WHether the Text of the Phil. 2.9.10.11. 1 on which they grounde this Ceremony, or will-worship, bee not in the judgment of all Di­vines both auncient and moderne, a Prophesy of the joynt subjection of all Angells, Saynts, Divells, and Reprobates to the supreame Lord­ship and dominion of Christ; Not now in the Church, in time of Divine Service and Sermons, but hereafter, when they shall all appeare before Christs Tribunall, to be judged by him; taken out of that Prophesy of Isay. 45. 23. As I live saith the Lord every knee shall bowe to me &c. and expresly interpreted of and applyed to the day of Iudgment by S. Paule himselfe. Rom. 14.9.10.11. By S. Iohn. Revel. 5. n. 12.13.14. Chap. 7.11.12. Iohn. 5.22, 23, 27, 28, 29. And by Christ himselfe Math. 20.5, 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 41, 44, 46. And Chap. 7.21, 22, 23. And whether this be a good inference? All knees of things in heaven, earth, and under the earth, shall submitte and bow to Christ before his Tribunall in the day of Iudgment, as to their supreame Lord and Iudge: Therefore all men and women ought now to bow their knees, or put of their hatts when ever they heare the name Iesus mentioned in the Church in time of divine Service and Ser­mon, The sole argument that can properly be deducted from this Text to justify this practice?

[Page 2] 2 Whether, the Originall be not [...], In, (not At) the name of Iesus; And this phrase thus Englished and translated in all other places of the Bible? Whether all the Greeke and Latine Fathers whatsoever doe not thus render it; In (not at) the name, And all English Translations too; (as Wickliffs, Purvi [...]s, Tyndalls, Coverdalls, Mathewes, The Bishops Bible, sett forth in the 2. Yeare of Queene Elizabeth, used in all Churches during her Raigne, And since, till the last Tran [...]lation 1614. Erasmus Paraphrase, All our ancient English writers, and the Common Prayer Booke it selfe, In the Epistle on Palme Sunday till M. Cozens corrupted it in the yeare 16 [...]9. by turning In into At, without any lawfull autho­rity and causing it to bee since so printed,) Except the Geneva translation only which mistaking M. B [...]za (whom the Translator followed) rendred his Ad nomen, to the name, At [...]he name whe­ther the last Engl [...]sh Translation (which the Translators themselves rendred, In the name according to the Originall, and all former authorized English Translations, but the Geneva, which Confe [...]rence at Hampton Court p 46. King Iames condemned as the worst of all, and enjoyned the Translators not to followe) was not counted by See his Ser­mon on Phil, 2.9.10. Bishop Andrewes (As some on good grounds report) who without their privity altered In into At the name, when the Coppy was fitted for the Presse of purpose to contemne this Ceremony for which he had preached: Else it had bene printed In (not At) the name, as the Translators truly Englished it and as the same phrase is ever translated by them S [...]e Acts. 3.6. c. 9.27.29. c. 16.18. 1. Cor. 5.4 [...] Ephes. 5.20.2. Thes. 3.6. with sundrie others. in all other places throughout the Bible; which had over [...]throwen this his pretended duty of the text:

3 Whether this Translation of At, for I [...] the name, doth not marre both the s [...]nce and English of the Text, and make it no sence? If any man should translate, I beleeve in God; I beleeve at God: Our Father which art in heaven; Our Father which art at heaven: Whatsoever you shall aske in my name. Whatsoever you shall aske at my name: I baptize thee in the name of the Father, Sonne and Holy Ghost, I baptize thee at the name of the Father &c. Goe to God in my name, Goe to God at my name: In the name of the Lord I will destroye them, At the name of the Lord I will destroy them: Pray to God in the name of Christ, Pray to God at the [Page 3] name of Christ: Mary kept all these sayings in her hart, Shee kept all these sayings at her hart, and the like; It would marr both the English and sence, and prove no better then non sence. And doth it not the like here; there being noe such phrase as ( At the name) to be founde in any other Text of Scripture or any English Author but in this place alone? The changinge of which In, into At here making the bowing in the name (To witt) in the Soverraigne Lordship and Power of Christ) to be nothing else, but a bowing at the naming of Iesus in time of divine Service or Sermons, con­trary to the scope of this place.

How the name Iesus, imposed on our Saviours Humanity 4 only at his Circumcision and not given to his Deitie, but to his humane nature, in the very beginninge of his humiliation Math. 1.21, 25. c. 2.1. Luke 1.31. c. 2. 21. Acts 4.27. Cann truly be said, to be the name above every name, given him after his Resurrection and exaltation, As the name in this Text of the Philippians was? and to be the true, cheefe, yea proper name of God and of Christs Divinity, As the Patrons of this Ceremony affirme; And how this they say can be proved?

Whether the name Saviour ( which is given to God himselfe. 5 Psal. 106.21. Isay 43. 11. Chap. 45.15.22. Ier. 14.8. Hosea 13.4.) be the very same with Iesus, And as venerable, as comfortable, yea as much the name of God as it is not: as is most evident, they differing in words, in use in all languages, the one being a Christen name imposed at his circumcision the other a Title or Surname; and both if them oft coupled together in Scripture, as in these texts: A Acts 13.23. Gal. 3.20. 2. Tim. 5.10. Tit. 1.4. c. 2.13. c. 3.6. Saviour which is Iesus, Iesus our Saviour &c. which were a tautologia being one and the same. Then why doe the Bishop An­drewes Ser­mon on Phil. 2.9.10.11 Patrons of this Ceremony make them one and the same; The one of them (to wit) the name of Saviour, being attributed to God the Father as well as to Christ, the other onely to Christ not to God the Father, who was never called Iesus, But Tit. 1.3. Psal. 106.21. 1. Tim. 1.1. often Saviour? If so, Then why doe they not teach, that men ought to bow at the name of Saviour as­well as at the name of Iesus? The rather, Because Saviour, (though it be not the same that Iesus is in Letters sound, or use, the one being as we say, a Christen name, the other, not properly a name, but [Page 4] a Ti [...]le, or purchased surname, though this Bishop confounds them as one;) that of it is the sence and interpretation of the name Iesus, M [...]h. 1.21. And themselves write and preach, Bp An­drewes in his Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10. M. Wil­liam Page in his treatise of Iustifica­tion of b [...]w­ing at the name of Iesus. That men must not bow to the Letters, sounde, nor sillabes of the name Iesus, But to the sence only, which is Saviour, to which, at which by this their doctrine, they should rather bow then to, or at Iesus.

Whether Sermon on Psal. 1.9.10.11. Bishop Andrewes Reason, That we must bow at the name of Iesus because it is the name of God, and because Saviour (As he saith) is the cheefest name of God; doth not more strongly 6 infer, that we should rather bow at the name of God and Saviour, than at the name Iesus? That we should bow at every name of God alike? at the name of the Father, Sonne, holy Ghost, Emmanuel, Sonne of God, Christ, Iehovah, Elohim, Adonai. (which we com­monly english, the Lord,) being all Psal. 29.2. Psal. 34.3. Psal. 66.2. Psal. 79.9. Ps. 83.18. Psal. 96.8. Psal. 99.3. Ps. 111.9. Ps. 148.13. Deutr. 28.58. reverend, excellent, great, holy, and dreadfull names aswell as at the name Iesus, Since all of them are the names of God? Whether this Proposition can be proved either by Scriptur or reason (which they take as granted,) That we must bow the knee at the utteringe or hearinge of that name which is the name of God? (the Antecedent or proposition on which the Bishops first argument or reason is grounded:) which Pro­position if it be true, will overturne the bowing at this name Iesus; which is not properly the name of God as of Christs Deity, Because divers who were but meere men had it imposed on them before Christ, And it was given to Christ principally not as he was God, but man upon his Nativity and Circumcision Math. 1.21.25. Chap. 2.1. Luke 1.31. Chap. 2.31. Acts 4.27?

Whether since Jesus is not, cannot be a Iesus or Saviour to Angels in heaven, Or Math. 8.28.29. Divels in hell, Whose nature he tooke not on him, Heb. 2.16. Nor yet to Reprobates in hell or earth, who are not saved by him, but yet a Lord & supreame Iudge over them all, Math. 28.18. Acts 10.36. Chap. 2.34, 36. Luke 8.31, 32, 33. Heb. 1.6. Iude. 6. 2. Peter: 2.4. Rom. 14.9, 10, 11, 12. Revel. 5.10, 11, 12, 13, 14. Chap. 7.9, 10, 11, 12. Ephes. 1.20, 21, 22.) His name ( Lord) be not more likely, to be the name above every name given to him upon his exaltation, in which every knee shall bow, intended in this Text then Iesus: Lord being the name [Page 5] given to Christ upon his Exaltation, as purchased by his death and Resurrection. Rom. 14.6, 8, 9, 10, 11. Acts. 2.34, 36. Chap 10.36. Math. 28.18. Ephes. 1.20, 21, 22. The name which every tounge shall confesse and call Christ by at last in the day of Iudgment, (As the very Text itselfe resolves in the words) Every [...]oung shall confesse that Iesus Christ is Lord, Phil. 2.11. Yea as Christ himselfe determines, Math. 7.21.22. Not every one that sayth unto me, Lord, Lord, shall ent [...]r into the Kingdome of heaven, &c. Many will say unto me in that day Lord, Lord, Math. 25.31, 37, 44, 45. When the Sonne of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy Angels with him; then shall he si [...]t upon the Throne of his glory &c. Then shall the righteouse on the right hand answere him saying, Lord &c. Then shall the on the left hande answere him and say, Lord when saw we thee an hungred &c. The name that is used Isay. 45.23.24.25. Rom. 14.11. As I live sayth the Lord, (Not Iesus) Every knee shall bow to me, and every tounge shall con­fesse to God: (The originall Text to which that of the Philippians referrs) The name by which Christ is called with reference to the day of Iudgment. 2. Cor. 5.11. Rom. 14.11. Heb. 10.30. 2. Petr. 3.8, 9, 10. Iude. 14. Revel. 18.8. Chap. 19.1.6. Yea the name of his greatest dignity supremacy and terror, Hee being called, Kinge of Kinges, and Lord of Lords, in respect of dominion and Iudicature, as by a name given him since his Exaltion. 1. Tim. 6.14, 15. Revel. 17.14. Chap. 19.19. Whether this name Lord (I say) in all these respects Extending equally to all things in heaven, earth and under the earth be not the name above every name here meant, rather then his name Iesus; He being in truth a Lord, but yet noe Iesus, no Saviour to Angels, Divels, and Reprobates, who therefore cannot, will not, shall not, bow unto him as their 8 Iesus, but only as their Lord? Math. 7.21.22. c. 25.31.37.44. Isay. 45.23.24. Rom. 14.9.10.11.

Whether this bowinge at the name of Iesus (being a dutie of the Text only in time of divine Service or Sermons, as the Bp. An­drewes Do­ctor Boyes, Giles, Wid­dowes. M. Page, with others. Patrons of it af [...]irme) can be in any probability the bowinge intended in the Text; Since there are noe Common Prayers or Sermons at all, for certaine in hell, or under the earth, Noe nor yet in the greatest [Page 6] parte of the earth, which neither knowe nor worship Iesus; Nor yet in heaven, where there are noe Sermons or common Prayers, but only Rev. 5.11.12 [...]13.14 c. 7.12. Blessings, prayses, and thanksgivings unto God and Christ. Now that bowing which this Text speakes of, is such a bowinge as is common to all, both in heaven, earth, and under the earth; A bowinge which they may, and shall all equally and joint­ly 9 performe; Therefore noe bowinge at the naminge of I [...]sus in the time of Divine Service and Sermons, which they want; and there­fore cannot use, Neither shall or can they ever actually performe?

How Iesus can be truly called a Bp. An­drewes Ser­mon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. M. Page his Treatise of bowing at the name of Iesus. proper and peculiar name given to Christ alone, when as we reade of divers others in Scripture that were called Iesus besides Christ. As Iesus the Sonne of Nunn, And Iesus surnamed Iustus. Acts. 7.45. Coll. 4.11. Heb. 4.8. Iesus the Sonne of Syrack, Iesus the high Preist, Bar Iesus [...] Acts. 13.6. &c. Or how can Christ be truly stilled, a common name, Since none was ever called Christ Others are called only adjectively that is an­nointed [...] but not Christ, a title peculiar to our Savi­our, as it used substantiuely as a title. substantively and abstractively or Messias, but hee alone? And none ever annoynted with the Deitie and holy Ghost and that to be both a Kinge, Preist and Prophet to his Church, but hee? Psal. 45.7. Acts. 4.27. Chap. 10.38. Isai. 61.1.

Whether this be not a notorious Paradoxe and falshood, Bp. An­drewes Ser­mon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. That that thinge that name which is proper, is ever better then that which is common? Since All accorde, that the common good, of the Republick and weale of the whole catholike Church, is bet­ter 10 and to bee preferred, before any mans proper or private good and wellfare? Since the Kinge himselfe, with all the greate Offi­cers of the State, the Prelates and Ministers of the Church, are better, more honorable, and more to be respected, (as they are publicke persons and Officers) then as they are private men; And since it will hereupon necessarily ensue, That the very essence of the D [...]itie and name of God, ( which are common to each of the Three persons in the Trinitie, as we learne in Athanasius Creede) should be worser then, inferior to the personall subsistence and names of each person in the Trinity, which are proper and incommunicable one to the other, where as the essence and name of the Deitie are common to each three persons: Which were heresie and Blasphemy to affirme, [Page 7] yea the Socrates Scholasticus Eccles. Hist. l. 7. c. 32.33. very heresie of Nestorious condemned in the Councell of Ephesus:

Whether it be not See A­thanasius Quod Chri­stus sit verus Deus, S [...]r. Ecclesiact. Hist. l. 7. c. 32.33. heresie to say, that Christ is not God, nor the name Christ the name of God? it beeing directly contrary to Rom. 9.5. Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever, Amen. 11 To Athanasius his Creede, And the second Article of Religion of the Church of England, Which say, that God and man is one Christ: Con­trary to the Doctrine of See Hi­lary, Atha­nasius, Ba­sil [...] Nazian­zen and o­thers in their wri­tings and Sermons against the Arrians. all Orthodox Fathers and Writers against the A [...]i [...]ns, who unanimously averre, See A­thanasius Quod Chri­stus sit ve­rus Deus.; that Christ is God; Yea contrary to Titus 2. 13. Lookinge for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearinge of the greate God and our Saviour Iesus Christ? Where Christ is not only called God, But the greate God: and to the Booke o [...] In the Le­tany, and thanksgi­ving after the Com­munion re­ceived. Common Prayer, which injoines us thus to pray: CHRIST have mercie upon us: O CHRIST heare us: From our enemies defend us O CHRIST, &c. And to say, Thou only O CHRIST, with the holy Ghost, art most high in the glory of God the Father: All which passages, expresly resolve Christ to be God, and the name of God, else we should not thus pray unto him as God.

Whether this be not a falshood, Bishsp Andrewes Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. that God cannot be an­nointed, as annointing signifies a designation to an office; Since Christ ^* both as he is God and Man, was designed to be a Saviour; and since we reade thus of Christs annointinge, Psal. 45.7. Therefore God, thy God, hath annointed thee, with the oyle of gladnesse aboue thy fellowes: Which the Fathers thus interpret, ^(p) O God the Sonne, Thy God (to witt) God the Father hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse, (to witt) with the holy Ghost. Acts. 10.38. Heb. 1.8.9.) Whence S. Augustine, Beda, Paschatius, Ra [...]ber [...]us, with sundry others on the 44. (our 45.) Psalme write thus: D [...]us ungitur a Deo &c. God is annointed by God, God the Sonne, by God the Fa­ther, with God the holy Ghost: And whether this be not an error, That Christ is not the name of God nor of our Saviours Divinity but 12 of his humanity only? Where as Iren [...]us advers. Heres. l. 3. c. 20. A­thanasius in his Declaration, Quod Christus sit verus D [...]us, that Christ is true God. P. 377. (therefore this name of Christ, the name [Page 8] of God) Nazianzen in his 5. Oration p. 167. B. With Elias Creten­sis on that place; Damascen Orthodoxae fidei l. 3. c. 3. p. 365. with Clichtonius in his Commentary on that place p. 366. And Aquinas 3. parte Quaest 16. Art. 5. Quaest. 17. Art. 1. expressly resolve; That Christ is called Christ, in respect of his Divinity; That Christ is the name both of his Divinity and Humanity, In which are expressed and comprized both his Divinity annointing, and his Humanity annoin­ted; And that he could not be called Christ, if he were only man; this name beinge predicated of both his natures, and given to him in respect 13 of both?

If this proposition be true, Bishop Andrewes Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. That Iesus is the proper name of God, and that God cannot be annointed, and so Christ not the name of God, as Bishop Andrewes argues: How can this agree with Acts. 4.27. Thy holy Childe Iesus whom thou hast annointed, &c. And Acts. 10.38. How God annointed Iesus of Nazareth with the holy Ghost and with power? Or with that of Tertullian (to omitt other Fathers) adversus Prazean: p. 709. Siue Iesus tantummodo positum est, intelligitur & Christus, quia Iesus unctus est: sive solum­modo Christus, idem est & Iesus, quia unctus est Iesus? Either Iesus therefore must not be the proper name of God, but the name only of Christs humanity, as Exposit. in Matth. 1. Tom. 5. Col. 1. Beda, Exposi­tio in Matt. 1. Tom. 1 p. 5. & in epist. ad Romanos c. 1. Tom. 2. p. 5.6. Anselme, De Divi­nis Officiis c. 41. Col, 1125. a Alcuninus & 3. parte qu. 16. Art. 5. qu. 17. Art. 1. Aquinas teach us, who say; that, Iesus est proprium nomen as­sump [...]ae carnis; Iesus is the proper name of Christs assumed humanity. And, Hoc nomen Iesus signi [...]icat solam naturam humanam, This name Iesus signifies only the humane nature; And so by the Bishops owne Doctrine, we must not bow unto it, because it is not the name of God, or Christs Divinity, but of his humanity only as these Fathers teach; Or else this proposition ( God cannot be annointed) must be false, because these two Texts expressly say, that Iesus as Iesus, was annointed; And themselves confesse, Bishop Andrewes Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. that Iesus as Ie­sus is God, And so God may be annointed, And then Christ will prove the name of God aswell as Iesus, notwithstanding the Bishops reason, and be therefore of right to be bowed unto, aswell as it, by the Bishops owne arguinge, if it be solid.

14 Whether that Text of Acts. 4.12. ( Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among [Page 9] men w [...]ereby we must be saved,) be meant of the name Iesus; As if men were saved by it alone, or only of the Pe [...]son of Christ, as the 10.11. verses, and the very first words ( Neither is there salvation in any other) with the Contents of our Bibles, that by the same I [...]sus only we must be eternally saved; and all O [...]hodox Int [...]preters expounde it?

If of the name Iesus only, Bishop Andrewes Serm. on Phil. 2.9.10.11. Giles Wi­dowes. his Confutation of an Appen­dix p. 38. M. Page, and others in their Ser­mons. As the Patrons of this Ceremony glosse it; How then can they be excused from Blasphemy, in attri­buting our Salvation unto the bare name of Iesus, which we receive only from his person and Merits, which make him a Saviour, and purchased him the Title of Jesus? Matth. 1.21. Acts. 13.23. Or how will it follow hence; There is noe other name under heaven whereby we must be saved, but the name Iesus, (though) not expressed in the Text, E [...]go we must bow a [...], and to this name, as oft as we heare it mentioned in the Church? If of the person only [as is most true] why then doe they abuse this Text [yea that place in Ps. 95.6. O come let u [...] worship and fall downe and kneel before the Lord our Maker; not Iesus or Saviour being writen long before our Saviours Nativity, or the name Iesus was given him, and so not meant of it] in applying it meerely to the name Iesus, to cause simple people to adore it, when as it speakes of the person only?

If the name of Iesus be thus to, be bowed to and at; Why 15 then bow they not to it when they see it written, printed, carved, paynted or ingraven, as well as when they heare it? why bow they not at the sight thereof, as well as at the sounde? why not out of the Church, as well as in the Church? Since Operum Tom. 3. Tract. 37. p. 335. Salmeron the Iesuite teacheth them; That this name whether it be pronounced with the mouth, or heard, with the eare, or where ever it is written, painted, or ingraven, is worthy divine worship, not for the bare word, wri [...]ing or picture it selfe, but for the signification of it, as the Crosse, and Image of Christ, are deservedly added with the worship of Lat [...]ia for the type and mystery represented in and by them? yea why bow and reverence they not it rather when they heare men dishonour and prosane it by cursing, swearinge, blaspheminge, when it is most contemned, vilified, abused, and so needes most honour and respect, then when it is only religiously and reverently used and uttered in the Church, without any irreverence, contempt or dishonour offered to it? And [Page 10] if bowing at the name Iesus in the Church, be a meanes to keepe 16 men from swearinge by it, (as some pretende) Then the bowinge at it, when men sweare should much more doe it; Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. yea then men should rather bow at the name of God than Iesus, Since that name is more abused by swearinge, and cursing then Iesus.

Whether these words of Bishop Andrewes and others, He is exalted to whose person knees doe bow; But he to whose name ONLY much more; his person is taken out of our sight, All that we can doe will not reach unto it; But his name he hath left behinde to us, that we may sh [...]we by our reverence and respect to it, how much we esteeme him; be not contrary to Math. 28.20. Loe I am with you allwayes even to the ende of the World? to Gal. 2.20. and Ephes. 3.17. Where Christ is said to live and dwell in us? to the Ibidem. Bishops owne words, who there immediately saith, that his body and soule, and these not without his Deitie are really present in the Sacrament: and so his person; and that Iesus is the proper and & cheefe name of his Deitie, which is ever present with us and not taken from us? Whether they be not a meere Idolizing of the very name Iesus, and a confining of this bowing only to his name, not person? Whether this speech and caution of his, ( Ibidem. doe it to the sence, have minde of him that is named, and doe his name the honour and spare not,) be not a meere Idola­trous Popish passage, The 2. and 3. Part. of the Homi­ly against the Perill of Idolatry. Bishop Vs [...]ers Answer to the Iesuites Challenge of Images. p. 496.497. Doctor Iohn Rainolds De Idololatria Romanae Ec­clesiae l. 2. C. 3. Sect. 69. borrowed by him from the Patrons of Image and Bread worship? Whether Papists may not as lawfully adore and bow to Images, Crucifixes, the Hoste and the like, as they or we may doe to the name of Iesus, with this distinction and caution, borrowed from them by the Bishops, and by them from the Pagans, in defence of their Idolls relative worship, and adoring of the Image, with a re­ference and eye to the person whom it represents? And what difference is there betweene worship the name, and the Crosse, Host, Crucifix or Image of Iesus, which the Notes on Phil. 2. v. 9.10 [...] on Apoc. v. 3. Sect. 11. Carolus Stengelius De sacrosan­cto nomine Iesu. c. 23. Salmeran, Operum. Tom. 3. Tract. 37. p. 335. Romish and other Papists make the same? and conjoine together as one both in reason and verity.

Whether this Text of Philippians 2.10, 11. doth not couple the bowinge of the knee, and confession of the tounge ( that Ie­sus Christ is Lord,) together, as duties equally to be performed at 17 the same time, and not to be dissevered? If so, (as is most certaine,) Whether must not our Bowers every time they bow their knees, [Page 11] heads, bodies, or stirre their Caps at the naminge of Iesus, confesse likewise, ad cry out aloude with their tounges, that Iesus Christ is Lord? Since the Text thus conjoines and requires them both alike; Or else are they not infringers of this Text and precept, for ne­glecting it?

Whether bowinge at the name of I [...]sus only, not of Saviour, 18 Christ, Emanuel, Sonne of God, Kinge of Kings, Lord of Lords, God, with other names and Titles of Christ, doth not seeme to reviue the heresie of Irenaeu [...] adv. Hereses lib. 1. c. 25. Epiphanius Contr. Hae­reses. Haer. Cer [...]nthus, That Iesus and Christ are two distinct persons and essences? That Iesus is better then Christ, yea then Saviour, then Emanuel, then Sonne of God, Kinge of Kings, Lord of Lords, God &c. That he is more honorable, worshipfull, and reverent as he is Iesus, and when he is so stiled; then as he is God, and when he is so called; or then when he is termed Saviour, Christ, Emanuel, Sonne of God, Lord, Kinge, and the like? And whether learned Doctor Whitaker in his Answer to William R [...]y­nolds the Rhemists Notes on Phil. 2.10, 11. P. 398, 399. writes not That the bowinge at the name of Iesus only, and not at the name of 19 Christ, may ingender a more dangerous Error then any can remooue, to witt, tha [...] Iesus is better then Christ; which is wicked to imagine?

Whether bowinge at the name of Iesus only, not at the name of the Father, or Holy Ghost, (to Doctor Boyes, Postil on the Epistle on Palme Sunday p. 280. H [...]o­ker Eccles. Politie. l. 5. Sect. 30. M. Adams his Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. and Bishop Andrewes on Phil. 2.9.10. testifie Iesus to be God, and the name of God;) Doth not make a kinde of disparity betweene the Three sacred persons of the Trinitie, Athana­sius Creede Articles of Religion: 1.2.5. who are coaeternall toge­ther and coaequall; in givinge more honour, reverence, adoration, to the one, then to the other; and imply, the Father and holy Ghost not to be God, or so much God, not to be so venerable, so honorable as Iesus, because their persons and names are not so much bowed to, and adored as his?

If Three persons of equall dignity should be made the Kings Viceroy, in any of his Dominions, and all men should bow to, Cappe and honour the persons, and name of the one when ever it were mentioned, but neglect to doe it when the other Two are named; Would not this intimate, One of them to be more honorable, or of greater authority then the other Two? And is [Page 12] not this case the same? When Ministers and people shall all Capp and bende the knee, as soone as ever they heare the sounde of the name Iesus, but not so much as stirre either Cap or knee, when they names of God the Father and Holy Ghost are mentioned with it, even in the same breath and Sentence almost, as they are in the Apostles and Athanasius Creede, and in the ordinary Blessing at the end of Di­vine Service and Sermons, wherewith the people are usually dismissed. When men shall repeate, I beleeve in God the Father allmighty Maker of Heaven and Earth; without any great reverence or bowinge of the knee; And then pronounce the next words, And in Iesus Christ our Lord, with a stentorian voice, bowinge both the body and knee very superstitiously (I should say devoutly,) as soone as ever the word Iesus, is uttered, before Christ our Lord be pro­nounced, out of their greate reverence and respect to this name Ie­sus, (which they here preferre before God the Father allmighty and Christ our Lord,) And then shall proceed to, I beleeve in the Holy Ghost; and utter that without any such Ceremony or solemnity; Or when they shall pronounce, the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ, with much solemnity, cappinge and genuflection when Iesus, (not Lord and Christ) are pronounced; And then shall slightly passe over, the Love of God the Father, and the comfortable fellowship of God the Holy Ghost, without any such Ceremony or incurvation. What man in his right sences must not of necessity acknowledge, that the very name Iesus, is more honoured, reverenced and ado­red, then either the names, or Persons of God the Father, or God the Holy Ghost, that more adoration is rendred to the Second, then to the First, or Third person of the Trinity, and a greate disparity made betweene them?

If Iewes or Infidells should come into our Churches, and observe this difference and disparity, would they not forthwith conclude, that we had no other God but Iesus? that the Father and Holy Ghost were not esteemed of us to be God? Or at least, made not so greate and honorable a God, as the Sonne? and that Christ and Iesus, were not one and the same person, the one being thus bowed to, not the other? Yes verily. We reade in Fox Acts and Monu­ments, Lon­don: 1610. p. 1514.1595.1604. the Booke of Martyrs, that the Bishops and Commissioners, appointed by [Page 13] Queene Mary to dispute with Cranmer, Latymer, and Ridley at Oxford, when ever they named, or heard the name of the Pope, put of their Capps thereto, (as men now doe at the na­minge of Iesus,) Which these 3. godly Martyrs would by no meanes doe, But when God, Christ, or the Queene were men­tioned, they used no such Reverence to their names: Did not these Commissioners then (in our Martyrs judgments) preferre the person, the name of their By Iewels Defence of the Apologie. part. 5. Di­vis. 11. c. 6. p. 480. Lord God the Pope, before the persons, the names both of God himselfe, of Christ; of the holy Ghost, at leastwise of the Queene? and thereby signifie that the Pope was more honorable and far greater then the Queene, or any other earthly Potentate, whose name could not challenge or commande the like reverence and Cappinge from them? yea doubt­lesse.

If Three men were sittinge together, and those who passe by, put of their Hats to one of them, not to the other two; doth not this make an inequallity betweene them advancinge the one that is thus capped or bowed too above his fellowes? Certainely it doth: I finde in the Edition 1610. Booke of Martyrs P. 1699. That when Arch­bishop Cranmer was convented before the Popes & Queenes Commissionors in S. Maries Church in Oxford; he putting of his Cap, and humblie bowing his knee to the ground, made reverence to the Queenes Proctors and Commissioners, who represented her person, but beholding Bishop Brookes in the face, who was the Popes Delegate and represented his person, he put on his Cap againe, making no manner of token of obe­dience towards him at all. Whereat the Bishop being And may not God the Father and the holy Ghost, by as good and the same reason be offended at the bow­ing only at the name of Iesus, as this Bishop was at Cranmers bowing to the Queenes Commissio­ners and Proctors, pretermit­ting him. offen­ded, saith unto him, that it might become him right well (weiginge the honor, veneration and authority he did repre­sent,) to doe his dutie unto him. Whereunto Doctor Cranmer answered, that he hath once taken a solemne Oath, never to consent to the admitting of the Bishop of Romes authority [Page 14] into this Realme of England againe, and that he had done it advisedly; and therefore would commit nothing, either by signe or token, which might winne his consent to the recei­vinge of the same: and that he did it not for any contempt to the Bishops person, which he could have bene content to have honored as well as any of the other, If his Commission had come from as good an authority as theirs: This answered he modestly, wisely, and patiently with his Cap on his head, not once bowinge or makinge any Reverence to him that re­verence to him that represented the Popes person, which was wonderously of the people marked: If this Archbishops puttinge off his Cap and, bowinge his knee to the one and not to the other to the Queenes commissioners only not the Popes. Did here in his owne, the Commissioner, and all the peoples judgment: make a great disparity betweene the power and Iurisdiction of the one and other, and preferre the one of them before the other: Must not, doth not the bowinge and cappinge at the name only of Iesus, not of God the Father, and God the holy Ghost, uttered alltogether, or severally, doe the like? noe doubt it doth. Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. M. Page, Widdowes, the Rhemists Salmeron S [...]ngelius and others in their fore­quoted places. Bishop Andrewes, and other of our bowers at the name, of Iesus, teach us in expresse termes, that the name Iesus is in this more honorable then all other Titles of Christ, and exalted ahove them all, because men must only bow their knees and vayle their Cappes to it, but not to any other of his Titles: If therefore their bowinge at the name of Iesus, makes a disparity betweene it and all other names of his, preferring it far aboue them all; Must it not likewise make an inequallity and disparity betweene the names and persons of the Trinity too, by the selfesame Person, and advaunce Iesus above the Father, and the holy Ghost, at whose names they never bow or stir their Capps. Wherefore this bowinge to, at, and Cappinge at the name Iesus only, must needs make, and imply an inequallity betweene the 3. Persons of the Trinity, [Page 15] As M. Cartwright largely proveth in his Answere to the Rhemis [...]s Annotations on Phil. 2.9, 10.11. Therefore it is neither to be practised nor endured among Christians, who beleeve the Athana­sius his Cr [...]ed Articles of Religion. 1.2.5. pari [...]ie and equallitie of the Trinitie both in Essence, internall and externall, honor, adoration, and veneration to.

Whether, if Bishop Andrewes Doctrine (warranted by no 20 Scripture) be true in this particular; Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10, 11. that we must bow at the name of Iesus, not of Christ, because the end is better then the meanes; and the end for which Christ was annointed, better then his unction it­selfe; it will not hence followe; that the humanity of Christ, being annointed by his Divinity, and the Holy Ghost; And the Salvation of us men, the end for which Christ was annointed; are much bet­ter then his Divinity, and Acts. 10.38. Isai. 61.1. the Holy Ghost himselfe, the ointment and meanes annointing his Humanity and enabling him to be a Sa­viour? And whether the playne meaninge of his Proposition be not this in substance; that the Humanity of Christ is better then his Di­vinity, or the Holy Ghosts Deitie? and the Salvation of man the end, better then the Deitie and Humanitie of Christ, the meanes of mans salvation? which is no lesse then Blasphemy to affirme.

What See the Appendix concerning bowing at the name of Iesus and Lame Giles his Haul­tings. Father, or ancient Writer for aboue 1250. yeares 21 after Christ, commenting on this Text, makes Iesus, the name aboue every name principally meant and intended in this Text, and not rather the names God and Lord? Or that makes this Ceremony of bowing or cappinge at every naminge of Iesus in time of divine Ser­vice, or Sermons in the Church, the bowinge spoken of in this Text? and what are their words to this purpose? Or whether it be not an undoubted truth, that no Father or Writer for 1200. yeares after Christ and more, made any such interpretation of these words, or mention of any such Ceremony used in the Church, which certainly used it not till above 1150 yeares after Christ, and so deemed it not a duty of the Text, or necessary Ceremony.

What Father, Ecclesiasticall Historian, or Writer for 1500. 22 yeares after Christ, relates that this Ceremony was taken up by the Christians in the primitive Church, to justifie, to testifie the eternall Deitie of Christ against the Arrians, and other Hereticks who denied it? whether this ground of the originall use of this Ceremony, be [Page 16] not a meere groundlesse forgery and fancye of some late Writers, Zanchi­us in Phil. 2.9.10. Mr. Hooker his Ecclesias [...]i­call Polity. l [...] 5. Sect. 30. D [...] Bayes his Postill. on the Epistle on Palme Sunday. p. 280. and M. Page his Iustification of bowinge at the name of Iesus. voyde of all prooffe, authority, and not warranted by any antiquity? and a [...]mittinge it true, whether doth it not cleerely demonstrate, that the primitive Christians (who by this Argument used it not before Arrianisme sprung) with those who used it only on this ground, reputed it no duty prescribed by this text, because thus oc­casionally taken up to refell and discover Arrians? That they bowed as much at the name of Christ, Sonne of God, Saviour, Emanuel, and other names or Titles of Christ, as at his name Iesus; since the Arrians denyed his Deity, principally as he was Christ; (this being their ordinary assertion confuted, condemned by the orthodox Councells and Fathers, See A­thanasius, Basil, Na­ziancen [...] the Acts of the Councells of Nice, Con­stantinople, Chalcedon, Ephesus; and all Histo­rians and Writers of Arrian Con­troversie. that Christ was not God:) and opposed his eternall Deity when he was stiled by any of these names or Titles, as much as when he was called Iesus, or as he was a Iesus? That they bowed at the name of the Holy Ghost; since as many, or more See Epi­phanius and Augustine de Haeresib. Hereticks denied his Deitie, as denied Christs? And that this bowinge is now needelesse and superfluous for the present on this grounde, (especially in our Churches where none deny Christs Deity, as the Arr [...]ans and the other auncient Hereticks did) and all pray unto him as God, even with bended knees and hartes, in our common Liturgie, as CHRIST, (not Iesus) have mercie upon us, &c. testifieth.

Whether the Christians in the primitive Church for above 800. yeares after Christ, used not alwayes to pray standing betweene Easter and Whitsuntide, and on every Lords day throughout the yeare; and de geniculis adorare, to adore stan­ding [...] Never using, but expressly prohibiting by sundry Concil. Nicaenum. Can. 20. Constantinop. 6. Can. 90. Timonense 3. sub Carolo Magno, Can. 37. Aquisgranense sub Ludovico Pi [...]. can. 46. Councells, all to kneele, or bow their knees in time of prayer, Sacraments, or Sermons, in honour and memory of Chris [...]s Resurrection: And were not their meetings from hence termed, Tertullian de Corona Militis lib. ad uxorem. l. 2. & Rhenani [...]ot [...] Ibid Contra Psyc [...]ic [...]s [...] lib. contr. Magd. 3. c. 6. De Ritib [...] cura grationem [...] Col. 137. & cont. 4. c. 6. coll. 432.433. Stations, Statutes, or Standings, because they thus per­formed 23 all their Religious Lordsday exercises, standinge?

[Page 17]If so, (as all auncient, all moderne Ecclesiasticall Historians and Write [...]s acknowledge [...]) Then that Assertion of Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. Bishop Andrewes and others is false; That the primitive Christians use to kneele at the Sacrament, and to bow their knees when ever they offered, prayed, or heared the name of Iesus men­tioned in time of divine Service or Sermons, since betweene Easter and whitsu [...]tide, and on every Lords day, Iustin Martyr. A­pol. 2. Ter­tullian. d [...] Corona Mi­litis. (the or­dinary time of their publick assemblies) they never used to bow their knees, no not so much as in prayer, in which it is Acts. 7.60. c. 21.5. Ephes. 3.14. 2. Chron. 6.13. Psal. 95.6. Dan. 6.10. Luke [...] 22.41. Acts. 9.40. c. 20.36. most proper, much lesse then at the Sacrament, or name of Iesus, at which we finde not in any antiquity, that they used to kneele or bow the knee, though they vsually did it in all their prayers and assemblies on the weeke dayes after Whitsuntide: The only thinge the Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. Bishops marginall authorities proove, though neither himselfe nor any one else may thence inferre, The primitive Church and Christians used in their Weekeday meetings, after Whitsunday, to pray kneelinge. Ergo they used to kneele at the sacrament and bow their knees at the naminge of Iesus in time of divine service and sermons, (especially on the Lordsday, whereon they never kneele) it being a meere incon­sequent. 24

Whether In Isay. 45. S. Hieroms words, quoted by Bishop Andrewes and others, Mori [...] est e [...]im Ecclesiastici Christo genn flectere; Sermon on Phil. 2.10.11. Giles Wid­dowes his confutation of an Appen­dix p. 122. It is an Ecclesiasticall Custome to pray kneelinge to Christ, (not Ies [...]s) be a convincinge authority to proove; that the primitive Christians used to bow at the name of Iesus, not of Christ, in the time of divine Service and Sermons, when as this Text, speakes only a bowinge of the knee in prayer to Christ; not Iesus; not of a bowinge at the naminge of Iesus; which name is not so much as mentioned in this place of his; and the bowinge here spoken of ascribed only to the person, not to the name of Christ, muchlesse of Iesus? yet this is the Antiquity they most relye on. Or whe [...]her Lib. 4. c. 45. T [...]m. 5. p. 312. S. Cirylls words on Isai. 45, (where there is not so much as any mention of the [Page 18] name Iesus, Hexa­meron. l. 6. c. 9. muchlesse of any bowinge at, or to it, but only a re­lation, that all Nations shall be converted to God:) Or Theodo­rets Exposition on Phil. 2.10, 11. ( Who makes the name of the begotten Sonne of God, not Iesus, the name above every name, intended in this Text, which he proves out of Heb. 1.4.5. Psal. 2.7.12.) Or Ambrose his words, (The knee is flexible where with before the other members the offence of the Lord is mittigated, anger appeased, grace provoked. For this is the guift of the highest Father towards his Sonne, That in the name (In nomine) of Iesus, every knee He & many others read it only passi­uely, as in­ferred by Christs power, at last not actiuely, as voluntari­ly rendred by any now. should be bowed, of things in heaven, earth, and under the earth; and that every tounge should confesse, that the Lord Iesus is in the glory of God the Father: For there are two thinges which above others appease God, Humility, and Faith, The foote therefore expres­seth the affection of Humility, and the obsequiousnesse of dili­gent service.) Which Father readinge this Text, In (not at) the name; makinge the bowinge there expressed, to be subjection, hu­mility, and service to Christ, (not any genuflexion at the naminge of Iesus in time of divine Service and Sermons, of which there is not one sillable or any the least intimation in this passage:) and de­fininge the name Sonne in this place, (if any name,) not Iesus; and the name God in his Commentary on this Text, the name above every name, here intended: Whether I say, can these impertinent Au­thorities, (the only places quoted by the Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. Widdowes, Page, and o­thers in their Ser­mons. Bishop and his followers, to justifie the antiquity of this Ceremony,) prove that the primi­tive Church and Christians used to bow at every mentioninge of the name Iesus, in time of divine Service and Sermons; or that this is a duty of the Text? when as they never so much as intimate any such thinge, and neither make the name Iesus, the name, nor this kinde of bowinge, the bowinge here prescribed? Yet these are our greate learned mens best, yea sole Authorities, on which they would founde this novell dutie, which doe in truth confound it.

25 Whether the Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. Mr. Page, Widdowes Stengelius, Salmeron: with others quoted in Lame Giles. Bishops and others Reasons for bowinge at the name Iesus, drawne only from the Nature, Letters, Quality, or Cir­cumstances [Page 19] of the name, not of the Person of Iesus; their bowinge and reverence given to the person of Iesus, as they pretende, only in respect of his name Iesus, at which, to which name of his they only bow, when, and because it is named; not at other seasons, when his person, is as really, as fully, represented to them under other of his names and Titles; not to this his name in respect of his person; (which is of equall dignity, when ever represented under all, or any his names and Titles) together with the bendinge of their heads and bodies at every mention of the name Iesus, in a more speciall and humble manner, even in the midst of their prayers, when they are allready prostrate on their knees to God and Iesus, and their mindes immediately fixed upon both their persons; be not on infallible de­monstration, that they adore the name, more then the very person of Iesus, or of God himselfe, and so make it a notorious Idoll, since they bow thus unto his person, only in respect, and because of this his name; since when as they are prostrate in prayer in the very higth of their devotion, and their mindes immediately fixed upon the person of God and Iesus, they yet give a speciall congee, ben­dinge, and inclination of their heads and bodies, when the name Iesus is but uttered; and so reverence honour and adore it more, then either the very person of God or Christ? Else what neede this new incuruation at the name, when as they are already devoutly prostrate on their knees to the person? 26

What warrant is therefore men to put off their Hatts, or bow their heads and upper parts only at the naminge of Iesus? since this Text precisely requires, the bowinge of the knee (yea of both knees, because of every knee?) and mens capps, hatts, heads, bodies, are not their knees, nor yet enjoyned here to bow?

Whether See the Appendix to Lame Gi­les, where all this is proved at large. Popes with pop [...]sh Councells, and Writers, Espe­cially 27 some late Iesuites, who instile themselves thus from the name Iesus, above one 1000. If not 1200. yeares after Christ, were not the first broachers, inventors, and propagators, of this ceremonie, and that with Charters and indulgences for many dayes sinnes, to such who should vouchsafe to use it; of purpose to satisfie and countenance their worshippinge of Images, Crucifixes, the Hoste, and other such parts of their Romish Idola [...]ry?

[Page 20]Whether did not the Church of England with other Prote­stant Churches (by the Notes on Phil. 2 9.10. and on Apoc. 13. Sect. 7. Rhemists, Stengelius, and other Papists Confessions,) abolish it as superstitious? De S. Nomine Ie­su. c. 23. and whether have not our Bi [...]hop Alley his Powr mans Library: p. 2. f. 88.103. Bishop Rabinghton Exposition of the Catho­licke Faith [...] p. 195.196.197. Doctor Whitakers Answer to William Raynolds. p. 398.399. and in his Preface to Saunders his Demonstra­tion. Doctor Fulke and M. Carth­wrights Confutation of the Rhe­mist Testa­ment Notes on Phil. 2.9.10. and in Apoc. 13. Sect. 7. Doctor Ayray on Phil. 2.9.10. Doctor Willet Synopsis Papismi Conc. 2. Error. 51. owne, with Brentius, Calvin, Marlorat, Musculus, Piscato [...], and Paraeus in Phil. 2.9.10. and in Rom. 14. other protestant Writers against the Papists, con­demned and written against it as no wayes grounded on this Text? whether the Papists to drawe on the adoration of this name Milanus, Hist. de Imaginibu [...] l. 3. c. 1. have not made golden Characters and Images of it, Yea instituted both a Brentius, Calvin, Marlorat, Musculus, Piscato [...], and Paraeus in Phil. 2.9.10. and in Rom. 14. solemne holy day of the name of Iesus on the 7. of August, Calendarium Romanum: Histori [...]e beatissime [...] Nominis Iesu sed cum Vsum sanum: f. 74.169.170. and Howers of the name Iesus, with this Collect or Prayer, for all those who devoutly bow unto it. God who hast made the most glorious name of thy only begotten Sonne Iesus Christ, to they faithfull ones the highest Miracle with the affection of sweetnesse, and exceeding dread­full, and terrible to wicked Spirits, Mercifullie grannt, that all those who devou [...]ly worship this name Iesus in earth (to wit, by bowinge at or to it, in [...]ime of divine Service or Sermons,) may partake of the sweetnesse of its holy consola [...]ion in this life, and in the Worlde to come may obtaine the joy of endlesse exaltation and rejoycinge, by the same our Lord Iesus Christ thy Sonne? And whether the present violent pressing and enforcing of this Ceremony, which Ecclesiasticall Policy: l. 5. c. 30. Mr. Hooker, Con [...]utation of the Rhemist Te­stament: Notes on Phil. 2.9.10. Doctor Fulke and Synopsis Papismi the 9. Generall Controversie. Error 51. Doctor Will [...]t, say, no man is, or ought to be forced or enjoyned to use,) in the selfsame, yea in a farr more earnest manner then ever the Papists urged it upon any, by Fy­ninge, imprisoninge, suspendinge, deprivinge such Ministers and others who refuse to use it, against all Law, all Iustice, the chap. 29. See Rastall Title Accusation. Statute of Magna Charta & Petittion of Right, tendes not only to the erectinge of Popery, and bringinge in of bowinge to Altars, Images, the Hoste, Transu [...]stantiation and Masse, as late experience and the turning of Communion Tables to Altars or Altaringe, every where manifests?

[Page 21]Whether bowinge at the name of Iesus, be not divine wor­ship and adoration, given immediately, either to the person or 29 name of Iesus, or to both? If so ( as the The Rhe­mists, Sten­gelius, and Salmeron, in their fore-noted places, and [...]ornelius à Lapide in Phil. 2.9.10.11. Papists, the Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11. Giles Wid­dowes his an­swer to an Appendix: and others quoted in Lame Giles. Bishop, and all those graunt, who make it a dutie of the Text,) whether it be not direct superstition and willworship, and so to be abandoned of us, since doubtlesse it is not enjoined or prescribed by this, or a­ny other Text of Scripture? and whether the misalleaginge and mistranslating of Phil. 2.9, 10, 11. of purpose to justifie this Cere­mony, of bowing and capping at and to the name Iesus, in time of Divine Service and Sermons; be not an expresse willfull perverting, corrupting, yea abusing of the Scripture, (and so a dangerous soule-condemning sinne. 2. Pet. 3.16. Acts. 13.10, 11. Rev. 22.18, 19.) which every good Christian is bounde in Conscience, to Gal. 2.14. Ps. 1.27.28 Iude 3.2. 2. Pet. 3.16.1 [...]. Acts 13.10.11.2. Iohn. 10.11 resist? And the bowing at the very naming of Iesus in the midst, or beginninge of a Sentence read, or preached, before we heare, or knowe what followes, a rash inconsiderate disorderly Ceremony or Superstition, (and so prohibited, 1. Cor. 14.33, 40.) causing men oft times to neglect, or forget the sence of what is read unto them, to bow at the names of Acts. 7.47. Hebr. 4.8. Iesus surnamed Iosua, Col. 4.11. Iustus, and the like; yea at the very name of Acts. 13.6. Bar-Iesus the Sorcerer, to and at which Mr. Cozens, with many more at Durham, most devoutly bowed, no lesse then twice in one day, one after another, (such was their grosse supersticious dotage;) and confoundinge adoration, and the acte of outward worship and bowing, with hearing and reading of Gods word, which are distinguished from it?

Whether Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10. Bishop Andrews words, ( The knee that will not bow at the name of Iesus, shall he strucken with somewhat that it shall not be able to bow, and for the name, they that will doe no honor to it, by bowing to it, at it, when it is recited, when time of necessitie comes shall receive no comfort by it,) be not a meere fabulous Bug­beare and groundlesse Commination, warranted by no Scripture nor Example; Much like that Lyinge Legend of Ignatius the Mar­tyr 30 (registred in no auncient or approved Author, but in some ^(t) late fabulous F [...]iers) That Iesus est amor meus, was founde [Page 22] written in golden Characters in his hart, not in his knees; which some now publish as an undoubted verity, to drawe on cappinge and bowinge to the name of Iesus, at which none write, that this Igna­tius 31 ever bowed, though he loved, aud honoured it as much as any, and so makes more against, then for these Cringers.

Whether the Emperor Eusebi­us de Vita Constantini, l. 1. c. 23. Baronius & Spardanus Anno 311. Sect. 4. Constantine with other of his Suc­cessor Emperors, and their Christian Souldiers, did not engrave the name of Christ in Characters, both in their Ensignes and Helmets, to testifie, what honour and reverence they yeilded to this title of his, from whence they where stiled Christians. Acts. 11.16. Chap. 26.28. 1. Pet. 4.16. Ephes. 3.14, 15. And did not every Nice­phorus Eccl. Hist. l. 17. c. 4. Mola­nus Sacrar. Imaginum. Hist. l. 3. c. 1 Citizen of Antioch, when their Citie was grievously shaken with an Earthquake, write the name of Christ over their Doores, and so escaped? Vnusquisque Civium Christi nomen pro foribus inscribens, Eo modo terrae motum dispulit, quum Deus religioso cuidam homini oraculo haec verba inscribere foribus praecepisset, Chri­stus 32 nobiscum, state:) when as we reade of no such honour then given or drawne by them to the name Iesus? And doth not this inferre, that the Emperors and Christians in those times, gave as much re­verence and honour to the name Christ as Iesus, if not farre more? and so it ought now to be as much capped and bowed to as it, what ever the Bishop objects against it?

Whether Calvin, Marlorat, Bishop Alley, Doctor Whitaker, Bishop Babington, Doctor Fulk, Doctor Willet, Doctor Ayry, and other domestick Divines in their In their places quo­ted, Quaest. 27. autho­rized workes, resolved not in expresse termes; that the bowing at the name of Iesus in time of Divine service and sermons, is not a dutie either warranted by, grounded on, or comman­ded in this Text? That the Sorbon Sophisters, Papists, Iesuites, are more then ridiculous and absurd, who will in­ferre and prove this Ceremony from it? That it is an See Doctor Whi [...]ker Preface in his Answer to Saunders his demon­stration of Antichrist, when he de­rides this, as one of the Papists most absurd ri­diculous ar­guments and inferen­ces. absurd and idle consequent and nonsequitur, not deducible from it, the name Iesus, being neither the name, nor this kinde of [Page 23] bowinge, the bowing intended in the Text? That those who used this Ceremony make the name of Iesus a kinde of magicall 33 word, which hath all its efficacy included in the sounde? if so, (as they all doe) then how absurd, ridiculous, superstitious, and magicall are those, who deduce such consequences from the Text now?

Whether this Ceremony of bowinge at the name Iesus in time of divine Service or Sermons, be enjoined, or prescribed in the Booke of common Prayer and administration of the Sacraments, other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England? if not, (which is most certaine) whether those Bishops and Ministers, who use, or presse this Ceremony upon others, or preach in defence of it, or any others not prescribed in that Booke, contrary to the expresse statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. (which enacts; that no Person, Vicar, Mi­nister, or Curate, shall use; and no other person or persons enforce or perswade any of them to use any Therefor [...] standing up at Gloria Patri, the Gosple, A­thanasius & the Nicene Creed, Pray­ing towards the East Al­tars, recei­ving the Sa­crament at the Com­munion Table, Bowing to the Table, & such other, New urged Ceremonies, not mentio­ned or prae­scribed in the Booke o [...] Common Prayer, are expressly a­gainst this act, ought not to be u­sed, and those who use them may be indited for it, and as such as urge, or presse, or prea [...]h for them too. other Rite or Ceremonie in saying of Mattens, Evensonge, or administringe the Sacraments, then such as are prescribed in the Booke of common Prayer, (before which this Act is printed) under paine of imprisonment, and o [...]her forfeitures;) have not thereby incurred the severall penalties mentioned in that Statute? And whether they are not more conformable to the Lawes and established doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, who refuse to use this Ceremony, then all, or any of those, who thus enforce or practise it, contrary to the provision of Statute, (which inhibits it,) the Booke of common Prayer, (wherein all the ce­remonies by Law and Parliament established in the Church of England are comprised, so farre forth as concernes Divine Service, Sacra­ments, and Preachinge,) together with our Homilies, and Ar­ticles of Religion, not so much as mentioninge or requiringe it, and so in truth, exploding it by their silence?

Obj. If any object, that the 18. Canon enjoynes it, there­fore it must be used.

Answ. I answere first, that the Canon speakes not one word of bowinge or cappinge at the name Jesus, but only [Page 24] saith, That when in time of Divine Service the Lord Iesus (not the name Iesus) which is not the Lord Iesus, shall be mentioned, And none is due but wha [...] Christ hims [...]lfe re­s [...]rves or prescribes in his Word. Due and Lowly reverence (not putting off the cap, since this Canon enjoynes all to si [...]t uncovered in the Church,) sh [...]ll be [...]one by all persons present, as h [...]th bene accustomed &c. The Canon therefore speaking only of the Lord Iesus, not of the name Iesus, and of due reverence; that is such as God requires in his Word; not of bowing the knee, or vaylinge the Bonnet, which God no where prescribes or requires as due to Christ, makes no­thing for this purpose.

2. The Canon if it doth any thing, only adviseth it by way of direction, not simply commands it, as necessary to be obeyed. Leavinge it Hooker E [...]clesiasti­call Polity l. 5. Sect. 3. W [...]llet Syno­psis Papismi Contr. gen. 9 Error. 51 arbitrary to men to use, or not to use it, and prescribinge no penaltie to those who shall omitt it. Whence Archbishop Bancrofi, in his Visi [...]ation Articles, not long af [...]er the Canon made, doth wholy omitt the urging or inquirie after the use of this Ceremony. Bishop Andrewes [...] being the first that ever gave it in charg in Visitation Articles, at least 16. yeares after its first compiling.

3. These Canons were never confirmed by Act of Par­liament, or consented to by the temporall Lords and Com­mons, but by the Major parte of the Prelates and Clergy in Con­vocation, and that with much opposition of Bish [...]p Rudde, and others of the better, though the weaker side; Therefore they are See 25. H. 8. c. 14.19.21.1. Eliz. c. 1.2. The Petition of Right, 3. Carl [...], 31. H. 8. c. 26.3. Ed. 6. c. 12.8. Eliz. c. 1.13. Eliz. c. 12. Kings Eccle­siasticall Lawes and all Acts tou­chinge Ec­clesiasticall matters. no wayes obligatorie or binding in point of L [...]w, either to the Clergy or Laity; neither can they controll the Statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. or Booke of common Prayer thereby establi [...]hed, by prescribinge new Ceremonies in time of Divine Service and Sermons, not men­tioned in that Booke and Statute; the Ceremonies whereof being confined and limited by Parliament, can neither be altered nor multiplyed but by Parliament, which hath the See the E­pistle of Pope Elutheriu [...] to King Lu­cius: Fox Acts, and Monuments 71.96. E [...]d. Hist. Novor [...]m l. 3. p. 67. & Ioannis Seldeni 5. Stat. 2. c Iurisdiction. Spicilegium Ibidem p. 167.168 20. H. 3 [...] c. 9.4. E 1. c 5.36. E. 3 c 8.2. H. 2.14. E. 3. Statute. 3. for the Clergie 2. H. 4. c. 15.5. H. 2. c. 6. M. 19. F. 3. [...]itz. Iurisdiction 28. hole power and [Page 25] right of makinge Lawes and Canons to binde the Subjects, as well in Ecclesiasticall and religious, as temprall matters, as Bishop Iewell recordes in his Defence of the Apologie of the Church of England. part. 6. c. 2. Divis. 1. p. 521, 522. and Bishop Bilson, in his true difference betweene Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion. part. 3. p. 540, 541, 542, 543. and the confirming of the Booke of common Prayer, of the Order of makinge and consecrating Preists and Bishops; Of the 39. Articles of Religion, and all other Ecclesia­sticall matters, together with the very Subsedies of the Clergy by Act of Parliament witnesse. As for the last clause in the Statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. for the publishing of new Ceremonies, by the Queene with the Archbishops or her Commissioners advice; as it clearly shewes, that Bishops have no power, to make, or alter Ceremo­nies, as they dayly doe, nor yet the King, unlesse specially en­abled and authorized by Parliament (else this proviso had been idle;) so it is personall only to the Queen, whom the Parliament knew and trusted, not reaching to her heires and successors, which were then unknowen, and therefore purposely omitted and not na­med or trusted in this clause, though they are since named in other clauses of this Act: so that being personall only it quite expired with them, and descending not to her successors, can give them or the present Prelates no power to prescribe, or enforce either this or other rites and Ceremonies, as they doe: I shall therefore conclude all with the Wordes of Doctor Willet in his Synopsis Papismi. The 9. generall Controversie Error 51 [...] The bowing at the name of Iesus, as it is used in Popery, to bende the knee at the sounde thereof, is not commanded in this place of Phil. 2. 10, 11. which shewed especially the subjection of all Crea­tures, of Turkes, Iewes, Infidells, yea of the Devills them­selves, to the power and [...]udgement of Christ: The kneeling at the name of Iesus is superstitiously abused in Popery, for the As our people now generally doe use it. people s [...]oope only at the sounde, not understanding what is read, and so make an As most now doe. Idoll of the Letters and Sil­labes, adoring and worshipping the very name, when they [Page 26] heare or see it: And againe, in sitting and not veyling at the These na­mes then are as much to be capped & bowed to as the name Iesus. name of Christ Immanuell, God the Father, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost, and bowing only at the name of Iesus, as the Papists doe. Protestants have only taken away, the supersticious abuse of the name Iesus: Note this. Due re­verence may be used to our Saviour, without any such Ce­remonie of capping and kneeling. (Therefore the 18. Canon, which requires only due reverence to be given; fullfilled without it too:) Neither doe we Why then it is now so strictly gi­ven in charge to all, and Mi­nisters and people so se­verely puni­shed for o­mitting it, or refusing to use it? binde any of necessity to use this reverence to the name of Iesus as the Papists doe, ( and our Bishops now also doe as well as they,) which thinke, that Christ cannot otherwise be honoured. Neither doe we judge or condemne those, that doe use it, being free from su­perstition, and As this is not so groun­ded grounded in knowledge and carefull not to give offence, for The true grounds of this Ceremo­ny. supersticious and offensive ignorance is not in any case to be defended. Finally this outward reve­rence to the name of Iesus, was first taken up among Chri­stians, because (as some affirme See Lame Giles & the Appendix concerning bowing at the name Iesus. though without grounde or warrant) of all other names, it was most de­rided and scorned of the Pagans and Iewes, and therefore they did the more honour it. Note this, Therefore Protestant now when Popery is so prevalent, should rather omit, then urge or use it. But now there is greater danger of Popish superstition in abusing holy things, then of profane Paganisme in utterly contemninge them; and therefore there is not such necessary and just occasion of usinge this externall ges̄ture now, as was in former times, it was not used of necessity then, much lesse now. Our Prelates therefore should not soe enforce it, both upon Mini­sters and people as they doe, nor yet suspend, silence, imprison those Ministers, excommunicate and vexe those people, who out of judgement and conscience refuse to use it; it being never gi­ven in charge or urged upon men in any Visitation Articles, till Bishop Andrewes, (the first Protestant Divine who ever pre­sumed [Page 27] to make it a duty of the Text, contray to the Tenent of all Antiquity,) nor people presented, molested, or Mini­sters silenced, suspended, censured, (yea fined and impri­soned) for not using it, or preaching against it, as no duty of the Text, till this last worst age of ours, for ought appeares by any histories, Writers, or records; and that against all Law, all reason, religion, the Statute of Magna Charta: c. 29. the Petition of Right, with other In Rastall Accusation. Lawes enacted for the peoples liberties, which cannot be taken from them, but by Parliament, which never yet prescribed this strang genu­flection to them.

Psal. 119.128.

I esteeme all thy precepts concerning all things to be right, and I hate every false way.