A Reply to an Answer Made by Doctor Whitgift, Reply · Part 35
To the next ſection contained in the. 99. and a peece of the. 100. page.
ALthough it be not of neceſſity / that we ſhuld receyue the communion ſitting / yet there is the ſame cauſe of abolyſhing kneeling / that there is of remouing the wafer cake / and if there be danger of ſuperſtition in one (as M. Doctor confeſſeth) why is there not danger in the other? And if there be men that take occaſion to fall at the one / and that by ſuperſtition / howe commeth it to paſſe that M. Doctor in the. 180. page / ſayeth that neyther goſpeller / nor papiſtes obſtinate nor ſimple / can ſuperſtitiouſly offend in this kneelyng / when as the kneeling caryeth a greater ſhewe of worſhyp / and Imprinteth in the mindes of the ignorant a ſtronger opinion and a deeper print of adoration / then the ſyght of a rounde …ake. And if kneeling be ſo void of all fault / as M. Doctor wold make vsus beleue / howe came it to paſſe / that in King Edwardes dayes / there was a proteſtation added in the boke of prayer / to cleare that geſture from adoration.
An other reaſon why kneeling ſhould be taken away / is for that ſitting agreeth better wyth the action of the ſupper / whervnto M. Doctor taketh exception / bothe in thys place / and where he ſpeaketh againe of it / that for ſo much as thys ſacrament is a ſacrament of thankes geuing / and thankes geuing a prayer / therfore kneeling to be moſt fit / as that whych we vſe ordinarily when we pray.
But he ſhuld hauehave remembred / that that thanks geuing may wel come after we hauehave receyued the ſacrament / and that whileſt we receyue the bread and wine of ye ſacramēt / we are not then moſt fit to ſpeake / they being in our mouths, and during the time we receyue them / our minde is occupied in conſydering the ineſtimable benefite whych the Lorde hathe beſtowed vponupon vsus / and to meditate of the frute whych we receiue thereby / by the Analogie and compariſon betwene the bodely nouriſhment and the ſpirituall / that by theſe conſiderations our minds may be more enflamed and ſette on fire / and our mouthes may be filled wyth the praiſe of God / after we hauehave receyued. And further if thys be a good reaſon that therefore it is meete we ſhoulde kneele at the ſupper for as muche as we geue thanks / then it foloweth that when ſo euer we hauehave ſupped or dined / it is meete that we ſhould kneele / when as yet we do ſay grace ſitting. And by thys he accuſeth our ſauioure Chriſte and hys Apoſtles / as thoſe whych did not vſe ye whych was moſt fitte: for in hys iudgement he ſayeth kneeling is the fitteſt ſite or poſition of the body which can be / and if our ſauioure Chriſt had bene of that iudgement / vndoubtedly he wold hauehave alſo kneeled / and cauſed hys Apoſtles ſo to do. In the. 181. page vntounto the admonition / ſaying that ſitting is moſt fitte / becauſe it betokeneth reſt and accompliſhment of the ceremonies in our ſauioure Chriſte / M. doctor ſayth it is a papiſticall reaſon / and triumpheth ouer the authors of the admonition / becauſe they allegory / when as notwythſtanding the ſurplice before / croſſing / and rings. &c. afterwards / are defended by nothing / but wyth vain allegories / whych hauehave nothing ſo good groūds as thys hath. But let it be that thys is not ſo ſound a reaſon (as in deede for my part I wil not defend it / and the authors them ſelues hauehave corrected it) yet M. doctor might hauehave dealt eaſlier with all / then to callit a papiſticall reaſon / which is far from popery / and the reaſon of two notable learned & zealous men Iohannes Alaſco / and of M. Hooper in hys In liturgia eccleſ. per…gr.commentary vponupon the Prophet Ionas. For the reſt whych he hath heere / or in the. 180. and. 181. page / it is either anſwered before (as that the danger of adoration may be taken away) or hath no matter worthy the anſwearing. I only admoniſh the reader / that ſitting at the communion is not holdē to be neceſſary / but only that I thinke that kneling is very dāgerous / for the cauſes before aledged.
VntoUnto the .iij. next ſections contained in the .100. and .101. page / I hauehave ſpoken already / when as I ſhewed the generall faultes of the ſeruice boke / only that is to be noted / that M. doctor ſtil priuely pincheth or euer he be aware at our ſauior Chriſtes action / in the firſt of theſe ſections / when as he commendeth rather thys forme of ſpeaking / take thou / then that whych our ſauior Chriſt vſed / in ſaying take yee. And if it be a good argument to proue that therfore we muſt rather ſay take thou / then take yee / becauſe the ſacrament is an application of the benefites of Chriſt: then for as much as preaching is the applying of the benefites of Chriſt / it behoueth that the preacher ſhould direct hys admonitions particularly one after an other / vntounto all thoſe whych heare hys ſermon / whych is a thyng abſurde. And therefore beſides that it is good to leaue the popiſh forme / in thoſe thyngs whych we may ſo conueniently do: it is beſt to come as neare y• maner of celebration of the ſupper / whych our ſauyor Chriſt vſed / as may be.
To the next ſection contained in the. 102. page.
When as many receiue they know not what / ſome other wythout any examination eyther of them ſelues or by others / how they come / wyth what faith in Chriſt / wyth what louelove towardes their brethren / I ſee not againſt what rule of our ſauioure Chriſte it is / or what raſhe iudgement to ſay that they come rather of cuſtome then of conſcience / when neyther they ſpeake generally of all / nor ſingularly of any one particulare perſon.