A Solution of Doctor Resolutus Resolutions for Kneeling, Chapter 3
CHAP. III. Kneeling agreeth not best vvith pietie.
THe Doctor will now prove kneeling to agree best with pietie. But if it agree not best with the decencie of a table, but overthroweth the right use of it how shall it agree best with pietie. That gesture agreeth best with pietie, that agreeth best with the order and rules of the institution. For he cannot be devout sayth Ambrose cIn 1 Cor. 11.who presumeth to do otherwaise, then the author hath set down.
The consideration of the giver the gift, the manner of donation, section 1.2.3.4. and receiving is not plainly set down by the doctor. The name of gift is ambiguous, as may be seen in Casaubonus. dDe Eucharist pag. 575.576.For the Fathers sometime called the inward grace of the Sacrament the gift, and sometimes the symbolicall part, and sometimes they called it the gift, & somtimes giftes. If we were to receive a gift, if it were both a morsell of bread out of gods own hand immediatly, we ought, no doubt to adore, and so his similitude of a subject receiving a benefit out of the princes own hand, may illustrat the matter very well. But at the Lords supper we receive the elements of bread and wine not out of gods own hands immediatly, but out of the hands of the Minister, who is our fellow-servant. 2. Our union with Christ, & participation of his body and blood is not begun at the Lords supper nether is it proper to it, but common to the word and to baptisme. By the ministerie of the word, and the Sacrament of Baptisme, we are made partakers of Christ and his benefites if we have the hand of faith to receive. Origen sayth, eIn numer. homil. 23. hoc quodmodo loquimur, sunt carnes Christi.that which we are presently speaking to you is the flesh of Christ. And in another place, fIn numer. homil. 16.we are sayd to drinke the blood of Christ not onelyonly by the rites of the Sacraments, but also when we heare the word. And Hierome sayth gIn psal. 147 licet in mysterio possit intelligi, tamen verius corpus Christi et sanguis ejus sermo scriptu…um est.howbeit the words of Christ to eate his flesh and drinke his blood, may be understood in the mysterie, yet more truly the speech of the scriptures is the body and blood of Christ. Augustinus sayth, hEpistola ad Bonifacium.there is no doubt but every one of the faitfull is made partaker of the body and blood of Christ, when in Baptisme he is made a mēber of Christ. Chrisostome sayth, iIn Marcum homil. 14.that in Baptism we adore the body of Christ. VVe receive then the very same benefits in the vvord and Baptisme which we receive in the Lords supper. Our union with Christ is begun by faith; faith is vvrought by the ministery of the vvord, and confirmed aftervvard by the same vvord, and strengthened also by the ministerie of the Sacraments, vvhichwhich are seales and pledges to us of our union vvith Christ. 3. These benefites are common to the Sacraments of the old Lavv and the nevv: they had the same substance of the seales that vve have, did eate the same spirituall food, and drink the same spirituall drink that vve do, 1 Cor. 10.3.4. Augustine saith kDe utilitate penitent. cap. 1. quicunque in manna intellexerunt Christumeundem quem nos spiritualem cibum manducavcrunt.that vvhosoever in the Manna understood Christ, did eate the same spirituall meat that vve do. And yet the people of God in gathering the manna, hovvbeit not ministred to them by the hand of men, did not kneele. The Paschall Lamb vvas the same to the people of God, that the Lords supper is to us, and yet they sate at the Paschal supper. 4. The invvard grace is not given to all the communicants, but to the godly onelyonly; neither do the godly ever find comfort at the instant of receiving the seale. Then according to the Doctors ovvn vvords, the action of donation not being perceived at the instant, it is then to be acknovvledged vvith thankesgiving vvhen it is felt aftervvard. But all the communicants participate of the Sacrament, even the vvicked. Novv the Lord in setting dovvn the order of the institution, had respect to the Sacramentall manner of donation, vvhichwhich is common to all, and not to the spirituall vvhichwhich is proper to fevv. Even the very vvicked eate the body and blood of Christ Sacramentally: and vvhen the godly eate spiritually, yet they participate not pure spiritualiter, as Cajetane lIn 3 quest. 79 80.speaketh, meerely spiritually, but Spiritualiter & Sacramentaliter. And this maner of donation vvith solemne testification, vvhichwhich is not purely spirituall, but spirituall and sacramentall is common to the godly both under the Lavv and under the Gospell, & to Baptisme, alsvveill as the Lords supper.
The Apostle 1 Cor. 11. condemneth all manner of unworthy receiving, vvhether by hypocrisie, when we come without faith and repentance: or by prophannes, when we come like drunkards and factiously. But sitting the Apostle did never condemne, but rather approved as the ordinary table-gesture. The wicked, howbeit they partake not spiritually of the Lords body, yet they are guiltie in respect of abusing the seales, as Chrysostome sayth, he that polluteth the Princes purple robe offendeth the Prince himselfe.
As for our manner of receiving, the common manner is sacramentall, and according to that which is common to all should our carriage be. The Godly receive also with faith spiritually, but as I have sayd not purely spiritually, but Spiritually and Sacramentally. Faith is accompanied with humility, it is true; but humilitie is an habit of the Soule, and not an act of adoration. Faith is accompanied with hunger and thirst, it is true; but hunger and thirst is not the prayer of the Soule, but a provoker of the soule to pray, as hunger and thirst provoketh a man to cry for meat and drink. Faith is accompanied with joy, and joy resolueth in desires, it is true; but desires are not formallie prayers and praises. Faith is accompanied with all other Christian graces: For every Christian grace is accompanied with the rest. But this concomitance of the habits of other graces, which is all times in a Christian, doth not import their actuall vvorking at all times. Faith is the chiefe vvorker in the act of receiving: the rest do assist, if there be need; but ought not hinder the meditation and application of faith. VVhen there do arise any short ejaculations of prayer or praise, they are onelyonly occasionall as the cō municant doth find himselfe disposed, and Faith for to vvork. Next, they are subtile and swift, that there is not that agility in our hompish bodies, as to follow with our gestures these swift motions, ending perchance in twinkling of an eye. Thirdly, they are secret between God and the Soule, & therefore ought to be concealed rather then expressed by gestures of vvorship. In a word, seeing the manner of our receaving is not purely spirituall, but spirituall and Sacramentall, the spirituall must not disorder the Sacramentall manner set down by him that is the instituter. VVe are bound to heare the word vvith Faith, and Faith must be accompanied with humilitie, and other Christians graces. There vvill arise also from hunger, thirst, joy; desires, vvishes, mentall ejaculations of player and praise; but the hearer must not for all that cease from hearing, and fall dovvn to vvorship. Is there any thing here required, but the like vvas required under the Sacraments of the old Law, and is required at the hearing of the vvord.
The secret and hid covenant, made betwixt God and Man, is made at the time of effectuall calling. The first solemnization section 5.6.7. of it, is made at our entrie in the bosome of the Kirke, vvhen vve make personall profession on our part, and the Minister in Gods name admitteth us, as the mouth of the congregation. This is sealed by Baptisme. Thereafter the vvord preached to all the members of the congregation, is presumed to be delivered to beleevers and penitent persons, and Faith and repentance is presupposed into the hearers, vvhen the promises of the Gospel ar made unto them. So that after their first entry, Faith is presumed in the hearer, as vvell as in the communicant. Next, the Sacramentall vvord is generall, as the vvord Preached is. This is my Body vvhichwhich is broken for you. This is the new Testament of my blood, vvhichwhich is shed for the remissions of the sins of many. It is not delivered in the singular number, for thee Peter, or thee Paul, no more then then the vvord preached. The seales and elements are received severally, and the Spirit vvorketh severally. The word is uttered generally, as the Sacramentall word is, but the Spirit vvorketh by it severally. If a man should kneele for the severall vvork of the Spirit, then he must kn…ele, as vvell at the vvord as at the Sacrament. As for the severall receiving of the seale, it is so received severally, at that it must also be received conjunctly, vvith other communicants, that is: that the communicants sitting at one table, communicate together, and distribute among themselves. The severall receiving of the outvvard seales, must not break the order of conjunct receiving, & communicating enjoyned by Christ, & an actuall remembranc… of Christs death & passion▪ must not burst forth in vocall thankesgiving in the very act of receiving. That as the communicating was conjunct, so the thankesgiving may be commoun, and that the conjunct communicating be not intertubed. VVhen the history of the Passion is read, we are in actuall remembrance of Christs death, but we burst not out in vocall praises. VVhen the seale is received, it is received from the hand of men, and it is no more but the outward seale, grace is not inclosed in it as a plaister in a box, or liquor into a vessel. The kirk in the time of Novatus, was gone frō the right form of administration, and therefore their example is no good argument to prove severall thanksgiving. And we read of nothing, that was answered then by the cōmunicants, but Amē. He that delivered sayd, The body of the Lord: he that received, sayd Amen. Novatus vvhen he delivered, sayd these words to the communicant, Sweare to me by the body of the Lord, that thou wilt not return to Cornelius, in stead of these words the body of the Lord; and likewise the receiver answered, in place of Amen, I will not return to Cornelius. mBaronius anno 57. numero 146. Et anno 254. numero 75. Bellarminus de eucharistia, lib. 4. c. 13.Now for a custome of saying Amen at the receiving, as a particle of confirmation of the words uttered by the Minister, to wit, the body of the Lord, vve cannot conclude kneeling; for they sayd Amen standing. But as I sayd before, we are not to look to the formes of the anciēt kirke. For the very Papists themselves have thought shame of some of them, and the posterior ages abolished many of them. Let it be remembred here also, that all the D. discourse may be applied to the Sacraments of the old Law, as well as of the new. For there in their Sacraments the covenant was solemnized, and they received the seales, and actuall remembrance of the benefits received, and to be received was required, but kneeling was not required. The comparing of the Sacraments of the old Law and new Law, and of the word of God with the Sacraments, together with the order of the institution, may furnish answers to al the Doctors arguments.
This Sacrament is called the Lords supper, partly for honor section 8 of the first institution, partly to poynt out to us the liberalitie of the spirituall supper, as suppers were more liberall then dinners of old. The spirituall part is called a Feast or supper metaphorically, & it is resembled by the symbolical part. It was not necessarie, that the symbolicall part should be like cōmon Feasts or suppers in all poynts. There are as many poynts in it, as may serve to resemble the spirituall supper. To which symbolicall representation of a supper, a table-gesture and specially sitting was most correspondent and agreeable, and so Christ and his Apostles used it. Piscator sayth,nIn Math. 26.26. Pag. 757. it is evident in that the disciples did eat of the bread, and drink of the cup sitting together at table, that this action had speciem convivij, the shew or semblance of a banket: yea, that it was a banket indeed, but a sacred one. And Mornaeus sayth, oDe eucharist. lib. 4. …. 7. mitto sacram coenam olim convivij instat in quo discumbebatur celebratam, cujus etiamnum in Benedictinorum mandato vestigium.the like. It is true, the Doctor sayth the name of supper should not diminish the estimation of it: but on the other side say I, no ceremonie should be brought in to take avvay speciem convivij the semblance of a banket or supper; but when the communicants receive severally kneeling, as if there were no table not onelyonly is that semblance of a banket or supper, which the Lord instituted taken away, but all forme of banket or Supper, that ever was used in any part of the world. As for the giving and receiving at this supper, we have spoken already.
The washing of the Disciples feet, and Christ his sitting at section 9 table, are not rightly matched together. His washing of their feet before the last service of the Paschall supper was an extraordinarie example to teach his Disciples humilitie, but his sitting at table, was not a thing extraordinary, but ordinary & usuall. He sate with them at the Paschal suppers before according to the custome of the sacred Feast, and not to teach them humilitie: so did he at the Eucharisticall supper.
VVe never reasoned after this manner, The Apostles sate at table with Christ, therefore we may sit now with Christ. Christ is not bodily present now, that we may sit with him. To ask if we would sit at table, suppose Christ glorified would come down from heaven and sit with us, were a question not worthy scanning. But we reason after this manner, when Christ was bodily present, the Apostles kneeled not, but sate at table; farre lesse when he is not bodily present should we kneele.
That he was then in the state of a servant, will not help their cause. For howbeit he vvas in the state of a Servant, yet upon singular occasions he was adored. If I would discourse Rhethorically upon the present occasion they had to move them to kneele, then any man would grant that the occasion of adoration was singular, and yet they kneeled not, for other weightie reasons and causes. It is also untrue, that the Doctor sayth, that he carried at this time onelyonly the forme of a Servant, and Minister of the externall element. for he carried also in open view, the person of a Lord, in that he did institute the Sacrament.
VVe yet reason further from the example of Christ and his Apostles, not respecting adoration directed to Christ bodily present, and we say that Christ directed not his Apostles to adore and worship God the Father for the benefit of redemption, when they were in the act of receiving. Christs familiar presence should not have with holden them from directing their prayers and praises to God, if it had b…en a thing requisite, no more then when they kneeled in their prayers to God at other times, no doubt notvvithstanding of Christs familiar presence in the carriage of a Servant. And Christ should have taught them so to do, if the reasons hitherto alledged by the Doctor were good. All his reasons are as good for the first supper as for the rest of the rest of the suppers which have followed since. The words of the institution served to teach the Apostles, as wel as us, that he was their benefactor, testator, adopter, redeemer, and feeder.
Again, the form that Christ instituted, he appointed it not for that night onelyonly, but to be observed to his comming again, & therefore the different state of Christ in humility or glory, did not alter it. And even after his ascension, when he was in the state of glorie, the Apostolicall Kirkes as we have sayd, sate at table. The rules of the institution and precepts generall & particular, admit no other gesture, but a table-gesture. Seeing these rules & precept are perpetuall & to be observed, whether Christ be in the state of glorie or humilitie, it is evident, that it was Christs vvill, that after his glorificatiō also, we should cō tinue the table-gesture, and the semblance of a supper till his comming again, when we shall sup with him in glorie.
section 10 VVhen the Apostle saith, Shew forth the Lord death, till he come again; the Doctor saith, he meaneth not verball preaching made by word, but reall preaching acted by taking, eating, drinking. This is a Iesuiticall exposition very familiar with the Doctor throughout his book. The Rhemists so expound the words, 1 Cor. 11.26. that this commemoration is nothing els but the representation of the death of Christ made by the elements & the action. But D. Fulk answereth that even according to the judgement of the Fathers, the Lords death must be shewed not onelyonly by the action, but also by words that may stirre us up to remembrance and thankfulnes. Although saith he a long sermon as we take a sermon, is not necessarie, yet at least a summarie and briefe declaration of the institution and use of the Sacrament, is necessarie. And therefore saith VVillets,pOf the sacrament. quest. 1. the Sacraments cannot rightly be Ministred, unles there be a declaratiō & shewing forth of the Lords death, not onelyonly in the visible action of breaking, distributing, but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death, with an exhortatiō to thankfulnes. Pezelius saith,qRefutatio Catechismi Iesuitatum. P. 421. that to annunce or declare, is not to expresse by similitude of fact, but to inculcate the death of Christ & his benefites, & to teach the right use of the Sacramēt. This annunciatiō agreeth with the Hagadah, that is the declaratiō which was made at the passover, according to the cōmandement, Exo. 13.8. & thou shalt shew. This precept was givē not to be performed cōfusedly by al, but according to good order & comelines, & therefore at the paschall supper one made the declaration, expounding every coremony, in the own place; the meaninge of the Lamb, of the bitter hearbs, & so forth of the rest This hagadah & declaratiō of the Iewes, saith Casaubonus,rExercitat. Pag. 324. answereth to annunciate, 1 Cor. 11.26.
But admitting the Doctors interpretation, what would he inferre? He would inferre that this Sacrament is called Eucharist not onelyonly for the thankesgiving, wherewith it beginneth & endeth, but because the action itselfe is an actiō of thankesgiving. for as it is a memoriall of his praise, so it is a testimonie of our thankfulnes. It is true indeed that the name of Eucharist is attributed, not by scripture, but by the Fathers to the action, yea to the elements themselves. But it is unproper appellation to call the bread of the Sacrament Eucharist, that is thankesgiving. And therefore Iustinus sApolog. 2.calling it so, must expound it again by more proper speech, saying panis Eucharistetheis, the bread whereupon thankesgiving was made, so likewise the action of giving, receiving, eating, drinking, if at any time they be called Eucharisticall, it is unproper speech; For properly thankesgiving standeth in words, and no other but verball thankesgiving is prop…rly Eucharistia. And from that which is properly thankesgiving, it should seeme most reasonable that the vvhole action is denominated Eucharist or thankesgiving. And Casaubonus saith, tExercitat. p. 517. Eulogia et Eucharistia utraque vox a parte una totam domini actionem designat.that the Sacrament is denominated both Eulogia, and Eucharistia from a part of the action, to wit, the proper thankesgiving and blessing.
The actions ar properly a representation, and consequently a memoriall of Christs death and Passion; but not properly a commemoration of his death and Passion. VVhen verball commemoration is made, of Christs death and Passion it is not formally, a rendring of thankes: farr lesse is the representation. VVe kneele not when verball commemoration is made of Christs Passion; should we kneele at the representation. The Iewish passover was to the People of God a memoriall of their by-past deliverance, and a type of the spirituall deliverance to come; yet neither for the action, not nor for the declaration made at the action did they kneele. To divine worship, sayth Cyrillus, uContra Iulianum Lib. 4.belong sacrifices, hymnes, prayers, praises, and thankesgivings, adoration and worship, sacred devotions, priesthood, temples, altars, offrings, confessions, solemnities. VVhere ye may see thankesgiving and adoration are distinguished from the rest. All these particulars belong to Gods honour in generall, but they are not adoration or praise in particular: honor is more generall then praise or adoration. He that adoreth, honoreth; but every one that honoreth, adoreth not. The last Section containeth a conclusion of his former discourses, which are answered.