at the Sacrament is not exemplary and left vs to be imitated by Christ his Apostles or the Apostolike Churches And although yee had demonstrated which neither by Scripture or antiquity yee will euer be able to doe That Christ and his Apostles did sitte at the receiuing of the Sacrament could it oblige vs to the like as I cleared before PP It is obiected that the sitting of Christ and his Apostles was not vpright but sitting with leaning If wee imitate the example of Christ wee should sitte after the same manner Answere It was the custome receiued amongst the Iewes before and in the dayes of Christ descending from the Romanes or as others alledge from the Persians c. ANS The reply yee make to this obiection is long and needeth not to be repeated for the gesture being vncertain wherewith the Apostles receiued and sitting neyther being instituted by Christ nor exemplary to vs as I haue before shewed whether they sate vpright or with leaning none of the formes is necessary to bee vsed So all your following Discourse is idle and to no purpose specially where yee say That sitting was a custome brought into the Church by Christ whose example being seconded with the practise of the Apostles is equiualent vnto a precept and that it is safer for a mans conscience to imitate Christ and his Apostles then to depart from them and imitate the custome of Churches which may erre for yee haue neither proued sitting to be an Apostolike practise not yet to be exemplary and all your reasons brought for that purpose haue appeared to be of no force Yet two things I note in this your answere first yee say That the Iewes did receiue their forme of sitting from the Romanes and Persians and in this yee erre for it is manifest by the sixt of Amos That before they conuersed either with Romanes or Persians that forme of gesture was vsed amongst them Next when yee say that there is little difference betweene the one fashion of sitting and the other that is also false for it differeth as farre from our forme of sitting as lying doth as is cleared by these words of Amos 6.4 They Iye vpon beds of Iuory and stretch themselues vpon their couches And by that verse of IVVENAL Sat. 1. Vacuisque thoris tantùm ipse jacebit Looke what difference there is betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or betweene sedere and iacere there is as great difference betweene their forme of sitting and ours But because both belonged to one vse the Translators of the Bible for our capacity interpret both by Sitting PP That this gesture may very well bee comprehended vnder the expresse precept of Christ in the Institution hoc facite doe this that is hoc totum facite doe all this ANS Where I pray you shew me what yee call all this will yee haue all to comprehend not the actions only which are set downe in the Institution as the taking the blessing the breaking the giuing c. but the circumstances likewise as the time the place the order the persons the site and position of body and the habit Then hoc facite must import doe this in the night season doe it in an vpper chamber doe it after supper do it with an vpper garment vpon you doe it with faire cleane washen feete doe it with vnleauened bread doe it with men and not with women doe it being thirteene persons in number one Giuer and twelue Receiuers and doe it with this gesture and position of body which now yee vse Heere all being certaine the gesture only is vncertaine some question is made of the number of the Receiuers because some thinke that Iudas went out after he got the soppe before the Sacrament all the rest are expressed in the story but whether the Disciples sate or stood or kneeled at the thankesgiuing in the receiuing no man knowes We were accustomed and still are to kneele at the thankesgiuing if we did imitate the Apostles herein they haue also kneeled and then it is very vncertaine whether they sate at the Receiuing But if wee doe not imitate their gesture in the thankesgiuing it is cleare that we neuer esteemed the imitation of the Apostolike gesture at the thanksgiuing to be comprised in the precept hoc facite which yee interpret doe all this PP Wee must not thinke that nothing belongs to the Institution but that which is mentioned in Pauls narration 1. Cor. 11. for then a Table could not belong to the Institution ANS Whatsoeuer yee thinke the faithfull will beleeue that the Apostle setting downe as hee doth in that place the true forme of keeping the Lords Supper would neuer haue omitted the gesture if the same had been a part of the Institution and if he had receiued any thing touching that from the Lord he had without all question deliuered the same to the Corinthians As for your instance of a Table if yee vnderstand thereby a materiall table appointed for feasters to sitte at such a table is not necessary as shal be cleared in the answer to the second breach but if by a Table yee vnderstand a commodious part whereon the elements must bee placed then the table must be reckoned amongst the necessary circumstancēs that accompany the action for when Christ commanded to doe this the command did insinuate That they must conuene in some place to doe it that there must be a Pastor to giue and some persons to receiue that the elements which are giuen and taken must be placed in some commodious part on which they may bee consecrated with thankesgiuing and blessing where they may bee broken and where they may be giuen and receiued such a table is necessary yet what the matter the forme and quality of this table should be is no where expressed in the Scripture but as the time when and the place where and the particular persons to whom and by whom the Sacrament shall bee celebrate so the particular matter and forme of the Table is not mentioned in the Institution but omitted with the rest of the necessary circumstances and left to be determined by the Church according to the rule of edification and decencie and is onely insinuated as a thing necessarily enioyned with the actions prescribed in the command for when the Apostle saith doe this albeit he saith not doe it at night or in the morning or in a priuate or publike place by such a person and congregation and such a part or Table or with such gesture yet the command imports that it should bee done at a conuenient time in a conuenient place by meete and qualified persons with a conuenient gesture and on a conuenient Table or on somewhat in stead of a Table Now what should be conuenient in such things it could not be defined for conueniency changes according to times ages and nations The specification thereof is left to the wise iudgement of the Church according to
better to wit that there is no testimonie in writing for the confirmation of that custome for by this reason it would follow that the obseruation of Sonday in stead of the Iewish Sabbath hath preuayled by a priuate custome only For in the Apostolique writings we haue no testimonie for the confirmation of that custome In Scripture we reade that our Sauiour rose on that day that on that day he appeared to his Disciples that on that day the Apostle appointed collections to be made for the poore that on that day at Troas the Disciples were assembled to breake bread and that S. Paul preached All these actions make aswell for the obseruation of Pasche Sonday and as the Bishop of Winchester saith somewhat more seeing it is after a sort the same day by reuolution whereon our Sauiour did rise yet all these practises exercises and meetings on the Lords day had not demonstrate the sanctification of it if it had not beene perpetually and vniuersally obserued afterwards by the Church This constant and vniuersall obseruation of the Church hath declared these practises to be exemplarie and that our Sauiour did consecrate that day by his resurrection and apparitions to be in stead of the Sabbath Vpon this ground S. August Epist ad Ianuar. 118. sayes Illa quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus quae quidem toto Terrarum orbe obseruātur dantur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenarijs Concilijs quorum est in Ecclesia saluberrima auctoritas commendata atque statuta retinere Sicuti quod Domini Passio Resurrectio Ascensio in coelum aduentus de coelo Spiritus Sancti anniuersaria solennitate celebrantur that is Those things which come to vs by Tradition and not by Writing and yet are obserued in the whole world must bee esteemed to haue beene commended vnto vs and instituted either by the Apostles themselues or by generall Councells whose authoritie hath euer beene wholsome to the Church as by example the Passion Resurrection Ascension and the descent of the holy Ghost from heauen which wee solemnely keepe euery yeare This rule of Saint Augustine if it bee not demonstratiue yet it is more probable then Socrates his opinion for it is more like a custome receiued by the vniuersall Church should proceed from the authoritie of the Apostles or some generall Councell rather then from a priuate obseruation as Socrates thinks Yet to confirme his opinion yee say that Iustine Martyr mentions no Holy day but the Lords Day What then Hee had not the occasion yet Tertullian who flourished but fortie yeares after him in the second booke directed to his wife hath these wordes Quis denique solennibus Paschae abnoctantem seeurus sustinet And in his booke De Praescriptionib aduers Haereticos mentions one Blastus whom hee calls an Heretike for maintayning that Pasche should bee kept on the 14. day of the Moone as the Iewish custome was Tertullian flourished in the yeare of our Lord 183. and speaking thus of Pasche not as of a new Constitution but as of a custome long before receiued in the Church does confirme the Bishop of Winchester his iudgement That in all likelihood this obseruation was Apostolique By Apostolique I meane not a doctrinall point which is to bee obserued as a substantiall part of diuine worship or a condition necessary to saluation but the imitation onely of an Apostolique practice concerning order and policie neither doe I meane such a practice as is expresly set down in Scripture and vniuersally obserued through the world such as the Lords Day is for such a practice hath the strength of a diuine Precept but I vnderstand such a practice as albeit it be not recorded in Scripture to haue beene done by the Apostles themselues or the Churches in their time yet the same being vniuersally receiued in the world and obserued since the Apostles dayes is most probably presumed to haue beene practised in their times and allowed by them And in this the Lords Day differs from Pasche and the other three dayes mentioned by Saint Augustine that the Lords Day hath not onely the vniuersall and perpetuall obseruation of the Church since the dayes of the Apostles but also the practice of our Sauiour his Apostles and the Church in their times expresly recorded in Scripture The other haue onely an vniuersall and constant practice of the Church since the Apostles time which not the lesse ought to be preferred to any priuate or late particular custome And to returne to the Act of Perth it ordaynes none of these dayes to be kept for Diuine and Apostolique but onely that on them once in the yeare a solemne commemoration be made of the benefits of our Redemption and therefore the Reasons ye bring to proue that these dayes are not Apostolique impugne no wayes the lawfulnesse of the act Where yee say that the obseruation of the Passion day hath brought into the Church set dayes of fasting condemned by our Diuines I aske you how yee doe proue that affirmation It is enough yee haue said it But to conclude this point I doe verily thinke That to fast and pray at some set times were lesse offensiue to God then to bee often feasting and surfetting pratling and lying traducing our Brethren and condemning the good order and policie of Gods Church PP If it had beene Gods will The sixe Reason that the seuerall acts of Christ should haue beene celebrated with seuerall solemnities the holy Ghost would haue made knowne to vs the dayes wheron they were done Secondly if the actions of Christ aduance the dayes wherein they were wrought as Hooker sayes or consecrate them as Bellarmine sayes they ought to be knowne otherwise it will fall out that we shall keepe the dayes holy that were neuer aduanced nor consecrated by Christs action or institution But so it is the day of Christs Natiuitie is hid from mortall men ANS It is true that if it had beene Gods will to haue aduanced and consecrated the dayes of Christs Natiuitie Passion c. by annexing to them some particular exercise of Religion such as the festiuall dayes of the Iewes had and clothing them with some mysticall signification the holy Ghost had made the dayes knowne otherwise they could not haue beene obserued But from the beginning we haue declared according to the iudgement not of Bellarmine but of our best reformed Churches and Diuines that these dayes are not kept for any relation that the worship hath to them as if by Christs actions or institution they were to be honoured with some religious exercise but for order and policy only as the most meet and oportune occasions in the iudgement of the primitiue Church and in our estimation most meet for testifying our conformitie with her and with the whole Christian world euer since The long discourse and dispute which yee subjoyne to proue the time of Christs Natitutie to be vncertayne because it is not contradictorie to the
to celebrate that holy action vpon the day of the Natiuitie which wee call Yule and vpon Easter day which we call Pasche The ground of this power is first the abolishing of the New-moones Festiual daies and Sabbaths by the coming of our Sauiour in whom the body of all these shadows is and next the libertie giuen by God to the Christian Church mentioned by Isaiah as ye heard before For as by the first we are freed from the bondage of the Law and the obseruation of the set times therein prescribed so by the second all times are sanctified to the worship of God in so farre that the Christian Church may make choyce of any time in the weeke any day in the moneth or yeere for their publique meetings to his worship And as for the Lords Day which hath succeeded to the Iewish Sabbath albeit God hath cōmanded to sanctifie it by the publike exercise of religiō yet neither is the whole pub like worship nor any part of it appropriated to that time but lawfully the same may be performed vpō any other conuenient day of the weeke of the Moneth or of the yere as the Church shall think expedient Vpon this ground Zanchius affirmed Ecclesiae Christi liberū esse quos velit praeter dominic dies sibi sāctificādos deligere And by this warrant did the primitiue Church sanctifie these fiue anniuersarie dayes of Christs Natiuitie Passion Resurrection Ascension and the Descent of the Holy Ghost Where it is obiected that it is onely proper to God to make holidayes I answer That it is onely proper to God to make times and places holy by appropriating to them a diuine worship which may not bee performed lawfully but in these places and on these times such as the Tabernacle and Temple and the Iewish Festiuities vnder the Law were for vnto them was appropriated by God a worship which might not be performed on another day and so these dayes did not only belong to the worship as meere circumstances but were proper parts or points thereof and could not bee omitted without marring of the whole action In which respect these dayes were holier then other dayes because a part of Gods worship consisted in obseruation of them Such holy dayes the Church cannot make But to make times and places holy by consecration of them to an holy vse the Church hath power for the dayes that she appoints are obserued only for order and policie and haue no relation to the worship performed on them as any Rite or religious Ceremonie belonging necessarily to the integritie thereof The Natiuitie of our Sauiour may bee remembred and publike thankes giuen to God therefore vpon any other time as well as vpon the twentie fiue of December likewise the Passion Ascension and the rest of these benefits yet wee remember them at certaine set times not because the times require such a worship or the worship such a time to the integritie and lawfulnesse thereof but to the end the worship may be performed orderly once euery yeare in euery place vpon one day that all people wheresoeuer they be at home or abroad may bee instructed and admonished to prayse and magnifie the grace of God and goodnesse of their Sauiour Herein the reformed Churches differ from the Papists who Iudaize in obseruation of those Festiuities because they professe to obserue them not for order only but esteeme them to be sacratiores sanctiores alijs diebus Bellar. de cultu sanctorum lib. 3. cap. 10. pars diuini cultus which we doe not For the Lords Day it hath succeeded to the Sabbath and is holy by diuine Institution hauing for euidence and confirmation thereof both a morall Precept and the exemplarie practice of Christ and his Apostles in Scripture In the forth command after the labour of six dayes the seuenth is appointed to bee sanctified in memoriall of Gods rest from his six dayes worke and the particular day not being expressed in the command was notified to the people either by the exemplary practice of Moses and the Church in the Wildernesse or by tradition of the Fathers going before if so it be that from the Creation that day was obserued Now after the legall shaddowes are abolished whereof the Iewish Sabbath was one if any will demand what day must bee obserued in the Christian Church wee answere that questionlesse for the quotient of the number the day cannot bee altered which by the Law is appointed Heauen and Earth shall perish but one iot of the Law shall not perish Our Sauiour came not to dissolue the Law but to fulfill it In the Law wee heare that God rested the seuenth Day that he blessed and sanctified it and there is a libertie giuen to labour six dayes but the seuenth is commanded to be kept holy so howbeit the Iewish Sabbath which was the shaddow be materially abolished as touching the particular Day yet the Day commanded in the Law formally must remayne and euer be the seuenth after six dayes worke But if yee will aske seeing the seuenth Day in particular is not expressed in the Law and that day which the Iewes obserued is abolished by Christ as the shaddow by the body how the particular and materiall Day may bee knowne that the Christian Church should obserue Vnto this we answere that the particular Day was demonstrated by our Sauiours Resurrection and his Apparitions made thereon by the Apostolicall practice and the perpetuall obseruation of the Church euer since that time of the Day which in Scripture is called the Lords Day as that which the Iewes obserued was called the Lords Sabbath because as the one was appointed by the Lord for a memoriall of his rest after the Creation so the other was inflituted by the Lord for a memoriall of his Resurrection after the Redemption For this wee must hold as a sure ground whatsoeuer the Catholike Church hath obserued in all Ages and is found in Scripture expresly to haue beene practised by Christ and the Apostles such as the sanctification of the Lords Day the same most certainly was instituted by the Lord to bee obserued and his practice in that is exemplar and hath the strength of a particular precept Hereby it is manifest that the sanctification of the Lords Day is of diuine Institution as well by reason of the diuine Precept commanding the seuenth Day in generall to bee obserued as of the diuine practice of Christ and the Apostles their specifying the Day which hath the force of a particular diuine Precept In respect whereof the obseruation of this Day is a point of diuine Worship and is holy not by Ecclesiasticall Constitution but by diuine Institution Moreouer this Day is holy by appropriation of it to a certaine religious vse whereunto no other Day can be applyed namely to bee a memoriall of the Lords rest after the Creation and of his Resurrection after the Redemption As also to be a signe of our sanctification here and of
Presbyters lest children should be ignorant of the spirituall superioritie of Bishops ouer them they should attend the receiuing of Confirmation by their hands so this was done for the honour of Prelacy as he speakes Now if any man will enuy this honour to Bishops it is a silly and poore enuy for it encreases their charge and burthen and if the conscience of their dutie make them not carefull of it in this profane and irreligious age the honor or credit it can bring them will neuer worke it Touching imposition of hands let Saint Augustine tell vs what it meanes Hee in his fift Booke De Baptismo contra Donatistas cap. 23. sayes Quid est manuum impositio nisi oratio super hominem that is to say What is imposition of hands but a prayer vpon the man that hands are laid vpon In all personall benedictions from the very beginning of the world it hath beene vsed Parents doe yet confer their blessing in this manner to their children and when spirituall blessings are giuen there can bee no offence to doe it with the like ceremonie But I heare that some cannot abide to heare the word of Confirmation the thing it selfe gladly they admit but they would haue examination or some the like word put for it Not onely the abuse but the very name of the thing abused so tender are the hearts of some men must be put away For this shortly I say that the Scriptures neuer taught vs to place Religion in wordes Saint Luke made no scruple speaking of a street in Athens to call it the street of Mars And the ship that Paul sayled in he names by Castor and Pollux though both these were the Idols of Pagans If names were to be stood vpon we should put our selues to great businesse it behoueth to change the names of our Moneths and Dayes which some haue pressed vnto but wise men know this to be folly Besides the word of Confirmation was vsed in the Church long before Popery was hatched as is manifest by Saint Cyprian Saint Augustine Tertullian Eusebius and others And thus much of Confirmation The Festiuities which are the next are impugned by this Argument amongst others That hereby wee conforme our selues to Papists in the keeping of holy dayes But had this Argument beene of any force would the reformed Churches haue agreed so vniformely in the obseruation of them All of them so farre as I know keepe holy the dayes of Christs Natiuitie Passion Resurrection and Ascension with the Descent of the holy Ghost The Churches of Bohemie Vngarie Polonia Denmarke Saxonie and high Germany The Heluetian Churches the Belgique and those of the low Countreyes The French English and Geneua it selfe in the beginning of reformation obserued them all The day of Natiuitie they yearely celebrate if I be rightly informed the rest are abrogated and by what occasion reade the 115. and 128. Epistles of Caluin where after he had shewed the occasion of their abolishment hee addes Ego neque suasor neque impulsor fui atque hoc testatum volo si mihi delata optio fuisset quod nunc constitutum est non fuisse pro sententia dicturum For the opinions of the rest of our Diuines in this particular Bucer Martyr Bullinger Zanchius Aretius Polanus Paraeus and Tilenus with all that I haue seene speake manifestly for it Tilenus his words in his Systema which came forth the last yeare are these Alios dies praeter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad peculiarium quorundam Dei beneficiorum Christi gestorum solennem anniuersariam in Ecclesia commemorationem celebrari nulla religio vetat modò prudons cautio accedat Ne videlicet vel vllius rei ereatae cultui consecrentur vel insitae diebus illis sanctitatis opinio foneatur vel denique ignauo otio foedifque voluptatibus hac occasione fenestra aperiatur I find in a Synod kept at Middleburgh Anno 1584 a Canon there made that all holy dayes should be abolished except the Lords day and the day of Christs Natiuitie and Ascension But if the Magistrates shall require moe to bee kept then the Ministers shall labour by preaching to turne the peoples idlenesse into godly exercises and businesse These be the wordes of that Canon which I haue cited aswell to shew you what that Church ascribes to Magistrates as because our case in this particular is verie like His Majestie as you know hath charged all his Subiects by Proclamation to abstaine from seruile labour in these times and it should become vs wel as that Act speaks to turn them from idlenes to godly exercises For to dispute of the lawfulnes of the prohibitiō neque huius fori nor will any Subiect that is in his right wits presume to doe it I doe not vrge the testimonies of the Fathers in this poynt because of them you who were at the last Assembly heard enough And they who eleuate the consent of antiquitie in this matter saying That the mysterie of iniquitie was then begun to worke will reuerence as I trust the iudgement of these reformed Writers who haue laboured to discouer that Mysterie and will thinke it no commendation to them to be dissenting from all the Churches that haue beene and are in the world Of the last Article which requires kneeling as the most reuerend gesture in partaking the holy Sacrament of the Communion I haue neede to say much seeing great stirres are made for this and as I esteeme without any cause The Apostle when he professes to deliuer vnto vs that which hee receyued of the Lord speakes not either of sitting or kneeling or standing by which it is cuident That situs vel positus corporis in coena as Zepperus speakes is not of the essence of the Sacrament but to be numbered amongst these circumstances which the Church may alter and change at their pleasure Where it is said that wee ought to conforme our selues to Christs action yee know it is answered That if so were it behoued vs to lye along about the Table to communicate with men and not with women And in the Euening after supper receiue this Sacrament which things were ridiculous to affirme Peter Martyr an excellent witnesse of Gods truth In classe secunda Locorum communium Cap. 4. speakes otherwise Nihil interest saith he si coenae Dominicae sacramentum stantes aut sedentes aut genibus flexis percipiamus modò institutum Domini conseruetur occasio superstitionibus praecidatur And in his Defence of the doctrine of the Eucharist aduersus Gardinerum answering the same argument which Bellarmine brings for reall presence Although in receyuing the Sacrament saith he we adore the Lord by kneeling we doe not thereby testifie the reall and corporall presence of Christ in the Sacrament for adoration the mind not being applied to the elements but to the things signified may lawfully bee vsed Peter Mouline in defence of his Maiesties Apologie against the Frier Copheteau where the Frier alledges
dare not bee so bold as to affirme them to be necessary As in extending the sense of Parables a moderation would be kept that it be not racked beyond the bounds and scope of the purpose whereupon the Parable is inferred so the parabolicke names giuen to these holy mysteries should not bee extended beyond the resemblance similitude set downe in Scripture for which these names are imposed Therefore when the Sacrament is called a Table and a Supper wee must not thinke that euery thing which is competent to an ordinary table and supper are to be found and obserued there but only such as haue cleare warrant in the Institution either in particular or by necessary consequence In particular the whole substantiall things actions and ceremonies are expressed from the which wee should take nothing and whereunto we should adde nothing The circumstances that doe necessarily accompany such things actions and ceremonies as the time when the place where the part whereon the person by whom and to whom and the order doe necessarily follow the action for some time and place must be when and where it must be done some persons by whom and to whom it must be celebrated some part there must be whereon the elements must be set and from whence they must be giuen and receiued some position and site of body must be vsed by the giuers and receiuers and some order must be obserued for entring and proceeding in the action and finishing therof some things would go before as Sermons or Seruice and it is decent that the celebration be closed with Psalmes and blessings but none of these circumstantiall things are particularly defined by Scripture therefore they are left to bee determined by the Church according to the rules of edification order and decencie PP The Sacrament of the Passcouer was also a holy Supper and the people of God vsed it so they kneeled not in the act of receiuing it ANS The Passeouer was an holy Supper yet it was also coenarecta that is a full and perfect repast The Sacrament is a Supper in resemblance onely as hath beene declared not instituted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for filling of the flesh but for feeding of the spirit and therefore is not to be receiued after a common and carnall manner but with a spirituall and religious carriage Lastly where you say that when the people receiued the Law of the Passeouer they bowed their heads and worshipped Exod. 12.17 and they did not so in eating of it That they were more reuerent in hearing the Law of the Passeouer then in the participation of it I answere They bowed not their head whilest they did heare but after they had heard and this I hope you will not deny but after the participation of the Passeouer they gaue thankes with as great reuerence and deuotion as they vsed after hearing of the Word Further at the participation they sate not but stood all the time wherin they shew farre greater reuerence then bowing of the head which is finished at one instant could import And after the first celebration when the Passeouer was slaine and sacrificed at the Altar you cannot say that the people did not bow for Micheas testifieth cap. 6. ver 6. That when the people brought their oblations they bowed As to the eating of it the same was in priuate houses and did serue them for an ordinary supper therfore was it to be receiued accordingly Our Sacrament is not such nor hath no such vse as hath been said therefore our manner of receiuing ought not to be conformed vnto that which was vsed at the participation of the Paschal Supper An answere to the second head wherein kneeling is considered as a breach of the second Commandement PP KNeeling in the act of receiuing the sacramentall elements is not onely a breach of the Institution in the Gospell but also of the second Commandement of the Law The first breach of the Commandement made by kneeling is the sinne of idolatrie idolatrie is committed in this act diuers wayes The Papists kneele in the acte of receiuing because they beleeue verily that the bread is Transubstantiate into Christs bodie and vpon this supposition of Transubstantiation and bodily presence they kneele this is the grossest idolatrie that euer was in the world The Lutheran kneeles vpon his supposition of Consubstantiation and Christs Reall presence by Consubstantiation This also is idolatry and a supposition false A third sort kneele for reuerence of the elements not giuing to the elements that high kinde of worship called commonly cultus Latriae which the Papists giue but an inferiour kinde of worship due as they thinke to consecrate creatures This also is idolatry ANS The penner of this Pamphlet takes it pro confesso that our Church which hee calleth the third sort kneeles at the Sacrament for reuerence of the elements and to proue it to be idolatry he makes a long confused and idle discourse touching the relatiue worship which Papists giue to their Idols I call it confused because hee makes no distinction therein betweene the proper accidentall and improper honour which Papists professe to giue to their Images without the knowledge whereof the disputation following cannot be vnderstood Therefore it must be cleared in the owne place I call it idle because he takes paines to proue that which is not controuerted namely that it is idolatry to kneele to the elements or for reuerence of the elements which we deny not yet hee confesseth that a religious honor which he calleth veneration should bee giuen to the elements and thereupon moues and answeres an obiection touching this point pag. 47. as followeth PP It may be obiected that holy things ought to bee reuerenced Answer True but not worshipped veneration is one thing adoration another adoration belongeth to persons veneration to things pertaining to persons and is nothing else but a religious respect or reuerent estimation of things pertaining to the vse of Religion a preseruation of them that they be not lost and a decent vsage of them according to their kinde this veneration or reuerence is a respectiue or relatiue reuerence giuen to them for Gods sake kneeling for reuerence of senselesse creatures is to take the proper gesture of relatiue adoration and apply it to relatiue reuerence for religious kneeling in all the Scripture is a gesture of adoration and soueraigne worship c. ANS This all is sound and touching it wee agree fully with you that reuerence which is done to the Sacrament should not bee expressed by kneeling which you truely call a gesture of adoration and soueraigne worshippe Therefore should it neither bee giuen to the booke of the Euangell nor to the elements of the Sacrament but to him only who is the Author and matter of both And yet if men fall downe and worship him at the hearing of the Gospell or after at the receiuing of the Sacrament or after and before it be receiued being moued thereto by contemplation
prayer not a verball Wee may forgiue him to say this of the sacrifice of the Masse where there is an offering of a sacrifice to God but Bellarmine was neuer so absurd as to call the act of receiuing from God a reall prayer to God ANS No man I thinke will alledge that the act of receiuing is praying or crauing although these two may agree well together But it is true that the celebration of this Sacrament is a reall thanksgiuing to God for the benefite of our redemption and although it be not a propitiatorie or impetratorie sacrifice as Bellarmine saith yet it is eucharisticke and a commemoration of the propitiatory and impetratory sacrifice of Christ And in the very act of receiuing and by the act of receiuing wee doe openly acknowledge and confesse before the world that our confidence of saluation is onely in the sacrifice of the Lord Iesus Christ which is a reall praysing magnifying extolling and preaching of his death vntill his comming againe Now to conclude yee haue made many long answeres to a short obiection and notwithstanding the argument remaines in force Your obiection proponed was this Wee may pray in the act of receiuing therefore wee may kneele Your first answere to this obiection was That kneeling is not the onely proper and commendable gesture of prayer and thereupon concluded we might not kneele This as we haue shewed is not a good consequence Next yee answered that to pray in the act of deliuery is against the Institution This we haue confuted Thirdly you answered that wee ought not to pray before a creature and therefore might not pray in the act of receiuing The antecedent of this is false as wee haue shewed at least as it is conceiued and the conclusion holds not Fourthly yee sayd that we are not commanded by the act of Perth to pray and therefore that we may not pray This followes not Fifthly because the prayer of the people in the act of receiuing is mentall yee inferred that they might not kneele and this is no good consequence Lastly yee sayd wee may not kneele before the Crucifixe and before Nebuchadnezzars Image and therefore we may not kneele in the act of receiuing the Sacrament And this is most absurd the Sacrament being a part of Gods worship instituted by himselfe but the vse of Idols and Images in his worship he hath expressely forbidden So all your answeres are meere sophisticall captions and abductions from the purpose yet yee proceede to answere some others that yee frame against your selfe PP Their other obiection that we may praise God in the act of receiuing therefore wee may kneele may bee answered after the same manner There is no publike thanksgiuing ordained to be made at the deliuery of the Elements mentall praise therefore must be meant Mentall praise is no more the principall worke of the soule then mentall prayer what was sayd of the ejaculations of the one let it bee applyed to the short ejaculations of the other ANS If yee answere this obiection as yee did the former then let the reply vsed by me be here repeated But I say further that by the words of the Institution Doe this in remembrance of me we are ordayned not onely mentally to giue praise but also really and publikely by the very action and celebration of the Sacrament it selfe in respect whereof the learned Pareus calleth this remembrance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fiduciae gratitudinis that is a remembrance of faith because by it our faith is confirmed and a remembrance of thanksgiuing because by it we should praise and magnifie as he saith the clemencie of the Father who gaue the Sonne and the benignitie of the Sonne who offered himselfe a sacrifice for vs. PP The name of the Eucharist giuen to this Sacrament helpes them nothing for it is a name giuen by the Ancients and not by the Scripture ANS The Trinitie is a name giuen by the Ancients and not by the Scripture to the three Persons subsisting in the vnitie of the diuine nature yet the truth of that which the word signifies being found in Scripture it helpes to conuince Heretikes that deny the same so the name of the Eucharist giuen to the Sacrament to declare the thankfull commemoration of our Sauiours death which thereby we performe according to the Scripture helpes vs much against you and your followers that spoile the Sacrament of the most principal end for which it was instituted that is to the praise and honor of our Sauiour in respect whereof it is called Sacrificium Eucharisticum a Sacrifice of thankesgiuing This Sacrifice the Pastor really acts in taking blessing breaking and giuing of the externall Elements for thereby the death of Christ and the application thereof to the faithfull is represented and it is acted by the people in their taking eating and drinking for thereby they declare and testifie the hunger thirst and desire of their soules after the righteousnesse and life of Christ and the ioy they haue in the meditation thereof with that assured confidence wherwith they rest and repose themselues therupon And this representation and application of Christs death with the testification of our faith therein and thankfulnesse therefore by the celebration of the Sacrament is a reall extolling preaching magnifying and praising of the Lords death from which mentall praise cannot be separated without hypocrisie Therefore to praise God in the act of receiuing is a chiefe part of the principall work of the soule and not your me ditation vpon the analogie betweene the signe and the thing signified which is only a catechetick preparation that should precede the principall worke If yee had remembred the Confession of Falth which ye professe your selfe to haue sworne and subscribed I am assured yee could not haue denyed this for in the 13. Sect. thereof about the end yee haue these words The end and cause of Christs Institution and why the selfe-same should bee vsed is expressed in these words Doe this in remembrance of mee as oft as yee eate of this bread and drinke of this Cuppe yee shall shew foorth that is extoll preach magnifie and praise the Lords death till he come If this be the principall end as yee see our Confession speakes of Christs Institution then not onely may wee praise him in the act of receiuing but we ought to praise him In respect of this the Sacrament is called the Eucharist and not in respect of the thanksgiuing wherewith we begin the action as yee would haue it to be in your words following PP Next as it is called Eucharistia so it is called Eulogia for the words He gaue thanks and He blessed are indifferently vsed by the Euangelists Some parts of this holy celebration stand in thanksgiuing as the beginning and the end and therefore is the whole action denominated from a part Saith Casaubone Eulogia Eucharistia vtraque vox à parte vna totam Domini actionem designat It followes not that
The fift Reason was transferred to Christ God and Man the Law-giuer in the New-Testament one that was faithfull in all the house of God But so it is that Christ neither by his owne commandement nor by direction of his Spirit inspiring the Apostles instituted any other day but the Lords Day c. ANS The Theologie of your Preface or Proposition I vnderstand not I learne in the Scripture that the Prerogatiue of the Father is communicated with the Son and that all power in heauen and in earth is giuen to our Lord Iesus Christ But I neuer read that God hath made any translation and denuded himselfe of any prerogatiue in the New Testament that belonged to him before in the olde That which ye subioyne that Christ and his Spirit hath instituted no other day but the Lords Day we freely graunt for if it were euident that the fiue dayes had beene instituted by Christ then we behoued to obserue and esteeme them as necessary parts of Gods worship and not circumstances determined by the Church to the worship of God for order and policie which we hold with our best Diuines And therefore wee say in the verie first wordes of our Act Wee abhorre the superstitious obseruation of Festiuall dayes This superstitious obseruation is nothing else but an obseruation of them with opinion of necessitie that is as necessarie parts of Gods worshippe instituted by Christ So in this wee agree yet I doe not allow of the reasons which yee vse for probation hereof Your first argument is If there had beene any other dayes dedicated to Christ the Apostle spake vnproperly and obscurely when he said Hee was rauished in the Spirit vpon the Lords Day For if there had beene a day for his Natiuitie and another for his Passion he should haue said that he was rauished in the Spirit vpon one of the Lords Dayes This argument is friuolous Although all the Festiuall dayes vnder the Law were dedicated to God and were called Sabbaths yea sometimes Sabbath Sabbathôn yet none of them is called the Sabbath of IEHOVAH or the Lords Sabbath that is reserued to the seuenth day of the Weeke and the seuenth Yeere which resembled Gods rest And although all the Synagogues were Houses dedicated to God yet the Temple is not called one of Gods Houses but the House of God euen so the Day of Christs resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the excellencie thereof is called the Lords Day albeit other times had beene appoynted for his honour Your next Argument is false in it yee affirme That the Apostle condemnes not onely the obseruation of Iewish dayes and the Iewish obseruation of the Iewish dayes to a typicall vse for the conuerted Iewes yee say did not obserue them as shadowes of things to come for then they had denyed Christ but he condemnes the obseruation of dayes as a Pedagogicall and rudimentarie instruction not beseeming the Christian Church But howbeit the conuerted Iewes did not obserue the Iewish dayes as shadowes of things to come yet they might haue obserued them as memorialls of by-past temporall and typicall benefits and for present temporall blessings as the benefit of their deliuery out of Egypt and for the Fruits of the earth which vse was also typicall Further they did obserue them with opinion of necessitie as things instituted by God for his worship and their saluation which sort of obseruation was Legall but this proceeding from infirmitie and for want of sufficient instruction was not a denying of Christ as it had beene if the same had proceeded from pertinacy after the knowledge of the Truth receiued And this was it which the false Apostles vrged vpon the Galatians and Saint Paul condemnes in that Epistle written to them and not simply the obseruation of any day for as after shall bee made manifest euery obseruation of the Iewish dayes is not damned by the Apostle who did sometime obserue them in his owne person after a most lawfull manner Neither can the obseruation of all dayes bee a Iewish custome and rite and Pedagogicall or rudimentarie instruction but the obseruation onely of these dayes which are prescribed in the Law otherwise the Festiuities appointed by Ieroboam and the festiuall dayes kept by the Heathen should all bee Iewish Customes and Pedagogicall instructions which yee will not say I hope PP Zanchius speaks to this purpose after this manner Magis consentaneum est cum prima institutione cum scriptis Apostolicis vt vnus tantum dies in septimana sanctificetur It is more agreeable to the first institution and the writings of the Apostles that one day of the weeke onely bee sanctified ANS It is your custome I perceiue to falsifie mutilate and corrupt the Acts of Assemblies and testimonies both of the ancient and moderne Diuines Beza his testimony yee adulterated in the dispute of kneeling here yee mutilate Zanchius his testimonie and bring it directly against his owne minde He writing vpon the fourth Precept of the Law pag. 671. mooues this question An plures habere festos debeat Ecclesia Christi c. for answere to this question he setteth downe two Propositions and confirmes them at length the first whereof is this Tametsi magis consentaneum est cum prima institutione cum scriptis Apostolicis vt vnus tantum dies in septimana sanctificetur cum scripturis tamen minime pugnat si plures vno sanctificentur modò omnis absit superstitio faciant ad aedificationem that is Albeit it be more agreeable to the first institution and the Apostles writings that one day onely in the weeke be sanctified yet it is not repugnant to the Scripture if moe then one be sanctified prouiding that all superstition bee auoyded and that they serue to edification Hauing confirmed this by the testimonies of the Ancients as Euseb de vita Constant lib. 4. Sozom. lib. 1. cap. 8. lib. 2. cap. 19. August tom 2. Epist. 118. Epiphan Tertull. de Idololat and the practice of the reformed Churches he concludeth with these wordes Dubitari igitur non potest quin liceat Ecclesiae plures dies festos constituere sanctificare that is It may not be doubted but the Church may lawfully appoint and sanctifie moe festiuall dayes His second position makes a full answere to the question Quanquam Ecclesiae Christi liberumest quos velit praeter Dominicum dies sibi sanctificandos deligere honestius tamen est laudabilius atque vtilius eos sanctificare quos etiam vetus atque Apostolica puriorque Ecclesia sanctificare solita fuit that is Howbeit the Christian Church hath libertie to make choyce of dayes to sanctifie them besides the Lords Day yet it is more honest commendable and profitable to sanctifie these which the ancient and Apostolique and most incorrupt Church hath beene in vse to keepe holy What dayes these were he shewes in the same place numbering out the dayes of the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection Ascension and Pentecost as
principall dayes and after their enumeration subjoynes Atque hac sunt Festa quae sicut à veteribus sanctificabantur sic sinunc sanctificentur non solùm improbari non potest sed etiam laudabile est honestum atque vtile quemadmodum in thesi diximus that is These are the festiuals which were kept holy by the Ancients and if wee should now obserue the same not onely is it not to bee improued but also it were commendable honest and profitable as wee said in the Position Thus Zanchius is directly contrary to your opinion for where yee alleadge that the Apostle condemnes the obseruation of dayes simply Zanchius affirmes the obseruation of some dayes beside the Lords Day not to bee repugnant to Scripture as it behoued to be if the same were condemned by the Apostle for a Iewish rite and Pedagogicall instruction By this let the Reader iudge what credit yee deserue in the rest of your reports where there is no proose but your owne affirmation PP Against this Argument it is first alleadged That the Apostle comporteth with the obseruation of dayes Rom. 14.5 6. Ans The Apostle beares with the infirmitie of the weake Iewes who vnderstood not the fulnesse of the Christian libertie And the Ceremoniall Law was not as yet buried But the same Apostle reproues the Galatians who had attavned to this libertie and had once left off the obseruation of dayes Next the Iudaicall dayes had once that honour as to bee appointed by God himselfe but the Anniuersarie dayes appointed by men haue not the like honour ANS After yee haue vsed two Arguments to proue That there is no day of diuine institution but the Lords Day a point not controuerted amongst vs yee labour to answere fiue obiections which yee propone against your selfe and the summe of your answere to the first is this That the dayes wherewith the Apostle comported were not the anniuersarie dayes appointed by men but the Iudaicall dayes which had once that honour to bee appointed of God and therefore were to be tollerated in the weake Iewes as long as the Ceremoniall Law wherein they were commanded was not buried the obseruation whereof notwithstanding hee condemned and reproued in the Galatians Out of this answere I forme this Proposition All the dayes whereof the Apostle condemned the obseruation were Iudaicall dayes prescribed in the Ceremoniall Law tolerated by him in weake Christians and that once had the honour to be appointed by God himselfe This Proposition is yours and is very true I assume But the fiue anniuersarie dayes appointed by the Assembly of Perth are not Iudaicall prescribed in the Ceremoniall Law tolerated by Saint Paul in weake Christians and such as had once the honour to be appointed by God himselfe The Assumption is likewise yours set downe in the last wordes of your Answere and is true also Therefore I conclude That the fiue anniuersarie dayes are not the dayes whereof the Apostle condemnes the obseruation Consequently hee condemnes not the obseruation of dayes simply as a Iudaicall Rite and Pedagogicall instruction contrary to your former Assertion PP It is secondly obiected that seeing the Lords Day was instituted in remembrance of Christs resurrection the other notable acts of Christ ought likewise to be remembred with their seuerall festiuities Ans It followes not that because Christ did institute the remembrance of one benefit therefore men may institute for other benefits Secondly Christs resurrection was a benefit including the rest of his benefits Thirdly The Lords Day was not appointed to celebrate the memory of Christs resurrection onely for then the resurrection should bee the proper subiect of Diuine seruice euery Lords Day and then it were vnlawfull to fast thereupon Fourthly It is called the Lords Day either because the Lord did institute it as the Communion is called the Lords Supper or else because it was instituted to the Lords honour and worship as the Iewish Sabbath is called the Sabbath of the Lord our God Fiftly Although it may be applyed to the remembrance of Christs resurrection seeing he rose that day and in some sort to be a signe of the heauenly rest yet that is but typus communis factus a common type fitted to resemble such things not typus destinatus that is appointed by God for that end Finally it was appointed for remembrance of all Christs actions and for his worship in generall not in a mysticall manner for the ioyfull remembrance of his resurrection onely So to diuide Christs actions and appoint anniuersary mysticall dayes for their remembrance is superstitious will-worship and a Iudaicall addition to Christs institution in your mind ANS Here onely I haue taken vp the summe of your answere which is this That Christ did not institute the Lords Day for a remembrance of his resurrection in a mysticall manner and therefore wee haue no warrant to appoint mysticall dayes for remembrance of the Natiuitie Passion and the rest of his notable actions Vnto which I answere first generally That it is the iudgement of some recent Diuines that the Lords Day was onely instituted as Ecclesiasticall dayes are for order and policie and hath no further but a circumstantiall vse in the worship of God Others following the Ancients hold that the Lords Day is not onely appointed for order and policie but that it is a memoriall of Christs resurrection and a signe of our eternall rest in heauen Saint August tom 5. de ciuit Dei lib. 22. cap. 30. Dominicus dies Christi resurrectione sacratus aternam non solùm spiritus sed etiam corporis requiem praefigurat That is The Lords Day which was made holy and sacred by the resurrection of Christ prefigures not onely the eternall rest of the spirit but also of the body Item tom 10. deverbis Apostoli Serm 15. Domini resurrectio promisit nobis aeternum diem consecrauit nobis Do ninicum diem qui Dominicus vocatur quia eo die Dominus resurrexit That is The resurrection of the Lord hath promised vnto vs an eternall day and hath consecrated the Lords Day vnto vs which is so called because the Lord rose vpon that day Item Epist ad Ianuarium Artic. 119. cap. 13. Dies Domini non Iudaeis sed Christianis resurrectione Domini declaratus est ex illo habere coepit festiuitatem suam That is The Lords Day was declared not to the Iewes but to the Christians by the resurrection of the Lord and from that time it beganne to be a festiuall day ibidem cap. 19. Vita prima quae de peregrinatione redeuntibus primam stolam accipientibus redditur per vnam Sabbathi quem diem Dominicum dicimus figuratur That is The first or euerlasting life which is giuen to them that haue ended their peregrination and receiued the glorious robe is figured by the first day of the weeke which we call the Lords Day Iust. Martyr Apol. 2. ad calcem Conuentus autem hos die Solis facimus quia