A defence of our arguments against kneeling in the act of receiving the sacramentall elements of bread and wine impugned by Mr. Michelsone

Defence of our fifth Argument. (Book 5)

KNeeling, say we, maketh many com∣munions in one Congregation, in the place of one, without any necessity: wheras if wee keeped the right order, wee needed not to doe so. This addition without any necessity, he leaveth out, and impugneth the rest. We set to that addition without any necessity, because some Congregations are so populous, that they cannot communicate together in one day. Neither doe I thinke that any reasonable man will allow Congre∣gations to be so populous, that they cannot communicate together in one day. That P••rishes should be of so large extent, and Congregations so populous, is rather to be reformed as an abuse, then to be allowed. So the addition of that clause, without neces∣sitie, is onely made in respect of the corrupti∣on of the times, not of that order which should be. Our Argument is grounded up∣on the Apostles precept, 1. Cor. 11. 33. Where∣〈…〉〈…〉 brethren when ye come together to eat, ta••∣〈…〉〈…〉 another. He sayth, that this text is alledged impertinently, because the Apostle by these words would redresse a certaine a∣buse which was in the Church of Corinth at their love-feasts, willing the rich to ••ary for the poore. This is just the answer of the Rhemists upon this place. Hee exhorteth them say they, to keep their sayd suppers or feasts in uni∣ty, peace, and sobriety, the rich expecting the poore,

&c. I content me with Fulk his answer. The words that follow (if any be an hungred, let him eat at home) doe declare manifestly, that this expectati∣on, or tarying one for another, is to receive the com∣munion of the Lords supper, and not to the eating of their love-suppers, which were ch••efly to relieve the poore, that were hungry. And bringeth the tes∣timonies of Photius, Chrysostome, Theo∣philact, Primasius, Ambrose, and Hierome, to this purpose. Ambrose upon this text sayth, He sayth that they must tarry one for ano∣ther, that the oblation of many may bee celebrated together, and that all may be served, and if any bee impatient, hee may bee fed with earthly bread at home. That you come not together to iudgement, that is, that you keep not the mystery so, as you bee worthy to be reprehended with offence, Hierome or some other under his name, upon this same place sayth, Because none taried for other, that the offring might be made in common, therefore they came together, not unto sanctification, but unto iudgement. Bilson t 1.1 citeth Augustine to the same purpose: yea Augustine affirmeth, that the Apostle speaking of this sacrament, sayth, For which cause brethren, when you assemble toge∣ther to eat, expect one another. And againe, v 1.2 he citeth these words of Chrysostome, x 1.3 Paul calleth 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Lords Supper, which is received in common, with one consent of all assembled toge∣ther: for untill all communicate and bee partaker•• of that spirituall food, the mysteries once set forth, are not taken away, but the Priests standing still, stay for all, yea for the poorest of all. The parti∣cle therefore knitting he 33. verse to the ver∣ses preceeding, maketh it manifest that this

precept is to be referred to the Sacrament. See more of this point in Perth Assembly y 1.4. He saith that we may communicate Sacra∣mentally in divers Parishes, which I thinke no other man ever affirmed. For howbeit they communicate together spiritually, as all Christians doe in the remotest parts of the world, receiving the same spirituall food signified in this Sacrament. Yet they doe not communicate together sacramentally, but who receive the Sacrament together. Cartwright, writing against the Rhemists, speaketh well to this purpose z 1.5 The Apo∣stle, 1. Cor. 10. 17. meaneth the communion of those that in one Congregation, or Church, eat together, and not of the communion of those that receive the Sacrament in another Church, it is evident, for that hee placeth the seale of this communion in eating all of one bread, and at one table: wheras they that communicate in another Congregation, or Church, communicate not of one table or bread with them that are farre removed, no more then they, that celebrated the Passeover in divers houses, were partakers of one Lamb or Kid. For notwithstan∣ding that Christ (who is the Lamb and the Bread) be but one, yet the outward matter of the Sacra∣ment cannot be one but many, according to the num∣ber of places, wherein the Sacrament is ministred. See more in this place, and in 1. Cor. 10. 17. See also Fulk in these places. And whether onely the twelue Apostles did communicate at the first Supper, see Cartwright and Fulk on Matth. 26. 20. This sacramentall commu∣nion of one Congregation was expressed yet more lively, where they dranke of one cup,

and eat of one bread. The Doctor himself•• alledged before a 1.6 a saying of Musculus, wherein he approved their forme, who used but one cup to signifie the Mysterie of one and the same bloud, wherof all the faithfull do drink alike, yet not condemning the custome of those Churches, which use moe cups in the Lords Supper, because of the multitude of the Communicants. Neither do I think on the other side, that others will condemne those who use but one cup. But to place a greater necessitie in one cup, then in one bread, cannot be commended. They had of old, in some Churches, one bread, as well as one cup, one in number, of one masse, unum unitate numerica sive physus per partium continuationem, and not one in mo∣rall conjunction of many peeces, as many dishes are called but one banket. And this one masse or loafe was unbroken, or cut in peeces till the Minister had first blessed; and for this use they had a knife called Sacra ••a••∣cea, as Iewell observeth. b 1.7 Where also the Reader may finde many testimonies of t•••••• one bread, whereunto I refer. This old custome declareth that sacramentall com∣munion cannot be extended so farre, as the Doctor would have it. See more of this ar∣gument* 1.8 in the two former Treatises.

Notes

• t 1.1

  Obedi∣ence, p. 461.
• v 1.2

  Obedi∣ence p. 494.
• x 1.3

  Homil. in dictum Pauli opor∣tet hereses esse.
• y 1.4

  P. A: pag. 44.
• z 1.5

  In 1. Cor. 11. 24.
• a 1.6

  Pag. 19.
• b 1.7

  Art. 11.
• * 1.8

  (c) P. A. pag. 44. Sol. p. 32.