all the parts of this holy ministration are actions of thanksgiuing ANS Although the name were taken as Causabone saith from one part of the action yet it is giuen to the whole action not by reason of this part onely but because it declares the nature and chiefe end of the action and albeit all the parts of this holy ministration seuerally considered are not actions of thanksgiuing yet the whole action which consists of these parts being performed Gratitudinis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Paraus saith that is with a purpose of thankfulnesse to celebrate the death of Christ is Eucharisticke or an action of thankesgiuing The hand or foot being seuerally considered is not the bodie yet the whole which consisteth of all the parts is the body So it is true to take the bread is not an action of thankesgiuing nor to breake it nor to giue it being seuerally considered but to take breake blesse and giue with intention by these actions to represent the death of Christ and the application thereof to the faithfull for the praise of his glorious grace is an action of thankesgiuing Therefore to conclude as wee come to the Sacrament to bee made partakers of Christs death by faith vnto saluation so wee come to the Sacrament to celebrate the remembrance of his death to his glory In respect of the first end it is The Communion of his body and bloud in respect of the last it is a reall predication and celebration of his death till his comming againe which should bee often performed because as Paraeus speaketh Mors Domini perpetuis laudibus celebranda est that is The death of Christ is to be celebrated with perpetuall praises these are specially offered at the celebration of the holy Sacrament and in this respect it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing PP Obiect What we may craue of God vpon our knees we may receiue on our knees Answ It is false I may pray vpon my knees Giue vs this day our daily bread but I may not receiue it on my knees The people of Israel prayed for food yet they were not esteemed vnthankful for not kneeling when they receiued the Manna ANS I neuer heard this obiection vsed by any man but by you in this place therefore if it bee false your selfe that forged it is author of the falsehood The Bishop of Galloway who is now at rest hath this obiection in his Treatise which is not yet answered as he alledgeth Whatsoeuer spirituall benefit I may lawfully aske on my knees the same I may lawfully receiue vpon my knees with thankesgiuing But I may lawfully with supplication aske saluation by Iesus Christ on my knees Therefore I may lawfully receiue it on my knees Another argument was propounded in the Assembly at Perth which neither at that time nor since hath been answered and it is this Whatsoeuer spirituall benefit we should receiue in a solemne act of diuine worship with thankesgiuing and prayer that wee may receiue on our knees The body and blood of Iesus Christ in the Sacrament is a spirituall benefit which in a solemne act of diuine worship wee ought to receiue with thankesgiuing and prayer Therefore we may receiue the body and blood of the Lord Iesus Christ in the Sacrament vpon our knees The proposition of this argument at that time denied was proued thus Whatsoeuer benefit we ought to receiue with thankesgiuing and prayer that we ought receiue with the gesture that is most agreeable to thankesgiuing and prayer Kneeling is such a gesture c. Ergo c. In the Assumption it is affirmed that Christs body and blood in the Sacrament should be receiued with prayer and thankesgiuing This we proue by this reason Whatsoeuer spirituall benefit we should receiue with a spirituall hunger and thirst and with a spirituall appetite and desire after the grace and vertue that is therein to saluation the same we should receiue with prayer which is nothing else but such an appetite and desire But the body and blood of Christ is such a benefit c. Next that it should be receiued with thankesgiuing I proue Whatsoeuer benefit we should receiue by extolling and preaching and magnifying and praysing the inestimable worth and excellence thereof the same we ought to receiue with thankâ—sgiuing But in the Sacrament we should receiue the body and the blood of Christ with extolling and preaching c. Ergo c. The Assumption is confirmed by the words of our Sauiour Doe this in remembrance of me and by the words of Saint Paul So oft as yee eate this bread and drinke this Cup yee shall declare that is extoll magnifie and praise The Lords death till hee come againe Because I finde you fighting against your owne shadow I thought good to set downe the very obiections which were vsed in the Assembly at Perth that as yet are not nor I hope shall euer be answered PP It is againe obiected That in the act of receiuing we receiue from Christ an inestimable benefite ought not a Subiect kneele when he receiueth a benefite from a Prince to testifie his thankfulnesse Answ This relation from Christ to the Sacrament as betweene the Giuer and the gift is common to all the Sacraments both of the old and new Law ordinarie and extraordinarie ANS The relation betweene the Giuer and the gift in the old Testament is not so euident because they wanted a cleare and expresse Word to expound the mysterie Where haue yee such a Word concerning Circumcision This is the putting off of the bodie of sinne by the vertue of Christs Death and Resurrection COLOS. 2.11 or concerning the Passeouer This is the body of Christ that is broken for you this is his blood that is shed for you The Law had but the shaddow the Gospell hath the expresse Image of good things to come In the Law they had the shadow of the Giuer and the gift but in the Gospell we see him with open face Now although to the shadow of the Prince men fall not downe nor doe reuerence they are to be excused but he must bee reputed a contemner who will not doe homage at the presence of his Prince Further as I said before the externall actions of their Sacrament could not bee commodiously performed with such a gesture as is kneeling but the action of our Sacrament may PP Next we receiue the mysticall pledges not out of the hands of God himselfe or his Sonne Christ immediately but out of the hand of the Minister The person who receiues the gift from the King is supposed to receiue it immediately and suppose mediatly yet ceremonies of Court and mediate ciuill worships are not rules of religious adoration which should euer be immediate ANS Wee kneele not to receiue the mysticall pledges but to receiue the bodie and blood of Iesus Christ which the mysticall pledges signifie and are deliuered immediately by the hand of the Lord Iesus
between the Altar and the Table as no more doth kneeling or any other gesture But to come to the ground whereupon yee build this reason yee say the people of God had an Altar for the Sacrifice and a table for the feast So Christians haue Christ for the Altar and the Sacrifice and a Communion Table for the Sacrament which is their feast This your comparison hath some shew but no solidity There is a correspondence I grant betweene the Iewish Altar and Christ who was the Altar that did sacrifice himselfe to be a Sacrifice for the sinnes of the world for the Iewish Altar was the type and Christ the verity But what correspondence is there betweene the tables whereon the Iewes did eate their sacrifices and the Communion Table The tables whereon they did eate their sacrifices were not holy instruments which appertained to the Tabernacle and Temple but such as they had in their owne priuate houses and therefore were not types which did eyther signifie our Communion Tables or whereunto our Communion Tables doe answere as anti-types for it is to be obserued that in Christian Religion there is nothing which hath any necessary correspondence or relation to the Legall ceremonies but that which is either the verity of some type or the antitype of some type As for example betweene Christ and the Leuitical Priest the Altar and the Sacrifice there is relation as betweene the type and the verity so betweene Circumcision and Baptisme the Passeouer and the Lords Supper there is relation as betweene the type and the antitype for our Sacraments haue succeeded these and are in their stead But as to the Table whereon the Passeouer and other sacrifices were eaten the same not being a sacred instrument or type appointed by God as hath been said there is nothing in Christian Religion answering thereto either as the verity it selfe or as an antitype succeeding thereto As therefore their tables were not necessary for eating of their sacrifices for it is certaine the Iewes were not astricted by any diuine ordinance to sitte at Table when they did eate the Passeouer and their other Sacrifices but were only commodious receptacles deuised by themselues which they might haue altered and interchanged as they thought meet Euen so a materiall artificiall table for celebration of this Sacrament is not an instrument appointed by our Sauiour as the Altars and Tables of Shew-bread but the same is appointed by the Church according to that power which shee hath to determine circumstances for the actions of diuine worship To the disposing of the elements some such receptacle and subiect is necessary as a table and decency requires it when and where the same may be had but it is not of such a necessary vse as the Altar vnder the Law for without an Altar a sacrifice could not be offered but without any such table the Sacrament hath often been ministred Euagrius lib. 6. hist cap. 13. records That Gregorius Pastor of Antiochia did minister the Sacrament to the Souldiers on the grasse before the 600. yeare of our Lord at Bannock-burne in the dayes of King Robert Bruce the like was done to the Scottish army on the fields and so at many other times when a table commodiously could not be had Finally where yee adde That for disposing of the elements a dresser or cupboord may serue these speeches smell of profanity as if to hold and sustaine the elements were such a base employment that the instrument wheron the Church thought meet they should be placed should neither be a table nor named a table And yet all these religious Epithets which yee alledge the Fathers gaue to the Communion as when they called it the Lords Table the heauenly Table the sacred Table c. were giuen to it not because the Communicants did sitte thereat or for any other gesture of body vsed by them but because the Lords body the bread of heauen the sacred mysticall and spirituall food of our soules were presented thereon in the holy Sacrament Causabone Exercit. 16.36 saith That by these appellations the Eucharist it selfe was vnderstood But heere it is manifest that the Epithets interiected in your discourse are not only impertinent but repugnant to the opinion yee hold For when yee aske why is it called a table if men sit not at it they answer you Because vpon that table the heauenly sacred and spirituall mysteries are set In respect thereof it is called a heauenly spirituall sacred and mysticall table In the dayes of Chrysostome and Theodoret by whom these Epithets were most frequently giuen to the Sacrament there was not a table in the Churches at which men did sitte but one onely on which the elements were placed and consecrate but yee neuer fall vpon the name of a Table sooner then yee imagine it was appointed for sitting And what then thinke yee of the Table of Shew-bread at which no man did sit Shall it not be called a Table because it lacked your employment of sitting or table gesture In all Reformed Churches of Europe our Church and very few excepted the Communion Tables haue no employment but only to hold and sustaine the elements This is to be seen in the Churches of France Germany Hungary Pole and England And in the Greeke Church Causabone obserues that there are two Tables one whereupon the elements are set before the Consecration and another wherupon they are Consecrate Thus haue I sufficiently declared that the only or chiefe vse at least of the Communion Table is for the setting and disposing of the elements and the consecration of them with the distribution of the same Now that by kneeling in the act of receiuing the vse of the Communion table is not taken away I proue by this reason Whatsoeuer gesture taketh not away the comely placing and decent consecration of the sacramentall elements on the Communion Table from which they may bee giuen and receiued that taketh not away the vse of the Communion Table But kneeling is a gesture that taketh not away the comely placing and decent consecration of the sacramentall elements on the Communion Table from which they may be giuen and receiued Therefore kneeling taketh not away the vse of the Communion Table PP The third breach of the Institution made by kneeling is the taking away of that mysticall rite representing Christs Passion to wit the breaking of the bread c. ANS If your meaning be that the Pastor breaketh not the bread before he giue it yee bely vs. Wee know that it is the Pastors part in the action to represent Christ the breaking of his body on the Crosse with the sorrowes of death for our sinnes therefore we obserue that rite religiously But if your meaning be that the people breakes not euery one with another in reuerence and sobrietie as is prescribed in the second Chapter of the first Booke of Discipline set foorth 1560 that shall be discussed in the answere to the sixth breach PP The fourth
dispensing with his owne hand the Sacrament of his grace Here you see that Christ is the breaker the giuer the distributer of the Bread and not the Disciples And so the Pastor is now the breaker the giuer the distributer and not the people Let the judicious Reader consider whether the iudgement of this learned man doth better agree with the Institution or the opinion of the Pamphlet penner And whether the Pastor who according to the Institution breakes the bread and giues it with his owne hands to the people or they who giue the bread to the people in whole schaues to bee broken and distributed by themselues comes neerer to Christs appointment But to come to the Cup If our Sauiour in giuing of the same did imitate the custome of the Iewes which Scaliger and others wrote to haue beene this that the Master of the Feast after he had blessed the Cup did first drinke thereof himselfe and then gaue it to him who sate next so as it passed from hand to hand till all had drunken it seemes that the Disciples did deliuer the Cup one to another But there is a great difference betweene the distribution of the Cuppe and the Bread for the distribution of the Bread is not a diuiding onely of the Bread from hand to hand but a breaking is conioyned with the distributing for he that giues to his Neighbour breakes before he giues Now in this breaking we know there is a mysterie which signifies the breaking of the Lords Body which is an act as is before made euident that onely appertaines to Christ both in the veritie when he did offer himselfe on the Crosse and in the mysterie when he did represent his oblation or the breaking of his body by the breaking of the bread and therefore is such an act as ought onely to be performed by him who in the Sacrament acteth the part of Christ and represents him sacrificing himselfe In distribution of the Cuppe there is no such mysterie for the giuing of it from hand to hand signifies not the shedding of our Sauiours bloud but the taking of the Cup by the Pastor and the drinking thereof doth represent that Cup which the Father propined to his Sonne and the Sonne receiued and dranke when willingly hee suffered his bloud to bee shed on the Crosse for the remission of the sinnes of many and for confirmation of the new Testament which Cup Bloud and Testament is in the Sacrament deliuered to the People by the Pastor in Christs name commanding them to take and drinke all thereof He in whose Name this command is vttered is properly the Giuer and propiner because by his authoritie it is giuen and by the warrant of his word it is receiued When the King drinks to any of his Subiects and sends it by the hand of his seruant the seruant is not properly the giuer and propiner but the deliuerer of the gift and propine and therefore as in the Sacrament the Pastor when he takes the Cup and drinks acteth the part of Christ and represents him taking and drinking that most bitter Cuppe of his Passion and death for our sinnes so when he giues and commands the people to take and drinke all thereof he acteth the part of Christ applying his bloud and giuing the New Testament confirmed thereby to euery worthy receiuer whether the same be deliuered immediately to euery one by his owne hand or if it bee sent by the hand of the Deacon as is was in the Primitiue Church or if it be deliuered from hand to hand by the Communicants amongst themselues But without all question if the Pastor may commodiously by himselfe make the deliuery it is most agreeable to the person which hee carries in that holy action who represents our Sauiour first willingly vndergoing death for vs then most bountifully applying it to vs with his owne hand O but in the 22. of Luke verse 17. our Sauiour sayd Take this Cuppe and diuide it amongst you The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Part it amongst you Here you trouble your selfe and the Reader much with a long discourse prouing that in this place the Eucharisticke Cuppe and not the Paschall is meant Yet let it be so What then they are commanded to part it amongst them ergo to reach it from hand to hand This followes not for when euery one takes his owne part of that which is to be parted they diuide the whole amongst them although euery one deliuer not with his hand to his neighbour the thing which is to be diuided or the remanent thereof as by example When the Manna which was gathered in the Wildernesse was cast together in heapes and the families came forth and parted the same amongst them euery man taking his Homer which was his part the Families diuided the whole amongst them without reaching from hand to hand the heape which was diuided so when the Disciples were commanded to diuide the Cup amongst them if euery one did drinke no more then his owne portion did leaue the rest to his fellow the cōmand was obeyed albeit when euery one had drunken the last had set downe the Cup on the Table or had deliuered it into his hand from whom he had receiued it or if one or two had beene maymed and lacked the vse of their hands so that the Cup behoued to be holden to their heads yet if they dranke no more but their owne part with respect to their neighbour who was to drinke after them they diuided the Cup for the diuiding is not the giuing of the Cup but the parting of the wine amongst them that was in the Cup So if they did drinke with such moderation that one two or three dranke it not all but that all did drinke as our Sauiour commanded howbeit they did not deliuer it one to another but receiued it seuerally euery one from Christs owne hand as wee doe out of the hand of the Pastor they neuerthelesse diuided the same amongst them To conclude the command giuen to the Apostles importeth that Poculum beneditionis is not Poculum ebrietatis fed charitatis that is to say The Cup of blessing is not the cup of drunkennesse but the Cup of charity which should not be carowsed by one but should be parted amongst many And therefore these two phrases the one vsed by Saint LVKE Diuide it amongst you and the other by S. MATTHEVV and S. MARKE Drinke thereof all and they dranke of it all are equiualent As to the giuing and deliuering of the Cup whether it should be by the hand of the Pastor or by the mutuall deliuering of the people one to another because it is not defined by the Scripture it is indifferent and left to bee determined by the Church These grounds being sure let vs consider your syllogisme Whatsoeuer action or command is inclosed within the Institution may not lawfully be broken But that the Cōmunicants should distribute amongst themselues was both an action
his people he held their hāds insteed of the blessing which he should haue vsed at the deliuery of the Elemēts he cōceiued an oath made the people sweare by that which was in their hands insteed of Amen which they should haue answered the blessing with he made the people say That they should not returne to CORNELIVS Whereby it is manifest that the blessing vsed by the Pastor at the deliuery of the Elements differed not at that time from the mentall prayer of the Communicant neither ought it now to differ but be the same in substance PP As for the prayer of the Minister in the act of distribution it is flat against the Institution as I haue already said The Minister is ordained by the Institution to act the person of Christ and pronounce the words of promise This is my body and not change the promise into a prayer Fenner in his Principles of Religion layeth this downe for a ground that in the second Commandement we are forbidden the practise and vse of any other rite or outward means vsed in the worship or seruice of God then he hath ordained Ioh. 4.22 2. King 18.4 And that by the contrary we are commanded to practise all these parts of his worship which hee in his word hath commanded and to acknowledge only the proper vse of euery rite and outward meanes which the Lord hath ordained Dent. 12.32 2. King 17.26 ANS It is false that yee say we change the promise into a prayer for at the Consecration wee obserue precisely the words of the Institution In the deliuery of the elements we vse a prayer that is not contrary but most agreeable to the Institution for directing the hearts of the people in the receiuing that they may worthily communicate So doe the Pastors in France at the deliuery vse a short speech and it was the custome of late in our Church to vse some exhortations before the distribution at euery Table wherein neither we nor they did or doe practise any rite or vse any means which God hath not ordained to bee vsed in his worship For although the particular forme of speech vsed in the French Church and the exhortations and prayers vsed by vs bee not expressely set downe yet being agreeable to the Word and the nature of the action in hand they haue sufficient warrant by these generall precepts Let all things be done to edification Let all things bee done decently and in order And with these precepts Fenners grounds doe agree Otherwise by what warrant is it appointed in the forme set downe before our Psalme bookes touching the celebration of the Lords Supper that during the time of the distribution some place of Scripture should bee read which doth liuely set forth the death of Christ to the intent that our eyes and senses may not onely be occupied in these outward signes of bread and wine which are called the visible word but that our minds and hearts also may be fully fixed in the contemplation of the Lords death which is by this holy Sacrament represented This ordinance is not contained in the Institution yet I hope yee will not say that it is flat contrary thereto but that it hath sufficient warrant by the generall Apostolike precepts before expressed and so hath the prayer vsed by vs in the acte of distribution But yee subioyne another reason to prooue the prayer vsed at this time vnlawfull PP Further wee are forbidden by the second Commandement to pray by direction before any creature ANS Why do yee then pray at the table when your meate is set before you and at the Consecration hauing the sacramentall Elements before you And when you visite the Sicke why direct yee your face and senses towards the person and the place where he lyes while yee are praying to God for him PP This publike prayer is but a pretended cause of kneeling as the Ministers of Lincolne make manifest in their Abridgement c. ANS To the Abridgement of these Ministers sufficient answeres are made by the learned Diuines of that Church and the Canons and Customes thereof defended against their calumnies Therefore let vs come to our owne touching which yee say PP As for our Church no such prayer is ordained to bee vttered by the minister Therefore no such prayer can be pretended Iu the late Canon it is said That the most reuerend and humble gesture of the body in our meditation and lifting vp of our hearts best becommeth so diuine an action Meditation is no prayer and the heart may be lifted vp by the act of faith and contemplation aswell as the action of prayer So that neither publike nor mentall prayer is expressed in our Act. ANS Albeit neither mentall nor publike prayer be expressed in the Act yet prayer thankesgiuing and praise are all insiuuated for albeit all meditation bee not prayer yet euery prayer is a meditation and although in the act of faith and contemplation the heart may bee lifted vp yet that eleuation of the heart requireth not the most humble and reuerent gesture of the bodie as kneeling In the ancient Church they were not accustomed to kneele when they made confession of their faith but to stand as Christian souldiers Our act insinuateth such a meditation and lifting vp of the heart as is vsed in actions of deuotion such as prayer and thankesgiuing which are practised by all who giue obedience to the act or doe worthily communicate But put the case that by the act no such thing were ordained expresly yet vpon this antecedent which yee vse namely wee are not ordained by any act of our Church to pray at the receiuing this conclusion will not follow Therefore we may not pray at the receiuing For wee are not ordained by any act of our Church expressely to discouer our heads in the act of receiuing May wee not therefore discouer our heads But any shew of reason is good enough to deceiue simple people PP But let the words be interpreted of mentall prayer euen mentall prayer is not the principall exercise of the soule in the act of receiuing the sacramentall Elements the minde attending on the audible words the visible Elements the mysticall actions and making present vse of them men should not be diuerted from their principall worke and meditation vpon the analogie betweene the signes and the things signified ANS The meditation vpon the analogie betweene the signe and the thing signified cannot be the principall worke of the soule it being nothing else but the consideration of the similitude that is betweene the natuall vse of the signes and the spirituall vse of the thing signified Namely that as the Elements serue to nourish the outward man so the body and the bloud of Christ hath a vertue to nourish the inward man and by eating and drinking the Elements are applied to feede the body So by faith the body and the blood of Christ are applied to feed the soule Such a
himselfe PP Thirdly the manner of deliuery of the gift and the will of the Giuer are to be considered If the Prince call his Nobles to a banquet it is his will that they sitte at table with him as Ionathan and Dauid sate at King Sauls table Christ hath declared by the Institution after what manner he would haue vs to receiue these mysticall pledges Kneeling cannot agree with the actions and precepts of the Institution ANS If we consider the manner of deliuery of the gift and the will of the Giuer it fauoureth kneeling rather then sitting for although we be inuited to a banquet yet it is not a bodily repast such as Ionathan and Dauid receiued at Sauls table That required leisure and time and such a site and position of bodie as is most commodious for ease but by the Institution it it manifest that the banquet whereunto wee are called is the body and blood of Iesus giuen externally in a little quantitie of bread and one Cuppe diuided amongst many and ministred internally with Christs owne hand Neyther come wee to this banquet to feede our bodies but to feede our soules and to extoll and praise his death as I haue ofte said before Whereupon the Apostle inferreth that wee should receiue worthily that is with such a reuerence both externall and internall as is worthie the Giuer and the gift and is most meete to set foorth the praise of the Giuer and the worth of the gift In this respect kneeling is most agreeable both to the actions and precepts of the Institution PP The second breach of the second Commandement made by kneeling is the shew of conformitie with the Papists The Lord forbade his people to bee like the Gentiles Leuit 18.3 and 19.27 and Deut. 12. The Christians were forbidden to decore their houses with Bay-leaues and greene bonghes because the Pagans vsed so to doe or to rest from their labours vpon the dayes that the Pagans did If conformitie in things not hauing state in idolatrous seruice but onely glauncing at the honour of the Idoll bee condemned farre more is conformitie in the grossest act wherein the life and soule of their idolatrie standeth Such is the gesture of kneeling amongst the Papists this outward conformitie tickleth the Papists and offendeth the godly ANS A shew of conformitie with the Papists in Idolatrie is a breach of the second Commandement But to kneele at the Sacrament our hearts being freed of the opinion of Transubstantiation and our mouthes confessing and professing that we doe onely kneele to God and our Sauiour Iesus Christ is no more conformitie with them in idolatrie then in the action of prayer to kneele when we direct our prayers to God and not to Angels or Saints or other creatures For example To kneele and say the Lords Prayer in honour of the Saints and to offer it as a libell of request to be presented and commended by their prayers to God which Papists professe themselues to doe Costeri Enchiridion de veneratione Sanctorum is idolatrie yet to kneele and offer that prayer to God only as wee doe is not idolatrie although both in the gesture of kneeling and in the substance of the prayer there bee a conformitie our Faith and profession being contrarie to theirs freeth vs of all shew of conformity with them in superstition and idolatry But the Lord forbade his people yee say to be like the Gentiles yet did he neuer forbid them to knele and lift vp their hands to him in their prayers although the Gentiles kneeled and lifted vp hands vnto their gods when they prayed The things wherein God forbade his people a conformity were vncleannesse idolatry superstition witcheraft c. and not such ceremonies of diuine worship as are by himselfe commanded yet abused by Idolaters And where yee say that Christians were prohibited to rest those dayes on which the Pagans rested I hope yee will not haue vs to worke on the Lords day because the Papists rest that day Finally when yee say that the life of Popish idolatrie consisteth in kneeling yee speake falsely for the life of their idolatrie consisteth in a professed adoration of the bread with opinion of Transubstantiation and not in the outward gesture of kneeling which being lawfull and religious in it selfe is onely abused by them to idolatrie And doe not all they who sitte at the Sacrament keepe an outward conformitie with the Arrians who will needs sitte to declare that they esteeme Christ Iesus to bee onely a meere man By your argument all they are transgressours of the first Commandement that communicate with them in sitting Now to that which yee adde in the end that this outward conformitie tickles the Papist and offends the godly yee are greatly mistaken it is your contentious opposition against the truth and disobedience of the lawfull ordinances of the Church which tickles the Papist and grieues all good men and not our conformitie in a lawfull and religious ceremonie PP The third breach of the second Commandement made by kneeling is the retaining the monument of vile idolatrie all human inuentions polluted with idolatrie except they be of necessarie vse ought to bee remoued from Gods seruice This gesture had a spot of prophanation from the beginning being at the first birth in this act dedicated to idolatrie The brasen Serpent set vp at Gods owne command was not spared when it was abused Wee detest the very garment of a theefe or a whoore though it bee innocent BEZA saith many things may bee tollerated for the weake which may not bee restored after they are taken away he commendeth them who abolished kneeling amongst other things Tanquam apertas idolomanias ANS You make the third breach of the second Commandement by kneeling the retaining of a monument of vile idolatrie and in this yee erre for kneeling is a religious ceremony appointed by God himselfe to bee vsed in all actions of adoration and was not of humane inuention therefore cannot be a monument of idolatrie in this or any other act If it be abused to idolatry although abuse the thereof should bee abhorred yet the religious gesture it selfe is not to be detested Let the theefe bee hanged and the whoore drowned yet the religious ceremony must bee restored to the right owner to whom all knees should bow The burning of Incense was a part of the ceremoniall worship vnder the Law and abused to idolatrie when it was offered to the brazen Serpent yet that part of worship was not abolished but the Idoll it selfe destroyed and the ceremony restored to God vnto whom of right it belonged Neither hath your comparison of the brazen Serpent and kneeling any force in it for the brazen Serpent in the time it was abolished had no vse that ceased with the vertue of the cure that the Israelites receiued by looking vpon it the act of kneeling continueth alwayes in a necessary vse for the better expressing of our thankfulnesse to God And where you say
to be obserued of necessitie for conscience of the diuine Ordinance as a day sanctified and blessed by God himselfe These are commanded to be obserued onely for ecclesiasticall order and policie and doe not oblige men in conscience to obedience but for eschewing scandall and contempt Secondly the Lords Day is to be obserued as the Sabbath of IEHOVAH that is not onely for a day wherein we are appointed to rest to God but as a day whereon God himselfe did rest after the Creation So it is obserued as a remembrance and resemblance of Gods rest Thirdly the Lords Day is obserued as is the Lords Supper this in remembrance of his death that in remembrance of his resurrection Fourthly the Lords Day is obserued as a pledge of that rest wherein hee that enters shall rest from his labours as God hath done from his And fiftly we obserue the Lords Day as a perpetuall signe betweene God and vs to signifie and declare that the God who hath sanctified vs to be his people and whom wee adore as IEHOVAH the Father who created the World in sixe dayes and rested the seuenth IEHOVAH the Sonne who redeemed the World and rising that day to life abolished sinne and death and brought life and immortalitie to light and IEHOVAH the Holy Ghost who on that day descended vpon the Twelue Apostles sanctifying them and the whole World by them with the truth of Gods Word In none of these fiue poynts doe we obserue the Festiuall dayes as the Lords Day PP It is left free to teach any part of Gods Word on the Lords day but for solemnitie of the festiuall solemne Texts must bee chosen Gospels Epistles Collects Psalmes must bee framed for the particular seruice of these dayes and so the mysticall dayes of mans appointment shall not onely equall but in solemnities surpasse the morall Sabbath appointed by the Lord. ANS If by the solemnitie of the Festiuall yee vnderstand the honour done to the Day wee deny that wee are appointed to choose any Text or frame our Doctrine and Exhortations thereto but if by the solemnitie of the Festiuall yee vnderstand the cōmemoration of the benefits made on these daies it is true that euery Minister is ordayned to choose pertinent Texts and frame his Doctrine and Exhortations thereto But vpon this yee will neuer conclude that these dayes which yee falsly call mysticall doe not onely equall but surpasse the morall Sabbath in solemnitie for the whole solemnitie hath onely respect to the benefits which on these times are remembred and no respect at all to the Time The solemnitie not being obserued for the Time but the Time for the solemne remembrance of these benefits The Lords Day otherwise is not onely obserued for the diuine seruice that is performed thereon but the same seruice and publike worship which may bee omitted on all the sixe dayes must be performed on the Lords Day because God hath appointed it to be sanctified with these holy Exercises PP If they were instituted onely for order and policie that the people may assemble to religious exercises wherefore is there but one day appointed betwixt the Passion and the Resurrection Wherefore fortie dayes betweene the Resurrection and Ascension and ten betweene the Ascension and the Pentecost Why follow we the course of the Moone as the Iewes did in our moueable feasts making the Christian Church clothed with the Sunne to walke vnder the Moone as Bonauentura alludes Wherefore is there not a certayne day of the Moneth kept for Easter aswell as for the Natiuitie Does not Bellarmine giue this reason out of Augustine that the day of Natiuitie is celebrated onely for memorie the other both for memorie and for Sacraments ANS Saint Augustines opinion alleadged by Bellarmine Epist 119. is not receiued by the reformed Churches as the reason moouing them to obserue these times for they expresly deny that they keepe these times for any mysterie or Sacrament that is in them but onely for order and policie which directeth all things to bee done to edification and allowes vs to make choyce of such circumstances as are most meet to promoue the spirituall businesse whereunto they are applyed And this is a kinde of Christian prudence and dexteritie for who knowes not what moment there is in the opportunity of Times and Places to aduance actions Now because no times can be found more conuenient for a solemne commemoration of the Birth Passion c. then these which are either he same indeed by reuolution or in cōmon estimation they follow in this the iudgement of the primitiue Church esteeming it pietie to prefer vnitie with the Catholike church in things indifferent and lawfull to the singularitie of any priuate mans opinion or the practice of any particular Church The allegation of Bonauentura his allusion in such a graue point is ridiculous for if the Sunne and the Moone bee taken mystically as they are in the Reuelation in this case the Church clothed with the Sunne that is with the light of the Gospell walkes not vnder the Moone that is according to the opinions and fashions of the world but treading these vnder foote followes the rules of order and decency for edification If by the Sunne and Moone these two Planets be vnderstood which God created for signes seasons dayes and yeares So long as the Church is militant on earth shee must vse the benefit of these Creatures in the determination of times for all her actions PP If the Anniuersary commemorations were like the weekely preachings Why is the Husband-man forced to leaue his plough at the one and not at the other Why did not Master Galloway curse the people for absence from the one aswell as from the other ANS I answere Although the circumstance of Time whereon the Anniuersary commemoration is made differs not in holinesse or any mysticke signification from the weekly dayes of preaching yet it differres in frequency and raritie for the dayes of weekely preaching doe returne and to astrict the Husband-man to leaue his plough so often were against equitie and charitie but the times of these commemorations being so rare to wit three seruile dayes onely in the yeare and the exercise so profitable Reason would if the Husbandman willingly did not leaue his plough at these times that by authoritie he should be forced aswell for his owne benefit as for eschuing scandall and contempt And Master Galloway had reason to curse these who for contempt and with offence of their Brethren absented themselues from the Sermons of Christs Natiuitie Lastly the difference of the seruice on these dayes from the weekely and ordinary makes them not to differ in holinesse or mysterie from the weekely dayes more then the difference in seruice which is performed on the fift of August and fift of Nouember makes these two dayes to bee mysticke or more holy then other times PP To make solemne commemoration of Christs Natiuitie vpon any other day then vpon the putatiue day