A Defense of our Arguments Against Kneeling in Receiving the Lords Supper, Defense 4
Defence of our fourth Argument.
THE communicants ought to distribute the elements to others, according to Christs precept, Divide it amongst you. This distribution cannot consist with kneeling. He alledgeth Fenner against this distribution, but impertinently: for he speaketh nothing against it. Beza is so farre from den…ing that precept, Luk. 22. 17. to be meant of the communion cup, that he are be bold to conj…cture the verses to bee transposed, and that this should bee their order, 16, 19. 20. 17. 18. Luke applieth the protestation, that Christ will drink no more of the fruit of the …e, to that same cup which he commanded them to divide amongst themselves. But that protestation is applied to the communion cup by Matthew and Mark, Math. 26. 28. 29. Mark. 14. 24. 25. It was therfore the communion cup which Christ commanded to divide. He alledgeth against this reason, Piscator in Math. 26. 29. saying, that it is no absurditie to think that Christ made that protestation twice, once of the paschall cup, and again of the communion cup. But writing afterwards upon Luke, he sayth, as being better advised, dPiscator in Luk. 17. 18. Ordinis inversio aliqua, quatenus pars actionis circa vinum narratur, v. 17. & 18. ante actionē circa panem. Nam verba illa de poculo coe… Domini… int…lligenda ess…l quet ex Ma…co, qui verba illa, dico me non bibitu…um, &c. verbis de poc…lo coe…ae Domini… pronunciatis continenter sub…ungit.that there is inversion of order to be observed in Luke, in so farr, as that part of the action, which concerneth the wine, is set downe vers. 17. and 18. before the action concerning the bread. For that these words are to be understood of the cup of the Lords supper, it is cleare sayth he, out of Mark. 14. 24. 25. who subjoyneth immediatly to the words pronounced of the cup of the Lords Supper, these words, I will drinke no more, &c. No Evangelist maketh mention twice of this protestation of not drinking more; how then can men so boldly conjecture, that it was spoken twice, once of the Paschal cup, and againe of the Eucharistical' Matthew and Mark make this protestation to be spoken but once, and that of the communion cup. Againe, if Christ had made this protestation concerning the paschall cup, how did he keep his promise, if he did drink after the paschall cup, of the Eucharisticall cup? Hee sayth Musculus doubteth, if it may be assirmed, that Christ himselfe did eat, and drink, of the sacramentall bread, and wine. But he doubteth without reason. Doth not Matthew and Mark say, that Christ protested …nene the communion cup, that hee would drink no more of the fruit of the wine after that. It followeth then that he drank of it. When the Schoolmen are to prove that wine is one of the sacramentall elements, they cannot find a proof in all the foure Evangelists, but in this protestation, eLectio 3… in Canon Missae.that hee will drink no more of the fruit of the vine. Gabriel B…el groundeth his proofe on this protestation, as it is set down by Luke, and collecteth, that neither the wine of apples, nor wine as it is in the berry, but as it is potable, is the matter of consecration in this sacrament. Doth not Musculus himselfe say, fDe coen… Domini, p. 348. Existimo neminem esse qui nege… vinum in poeulo fuisse, cum dixerit Dominus Math. 26. Luk. 22. haud bibiturum se amplius. Homil. 83. in Math.I thinke there is no man will deny, that wine was in the cup. seeing the Lord sayd, Math. 26. Luk. 22. that hee would drink no more of the fruit of the wine, &c. Chrysoltome sayth, Ipse quoque bibi… ex eo, ne …itis illis verbis dicerent, Quid? ergo sanguinem …, & carnem comedimus? & pertuba…entur. He drank also of it, lest hearing these words, they should say, What? Doe we then drink blood, and …? and so should be troubled. And Hierom …aith, gAd Hedibiam.that the Lord was conviva, & con…um, comedens, et qui comeditur, the banketer, and …e banket it seife; he who did eat, and was eaten. Where to should I cite many old testimo…. The two ancient hSe tenet in manibus, se cibat ipse cibus. Se nascēs dedit socium, convescens in edulium.hymnes, are suf…nt. He needed not to partake of this …ment for himselfe, yet for example sake, …o shew, what others should doe, hee communicated with his Apostles. Hee needed …ot to have been baptized for himselfe, and … he was baptized for the instruction of others▪ It becommeth him, who inviteth others to a banket, to eat with his guests. Se… further in iDe coena Domini q. 59.Buc…nus common places. Hes sayth next, that Christ kept his promise, albeit he drank of the cup of the new Testament, after that hee drank of the paschall cup, but letteth us not see, how that should be. He protested, that that passover should be the last, he should eat with them in this mortall life, and this hee performed. He sayth he protested the like of the paschall cup, Luk. 22. and yet drank after that of the communion cup, but that is the very thing we deny: and we have already made manifest, that there was but once protestation made anent the cup, and that it was the communion cup. Further, this protestation was made anent the last cup; but so it is, that the cōmunion cup was the last cup. kBeza in Mark. 14. 25. Alludit ad morem, q. o nefas erat post poculum illud apolyticon quicquam cibi in posterum diem capere.Christ alluded to the Canon, and custome, whereby it was not lawful to tast any thing that night after the last cup, the cup of …praise. Christ foretelling his death, protests he will drinke no more of it, not that night onelyonly, but not at all in this mortall life.
The obaldus Meuschius lDefens. Harm…n. generalis, cap. 4proveth that this protestation was once onelyonly spoken, and that of the Sacramentall cup, by this same custome of the Iewes. Inde concludi potest, quod Iudaei panem. & poculum soliti sint distribuere, prorsus in sine Paschatis quibus distributis quicquam porro gustare ea vespera nefas erat. He not onelyonly openeth up Hysteron proteres Lucae contin…um, the inversion of order i… Luk, and affirmeth the distribution of the cup ver. 17. to be meant of the communion cup: but also saith, therfore mVerosimile igitur est & prope necessarium hos versiculos ex sacrae coenae institutione huc esse a scribis trajectos.it is likely, yea almost necessary, that the verses 17. and 18. were taken out of the institution of the Supper which …odoweth, and were placed here by the negligence of W…uers. Howsoever it be, if there be not transposition of the verses, there is anticipation in the matter, and purpose it selfe. To the reasons and testimonies before alledged, and in Perth Assembly, and the answer to Doctor Resolutus, I adde onelyonly the testimony of Swarez. (z) Howbeit these words, I (n) Tim. 3. p. 909. Licet a Luca haec verba, non bibam &c. referantur ante consecrationē, videtur tamen id factum esse per anticipationem Nam Matthaeus & Marcus post consecrationem ista referunt.will not drink, be related before the consecration, yet it seemeth to be done by way of anticipation: for Matthew and Mark relate them after the consecration. Seeing …hen we have so many reasons, and such a cloud of witnesses, both of Papists and Protestants, the ancient Fathers, the Schoolemen, and moderne Writers, hat the Precept divide it amongst you, belongeth to he communion cup; Kneeling in the act of receiving the Sacramentall elements cannot have place. It is true, when Christ said, drink yee a… of it, hee required that one should not drink out all that was in the cup▪ as the Priest doth in the Masse, but that every one drink of it. But this precept, divide … you, import…h further, that they should divide, and distribute it among them selves. Christ saith not, Let it be divided, or, I w…d divide it, but, divide yee it amongst your selves. When Christ gave the cup to th… …rest, he took it not from him againe, to d…l…v…r it to the next; n…r yet did every one s…t down the cup on the Table, that the next might take it up from the Table, but they reached the cup to the other. So was the last Paschal cup caried frō hand to hand. This last Paschall cup was changed into the Eucharistical, & when it was changed, it was carried from hand to hand after the same manner. Piscator oIn Math. 26. Ita salicet ut illud dederit alteri ex proxime accumbē tibus actum deinceps singuli ordine aljis cata cucloposiā istud porrexerint.saith, that they reached the cup one to another, Bellarmine saith, Caiuem autem non fregit nec div…sit ipse discumbentibus. sed dedi… integrum ut unus alteri porrigeret, de Eucharist lib. 4. cap. 25. Christ brake not the cup▪ nor divided it himselfe to the …i…ters, but gave it whole, that one may reach to another. Swarez saith pTom. 3. p. 861. Quod in calice est ev…dentius ex illis verbis. Accipite & divid…e inter vos, fuit ergo per proprias Apostolorū manus ab uno in alium delatus.hee applyed not with his own hand the consecrated bread to the mouthes of the Aposties, but onelyonly offered the plate to them, and t…ey tooke it with their own hands. which u more evident in the cup, in these words, Take it and divide it amongst you. It was carried therfore by the Aposties own hands from one to another. Seeing therefore this is acknowledged, not onelyonly by Calvin, Beza, Piscator, Bellarmine, Swarez, Walterius, and many moe both Popish and Protestant Writers, that, divide it amongst you, concerneth the communion cup, we may not heare without any gaine-saying, that it is indifferent, whether the Ministers or the Communicants, distribute it. For if Christ commanded the cup to be distributed by the Communicants, who hath authoritie to make it indifferent? But when it is made indifferent to open a doore to superstitious and idolatrous rites to enter in, then is Christ Precept most of all to be observed, If the cup should be divided by the Commumunicants, then is it like that the bread should be divided also, seeing Christ said of the br…ad, Take yee, eat yee, in the plurall number. See Piscator in Matth. 26. He saith qProbabile est Dominum panem confregisse in duas partes, earum que alteram dedisse illi qui proximus ipsi accumbebat ad dextram alteram vero idi qui ad sinistram, ut isti deinceps proxime accumbentibus porrigerent, donec singuli particulā sibi decerpsissent.It is probable that the Lord brak the bread in two parts, and gave one of them to him that sa…e neerest to him on the right hand, the other to him, that sate on the left, and that they reached in order to the neerest. B…za, Tossan…s Hospin…anus, Tindall say the like: Mornaeus, Sibrandus, and others, extend the Precept to the bread also. The reader will finde them already all…dg…d in Per… Assembly, page 41. 42. 43. and …he answer to Doctor Resolutus, page 8. 9. An…logie requireth that the Communicants should distribute the bread as well as th… cup. And it were not seemely to see the Communicants distribute the cup, and the Minister to goe along to minister the bread. That the cup should be divided by the Communicants is sufficient for our Argument against kneeling. For it excludeth kneeling … receiving the cup. If we may not kneele, when we receive the cup, should we kneele when we receive the bread? I bel…v that there is no man so absurd, as to think it.
This rite of the Communicants dividing the elements, say we, hath a profi…le use, in that it is an interchange amongst the Communicants of tokens of l…ue and amitie. Hee answereth that the Primitiue Kirke had another meane, to entertaine love, and friendship, to wit the Love-feasts. Let the taunt which he borrowed from Gardinerus be here retorted against himselfe. He hath his mind in patinis. Iude saith that the false Teachers were rocks, or spots in the feasts of charity feeding(r) De Orig. error. circa coenam …ol. 201. Hinc fortassis ritus ille ad nos manavit, qui etiam hodie in usu est, ut finitis, Missarū solenn…s panes diuidantur pauperibus. themselves without feare. They would have wished that world to last ever. Doeth he think that the Love-feasts were to remaine, as long as the Sacrament of the Supper? They are worn… long since out of use, and no trace of them left, saving that when the solemnities of the Masse are ended some bread is distributed to the poore, as Bullingerus reporteth. There is also some footst…p of them, as some doe think, at fu…erals. Wee point out a rite commanded, which should endure, seeing it was commanded, he leadeth us to another temporarie custome. sAntiquitatum cō vivialium li. 3. cap. 10. In jis enim amicitiae ergo humaniter se mutuo excipientes vini calicem sibi invicem porrigebant, quent Philotesiam appellabant, metonymice nimirum, quia symbolum erat amoris, & amicitiae, q… nomine verissime quis idud sacrosanctae Domini coerae poculum … signierit. See more of this 4. Argum. P. A. page 41. 42. 43. 44. Sol. pag. 8. 9. 10.The guests in evill bankets of old, entertaining others courteously reached a cup of wine to others, which cup they called, Philotesia, Metonymicallie, because it was a symbole of louelove and friendship, which name a man may justly impose … the cup of the holy Supper of the Lord, saith St… k…us. There be other tokens of love in the Supper it selfe, without the Love-feasts; yet one token should not justle out another. We cannot be too much remembred of this duty. To drinke of one cup betokn…th friendship, but to reach the same cup also to others expresseth this duty in a more lively manner.