any ones iudgement that shall compare what they alledge with this that I haue set downe at large They cite also Peter Martyr as being cleare on their side to condemne the gesture of kneeling Yet who so reades his Commentarie vpon the booke of Iudges imprinted at Zurich in the second chapter fol. 33. he shall plainely finde these words I thinke wee should not contend that rites and ceremonies should be any where the same but there must be this prouiso that all come as neere as may be to the word of God and that edification with decent order may be furthered Nihil alioquin interest si coenae dominicae sacramentum stantes aut sedentes aut genibus flexis percipiamus modo institutum Domini conseruetur occasio superstitionibus praecidatur Vide etiam inter locos communes fol 193. otherwise it makes no matter whether wee receiue the Sacrament of the Lords Supper standing or sitting or kneeling so that the Lords ordinance be kept and that occasion of superstitions may be preuented And this appeares to be penned by him after his booke set forth against Stephen Gardiner I haue heard some reply that Peter Martyr is yet against vs because he saith it makes no matter whether of the gestues be vsed and yet our Law bindes to kneeling onely Vnto which besides the former reioynders this is to the purpose that the abridgement before named citing Hooper in his sixt Sermon as vtterly against kneeling his words are yet found and by others of them alleadged no otherwise than thus that hee could wish it were commanded by the Magistrates that the receiuers should doe it standing or sitting and that sitting rather he thought best Now if either of these two were enioyned the other could not be left so indifferent that euery particular man or woman might yet make their choice therefore that could not be Peter Martyrs meaning but that herein liberty was left to the choice of euery distinct Church Master Greenham also a worthy man for zeale and industry in preaching the Gospell and one who is alleadged in the Register of opposites to haue much withstood our ceremonies in his yonger yeeres afterward one comming to aske his aduice whether to sit or kneele at the Lords Table it is set downe among his graue counsels vpon the word Sacraments that he gaue this answere For such things let vs labour what wee may to doe as much as we can for the peace of the Church Being occasioned to write further vpon this argument and in manner as before thus I proceeded first arguing in this manner IT is the holy Communion therefore how should not the gesture which is most proper to pietie and holinesse be at least as fit as any other Surely standing or sitting are not gestures more fitting deuotion then kneeling is Nay how are they so much seeing that howsoeuer deuotion may concurre with them yet it is not declared by them but by kneeling we partly expresse it therefore to bow downe and to worship are often ioyned together as O come let vs worship fall downe and kneele Psa 95. and in Psal 22.29 All that be fat on earth shall eate and worship and they that goe downe to the dust shall kneele before him Where we see eating and worshipping are ioyned together and bowing downe is not seuered from them 1. Obiection Oh but this is a maine reason why we dare not kneele lest wee should seeme to worship and namely to worship the Bread and the Wine because our kneeling is appointed to be before them Answere From whom should seeming or censure be feared Not from any that vnderstand the doctrine of the Church of England nor yet from the Papists for they auerre still notwithstanding our kneeling that wee receiue but Bread and Wine howsoeuer they wrong vs herein yet they traduce vs not so much as to say we pretend to worship them Lib. 4. de Eucharistia c. 29. §. 2. For Bellarmine plainely acknowledgeth we all renounce that And how should our worship by any of our selues be thought to be directed to the Bread and Wine as hauing Christs body in them before we receiue them or whiles we are onely in the act of receiuing when the order of the words is first to take and eate before they be Sacramentally declared to become his body and bloud Also the prayer going before makes it plaine against all cauilling viz. That wee receiuing these thy creatures of Bread and Wine according c. in remembrance c. may be partakers of his most blessed body and bloud 2. Obiection Yet we thinke we should not bow downe before a creature to worship God as the Papists doe in and before their images Answere No more we doe for our worship is directly to God and to Christ no way vnto the creatures Tom. 6. conera Maxi◠〈◊〉 3. cap. 22. 〈◊〉 â—54 because as Saint Augustin saith In sacramentis non quid sint sed quid oftendant semper attenditur We consider not what they are but what they shew or signifie And the signification is such as it doth iustly occasion our humiliation when we receiue and are about to receiue them for so our famous Diuines P. Martyr BB. Iuel and the Lord du Plesse all of them allow of Saint Augustines saying in Psal 98. No man eates the flesh of Christ except he first worship it These diuines all say plainely We doe so we worship him in the Mysteries but not the Mysteries themselues in the Sacrament but not the Sacrament the Creator in the creature sanctified and not the Creature Peter Martyr loc com classe 4. cap. 10. pag. 863. Iuel fully to the same effect in his answere to Harding Act. 8. diuision 22. pag. 404. and Morney fourth Booke of the Sacrament cap. 6. p. 452. Hereunto I annexe the confession of two worthies among our Martirs BB. Ridly and Latimer Ridly in his disputation at Oxford answering Doctor Glin pag. 1451. saith We adore and worship Christ in the Eucharist and if you meane the externall Sacrament I say that also is to be worshipped as a Sacrament Latimer also saith pag. 1458. Wee worship Christ in the heauens and we worship him in the Sacrament but the massing worship is not to be vsed Againe as touching the Papists bowing before Images they say they worship them because by them they remember Christ whereas we doe not worship bread and wine in remembrance of Christ but wee worship onely Christ of whom we are remembred by the bread and wine and Bellarmine shewes if they should worship images no otherwise it were to bee accounted no image-worship at all his words be these Siimago non est veneranda nisi improprie De imag San. lib. 2. cap. 21. § 2. probatur est quia nimirum coram illa vel in illa aut per illam adoratur exemplar certe licebit simpliciternegare imagines esse venerandas 3. Obiection Wee thinke still tho that with respect to creatures
and approbation then hath the force of a perpetuall command concerning vs and to binde vs. Answere This assertion is many wayes liable to exceptions for when the Lord said This doe Luk. 22.19 19. 1. Corin. 11.24 it must needs be hee respected the substance and not precisely the circumstances therefore the Minister communicating vnto others is not allowed nor at any hand required to sit Secondly whereas hee alwaies himselfe receiues first Christs owne example will not warrant Thirdly to omit difference of number in Communicants from his number and difference of sexe who doubts but that it is fittest to receiue in the publique place of Gods worship though the first celebration were in a priuate chamber and that it is fittest to receiue in the fore-noone and before dinner albeit the time then were after supper and not then onely but long afterward as Acts ch 20. vers 11. the breaking of bread was it seemeth after the sermon 1. Cor 11.21 and so after midnight Likewise in Corinth euery one tooke his owne Supper before which the Apostle there reprooues onely in respect of the excesse and of such banqueting in the Church and of vncharitablenesse towards the poor not in respect of the time therfore doth expressely mention the time of Christs institution to haue beene in the night by and by after vers 23. Now seeing we hold all those circumstances may vary from the first institution why must onely the same gesture be obseru'd which as I shewed before is not the same but in a generality A common gesture ye presse still must be vsed as Christ did vse it wherein wee would ioyne with you if yee meant common by the Churches vse in receiuing but of that before Obiection Christs institution and the practise of his Apostles may bee vrged against kneeling because they were not required to kneele neither did they so at receiuing when hee himselfe was present and did minister vnto them Answere This shall be answered more directly when a like obiection will come in againe First then I now reply that the words are Math. 26. v. 26. and Marke 14.22 As they did eat Iesus tooke bread c. not as they did sit or as they did lye c. so that our Sauiours practise must needs afford a stronger argument for a necessitie of eating somewhat before which is expressed then for receiuing by such or such a position of the body which is not expressed Secondly seeing the bread was broken to them as they did eate and as their manner of sitting or lying was to eate wee see I thinke a plaine difference how we may kneele more conueniently in receiuing as the seats bee fitted for vs then they could Thirdly the argument from Christ his practise ministring to them who did not kneele to vrge a necessitie as if therefore we may not kneele is a plaine fallacy as if one should say Christ did vsually preach sitting as Math. 4.1 13. v. 2. and Luk. 4.20 therefore we may not preach standing or he is noted to haue preached standing but once therefore we may not doe so often or thus Christ did preach many times but we reade yet onely of one time wherein he tooke a Text. Luk. 4. v. 16. So wee should doe best to preach commonly without taking of a Text. Furthermore seeing the Lord Iesus is propounded to vs for an ensample not onely in his manner of performing the parts of Gods worship but in all manner of conuersation 1 Peter 1.15 excepting what appertained to his diuine nature or to his offices therefore as well seeing he chose to be poore we must refuse to be rich As he wore a coate without seame so we must haue no seame in our vpper garment And thus way may be made for the spirit of contradiction to trouble the whole Church of God and euery member of it Obiection But we marueile still if this gesture of kneeling were to be allowed why all reformed Churches doe disallow it that it is vsed only among the Papists Answere The gesture among the Papists which some relate was commanded first by Pope Honorius the third was kneeling not at receiuing Balaeus de actis Rom. pontif l. 5 pag. 279. but at the eleuation or lifting vp of the Masse-cake or hoast as they tearme it ouer the Priests head that all should then together fall downe and adore it but we haue no such kneeling because we haue no such eleuation nor we haue no such hoast to eleuate but in our hearts we abandon it yet can we imagine no other but that the members of the Church seuerally in time of receiuing did kneele of ancient time because of these and the like sayings of the Fathers that then liued Cyprian ad Quirinum l. 3. cap. 94. as that the Eucharist with feare and honour is to be receiued and that it is to be discerned and distinguished from other meates August in Epist 118. veneratione singulariter debita by a veneration singularly due vnto it And at this day Hodie in mysteris adoramus carnem Christ Amb. dispu Sanct. lib. 3. cap. 12. we adore Christs flesh in the mysteries which being a sentence the Papists alleadge against the Church of England Doctor Bilson answeres lib. 4. pag. 537. in 8. Verily and so doe we we adore Christ in them we adore not the mysteries themselues which must needes be Ambrose his meaning because he said a little before neither doe we reade that any thing is to be adored besides God Neque adoratudum quicquam prater deum legimus Chrysostome also held that Christ is to be adored in the Sacrament no lesse Chrysost hom 24. in cap. 16. ad Corinth cum reuerentia tremore with reuerence and trembling then as the wise men did performe to him lying in the manger Matth. 2. which we see there plainely was by kneeling But if these and like sayings of the Ancients should either be suspected or contemned we refuse not the iudgement of Churches reformed now adayes and of the godly learned in them The Church of Bohemia in their confession Anno 1575. as they say first Hoc sacramentum c. This sacrament ought to be administred and receiued without adoration and the worship which is due to God onely so they say by and by after Populus fidelium vsitatissime in genuo procumbens hoc accipit The faithfull people most vsually receiue this falling downe vpon their knees with giuing of thankes and reioycing himns and rehearsall of benefits by the death of Christ and all this as they vnderstand according to Christs bidding Doe this in remembrance of me The Heluetians also in their confession pag. 113. to cleare themselues from hauing a meane regard Sunt enim haeres sanctae venerandae de sacris symbolis of the holy signes they say thus of them These are things holy and venerable And the censure in the name of the Churches of France and
man to change those things that belong to the common state §. 6. they are not aduised sure that would haue it left indifferent at least for who list to kneele who list to sit who list to stand Page 6. but of this heretofore Beza is also plentifull to this purpose in Epistola 24. 13. Obiection Yet godly Diuines would haue ceremonies most pure according to Christs institution or example Answere First this obiection is nothing to the purpose in this case there beeing no institution nor cleare example for one gesture more then another Secondly I answere Godly Diuines would not haue contention or opposition maintained in the Church for things indifferent or that may be tollerated when they are once growne to bee in vse Caluin Epist 118. 120. M. Caluin saith that diuersity of rites and vsages in one and the same Church well composed or ordered is not tollerable in Epist 118. wherfore he saith he wished Hooper not to stand out as he did about Cap and Rochet Epist. 120. Beza in conference with Iacobus Andreas Colloquiū mon. pelgartense pag. 425. saith Non repugno quin coena Domini in altari celebrari possit I gaine-say not but that the Lords Supper may be administred vpon an Altar Zanchus lib. 1. de cultu dei externo col 485. And Zanche saith Quta neque Christus neque Apostoliprohibuerūt altaria aut mandarunt vt mensis ligneis vteremur idcirco inter adiophora hoc quoque annumerandum est If Master Beza had beene altogether so indifferent to the Church of England Beza in explā 2. pag. 25. as he was to his neighbours of Zurich I cannot thinke but he would haue written as fauourably concerning our vse of kneeling as hee did of their vse to receiue from their Ministers with their mouthes and not with their hands He saith indeed that vse came vp from a superstitious veneration of the signes the originall of kneeling he makes to be better vt supra hee spares not to call it monstrous when an opinion of worship concurs with it yet he yeeldeth that whatsoeuer is rightly done as viz. to abolish such a vse is not simply and absolutely necessary therefore they that so vrge taking with the hand that they hold it a prophanation to receiue it other-way when receiuing with the mouth only is without impiety and superstition and vpheld to auoyd the perill of innouation I am afraid saith Master Beza they that censure it so hardly doe themselues rather offend or sinne by ignorance of what is fit to bee held in these cases or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of pertinacie and selfe-wilfulnesse Againe if wee may reason as Master Calnin doth Harmon 4 lib. pentateuch writing vpon the second Commandement page 286. for the lawfull vse of such Churches or Temples as haue formerly beene defiled with Idolatrie Quia nos non obstringit quod propter consequentiam vt loquuntur legi additum est which to my vnderstanding is q. d. the abuse of a thing doth not restraine vs from making a lawfull vse vse thereof I see not by this reason how any Popish abuse of kneeling surplice or the Crosse can vtterly make vnlawfull the vsage of them so as in our Church they bee enioyned And if vnder name of taking away what may nourish superstition wee stand precisely to vrge remouing of somewhat which is per se medium in it selfe indifferent M. Caluin saith saith wee may esse in nimio rigore superstitiosi our selues become superstitious in too much strictnesse like him that did caleare fastum Platonis alio fastu Thirdly I know not whom our Church of England are to esteeme for more godly Diuines and free from all partialitie then the two publique professors in the two Vniuersities in King Edwards time Bucer and Martyr who notwithstanding they had not beene formerly accustomed to the vse of our English ceremonies yet beholding them they did in no wise dehort from them but perswaded the vse of them as their letters extant doe shew and partly for this reason Bucer in script Anglic. fol. 708 Hooper because as Bucers words be it is euident that Iesus Christ our Lord did onely prescribe the substance of the ministring both of the word and Sacraments in his owne words and al other things which pertaine to the decent and profitable administration of his mysteries hee hath left and admitted to be ordered by his Church and hence saith he we celebrate the Lords Supper neither in the euening nor in a priuate house nor leaning nor yet with men onely Master Beza to this purpose saith againe Beza Epistola 8. pag. 71. That whatsoeuer was performed by the Apostles in rites and ceremonies he did not iudge that forthwith it must bee followed for a rule without adding or altering because in the beginning the Apostles themselues could not determinately set downe all what they iudged to be expedient for the Churches and therefore they did necessarily proceed by little and little as appeares by their institution of Deacons and their practise so often and in so many things of the Iewish ceremonies Heereto I may adde that which another hath declared more at large Sprint in his Cassander how the Apostles did some things for the peace of the Church furtherance of the Gospell which in some other respects they did censure most hardly Acts 16.3 for S. Paul circumcised Timothy although hee professed to the Galathians If they were circumcised Galat. 52. Christ should profit them nothing He made vowes shaued his head Acts 18.18 chap. 8.26 was purified after the Iewish manner and yet he called such obseruations impotent and beggerly rudiments Galat. 4.9 The Apostles also did impose some things tearming them necessary Acts 15.28 as to absteine from bloud and that which is strangled yet I hope we ioyne not with those sectaries who would bring the Church into such bondage againe I wish hartily too that among other godly Diuines they were not neglected I meane in their reasons whose direction otherwise by authority is pressed vpon vs by law for the Preface before the booke of Common Prayer seemes to me to be so penned as may giue all syncere Christians void of preiudice good satisfaction Lastly I cannot but think it dangerous to reason thus that because Popery is Antichristianity therfore it should be a good rule in reformation to shew our selues vnto them most opposite for this false-light like ignis fatuus seemes to haue deceiued the old Arrians who would not entitle the Sonne and the Holy Ghost to be essentially God that so they might be most vnlike the Gentiles who professedly did worship manie gods Then the eagernes to be most opposite to Arius made some to be Tritheits accounting the three persons to be three gods and some to hold with Sabellicus that the Father Son and Holy Ghost were but meerely names and did not note out so much as a threefold distinction personall and to conclude in stead of instancing farther of old wee cannot deny but the Separatists vpon this ground are departed from vs and if the position be sound we ought all to goe out after them Sed Deus meliora qui facit vnanimes in domo cui in domo sua ex pietate concordia suorum sit laus gloria in sacula seculorum Amen FINIS