1. Cor. 14.16 But the very phrase of blessing and giving of thanks makes it probable that this Text is to be understood as Mr. Thorndike expoundeth it of the Consecration of the Communion And at that time the people did ordinarily answer Amen and nothing more as appeareth from the early testimonies of Justin Martyr and Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria 2. But if this sense be not admitted this Text of the Apostle doth neither mention nor in the context more nearly refer to Prayer than to singing in which latter the peoples bare saying Amen is not contended for nor allowed as a constant rule for the Churches practice though it was probable the usual method in the Christian Assemblies in those Apostolical days when the duty of singing was performed by the immediate inspiration of the spirit upon some particular persons and that these extraordinary motions of Gods spirit in those times were only vouchsafed to the Clergy or Ministry is not probable from the contents of that very Chapter And therefore this place of Scripture doth not confine the whole vocal service of God excepting an Amen to the Ministry the people being altogether debarred and excluded 5. But that all the servants of God may allowably be interested where the due rules of order and edification are observed in the outward joint expression of praise and Prayer to God is very agreeable to the holy Scriptures where the holy Angels are represented to cry one to another and say Holy holy holy is the Lord of Hosts the whole Earth is full of his glory Is 6.3 and all Israel praised God and said For he is good for his mercy endureth for ever 2. Chr. 7.3 And as S. Paul exhorteth that with one mind and one mouth Christians should glorifie God Rom. 15.6 S. John in his Vision beheld and heard the four living things the Elders the Angels and every Creature in Heaven and Earth expressing blessing honour glory and power unto God Rev. 4.8 11. Ch. 5 8. 14. and a great multitude whom no man could number crying with a loud voice and saying Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne and to the Lamb. Rev. 7 9 10. and he heard also the voice of the 144000. who were with the Lamb on Mount Sion as the voice of many Waters and as the voice of a great thunder singing a new Song Rev. 14.1 2 3. and these places last mentioned are the more considerable because they contain representative Visions of the service acceptably performed to God in the Christian Church 6. If we consult Ecclesiastical practice there is very probable evidence that under the Old Testament the people did vocally join by responsals in the ordinary service of God in the Sanctuary and Synagogues V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 6.13 Both the Joma and other Tracts of the Talmud mention the people in the period of their Prayers expressing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Blessed be the name of the glory of his Kingdom for ever and ever In Ch. Par. in Deut. 10.16 And the particular responsals used by the Jews at Circumcision are expressed by Fagius The use of alternate singing among the Essens is sufficiently known but that this was of very ancient use in the Jewish Church is very likely because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth to answer is an usual expression of singing even in the holy Scriptures And there appeareth considerable evidence from Ex. 15. v. 1. v. 20. that that Song of Moses and the Children of Israel Phil. de Vit. Mos l. 3. was uttered as Philo Judaeus averreth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with responsal melodies alternately repeated 7. In the Christian Church the Original of the Antiphona or the alternate singing of Hymns by two quires is ascribed by Socrates to Ignatius the like use of Davids Psalms is declared by Theodoret to have had its beginning at Antioch from Flavianus and Diodorus Their Original in the Latin Church is referred by Platina to Damaseus and by Walafridus Strabo to S. Ambrose Is Hisp de Eccl. Offic. l. 1. c. 7 8. but both Isidorus Hispalensis and Rabanus Maurus do testifie that long before this the Responsoria wherein the whole Quire answered to one Man Rab. Maur. de Inst Cler. l. 2. c. 50 51. were known by that name and used in the Latin Church And sometimes the whole Assembly joined in their Hymns and Psalms sometimes they were sung by one alone all the rest joining to eccho forth the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or end of the Hymn Conc. Laod c. 15 and by the Laodicean Council the wholy Assembly were not allowed to join in their publick singing which was required to be performed by the appointed singers only Thus the Ecclesiastical practice hath varied according to what was thought prudent and convenient 8. Concerning Prayers and Confessions S. Basil declareth it to have been in his time the ordinary practice of divers Eastern Churches Bas Ep. 63. that every man by his own words did profess repentance and make confession Naz. Or. 3. And Gr. Nazianzene acquainteth quainteth us that Julian in imitation of the Christians did appoint amongst the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a form of Prayer to be said in parts or by way of Responsals Hierom also relateth that populus cum sacerdote loquitur in precibus the people did speak with the Priest in the Prayers and Gregory the great noteth Gr. Ep. l. 7. c. 63. that in the Greek Church the Lords Prayer was ordinarily said by all the people together and as anciently as we can meet with any parcels of Liturgy or particular Offices the use of responsals may be easily discerned even as far as S. Cyprians sursum Corda and Habemus ad Dominum Wherefore the use of responsals and the people joining in some expressions in the publick service of god was a thing thought useful by the ancient Church as well as by our own and is allowable by the rules of the Scripture and the Order of the publick worship of God and whosoever assert that the vocal joining of the people in any expressions of Prayer in the publick Assembly is as Vzziahs action was an intrenching upon the Priests Office doth set up such Bars about the service of God which do keep Gods people at a greater distance from the throne of Grace than the nature and priviledge of Christian liberty will allow Yet the composing or directing particular Prayers for the publick use of Christian Assemblies is the proper work of the Church Officers who are to be the guides thereof as also teaching and instructing being an act of authority doth ordinarily belong to the Ministers of the Church and this is that speaking which is forbidden to Women in the Church because it is an act of authority 1. Cor. 15.34 1. Tim. 2.12 Whereas the joint expressing some words of confession or supplication is wholly an act of humility and is not forbidden
Ecclesiastical Authority because they were so wonderfully inspired and guided by the holy Spirit yet if it can be shewed that the Apostles themselves appointed external Rites attendant on the service of God which were of an alterable and mutable nature this will manifest that the use of such things is well consistent with the Gospel worship and thence it will follow that the Christian Church hath liberty as well as the Jewish Church had to determine such observations since God hath give no special command to abridge that liberty Here I shall consider 2. 1 The holy kiss or kiss of Charity It was a common friendly salutation for men to kiss each other both among the Jews and in other Eastern Countries as hath been observed from Xenophon and Herodotus and was also used in the Western parts of the Empire in the time of Tiberius But both S. Paul Rom. 16.16 and and S. Peter 1. Pet. 5.18 required the practice of this holy kiss as a peculiar Christian Rite and observation but when and how it was used we must discover from the relation of the ancient Christian Writers That it was used at their publick Assemblies at the time of their solemn Prayers Grot. in Rom. 16. c. 16. is proved by Grotius from the testimonies of Justin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus and Tertullian who calleth it signaculum orationis the seal of Prayer and speaking of it as it was their ordinary expressive attestation of Unity Peace Tertul. de Orat. c. 14. and Love he saith Quae oratio cum divortio Sancti sâ—uli integra What Prayer can be perfect which is separated from the holy kiss Cassand Liturg. c. 39. And Cassander hath evidenced from S. Austin Innocent and divers other particular Authors and ancient Offices that it was especially used at the time of the holy Communion sometimes before but for the most part after the Consecration of the elements and before their distribution by which Ceremony Christians expressed their consent to those administrations and their love to each other and of this kiss at the Lords Supper Calvin supposeth S. Paul to speak Calv. in 1 Cor. 16. â—0 when he commandeth the Corinthians to greet one another with an holy kiss Indeed several modern Ritualists being willingly so short sighted as to discern no further than the dusky and false light of the Romish Decretals doth discover do ascribe the use of the kiss 〈◊〉 the Communion to a later original some from Leo the second others from Innocent the first but this appeareth to be a fond and vain imagination because this Custom was not only mentioned by S. Chrysostome but evidently referred to by the Laodicean Council Conc. Laod. Can. 19. Just Mart. Ap. 2. and is also expressed by Jestin Martyr in his Apology written within less than an hundred years after the Apostolical Epistles of S. Paul and S. Peter Yet that this was an external mutable Rite is so far agreed upon and acknowledged as that it is generally disused because through the vanity of mens minds it was discovered at length to promote impurity and obscenity rather than holiness and Christian love And the Romish Custom introduced instead hereof of kissing the tabellam pacis or the Table of Saints Pictures is quite another thing from the Apostolical Rite and cannot be excused from superstition from the relation it beareth to their Doctrine of the Adoration of Saints And if we enquire how this ancient use of the holy kiss was most ordinarily practised it is manifest from the testimony of the Author of the Constitutions Const Apost l. 8. c. 11. concerning the more early times of Christianity and from Amalarius describing its use about 800. Years ago Amalar. de Deccl Offic. l. 3. c. 32. that it was not promiscuously used by men and women towards each other but separately and distinctly by men towards one another and by women among themselves alone 3. 2. Their Agapae or Feasts of Charity which were appointed in part for the relief of the poor Zonar in Conc. Trul. 74. Gang. 11. Chrys in 1 Cor. but especially to express continue and increase Christian love and fellowship which is also one great design of the Lords Supper were in and after the Apostles times used either immediately before as some affirm concerning some Churches or immediately after it as others assert and which was the more general practice and even in the places of publick Assemblies That they were celebrated at the same time and place with the Lords Supper hath been usually observed and collected from 1. Cor. 11.20 23. and from Act. 2.42 46. and from thence appeareth to have been used as an Ecclesiastical Rite The use of these Feasts of Charity was mentioned with approbation by S. Jude v. 12. and according to some Greek Copies by S. Peter 2 Pet. 2.13 and amongst the ancient Writers by Ignatius Ep. ad Smyr Tertullian Apol. c. 39. Clemens Alexand. Paedag l. 2. c. 1. Orig. Cont. Celsum l. 1. Conc. Gangr c. 11. and by S. Chrysostom Augustine and divers others some placing them as the Passover was eaten before the Lords Supper others comparing them to the Jewish Feasts eaten after the Passover But when these Feasts of Charity became greatly abused the Canons both of Provincial and general Councils Conc. Laodic c. 28.3 Carth. 30. Trul. 74. excluded them from the publick places of Church Assemblies and as Baronius observeth they were abolished in Italy by S. Ambroses Authority as they were also not long afterwards in Africa by S. Augustine and the other Bishops of the Carthaginian Province Baron an 377. n. 14 Aug. Ep. 64. and they became generally disused though some appearances thereof may possibly be discerned in later times in the Communion upon Maundy Thursday in divers Churches and in the practice of the Greek Church upon the day of the Resurrection or Easter Day Cassand Liturg. c. 4. when as Cassander relateth after the holy Communion allatis in Ecclesiam epulis communiter convivantur they have a common Banquet brought into the Church of which they all partake 4. But against that part of this observation that the Agapae were anciently joined with the holy Communion it may be objected Albasp Obj. lib. 1. Obj. 18. that Albaspinus doth on purpose undertake to prove that in Tertullians time the Agapae and the Eucharist were not observed together but that the former was celebrated at night from Tertul Apol. c. 39. and the latter in the Morning from Tertul. lib. 2. ad Vxor c. 5. and de Coron Mil. c. 3. But in answer to this we may consider that in that very observation Albaspinus himself admitteth with a Non inficias iverim that the Agapae were in the time of the Apostles celebrated with the Eucharist and concerning the time of Tertullian he neither undertaketh to prove that there were no Agapae in the Morning nor no Communion in the Evening for those very words of Tertullian de
in his Gloss published from Strasburgh 1570. upon those words of the Apostle If any man seem to be contentious we have no such Custom nor the Churches of God write thus The Apostle saith he rejecteth morose and contentious answerers shewing that profitable rites received by grave authority ought by no means to be contemned or plucked in pieces though they be not built on solid demonstrations But if any man will be stiff in his opinion the Apostle will not contend any longer with him but will acquiesce in the Custom of Godly and worthy men and of the Churches of God themselves idemque saith he alios omnes pios facere debere and that all pious men ought to do the same is acknowledged there to be an Apostolical direction by Illyricus when he was out of the heat of contention in a cool and calm temper 4. If we view the pulick writings of the Reformed Churches Conf. Bohem Ars. 15. the Bohemian Confession declareth them to teach that humane Traditions Rites and Customs which do not hinder Piety are to be preserved in the publick Christian Assemblies And in their account of the Discipline and Order of their Churches they divide the matters of Religion into three heads the Essentialia which contain the matters of Faith Love and Hope the Minisierialia which enclude the means of Grace as the word of God Rat. Difc Ord. c. 1. the Sacraments and power of the Keys and the Accidentalia by which they say they mean what others call Adiaphora or external Ceremonies and Rites of Religion In these matters Adiaphorous they say they may have some things in use among them which are different from other Churches and yet are they not willing upon any small occasions to allow any alteration therein neque ob leves causus quicquam mutare aequum putamus nemini apud nos licet insuetas ceremonias inahoare Ibid. c. 2. And in their Ordination both of their Bishop and their Consenior who is designed to represent the Chorepiseopus in some ancient Churches whose Office is like that of our Arch Deacon and their Minister and their Deacon those of the same Order give to the person then ordained their right hand of fellowship and those of the inferiour Order when one is ordained to any of the higher degrees give him their right hand in token of subjection testified and assured by that external Rite 5. The Augustane Confession in several expressions asserteth it lawful for the Bishops or Pastors Conf. August de Eccâ—◠〈◊〉 Artâ—â—â— 21 de descrimine cibor to appoint things for Order in the Church and declareth that they do retain many ancient Rites or Ceremonies though they complain also of the abuse of others in the Romish Church as the Church of England doth and it asserteth also ritus illos servandos esse qui sine peccato servari possunt ad tranquillitatem bonum ordinem Ecclesiae conducunt Conf Saxon de Tradition The Saxon Confession treating of Rites appointed in the Church by humane Authority declareth that nothing ought to be appointed against Gods word or in the way of superstition but that some blameless Rites for good order both ought to be and by them are observed ritus aliquos honestos boni ordinis causa factos servamus servandos esse docemus And the Ceremonies most opposed in the Church of England with more besides them are retained both in that and in other Lutherane Churches Conf. Helv. c. 27. The Helvetick Confession asserteth that the Church hath always used a liberty about Rites as being things of a middle or indifferent nature The French Church alloweth that there be singulis locis peculiaria instituta Conf. Gallic c. 32. prout commodum visum fuerit peculiar Constitutions for several places as it shall appear profitable And the Strasburgh Confession discoursing about humane Traditions or external Rites and Observations which conduce to profit though they be not expressed in the Scriptures Conf. Argent c. 14. saith that many such the Church of God at this day doth rightly observe and as there is occasion doth make new ones adding these sharp words quas qui rejecerit is non hominum sed Dei cujus traditio est quaecunque utilis est authoritatem contemnit that whosoever rejecteth these things doth not contemn the authority of men but of God of whom is every profitable Constituion Wherefore he who will yet disclaim all Ceremonial Rites under Christianity and will esteem them to be a pestilential and dangerous Contagion in the Church must undertake to affix both to the ancient and latter most famous Churches a Miserere nostri SECT V. The ill consequences of denying the lawfulness of all Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions in things indifferent observed 1. Though the condemning the practice and rule of the Church in all Ages and even in the time of the holy Apostles and Prophets be inconvenience sufficient for any opinion to stand charged with yet besides this which hath been evidenced in the two former Sections the denying the lawfulness of any external Rites 1. Debarreth the Church of what is really advantagious unto it for some fit external Rites of order and decency provided they be not over-numerous do promise solemnity in the service of God and tend to excite a greater degree of seriousness reverence and attentiveness It was S. Austins observation De Curia pro mortuis c. 5. that in Religion the outward actions of bowing the knee stretching forth the hands and falling on the ground though they be not performed without the preceding actions of the Soul do much encrease the inward affections of the heart In the common affairs of the World the boaring his Ear with an Awle who was willing to undertake a perpetual service the giving possession among the Jews by the pulling of the shoe and amongst us by divers other ways of livery and seisin the delivering some ensign of authority at the enstallment of a Magistrate and the giving the hand as a pledge of fidelity have by the common prudence of men been judged useful Rites to render those undertakings and actions the more solemn and observable Nor can there be any reason why some external actions may not obtain the like effect in matters of Religion especially considering that both Prophets and Apostles in delivering their extraordinary Messages from God thought fit frequently to make use of visible representations that their words might thereby take the deeper impression Thus Ezekiel carried out his stuff in their sight and Isaiah walked naked without his ordinary Garments when they denounced Captivity and Agabus foretelling the imprisonment of S. Paul bound himself with his girdle Act. 13.51 Mar. 6.11 and the Apostles according to the commandment of Christ shook of the dust of their feet as a testimony against those Cities who received them not V. Hor. Hebr. in Mat. 10.14 which was a rite
a laying a burden upon the Churches Act. 15.28 Wherefore when the whole matter of this Decree is in that verse called necessary things we must thereby understand that some things indifferent yea under the Gospel inconvenient in their own nature being judged of use for the avoiding scandal and promoting Peace and Vnity in the Church became necessary to be practised in the Church after that Decree and Injunction And though the end of designing the Unity and encrease of the Church did require that in some things the Gentile Christians should yield a complyance to the Jews yet in what particulars this compliance should consist was determined by the authority of this Apostolical Synod whereby the practice thereof became necessary 3. Obs 2. That Apostolical Decree concerning these matters indifferent was designed to lay an obligation upon the practice of all Gentile Christians in those Apostolical times There are indeed some very learned men who have reputed this Decree to be a local constitution confined to Syria Cilicia and the Territories of Antioch and Jerusalem And if it had extended no further it had been a sufficient instance of an injunction in things indifferent but if it was intended to oblige all the Gentiles it is thereupon to be esteemed a more full and large example Now that this Decree contained in the first Canonical and Apostolical Epistle of the New Testament was of general concernment to the Gentile Christians though its inscription referred 〈◊〉 those places above-mentioned may be concluded because S. James declared it in general to have respect to the believing Gentiles Act. 21.25 because S. Paul Silas and Timotheus delivered this Decree even unto the Cities of Lycaonia Phrygia and Galatia to be observed by them Act. 16.1 3 4 6. and because the Primitive Christians did in all places account themselves bound by this determination of the Apostles to abstain from bloud and things strangled as appeareth from the testimonies of Tertullian Tertul. Apol c. 9. Minut. in Oct. Orig. cont Cels l. 8 Eus Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 1. Minutius Felix Origen the Epistle from France concerning their Martyrs recorded in Eusebius and the Canon of the Greek Code above-mentioned 4. Obs 3. It is acknowledged upon good grounds and granted by the Presbyterians that this Apostolical Sanction doth evidence a power in the Church of enjoining in lawful things what may be conducible to the good and welfare of the Church both because the successive practice of the Church did thence-forward exercise such a power and because though the Apostles might be inspired extraordinarily after they met together in this Synod yet they did not account a particular divine inspiration necessary to make an Ecclesiastical Constitution but in that great question whether and how far the Gentiles should undertake the Law of Moses they came together to consider of this matter Act. 15.5 6. and proceeded therein by way of disputation v. 7. Hence Gillespy in his assertion of the Government of the Church of Scotland Gillesp Par. 2. Ch. 4. Ch. 8. concludeth the authority of Synodical Assemblies and that they have a diatactick power to make Decrees The London Ministers in their Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici Part. 2. c. 14. declare this Apostolical Synod to be a pattern and platform for others and thence allow a Synodical power of imposing things on the Church which they assert to be encluded in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 15.28 And the Assemblies Consession doth from hence assert a power in Synods to make Decrees and determinations Conf. c. 31. which ought to be received with reverence as from Gods Ordinance and to set down rules and directions for the better ordering the publick worship of God Yet it may be observed that some of that way have in this particular manifested great partiality as Mr. Rutherford Ruth Introd to Div. Right of Ch. Gov. Sect. 5. p. 81. Disp of Candale Libert qu. 5. when he disputes against our Church and against the lawfulness of external Rites he denyeth any power in the Church to prescribe Laws touching things indifferent Plea for Presbyt Ch. 14. p. 199. but in his Plea for Presbytery he asserteth their Synods to have power to make Ecclesiastical Canons and Decrees which tie and bind particular Congregations to observe and obey them 5. Wherefore if the Apostles did make injunctions concerning things indifferent and imposed them upon all the Churches of the Gentiles and accounted their authority of Ecclesiastical Government guided by prudential consideration to be sufficient without extraordinary inspiration to establish such a Sanction then must this power remain in the Church taking in the Princes supremacy where the Authority of Church Government abideth permanent 6. And if we consider the Church under the General Notion of a Society as it is ordinary in all Societies for the Rulers thereof to exercise a power of making Rules and Constitutions not contradictory to any superiour Government for preserving a due order in that Society so this doth especially take place in the Christian Church where there are special divine Laws which require care to be taken for order and decency and command Christians to obey them who have the rule over them And that those who will enjoy the Communion of any particular Church must submit to the Rules of order appointed therein is but the proper result of orderly Constitution and is of general practice insomuch that the French Reformed Churches as hath been observed by Mr. Durell Durelli Vindic. Eccl. Angl. c. 22. in Praf would not suffer Mr. Welch who came thither from Scotland to continue in administring the Sacrament without using the prescribed form of Prayer and admitting the standing gesture according to the order of that Church but he being enjoined Conformity by the Synod at S. Maixant 1609 left that Church and Realm rather than he would embrace it 7. But it is by some pleaded against the lawfulness of Constitutions Ecclesiastical that these are an infringing of Christian liberty But whereas Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions are in themselves lawful as hath been proved prudential determinations about such indifferent things can no more incroach upon Christian liberty than do the political Sanctions of Civil Laws and the Domestick commands of Parents and Masters And surely every mans apprehension must needs acknowledge it a gross mistake to imagine that when the Precepts of Christianity do earnestly enjoin the practice of self-denial meekness submission and obedience to superiours it should be the priviledge of Christian liberty to disoblige men from any or these things which would represent our most excellent Religion as contradicting it self But true Christian liberty conveyeth a priviledge of freedom from that which the Christian Doctrine abolisheth the Mosaical Covenant and Ceremonies of the Law from that which its Precepts prohibit and disclaim the life of sin and bondage to the Devil and being under any other as our Soveraign and supreme
from Suetonius Sueton. in Tiberio n. 36. who declareth that Tiberius commanding all Jews to depart from Rome forced them Religiosas vestes comburere to burn their garments which they used in their Religious services which at Rome could be none other than their Synagogue Worship or School Assemblies Phil. de Cherubim and Philo Judaeus speaketh of their attendance thereupon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arrayed in white apparel Phil. de Vit. Contempl And declareth the same concerning their Religious Feasts 12. A third instance is their practices and injunctions of decent gestures in their Religious Assemblies At the reading of the Law Neh. 8.5 Ezra opened the Book in the sight of all the people and when he opened it all the people stood up And when they praised and gave glory to God the Levites commanded the people Neh. 9.5 stand up and bless the Lord your God for ever and ever 13. A last instance I shall here give is in the admission of their chief Proselytes or Members of the Jewish Church from amongst the Gentiles where besides Circumcision which God particularly enjoined in this very Gase Ex. 12.48 and Sacrifice whereby they declared themselves professedly to communicate with the Temple Service and to be partakers of the Altar Selden de Syn. l. 1. c. 3. they also made use of washing or a kind of Baptism in initiating these Proselytes Hor. Hebr. Mat. 3.6 of which we have a large account in divers modern Authors This rite among the ancient Jews did principally express the defilement and pollution of the Gentile World which could alone be cleansed by undertaking the true Religion and the right service of God And though there might be some rational ground for the expediency of this practice because washing was under the law of frequent use in many particular Cases of uncleanness as being a means appointed for their cleansing yet neither from hence nor from Moses sprinkling the Israelites to confirm Gods Covenant to them Ex. 24.8 which place the Jewish Writers do much urge though that action was not performed with water but with the bloud of the Covenant which had water mixed therewith Heb. 9.19 do contain any special command of God that washing the Proselytes should be a rite attending their Circumcision nor do we find that when Abraham and his Family received Circumcision that any such Attendant rite was joined therewith And yet it hath been frequently acknowledged that our Saviour chusing washing or Baptism to be the initiative rite under the Gospel did shew thereby some allowance and approbation of this way of admission under the Law 14. Buxt Syn. Jud. c 5. c. And it is manifest from Buxtorf Synagoga Judaica that the Jewish practice did receive divers other Synagogal Rites even such whereof some were questionable and doubtful and other manifestly vain and ridiculous But even these miscarriages under the degeneracy of their Religion cannot render those other observances unallowable which have so considerable testimonies of their approbation in the holy Scriptures And thus in their Synagogue Worship from the instances I have mentioned to which more might be added we have evidence of the lawful use of external Rites which may conduce to preserve the order of Church Society to the distinction and Ornament of Ministers reverend behaviour in the service of God and some expression of solemnity in the sacramental admission into the Church 15. Thirdly We may consider the natural worship among the Jews or Hebrews or their general Religious profession which was neither appropriated to their Synagogues or Schools Bux Syn. Jud. c. 2. where they were ordinarily Circumcised as Buxtorf observeth nor to their publick Ceremonial or Temple worship where divers instances may be produced 16. First in the taking an Oath Abrahams Servant used the Rite of putting his hand under his Masters thigh which Aben Ezra observed to be also a Custom among the Indians Nehemiah upon the like occasion did shake his lap desiring God so to shake out every man from his house and his labour who performed not that promise Petit. Var. lect l. 1. c. 16. Fag in Gh. Par. Ex. 23.1 Exceptâ—ex Hom. Chrys de Juram Tom. 6. Fr. Duc. Neh. 5.12 13. At other times lifting up the hand was used in that solemn and Religious invocation Gen. 14.22 And it hath been observed that it was an ordinary Rite among the Jews in taking an Oath to lay their hand upon the Book of the Law as the ancient Christians even in S. Chrysostomes time laid their hand upon the Book of the Gospel But he must be satisfied with very little evidences who thinketh that he hath found a divine institution for these observations which are only outward signs of Religious invocation as our words are and therefore such expressive signs so far as expediency and due solemnity shall require may be lawfully used though they be not particularly determined by a Divine commmand 17. Secondly we may observe Rites of Memorial Thus we not only read of Samuel setting up a stone as a Monument of Gods praise and a token of remembrance that he had helped them 1. Sam. 7.12 but Laban and Jacob erected a heap to be a solemn memorial and testimony of their Oath Gen. 31.46 47. and when Joshua made a Covenant with the people of Israel to serve the Lord he set up a stone under the Oak by the Sanctuary of the Lord to be a witness and memorial of their duty and engagement Jos 24.26 27. 18. To these might be added the use of sackcloath and ashes as a testimony of humiliation and repentance the use of imposition of hands in their ordinary benediction which also our Saviour practised and I shall in another Chapter shew that the Ring in the contract of Marriage was used among the Jews And yet none of these things were enjoined in the Law of Moses further than what concerneth the Priestly benediction of Aaron with hands lifted up which some conceive to be a rite appointed in the Law 19. And from what I have hitherto observed it may be reasonably concluded that it is no encroaching upon or opposing the Authority of God if some indifferent and expedient things be determined and received in the Church as things useful but not as Divine Sanctions And he who will deny the lawfulness hereof in the Christian Church must also assert and prove that the coming of Christ hath deprived his Church of a very considerable part of that liberty and authority which the Jewish Church always possessed But against the rashness of any such positions the following Sections will be a sufficient defence SECT III. Shewing Ecclesiastical Constitutions particularly concerning Ceremonial Rites to be warranted by the Apostolical Doctrine and practice 1. The second main argument is deduced from the Apostles practice and doctrine Now though what they appointed in the Church about any matters external cannot be easily proved to be determined by humane prudence and
because it could not consist with their owning the Law of Moses and is not mentioned either in the Scriptures or in Josephus But considering how little Josephus wrote that hath any kind of relation to the Samaritan worship and that our Saviour chargeth them with a miscarriage about the object of their worship Joh. 4.22 Ye worship saith he ye know not what considering also that the worshippers at Bethel by whom the Samaritans were instructed did before their Captivity worship God there by an Image and that the Assyrians Syrians and others Neighbouring upon the Samaritans as Bochartus sheweth Bochart ibidem did chuse the form of a Dove to be the Image and resemblance of God there is no just reason to question the evidence of the Jewish Writers concerning the Samaritans 4. It hath been also objected against all Ecclesiastical Constitutions that the Apostle blamed the Colossians Col. 2.20 21. Why as though living in the World are ye subject unto Ordinances such as he mentioneth in the next verse Touch not or eat not tast not handle not Ans This place concerneth not prudential Rules of order Davenant Zanch. In Loc. but it blameth the Colossians that they should suffer their minds to be deluded Whitak Cont. 4. Qu. 7. c. 3. and their practices to be enshared and perverted by false positions delivered as Doctrines and this is observed to be the sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 20. and these things were called the Commandments and Doctrines of men v. 22. and will-worship v. 23 because they were delivered as proper divine Commandments And that this was the cause of the Apostles reproving the Colossians may be further manifest because the Apostles themselves upon a prudential and Christian account enjoined the Gentiles to forbear some sorts of meal the observing of which Apostolical Constitution which did not doctrinally declare those things themselves to be unclean was in no wise condemned by S. Paul writing to his Colossians 5. That place of S. James Jam. 4.12 There is one Lawgiver who is able to save and to destroy doth appropriate to God the Authority of establishing and executing such Laws the obeying or disobeying which is the sure way to eternal life or destruction because they are his Laws but this Scripture having no peculiar respect to the worship of God in publick Assemblies doth no more condemn Ecclesiastical Constitutions of Creder in the Church than either the civil sanctions of secular Governours or the Domestick commands of Parents or Masters Inst l. 4. c. 10. Sect. 7 30. And even Calvin with some respect to this place of St. James aserteth in his Institutions that in the great matters of Christianity there is unicus vitae magister one only who is to rule and command our life but in externa Disciplina Ceremoniis in matters external concerning Discipline and Ceremonies he hath not thought sit to prescribe every particular thing but hath left us to be guided by general rules 6. I know that some who urge this place of S. James would thence conclude that none besides God have any power or Authority by their commands to himâ—â—â—â— Consciences of men Now though this TExe speaketh nothing expresly of Conscience or its obligation I shall concerning that matter add that Ecclesiastical Constitutions do no otherwise bind the Consciences of men so far as concerneth the nature of the obligation than the commands of Magistrates Parents and Masters do though they have ordinarily the stronger motives with direct respect to the Peace and Order of the Church and the edification of its Members And it must be acknowledged that no humane Authority can bind the â—â—â—ing power of Conscience so that it is 〈…〉 that a duty which is whereby â—â—â—â—â—â—ded without having liberty 〈…〉 of its lawfulness and this is â—â—â—ifâ—â—tly the sense of several 〈…〉 Writers when they say that Goâ—â—â—â—ly hath power to bind the Conscience But that humane Laws and commands do secondarily and consequentially bind the Conscience to take care of practising what is lawfully commanded is that which can 〈◊〉 be denyed It would certainly sound harshto a Christian Ear if any shall assert that a Child is not bound in Conscience to do any particular lawful thing which his Father commandeth him it being all one to assert that it is not his duty and that he is not bound in Conscience to do it But if he be bound in Conscience to do that upon his Fathers command which he was not bound to undertake without that command it must needs be his command which layeth that obligation upon Conscience secondarily and consequentially or with a respect unto Gods general command of obedience 7. In this sense it is not unusual with Protestant Writers beyond the Seas as well as with divers of our own Nation as particularly Bishop Saunderson de Obligatione Conscientiae Duct Dubit l. 3. c. 1. rule 1.5 Ch. 4. rule 5. and Bishop Taylor very largely in his Ductor Dubitantium to assert that the injunctions of our Superiours bind the Conscience Vrsin in his Explicatio Catechetica asserteth the Constitution of the Magistrate to bind the Conscience that is saith he by reason of the command of the Magistrate Ex. Cat. qu. 96. it becometh necessary to be performed and cannot be neglected without the offence of God though it be no case of scandal In praec 2. de Cultu Dei And in his Loci Theologici he to the same purpose declareth edicta Magistratûs obligant conscientias and absque scandalo obligatur conscientia ad harum legum observationem To the same purpose may Paraeus be produced Alsted Theol. Cas c. 2. Reg. 2. And Alsted very well noteth that humane laws mediately or under God do bind the Conscience even as an Oath Vow or promise made by a mans sely doth 8. I shall not insist upon that objection from Heb. 3.5 6. which expresseth the faithfulness of Christ to be more glorious than the faithfulness of Moses from whence it hath been with more manifest violence than strength of argument concluded that under the Gospel which is perfectly and compleatly delivered by Christ there is no place left for any prudential Constitutions which were say they wholly excluded under the Mosaical law But I suppose I have beyond all contradiction evinced that under the Mosaical Law there were divers things appointed by Ecclesiastical Authority And that Moses's faithfulness consisted in delivering the Law as he received it and not in the compleatness of enjoining every particular circumstance in the Church will appear evident because otherwise he could not be accounted as faithful with respect to their Synagogue worship as to their Temple worship And it may be further noted that the numerous divine commands about matters external referring to the Temple worship V. Sanders de Obl. Cons prael 6. Sect. 30. which was the Law of Commandments contained in Ordinances was no part of the
and whether this position will not go far toward the condemning Religious and devout behaviour in Christian Assemblies because it is an outward and visible expression of a pious frame of mind whereas such external actions rightly used with a due significancy are testimonies and incentives of Piety and Religion but without such a signification are either Hypocritical or at least vain and empty 5. But some distinguish here between such things which have a natural significancy as Religious gestures and such things as signifie by humane Constitutions and consent the former they do admit but not the latter But this distinction is to little purpose partly because there can be no sufficient reason given why the latter should be universally disallowed while the former are approved partly because most things supposed to have a natural significancy did derive their original signification from humane custom and consent as reverent gestures and uncovering the head and partly because divers particular things above-mentioned which cannot be disapproved cannot be pretended to have a natural signification to which laying the hand on the Book in an Oath and others more may be added 6. Cons 3. The disallowing all external significative Rites in Gods service is a thing opposite to the general sense of the Church of God in all former Ages That divers signfiicative Rites were lawfully used in the Jewish Church without any divine Institution is sufficiently manifest from the instances given in the former Chapter and such were also the Apostolical Rites of the Love-kiss the Feasts of Charity and the having mens heads uncovered and not veiled The judgment of Calvin and Zanchy approving such Ceremonies of Ecclesiastical appointment were also in that Chapter produced and the same may be observed in Vrsin Explic. Catech. q. 103. and P. Martyr Ep. Hoopero Art 15. The Bohemian Confession teacheth that such Rites by whomsoever they were introduced ought to be preserved which advantage Faith the worship of God and other things that are good amongst Christians with which agreeth the Strasburgh Confession Cap. 14. Some significative Rites of the Ancient Christian Church were also mentioned in the foregoing Chapter to which may be added the frequent use of the Trinal Mersion in Baptism as a profession of the Trinity and of Conformity to the Death of Christ which continued three days and this is used in divers Protestant Churches at this day they also sometimes purposely used the single Merscon to testifie the Unity of the Godhead In c. 2. q. 1. c. legum Sometimes as appeareth by the words of Hincmarus the person to be baptized supposing him adult was to give up his name in writing to signifie by that action his willingness and desire to undertake Christianity and to obtain Baptism And very anciently the person receiving Baptism did then change his Garments arraying himself in white as an admonition to him that he then changed his state and undertook the innocency of the Christian profession De Consecr Dist 4. c. post baptismum Accepisti this Custom was observed by Gratian from Rabanus and S. Ambrose and is thought by a learned man of our own Nation to be as ancient as the Apostles themselves and to be alluded unto in the use of those Scripture Phrases Mr. Thorndike Right of the Church c. 4. of putting of the old man with his deeds and putting on the new man Col 3.9 10. 7. The main Objection peculiarly directed against signisicant Ceremonies is that such things have a resemblance of Sacraments but no Ecclesiastical Authority nor any person below Christ himself can constuâ—â—te or appount a Sacrament Cont. Faust l. 10. c. 16. Indeed S. Augusline sometimes speaketh of Sacraments as being nothing else but verba visibiliâ— visible words and other where saith Ep. 5 Marc. that signs referring to divine things are called Sacraments but these expressions were noted by Kemnitius as instances to shew Kemnit Exam. de Sacram. Can. 1. that S. Augustine used the word Sacrament in a great latitude of sense this being an Ecclesiastical word not always taken in the same strictness of signification And S. Aug. doth there peculiarly speak of a certain kind of signs viz. the Jewish Ceremonies appointed by the Divine Law which I have above observed to enclude somewhat Sacramental 8. But that we may rightly apprehend 〈…〉 significative signs are lawfully 〈…〉 in the Church I shall distinguish 〈◊〉 signs referring to matters of Religion into so many several ranks or Classes as may be sufficient for the clearing my present enquiry Wherefore 9. First Some external signs are appointed to ratifie seal and confirm the Covenant of God and to tender and exhibit the Grace of that Covenant or Christ himself unto us And these signs are properly Sacraments according to the definition thereof in our Church Catechism to be outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual Grace given unto us ordained by Christ himself as a means whereby we receive the same and a pledge to assure us thereof Accordingly Baptism as a means of Grace doth exhibit remission of sins Act. 22.16 and Salvation 1 Pet. 3.21 and the Lords Supper exhibiteth the New Testament in Christs bloud and is the Communion of the body and bloud of Christ 1 Cor. 10.16 Ch. 11.25 And Rabanus Maurus describing a Sacrament saith De Instit Cler. l. 1. c. 24. that therein sub integumento rerum corporalium virtus divina secretius operatur salutem And that this is the common Doctrine of the Protestant Writers concerning Sacraments which they defend against the Calumnies of the Papists who charge them with asserting the Sacraments to be only significative signs but not exhibitive and also against the fond opinion of the Anabaptists and other Sectaries accounting Sacraments to be chiefly professing signs may be evidenced by perusing Bishop Cranmer in his Preface to his Book of the Sacrament Bishop Ridley de Coena Dom. p. 28 29. Bishop Jewel Apol. Reply Art 8. Dr. Whitaker de Sacr. Qu. 1. c. 3. Bucer Conf. de Euchar. Sect. 45. Epist ad Michael N. Hispan Kemnit Exam. de Sacr. Can. 5 6 7. Vrsini Apol. Catech. ad 3 m Calumn adv Anabapt Chamier de Sacram l. 1. c. 10. Sect. 13. Rivet Cath. Orth. Tr. 3. q. 1. with many others Now none can appoint any such sign as this but he who hath power of giving the Grace exhibited thereby and if any humane authority constitute any sign to this end and purpose it would therefore be an high intrenchment upon the Soveraignty of God and the authority of Christ and the expecting this Grace from any such sign is great superstition 10. Secondly There are signs appointed not to exhibit and tender the Grace of Gods Covenant but to testifie in Gods name the certainty of some point of Faith as the Star in the East was a witness of Christs Birth and an assurance thereof to the Wise men or to tender some particular
them but even to urge them to approve and allow what is really sinful and is rightly so esteemed by them 20. But the main objection to be here considered is that S. Paul Rom. 14.1 c. commandeth to receive them who are weak in the Faith but not to doubtful disputations Commiss Papers p. 70. and alloweth no judging or despising one another for eating or not eating meats and for observing or not observing days and hence it is urged that no such things indifferent ought to be imposed but to be made the matter of mutual forbearance Now it must be granted that Christian Charity requireth a hearty and tender respect to be had to every truly conscientious person so far as it may consist with the more general interest of the Church of God yet it is manifest that the Apostle is not in this Chapter treating about and therefore not against the rules of order in the service of God But in order to a right understanding of this place I shall note three things 21. First that these directions given by the Apostle in the beginning of this Chapter so far as they give allowance to the different practices therein mentioned have a peculiar respect to those times only of the first dawning of Christianity when most of the Jews who believed in Christ did as yet zealously retain the Mosaical Rites abstaining from certain meats as judging them unlawful and unclean Rom. 14.2 14. and observing Jewish days and times out of a peculiar esteem for them v. 5. and yet this for a time was in this Chapter allowed and indulged by the Apostle But afterwards the Rules and Canons of the Church severely condemned all Christians whether of Jews or Gentiles August Ep. 19. Conc. Gangr c. 2. Conc. Laod. c. 29. who observed the Mosaical Law and the Rites and distinction of meats contained therein out of Conscience thereunto yea S. Paul himself vehemently condemned the Galatians who were Gentiles for observing such distinctions of days out of Conscience to the Law Gal. 4.10 11. and passeth the like censure upon the Colossians who distinguished meats upon the same account Col. 2.20 21 22. Wherefore we must further observe that in the Apostles times and according to the Rules they delivered to the Church The Gentile Christians were in these things with others prohibited the observation of the Law of Moses and its Ceremonies though many of them as the Galatians and Colossians were prone to judge this to be their necessary duty Act. 21.25 Gal. 5.2 The Jews among the Gentiles who did not yet understand that the Law of Moses was abrogated were allowed to observe its Rites and to practise according to the Jewish Customs Act. 21.21 24. Gal. 2.12 13. Act. 16.3 But the Jews who lived in Judea and S. Paul himself when he was there were obliged or enjoined to observe the Mosaical Rites though they were satisfied that the binding power of the Law was abrogated Act. 21.24 Gal. 2.12 Now in these different practices allowed determined and ordered by the directions and rules given by the Apostles as temporary provisions for the several sorts or different Churches of Christians the Apostle requireth the Romans to receive and not to judge one another 22. 2. When the Apostle commandeth them to receive them who are weak in the Faith he thereby intendeth that they ought to be owned judged as Christians notwithstanding these different Observations v. 1. And when he commandeth that he that eateth should not despise him that eateth not and that he that eateth not should not judge him that cateth v. 3. he forbiddeth the weaker Jews to condemn the other Jews or Gentiles as if they were not possessed with the fear of God because they observed not the Law of Moses and prohibiteth those others from despising or disowning these weaker Jews as not having embraced Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 3. signifying here so to despise as withal to reject and disclaim as Mar. 9.12 Act. 4.11 1 Cor. 1.28 because they observed the Rites of Judaism And to this sense are manifestly designed the Apostles Arguments whereby he enforceth these Precepts V. 3. For God hath received him v. 4. to his own Master he standeth or falleth for God is able to make him stand v. 6. he acteth with Conscience to God and v. 10. Why dost thou judge thy Brother or why dost thou set at naught thy Brother We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ So that the main design of this part of this Chapter is this To condemn them who press their own practices or judgments in things unnecessary as being the essential and necessary points of Religion and Christianity and thereupon do undertake to censure all those who differ from them in such lesser things as having no true Religion or inward relation to or Communion with Jesus Christ though they live never so conscientiously and act according to the best apprehensions they can attain Aug. Exp. prop. 78. ad Rom. To this purpose S. Austen expounded these words Non ferre audeamus sententiam de alieno corde quod non videmus Beza in Loc. and Beza saith upon them Rudes non debent ut extra salutis spem positi damnari And this which is the true intent and scope of the Apostle in that place doth in no wise impugn the use of Ecclesiastical Authority in appointing what is orderly and expedient about things indifferent but he will by no means allow that lesser things should be esteemed the main matters of Religion and Christianity to which purpose he layeth down that excellent Rule in v. 17. The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost 23. 3. The considering the Apostolical practice in making Decrees at the Council of Jerusalem in S. Pauls setting orderly bounds to the use of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit in the Church of Corinth or limiting the exercise thereof to avoid confusion and his not allowing S. Peter Barnabas and other Jews to practise without controul what agreed with their present apprehensions under those circumstances but was the way to disadvantage the peace and welfare of the Church and his giving commands for order and decency with things of like nature do evidence that it is a great misunderstanding of the Apostles Doctrine in this place to conceive that he condemneth the establishing useful rules for the order and edification of the Church though they do not always comply with every particular persons apprehension 24. But if it be further objected that if those things may be commanded or enjoined which some persons though through mistake judge unlawful either they must practise against their own judgments which would be sinful or their being conscientious will be their disadvantage which is not desireable To which I answer 1. That if in some particular things certain persons through meer mistake accompanied with humility and designs of peace should judge things
sitting 2. That if this supposed gesture used at the institution was essential or of necessity to the Sacrament they who undertake to change discumbing into sitting upon pretence that that is the ordinary Table gesture in these Countries must undertake to assert that the introducing new Customs among men-may have power to alter the necessary and essential duties of Gods Ordinances which is a position destructive to Religion and Christianity for if any Company of men should enure themselves to a diet wherein they ordinarily allow themselves neither Bread nor Wine this will in no wise warrant their undertaking to celebrate this Sacrament in any other Elements where these Elements may be as easily had and used as men may compose themselves to a reclining or discumbing gesture 7. Wherefore he who urgeth the necessity of any gesture at this Sacrament upon pretence that it was used by Christ and his Apostles doth declare that for a duty which is none and pretendeth to follow their example where probably he may be mistaken in it but he who conformeth to that gesture which is by authority established Dr. Kellets Tricaen l. 3. c. 5. Sect. 3 6. Ch. 7. Sect. 1. though it were certainly different from the gesture at the institution which yet some have conjectured to have been a kneeling gesture doth manifestly follow the example of Christ and his Apostles who did embrace that Passover gesture which was at that time of common practice among the Jews but could not be pretended to be the gesture at the first celebration thereof SECT IV. Of the Communion gesture observed in the Christian Church both in the purer and the more degenerate times thereof 1. Obj. 3. It is urged by some Non-Conformists that the Universal Church in the Primitive times used sitting and not kneeling Holy Table Ch. 5. p. 134. and that the holy Communion was then received sitting is thought not improbable by some others Of Relig Assemb c. 4. Now though this if it were true would not prove our gesture unlawful because the Church is not bound to observe always the same indifferent rites and gestures for though Christ and his Apostles after his Ascension sate when they taught the people Act. 16.13 all Ministers are not thereby obliged to the same gesture Yet I further assert 1. There is no evidence that ever the Primitive Church used any ordinary Table gesture at the receiving the Lords Supper but considerable proof may be made of the contrary We read indeed of the seats for the Bishop and Presbyters in the Christian Assemblies but as this cannot respect the whole Assembly so it giveth no more evidence of their gesture at the Communion than the same thing with us doth of our gesture Apol. c. 39. That place of Tertullian which Rhenanus sometime understood of the Eucharist Non prius discumbitur quam oratio ad Deum praegustetur c. that they do not discumb V. Pamel ibid. or use the reclining gesture till they have first prayed doth manifestly refer to their love feast only whereas it followeth in Tertullian they eat as much as satisfieth hunger and drink as much as becometh sober persons Cyp. Ep 42. When Cyprian writeth to Cornelius that he would not allow the Letters of the Novatian party to be read considentibus sacerdotibus Dei altari posito while the Priests of God were sate together and the Altar prepared he doth not express their usual gesture at the Lords Table but the manner of their holding Synods as may be collected from that and the foregoing Epistle Ep. 41. Petit. Var. Lect. l. 3. c. 4. And it is well observed by Petitus that the Canons and practice of the ancient Church required their annual Synods to assemble upon the stationary days at the close of which stations they always received the Communion 2. But that the Primitive gesture at the Communion was not such as they used at their ordinary Tables may be partly collected from Tertullian Tertul. Apol. c. 8. who relating and refelling the impudent slander of the Gentiles occasioned as Eusebius saith by the Gnosticks first against the Eucharist Eus Hist Eccl. l. 4. c. 7. and then against the Love Feasts as is manifest by comparing this with Cap. 7. and with Minucius Felix he proceedeth from the former to the latter saying Minuc Fel. edit Oxon. p. 26 98 c. interea discumbens c. or then falling to a Table gesture c. which sheweth that such a gesture was used at their Love Feasts but not at the holy Communion This is also expressed by Justin Martyr Just Mart. Ap. 2. who declareth that after the end of their Sermon or Exhortation they all rise up and give thanks and receive the holy Sacrament which words shew that though they sate before at the time of the Sermon they changed that gesture on purpose when they came to attend the receiving the holy Communion 3. I assert 2. The Primitive Church did practise and require at the receiving the Communion such a gesture as was usual to express humility and reverence and worship towards God Cyr. Hieros Cat. Myst 5. Cyrill directeth the Communicant to take the Cup 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bowing down after the manner of worshipping and adoring Chrys Hom. 24. in 1 Cor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Chrysostome required more worship and reverence to be expressed towards Christ at the receiving the Sacrament than the wise men of the East shewed to him when they fell down and worshipped him with fear and trembling A humble frame and behaviour was thought so agreeable to this Ordinance by Origen Orig. in Divers Hom. 5. if that Homily be his and not some other ancient Writers that he exhorteth the Communicant to imitate the humility of the Centurion who said Lord I am not worthy that thou shouldst come under my roof And that the Christians usually expressed adoration at the receiving this Sacrament is manifest from S. Augustines Aug. in Ps 98. Ep. 120. c. 27. Amb. de Sp. Sanc. l. 3. c. 12. Nemo manducat nisi prius adoraverit and from other like expressions both of his and S. Ambroses 4. Now whereas the twentieth Canon of Nice according to a more ancient Custom enjoined all Prayers upon the Lords days and from Easter to Whitsunday to be performed in a standing gesture which 8. Augustin saith was the general practice upon those days at the Eucharistical Aug. Ep. 119. c. 15. or Communion Prayers it is not to be doubted but that their gesture of reverence used upon those days at this Sacrament was a standing gesture especially since Tertullian earnestly declareth against the use of a sitting posture in adoration Tertul. de Orat. c. 12. as being irreverent and also acquainteth us that it was not allowed in those times DeCor Milit c. 3. de geniculis adorare to perform any adoration kneeling upon the Lords days Wherefore when