A defence of the innocencie of the three ceremonies of the Church of England viz. the surplice, crosse after baptisme, and kneeling at the receiuing of the blessed Sacrament. Diuided into two parts: in the former whereof the generall arguments vrged by the non-conformists; and, in the second part, their particular accusations, against these III. ceremonies seuerally, are answered, and refuted. Published by authoritie.

SECT. XXXIIII. The second absolute, and direct Romish worship of the Sacrament, Idolatrously.

It is the Romish profession, to adore the Sacrament (name∣ly the corporall substance contained therein) as the very person of the Son of God, in the proper substance of his bodily presence; which we iudge Idolatrous, not onely by an Accidentall possibility, but by an absolute infallibility.

For first, that the worshippers do adore the bread with diuine honour, in stead of Christ himselfe (which possi∣bility the Doctors of the Romish Church do cōfesse) may happen to their Adoration of the Eucharist, by reason of many possible accidents: as if he that consecrateth haue not had a true Ordination; or,* 1.1 in consecrating of the Sa∣crament, haue not a right Intention; or, in vttering the words of Consecration, faile in his syllabicall pronuncia∣tion; or, if the formes of the Sacraments themselues, by vnfit admixtion, or putrifaction, lose their perfection. In all these (for euerie one of them is possible) possibilities it may fall out that the Romish worshippers do adore with Diuine honour the element of bread, in stead of the Son of God: which what is it but, at least, an Accidentall Ido∣latry; but yet true Idolatry?

They haue, in this case, no other colour of euasion, than to tell vs, that when they kneele downe to adore this Sacrament, they do it with an implicite and inward con∣ceit of the minde, saying; If Christ be present, then I adore thee &c. But this is a most miserable shift, to make Adora∣tion (which is the highest honour, & homage, which man oweth properly to God) vnto an Hypothetical beleefe [if Christ be there.] The truth of God telleth vs, that who∣soeuer cōmeth to God, He must beleeue that God is, that is,

honour him with a Diuine faith, that he is wheresoeuer he is adored: But in Ifs and Ands, that is, in fallibilities, there can be no Diuine faith. Ergo, this Suppositiue faith is meerely supposititious; because it is impossible, that the Ielousie of God should admit of a doctrine, or Religion, whereby it must necessarily happen sometime, that the creature should be worshipped with honour, properly due vnto the Creator himselfe. This be spoken of the possibility.

How much more Idolatrous must they appeare to be, when as, by necessary consequences from Scripture, iudgement of ancient Fathers, and the aduocation of the perfectest Senses of man, it may be infallibly proued, that that which they adore, as Christ himselfe, remaineth still in figure, forme, and substance, the same Bread, that it was before Consecration? This inferreth such an infal∣libilitie of their Idolatry, that it is impossible, but the Po∣pish Adoration of this Sacrament must be Idolatrous. From which kind of Idolatry, whether possible, or infal∣lible, you will free vs, before we conclude this cause.

Hitherto haue we shewne what kinde of worship, in receiuing the Sacrament, ours is not; namely, not Po∣pish; whether you consider the Relatiue kinde of wor∣ship, by making the Sacrament an obiect of Adoration, In quo, or per quod: or else the absolute manner of Ado∣ration, by worshipping the Sacrament, tanquam obie∣ctum, quod adoratur. We are now to shew, what is the obiect of our Reuerence, in receiuing the Sacrament.

Notes

• * 1.1

  See the Pro∣testants Ap∣peale lib. 2. c. 2. sect. 23.