Perth Assembly, Part 5 · Subpart 1
KNEELING IN THE ACT OF RECEIVING THE SACRAmentall elements of Bread and Wine, proved vnlawfull.
IT hath been the uniforme and constant order of this Kirke, since the reformation: tha… the communicants should receaue the sacramentall elements of bread and wine, sitting at the table. In the second head of the first booke of discipline, are set downe these words. The table of the Lord is then rightly ministred, when it approcheth most neare to Christs owne action: but plaine it is, that at that supper Christ Iesus sat with his disciples: and therefore wee doe iudge…punc; that sitting at a table, is most convenient to that holy action. In the generall Assembly holden in December 1562. It was ordeined, That one uniforme order be observed in the ministration of the Sacraments, according to the order of Geneva. And in December, Anno 1564. It was ordeined, That Ministers in ministration of the Sacraments, shall use the order set downe in the Psalme bookes. In the Assembly holden anno 1591: it was ordained, That an Article should be formed, and presented to his Maiesty, and the estates, craving order to bee taken with them, who give or receive the sacrament after the Papisticall manner. In the Kings confession of faith, subscribed and sworne, by persons of all estates: are contained these words: We detest all the ceremonies of the Romane Antichrist added to the ministration of the Sacraments; we detest all his rites, signes, and traditions. This laudable order was altered at the pretended Assembly holden last at Perth in August anno 1618. The tenour of the Act followeth as it was formed by some of the Bishops, and their followers. Since we are commanded by God himselfe, that when we come to worship him, wee fall downe and kneele before the Lord our Maker: and considering withall, that there is no part of divine worship more heavenly and spirituall, then is the holy receiving of the blessed body and bloud of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ; like as the most humble and reverend gesture of the body in our meditation, and lifting up of our hearts, best becommeth so divine and sacred an action. Therefore, notwithstanding that our Church hath used since the reformation of religion, to celebrate the holy communion to the people, sitting, by reason of the great abuse of kneeling at the worshipping of the Sacrament by the Papists, yet now seeing all memory of by past superstition is past, and no perill of the same againe is feared: In reverence of so divine a mystery, and in remembrance of so mysticall an union as we are made partakers of, thereby doe ordaine, that that blessed Sacrament be celebrated hereafter meekely and reverently upon their knees. This alteration is to us unlawfull, for that which hath been established by so many lawes, Civill and Ecclesiasticall, by so long custome, and prescription of time, confirmed by our oathes, and subscriptions, wee may not lawfully alter. But so it is, that sitting at the table in the act of receaving, hath been established by lawes, custome, long prescription of time, and confirmed by oathes and subscriptions as is evident by the former diduction. It is notwithstanding expedient to descend further in opening up the unlawfulnes of kneeling. 1. as it is a breach of the institution. 2. as it is a breach of the second commandment. 3. as it is with out example and practise of the ancient Kirk. 4. as it disagreeth from the practise of the reformed Kirks.
Kneeling, considered, as it is a breach of the institution.
THE manner of Christs proceeding, from the paschall supper to the Eucaristicall, is to be observed, for the better understanding of the Institution. Before and in the dayes of Christ, the Paschall supper consisted, of two services or suppers, and a conclusion.
After the ordinary washing of their hands, they sat downe to the first service, and eate the Paschall lamb with unleavened bread. Then they rose to the washing of their feet; thereafter, they sat downe againe to the second supper or service, and did eate of a sallet, made of soure hearbs, and dipped in a composed liquor, as thick as mustard. Iudas after he gat a sop of this second service, he went out immediatly. In the conclusion of the second service of the Paschall supper, the Lord of the house took an unleavened cake of bread and blessed it, after this maner. Blessed art thou o Lord our God, King of the World, who hast sanctified us by thy precepts, and hast given us a commandement concerning the eating of unleavened bread. Christ likewise took the bread and gaue thanks. The Lord of the house, after thanks-giving brake the bread, and gaue it unto the company, saying, This is the bread of misery, which our fathers eat in Egipt: whosoever hungreth let him come neare and eat, whosoever hath need, let him come neare and celebrate the Passeover. Christ after thanks-giving brak the bread, and gaue it to his disciples, saying, take yee, eat yee, this is my body that is broken for you. Therafter the Lord of the house tooke the cup, and blessed it after this manner. Blessed art thou O Lord who hast created the fruit of the vine, after he had tasted the cup he gaue it to the nearest and so it was caried from hand to hand. This cup was called, the cup of praise and thanks-giving, because they sung a Psalme after it. Christ took the cup likewise, and after he had given thanks gaue it to the nearest of his disciples, saying, take ye, drink ye all of this; for this cup, is the new-testament of my blood &c. the cup was caried from hand to hand, the supper ended they sung a Psalme. Morneus alib. 1. de missa cap. 1.and Beza bIn Met c. 26.20,do set downe this maner of proceeding, as observed before by Munsterus, Paulus Burgensis, Tremellius, Cassander, and Iosephus Scaliger. Iosephus Scaliger setteth downe cde emendat. temporum. lib. 6.a paschall canon, forbidding, to take any meat or drink after the cup of thanks-giving. This discourse being premitted the breaches of the institution are to be considered.
The first breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of that commendable gesture of sitting, used by Christ and his Apostles, at, and after the Institution. Christ and his Apostles sate at table, after the forme of their usuall sitting at ordinary bankets and feastes. They sat at the first service of the Paschall supper. Baradius, Swarez, Iansenius, and others affirme, that there is no circumstance in the text, Exod. 12, to inforce standing at the Passeover. Next, suppose the circumstances there expressed did import standing, yet it was not inioyned as an ordinary rite, but as many other circumstances, belonged only to the first Passeover in Egipt, as to eate with haste, and with loynes girded up, and to sprinkle the lintill and two sideposts of the doore with blood, as Beza hath observed dAnnot. in Mat. 26.20and Scaliger in the late edition of his books de emendatione temporum eLib. 6. p. 534.sayeth the like: put the case, that this gesture continued longer, yet long before the dayes of Christ this gesture was changed. Scaliger produceth out of the rituals of the Iewes,fDe emendat. temp. lib. 6. p. 539 their words: Quam diversa haec nox à ceteris noctibus quod in aliijs noctibus semel tantum l…vamus in hac autem bis. Quod in reliquis noctibus comedimus sive fermentum sive Azimum in hac autem onmino azyma. Quod in reliquis noctibus vescimur oleribus omne genus in hoc autem intybis. Quod in omnibus noctibus tam edentes quam bibentes vel sedemus vel discumbimus in hac autem omnes discumbimus. How farr different is this night from other nights? other nights we wash once, this night twice: other nights we eate leavened or unleavened bread, this night onelyonly unleavened. Other nights we eate all sorts of hearbs, this night onelyonly Cicory. Other nights as well eating as drinking, we either sit or sup; this night we all sup, that is, sit leaning. In his first Edition he sayth, That the b…oke Kiddush pesach, out of which their words are alledged, is a little elder then Christs time. It is cleare then, that Anakeimenon discumbentibus, cannot be translated, standing, neither did ever any translator so translate the word any where. It is sayd likewise, they sate downe at the second service after he had washen the disciples feet. And whilest they did eate, edentibus illis, Math. 26.26. Mark. 14.22. Christ tooke bread and blessed, &c. If whilest they did eate, then also whilest they did sit. As these two are conioyned, Mark. 14.18. The phrase imports, that nothing intervened betwixt the eating and the celebration of the sacrament: it was ministred therefore unto them sitting. This is so evident that never man doubted of it till this last yeare. Even these who affirme but against the truth, that they stood at the first service, confesse that they sate at the second, and the celebration of the Sacrament. M. Iohn Mare in Math. 26. saith, gTametsi agnum typi…um dominus …tans comederit ritu legis, sedens samen communicavit.That Christ sate, and he brings in an old verse to this effect: Rex sedet in coena, turba cinctus duodena. Se tenet in manibus, se cibat ipse cibus. The Bishop of Chester hDesence pag. 248.confesseth, That it is true, Christ did administer the sacrament in a kinde of sitting gesture, and that in the same gesture the Apostles did receiue it.
That sitting was institute, I proue it by two reasones. First, the gesture that Christ retained in passing from the conclusion of the Paschall Supper, that he did institute: sitting he retained, therefore sitting he did institute. In the conclusion of the Paschall Supper some things were changed, other things were retained, a third sort were neither changed, nor retained as belonging to the institution, but onelyonly of occasionall necessitie which could not conveniently be changed, but were done necessarly: as for exemple, vnlevened bread because there was no other, the circumstance of the time, the parlour and such other circumstances belonging to the Passeouer, they were retained of necessitie, by reason of the present occasion of the Paschall Supper and could not conveniently hauehave bene changed. But as for the gesture of sitting, he might hauehave changed it, in standing, or kneeling without working any miracle, if it had not been his minde that we should receaue the sacrament of the Eucharisticall Supper, with the same gesture the Iewes receaued the Paschall Supper. The second reason, we are bound to imitate Christ, and the commendable example of his Apostles, in all things wherein it is not evident, that they had speciall reasones mouing them thereto which doe not concerne vsus. Yea it is grosse hypocrisie for us, to pretend more reuerence and deuotion in the act of receving, then the Apostles did when Christ was present, or the Apostolick Kirks did lately after the Institution. Wherefore doth the Apostle propone the custom of the first Kirks. 1. Cor. 11.16. 1. Cor. 14.33. 2. Tim. 3, 14. If they did not oblige us to imitation? When Christ was in the state of humillitie they sate: he was worshiped vponupon extraordinary occasiones. Math. 9.18. and 8.2, and 14.33. and 20.20. Ioh. 9.38. they were not now in any common action, or at an ordinary Supper, they had now reason to kneele if they should hauehave kneeled at all. After his resurrection, when he was in Emaus with some of the disciples, it is said Luk. 24, 30. that as he sat at meate with them, he tooke bread, blessed it, brake it, and gaue it unto them. This place is interpret of the Sacrament by Augustine, Paulinus, Esychius, Theophilactus, Beda, Euthimius, Hieronimus, all aledged by Bellarmin iDe Eucharist. l. 4. c. 24.and Gregorius de Valentia kDe legitimousu Eucharist. cap. 7.: they aledge also some of our owne writers to the same purpose but so it is, they were sitting when Christ gaue them the bread, whatsoeuer be the interpretation of the text, yee see they acknowledge sitting at table. Last of all, after his ascension and glorification in the heauens, the Apostlick Kirk sate at table. The manner of the partaking of the table of devils was by formall sitting at table in the house of the Idole:1. Cor. 8.10. Iohnathan the Chalde paraphrast Amos. 2.8. interpreteth the garments wheron the vsurer sate beside euerie Altar, to hauehave bene bedds prepared in the houses of their gods, to sit on when they feasted vponupon things sacrificed to Idols. The people of Israel sate down to eat and drink at the Idelatrous feast of the golden calfe. The Apostle compareth the partaking of the Lords table, and the table of deuils. 1. Cor. 10.21. Next, they sate at the louelove feasts: we can not thinke that they rose from the tables, either before or after the louelove feasts, to receaue the Sacrament seuerally out of Pauls hand. Bilson sayeth, they sate at table lObedience p. 460and to this purpose alledgeth Augustin: mEpist. 11…Non debent fratres mensis suis ista miscere sicut faciebant quos Apostolus arguit & emendat, we may se then Christ instituted it, the Apostlick Kirks followed it, no different respect of the state of Christs humility or glory brought in any other gesture.
It is objected that the sitting of Christ and his Apostles was not upright but sitting with leaning. If we imitate the example of Christ, we should sit after the same maner.
Answer. It was the custom receaued amongst the Iewes before and in the dayes of Christ, descending from the Romanes, or as others alledge from the Persians, Ester. 1. the table was situate in the midst of the hall or parlour, and the beddes about the table except the part that was free for the seruice of the table: They sat upon the beddes somewhat leaning toward the table and their feet lying out at the out-side of the bed…s. The beds of the rich and wealthy were so high, that it behoved them to ascend by steps. There was a space between the beds and the walles of the Hall or Parlour, that servants might hauehave roome to stand at the feet of the guests, and make service. They that stood behinde to serue, were sayd, stare à pedibus, to stand at their feet, as Petrus Ciacconius proveth out of Seneca and Suetonius. De TriclivioBy this discourse we may understand, first, that when Mary stood at Christs feet, Luk. 7.38. she lay not groueling at his feet,Discourse of kneeling. p. 1351 as the Bishop of Rochester perverteth the gesture. Next, that Christ and his Apostles used at supper the gesture used at ordinary suppers. If we sit therefore according to the received gesture of the Countrey wherein we are, we imitate aright, and it were Apith imitation to sit otherwise. It is indifferent whether we use white or red wine▪ we are no more bound to the wine of Iudea, then to the wine of France, at the ministration of the Supper: these are but nationall differences. Thirdly, there is so little difference betwixt the one fashion of sitting and the other, that both the words, diseumbers and sedere are translated indifferently, to sit, in the English translations. The delicate and sinfull woman, Ezek. 23. is sayd to sit in a glorious bed, and a table spread before her. Iosephus translateth the sitting of Ioseph… brethren by the word Kataclinein, signifying, halfe silling, balse leaning, howbeit upright sitting was the gesture used in Iosephs time, a man standing leaning, is sayd to stand as well as when he stands upright, siclyk sitting. Leaning is a position of the body common to sitting or standing. The Iewes themselues at this day sit upright at their Pas…hall supper.
There is a difference betwixt customs brought into the Kirk by invention of men, and the custome brought in by Christ, and entertained by his Apostles; as there is a difference betwixt the Lords day and the Holy dayes invented by men. It is safer for mans conscience to imitate Christ and his Apostles, then to depart from them, and imitate the custome of Kirkes, which may erre. Yea, Christs example seconded with the practise of the Apostles, is equivalent to a precept as I hauehave sayd. Yea this gesture may very well be comprehended under the expresse precept of Christ in the institution, Hoc facite, doe this: that is, hoc totum facite, doe all this. For wee must not thinke that nothing belongeth to the institution, but that which is mentioned in Pauls narration, 1. Cor. 11. for then a table should not belong to the institution: no doubt our Saviour instructed them how to discerne the Lords body, how to eate and drink, before he commanded them to eate and drinke. But the Evangelists, and Paul writes of the Sacrament as of a thing knowne to the Kirke by practise, presupposing a table, and the communicants convened and sitting at the table.
The second breach of the Institution made by kneeling in the act of receauing, is the taking away of the vse of a table. Christ and his Apostles sat at table. 1. Cor. 10. Luk. 22. wherfore serves the name of a table if we kepe not the proper use and imployment of it? The fathers call it the Lords table, the heavenly table, the sacred table, the mysticall table, the spirituall table, the Rationall table: whereto serue all these commendations, if in the mean time it be not used as a table, but rather as an altar? If it be not used as Christ and his Apostles vsed it, that is by sitting at it to receaue of the dainties set vponupon the table? The Sacrament is called a Supper and therfore a table is answerable to it. It is neuer termed a Sacrifice in the Scripture. We sit at tables, but not at altars: we eat and drink at tables, but not all altars. The ancients called this table an altar, but vnproperly & in respect of the cōmemoration of Christs sacrifice. This improper speach was dangerous, & hes proven hurtful to the Kirk transforming indeed a table into an Altar. If we reteine no more but the name of a table, the Papists can, and do… giuegive that name to the lidd of their Altar. The people of God had an altar for the sacrifice, and a table for a feast. Siclyk the Ethnicks. So Christians hauehave one altar for one sacrifice, to wit, Christ who is Preist, Altar, and Sacrifice Heb. 13.10. and a table for the feast after this sacrifice once made, to wit, the Sacrament of the Supper. As the Israelites and the Ethniks sate at the tables of their feasts made of things sacrificed, so do we at our sacred feasts, to distinguish betweene an Altar and a table, a sacrifice and a Supper made of the thing sacrificed. A dressour or Cupboord may serue as well for disposing of the elements, and reaching them to the communicants as a table. If a table should serue, to no other vse but to sett on these Elements, and reach them from the table; Christ and his Apostles vsed not the table after that maner. As it serued them to the Paschall Supper, so it serued to the Eucharisticall.
The third breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of that mysticall rite representing Christs passion, to wit, the breaking of the bread. The Apostle sayes not, The communion of one bread; but, The communion of one broken bread hath in it a mystery of our unity. When the bread is carved in little morsels before it be presented to the table, it is not the sacramentall and mysticall breaking in the use of the Sacrament which ought to bee performed after the thankesgiving according to Christs example. Augustine sayth: Cum illud quod est in Domini mensa benedicitur & sanctificatur, Epist. 59. ad Paulinum.& ad distribuendum comminuitur. When that which is blessed on the Lords table, sanctified, and broken in small peeces to be distributed, &c. This breaking was needfull both for mystery and distribution. The breaking of the bread was thought so needful in the Sacrament, that it was called, Breaking of Bread. The Syriack interpreter translateth the breaking of bread Eucharist, Act. 2.24. and 20.7. Pareus on 1. Cor. 11. proveth at length this rite not to be indifferent, but a thing commanded. Where kneeling is practised, we read not in their Service-bookes of this breaking of bread after thankesgiving: whereby the passion of Christ is not set forth to the communicants as it ought to be.
The fourth breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the change and restraint of the commandement given to many in the plurall number, Eate yee, drinke yee: to one in the singular number, Eate thou, dainke thou. Fenner in the doctrine of the sacraments, expresseth the pith of this phrase in a liuely maner. It is fittest (sayth he) to note out the fellowship and communion of the Church in this worke, the person of Christ by the Minister, bidding all his guests with one louelove as from him to bee mer…y, and eate with faith one spirituall meat together. Our faith is further succoured, when we may together, and with one heart, apply our selues to the meditation and fruit of this speech of Christ by the Minister, which in the particular speaking doth loose that our working together, and maketh the mindes of Christians hang the longer in the waiting for this sentence, and the comfort of it, and their minds are offered unto greater occasions of slips and with drawings, by humane infirmity, when these things are prolonged, which may more effectually be done together and speedily.
The fift breach of the institution made by kneeling, is, the altering of the enunciatiue words of Christ, This is my body which is broken for you: whereby he declares his comming in the flesh and suffering for sin, the maine ground of our redemption, and, changing them in a prayer to blesse our body and soule. The body of our Lord Iesus Christ which was given for thee, preserue thy body and soule unto everlasting life. The Papist in this poynt goeth neerer to the institution: for hee giveth not the Eucharist, except the host be first consecrated at some Masse, with these words, This is my body. This prayer inserted betwixt the thanksgiving and the distribution, and repeated to every communicant, is idle battalogie. The use of the prayer and thanksgiving for the use of the elements, indureth all the time of the action. Christs words in the institution containe partly a command, partly a promise, partly institution. Christs promise is contained in their definitiue words, This is my body that is given for you: This is my bloud which is shed for the remission of the sins of many. When the forme of the words is altered, the promise is obscured. It is not enough to rehearse the words of the institution in the prayer immediatly preceding the action, but in the action every rite and ceremony should hauehave the words of the institution concurring. Let the word be ioyned with the element, and so it shall be a sacrament, saith Augustine.
The sixt breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of the distribution that ought to be amongst the communicants. When Christ said, Take yee, eate yee, he insinuates that they should take and divide amongst themselues. The word Edoke… he gaue, doth not import that he gaue immediatly. The Disciples in setting the bread before the fiue thousand, Mark. 6.41. gaue the bread to the fiue thousand, Math. 14.19. the fiue thousand distributed among themselues. Cajetanus uppon Math. 26. acknowledgeth, that the Disciples were in so great distance from Christ, that their hands could not meet with his hands, Beza sayth,Epist. 2. that howbeit Christ had sitten in the midst, as Painters make him to sit, yet in respect of the manner of their sitting, it behoved either Christ to rise and come to them that were farre distant, or them to come to him, if he had given the elements to every one in their own hands. Tossaus sayth, that Christ gaue to the two neerest,In Mat. 26 and they reached to them who were further off. In the first booke of Discipline penned Anno. 1560. it is ordained that the Minister breake the bread, and distribute the same to those that be next him, commanding the rest every one with reverence and sobriety to break with other, because it is neerest to Christs action. Further, we hauehave a plain precept, Luk. 22.17. Divide it amongst you, speaking of the communion Cup, and not of the Paschall. The Evangelists make mention of foure things belonging to the communion cup. 1. Thankesgiving. 2. Distribution. 3. Assertion that it is his blood. 4. A protestation that he will not drink of the Vine untill the kingdom of God shall come: the assertion that it is his blood, is set down afterward by Luk. v. 20. the other 3 are set down in this 17. vers. It is therfore the same cup. Next, if it had not been the cōmunion cup, and consequently the last, the communion cup behoued to hauehave come after: but that cannot agree with the protestation: for how could Christ protest of the Paschal cup that he would drink no more of the fruit of the wine, If he drank after it of the Euangelicall cup. The paschal canon interdyted to eat or drinke after the cup of thanksgiuing or praise, the cup of praise in the end of the paschall Supper was changed as I hauehave said into the Eucharistical cup, & was all one with it: and the protestation of not drinking, more agreeth with the Canon made of the last Paschal cup all one with the Evangelical. This cup was caried about from hand to hand, and diuided amongst them by them selues. The two Evangelists doe not so much as mention the cup of the Passeouer and yet make mention of this protestation of not drinking more of the fruite of the Vine. The verses immediatly proceeding the protestation, make mention only of the cup of the Lords Supper. Math. 26.28. Mark. 14.24. Fulk saith, the demonstratiue pronomen (this) Math. 26.29. declareth, that be spake of the …ine in his hand that is of the communion cup. If there was two cups then either the words of the protestation were repeated, or set downe by Mathew and Mark out of the owne place, and wrongfully applyed, but none of these two is to be admitted. Thirdly Luke omitteth the mention of thanksgiving and the commandement to drink of this cup verse 20. howbeit both be expresly set downe by other Evangelists, and the analogy with the actiones concerning the bread requireth the same. Whairfore rhen did he omit them? even because speaking before of the same cup▪ verse. 17. he had made mention of these two points, he eschueth to repeat them as already mentioned. And wherefore made he mention of the cup verse. 17. even that the protestation of not drinking more verse. 17 mig…t be ioyned with the protestation of not eating more verse. 16. he maketh mention of the assertion of his blood verse 20. because it was not yet spoken of. The other 3. points are omitted as alreadie spoken of verse. 17. this inversion of order and making mention of the cup of the communion before the order of Institution, was observed long since be sLib. 3. de consensu Evang.Augustine and tin Mat. 26Euthymius, and is acknowledged not only by our own diuines, but also by Barradius, Ians…nius, and other learned papistes, Theobaldus Meushius uDesensio harmoniae generalis.obserueth a constant continuall inuersion of the order in this chapter of Luke. Operae pretium est in his advertere hysteron proteron Lucae contrarium. Augustine sayth, anti…ipavit ut so…t. There is a cleare instance verse. 21. after the words of the Institution it is said, Behold the hand of him that betrayeth me, is with me at the table. Now it is cleare, that Iudus went out immediatly after hee receaued the Soppe. Zacharias xHarmon. Evang. lib. 4 cap. 156.Chrisopolitanus obserued herein a recapitulation of some things pretermitted before. (Quod post calicem datum, traditorem commemorat pretermissa recapitulare videtur. Beza in his annotationes conjectureth, that the verses are transposed, and that the 19. and 20. verses should be subjoyned to the 16. and that the 17. verse should be subjoyned to the 19. and 20. Bilson yObedience pag. 495.and Iewel zOf privat Masse, division 8.against Harding and many other diuines, disputing against the priuate masse, exponeth the words Luk 22.17. diuide it amongst yo… ▪ of the cōmunion cup. That wch is spoken of the cup should be meant also of the bread, for as Christ said, Take yee, drink ye, so said he, Take ye, eate ye. Tindal aPag. 477in his tractate of restoring the L. Supper, requireth that eueryevery man break & reach forth to his neighbour. This distribution amongst the communicants was commanded, no doubt to nourish louelove, and to be a bond of vnion amongst the communicants and agreeth best with the nature of a feast, where signes and tokens of amitie are interchanged. Clemens Alexandrinus bStromat. lib. 1.sayth it was permitted to every one of the people, to take a part of the Eucharist. Etiam Eucharistiam cum quidam ut mos est diuiserint, permittitur uni…uique ex populo partem ejus sumere. When Tertullim sayeth, We receaue it of no other hands, but the hands of our presedents, or rulers, he meaneth not simply of pastores but of any governours Ecclesiasticall whatsoeuer. and suppose he meane only of pascores, yet he confesseth it to be tradition and no scripture, as Iunius hath observed vponupon that place. Howsoeuer this was the custome in Africa to receaue it out of the ministers hand, yet not so at Rome and every where: for Iustinus cApol. 2.telleth vsus how the Deacons gaue to eueryevery one of them that were present, part of the bread and likwise of the wine.
In the liturgie of S. Iames, it is said that the Deacons lift up the dishes and cuppes to impart to the people. It came to passe afterward that the Deacones dispensed not the bread, but the wine only, the ridiculous reasons whereof are set downe by Aquinas dPart. 3. quaestr 82. art. 3.this superstitious custome, of taking it out of the Ministers hand, did grow afterward to Superstitious receaving in at the mouth, and in some parts to the drawing of the wine out of the cupes with silver pipes, the minister ought not, howbeit he might commodiously, giuegive the elements out of his owne hand to every communicant, because it is against the institution and purpose of Christ, willing the communicants by this rite, to interteine communion amongst them selues. Whatsoever action or command is inclosed within the institution, may not lawfully be broken: but that the communicants should distribute amongst themselues, was both an action at the first supper, and a precept, as I hauehave proven. This precept and action by consequence dischargeth kneeling, because that gesture and this distribution is no wayes compatable.
Christs generall precept, doe this maketh the actiones of the first supper precepts. The particular precept divide it amonngst you leaveth no place to any tergiversation.
The seventh breach of the institution made by kneeling is, an unnecessary deviding of the communicants, making populous congregationes to receaue on many dayes whear they may receaue in one. Every particular congregation ought to be convened Epi to auto into one place, at one time to communicate togither as far as is posible. Although all the faithfull communicate with Christs body spiritually, yet they only communicat Sacramentally, who hauehave their communion sealed by the outward action of eating of one Sacramentall bread it being a commandement of the Apostle, that every one should tary one upon an other when they assemble them selues to celebrate the holy Supper, it followeth that they should receaue togither, Ambrose expounding these words, sayth, Expectandum dicit ut multorum oblatio simul celebretur et omnibus ministretur, they must tary that the oblation of many may be celebrate togither, and so be ministred to them all. Leo writing to Dios…orus, gaue him this advice, that where the Church was so litle, that it was not able to receaue all the people to communicate togither, the Preist should minister two or three communions in one day▪ Calixtus fDe consecrat. dist, 2. …eracta.ordained, that consecration ended, all communicate, that will not stand excommunicate, for so the Apostle determined, and the holy Romane Kirke observeth. See more of this purpose in Iewels sermon at Pauls Crosse.
The eight breach of the institution made by kneeling is, the altering of the purpose of the institution, or nature of this Sacrament. It was instituted to be a supper, a spirituall feast: it was the will of Christ therefore, that we should behaue our selves as ghuests invited to a banket. Ghuests invited to a banket, even to a Princes banket kneele not in the act of backeting. They are invited indeed to a spirituall refreshment, but the Sacramentall Supper should cary the resemblance of a supper, in the formes and fashions therof, or els it could not rightly be called a Supper; for it is not only the matter, that is, the dainties and foode, that maketh a banket, but also the ordering of the ghuests, and kindly interteinment of them. The Sacrament of the Passeover was also a holy Supper, and the people of God vsed it so: they kneeled not in the act of receaving of it. When they receaved the law of the Passeover, they bowed the heads and worshipped. Exod. 12.27. Yet did they not so in the eating of it. They were more reverent and devout, in hearing the law of it out of the mouth of Moses then in the participation of it.
Let no man object against us, the examples of some kirks, where some of the former breaches are made without kneeling: seeing kneeling hath made them all, and seeing we hauehave the institution, standing to us in force of a command, wherin nothing should be altered, in matter, forme, or order; nothing added; nothing diminished: for divine institutions admit, neither addition nor diminurion *saith Pareus in 1. Cor. 11.the Apostle alledgeth the institution against all abuses, that which I receaved of the Lord, that hauehave I delivered unto you, 1. Cor. 11.23. Doubtlesse (sayth Pareus) he receaved this history of the institution from the Lord, with other revelations, when he was ravished to the third heavens. It is not my invention. (would the Apostle say) but the Lords ordinance, concredit unto me to be kept as a iewell. It is not for nought, that the Evangelistes with one consent doe set downe the forme of this institution, and that the Apostle trieth all corruptions in the Supper by it, as by a rule. Ciprian saieth Epist, 3. lib. 3. we must follow the trueth of God, and not the custome of men. And in an other place he saieth when the channels ar corrupted we should run to the fountain. It is not so much our purpose to taxe others as to defend our selues
Kneeling considered, as it is a breach of the second commandement.
KNeeling in the act of receaving the Sacramental elements, is not only 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 Idolatry. Idolatry is committed in this act divers wayes. The Papists kneele in the act of receaving, because they beleue verely, that the bread is transubstantiat into Christs body, and upon this supposition of transubstantiation and bodily presence, they kneele. This is the grossest idolatry that ever was in the world. The Lutheran kneeleth upon his supposition of consubst…ntiation, and Christs reall presence by consubstantition: this also is idolarrie and the supposition false. A third sort kneele for reverence of the Elements, not giving to the Elements that high kind of worship called commonly cultus latriae, which the Papist giveth, but an inferior kinde of worship due (as they thinke) to consecrate creatures: this also is Idolatry.
Kneeling for reverence of the elements, is Idolatry, because it is a religious worship of a creature. It is not civill worship they giuegive in the act of receiuing the sacred Elements: the matter and motiue of their reverence is a matter of religion, to wit, because the elements are holy signes and seales: it is therefore religious worship. Religious worship is divine worship. All manner of worship pertaining to godlinesse and religion, is religious worship.gDefence of Perkins 2. part. pag. 1180. Divine or godly worship is all manner of worship pertaining to godlinesse and religion (saith Doctor Abbots.) Divine worship is proper to God: therefore religious worship, or worship of religion is peculiar to God alone. Augustine saith▪ Apostolus & creaturam laudat & eitamen cu…tam religionis exhibere vetat. hContra Faust. lib. 14 c. 11.The Apostle commendeth the creature, forbiddeth neverthelesse that worship of religion be yeelded to it. And again he saith,iContra 2. epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 4. Quis dicat non debere observare Christianos ut uni Deo religionis obsequium serviatur: Christians are to obserue that with the dutie of religion they serue God onelyonly. Peter and the Angell refused religious worship. If it may not be giuen to Angels and Saints, farre lesse may it be given to dead elements and sencelesse creatures. To kneele for reverence of the elements, and a religions estimation of them in the mind, is to determine adoration in the creature. Some honour r…doundeth to God, or Christ, but that convoy by redundance, is common to all respectiue, and dependant worships given to dead and sencelesse things: for Creatures without sence are not worshipped absolutely for holinesse, vertue, or any other excellencie inherent in themselues, but for their coniunction with, or representation of the persons represented, in whom the excellency is intrinsecally: and this the Papist will grant, not onelyonly of his Images, but of all sacred things also. They are worshipped onelyonly in respect of the person, yet notwithstanding of this dependant and respectiue worship, they affirme the sacred things are worshipped per se, howbeit, not propter se, by themselues, howbeit not for themselues; because by themselues they hauehave relation, or coniunction with or representation of the persons adored: that is, they hauehave in them a cause of adoration, howbeit a dependent cause. Swarez sayth, Honor illis exhilitus non in illis sistit, kIn Aquinatem. Tom. 1. Disput 51 sect. 3.sed in ipsas personas propter quas adorantur, redundat. That the honour determined in the Images or sacred things, redoundeth notwithstanding to the principall. He that honoureth a mans image, honoureth it for his sake whose image it is. This transient worship is convoyed to the principall, onelyonly mediatly: God will hauehave no mediate creature to go between him and his worship: he will not communicate a glance of this worship to any creature. Civill worship is convoyed mediatly to the person of the Prince, by bowing to sencelesse creatures, as to the chaire of Estate, the cloath of Estate, the Kings letter and seale, because the estate thinkes it expedient for Princely Maiesty that these things be reverenced, which serue in a speciall manner for the Princes use, as signes of his presence or pleasure. But the ceremonies of the Court, and mediate civill worships, are not rules of religious adoration. For as Augustine saith, Multa de cultu divino usurpata sunt, quae honoribus deferuntur humanis, Lib. de civ. Dei. lib, 10. cap. 4.sive humilitate nimi…, sive adulatione pestisera. That too great humility or pestiferous flatterie, may be the originall of many humane honors and courtesies. God hes inhibit mediate religious worships.
It may be objected, that holy things ought to be reverenced.
Answer. True, but not worshiped. Veneration is one thing, Adoration an other. Adoration belongeth to persones. Veneration to things perteining to persons, and is nothing els, but a religious respect, or reuerent estimation of things perteining to the vse of religion, a preservation of them that they be not lost; a decently vsage of them according to their kinde. This veneration or reverence, is a respectiue or relative reverence giuen them for Gods sake. Kneeling for reverence of sensles 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 soveran worship. Augustine, speaking of the brasen serpent, Sacred writings, and the bread in the Sacrament, sayeth. mDe trinit. lib. 3. c. 10.honorem tanquam religiosa habere possunt, stuporem tanquam missa non possunt. They may hauehave honor as maters religious, but wonder, as maters of me…vell they can not hauehave. When Ezra read the booke of the law Nehem. 8.3.4.5. the people stoode vp, but when he praised God they bowed themselues and worshiped the Lord with their faces toward the ground. Here ye see veneration and adoration. submissiom, and recognition of some other thing more excellent. The altar, the offerings, the Preists garment, were holy, yet the Iewes worshiped them not. The uncovering of the head, is a gesture of reverence, and yet the Gentiles had their heads covered when they worshiped their Gods, as Brissonius proveth. nFo…mulae lib. 1.Drusius proveth the like oPreterita. 1. Cor. 1.4of the Iewes, that they couered their head when they prayed to God. But kneeling was ever holden among all nations for a proper gesture of adoration. either ciuile or religious.
The Ministers of Lincolne in the third part of their defence laid to the charge of their Church representatiue, that kneeling is intended for reverence of the elements. I refer the reader to their proofes: for the present let it only be observed, upon what occasion kneeling was urged. In their first reformation it was left free. Gardiner, Boner, and other Papists sought to make the first booke of common prayer odious, amongst other things for want of reverence to the Sacrament. The Papists made insurrection, and challenged proudly in their Articles a reformation, for reverence of the Sacrament: and on the other side, some, inconsideratly fixed railing libels at Pauls-cross, and other places, terming the Sacrament lack of the box, the Sacrament of the Halter, round Roben &c. These proceedings moved Rid…y in his preachings at Pauls-Crosse to proceede so far, that the cheefest papists seemed to desire no more, but that his practise might be answerable to his doctrine. This stirre made also Cranmer, and Ridly, at the second revewing of the booke of common prayer, to inioyn kneeling, with this reason; that the Sacrament might not be prophaned, but holden in a holy and reverent estimation. They feared to offend superstitious people in a time of strong opposition, untill they were better taught, neither was their judgement cleare in this cause: for they thought it not idolatry to worship the consecrate elements, with an inferiour kinde of worship, and for the relation they hauehave to the thing signified, providing they yeeld not unto them soverain or godly worship, as they called it. They were but newly come forth out of the darke denne of popery, and could not see all things in the first dawning of the day.
In the late act, we are ordeined, to kneele for reverence of the divine misteries. I see not wherein this differeth from the Bishop of Rochesters argument. pDiscourse of kneeling pag. 124.that great and reverent dreedfull misteries, must be receaved with greate and dreedfull humilitie of soul, and humiliation of body: therfore in the act of receauing we must kneel. If this argument were good, then the Sacraments and sacrifices of the old law should hauehave been thus worshipped: And if we will measure by the sight, the sacraments and sacrifices of the old Law were more dreadfull then the sacraments of the new. For the slaughter of beasts, and Sheding of blood, was more dreedfull, then the pouring out of wine. The auncients held the sight of this Sacrament, not only from pagans, but also from the Catachumenists, they preached darkly, they wrote darkly, to the same end. This doing was not commendable, it made the mysterie of this Sacrament both dark and dreadfull. Augustine hes already said, they may be honored as matters religious but wondred al as matters of marvel they can not. But to returne to the purpose, to kneel for reverence of the mysteries is nothing els but to worship the mysteries.
Wheresoeuer the publick intent of a Kirk is to worship the Sacrament, every privat man following that intent, is formally an Idolater. If his priuat intent be divers from the publik, yet he is still materially, & Interpretatiuè an Idolator. If a man receiue the Eucharist in the papisticall Kirk on his knees, howbeit he kneel not vponupon the supposed conceit of transubstantiatiō, but his own privat intent, he is materially guilty of their grosse Idolatrie. Ismenias stouping down before the King of Persia to take up a ring, which he let purposly fall, was not excused▪ because this stouping in common vse, was the adoring of the King of Persia.
Kneeling directed to the bread and wine in the hands of the Minister, is idolatrie, howbeit the inward motion of the minde and affection of the hart be directed only to God, or his Son Christ, as the only object of adoration. This immediate convoy of worship to the principall obiect, is nothing else but that finer sort of Idolatry and relatiue worship, which Durandus, Holcot, Mirandula, Alphonsus, Petrus Cluniacensis, and others, giuegive to their images. They say Images are not otherwise adored, then that before them and about them, are exhibite the externall signes of honor: the inward affection is directed onelyonly to the principall object: as the services done at a funerall show, to one emptie coffine, as if the corps were present. See Bellarmine qDe iimaginibus cap. 20and Swarez rin Aquin. Tom. 1. disp. 54. sect. 3.when it is said therfore to varnish this second intent that the elements are not Objectum quod, the thing it self that is worshiped, nor objectum in quo, or, per quod, in the which, or by the which, but objectum a quo significativè the obiect or signe moving vsus vponupon the sight thereof, to lift vp our hearts to the spirituall object of faith. This kinde of relatiue worship will not be found different from the relatiue worship of Durandus and the rest: For Bellarmine and Swarez draw Durandus and the rest from In illa, et per illam Imaginem, in and by the image, to Circum and coram, about, or before the Image. Swarez sayth sibid. disput. 53. sect. disp. 54. sect. 4that the image is neither the formall, nor the material, the total, nor the partial object of adoration in their opinion; but that only at the presence of the images the principal called to remembrance by the image is adored, that the image is an occasion, amids, a signe stirring up a man to adore the principall. Their adoration then was also abstract from the object, as they pretend theirs to be. The bread and wine or any other creature whatsoeuer, differeth not in this present case, for howsoeuer they were ordained of God to be signes and seals of his graces, yet they are not in statu accommodato ad adorandum; they hauehave no such state in the seruice of God, as that by them, or before them God or his sonne Christ should be adored. Next If this kinde of relatiue worship were to be allowed, then all the holy signes both in the old and New Testament should hauehave serued to the same vse. Then they who are far distant from the table should kneel, for the Elements are to them, objectum a quo significatiuè. Then at the sight of the sunne or any bewtifull creature, we should kneel seeing they put vsus in minde of Gods incomprehensible bewtie. And seeing many of them doe allow the historicall use of images, we may fall down before the Crucifix, providing the action of the minde be abstracted from the image. Thirdly all the parts of Gods worship ought to be direct, and not oblique. Perkins tIdolatry. p. 677.678sayth, it is idolatrie to turne, dispose, or direct the worship of God, or any part thereof to any particular place or creature, without the appointment of God, and more specially, to direct our adoration to the bread or the place where the bread is, what is it lesse then Idolatrie.
Kneeling before the elements referred directly to Christ. is, either a gesture signifying the humble submission of the mind in generall, whereby we make obeysance, as if he were bodily present: or else it signifieth more particularly our humiliation In prayer: this is but a speciall, the former was a generall; The like reasons serue against both. It is trew we can not kneell to God in prayer, but there are many things before us, a Kirk, a house, a wall, a tree, a starre, &c. But we set them not before us purposly; we are by no direction tyed unto them, they stand only before us by casuall position, neither can we chuse otherwise to doe. It is true, likewise, that God directed his people under the Law to bend and bow themselues toward the Ark, and the Temple wherein the Ark was, and the Mountaine whereon the Temple was situate: partly least that rude people should turne their worship another way; partly because of his promise to heare them when they shold pray toward the Temple, or the Ark; partly because of his singular maner of presence in the Ark: he was said to dwell between the Cherubines, the Ark is called his foot-stoole? and sometime the face of God; the glory of the Lord. It is reason, where God is present after an extraordinary maner, as when he spake out of the bush, and the cloud, that odoration be directed to the place of his extraordinary presence. The Altars; the offerings and other holy things wanted the like presence, and the like promise. The Ark and the Cherubines upon the Ark, were not seene: and therefore could not be readily abused to idolatry.
The Sacramentall elements hauehave neither the like presence, the like promise, nor the like commandement. Worship is tyed no longer to any certaine thing or place on earth. Ioh. 4.21.22. Adoration is tyed in the new Testament to the manhood of Christ, the true Ark and propitiatory: and is caried to that place, in which we certainly know the said manhood to exist substantially sayeth Perkins, uIdolatry pag. 677.678.700 701.and therefore it is, that wee lift up our eyes to the heavenes, where he is, and direct our very externall worship unto him.
It is objected, and said, that wee may pray in the act of receaving; therefore wee may kneele in the act of receaving. Answer. This objection insinuates that kneeling is the proper and onelyonly commendable gesture of prayer, and therefore the Bishop of Rochester exponeth the standing of the publican Luk. 18.11.13. to hauehave been kneeling, because (sayeth he) the Iewish custome was to pray kneeling. But if he had remembred the Lords owne saying Ierem. 15. though Moses and Samuell stood before me &c. he might hauehave understood that they prayed standing as wel as kneeling. Drusius observeth, xIn Mat▪ 6.that of old they prayed standing, that therfore prayers were called stations, or standings. And Rabbi Iuda had a saying, that the world could not subsist without statiōs or standings ySine stat…nibus non subsisteret mundus.And where it is said, Abram stood before the lord: Manabem, an Hebrew Rabine expoundeth it, he prayed before the Lord. Next the prayer meant of, is either some publicke prayer uttered by the Minister, or the mentall prayer of the communicant. As for the prayer of the Minister in the act of distribution, it is flat against the institution, as I hauehave already sayd. The Minister is ordained by the institution to act the person of Christ, and pronounce the words of promise. This is my body: as if Christ himselfe were pronouncing these words, and not change the promise into a prayer. Fenner in his principles of Religion zPag. 95.layeth this down as a ground, That in the second commandement we are forbidden the practise and use of any other rite, or outward meanes used in the worship or service of God, then he hath ordained, Ioh. 4.22. 2 King. 18.4. and that by the contrary we are commanded to practise all those parts of his worship, which he in his word hath commanded, and to acknowledge onelyonly the proper use of every rite and outward meanes which the Lord hath ordained. Deut. 12.32. 2. King. 17.26. Further, we are forbidden by the second commandement to pray by direction before any creature, This publicke prayer is but a pretended cause of kneeling, as the Ministers of Lincolne make manifest in their abridgement: for no Canon of our neighbour Kirke hath directed any part of this kneeling in the act of receiving, to be assigned to the said prayer. In populous congregations, where there is but one Minister, the communicants sit a quarter of an houre before the Minister repaire to them with the sacrament. And last, the prayer is ended before the delivery of the elements. As for our Kirk, no such prayer is ordained to be uttered by the Minister; therefore no such prayer can be pretended. In the late Canon it is sayd, That the most reverent and humble gesture of the body in our meditation and lifting up of our hearts, best becommeth so divine an action. Meditation is not prayer, and the heart may be lifted up by the act of faith and contemplation, as well as by the action of prayer; so that neither publick nor mentall prayer is expressed in our act. But let the words be interpreted of mentall prayer, even mentall prayer is not the principall exercise of the soule in the act of receiving the sacramentall elements: the minde attending on the audible words, the visible elements, the mysticall actions, and making present use of them, men should not be diverted from their principall worke and meditation, upon the Analogie betwixt the signes and things signified. The soule may send up in the meane time some short ejaculations and darts of prayer to heaven to strengthen her owne weaknesse, and returne to her principall worke of meditation and application of the benefites represented. These short ejaculations of the minde are onelyonly occasionall, as a Christian feeleth his owne present estate, and are incident to all our actions both civill and religious: In the act of receiving our earthly food, in going out the way, in hearing the word. If a man be moved inwardly, when he heareth, that the word was made flesh, shall he kneele as they do in the Romane Kirke? If a man should kneele at every inward motion of the minde, when he heareth the word, what confusion would there be in the congregation? A man looking occasionally to a crucifix, may remember Christ, and send up some ejaculations, shall he therefore kneele? The three children prayed mentally no doubt when they were brought before the golden Image, but lawfully they might not kneele before it. Perkins destinguisheth notably betwixt publick, private, and secret worship: aIdolatry pag. 70….the secret and mentall worship must be yeelded to God, and the signes thereof concealed from the eyes and hearing of men, as Nehemiah when he prayed in presence of the King, Nehem. 2.4. In a word, the Institution, and the second commandement hinder kneeling at this time, suppose mentall prayer were the principall exercise of the soule. I heare there is alledged a third sort of prayer, to wit, that the very act of receiving is of it selfe a reall prayer. Is not this as much as to say, that craving and receiving is all one? Bellarmine bDe Missa▪ l. 2. c. 4.sayth, That prayer of i… selfe, and of the own proper office, doth impetrate, and that a sacrifice hath the force and power of obtaining, or impetrating: because it is, Quaedam oratio realis, non verbalis, a certaine reall prayer, not a verball. We 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 never so absurd as to call the act of receiving from God, a reall prayer to God.
Their other obiection that we may praise God in the act of receiving; therefore we may kneele, may be answered after the same manner. There is no publicke thankesgiving ordained to be made at the delivery 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 be applied to the short e…aculations of the other. The name of Eucharist given to this Sacrament, helpeth them nothing: for it is a name given by Ancients, and not by the Scripture. Next, as it is called Eucharistia, so it is called cCyril. ep… 10. con. Nestor. in cō …cil. Ephesin…Eulogia: for the words, he gaue thankes, and he blessed, are indifferently used by the Evangelists. Some parts of this holy celebration stand in thankesgiuing, as the beginning and the end: and therefore is the whole action denominated from a part, saith dExercit. pag. 517.Causaubon. Eulogia & Eucharistia utra que vox à parte una totum Domini actionem designat. It followeth not that all the parts of this holy ministration are actions of thankesgiving.
Obiect. What we may craue of God upon our knees, we may receiue on our knees.
Ans. It is false, I may on my knees, GiueGive us this day our daily bread; but I may not receiue it on my knees. The people of Israel prayed for food, yet they were not esteemed unthankfull, for not kneeling when they received the Manna.
It is again objected, that in the act of receauing, we receaue from Christ an inestimable benefit, ought not a subject kneele when he receiveth a benefit from a Prince to testifie his thankfulnes? Answer, this relation from Christ to the Sacrament, as betweene the giver and the gift is common to all the Sacraments both of the old, and new law, ordinary, and extraordinary. Next we receaue the mysticall pledges, not out of the hands of God himselfe or his Son Christ immediatly, but out of the hand of the Minister. The person who receaveth the gift from the King, is supposed to receaue it immediatly: and suppose mediatly, yet ceremonies of Court, & mediate ciuil worships, are not rules of religious adoration; which should ever be immediate. Thirdly the manner of delivery of the gift and the will of the giuer, are to be considered. If the Prince call his Nobles to a banket, it is his will that they sit at table with him, as Iohanathan and Dauid sat at King Sauls table. Christ hes declared by the Institution, after what maner he wold hauehave vsus receaue these mysticall pledges. Kneeling cannot agree with the actions and precepts of the Institution.
The second breach of the second commandement made by kneeling, is, the shew of conformity with the papists. The Lord forbade his people to be like the Gentiles, Leuitie. 18.3. and 19.27 & Deut: 12. the christians were forbidden to decore their houses with bay leaves, and greene boughes, because the paganes vsed so to doe, or to rest from their labours, those dayes that the Paganes did. If conformity in things not haueing state in Idolatrous seruice, but onelyonly glanceing at the honor of the Idoll, be condemned; far more is conformity in the grossest act, wherin the life and soul as it were of their Idolatrie standeth, Such as is the gesture of kneeling among the papists. And for this cause Hooper eOn Ionas …n. 6.in his sermon before King Edward, for the same cause condemned this gesture. This outward conformity tickleth the papist, and offendeth the godly.
The third breach of the second commandement made by kneeling is, the reteining of a monument of vile idolatrie. All humane inuentiones polluted with idolatrie, except they be of necessarie vse, ought to be remoued from Gods seruice. This gesture had a spot of profanation from the beginning, being at the first birth in this act dedicat to Idolatrie. The brasen serpent set up at Gods own command, was not spared when it was abused. We detest the very garment of a theese, or a whore, though it be innocent. Biza fEpist. 8.sayeth, many things may be tollerate for the weake, which may not be restored after they are tane away. He commendeth them, who hauehave abolished kneeling amongst other things tanquam apertas Idolomanias.
The fourth breach of the 2d comandement made by kneeling, is, the continuall occasion and danger of idolatry. Wee are forbiden all occasions and provocations of idolatry. There is a naturall pronnesse in all men to idolatry; great ignorance in the common people, and Superstition rooted in the hearts of men: Papistes daily increase, the idol of the bready God is still in great accompt in the Romane Kirks round about us, and in private corners amongst us: and yet men are not ashamed to say, that all memory of former superstition is past, and no perill is to be feared againe. The virgines in Cyprians time granted they walked with yong men, talked with them, went to bed with them, but when it came to the act they absteined. Cyprian gLib. 1. ep. 11.answereth, Nou est locus dandus diabolo: nemo diu tutus periculo proximus. i. Place should not be given to the devill, no man is long safe who is neare the point of danger. The Belgick Kirks in their Synods permitted not liberty of kneeling, for the same respect of bread-worship as may be seene in, the harmony of their Synods, set forth of late by Festus Homius hCap. 13., Liberum est stando, sedendo, vel eundo caenam celebrare non autem geniculando ob artolatreias periculum. If a lawfull use could be devised yet this danger cannot be eschued. Information by preaching is a sufficient remedy: meate doth not nourish so fast as poyson doeth corrupt. The watchmen are some time ignorant, or negligent, many want doctrine. It is better to fill up the pitt, then to set one beside it to warne the passengers that they fall not in, such ceremones ought to be appointed, which by their goodnes and edification may help the preaching of the word, and not such as the word must daily hauehave need to correct. The strength of many poore Christian soules should not be tryed by bringing them to the very brink of danger.
The fift breach of the second commandement made by kneeling, is, a shew of wisdome in wil-worshipe and humility, Coloss. 2.23. a worship is set up by mans voluntary devotion in a principall part of Gods service, under colour of humility. We ought to come indeed, and receaue with humility these misticall pledges: but is there no reverence and humility, but in kneeling? Swarez iTom. 1. Disp. 51. sect. 1.sayth that humility and adoration are distinguished, in their proper motiues and respects, in propriis honestatibus et motivis. It was not manerly for the disciples to use any gesture they pleased at Christs table. It was his honor to command, and their humility to obey. Sitting was not pomp, glorious pride, or prophane gesture, as men are not ashamed so to call it; because it was obedience to the Lord. This their pretended humility, is a naturall humility; like unto Peters, when he refused that Christ should wash his feet. Obedience is better then sacrifice. Fenner in the doctrine of the Sacraments.kPag. 130 hath a notable saying, [that the whole honor of the Sacraments is, that they remaine unto the Church of God in that simplicity he left them; and that no action here is worth any thing, but by reason of Gods word, which is sanctified to a profitable use, and made an instrument of the working of the holy Ghost.]
Object. There is no new worship appointed, but an action already appointed for Gods service is applyed to the said Supper. Answ. The parts of Gods worship may not be applyed to other when comlines, commodiousnes, institution, and command will not suffer. A man may not kneele all the time of the Sermon; he may not reade in the act of receaving; baptisme may not be ministred in the midst of the communion, and many such instances might be alledged. Aquinas sayth, l2.2. quest. 81. ad 5.Superstuum in his quae ad divinum cultum pertinent esse potest no secundum substantiam quanti, sed secundum alias circumstantias, puta quia cultus divinus exhibetur cui non debet exhiberi vel quādo non debet vel secū dum alias circumstantias prout non debet. That superfluity in things pertaining to the worship of God, is to be considered, not according to the quantity, for we cannot worship God exceedingly enough: but is to bee considered according to other circumstances, viz. when the worship of God is not exhibited to whom it ought to be exhibited, or when it ought not, according to other circumstances, as it ought not to be exhibited. By superfluity he meaneth excesse, a vice in all morall vertues. To bee short, a rite Sacramentall, devised by man, pretending humility, and shouldring out other rites instituted by God, cannot be but presumptuous wil-worship. Such is the gesture of kneeling, as we hauehave already proued.
Obiect. The Eucharist is a part of Gods worship, therefore we ought to kneele in the act of receiuing.
Answ. In a large sence every act whereby God is honoured may be called the worship of God, as oathes, vowes, sacrifices, &c. But adoration is the worship of God in a strict sense. Kneeling is the gesture of adoration, but not of every part of Gods worship. Receiving, eating, drinking in the sacrament, are parts of Gods worship, but they are not gestures of adoration. All the Sacraments both of Iewes and Christians, were parts of Gods worship as well as the Eucharist, and yet they kneeled not in the act of participation.
Obiect. The Eucharist is a sacrifice, and congeries sacrificiorum, a heape of sacrifices, a commemoratiue sacrifice, a sacrifice of a broken and contrite hart, of praise, of praier, of almes, therefore this Sacrament should be receaved with kneeling, sayeth the B. of Rochester mDiscours. p. 84.: and therfore the gesture of kneling is rightly applyed to such a kinde of worship.
Answer. The actions aforesaid are called sacrifices, onelyonly by analogie and metaphoricallie▪ they are not proper sacrifices: the invisible Sacrifice by the which a man offereth himselfe by contrition, inward devotion, mortification is the daily Sacrifice of a christian. Rom. 13.1. we offer our selfes to be sacrificed when the word is preached. Rom. 15. we kneele not when we giuegive almes. These improper and metaphorical sacrifices, are not acts of adoration. nSwarez. tom. 1. disput. 51. sect, 2. Est autem ridiculum dicere Elecmosynam esse actū adorationis.The paschall lambe was slaine in the maner of a reall sacrifice, and yet notwithstanding of this immolation, they kneeled not at the eating of the paschall lamb. The Sacraments of the old and new Testament were alyke in representation, significatition, and exhibition. Of prayer and praise we spake before in particular.
Kneeling not practised in the auncient Kirk.
THE former two breaches are sufficient of them selves, howbeit kneeling were otherwaies warranted by the practise of the Kirk: but as it had no warrant from Scripture, & reason, so likewise it wanteth the warrant of antiquity. When the Arrians denyed Christs true divinitie, the orthodoxe Kirk acknowledging his diuinity, kneeled not in the act of receiuing which was expedient if it had been lawfull: because the Arrians debased the Sonne of God. It was the custome of the kirk to stand in time of publick prayer vponupon all the Lords dayes in the yeare, and eueryevery day from Easter to Pentecost, as witnesseth Tertullian, Cyprian, Basilius, Ierome, Augustine, Hugo de sancto Victore, Anselmus, the Council of Nice, the 6. Council of Carthage, The Council of Constantinople, Quinisextum, the Council of Turone. The testimonies are set down in the B. of Rochester his discourse. Bellarmin closeth all vp in one generall, to wit, that in his time fiue hundreth years were not past, since the rite to pray standing & not kneeling on the Lords day had ceased. oDe cultis sanctor. c. 11If they kneeled not in the time of praier where this gesture is most requisit by their own confession, because of the joyfull memory of Christs resurrection, far lesse did they kneel in the act of banketting and receiving the inestimable giftes offered vntounto vsus in this sacrament, a matter of great joy. Wherefore serued the signification of standing in prayer, if it was controlled with the gesture of an humble penitentiary at the sacrament? The testimonie alledged by the B. of Rochester pPag. 177out of Tertullian, that they that were to be baptized, must pray with often prayers, and fastings, and kneelings, and watchings, proveth neither kneeling on the Lords day in tyme of prayer, or the act of baptisme, but only declareth what were the exercises of preparation on the dayes preceding baptism. In the assembly holden last at S. Andros, stā ding or kneling in time of publik prayer was left to eueryevery mans liberty. In the Assembly holden at Perth, they hauehave tane away this liberty in the act of receiving. They left liberty in the act of publick humiliation, and hes tane it away in the act of mentall meditation. Let any man therfore judge of their intention. The authors aboue rehearsed make not all mention of prayer, when they speak of standing: but generally they speak against kneeling on the Lords day. Tertullian qDe Coron. milit.sayth generally de geniculis adorare, to adore vponupon the knees upon the Lords day is vnlawful. He sayth not orare, but adorare. Hierom rContra Luciferanos.his testimony also is general against adoration on the knees. Pope Alex. the 3. hath their words. Quoniā diebus autē dominicis & alijs praecipuis sestivitatibus suis inter pascha & Pentecosten genuum flexio nequaquam debet fieri: sDecretal. lib. 2. tit. 9. de ferijs cap.nisi aliquis ex deuotione id velit facere in secreto. In consecrationibus autē Episcoporum & Clericorū ordinationibus consecrans & consecratus tantum genua flectere possunt secundum quod consecrationis modus requrit. VponUpon the Lords day and other cheese festivities, and betwen Ester and Pentecost there ought to be no kneeling, except one will doe it in secret of devotion. In the consecration of Bishops and ordination of clergie-men he that consecrateth and he thet is consecrated, may only bow their knees, so far as the forme of consecration requireth. If this was the only exception, it followeth that in no other case, they did kneel on these dayes. Exceptio firmat regulam in casibus non exceptis. They received the communion usually vponupon the Lords day: and therefore it was called the day of bread tChrysost. hom. 5. de resurrectione.. Yea and in some places only vponupon the Lords day, as Iewel observeth vArtic. 1. Divis. 25.out of an Epistle sent from the councell of Alexandria in the defence of one Macarius. Tertullian expresly affirmeth, that the maner was to stand at the receaving xDe orat.. Dionysius Alexandrinus writeth to Xistus concerning one who standing at the table had often receaved the holy food in these words. Nonne solennior erit statio tua si ad aram Dei steteris accepto corpore Domini. yEuseb. lib. 7. cap 8.Chrisostome zHomil. in Encenijs.sayth, Stemus trementes & timidi demissis oculis renata autem anima gementes siue jubilantes corde. Let vsus stand trembling, &c. The Alyssines receiue the sacrament standing euen to this day, as also the Muscouites, howbeit drowned otherwise in great superstition, receiue the Sacrament standing.
Oject. the Ethincks objected to Christians that they did honor Bacchus and Ceres; and Averroes, that they adored that which they did eate. Theodoret saith aDialog. 2.the misticall signes are adored. Augustine bin psal. 98no man eateth that flesh before he adore it. Ambrose cLib. 3. cap. 12. de spirit. sanct.we adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries Chrysostome sayth, dHomil. 24 in 1. Cor.let us imitate the Barbarians, thou beholdst him not in a manger, but on an Altar. And again, eHomil. 7. in Mattheumthey are like Herod, who adore not the Eucharist.
Answ. It followeth not they adored, therefore they kneeled. The Ethnicks did mistake the reuerend and graue behauiour of Christians at the receauing the Sacrament, as they did many other things both in Iewes and Christians: they gaue out that they were worshippers of the clouds, of the Sonne of the crosse, of the head of an Asse, of the slaughter of infants. Augustine sayeth. A Cerere & Libero paganorum dijs longè absumus quamvis panis & calicis sacramentum nostro ritu amplectimur. fContra Faustum.We are far from Ceres & Bacchus the Gods of the Pagans, howbeit we imbrace the Sacrament of the bread & the cup after our rite. When Theodoret sayth the mystical signes are adored,gObedience- p. 534.557. he meaneth by adoration, reuerend and religious handling, as becometh so great mysteries: and so Bilson: exponeth Theodoret, and to this purpose alledgeth the glosse of the Canon Law, hDe consecrat. dist. 3. venerabilis.In hoc sensu possumus quamlibet rem sacram adorare, id est reverentiam exhibere. Anastasius sayth,iDe consecrat. dist. 1. Apostolica. Dominica verba attentè audiant, & fideliter adorent. Let them diligently heare, & faithfully adore the word of God. The word adoration is sometime taken in a large sence for veneration; so do all our Divines expone Theodoret, or else his phrase were absurd: and indeed none of the Fathers used that phrase but he. Chrysostomes Homilies on Mathew are a supposititious worke. The rest of the testimonies alledged make mention of adoration, not of the Sacrament, but of Christ in the Sacrament: and they are to be understood of spirituall and internall adoration, common to this sacrament with other sacraments. Augustine sayth, The flesh of Christ is adored either in the sacrifice, or otherwise by faith kFulk. 1. cor. 11. sect. 18.. The adoration is as the eating, the eating is spirituall and by faith. Augustine speaking of the veneration of this sacrament, sayth, lEpist. 118.Contemptum solum non vult cibus ille. That meat misliketh onelyonly contempt, as Manna did lothsomnesse. Ambrose speaketh of all the mysteries of Christian mFulk. 1. cor. 11. sect. 18.Religion. Chrysostom is to be understood of spirituall reverence nFulk ibid.: and therefore he useth emphaticall speeches of ascending up to the gates of heaven, even of the heaven of heavens, like Eagles. For the same Chrysostome sayth, oHom. 14. in Marcum.that we adore Christ in Baptisme. None of all the testimonies alledged expresseth any gesture of the body, let be kneeling.
Obiect. For an humble gesture are alledged Origen pHomil. 15 in divers. locos.: Thou therefore humbling thy selfe, imitate the Centurion, and say, Lord I am not worthy, &c. Cyrillus of Ierusalem qIn cateches. mystugogic., Then after the communion of the body of Christ, come also to the cup of his bloud, not reaching out thy hands, but falling on thy face in manner of adoration and worship, say Amen. Nazianzen rin Epitaph. Gorgonia.sayth, his sister fell down before the Altar, and called on him who was worshipped on the Altar.
Answ. Origen directs the words to be sayd as well when the preacher entreth into our house, as when we receiue the sacrament. sBilson, Obedience. p. 540.Further, Possevinus a learned Papist, acknowledgeth that worke to be counterfeit tRiveti specimen critici sacri. lib. 2. cap 13.. The Catechismes attributed to Cyrill of Ierusalem is a booke newly sprung up, and unknown to the Ancients. It was not to be found in Hardings time, but in writing. See Moulins translated vPart 2. pag 65.. This counterfeit Cyril sayth not, Cade pronus, fall down on thy face; but, accede pronus, come inclining, or bowing thy body; as men use to doe when they make courtesie. Nazianzens sister was sick in body, and sicke in minde: her fact was private, and in the darke of the night, she was not in the act of receiving the sacrament, she blubbered with her teares the fragments of the sacrament received before. Christ is honoured at the Altar, or communion-table, by the administration of the sacrament celebrated to his honour and worship, in remembrance of him: his mercies are there layd foorth in the mysteries. Yee see no testimony can be alledged for geniculation. The Councell of Constantinople holden under the Emperour Basilius, hath these words: Iesus Christus panis substantiam mandavit apponi, ne scilicet humana effigie figurata idolatria introduceretur. For eschewing of Idolatry, the Lord commanded the substance of bread to be set on without any humane shape. The proofes already made for standing upon the Lords day, for 1000. yeare in the Kirk, do evince that geniculation had no place in the act of receiuing all that time. It was therefore followed upon bodily presence and transubstantiation.
Kneeling not practised in the reformed Churches.
THE Lutheran Kirkes do acknowledge reall presence by way of consubstantiation: it is no wonder therefore that they approue kneeling. The reformed Kirks as they hauehave damned bodily presence, so hauehave they reiected this gesture of kneeling in the act of receiving. The Kirk of Bohemia hath retained this gesture since the dayes of Iohn Husse. In their confession exhibited to King Ferdinand, An. 1535 it is thus sayd, yCap. 15.Ministeri verò Dominicae caenae verba referentes plebem ipsam ad hanc fidem hortantur, ut corporis Christi presentiam adesse credant. The Ministers are willed to stir up the people to beleeue that the body of Christ is present: the poorer sort amongst them, as they hauehave rejected the errour of reall presence, so depart they from this gesture. In our neighbour Kirk some of their defenders of kneeling will not hauehave us inquisitiue of the manner of Christs presence in the sacrament. zHooker Eccles. polic. lib. 5. sect. 67.And the Bishop of Rochester commendeth the simplicity of the Ancients, which disputed not whether Christ was present Con, sub, in, or trans, in this Supper. aDiscours. pag. 35.Sutton in his Appendix to his Meditations on the Lords Supper, condemneth likewise this diligent search of the manner of Christs presence. If the manner 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 Kirk and some reformed Kirks hauehave 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 wee accommodate our selues to a table to participate of the dainties set thereon, standing was never abused to idolatry as kneeling hath been. We are not bound to imitate other kirks further then they imitate Christ. Our sitting is not Scotish Genevating, but a commendable imitation of the Apostolicall Churches, and obedience to Christs institution.
They flee up at last to the Kirk triumphant; and alledge for kneeling the 24. Elders falling down before the Lambe, but how conclude they this, that they that are called to the Supper of the lambe kneele at the Supper of the lambe? 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 heaven? all creatures in heaven, in earth, and under the earth; are said to bow their knee at the name of Iesus, that is, to acknowledge his soverain authority, howbeit the celestiall Angels, blessed soules, and infernall spirits, hauehave not knees to bow with. The everlasting felicity of the children of God, is the Supper of glory▪ doe they drink continually of that felicity upon their knees? thowsand thowsands stand before him, many shall come from the East, and from the West, and sit at the heavenly table with Abraham, Isaak, and Iacob: may we not then conclude sitting and standing, as well as they doe kneeling, if we looke to the letter of parables, visions, allegories and prophesies? But Symbolicall Theologie is not argumentatiue. Last, how will they proue evidently that the falling of the 24. Elders before the lambe, is to be interpreted of the Kirk triumphant, rather then of the Kirke Militant?