body he meanes the body of Christ lying in the Manger and these wicked and barbarous men leauing their houses and Countrey hauing finished a long iourney and comming to the place they adored with great feare and trembling Let vs therefore sayeth hee that are Citizens of heauen imitate these Barbarians Thus farre Chrysostome Now to imitate them is not to come with inward reuerence onely but to shew it also in outward gesture for of them the Scripture saith That falling downe they adored CHRIST And it is manifest by the words following that Chrysostome meanes not of the inward adoration onely but also of the outward Non solum hoc ipsum corpus vides sicut illi c. Thou doest not onely see the same body as they did but thou knowest both his power and dispensation and thou art ignorant of no thing done by him as being exactly and accurately imitated in all mysteries Let vs therefore stirre vp our selues with feare Et longe maiorem quà m illi Barbari ostendamus reuerentiam that is Let vs shew foorth much more reuerence then these Barbarians The word Ostendamus manifestly shewes that Chrysostome exhorteth his people not to the inward adoration of Christ onely at the Sacrament but to the externall also The practise of all Churches since the dayes of Christ confirmeth the same for there was neuer any Church wherein the Sacrament was receiued without some externall signe and gesture of adoration To stand before the Lord in a solemne act of diuine worshippe is a gesture of adoration and as yee obserued before out of Drusius in the 51. Page of this Pamphlet standing is taken for prayer because it was the vsuall gesture at prayer The discouering of the head in our Church is an externall signe of adoration otherwise our people who are wont to sitte at the reading of the Word singing of Psalmes and publike prayers did vse no externall signe at all And as in these actions the discouering of the head is a signe of adoration so is it in the receiuing of the Communion and was so euen when wee did sit at the receiuing for the reuerence of the bare head was not giuen at that time to the externall Minister nor to the externall Elements but to Christ himselfe his body and bloud Now it is certaine that the externall reuerence giuen to Christ in an act of diuine worship is diuine and therefore the reuerence of adoration as your selfe affirmed pag. 48. This conslant and vniuersall practise compared with the testimonies of the Ancients cuidently shewes the vanitie of your answeres against externall adoration vsed in all ages at the receiuing of the Sacrament Leauing them therefore I come to your conclusion PP The proofes already made for standing vpon the Lords day for 1000. yeeres in the Church doe euince that geniculation had no place in the act of receiuing all that time It hath therefore followed vpon bodily presence and transsubstantiation ANS Your proofes haue euinced nothing except yee grant that to receiue the Sacrament is an act of adoration for all the testimonies ye bring runne that way And at most yee haue onely proued that on the Lords day they stood at the Sacrament whereupon if yee conclude that geniculation had no place yee must vpon the same ground that sitting had no place yea it shall euince that sitting had no place in the Church vnto the yeere 1560. at which time it was receiued in our Church for after these 1000. yeeres wherein yee proue that standing was vsed kneeling succeeded and hath continued euer since in the Church vntill the time of reformation So sitting was neuer in vse by your owne argument As to the gesture vsed by our Sauiour at the Paschall Supper which yee affirme was continued at the institution of the Sacrament it was not sitting at a Table vpon fourmes or chaires but lying and leaning vpon beds and it is vncertain as I shewed before whether that gesture was continued or not and albeit it had beene continued there was neuer Church or Diuine that thought it exemplary for if they had done they would neuer haue vsed standing or passing or kneeling in stead of it If we might bee bold to coniecture with what gesture the Apostles receiued the Sacrament as yee are bold to affirme that they sate or what gesture Christ would haue vs to obserue it were doubtlesse surest to thinke that the Apostles receiued with that same gesture which they vsed at the thanksgiuing and blessing wherewith the Institution begins and therefore that the gesture which the Church thinketh most meet to be vsed at the thankesgiuing is the gesture fittest for the people to receiue because the action it selfe is a reall thankesgiuing and should haue conioyned with it the thankesgiuing and blessing wherewith the action beginnes in the minde and affection of the receiuers and because euer since the first Institution wee finde the Church to haue vsed the same gesture at the receiuing that they vsed at the thankesgiuing and prayer For when for the space of a thousand yeeres they stood and prayed as you your selfe affirme and so doth your namelesse Master of table gesture then they stood and receiued the Sacrament and after that when on the Lords day the Church began in stead of standing to vse kneeling at prayer they began also to receiue the Sacrament kneeling which forme of receiuing hath continued to our times But to returne againe to your argument where yee say that the proofes made for standing doe euince that for the space of a thousand yeeres kneeling had no place I will let you see how futile your argument is The Church stood on the Lords day at the Sacrament for the space of a thousand yeeres Ergo say yee they kneeled not for the space of a thousand yeeres May you not by the very same reason conclude The Church laboured not nor fasted on the Lords day for the space of a thousand yeeres Ergo they neither fasted nor laboured at all for the space of a thousand yeeres If during all that time the Sacrament had been onely celebrated on the Lords day your argument were probable but seeing the Sacrament as S. Augustine writes was giuen euery day and to giue it on the first fourth and sixt dayes of the weeke was held to bee an Apostolike constitution Therefore as on the rest of the weeke dayes except the Lords day they prayed fixis in terram genibus with their knees close to the ground so with that same gesture they receiued the Sacrament for the Church did euer receiue with the same gesture which they vsed in prayer as I haue proued by induction The Apostles receiued with the same gesture which they vsed at the thankesgiuing This yee cannot denie except yee ouerthrow all the grounds that yee laid for the example and precept of Christ to bee obserued The Church on the Lords day hath euer vsed to stand at the Sacrament when they stood at prayer and if you
or by themselues receiuing the Sacrament of the Altar after admonition shall bee excommunicate if repentance interuene not This sheweth what is meant by giuing or receiuing the Sacrament in a Papisticall manner for it was neuer our Churches meaning to censure these that receiued the Sacraments after the manner of the Reformed Churches in France England or Germany where many of our people haue receiued the Sacrament of Christs bodie kneeling Nor did our Predecessors euer condemne their customes and esteeme sitting necessary albeit for the estate of our Church they held it in the beginning to be most conuenient Next yee say That in the Kings Confession of Faith c. are these words contained We detest the ceremonies of the Romane Antichrist added to the ministration of the Sacraments and we detest all his rites signes and traditions This argument were good if yee did proue kneeling to be a rite or ceremony added to the Sacrament by the Roman Antichrist But we know this ceremony to be diuine and not Antichristian a ceremony allowed by God to bee vsed in his worship for he hath said expresly in his Word Vnto me all knees shall how and againe In the name of Iesus euery knee shall bow Neither will yee euer be able to proue the vse of this ceremony in receiuing the Sacrament to be Antichristian or to haue been instituted by the Antichrist of Rome for albeit Honorius ordained that the people should kneele at the eleuation and circumgestation of the Hoste to those who are sicke yet he made no constitution for kneeling at the receiuing of the Sacrament and there is as great difference betweene the eleuation in the Masse and the pompous circumgestation of the Hoste and the celebration of the Sacrament as is betwixt an idolatrous and superstitious inuention of man and a lawfull act of diuine worship Therefore to conclude the answere of this Section vnto the argument propounded by you I oppone this Euery indifferent alterable ceremony the innouation and abrogation whereof is thought expedient by the Church may be lawfully altered notwithstanding of any lawes customes oathes or subscriptions formerly made for obseruation therof for a time But sitting at the Sacrament is an indifferent alterable ceremony the innouation and abrogation whereof is thought expedient by the Church Ergo Sitting at the Sacrament may be lawfully altered notwithstanding of any lawes customes oathes or subscriptions formerly made for obseruation thereof for a time The Proposition is manifest by these Constitutions which we haue cited out of the seuenteenth chapter of the booke of Discipline confirmed in the Assembly 1581 and subscribed by many of the Ministry Yea the very nature of alterable ceremonies is such that to the obseruation of them no man is longer astricted then they stand in their integritie without change but if for any corruption and abuse or for some greater or better respect they be altered by the Church the obligation for obseruing of them ceases and bindes no more As to kneeling which the Assembly hath ordained in stead of sitting as yet we haue seene nothing against it neither Law Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall nor custome c. And I hope the reasons yee bring hereafter shal be found as friuolous But keeping your order I will first consider how yee qualifie it to be a breach of the institution PP p. 35. lin 25. The first breach of the institution by kneeling is the taking away of that commendable gesture of sitting vsed by Christ and his Apostles at and after the Institution That Christ and his Apostles sate at Table yee labour to proue it by the words of the Euangelist Edentibus illis whilest they did eate Matth. 26.26 Mark 14.22 Christ tooke bread and blessed c. If whilest they did eate say yee then also whilest they did sit as these two are conioyned Mark 14.18 The phrase imports that nothing interuened betwixt the eating and the celebration of the Sacrament it was therfore ministred vnto them sitting This is your reasoning pag. 36. lin 16. seq ANS Your argument is a captione à fallacia consequentis For albeit nothing interuened betweene the eating of the Paschall Supper and the celebration of the Sacrament yet it followeth not that the Sacrament was ministred vnto them sitting For as yee say their eating of the Paschall Supper and sitting were coniunct and that eating of the Paschall Supper ceasing at the beginning of the institution of this Sacrament how will it follow that the gesture of sitting continued and was not changed For although nothing interuened betweene the Paschall Supper and the Sacrament yet the gesture might haue beene changed when the action was changed And as the one action ceased when the other began so the gesture of sitting might haue ceased with the action wherewith it was conioyned and another gesture might haue begun and been vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament Moreouer betwixt their eating of the Paschall Supper and the administration of the Sacrament to the Disciples there interuened diuers actes as first the taking of the bread secondly the thankesgiuing thirdly the breaking fourthly the precept Take yee eate yee fiftly the word whereby the element was made the Sacrament After this the Sacrament was giuenby our Sauiour and receiued by the Disciples which yee call the ministration of the Sacrament vnto them Now albeit it were true that between the time they sate eating of the Paschall Supper and the time when the Sacrament began to bee celebrated nothing had interuened yet betwixt that and the ministring of the Sacrament to the Disciples all these fiue acts interuened In which time the gesture of sitting might haue beene changed for if they changed it not at the breaking of the bred by our Sauiour which was the first act yet they might haue changed it at the thankesgiuing which was the second or at the breaking which was the third or at Christs pronouncing of the words whereby the element became a Sacrament So vpon this ground that they were sitting and eating yee cannot conclude that they receiued the Sacrament sitting seeing betwixt the time of their eating of the Paschall Supper so many acts interuened wherein the gesture of sitting might haue beene changed before they receiued the Sacrament Thus it is not certaine that they sate and receiued the Sacrament or as yee say that the Sacrament was ministred vnto them sitting If it be replied that it is not written that they rose and altered their gesture I answere à non scriptum ad non factum est non valet consequentia It is not written that they altered their gesture therefore they did not alter it it followeth not in Theologie this consequence is euer good Nothing that is not written is to bee holden and beleeued for an vndoubted truth in the worship of God But after the eating of the Paschall Supper that the Apostles sate still at Table and altered not their gesture vntill they had receiued the Sacrament is a
thing that is not written Therefore after the eating of the Paschall Supper that the Apostles sate still without altering their gesture vntil they had receiued the Sacrament is not to be beleeued and holden for an vndoubted truth in Goods worship But yee subioyne lin 20. eiusdem pag. PP This is so euident that neuer man doubted of it till this last yeare euen those who affirme but against the truth that they stood at the first seruice confesse that they sate at the second and at the celebration of the Sacrament So doth Master Iohn Mare and the Bishop of Chester c. ANS That this is not so euident as yee alledge is manifest by that which hath bin said But the cause that hath moued vs doubt since the last yeare is the Paradox which yee and your followers haue vndertaken to defend since the last yeare of which neuer Diuine either in the ancient or reformed Church dreamed of before namely that we should beleeue without doubting First that the Apostles receiued the Sacrament sitting Secondly that this gesture of theirs was exemplary Thirdly that it was instituted by our Sauiour to be obserued in all succeeding ages Since yee after this manner vrge sitting with an opinion of necessity and impose it vpon the consciences of the weake with such terrours and feares that it cannot be omitted without a manifest breach of the Institution we can doe no lesse then trie by the Scriptures whether it be so or not The testimony of M. Iohn Mare or of any morral man cannot tye our consciences to beleeue or practise any thing in Religion as an Article of Faith or a necessary point of Gods worship whereof there is not a cleare and vndoubted warrant in the Word of God And for the Bishop of Chester Now Bishop of Couentry and Lichfield hee declareth his opinion onely but astricts no man to beleeue it nor will he haue any man to build thereupon as yee doe that the Apostles sitting was exemplary against the which his arguments in the Treatise that yee cite are such as might haue stayed you or any other that reason could satisfie from taking a pen in hand to the contrary PP That sitting was instituted I proue it by two reasons first the gesture that Christ retained in passing from the conclusion of the Paschall Supper That hee did institute sitting hee retained Therefore he did institute sitting ANS This is a Demonstration whereupon the faith and obedience of the worthy Receiuers must be grounded touching the gesture they must vse at Communion yet the Libeller perceiuing that the proposition of this argument may be denyed and being denied that it must be proued by this generall Whatsoeuer Christ retained that he did institute and considering withall that Christ retained many things as the place the quality of the bread and circūstance of time which he dare not affirme to haue bin instituted hee makes exception of such things as were retained of necessity and could not conueniently bee changed And thereupon subioynes this saying PP pag. 36. lin vlt. But as for the gesture of sitting he might haue changed it in standing or kneeling without working any miracle if it had not been his minde that we should receiue the Sacrament of the Eucharisticall Supper with the same gesture that the Iewes receiued the Paschall ANS In this argument hee takes it for granted that the Disciples sate at the Sacrament which yet is in question and by Scripture shall neuer be decided And this is a Sophisticke deception called petitio principij Next the reason whereby hee prooues that sitting was instituted and not the other circumstances which were likewise retained is because Christ might haue changed it in standing or kneeling without working a miracle But this reason I hope will not be found demonstratiue for our Sauiour without working a miracle might haue changed the vpper chamber wherin he eat the Passeouer taken himselfe to some other roome Therefore by your argument his minde was that we should only celebrate the Sacrament in an vpper chamber Likewise our Sauiour without working of a miracle might easily haue called his Mother and other women to the Sacrament and so haue altered the sex and number of the Communicants therfore it was his mind by your reason that twelue men sitting at once at Table and no women should receiue the Sacrament Finally our Sauiour might haue celebrated the Sacrament without his vpper garment which he did put on after he had washed his Disciples feete before he celebrated the Sacrament Therefore Baronius the Cardinall concludes wel by your ground That it was his mind the Priest should put on his Masse-clothes which are his vpper garment before he celebrated the Sacrament But that all men may see the vanity of this argument I shall clearly proue by it that sitting was not instituted Christ yee say might easily haue changed the gesture which he vsed at the Paschall Supper without the working of a miracle in standing or kneeling if it had not been his minde that we should receiue the Sacrament of the Eucharisticall Supper with the same gesture that the Iewes receiued the Paschall Now I assume But the Iewes this night receiued the Paschall Supper not sitting right vp in chaires or fourmes as we do but lying on beds although that both the gestures might haue been and were vsed by them in other nights as is manifest by the testimonie which you cite your selfe out of SCALIGER De emendatione temporum lib. 6. Quòd in omnibus alijs noctibus tam edentes quà m bibentes vel sedemus vel discumbimus in hac autem omnes discumbimus That is to say Other nights eating or drinking we either sit at table or lye This night we all lye yee turne it we all suppe that is sit leaning Thus then I reason vpon the ground of your owne demonstration The gesture of lying vsed by our Sauiour at the Paschal Supper according to the custom of the Iewes might haue easily and commodiously been changed without working a miracle by turning about his face and body to the Table and setting of himselfe right vpon the beddes with his feete to the ground as our custome is to sitte at table Therefore according to your owne principle it was not Christs minde that we should sitte vpright at table as wee doe and all the Iewes in those dayes vsed to doe at other times but that wee should lye at table as the Iewes did at the Supper of the Passeouer Now let the judicious Reader consider if this be a sure ground whereupon to settle a certaine and infallible point of Gods worship But I conuert the argument Nothing vsed at the Paschall Supper and retained at the Sacrament that is not expressed in the words of the Institution was instituted But sitting vsed in the Paschall Supper retained as yee alledge at the Sacrament is a thing not expressed in the words of the Institution Therefore sitting vsed at the Paschall
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
of his Natiuitie would be thought a great absurditie ANS If yee haue not fallen into this absurditie yee must grant that yee neuer made in your time any solemne commemoration of Christs Natiuitie And I verily beleeue that in this omission yee haue many companions by whose negligence God hath beene defrauded of the honour due to him for this benefit and the people lacked instruction in a principall Article of Faith This Article is the ground of all the rest for as Chrysostome sayes If our Sauiour had not beene borne he had neither suffered nor risen againe from the dead and thereupon he calls the day of this commemoration Metropolim omnium Festorum Euen for this it was expedient that a certayne time of the yeare should haue beene appointed for this commemoration which otherwise would haue been neglected and as yee say thought absurd But to returne to your Argument The commemoration of Christs Natiuitiy is no more astricted to the 25. of December then to any other time for although the 25. of December by ordinance of the Church bee dedicated to that religious seruice yet the seruice is not astricted to the time as the seruice of the Iewish festiuities which lawfully might not be performed on any other dayes then the festiuall The commemoration appointed by our Church to bee made on these fiue dayes may lawfully be performed at other conuenient times although on these dayes the same must not bee omitted For the seruice ar I haue said is not appointed for the Time but the Time is appointed for the worship So it is not absurd to remember Christs Natiuitie so oft as occasion is offered with all conuenient solemnitie as it may serue to his honour and the edification of the Church Thus wee haue seene that according to the Doctrine of the reformed Churches Anniuersarie dayes are and may bee obserued though not for any mysterie or holinesse that is in them more then in other dayes but for order and policy onely Against this all the Reasons which Bellarmine or yee haue brought or can inuent shall neuer preuaile more then the barking of a dogge against the Moone PP Next it may be obiected that the people of God might haue indicted dayes of fasting at their owne determination and an interdiction of all kind of worke Ans They had a generall warrant from God Ioel. 2.15 to proclayme a generall fast according to the occurrence of their calamities and other affaires of the Church The light and Law of Nature leades a man to this obseruation of an occasionall fast The like may be said by analogie of thanksgiuing that wee ought to praise God in the meane time when wee receiue the benefit But to make of the occasionall dayes of fasting or feasting anniuersarie and set festiuall and fasting dayes is without warrant It remaynes therefore that it is the Lords soueraignty to make or ordayne a thing to bee holy God first sanctifies by commandement and institution man sanctifies thereafter by obseruation applying to an holy vse the time sanctified by God ANS The conclusion agreeth not with the premisses for if it be Gods soueraigntie to make or ordayne a thing to bee holy how may the Church make a thing holy by appointing an occasionall feast or fast as yee grant shee may doe The instinct of nature and that command out of Ioel is a generall warrant onely The particular calamitie or benefit wherefore a fast or feast should be proclaymed is not expressed neither is the time particularly determined whereupon the solemne festiuitie or fast should be kept but the one is left to the estimation and the other to the determination of the Church So by that warrant libertie is giuen to the Church to consider and define the causes for the which a fast should bee proclaymed and to determine the time when the same should be obserued and to separate that time from common businesse and consecrate the same to the spirituall exercise of preaching hearing praying fasting c. as our Church hath vsed to doe very often Now if the Church hath power vpon occasionall motiues to appoint occasionall fasts or festiuities may not shee for constant and eternall blessings which doe infinitely excell all occasionall benefits appoint ordinary times of commemoration and thanksgiuing Ye say that this hath no warrant but yee speake without warrant for there is as great warrant to appoint such dayes as is for any other point of Ecclesiasticall policie touching the determination of times places formes and order to be obserued in the worship of God according to these generall grounds Let all things bee done to the glorie of God 1. Cor. 10. to edification 1. Cor. 14. with order and decencie 1. Cor. 14.16 The whole policie of our Church touching the vse of these circumstantiall things is ordered by these rules and according to these did our Church in the first booke of Discipline which yee cite often ordayne for the purpose now in hand That in euery notable Towne a day beside the Sonday should bee appointed weekely for Sermon that during the time of Sermon the day should be kept free from all exercise of labour as well by the Master as by the seruant That euery day there be either Sermon or prayers with reading of the Scriptures That Baptisme be orderly ministred either on the Sonday or after Sermon and the dayes of prayer That at foure seuerall times of the yeere the Sacrament of the Lords Supper be ministred viz. on the first Sonday of March on the first Sonday of Iune first Sonday of September and the first Sonday of December That in euery towne where Schollers are and learned men repaire a certaine day euery weeke be appointed for the exercise of Ministers in prophecie And the said booke affirmes The dedication of times and houres for such generall and particular exercises of the Word and Sacraments and Prayer to appertayne to the policie of the Church If the Church hath power after this manner to appoint times for Doctrine and diuine Seruice and Doctrine and diuine Seruice for times as the doctrine of the Catechisme on Sonday at afternoone reade the 9. Chapter of the said booke it cannot be denyed but the Church hath also power to appoint a certaine time day and houre for commemoration of Christs Natiuitie Passion c. For what more power had our Church at that time to appoint the Sacrament to be ministred the first Sondaies of March Iune c. then she hath now to appoint a Sermon to be made of Christs resurrection vpon Easter day and a Sermon of the sending downe of the holy Ghost vpon Whitsunday and does not the light of Nature teach vs that rare and great benefits should be remembred with more then ordinary thankefulnesse Hereby it is cleere that it is not the Lords soueraignty onely to make or ordayne a thing to be holy but it is a prerogatiue that God also hath giuen to the Christian Church But to the end
time is meete for Baptisme The solemnitie may be lesse but the grace is not diminished So that which ye say that Baptisme was tied of olde to Pentecost and Easter is false But that which the Bishop sayes is true that on these daies the Sacraments were lwaies solemnely ministred PP I will now frame one argument against this conceit of Apostolicall tradition and obseruation of Pasche The Apostles were led all their life-time by the infallible direction of the Spirit If they had accorded on the obseruation of Easter they had not disagreed on the day But their most ancient Records the bastard-Epistles aboue mentioned report that Philip and Iohn kept the fourteenth day of the Moone as the Iewes did And Peter the Lords Day following the fourteenth day of the Moone ANS In these Epistles there is no mention of Peter and so by these Epistles ye cannot proue that Iohn and Peter disagreed on the day It is said that Polycarpus and Anicetus disagreed on the day yet they accorded in the obseruation of the Feast which is directly contrarie to your argument But ye say the Apostles who were gouerned by the Spirit could not disagree on the day Did not Paul and Barnabas agree in planting of the Gospell yet they disagreed in chusing of their Fellow-Labourer Paul Peter agreed on this ground that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Law but by the Faith of Iesus Christ yet in the practise of the workes of the Law they disagreed Gal. 2. They agreed in the substance yet in the matter of circumstance and vse of things in their owne nature indifferent they disagreed But for these diuersities of opinion neither did they cast the substance away nor broke they the bond of charitie amongst themselues as ye doe who can brooke no man but him who will be sworne to your opinions as if they were Oracles But to be short this argument is answered by the learned Bishop in that Sermon so fully as may giue contentment to any that delights not in contention His words are these Pag. 25. Iames Bishop of Ierusalem and others who succeeded him the sooner to win their Brethren the Iewes condescended to keepe Easter 14. Luna the 14. of the Moone as they did That which by them was done by way of condescension was after by some vrged as a matter of necessitie So we see S. Paul when he came vp to Ierusalem to the Pentecost was counsailed or not scandalizing the Iewes to carrie himselfe as one that obserued the Law and practise some legall ceremonies to that effect which he did vsing them not as a part of diuine worship but as indifferent things and meanes expedient to win him credite with the Iewes that hee might edifie them in the truth So himselfe sayes He became all things to all men that he might winne some The keeping of the 14. day by Iohn and Iames is not an argument that they disagreed from the rest in iudgement touching the set day if any then was determined more then the practise of other ceremonies proues their disagreeing from S. Paul in the poynt of Christian libertie for this they did onely by way of condescension So the Apostles in these times might haue kept Easter vpon diuerse daies by the direction of the Spirit because the solemne commemoration of our Sauiours resurrection which we call Easter is not to be kept at any set time for any mystery that one day hath more then another by diuine institution The contentions therefore about the day were iustly blamed by the reformed Churches who acknowledge no day except the Christian Sabbath to haue greater prerogatiue then anothen But the greater part of the world keeping the solemnitie of Easter vpon the Lords Day which followed the 14. of the Moone the Churches of Asia being a fewer number did not well to preferre the singularitie of their opinion and custome to vnitie and conformitie with the greater part of Christendome in such a poynt Againe Victor Bishop of Rome cannot bee excused who first did vrge conformitie pressed it by violence vpon the Churches that were without his Iurisdiction and to excommunicate them was an insolent tyrannie seeing they were not subiect to his power Yet after the Nicene Councell had setled that controuersie and determined the day these must iustly be blamed that contentiously troubled the Christian peace disobeyed the Canon of the Councell and were disconforme to the rest of the Churches not by mistaking the day as some were but through wilfulnesse and pride the parents of contention PP Lastly they reason with Augustiue a posteriori That seeing the Lords passion resurrection ascension comming down of the Holy Ghost is celebrated with anniuersary solemnity through all the World they must needs haue beene ordayned eyther by the Apostles or by generall Councels But so it is that these daies were obserued before there was any generall Councell It must follow therefore that the Apostles ordained them Ans Augustines distinction is not necessarie for many customes crept in and thereafter preuailed vniuersally which were neither ordained by the Apostles nor generall Councels Socrates in his Historie sayes I am of opinion c. ANS Socrates in the testimonie which yee alledge lib. 5. cap. 22. for probation of your answere sayes that he is of opinion that the Feast of Easter hath preuailed amongst people of a certaine priuate custome and not by Canon He confirmes his opinion by this reason that they who keepe Easter on the 14. day of the Moone bring Iohn the Apostle for their author Such as inhabite Rome and the West parts of the World alledge Peter and Paul and yet there is none of them can shew in Writing any testimonie for confirmation of their custome First here it is to bee marked that Socrates in this testimonie calls his allegation an opinion onely that is a likely and probable conceit but that is not sufficient to infringe Saint Augustines rule and the probations that he brings are of no force for first it makes nothing against Augustines rule that the Easterne Churches kept the solemnitie on one day and the Westerne on another because Saint Augustine sayes not that the commemoration of these benefits was made vpon one and the selfe-same day onely hee sayes Anniuersaria solennitaie celebrantur that is They are yearely celebrated after a solemne manner The diuersitie of the day consuteth not this assertion but confirmes rather his saying namely that the solemnitie was obserued through all the World seeing in one part it was celebrated for winning of the Iewes according to the practise of S. Iohn and in the rest of the World on Pasche Sonday whereon our Sauiour rose according to the tradition of Saint Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles So this same solemnitie being kept through the whole Church although not on the same day Saint Augustines rule remains good that the solemne commemoration of Christs resurrection is Apostolicke The next probation is no
be baptised For these sate amongst the Catechumenists while they were sufficiently instructed in the mysteries of Religion and were able to giue a confession of their Faith before the Bishop and the People But such as were baptised in their infancy because they had not giuen a confession of their Faith vnto the Church about the end of their childhood they were presented by their Parents of new and examined by the Bishop according to a certayne common forme of Catechisme which they had in these times And to the end this action that was in it selfe graue and holy might haue the greater reuerence and dignitie the ceremonie of imposition of hands was also vsed Thus the child after approbation of his Faith was dimitted with a blessing c. Such an imposition of hands which is vsed for a simple blessing I commend doe and wish the sincere vse thereof were restored Et Sect. 13. Vtinam verò morem retineremus quem apud Veteres fuisse admonui priusquam abortiua haec Sacramenti larua nasceretur non enimesset Confirmatio talis qualem isti fingunt quae sine Baptismi iniuria nec nominari potest sed catechesis qua pueri aut adolescentiae proximi fidei suae rationem coram Ecclesia exponerent Esset autem optima catechizandi ratio si formula in hunc vsum conscripta esset summam continens familiariter explicans omnium fere religionis nostra capitum in qua vniuersa fidelium Ecclesia consentire sine controuersia debet Puer decennis Ecclesia se offerret ad edendam fidei confessionem regaretur de singulis capitibus ad singula responderet si quid ignoraret aut minus intelligeret doceretur ita vnicam veram synceram Fidem qua vnanimiter Deum vnum colit fidelium populus teste spectante Ecclesia profiteratur Hac disciplina si hodiè valeret profectò parentum quorundam ignauia acueretur qui liberorum institutionem quasi rem ad so nihil pertinentem securè negligunt quam tunc sine publice dedecore omistere non possent maior esset in populo Christiano fidei cousonsus nec tanta multoruminscitia ruditas non adeò temerè quidam nouis peregrinis dogmatibus abripereutur omnibus denique esset quaedam velut methodus doctrinae Christianae that is Would to God we did obserue the custome which I shew the Ancients vsed For then Confirmation should not be such as the Papists fancie which cannot be once named without the injurie of Baptisme but it should be a catechizing of children whereby they should giue account of their Faith before the Church And the best manner of catechizing were this That a forme should be penned for that vse contayning the summe of all the heads of our Religion and expounding them familiarly vnto which Faith and Religion the vniuersall Church of the faithfull should agree that the child being ten yeares old should present himselfe to the Church to giue a confession of his Faith bee demanded vpon euery Article and made to answere seuerally to euery one and if hee were ignorant of any point or did not well vnderstand the same he should be instructed Thus he should in presence of the Church and vnder the testimonie thereof make profession of that onely true and sincere Faith wherewith the Congregation of the faithfull worships God If this discipline were in vigour at this time the slouth of some Parents should bee corrected that securely neglect the instruction of their children as a thing not appertayning vnto to them which then without a publike shame they could not leaue vndone a greater consent should bee amongst Christian people in Religion and the ignorance of many should be nothing so great some would not bee so hastily carried away with new and strange opinions and in a word all should haue a methode of Christian Doctrine This was the minde of the most learned and worthy Diuine that hath liued in this last age wherewith let the Reader iudge if the Ordinance of Perth bee not agreeing An answer to the last head intituled Of the Administration of the Sacraments in priuate places TO the end the last Controuersie touching the administration of Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord in priuate houses may bee the better discussed wee shall premit some few grounds for cleering the question First The publike actions of Christian Religion are not tyed to any certayne time or place by diuine Institution but may bee lawfully performed at any time and in any place when necessity requires Secondly That the publike actions may be lawfully performed a publike Minister a lawfull Assembly and the forme prescribed in the Word must necessarily be kept Thirdly Howbeit some hold that Baptisme ministred by a priuate person is valide and effectuall yet no man can hold truely that it is lawfully ministred by such a person Fourthly Although the Communion Elements bee duly consecrated by a publike Minister in a most solemne and lawfull Assembly yet if he apply them only to his owne priuate vse or to so me other particular person making no distribution according to the Institution the action is not lawfully performed Fiftly The lawfull Assemblies wherein the publike actions may be performed are eyther ordinary or not ordinarie The ordinary are not defined in the word particularly but are left to bee determined by the Church which according to the generall Rules of Christian Policie hath deuided the Christian people in sundry Congregations called Parishes whose meeting in the ordinary times and places appointed are the ordinary Assemblies wherein the puolike actions of Religion should be performed ordinarily Sixtly The Assemblies that are lawfull but not ordinary are the meetings of two or three at least in the Name of Iesus Christ wherein he hath promised his presence to heare their Prayers and approue their lawfull actions of piety In such Assemblies the Word hath beene preached and Baptisme ministred as in the 16. of the Acts the Master of the Prison and his Family were baptized by Paul The Husband the Wife and a Seruant make a Family where there be no more The Family of Priscilla and Aquila are called a Church This Pamphleter affirmes with Saint Augustine Paulinus Esychius Theophylactus and others That our Sauiour at Emaus did celebrate the Sacrament to the two Disciples with whom he communed in the way There the whole Assembly were but three whether the Sacrament was ministred or not at that time this is certaine as many as hold that the same was celebrated must also hold that three make the bodie of a Church wherein the Eucharist may be lawfully ministred and if the Eucharist much more Baptisme which was ministred by Philip to the Eunuch where there was no Christian Assembly conuened Yet doubtlesse he was baptised in presence of his Seruants who were witnesses to the action For Baptisme would be ministred in presence of some witnesses and the Eucharist cannot be lawfully ministred without some communicants
can produce one instance to the contrarie I shall pray you doe it or if not suffer mee to conclude against you that as on the Lords day when they stood and prayed they also stood and receiued so at that same time on the weeke dayes when they kneeled and prayed they kneeled and receiued and this is proued by all these testimonies of the Ancients wherein the people are exhorted to humble themselues externally at the Sacrament as by the most cleare testimony of Chrysostons I cited before Hereby it is manifest that the gesture of kneeling followed not the errour of Transsubstantiation but was receiued and retained in the Church on the Lords day at publike prayer and receiuing of the Sacrament as it had been vsed before on the weeke-dayes at these religious exercises Thus following your owne foot-steps and building on your owne grounds kneeling is proued to haue been in vse in all ages and with your owne hands yee haue thrust sitting to the doore for the space of 1560. yeares An answere to the last Section entituled Kneeling not practised in the Reformed Churches PP THe Lutheran Churches do acknowledge reall presence by way of Consubstantiation it is no wonder therefore that they approue kneeling The Reformed Churches as they damned bodily presence so haue they reiected the gesture of kneeling in the act of receiuing The Church of Bohemia hath retained this gesture since the dayes of Iohn Husse In their Confession exhibited to King Ferdinand anno 1535. it is thus said Ministriverò Dominicae coenae verba referentes plebem ipsam ad hanc fidem hortantur vt corporis Christi praesentiam adesse credant The Ministers are willed to stirre vp the people to beleeue that the bodie of Christ is present the purer sort amongst them as they haue reiected the errour of reall presence so depart they from this gesture In our neghbour Church some of their defenders of kneeling will not haue vs inquisitiue of the maner of Christs presence in the Sacrament And the Bishop of Rochester commends the simplicity of the Ancients which disputed not whether Christ was present con sub in or trans in this Supper Sutton in his Appendix to his Meditations on the Lords Supper condemnes likewise this diligent search of the maner of Christs presence If the maner of Christs presence be not determined there can arise no other but a confused worship of such a confused and determinate presence The Papists acknowledge that there ought to be no adoration but where there is acknowledged a bodily presence in the Sacrament Hence it is that they proue mutually the one by the other It will not follow that we may change sitting into kneeling because the ancient Church and some Reformed Churches haue changed sitting into standing because kneeling maketh so many breaches both in the Institution and in the second Commandement and is no wayes a table gesture By standing we accommodate our selues to a table to participate of the dainties set thereon standing was neuer abused to idolatrie as kneeling hath been we are not bound to imitate other Churches further then they imitate Christ Our sitting is not Scottish Geneuating but a commendable imitation of the Apostolicall Churches and obedience to Christs Institution They flee vp at last to the Church Triumphant and alledge for kneeling the foure and twenty Elders falling downe before the Lambe but how conclude they this that they that are called to the Supper of the Lamb kneele at the Supper of the Lamb And seeing the blessed soules shall not be clothed with their bodies before the Resurrection how can they conclude materiall geniculation of the blessed Saints in heauen All creatures in heauen in earth or vnder the earth are said to bow their knee at the name of Iesus that is to acknowledge his Soueraigne authority howbeit the celestial Angels blessed soules and infernall spirits haue not knees to bow with The euerlasting felicity of the children of God is the Supper of glory Doe they drinke continually of that felicity vpon their knees Thousands thousands stand before him many shall come from the East and from the West and sitte at the heauenly Table with Abraham Isaack and Iacob may we not then conclude sitting and standing as well as they do kneeling if we looke to the letter of parables visions allegories and prophecies but symbolicall theologie is not argumentatiue Lastly how will they prooue euidently that the falling of the foure and twenty Elders before the Lambe is to bee interpreted of the Church Triumphant rather then of the Church Militant ANS To proue that kneeling is not practised in the Reformed Churches yee cut off in the beginning from their number the Lutherans because they acknowledge the Reall presence by way of Consubstantiation This I grant is an error yet is it not directly fundamentall They abhorre as we doe the Bread-worship and they worship Christ in the Sacrament as we should do their errour is onely in the manner of his presence which errour should not debarre them from the Communion of the Reformed Churches with them yee reckon the Church of Bohemia because in their Confession exhibited to King Ferdinand anno 1535. they say Ministriverò coenae Dominicae c. Let the Ministers when they rehearse the words of the Lords Supper exhort the people to this faith that they may beleeue the body of Christ to be present there By this yee conclude that some of them held the errour of Reall presence in the Sacrament and yet their Confession mentioneth neither reall nor corporall nor locall presence And it is no errour to beleeue the presence of Christs body in the Sacrament after some manner as to beleeue that it is there obiectiue that is as the reall obiect whereupon we must fixe and fasten our Faith and to beleeue that it is there virtute efficacia in vertue and efficacie to nourish and strengthen vs in newnesse of life heere and raise vs vp vnto eternall life hereafter In respect whereof Christ saith That his flesh is meate indeed and his blood is drinke indeed and that he who eateth his flesh and drinketh his blood hath life eternall and that he shall raise him at the last day Lastly to beleeue that the body of Christ is present in the Diuine Person wherein it subsisteth albeit locally the same be in heauen is no errour for wheresoeuer the person is there both the Natures are present coniunctly The Diuinitie is euer and euery where clothed with the humanitie wherein it dwelleth bodily and ought to be considered so in all actions of diuine worship and the Humanity is euer and euery where conioyned with the Diuinitie albeit the same be not extensiuè or diffusè as the Vbiquetars hold through euery place with the Diuinitie As by example wheresoeuer a man is personally present there his head his body all his members are present albeit the foot or the hand be not in the place where the head is yet they are