peace and Vnion Whosoever therefore shall any ways obstruct so blessed and desirable a Work must be concluded every ill man And such a one most certainly is he whatsoever we may think of it who withdraws himself from the Holy Communion upon groundless jealousies and unreasonable fears of incurring the divine displeasure if he receive Kneeling and shall go about by the Bugbear-words of Idolaters Antichrist the man of sin to scare weak and honest men from Receiving the Holy Sacrament in our Churches Because the Lords Supper was instituted for this peculiar end among others viz. to be an uniting Ordinance to bind Christians together in the strictest bonds of Love and Friendship to dispose and engage them to put on Bowels of Mercy to exercise the most kind and tender affections and the most fervent Charity one towards another that is possible for men to do Those Nonconforming Ministers therefore who possess the people with these Arguments which they themselves know unless they be grosly ignorant to be false and senceless to render them averse from the Lords Supper as it is administred in our Churches are in plain English the Authors and Fomenters of our Divisions and the Disturbers of our Peace In the second place to proceed it is not unlawful to use such Things and Rites as either have been or are notoriously abused to Idolatry Before I produce my Reasons for the proof of this Proposition I think it will not be amiss to inform the Reader with those Arguments which Dissenters use to overthrow it and they are these two in general 1. All Things and Rites which have been notoriously abused to Gillesp Eng. Pop. Cer. c. 2. par 3. p. 130. Idolatry if they were such as were devised by man and not by God and Nature made to be of necessary use should be utterly abolished and purged away from divine Worship But Kneeling in the Act of Receiving is one of these Rites therefore it should utterly be Abridgment of Linc. Min. p. 17. Vid. Mr. Hook Eccles Pol. lib. 4. p. 160. abolished 2. To imitate and agree with Idolaters by using such Rites and Ceremonies as they do though in themselves indifferent and though they contain nothing which is not agreeable to the Word of God is sinful So that not to abolish utterly whatsoever we know to have been abused heretofore to Idolatry to take up any old Heathenish and Idolatrous Customs and Rites though at present disused by Idolaters is sinful and then to use the same Rites Gillesp p. 141. c. 3. with Idolaters at present to sort our selves and communicate with them in their Rites is to partake of their sins and to become Altar Dam. p. 536 549. guilty of Idolatry too With these Arguments they make a great noise and endeavour to confirm them by Scripture and Reason I shall not offer at a Confutation of these Proofs which stand built upon a weak and sandy Foundation upon trifling and sorry Reasons upon Scripture-Precepts whose sence is horribly wrested and Scripture-Examples falsly applied and nothing to the purpose There is a Case of Conscience lately published wherein the Author hath done this Work to my hands For he clearly shews That a Vid Case resolved whether the Ch. of Eng. Symbolizing c. p. 24. to p. 47. p. 38. Churches agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome is no Warrant for Separation from the Church so agreeing and particularly instanceth in our Churches agreement with the Church of Rome by Kneeling at the Sacrament There you will find the most considerable Texts and Examples which they drag from Scripture and urge for themselves rendred utterly unserviceable to their Cause and rescued from their Tortures All that I shall do therefore at present is onely this briefly to propound my Reasons for the proof of my Assertion by which I hope to make it evidently appear that our Dissenting Brethren lie under a great errour and mistake by thinking that all those Rites and Ceremonies which are in themselves indifferent and of mans devising ought to be utterly abolished and become sinful for us to use purely because they either have been or are notoriously abused
all your Party formerly may prevail with you more than any of ours give me leave to mind you what Mr. Hildersham hath resolved in several cases like to ours particularly about this of Mens leaving their own Pastors to hear others VI. 1. And first he resolves this That it is the Ordinance of God every Pastor should have his own Flock to attend and every one of Gods People should have a Pastor of his own to depend upon From whence he concludes that none of those People may ordinarily and usually leave that Pastor because then he doth not depend upon his Ministry which he proves every one of them is bound to do 2. And that you may not imagine he means any other Pastor than such as ours his second Resolution is this that they who dwell next together should be of the same Congregation whence the name of Paroichia and Parish first came 3. Now thirdly if it happen that he who is the setled Pastor of the place where you dwell is a man whose Gifts are far inferiour to some others his Resolution in this case is That he being a Man whose Gift is approved by Gods Church and who is conscionable in his Place and of an unblameable Life you ought not to leave him at any time with contempt of his Ministry And then you contemn his Ministry when you speak or think thus in your heart Alas he is no Body a good honest Man but he hath no Gifts I cannot profit by him Mind I beseech you these Words which are none of mine but Mr. Hildersham's and I doubt too common Language now among you and mark the Reasons he gives which I shall contract why you may not do this First A Man may be a true Minister though his Gifts be far inferiour to many others and consequently secondly You are bound to love him and reverence him and thank God for him and thirdly Doubtless you may profit by him if the Fault be not in your selves The best Christian that is may profit by the meanest of Christs Servants And I am perswaded saith he There is never a Minister that is of the most excellent Gifts if he have a godly Heart but he can truly say he never heard any faithful Minister in his Life that was so mean but he could discern some Gift in him that was wanting in himself and could receive some profit by him Which is a thing worthy your consideration now for there is none of your Ministers dare say that they cannot profit by the Sermons that are commonly preached in our Churches and therefore so may you if you please to be impartial how meanly soever you may think of any of our Ministers especially if you observe this fourth thing which the same Mr. Hildersham judiciously adds That 4. The Fruit and Profit which is to be received from the Ministry depends not only nor chifely upon the Gifts of the Man that preaches but upon the Blessing that God is pleased to give unto his own Ordinance To which he applies those Words of the Apostle 1 Cor. 3. 5 6 7 8. Who is Paul and who is Apollo but Ministers by whom ye beleived even as the Lord gave to every Man I have planted Apollo watred but God gave the Increase So then neither is he that planted any thing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the Increase c. And God doth oft give a greater Blessing to weake than to stronger means and therefoer consider saith he the Fault may be rather in thy self than in the Preacher that thou canst not profit And indeed how shouldst thou profit by his Ministry if thou come with Prejudice without any Reverence or Delight unto it and dost scarce acknowledg God's Ordinance in it nor ever seek to God for his Blessing upon it but look wholly at the Man who preaches To conclude this he observes the great want of Judgment that appears in this sort of Christians in the choice they make of their Teachers and the applause they give unto them which shews how necessary it is they should be confined commonly to their own For as some admire and follow another rather than their own Pastor because he can make more ostentation of Eloquence Reading Learning and such like humane Gifts than their own Pastor doth upon which account the Corinthians preferred sundry Teachers before St. Paul himself so there are those who leave their own Pastor and go to others only for Varieties sake Though their own have never such excellent Gifts yet can they not like any one Man long but having itching Ears must have an heap of Teachers And some also prefer others before their own Pastor only because they shew more Zeal mark this in their Voice and Gesture and Phrase of Speech and manner of Delivery though happily the Doctrine it self be nothing so wholsome or powerful or fit to edifie their Consciences as the Doctrine of their own Pastor is Any though these be the best of the three sorts now mentioned and pretend much Love and Zeal yet we may wish them more Knowledg and Judgment I omit other things upon this Subject which you may find in his 58th Lecture upon the 4th of St. John Where he admits indeed that a man may some time go from his own Parish Church to hear another whose gifts he more admires But then like a judicious Divine adds this notable observation to correct and regulate this liberty that it may not prove an evil Humour viz. He only makes right use of the benefit of hearing such as have more excellent Gifts than his own Pastor as learns thereby to like his own Pastor the better and to profit more by him Mark it I most earnestly intreat you together with his Illustration of it by this Example The excellent Gifts God hath bestowed on others in this case may be fitly resembled unto Physick which they use well whose appitite is thereby amended and are made able to rellish and like their ordinary food the better If after men have heard one of excellent Gifts they begin to distaste the Ministry of their ordinary Pastors and can like of none profit by none unless they have rare Gifts they become at length like to those who by accustoming themselves to drink hot and strong Waters bring their Stomacks to that pass that they can find no Relish or Vertue in any Drink or Water be it never so hot or strong Believe it they receive no true profit from the most admired Preacher who learn not by hearing him to profit by any one that delivers to them the wholesome Words of our Lord Jesus and the Doctrine that is according unto Godliness though in the plainest manner imaginable both for Method and Language This I have chosen to write in his Words because there are some I fear that would scarce indure such Doctrine from us which may at least be more reverently received and duly considered proceeding from a Person of such note heretofore