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 iâ— 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 alâ— 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 probabâ—e 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 fâ—xis 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 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 mâ—st cleare testimony of Chrysostom 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 Ministri verò Dominicae coenae verba referentes plebem ipsam ad hanc fidem hortantur vt corporis Christi praesentiam adessâ— 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 Ministri verò 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
idolatrous worshippe inuented by man And it is euident at the time when that Decree was made the people were accustomed to kneele at the receiuing and if it had not beene the custome there is no question but the same would haue beene straitly enioyned by the same Decree But it is playne that before that time as euer since this gesture is continued in the Church for as Saint Augustine vpon the 98. Psalme testifies No man doeth worthily receiue but hee that adores And in the same places hee saith Non peccatur adorando carnem Christi sed peccatur non adorando that is Wee sinne not in adoring Christs body in the Sacrament but we sinne if wee adore it not And Chrysostome in one of his Homilies hath these words Ergo adora communica that is Adore then and communicate but vnto these and the rest of the testimonies yee answere That it followeth not because they adored that therefore they kneeled because say yee their testimonies make mention of adoration not of the Sacrament but of Christ in the Sacrament and wee say the same that at the Sacrament Christ only is to be adored and not the sacramentall Elements which are the signes So in this wee agree but because that maketh nothing against kneeling yee subioyne that their testimonies are to bee vnderstood of spirituall and internall adoration and to confirme it yee quote in the Margine D. Fulke vpon the first to the Cor. 11. Sect. 18. But let the Reader peruse the place he shall finde nothing in it against the gesture of kneeling or any other religious signe of adoration onely hee saith that adoration mentioned by the Fathers is to be vnderstood of the spirituall adoration of Christ and not of the externall adoration of the Sacrament And if hee had meant otherwise Chrysostomes words in the 24. Homilie vpon the first to the Corinths Cap. 10. cited by himselfe would haue controlled his saying Hoc corpus etiam iacens in praesepi reuâ—riti sunt Magi c. that is to say The wisemen did reuerence to this 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 aâ—t 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 Chuâ—ch 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 〈…〉 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 sâ—all 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
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 is friuolous But keeping your order I will first consider â—ow 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 Edentiâ—us â—llis 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 â—itting This is your reasoning pag. 36. lin 16. seq ANS Your argument is a captione â 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 giuen by 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 bread 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 〈…〉 consâ—â—â—ence is â—uer good 〈…〉 is not written is to â—ee holden and â—elâ—eued for 〈◊〉 vndoubted truth in the worâ—hiâ— of God â—ut after the eating of the Paschall Supper that the Apostles 〈◊〉 will at Table and aâ—â—ered not their gesture vntill they â—ad receiued the â—acrament is a thing that is not written â—â—erefore after the eating of the Paschall Supper that the Aâ—ostles sate still without altering their gesture vntil they â—ad receiued â—he Sacrament is not to be beleeued and â—olden for an vndoubted truth in Gods worship But â—ee subioâ—ne 〈…〉 â—uâ—dem pag. Pâ— This is so euident that neuer man doubted of it 〈…〉 â—eare euen â—hose who â—ffirme but against the 〈◊〉 that they â—â—ood at the 〈◊〉 seruice confesse that 〈◊〉 sate at the second and at the celebration of the Saâ—rament 〈◊〉 Master â—ohn Mare and the Bishop o◠〈◊〉 c. ANS â—hat this is not â—o euident as yee alledge is manifest 〈◊〉 that which hath bin said But the cause that hath 〈◊〉 â—oubt since the last yeare is the Paradox which â—ee and your followers haue vndertaken to defend since â—he â—ast â—eare of which â—euer Diuine either in the anciâ—nt oâ— reformed Church â—reamed of before namely â—hat we should beleeue without doubting First that the â—postles receiued the Sacrament sitting Secondly that â—his gesture of theirs was exemplary Thirdly that it was â—nstituted by our Sauiour to be obserued in all succeeding 〈◊〉 â—ince â—ee â—fter â—his manner vrge sitting with an â—pinion oâ— necessity â—nd impose it vpon the conscienâ—es of the weake with such terrours and feares that it â—annot be omitted without a manifest breach of the Inâ—titution we can doe no lesse then trie by the Scriptures â—hether it be so or not The testimony of M. Iohn Mare or of any mortall 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 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 circuÌ„stance 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 â—he â—acrament of the Eucharisticall Supper with the â—ame gesture that the Iewes receiued the Paschall ANS In this argument hee takes it for granted that the Disciples sâ—te at the Sacrament which yet is in question 〈◊〉 by â—cripture shall neuer be decideâ— And this is a Sophisticke deception called â—etitio principij Next the reaâ—on whereby hee prooues that sâ—tting was instituted and â—ot the other circumstances which were likewise retained â—s because Christ might haue changed it in standing or kneeling without working a miracle But this reason â— hope will not be found demonstratiue for our Sauiour without working a miracle might haue changed the vpper â—hamber wherin he eat the Passeouer taken himâ—elfe to some other roome Therefore by your argument â—is minde was that we should only â—elebrate the Sacrament in an vpper â—hamber â—ikewise our Sauiour withâ—ut working of a miracle might easily haue called his Mother and other women to the Sacrament and so haue â—ltered the sex and number of the Communicants therâ—ore it was his mind by â—our reason that twelue men sitâ—ing at once at Table and no women should receiue the â—acrament Finally our Sauiour might haue celebrated the Sacrament without his vpper garment which he did put on after he had washed his Diciples feete before he â—elebrated the Sacrament Therefore Baronius the Cardinall concludes wel by your ground That it was his mind â—he Priest should put on his Masse-clothes which are his â—pper garment before he celebrated the Sacrament But â—hat â—ll men may see the vanity of this argument I shall â—learly â—roue by it â—hat sitting was not instituted Christ â—ee saâ— might easily â—aue changed the gesture which he 〈◊〉 at the Paschall Supper without the working of a miracle â—n 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 â—dentes 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 Supper and retained c. was not instituted begins seeing in so doing yee pretend or shew more reuerence and deuotion then the Apostles did who sate but if yee say they stood or kneeled as wee doe how know yee that they sate at the Receiuing and retained not still the gesture wherewith they gaue thankes PP Wherefore doth the Apostle propound the custome of the first Churches 1. Cor. 11.16 2. Tim. 3.14 1. Cor. 14.33 if they did not oblige vs to imitation ANS More impertinent testimonies yee could not haue brought then the last two and if they be rightly cited let the Reader iudge to the first wherein mention is made of the custome of the Churches I answere If the custome of the Church and the actions and practises of Christ be morall and of the nature of things commanded generally in the Decalogue they oblige vs indeed to imitation but naturall actions such as eating drinking waking sleeping resting talking and such like done by them with the circumstances thereof namely the manner time and place of their eating drinking c. doe not tye vs to the imitation of them although there bee no cause mouing them thereto which concernes vs not Therefore in all things we are not obliged to their imitation Neither doe the ceremonies and circumstances obserued by them in the exercise of Religion astrict vs except they be enioyned by some constant precept in the Gospell as by example Iohn baptised at a riuer and they who were baptised went downe into the water and came vp out of it againe in some places the Church vsed a threefold immersion in the Apostles time they vsed to salute one another with a holy kisse they kept their banquets of loue at their meetings and other moe customes they had which not being enioyned to vs by a constant command doe no wise oblige vs as no more doth the circumstance of place time habite persons position and site of body as standing sitting or walking And in a word in the actions of Christ his Apostles or the customes of the Church there is nothing exemplary and left to be imitated of vs but that which either being morallâ—â— generally commanded in the Decalogue or being ceremoniall and circumstantiall is particularly commanded by some constant precept in the Gospell But I 〈◊〉 â—ake you that would haue euery action of Christs to be imitated by vs which hath not a speciall exception 〈◊〉 â—ome cause mouing him that concernes vs not what â—s the cause that at the celebration of the Sacrament yee blesse not the Bread first seuerally by it selfe and the Cup seuerally by it selfe after the distribution of the Bread seeing Christ did so as it is expresly mentioned yet hauing no cause to moue him which concernes vs not This 〈◊〉 perswaded if our ground bee sure is a more euident breach of the institution then is our not sitting at the Sacrament for in the words of the institution there 〈◊〉 mention of sitting but the giuing of thankes twice is expresly set downe and there could bee no cause to moue Christ vnto this which doth not concerne vs. For sitting if it be so that Christ sate there
we may kneele in the act of receiuing Ans. This Obiection insinuateth that kneeling is the proper and only commendable gesture of prayer and therefore the Bishop of Rochester expounds the standing of the Publican Luk. 18.11.13 to haue been kneeling because saith hee the Iewish custome was to pray kneeling But if he had remembred the Lords owne saying Ier. 15. Though MOSES and SAMVEL stood before me c. he might vnderstood that they prayed standing as well as kneeling c. ANS The obiection yee bring concludeth that wee may kneele not that we ought to kneele therefore no man will thinke that the obiection insinuateth kneeling to be the proper and only commendable gesture of praying but that it is a very commendable gesture such as may be vsed that which you ayme at in answering this obiection is to confute the Bishop of Rochester his opinion that by standing kneeling Luk. 18.11 13. is meant But the Bishops opinion is not so absurde as you would haue men to thinke for by standing in the Scripture any diuine seruice is signified Therefore the Lords Prophets Priests and Angels are said to stand before him that is to serue him In the first of the Kings 8.22 it is written that Salomon stood before the Altar of the Lord and prayed but in the second of the Chronicles 6.13 It is said he kneeled downe and prayed vpon his knees So standing in the booke of the Kings is taken for kneeling But leauing this I come to your next words PP The prayer meant of is either some publike prayer vttered by the Minister or the mentall prayer of the Communicant ANS This is a needlesse distinction for the mentall prayer of the Receiuer should not bee different from the prayer vttered by the Minister at the deliuery of the Elements and ought only to bee an Amen to the Ministers prayer The ancient custome of the Church was such for in the dayes of Cornelius Bishop of Rome anno 251. as Eusebius records l. 2. c. 32. when Nouatus gaue the Sacramēt to 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 Deut. 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 In 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 insinuated for albeit all meditation bee not prayer yet euery prayer is a meditation and although in
the Festiuall dayes as the Lords Day PP It is lest 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 coÌ„memoration 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 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 coÌ„mon 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 benefiâ— of these Creatures in the determâ—nation 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 Husband-man 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 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 Natiuity 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
before alleged His proofe out of Scripture Psal. 118.8 1. Cor. 7.8 are very weake for the first testimonie is applyed to euery Lords Day is not to be restrained to Pasche day The other testimonie imports not a CelebratioÌ„ of Easter Feast vpoÌ„ any Anniuersary day but rather the Apostle teaches vs to celebrate this Feast of the Passeouer all the yeare long His last proofe is taken from the custome of Baptisme and the Eucharist ministred vpon Pasche day as if they had beene ministred only vpon that day ANS Ye turne your selfe now against the learned Sermon preached at Whiâ—e Hall by the Bishop then of Elie now of Winchester who prouing the obseruatioÌ„ of Easter to haue bin an old custom obserued in the Church since the Apostles daies yea by the Apostles themselues hits the marke whereat he shoots directly while as ye will proue these Epistles of Polycrates and Irenaeus counterfeit ye shoot short indeed The testimonie of the 118. Psalme yee say should be applyed to euery Lords Day but seeing he rose on the first day of them as yee cannot deny doubtlesse when that day returnes by course once euery yeare vnto it all the prototype and architype of them all of euery congruity saies the Bishop the Resurrection is to be applyed somwhat more This by example he makes plain His Maiesties deliuerance vpon the fift dayes of August and Nouember being Tuesdayes both wee keepe for their remembrance a Sermon on Tuesday euery week of the yeare but when by course of the yeare in their seuerall moneths the very originall dayes theÌ„selues come about shal we not doe wee not celebrate them in much more solemne manner what question is there weigh them well ye shal find the case alike one cannot be but the other also must bee Apostolike These are the words of the learned Bishop which proue his intent so cleerly that ye are forced to flye to another shift as your custome is say If the Prophesie should be applyed to any precise day it should bee applyed to the Lords day But seeing the words are to be vnderstood aswel of Dauid as of Christ the day is taken ye say for the time indefinitely wherin Dauid was made King the corner stone of Gods people This is your shift which cannot auaile you for if it be taken indefinitely for the day wherin Dauid was made the typick corner Stone then much more must it bee taken for the definite day whereon Christ the Veritie was made the true corner Stone of the Church of God If of Dauids Coronation it might be said This is the day which the Lord hath made Let vs reieyce and bee glad in it much more is it to be said of that day whereon CHRIST rose againe from the dead and was crowned with glory and honour and set ouer the workes of Gods hands and had all things put vnder his feet For this day hath euer beene esteemed since the resurrection of our Lord a day made by God not by creation onely but also by institution Thus doe yee not escape the Bishops hand flie where you can When ye entered into combate with such an Antagonist yâ— were not wel aduised Infoe lix puer atque impar coÌ„gressus Achilli In the other testimonie I grant with S. Augustine that by the Feast the course of our Christian Life is to bee vnderstood yet the allusion would import that a Paschall Feast was kept amongst them and the Sacraments celebrated The last proofe that Baptisme and the Eucharist were on this day solemnely ministred yee cannot denie And the Bishoppe affirmes not that they were onely ministred on that day Tertull. de Baptis Diem Baptismo solenniorem Pascha praestat cum passio Domini in qua tingimur adimpleta est c. Exinde Pentecoste ordinandis lauacris laetissimum spacium est quod Domini resurrectio inter Discipulos frequentata est gratia Spiritus sancti dedicata spes aduentus Domini subâ—stâ—nsa c. Caeterùm omnis dies Domini est omnis hora omnâ— tempus habilâ— baptismo Si de solennitate interest de gratia nihil refert that is Easter is the most solemne Day for Baptisme seeing the Passion of our Lord wherein wee are dipped is thereon fulfilled after that Whitsonday is a most ioyfull time for the lauacre of Regeneration because on that Day the resurrection was frequently shewed to the Disciples the grace of the Holy Ghost dedicated and the hope of Christs comming againe insinuated Otherwise euerie day is the Lords euerie houre and euerie 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 dâ—sagreed on the day But their most ancient Records the baâ—tard-Episâ—les aboue mentioned report that Philâ—p 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 Peâ—er and so by these Epistles ye cannot proue that Iohn and Peter disagreed on the day It is said that Polycarpus and Aâ—icâ—tus 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 themsâ—lues 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 â—ucceeded him the sooner to win their Brethren the Iewes condescended to keepe Easter 14. Lunae 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
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 necessâ—ty 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 publike 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 Although a Temple bee not necessary at Caluine sayes in the 185. Epistle yet the Infant should be baptized in coetu aliquo Si enim infans clam baptizetur nullis adhibitis testibus illud neque respondet ordini à Domino posito neque Apostolorum exemplo Likewise that there may bee a Communion conueniat coetus aliquis ex cognatis familiaribus vicinis saies Caluine These grounds being warranted by Scripture and by the Ancients first wee shall set downe the Acts of the Assembly which yee labour to refute next your Refutation and Answere thereto The Acts concluded at Perth touching priuate Baptisme and Communion THe Minister shall often admonish the people that they deferre not the baptizing of Infants any longer then the nexts Lords Day after the Childe bee borne vnlesse vpon a great and reasonable cause declared to the Minister and by him approued As also they shall warne them that without great cause they procure not their Children to be baptized at home in their houses but when great need shall compell them to baptise in priuate houses in which case the Minister shall not refuse to doe it vpon the knowledge of the great need and being timely required thereto then Baptisme shall be administred after the same forme as it should haue beene in the Congregation And the Minister shall the next Lords Day after any such priuate Baptisme declare in the Church that the Infant was so baptized and therefore ought to bee receiued as one of the true Flocke of Christs Fold Item If any good Christian visited with long sicknesse and knowne to the Pastor by reason of his present infirmity vnable to resort to the Church for receiuing of the holy Communion or being sick stall declare to the Pastor vpon his coÌ„science that he thinks his sicknes to be deadly and shall earnestly desire to receiue the same in his house The Minister shall not deny to him so great a comfort lawfull warning being giuen to him vpon the night before and that there be three or foure of good Religion and conuersation free of lawfull impediments present with the sicke person to communicate with him who must also prouide a conuenient place in his house all things necessary for the reuerend administration thereof according to the order prescribed in the Church PP In the ninth head of the first Booke of Discipline it was thought expedient that Baptisme should be ministred vpon