The New Covenant — William Attersoll

The New Covenant · William Attersoll

CHAP. VI. Of the fourth outward part of the Lords Supper.

THe laſt outward part remaineth, which are theaThe fourth outward part are the communicants. communicants: whoſe actions are outward, to take the bread and wine into their hands: then to eate the bread & drinke the wine to the nouriſhment of their bodyes,bMat. 26, 26. as is directly proued by the inſtitution of this Sacrament, where Chriſt gaue the bread and cup into their hands, the Diſciples receiued the one and the other, they did eate the bread and all dranke of the cup. Theſe being the neceſſary actions of eueryevery receiuer, to take, to eate, to drinke: it beateth downe many falſe doctrines of the Church of Rome, as their reſeruation, oſtentation, eleuation, adoration, circumgeſtation, proceſsion, and priuate communion: it teacheth alſo many neceſſary truths to direct our knowledge and increaſe our obedience, which we will conſider in order.

Vſe 1 Firſt of al, did Chriſt command his Diſciples to eate and drinke that he deliuered, and poſted them not ouer to eate thereof when they were departed, neither willed them to defer their eating vntill afterward: then all keeping & reſeruing of bread in boxes, pixes, and other veſſels of the Church for dayes, weekes, and months, all ſhewing it to the people,cCon. Trid. ſeſſ. 3. can. 5. lifting it ouer the Prieſts head, and going with it in proceſsion, is vtterly vnlawful. For it is no Sacrament vnleſſe it be vſed according to Chriſts inſtitution and cōmandement, but to the inſtitution it belongeth, as on the behalfe of the Miniſter to take, to bleſſe, to poure out, and to diſtribute: ſo on the behalfe of the communicants to take, to eate, and to drinke, in them all, to ſhew therby the Lords death, and to do it in remembrance of him: which cannot be performed but by obſeruing the whole action. For how can they ſhew the Lords death, or do it in remembrance of Chriſt, vnleſſe they take and eate? And as the Paſchal lambe was not that paſſeouer, vnleſſe it were killed and eaten: no more is the bread and wine a Sacrament, except they be receiued and digeſted. The Paſſeouer was the ſame in effect with the Lords Supper,dReuel. 13, 8. who was the lambe ſlaine from the beginning of the world. Now God commanded that none of it ſhould remaine vntounto the morning, but the remnanteExod 12, 10 ſhould be conſumed with fire. The like may be ſaide of Manna, the ſame in ſubſtance with this Sacrament: it was not to be kept & caried about, Let no man fExod. 16, 19reſerue therof till morning. Beſides, there is the ſame reaſon of the cup & of the bread: but they reſerue not the wine, they carry it not about to ſhew the people: why then ſhould they keepe the other part? Likewiſe, when Chriſt ſaid to his Apoſtles,gMat. 28, 20. Goe baptize the nations: it was no baptiſme by thehH…ſi. Confeſſ. de Euchar ſt. cap. …9. confeſſion of the aduerſaries themſelues, vnleſſe there were ſome perſon baptized: ſo when Chriſt ſaid, Take and eate, there is no Sacrament vnleſſe there be a receiuing and eating. For as the one ſtandeth in waſhing, ſo doth the other in eating and drinking, not in keeping and reſeruing, not in carying in proceſsion on a white horſe, not in hanging it vp vnderunder a Canopy, nor in bearing it to the ſicke with bell and candle. Chriſt tooke bread and gaue it to his Diſciples ſaying,iMat. 26 26.27. 1 Cor. 11, 26. Eate ye: he tooke the cup, and when he bad giuen thanks he ſaid, Drinke ye all of this, do this in remembrance of me: as often as ye ſhall eate this bread and drinke of this cup ye ſhew the Lords death till he come. But they hang it in the pixe, beare it in boxes, and carry it about in publike triumphes, and in common calamities, when any iudgement of war, plague, peſtilence, and famine, and like viſitation is among them: then their Iacke in the boxe goeth abroad in ſolemnekConcil Trid ſeſſ. 13. cap. 5. proceſsions to be ſeene, which is the way to increaſe, not to ſlacke: to kindle, not to quench: to prouoke, not to reuoke the iudgments of God gone out againſt them. Beſides, they ſhew this Sacrament to the ſimple people, to fal downe to it as to a God, they put it vponupon the breaſts of the dead, and ſometimes lay it in the graue with them, I thinke to declare it to all the world, that they wiſh Chriſt dead, buried, and forgotten for euer, that the Biſhop of Rome might with his ſhauelings rule and raigne as a God vp on the earth. Can light and darkneſſe, can heauen and earth, fire and water, ſweet and ſowre be more contrary then theſe vaine things, to the inſtitution of Chriſt? Who neuer ſaid, keepe it in veſſels, hang it vnderunder Canopies, carry it in proceſsions,lOrig in Leuit. hom. l. 5. giuegive it to the dead, lay it vp in their tombes, bring it abroad in common iudgements: but take ye, eate ye, drinke ye, and by receiuing, eating, and drinking, ſhew ye forth the Lords death vntill he come to iudgement to iudge the quicke and the dead. This Sacrament is an holy feaſt, an heauenly banket, and therefore not to be hidden in a boxe, as a light put vnderunder a buſhell, but to be ſet on the Lords Table for all his gueſts to feed thereon.

Againe, if the ſubſtance and eſſence of this Sacrament Vſe ſtand in the lawful vſe of eating & drinking: then all eleuation & holding vp of the Sacrament ouer the Prieſts head, al adoration, falling downe, honouring it with diuine worſhip and calling the SacramentmGuil. Alan. de ſacrific. Euchar cap 41. Briſto. moti. 26. their Lord and God, as it is deſtitute of all antiquity, ſo it is full of groſſe and palpable Idolatry. For whereas it was accuſtomed to hold vp the armes & offerings conſecrated to God for the poore, therby imitating the heaue-offering of the Iewes, and ſtirring vp the people to the like charity and deuotion, it degenerated to the lifting vp of the hoſt and bread in the Sacrament. So that where Chriſt ſaith, take ye, eate ye: theſe bread-worſhippers hauehave changed it into, looke ye, gaze ye, worſhip ye, giuing his glory to dumbe and ſenceles creatures. True it is, we confeſſe that the Sacraments as myſteries ſanctified to an holy vſe, as veſſels of Gods grace, and as inſtruments fitted to worke great things, are not to bee contemned or refuſed, but to be receiued with due regard, and to be vſed with all ſobriety: yea we confeſſe that Chriſt God & man is to be worſhipped eueryevery where: we honour his word, we reuerence his Sacraments. Notwithſtanding,nThe Sacrament is not to be adored. we put a difference betweene God and the Sacrament of God, the ſame honour is not due to the one, that is due to the other, and therefore we cannot adore the Elements with diuine worſhip, for many reaſons. Firſt, becauſe Chriſt in the inſtitution of his Supper ſaid, take, eate, drinke: he ſaid not, worſhip, fall downe, bow the knees before the Sacrament, and call vponupon it in time of need. We heard before in the caſe of vnleuened bread, they appealed to the inſtitutiō of Chriſt: why do they now flye from it, turning eating & drinking into worſhipping & adoring? Wherfore, is it not a great iniquity & wickednes to omit that Chriſt commādeth, & do what he commādeth not? Secondly, God only is to be worſhipped with diuine honour,oMat. 4, 10. Thou ſhalt worſhip the Lord thy God & him only thou ſhalt ſerue. And Exod. 20. Thou ſhalt not bow downe to thē, nor worſhip thē. Now the Sacrā. is not Chriſt, it is an inſtitution of Chriſt: it is not God, but an ordinance of God; for God is not viſible, but the ſacrament is viſible, that al may know it, & ſee it with their eyes: the Sacram. is eatē, but God cannot be eatē & ſwallowed vp of vsus,p1 Kin. 8, 27. Acts 7, 48, 49. whom the heauens & the heauens of heauens cannot containe or comprehend. Thirdly, Chriſt reproueth the Samaritans, becauſe They worſhipped that qIoh. 4, 22.they knew not: but the papiſts know not the body of Chriſt to be contained vnderunder the accidents of bread & wine, for the Scriptures hauehave not taught it, Chriſt hath not deliuered it, the Apoſtles hauehave not ſhewed it. Beſides, they know not the Prieſts intent, whereon they ſay the eſſence of the Sacrament dependeth, ſo as if he had no purpoſe of conſecration, they cannot deny themſelues to be Idolaters and bread worſhippers. Fourthly,rIoh 4, 24. the true worſhippers muſt worſhip God in ſpirit and in truth, as Chriſt ſetteth downe, Iohn 4, 24. that is, not according to our owne imaginations and deuices, but as God hath preſcribed: but to fal downe to the Sacrament is a bodily ſeruice, a new forged worſhip, and an humane inuention. Fiftly, without faith no man canſHeb. 11, 6. pleaſe God: but faith commeth by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, which yet they could neuer ſhew vntounto vsus: therefore they can hauehave no aſſurance of pleaſing God in their willworſhip. Sixtly, if this Sacrament be to be worſhipped, then it is vnited perſonally to Chriſt, becauſe adoration ſhould not be due to Chriſt as man, except God and man in the vnion of perſon were one Chriſt: but there is no perſonall vnion betweene Chriſt and the Sacrament of Chriſt: therefore not to be worſhipped. Seauenthly, no man in his wits and right mind will honour that with diuine worſhip, which himſelfe may take in his hand, and eate with his mouth, & which may be deuoured by Mice, Rats, dogs, wormes, or other vermine: for how ſhall that be adored as God, that cannot defend it ſelfe from the teeth of men and beaſts? As Ioaſh anſwered,tIud. 6, 31, 32. Will ye plead Baals cauſe? If he be God, let him plead for himſelfe againſt him that hath caſt down his Altar. Laſtly, ſeeing they adore Chriſt in the pixe, where the bread is; and in the chalice where the wine is, why do they not likewiſe worſhip him in the Prieſt and in the faithful people, & eueryevery man in his brother, when they hauehave created and eaten him vp? The ſame Chriſt that was ſurely incloſed in the pixe, is by their doctrine, really contained in the body of Prieſt and people, whē they hauehave eaten and drunken their ſuppoſed ſacrifice: Why then adore they not the fleſh of Chriſt, after that it is entred into the mouth of man, as wel as in the goldē boxe, or in the golden chalice? Nay, why may he not be adored in the bodies of mice and vermine by them, if it fall out that they eate vp their God? Shall he be any where without honour? Or will they worſhippe him where they liſt, and ouerskip him where they pleaſe? Howſoeuer therefore Chriſt is to be worſhipped, yet we muſt take heed we worſhip not a piece of bread in ſtead of Chriſt, which is moſt groſſe and horrible Idolatry.

Vſe 3 Moreouer, if Chriſt command the bread to be eaten and the wine to be drunke, then they are not to be offered vp to God the Father, as is vſually wont to be done in the pageant of the Maſſe. This is a deepe dungeon of iniquity, and a monſter of many heads,u… turning the holy Sacrament into an vnbloody ſacrifice for the quicke & the dead, aboliſhing the fruite and remembrance of the death of Chriſt, diſanulling his Prieſt-hood, giuing him to his Father, whereas the Father hath giuen him to vsus; and imagining thereby to pay a price to God, which he ſhold receiue as a ſatisfaction for our ſins. True it is, the Lords Supper may af…er a ſort be called a ſacrifice, not as the Church of Rome meaneth,aIn wine …ea… Ch …iſts Su…p… … be ca…led a …ac…ifi…e. but becauſe therein we offer vp praiſes & thankſgiuings to God, for that ſacrifice of attonemēt once made vponupon the Croſſe, which is moſt acceptable to God: and becauſe ſuch as come aright thereunto, offer vp themſelue; wholy to God, a reaſonable, holy, and liuing ſacrifice: and laſtly, becauſe therby we cal to our remembrance the bloody ſacrifice of Chriſt with all the circumſtances thereof, the ſhame of the Croſſe, the darkeneſſe of the heauen, the ſhaking of the earth, the renting of the ayre, the cleauing of the rocks, the reproches of the Iewes, the taunts of the Souldiors, the opening of the graues, and the conquering of the Diuell. For the Chriſtians in former times,bThe Fathers of the church liuing among the Gentile, called th… ſ…pper a ſa…. perceiuing that many both Iewes and Gentiles, refuſed to imbrace the faith of Chriſt, and to ioyne themſelues to the Church, becauſe they pretend the want of ſacrifices among th…m, (and nature engrafted in all nations this principle, that we hauehave no free acceſſe to God, no true peace to our ſelues, without a ſacrifice) the Fathers to win ſuch as were without, affirmed that the Church had alſo a ſacrifice, and thereupon entituled the Sacrament of the Supper with the name of a ſacrifice, for the cauſes before remembred. But for a mortall man, whoſe breath is in his noſtrils, to preſume in the pride of his heart, vnderunder the formes of bread and wine o offer vp Chriſt the Sonne of God in ſacrifice to his Father, and to dare to deſire the Father fauourably to behold and accept his owne Sonne, is idolatry, blaſphemy, & horrible impiety, to be deteſted of all true hearted Chriſtians.

Touching the originall ofdThe originall of the word Maſſe. the word Maſſe, it ſeemeth to come from an ancient cuſtome of the Church, ſending away ſuch as communicated not. For the Deacon was accuſtomed to bid thē depart that were nouices in the faith, and ſuch as by Church-diſciplineeFolid …. de inuent Rerum l…b 5. c 19. were remoued from the Communion. This dimiſsion of them was noted by the word M…ſſ…, ſignifying a ſending away and licenſing to depart: and thus ſome offSuct… in Cal…g cap 24. the heathen vſed it. The name then being in it ſelfe not euill, is turned into an euill practiſe, and therefore as it is vſed and vnderſtood of our aduerſaries, we reiect both the name and thing it ſelfe, for theſe cauſes. Firſt no Angell, no man, no creature is of that dignity and worthines, that he may offer vp and ſacrifice the Sonne of God: for the Prieſt is aboue the ſacrifice: they therefore that will be the Prieſts to offer Chriſt, aduance & lift vp themſelues aboue Chriſt. Secondly, if Chriſt bee really offered in the Maſſe, then hee is killed truely and indeed: for a reall ſacrifice proueth a reall death, and when Chriſt was ſacrificed really, he dyed really, as when the beaſts were ſacrificed, they were killed. And Hol…t one of the ſchoolemen ſaith. If there had beene a thouſand hoſts n a thouſand places, at the ſame time that Chriſt d d hang vponupon the Croſſe, g… l…b. ſent …. 3.Chriſt had beene crucified in a thouſand places. Wherefore, they that really ſacrificed our Sauiour Chriſt, did in that act really and wickedly kill him: ſo that the Prieſts of Baal, if they will be ſacrificers of Chriſt, muſt acknowledge themſelues therein the reall murtherers of Chriſt.

Thirdly, new ſacrifices are not to be inſtituted by men, without commandement of God, as Moſes teacheth, Deut. 12. We muſt not do what ſeemeth good in our own eyes, but take heed and heare all theſe words which he commandeth vsus. Now Chriſt neuer ſaid, Sacrifice ye my body and blood to God. Fourthly, Chriſt tooke the bread and gaue it to his Diſciples, he did not offer it vp to God the Father, he tooke the cup and bad them all drinke of it: he did not turne himſelfe to God, end deſire him then to accept the ſacrifice of his body and blood. Fiftly, if the bread and wine remain in their former ſubſtance in the Lords Supper: then bread and wine onelyonly are offered, not the body and blood of Chriſt, but they remaine: for Chriſt deliueredi1 Cor. 10, 16 bread to his diſciples, and Paul teacheth that it is the bread which is broken, and that as often as they ſhall eate this bread and drinke of this cup, they ſhew the Lords death: therefore their reall Sacrifice is reall Idolatry. Sixtly, it appeareth in the inſtitution of the Supper, that Chriſt conſecrated the bread apart, and the wine apart, and afterward deliuered them both apart, but the body of Chriſt was neuer ſacrificed without the blood, nor the blood without the fleſh: for Chriſt offered vpō the Altar of the Croſſe the ſacrifice of his body and blood together, this is the cauſe that he ſaide, Take ye, eate ye, drinke ye, not take ye to offer and to ſacrifice.

Seuenthly, the Scripture teacheth vsus one offering and ſacrifice for ſin once performed and offered. Heb. 10. We are ſanctified by the offering of Ieſus Chriſt kHeb. 10.12.once made: & ver. 12. This man after he had offered one ſacrifice for ſinnes, ſitteth at the right hand of God. And the Apoſtle, 1 Tim. 2. There is one meditator betweene God and men, the man Ieſus Chriſt, who gaue himſelfe a ranſome for all men. So 1 Ioh. 2. If any man ſinne, we hauehave an aduocate with the Father, Ieſus Chriſt the righteous, and hee is the propitiation for our ſins. Likewiſe Heb. 9. By his owne blood he entred in once vntounto the holy place, & obtained eternall redemption for vsus: not that he ſhould offer himſelfe lHeb. 9, 12, 25often, as the high Prieſt entred into the holy place eueryevery yeare, with other blood (for then muſt he hauehave often ſuffered ſince the foundation of the world) but now in the end of the world hath he bin made manifeſt once to put away ſin by the ſacrifice of himſelfe. We hauehave plentifull teſtimonies of this truth in this Epiſtle, as chap. 10. Where remiſsion of theſe things is, there is no mHeb 10, 18more offering for ſin. If then we hauehave remiſsion by the ſacrifice of Chriſt, all other ſacrifices are ſuperfluous, and abrogate his al-ſufficient ſacrifice. So Rom. 6. In that he dyed, he dyed for ſin nRom. 6, 10.once. And 1. Pet. 3. Chriſt alſo hath once ſuffered for ſins, the iuſt for the vniuſt. If then this perfect offering were once onelyonly to be offered, then he is not offered, neither can be offered againe in the Maſſe. And if the only oblation of Chriſt once offered by himſelfe be ſufficient: al other oblations and ſacrifices are vaine and ſuperfluous. For how is that perfect, which is often repeated?

Eightly, to make a lawfull ſacrifice, there is required neceſſarily a fit Miniſter lawfully called of God, foroHeb. 5, 4, 5. no man taketh this honour to himſelfe but he that is called of God, as was Aaron: ſo likewiſe Chriſt tooke not to himſelfe this honour to be made the high-Prieſt, but he that ſaid to him, Thou art my Sonne, this day I begat thee, gaue it him. But Chriſt is the onelyonly Prieſt of the new teſtament, his Prieſthood is immortall and eternall, he liueth for euer, therfore the popiſh Prieſt-hood is a plant neuer planted by the heauenly Father thepIoh. 15, 1.2. true husband-man, and the popiſh Prieſts were neuer called of God to ſacrifice the body and blood of Chriſt, he gaue vntounto them no ſuch authority,qMat. 15, 23. and therfore in time ſhall be rooted vp. If they pretend the precept and planting of God, let them ſhew their commiſsion that we may ſee it, and let them bring forth their charter that we may trye it, otherwiſe we muſt take them for vſurpers, and counterfeit Officers in the citty of God.

Ninthly, the Apoſtle teacheth, that without ſhedding of blood is norHeb. 9, 22. remiſsion: But in the vnbloody ſacrifice of the Maſſe, there is not effuſion of blood, he doth not ſuffer, he is not killed, he doth not ſhed his blood, he doth not die: therefore in the Maſſe is no remiſsion of any ſins.

Tenthly, if Chriſt be daily offered in the Maſſe, then he doth daily ſatisfie for ſinne, for the end of his offering is to make ſatisfaction, as Rom. 4, 25.ſRom. 4 25. He was deliuered to death for our ſinnes, and is riſen againe for our iuſt ficat on And Gal. 1, 4. He gaue himſelfe for our ſinnes that bee m…ght deliuer vsus from this preſent euill world; But he doth not make ſatisfaction for our ſinnes, no more then now he dyeth and riſeth againe, for then Chriſt would not hauehave ſaid,tIoh. 1…, 30. It is finiſhed: nor the Apoſtle,*Heb. 9, 12. He entred once into the holy place. Wherefore, no more ſacrifice for ſinne remaineth to be offered by ſuch as iniuriouſly vſurpe the Prieſthood of Chriſt.

Laſt of all, al true Chriſtians are Prieſts to offer vp their bodyes an acceptable ſacrifice vntounto God, which is their reaſonable ſeruice of God, and to offer vp a broken and contrite ſpirit, as 1 Pet. 3, 9. Ye are a choſen generation, u1 Pet. 2, 9.a royall Prieſthood, and an holy nation. And Reuel. 1. Hee hath loued vsus and waſhed vsus from our ſinnes in his blood, & made vsus Kings and Pr eſts vntounto God his Father. Theſe are the Prieſts that now remaine, this is the Prieſthood which we profeſſe. Whoſoeuer maketh himſelfe any Prieſt of another order in the new teſtament, abrogateth and aboliſheth the Prieſthood of Chriſt, being after the orderaHeb. 6, 20. Pſal. 110.4. of Melchizedech, who was both King and Prieſt.

Now then, as they commit ſacriledge againſt Chriſt, that preſume to offer him vp an vnbloody ſacrifice to God the Father, to make peace and attonement betweene God and man: ſo they adde another iniquity as drunkenneſſe to thirſt, making their oblation not onelyonly profitable to take away the ſinnes of the liuing but auaileable to clenſebThe Maſſe is no propitiatory ſacrifice f… the dead, …o wit, the price and redemption of …oules. the ſinnes of the dead, that are come to the end of their dayes. Indeed we deny not, but the Maſſe may be beneficial to the rabble of Fryers and ſacrificing Prieſts that make it gainefull to themſelues, who through their ſale and merchandize of Maſſes, dwell ſtately, go ſumptuouſly, fare delicately, drinke wine in ſiluer and gold, abound in pleaſures, and heape vp great aboundance of all riches: ſhall we not now ſay, the Maſſe is profitable? But other profit of the Maſſes thē theſe to the Maſſe-mongers, we know none. We know, we finde, we feele them otherwiſe many waies pernitious in themſelues, diſhonourable to God, and hurtfull to the people. For firſt, the Sacrament was inſtituted to no ſuch end and purpoſe, as to helpe the dead, and to be a propitiation for their ſinnes. For Chriſt ſaid, Take and eate, this is my body: drinke ye, this is my blood: but the dead cannot take any thing offered vntounto them: they can neither eate nor drinke: wherefore, this Supper being ſpirituall meate and nouriſhment for the ſoule, cannot auaile the dead, who are neither fed nor nouriſhed. Secondly, it profiteth as much to be baptized for the dead, as to receiue the Supper of the Lord for the dead: for both Sacraments were inſtituted of Chriſt, and there is the ſame reſpect of both. But it can doe no good to baptize one for another, the liuing for the dead, therefore the liuing comming to receiue the Sacrament of the Supper cannot releeue the dead.

Thirdly, there is no forgiueneſſe of ſinnes after this life, we hauehave forgiueneſſe in this life or neuer. Whatſoeuer is bound on earth, is bound in heauen. Heere is the time, heere is the place, heere is the occaſion offered to worke, as the wiſe man teacheth, Eccl. 9. All that thine hand ſhall find to do, do it with all thy power: for there is cEccl. 9, 10.neither worke, nor inuent on, nor knowledge, nor w…ſedome in the graue whither thou goest. And Heb. 3. To day if ye will heare his voyce, harden not your hearts. Wherefore then is a ſacrifice offered for the dead, for whom there is no reliefe, no redreſſe, no remiſsion? Fourthly, it is vaine to offer for thoſe that hauehave ended their dayes, and are already come to the end of their race,dIoh. 9, 4. and 11, 9, 10. whoſe eſtate can neuer be changed. This the Euangeliſt Iohn teacheth. Chap. 9, 4. The night commeth, when no man can wor…e, and Chap. 11. Are there not twelue houres in the day? If a man walke in the day, hee ſtumbleth not, becauſe hee ſeeth the li…ht of this world. And chap. 11.9, 10. If a man walke in the night, he ſtumbleth becauſe there is no light in him. And Paul 2. Tim. 4. I hauehave f…ught a good fight, I hauehave ſin ſhed my race, I hauehave kept the faith, from henceforth is laid vp for me the crowne of righteouſneſſe. But this is the eſtate of all the dead, they are entred into iudgement, they are not ſubiect to any change.

Laſtly, if the ſacrifice of the Maſſe could waſh away the ſinnes of the dead, thē the ſacrifice of the Maſſe ſhould ſurmount and exceed the ſacrifice offered by Chriſt himſelfe vponupon the Croſſe. For this helpeth the liuing, it auaileth not the dead: and ſo we ſhould hauehave other meanes to take away ſinne then his oblation, and there ſhould be another propitiation for the ſins of the world. And thus much of the popiſh Idoll of the blaſphemous Maſſe.

Vſe 4 Furthermore, did Chriſt deliuer his laſt Supper to all his Diſciples that were preſent? Did none ſtand by and gaze on while other receiued? Then heereby fall to the ground the priuate communionseAgainſt priuate maſſes in the church of Rome. of the popiſh Church, where all isfConcil. Trid. ſeſſ 22. cap. 6. deuoured by the Prieſt, nothing deliuered to the people. For whereas the ordinance of Chriſt and ancient order of the Church was for the Miniſter & people to receiue the Sacrament together: among them the Preſt accompanied with his boy to make anſwere, receiueth the Sacramēt himſelfe alone, without diſtribution made to others, yea although the whole congregatiō be preſent and looke vponupon him, whereby God is diſhonoured, the communion is aboliſhed, the people of God are therby depriued and robbed of all comfort. How is this a feaſt which the Prieſt prepareth for himſelfe, not for others: receiueth by himſelfe, not with his brethren: hee ſpeaketh to himſelfe, and not to the aſſembly: he vſeth a ſtrange tongue, and no man knoweth what he meaneth: the people is taught nothing, they vnderſtand nothing, they heare nothing, they receiue nothing; and a few childiſh, apiſh fooliſh, and vnſeemely geſtures excepted, they ſee nothing: they taſte nothing, they partake nothing, neither comfort of heart, nor memory of Chriſt, nor benefit of his paſsion. But Chriſt in his laſt Supper, did not eate vp all alone, but after the Diſciples had ſupped as Mathew gMat. 26, 26.ſetteth it downe, he tooke bread & bleſſed, he brake and gaue it to them, ſaying, take ye, eate ye: neither did he drinke alone of the fruite of the vine, but taking the cup he gaue thankes, and gaue to them all, ſaying, Drinke ye all of this. So then albeit a certaine number of communicants are not limited and determined: yet Chriſt in theſe words appointeth a company to be preſent, as appeareth by the number, Take ye, eate ye, drinke yee all, diuide ye it among your ſelues, doe ye this in my remembrance, ye ſet forth the Lords death, when ye come together to eate, tarry ye one for another, as often as ye ſhall eate this bread.

Theſe words cannot bee vnderſtood of one particular man, but neceſſarily import a great number of men: nay, the Philoſopher teacheth, that the word (all) muſt be verefied at the leaſthAriſt. lib. 1. de Cocl. cap. 1. of the number of three, which is the leaſt and loweſt number that would be admitted to this Supper. Neither doe we reade that ſo ſoone as one was gained to the faith, that the Apoſtles adminiſtred this Sacrament to him, much leſſe would they miniſter to themſelues alone, when none were conuerted in a nation or Citty.

Secondly, Chriſt expreſly commandeth vsus to do as himſelfe did, when hee left this fare-well token and pledge of his louelove to his Diſciples, ſaying,iLuk. 22, 19. Do this in remembrance of me. But he, after the words of conſecration, did not offer a ſacrifice to his Father vnderunder ſhewes of bread and wine, but gaue the bread and cuppe to his Diſciples, and left his owne example as a direction for vsus to follow: ſo that the diſtribution & deliuerance of the ſignes is of the ſubſtance of the Sacrament, as well as the breaking of the bread or pouring out of the wine, and it is not lawfull in any ſort to change the teſtament of Chriſt, or to corrupt the meaning of the teſtator. Thirdly, the Apoſtle teacheth how he receiued from the Lord that which he deliuered to the churches, that the people ſhould eate of this bread and drinke of this cup:k1 Cor. 11, 23 and proueth that the faithfull are made partakers of the Lords Table, not by gazing or looking on while others eate, but by eating: not by ſtanding ſtil while others drinke, but by drinking, as 1 Cor. 10. We that are many are one bread and one body, becauſe we are all partakers of one bread. Fourthly, the ſame Apoſtle reproueth the Corinthians, which preſumed to take the Supper of the Lord before others, and did not tarry for their brethren when they came together to be partakers of the Sacrament, as we ſee, 1 Cor. 11. EueryEvery man when they ſhould eate, l1 Cor. 11.20, 22.taketh his owne ſupper afore, this is not to eate the Lords Supper. And afterward, Wherefore my brethren, when ye come together to eate, tarry one for another. Now becauſe the Corinthians brake this order & ordinance, he chargeth them to come vnreuerently, to receiue vnworthily, to eate and drinke iudgement vntounto themſelues. Shall they then that are faithfull Chriſtians, patiently beare the iniury done them by theſe ſacrificing Maſſe-mungers, who neuer bid the Lords gueſts, nor call them to his table, nor tarry for them till they come to this heauenly banket, but like the Prieſts of Bell, do eate and drinke vp all themſelues.

Fiftly, the ſame Apoſtle willeth and warneth all perſons which come to this communion, diligently to proue & examinen1 Cor. 11, 28 themſelues, and then to come to this Supper, as we ſee, 1 Cor. 11. Let a man examine himſelfe, and ſo let him eate of this bread, and drinke of this cup: ſo that he would not hauehave any excluded from receiuing, which hauehave tryed their harts by examining, & are thereby rightly prepared to this great worke. Laſtly, the names giuen to this Sacrament, noting the nature thereof, do affoord vsus a good conſideration to ſtrike through the heart of this priuate Maſſe, being called ſometimes the Supper of the Lord, and ſometimes a communion among our ſelues. If it be an holy Supper and ſpirituall banket, why are none bidden and called thereunto? If it be a communion, why doth the Prieſt vncharitably ſwallow all alone? wherby they make it a communion, but without company: a ſupper, but without gueſts: meat, but without eating: drinke, but without drinking: a table, but without ſitting downe: a participation, but without any that are partakers: a banket, but without feeding thereat, the people departing as hungry and thirſty as they came. Wherefore, as no man celebrated the Paſſeouer aright, or receiued profit thereby, but ſuch as did eate the fleſh therof: ſo can none come to the ſupper of the Lord as he ought, though he looke vponupon others, except he eate of the bread and drinke of the cup, according to the commandement of Chriſt, the author thereof. But becauſe the Church of Rome is neuer mad without reaſon, let vsus driue them out of all their ſhifts and ſtarting holes, wherein they go about to hide their heads. Firſt, they aske the queſtion, What if Obiection 1 their be none worthy to communicate, may wee not hauehave Maſſes without communicants? I anſwere, Anſwere. this is to ſuppoſe an impoſsibility. For whereſoeuer the word is truly preached, it gaineth ſome to the faith, Chriſt being in the midſt of them that are gathered together in his name: and therefore it neuer happeneth that all become vnworthy. The word of God hath his effect, and one part of the ſeed falleth into good ground, as we ſee in the parable of the ſower.Luk. 8, 15. And if it could come to paſſe which is heere imagined, it were better to abſtaine for a ſeaſon then to break the commandement of Chriſt, according to the rule of the Apoſtle, When ye come together to eate, tarry one for another. 1 Cor. 11, 33.Furthermore, the Prieſt knoweth not the worthineſſe or vnworthineſſe of the greateſt part: if any offer themſelues to receiue, they muſt be receiued, when their ſinne is not knowne.

Secondly, they ſay that priuate Maſſes may bee called Obiection 2 common, becauſe the people heerein communicate ſpiritually, and becauſe they are celebrated by the publike Miniſter. Anſwere. Heere wee hauehave common Maſſes without a communion, and without any Communicants: howbeit this is true, that heere is no communion at all in breaking of bread, and eating it beeing broken, commanded in the Goſpell.

What agreement then is there betweene Chriſt ſitting at the Table with his Diſciples, diſtributing the bread, and miniſtring the cup vntounto them; and the Maſſe-Prieſt ſtanding alone at an Altar, and eating all alone, without being ſeene of the people? Beſides, if a Miniſter pray alone in a corner of the Church, yet his prayer cannot be called publike, albeit it be made by a publike perſon, and offered vp for all that are abſent, and conceiued in a publike Temple. The like may be ſaide, of the adminiſtration of the Lords Supper.

Thirdly, they pretend that the cauſe why the people Obiection 3 do not communicate, is their want of deuotion and good affection that they ought to hauehave to holy things, Heere is a new colour ſet vponupon a foule and deformed face. Anſwere. A man would thinke that heareth theſe excuſes, that the Church of Rome did onelyonly tollerate priuate Maſſes, but not command them; and that they deſire they ſhould be publike & common, were it not for the ſlothfulneſſe and the backwardneſſe of the people.Seſſ. 7. Howbeit, the Councell of Trent not onelyonly ſuffereth, but alloweth and commandeth priuate Maſſes, wherein the Prieſt alone communicateth. Againe, if they deſired that the people ſhould communicate, they would reproue their negligence, and ſtir them vp to greater diligence: whereas they confirme them and continue them in it, and apply themſelues vntounto it, and leade them into error by their owne example. Neither hauehave they cauſe to make ſuch a generall complaint, ſeeing the people for the moſt part are more deuout and religious then the Paſtors of the Church of Rome, as it was in the dayes of Hezekiah. 2. Chron. 30.

Obiection 4 Fourthly, they demand whether it be the faſhion at feaſts to conſtraine them to eate that are not diſpoſed to eate? Is not eueryevery one left to himſelfe, whether hee will eate or not eate? I anſwere, Anſwere. the Church of Rome leaue it not at liberty for the people to eate, or not to eate: but vtterly forbid them and reſtraine them. Secondly, at our common feaſts, no man is compelled to eate, becauſe there is no abſolute commandement of God to binde them vntounto it: but in this holy feaſt it is farre otherwiſe, for we hauehave the expreſſe commandement of God, to take and eate all of vsus. Laſtly, this compariſon of a feaſt ill beſitteth their whole purpoſe. For who euer ſaw a feaſt, where all the gueſts that are bidden ſtand by and eate nothing, and the Gouernor of the feaſt deuoureth and ſwalloweth vp all alone, as it falleth out in the Maſſe, where no body but the Prieſt eateth? Or who euer heard of a ſolemne feaſt, whereunto no body is inuited? But in priuate Maſſes, no man or woman is bidden to come, or receiued if they come.

Obiection 5 Fiftly, they adde, if the people wil not come, would you hauehave, vsus leaue the ſeruice of God? Should we be negligent when they are negligent? Or ſhould we follow the humor of the people. Anſwere. This obiection ſtandeth vponupon a double ſuppoſition, and both of them falſe. The firſt is, that they deſire the people ſhould come and receiue, whereas all men know the contrary, and ſome men hauehave accounted it no leſſe then hereſie, to require the partaking of the people at this Supper. The ſecond is, that the Euchariſt without Communicants is the ſeruice of God: theſe points they take for granted, but they neuer go about to prooue them and confirme them. If we will receiue ſuch traſh at their bare word, ſo it is: if not, they hauehave not a dram of reaſon to eſtabliſh it. Furthermore, whereas they adde that the ordinances which God hath commanded, ought not to be left for the indiſpoſition of particular men; I would know whether the Miniſter ſhould pray in the Church openly, when there is none to ioyne with him? Or whether hee ſhould preach the word, when there are none to heare him? If he may not, then how ſhould hee deliuer the Supper, when there are no gueſts? I will heere conclude with the complaint that Chryſoſtome vſeth in his time, when this corruption began to creepe in: O cuſtome! O preſumption! Chryſoſt. Homil. 3. in Epheſ.In vaine is the daily ſacrifice offered: in vaine do we ſtand at the Altar, ſeeing no body communicateth. Tell me, if a man that is bidden to a feaſt waſh his hands and ſit downe, and bee placed at the Table, and yet eate not, doth hee not wrong him that bad him? Were it not better that ſuch a one were not preſent? So thou art preſent, thou haſt ſung the hymne, and in that thou haſt not retired thy ſelfe with them that are vnworthy, thou haſt made profeſsion that thou art of the number of thoſe that are worthy, how then dooeſt thou ſtay and not partake of the Table?

Laſtly, they demand farther, Doth the eſſence of the Obiection 6 Sacrament depend vponupon the peoples communicating thereof? I anſwere, Anſwere. All communions without communicants do ouerthrow the nature of a Sacrament. For Saint Paul defineth this Sacrament to bee a Communion of the bodye of CHRIST, 1 Corinthians, chap. 10. verſe 10. and therfore the Church of Rome deſtroyeth the definition, and conſequently the eſſence thereof. But of this wee hauehave ſpoken ſufficiently before.

And thus much of the ſole communions and priuate Maſſes brought into the worſhip of God, againſt the example of Chriſt, againſt the practiſe of the Apoſtles, againſt the vſe of the Church, againſt the authority of the Fathers, againſt the light of reaſon, and againſt the name and nature of the Sacrament it ſelfe.

Vſe 5 Hitherto we hauehave pulled downe the hereſies of the church of Rome, and hauehave raked in the dirt and dunghill of their deuices, the ſauour whereof hath annoyed heauen & earth: now let vsus obſerue out of this laſt outward part of the Sacrament, how we are directed and inſtructed thereby to further our knowledge and obedience. Did Chriſt command the faithful of his family to eate and drink that which he deliuereth, without laying any further burden or bondage vponupon them? Then we muſt vnderſtand,oIt is no precept of Chriſt to receiue the Lords Supper faſting. it is no precept of Chriſt to receiue the Lords Supper faſting, before any other meates and drinkes.

True it is, the people whoſe zeale goeth beyond their knowledge, make a great ſcruple of conſciēce in this point to come faſting,pAuguſt. epiſt. 118. which cuſtome we do not condemne, but commend, ſo it be without ſuperſtition in themſelues, and iudging of others. But howſoeuer many make as great a matter to communicate faſting, as to come in faith: yet this is no neceſſary rule or commandement binding the conſcience to the obſeruation thereof. For the word of God and inſtitution of the Sacrament are perfect directions to the Church, teaching all matters of faith and obedience, yet they teach no ſuch practiſe. And our bleſſed Sauiour teacheth his Diſciples what they ſhould do, the Euangeliſts deliuer what they did, and among al their doctrine we finde not this precept of faſting.

Againe, Chriſt adminiſtred it not faſting, the Apoſtles receiued it not faſting: not that we are bound to celebrate the Supper at that time: but to ſhew that Chriſt would neuer hauehave choſen to doe it after ſupper, if that time had bin ſimply vnlawfull.

Beſides, the Apoſtle, 1 Corinth. 11. reprouing the abuſes crept into this Sacrament, and labouring to reduce it to the firſt inſtitution, exhorteth the Corinthians to tarry one for another, and if any be hungryq1 Cor. 11, 36 that he cannot tarry, he muſt beforehand eate at home, that ſo he may better waite for the reſt of the congregation. Now hee would neuer hauehave giuen counſell and commandement, if it had beene vnlawfull or vngodly to take ſome little repaſt and ſhort refreſhing before, in regard of the preſent infirmity and weakeneſſe of the body. Laſtly, he teacheth in another place, That the kingdome of heauen is not rRom. 14, 17.meat nor drinke, but righteouſneſſe, and peace, and ioy in the Holy-Ghost.

To conclude, as he willeth that he which eateth, deſpiſe not him that eateth not, and he which eateth not, condemne not him that eateth:ſRom. 14, 3.5, 19. ſo muſt it be in this indifferent practiſe, he that can take it, let him take it: but let not him that receiueth faſting, iudge him that faſteth not: and let not him which faſteth not, condemne him that receiueth faſting, he ſtandeth or falleth to his owne Maiſter. Who art thou then that iudgeſt another mans ſeruant? Let eueryevery one be perſwaded in his owne minde, and looke to the warrant of his owne worke. Let vsus follow thoſe things which concerne peace, and wherewith one may edifie another. If any liſt to be contentious, we hauehave no ſuch cuſtome, neither the Churches of God.

Laſtly, obſerue with me that the actions commanded Vſe 6 vntounto the Communicants, after the Miniſter hath taken and bleſſed, broken and diſtributed the bread, taken and bleſſed, and deliuered the cup, are theſe, to take the bread and to drinke of the cuppe of the Lord: theſe are in themſelues neceſſary, theſe are commanded and expreſſed by the Euangeliſts: other geſtures may ſerue to comelineſſe and decency, but not to the eſſence and nature of the Sacrament. How much then are they deceiued, who beſides taking, eating, and drinking preſcribed in the Goſpell, doe ſtriue for the neceſsity of ſitting at the Supper, as if it were a maine pillar of religion, & cry out againſt the humble, lowly, & reuerent geſture of kneeling, as if it were a matter of impiety, and abhorre and deteſt the order of our Church as the ſinne of Idolatry. There is nothing neceſſary to bee obſerued as a point of faith, but we hauehave faire warrant for it out of the Scriptures: but for this ſitting to bee ſo ſtraitly vrged, we hauehave none at all. Chriſt ſaith indeed, Take ye; and therefore taking is neceſſary. Chriſt ſaith, Eate yee; therefore eating is alſo neceſſary for vsus. He ſaith, Drinke yee; therefore drinking is alſo neceſſary. But hee neuer ſaid to any, Sit ye; therefore we conclude that ſitting is not neceſſary. Howbeit diuers doe make ſitting as neceſſary in the action of receiuing, as eyther eating or drinking, albeit we hauehave a commandement for the one, but no commandement for the other. And albeit it be an argument concluding negatiuely from authority, yet it is from the authority of God wheras thēſelues reaſon negatiuely from the authority of men in matter of hiſtory, that becauſe they ſpeake nothing of kneeling, therfore it was not vſed. I am not ignorāt how farre this point hath beene caried in heat of zeale, and what our learned and reuerent brethren hauehave written of the abſolute neceſsity of this ſitting at the Sacrament of the Supper, inſomuch that they teach touching our kneeling, that in the outward acte of Idolatry, there is no difference to be diſcerned betweene the Papiſts and vsus: whereas they kneele to their breaden God, but we giuegive thankes vntounto God for giuing to vsus the Sacrament of his body and blood, and do not worſhip the bread nor yet kneele vntounto it, and therefore there can be no acte or ſhew of Idolatry in vsus, foraſmuch as we hauehave no Idoll before vsus, as they hauehave.

Beſides, I would hauehave all men know what an vncharitable & vnchriſtian cenſure & ſentence they giuegive of our Church, which although it hauehave baniſhed Idolatry, and is as far frō it as themſelues, yet is charged with Idolatry, & ſin greater then Idolatry.Arg. 4. Pag. 62. For thus they write, What speake we of ſeeming heerein to doe the ſame outward acte of Idolatry that the Papiſt doth? ſeeing there is alſo in this ſo great appearance of the inward and ſpirituall Idolatry of the heart, in that this geſture ſeemeth to be both inioyned & practiſed euen with a ſuperſt…tious intent & meaning to adore the Sacrament it ſelfe. Heere is a grieuous accuſation of priuate men againſt an whole Church, but no proofe at all of the accuſation. And who made them Iudges of the heart, or opened them a window to looke into it? Againe, they ſpeake afterward theſe words,Arg. 4. Pag. 66. Adde heereunto, that for men to tye themſelues in their prayer to adore God, in or before any creature (without warrant of the word) is Idolatry. And that it were farre leſſe ſinne, and an appearance of an Idolatry that is nothing ſo groſſe, to tye vsus in our prayers to kneele before a Crucifixe, then to binde vsus thus in praying to God to kneele before the bread and wine. I could wiſh that this ſentence had periſhed in the birth, and neuer ſeene the light: then ſhould it not hauehave beene grauen as with a pen of iron, and remaine to be read of eueryevery man, neither ſhould thoſe of the ſeparation alledge it, and take occaſion to ſlander our Church and profeſsion by it. For by this it appeareth that they iudge our kneeling to be flat Idolatry. If it be as bad or worſe then kneeling before a Crucifixe, it can be no better then Idolatry, foraſmuch as kneeling before a Crucifixe is open Idolatry, and cannot be denyed: whereas we do not worſhip God in the bread or kneele vntounto it, as the Papiſts do to the Crucifixe. The bread indeed we confeſſe is before vsus when we pray to God for his bleſsing vponupon it, that it may auaile vsus to the end for which hee hath appointed it, euen as the meate which we ordinarily receiue in our houſes, is before vsus vponupon the Table when we do giuegive thankes for it. Now they might as well ſay, we pray to our meate or before the meate, as that we kneele vntounto the bread or before the bread of the Sacrament. And it is as lawfull for vsus to kneele downe at the Table when wee doe giuegive thanks, as of cuſtome we ſtand or ſit: & yet we ſhould thereby be vniuſtly cenſured to kneele downe to our food which we receiue. I would gladly therefore be reſolued of ſuch as ſtumble at the orders of our Church, whether they allow of the former ſaying of theſe men or not? If they doe not like it nor approue of it, wherefore doe the… ioyne with them in their opinion, when it is vpholden with ſo weake proofe as with a rotten pillar?

If they do allow it as currant, & hold that ſo many as kneele in the acte of receiuing do commit Idolatry, and thereby make the houſe of God no better then an Idols temple, how dare they be preſent at ſuch Idolatrous ſeruice, & yet make no ſcruple at it? Obiection. To this peraduenture they will anſwere, they will not examine other mens conſciences, neither take vponupon them to iudge of other mens doings: if they thinke they may kneele lawfully, let them do it, ſo that they condemne not others that hauehave more tender conſciences then themſelues. Anſwere. But they muſt not thinke ſo to eſcape and creepe away in the darke, as if they were not eſpied. For they cānot turne ouer the matter to others to looke to thē ſelues, as if it did nothing concerne them: but the queſtion is, how they can iuſtifie their owne preſence at others kneeling, who are accuſed and condemned to do as bad or worſe then bow downe to Idols, and kneele before a Crucifixe? Will their tender conſciences ſerue them to bee preſent at Idols ſeruice and at more groſſe worſhippe then kneeling before a Crucifixe? If the conſciences of any be ſo large in this, and ſo ſtraite at the bare geſture of kneeling, let them take heed they do not incurre the cenſure of Chriſt, who accuſed the Phariſies that they ſtraine at a gnat, and ſwallow a Camell, Mat. 23, 24.that they ſtumble at a ſtraw, and leape ouer a blocke, being preciſe in ſmall things and loofe in greater. Or if they be content to ioyne with vsus in the ſeruice of the ſame God, and come with vsus to the ſame table, let them acknowledge that we doe bow the knees to the Father of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt,Eph 3, 14. and not to an Idoll, and that we do not turne Beth…el into Beth-auen, the houſe of God into the houſe of iniquity, and thereby alſo renounce and vtterly forſake their raſh opinion, who ſpeake, and write, reſolue and determine againſt the geſture receiued and commanded to be vſed in our Church. For if that which they d… maintaine and publiſh be true then in ſtead of partaking the bleſſed body and blood of ou bleſſed Sauiour,1 Cor. 10, 20.21. wee ſhould hauehave f…llowſhippe w th the diuels: in ſtead of d…in…ing the …up of the Lor…, wee ſhould drinke the cup of diuels: and in …tea… of beeing partakers of the Lords Table, we ſhould bee partakers of the Table of Diuels. But to leaue theſe, who I hope hauehave learned to leaue themſelues and to forſake their aſſertion, I dare boldly auouch and offer opē ly to defend, that ſitting at the communion is not more requiſite and neceſſary, then either ſtanding at the hearing of the word, or kneeling in the action of prayer and calling vponupon the name of God, if it be as neceſſary: ſo that if they maintaine that ſitting is the moſt conuenient geſture at the partaking of the Sacrament, I will ioyne with them in this alſo & maintaine, that ſtanding is the fitteſt geſture at hearing, and kneeling alſo at prayer. Hence it is, that when Balaam was to deliuer the word of God vntounto the King of Moab, he ſaid, Riſe vp Balak and heare: Num. 23, 18.and hearken vntounto mee thou ſonne of Zippor, Numb. 23. The like we ſee in Samuel, when he was to annoint Saul King ouer Iſrael, he ſaide vntounto him, Stand thou ſtill a while, 1 Sam. 9, 27.that I may ſhew thee the word of God. Beſides theſe precepts and commandements, we hauehave ſundry examples of Kings and Princes, ſacred & prophane, and of whole aſſemblies that practiſed this geſture. We reade in the booke of Iudges, Iudg. 3, 20.how Eglon King of Moab roſe out of his throne, ſo ſoone as hee vnderſtood that Ehud had a meſſage to do to him from God. Ioſiah the good King of Iudah ſtood in his place by a pillar, while the Prieſts read in the booke of the Couenant, which was found in the houſe of the Lord, 2. Chron. 34.2 Chro. 34.31 2. Kings 23, 2, 3.2 Kin. 23, 2, 3. When Ezra the Scribe opened the booke in the ſight of all the people (for he was aboue them in a Pulpit of wood) to reade in it diſtinctly, and to giuegive the ſenſe, and to cauſe thē to vnderſtand the reading, all the people ſtood vp. Nehe. 8, 5.Nehe 8 5. Can thoſe that vrge and preſſe the neceſsity of ſitting, and the vnlawfulnes of kneeling vnderunder the hard & heauy doome of Idolatry, ſhew ſo many precepts and examples thereof? Or are they able to bring any commandement requiring the one as a duty, and forbidding the other as a ſinne? Frō hence then we reaſon thus.

If ſitting be ſimply neceſſary in the acte of receiuing; then ſtanding is neceſſary in the acte of hearing, and kneeling in the acte of prayer.

But ſtanding is not ſimply neceſſary in the acte of hearing, nor kneeling in the acte of prayer; Therefore ſitting is not ſimply neceſſary in the acte of receiuing.

Furthermore, we muſt vnderſtand that ſitting or kneeling, or ſtanding, are not (being conſidered in themſelues) of the nature and ſubſtance of the Sacrament, but onelyonly accidentall things and outward geſtures of the body: they touch not the life and eſſence of the Supper, but are left at liberty to be ordered and appointed by the Church, as ſhall bee thought fitteſt. Is it of the ſubſtance of prayer to kneele alwayes in the very action of it? I thinke not: for how thē did the Publican ſtand and pray? Luk. 18.13. Mar. 11, 25.And yet he did pray aright and acceptably to God. Or how is it that Ch…iſtia…th, Mar. 11. When ye ſtand praying, forgiue: if ye hauehave ought againſt any. Others may pray ſitting, or walking, or lying, and yet be heard of him to whom they pray. Tertull…an reporteth this as the common cuſtome of his time,De cor…n. milit. and as a tradition receiued from the Apoſtles, that it was vnlawful to kneele at prayer vponupon any Lords day, or vponupon any other day betweene Easter and Whitſontide. And afterward in the firſt Nicene councell a ſolemne decree was made,Cano. 20. that none might pray kneeling, but onelyonly ſtanding vponupon the Lords day: and Baſile that liued after that councell declareth that it was retained as an Apoſtolical traditiō in his time, the true reaſon wherof ſeemeth to be this,Hoſpin. defeſt. Chriſt. becauſe on thoſe dayes is celebrated the ioyfull remembrance of the Lords reſurrection. Thus did thoſe times determine for ſtanding at prayer, and yet is kneeling the fitteſt geſture, (which themſelues ſay is knowne to be commanded of God) and we dare not ſay that their decrees were vnlawful and againſt the word of God.

Moreouer, is it of the nature of hearing to ſtand? How then notwithſtanding the former precepts & precidents of ſuch as went before vsus in it, is it ſaid by Ezekiel, Ezek. 33.31.ch. 33. They come vntounto thee as the people commeth, & they ſit before thee as my people, and they heare thy words, but they will not do them? Indeed the Prophet reproueth them in this place, howbeit it is not for the ſcituation of their bodies, but for not attention of their mindes, and diſobedience of their hearts. If then neither ſtanding at the time of hearing the word, nor kneeling at the time of praying to God, bee of the eſſence of hearing and prayer: how ſhall ſitting be of the ſubſtance of receiuing this Sacrament? It can bee therefore no other in it ſelfe, then a variable circumſtance or ceremony that may be altered and changed, as occaſion ſhall ſerue, and the Church determine.

Furthermore, who is able to ſhew that there ſhould bee greater neceſsity of ſitting at the Supper, then there is of dipping in baptiſme? For dipping commeth neerer to the nature of that Sacrament, then ſitting doth to the nature of the other: foraſmuch as the continuance vnderunder the water ſerueth more fitly to ſignifie our burying of the bodye of ſinne, and going forward to mortifie the corruptions of the old man, and yet notwithſtanding children that are ſprinkled with water are truely and rightly baptized. But if we would compare things of equall nature together, we might affirme, that receiuing ſitting or ſtanding, is all one with receiuing of it in leauened bread or vnleauened, with white wine or red, or any other colour. So that as it skilleth not whether the bread be leauened or vnleauened ſo that it he bread, and whether the wine be red or white ſo that it be wine: ſo the matter is not great conſidered in it ſelfe, without the authority of the Magiſtrate, whether we receiue ſitting, or ſtanding, or kneeling, ſo that we do receiue it.

Nay, to ſhew how little reaſon there is to ſtand ſo ſtrictly vponupon the neceſsity of ſitting, that men and women will rather abſtaine from the Communion, then not follow their opinion, it may well be iudged more neceſſary to tye vsus to receiue in vnleauened bread, then binde our ſelues to the onelyonly geſture of ſitting, becauſe it may put vsus in mind to keepe the feaſt not with olde leauen,1 Cor. 5, 8. neither with the leauen of malice, and wickedneſſe, but with the vnleauened bread of ſincerity and truth.

But it will be obiected, Obiection. that we muſt cleaue preciſely to the firſt inſtitution, and that Chriſts example muſt be our warrant and direction what we ought to do. To this I anſwere Anſwere. three things. Firſt, I would hauehave it ſhewed vndoubtedly & demonſtratiuely that the Diſciples ſate while they receiued. It is true, they ſate at the Table while they did eate the Paſſeouer, but what geſture was vſed at the Supper is not expreſſed, neither can by any neceſſary conſequence be collected and concluded. From whence I reaſon in this manner.

Whatſoeuer is neceſſarily to be obſerued in the Sacrament of the Supper, is eyther expreſſed manifeſtly, or may neceſſarily be gathered from the inſtitution.

But that the Diſciples ſate at the Supper is not manifeſtly expreſſed, nor can neceſſarily be gathered from the inſtitution. Therefore ſitting is not neceſſarily to be vſed in the Sacrament of the Supper.

Obiection. If any aske whether I can proue they kneeled: I anſwere, Anſwere. I cannot, neither that they ſtood vp, foraſmuch as it is left doubtfull, and vncertaine how they receiued: and therefore in it ſelfe it is a circumſtance moſt indifferent. Obiection. Againſt this it will be ſaide, that many great and learned men grant and confeſſe that Chriſt ſate when he deliuered it, and the Diſciples when they receiued it. I anſwere Anſwere. firſt, that ſome of them ſpeake by ſuppoſition and by way of conceſsion, that albeit it be not expreſſed, yet it may be yeelded vntounto. Againe, they ſpeake of it, as of a matter that is probable & moſt likely: howbeit they make of it no matter of faith, nor article of religion, nor point of ſaluation, much leſſe do they turne a ceremony into ſubſtance, or a circumſtance into the eſſence it ſelfe. And if this will content them, wee can eaſily yeeld it vntounto them, that it is moſt probable that Chriſt and his Diſciples ſate. Neuertheleſſe, from a matter that is likely, we may not conclude it to be a matter neceſſary, becauſe albeit they ſate at the Paſſeouer, the geſture might peraduenture be altered at the Supper, many things paſsing betweene the keeping of the one and the adminiſtration of the other. For heere I would be reſolued of theſe points, whether of a matter not written, wee may conclude a matter not done? Secondly, I demand, whether they can poſsibly proue the ſitting of the Diſciples by any inuincible argument, if any man wil deny it? I aske this the rather, becauſe if it were a matter of ſo great waight and importance, that we ſhould rather not communicate at all then kneele, and that it were no leſſe a ſinne then Idolatry, which is the worſhipping of Images, we muſt hauehave plaine Scripture and euident proofe to inforce the neceſsity of ſitting, we muſt not be led by coniectures, nor go by probabilities, which in the matters of God do deceiue, and oftentimes it falleth out,Ariſt. Topic. that many falſhoods are more probable then truths; becauſe we iudge of truth by the nature of it ſelfe, but of probality by the opinion of men. Thirdly, I would know, whether among ſo many Authors and authorities alledged touching ſitting, or ſtanding at the communion, they be content to ſtand to a verdit of twelue men, and ſo to hauehave the matter paſſe by a Iury touching the lawfulnes or vnlawfulneſſe of kneeling? This is our country law, and this offer they cannot diſlike, foraſmuch as the witneſſes are their owne, and we will take exceptions to none of their depoſitions. They tell vsus indeed that ſome were wont to ſit, and ſome to ſtand, and that diuers hauehave wiſhed that kneeling might bee remoued, fearing that it ſhould be an occaſion of Idolatry, but they proue not the point in queſtion, to wit, that it is vnlawful to receiue kneeling: or that men ought to abſtaine rather then kneele, and not ſit. But of this we ſhal hauehave better occaſion to ſpeake more afterward. Now then, to returne to the former matter, ſeeing they cannot proue by force of reaſon but by probability of truth, what geſture Chriſt and his Diſciples vſed, how is it that they would gather a certaine doctrine from an vncertaine doing? But be it that it were true, that the Scripture had determined what particular geſture was vſed, and that both Chriſt and his Diſciples ſate at the Table, I will diduct from hence this concluſion, which I ſee not how they can auoid.

If it be neceſſary for the people to ſit in the acte of receiuing, then it is neceſſary alſo for the Miniſter to ſit in the deliuering of it:

But it is not neceſſary for the Miniſter to ſit in the deliuering of it,

Therefore it is not neceſſary for the people to ſit at the receiuing of it.

The conſequence of the firſt propoſition, if it be denyed, is eaſily proued, becauſe as the geſture of the Diſciples muſt be a direction to the people, ſo the geſture of Chriſt muſt be an inſtruction to the Miniſter. The Diſciples did take the bread into their hands and did eate it, they tooke the cup and dranke thereof: theſe are ſet downe to be examples what the people ought to do. Chriſt Ieſus tooke the bread and bleſſed, he brake it and gaue it, he tooke the cup, he bleſſed, he powred out the wine and gaue it; thus he did, and thus ought the Miniſters after his example to do. So then if the Diſciples ſate at the Table (I ſpeake by ſuppoſition) and the people be for that cauſe bound to ſit at the Supper: then likewiſe if Chriſt ſate, the Miniſters ought not to deliuer it ſtanding, or walking, but ſitting. But if the Miniſters be not bound to ſit as they deliuer it, no more are the people bound to ſit as they receiue it: foraſmuch as according to their opinion and allegation, there was a coherence and connexion of both theſe together in the firſt inſtitution. The aſſumption or ſecond part of the former reaſon, to wit, that it is not neceſſary for the Miniſter to ſit, I wil not ſpend any words to ſtrengthen, leaſt I ſhould ſeeme to fight with mine owne ſhaddow, and to go about to proue that which no man deryeth: and therefore if it muſt be left indifferēt in it ſelfe for the Miniſter to ſit or to ſtand, it can by no meanes be made neceſſary for the people to ſit onelyonly. And if the geſture of Chriſt and his Diſciples were al one, how can they that cleaue ſo ſtrictly to the inſtitution allow, that the geſture of the Miniſters and people ſhould be different?Three demands required to be proued. Wherefore, if it may be thought reaſonable, I require theſe three things to be proued vntounto me: Firſt, that the Diſciples ſate at the Table at the partaking of the Lords Supper. Neither would I hauehave them tell me of likelihoods, and preſumptions, and probabilities: but becauſe kneeling reuerently is made flat Idolatry, or at leaſt is held to be a ſpice and to beare a ſhew of Idolatry, I demand plaine, euident, and direct proofes, ſuch as may ſatisfie the conſcience: and ſo much the rather, becauſe they make it a matter of conſcience, that we may ſee how they will perſwade another, who are or at leaſt will ſeeme to be ſo certainly reſolued themſelues. Secondly, albeit it were ſufficiently proued by ſtrong and vndoubted demonſtrations, that not onelyonly Chriſt but his Diſciples ſate, yet they hauehave not gained and obtained that which they deſire, foraſmuch as we come vponupon them with a ſecond demand, harder for them to proue then the former, nay I will ſay, more vnpoſsible, to wit, whether the ſuppoſed ſitting vſed by Chriſt and his Apoſtles were the ſame that is vſed with vsus, or not? If they confeſſe it is not the ſame, how is it that they call vsus ſo much to the inſtitution? Or how is it that the Diſciples vſed one geſture, and they allow, & require, and practiſe another? If they affirme that their ſiting was as our ſitting, they are eaſily conuinced both by euident teſtimonies of the Scriptures, and by the cleere authorities of godly Writers, and by the continuall practiſe of thoſe Eaſterne countries euen vntounto this day. For if wee will ſpeake truely and properly of ſitting, as we do account of ſitting, which is done with the body vpright, neyther Chriſt nor his Diſciples ſate at the Paſſeouer, as wee hauehave the deſcription thereof ſet downe by the Apoſtle Iohn: and therefore after that Chriſt had teſtified and told them, Verily, verily, I ſay vntounto you, one of you ſhall betray me: Ioh. 13, 23, 2…the Euangeliſt addeth, Now there was leaning on Ieſus boſome one of his Diſciples whom Ieſus loued, Simon Peter therefore beckoned vntounto him that he ſhould aske who it ſhould be of whom he ſpake? hee then lying on Ieſus breaſt, ſaid vntounto him, Lord who is it? Wherby by it appeareth, that their ſitting was not as our ſitting, but a kinde of leaning or bowing downe of the body, not an vpright carriage or ſcituation of it. If then they receiued the Paſſeouer leaning or lying all along, according to the faſhion of thoſe times, and thoſe places, and thoſe perſons, it muſt follow by good ſtrength of reaſon, that if they ſate at the Supper, they ſate not, as wee call ſitting, but leaned at it and lay along, which we would account according to the manners and cuſtomes of our countries wherein wee dwell, to be very vnciuill, and vnſeemely, and vndecent. And this is the iudgement of the learned. Beza writing vponupon the former words touching the Diſciples leaning on Ieſus boſome, ſaith, This is to bee referred to the ſitting downe of the ancient, Beza annot vponupon lib. 13.that many being ſet, the laſt did as it were leane backe vponupon the former, his feete being laide out from him. And Caluine vponupon the ſame words vſeth theſe words in his Commentaries vponupon Iohn, Caluin. Com. vponupon Iohn.It might ſeeme an vndecent thing at this day, but ſuch was their manner of ſitting at that time: for they ſate not at a table as we do now, but hauing put off their ſhooes and leaning vponupon Cuſhions, they ſate halfe vpright in beds, or they lay all along vponupon little beds with their bodyes halfe way bolt vpright.

Thus we ſee how it was in Chriſts time: and thus it appeareth to hauehave beene before in the times of the Prophets. In the book of Eſter Eſter 7, 8.it appeareth they lay along vponupon their beds when they were at their bankets and feaſts, chapter 7. Then the King returned out of the Pallace garden into the Pallace of the banket of wine, and Haman was fallen vponupon the bed wheron Eſter was. And in the Propheſie of Amos, Amos 2, 8.hee ſpeaketh againſt the cruelty and oppreſsion of the Iſraelites, chap. 2. 8. They lay themſelues downe vponupon clothes laide to pledge by eueryevery Altar, & they dr…nke the wine of the condemned in the houſe of their God. Whereby it is plaine, and might yet be made plainer by infinite teſtimonies ſacred and prophane, that their ſitting was much different from ours, and therefore I would know whether our receiued cuſtom of a moſt humble and reuerent geſture of kneeling, ought to bee changed into lying all along obſerued by Chriſt and his Diſciples, our ſhooes being pulled off, and Cuſhions lying vnderunder our elbowes? From hence then we reaſon thus.

If we be tyed preciſely to the example of Chriſt and his Diſciples, then we muſt leane and lye downe all along in receiuing the Supper:

But we muſt not leane and lye downe all along in receiuing the Supper:

Therefore we are not tyed preciſely to the example of Chriſt and his Diſc…ples.

So then, except they can ſhew vsus that leaning is ſitting, & that ſtooping is all one with being vpright, they can neuer warrant that manner of ſitting which they require to be vſed at the Communion. Laſtly, I demand to hauehave it proued, that in eueryevery point we are tyed to the inſtitution, and that it is not lawfull for the Church in any caſe to depart from the firſt celebration thereof. But we know that Chriſt before he adminiſtred his laſt Supper, did eate the Paſſeouer with his Diſciples, and deliuered it at euening, Mathew 26, 20.Mat. 26, 20. He deliuered his Supper alſo in a priuate houſe, and in an vpper Chamber, he inſtituted it after Supper, when their bellies were filled and hunger ſatisfied. But wee are not bound, neither hath the Church thought fit to hauehave it receiued in the ſame manner, neyther tying the receiuers to vnleauened bread, nor to priuate houſes, nor to the euening of the day, nor after our ordinary ſuppers, and therefore we are not tyed to eueryevery circumſtance in the inſtitution.

If it bee anſwered that Chriſt made ſpeciall choice of theſe things aboue any other, Obiection. that it might appeare the ſupper came in place of the Paſſeouer; I might as well reply, Anſwere the Euangeliſts expreſſed not what geſture was vſed, that we ſhould learne not to contend about it: as wee hauehave no mention what bread was vſed, that we might know it skilleth not whether we take leauened or vnleauened, ſo that it bee bread. But to paſſe that ouer, wee hauehave gained thus much, that as all the circumſtances of the inſtitution are not written for our imitation, ſo neyther are all vnlawfull that are not warranted from the inſtitution. And thus hauehave we an anſwere ſhaped to their argument, which is thus concluded,

Whatſoeuer croſſeth the practiſe of our Sauiour, muſt not be allowed off.

But kneeling croſſeth the practiſe of our Sauiour,

Therefore kneeling is not to be allowed off.

The propoſition muſt be warily vnderſtood and limited according to the rule of the Scripture, or elſe being generally vttered, it is falſe, and taken vp both by Anabaptiſts in the queſtion of the baptizing of Infants, and by the Papiſts in the point of vnleauened bread. The Anabaptiſts build vponupon this foundation, Chriſt was baptized at thirtie yeares, and we trow hee knew well the right vſe of the Sacrament, therfore neither ought we to be baptized ſooner. But if this were a good conſequent, and might paſſe without controlement, then muſt we be firſt circumciſed, and afterward baptized, then muſt baptiſme be adminiſtred in Iordan or in ſome riuer. So in the controuerſie betweene the Church of Rome and vsus, whether leauened or vnleauened bread is to be vſed, Bellarmine reaſoneth thus; Chriſt at his laſt Supper vſed vnleauened bread,Bellar de Euchar li. 4. ca. 7 therefore we muſt alſo: for it cannot be doubted, but that is far better and rather to be done which Chriſt himſelfe did. But if we muſt giuegive place to this kinde of reaſoning, and grant any force to be in it, then it wil as well follow from Chriſts example, that the Sacrament of the Lords Supper muſt bee receiued in an vpper chamber, not in the open Church: at euening, not in the morning: after ſupper, not before dinner; none of which we will grant, albeit all of them ſtand grounded vponupon the practiſe of Chriſt. Beſides, it is well enough knowne, that the Church of Geneua do not account themſelues or any other church bound in the action of receiuing to the platforme of the inſtitution, or the practiſe of the Diſciples, and therefore the people doe receiue it at the hands of their Miniſters ſtanding, and do eate it walking and paſsing from them: and their Elders which are their Gouernors for diſcipline, do reach the cup vntounto them. Frō hence we may fitly retort and returne the former argument vponupon their owne heads.

Whatſoeuer croſſeth the practiſe of our Sauiour, muſt not be alowed off:

This is their owne propoſition, I hope they know it & will not deny it. Then we aſſume,

But the order of the Church of Geneua, receiuing ſtanding, croſſeth the practiſe of our Sauiour:

Therefore the order of the Church of Geneua, receiuing ſtanding, is not to be allowed off.

Wherefore if we will vnderſtand the former propoſition aright, we muſt reſtraine it to ſuch things as are eſſential and hauehave commandement from the word; for whatſoeuer croſſeth the practiſe of our Sauiour in any materiall point, of which he hath ſaid, Do this in remembrance of me, doubtleſſe that is not to be allowed of. But kneeling in the acte of receiuing is not in the number of thoſe thing. Laſtly, ſeeing they will needs tye vsus hard to the inſtitution, I will endeauour to vnknit the knot in this manner,

If we be bound of neceſsity to do as the Diſciples did, then we muſt of neceſsity ſit at the ſame Table with the M…niſter as they did with Chriſt:

But we are not bound of neceſsity to ſit at the ſame Table with the Miniſter, as they with Chriſt:

Therefore we are not bound of neceſsity to do as they did.

The knitting together of the parts of the propoſition is apparāt, becauſe it is expreſly obſerued by the Euangeliſts, that Chriſt ſate downe with the twelue: and againe, Behold, Mat. 26.20. Luk. 22, 21.the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the Table. Wherby it may be gathered, that theſe men which do ſo much vrge the neceſsity of ſitting at the Sacrament do not themſelues preciſely obſerue the order of the inſtitution, nor the exā ple of Chriſt and his Diſciples, but do ſwarue from it and breake it, becauſe according to their practiſe, they ought to ſit at the ſame table with the Miniſter in imitation of thē. Seeing then they build the frame of their opinion vponupon the foundation of the inſtitution, why do they make a greater matter of ſitting, thē of ſitting at the ſame table?How a man may breake the inſtitution ſitting. Or wherfore do they depart from the inſtitution, & faile in the manner of their receiuing ſitting, and yet will ſeeme religiouſly to cleaue to the example of Chriſt? Let thē therefore make it manifeſt, that it is more neceſſary for them to ſit, then it is neceſſary to ſit at the ſame Table. Will they hauehave what they lift to be neceſſary, and what they liſt, not to be neceſſary? what they pleaſe to be indifferent, & what pleaſe not thē, not to be indifferent? But ſome will ſay, as hath bin often obiected Obiection. vntounto me, It is a Supper or a feaſt: and therefore if we be not tyed to the inſtitution, yet we are tyed to the ſame geſture which is vſuall at our ſuppers and feaſts. I anſwere, Anſwere. this is a moſt weake and vngrounded aſſertion, and therefore whoſoeuer truſteth vntounto it, or leaneth vponupon it, it will deceiue him and make him fal. For it is called a Supper vnproperly and figuratiuely, and therefore to draw an argument from it, as if it were ſpoken properly, can hauehave no ſure and certaine foundation. Beſides, ſuch do ſuppoſe it is called a Supper, becauſe of the geſture which we are charged to obſerue at the partaking of it, and that we muſt neceſſarily receiue it as we do our ſuppers. But it is called a Supper for other cauſes, as we hauehave noted in the firſt chap. of this booke. Againe, the more common and vſuall geſture obſerued at bankets, is to ſtand, and not to ſit: and therfore by this reaſon, we ſhould hauehave neither ſitting nor kneeling, but ſtanding at the Table of the Lord. Furthermore, I might better affirm, that it ought to be receiued kneeling, becauſe it i… receiued with prayer, which is the moſt common & cō mend…ble geſture in that part of Gods worſhip. Laſtly, ſitting, ſtanding, & leaning, are variable circumſtances, which change and alter according to the different manners & ſeuerall cuſtomes of ſeuerall places. I hauehave alſo heard others alledge in defence of their refuſall to receiue kneeling, Obiection. that they can ſee no reaſon why they ſhold kneele to the bread and wine. Anſwere. And wherefore do they not as wel ſay, they ſee no reaſon why they ſhould kneele to the Miniſter? for they do no more kneele to the bread and wine which they do receiue, then to the Miniſter of whom they do receiue. For no man requireth thē to kneele downe to the outward ſignes, any more then to the ſeates that are before them. We kneele to the creator, not to the creature. And if we may no… kneele in the action of receiuing for feare of ſuperſtition, by like reaſon we may not be vncouered and bare-headed: Anſwere. for this ceremony we vſe in the matter of Gods worſhip. But we alwayes vſe that geſture of kneeling in prayer, when the Sacrament is not adminiſtred: and when the Sacrament is deliuered, we vſe the outward reuerence of bowing the knee, and thinke it meet to be performed and retained, partly to ſtirre vp in our ſelues and in others a more religious eſtimation of thoſe diuine ſeales,Reaſons why we kneele at the Communion partly to remoue all prophane thoughts of contemners and deſpiſers of the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord Ieſus, partly to put a difference hereby from our common bread and wine which we take in our houſes and at our Tables, and partly to teach vsus to lift vp our harts to God to bleſſe his own ordinance, that as well we may take his Son by the hand of faith, as receiue his ſeales by the hand of the body. So then, it is one thing to kneele before a creature, or where the creature is, & another to bow downe vntounto it to honor it & adore it. And how can we kneele any where, but it muſt be before ſome creature in heauē aboue, or in the earth beneath? It is one thing to kneele at the Sacrament, & another to kneele to the Sacrament. If we ſhould kneele downe at our giuing of thanks for our ordinary meates and drinkes at home, may we iuſtly be taxed for kneeling to our meates & drinkes? We kneele downe to God onelyonly to whom we pray and make requeſt, not to the outward ſignes to which we pray not. Againe, it will be obiected, Obiection. that we muſt abſtaine from all appearance of euill: but if kneeling at the Communion be not Idolatry, yet at leaſt it hath appearance of Idolatry in our conformity with the Church of Rome, which hath brought in tranſubſtantiation: and therefore if we ſhal kneele as they do, there is feare of adoratiō. Thus hauehave I heard many reaſon. I anſwere, Anſwere. kneeling reuerently obſerued, is no ſhew or appearance of euill, but of good. And there is no feare of adoration when we kneele, more then there is while we ſit. For doth not he that ſitteth & prayeth aright, adore God? and may not a man worſhippe an Image ſitting, as well as kneeling? and ſet vp an Idoll in his heart while he prayeth to it, truſteth in it, dependeth vponupon it, and confeſſeth vntounto it, when he ſitteth vp as well as when he lyeth downe? And in whom is there feare of adoration? Or to whom is there occaſion giuen of ſtumbling? Not to the Church-papiſts that liue among vsus and communicate with vsus through hypocriſie: for howſoeuer they holde their Idoll of tranſubſtantiation, yet we cannot nouriſh and nuzzle them in their Idolatry, becauſe they hold our conſecration to be no conſecration, and conſequently our Sacrament to be no Sacrament, and profeſſe themſelues in the prophaneſſe of their hearts to receiue it as ordinary bread. Not to our own people, who in their kneeling hauehave no purpoſe to adore the bread, or to bow downe vntounto it. What offence then can be giuen by this geſture to any that liue among vsus, if not to …he papiſts, who wil neuer kneele to our bread, much leſſe to any others? who hauehave learned long ago to renounce their tranſubſtantiation, their ducking, their proſtrating & falling vponupon al foure, their kiſsing the earth, their knocking and bouncing of their breaſt, and all popiſh creeping and crouching to the bread to adore it. They tell vsus that kneeling to the Sacrament was brought in by Antichriſt that man of ſin and ſon of perdition, Obiection. Honorius the 3. in the yeare of our Lord, 1220. therby teaching the people to worſhip the bread. But what is all this to the purpoſe, or what doth this belong vntounto vsus who, Anſwere. thogh we allow kneeling at the Supper, yet diſlike and condemne kneeling to the Supper, reſeruing of it, carrying it about, lifting of it vp, & doing worſhip vntounto it? Honorius the 3. firſt commanded the people at eleuation time to encline and bow themſelues, & when the hoſt was carried about in a ſolemne proceſsion to fall downe to it. This ſuperſtition and abuſe we go not about to iuſtifie, or defend, or reſtore, but condemne it to the pit of hell from whence it came. Hence it is that Caluine teacheth,infiit. …ib. 4 cap. 17 35.36. that the Apoſtles are not read to hauehave proſtrated themſelues and lye along to worſhip the Sacrament: it is the practiſe of Rome to proſtrate themſelues before the bread to adore it. There hath bin much written againſt kneeling at the Communion, but the weakeneſſe of the reaſons ſerueth to diſcouer the imperfections of their writings. For firſt, their opinion looketh one way, & their proofes another: they go about to tye vsus to the example of Chriſt & to proue ſitting, & euermore they conclude ſtanding, ſo that we may ſay with the Poet, Amphora coepit Inſtitut,Horat. de art. Pee… currente rota cur vrceus exit? Secondly, they tell vsus that ſome hauehave wiſhed this geſture of kneeling to be aboliſhed, but who hauehave pronounced and determined that it is vnlawfull? Thirdly, do they bring vsus any examples either of Churches in generall, or priuate perſons in particular, that did ſit at the communion? which deepe ſilence of thoſe that ſpeake of the Sacrament, argueth that the particular geſture was not thought neceſſary, no more then eating the Paſſeouer ſtanding, which was afterward altered. Fourthly, they wreſt many authors out of ioynt, they bring them in to ſerue their purpoſe, and then make them to depoſe what they liſt. Thus they ſerue Caluine in many places, making him to ſpeake againſt kneeling at the Communion, whereas he onelyonly writeth againſt the popiſh adoration. Thus alſo they often cite many & ſundry worthy defendors of our faith againſt the enemies of the grace of God:D. Fulke. D. Sut… …ſſe. D. Willet. and albeit by their great labours they deſerue great praiſe in the Church, yet they marſhall them among other writers, as if either they diſliked the order of our Church, or elſe were ſome ſimple fellowes that regarded not what they wrote: or as if their opinions and their practiſes, their bookes and their liues, their writings and their doings were diſſonant and differing the one from the other: or as if they did ſet downe certain principles which themſelues do not remember when they come to particulars. Fiftly, they teach that kneeling in the act of receiuing the bread and wine is impoſed and obſerued as a part of Gods worſhip, and that it is by all men confeſſed to bee a chiefe part of religious adoration:De Actorat. p. 22. 3. whereas Aretius a learned Diuine maketh it onelyonly an accidentall part of religious worſhip, and it is a cleere caſe, it is no chiefe part of it, both becauſe religious adoration may be and is vſually without it, and it is alſo vſually without adoration. For kneeling is not alwayes ioyned with diuine worſhipping, as appeareth in the example of Abraham before the people of Heth, of Iacob to his brother Eſau, of the debter before his creditor,Gen. 23, 7. & 33, 7. Mat. 18.29. Gen. 48, 12. 1 Kin. 1, 33. and of the ſubiects before their Princes: al theſe bow the knee of the body, and yet do not worſhip in a diuine manner. Laſtly, the authors which they bring, do ſpeake againſt them in the particular point for which they bring thē: ſuch perſons then as ſtand vponupon the opinion of others, let them heare with patience the iudgement of as excellent Diuines as this age hath brought forth.Art. 1 ſect 8. B. Iewel writing againſt Harding ſaith thus, I deny not certaine circumſtances, as faſting, ſitting, ſtand ng, kneeling, and other like ceremonies obſerued in celebrating the holy myſteries, are to be moderated and appointed at the iudgement of the Church. If theſe circumſtances of faſting, ſitting, ſtanding, and kneeling may bee appointed by the Church, then the word of God hath determined and defined nothing concerning the vſe of them: for the Church hath not authority to eſtabliſh any thing againſt the Scriptures. But becauſe his iudgement may be thought partiall, let vsus heare what others teſtifie. It is the order of the Church of Geneua to receiue ſtanding, as we noted before, and as Beza himſelfe witneſſeth. And he hath a notable Epiſtle written to a friend, reſoluing him what the faithfull ought to do that liue where the bread in the Supper is not broken, ne…ther deliuered into the hands, but put into the mouths of the Communicants; things of greater waight and importance then is kneeling at the Sacrament:Beza. epiſt. 2. things that are not in themſelues indifferent: things that are no better then plaine corruptions of the inſtitution of Chriſt: yet he aduiſeth and counſelleth that we ſhould not trouble our conſcience with theſe matters, not giuegive offence to our brethren by refuſing to communicate in ſuch places and among ſuch perſons, as if we were in danger to looſe the life and heart of all Chriſtianity. I appeale now vntounto themſelues that cannot abide our kneeling, and make them Iudges in this controuerſie, whether hee that perſwadeth the people to ſuffer the bread vnbroken to bee put into their mouths, rather then altogether to abſtaine, would not alſo aduiſe to receiue kneeling, according to the order of the Church where it is required and commanded, rather then to breake the peace of the Church? To this purpoſe he ſaith, That which is not in it ſelfe neceſſary, we ought not to vrge farther then is meet. And afterward, The taking of the Supper is preciſely enioyned vntounto vsus, but not the manner how we ſhall take it. Epiſt. 12. et 8And in another epiſtle, when he was asked his opinion touching the bowing of the knee in the act of receiuing, hee thinketh of it as of receiuing with vnleauened bread, yet to auoid ſuperſtition (though it be not euill in it ſelfe) he wiſheth it were aboliſhed, howbeit it is not of him ſimply condemned. With him accordeth the church of France & of the low Countries, who dare not pronounce the ceremony of kneeling in receiuing of the Elements to be vtterly vnlawfull, but for the vtter rooting of bread-worſhip out of the hearts of men, Ob…eruat. vponupon the Harmo of C…nfeſt. Inſtit. lib. 4. cap. 17.they hold it much better in moſt places to hauehave it vtterly abol ſhed. Caluine ſpeaking of this geſture applyeth it wholy againſt the Church of Rome that worſhip this Sacrament; not againſt the true Churches of God that receiue kneeling at the Sacrament, but abhorre and condemne the adoring of the Sacrament. Peter Martyr ſheweth that this outward reuerence vſed in kneeling, is not in it ſelfe and it owne nature euill,Loc. commu. claſſ 4 cap. 10. ſect. 50. ſo that we ſtay not in the Elements, but worſhip in ſpirit and truth Chriſt Ieſus ſitting in the heauens. True it is, (to conceale nothing of his opinion) he taketh this proſtrating & bending of the knee not to be ſo fit, vnleſſe often preaching be ioyned by way of iuſtruction: ſo that if the people bee taught that they are not to worſhip the outward elements, then there is no ſuch feare of Idolatry, but this geſture may be vſed and retained; and this is our caſe at this day. Beſides the iudgement of this godly man and learned Diuine, we hauehave the conſent of the Churches of Bohemia, who far from ſuperſtitious adoring the outward ſignes, bow their knees at receiuing of the Sacrament, as appeareth in the Harmony of the Confeſsions, ſect. 14.Hum of the Church ſect. 14. This Sacrament without adoration and that worſhip which is due to God onelyonly, yet with due reuerence and religion muſt be receiued and adminiſtred, and with that especially which is greateſt of all, namely faith and examination of a mans ſelfe. And not farre after it is added, The Sacrament is reuerently with all godlineſſe diſtributed, and the people of the faithfull moſt commonly falling downe on the…r knees, do receiue this Sacrament with thanksgiuing, with gladneſſe, w th ſinging of hymnes & holy Pſalmes: and they ſhew forth the Lords death, and admoniſh themſelues of all his benefits, to the confirmation of their faith, in a true Communion with Chriſt and his body. Thus we hauehave laid before vsus the iudgement of the beſt Diuines of our age, and the lawdable practiſe of ſundry churches of our time, among the which none doe ſimply condemne the vſe of our Church and the practiſe enioyned to our people. And albeit they ſay, it is beſt to follow his doings who did all things well, yet do not pronounce that they do euill who receiue it kneeling, or otherwiſe then the Diſciples tooke it. But the queſtion which I handle, is not, what geſture is the fitteſt or vnfitteſt for the Magiſtrate to command, but whether the geſture of kneeling be lawfull or not lawfull, whether the Sacrament bee prophaned by it, or not, and whether we ought to ſubmit our ſelues to it where it is impoſed, and whether we ſhould abſtaine from the communion, or may with a good conſcience forbeare the vſe of it where we are not permitted to ſit or ſtand at our owne pleaſure.

Hauing finiſhed in this manner theſe profes for the lawfulneſſe of kneeling, and diſproſes of the contrary, I receiued from a godly, learned, and reuerent Diuine, a collection of certaine reaſons, together with an anſwere of certaine obiections, whereof I hauehave thought good to make the gentle reader acquainted, that is deſirous to ſettle his conſcience in this point.

Touching kneeling at the Communion.

Argument 1. No ſet geſture is commanded. Paul, 1 Cor. 11.1 Cor. 11, 23. deliuering what he had receiued of the Lord, mentioneth not any geſture at all. Therefore any decent and ſeemely is left free to be vſed of vsus in it ſelfe.

Argu. 2. The Conſcience is not bound in any thing which belongeth not to Gods kingdome. Now the kingdome of God, that is, the kingdome of grace, conſiſteth not in meate and drinke, that is, in outward things, Ro. 14.Rom. 14, …7. ſuch is eueryevery geſture of the body. Therefore no geſture ſimply and in it ſelfe belonging to Gods kingdome, as hindring or furthering vsus in the ſeruice of God & in the duties of religion, any may be vſed without ſcruple of conſcience.

Argu. 3. A moſt reuerent geſture is fit to bee vſed in that action which is performed with prayer. Such is the action of receiuing this Sacrament being both giuē and receiued with prayer: therefore a moſt reuerent geſture is fit for it, which is kneeling.

Argu. 4. It ſeemeth in the primitiue Church they vſed to kneele at this action, becauſe the Pagans obiected to the Chriſtians that they worſhipped Ceres & Bacchus: (Auguſt. contra Faustum) Aug. con. Fauſt.which they did (as it is probable) ſeeing them vſe that reuerent geſture at the Lords Table in receiuing the bread and wine.

Argu. 5. Peter Martyr thinketh that kneeling may lawfully be vſed, where there is no opinion of tranſubſtantiatiation, Loc. com. claſſ. 4. ca. 10. ſect. 50.Loc. com. claſ. 4. c. 10. Many godly men bend the knee and adore at the hearing of thoſe words, The word was made fleſh, yet thoſe words are not to be ſaid to be adored, but the things themſelues ſignified thereby. Now what ſhould hinder the ſame to be done in the Sacrament, ſo that the ſignes themſelues be not worſhipped?Art. 1. diuiſ. 8. againſt Har…. B. Iewel leaueth receiuing the Supper faſting, ſitting, ſtanding, kneeling, & ſuch circumſtances to the diſcretion and determination of the Church, The like might be ſaid of the Churches of Bohemia. (Theſe ex…mples and authorities I put down briefly, becauſe they are handled at large before.)

Obiect. 1 Chriſt and his Apoſtles at the firſt inſtitution Obiection 1 ſate: therefore we ought to do ſo.

An. Firſt conſider the ſpeciall occaſion. They were now Anſwer 1 ſitting at ſupper, and this Sacrament was to be inſtituted in the place of the Paſſeouer: therfore our Sauiour continued that geſture ſtill, and would not of purpoſe riſe from Table for ſo ſmall a matter. But if he had come of purpoſe onelyonly to inſtitue this Sacrament, then it is queſtionable whether he would hauehave made choice of the geſture of ſitting. Secondly, our Sauiour as he ſate at the inſtitution of this Sacram… ̄t, ſo alſo he bleſſed or gaue thanks ſitting,Mat 26.26. with 20. As they did eat▪ Ieſus took the bread, & when he had bleſſed, &c. compared with the 20. v. He bleſſed as they did eate: now they did eate ſitting: therefore he bleſſed ſitting. If then we be tyed to his example in ſitting at the Sacrament, then the Miniſter is alſo tyed to it in bleſsing with prayer the bread and wine, and ſo he may not kneele at that prayer which containeth the bleſsing of the bread and wine. Thirdly, why are we not likewiſe bound to the circumſtance of time by his example to celebrate it at night? as alſo to ſit in that manner, leaning one vponupon another, as wel as to this geſture?

Obiection 2 Obiect. 2. We muſt abſtaine from all appearance of euill, 1 Theſ. 5.1 Theſ. 5, 12, but here is appearance of popiſh adoration of the bread. Therefore we ſhould abſtaine from kneeling.

Anſwere. Anſwere. That place is ſpecially meant of matters of doctrine which may iuſtly be ſuſpected, & carry ſome ſhew or appearance of error, though not direct falſhood, Caluin. Comment. in illum locum. Caluin. Comment. in 1 Theſ. 5, 22.Secondly, if we take it as a generall rule, it muſt be reſtrained, and not extended to al things which come neere euill. Our abſtinence from fleſh in time of Lent and other dayes being commanded by authority, may ſeeme to be drawne within the compaſſe of that precept, if we reſtraine it not. For it hath an appearance of the ſuperſtitious religious faſt of the Papiſts. There is abſtinence from fleſh in both, yet the end is farre different: they to worſhip God, we for politicke and ciuill reſpects. So heere the outward geſture is like in both, they kneele, and we kneele: but the end is different, they to adore the bread, we to adore God. Beſides, in the primitiue church, the chriſtiās in prayer turned their faces to the Eaſt, which was an appearance of worſhipping the Sunne, and ſo were they charged to do by the Gentiles: Tert. in Apol.yet in it ſelfe it is not vnlawfull to turne to the Eaſt in prayer. The fact of Paul in ioyning with the Iewes in a worke of the ceremonial law,Act. 21. to wit, purifying, might as well (as this geſture) be drawne within the compaſſe of the former precept, as making for the confirming of the Iewes in the neceſsity of keeping the ceremoniall law. Many ſuch inſtances might be brought to this purpoſe. I take it therefore that this geſture of kneeling cannot be ſaid to be the appearance of euill, but onelyonly in reſpect of the circumſtances, as if among Papiſts receiuing with adoration, a Proteſtant ſhould receiue and kneele, heere indeed is appearance of euill. Or a perſon that is doubted of, whether hee bee a Conſubſtantiaſt or Tranſubſtantiaſt, ſhould receiue with kneeling, and would not receiue otherwiſe, this would breed great ſuſpition, & kneeling would proue in ſuch a perſon the appearance of euill. But being vſed of vsus renouncing theſe doctrines, it is not ſo. Wherefore that precept muſt thus be vnderſtood, whatſoeuer hath in it ſelfe an appearance of euill, is to be auoyded ſimply. But not ſo, that which may hauehave ſome ſuch appearance by reaſon of ſome circumſtances of time, or place, or perſons. Remoue thoſe circumſtances, as they are in this caſe remoued with vsus, and the thing then may be vſed, and yet no appearance at all of euill.

Theſe reaſons and anſweres to obiections I receiued from a graue and iudicious Diuine which I hauehave heere ſet downe, which I dare be bold to affirme, are of more force & greater importance then any thing that euer I hauehave read or heard obiected againſt our kneeling at the Communion. And therefore if we will not be wedded to our owne iudgment, or carried away violently as it were with the ſtreame of ſelfe-louelove and a preiudicate opinion, let vsus yeeld our ſelues to the ſtrength of theſe arguments, and acknowledge the weakeneſſe of the contrary obiections. Now that I might omit no defence of thoſe that are otherwiſe minded vnanſwered; and thereby leaue thoſe of weaker iudgment, that relye too much vponupon them, vnſatisfied: let vsus particularly examine the arguments, which are as the grounds and foundations whereupon they build. Firſt they obiect,The firſt argument that kneeling at the Communion is an humane inuention of no neceſsity, vſed and abuſed to Idolatry. I anſwere, that touching the adminiſtration of the Sacraments, there is & alwayes hath bin aliquid humani, that is, ſomething left to man to order and appoint. In all times of the Church, God hath had his Sacraments, and at all times he hath left ſomewhat arbitrary, whereof he hath ſpoken nothing, but left it to the diſcretion of men. Take the firſt Sacrament for an example in a ſetled Church, I meane Circumciſion. The cutting off of the fore-skin is appointed, and the day of the adminiſtration of it is limited; but by what Miniſter, or by what inſtrument, or with what prayers, or with what words of inſtitution it is to be practiſed, is neither expreſſed, neither can be collected. The like wee might ſay touching the Paſſeouer, who is able to tel vsus how it was conſecrated, snd with what prayers it was ſolemnized? yet we may not thinke that they were as dumbe ſhewes that had no word to informe the conſciences of ſuch as were partakers of thē. We ſee alſo that it is left to the iudgement of the Church what prayers ſhall be vſed both at baptiſme & at the Lords Supper. In baptiſme, dipping or waſhing; once or often: in the Supper, what bread it ſhall be, of what matter, of what forme, of what quantity we are to take: and touching the wine, of what colour, and in what cups it ſhall bee put, and ſundry ſuch like circumſtances eueryevery Church determineth freely. Therefore all inuentions of men are not meere corruptions of the matter. The like we might ſay of the preciſe times of celebrating the Sacraments, which are not tyed to certaine dayes, all which are as waighty as ſitting is. And touching things abuſed to Idolatry, wee are not bound by and by to leaue them for the abuſe, but retaining the vſe remoue the abuſe. For who knoweth not that the bread it ſelfe hath beene and alſo is ſhamefully and groſly abuſed to Idolatry? and yet we are not to depart from the inſtitution of God for the ſuperſtitiō of man. If any alledge againſt theſe things, Obiection. that ſome humane inuentions may be vſed in Gods ſeruice, and ſome things which are abuſed to Idolatry may be vſed in Gods ſeruice, but not humane inuentions abuſed to Idolatry: Heereunto I anſwere Anſwere. three things. Firſt, if humane traditions may be admitted into the worſhip of God, and likewiſe things abuſed to ſuperſtition, then why not humane traditions abuſed to ſuperſtition? If they may be receiued ſeuerally, why not ioyntly together? and if either of them, why not both of them? Secondly, kneeling at the Communion is not meerely humane, nor meerely diuine, but rather a mixt action compounded of both. Caluine in that learned and worthy worke of his Inſtitutions, mouing the queſtion, whether kneeling at time of ſolemne prayer be an humane tradition that a man may refuſe or neglect at his pleaſure, anſwereth thus,Caluin Inſtit. lib 4 cap. 10. ſect. 30. I ſay it is ſo an humane tradition that withall it is diuine. Gods it is, ſo farre foorth as it is a part of that beauty whoſe care and obſeruation is commended vntounto vsus by the Apoſtle: and it is mans or of men ſo far forth as it specially deſigneth what was ſhewed in the generall. The ſubſtance of which anſwere I take it to be this, that in the generall it is diuine, but in the ſpeciall it is humane. So touching the communion, this geſture may be called diuine in ſome part, becauſe it is enioyned by the church which we are commanded to hear, required by the Magiſtrate to whom we muſt be obedient for conſcience ſake,Mat 18, 17. Rom. 13, 5. and adminiſtred with a ſolemne and effectuall prayer, The body of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt which was giuen for thee, preſerue thy body and ſoule to euerlaſting life, &c. & in former time, as the Miniſter did vſe this prayer, ſo the people did teſtifie their conſent, and ioyne with the Miniſter ſaying, Amen: Hiſt. li. 7. cap. 9.Hence it is that Euſebius in his Eccleſiaſticall hiſtory witneſſeth, that bowing the hand they did receiue the body of Chriſt, and anſwered, Amen. And albeit this be not enioyned and commanded, yet I doubt not but eueryevery right receiuer and true religious heart doth teſtifie his aſſent ſecretly vntounto God, and deſireth that inwardly betweene God and his owne ſoule which the Miniſter outwardly vttereth and expreſſeth. Thus may kneeling be ſaid not vnfitly to be diuine: and inaſmuch as it is appointed by men and from men, I confeſſe it may be ſaid to be humane. Laſtly, it were no hard matter to giuegive ſundry inſtances of ſundry humane traditions that hauehave beene abuſed to Idolatry, and yet are not meerely vnlawfull, nor in themſelues euill when they are retained and receiued. Of this ſort is prayer toward the Eaſt an ordinance of man, and ſuch an action as hath beene very ſuperſtitiouſly abuſed: yet if it were impoſed vponupon vsus by authority, I ſee not but we might and ought to ſubmit our ſelues vntounto it with all obedience. Of this kinde alſo is the ſetting of the Lords Supper vponupon an Altar, which God neuer appointed, nor Chriſt himſelfe with his Diſciples obſerued, and it is that which hath beene and at this day is greatly abuſed in popery: yet if it were appointed that in eueryevery church we ſhould hauehave Altars, as in ſome reformed churches is practiſed, why might wee not content our ſelues to receiue vponupon Altars, prouided that all ſuperſtition be abandoned and remoued? Thus much of the firſt reaſon, which is the ground of all the reſt, and therefore we will paſſe them ouer briefly.

The ſecond argument.Secondly, it is obiected that kneeling is commanded with myſticall ſignification. I anſwere, the people of God in all times hauehave vſed ſuch actions and geſtures, as that they vſed them as helpes of their weakeneſſe, and furtherances of themſelues in true piety. Thus they vſed to rent their clothes to teſtifie their ſorrow and heauineſſe of heart, and ſome their diſpleaſure and indignation conceiued at that which they did ſee and behold with their eyes.

This was an humane tradition, and yet it had a myſticall ſignification, declaring the renting of the heart. Neither doth the Prophet ſimply reproue it, but comparatiuely correct it,Ioel 2, 13. ſaying, Rent your heart, and not your garments, that is, rather this then them. For this cauſe alſo we vncouer the head, lift vp the eyes and hands in prayer. Now kneeling hath no other myſticall ſignification at the Communion, then this and the former geſtures hauehave in prayer, ſhewing the humble and gratefull acknowledgment of the benefits of Chriſt with all thankſgiuing, beeing of our ſelues vnworthy (as we profeſſe) to gather vp the crums vnderunder his Table, and to receiue the leaſt of his mercies.

The third argument.Thirdly, it is obiected that kneeling is impoſed as a neceſſary part of Gods worſhippe. I anſwere as before, the kingdome of God conſiſteth not in this or ſuch like ceremonies. It is a wrong done vntounto our Church to lay any ſuch imputation vponupon it: foraſmuch as it doth no where & vponupon no perſon impoſe it is as a neceſſary part of the ſeruice of God. For then it were vtterly vnlawfull to alter or change it, or to bring in any other geſture in ſtead therof: becauſe it is not in the power of any Prince or people to abrogate any neceſſary part of the ſeruice of God. Howbeit we noted before out of the defence of the Articles againſt Harding, written by the reuerent Father in God, Biſhop Iewel of famous memory, that comming to the Communion faſting, and in receiuing, to ſit, or kneele, or ſtand, may be diſpoſed and determined by the Church: yet he neuer thought that the church had any authority to deſtroy & aboliſh any neceſſary part of Gods ſeruice and worſhip. If any of the ignorant ſort doe iudge otherwiſe, it is their fond opinion, not the Churches reſolution. It skilleth not what any priuate perſon holdeth or may hold touching this point, neyther may the whole Church be iuſtly charged with it, and beare the blame of it.

The fourth and laſt argumentThe fourth argument. is of leſſe validity then the former. For as the firſt encounter hath the greateſt force, and the ſureſt guard is placed in the forefront; ſo hauing ſuſtained the ſhocke of that battell, I doubt not but to put to ſlight the poore remainder. It is obiected, that the action of kneeling ſwarueth from the generall rules appointed to direct indifferent things, which ſhould not be vngodly, nor offenſiue, nor vnfit, nor ridiculous, nor vnprofitable, nor vndecent. I anſwere, I hauehave proued already, that this geſture containeth no wickedneſſe not impiety; it is not childiſh or ridiculous, neither hath it in it any ſhew or colour thereof; neyther is it offenſiue, except peraduenture any take offence at it. And touching the indecency or vnfitneſſe of it, albeit I cannot ſee how it can be rightly ſo accounted among vsus, where the people are taught and inſtructed how to vſe it, yet if this were granted, it cannot prooue the vnlawfulneſſe of it.

Thus I hauehave runne ouer as briefly as I could theſe reaſons, and opened the weakeneſſe of them to the faces of ſuch as vrge them. I hauehave not purpoſely concealed any waight or force that they may carry with thē for mine own aduantage, but propounded thē to the view of al mē as ſincerely as I could, for the cauſe noted in the end of this diſcourſe: neither do I know any learned writers beſide themſelues againſt it. It is true, that ſome of late oppoſing the order of the church, do pretend ſundry teſtimonies and authorities of many Authors, and paint the margins of their bookes with almoſt infinite quotations, but what do they all make either for them, or againſt vsus? Do they ſpeake againſt the lawfulneſſe of kneeling, or ſhew that it is againſt Gods word, or hold that all men ought to deny to yeeld vntounto it? no ſuch matter. Nay, eyther they are ſilent in the point for which they are alledged, or elſe they are witneſſes directly depoſing againſt thoſe that alledge them. Let them without all circumlocution or multiplying of words informe vsus, eyther by text of Scriptures, or decree of Councels, or conſtitution of Emperors, or ſentence of Fathers, or iudgement of Martyrs, or determination of Diuines, who hauehave euer taught or publiſhed, that kneeling at the Lords Supper is vtterly vnlawfull. This as yet they hauehave not done, and by reaſon of their deepe ſilence in this matter I am perſwaded they cannot doe. Let them or any for them proue vntounto vsus directly, that wee ought by no meanes to ſubmit our ſelues to this geſture, or that wee may diſturbe the peace of the Church for it, either out of Caluine, or Beza, or Iunius, or Vrſinus, or Bucer, or Bullenger, or Bucanus, or Piſcator, or Paraeus, or Polanus, or Peter Martyr, or Aretius, or Gualter, or Muſculus, or in effect any of elder or later times: or ſhew vntounto vsus, that they hauehave aduiſed and counſelled any, either vtterly to abſtaine from, or for a time to forbeare the receiuing of the Communion, rather then to kneele at it, and then they ſhall ſpeake more to the purpoſe, and yeeld vntounto vsus better ſatisfaction. But if they be not able to bring vsus one ſentence or ſillable out of theſe Writers which are produced by themſelues, or out of any other whoſe praiſe is in the Church for their worthy labours, becauſe their iudgement is plaine, let them freely confeſſe their error, and readily yeeld vntounto the truth. Theſe are thoſe pillars of the church that hauehave carried the burden of the building, and thoſe labourers that hauehave borne the heat of the day; who albeit they hauehave written much of the Sacraments, and themſelues liued where they receiued eyther ſtanding or ſitting, yet neuer wrote againſt kneeling, nor condemned thoſe Churches that practiſed it, knowing very well that we are no more bound to follow them, then they are to follow vsus. Indeed they hauehave all of them abhorred kneeling to the bread, but none of them hauehave abhorred kneeling at the receiuing of the bread: and therefore let them that hauehave beene ſo earneſt heeretofore for ſitting at the Communion, and to reaſon for the practiſe a… in the maintenance of it, lay their hand vponupon their mou and not ſo eagerly purſue that cauſe, but be content to ſubmit themſelues to the order of the Church; and let them learne to giuegive thanks to God the Father, that we hauehave the Supper of the Lord ſo ſincerely adminiſtred among vsus, and that they may ſo reuerently receiue it, which in ſo pure and holy a manner is not either deliuered or taken in ſome other Churches, where notwithſtanding they ought to Communicate that liue in them. So long as wee may take the bread and drinke of the cuppe of the Lord with hearing the word preached, with prayers and praiſes offered to God, let vsus not ſtriue and contend in indifferent things, (as we hauehave proued this to be) which are to be ordered by the higher powers; but yeeld obedience to the truth, and be content to ioyne with our brethren, as in the action of the Supper, ſo in the geſture of the body, that ſo with ioy of heart and comfort of Spirit, with one minde & with one mouth we may glorify our Father which is in heauen. And if the beſt reformed Churches bee onelyonly the competent Iudges in this caſe,Pag. 50. to whoſe iudgement we are to conforme our ſelues, as themſelues confeſſe, the queſtion will ſoone be at an end, foraſmuch as there is no Church vnderunder heauen that we know, nor learned writer before our times that I can vnderſtand by the relation and obſeruation of others, to hauehave ſimply condēned the geſture of kneeling at the Sacrament as vnlawfull. I deny not but ſome hauehave held this ceremony needleſſe, vnprofitable, in expedient, and fit to be aboliſhed, but not impious, vnlawfull, Idolatrous in it ſelfe. It is well ſaid of Beza Beza epiſt. 2.in his ſecond Epiſtle, that albeit the Sacraments be inſtituted by Chriſt, and that by mans authority nothing ought to bee added to them or detracted from them, yet not eueryevery declining from the inſtitution is to be accounted a corruption, ſo that the intent and purpoſe of the Author of them be obſerued. When the Lord Ieſus did ordaine his laſt ſupper, it is moſt likely that the diſciples receiued the bread and the cup not at the hands of Chriſt, but one of another, foraſmuch as he tooke the cup and gaue thanks, and ſaid, Take this and diuide it among your ſelues, Luke 22, 17.and that all of them did drinke of one and the ſame cup: what then? Shall wee ſay that thoſe Churches offended, or that the commandement of Chriſt is tranſgreſſed, or that the inſtitution is violated, where one doth not deliuer the Sacrament to another, but all receiue it at the hand of the Miniſter, & where they drinke alſo not of one, but of diuers cups? No, in no wiſe: becauſe the taking of the Elements is neceſſarily required, but the manner is not preciſely appointed and preſcribed. And heereby alſo we ſee farther, that we are not ſeruilely bound to cleaue to the example of Chriſt in the adminiſtration and participation of the Supper: albeit on the other ſide we hauehave no purpoſe to oppoſe our ſelues any way againſt him; but inaſmuch as he hath left it free, we hauehave made choice of that we thinke fit. Thus I hauehave finiſhed the point which I intended, to bring backe our deceiued brethren and ſiſters to a willing ſubmiſsion to the orders of our Church in this behalfe. I hauehave of purpoſe abſtained from ſpeaking of many other points which I might hauehave touched, and peraduenture had beene fit to be obſerued, leaſt I ſhould exaſperate any way thoſe that are contrary minded, and thereby driue them farther from that whereunto I goe about to perſwade them, and ſo wound thoſe whom I deſire to win. For I am ſo farre from going about to kindle the coales of contention, and mouing them any way to anger, or bringing them to trouble, whom I minde to gaine to the truth▪ that if I hauehave let fall any thing from my pen, that they which are contrary to me in opinion and to our Church in practiſe, might take to be ſpoken to their diſgrace, or vttered in contempt of their perſons, I do heere freely condemne it my ſelfe, before it come into other mens hands to be read of them: I ſeeke for verity, I ſtriue not for victory. In the matters of God we ſhould be farre from bitterneſſe, and eſpecially in things of this nature we ought to be patient toward al men. In all controuerſies I account it an heauenly direction worthy to bee followed, ſet downe by the Apoſtle, Eph. 4.Eph. 4, 31, 32. Let all bitterneſſe, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and euill speaking, be put away from you: and be ye kinde one to another, tender hearted, forgiuing one another, euen as God for Chriſts ſake hath forgiuen you. And to conclude, I ſay with the ſame Apoſtle in another place, Gal. 6.Gal 6, 16. As many as walke according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and vponupon the Iſrael of God.

Thus much of the duties and rites to be practiſed of the Communicants, as likewiſe touching the reſt of the outward parts of the Lords Supper.

The New Covenant, Book 3 · Chapter 6

p. 385CHAP. VI. Of the fourth outward part of the Lords Supper.

Touching kneeling at the Communion.

CHAP. VI. Of the fourth outward part of the Lords Supper.