A Defense of our Arguments Against Kneeling in Receiving the Lords Supper, Defense 14 – Defense 15
Defence of our foureteenth Argument.
KNeeling in the act of receiving is scandalous to many. He saith that wee ought to do our duty, though men be never so much offended, otherwise the scandall is not given, but taken: our duty is to obey the ordinance of the Kirk made anent kneeling, and not to offend the Kings Majesty. Here ye see first he opponeth offending, that is greeving or displeasing the Kings Majestie, to offending, that is, giving occasion to his brother to fall in a grosse sinne, and so to distroy him, for whom Christ died, so far as in him lyeth. Next suppose that(g) Quando ipsum factū est tale, quod de sui ratione habeat, quod sit inductivum ad peccandum, puta cū aliquis publice facit peccatū, vel quod habet similitudinem peccati. 2. 2. quest. 43. art. 1. ad 4. kneeling in the act of receiving the sacramentall elements, were not a sinne, both in disordering the right manner of celebration, and also in that it is idolatry; yet it is a matter of actiue scandall, in that it hath a shew of evill, and giveth occasion to our brother to fall into that evill, wherof it hath a shew, to wit in bread-worship. For a mans doing is the cause of anothers fall, two wayes, per se, of it selfe, or per accidens, through the default of another onelyonly, who is ill affected, and taketh occasion to offend, even at good things. The first is actiue scandall, the second is passive. In the active, sometime there is intentio operantis, an intention in the doer to draw another to sin: sometime there is without any such intention, onelyonly conditio operis, such a manner of doing, that of it selfe it giveth occasion to another to fail. As when a man doth such an act, which is an inducement to sinne; as when a man committeth publiquely a sinne, or that which hath the shew, or likenesse of sinne, saith Aquinas. This shew of idolatry that is in kneeling, suppose there were no more, is an inducement and occasion to others to commit idolatry, & hardneth the Papist in his idolatry; It is an active, not a passive scandall. We must not omit a necessary duty, suppose others unjustly take offence. But kneeling in the act of receiving is not a necessary duty, but such a deed as is inductive to scandall.
The Doctor' saith that it is a necessary duty to obey the ordinance of our Superiours, and not to withstand the Authority. No man denyeth obedience to be due to the Magistrate, or Superiour, suppose others should take offence, for that were mat…ris proxima scandali, the neerest and immediate matter of the scandall, to deny that lege cominum, by the common law, the law of God and men▪ Magistrates and Superiours should be obeyed. But lege particulari by a particular law made of any particular matter, wee are not ever bound to active obedience; as when he commandeth to sinne, or do any thing that hath the shew of sinne, or is apt to breed scandall; like as kneeling in the act of receiving hath proved by the event, or experience both of the ages before and at this present. Neither is in this same case obedience passive denyed; and so the Morall duty of obedience is fulfilled. Daniel would not desist from opening his windowes toward Ierusalem not withstanding of the Kings edict. The commandement of the Magistrate cannot make a thing, which of it selfe is scandalous, and hurtfull, not to bee hurtfull, but rather by the strength of his authoritie maketh it more scandalous and hurtfull, then it would be. But none of our Formalists will deale in earnest with the supreme Magistrate, and tell him that he committeth active scandall in laying a stumbling block before the people, and therfore sinneth against the LORD. The Nurse that left a knife vvith the child found dead at her returne, could not be free of blame; but the Nurse that layeth downe the knife, is farre lesse to be excused. Ez…kias removed a passive scandall, to vvit, the brazen Serpent: For the brasen Serpent vvas not an active scandall. Seeing therefore there is passive scandall in this kneeling, it is sufficient cause to remove it, suppose there vvere no active. Will the flattering Formalist then bee instant vvith the Magistrate to remove, or rather not to reinduce this passive scandall, and follovv the example of good Ezekias. For this invention of man, hath beene, is, and is still likely to be abused superstitiously, giving and not granting that of it selfe it vvere not idolatry. But our flatering Formalists care more for their formal coats, then the hazard of many thousand soules. Againe, it is to be remembred, that our superiours cannot free u…, or drive us from our oath taken by their own consent. Can they make us sweare the one day, and drive us to perjury another day. Last, it is no lawfull ordinance, which was made at Perth, as all our arguments doe evince▪ neither vvas that meeting a lawfull and free Synod, but a Null and pretended Assembly, vvhichwhich they are never able, doe vvhat they can, to defend. The Doctor fayth, he feareth some Ministers do cause the people to take offence. Surely, if they were not constant in their doctrine, and practise, as they have professed these many yeares, they would cause the people take offence at the vvhole doctrine, vvhichwhich they have taught, and to call it in doubt. Let them alone sayth he, they be blind leaders of the blind. Certainly, vvho vvill be lead by this vvorthy vvork of the Doctors, I affirme he is either a temporizer seeking a cloake for his back-sliding, or els he is blind, led by a blind Doctor: or if he be not blind, he is blinded vvith avarice and ambition, or hath a part of both.
Defence of our fifteenth Argument.
HE maketh us an argument of every thing, wherewith we exaggerate their fault. We say, that Bellarmine argueth a priori from the real presence for adoration▪ and againe, a posteriori from adoration for the reall presence. And if it bee lawfull to kneele at the receiving of the sacrament, it is lawful to kneele before images. He sayth, We may fal down before the symbols, which we have already refuted. He sayth, that the Papist worshipeth Christ, & the image with one worship, Christ and the Eucharist as being one. What is that to the purpose, that the idolatry of the Papist, and of the formalist, is not all one in every respect, seeing he misapplieth onelyonly the popish adoration, as I have sayd before. Bellarmine sayth not, that Christ and the image is to be worshiped with one vvorship after one manner: for Christ is to be vvorshiped vvith that high worship called cultus latriae, and that properly, the image of Christ improperly, and per accidens; as he that adoreth the King, adoreth him and his purple robe at one time with one vvorship, but after a divers manner. So in the sacrament they adore Christ and the species together with the same vvorship, but not after the same manner: for they worship the accidents and species, onelyonly per accidens, vvith that vvorship vvhichwhich they give unto Christ, as in the coadoration of the Kings throne, or his robe, when the King is worshipped. But the formalist kneeleth for reverence of the elements, not per accidens, but perse, howbeit propter alium. Now to kneele for reverence is to adore with that gesture, which in scripture is used in religious and divine vvorship to be given onelyonly to God.