A true narration of all the passages of the proceedings in the generall Assembly of the Church of Scotland, holden at Perth the 25. of August, anno Dom. 1618 VVherein is set downe the copy of his Maiesties letters to the said Assembly: together with a iust defence of the Articles therein concluded, against a seditious pamphlet. By Dr. Lyndesay, Bishop of Brechen.

An answere to the Articles presented to the Assembly, AVGVST 27▪ and quotations added by the Pamphleter for confirmation.

PP.

FOr so much as we haue beene debarred of ac∣cesse, and from hearing the proceedings of the Conference▪ their Reasonings, Consul∣tations, and Aduisements, about the Arti∣cles proponed to this g••nerall Assembly: whereof, all, and euery one of them so neare∣•••• touches vs in our Christian resolution, and offices of our M••nistry▪ in most humble manner wee present to your consi∣deration the particulars hereafter specified in the feare of God, in••reating your fauourable answere to the same.

ANS.

Neither he who presen••ed the Articles, nor they who pen∣ned them, can affirme truely, that they were absent from the Conference, and none were debarred, who were desirous to be present. The truth is, after long, and modest reasoning, and graue deliberation, when all had beene heard, both in pr••uate at the Conference and in publique before the Assem∣b••y, and all doub••s and ob••ections had beene proponed, an∣swered and satisfied▪ these, or the like Art••cles were pre∣sen••e•• not for resoluti••n of those by whom they were pro∣poned, who were already setled in this resolution, not to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ but to per••urbe the mindes of these who were pre∣pare•• to vote, and conclude, and so to bring all in question

againe, that before had beene discussed; and therefore were iustly reiected by the Moderator as malicious and crafty de∣latorie exceptions, as shall bee manifest by the answeres fol∣lowing made to them, not as they were presented to the As∣sembly, but as they are proponed here, with your Additions, Q••otations, and Confirmations.

The first Article.

PP.

THe Articles proponed, if they be concluded, they doe innouate, and bring vnder the slander of change, the e∣state of this Church, so aduisedly established by Ecclesiasti∣call Constitutions, Acts of Parliament, approbation of other Churches, and good liking of the best reformed Christians without and within this Kingdome, and so euidently blessed with happy successe, and sensible experience of Gods grea∣test benefits, by the space of fiftie eight yeares and aboue; so that wee may boldly say to the praise of God, That no Church hath enioyed the truth and puritie of Religion in lar∣ger libertie. And vpon some such considerations, it pleased his gracious Maiestie to continue the Church of England in her established estate, as may bee seene in the Conference at Hampton Court, and Thomas Sparke his booke written thereupon, Ipsa quippe mutatio, etiam quae adiuuat vtilitate, nouitate perturbat: quapropter quae vtilis non est, perturbatio∣ne infructuosa consequenter noxia est, saith Augustine, Epist. 118. that is, Euen a change that is helpefull for vtilitie, per∣turbeth with the noueltie. Wherefore, consequently, a change that is not profitable, is noysome through fruitlesse pertu••bation. Rather a Church with some fault, then still a change, it is said in the Conference at Hampton Court.

Answere to the first Article.

IF the estate of our Church did consist in circumstantiall al∣terable Ceremonies, the change of these might import a ••hange of her estate: But such points and ceremonies as were concluded by the Assembly at Perth, haue the like re∣••ect to the estate of the Church, that ornaments and ve∣••••ures haue to the body, seruing onely for commoditie, or∣••er and decency, to bee kept in the worship of God: And herefore when occasion requireth▪ as a change should bee made of apparell and may bee made without alteration of ••he constitution and health of the body. So the change of Ceremonies, necessary for the time▪ doe not innouate and bring vnder slander of change the estate of the Church, as Augustine saith, Epist 86. Vna fides est vniuersae Ecclesiae, ••amersi ipsa fidei vnitas qui••usdam diuersis obseruationibus ce∣••ebratur quibus ••ullo modo quod ••n ••ide verum est impeditur, ••mnis enim pulchritudo siliae Regis intrinsecus: ••llae autem ob∣••eruationes quae variae obseruantur▪ in ••ius veste entelliguntur, vnde illi dicitur in fimbrijs aure•••• circumamicta varietate: that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 The Faith of the vniuersall Church is one, albeit the Vni∣••ie of the Faith it selfe bee celebrate with some diuers obser∣uations▪ whereby the Veritie of the Faith is not impedit, for all the beautie of the Kings daughter is within; but these obseruations, which are variantly obserued, are vnderstood to be in her apparell, therefore it is said of her, That shee is clothed with varietie in vestures of gold▪ Psal. 45. In this veritie of Faith, whereby the Church standeth, her estate consisteth▪ this must bee euer kept one and the same, albeit of the obseruations and ceremonies, wherewith it is clothed, ••t may sometime be said, as God said of IOSVA, Take away ••he filthy garments from him I will clothe thee with a change of rayment. Tertull. de Virginibus Velandis. Regula qui∣dem fidei vna omnino est sola immobilis, & irreformabilis, &c. Hac lege fidei manente, caetera iam disciplinae, & conuersatio∣nis

admittunt nouitatem correctionis, operante scil cet, & pro∣ficiente vs{que} in finem, gratia Dei. The rule of Faith is altoge∣ther one, onely vnchangeable, and such as cannot be refor∣med, &c. This Law of Faith standing firme, the remanent things, that concerne discipline and conuersation, admit the noueltie of correction by the grace of God, which worketh and maketh a profitable progresse, euen to the end. Augu∣stines sentence, which yee cite, is not repugnant to this, for in that place he speaketh not of such a mutation, as procee∣deth from the instant, and lawfull desire of a Prince, and af∣ter due deliberation, is concluded by the body of the whole Church; but of such a nouation as is vrged contentiously by some curious spirits, who being strangers to the Church, wherein they presse to make the nouation, would haue the customes thereof changed, according to the formes of their owne Countrey; or being trauelled abroad, would make a reformation according to that, which they see in their pere∣grination, Aut quia in sua patria sic ipse consueuit, aut quia ibi vidit vbi peregrinationem suam, quo remotiorem à suis, eo do∣ctiorem factam putat. In such a case, saith Augustine, the no∣uation helpeth not so much by vtilitie, as it hurteth by no∣ueltie; such was the alteration that was intended and vrged by some Innouators at Hampton Court. Where notwith∣standing some few particulars were explayned in the Litur∣gie of the Church of England, as is set downe in the third dayes Conference by D. William Barlow, as followeth.

1. Absolution or remission of sinnes in the rubricke of ab∣solution.

2. In priuate Baptisme, that a lawfull Minister bee pre∣sent.

3. Examination and Confirmation of Children.

4. Iesus said vnto them twice, to bee put in the Domini∣call Gospels, in stead of, Iesus said to the Disciples.

Thus his Maiesty who had wisely said before in that Con∣••erence. Rather a Church with some fault, then still a change: declared that where the fault might bee redressed, without change of the estate of the Church▪ the fault was to be men∣ded and the estate ••reserued.

The second Article.

PP.

The receiuing againe of these Articles so iustly ••eiected▪ and so carefully and long kept forth of the CHVRCH•• grieueth reformed Professours tenderly af∣fected to our reformation, and giueth occasion to our Ad∣uersaries to reproue our separation from them of rashnesse, leuitie and inconstancie▪ and not only hindereth their con∣uersion▪ but strengthneth their hope of our further confor∣mitie with them▪ quoties non mutarunt suam quisque sen∣tentiam, &c.

ANS.

The receiuing againe of these Articles neuer reiected as vnlawfull, giueth no iust occasion of griefe to any, who are not superstitiously affected to externall Rites and Ceremo∣nies: and such are not to be followed, but should be better informed. And as for the Aduersaries it grieueth them, that by this change their mouthes are stopped, who before took occasion to slander our Church of prophanenesse for fitting at the Sacrament▪ of impious ingratitude for neglecting the solemne commemoration of the inestimable benefits of our Redemption▪ of contempt of the Sacraments, and crueltie, for refusing in cases of necessitie Baptisme to Infants, and the Supper of the Lord to these who desire the comfort thereof, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the time of their death: which things being now restored in our Church, they are afraid that many who before of their ••ect, did not so much abhorre our profession for the sub∣stance of doctrine, as for the precise excluding of these reli∣gious

Rites, may now bee moued to adioyne themselues to our Church. But to be short, what can bee so well done by vs, whereat they will not take occasion to slander vs ei∣ther of inconstancie, or prophanenesse, and impietie? Therefore our actions must not depend on their constructi∣ons, but we must doe that which is most expedient and best for the estate of our owne Church, and not regard their hopes, conceits, calumnies, and lyes, whereby they maintaine their Kingdome of darknesse.

The third Article.

PP.

They cannot stand in one profession with brotherly kind∣nes, peace, and loue, which must bee tenderly kept amongst the members of Christs body, as the same consisteth of strō∣ger and more infirme, as may appeare in the Apostolicall Rules following, &c. Things indifferent (put the case mans inuention were of that nature) in the case of scandall, ceasse to be indifferent, and are as things morall. Perkins, Gal. 2.3.

ANS.

Vnto this Article Augustine answereth in his 118. Epi∣stle to Ianuarius, cap. 2. in these words; Saepe sensi dolens, & gemens multas infirmorum perturbationes fieri, per quorundam fratrum obstinationem, & superstitiosam timiditatem, qui in re∣bus huiusmodi, quae ne{que} sacrae Scripturae authoritate, ne{que} vni∣uersalis Ecclesiae traditione: ne{que} vitae corrigendae vtilitate ad certum possunt terminum peruenire, &c. Tam litigiosas excitant contentiones, vt nisi quod ipsi faciunt nihil rectum existiment: I haue often thought with sorrow and sighing, that the per∣turbations and offences of many weake ones, come by the contentious stubbornnesse of some Brethren, and by their superstitious feare, who for such matters, as neither by au∣thoritie of the holy Scripture; nor by the tradition of the v∣niuersall Church: nor by vtilitie for amendment of life, can be determined and brought to some certaine point, stirre vp contentions that they esteeme nothing right but that which they doe themselues. This is it that breaketh the bonds of

kindnesse, peace and loue amongst Brethren. As to things in∣••ifferent it is true indeed, that they become not only scan∣••alous, and morally euill, as Perkins sayth, but superstitious, ••nd Rites of wil-worship, when they are vrged as necessary ••o be vsed for parts of Gods worship instituted by himselfe, as ye vrge sitting at the Table in the Sacrament of the Sup∣••er: or when it is vrged, ••hat they be reiected and excluded ••rom the worship of God, as simply vnlawfull, and which may be vsed▪ without breach of some diuine Ordinance, as ••ou will haue kneeling: and the commemoration of Gods ••nestimable benefits ••pon the fiue Anniuersary dayes: the ••ebration of ••he Sacraments in cases of necessity in priuate places: and the examination▪ and blessing of yong Children ••y the Bishop in his Visitation ••he contentious mainte∣nance of such points against the order of the Church can neither stand with Pietie, nor Charitie▪ nor with the Apo∣••tolicall Rules. Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne. Giue no of∣fence neither to the ••ew▪ nor to the Grecian: nor to the Church if God▪ Let all things be done honestly, and in order.

The fourth Article.

PP.

They giue way to humane ••nuentions, and bring the wrong key of mans wit within the house of God, whereby ••oves and ••rifling Ceremonies in number, and force are mul∣••iplyed as mens wits are variable to inuent: Who requireth those things at your hands▪

ANS.

The determination of the circumstantiall Ceremonies, be∣longing to the formes times▪ places▪ and persons▪ by whom, where▪ when▪ and how God should bee worshipped, conclu∣ded by the Assembly at Perth▪ giue no way to humane in∣uention nor bring within the house of God any key, but that which God hath giuen to his Church, for pie••y and edi∣fication▪ and for establishing of order, and decencie to be••∣••ed ••n his worship, which things God requireth at our hands.

The fift Article.

PP.

The admitting of some openeth the doore to the rest, & the multitude of such make vs inferiour to the Iewes in two respects. First, Their Ceremonies were all diuine. Secondly, In number fewer then rituall Christians do obserue betwixt the Pasche and Pentecost. Gerson complayneth, Quod multi∣tudine leuissimarum ceremoniarum vis omnis Spiritus sancti, quem in nobis vigere oportuit, & vera pietas sit extincta: that with the multitude of friuolous Ceremonies, true pietie was extinguished, and the force of the Spirit which ought to bee powerfull in vs. Iewell. Apollog. p. 116. Sed quamuis hoc ne{que} inueniri possit, &c. Aug. Epist. 119. Howbeit it cannot bee found, how they are contrary to the faith; yet they presse downe Religion it selfe with seruile burthens, so that the estate of the Iewes is more tolerable, who howbeit they did now acknowledge the time of their liberty, are sub∣iect notwithstanding to the burthens of the Law, not to the presumptions of man. Quanto magis accedit cu∣mulo, &c. Confess. Orthodox. cap. 27. that is, The more, that the heape of Rites and Ceremonies in the Church in∣creaseth, the more is derogated, not onely from Christian libertie, but also from Christ, and his faith; learned & graue men, may like better of the single forme of Policie in our Church, then of the many Ceremonies of the Church of England, Epist. before Basilicon Doron.

ANS.

Some Ceremonies must bee admitted, otherwise neither order nor decencie can be obserued, in the worship of God: and the admission of such as be lawfull, and profitable, is not

••he cause of introducing vnnecessary burthens: but when ••he Church extendeth her libertie▪ beyond the bounds assig∣ned thereto, of order and decency; and moderateth not the ••se of her power▪ according to the ••••ostolicall Rules of pie∣•••• and charity, 1. Cor. 10.••1. Whatsoeuer yee doe, doe all to the ••lory of God 1. Cor. 14.26. Let all things ••e done to edification, Rom▪ 14.10. Let 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ther••ore follow after the things which make ••or peace▪ and things wherewith one may edifie another, Gal. 5.••. Stand in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made you free, and ••e not intangled againe with the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of bondage. When ••hese rules are no•• looked to▪ and thereby the power of the Church moderated and keened within the limits of circum∣stantiall things belonging only to the manners, times, and places of diuine worship▪ w••ereof some of necessitie must be determined and appointed to bee vsed in the worship of God▪ vnnecessary burdens are laid vpon the Church, as it was in Papistr••. Against this abuse, the complaints of Ger∣••on and Augustine are directed▪ which ye shall neuer be able to apply truly against the Ceremonies determined and con∣••luded at Perth▪ which are all within the compasse of the Apostolicall Canons, and concerne only circumstantiall ••hings; and there be farre more learned and graue men, who ••ike better of them, then of our former order, as after shall be cleered in the dispute.

The sixt Article.

PP.

Matters of that nature bring ineuitably with them disputa∣tions diuisions contentions▪ as may be seen in all Churches, where such coales of contention get entrie. The Pascha of the Primitiue Church▪ &c.

ANS.

It is not the nature of the matters, but the nature of contentious persons, that for such matters take occasion to make question and strife,

The seuenth Article.

PP.

They hinder edification, for how much time and zeale shall bee spent vpon the in-bringing and establishing of these, as much leisure and oportunity Satan getteth to sow and water the tares of Ath••isme, Schisme, Popery, and Dis∣sention. Consider the sen••••nce following, Let vs proceed by one rule, that we may minde one thing, &c.

ANS.

This is a prophetical Article easie to bee diuined by these, who had already concluded by their opposition, and con∣tradiction to hinder the peaceable in-bringing therof, & to open a gate of dissention wherby Satan might enter to sow the tares of Schisme, Atheisme, and Popery in the Church; yet obedient and peaceable Pastors, haue in their Congre∣gations brought in practice, all these things without losse of time, or trauell. And Satan, Schisme, Atheisme, and Po∣pery had bin debarred, and the work had pleasantly and pro∣fitably gone forward, had the rest concurred with them, according to the golden sentēces following. First, Let vs proceed by one rule, that we may mind one thing. Secondly, Let vs follow the truth in loue. Thirdly, Giue no place to the De∣uill. Fourthly, Let no root of bitternesse spring vp to trouble you. Fiftly, Fulfill my ioy, that yee bee like minded, hauing the

same loue, being of one accord and one iudgement, that nothing bee done through contention, or vaine glory, but that in meek∣nesse of minde euery man esteeme other better then himselfe. Sixtly, Doe all things without murmuring, and reasoning.

The eighth Article.

PP.

They bring a sensible blot, either vpon the happie memory of our godly, and wise Predecessors, in so farre as wee de∣part from that reformation, so wisely brought in, appointed & established by them: or else vpon our selues, by resuming againe of dangerous superfluities, without reason, reiected by them for weighty and necessary causes. Magnum est hoc Dei munus, &c. Beza Epist. to Master Knox. This is a great benefite of God, that yee brought into Scotland true religion, and good order, the bond that retayneth doctrine at one time; So I beseech and obtest that yee retayne these two together, so that yee remember, that if the one bee left, the other cannot endure long: and againe he saith, Quam re∣cte illud, quod disciplinam, &c. How well was that done, that yee conioyned doctrine and discipline together! I beseech you, and obtest, that yee goe forward, lest it happen to you, which is befallen to many that could not make a progresse, hauing stumbled in the very entry. Yea somtime were not willing, which ••s most lamentable

ANS.

Distingue tempora, & conciliabis Scripturas: What ou•• Predecessors did, being agreeable to their times, was well done, and is approued of vs: and by their example in these alterable ceremonies and circumstances, wee should like∣wise conforme our selues to our times, by reiecting, or re∣ceiuing▪

or of new ordayning what wee find to bee 〈…〉〈…〉 edification, according to the power giuen by God to the ••ep••••sentatiue Church, both to make Constitutions for the g••od behauiour of all her members in their vocation, as 〈…〉〈…〉 abrogate and abolish all Statutes and Ordinances co••c••••ning Ecclesiasticall matters, that agree not with the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 &c. as is affirmed in the Booke of the Policy of our Chu••ch, cap. 7. registred amongst the Acts of the generall Assembly, Anno 1581. The 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or good order of the Church of Scotland, which Beza praiseth as the band whereby doctrine is preserued, and which hee exhorteth to retayne carefully, is the vse of this Ecclesiasticall power in▪ censuring of manners, called in the 74. Epist. D••scipline, and in the 79. Good order; which being lost, hee saith, The doctrine cannot bee long preser••ed. This hee proueth: First, by the nature of the thing it selfe, Quis enim leges s••tis recte seruari nisi constitutis earum custodibus, & vin∣dicibus posse sperarit. Who can hope, that Lawes can bee well enough kept, except keepers and auengers of them, bee appointed? Here hee compareth the doctrine to the Lawes, good order, and discipline to the auengers and keepers of the Lawes. Secondly, hee proueth the same by experience; Et ipsa saltem stultorum Magistra, experien∣tia, earum gentium exemplo, docet quibus certum est hodie, ob hoc ipsum potissimum erratum, quod corrigi populi non susti∣nent, Euangelium ad iud••cium potius, quam ad misericordiam promulgari: that is, Experience it selfe, the Schoole ma∣ster of Fooles, by the example of these Nations teacheth this, wherein it is certayne this day, that chiefly for this errour, namely, That the people will not suffer themselues to bee corrected, that the Euangell is preached amongst them, rather for iudgement, then for mercy. Here it is ma∣nifest, that by the good order and discipline, the points in controuersie belong not: But yee, no sooner heare good order or discipline commended▪ but presently yee imagine,

that your table gesture of sitting at the Sacrament; the a∣bolition of Holy-dayes, and celebration of the Sacrament in priuate places in cases of necessitie, &c. are meant, as if without these Ceremonies and obseruations, the doctrine could not bee preserued; for how was it preserued in Geneua, where they sit not at table, but stand, or passe at the receiuing of the Sacrament? where the fiue Holy-dayes are not discharged, but Christmasse, and Pasche solemnely kept, and the Sacrament ministred on them. * 1.1 Caluine hol∣deth in cases of necessity, That Baptisme may be ministred in coetis aliquo, in some meeting without a Temple; That the Communion should bee giuen to the sicke; and wisheth that the examination of children, with the ancient forme of blessing were restored in the reformed Churches: whereby it is manifest, that the discharge and abolition of these things is not in the iudgement of Caluine and Beza, the band, wherby doctrine is retayned, but the discipline which consisteth in censuring of manners, which you both here, and in discussing of the Oath following, take for the order and policy that consisteth in alterable Ceremonies. And by the ambiguitie of the word, doe purposely deceiue your Reader.

The ninth Article.

PP.

They set loose the filthy mindes and mouthes of fleshly liuers, to triumph against the most sound Professors, and to rejoyce in their rotten opinions, and restored oppor∣tunities of sensuall obseruations of guising, gluttony, care∣lesse, &c.

ANS.

The sacred exercises of sound doctrine, appointed to be vsed on the fiue Anniuersarie dayes, restoreth not, but most powerfully abolisheth the opportunities of sensuall obseruations, rooteth out rotten opinions, and stoppeth the mouthes of fleshly Libertines, not to triumph against sincere Professors.

The tenth Article.

PP.

They are declared by this Church to bee contrary do∣ctrine, as may bee seene in the first, second, and third Chap∣ters of the first booke of Discipline, in these words: Wee iudge that all doctrine repugnant to the Euangell, should bee vtterly suppressed as damnable to mans saluation, &c. By contrary doctrine, wee vnderstand whatsoeuer men by Lawes, Councells, or Constitutions, haue imposed vpon the consciences of men without the expresse Commande∣ment of Gods Word, as keeping of holy dayes commanded by men, the feast of Christmasse, and other feasts, &c.

ANS.

The iudgement and declaration of our Church touching this point, is very sound; For whatsoeuer is imposed by men, or by Ecclesiasticall Constitution vpon the consci∣ence to bee obserued, as parts of diuine worship, that is not expresly or by necessary consequence contayned in the Word, is contrary to the wholsome Doctrine; as the Pa∣pists did the obseruation of Christmasse, and other festi∣uall dayes; which the reformed Churches, and the Assem∣bly

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

the present opinions of the Presbyteries, & particular Chur∣ches of the Realme: but receiued a free, and voluntary Commission, to vote, as they should bee mooued, and per∣swaded by the motiues, and reasons proponed at the As∣sembly; otherwise, they had met with preiudice. And there∣fore, what they concluded according to their Commission, was not obtruded vpon the Churches against their will, but according to their wills contayned in the Commission.

The twelfth Article.

PP.

The Commissioners of Presbyteries here assembled, vn∣derstanding the alienation of them from whom they recei∣ued commission, from these Articles, can by no warrant ob∣lige their vnwilling Presbyteries, and Congregations to their votes. Ecclesiam dissentientem & inuitam obligare, quis potest? Who can binde a Church dis-assenting, and vn∣willing?

ANS.

If the Commissioners had come to the Assembly with∣out a free and vnbounded Commission, to reason, vote, and conclude, in their names, they could not by their votes, and conclusions haue bound the Churches, and Presbyteries from whom they come, if they had after dis-assented. But the generall and vnlimited Commission giuen to the Commissioners, to reason, vote, and conclude with this expresse clause, Firme and stable holding, and for to hold whatsoeuer their Coommissioners should conclude in their names, obliged the Presbyteries and Congregations by whom the Commission was giuen. And here I marke a con∣tradiction betwixt this Article, and that which ye affirme in

discussing of the Oath, pa. 30. Namely, that the Oath of the Church representatiue giuen An. 1596. did oblige them all who were liuing to the maintenance of the puritie of Reli∣gion in Doctrine and Discipline. Heere yee acknowledge, that the Church representatiue hath power to oblige all li∣uing within the iurisdiction; therefore yee cannot allow of ••his Article according to your grounds.

The thirteenth Article.

PP.

There stand in force diuers Acts of Parliament in fauours of our present order, Iacob. 6, Parl. 1 cap. 8. Iames 6. Parl. 8. cap. 68. & cap. 69. Item. in the first Act of Parliament, An∣no 1592.

ANS.

None of the Acts of Parliament here cited is contrary to ••he alteration.

The fourteenth Article.

PP.

The Ministers of this Church, by order of the same prin∣ted and inserted before the Psalme Booke, at their admissi∣ons respectiue, promise in the presence of God, and of his Congregation assembled, to abhorre, and vterly refuse all Doctrine alledged necessary to saluation, that is not expres∣ly contayned in the olde and new Testament, &c. Item, to submit themselues to all admonitions secretly, or publikely giuen.

ANS.

Against this promise, nothing was concluded by the As∣sembly at Perth; but how this promise is performed by these who disobey the Ordinances thereof, let them aduise with their owne conscience.

The fifteenth Article.

PP.

The Subscribers of the Confession of Faith by their oath, therein contained, promise, and sweare to continue in the obedience of the doctrine & discipline of this Church, & to defend the same according to their vocation and power all the dayes of their liues, &c. And to abhor and detest all con∣trary religions, but chiefly all kind of Papistry in generall, e∣uen as they are now damned by the Church of Scotland: but in special the Popes fiue bastard Sacraments; whereof Con∣firmation is one: with all Rites and Ceremonies, and false doctrines added to the Sacraments without the Word of God: his absolute necessity of Baptisme, &c. which Confessi∣on is come to the eyes of the World in print: and solemnly renued in the Couenant celebrated in the generall and pro∣uincial Assemblies, Presbyteries, and Church Sessions in the yeere of God, 1596. and how shal any man be heard to speak against that, whereunto he hath formerly sworne and sub∣scribed? For the better vnderstanding of this last Article, I will set downe a short discussion of the Oath.

ANS.

There is nothing that the Subscribers of the Confessi∣on of faith did by their oath oblige themselues to obserue and defend, that is contrary to any of the Articles conclu∣ded

at Perth: and no man should bee heard to speake contra∣ry to that, whereunto hee hath formerly sworne & subscri∣bed. And therefore they who haue sworne & subscribed in the 21. Article of the Confession of faith, confirmed in Par∣liament, Anno 1567. That no policie and order in Ceremo∣nies can bee appointed for all ages, times, and places, but that they may, & ought to be changed, when necessity re∣quireth; should not now bee heard affirming the contrary in this Pamphlet, that they may not bee changed; where∣in ye contradict your oath, and perswade others to doe the same. Of the which oath the discussion set downe by you, is a glosse that destroyeth the Text, as shall by Gods grace bee made manifest, by the examination thereof which followeth.

The Examination of the Oath discussed.

BEfore the Penner of this Pamphlet begins to discusse the oath, he sets downe the articles controuerted: then, fiue seuerall obligations, whereby (as he alledgeth) our Church is obliged to exclude, and abhorre the particular actes con∣cluded at Perth: Thirdly, he considers the Oath, which is the chiefe of the fiue obligations. Keeping his order, wee shall seuerally examine his sayings, concerning them. And first touching the articles controuerted, he sayes thus.

PP.

The Religion, Doctrine, and Discipline, receiued, belee∣ued, and defended by the Church of Scotland, namely, the publike ministration of Baptisme, and the Lords Supper, sitting at the Table in the act of receiuing the bread, and the wine of that Sacrament: The obseruation of the Lords day, and the examination of Children, for the first time at the ninth yeare of their age, for the second at the twelfth, for the third at the fourteenth; excluding and abhorring priuate Baptisme, priuate Communion, kneeling in the act of receiuing the Supper, Holy dayes, or Feasts of Christ∣mas, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and sending downe of the Holy Ghost; were brought in at the reformation of Religion, and enioyed euer since in manner and forme as followeth.

Answ.

The Libeller hath forgotten to exclude Confirmation, but since it is vnderstood, wee answere to the rest. First, That the solemne ministration of the Sacraments appoin∣ted by the Church, especially, the act of the assembly holden at Edinburgh, Anno 1581. which forbiddeth the ministra∣tion thereof in priuate houses, excludes not the ministration thereof in priuate places, when as necessitie vrges; cases of

〈…〉〈…〉.

PP.

〈◊〉〈◊〉 Obligations whereby wee are bound to exclude the ••onclusions of the Assembly at Perth▪ and to obey, defend, and maintaine the contrary, are first▪ The vniforme iudge∣ment of the Church condemning the one, and allowing the 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ Secondly▪ Ecclesiasticall Canons, publike confessi∣ons, and solemne protestations of lawful assemblies. Third∣ly, actes of Parliament ratifying the Constitutions of the

Church. Fourthly, The prescription of 59. yeares: and fiftly, the Oath and subscriptions of the whole Estates of the Realme. By all these bands, the Church in generall, and euery member thereof in particular, are obliged to sit at the Communion, and to reiect kneeling with the obserua∣tion of the fiue Holy dayes, and other things concluded in the Assembly at Perth.

ANS.

Yee are not able to produce any warrant for the vni∣forme iudgement of the Church, nor Canon of Assembly, nor act of Parliament, nor confession of faith, nor publike protestation, which either condemnes the points conclu∣ded at Perth, as vnlawfull to bee vsed in the worship of God; or establisheth the contrary as things necessary, that cannot be altered in no time succeeding. And as for your 59. yeares practise, it cannot change the nature of things indifferent, and make these formes and circumstances, which are of themselues alterable, become necessary and vnchangeable: yea, by the contrary, the prescription of a long time giues iust cause often of alteration, because either the things practised, which at the beginning were profita∣ble, become hurtfull, or that which was conuenient in the time preceding, becommeth inconuenient: or because the same things are abused to superstition and prophanenesse: or because an opinion is bred, by long custome, of necessi∣tie. This I make manifest by the one and twentieth article of the Confession of our faith, confirmed in the first Par∣liament holden by his Maiesty, anno 1567. Decemb. 15. which ye affi••me your selfe to haue sworne and subscribed. The words of the article are these, about the end thereof. The other end of generall Councels was for good policie, to bee con∣stituted ••nd observed in the Church▪ whereas in the house of God it becommeth all things to be done d••cently▪ and in order: not that wee thinke that any policie and order in ceremonies, can be appointed for all ages, times, and places; for as Ceremonies (such as men haue

deuised) are but temporall, so may and ought they to bee changed, when they rather foster superstition, then that they edifie the Church vsing the same. Likewise in the seuenth chapter of the second booke of Discipline, registred amongst the acts of the ge∣nerall Assembly, anno 1581. we haue two conclusions to the same purpose, set downe in these words: The finall end of all Assemblies, is first to keepe the Religion and Doctrine in pu∣ritie, without error and corruption: Next, to keepe comlinesse, and good order in the Church. For this orders cause, they may make cer∣taine rules and constitutions, pertaining to the good behauiour of all the members of the Church in their vocation. Secondly, they haue power also to abrogate and abolish all statutes and ordinances, con∣cerning Ecclesiasticall matters that are found noysome, or vnprofi∣table, or agree not with the time, or are abused by the people. Here∣by it is euident; that seeing the matters controuerted, are but matters of circumstance, forme, and ceremony, as af∣terwards shall be proued, that neither the Church in ge∣nerall, nor any member thereof in particular, did, or might lawfully binde themselues by oath, subscription, or any o∣ther obligation, not to change or alter their practise and cu∣stomes touching these things: for all they that subscribe the Confession of faith, and the second booke of Discipline, did sweare, that they thought these things should and might be altered when necessitie required. This answere being made to the first foure Obligations, we come to the Oath, about which yee spend many words, and before yee begin, moue the question following.

PP.

Quaeritur, if one or moe Preachers, or Professours in the Church of Scotland, standing to the Churches former iudgement, and able to defend the same by good reason, at least, seeing no warrant in the contrary, may dispense with the said Oath, and follow the pluralitie of Preachers and Professors, dispensing with the same in the Assembly? Or what power may compell the alteration of iudgement,

and loose the said Oath, in any case aforesaid?

ANS.

The former iudgement of our Church, whereunto wee did binde our selues by our oathes was, that no policie, nor order in ceremonies could be appointed for all ages, times, and places; and that the same might, and ought to bee changed vpon great causes, and weightie reasons, as is e∣uident by the former answere. To this iudgement of the Church, the Assembly at Perth adhered, and according thereto altered some customes, touching circumstantiall ceremonies formerly vsed in the Church, vpon good and great reasons: neither did that Assembly loose the said Oath, or dispense with it in any sort, but hath confirmed it by their owne practise. Wherefore I answere, That euery Preacher and Professor in our Church, should stand to the former iudgement thereof, whereunto he bound himselfe by his Oath, when he did sweare to the Confession of faith, and that no power can compel the alteration of iudgement, or loose the said Oath in any case. And that he who sware, That he did thinke that no policie, and order in ceremonies can be appointed for all ages, times, and places, but that the same may, and ought to be changed, when necessitie requires; Did neuer, nor could sweare without breach of this Oath, that the ce∣remonie of sitting at the receiuing of the Sacrament (estee∣med by our Church, at the reformation, most conuenient, but not necessarie) could bee appointed for all ages, times, and places; and that it might not, nor ought to bee altered in any case: by the contrary all who swore to the Confes∣sion of faith, did sweare, That the policie, and order of sit∣ting at the Sacrament was such, as could not be appointed for all ages, times, and places, and that it might, and should be changed, when it did not so much edifie the peo∣ple in pietie, as foster prophanenesse and superstition. And this, sitting fosters in all these that practise it, with a super∣stitious conceit and opinion, that the same was instituted

by our Sauiour as a point of diuine worship, and by his ex∣emplary practise commended to the Church, for an essential or integrant part of the Sacrament, which yee maintaine in this Pamphlet.

Now leauing this to bee considered by such as are not partially affected, but loue the truth, and hate contention: I proceed to the Oath, which yee consider first in the per∣sons, takers of the same: Secondly, in the matter whereto they sweare: Thirdly, in the forme and manner, whereby they are bound: And fourthly, by the force and effect of that forme, for making sure mens particular deeds. Tou∣ching the persons, yee say this.

PP.

The Persons, takers of the Oath, are Christians come to perfect yeares, and free persons, who did not only know in generall the doctrine and discipline, whereto they bound themselues by their oath, but in particular the points con∣trouerted, as followeth: First, That in the yeare of God, 1581. it was concluded, that the Sacraments should be so∣lemnely ministred, and not in priuate houses: Secondly, That in the yeare 1560, it was declared by the Church, that Christ sate with his Disciples at Table, when hee insti∣tuted the Supper, and that sitting at Table was the most conuenient gesture to this holy action: Thirdly, That Con∣firmation was to be abhorred, as one of the Popes fiue ba∣stard Sacraments: Fourthly, That the keeping of Holy dayes, such as the Feast of Christmas, imposed vpon the consciences of men, without warrant of Gods word, was condemned by preaching, and corrected by publique cen∣sures of the Church.

ANS.

I will not answere you, as iustly I might, that the first booke of Discipline, whereby the most of these constituti∣ons are warranted, was neuer knowne to our common Professors, nor acknowledged by our Church, to haue the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall Canons: but I say, The Assem∣bly

at Perth hath decreed nothing to the contrary thereof. For first, Touching the administration of the Sacraments, we fully agree to the ordinance made anno 1581, to wit, That the Sacraments should bee solemnely ministred, and not in priuate houses: The occasion of making this ordi∣nance was a misorder that fell out in the persons of two Ministers, namely, Master Alexander Mure, Minister at Falkland, and Master Alexander Forrester, Minister at Tre∣nent, as is cleare by the narratiue of the act, which is rela∣tiue only to the celebration of Mariage, and the ministra∣tion of the Sacraments, extra casum necessitatis, where, with∣out any vrgent necessitie order may be kept. But our que∣stion is, whether in extraordinary cases the Sacraments may be ministred extraordinarily in priuate houses, as they were in the Primitiue Church by the Apostles, and in the beginning of the reformation, by the Preachers of the Go∣spell? In these and the like cases, there is no act of any As∣sembly, that determines what should bee done. Therefore put the case, our Church had sworne and subscribed that or∣dinance, yet hath shee done nothing contrary to her oath, either by making, or obeying the acts concluded at Perth, which doe only respect the cases of necessitie.

So, whether to sit at a Table in receiuing the Communi∣on, was most conuenient, according as our Church estee∣med at the time of reformation, is not the question: but whether to sit at a Table be necessary, as instituted and left by our Sauiours example to be obserued, and that without breach of the institution, the same may not be altered? This question was neuer defined by any Canon of our Church: Therefore put the case, that our Church had sworne and subscribed, That to sit at the Communion was most conue∣nient, according to the iudgement of our first Reformers: yet, we haue done nothing contrarie to that oath, by inter∣changing sitting with kneeling, because kneeling at this time is found to be the more conuenient gesture: for that which at one time is more conuenient, may bee lesse conue∣nient

at another. As to our Sauiours sitting (if so be he sate, ••am adhuc sub iudice lis est) it was not exemplary, or appoin∣ted to be followed of vs, as shall be afterwards proued; and his practise did only declare, that sitting might be lawfully vsed, not, that of necessitie it must be vsed, and cannot bee altered, when the Church findes the change expedient.

Thirdly, whether Confirmation, as it was abused in Popery for a Sacrament, should be re-induced, is not the question, for that is condemned in the very narratiue of the act made at Perth. But, whether the Bishop in his Visita∣tion, ought to trie the education of yong children in the grounds of Religion, as in the first booke of Discipline the Superintendent was ordained to doe, whereof yee may reade in the fift head touching the office of Superintendents. Therefore put the case our Church had sworne, and subscri∣bed all the heads and Constitutions of the foresaid booke, yet by the act made at Perth, shee hath not violated her oath, by appointing Bishops in their Visitations to take this triall. For they are now the Superintendents of the Church.

Fourthly, Wee contend not, whether the obseruation of Holy dayes, as that of Christmas, should be imposed vpon the conscience, which in the explication of the first head of the foresaid booke of Discipline is condemned, as also in the first words of the act made at Perth, touching the fiue dayes: but the question is, whether the Church may ap∣point the commemoration of Christs inestimable benefits vpon the said dayes, as all the reformed Churches doe, and our Diuines hold to bee lawfull. Of this our Church neuer defined any thing. Therfore the making & obseruing of the act touching this point, is not against her former oath. And to conclude, The Subscribers and Swearers vnto our Do∣ctrine and Discipline, know no Canon nor constitution of the Church made in former times, that is contrary to the Articles concluded at Perth. Thus much ••ouching the per∣sons who did sweare: The next thing yee consider, is the

matter whereunto they did binde themselues by their oath, which yee set downe as followeth.

PP.

The matter whereunto they binde themselues by oath, is the Religion, Doctrine, and Discipline receiued, beleeued, and defended by the Church of Scotland; in respect of this matter, the Oath is partly assertorie, and partly promisso∣rie, as yee say.

ANS.

By that which alreadie hath been said, it is manifest, that albeit our Church had sworne to all the heads and ordinan∣ces aboue specified, set downe in the bookes of Discipline: yet there is nothing committed contrarie to this Oath, by the actes made at Perth. But now since yee are come to the matter of the Oath, let vs see if the points in controuersie be any part of that matter. The matter, as yee affirme, is the Religion, Doctrine, and Discipline, receiued, beleeued, and defended by the Church of Scotland. This definition or description of the matter, is not so full and particular, as is set downe in the Oath it selfe: neither haue yee, in reciting the words, been so faithfull, as yee are feruent for the cause yee maintaine. For yee haue pretermitted diuers things belonging to the limitation of the matter, by which all the particulars in question are clearely excluded. The words cited by you are these: We beleeue with our hearts, confesse with our mouthes, subscribe with our hands, and constantly affirme be∣fore God and the world, That the Faith and Religion, receiued, be∣leeued, and defended by the Church of Scotland, the Kings Maie∣stie, and three Estates of this Realme, &c. is onely the true Chri∣stian Faith and Religion pleasing God, and bringing saluation to man. Heere yee omit many things that concerneth the li∣mitation of the matter, which at that time were knowne to such as sware the same, and now must be expounded vn∣to the Reader, that is to iudge and consider our Contro∣uersie. Therefore I shall set downe heere the words of the Oathe, as it was published in print by Robert Waldgraue,

anno 1590. We beleeue with our hearts, &c. That this onely i•• the true Christian Faith and Religion pleasing God, and bringing saluation to man, which is now by the mercy of God reuealed to the world, by the preaching of the blessed Euangell, and receiued, belee∣ued, & defended by many & sundry notable Churches & Realmes, and chiefely by the Church of Scotland, &c. In these words we haue two limitations pretermitted by you: The first is, that the matter of the Oath, is the Doctrine and Discipline re∣uealed to the world by the Gospell: This limitation exclu∣deth all Ecclesiasticall determinations and constitutions, which are not expresly, or by a necessary consequence con∣tained in the written Word. The next is, That the matter of the Oath is the Doctrine and Discipline, which is recei∣ued, beleeued, and defended by many notable Churches and Realmes, and chiefely by the Church of Scotland. This limitation excludeth all these things, wherein the Church of Scotland hath not the consent of many notable Churches and Realmes, who with her hath receiued, beleeued, and defended the same. By these two, are all the points in con∣trouersie excluded, and cut off from being any part of the matter, whereunto the Swearers by their oath did oblige themselues. And vnto these two, if we adde the third limi∣tation, there can remaine no more any doubt, touching the matter of the Oath. This is, that the Doctrine and Disci∣pline, whereunto they sweare, is particularly expressed in the Confession of Faith, established, and publikely confir∣med by sundry actes of Parliament. This Confession is re∣gistred in the bookes of Parliament, at the yeare 1567. and is inserted amongst the Confessions of the Reformed Chur∣ches in the booke called Syntagma Confessionum. But so it is, that in the Confession of our Faith established by Parlia∣ment, there is no mention made of the Articles controuer∣ted: neither hath many notable Churches and Realmes re∣ceiued, beleeued, or defended the same, neither are they ex∣presly, or by necessary consequence contained in the Gos∣pell: And therefore they cannot by any point of our Reli∣gion,

or part of the Doctrine and Discipline, whereunto the Swearers did oblige themselues by their assertory, and promissory Oath. By the Gospell it is not certaine, That our Sauiour and the Apostles did sit at the Supper, and al∣beit he had sitten, yet sitting is no more commanded to be obserued in that sacred action, then the vpper chamber where he sate, or the night season, when the Supper was celebrated, or the sex, and number of the Communicants, who were twelue men, and no women; or the qualitie of the element, which was vnleauened bread, or the order fi∣nally after Supper. All these, howbeit they be certaine, yet none of them are esteemed exemplary; far lesse can sitting, which is vncertaine, be esteemed such. And for the rest of the points, Neither kneeling at the Communion, nor the administration of the Sacraments in priuate houses, when necessitie requires, nor the commemoration of Christs in∣estimable benefits, on certaine set times of the yeare, nor the triall of yong childrens education by the Bishop at his Visitation: none of these, I say, are either expresly or by necessary consequence forbidden in the Gospell, nor are hey condemned by many notable Churches and Realmes, nor abiured in the Confession of our Faith, confirmed by actes of Parliament; and so cannot be counted the matter of this Oath.

But to remooue all scruple that may arise, touching the matter of this Oath: It is true, That in the promissorie Oath, the Swearers thereof binde themselues to continue in the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of Scotland, and to defend the same according to their vocation and power all the dayes of their liues, vnder the paines contai∣ned in the Law, and danger both of body and soule in the day of the Lords fearefull iudgement. Heere, touching the Doctrine, praised be God, there is no controuersie a∣mongst vs: all the doubt concerneth Discipline, and that is remoued also, if it be taken only for that which is reuealed in the Gospell, or receiued, beleeued and defended by ma∣ny

notable Churches and Realmes, or that which is set downe in the Confession of Faith, as is already declared▪ But because the Discipline of the Church may be extended beyond these limits, and made to comprehend all Ecclesia∣sticall constitutions and determinations of generall circum∣stances, formes and ceremonies belonging to the worship of God, and the decent ordering of his house; let vs con∣sider this point more particularly.

If by the Discipline of the Church in the words of the Oath,* 1.2 that part of Ecclesiasticall policie bee meant, which concernes the censuring of manners: in which sense it is ta∣ken, in the order set downe before our Psalme bookes, and in the seuenth h••ad of the first booke of Discipline, intitu∣led (of Ecclesiasticall Discipline) and in the second booke, wheresoeuer it is mentioned, and by all Ecclesiasticall wri∣ters most frequently: Then it is certaine, that the fiue Arti∣cles controuerted, belong nothing to the Discipline, where∣in the Swearers binde themselues by their oath, to continue to their liues end.

But if therby be meant the whole policie of the Church, in which sense it is sometimes taken, though rarely: then first, it containes all the precepts of policie prescribed in the Word, in which precepts there is no determination concerning these articles, as before we said. Next, it com∣prehendeth all the ordinances of the Church, touching formes, ceremonies, and order to be obserued in Diuine Seruice, and in the exercise of Ecclesiasticall Censures, ac∣cording as the circumstances of time, place, and persons. In this part of Discipline, it is true, that all the controuer∣ted points are contained: But as I shewed before, it is ma∣nifest by the limitations of the matter of the Oath, that this part of the policie is excluded; for it is neither expressely, nor by necessary consequence contained in the Word, nor is it receiued, beleeued, and defended by many notable Churches and Realmes; nor is there any thing concerning it set downe in the Confession of Faith, confirmed by actes

of Parliament; onely this generall wee haue, that no con∣stant order and policie can be set downe in ceremonies, and that constitutions made by men, may and ought to be alte∣red when need requires.

Furthermore, in the booke of Policie that was published after the Oath, anno 1581, and subscribed by sundrie Mini∣sters, there is no mention made of these fiue Articles now in question. In the first booke of Discipline penned anno 1560, there are some conclusions set downe touching sit∣ting at the Sacrament, the abolition of Holy dayes dedi∣cated to Saints in Popery, and the Feast of Christmas, im∣posed vpon the consciences of men; as also the administra∣tion of Baptisme vpon ordinary dayes of preaching, for remouing the Papisticall opinion of absolute necessitie; and if by the discipline mentioned in the Oath, yee vnderstand the conclusions of Policie set downe in that booke, and hold that the Swearers did by their Oath oblige themselues to obey all the conclusions thereof to their liues end: then I demand what is the cause, that yee and your followers do not only refuse to obey, but improue and impugne the most principall point of policie set downe in that booke, namely the office of Bishops, whose prouision, jurisdiction, power and election, are particularly described in the first head of that booke, vnder the name of Superintendents? But be∣cause the booke is rare, and not at euery mans hand, I will draw out of it onely some few things, touching the jurisdi∣ction and power of the Superintendents, that the posterity may see what was the judgement of their Predecessors, the Reformers of Religion, touching the Office-bearers, and gouernment of the Church. And to beginne with the bounds of their jurisdiction, the same is set down with this Title:

The names of the places of residence, and seueral Diocesses of the Superintendents.

INprimis, the Superintendent of Orknay, his Diocesse shall be the Iles of Orknay, Ca••thnes and Strathneuer: his residence in the Towne of Kirkwall.

The Superintendent of Rosse, his Diocesse shall compre∣hend Rosse, Sutherland, Murray, and the North Iles, called the Skie, and Lewes with their adjacents▪ his Residence, the Chanonrie of Rosse.

The Superintendent of Argyle, his Diocesse shall be Ar∣gyle, Kintyre, Lorne, the South Iles, Arrane and Boote, with their adjacents, and Lowhaber: His Residence in Argyle.

The Superintendent of Abirdene, his Diocesse betweene Die and Spae, containing the Shirrefdomes of Abirdene and Banff▪ His Residence in old Abirdene.

The Superintendent of Brechin, his Diocesse, the whole Shirrefdomes of Mernis and Angouse, with the Brae of Marre to Die: His Residence in Brechin.

The Superintendent of Fife; his Diocesse, the Shirref∣domes of Fife and Fotthringham to Striuiling, and the whole Shirrefdome of Perth: his Residence in Saint Andrewes.

The Superintendent of Edinburgh his Diocesse, the Shir∣refdome of Lowthian and Striuiling▪ on the South-side of Forth, wherto is added by the consent of the whole Church, Merse, Lawderdale and Weddale: his Residence in—

The Superintendent of Iedburgh, his Diocesse, Tauiot∣dale, Liddisdale, Tueddale, with the Forrest of Ettrick: his Residence in—

The Superintendent of Glasgow, his Diocesse, Cliddisdale, Renfrow, Monteith, Lennox, and Cunninghame: His Residence in Glasgow.

The Superintendent of Dumfreis, his Diocesse, Galloway, Carrick, Niddisdale, Annandale, with the rest of the West∣dales: his Residence in Dumfreis.

These were the bounds of their Iurisdiction: their Office is described as followeth.

The function and power of the Superintendents.

THey must not be suffered to liue, as idle Bishops hither∣to haue done; neither must they remaine where gladly they would, but they must be Preachers themselues.

Charge and command shall be giuen them, to plant and erect Churches, to sett, order and appoint Ministers, as is prescribed, in their Countries.

After they haue remained in their chiefe Towne three or foure monethes at the most, they shall enter in Visitation, in the which they shall not onely Preach, but examine the life, diligence and behauiour of the Ministers; as also they shall trie the estate of their Churches, and the manners of the People.

They must further consider, how the poore are prouided, and the youth instructed: they must admonish, where ad∣monition needs, and redresse such things, as by good coun∣sell they are able to appease,

Finally, they must note such crimes as be hainous, that by the censures of the Church the same may bee corrected. After all this, the order of election of Superintendents is set downe, which we haue more largely before the booke of our Psalmes in meeter.

This being one of the chiefe points of policie concluded in that booke: how is it, that yee haue dispensed with your oath hereabout? And by what power is your oath loosed concerning this head? Shall men bee tyed by the Oath to the ceremonies prescribed in that booke, and not to the substance of the policie? to alterable circumstances and formes of actions, and not to the power of gouerne∣ment, whereby they should be disposed and ordered? What can be answered to this, by him that vrges the Oath for the controuerted points, consisting in ceremonies, gestures and

circumstances, for the indifferent Reader iudge.

But because it is true, that one mans fault excuses not an∣other▪ leauing you to your consciences, we answere for our selues, according to the one and twentieth article of the ••onfession of our Faith: That we thinke no policie, nor order in ceremonies can be established to endure for all ages, times and places; and that whatsoeuer things are appointed by men▪ they are all tem∣porall, and may, and ought to be changed, when necessitie requireth. Hereupon we say, That no man 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by the Oath oblige him∣selfe, to obey and defend that part of Discipline which con∣cerneth these alterable things▪ all the dayes of his life, but onely that discipline which is vnchangeable, and comman∣ded in the Word. Yea, we further affirme, that euery man who sware to the discipline of the Church in generall, by vertue of that oath standeth obliged▪ not only to obey and ••e••end the constitutions of the Church▪ that were in force at the time of making his oath▪ but also to obey and defend whatsoeuer the Church thereafter hath ordained, or shall ordaine to be obserued for edification, comlinesse, and de∣••encie, whether thereby the former constitutions bee esta∣blished or altered▪ and abrogated▪ euen as they who sweare to obey the gouernment of a Kingdome or Citie, are by their oath not onely obliged to obey the present Actes and ••awes, but all, which shall afterwards bee made for the Common-wealth, howbeit the former be thereby dischar∣ged▪ as when Lawes are made for exportation and impor∣tation of goods, for weights and measures, for fishing, cut∣ting of woods, for peace, for warre, and whatsoeuer con∣stitutions they bee that are made, such as haue giuen their oath of obedience are thereby tyed to reject the former, and obey the later▪ I conclude this with the doctrine of that learned Diuine, Master CALVINE, Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. sect. ••0. God would not (saith hee) in externall ceremonies and disci∣pline prescribe particularly what we ought to follow, because he fore∣••aw that, to depend on the condition of times, neither ••id he iudge ••ne forme agreeable to all ages. Heere then (saith he) we must flie

to the generall rules which God hath giuen, that according to them may be defined, whatsoeuer the necessitie of the Church re∣quires to be appointed for order and decencie. Finally, seeing God hath set downe nothing of those matters expressely, because they are not necessary to saluation, and are diuersely to bee applyed, to the manners of euery age, and for edification of the Church; it is lawfull, as the vtilitie of the Church shall require, as wel to change and abrogate these that haue been in vse, as to appoint new cere∣monies. I confesse indeed, that we should not runne rashly and vpon light motions, vnto nouation: but what may hurt, and what may edifie, Charity can best iudge, which, if wee admit to bee modera∣trix, all shall be in safetie, and goe well. Thus farre Caluine, whereby he doth manifest, that the Church hath power to change and innouate, as necessity requireth, all the par∣ticular ordinances shee maketh of things alterable: and they who in generall haue sworne to obey the Discipline of the Church, are all bound by their oath to kneele at the Communion, to obserue the fiue Holy dayes, and to obey all the rest of the Articles concluded at Perth.

That which yee afterwards subjoyne, touching the forme and force of the Oath we approue: onely we wish you to consider, seeing it is a part of Ecclesiasticall Disci∣pline, as well to change and abrogate ceremoeies in vse, as to appoint new: That yee by all these forcible formes of the Oath, which cannot be loosed, are obliged to fol∣low the Church in the alterations shee makes, and to de∣fend and obey the Actes and Constitutions that concerne the same; and that all, who disobey in their owne persons, or by their exemplary practise and perswasions, induce others to disobey and rebell, to the disgrace of their Mo∣ther the Church, and the breaking of the bond of peace, whereby the vnitie of the Spirit is conserued, doe assu∣redly lye tyed vnder the fearefull cords and chaines of periury, except they seriously repent.

The Libeller hauing ended his foure Considerations, propounds some defences vsed by them, who submit

••hemselues to the Actes of Perth whom contumesiously 〈◊〉〈◊〉 calleth Temporizers▪ and to other Defences maketh his owne Replies. First, saith he▪ they make themselues freed 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Oath, because the nouation was made by the King, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Church their Superiours▪ vnto this he giueth a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 answere 〈…〉〈…〉 that this nouation could not bee ••••wfully made by the King, because hee himselfe did ••weare the Confession of Faith: Next, that the Church ••ould not make any such nouation, because all of the Church did sweare the Oath▪ either personally or really▪ ••ersonally all who subscribed the Confession of Faith, ••hich he reckons to haue been the generall assemblies of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Church Synods▪ Presbyteries▪ Schollers passing their ••egrees and Burgesses, when they obtained their Liber∣••••es▪ Really, Children sweare in the persons of their Pa∣••ents▪ and all the particular members of the Church, in ••he Church representatiue. This his Assertion, being du∣•••• examined, will bee found false▪ ••or the greatest part, ••ouching the persons, whom he alledgeth to haue sworn: ••nd as to their reall obligation, it is friuolous▪ for no man 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bee really bound by an assertory oath, but onely the ••erson that sweares. But passing by this. I answer▪ That when the King and Church sweare the Confession of ••aith▪ by that Oath▪ they did neither abiure any of the ••rticles concluded at Perth▪ neither did oblige them∣selues to maintaine and obey the contrary: for it is mani∣••est by the limitations set downe in the beginning of the Oath that all these particulars were excluded. And they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sweare to continue in the Discipline of the Church of ••cotland generally▪ ••nd to defend the same all the dayes of ••heir life were so farre from tying themselues to con∣••inue in the obedience of euery particular ordinance tou∣••hing indifferent and alterable things; that by the contra∣••••••, ••he ••ne and twentieth Article of the Confession of ••aith aboue rehearsed, they stood obliged to obey euery alteration, that should be concluded by the Church. The

Church representatiue did sweare in that Article, to al∣ter all such constitutions, when it should be needfull: and the particular members of the Church sweare to obey her will and ordinance in the points altered and chan∣ged. For to obey the Discipline in generall, is to obey euery thing, that the Church by the power giuen her of God appointeth to bee done, or not done, for order and policie. So, for any nouation that is made, neither hath the King, nor the Church representatiue violated their Oath, nor haue the inferiour members beene loosed and freed from their oathes, but in giuing obedience to the points of Discipline concluded by their Superiours, they made their oathes and promises good, which otherwise by their disobedience they should haue transgressed.

As to the Oath which (as you say) the Bishop of Ely, now Bishop of Winchester, affirmeth his Maiestie twice to haue giuen, for maintaining that forme and manner of Gods worship established by the Lawes of both King∣domes, you might easily haue perceiued, that he did not by the forme which he mentioneth, vnderstand these in∣different points of policie, wherein some little discon∣formity there is, and cannot but be, in regard of the dif∣ferent estate of our Church and theirs; but by that forme, her vnderstood that same fashion and manner of wor∣shipping God, as is prescribed to vs in his Word, is pro∣poned in the seuerall Confessions of our Faith, which is one, and the same both with them and vs. So you de∣praue that reuerend Fathers speech, and craftily insi∣nuate his Maiestie to be guiltie of periury, in that by his Highnesse most lawfull and earnest desire, the alteration of these indifferent things hath beene wrought: but yee should know, that these are but things accessory to the essentiall forme of Gods worship, whereunto his Maiesty did sweare at his Coronation, which to this day con∣stantly he hath maintained, and will by the grace of God for many yeares after, yea, euen vntill that temporall

••rowne bee changed with that eternall.

Another defence ye alledge is vsed by the Pastors, and ••rofessors that liue obedient to the Laws of the Church: They haue not violated their Oath, they say, because the ••ubstance of Religion is kept, and onely some indifferent ••oints altered. And to this yee make three replyes: First, ••aying, That we sware to keepe the same forme of wor∣••hip, that was vsed in the Church of Scotland, and speci∣ally in the vse of the Sacraments. Secondly▪ That the Oath was in a matter of Religion, which is not changea∣ble▪ as are the Statutes of Republiques and Corporations. Thirdly, Put the case, yee say, the points innouated were matters indifferent; yet seeing they were once abiured for their abuse, they may not be receiued againe, except either we could prooue, that our oath in the beginning was vnlawfull, or that our former formes are become vnlawfull, not expedient for edification of the Church, o•• ••esse edificatiue, then the ceremonies presently vrged.

•• answere to the first▪ That the forme of worship vsed in the Church of Scotland is not altered; for still we hold that forme of worship, which is prescribed to vs in the Word, defended & receiued by many notable Churches and Realmes, and particularly contained in the Confes∣sion of our Faith. As for the gesture and kneeling, and those other circumstances of times and places, where the Sacraments may be ministred in cases of extremity, there is no man, being in his right wits, that will thinke the forme of Gods worship consisteth in such things, or that they are any part thereof. Your second reply we admit, and affirme according thereto, That the matter of Re∣ligion, whereto we sware, is not alterable, nor can it bee changed▪ And that the points questioned, being of their owne nature indifferent, are excluded from the Oath, and are no part of the matter thereof.

To your third reply, I answere, That wee haue not receiued any thing againe in our Church, which euer was

damned, and abiured for their abuse: for in the negatiue part of our oath, wherein Papistrie is abiured, there is no mention of kneeling, nor of the commemoration of Christs benefits vpon the fiue anniuersary dayes, nor is any of the other three Articles euer touched. It is true, that Popish dedication of dayes to other Creatures, and the obseruation of them, with an opinion of necessitie, or that they were any part of Gods worship, are abiured in that Confession, (and that also wee haue condemned in the Acte made at Perth, concerning the obseruation of these times:) but to make commemoration of the bene∣fits, that our Sauiour by his Birth, Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension hath brought vnto vs, we neuer held it vn∣lawfull, nor did count it a matter of abuse. Therefore it is not necessary, that either our oath be proued vnlawful, or our former formes; it sufficeth, that they bee prooued lesse edificatiue, or not so expedient for the time, because they are abused by the people to superstition and pro∣phanenesse, as afterwards we will make cleare in their owne place.

Where yee say, That it was confessed in the Assembly, that they were not expedient for our Church, and that the same were yeelded vnto, for holding of some exter∣nall inconueniences, a matter now denied, yee say, as im∣porting tyrannie, because you confesse, you haue this on∣ly by report; and it is the nature of all your sort to be too credulous, we passe it. In the meane time wee will not deny, that to some, they appeared very inexpedient, for diuers respects, of the which the chiefe were, the discre∣dit they feared to incurre with their people, that did esteeme the condemning of the abuse of these ceremo∣nies, to haue been an absolute reiecting of them, as cere∣monies idolatrous, which neuer was done by any prudent or wise Pastor: another respect was, because simple ones, that had not learned to make distinction betweene cir∣cumstances, and the substance of Religion, might take

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

thus abused by people vnto superstition, this is one preg∣nant reason wherefore the alteration should haue beene made.

As to that which they speake of the credite of Pa∣stors, the same ought not to be maintained, by ••ostering an errour in the hearts of people; namely, that the Mini∣sters taught that which they neuer taught, or at least should not haue taught: As by example, that the obser∣uation of the fiue Holy dayes, to the commemoration of Christs benefits, is vnlawfull. This I am assured was ne∣neuer done by any well aduised Preacher, for it had bin a condemning of the Primitiue Church, and all the Re∣formed Churches now in the world, Likewise, to haue taught that kneeling in the acte of receiuing the Sacra∣ment is vnlawfull, were to haue contradicted the best, and most learned Diuines we haue. Beza saith of it, Spe∣ciem habet piae, ac Christianae venerationis, ac proinde olim potuit cum fructu vsurpari. That is to say, kneeling at the Sacra∣ment hath a shew of holy and Christian worshippe, and therefore of old might haue been fruitfully vsed. Where∣by yee see, he condemneth not simply the ceremonie, but witnesseth that there was a time, when the same did edi∣fie and profite. Caluine, before him, called it Cultum legi∣timum, that is, a Lawfull adoration, being vsed in the action of the Supper, and directed to Christ. Petrus Mar∣tyr saith, Multi piè genua flectunt & adorant, that is, Many in receiuing the Sacrament doe bow their knees religi∣ously, and adore Christs flesh. Paraeus speaking of the same gesture, esteemes it an indifferent ceremonie. And that which so great and learned Diuines iudged to bee lawfull, what are we to condemne?

Next, I answere, That the credite of the Pastours should not be maintained with the discredit of the Prince amongst his Subiects: for if they who should be patternes of reuerence and obedience to others, shall in their owne persons withstand the lawfull desires, & godly intention

〈…〉〈…〉

〈◊〉〈◊〉

〈…〉〈…〉 wee become 〈…〉〈…〉 the contrary. This is an high 〈…〉〈…〉 we contrauene our oath 〈…〉〈…〉 ••n the contrary. & ••herafter 〈…〉〈…〉 ••ath ••s ••uritanisme. If sincere and 〈…〉〈…〉 ••••albe still ••ursued for their constan∣•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their ••rofession▪ and the conscience they make of 〈…〉〈…〉 ••oe we not expone the whole Nation to a wo∣••ull ••engeance, and perpetuall ignominy?

ANS.

Our assertory Oath, touching the Artic••es contro∣••erted, condemneth those onely in the guilt of periury▪

who hold, that policy and order in ceremonies may not be altered when necessity requireth, and being altered, ought not to bee obeyed. And indeede it is a profound point of infernall policy, not only by an exemplary pra∣ctise of disobedience against the lawes of Ecclesiasticall Discipline, to contrauene the Oath in your owne Person, but also vnder pretext of constancy of Profession, and conscience of the Oath, to perswade others for feare of periury, to periure themselues: Whereby yee both ex∣pose your selues to the fearefull iudgement of Gods ven∣geance, and drawe others with you to the same perdi∣tion.

Your sophisticke cauillations, whereby yee intend se∣ditiously, to proue the vnlawfulnesse of the Articles con∣cluded at Perth, shall now bee answered, and the truth cleared to the satisfaction of all men, who are not con∣tentious.

An answere to the arguments brought against kneeling in the act of receiuing of the holy Communion.

PP.

IT hath been the vniforme, and constant order of this Church since the Reformation, that the Communi∣cants should receiue the Sacramentall elements of Bread and Wine, sitting at the Table. In the second head of the first booke of Discipline, are set downe these words: The Table of the Lord is then rightly ministred▪ when it approacheth most neere to Christs owne action: But plaine it is, that at that Supper Christ Iesus sate with his Disciples, and therefore we doe iudge, that sitting at that Table is most conuenient to that holy a••tion. In the generall Assembly holden in Decemb. 1562, it was ordained, That one vniforme order should be obserued in the ministration of the Sacraments, according to the order of Geneua: And in December 1564, It was ordained▪ That

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

of time, and confirmed by oathes and subscrip∣tions, as is euident by the former deduction. It is not∣withstanding expedient to descend further in opening vp the vnlawfulnesse of kneeling. First, as it is a breach of the Institution. Secondly, as it is a breach of the second Commandement. Thirdly, as it is without the example and practise of the ancient Church. Fourthly, as it disa∣grees from the practise of the Reformed Churches.

ANS.

After yee haue laid downe your grounds; some for sit∣ting▪ and some against kneeling: yee subioyne the tenor of the acte concluded at Perth, but most corruptly, as we haue noted in the margine; and then yee forme this argument: That which hath been established by so ma∣ny lawes Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall, by so long custome, and prescription of time, and confirmed by oathes and subscriptions, we may not lawfully alter: But so it is, that sitting at Table, in the acte of receiuing, hath beene esta∣blished by lawes, customes, long prescription of time, and confirmed by oathes and subscriptions.

A man that had heard the proposition only, would ex∣pect some great matter in the assumption, belonging to some article of Faith, or precept of obedience set downe in Gods Word: and all resolues in an indifferent ceremo∣nie of sitting at the Sacrament. But yet to make simple people beleeue, that it were some necessary or substanti∣all point of Religion, that might not be altered, ye make a great shew of lawes, customes, &c, which being exami∣ned, shall vanish as smoake before the winde. And where yee beginne with a strong alleageance, that it was esta∣blished with so many lawes Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall: I aske you first, by what Ciuill lawes? Yee say, (so many) yet in your deduction, whereby you affirme the assump∣tion to be euident, yee cite not one law, neither can yee, albeit yee are not ashamed to say (so many). For your Ecclesiasticall lawes, yee cite first, the words set downe

in the second head of the first booke of Discipline; the Table of the Lord is then rightly ministred, &c. These words are not a law, for that booke of Discipline was neuer receiued, nor confirmed, either by the Ciuill, or Ecclesiasticall estate; some of the Nobility subscribed it, but others, who had the chiefe authority, as Master Knox complaines in his History, reiected the same, calling it Deuout imaginations. Next, yee cite the ordinance of the generall Assembly, 1562, appointing the order of Geneua to be obserued: this Act cannot establish your sitting, for in Geneua, they stand, or passe, as they Receiue, and sit not at Table. The last Acte, which yee cite in anno 1564, ordaineth Ministers in the ministration of the Sa∣craments, to vse the order set downe in the Psalme book. In that Act there is no mention of sitting, and by the or∣der set downe in the Psalme bookes, that may be meant, which before was called, the order of Geneua. How so∣euer it be, there is no particular law for sitting, no Ciuil law at all: and none Ecclesiasticall; but this onely one, which is generall.

Your second probation is, That sitting is established by so long a custome and prescription of time: Who would not, when he heares (so long) looke at least for a three or foure hundred yeares? and all this length of time yee can alledge to, is since the yeare of God 1560, not halfe an age: before which time, kneeling was in vse many hundred yeares on the Lords day, and on other dayes in the weeke, euer since the first Institution, as af∣terwards shall be proued, with better reasons, then any yee can bring for the necessity of sitting▪ This long cu∣stome and prescription for kneeling, yee esteeme to be of no moment, albeit it was a gesture instituted by God: but for sitting, a gesture instituted by man; yee count eight and fifty yeares a long prescription. So men esteeme their owne Dwarfes to be Giants, Nostrum sic nanum Atlanta vocamus.

The last argument wherein yee glory most, is, that sit∣ting is confirmed by oathes and subscriptions: This is a childish and false alledgeance: for there was neuer oath, nor subscription giuen in our Church, that by any conse∣quence can import a confirmation of sitting, or of any o∣ther indifferent alterable ceremonie, for all times follow∣ing. Seeing no man is astricted longer vnto the obseruatiō of it, then the Ecclesiasticall Constitution stands, which being altered by the Church that made it, their oath and subscription bindes them to obserue that, which in stead of the former, is ordained to be receiued. This is manifest by the Constitutions set downe in the seuenteenth chap∣ter of the booke of Discipline, receiued and confirmed in the generall Assembly holden at Glasgow the 24. of A∣prill, anno 1581, the tenor whereof followes: The finall end of all Assemblies, is first to keepe the Religion and Doctrine in purity, without errour or corruption. Next to keepe comlinesse and good order in the Church: for this orders cause, they may make certaine rules and c••nstitutions, pertaining to the good be∣hauiour of all the members of the Church in their owne vocati∣on: They haue power also to abrogate and abolish all statutes and ordinances, concerning Ecclcsiasticall matters, that are found noysome and vnprofitable, and agree not with the time, or are a∣bused by the people. And after a few words, it is subioyned: That it appertaines to the Presbyteries, to cause the Ordinances made by the Assemblies Prouinciall and generall, to be kept and put in execution. Hereby it is manifest, that when the Church alters indifferent thing in policie, that they who are astricted by their oathes to obey the Discipline of the Church, are tyed, both not to practise these things, which the Church hath discharged; and to obserue these things, which the Church, in stead thereof, hath established to be done. Whereupon I conclude, That so many as haue sworne and subscribed, (after the forme contained in the Oath) to continue in the obedience of the Discipline of the Church; are all obliged by their subscriptions, now

not to sit, but to kneele at the Communion: because the Church hath found it meete, that sitting should bee inter∣changed with kneeling? Thus I haue answered your rea∣sons, lawes, customes, subscriptions and oathes, which yee bring for sitting.

I come to consider the ordinances made, as ye alledge, against kneeling: where first yee alledge an Act made in the Assembly 1591, that an Article should bee formed, and presented vnto his Maiesty, and the Estates, for order to be taken with them, who giue or receiue the Sacra∣ments after the Papistical manner; but by Papistical ma∣ner is meante, the giuing of the Sacrament by a Masse Priest, and the receiuing the same after the order of the Romane Church: which may be cleared by an Act of the Assembly, anno 1565. Decemb. ••6. Sess. 2. The ••enor wher∣of is this▪ Persons reuolting from the profession of the Gospell, by offering their children to be baptized after the Papisticall ma∣ner, or by themselues receiuing the Sacrament of the Altar, after admonition, shall bee excommunicate, if repentance interuene not. This sheweth what is meant by giuing, or receiuing the Sacrament in a Papisticall manner; for it was neuer our Churches meaning, to censure these that receiued the Sacraments after the manner of the Reformed Churches in France, England, or Germany, where many of our people haue receiued the Sacrament of Christs bodie kneeling: Nor did our Predecessors euer condemne their customes, and esteeme sitting necessary, albeit for the estate of our Church, they held it in the beginning to be most conuenient.

Next, yee say, That in the Kings Confession of Faith, &c. are these words contained: We detest the ceremonies of the Romane Antichrist, added to the ministration of the Sacra∣ments▪ and we detest all his rites, signes, and traditions. This ar∣gument were good, if yee did proue kneeling to be a rite or ceremony added to the Sacrament, by the Roman An∣tichrist. But we know this ceremony to be diuine, and

not Antichristian, a ceremony allowed by God to bee v∣sed in his worship: for he hath said expresly in his Word, Vnto me all knees shall bow: and againe, In the name of Iesus euery knee shall bow. Neither will yee euer be able to proue the vse of this ceremony, in receiuing the Sacrament, to be Antichristian; or to haue been instituted by the Anti∣christ of Rome: for albeit Honori••s ordained that the people should kneele at the eleuation, and circumgesta∣tion of the Hoste to those who are sicke, yet he made no constitution for kneeling at the receiuing of the Sacra∣ment: and there is as great difference betweene the ele∣uation in the Masse, and the pompous circumgestation of the Hoste▪ and the celebration of the Sacrament, as is betwixt an idolatrous, and superstitious inuention of man, and a lawfull act of diuine worship. Therefore to conclude the answere of this Section, vnto the argument propounded by you, I oppone this.

Euery indifferent alterable ceremony, the innouation and abro∣gation whereof, is thought expedient by the Church, may be lawfully altered, notwithstanding of any lawes, customes, oathes, or subscriptions formerly made, for obseruation ther∣of▪ for a time.

But sitting at the Sacrament is an indifferent alterable ceremo∣ny, the innouation and abrogation whereof, is thought expe∣dient by the Church.

Ergo, Sitting at the Sacrament may be lawfully altered, not∣withstanding of any lawes, customes, oathes, or sub∣scriptions formerly made for obseruation thereof, for a time.

The Proposition is manifest by these Constitutions, which we haue cited out of the seuenteenth chapter of the booke of Discipline, confirmed in the Assembly, 1581, and subscribed by many of the Ministry. Yea, the very nature of alterable ceremonies is such, that to the obser∣uation of them no man is longer astricted, then they stand in their integritie without change; but if for any

corruption and abuse, or for some greater or better re∣spect, they be altered by the Church, the obligation for obseruing of them ceases, and bindes no more.

As to kneeling, which the Assembly hath ordained in stead of sitting, as yet we haue seene nothing against it, neither Law Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall▪ nor custome, &c. And I hope the reasons yee bring hereafter shal be found is friuolous. But keeping your order, I will first consider, ••ow yee qualifie it to be a breach of the institution.

PP▪ p. 35. lin. 25.

The first breach of the institution by kneeling, is, the taking away of that commendable gesture of sitting, v∣sed by Christ and his Apostles, at, and after the Instituti∣on. That Christ and his Apostles sate at Table, yee la∣bour to proue it, by the words of the Euangelist, Edenti∣••us ••llis. whilest they did eate, Matth. 26.26. Mark. 14.22. Christ tooke bread, and blessed, &c. If whilest they did eate, say yee, then also whilest they did sit, as these two are conioyned▪ Mark▪ 14.18. The phrase imports, that no∣thing interuened betwixt the eating, and the celebrati∣on of the Sacrament: it was therfore ministred vnto them ••itting. This is your reasoning▪ pag. 36. lin. 16. & seq.

ANS.

Your argument is, a captione â fallacia consequentis: For albeit nothing interuened betweene the eating of the Paschall Supper, and the celebration of the Sacrament, yet it followeth not▪ that the Sacrament was ministred vnto them sitting. For as yee say, their eating of the Pa∣schall Supper and sitting were coniunct; and that eating of the Paschall Supper ceasing at the beginning of the in∣stitution of this Sacrament; how will it follow, that the gesture of sitting continued, and was not changed? For although nothing interuened betweene the Paschall Sup∣per and the Sacrament, yet the gesture might haue beene

changed, when the action was changed. And as the one action ceased when the other began, so the gesture of sit∣ting might haue ceased with the action, wherewith it was conioyned: and another gesture might haue begun, and been vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament▪ Moreo∣uer, betwixt their eating of the Paschall Supper, and the administration of the Sacrament to the Disciples, there interuened diuers actes; as first, the taking of the bread▪ secondly, the thankesgiuing: thirdly, the breaking: fourth∣ly, the precept, Take yee, eate yee: fiftly, the word where∣by the element was made the Sacrament. After this, the Sacrament was giuen by our Sauiour, and receiued by the Disciples, which yee call the ministration of the Sacra∣ment vnto them. Now albeit it were true, that between the time they sate eating of the Paschall Supper, and the time when the Sacrament began to bee celebrated, no∣thing had interuened: yet betwixt that, and the mini∣string of the Sacrament to the Disciples, all these fiue acts interuened. In which time, the gesture of sitting might haue beene changed: for if they changed it not at the breaking of the bread by our Sauiour, which was the first act, yet they might haue changed it at the thankes∣giuing, which was the second; or at the breaking, which was the third; or at Christs pronouncing of the words, whereby the element became a Sacrament. So vpon this ground, that they were sitting, and eating, yee cannot conclude, that they receiued the Sacrament sitting; see∣ing betwixt the time of their eating of the Paschall Sup∣per, so many acts interuened, wherein the gesture of sit∣ting might haue beene changed, before they receiued the Sacrament. Thus it is not certaine, that they sate, and re∣ceiued the Sacrament, or, as yee say, that the Sacrament was ministred vnto them sitting. If it be replied, that it is not written, that they rose, and altered their gesture: I answere, à non scriptum, ad non factum est, non valet conse∣quentia. It is not written, that they altered their gesture,

〈…〉〈…〉 cons••••••ence is ••uer good.

〈…〉〈…〉 is not written▪ is to ••ee holden and ••el••eued for 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vndoubted truth in the wor••hi•• of God.

••ut after the eating of the Paschall Supper▪ that the Apostles 〈◊〉〈◊〉 will at Table▪ and a••••ered not their gesture▪ vntill they ••ad receiued the ••acrament▪ is a thing that is not written.

••••erefore▪ after the eating of the Paschall Supper, that the A∣••ostles sate still▪ without altering their gesture, vntil they ••ad receiued ••he Sacrament▪ is not to be beleeued▪ and ••olden for an vndoubted truth in Gods worship.

But ••ee subio••ne 〈…〉〈…〉 ••u••dem pag.

P••.

This is so euident▪ that neuer man doubted of it▪ 〈…〉〈…〉 ••eare▪ euen ••hose who ••ffirme, but against the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that they ••••ood at the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 seruice; confesse, that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sate at the second▪ and at the celebration of the Sa∣••rament. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Master ••ohn Mare, and the Bishop o•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉▪ &c.

ANS.

••hat this is not ••o euident▪ as yee alledge, is manifest 〈◊〉〈◊〉 that which hath bin said. But the cause, that hath 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••oubt since the last yeare▪ is the Paradox▪ which ••ee and your followers haue vndertaken to defend▪ since ••he ••ast ••eare▪ of which ••euer Diuine▪ either in the anci∣••nt o•• reformed Church▪ ••reamed of before▪ namely, ••hat we should beleeue without doubting: First▪ that the ••postles receiued the Sacrament sitting. Secondly, that ••his gesture of theirs was exemplary. Thirdly, that it was ••nstituted by our Sauiour▪ to be obserued in all succeeding 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ••ince ••ee ••fter ••his manner vrge sitting, with an ••pinion o•• necessity▪ ••nd impose it vpon the conscien∣••es of the weake▪ with such terrours and feares▪ that it ••annot be omitted, without a manifest breach of the In∣••titution; we can doe no lesse, then trie by the Scriptures▪ ••hether it be so, or not. The testimony of M. Iohn Mare,

or of any mortall man, cannot tye our consciences to be∣leeue, or practise any thing in Religion, as an Article of Faith, or a necessary point of Gods worship, whereof there is not a cleare and vndoubted warrant in the Word of God. And for the Bishop of Chester,* 1.3 hee declareth his opinion onely, but astricts no man to beleeue it, nor will he haue any man to build thereupon, as yee doe; that the Apostles sitting was exemplary: against the which, his arguments in the Treatise that yee cite, are such, as might haue stayed you, or any other that reason could satisfie, from taking a pen in hand to the contrary.

PP.

That sitting was instituted, I proue it by two rea∣sons: first, the gesture, that Christ retained in passing from the conclusion of the Paschall Supper, That hee did institute sitting hee retained, Therefore he did institute sitting.

ANS.

This is a Demonstration, whereupon the faith and o∣bedience of the worthy Receiuers must be grounded, tou∣ching the gesture they must vse at Communion: yet the Libeller perceiuing, that the proposition of this argument may be denyed, and being denied, that it must be proued by this generall; Whatsoeuer Christ retained, that he did institute: and considering withall, that Christ retained many things, as the place, the quality of the bread, and circūstance of time, which he dare not affirme to haue bin instituted; hee makes exception of such things, as were retained of necessity, and could not conueniently bee changed. And thereupon subioynes this saying.

PP. pag. 36. lin. vlt.

But as for the gesture of sitting, he might haue chan∣ged it in standing or kneeling, without working any mi∣racle, if it had not been his minde, that we should receiue

••he ••acrament of the Eucharisticall Supper, with the ••ame gesture, that the Iewes receiued the Paschall.

ANS,

In this argument, hee takes it for granted, that the Disciples s••te at the Sacrament, which yet is in question, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by ••cripture shall neuer be decide••. And this is a So∣phisticke deception▪ called ••etitio principij. Next the rea∣••on whereby hee prooues that s••tting was instituted, and ••ot the other circumstances, which were likewise retai∣ned▪ ••s because Christ might haue changed it in standing, or kneeling, without working a miracle. But this reason▪ •• hope▪ will not be found demonstratiue: for our Sauiour, without working a miracle, might haue changed the vp∣per ••hamber, wherin he eat the Passeouer, & taken him∣••elfe to some other roome. Therefore by your argument ••is minde was, that we should only ••elebrate the Sacra∣ment in an vpper ••hamber. ••ikewise our Sauiour, with∣••ut working of a miracle, might easily haue called his Mother▪ and other women to the Sacrament, and so haue ••ltered the sex, and number of the Communicants: ther∣••ore it was his mind by ••our reason▪ that twelue men sit∣••ing at once at Table▪ and no women, should receiue the ••acrament. Finally▪ our Sauiour might haue celebrated the Sacrament without his vpper garment, which he did put on▪ after he had washed his Diciples feete▪ before he ••elebrated the Sacrament. Therefore Baronius the Cardi∣nall concludes wel by your ground. That it was his mind ••he Priest should put on his Masse-clothes▪ which are his ••pper garment▪ before he celebrated the Sacrament. But ••hat ••ll men may see the vanity of this argument▪ I shall ••learly ••roue by it, ••hat sitting was not instituted: Christ, ••ee sa•• might easily ••aue changed the gesture▪ which he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 at the Paschall Supper▪ without the working of a miracle▪ ••n standing, or kneeling, if it had not been his minde, that we should receiue the Sacrament of the Eu∣charisticall

Supper, with the same gesture that the Iewes receiued the Paschall. Now I assume, But the Iewes this night receiued the Paschall Supper, not sitting right vp in chaires or fourmes, as we do, but lying on beds; although that both the gestures might haue been, and were vsed by them in other nights, as is manifest by the testimonie which you cite your selfe out of SCALIGER, De emen∣datione temporum, lib. 6. Quòd in omnibus alijs noctibus tam ••dentes, quàm bibentes, vel sedemus, vel discumbimus, in hac autem omnes discumbimus. That is to say, Other nights, eating or drinking, we either sit at table, or lye; This night we all lye (yee turne it, we all suppe, that is, sit lea∣ning.) Thus then I reason vpon the ground of your owne demonstration: The gesture of lying, vsed by our Saui∣our at the Paschal Supper, according to the custom of the Iewes, might haue easily and commodiously been chan∣ged, without working a miracle, by turning about his face and body to the Table, and setting of himselfe right vpon the beddes, with his feete to the ground, as our cu∣stome is to sitte at table. Therefore, according to your owne principle, it was not Christs minde, that we should sitte vpright at table, as wee doe, and all the Iewes in those dayes vsed to doe at other times; but that wee should lye at table, as the Iewes did at the Supper of the Passeouer. Now let the judicious Reader consider, if this be a sure ground, whereupon to settle a certaine and in∣fallible point of Gods worship. But I conuert the argu∣ment.

Nothing vsed at the Paschall Supper, and retained at the Sa∣crament, that is not expressed in the words of the Institu∣tion, was instituted.

But sitting vsed in the Paschall Supper, retained, as yee al∣ledge, at the Sacrament, is a thing not expressed in the words of the Institution.

Therefore sitting vsed at the Paschall Supper, and retained, &c. was not instituted.

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

begins? seeing in so doing, yee pretend, or shew more reuerence and deuotion, then the Apostles did, who sate: but if yee say, they stood, or kneeled as wee doe; how know yee, that they sate at the Receiuing, and retained not still the gesture, wherewith they gaue thankes?

PP.

Wherefore doth the Apostle propound the custome of the first Churches, 1. Cor. 11.16. 2. Tim. 3.14. 1. Cor. 14.33. if they did not oblige vs to imitation?

ANS.

More impertinent testimonies yee could not haue brought, then the last two, and if they be rightly cited, let the Reader iudge: to the first, wherein mention is made of the custome of the Churches, I answere: If the custome of the Church, and the actions and practises of Christ be morall, and of the nature of things comman∣ded generally in the Decalogue, they oblige vs indeed to imitation; but naturall actions, such as eating, drinking, waking, sleeping, resting, talking, and such like done by them, with the circumstances thereof; namely, the man∣ner, time, and place, of their eating, drinking, &c. doe not tye vs to the imitation of them, although there bee no cause mouing them thereto, which concernes vs not. Therefore in all things we are not obliged to their imita∣tion. Neither doe the ceremonies and circumstances ob∣serued by them in the exercise of Religion, astrict vs, ex∣cept they be enioyned by some constant precept in the Gospell: as by example, Iohn baptised at a riuer, and they who were baptised went downe into the water, and came vp out of it againe: in some places the Church vsed a threefold immersion: in the Apostles time, they vsed to salute one another with a holy kisse: they kept their banquets of loue at their meetings, and other moe cu∣stomes they had, which not being enioyned to vs by a constant command, doe no wise oblige vs: as no more

doth the circumstance of place, time, habite, persons, position, and site of body, as standing, sitting or walking. And in a word, in the actions of Christ, his Apostles, or the customes of the Church, there is nothing exemplary, and left to be imitated of vs, but that which either being morall•••• generally commanded in the Decalogue, or be∣ing ceremoniall and circumstantiall, is particularly com∣manded by some constant precept in the Gospell. But I 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••ake you, that would haue euery action of Christs to be imitated by vs▪ which hath not a speciall exception 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••ome cause▪ mouing him, that concernes vs not: what ••s the cause, that at the celebration of the Sacrament, yee blesse not the Bread first, seuerally by it selfe, and the Cup seuerally by it selfe, after the distribution of the Bread? seeing Christ did so, as it is expresly mentioned, yet ha∣uing no cause to moue him, which concernes vs not. This 〈◊〉〈◊〉 perswaded, if our ground bee sure, is a more eui∣dent breach of the institution, then is our not sitting at the Sacrament▪ for in the words of the institution, there 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mention of sitting, but the giuing of thankes twice is expresly set downe▪ and there could bee no cause to moue Christ vnto this, which doth not concerne vs. For sitting if it be so, that Christ sate) there is a manifest ••ause moouing him vnto that▪ which doth not concerne 〈…〉〈…〉 the Paschall Supper, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 occasion whereof, he was sitting ••efore. Therefore to conclude, if it bee no ••reach of ••he ••nstitution, once to giue thanks▪ and blesse ••he bread and cup at once, which Christ Iesus in the In∣stitution is said to haue done at two seuerall times, it is without all reason, to make that necessary, which is not expressed in the Institution; and call that a breach of the ••nstitution▪ which neuer was instituted. Thus hauing shewed the ground, whereupon you build your exempla∣••e actions▪ to bee a heape of sand, scraped together by your selfe, without warrant of Scripture, Antiquity, or any moderne Writer; the arguments yee bring after∣wards

from the sitting of Christ with some of the Disci∣ples after his Resurrection, when he was at Emmaus; and the sitting of the Apostolike Church, after our Sauiours Ascension, are to no purpose: seeing your rule failes, and cannot proue the sitting of Christ, and his Apostles, at the Sacrament (if so they sate) to be exemplary, more then any of the other circumstances of time, place, order, and persons. But that the Reader may see, how vncertaine your testimonies and reasons are, we will consider them particularly.

PP.

Christ after his Resurrection, when hee was in Em∣maus with some of the Disciples, as he sate at meat with them, tooke bread, blessed it, brake it, and gaue it vnto them, as it is said, Luk. 24.30. This place is interpreted by Augustine, Paulinus, &c. But so it is, they wete sitting when Christ gaue them the bread: whatsoeuer be the in∣terpretation of the Text, yee see, they acknowledge sit∣ting at the Table.

ANS.

I see not, that they did acknowledge the Disciples to haue sate at Table, when they receiued: for as I said be∣fore, there interuened betweene the taking of the bread by Christ, and the receiuing of the same by the Disciples, the act of thankesgiuing, breaking and giuing the bread, in which time, the gesture of sitting might haue beene al∣tered. Thus it is not certaine, that they sate at the Recei∣uing. If yee reply: it is not written that they did alter the gesture of sitting: to that I answere before, and it is the Papists argument against the giuing of the Cup to the Layickes; it is not written, say they, that the Cup was giuen, in this place: Therefore, &c. Also yee know, that the time of Christ his sitting heere with his Disciples at Emmaus, was the night season, the place, a priuate Inne: that the breaking and giuing of that bread, was before or after another ordinary supper; and that onely men

were there present▪ and not women: all which points be∣ing certaine, according to your first reason, whereby yee ••••tended to proue sitting to haue been instituted; it will ••ollow that all these circumstances, and things, were in∣stituted to be obserued as well as sitting, because our Sa∣uiour retained all these things, hauing no necessity at this ••••me to celebrate the Sacrament. Thirdly, I say, if the ••acrament was here ministred▪ we haue an expresse war∣rant for priuate Communion, which yee impugne▪ for Iesus heere ministred vnto two onely, and yee will not ••••ntent 〈◊〉〈◊〉 haue 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ministred to ••hree. Lastly, it is the iudgement of the learned Calume, That there was no ce∣••ebration of the Sacrament at that time, and that Christ was knowne to these Disciples by an ordinary prayer, which he vsed in blessing of the Table, and not by the ce∣lebration of the Sacrament▪ which opinion, he saith, al∣though it seeme plausible, is no more then a coniecture, which leanes to no probable reason. Then yee see▪ that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vncertaine 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christ gaue this Sacrament at Emmaus▪ and if he did▪ that there sitting at the Receiuing 〈◊〉〈◊〉 also vncertaine▪ And therby your argument is nought, and serueth only to establish priuate Communion. Thus ••aue you gained nothing by this testimony, but lost much.

PP.

Last of all after his Ascension and glorification in the ••eauens▪ the Apostolike Church sate at Table. The man∣••er of ••he partaking of the table of Diuels, was by for∣ma•••• sitting at table in the house of the Idoll: Ionathan the Chaldee Paraphrast. Amos ••.8. interpreteth the gar∣ments, whereon the Vsurer sate beside euery Altar, to ••aue been beds prepared in the houses of their gods, to sit 〈◊〉〈◊〉 when they feasted vpon things sacrificed to Idols. The people of Israel sate downe to eate and drink, at the ••dolatrous feast of the golden Calfe The Apostle com∣pare•••• the partaking of the Lords Table, and the table

of Diuels, 1. Cor. 10.21. Next, they sate at the Loue feasts: we cannot thinke, that they rose from the Tables to receiue the Sacrament.

ANS.

To proue that the Apostolike Church sate at Table, you bring the comparison, that the Apostle makes be∣tweene the partaking of the Lords Table, and the table of Diuels: and the partaking of the table of Diuels, you say, was by a formall sitting at table in the house of the Idoll: for which yee alledge Ionathan the Chaldee Para∣phrast, vpon the eight verse of the second chapter of A∣mos; but neither the Text, nor his interpretation proues the formall sitting yee speake of: for the text saith, they laid themselues downe vpon clothes by euery Altar, and not, that they sate: And the Paraphrast, as Mercerus ex∣pounds him, saith, That those clothes were Parapetasma∣••a, that is, couerings or mattes, whereupon they laid themselues downe, and not sate, by euery Altar, and not in the Idols house. And for the place of the Apostle:

Yee cannot be partakers of the Table of the Lord, and of the table of Diuels, there is no materiall or artifi∣ciall table vnderstood, either by the one Table or the o∣ther; and by participation, formall sitting is not meant.

This is manifest by these words, Yee cannot be partakers: for certaine it is, that they might haue sitten formally at ta∣ble in the house of the Idoll, and eaten of their sacrifices, and might also haue sitten at the Lords Table formally, and receiued the external elements. But the Apostle saith, That these two Tables, and the participation of them are so opposed, as they could not be partakers of both. Ther∣fore by the table of Diuels in that place we vnderstand the sacrifices offered to Diuels, and by participation, we vnderstand the eating of these sacrifices, with a consci∣ence toward the Idoll, where euer it was done, whether in the Idols Temple, as 1. Cor. 8.10. or in the priuate hou∣ses of Idolaters, as 1. Cor. 10.27.28. And by the Table of

the Lord, we vnderstand the body and blood of our Sa∣uiour in the Sacrament, and by the partaking of the Lords Table, the spirituall eating and drinking of his flesh and bloud in the Sacrament, by a true and liuely faith. These two Tables, and partakings could not stand together. And so by the Table of the Lord, the Apostle meanes not a material table, at which the Communicants sate, but the body of Christ in the Sacrament. According to this Causabone in his Exercitations against Baronius, 16.36. citing these words, Non potestis mensae Domini participes esse, &c. saith, Hîc mensa Domini, est ipsa Eucharistia, quam exemplo Pauli, Patresita saepè nominant. That is, The Table of the Lord in this place, is the Eucharist it selfe, which the Fathers often call by this name of the table, following Saint Pauls example. Now where yee adde, that the people of Israel sate downe to eate and drinke at the feast of the golden Calfe: I am assured, yee thinke not, that the Israelites had a materiall table, at which they sate in that feast, so as their sitting will make nothing for the formall sitting, which yee would conclude. And for that which yee tell vs of the Loue feasts, that people sate at them, and that yee cannot thinke they rose from the ta∣ble to receiue the Sacrament; yee must know, that your thoughts are no probation: and whatsoeuer yee thinke, it is the Apostles expresse minde, that they who discerne not the body of the Lord from that, and all other carnall feasts, are guilty of his body. And if yee thinke these ho∣ly mysteries were worthily receiued, if after the same manner, and at the same time and table, they receiued without making discretion between the one feast and the other, yee thinke not according to the truth:

Nam hîc coena à mysterijs toto genere diuersa erat: as Causabone speakes in the same booke of his Exercitations, 16.31.

Then to conclude, neither haue yee proued that the Apo∣stles, or Apostolike Church receiued the Sacrament sit∣ting formally at a table; nor if they sate, that their sitting was exemplary: for

Whatsoeuer is exemplary in Christ his actions, or in the Apo∣stles, or in the Apostolike Churches, is either morall, and commanded in the Decalogue generally; or then it is some action, or circumstantiall ceremony of Religion, enioyned by precept in the Gospell.

But sitting at the Sacrament is neither morall, and so com∣manded in the Decalogue; or is it an action or circumstanti∣all ceremony of Religion, enioyned by precept in the Gospell.

Therefore sitting at the Sacrament is not exemplary, and left vs to be imitated, by Christ, his Apostles, or the Aposto∣like Churches.

And although yee had demonstrated, which neither by Scripture or antiquity, yee will euer be able to doe, That Christ and his Apostles did sitte at the receiuing of the Sacrament, could it oblige vs to the like, as I cleared before?

PP.

It is obiected, that the sitting of Christ and his Apo∣stles was not vpright, but sitting with leaning. If wee imitate the example of Christ, wee should sitte after the same manner. Answere, It was the custome receiued a∣mongst the Iewes before, and in the dayes of Christ, de∣scending from the Romanes, or as others alledge, from the Persians, &c.

ANS.

The reply yee make to this obiection is long, and nee∣deth not to be repeated; for the gesture being vncertain, wherewith the Apostles receiued; and sitting neyther being instituted by Christ, nor exemplary to vs; as I haue before shewed, whether they sate vpright, or with lea∣ning, none of the formes is necessary to bee vsed. So all your following Discourse is idle, and to no purpose; specially where yee say, That sitting was a custome brought into the Church by Christ, whose example being seconded with the practise of the Apostles, is equiualent vnto a precept; and that it is safer for a mans conscience

to imitate Christ and his Apostles, then to depart from them, and imitate the custome of Churches which may erre: for yee haue neither proued sitting to be an Aposto∣like practise, not yet to be exemplary; and all your rea∣sons brought for that purpose, haue appeared to be of no force. Yet two things I note in this your answere: first yee say, That the Iewes did receiue their forme of sitting from the Romanes and Persians; and in this yee erre: for it is manifest, by the sixt of Amos, That before they conuersed either with Romanes or Persians, that forme of gesture was vsed amongst them. Next, when yee say, that there is little difference betweene the one fashion of sitting, and the other, that is also false: for it differeth as farre from our forme of sitting, as lying doth: as is clea∣red by these words of Amos 6.4. They lye vpon beds of Iuory, and stretch themselues vpon their couches. And by that verse of IVVENAL Sat. 1.

Vacuis{que} thoris tantùm ipse jacebit.

Looke what difference there is betweene 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or betweene sedere and iacere; there is as great difference betweene their forme of sitting, and ours: But because both belonged to one vse, the Translators of the Bible for our capacity interpret both by Sitting.

PP.

That this gesture may very well bee comprehended vnder the expresse precept of Christ, in the Institution, hoc facite, doe this, that is, hoc totum facite, doe all this.

ANS.

Where, I pray you, shew me, what yee call (all this?) will yee haue (all) to comprehend, not the actions on∣ly, which are set downe in the Institution, as the taking, the blessing, the breaking, the giuing, &c. but the circum∣stances likewise, as the time, the place, the order, the per∣sons, the site and position of body, and the habit? Then (hoc facite) must import, doe this in the night season, doe it in an vpper chamber, doe it after supper, do it with an

vpper garment vpon you, doe it with faire cleane washen feete, doe it with vnleauened bread, doe it with men, and not with women; doe it being thirteene persons in num∣ber, one Giuer, and twelue Receiuers; and doe it with this gesture and position of body, which now yee vse. Heere, all being certaine, the gesture only is vncertaine: some question is made of the number of the Receiuers, because some thinke that Iudas went out, after he got the soppe, before the Sacrament: all the rest are expressed in the story; but whether the Disciples sate, or stood, or kneeled, at the thankesgiuing in the receiuing, no man knowes. We were accustomed, and still are, to kneele at the thankesgiuing, if we did imitate the Apostles here∣in, they haue also kneeled, and then it is very vncertaine, whether they sate at the Receiuing: But if wee doe not imitate their gesture in the thankesgiuing, it is cleare that we neuer esteemed the imitation of the Apostolike ge∣sture at the thanksgiuing, to be comprised in the precept, hoc facite, which yee interpret, doe all this.

PP.

Wee must not thinke that nothing belongs to the In∣stitution, but that which is mentioned in Pauls narrati∣on, 1. Cor. 11. for then a Table could not belong to the Institution.

ANS.

Whatsoeuer yee thinke, the faithfull will beleeue, that the Apostle setting downe, as hee doth in that place, the true forme of keeping the Lords Supper, would ne∣uer haue omitted the gesture, if the same had been a part of the Institution, and if he had receiued any thing tou∣ching that from the Lord, he had without all question de∣liuered the same to the Corinthians. As for your instance of a Table, if yee vnderstand thereby a materiall table, appointed for feasters to sitte at, such a table is not neces∣sary, as shalbe cleared in the answer to the second breach:

but if by a Table yee vnderstand a commodious part, whereon the elements must bee placed, then the table must be reckoned amongst the necessary circumstances, that accompany the action: for when Christ commanded to doe this, the command did insinuate, That they must conuene in some place to doe it, that there must be a Pa∣stor to giue, and some persons to receiue; that the ele∣ments which are giuen and taken, must be placed in some commodious part, on which they may bee consecrated with thankesgiuing, and blessing, where they may bee broken, and where they may be giuen and receiued: such a table is necessary, yet, what the matter, the forme, and quality of this table should be, is no where expressed in the Scripture, but as the time when, and the place where, and the particular persons to whom, and by whom the Sacrament shall bee celebrate: so the particular matter and forme of the Table is not mentioned in the Instituti∣on, but omitted with the rest of the necessary circumstan∣ces, and left to be determined by the Church, according to the rule of edification and decencie, and is onely insi∣nuated, as a thing necessarily enioyned with the actions prescribed in the command: for when the Apostle saith, doe this, albeit he saith not, doe it at night, or in the mor∣ning, or in a priuate or publike place, by such a person and congregation, and such a part or Table, or with such ge∣sture: yet the command imports, that it should bee done at a conuenient time, in a conuenient place, by meete and qualified persons, with a conuenient gesture, and on a conuenient Table, or on somewhat in stead of a Table. Now, what should be conuenient in such things, it could not be defined; for conueniency changes, according to times, ages and nations: The specification thereof, is left to the wise iudgement of the Church, according to chari∣tie, quam si moderatricem patiemur, saith CALV••N, salua ••runt omnia, that is, Charity being the moderatrix, all shal goe well.

PP.

No doubt our Sauiour instructed them how to dis∣cerne the Lords body, how to eate and drinke, before he commanded them to eate and drinke. But the Euange••lists and Paul writes of the Sacrament, as of a thing knowne to the Church by practise, presupposing a Table, and the Communicants conuened, and sitting at the Table.

ANS.

Yee appeare in this place, to haue forgotten that which you affirmed in the beginning of your dispute, to wit, That nothing interuened betweene the celebration of the Sacrament, and the eating of the Paschall Supper: for now you say, That our Sauiour, no doubt, instructed them how to eate and drinke, before they were comman∣ded to eate and drinke, that is, in your minde, he taught them to conuene themselues, and set them downe at Ta∣ble: but I alledge, he taught them to stand or kneele ar the receiuing, which wee know certainly to haue bin the practise of the Churches thereafter: What warrant haue you more for the one, then I haue for the other? The Pa∣pists will say, that hee taught them the doctrine of Tran∣substantiation, and the Sacrifice of the Masse, and all the ceremonies vsed at that action, which being after knowne to the Churches by practise, are omitted by Saint Paul and the Euangelists, when they wrote of the Sacrament▪ because, as yee say, they presupposed these things to bee knowne. So farre are yee miscaried with the loue of your darling, Table gesture, that for establishing and authorising the same, yee dare alledge vnwritten verities, whereup∣on the Church of Rome founds all her heresies. But to conclude, against your false Assertion, I forme you this reason:

Whatsoeuer is of necessary vse in the Sacrament, is expressed in the words of the Institution, or then is annexed vnto that which is expressed, as a necessary circumstance belonging thereto.

But sitting, is neither expressed in the words of the institution, nor is annexed to that, which is expressed as a necessary cir∣cumstance belonging thereto.

Therefore sitting is not of necessary vse in the Sacrament.

PP.

The second breach of the Institution made by knee∣ling in the act of receiuing, is the taking away the vse of a table. Christ and his Apostles sate at Table, 1. Cor. 10. Luk. 2••. Wherefore serueth the name of a Table, if wee keepe not the proper vse, and employment of it? The Fathers call it the Lords Table, the heauenly Table, the sacred Table, the mysticall Table, the spirituall Table, the rationall Table. Whereto serue all these commendations, if in the meane time it be not vsed as a Table, but rather as an Altar? if it be not vsed, as Christ and his Apostles vsed it, that is, by sitting at it, to receiue the dainties set vpon the Table? And a little after; The people of God had an Altar for the Sacrifice, and a Table for a Feast. Such like the Ethnickes: so Christians haue an Altar for a Sacrifice, to wit, Christ who is Priest, Altar, and Sa∣crifice, Heb. 13.10. And a Table for the Feast, after this Sacrifice once made, to wit, the Sacrament of the Sup∣per. As the Israelites, and the Ethnickes sate at the table of their feasts, so doe we at our sacred Feasts, to distin∣guish betweene an Altar and a Table, a Sacrifice and a Supper made of the thing sacrificed; a dresser or cup∣boord may serue as well for the disposing of the ele∣ments, &c.

ANS.

I must take paines heere for clearing your minde, to draw your arguments together, which are set downe, ••anquam scopae dissolutae, as loose or euill knit beesomes: yee proue that kneeling taketh away the vse of a table, be∣cause the proper vse of a table is for sitting. This yee qualifie, because Christ and his Apostles sate at Table: And because the Iewes, and the Ethnickes sate at their

feasts made of things sacrificed. And this is your first argument: Your next is, because sitting makes a distin∣ction betweene an Altar and a Table, betweene a Supper and a Sacrifice. For answere to your first argument, I say, it is a meere caption, à fallacia consequentis: for albeit that Christ and his Apostles, the Iewes and the Ethnicks sate at their feasts, it followeth not, that the proper vse of a table is sitting. The proper vse of a table, is to hold and sustaine the meat that is set thereon: beds in these dayes were ordained for sitting, fourmes, chaires, and bonkers in our times: the taking away of sitting, takes away the vse of the beds, fourmes, and seates whereon they sate, but not the vse of the table: this still remaines, if the ele∣ments be placed thereon, and consecrate in the celebra∣tion of the Sacrament, albeit no man sitte thereat. As to Christ and the Apostles, the Iewes and the Ethnicks, they sate at their feasts, when they did eate their sacrifices, be∣cause these feasts were sufficient bodily repasts; at which they spent long time in eating, drinking, and conference: For the ease of their bodies, sitting, lying, or such like a gesture was necessary; but our Sacrament, which is wholly finished, by receiuing a morsell of bread, and a very little wine, requires not a long time, nor such an easefull gesture for the body. It is vncertaine, as I shewed before, what kinde of gesture our Sauiour and the Apo∣stles vsed; and if they sate, it was occasioned by the for∣mer Supper, and no wise requisite for the Sacrament, nei∣ther for ease of the body, the action being quickly ended; neither for conference, for there was none vsed thereat: neither for receiuing the dainties, or the elements from the table, by stretching out their hands. As to the bread, Scaliger saith, that the custome was, of the Master of the feast, to breake the bread in so many peeces, as the num∣ber of the feasters were: and vnto euery one a peece was giuen, as great as an Oliue: or if yee reiect his authority, whom yee formerly cited in the booke of Discipline,

1560, which yee make the ground of your order, it is said, the bread was broken by our Sauiour, and deliuered to him who sate next, and that they brake, and deliuered each to his neighbour▪ Likewise that they diuided the cup amongst them, after our Sauiour had giuen the same; so they stretched not forth their hands to take the elements from the table; and their sitting at table for these ends was needlesse.

To your second argument I answere: the distinction of the Table from the Altar is not made by sitting, but by the employments proper to them. The Altar was ordai∣ned for the sanctifying of the oblations made to God, the Table to hold and sustaine such things as are offered, and giuen to vs, according to Christs Institution. The Priest stood at the Altar when he offered, and the people when they praied: so the Communicants in the Primitiue Church stood at the Table, when they receiued the Sacra∣ment on the Lords day, and this conformity in gesture tooke not away the difference between the Altar and the Table, as no more doth kneeling, or any other gesture. But to come to the ground, whereupon yee build this rea∣son, yee say, the people of God had an Altar for the Sa∣crifice, and a table for the feast: So Christians haue Christ for the Altar and the Sacrifice, and a Communion Table for the Sacrament, which is their feast. This your com∣parison hath some shew, but no solidity. There is a cor∣respondence, I grant, betweene the Iewish Altar, and Christ, who was the Altar that did sacrifice himselfe, to be a Sacrifice for the sinnes of the world; for the Iewish Altar was the type, and Christ the verity. But what cor∣respondence is there, betweene the tables whereon the Iewes did eate their sacrifices, and the Communion Ta∣ble? The tables whereon they did eate their sacrifices, were not holy instruments, which appertained to the Ta∣bernacle and Temple, but such as they had in their owne priuate houses; and therefore were not types, which did

eyther signifie our Communion Tables, or whereunto our Communion Tables doe answere, as anti-types▪ for it is to be obserued, that in Christian Religion there is nothing which hath any necessary correspondence, or relation to the Legall ceremonies, but that which is ei∣ther the verity of some type, or the antitype of some type. As for example, betweene Christ, and the Leuitical Priest, the Altar, and the Sacrifice, there is relation as betweene the type and the verity: so betweene Circum∣cision and Baptisme, the Passeouer and the Lords Supper, there is relation, as betweene the type and the antitype; for our Sacraments haue succeeded these, and are in their stead. But as to the Table, whereon the Passeouer and other sacrifices were eaten, the same not being a sacred instrument, or type appointed by God, as hath been said, there is nothing in Christian Religion answering thereto, either as the verity it selfe, or as an antitype succeeding thereto. As therefore their tables were not necessary for eating of their sacrifices (for it is certaine, the Iewes were not a stricted by any diuine ordinance to sitte at Table, when they did eate the Passeouer, and their other Sacrifi∣ces) but were only commodious receptacles deuised by themselues, which they might haue altered and inter∣changed as they thought meet: Euen so, a materiall arti∣ficiall table for celebration of this Sacrament, is not an instrument appointed by our Sauiour, as the Altars and Tables of Shew-bread, but the same is appointed by the Church, according to that power which shee hath to de∣termine circumstances for the actions of diuine worship. To the disposing of the elements, some such receptacle and subiect is necessary, as a table, and decency requires it, when, and where the same may be had; but it is not of such a necessary vse, as the Altar vnder the Law, for with∣out an Altar, a sacrifice could not be offered, but without any such table, the Sacrament hath often been ministred. Euagrius lib. 6. hist. cap. 13. records, That Gregorius Pastor

of Antiochia did minister the Sacrament to the Souldiers on the grasse, before the 600. yeare of our Lord: at Ban∣••ock burne in the dayes of King Robert Bruce, the like was done to the Scottish army on the fields, and so at many o∣ther times, when a table commodiously could not be had. Finally, where yee adde, That for disposing of the ele∣ments, a dresser or cupboord may serue, these speeches smell of profanity; as if to hold and sustaine the elements were such a base employment, that the instrument wher∣on the Church thought meet they should be placed, should neither be a table, nor named a table. And yet all these religious Epithets, which yee alledge the Fathers gaue to the Communion, as when they called it the Lords Table, the heauenly Table, the sacred Table, &c. were giuen to it, not because the Communicants did sitte thereat, or for any other gesture of body vsed by them, but because the Lords body, the bread of heauen, the sacred, mysticall, and spirituall food of our soules, were presented thereon in the holy Sacrament. Causabone Exercit. 16.36. saith, That by these appellations, the Eucharist it selfe was vn∣derstood. But heere it is manifest, that the Epithets in∣teriected in your discourse, are not only impertinent, but repugnant to the opinion yee hold: For when yee aske, why is it called a table, if men sit not at it? they answer you, Because vpon that table, the heauenly, sacred, and spirituall mysteries are set. In respect thereof, it is called a heauenly, spirituall, sacred, and mysticall table. In the dayes of Chrysostome and Theodoret, by whom these Epi∣thets were most frequently giuen to the Sacrament, there was not a table in the Churches, at which men did sitte, but one onely, on which the elements were placed, and consecrate: but yee neuer fall vpon the name of a Table sooner, then yee imagine it was appointed for sitting. And what then thinke yee of the Table of Shew-bread, at which no man did sit? Shall it not be called a Table, be∣cause it lacked your employment of sitting, or table ge∣sture?

In all Reformed Churches of Europe, (our Church and very few excepted) the Communion Tables haue no employment, but only to hold, and sustaine the elements: This is to be seen in the Churches of France, Germany, Hun∣gary, Pole, and England. And in the Greeke Church Cau∣sabone obserues, that there are two Tables, one where∣upon the elements are set before the Consecration, and another wherupon they are Consecrate. Thus haue I suf∣ficiently declared, that the only or chiefe vse at least of the Communion Table, is for the setting and disposing of the elements, and the consecration of them, with the di∣stribution of the same. Now, that by kneeling in the act of receiuing, the vse of the Communion table is not ta∣ken away, I proue by this reason.

Whatsoeuer gesture taketh not away the comely placing, and decent consecration of the sacramentall elements on the Communion Table, from which they may bee giuen and re∣ceiued, that taketh not away the vse of the Communion Table.

But kneeling is a gesture, that taketh not away the comely pla∣cing, and decent consecration of the sacramentall ••lements on the Communion Table, from which they may be giuen, and receiued.

Therefore kneeling taketh not away the vse of the Communion Table.

PP.

The third breach of the Institution made by knee∣ling, is the taking away of that mysticall rite represen∣ting Christs Passion, to wit, the breaking of the bread, &c.

ANS.

If your meaning be, that the Pastor breaketh not the bread before he giue it, yee bely vs. Wee know that it is the Pastors part in the action, to represent Christ the breaking of his body on the Crosse, with the sorrowes of death for our sinnes; therefore we obserue that rite reli∣giously.

But if your meaning be, that the people breakes not euery one with another in reuerence and sobrietie, as is prescribed in the second Chapter of the first Booke of Discipline set foorth 1560. that shall be discussed in the answere to the sixth breach.

PP.

The fourth breach of the Institution made by knee∣ling, is the change and restraint of the commandement, giuen to many in the plurall number, Eate yee, drinke yee: to one in the singular number, Eate thou, drinke thou.

ANS.

This is a calumny, we neither change the command, nor so much as a iot contained in the institution: For, first, wee consecrate the Elements, vsing the words of Saint Paul, and the Euangelists, without altering a silla∣ble. Thereafter, when we giue the Elements seuerally to euery person, wee apply the generall command to euery one in particular, which if we did not, euery wor∣thy receiuer ought to apply vnto himselfe, else he can∣not communicate in faith; for he that esteemes not, that command to belong to himselfe in particular, hath no warrant for his taking, eating, and drinking. This ap∣plication therefore made by the Pastor to euery commu∣nicant, is not a breach, but a meane, seruing to the right and precise obseruation of the Institution.

PP.

The fift breach of the institution made by kneeling is, the altering of the enunciatiue words of Christ, This is my body which is broken for you: This is my bloud which is shed for you, in a prayer, To blesse our body and soule, saying, The body of our Lord Iesus Christ, &c.

ANS.

This also is a calumny, for these words wee vse not in stead of the sacramentall words, because then there should be no Sacrament at all: for by the sacramentall word, This is my body, the bread is made the Sacrament

of Christs body: and by this word, This Cuppe is the New Testament in my bloud, the Cuppe is made the Sacrament of his Bloud; and without this word, whereby the will of our Sauiour is declared, which makes the Sacrament, all our prayers and wishes should serue to no vse. It is true, after the Sacrament is made by the sacramentall word, these, or the like words are vttered by the Pastor at the deliuery of the Elements, whereby the generall prayer and blessing, wherewith the action beginnes, is applyed particularly to euery Communicant, and they admonished, and instructed to apply it to themselues. This is the dutie both of the Pastor and of the people: for as in the prayer it is our duetie to wish in generall, that all who are to participate the bodie and bloud of Iesus, may be preserued thereby to euerlasting life: so it is our duetie to wish the same to each one seuerally at the instant when he is receiuing. And as it is the Peo∣ples dutie, when the prayer is conceiued for all, to wish that Christs body and bloud may preserue all the recei∣uers thereof: so, when they receiue seuerally, to wish, that themselues in particular may be preserued thereby: For, if this be one of the principall ends, wherefore they come to receiue, can they receiue worthily without this or the like wish? No man without blasphemie can call this an idle battologie.

PP.

The sixth breach of the Institution made by knee∣ling, is the taking away of the distribution that ought to be amongst the Communicants. When Christ sayd, Take yee, eate yee, he insinuates, that they should take and diuide amongst themselues. [A little after.] In the first Booke of Discipline, penned Anno. 1560. it is ordained, that the Minister break the bread, and distribute the same to those that bee next him, commanding the rest, euery one, with reuerence and sobrietie to breake with other, because it is neerest to Christs action: further, we haue

a plaine precept, Luke 22.17. Diuide it amongst you, &c.

ANS.

If yee stand to that, which yee alleadge out of Scali∣ger, was the custome of the Iewes, and vsed by our Saui∣our in the Institution: yee haue no cause to quarrell the distribution of the bread; for the Master of the feast v∣sed to breake the bread in so many peeces as the number of the Feasters were, giuing to euery one a peece: nei∣ther did each person measure his owne portion, giuing the rest to his neighbour, according to our custome. But leauing this, if we shall consider by the Institution, what part is proper to the Pastor, and what to the People, wee will finde, that as it is the Pastors part to take bread, to blesse, and giue thanks; so is it his part, first, to breake the bread, then to giue it with this precept, Take, eate; and so, that it is the Peoples part not to breake it, but to take it broken: for, as it was the part of Christ, first, to giue his flesh for the life of the World, when he did offer himselfe in a sacrifice for our sinnes, which he will haue represented in the Sacrament by the Pastor in breaking the bread: so it was his part to giue his flesh to the faith∣full, not to be broken and sacrificed by them, but to bee eaten, after it was once broken & sacrificed by himselfe. If therefore it be not the part of the people, either to re∣present the oblation of Christs body, or the donation thereof to vs, but the part of the Pastor properly, who in these actions represents Christ, it cannot be the part of the people to breake the bread, nor to giue the bread one to another. For this cause, in the ancient Church, it was euer giuen, either by the Pastor himselfe, or by his Deacon, who supplied his place, and helped him in the action; but neuer by any of the people to others. And Clemens Alexandrinus in the place which your selfe quotes, saith not, that the people diuided the bread; but that it was permitted to euery one of the people to take a part of the Eucharist, after that some (doubtlesse the Masters

of the Church) had diuided it in peeces, as their custome was. The learned Musculus in his common places, De coena Domini, pag. 444. speaking of this purpose saith; Fre∣git & dedit Discipulis suis, fregit ipse manu sua panem, ac fra∣ctum à se dedit Discipulis: non dedit integrum, & ab ipsis fran∣gendum, sed à se fractum panem. Non dedit vt ipsi distribuerent, sed vt à se distributum acciperent & ederent. Erant Apostoli in ca coena Domini, non vt dispensatores mysteriorum Dei: sed vt conuinae, vt fideles, vt Discipuli, vt Communicantes: Christus verò vt Conuiuator, vt Dominus, eadem opera instituens, ac sui∣ipsius manibus dispensans gratiae suae sacramentum. That is to say, Christ Iesus brake, and gaue to his Disciples: hee brake the bread with his owne hand, and when it was broken he gaue it to his Disciples: he gaue it not whole vnto them, to be broken by them, but he gaue them that which he had broken: he gaue it not to them to be distri∣buted by them, but that they should take it being distri∣buted by him, and eate it. The Apostles were in that Supper not as dispensers of the mysteries of God, but as Guests, as the faithfull, as Disciples, and as Communi∣cants: but Christ was as the maker of the Feast, as the Master, at one time both instituting and dispensing with his owne hand the Sacrament of his grace. Here you see, that Christ is the breaker, the giuer, the distributer of the Bread, and not the Disciples: And so the Pastor is now the breaker, the giuer, the distributer, and not the peo∣ple. Let the judicious Reader consider, whether the iudgement of this learned man doth better agree with the Institution, or the opinion of the Pamphlet penner: And whether the Pastor, who according to the Institu∣tion breakes the bread, and giues it with his owne hands to the people, or they, who giue the bread to the peo∣ple in whole schaues to bee broken, and distributed by themselues, comes neerer to Christs appointment.

But to come to the Cup: If our Sauiour, in giuing of the same, did imitate the custome of the Iewes, which

Scaliger and others wrote to haue beene this; that the Master of the Feast, after he had blessed the Cup, did first drinke thereof himselfe, and then gaue it to him who sate next; so as it passed from hand to hand till all had drunken: it seemes, that the Disciples did deliuer the Cup one to another. But there is a great difference be∣tweene the distribution of the Cuppe and the Bread: for the distribution of the Bread is not a diuiding onely of the Bread from hand to hand, but a breaking is conioy∣ned with the distributing: for he that giues to his Neigh∣bour, breakes before he giues. Now in this breaking we know there is a mysterie, which signifies the breaking of the Lords Body; which is an act, as is before made eui∣dent, that onely appertaines to Christ, both in the veri∣tie, when he did offer himselfe on the Crosse and in the mysterie, when he did represent his oblation, or the brea∣king of his body, by the breaking of the bread: and therefore is such an act, as ought onely to be performed by him, who in the Sacrament acteth the part of Christ, and represents him sacrificing himselfe. In distribution of the Cuppe there is no such mysterie: for the giuing of it from hand to hand signifies not the shedding of our Sa∣uiours bloud, but the taking of the Cup by the Pastor, and the drinking thereof, doth represent that Cup which the Father propined to his Sonne, and the Sonne receiued and dranke, when willingly hee suffered his bloud to bee shed on the Crosse for the remission of the sinnes of ma∣ny, and for confirmation of the new Testament; which Cup, Bloud, and Testament, is in the Sacrament deliue∣red to the People by the Pastor in Christs name, com∣manding them to take, and drinke all thereof. He in whose Name this command is vttered, is properly the Giuer and propiner, because by his authoritie it is giuen, and by the warrant of his word it is receiued. When the King drinks to any of his Subiects, and sends it by the hand of his seruant, the seruant is not properly the

giuer and propiner, but the deliuerer of the gift and pro∣pine: and therefore, as in the Sacrament, the Pastor when he takes the Cup, and drinks, acteth the part of Christ, and represents him taking and drinking that most bitter Cuppe of his Passion and death for our sinnes: so, when he giues and commands the people to take, and drinke all thereof, he acteth the part of Christ, applying his bloud, and giuing the New Testament confirmed thereby to euery worthy receiuer, whether the same be deliuered immediately to euery one by his owne hand; or if it bee sent by the hand of the Deacon, as is was in the Primitiue Church, or if it be deliuered from hand to hand by the Communicants amongst themselues. But without all question, if the Pastor may commodiously by himselfe make the deliuery, it is most agreeable to the person which hee carries in that holy action, who repre∣sents our Sauiour, first, willingly vndergoing death for vs, then, most bountifully applying it to vs with his owne hand.

O, but in the 22. of Luke, verse 17. our Sauiour sayd, Take this Cuppe, and diuide it amongst you: The word is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Part it amongst you. Here you trouble your selfe, and the Reader much with a long discourse, prouing that in this place the Eucharisticke Cuppe, and not the Paschall is meant: Yet let it be so. What then? they are commanded to part it amongst them, ergo, to reach it from hand to hand. This followes not; for when euery one takes his owne part of that which is to be par∣ted, they diuide the whole amongst them, although eue∣ry one deliuer not with his hand to his neighbour the thing which is to be diuided, or the remanent thereof: as by example; When the Manna, which was gathered in the Wildernesse, was cast together in heapes, and the fa∣milies came forth, and parted the same amongst them, euery man taking his Homer, which was his part; the Fa∣milies diuided the whole amongst them, without reach∣ing

from hand to hand the heape which was diuided: so when the Disciples were commanded to diuide the Cup amongst them, if euery one did drinke no more then his owne portion, & did leaue the rest to his fellow, the cō∣mand was obeyed: albeit when euery one had drunken, the last had set downe the Cup on the Table, or had deli∣uered it into his hand, from whom he had receiued it; or if one or two had beene maymed, and lacked the vse of their hands, so that the Cup behoued to be holden to their heads; yet if they dranke no more, but their owne part, with respect to their neighbour, who was to drinke after them, they diuided the Cup: for the diuiding is not the giuing of the Cup, but the parting of the wine amongst them, that was in the Cup: So if they did drinke with such moderation, that one, two, or three dranke it not all, but that all did drinke as our Sauiour commanded; how∣beit they did not deliuer it one to another, but receiued it seuerally, euery one from Christs owne hand, as wee doe out of the hand of the Pastor, they neuerthelesse diuided the same amongst them. To conclude, the command gi∣uen to the Apostles, importeth, that Poculum benedictionis, is not Poculum ebrietatis, sed charitatis, that is to say, The Cup of blessing, is not the cup of drunkennesse, but the Cup of charity, which should not be carowsed by one, but should be parted amongst many. And therefore these two phrases, the one vsed by Saint LVKE, Diuide it amongst you: and the other by S. MATTHEVV and S. MARKE, Drinke thereof all, and they dranke of it all, are equiualent. As to the giuing and deliuering of the Cup, whether it should be, by the hand of the Pastor, or by the mutuall deliuering of the people one to another, because it is not defined by the Scripture, it is indifferent, and left to bee determined by the Church.

These grounds being sure, let vs consider your syllo∣gisme▪ Whatsoeuer action or command is inclosed with∣in the Institution, may not lawfully be broken. But that

the Cōmunicants should distribute amongst themselues, was both an action at the first Supper, and a precept, as hath been proued; Therefore kneeling by consequence is discharged. By what consequence I pray you? Because, say you, that gesture, and this distribution, is no wayes compatible. It is a manifest vntruth; for he that kneeles, may take as well his portion of the wine, and leaue the rest to his neighbour, as he that sittes; and if you thinke that one cannot reach, and deliuer the Cup to his neigh∣bour kneeling beside him, you are deceiued: for I haue seene at one daies seruice a thousand persons, who haue reached the Cup one to another kneeling, as they were accustomed to doe sitting at Table before: yet, as hath been said, that was not necessary, for the precept in the Institution is not, Giue this Cup one to another, but diuide it, or part it amongst you, or drinke all thereof.

PP.

The seuenth breach of the Institution made by knee∣ling, is an vnnecessary diuiding of the Communicants, making populous congregations to receiue on many dayes, where they may receiue in one.

ANS.

Where the Congregations are populous, as in Burghes, three, or two dayes at the least, were allowed them. And in those same places where kneeling hath been practised, the seruice hath beene perfected in as short time, as euer it was before, which we know by experience.

PP.

The eight breach of the Institution made by knee∣ling, is, the altering of the purpose of the Institution, or nature of this Sacrament. It was instituted to be a Sup∣per, a spirituall Feast, &c. Therefore the Guests inuited thereto, as you conclude, should not kneele.

ANS.

To make good this your imagined breach, you haue borrowed three arguments from your Master of table

gesture. Thereof this is the first, to which I shortly an∣swere, That a common banquet requires a common ge∣sture, such as sitting, and the same is most fitting: but a spirituall banquet requires a spirituall gesture; your selfe doe acknowledge it to be a spirituall Feast, and the most religious gesture, is the most decent in this action: and that is kneeling.

PP.

Guests inuited to a banquet, euen to a Princes ban∣quet, kneele not in the act of banquetting.

ANS.

A Princes banquet, is but a common carnall banquet, and therefore men should not vse thereat a religious ge∣sture, such as kneeling. Besides, the length of time, which must bee spent at the banquet of a Prince, makes such a gesture inconuenient. But if you were to receiue one morsell of bread, or one drinke, from the hand of the Prince himselfe, you would bee thought vnciuill, if you did not receiue it on your knees. And I maruell that you should vse this argument, who say so often, that the cu∣stomes of Courts are not rules of Theologies.

PP.

The sacramental Supper should carry the resemblance of a Supper, in the formes and fashions thereof, or else it cannot rightly be called a Supper: for it is not onely the matter, that is, the dainties and food that makes a ban∣quet, but also the ordering of the guests, and kindly en∣tertainment of them.

ANS.

It is true, that it cannot properly be called a Supper, except it carry the resemblance of a Supper, both in the dainties, and in the formes and fashions of a supper; but it may be called a supper rightly, as yee speake, although it doe not resemble a supper in all these things. For that which is properly called a supper, hath plenty and varie∣tie of meat and drinke, at least it is a sufficient bodily re∣past.

Secondly, at it so much time is spended, as is pro∣portionable to the entertainment. Thirdly, the Guests doe entertaine one another by caruing, and drinking, and other kindly and familiar communication. Fourthly, The time thereof is the euening or night season. I am assured, that the Sacrament, for any resemblance it hath in any of these things to a supper, cannot properly be called a sup∣per, farre lesse in respect of ordering, and entertaining the Guests. For at ordinary suppers, Guests are ordered according to their qualities, but heere there is no respect of persons: for entertainment, Guests are entreated pro∣lixè, that is, largely and long; but heere, more then spa∣ringly, for the bodily part, with a morsell of bread, and a little wine. These being laid aside, what are your table and sitting thereat, but idle spectacles? Yee breake, and giue the bread one to another: that wee haue shewed to be against the Institution; yee drinke one to another, but we ought not to drinke one to another, as the giuer and propiner drinkes to the receiuer: for our Sauiour onely, who is represented by the Pastor, is the giuer and pro∣piner of the Cuppe externally, and of his owne bloud in∣ternally; and all the people are but receiuers, not giuers or propiners in any wise. And as to our Communion a∣mongst our selues, it standeth not in this, That wee haue any fellowship in dispensation of the sacred mysteries, but it standeth in the participation alonely: not in this, that we take the bread, breake, and giue it to one ano∣ther: but in this, that we all receiue the same bread, which is broken by the Pastor, and the same flesh which our Sa∣uiour did breake vpon the Crosse: such like not in that we take the Cup, drinke, and giue it one to another; but in this, that we drinke all of the same Cup, which the Pastor giues after thankesgiuing; and the same bloud which our Sauiour shed for the sinnes of many; otherwise, if wee confound the actions of the Pastor and the people, wee breake and violate the Institution, and disturbe the

whole action, making the people not only act their owne part, but also take vpon them the part of Christ, and the Pastor. We must not therefore seeke the resemblance of the Supper in these things, that are manifestly repugnant to the Institution, but in such things, as are contained therein

Go too then, and let vs take a view of these: first, in the Institution a supper is resembled by a sufficient repast, not in the quantity, but in the nature and quality of the elements, the one being drie, the other wette; the one meate, the other drinke, in which two kindes a perfect food consists; to teach vs, that in Christ is all fulnesse: He that comes to me shall neuer hunger, And he that beleeues in me, shall neuer thirst. Secondly, a Supper is resembled in the Sacrament, by the blessing and distribution that is made by the Master of the feast, and by taking, eating and drin∣king of the Guests, which are the essentiall parts, and properties of a Supper. Thirdly, as a supper is not the repast of some few, but of the whole family and guestes, who are present; for which cause it was called coena tan∣quam 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because it was common: So is the Sacrament instituted for all that are present, who may, and will come and present themselues therto. These are the things set downe in the Institution, wherein the resemblance stands. Your table prerogatiues, gestures, formes, fashi∣ons, ordering and entertainment of guestes, we find not, and therefore dare not bee so bold, as to affirme them to be necessary. As in extending the sense of Parables, a mo∣deration would be kept, that it be not racked beyond the bounds and scope of the purpose, whereupon the Para∣ble is inferred: so the parabolicke names giuen to these holy mysteries, should not bee extended beyond the re∣semblance & similitude set downe in Scripture, for which these names are imposed. Therefore when the Sacrament is called a Table, and a Supper, wee must not thinke that euery thing which is competent to an ordinary table, and

supper, are to be found and obserued there, but only such as haue cleare warrant in the Institution, either in parti∣cular, or by necessary consequence. In particular, the whole substantiall things, actions, and ceremonies are expressed, from the which wee should take nothing, and whereunto we should adde nothing. The circumstances that doe necessarily accompany such things, actions, and ceremonies, as the time when, the place where, the part whereon, the person by whom, and to whom, and the or∣der, doe necessarily follow the action: for some time and place must be, when, and where it must be done; some per∣sons by whom, and to whom it must be celebrated; some part there must be, whereon the elements must be set, and from whence they must be giuen and receiued; some posi∣tion and site of body must be vsed by the giuers, and re∣ceiuers, and some order must be obserued for entring and proceeding in the action and finishing therof: some things would go before, as Sermons or Seruice; and it is decent, that the celebration be closed with Psalmes and blessings: but none of these circumstantiall things are particularly defined by Scripture, therefore they are left to bee deter∣mined by the Church, according to the rules of edifica∣tion, order, and decencie.

PP.

The Sacrament of the Passeouer was also a holy Sup∣per, and the people of God vsed it so; they kneeled not in the act of receiuing it.

ANS.

The Passeouer was an holy Supper, yet it was also coena recta, that is, a full and perfect repast: The Sacra∣ment is a Supper in resemblance onely, as hath beene de∣clared, not instituted 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for filling of the flesh, but for feeding of the spirit; and therefore is not, to be receiued after a common and carnall manner, but with a spirituall and religious carriage.

Lastly, where you say, that when the people recei∣ued

the Law of the Passeouer, they bowed their heads, and worshipped, Exod. 12.17. and they did not so in eating of it: That they were more reuerent in hearing the Law of the Passeouer, then in the participation of it. I answere, They bowed not their head, whilest they did heare, but after they had heard; and this I hope you will not deny: but after the participation of the Passeouer, they gaue thankes with as great reuerence and deuotion, as they vsed after hearing of the Word. Further, at the participation they sate not, but stood all the time, wher∣in they shew farre greater reuerence, then bowing of the head, which is finished at one instant, could import. And after the first celebration, when the Passeouer was slaine, and sacrificed at the Altar, you cannot say, that the peo∣ple did not bow: for Micheas testifieth, cap. 6. ver. 6. That when the people brought their oblations, they bowed. As to the eating of it, the same was in priuate houses, and did serue them for an ordinary supper; ther∣fore was it to be receiued accordingly. Our Sacrament is not such, nor hath no such vse, as hath been said; there∣fore our manner of receiuing ought not to be conformed vnto that, which was vsed at the participation of the Paschal Supper.

An answere to the second head, wherein kneeling is con∣sidered, as a breach of the second Com∣mandement.

PP.

KNeeling in the act of receiuing the sacramentall ele∣ments, is not onely a breach of the Institution in the Gospell, but also of the second Commandement of the Law. The first breach of the Commandement made by kneeling, is the sinne of idolatrie: idolatrie is com∣mitted in this act diuers wayes. The Papists kneele in the acte of receiuing, because they beleeue verily that the bread is Transubstantiate into Christs bodie,

and vpon this supposition of Transubstantiation and bo∣dily presence, they kneele: this is the grossest idolatrie that euer was in the world. The Lutheran kneeles vpon his supposition of Consubstantiation, and Christs Reall presence by Consubstantiation: This also is idolatry, and a supposition false. A third sort kneele for reuerence of the elements, not giuing to the elements that high kinde of worship, called commonly cultus Latriae, which the Pa∣pists giue, but an inferiour kinde of worship, due (as they thinke) to consecrate creatures: This also is idolatry.

ANS.

The penner of this Pamphlet takes it, pro confess••, that our Church, which hee calleth the third sort, kneeles at the Sacrament, for reuerence of the elements; and to proue it to be idolatry, he makes a long confused, and idle discourse, touching the relatiue worship, which Papists giue to their Idols. I call it confused, because hee makes no distinction therein, betweene the proper, accidentall, and improper honour, which Papists professe to giue to their Images: without the knowledge whereof, the dis∣putation following cannot be vnderstood: Therefore it must be cleared in the owne place. I call it idle, because he takes paines to proue that which is not controuerted; namely, that it is idolatry to kneele to the elements, or fo•• reuerence of the elements, which we deny not; yet hee confesseth, that a religious honor, which he calleth vene∣ration, should bee giuen to the elements, and thereupon moues, and answeres an obiection touching this point, pag. 47. as followeth.

PP.

It may be obiected, that holy things ought to bee re∣uerenced. Answer, True, but not worshipped; venerati∣on is one thing, adoration another; adoration belongeth to persons, veneration to things pertaining to persons, and is nothing else, but a religious respect, or reuerent estimation of things pertaining to the vse of Religion; a

preseruation of them, that they be not lost, and a decent vsage of them, according to their kinde: this veneration or reuerence, is a respectiue or relatiue reuerence giuen to them for Gods sake: kneeling for reuerence of sense∣lesse creatures, is to take the proper gesture of relatiue a∣doration, and apply it to relatiue reuerence: for religi∣ous kneeling in all the Scripture, is a gesture of adoration and soueraigne worship, &c.

ANS.

This all is sound, and touching it, wee agree fully with you, that reuerence which is done to the Sacrament should not bee expressed by kneeling, which you truely call a gesture of adoration, and soueraigne worshippe. Therefore should it neither bee giuen to the booke of the Euangell, nor to the elements of the Sacrament, but to him only, who is the Author, and matter of both. And yet if men fall downe, and worship him at the hearing of the Gospell, or after, at the receiuing of the Sacrament, or after, and before it be receiued, being moued thereto by contemplation of his grace, and glory in the one and other: this religious worship no man wil deny to be law∣fully performed, as well by the worthy receiuer of the Sacrament, as by the reuerent hearer of the Word; for as we bow not to the letters and syllables, and sounds of the words of the Gospell, but to him, whose minde and will is declared therein: So doe wee not bow to the ele∣ments of bread and wine in the Sacrament, but to him, whose body and bloud we receiue thereby. But you, to make the world beleeue, that the Churches of Scotland and England kneele to the elements of bread and wine in the Sacrament, at least haue ordained so to be done: you alledge against the Church of England, the Ministers of Lincolne their defence in the third part thereof, referring the Reader to their proofes; touching which part, I only reply this, that there be sufficient answeres made to these proofes, by learned and reuerend men in that Church,

whereto also I remit the Reader. Against our Church, you lay a false imputation, and frame thereupon all your discourse against kneeling, as it is a breach of the second Commandement, which we will now examine.

PP.

In the late act, wee are ordained to kneele for reue∣rence of the diuine mysteries. I see not wherein this dif∣fers from the Bishop of Rochesters argument, that great and reuerend dreadfull mysteries, must be receiued with great and dreadfull humilitie of soule, and humiliation of body: therfore in the act of receiuing, we must kneele; if this argument were good, then the Sacraments, and sa∣crifices of the old Law, should haue been thus worship∣ped: and if we will measure by the sight, the Sacraments and sacrifices of the old Law, were more dreadfull, then are the Sacraments of the new: for the slaughter of beasts and shedding of blood, was more dreadful, then the pow∣ring out of wine. The Ancients held the sight of this Sa∣crament, not only from Pagans, but also from the Cate∣chumenists: this doing was not commendable, it made the mysterie of this Sacrament both darke and dreadfull. Augustine saith, they may bee honoured as matters religi∣ous, but wondered at, as matters of maruell, they can∣not. But to returne to the purpose, to kneele for reue∣rence of the mysteries, is nothing else but to worship the mysteries.

ANS.

Heere you set your selfe against three parties, the Bi∣shop of Rochester, the Ancients, and the Assembly at Perth. For the Bishop of Rochester, I answere shortly, That he takes the mysteries with Chrysostome, for the body and blood of Christ, represented in the Sacrament by the elements of bread and wine. In which sense, they are tru∣ly called great and dreadfull, and ought to bee receiued with great humility of soule, and humiliation of body: Non enim peccatur adorando carnem Christi, sed peccatur non

adorando; We sinne not, saith Saint Augustine, in adoring Christs flesh, but we sinne, if wee adore it not in the Sa∣crament.

That which you blame in the Ancients, of withhol∣ding the sight of the Sacraments, not only from Pagans, but also frō the Catechumenists, Chrysostome iustifies with great reason, Hom. 7.1. Cor. on these words: We speak the wisdome of God, which is hid. Alia videmus, saith he, alia cre∣dimus, aliter afficior ego, aliter infidelis. Infidelis, si lauacrum audiat, aquam simpliciter cogitat, &c. ideo fidei arcana, non sunt temerè apud indignos evulgāda: We see one thing, saith Chry∣sostom, we beleeue another. I who beleeue am otherwise affected, then an Infidel is: if an Infidel heare of washing in Baptisme, he thinkes there is nothing there but water, &c. For this cause the mysteries of our faith ought not rashly to be divulgate to the vnworthy. This iudgment of Chrysostomes is not crossed by S. Augustines testimony, but confirmed rather: for if the Sacraments should be honou∣red, as matters religious, then as Chrysostom saith, Pretiosa margarita est à contemptu vindicanda, that is, a pretious jewel ought to be preserued from contempt.

Where you alledge against the Assembly at Perth, that in the late act therof, we are ordained to kneele, for reue∣rence of the diuine mysteries, you are guilty of manifest falshood: for in reciting the words of the act, you blot out some, change others, and thereby corrupt purposely the whole sense and meaning of the act. You blot out these words, of God, and in due regard: you change the word my∣stery, in mysteries, & these you interpret to be the elements, whereas in the act, the word (mystery) signifies not the e∣lements, but the receiuing of the blessed body and blood of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ. But that your de∣ceit may be manifested, I will set downe the act, as it is extracted forth of the Register of the Assembly, vnder the hand of the Clerke thereof.

Since we are commanded by God himselfe, that when we come

to worship him we fall downe, and kneele before the Lord our Ma∣ker: and considering withall, that there is no part of diuine worship more heauenly and spirituall, then is the holy receiuing of the bles∣sed body and blood of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ: like as the most humble and reuerent gesture of the body, in our medita∣tion and lifting vp of our hearts, becommeth well so diuine and sa∣cred an action: Therefore notwithstanding, our Church hath v∣sed since the reformation of Religion heere, to celebrate the holy Communion to the people sitting, by reason of the great abuse vsed in the idolatrous worship of Papists: yet now since all memory of by-past superstition, is blotted out of the hearts of the people prai∣sed be God; in reuerence of God, and in due regard of so diuine a mysterie, and in remembrance of so mysticall an vnion, as wee are made partakers of thereby, the Assembly thinkes good, that, that blessed Sacrament bee celebrated hereafter to the people, humbly and reuerently kneeling vpon their knees.

This is the true copie of the act, differing in many things from that which you sette downe. Pag. 34. in the narratiue thereof, the reasons are set downe, wherefore the people should kneele, when they receiue the Sacra∣ment, which are repeated orderly in the conclusion, as the causes of the same. The first reason is, Since we are com∣manded by God himselfe, that when we come to worship him, wee fall downe, and kneele before the Lord our Maker. Relatiue vnto this, we haue in the conclusion, Therefore in reuerence of God, the Assembly thinkes good, that the Sacrament be giuen to the people kneeling. The second reason in the narratiue is, And considering withall, that there is no part of diuine worship more heauenly and spirituall, then is the holy receiuing of the blessed bodie and blood of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ. Relatiue to this, wee haue these words, And in due re∣gard of so diuine a mysterie. Wee say not in regard of the diuine mysteries, which you interpret the elements, but Mysterie, that is, the holy receiuing of the body and blood of Iesus Christ, mentioned in the narratiue. Our third reason is, the correspondence which ought to be

betweene the outward gesture of our body, and the me∣ditation, and lifting vp of our hearts, when we remem∣ber and consider the mysticall vnion betweene Christ and vs, and amongst our selues, whereof we are made partakers by receiuing of Christs blessed body and bloud. This is expressed in these words, Like as the most humble and reuerent gesture of the body in our meditation, and lifting vp of our hearts, becomes so diuine and sacred an action. Relatiue to this, in the conclusion, we haue these words; And in remembrance of so mysticall an vnion, as we are made partakers of thereby: for this remembrance is a part of our medita∣tion. So to conclude, we come to worship at the Sacra∣ment the Lord our Maker, who hath not onely made vs by creation, but who by redemption hath made vs his people, and the sheepe of his pasture, Psal. 95.7. Psalme 100.3. that is, God manifested in the flesh▪ We come to receiue his flesh and bloud, and in reuerence of him wee are commanded by the act to kneele. As yee then inferre vpon your forgery and falshood, that to kneele for reue∣rence of the mysteries is nothing else, but to worship the mysteries: so I inferre vpon the very words wherein the act is conceiued, That to kneele for reuerence of God, in due regard of the diuine mysterie, that is, the receiuing of Christs body and bloud, in remembrance of the mysti∣call vnion, whereof thereby we are made partakers, first, with our Head and Sauiour; and next, through him, with God, and amongst our selues: to kneele, I say, at the Sa∣crament for the reuerence and respects aforesayd, is to worship God rightly, and that is the due obseruation of his commandement.

PP.

Wheresoeuer the publike intent of a Church is to worshippe the Sacrament, euery priuate man following that intent, is formally an idolater. If his priuate in∣tent be diuerse from the publike, yet he is still materially and interpretatiuè an Idolater, &c.

ANS.

Yee begin now to manifest your selfe; yee peruerted the words of the act, to draw vpon our Church the vile imputation of idolatry, and now yee seeke to diuide the Church, and perswade people to disobedience vnder that colour. But the publike intent of our Church was neuer to worship the Sacrament, but was, and is, to worship the Lord Iesus, of whose flesh and bloud wee are made partakers in the Sacrament. And they who follow the Church in this, are neither formally nor materially ido∣laters, but true and sincere worshippers of God.

PP.

Kneeling directed to the bread and wine in the hands of the Minister, is idolatry, howbeit the inward motion of the minde, and affection of the heart, be directed one∣ly to God, or his Sonne Christ, as the onely obiect of a∣doration.

ANS.

Still you build vpon the false ground you haue layd, that kneeling is direct to the bread and wine in the hands of the Minister, which is a manifest calumny: for the act doth appoint no such thing. To direct our knees to the signes, and the affection of our heart to the thing signifi∣ed, is not onely idolatry, but a kinde of hypocrisie, and mixture of worship, which God abhorres. Neither did our Church euer allow it in our doctrine, prayers, and exhortations, which are vsed at the Ministration; this is condemned, and the very act ordayning, that we should kneele before the Lord our Maker, forbids the same.

PP.

This immediate conuoy of worship to the principall obiect, is nothing else, but that finer sort of idolatry, and relatiue worship, which Durandus, Holcot, Mirandula, Alphonsus, Petrus Cluniacensis, and others, giue to their Images.

ANS.

If wee did kneele to the Sacrament, that by it our worship might bee conueyed to God, our kneeling were such a relatiue worship as yee affirme: but we kneele at the Sacrament, and not to the Sacrament, as wee kneele at prayer, and not to the words and oration of the pray∣er, but to God to whom wee direct our prayer. When God spake, Abraham fell on his face, not to the sound of words, which he heard, but to the Speaker. When the fire came downe at Elias prayer, the people fell on their faces, not to the fire which they saw, but to God, who wrought the myracle. This kneeling and falling on the face before God in the act of prayer, in the act of seeing, in the act of hearing, is a worship done to God immedi∣ately; and so it is in the act of receiuing the Sacrament.

PP.

They say, Images are not otherwise adored, then that before and about them are exhibited the externall signes of honour. The inward affection is directed onely to the principall obiect: as the seruices done at a Funerall shew to an empty Coffin, as if the corps were present.

ANS.

To make it appeare that there is no difference be∣tweene our kneeling at the Sacrament, and the kneeling of the Papists to their Idols, the Pamphleter (such is his malice) trauels so farre as lyes in him, to extenuate the idolatry of Papists, and to obscure their opinion and doctrine of kneeling to Images, which I will therefore set downe distinctly and shortly out of their owne Wri∣ters.

The Doctrine of Papists, touching the honour of Images.

THe Papists professe, that they giue to their Images two kindes of honour: The one they call Proper,

the other Accidentall and improper. The proper, they say, is due to the Image, as it is an holy thing, such as the honour which is giuen to the Euangell, to holy Vessels and Vestures; and it is proper, because it rests in the I∣mage, as in the proper obiect, and is not conueyed by the Image immediately to the principall and archetype, albeit it be giuen to the Image, for the respect and reue∣rence which is carryed to the principall, and so by con∣sequence redounds to the principall. This honour they affirme to differ, not in specie, but in degree onely from the honor which is properly due to the principall. Bellar. lib. 2. de Imag. cap. 21. & 25.

Before wee proceede to the improper and accidentall adoration of Images, we haue here to consider, that al∣beit no honour, but contempt, and destruction onely be due to Papisticall Images, because they are not holy things, but detestable abominations: yet therefore we must not thinke, that to such things as are truely holy, and applyed to religious vses, reuerent and religious re∣spect is not due, as to the holy Sacraments, and to the E∣uangell, which honor rests in them, and is giuen to them in respect of him, whose word and Sacraments they are, and so redounds to him consequently: such an honour I meane as is the hearing of the Word reuerently, and the handling of the Sacraments, with the preseruing, and vsing of them decently. It is true, this honour is not pro∣perly a spece of adoration, but a religious reuerence onely, which we must not reiect, because the Papists giue the same, or the like, to their Idols: for they giue to things which are not religious, but superstitious, and execrable, a religious honour: therefore this reason is a meere de∣ception, wherwith ye abuse the simple. Papists giue such honor to their Idols, and in so doing they commit idola∣try: therefore sincere Professors in giuing that honor to the Sacraments & the word, commit idolatry. It followes not, for Papists giue the honor which is due to the Word

and Sacraments vnto their Idols, to which it no wise be∣longs: as by example; Papists vse their Images for signes, meanes, and occasions to stirre them vp to worshippe God, and in this they commit idolatry, because they re∣uerence, vse, and handle them as holy things, which God hath not allowed to be done: but when a true Christian vseth the Word of God, and the Sacraments for signes, middesse, occasions, and instruments to stirre him vp to worship God, and in that respect honours and reueren∣ces them as holy things, hee doth not commit idolatry, nor breakes not the second Commandement: but by the contrary he obserues that Commandement, in vsing the meanes, which God himselfe hath ordayned to be vsed in his worship: and hee obserues the third Commande∣ment, which bindes all men to sanctifie the Name of God, and such meanes as he hath vouchsafed to manifest himselfe by to vs in his worship.

Now I proceede to the accidentall and improper ho∣nour, which Papists professe themselues to giue to their Images. This is the point here most controuerted, and therefore most expedient to be knowne.

The accidentall honour which they giue to their Images is, an adoration of their Images coniunctly with the principall; as when the King is honoured, his Robe Royall, and all his Ornaments are honoured coniunctly with his person, and with the same signes of honour that are giuen to his person: Bellarm. ibidem cap 20. & 23.

The improper honour is the adoration of the Image in place, and stead of the principall: as, when the Prince his Ambassadour is honored for the Prince himselfe; or, an empty Coffin or Image, for the person himselfe, whose Image it is; all the honour due to the Prince, is done in that case to the Ambassadour or Image; as beck∣ning, kneeling, discouering of the head, prostration of the body, kiss••ng, enbracing, and burning of Incense, &c. Bellarm. ibidem.

The improper, and accidentall honour, or adoration, differs from the proper: first, because the proper, as they say, although it be the same in specie, with that which is giuen to the principall, yet it differs from it in degree; but this improper honour is the same, both in specie and in degree. Next, because the proper, as they say, termi∣natur, that is, ends and rests in the Image, and redounds not immediately to the principall, but by way of conse∣quence. The improper, and accidentall adoration, al∣though it be done to the Image, non tamen terminatur, yet it ends not, and rests in the Image, but passes, and is im∣mediately conueyed to the principall by the Image, and from the Image. Bellarm. ibid. cap. 21. & 25.

This is summarily their doctrine, as may bee seene in their Writings. To apply this to our purpose, yee labour to extenuate this adoration, which they professe them∣selues to giue vnto their Images accidentally and im∣properly, saying, that the externall signes of adoration, such as kneeling, bowing, discouering of the head, &c. are onely done before them, and about them. This is too sparingly and rashly spoken: for these externall shewes are not onely done before and about them, but the exter∣nall adoration is wholy exhibited to them. Bellarmine lib. 2. de Imag. cap. 23. writeth thus: Aliquando imago su∣mitur pro ipso exemplari, & ea quae fierent circae ipsum exemplar 〈◊〉〈◊〉 adesset praesens, fiunt circa imaginem, mente tamen defixa in exemplari: sic concionatores alloquuntur imaginem crucifixi, ••i{que} dicunt, Tu nos redemisti, tu ••os Patri reconciliasti. That is to say; The Image sometimes is taken for the exem∣plar it selfe, and these things which would be done about the exemplar it selfe, if it were present, are done vnto the Image, or about the Image, the minde being alwaies fixed vpon the exemplar. So Preachers direct their speech to the Image of the Crucifiex, and say vnto it, Thou redeemedst vs, thou reconciledst vs to the Father. And a little after▪ in the same place he saith; Aliquando

non accipimus imaginem pro exemplari, nec consideramus solam imaginem, vel solum exemplar, sed confideramus exemplar, vt obiectiue relucet in imagine, & ipsum sic repraesentat••m & gua∣si vestitum imagine veneramur: tunc autem necessario adoramus imaginem, eodem cultu, quo ipsum exemplar: That is to say, Sometimes the Image is not taken for the exemplar, nei∣ther consider we the Image by it selfe alone, nor the ex∣emplar by it selfe alone: but wee consider the exemplar as an obiect shining in the Image, and so we adore the exemplar it selfe represented, and cloathed as it were with the Image: then of necessitie wee adore the Image with the same worship wherewith we adore the princi∣pall. In the 25. Session of the Councell of Trent, De in∣uocatione, & sacris imaginibus, it is enacted as followeth: Imagines porro Christi, Deiparae Virginis, & aliorum Sancto∣rum in templis praesertim habendas & retinendas, eis{que} debitum honorem, & veneration••m impertiendum; non quod credatur inesse eis aliqua diuinitas vel virtus propter quam sunt colendae, &c. S••d quonam honos qui eis exhibetur, refertur ad prototypa, quae illa•• repraesentant, ita vt per imagines quas osculamur, & coram quibus caput aperimus, & procumbimus, Christum ado∣remus. That is to say; The Councell, moreouer, ordaines, that the Images of Christ, of the Virgin Mary, and of other Saints, should bee kept and retayned chiefely in Churches, and due honour & veneration giuen to them: not because we beleeue, that there is in them any diuini∣tie or vertue, for the which they ought to bee worship∣ped, but because the honour which is giuen to them, is referred to the exemplar, which they represent; so as by the Images which we kisse, and before the which we dis∣couer our heads, and fall downe, we adore Christ. Hence it is manifest, that the signes of honour, which are done before them, and about them, are exhibited to them they kisse them, they speake to them, they kneele, they fall downe, they discouer their heads to them, and all is done about them, that would be done about Christ; all is

done to them, that would bee done to Christ, as if hee were present in person. This is the professed and auou∣ched doctrine of the Papists, which yee, as a deceiuer, go about to extenutae. So, to conclude this point, that by the act at Perth we are ordained to bow our knees to the Elements of bread and wine in the Sacrament, or that a∣ny such honour, or signe of adoration is done to the Sa∣crament by vs, as Papists grant they giue to their Ima∣ges, is a most impudent lye.

PP.

When it is said therefore, to varnish the second intent, that the Elements are not obiectum quod, the thing it selfe that is worshipped, nor obiectum in quo▪ or, per quod, in the which, or by the which; but obiectum à quo ••••gnificatiuè the obiect or signe mouing vs vpon the sight thereof, to lift vp our hearts to the spirituall obiect of faith▪ This kinde of relatiue worship will not bee found different from the relatiue worship of Durandus, and the rest.

ANS.

If we adore the sacramentall Elements, whether wee adore them, as the principall obiect, quod, that is chiefly to be worshipped; or as the coniunct, or mediate obiect in quo, and per quod, wherein, or whereby we adore the prin∣cipall; or if we adore them as the obiect mouing vs a quo to adore the principall: if, in a word they be the passiue obiect of our adoration, whether we adore them con∣iunctly with Christ, or in his stead, as the Papists do their Images, wee cannot be excused of idolatry: but if they be no manner of way the passiue obiect of our adoration, but the actiue onely of that adoration, which at the Sa∣crament is giuen to Christ, that is, such an obiect & signe as moues vs vpon the sight, or by the signification therof, to lift vp our hearts, & adore the only obiect of our faith, the Lord Iesus: such as the holy Word of God, his works & benefits are, by meditation & consideration whereof, we are moued and stirred vp to adore him. The worship

proceeding from such occasions and motiues (as the bow∣ing of our knees at the Sacrament to Christ, occasioned by the vse and signification, which the sacramentall Ele∣ments haue in that action) differs as much from the rela∣tiue worship, which Durandus, and the rest giue to their Idols, as the sincere and right worship of God differs from detestable idolatry.

PP.

Bellarmine and Suarez drawe Durandus and the rest from in illa, & per illam imaginem, in and by the Image, to circum & coram, about, or before the Image.

ANS.

Yee still continue to extenuate the idolatry of the Papists, and labour to deceiue your Reader. Bellarmine neuer drawes Durandus and the rest from in illa & per illam imaginem: that is, to worship the principall in the Image, and by the Image: for he affirmes, Lib. 2. de Imag. cap. 2••. Quemadmodum in die parasceues cum Crucifixus paulatim de∣••egitur & ostenditur & adorandus proponitur, illa omnia per ima∣ginem ips•• Christo verè exhiberi intelliguntur: that 〈◊〉〈◊〉, As on Good-friday, when the Image of Christ crucified is a lit∣tle discouered and shewed, & proponed to bee adored, all these things are vnderstood to bee exhibited to Christ per imaginem, by the Image; he saith not, coram and circum, before, & about the Image, but per, that is, by the Image: and a little after, in the same Chapter, Aliquando considera∣mus exemplar, vt obiectiuè relucet in imagine, &c. that is, We sometimes consider the exemplar, as set before our eyes in the Image, & we adore it, as clothed with the Image. Here he saith, the principall is adored in the Image, as the King in his royall Roabe: this is the coniunct adoration, when the principall is adored in the Image, & the Image with the principall coniunctly. The place which I cited out of the Councel of Trent, saith, Per imaginē Christū ado∣ramus, that is, We worship Christ by the Image. Bellar. cap. 21.26. describes the improper adoration in these words;

Si imago nō est adoranda nisi improprie, quia nimirū corā illa vel in illa, vel per illā adoratur exemplar, &c. that is, If an Image should not be adored but improperly, to wit, because be∣fore it, or in it, or by it, the exemplar is adored. And Cap. 20. about the end, Fiunt erga statuā omnia, quae circa corpus fierent. that is, All things are done to the Image, which would haue beene done to the body. So these words, per. in, circa, erga, are vsed by Bellarmine, and the Papisticall Doctors, as corā, & circū. This was to be declared, because afterwards yee alledge, that we kneele before the Sacra∣ment: & to make it appeare, that we match the Papists in their idolatry, ye would haue the Reader beleeue, that the Papists do no more but kneele before their Images; and that they doe not worship God, or our Sauiour Iesus Christ in, and by their Images.

PP.

Suarez saith, that the Image is neither the formall, nor the materiall, the totall, nor the partiall obiect of ado∣ration in their opinion: but that onely at the presence of the Images the principall called to remembrance by the Image, is adored; that the Image is an occasion, a middesse, a signe, stirring vp a man to adore the princi∣pall. Their adoration then was also abstract from the ob∣iect, as they pretend theirs to be.

ANS.

The Papists alledge, yet falsely, that the Image is no waies the obiect of their internal adoration, but the prin∣cipal only, wherupon their minds are fixed. Yet all of thē in one voice, & the Councell of Trent confesse, that they exhibite to the Images all the externall reuerence & ado∣ration which is due to the principall; and that they adore the Image, either in liew of Christ, or coniunctly wi••h him, as the robe and vesture wherein hee is clothed, and shines. Their externall adoration therfore is not abstract from their Images, but our externall and internall both are abstract. For we are no more enioyned by the act to bow our knee to the sacramentall Elements,

then to fixe our minds vpon them, & worship them in our hearts. Also, when Suarez calleth the Image an occasion, a middesse, a signe, stirring vp a man to adore the princi∣pall, he neither saies, nor meanes, that the Image should not be adored externally with that same worship which is due to the principal. To be short, The Papists make their Images obiects of adoration both actiuely & passiuely: actiuely, because they call men to remembrance of the principall, & as signes, middesse, & occasions, they stir vp mē to worship. Passiuely, because the same external wor∣ship, whereunto men are stirred vp by the Image, is first exhibited to the Image, & by it conueied to the principal. So whatsoeuer vse the Image hath besides, in their opini∣on, it is manifest by their doctrine, that it is externally to be adored with the same worship that is due to Christ.

PP.

The bread and wine, or any other creature whatsoe∣uer, differs not in this present case: for howsoeuer they were ordained of God to be signes & seales of his graces, yet they are not in statu accōmodato ad adorandū, they haue not such state in the seruice of God, as that by them, or before them, God or his Sonne Christ should bee adored.

ANS.

I haue shewed, & shall presently shew, by Gods grace, the difference in this case to bee as great, as is betweene idolatry, and the true worship of God. First, It is idolatry to vse any Image in the worship of God, for a signe, an occasion, or a middesse to stir vp a man to worship God; fo•• they are prohibited in the second Comandement, and by the Prophet they are called Teachers of lyes, because by them properly and truly, nothing can be brought to our remembrance, for which we should adore God: but on the other part, it is not possible that either our mindes can be informed to know God, or our affections moued to worsh••ip••e him, except by the contemplation of the creatures, the meditation of the Word, and the conside∣ration

of the holy Sacraments: take these occasions, middesse, and signes away, yee abolish Religion, and all the worship of God out of the Word. I hope the Reader by this shall see the difference to bee as great in this case, as is betweene a lawfull meane of Gods worship, com∣manded by himselfe, and the inuention of man prohibi∣ted by God.

Next, the Papists will haue these middesse, occasions, & signes not onely obiects of diuine worship actiue, that is, seruing to stir vp, and moue men to worship, which is the first degree of their idolatry: but they will haue them likewise passiue obiects, such as are to be worshipped ei∣ther in stead of the principall, or coniunctly with him; & this is a higher degree of idolatry. In this then they differ also from the Word, Sacraments, & creatures, that these being the ordinary obiects & instruments whereby men must be stirred vp to worship God, & so the obiects of di∣uine adoration actiuely, they neither are, nor should they be esteemed passiue obiects of adoration, that is, such as should be adored, either coniunctly with God, or in his stead. This we condemne & detest, yet must not run on with you to the other extremity, & say, that howsoeuer they were ordained of God to be signes & seales of his graces, yet they are not in statu accōmodato ad adorādū: for although by them, & before thē, that is, (to make the ob∣curities which ye affect, plaine) albeit they should neither be adored in place of God & his Son, or coniunctly wi••h God & his Son, as the Papists professe to adore their Ima∣ges▪ yet certaine it is, that there is nothing in nature, or religion fit & apt to stirre men vp to worship God, if the Sacraments be not meet. Shall our corporall food, when it is presented on table before vs, bee in such state, as is proper to stir vs vp to worship God with thanksgiuing & praier? Shall the consideration of the benefit which we haue by the light of the day, & by our rest & sleepe in the night, be esteemed motiues of such moment, that he who

is not thereby moued in the morning when he riseth, and at night when he goeth to bed, to pray, and giue thanks, is esteemed a slothfull and ingratefull Christian? Shall a seasonable seede time, shall the first and latter raine, and a faire haruest bee pregnant occasions to remember vs both in priuate and publike to giue thanks, and praise God for his goodnesse? And shall the blessed Sacrament of the body and bloud of Iesus Christ, in the very act, when it is in giuing and receiuing, not be esteemed to be in proper state to moue vs, and stirre vp our hearts to pray, and giue thanks for that inestimable benefite, euen when our Sauiour hath cōmanded that we should do this in remembrance of him? It is an absurd opinion. Then to conclude; If yee hold these two points which ye haue propounded, to wit, that the Sacrament, and creatures of God should not be vsed as occasions, middesses, and signes to moue vs by the sight and meditation of them, to lift vp our hearts to the spirituall obiect of our faith, that is, to God in Iesus Christ, because Suarez saith, that their Images haue that vse; then certainely, you must hold, that God should not bee knowne nor worshipped in the World: for without this vse of the Word, Sacra∣ments, and Creatures, God cannot bee knowne, nor worshipped. So whilst yee flye idolatry, yee fall into A∣theisme. Next, if yee hold, that the Sacraments in the very act of the administration, are not in statu accommoda∣to ad adorandum, you must take away the chiefe and prin∣cipall ende of the Sacrament commended to vs by the Lord himselfe in these words, Doe this in remembrance of me. Saint Paul interprets these words thus; So often as yee eate this bread, and drinke of this Cuppe, yee shall declare the Lords death, till he come againe: that is, as the Confession of our faith, which yee haue sworne and subscribed, ex∣plaines it, Yee shall extoll, magnifie, and prayse his death. Now this is a reall act of adoration, which both the Lord himselfe, and his holy Apostle would haue vs moued vn∣to

by this Sacrament. So by these your positions and as∣sertions, yee mutilate the Sacrament of one of the most principall ends, for the which it was instituted. And ge∣nerally yee take from the Creatures of God, and the holy Sacraments, the most excellent vse, for which they were appointed: namely, to be meanes and motiues to stirre vs vp vnto the worship of our Creator and Redee∣mer.

PP.

If this kinde of relatiue worship were to be allowed, then the holy signes both in the olde and new Testament should haue serued to the same vse; then they who are farre distant from the Table should kneele: for the Ele∣ments are to them obiectum à quo significatiuè: then at the sight of the Sunne, or any beautifull Creature we should kneele, seeing they put vs in minde of Gods incompre∣hensible beautie: and seeing many of them allow the historicall vse of Images, we may fall downe before the Crucifixe, prouiding, the action of the minde be abstra∣cted from the Image.

ANS.

We allow no worship, whether it be relatiue, or ab∣solute, that is either giuen to Sacrament or Creature. But it is a grosse error to thinke that the worship which is onely giuen to God immediately, or directly, is rela∣tiue, because it is motioned, and occasioned by the con∣sideration of Gods Creatures, and blessed Sacraments: for so all the worship of God must be relatiue, because it is all occasioned either by the Word, the Sacraments, or the Creatures: whereas, indeede, there is no worship relatiue, but that which is giuen to some mediate thing, for the relation it hath to the principall: and as for vs, wee neyther giue to the Word, the Sacrament, or any Creature, diuine worship, but onely to God, whom by the Word, the Sacrament, and the Creatures wee are taught and admonished to worship. The relatiue wor∣ship

is onely that which Papists giue to their Idols, for the relation they haue to the principall, which we detest, and condemne as much as your selfe.

Where you say, that the signes of the olde and new Testament, and the sacramentall Elements, when they are onely seene, as likewise the Sunne, or any beautifull creature, might then moue vs to adore: I answere, that although they be potentially obiectū à quo, obiects where∣by we may bee stirred vp to worship; yet are they not actually such, except they bee applyed, and accommo∣date to that vse, either in the ordinary publique ministe∣rie, or in a mans priuate meditation and deuotion: or extraordinarily vpon some present and great occasion; as when the fire came downe at the prayer of Elias, and consumed the sacrifice. When the Signes, Sacraments, or Works of God, are after that manner propounded and insinuated, they are in statu accommodato ad orandum, and then men ought to adore and worship God: yet it is not necessary that they should, vpon all such occasions, fall downe and kneele, as yee conclude: For when in our priuate meditation and deuotion, or when by some present great occasion, wee are inwardly moued and af∣fected to worship; our externall gesture of adoration is arbitrarie, and left to our owne priuate election, to doe what is most conuenient & decent for that time: Some∣time the discouering of the head is sufficient, sometime the lifting vp of the eyes onely, and sometime no gesture at all is required; but in the ordinary Ministerie, when the works of God, or his benefites are propounded, and applyed publikely, to stirre vs vp to worship in the as∣semblies of the Church, then our gesture ceaseth to bee arbitrarie: for it must be such as is prescribed and recei∣ued in the Church, where we worship. So, when by the sight of the Sacraments onely, or by the sight of holy signes, or creatures of God, wee are moued priuately to worshippe, wee may vse, or not vse, what ge∣sture

we thinke meetest; yet when we come to the table our selues, not to be spectators, but to communicate with others, we oug••t to receiue, and worship after the forme and custome of that Church in which we are. If they sit with their heads discouered, so should we: If they stand or passe by, so should we: If they kneele, so should wee for vniformity and peace sake. Saint Augustine in his 118. Epist. Ad quam fortè ecclesiam veneris, eius morem serua, si cui∣quam non vis esse scandalo, nec quenquam tibi: that is, Keepe the custome of the Church whereunto thou comest, if thou would be offensiue to no man, and wouldst haue no man offensiue to thee: This Saint Augustine learned of Saint Ambrose, and as he saith, hee did neuer thinke of it, but he esteemed it as an oracle, that he had receiued from heauen. As to those in the Reformed Churches, who al∣low the historicall vse of Images, they condemne with vs, both the externall and internall adoration of Images: Therefore, by their doctrine, wee may not kneele be∣fore the Crucifixe, because it is a sort of externall adora∣tion.

PP.

All the parts of Gods worship ought to be direct, and not oblique. Perkins saith, It is idolatry to turne, dispose, or direct the worship of God, or any part thereof, to a∣ny particular place, or creature, without the appoint∣ment of God; and more specially, to direct our adorati∣on to the bread, or to the place where the bread is, what is it lesse then idolatrie?

ANS.

If by the Act of Perth, wee had beene ordained to kneele to the Sacrament, either in stead of Christ, or con∣iunctly with him, you might call it an oblique worship that were enioyned; but seeing we are commanded, in re∣ceiuing the holy Sacramēt, to bow our knees to God on∣ly, and to nothing with him, or in his stead; our worship is direct, and not oblique: Therefore wee subscribe to the

iudgement of Perkins. But I must tell you, that hitherto your disputation hath not only been oblique, but imper∣tinent, for your haue impugned nothing set downe in the Act; only you haue set your selfe against a position for∣ged by your selfe, in falsifying the Act. Thus while you haue intended that you shall neuer be able to performe, namely, to proue, that by kneeling at the Sacrament, a breach is made of the second Commandement, you haue made a manifest breach of your credit and honesty.

PP.

Kneeling before the Elements, referred directly to Christ, is either a gesture signifying the humble submissi∣on of the minde in generall, whereby wee make obey∣sance, as if hee were bodily present: or else it signifieth more particularly our humiliation in prayer: This is but a speciall, the former was a generall; the like reasons serue against both. It is true, wee cannot kneele to God in prayer, but there are many things before vs, a Church, a house, a wall, a tree, a staire, &c. But wee set them not before vs purposely, wee are by no direction tyed vnto them; they stand only before vs by casuall position, ney∣ther can we choose otherwise to doe.

ANS.

Your former dispute was founded on falsehood, this runnes all vpon ambiguity of speech. To kneele before the Elements hath two senses, either it signifies to kneele to the Elements, as wee are said to kneele before God, when we kneele vnto him; and Papists before their I∣mages, when they kneele to them. In this sense, it is a lye to affirme, that we kneele before the Elements. Next, to kneele before any thing, signifieth to kneele, hauing some things before our eyes, or in our sight, or obiect to our senses either by casuall position, as you say, or purposely. To kneele to God before any thing, standing, or set casu∣ally before you, you doe not condemne; but to kneele to God, hauing any thing purposely before vs, as the sacra∣mentall

Elements, that yee insinuate to be idolatrie, but I hope you shal neuer proue it: for a Penitentiary kneeles to God purposely before the Congregation, and with a respect to the Congregation; namely, that they may con∣curre with him in prayer, he may testifie to them his vn∣fained repentance, and they being satisfied therewith, may receiue him againe into their fellowship. Heere is a kneeling to God before something purposely, and with respect, which is not idolatrie. When wee come to our common tables, before we eate, either sitting with our heads discouered, or standing, or kneeling, we giue thanks and blesse with a respect to the meat, which is purposely set on table; yet this is not idolatry. And to draw some∣what nearer to the purpose: The Pastor, when he begins the holy action, hath the bread and the cup set before him purposely vpon the table, and with respect to them hee giues thankes to God, for that it hath pleased him to in∣stitute the Sacrament in these Elements, that hee might thereby communicate to vs, the body and the blood of Iesus. And thus hee ought to blesse the Elements, for which the Apostle saith, The Cup of his blessing which wee blesse, is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ? Heere is a praying, a blessing, a thankesgiuing to God before the Elements, purposely set before vs, and not by casuall po∣sition: And it is true, that if any may bee said to kneele before the Elements, it is the Pastor in this part of the action, and not the people. For when they receiue, they do not set the bread before them, as Papists doe the Cru∣cifix, but presently they put it in their mouthes, and whi∣lest they are eating, they continue still kneeling, not be∣fore the bread, which is not then before them, but before the Lord Iesus, vnto whom they only kneele. In all this the Pastor doth imitate our Sauiour himselfe, who first tooke the bread, and hauing it purposely before him, or holding it in his hands, Gaue thankes, and after Supper tooke the Cup, which he did blesse also. So to kneele or adore God

before the Elements, that is, hauing them in our sight, or obiect to our senses, as ordinary signes, means, & memo∣rials to stirre vs vp to worship God and our Sauiour, di∣rectly, immediatly, & onely, and not the Elements, either in his stead, or coniunctly with him; is no idolatry, but the right and true forme of Gods worship.

The cause of all this errour is, you make no distincti∣on betweene the abuse of Idols in the worship of God, and the right vse of his workes, Word, and Sacraments. To pray, or giue thankes to God before an Image, with respect to it, is idolatry: but to pray and giue thankes to God, hauing his creatures, or Sacraments before our eyes and mindes, and being mooued by the respects that we consider in them, is a most lawfull and religious forme of adoration. For we can neither pray to God▪ nor thank him, nor praise him, but euer there must bee, before the eyes of our minds at least, something of his works, Word, or Sacraments, if not before our externall senses; and that we must respect, consider, and be mooued thereby. Contrariwise, to set before the eyes of our minds or bo∣die, any Image, as a meane or motiue of adoration, is idolatrie. For although the worship were abstracted, which is occasioned by the Image, and were not giuen vnto it (as neuer any hath said, except your selfe, of the externall adoration) yet it is damned, because no true worship can be properly occasioned by an Image, which is a Doctor of lyes, teaching nothing of God, but false∣hood and vanities. But the blessed Sacrament being in∣stituted by Christ, to call to our remembrance his death, and the benefit we haue thereby, giues vs so oft as we re∣ceiue it, a most powerfull and pregnant occasion of thankesgiuing and praise; which if wee should neglect, and not adore, we should bee guilty of the breach of the first Commandement, because we did not adore, when Christ purposely did offer the greatest occasion, that can be presented so to doe. Therefore, when by that occasi∣on,

we adore our Sauiour, both on the knees of our soule and body, we are no breakers, but due obseruers, as well of the first, as second Commandement.

PP.

It is true likewise, that God directed his people vn∣der the Law, to bend and bow themselues towards the Arke, and the Temple wherein the Arke was, and the mountaine whereon the Temple was situate: partly, lest that rude people should turne their worshippe another way; partly because of his promise to heare them, when they should pray towards the Temple, or Arke; partly because of his singular manner of presence in the Arke. He was said to dwell betweene the Cherubins, the Arke is called his foot-stoole, and sometimes the face of God, the glory of God: It is reason, where God is present af∣ter an extraordinary manner, as when he spake out of the bush, and the cloud, that adoration be directed to the place of his extraordinary presence: The Altars, the of∣frings, and other holy things, wanted the like presence and promise,: The Arke, and the Cherubins vpon the Arke were not seene, therefore could not be readily abu∣sed to idolatry.

ANS.

You make heere an exception, and confesse, that it was lawfull to kneele before the Temple, the Arke, and Gods holy Mountaine, because of Gods direction, pro∣mise and presence. Likewise yee acknowledge that ado∣ration may bee directed to the place of extraordinarie presence. And hereby it is manifest, that to worship God before a creature, or before the testimonies of his pre∣sence, although we haue these things before vs purposely and not occasionally onely, doth not import a commu∣nion of his worship with the creatures, or meanes, be∣fore the which men may worship: for it is certaine, that if the people vnder the Law, by bending, as you say, and bowing of themselues towards the Temple, Mountaine,

and Arke, had communicated any part of Gods wor∣ship with the Temple, Mountaine, and Arke, as the Pa∣pists doe with their Idols, their worship had beene idola∣try, and a breach of the second Commandement, which God would neuer haue appointed, for whatsoeuer re∣spect, eyther of his ordinary, or extraordinary presence. Where yee say, That the Altars, and Offerings and other holy things, wanted the like presence, & that before these, they might not bow in that respect, it is vtterly false: For Salomon first stood, and after kneeled before the Altar, and prayed, 2. Chron. 6.12. And hee stood before the Altar of the Lord in presence of all the Congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands, For SALOMON had made a brasen scaffold of fiue cubits long, and fiue cubits broad, and three cubits high, and set it in the middest of the court, and vpon it hee stood, and he kneeled downe vpon his knees before all the Congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands towards heauen, and said, &c. Likewise it is manifest by the Prophet Micha. 6.6. That the people bowed when they offered their Oblati∣on: Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow my selfe before the most high God? Heere we haue Salomon kneeling before the Altar, and the people kneeling, when they of∣fered their oblations. Where you say, that the Arke and Cherubins were not seene, towards which they bowed, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 makes nothing for your purpose, for the Temple was seene, and the Mountaine was seene, towards the which they also bowed: So was the Altar and the Oblations. Therefore this is but a dreame, that you haue fancied to your selfe, to say, it is idolatry to bow our knees to God before his creatures, or holy mysteries, if so we vse them only as meanes, and instruments, and memorials, to stirre vs vp to worship God.

PP.

The Sacramentall Elements haue neither the like pre∣sence, the like promise, nor the like commandement.

ANS.

If yee doe maintaine this, it is an absurde heresie; for the holy Sacrament hath farre more euidence, and excel∣lent promises, presence and command, then any type vn∣der the Law. Our Sauiour before his Ascension, when he commanded his Apostles to teach and baptise, promised, that whilest they taught his people that which hee com∣manded them, He would be with them to the end of the world. Amongst the obseruations which hee commanded them to teach, this is one of the first and principall, Doe this in remembrance of mee. Is not Christ present then with Pastor and people, according to his promise, in this holy action? And in another place, he saith, Where two or three are mette together in my name, there am I in the middest of them. Where so many Communicants are met together, is not our Sa∣uiour in the middest of them? Further, when he saith of the bread, This is my Body, and of the Cup, This is my Blood: doth it not import a coniunction betweene his Body and the Elements, and a spirituall presence of his Body in the Sacrament? And should not his body and blood be as present to the eyes of thy minde, thy know∣ledge and vnderstanding, and to the hand of thy heart, thy faith and confidence, as are the Elements to thy ex∣ternall senses, and bodily hand? Haue we not taught our people to this day, and yet should teach them, that in this action, there is an internall and externall receiuer, the hand and the heart: that there is an earthly and spiritual gift, the Elements of the Sacrament, and the body and blood of Christ? And should we not beleeue, that Christ, God, and Man, is as really present in the Sacrament, ac∣cording to his Diuinity, as we beleeue him to bee bodily present in heauen, giuing and applying the selfe-same bo∣die which is in heauen, as really to the inward man, as the Pastor is giuing the Elements to the outward? How dare you then affirme, that the Sacrament hath not such a presence of Chrst, as the Arke, the Propitiatory, and the

Cherubins had. O but he said, that he would dwell be∣tweene the Cherubins; That dwelling was typicall, but Christ hath promised to dwel spiritually and really in the hearts of the worthy receiuers. The bread which we breake, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? The cup which we blesse, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And saith he not of this communion? Hee that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, remaineth in me, and I in him. God called the Arke his foot-stoole, but Christ calleth the sacramen∣tall Elements, his body and blood. Sometime hee called the Arke his face, and glory, because it was a type of his face and glory; but the Sacrament is not a bare type, but a powerfull instrument, whereby Christ is communicate vnto vs, that wee may bee made partakers heere of his grace, and hereafter of his glory. Finally, when we are commanded to doe this in remembrance of him, we are com∣manded to adore him; for according to the interpretati∣on, made in the Confession of Faith, confirmed by act of Parliament, which yee professe your selfe to haue sworne, To doe this in remembrance of Christ, is to magnifie, declare, extoll, and praise his death till his comming againe. And this is a reall act of adoration.

PP.

Worship is tyed no longer to any certaine thing, or or place on earth.

ANS.

That is true, yet worship stands in certaine actions, which must bee performed in some conuenient place, as Prayers, Supplications, Intercessions, Thankesging and Praises; whersoeuer these actions are performed, in these places God must bee worshipped: and if the blessed Sa∣crament bee an action of that kinde, in it God must bee worshipped, and in the place where it is celebrated.

PP.

Adoration is tyed in the new Testament to the Man∣hood of Christ, the true Arke, and Propitiatory; and is

carried to that place, in which wee certainly know the said Manhood to exist substantially, saith Perkins; and therefore it is, that wee lift vp our eyes to the heauens, where hee is, and direct our very externall worship to him.

ANS.

We doe fully agree with Perkins in all this, for wee neither direct our internall, nor externall adoration to the sacramentall Elements, nor to the place where they are, but to the Manhood of Iesus, which wee acknow∣ledge, and beleeue to be locally only in heauen. Therfore in the ancient Church, when the people came to the Sa∣crament, the Deacon cried, Sursum corda, Lift vp your hearts, and the people answered, Habemus ad Dominum. Wee haue our hearts lifted vp to the Lord. But what is this to the purpose in hand? For the question is not, in whom God should bee worshipped, or in what place Christs Manhood is, wherin God should be worshipped; but the question is, whether at the Sacrament in the act of receiuing the sacramentall Elements externally, and the body and blood of Iesus Christ, internally; we may bow our knees, and lift vp our hearts, and adore that Man∣hood, by reason of the personall vnion, that it hath with the Godhead, and the Godhead dwelling in the Manhood corporally. This is the only true relatiue worship accep∣table to God, in the Humanitie to worship the Diuinitie, and the Humanitie with the Diuinitie in one Person, the inuisible God in his owne essentiall and incarnate Image, the Lord Iesus: That such worship may, and should bee performed in receiuing the blessed Sacrament, neuer any Diuine, ancient or moderne, hath doubted to this day, except Anabaptists and Arrians, who deny Christs Diui∣nity, and will neither adore him in the Sacrament, nor any other action of Diuine worship.

PP.

It is obiected, and said, that we may pray in the act

of receiuing. Therefore we may kneele in the act of re∣ceiuing. Ans. This Obiection insinuateth, that kneeling is the proper and only commendable gesture of prayer: and therefore the Bishop of Rochester expounds the stan∣ding of the Publican, Luk. 18.11.13. to haue been knee∣ling, because, saith hee, the Iewish custome was to pray kneeling. But if he had remembred the Lords owne say∣ing, Ier. 15. Though MOSES, and SAMVEL stood before me, &c. he might vnderstood, that they prayed stan∣ding, as well as kneeling, &c.

ANS.

The obiection yee bring concludeth, that wee may kneele, not that we ought to kneele: therefore no man will thinke, that the obiection insinuateth kneeling to be the proper and only commendable gesture of praying, but that it is a very commendable gesture, & such as may be vsed: that which you ayme at in answering this ob∣iection, is to confute the Bishop of Rochester his opinion, that by standing kneeling, Luk. 18.11 13. is meant. But the Bishops opinion is not so absurde, as you would haue men to thinke: for by standing, in the Scripture any di∣uine seruice is signified. Therefore the Lords Prophets, Priests, and Angels, are said to stand before him, that is, to serue him. In the first of the Kings 8.22. it is written, that Salomon stood before the Altar of the Lord, and prayed, but in the second of the Chronicles 6.13. It is said he kneeled downe, and prayed vpon his knees. So stan∣ding, in the booke of the Kings, is taken for kneeling. But leauing this, I come to your next words.

PP.

The prayer meant of, is either some publike prayer vttered by the Minister, or the mentall prayer of the Communicant.

ANS▪

This is a needlesse distinction, for the mentall prayer of the Receiuer should not bee different from the prayer

vttered by the Minister at the deliuery of the Elements, and ought only to bee an Amen to the Ministers prayer. The ancient custome of the Church was such; for in the dayes of Cornelius Bishop of Rome, anno 251. as Eusebius records, l. 2. c. 32. when Nouatus gaue the Sacramēt to his people, he held their hāds, & insteed of the blessing which he should haue vsed at the deliuery of the Elemēts, he cō∣ceiued an oath, & made the people sweare by that which was in their hands, & insteed of Amen, which they should haue answered the blessing with, he made the people say, That they should not returne to CORNELIVS. Whereby it is manifest, that the blessing vsed by the Pastor at the de∣liuery of the Elements, differed not at that time from the mentall prayer of the Communicant, neither ought it now to differ, but be the same in substance.

PP.

As for the prayer of the Minister in the act of distri∣bution, it is flat against the Institution, as I haue already said. The Minister is ordained by the Institution, to act the person of Christ, and pronounce the words of pro∣mise; This is my body, and not change the promise into a prayer. Fenner in his Principles of Religion, layeth this downe for a ground, that in the second Commandement we are forbidden the practise and vse of any other rite, or outward means vsed in the worship or seruice of God, then he hath ordained, Ioh. 4.22. 2. King. 18.4. And that by the contrary, we are commanded to practise all these parts of his worship, which hee in his word hath com∣manded, and to acknowledge only the proper vse of eue∣ry rite, and outward meanes, which the Lord hath or∣dained, Deut. 12.32. 2. King. 17.26.

ANS.

It is false that yee say, we change the promise into a prayer: for at the Consecration wee obserue precisely the words of the Institution. In the deliuery of the ele∣ments,

we vse a prayer that is not contrary, but most a∣greeable to the Institution, for directing the hearts of the people in the receiuing, that they may worthily commu∣nicate. So doe the Pastors in France at the deliuery vse a short speech: and it was the custome of late in our Church, to vse some exhortations before the distribution at euery Table; wherein neither we nor they did, or doe practise any rite, or vse any means, which God hath not ordained to bee vsed in his worship. For although the particular forme of speech vsed in the French Church, and the ex∣hortations and prayers vsed by vs, bee not expressely set downe; yet being agreeable to the Word, and the nature of the action in hand, they haue sufficient warrant by these generall precepts:

Let all things be done to edi∣fication; Let all things bee done decently and in order.

And with these precepts Fenners grounds doe agree: O∣therwise, by what warrant is it appointed in the forme set downe before our Psalme bookes, touching the cele∣bration of the Lords Supper, that during the time of the distribution, some place of Scripture should bee read, which doth liuely set forth the death of Christ; to the in∣tent, that our eyes and senses may not onely be occupied in these outward signes of bread and wine, which are called the visible word, but that our minds and hearts al∣so, may be fully fixed in the contemplation of the Lords death, which is by this holy Sacrament represented. This ordinance is not contained in the Institution: yet I hope yee will not say, that it is flat contrary thereto, but that it hath sufficient warrant by the generall Apostolike pre∣cepts before expressed: and so hath the prayer vsed by vs in the acte of distribution. But yee subioyne ano∣ther reason to prooue the prayer vsed at this time vn∣lawfull.

PP:

Further, wee are forbidden by the second Comman∣dement to pray by direction before any creature.

ANS.

Why do yee then pray at the table, when your meate is set before you, and at the Consecration hauing the sa∣cramentall Elements before you? And when you visite the Sicke, why direct yee your face and senses towards the person, and the place where he lyes, while yee are pray∣ing to God, for him?

PP.

This publike prayer is but a pretended cause of knee∣ling, as the Ministers of Lincolne make manifest in their Abridgement, &c.

ANS.

To the Abridgement of these Ministers, sufficient an∣sweres are made by the learned Diuines of that Church, and the Canons and Customes thereof, defended against their calumnies. Therefore let vs come to our owne, touching which yee say.

PP.

As for our Church, no such prayer is ordained to bee vttered by the Minister, Therefore no such prayer can be pretended. In the late Canon it is said, That the most re∣uerend and humble gesture of the body, in our meditation and lifting vp of our hearts, best becommeth so diuine an action. Meditation is no prayer, and the heart may be lifted vp by the act of faith and contemplation, aswell as the action of prayer. So that neither publike nor men∣tall prayer is expressed in our Act.

ANS.

Albeit neither mentall nor publike prayer be expres∣sed in the Act, yet prayer, thankesgiuing, and praise, are all insinuated: for albeit all meditation bee not prayer, yet euery prayer is a meditation: and although in the act of faith and contemplation, the heart may bee lifted vp; yet, that eleuation of the heart requireth not the most humble, and reuerent gesture of the bodie, as

kneeling. In the ancient Church, they were not accusto∣med to kneele, when they made confession of their faith, but to stand as Christian souldiers. Our act insinuateth such a meditation, and lifting vp of the heart, as is vsed in actions of deuotion, such as prayer and thankesgiuing; which are practised by all, who giue obedience to the act, or doe worthily communicate. But, put the case, that by the act, no such thing were ordained expresly, yet vp∣on this antecedent which yee vse; namely, wee are not ordained by any act of our Church, to pray at the recei∣uing; this conclusion will not follow: Therefore we may not p••ay at the receiuing. For wee are not ordained by any act of our Church expressely, to discouer our heads in the act of receiuing; May wee not therefore discouer our heads? But any shew of reason is good enough to deceiue simple people.

PP.

But let the words be interpreted of mentall prayer, euen mentall prayer, is not the principall exercise of the soule, in the act of receiuing the sacramentall Elements; the minde attending on the audible words, the visible E∣lements, the mysticall actions, and making present vse of them, men should not be diuerted from their princi∣pall worke, and meditation vpon the analogie betweene the signes, and the things signified.

ANS.

The meditation vpon the analogie betweene the signe, and the thing signified, cannot be the principall worke of the soule, it being nothing else, but the consideration of the similitude, that is betweene the natuall vse of the signes, and the spirituall vse of the thing signified: Name∣ly, that as the Elements se••ue to nourish the outward man: so the body and the bloud of Christ, hath a vertue to nourish the inward man, and by eating and drinking, the Elements are applied to feede the body: So by faith, the body and the blood of Christ are applied to feed the

soule. Such a meditation, an Hypocrite and Reprobate may haue at the Table, therefore it cannot be the princi∣pall worke of the minde, which distinguisheth the wor∣thie, from the vnworthie Receiuer. When we heare and reade the Word, the principall work of our mind, should not be a meditation vpon the forme of the characters, the sound of the letters, the coniunction of them, their sounds in the syllables, the syllables in the words, or the force and vertue of the words to signifie the matters; but the chiefe work of our mind should be to conceiue, vnderstand, and consider rightly what is spoken. So when we come to the Sacrament, the chiefe employment of our minde, should not be to consider the proportion that is betweene the naturall vse of the Elements, and the spirituall vse of Christs body and blood, but a meditation and spirituall action correspondent, and analogicke to the externall sa∣cramentall actions. As therefore the principall externall sacramental actions, are to take, eate and drink reuerent∣ly the symbolick Elements, the bread and wine; so the principall worke of the soule, correspondent by analogie thereto, is to remember the sacrifice of Christ, the brea∣king of his body, and shedding of his blood: to consider the benefit that we haue thereby, to put our confidence therein; and for all, to praise and magnifie his name with thankfulnesse. This worke and meditation, is proper to the worthy Receiuers, and stirreth vp in the soule, that most reuerent estimation and affection towards our Sa∣uiour, with an humble submission of our minds vnto him, which we call adoration: whereof the outward testimo∣nie and signe, is the humble and reuerent gesture of the body, prescribed in the act, which is also a gesture most conuenient for prayer. So this gesture prescribed in the act, doth not only attend the prayer vttered by the Pa∣stor, and conceiued by the people in the act of receiuing, but is proper to that, which is indeed the chiefe and prin∣cipal exercise & work of the mind, in al worthy receiuers.

PP.

The soule may send forth in the meane time some short eiaculations, and darts of prayer to heauen, to streng∣then her owne weakenesse, and returne to her principall worke of meditation, and application of the benefits re∣presented. These short eiaculations of the minde, are onely occasionall, as a Christian feeleth his owne present estate; and are incident to all our actions, both ciuill and religious: in the act of receiuing our earthly food, in go∣ing on the way, in hearing the Word. If a man bee mo∣ued inwardly, when he heareth that the Word was made flesh, shall he kneele, as they doe in the Romane Church? If a man should kneele at euery inward motion of the minde, when hee heareth the Word; what confusion would there be in the Congregation?

ANS.

The verball prayer vttered by the Pastor, and the mentall conceiued by the people, in the act of receiuing, is not an eiaculation, but necessary to be vsed in the acti∣on by the worthy Receiuers; for no man can receiue the body and the blood of Christ worthily, without a spiri∣tuall hunger and thirst after the righteousnesse and life that is in him: which spirituall appetite and desire, being declared by the Pastor in these or the like words, when he deliuereth the bread: Grant Lord, that by the vertue of thy body, which we receiue, we may haue life eternall, and be raised vp at the last day. And when hee deliuereth the Cup: Grant Lord, that by the vertue of thy blood, which we receiue, we may be purged from our sinnes, and filled with thy Spirit. And the Receiuers conceiuing, and confirming the same, by say∣ing with their mouthes, as the custome was in the ancient Church, or in their hearts, Amen: They send not vp oc∣casional eiaculations, but necessary and ordinary prayers, such as the nature of the action requires. Therefore, as I said before, although occasionall secret prayers may be offered to God, without any externall gesture, or with

such as the worshipper thinks meetest for the time; yet these, which are purposely conceiued in the ordinary and solemne act of diuine worshippe, should be presented to God, with such a gesture, as is conforme to the order pre∣scribed, and receiued in the Church.

PP.

A man looking occasionally to a Crucifixe, may re∣member Christ, and send vp some ejaculations, shall hee therefore kneele? The three children prayed mentally, no doubt, when they were brought before the golden I∣mage, but lawfully, they might not kneele before it.

ANS.

Here yee affirme againe, that which yee falsely alled∣ged before: namely, that the Sacrament, or any other creature, differs not in the case of adoration from the Pa∣pists Images: and therefore, as it is vnlawfull to kneele before the Crucifixe, or Nebuchadnezzars golden Image, albeit wee may pray mentally before them; so is it vn∣lawfull to kneele, and pray at the Sacrament, that is, ha∣uing the sacramentall elements before vs, or obiect to our senses. This comparison is odious & false: for there is no worship more lawfull then the prayers & blessings vtte∣red by the Pastor, hauing the Elements disposed on the Table before him at the consecration: for this agrees both with the Institution, & hath our Sauiours example, as we said before. These comparisons serue to no other vse, but to extenuate idolatry, and discredite the Sacrament.

PP.

Perkins distinguisheth notably betweene publike, pri∣uate, and secret worship: The secret and mentall wor∣ship must bee yeelded vnto God, and the signes thereof concealed from the eyes and hearing of men, as Nehemi∣ah, when he prayed in presence of the King, Nehem. 2.4. In a word, the Institution, and the second Commande∣ment hinder kneeling at this time, suppose mentall prai∣er were the principall exercise of the soule.

ANS.

Perkins speakes rightly: for if the worship be secret and mentall, it must be concealed from the eyes of men: but if it be mentall, and publike, such as are the prayers of the people in time of diuine Seruice, who mentally follow the prayer publikely vttered by the Pastor, these mentall prayers must be offered with such external signes of adoration, as are vsed in the Congregation. But in the act of receiuing, say yee, that cannot bee, because it is a breach of the second Commandement, and of the Insti∣tution: I answere, That reason of yours is the caption called Petitio principij, to take that for granted which is in question, and I may truely say, already confuted. So that there remaines now no more question, but that wee may both pray and kneele in the act of receiuing, with∣out breach of the second Commandement, and most a∣greeably to the Institution.

PP.

I heare there is alledged a third sort of prayer, to wit, that the very act of receiuing is of it selfe a reall prayer. Is not this as much, as to say, That crauing, and recei∣uing is all one? Bellarmine saith, that prayer of it selfe, and of the owne proper office, doth impetrate; and that a sacrifice hath the force and power of obtaining and impetrating, because it is quaedam oratio realis, non verba∣lis, a certaine reall prayer, not a verball. Wee may for∣giue him to say this of the sacrifice of the Masse, where there is an offering of a sacrifice to God: but Bellarmine was neuer so absurd, as to call the act of receiuing from God, a reall prayer to God.

ANS.

No man, I thinke, will alledge, that the act of recei∣uing is praying, or crauing, although these two may a∣gree well together. But it is true, that the celebration of this Sacrament is a reall thanksgiuing to God for the be∣nefite of our redemption; and although it be not a propi∣tiatorie,

or impetratorie sacrifice, as Bellarmine saith, yet it is eucharisticke, and a commemoration of the propiti∣atory, and impetratory sacrifice of Christ: And in the very act of receiuing, and by the act of receiuing, wee doe openly acknowledge and confesse before the world, that our confidence of saluation is onely in the sacrifice of the Lord Iesus Christ; which is, a reall praysing, mag∣nifying, extolling, and preaching of his death vntill his comming againe. Now to conclude, yee haue made ma∣ny long answeres to a short obiection, and notwith∣standing the argument remaines in force. Your obiecti∣on proponed was this:

Wee may pray in the act of receiuing, therefore wee may kneele.

Your first answere to this obiection was, That knee∣ling is not the onely proper and commendable gesture of prayer, and thereupon concluded, we might not kneele. This, as we haue shewed, is not a good consequence.

Next, yee answered, that to pray in the act of deli∣uery is against the Institution. This we haue confuted.

Thirdly, you answered, that wee ought not to pray before a creature: and therefore might not pray in the act of receiuing. The antecedent of this is false, as wee haue shewed: at least, as it is conceiued, and the con∣clusion holds not.

Fourthly, yee sayd, that we are not commanded by the act of Perth to pray; and therefore that we may not pray. This followes not.

Fifthly, because the prayer of the people in the act of receiuing is mentall, yee inferred, that they might not kneele▪ and this is no good consequence.

Lastly, yee sayd, wee may not kneele before the Cru∣cifixe, and before Nebuchadnezzars Image, and there∣fore we may not kneele in the act of receiuing the Sacra∣ment. And this is most absurd, the Sacrament being a part of Gods worship, instituted by himselfe: but the vse

of Idols and Images in his worship he hath expressely forbidden. So all your answeres are meere sophisticall captions and abductions from the purpose: yet yee pro∣ceede to answere some others, that yee frame against your selfe.

PP

Their other obiection, that we may praise God in the act of receiuing, therefore wee may kneele, may bee answered after the same manner. There is no publike thanksgiuing ordained to be made at the deliuery of the Elements: mentall praise therefore must be meant. Men∣tall praise is no more the principall worke of the soule, then mentall prayer: what was sayd of the ejaculations of the one, let it bee applyed to the short ejaculations of the other.

ANS.

If yee answere this obiection as yee did the former, then let the reply vsed by me be here repeated. But I say further, that by the words of the Institution, Doe this in remembrance of me, we are ordayned, not onely mentally to giue praise, but also really, and publikely by the very action and celebration of the Sacrament it selfe: in re∣spect whereof the learned Pareus calleth this remem∣brance, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 fiduciae & gratitudinis, that is, a remem∣brance of faith, because by it our faith is confirmed: and a remembrance of thanksgiuing, because by it we should praise and magnifie (as he saith) the clemencie of the Fa∣ther, who gaue the Sonne; and the benignitie of the Sonne, who offered himselfe a sacrifice for vs.

PP.

The name of the Eucharist giuen to this Sacrament helpes them nothing, for it is a name giuen by the An∣cients, and not by the Scripture.

ANS.

The Trinitie is a name giuen by the Ancients, and not by the Scripture, to the three Persons subsisting in the

vnitie of the diuine nature, yet the truth of that which the word signifies, being found in Scripture, it helpes to conuince Heretikes, that deny the same: so the name of the Eucharist giuen to the Sacrament, to declare the thankfull commemoration of our Sauiours death, which thereby we performe according to the Scripture, helpes vs much against you and your followers, that spoile the Sacrament of the most principal end, for which it was in∣stituted, that is, to the praise and honor of our Sauiour; in respect whereof, it is called Sacrificium Eucharisticum, a Sacrifice of thankesgiuing. This Sacrifice the Pastor real∣ly acts, in taking, blessing, breaking, and giuing of the externall Elements; for thereby the death of Christ, and the application thereof to the faithfull is represented: and it is acted by the people, in their taking, eating, and drin∣king, for thereby they declare and testifie the hunger, thirst, and desire of their soules after the righteousnesse and life of Christ, and the ioy they haue in the meditation thereof, with that assured confidence wherwith they rest, and repose themselues therupon. And this representation and application of Christs death, with the testification of our faith therein, and thankfulnesse therefore, by the cele∣bration of the Sacrament, is a reall extolling, preaching, magnifying and praising of the Lords death, from which, mentall praise cannot be separated without hypocrisie▪ Therefore to praise God in the act of receiuing, is a chiefe part of the principall work of the soule, and not your me∣ditation vpon the analogie betweene the signe, and the thing signified, which is only a catechetick preparation, that should precede the principall worke. If yee had re∣membred the Confession of Faith, which ye professe you•• selfe to haue sworne and subscribed, I am assured yee could not haue denyed this; for in the 13. Sect. thereof about the end, yee haue these words: The end and cause of Christs Institution, and why the selfe-same should bee vsed, is expressed in these words, Doe this in remembrance of mee, as oft as yee eate of this bread, and drinke of this Cuppe▪

yee shall shew foorth, that is, extoll, preach, magnifie, and praise the Lords death till he come. If this be the principall end, as yee see our Confession speakes, of Christs Institution, then, not onely may wee praise him in the act of recei∣uing, but we ought to praise him. In respect of this, the Sacrament is called the Eucharist, and not in respect of the thanksgiuing, wherewith we begin the action, as yee would haue it to be in your words following.

PP.

Next, as it is called Eucharistia, so it is called Eulogia: for the words, He gaue thanks, and He blessed, are indiffe∣rently vsed by the Euangelists. Some parts of this ho∣ly celebration stand in thanksgiuing, as the beginning and the end: and therefore is the whole action denomi∣nated from a part. Saith Casaubone, Eulogia & Euchari∣stia, vtra{que} vox à parte vna totam Domini actionem de••ignat: It followes not, that all the parts of this holy ministrati∣on, are actions of thanksgiuing.

ANS.

Although the name were taken, as Causabone saith, from one part of the action, yet it is giuen to the whole action, not by reason of this part onely, but because it declares the nature and chiefe end of the action: and al∣beit all the parts of this holy ministration seuerally con∣sidered, are not actions of thanksgiuing, yet the whole action, which consists of these parts, being performed Gratitud••nis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as Paraeus saith, that is, with a purpose of thankfulnesse to celebrate the death of Christ, is Eu∣charisticke, or an action of thankesgiuing. The hand or foot being seuerally considered, is not the bodie, yet the whole, which consisteth of all the parts, is the body. So it is true, to take the bread is not an action of thankesgi∣uing, nor to breake it, nor to giue it, being seuerally con∣sidered; but to take, breake, blesse and giue, with inten∣tion by these actions to represent the death of Christ, and the application thereof to the faithfull, for the praise of

his glorious grace, is an action of thankesgiuing. There∣fore to conclude, as wee come to the Sacrament to bee made partakers of Christs death by faith vnto saluation▪ so wee come to the Sacrament to celebrate the remem∣brance of his death to his glory. In respect of the first end, it is, The Communion of his body and bloud, & in respect of the last, it is a reall predication and celebration of his death, till his comming againe; which should bee often per∣formed, because, as Paraeus speaketh, Mors Domini perpe∣tuis laudibus celebranda est, that is, The death of Christ is to be celebrated with perpetuall praises: these are specially offered at the celebration of the holy Sacrament, and in this respect it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing.

PP.

Obiect. What we may craue of God vpon our knees, we may receiue on our knees. Answ. It is false, I may pray vpon my knees, Giue vs this day our daily bread, but I may not receiue it on my knees. The people of Israel prayed for food, yet they were not esteemed vnthankful, for not kneeling when they receiued the Manna.

ANS.

I neuer heard this obiection vsed by any man, but by you in this place, therefore if it bee false, your selfe that forged it, is author of the falsehood. The Bishop of Gal∣loway, who is now at rest, hath this obiection in his Trea∣tise, which is not yet answered, as he alledgeth:

Whatsoeuer spirituall benefit I may lawfully aske on my knees▪ the same I may lawfully receiue vpon my knees with thankesgiuing.

But I may lawfully with supplication, aske saluation by Iesus Christ on my knees.

Therefore I may lawfully receiue it on my knees.

Another argument was propounded in the Assembly at Perth, which neither at that time, nor since hath been answered, and it is this.

Whatsoeuer spirituall benefit we should receiue in a solemne act of diuine worship, with thankesgiuing and prayer, that wee may receiue on our knees.

The body and blood of Iesus Christ, in the Sacrament, is a spi∣rituall benefit, which in a solemne act of diuine worship, wee ought to receiue with thankesgiuing and prayer.

Therefore we may receiue the body and blood of the Lord Iesus Christ, in the Sacrament, vpon our knees.

The proposition of this argument, at that time denied, was proued thus:

Whatsoeuer benefit we ought to receiue with thankesgiuing and prayer, that we ought receiue with the gesture that is most agreeable to thankesgiuing and prayer.

Kneeling is such a gesture, &c. Ergo, &c.

In the Assumption it is affirmed, that Christs body and blood in the Sacrament, should be receiued with prayer and thankesgiuing: This we proue by this reason;

Whatsoeuer spirituall benefit we should receiue with a spirituall hunger and thirst, and with a spirituall appetite and desire after the grace and vertue that is therein to saluation: the same we should receiue with prayer, which is nothing else, but such an appetite and desire.

But the body and blood of Christ is such a benefit, &c.

Next that it should be receiued with thankesgiuing, I proue:

Whatsoeuer benefit we should receiue by extolling, and prea∣ching, and magnifying, and praysing the inestimable worth and excellence thereof, the same we ought to receiue with thankesgiuing.

But in the Sacrament, we should receiue the body and the blood of Christ, with extolling and preaching, &c. Ergo, &c.

The Assumption is confirmed by the words of our Sa∣uiour, Doe this in remembrance of me, and by the words of Saint Paul, So oft as yee eate this bread, and drinke this Cup, yee

shall declare, that is, extoll, magnifie, and praise, The Lords death till hee come againe. Because I finde you figh∣ting against your owne shadow, I thought good to set downe the very obiections, which were vsed in the As∣sembly at Perth, that as yet are not, nor I hope shall euer be answered.

PP.

It is againe obiected, That in the act of receiuing, we receiue from Christ an inestimable benefite: ought not a Subiect kneele, when he receiueth a benefite from a Prince, to testifie his thankfulnesse? Answ. This relation from Christ to the Sacrament as betweene the Giuer, and the gift, is common to all the Sacraments both of the old and new Law, ordinarie, and extraor∣dinarie.

ANS.

The relation betweene the Giuer and the gift, in the old Testament is not so euident, because they wan∣ted a cleare and expresse Word to expound the myste∣rie: Where haue yee such a Word concerning Cir∣cumcision? This is the putting off of the bodie of sinne, by the vertue of Christs Death and Resurrection, COLOS. 2.11. or concerning the Passeouer, This is the body of Christ, that is broken for you, this is his blood, that is shed for you? The Law had but the shaddow, the Gospell hath the expresse Image of good things to come: In the Law they had the shadow of the Giuer, and the gift, but in the Gospell we see him with open face. Now although to the shadow of the Prince men fall not downe, nor doe reuerence, they are to be excused; but he must bee reputed a contemner, who will not doe homage at the presence of his Prince. Further, as I said before, the ex∣ternall actions of their Sacrament, could not bee com∣modiously

performed with such a gesture, as is knee∣ling, but the action of our Sacrament may.

PP.

Next, we receiue the mysticall pledges, not out of the hands of God himselfe, or his Sonne Christ imme∣diately, but out of the hand of the Minister. The per∣son who receiues the gift from the King, is supposed to receiue it immediately: and suppose mediatly, yet ce∣remonies of Court, and mediate ciuill worships, are not rules of religious adoration, which should euer be immediate.

ANS.

Wee kneele not to receiue the mysticall pledges, but to receiue the bodie and blood of Iesus Christ, which the mysticall pledges signifie, and are deliue∣red immediately, by the hand of the Lord Iesus him∣selfe

PP

Thirdly, the manner of deliuery of the gift, and the will of the Giuer, are to be considered. If the Prince call his Nobles to a banquet, it is his will that they sitte at table with him, as Ionathan and Dauid sate at King Sauls table. Christ hath declared by the Institution, af∣ter what manner he would haue vs to receiue these my∣sticall pledges. Kneeling cannot agree with the actions and precepts of the Institution.

ANS.

If we consider the manner of deliuery of the gift, and the will of the Giuer, it fauoureth kneeling, rather then sitting: for although we be inuited to a banquet,

yet it is not a bodily repast, such as Ionathan and Da∣uid receiued at Sauls table. That required leisure and time, and such a site and position of bodie, as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 most commodious for ease; but by the Institution 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it manifest, that the banquet whereunto wee are cal∣led, is the body and blood of Iesus, giuen externally in a little quantitie of bread, and one Cuppe diuided a∣mongst many, and ministred internally with Christs owne hand. Neyther come wee to this banquet to feede our bodies, but to feede our soules, and to ex∣toll and praise his death, as I haue ofte said before. Whereupon the Apostle inferreth, that wee should re∣ceiue worthily, that is, with such a reuerence, both ex∣ternall and internall, as is worthie the Giuer, and the gift, and is most meete to set foorth the praise of the Giuer, and the worth of the gift. In this respect, knee∣ling is most agreeable, both to the actions and precepts of the Institution.

PP.

The second breach of the second Commandement, made by kneeling, is the shew of conformitie with the Papists. The Lord forbade his people to bee like the Gentiles, Leuit. 18.3. and 19.27. and Deut. 12. The Christians were forbidden to decore their houses with Bay-leaues and greene boughes, because the Pagans vsed so to doe; or to rest from their labours vpon the dayes that the Pagans did. If conformitie in things not hauing state in idolatrous seruice, but onely glaun∣cing at the honour of the Idoll bee condemned, farre more is conformitie in the grossest act, wherein the life and soule of their idolatrie standeth. Such is the gesture of kneeling amongst the Papists, this out∣ward conformitie tickleth the Papists, and offendeth the godly.

ANS.

A shew of conformitie with the Papists in Ido∣latrie, is a breach of the second Commandement: But to kneele at the Sacrament, our hearts being freed of the opinion of Transubstantiation, and our mouthes confessing and professing, that we doe onely kneele to God, and our Sauiour Iesus Christ; is no more confor∣mitie with them in idolatrie, then in the action of prayer to kneele, when we direct our prayers to God, and not to Angels or Saints, or other creatures. For example, To kneele, and say the Lords Prayer in ho∣nour of the Saints, and to offer it as a libell of re∣quest to be presented, and commended by their prayers to God, which Papists professe themselues to doe, (Costeri Enchiridion de veneratione Sanctorum,) is idola∣trie; yet to kneele, and offer that prayer to God on∣ly, as wee doe, is not idolatrie: although both in the gesture of kneeling, and in the substance of the prayer, there bee a conformitie, our Faith and profes∣sion being contrarie to theirs, freeth vs of all shew of conformity with them in superstition and idolatry. But the Lord forbade his people (yee say) to be like the Gen∣tiles, yet did he neuer forbid them to knele, and lift vp their hands to him in their prayers, although the Gen∣tiles kneeled, and lifted vp hands vnto their gods when they prayed. The things wherein God forbade his peo∣ple a conformity, were vncleannesse, idolatry, supersti∣tion, witchcraft, &c. and not such ceremonies of diuine worship, as are by himselfe commanded, yet abused by Idolaters. And where yee say, that Christians were pro∣hibited to rest those dayes, on which the Pagans rested, I hope yee will not haue vs to worke on the Lords day, because the Papists rest that day. Finally, when yee say, that the life of Popish idolatrie consisteth in kneeling,

yee speake falsely; for the life of their idolatrie con∣sisteth in a professed adoration of the bread, with opi∣nion of Transubstantiation, and not in the outward gesture of kneeling, which being lawfull, and religious in it selfe, is onely abused by them to idolatrie. And doe not all they who sitte at the Sacrament, keepe an outward conformitie with the Arrians, who will needs sitte, to declare, that they esteeme Christ Iesus to bee onely a meere man? By your argument, all they are transgressours of the first Commandement, that communicate with them in sitting. Now to that which yee adde in the end, that this outward confor∣mitie tickles the Papist, and offends the godly: yee are greatly mistaken; it is your contentious opposition against the truth, and disobedience of the lawfull ordi∣nances of the Church, which tickles the Papist, and grieues all good men▪ and not our conformitie, in a lawfull and religious ceremonie.

PP.

The third breach of the second Commandement, made by kneeling, is the retaining the monument of vile idolatrie; all human inuentions polluted with ido∣latrie, except they be of necessarie vse, ought to bee remoued from Gods seruice. This gesture had a spot of prophanation from the beginning; being at the first birth in this act dedicated to idolatrie. The bra∣sen Serpent set vp at Gods owne command, was not spared when it was abused: Wee detest the very gar∣ment of a theefe, or a whoore, thought it bee inno∣cent: BEZA saith, many things may bee tollerated for the weake, which may not bee restored after they are taken away: he comm••ndeth them, who abolished kneeling, amongst other things, Tanquam aper••as idolo∣manias.

ANS.

You make the third breach of the second Comman∣dement by kneeling, the retaining of a monument of vile idolatrie; and in this yee erre, for kneeling is a re∣ligious ceremony appointed by God himselfe to bee v∣sed in all actions of adoration, and was not of humane inuention; therefore cannot be a monument of idola∣trie in this or any other act. If it be abused to idolatry, although abuse the thereof should bee abhorred, yet the religious gesture it selfe, is not to be detested. Let the theefe bee hanged, and the whoore drowned, yet the religious ceremony must bee restored to the right owner, to whom all knees should bow. The burning of Incense was a part of the ceremoniall worship vnder the Law, and abused to idolatrie, when it was offered to the brazen Serpent; yet that part of worship was not abolished, but the Idoll it selfe destroyed, and the ceremony restored to God, vnto whom of right it be∣longed. Neither hath your comparison of the brazen Serpent, and kneeling, any force in it; for the brazen Serpent, in the time it was abolished, had no vse: that ceased with the vertue of the cure, that the Israelites receiued by looking vpon it; the act of kneeling con∣tinueth alwayes in a necessary vse, for the better ex∣pressing of our thankfulnesse to God. And where you say, that kneeling from the first birth in this act, hath been dedicated to idolatrie, I flatly deny it: for albe∣it Honorius a foure hundreth yeares since, or there a∣bout, was the man that decreede kneeling to bee vsed in the eleuation, and circumgestation of the Hoste; yet it was not he, that brought in that gesture at the time of participation. In the eleuation or circumgestation, the same, I grant, was abused to idolatry, but neither th••se, nor the Hoste in them, were the Sacrament; for

when the bread or cup are not vsed according to the Institution, they cease to be the Sacrament; ••o knee∣ling directed to the bread at the eleuation, &c. was not a prophanation of it at the Sacrament, but a propha∣nation of it in a superstitious, and idolatrous worship. In respect of this, Caluine and some other recent Di∣uines, haue disliked it; and yet they say, if kneeling in the action of the Supper, did not rest in the Elements, but were directed to Christ sitting in heauen, the same were a lawfull sort of adoration. This Peter Martyr said, whose words are Neque externa adoratio esset mala, multi enim piè genua flectunt, & adorant, that is to say, Ex∣ternall adoration in that case, were not euill, for many piously bow their knees, and adore. Beza in his twelfth Epistle, saith, That the bowing of the knee at the re∣ceiuing of the Elements, is a sort of holy and Christi∣an reuerence, Ac proindè olim potuit cum fructu vsurpari, that is, of old, it might haue been vsed profitably. That testimony which you cite out of the eight Epistle, ac∣cording to your custome, yee corrupt, to make it serue your purpose: for Beza commending them that abo∣lished kneeling at the receiuing of the Sacrament, saith not, tanquam apertas idolomanias, but non minus quam aper∣tas idolomanias, and so distinguisheth it from idolatrie: like as a little before in the same Epistle, he saith, That this gesture of kneeling being considered in it selfe, is not impious; and in his twelfth Epistle speaking of the same matter, he hath these words, Interim tamen cum ista per se non sint idololatrica, idem de illis, quod de proximè praece∣dentibus sentimus. So we haue Caluine, Martyr and Beza, all of them contradictors to you in this, that kneeling at the Sacrament is a monument of vile idolatry. Where I marke further, that in Beza his iudgement, kneeling was not at the first birth, in this act, dedicated to ido∣latry, for he saith of it, quòd olim potuit cum fructu vsurpari,

that of olde time, it might haue beene vsed profita∣bly, and the words hee subioynes make this yet more manifest, Tamen quia ex hoc fonte orta est artolatria; If Bread-worship did spring from kneeling according to his minde, then kneeling at the Sacrament, was in vse before Bread-worship, and so was not dedica∣ted, as yee say, to idolatrie in this act from the first birth thereof. But to the end, the weakenesse of your Achillean argument may appeare, let vs put it in forme:

Whatsoeuer ceremonie in an act of diuine worship, such a•• the Sacrament is, hath been dedicated to idolatrie from the first time it was vsed, in that act, the same is to bee remoued from the act, as a monument of vile ido∣latrie.

To this I answere, that wee must consider the ce∣remonie it selfe, whether it bee of humane or di∣uine institution; if it bee of humane institution, it may be remooued, such as is the crossing of the bread and cuppe in the Sacrament: But if the ceremony bee of diuine institution, such as kneeling is, for the same is commended by God vnto vs in his Word: then wee ought to consider, whether the abuse of that ce∣remonie hath proceeded from the nature of the acti∣on, wherein it was vsed: for if it bee so, it ought to be abolished in that action, because it can neuer bee purged from the spotte which it contracteth by the action; and in such a case, the action and gesture ought both to bee abolished. But if the abuse proceede not from the nature of the action, but from the opinion of the agent; then the opinion being remoued, the religious ceremonie may bee vsed without any pro∣phanation of idolatrie: for example, The abuse of kneeling in eleuation, &c. proceeded not onely from the opinion of the agent, but from the nature of the

action, which is idolatrous and superstitious: kneeling in this action cannot be purged from the contagion of idolatry, because of the relation it hath to the idola∣trous action: and therefore both the action and the gesture ought to bee abolished. But the Sacrament of the Supper being an action instituted by GOD, and kneeling being of the owne nature an holy, and re∣ligious ceremony, it can neuer receiue contagion of idolatrie from it, but onely from the opinion of the agent: then remooue the opinion, both the action it selfe may bee rightly vsed, and kneeling therein, as being very agreeable to the nature of the action. For wee cannot deny, that CHRIST in this action is to be adored, and of that wee giue euident testimony, euen when wee sit at Table; for our sitting bare-hea••ed is a signe of adoration, as well as knee∣ling; and is no lesse idolatrous, if it be done for ado∣ration of the bread. That to conclude, if wee remoue no•• the euill opinion, the superstition remaines, and po••••t••s the action: but if the opinion be taken away, neither doth the action pollute the gesture, nor the ge∣sture the action, both of them being religious, and of diuine Institution, sorting and agreeing naturally one with another.

PP.

The fourth breach of the second Commandement made by kneeling; is the continuall danger, and occa∣sion of idolatry We are forbidden all occasions, and prouocations of Idolatry. There is a naturall prone∣nesse in all men to idolatry, great ignorance in the common people, and superstition rooted in the hearts of men: Papists daily encrease, the idoll of the brea∣die god is still in great account in the Romane Chur∣ches round about vs, & in priuate corners amongst vs:

and yet men are not ashamed to say, that all memory of former superstition is past, and no perill is to be fea∣red againe. The Virgins in Cyprians time, granted they walked with yong men, talked with them, went to b••d with them, but when it came to the act, they ab∣stained. Cyprian answeres, Non est locus dandus Diabolo: nemo diu tutus periculo proximus: Place should not be gi∣uen to the Diuell: no man is long safe, who is neere the point of danger. The Belgick Churches in their Synods permitted not libertie of kneeling, for the same respect of bread worship, as may be seene in the harmonie of their Synods, set forth of late, by FESTVS HOM∣MIVS, Liberum est stando, sedendo, vel ••undo coenam cele∣brare, non autem geniculando ob artolatrias periculum: If a lawfull vse could be deuised, yet this danger cannot be eschewed. Information by preaching is a sufficient re∣medie; meate doth not nourish so fast, as poyson doth corrupt. The watchmen are sometime ignorant, or negligent, many want doctrine▪ it is better to fill vp the pit▪ then to set one beside it, to warne the passen∣gers, that they fall not in: such ceremonies ought to be appointed, which by their goodnesse and edification may helpe the preaching of the Word, and not such as the Word daily must haue need to correct: the strength of many poore Christian soules, should not bee tryed by bringing them to the very brinke of danger.

ANS.

Your fourth breach is the occasion and danger of idolatry. But kneeling imports no more danger, nor occasion of idolatry, then sitting doth of prophanation and contempt of the Sacrament: and with vs there be many moe prophane Christians, then idolatrous Pa∣pists; and people are farre more ready by sitting to take occasion of despising the Sacrament, their senses

leading them to esteeme basely of it, then by kneeling, to thinke the bread and wine to be the body and blood of Christ materially; the same being against sense and reason, and the doctrine of the Word, which teacheth them the contrary. The Virgins in Cyprians time, by walking and talking, and lying with yong men, did ex∣pose themselues to vncleannesse, and as Cyprian saith, gaue place to the Diuell; but the lawfull vse of a religi∣ous ceremony, can neuer be the occasion of idolatrie, nor can the vse of it giue place to the Diuell: Res bonae neminem scandalizant, saith TERTVLLIAN de velan∣dis Virginibus, nisi malam mentem. That is, good things giue offence to none, but an euill minde. The iudge∣ment of the Belgick Churches, we reproue not, because they know best, what serues to the edification of their Churches; nor will they (I hope) reprooue our iudge∣ment concerning kneeling, which is grounded vpon reasons as expedient for our estate, as any can be alled∣ged by them, for their owne: but the liberty which they giue to celebrate the Sacrament with the gesture of sit∣ting, standing, or passing, condemnes ••latly your opi∣nion, of the necessity of sitting, which neuer any Church or Diuine, ancient or moderne did hold, except your selfe; yet pardon me for reckoning you amongst the Diuines. As to the feare of Bread-worship, it will ne∣uer be caused by the religious vse of kneeling, but by some peruerse disposition of the Receiuer, which no∣thing can remedie sufficiently, but right information made by sound doctrine. It is true, that to the vncleane, all things are vncleane: a soule that is euill disposed, may like a Spider conuert into poyson the iuyce of the same flower which the Bee turneth into hony: out of the sacramentall Word, This is my body, which is broken for you, the Papist draweth the poyson of Transub∣stantiation; but the true Christian, the sweet and spiri∣tuall

participation of the body of our Lord. The word giues not to the Papist an occasion of his errour, but he takes occasion at the Word, because of the peruerse dis∣position of his minde; so kneeling being a religious ce∣remonie, and commanded by God, when it is lawfully vsed at the receiuing of the Sacrament, can neuer giue occasion of Bread-worship, although superstitious men hauing corrupted their mindes, may make it an occasion of that, and worse. The gesture of sitting is at this day abused by Arrians, and made a signe of their deniall of the God-head of Christ; and prophane Chri∣stians haue taken, and daily take occasion thereby, to fall into the pit of contempt, and prophanation of this Sacrament, from which inconuenience, no ceremonies that can be chosen, will preserue them, except they be warned daily, and directed by the Word how to carry themselues; and if we neglect this, committing their safetie to the ceremonies of sitting, standing, walking, or kneeling, we shall not only bring them to the brinke of danger, but shall drowne them in the depth, either of prophanenesse, or of superstition and idolatry. Now, if you thinke that there is greater danger of idolatrie to be feared from kneeling, then of prophanenesse from sitting, you are much deceiued: for if wee consider the disposition of our people, amongst whom, some I con∣fesse haue vnderstanding, & yet are inclined to supersti∣tion & idolatry; the greater company are simple ones, that neuer did, nor euer will, as it is to be supposed, take occasion by kneeling, to thinke the bread the bo∣die of Christ, or yet to adore it for his body. This er∣rour was brought in by the Clergie and Scholastickes, wherof the people could neuer haue dreamed, if it had not been daily inculcate into their eares, and they per∣swaded so to thinke, by the false interpretation of the words, This is my body. The right exposition of the

same hath remoued that error, and must still debarre it, not the gesture of sitting; for thereby simple ones are ready, by their owne inclination, to take occasion, as wee haue knowne in time past, of contemning the holy Sacrament, and so from superstition to runne in∣to a profanation of the Lords Body: from eyther of these extremities no thing can preserue them, but the trauels of a faithfull Pastor, in Catechizing and Prea∣ching. As to men of vnderstanding they are in lesse danger, and howsoeuer they receiue sitting, standing, or kneeling, they know the Elements in the Sacrament to retaine their former substance, and that they are changed in the vse onely. Neither haue such of them, as are inclined to Papistrie, beene conuerted a jot by sitting, from their former errors; but to the contrarie, confirmed in their erronious opinions, disdayning our profession for the irreuerent celebration of the holy Sacrament, If at any time, by the doctrine of truth, they shall be conuerted from their errors, this gesture that is required of kneeling, shall bee a meanes to pre∣serue them in a constant profession; and as I haue sayd, keepe them also from the other extremitie of con∣tempt.

PP.

The fifth breach of the second Commandement made by kneeling, is, a shew of wisedome in will-wor∣shippe and humilitie, Coloss. 2.2••. This their preten∣ded humilitie, is a naturall humilitie, like vnto Peters, when he refused, that Christ should wash his feete. Obe∣dience is better then sacrifice. FENNER, in the doctrine of the Sacraments, hath a notable saying: That the whole honor of the Sacraments is, that they remaine within the Church of GOD in that simplicitie he left them.

ANS.

The fifth breach yee alledge to be will-worshippe. The Apostle, Coloss. 2. defines will-worshippe to bee wilfull condemning, or thralling of men to the obser∣uation of such things in Gods worship as necessarie, whereof there is no certaintie in the Word of God, the Authors of the said obseruation being rashly puft vp by the mind of the flesh, ver. 18. Now whether yee, that haue no certaintie in the Word for sitting at the Sacra∣ment, but such reasons onely, as we haue cleerely shew∣ed to be rashly forged out of the minde of the flesh, and yet doe wilfully condemne and thrall mens conscien∣ces to the obseruation of that, as necessarie; or wee, who neyther vrge sitting nor standing, nor kneeling as necessary; but esteeming all indifferent, leaue the choyce vnto the Church, vpon whose iudgement it be∣commeth all men to rest in circumstantiall indifferent things: whether (I say) yee, or wee be guiltie of wil-worshippe, let the discreete and wise Christian iudge. Your example of Saint Peter makes not for you: for if our Sauiour had declared his will to vs concerning kneeling or sitting, as he did to him touching the wash∣ing of his feete, it had beene rebellion inexcusable in vs, to haue opposed thereto, vpon whatsoeuer pretext. No more doth Fenners saying helpe you, to which wee all subscribe.

PP.

Obict. There is no new worship appointed, but an action alreadie appointed for Gods seruice is applyed to the sayd Supper. Ans. The parts of Gods wor∣shippe may not be applyed to other, when comlinesse, commodiousnesse, institution, and command will not suffer. A man may not kneele in al the time of Sermon:

he may not read in the act of receiuing, &c. To be short, A rite sacramentall, deuised by man, pretending hu∣militie, and shouldering out other rites instituted by GOD, cannot bee but presumptuous will-wor∣shippe.

ANS.

After ye haue propounded these fiue breaches of the second Commandement excogitate by your selfe, and neuer heard before in any Church, yee obiect, that kneeling is no new worshippe, but an action already appointed for Gods seruice, and applyed to the Sup∣per. And yee answere, That the parts of Gods wor∣ship may not bee applyed to other, when comlinesse, commodiousnesse, institution, and command will not suffer. This answere no man will deny; yet, yee take paynes, as Sophists are wont to doe, to prooue that which is not controuerted. The point we denie is this, that comlinesse, commodiousnes, institution, and com∣mand, permitteth not kneeling to bee vsed in the act of receiuing. This yee haue not prooued, nor bring yee any argument now to prooue it: but simple peo∣ple will not perceiue your cunning and finenesse. In a word, kneeling is not, as yee affirme, a sacramentall rite, but a religious ceremony flowing from the re∣likes of that naturall pietie, wherein man was created▪ approued, and committed by God himselfe to be vsed in all such parts of his worship, as edification, order, and decency allowes. To debarre this from the Sacra∣ment, by sitting, a gesture neuer commanded to be v∣sed in Gods worship, yet vrged by you, with opinion of necessitie, pretending the humilitie of obedience, where yee haue neither precept nor president; is indeed a subtill catching of the simple conscience in the yarne and net of wil-worship.

PP.

Obiect. The Eucharist is a part of Gods worshippe, therefore wee ought to kneele in the act of receiuing. Answ. In a large sense euery act whereby God is ho∣noured, may be called the worship of God, as oathes, vowes, and sacrifices, &c But adoration is the wor∣shippe of God in a strict sense. Kneeling is the gesture of adoration, but not of euery part of Gods worshippe. Receiuing, eating, drinking in the Sacrament, are parts of Gods worshippe; but they are not gestures of adoration. All the Sacraments both of Iewes and Christians, were parts of Gods worshippe, as well as the Eucharist, and yet they kneeled not in the act of participation.

ANS.

Yee obiect heere, That the Eucharist is a part of Gods worshippe, therefore wee ought to kneele: and yee answere, That kneeling is a gesture of adoration, but not of euery part of Gods worshippe: This an∣swere is true; but it makes against your selfe: for the Eucharist is an Eucharisticke action, that is, an action of thanksgiuing and prayse, which cannot bee perfor∣med without adoration, the gesture whereof yee con∣fesse to bee kneeling. As to the Sacraments of Circum∣cision and Baptisme, the externall acts of them (I speake of Baptisme as it was vsed in these times, when men went downe into the water, and were bap∣tized) could not bee commodiously performed with kneeling: But I thinke it were no sinne, if a man of perfect yeeres, comming to be baptized, should kneele: and contrarywise, it were vndecent for him, not to kneele at the inuocation of the Name of the Father, the Sonne, and the holy Ghost. As to the Passeouer

we haue often answered, that it was a full repast, and could not be commodiously celebrated with kneeling: as no gesture is of necessary vse, so none is to bee cho∣sen which is not commodious.

PP.

Obiect. The Eucharist is a sacrifice, and congeries sacrificiorum, a heape of sacrifices, a commemoratiue sacrifice, a sacrifice of a broken and contrite heart, of prayse, of prayer, of almes: therefore this Sacrament should be receiued with kneeling, saith the Bishoppe of Rochester: and therefore the gesture of kneeling is rightly applyed to such a kinde of worship. Answ. The actions afore sayd are called Sacrifices onely by analogie, and metaphorically. They are not proper sacrifices. The inuisible sacrifice, by the which a man offers himselfe by contrition, inward deuotion, morti∣fication, is the daily sacrifice of a Christian, Rom. 12.1. We offer our selues to be sacrificed when the Word is preached, Rom. 15. We kneele not when wee giue almes. These improper and metaphoricall sacrifices are not acts of adoration. The Paschall Lambe was slaine in the manner of a reall sacrifice, and yet not∣withstanding this immolation, they kneeled nor at the eating of the Paschall Lambe The Sacraments of the old and new Testament were alike in representati∣on, signification, and exhibition.

ANS.

Howsoeuer the sacrifices aforesaid be metaphori∣call, as yee say, and no proper sacrifices, yet they are spirituall sacrifices, which men are accustomed to offer with kneeling. Although wee kneele not when we giue almes, yet we kneele when we pray & praise. The sacrifice of the Passeouer, and other sacrifices vn∣der

the Lawe, although when they were eaten in pri∣uate houses, they did not kneele that eat them, because it could not be done conueniently, for the reasons oft recited: yet it appeares, when they were offered on the Altar, which was the publike act of Gods wor∣ship, that they bowed their knees. So Micheas, Cap. 6. vers. 6. and Saint Luke saith in his first, that when Za∣charie was offering Incense, all the people continued praying: which they did not without kneeling, or some other externall rite of adoration. Where yee af∣firme, that the Sacraments of the old and new Testa∣ment were alike in representation, signification, and exhibition; it is true, as touching the matter represen∣ted, but the manner was as farre different, as the shaddow is from the expresse and perfect image of the thing it selfe. The sacrifices of the olde Testament were but shaddowes of Christ▪ our Sacraments, by reason of the Word annexed to them, and the doctrine of the Gospell, whereby they are cleerely expounded, are viue and perfect images of Christ, and of the benefites wee haue by him; therefore they are to bee celebrated with greater adoration and deuotion, both externall and internall, then the sacrifices vnder the Law, because our deuotion and adoration should be proportioned to the measure of our knowledge and faith.

An Answere to the Section, entituled, Kneeling not practised in the ancient Church.

PP.

THE two former breaches are sufficient of them∣selues, howbeit kneeling were otherwise warran∣••ed by the practise of the Church, &c.

ANS.

I am assured, if kneeling be warranted by practise of the ancient Church, no good Christian will thinke for the friuolous reasons adduced by you, that they committed any of these breaches. But you labour to proue, that the ancient Church did not practise it▪ for yee say, that when the Arrians denyed Christs true diuinitie, the Orthodoxe Church, who ac∣knowledged his diuinitie, kneeled not in the act of receiuing, which had beene expedient, if the same had beene lawfull: vnto which I answere, That there be many things expedient to be done, which not∣withstanding are not done, nor ought to be done; not because they are vnlawfull in themselues, but for some other respect, as some custome receiued, or some order formerly established, which vpon euery appa∣rant expedience is not to be altered: for example, It was expedient, because of the same heresie, to haue kneeled at all times, when publike prayers were offe∣red to Christ, or to the Father in his name: yet on the Lords day, which was the most solemne time of wor∣ship, the ancient Church kneeled not at publike prayer; not because it was vnlawfull in it selfe to haue knee∣led, but because there was an order receiued in the Church, that on the Lords day the people should stand and not kneele.

Next, when yee say, that the ancient Church did not kneele at the receiuing of the Sacrament, and will prooue it by this, that it was the custome of the Church to stand in the time of publike prayer all the Lords dayes in the yeere, and on euery day from Easter to Pentecost, because of the ioyfull me∣mory of Christs resurrection: for, say yee, this Sacra∣ment, being a matter of great ioy, far lesse would they

k••eele at the celebration of it. To this, I answere, That if the order of the Church could haue permit∣t••d knee••ing, the nature of the action, although 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bee a matter of great ioy, would haue sorted ••ell enough with this humble gesture. In the 17. of Gen•••• 16. God promised to Abraham, that hee would ••••esse Sarah, and giue him a sonne by her, and make her the mother of many Nations, and Kings to come of her the Text saith in the next verse, that Abraham fell vpon his face, and laughed Here yee see a matter of great ioy, which made Abraham to laugh, ioyned with a ge∣sture of greater humilitie then bowing of the knee is. The bowing of the body and the knee, is not as your Master of table gesture and ye here affirme, the gesture onely of an humble Penitentiar; but it is the gesture al∣so of these that giue thanks. So the Leper gaue thanks, Luke 17.16. And of these who ioyfully sing prayses to God, Psalm. 1••8. vers. 2. And of these who pray as our Sauiour, Luk. 22.41. who kneeled and prayed, though ••e was no Penitentiar. And of these, who of∣fered their gifts to God, Mich. 6.6. And of these with whom God talked, either immediately, as he did with Abraham, Gen. 17.3. or mediately, as by Mayses, to the people of Israe••, Exod. 12.27. And of these that were astonished at the works of God or his Word, 1. King. 18.39. 1. Cor. 14.25. To be short, if Abra∣ham, when he did onely receiue the promise of the bles∣sed seede, fell on his face▪ Gen 17.17. how much more ought the faithfull bow their knees, when they receiue the performance of this promise, euen the blessed Seede himselfe from the hand of God in this spirituall Ban∣quer? So it is not the nature of the action that will enforce the gesture of standing to haue been vsed in the Sacrament rather then at prayer, but the custome and order of the Church only; which if ye were able to pro∣duce

as well for standing at the Sacrament, as at pray∣ing on the Lords day, your argument were strong: but that yee shall neuer doe, except ye grant according to the truth, that the Sacrament is an act of reall ado∣ration. In that case Tertullians testimony, which you cite, would aduance your cause mightily, who sayes, De geniculis adorare nefas ducimus.

Two or three testimonies of Eusebius, Chrysostome, and Tertullian, for standing on the Lords day at the Table, or Altar, when the Sacrament was receiued, will not proue a constant and vniuersall practise of that gesture. Neyther is the example of the Abissines, and Muscouites, who stand to this day, able to counter∣poyse the practise of the vniuersall Church, for the space of foure or fiue hundred yeeres preceding their dayes, wherein they kneeled at the receiuing. Nor are you able to prooue, that the gesture of kneeling was brought into the Church by the error of Transsubstanti∣ation, as ye confidently affirme in the last line of this Section. For Honorius, as wee sayd before, did not de∣cree kneeling to bee vsed at the receiuing of the Sacra∣ment, but at the eleuation and circumgestation which was a superstitious and idolatrous worshippe in∣uented by man. And it is euident, at the time when that Decree was made, the people were accusto∣med to kneele at the receiuing; and if it had not beene the custome, there is no question, but the same would haue beene straitly enioyned by the same Decree. But it is playne, that before that time, as euer since, this gesture is continued in the Church: for as Saint Au∣gustine vpon the 98. Psalme, testifies, No man doeth worthily receiue, but hee that adores. And in the same places hee saith, Non peccatur adorando carnem Christi, sed peccatur non adorando: that is, Wee sinne not in adoring Christs body in the Sacrament; but

we sinne, if wee adore it not. And Chrysostome in one of his Homilies hath these words, Ergo adora, & com∣munica: that is, Adore then, and communicate, but vnto these, and the rest of the testimonies, yee an∣swere, That it followeth not, because they adored, that therefore they kneeled, because (say yee) their testimonies make mention of adoration, not of the Sacrament, but of Christ in the Sacrament▪ and wee say the same, that at the Sacrament Christ only is to be adored, and not the sacramentall Elements, which are the signes. So in this wee agree; but because that maketh nothing against kneeling, yee subioyne, that their testimonies are to bee vnderstood of spirituall and internall adoration; and to confirme it, yee quote in the Margine D. Fulke, vpon the first to the Cor. 11. Sect. 18. But let the Reader peruse the place, he shall finde nothing in it against the gesture of kneeling, or any other religious signe of adoration; onely hee saith, that adoration, mentioned by the Fathers, is to be vnderstood of the spirituall adoration of Christ, and not of the externall adoration of the Sacrament. And if hee had meant otherwise, Chrysostomes words in the 24. Homilie, vpon the first to the Corinths, Cap. 10. cited by himselfe, would haue controlled his saying: Hoc corpus, etiam iacens in praesepi, reu••riti sunt Magi, &c. that is to say, The wisemen did re∣uerence to this body (he meanes the body of Christ,) lying in the Manger; and these wicked and barba∣rous men, leauing their houses and Countrey, hauing finished a long iourney, and comming to the place, they adored with great feare and trembling. Let vs therefore (sayeth hee) that are Citizens of hea∣uen imitate these Barbarians. Thus farre Chryso∣stome. Now to imitate them, is not to come with inward reuerence onely, but to shew it also in out∣ward

gesture; for of them the Scripture saith, That falling downe, they adored CHRIST. And it is mani∣fest by the words following, that Chrysostome meanes not of the inward adoration onely, but also of the outward; Non solum hoc ipsum corpus vides, sicut illi, &c. Thou doest not onely see the same body as they did, but thou knowest both his power, and dispensation, and thou a••t ignorant of no thing done by him, as being exactly and accurate∣ly imitated in all mysteries. Let vs therefore stirre vp our selues with feare, Et longe maiorem quàm illi Barbari ostendamus reuerentiam: that is, Let vs shew foorth much more reuerence then these Barbari∣ans. The word, Ostendamus, manifestly shewes that Chrysostome exhorteth his people not to the inward adoration of Christ onely at the Sacrament, but to the externall also. The practise of all Churches since the dayes of Christ confirmeth the same: for there was neuer any Church, wherein the Sacrament was receiued without some externall signe and gesture of adoration. To stand before the Lord in a solemne act of diuine worshippe, is a gesture of adorati∣on: and as yee obserued before out of Drusius in the 51. Page of this Pamphlet, standing is taken for prayer, because it was the vsuall gesture at pray∣er. The discouering of the head in our Chu••ch is an externall signe of adoration, otherwise our people, who are wont to sitte at the reading of the Word, singing of Psalmes, and publike prayers, did vse no externall signe at all. And as in these actions, the dis∣couering of the head is a signe of adoration, so is it in the receiuing of the Communion; and was so euen when wee did sit at the receiuing: for the reuerence of the bare head was not giuen at that time to the ex∣ternall Minister, nor to the externall Elements, but to

〈…〉〈…〉▪

PP.

The proofes already made for standing vpon the Lords day for 1000 yeeres in the Church, doe euince that geniculation had no place in the act of receiuing all that time. It hath therefore followed vpon bodily presence and transsubstantiation.

ANS.

Your proofes haue euinced nothing, except yee grant, that to receiue the Sacrament is an act of ado∣ration; for all the testimonies ye bring runne that way. And at most yee haue onely proued, that on the Lords day they stood at the Sacrament: whereupon if yee conclude, that geniculation had no place, yee must vp∣on the same ground, that sitting had no place: yea, it s••all euince, that sitting had no place in the Church, vnto the yeere 1560. at which time it was receiued in our Church: for after these 1000. yeeres, wherein yee proue that standing was vsed, kneeling succeeded, and hath continued euer since in the Church, vntill the time of reformation. So sitting was neuer in vse by your owne argument. As to the gesture vsed by our Saui∣our at the Paschall Supper, which yee affirme was con∣tinued at the institution of the Sacrament, it was not sitting at a Table vpon fourmes or chaires, but lying, and leaning vpon beds: and it is vncertain, as I shewed

before, whether that gesture was continued or not; and albeit it had beene continued, there was neuer Church or Diuine, that thought it exemplary; for if they had done, they would neuer haue vsed standing, or passing, or kneeling in stead of it.

If we might bee bold to coniecture, with what ge∣sture the Apostles receiued the Sacrament, as yee are bold to affirme that they sate; or what gesture Christ would haue vs to obserue; it were doubtlesse surest to thinke, that the Apostles receiued with that same ge∣sture, which they vsed at the thanksgiuing and blessing, wherewith the Institution begins: and therefore that the gesture, which the Church thinketh most meet to be vsed at the thankesgiuing, is the gesture fittest for the people to receiue; because the action it selfe is a reall thankesgiuing, and should haue conioyned with it, the thankesgiuing and blessing, wherewith the action be∣ginnes in the minde and affection of the receiuers: and because euer since the first Institution, wee finde the Church to haue vsed the same gesture at the receiuing, that they vsed at the thankesgiuing and prayer. For when for the space of a thousand yeeres, they stood and prayed, as you your selfe affirme, and so doth your namelesse Master of table gesture; then they stood, and receiued the Sacrament: and after that, when on the Lords day, the Church began, in stead of standing, to vse kneeling at prayer, they began also to receiue the Sacrament kneeling, which forme of receiuing hath continued to our times.

But to returne againe to your argument, where yee say, that the proofes made for standing doe euince, that for the space of a thousand yeeres kneeling had no place, I will let you see how futile your argument i••. The Church stood on the Lords day at the Sacrament, for the space of a thousand yeeres: Ergo, say yee, they

kneeled not for the space of a thousand yeeres. May you not by the very same reason conclude? The Church laboured not, nor fasted on the Lords day, for the space of a thousand yeeres: Ergo, they neither fasted nor la∣boured at al••, for the space of a thousand yeeres. If du∣ring all that time, the Sacrament had been onely cele∣brated on the Lords day, your argument were proba∣b••e: but seeing the Sacrament, as S. Augustine writes, was giuen euery day, and to giue it on the first▪ fourth, and sixt dayes of the weeke, was held to bee an Apo∣stolike constitution: Therefore, as on the rest of the weeke dayes, except the Lords day, they prayed, f••xis in terram genibus, with their knees close to the ground; so with that same gesture they receiued the Sacrament, for the Church did euer receiue with the same gesture, which they vsed in prayer, as I haue proued by indu∣ction. The Apostles receiued with the same gesture, which they vsed at the thankesgiuing. This yee cannot denie, except yee ouerthrow all the grounds that yee laid, for the example and precept of Christ to bee ob∣serued. The Church on the Lords day, hath euer vsed to stand at the Sacrament, when they stood at prayer, and if you can produce one instance to the contrarie, I shall pray you doe it; or if not, suffer mee to conclude against you; that as on the Lords day, when they stood and prayed, they also stood and receiued: so at that same time on the weeke dayes, when they kneeled and prayed, they kneeled and receiued: and this is proued by all these testimonies of the Ancients, wherein the people are exhorted to humble themselues externally at the Sacrament, as by the m••st cleare testimony of Chrysostom I cited before. Hereby it is manifest, that the gesture of kneeling followed not the errour of Trans∣substantiation, but was receiued and retained in the Church on the Lords day, at publike prayer and recei∣uing

of the Sacrament, as it had been vsed before on the weeke-dayes, at these religious exercises. Thus fol∣lowing your owne foot-steps, and building on your owne grounds, kneeling is proued to haue been in vse in all ages, and with your owne hands, yee haue thrust sitting to the doore for the space of 1560. yeares.

An answere to the last Section, entituled Kneeling, not practised in the Reformed Churches.

PP.

THe Lutheran Churches do acknowledge reall pre∣sence by way of Consubstantiation: it is no won∣der therefore, that they approue kneeling. The Refor∣med Churches, as they damned bodily presence, so haue they reiected the gesture of kneeling in the act of recei∣uing. The Church of Bohemia hath retained this gesture since the dayes of Iohn Husse. In their Confession exhi∣bited to King Ferdinand, anno 1535. it is thus said, Mi∣nistri verò Dominicae coenae verba referentes plebem ipsam ad hanc fidem hortantur, vt corporis Christi praesentiam adess•• credant. The Ministers are willed to stirre vp the people to beleeue, that the bodie of Christ is present: the pu∣rer sort amongst them, as they haue reiected the errour of reall presence, so depart they from this gesture. In our neghbour Church, some of their defenders of knee∣ling, will not haue vs inquisitiue of the maner of Christs presence in the Sacrament. And the Bishop of Rochester commends the simplicity of the Ancients, which dispu∣ted not, whether Christ was present, con, sub, in, or trans▪ in this Supper. Sutton in his Appendix to his Meditati∣ons on the Lords Supper, condemnes likewise this dili∣gent search of the maner of Christs presence. If the ma∣ner of Christs presence be not determined, there can a∣rise no other, but a confused worship, of such a confu∣sed

and determinate presence. The Papists acknow∣ledge that there ought to be no adoration, but where there is acknowledged a bodily presence in the Sacra∣ment. Hence it is, that they proue mutually the one by the other.

It will not follow, that we may change sitting into kneeling, because the ancient Church, and some Refor∣med Churches, haue changed sitting into standing: be∣cause kneeling maketh so many breaches, both in the Institution, and in the second Commandement, and is no wayes a table gesture. By standing, we accommo∣date our selues to a table, to participate of the dainties set thereon: standing was neuer abused to idolatrie, as kneeling hath been; we are not bound to imitate other Churches further, then they imitate Christ. Our sitting is not Scottish Geneuating, but a commendable imi∣tation of the Apostolicall Churches, and obedience to Christs Institution.

They flee vp at last to the Church Triumphant, and alledge for kneeling, the foure and twenty Elders fal∣ling downe before the Lambe: but how conclude they this, that they that are called to the Supper of the Lamb kneele at the Supper of the Lamb? And seeing the bles∣sed soules shall not be clothed with their bodies before the Resurrection, how can they conclude materiall ge∣niculation of the blessed Saints in heauen? All creatures in heauen, in earth, or vnder the earth, are said to bow their knee at the name of Iesus, that is, to acknowledge his Soueraigne authority, howbeit the celestial Angels, blessed soules, and infernall spirits, haue not knees to bow with. The euerlasting felicity of the children of God, is the Supper of glory; Doe they drinke conti∣nually of that felicity vpon their knees? Thousands, thousands stand before him; many shall come from the East, and from the West, and sitte at the heauenly Ta∣ble

with Abraham, Isaack, and Iacob: may we not then conclude sitting and standing, as well as they do knee∣ling, if we looke to the letter of parables, visions, al∣legories and prophecies? but symbolicall theologie is not argumentatiue. Lastly, how will they prooue eui∣dently, that the falling of the foure and twenty Elders before the Lambe, is to bee interpreted of the Church Triumphant, rather then of the Church Militant?

ANS.

To proue that kneeling is not practised in the Re∣formed Churches, yee cut off in the beginning from their number the Lutherans, because they acknowledge the Reall presence by way of Consubstantiation. This I grant is an error, yet is it not directly fundamentall. They abhorre, as we doe, the Bread-worship, and they worship Christ in the Sacrament, as we should do; their errour is onely in the manner of his presence, which er∣rour should not debarre them from the Communion of the Reformed Churches: with them yee reckon the Church of Bohemia, because in their Confession exhibi∣ted to King Ferdinand, anno 1535. they say, Ministri ve∣rò coenae Dominicae, &c. Let the Ministers when they re∣hearse the words of the Lords Supper, exhort the peo∣ple to this faith, that they may beleeue the body of Christ to be present there. By this yee conclude, that some of them held the errour of Reall presence in the Sacrament; and yet their Confession mentioneth nei∣ther reall, nor corporall, nor locall presence. And it is no errour to beleeue the presence of Christs body in the Sacrament after some manner; as to beleeue that it is there obiectiue, that is, as the reall obiect, whereupon we must fixe and fasten our Faith: and to beleeue that it is there virtute, & efficacia, in vertue, and efficacie, to nou∣rish and strengthen vs in newnesse of life heere, and

raise vs vp vnto eternall life hereafter: In respect whereof, Christ ••aith, That his flesh is meate indeed, and his blood ••s drinke indeed; and that he who eateth his flesh, and drinketh his blood, hath life eternall, and that he shall raise him at the last day. Lastly, to beleeue that the body of Christ i•• present in the Diuine Person, wherein it subsisteth, albeit locally the same be in heauen, is no errour▪ for wheresoeuer the person is, there both the Natures are pre••ent coniunctly. The Diuinitie is euer, and euery where clothed with the humanitie, wherein it dwelleth bodily, and ought to be considered so in all actions of diuine worship: and the Humanity is euer, and euery where conioyned with the Diuinitie, albeit the same be not extensiue, or diffuse, as the Vb••quetars hold, through euery place with the Diuinitie: As by example, where∣soeuer a man is personally present, there his head, his body, & all his members are present, albeit the foot or the hand be not in the place where the head is, yet they are coniunctly present with the head, where the person is; and so as Christ is personally present at the Sacra∣ment, so is his Diuinitie and Humanity coniunctly pre∣sent in the Person. That to conclude, it is no errour ac∣cording to the Confession aboue expressed, to beleeue the spirituall, powerfull, and personall presence of Christs bodie at the Sacrament, and in that respect to worship his flesh and blood there: yea, Saint Augustine saith, That it is sinne, not to worship his flesh there. But you must be excused to exclude all from your Commu∣nion, that beleeue any such thing, because yee haue de∣nied before, that the Sacrament hath such a promise, and presence of Christ, as the Temple or Arke had vn∣der the Law, pag. 51. And pag. 50. yee denied, that it was a signe that should moue vs vpon the sight thereof, ••o lift vp our hearts to the spirituall obiect of Faith (I vse your own words) or a meanes or occasion to stirre

vp men to adore the Principall, that is, Christ: And so yee doe acknowledge, that they are ordered of God to be signes only, and seales of his graces, without any promise, power, vertue, or presence of the bodie of Christ; that is the opinion of the Anabaptists. If these be they, whom yee call the purer sort amongst the Bo∣hemians, I know not; this I know, that the Polonian Church esteemes them Arrians, who sitte at the Sacra∣ment, whom I hope yee will not repute to be the purer sort, or reckon amongst the Reformed. Thirdly, if yee debar from the communion of the well reformed Chur∣ches, all who are of the Bishop of Rochester and Suttons minde, who commend their simplicitie, that beleeue Christs presence, and are not inquisitiue of the maner, but professe with Durandus, saying, modum nescimus, pra∣sentiam credimus; then shall yee excommunicate from your societie, all that preferre the peace of the Church, to the loue of contention and curious disputes, that haue disquieted the Church, rent the body therof a sun∣der, and diuided the same in factions.

Where yee say, that if the maner of Christs presence be not determined, there can arise no other but a confu∣sed worship of such a confused, and indetermined pre∣sence: your allegation is but rash and prophane. Can yee determine the maner of Christs presence in heauen particularly? or the manner of God the Father his pre∣sence in heauen and earth, albeit we beleeue that God is in essence and power euery where, and that Christ is bodily in the heauens? These determinations are but generall, and confused notions; yet God forbid wee should say as yee doe, that the presence of the Father and the Sonne in heauen, and in earth, are confused, or that the worship is confused, that is giuen thereto ac∣cording to Gods Word.

As to the Papists, who acknowledge (as yee say) that

there ought to be no adoration, but where there is a bodily presence acknowledged in the Sacrament, al∣though yee be of the same minde, and thereupon con∣demne all adoration of Christ in the Sacrament, yet we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 no more ••o that their opinion, then to the rest of their errours; and therefore affirme with the learned and Diuine Bishop IEVVEL, That i•• is without doub•• our dutie to adore the body of Christ, in the word of God, in the Sacrament of Baptisme, in the mysteries of the body and blood of Christ, and wheresoeuer any foot-step or signe of it ap∣peare••, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 chiefely in the holy mysteries, in which we haue a li∣uing expresse Image of all Christs peregrination in the fles••. To conclude, if yee except out of the number of the reformed Churches, all that thinke that Christ is pre∣sent in the Sacrament, and in the Sacrament to be ado∣red; I feare yee draw the number of the reformed Churches to a very small count, whom yee call the pu∣rer sort, such as Arrians, Anabaptists, and their fol∣lowers. But if by the reformed Churches, yee vnder∣stand those, who distinguish betweene the signes and the things signified, giuing to the signes the reuerence due to them, and adoring onely the thing signified, to wit, the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament of these, some, I confesse, do erre in esteeming Christs bo∣die to bee really and locally present: and yet, seeing they agree with vs in the chiefe and principall grounds of Religion, wee must not excommunicate them from the number of the reformed. But let vs lay aside these, whom yee call Vbiquetars: If yee hold the rest for Re∣formed Churches, that are in Germanie, Polonia, Bohemia, Hungaria, Denmark, Norway, and great Britaine, with the Church of Ireland; for one that sitteth at the recei∣uing of the Sacrament in all these Churches, they are an hundred that kneele.

I mention not the Church of France, where they

stand, and sit not; whom yee condemne by your do∣ctrine of breaking the Institution, and transgressing the Precept, and precedent of our Sauiour; and with them, the ancient Church for the space of a thousand yeeres, that stood and receiued, as also others of the Reformed, who follow their example: for when yee maintaine sitting as necessarie by institution, example, and precept; yee condemne all that do otherwise. Yet, yee could p••esse heere to excuse them, or rather to mi∣tigate your censure of them, saying first, that by stan∣ding, men accommodate themselues to a table, to par∣ticipate of the dainties set thereon. Next, that standing hath neuer beene abused to idolatry, as kneeling hath bin: but these abuses are friuolous, and nothing worth; for in the Church of France, where they receiue stan∣ding, they doe no more accommodate themselues to a table, then they who kneele; for neither doe they reach their hand to the table, to take any thing to themselues therefrom, receiuing all from the hand of the Minister; nor doe they stand socially, as yee will haue sitting to be vsed for society and familiar entertainment; but first one or two commeth, and hauing receiued, they passe to giue place to others. Secondly, yee forget, or th••n are ignorant, that the Priest standeth, whilest hee saith Masse, and receiueth, adoring the Elements. And th••r∣fore kneeling was neuer more abused by the people, then standing is by the Priest. So as by these your ex∣cuses, the reformed Churches of France, and others, that stand at the receiuing of the Sacrament, are not li∣berate frō the breach of the Institution, & second Com∣mandement, wherewith yee charge those that kneele.

In the end hauing condemned all for Idolaters, who kneele on earth at the Sacrament, yee ascend to hea∣uen, and there yee deny that we are able to conclude, that they who are called to the Supper of the Lambe,

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

vsed by the Saints in adoration, which is attributed to the blessed Spirits in heauen metaphorically▪ and therefore that on earth there is no gesture more pro∣per to be vsed in adoration, then the reuerend gesture of kneeling. Last of all, by the falling downe of the twentie foure Elders, it is euidently prooued, that thanksgiuing and praise may be offered to God on ou•• knees, or in a gesture more humble, whether they bee interpreted to bee the Church militant, or trium∣phant.

Now to conclude: When all your reasons and dis∣courses shall be considered by the iudicious Reader, he shall finde, that they all tend to the contempt of the Sa∣crament, and to leade men to a prophane estimation thereof: For first, yee maintaine, that it is to be cele∣brated with no other gesture then a common banquet for bodily repast. Secondly, that it is not in statu ac∣commodato ad adorandum: that is to say, That it is not a signe or middest appointed to stirre vp the receiuers to worshippe their Sauiour. Thirdly, that Christ is ey∣ther not present in the Sacrament at all, or that his bo∣dy is not to bee esteemed present after any manner. Fourthly, that at the Sacrament neither his person, nor his body and bloud: that is, neither the giuer, nor the gift is to be adored. Finally, that all, who at the Sacrament adore him by bowing of their knees, are Idolaters, breakers of the second Commandement, and violators of the Institution. These are assertions very contrarious to the iudgement of the Primitiue Church, touching the Sacrament, which of all the parts of Gods worshippe, they esteemed the most princi∣pall; as Casaubone obserues out of the Ancients in his 16. Exercit. Sect. 58. which hee concludes with these words; Ex Augustin•• disputatione contra Pa••stum Mani∣ch••um, lib. 20. cap. 21. discimus veterem Ecclesiam in illa,

〈…〉〈…〉

Sentenua Petricou••e•••••• Synod•• generalis, Anno Dom. 1578. Conclus. 4. sub f••nem.

CEremonias libertati Christian•• donamus, ac permitti∣mus, vt stantes▪ vel genua fie••tentes, pij, sacramentum corporis, et sanguinis Christi sumant: sessionis verò ad men∣sam Domini, quia praeter ritus in omnibus per Europam Eccle∣s••is vulgo consuetos, illi inter nos primi auctores extirerunt, qui omnia temere in Ecclesia mutantes, et sine scientia, Christum quasi imitantes, à nobis ad Arrianismum transfugae facti: qua∣re

hanc prop••iam ipsis, vt Christum, et sacra eius irr••uere••ter ••••a••tantibus, tanquam inhonestam & irreligiosam, s••mphe••∣••••••bus{que}; admodum scandalosam ceremoniam reijeimus. That is, For Ceremonies we remit them to Christian libert••, and permit the godly to receiue the Sacrament of Ch••ists body and bloud standing or kneeling▪ but be∣cause sitting at the table of the Lord, by, and besides the custome commonly vsed in the Churches of Eu∣••ope, was first inuented by these that changed all things temerariously in the Church; who counter••aiting Christ, without knowledge, haue played the fugitiues from vs to Arrianisme: we reiect this ceremony as vn∣hon••st, irreligious, and e••tremely scandalous to the simpl••r sort, leauing the same to them that handle the sacred things of Christ vnreuere••ly, as they doe him∣selfe.

Wlodislauiensis Synodi generalis, Anno. 1583. Iunij 19. Conclus. 6.

QVod attinet ad ceremonias caus Dominicae, sententia iam o••im in Sendomiriensi Synodo agitata, & conclusio in generali Cracouiensi, at{que} Petricouiensi Synodo facta, ac repetita, in hoc etiam Wlodislauiensis Synodi consessu approba∣ta est: nempe, Ne in vsu sit sessio ad mensam Domini in vllis huius consensus Ecclesijs Poloniae & Lituaniae, &c. Na•••• haec ceremonia (licet cum cateris libera) Ecclesijs Christianis, & caetibus Euangelicis non est vsitata; tantúm{que} ••nfidelibus Arrianis cum Domin•• pari solio sese collocantibus propria: Hortamur itaque, vt administretur c••na Domini stantibus, vel genua flectentibus, cum protestatione contra artolatri∣am Papistis consuetam. That is; Concerning the cere∣monies of the Lords Supper, the opinion agitated long agoe in the Synode of Sendomire, with the con∣clusion taken in the generall Synode of Cracouia, and

〈…〉〈…〉.

〈◊〉〈◊〉 1. Cor. 11. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 2. De fractione pan•••• in sacra Euchari••tia.

NEqu•• 〈…〉〈…〉 quas quidam, alioqui erudi∣•••••• Theo••ogus, 〈◊〉〈◊〉: quod si singula nobis im••tand•• ••••••ent, etiam prius agnum pascha••em no•• edere, in mensa se∣dere, duodenos tantum communicare, in domo, vel palatio, et nocte oportere••. Hasce enim peristaseis non sacramenti propria••, de quibus solis prepositio hec ••omnis Christi act•••• est nostra insti••utio) loquitur, sed accidentarias fuisse, iam modo ostensum est. That is; this proposition is not im∣prooued by the instances which a Theologue otherwise very learned obiects, saying, If wee should imitate all Christs actions, then it behooued vs first to eate the Paschall Lambe, ••it at a Table, and twelue persons on∣•••• ••••mmunicate in a priuate house or Palace, and in the 〈…〉〈…〉 for these circumstances are not pro∣per to t••e Sac••ament, but accidentary onely, as wee haue shewed. And it is of the proper actions of the Sacrament, that this proposition (Euery action of Christ is our institution) speakes.

Caluinus Instit. Lib. 4. Cap. 17. Sect. 37.

CHristo, inquiunt, hanc venerationem deferimus. Pri∣mum, si in coena hoc fieret, dicerem adorationem ••am demum esse legitimam, quae non in signo residet, sed ad Christum in coelo sedentem dirigitur. That is; Wee giue this worshippe (say they) to CHRIST: First, if this were done in the action of the Supper, I would confesse the adoration to bee lawfull, which resteth not in the signe, but is directed to Christ, sitting in heauen.

Beza Epist. 12. pag. 100.

GEniculatio denique dum symbola accipiuntur, speciem quidem habet piae, ac Christianae venerationis, ac proinde olim potuit cum fructu vsurpari. That is, Knee∣ling at the receiuing of the Elements hath a shew and forme of holy and Christian adoration; and therefore of olde might haue beene vsed profita∣bly.

Petrus Martyr, Class. 4. locus 10. Sect. 49. & 50.

IN Sacramento distinguimus symbola à rebus, & sym∣bolis aliquem honorem deferimus, nimirum vt tra∣ctentur decenter, & non abijciantur, sunt enim sacrae res, & Deo semel deputatae: quo verò vel res significatas, ••as promptè, & alacriter adorandas concedimus: inquit enim Augustinus, hoc loco, Non peccatur adorando carnem Christi, sed peccatur non adorando. Adoratio interna po∣test adhiberi sine periculo, neque externa suá naturá essct

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

Notes

• * 1.1

  Ep. 184. Ep. ••1. Ep. ••61. Ep. 363. In••••itut ••ib. ••. cap. 2••. Sect. 4. & 13.
• * 1.2

  A considera∣tion of the Discipline whereunto the Swearers did oblige themselues:
• * 1.3

  Now Bishop of Couentr•• and ••ich∣field.