WHat Gesture our Blessed Saviour, and his Apo­stles used at the Institu­tion, and first Celebrati­on of the Holy Eucha­rist, is not expresly mentioned in the Go­spel. That which they used at the eating of the Passover, is set down, and exprest by two words, which are promiscuously used by the Evangelists to signifie the same [Page 2] Gesture, viz. somtimes by [...], and somtimes by [...]. By [...]. Matt. 26. 20. Mark 14. 18. Jo. 13. 23. By [...]. Luke 22. 14. Jo. 13. 1 [...]. Both which words our last English Translation commonly ren­dreth, Sitting down [at the Table] answera­bly to the Gesture now in use amongst us: but the words properly signifie, Discumbere, vel Jacere, to lie down, in a leaning posture, on certain low Couches, such as were then in use (hence called Lectuli caenatorii, vel discubitorii) the principal Guest at the head of the Couch; the Second, a little lower, and behind him, laying his Head in the Bo­some of the first, and so successively, as ma­ny as the Couch would conveniently hold. That this was the posture of our Saviour, and his Apostles, at the eating of the Pass­over, will appear not only by the proper si­gnification of the words, and the known Custom of the Jews in that age, but also by a Passage recorded by St. John, touching our Saviour, and himself, John 13. 23. There was one of his Disciples, whom Jesus loved, [...], who leaned on the Bosom of Jesus. Compared with John 21. 20. Where we read that Peter turning about, saw the Disciple whom Jesus loved, [Page 3] following, [...], who also leaned on his Breast at Supper; yea, the Jews had been so long accu [...]omed to this Gesture before our Savi­ours time, that when some Thousands of them were to be miraculously fed by him, with a few loaves, and fishes, though they were then in the open fields, yet they readily applied themselves to the same Posture, when upon our Saviours command, they were di­stributed into several Companies, con [...]i­sting of equal numbers, to partake of that food, wherewith he purposed to satisfie them all. [...], He commanded his Disciples, ut accumbere face­rent, to make them all lye or leane down upon the Grass. Then it follows, [...], They lay, or leaned down in ranks, by Hundreds, and by Fifties. Mark 6. 39, 40.

Now, this Table-Gesture the Jews had learned of the Greeks, and Romans, who for many years had lorded it over them, and taught them this among other Customs. To say nothing of the Persians, under whose Dominion they had lived for many years before, upon their Return from the Babylo­nish Captivity; for they also used the same [Page 4] Posture at their Feasts, and Banquets, as we read, Esth. 1. 5, 6. Where in the descri­ption of the Royal Feast, which King Ahasu­erosh made the Citizens of Shushan, in the Court of the Palace-Garden; among other particulars, whereby the magnificence of the Feast is set forth, we find mentioned Beds of Gold, and Silver. And at the Ban­quet wherewith Queen Esther enterteined the King and his great Favorite Haman, we find him supplicating for his life to the Queen, lying prostrate on his face, upon the Banquetting Bed, whereon she reposed, Esther 7. 7, 8.

But if any desire to see more touching the use of this Table-Gesture, among the Jewes, they may please to consult the following passages in the History of the Gospel. For [...]. See Mat 9, 10. and 22. 10. and 26. 7. Luke 7. 37. and 22. 27. and Jo. 6. 11. For [...]. See Mat. 15. 35. Luke 11. 37. and Chap. 14. 10. and 17. 7. Joh. 6. 10. and 21. 20.

It is probable indeed, that our Saviour and his Apostles used the same Gesture at the Celebration of the Eucharist, which they had used at the eating of the Passover; First because we read that this Sacrament [Page 5] was instituted at the Close of the Feast, be­fore the food was quite taken away from the Table, viz. at the end of the last Course. So St. Matthew tells us [...], as they were eating, Jesus took Bread, and blessed it, &c. St Mark saith the same, Chap. 14. 22. with whom we may compare St. Luke, Chap. 22. 15, 19. Secondly, because the Evangelist St. John tels us of himself, that he leaned on the Bosome of Jesus, a little be­fore Judas went out. John 13. 23. with chap. 21. 20, 24. Now, that Judas, before he went out to betray his Master, received the Sacrament with the rest of the Apostles, is not only the Judgment of the Church of England (exprest in the Exhortation be­fore the Communion) but the general opi­nion also of the ancient Fathers; Both grounding their Judgment, as I suppose, on those words of St. Luke. Ch. 22. 19, 20, 21. Where the Evangelist tells us, that after our Blessed Saviour had delivered the Sacra­ment in both kinds to his Apostles, he ad­ded these words, Behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me, is with me on the Table.

Probable I say, not certain, because St. Luke, and St. Paul both tell us that this Sa­crament was instituted after Supper. The [Page 6] Evangelist informing us, that our Saviour took the Sacramental Cup, [...], after Supper: which circumstance the Apostle also thought fit to remember us of, where he particularly relates the order, and man­ner of the Institution, viz. 1 Cor. 11. 25. And St. John tells us, that Supper being end­ed, our Saviour arose from the Table, and washed his Disciples feet, and afterwards set himself down again. So that, for ought is exprest to the contrary, he might possibly vary his Posture, and his Disciples with him, when he celebrated that Gospel-mystery, which he then instituted, in the room of the Jewish Passover, especially when the Text saith, that he began the Celebration thereof with a new Benediction; which clearly ap­pears by comparing, Mat. 26. 26, 27, 28. with Luke 22. 17. 20.

Thus the Scripture leaveth us somwhat in the dark, as touching the Gesture which our Saviour, and his Apostles used at the first Institution: which doubtless it would never have done, if the Gesture then used had been oblieging to posterity; whereas we find not there mentioned so much as a certain pat­tern to imitate, much less any Precept to bind us unto Obedience. Now, in such a [Page 7] case as this, I know no better rule to guide our Practice by, then the examples of the Primitive Church, which in all reason should best know what the Apostles both did and taught, and therefore is to be looked upon, as the best keeper and witness of what they left us, as the most faithful Depositary of their Principles, and the most authentick Directress of our Practice. Now, if we please to consult the most ancient Records of those early Times, this we shall find.

First, The Council of Laodicea (which was somwhat ancienter then that of Nice, and whose Canons were afterwards received into the Code of the Church-Universal) ab­solutely forbiddeth the posture of lying on Couches in the Church, at the Celebration of the Lords Supper, or the feasts of Charity which accompanied it.

The words of the Twenty eighth Canon of that Council, are these, [...]; that is, The Feasts of Charity are not to be kept in the Lords house, or in the Church, neither may ye eat, or make Couches in the House of God. The same Ge­sture was [...] afterwards forbidden to be [Page 8] used, in the very same words, by a great Council of Greek Bishops assembled in Trullo, and that under the pain of Excommunica­tion, viz. Can. 74. Both Councils, as I sup­pose, either conceiving this Gesture not re­verent enough for so venerable a Mystery, or (at least) much subject to abuse, which I the rather think, because I find some such like abuse crept into the Church of Corinth in those early days, which the Apostle also sharply taxeth, 1 Cor. 11. 22. 29. Have ye not houses to eat, and to drink in? Or despise ye the Church of God? he that eateth, and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh Dam­nation to himself, not discerning the Lords Body. Where he blames them for using the same freedom, and bold carriage at the Lords Table, and the Feasts of Charity, which wait­ed on it, as at their own ordinary meals, thereby making no difference between their Corporal and their Spiritual Repast; for which cause these Agapae, or Feasts of Charity▪ were afterwards left off, when the Abuse began to spread so far, as universally to prevail.

Secondly, for Sitting, this Gesture which our Non-Conformists so much contend for, as the most proper for the Holy Communion; [Page 9] it was so far from being appropriated there­to of old, that (upon the best search I could make) I have not found it used at all in Di­vine Service, except at the reading of the Lessons, and the hearing of the Sermon. For Justine Martyr implies that during this part of the Service, the People sate; when he thus informs us concerning the Christian Assemblies of his time (such at least, where­with he was acquainted.) After the reading of the Lessons, and the Exhortatory Ser­mon of the [...], or Bishop, [...], that is, we rise up altogether, and send up our Pray­ers, Apol. 2. But whether, or no this was permitted to the People in all places, I much question: partly, because Optatus tells us, Populus in Ecclesiâ sedendi licentiam non ha­bet, that is, the People is not licensed to sit in the Church; partly, because in most, if not all the Eastern Churches at this day, the People have no seats at all allowed them in the Church, as I shall shew anon. However, this is clear enough, that after the first Service was end­ed, the Catechumens, and some others dis­mist, and the office of the Communion begun, the People never sate, no not so much as in the Intervals of that Service. For first, the [Page 10] same Justin Martyr, in the place alledged, makes not the least mention of any return to Sitting, after they once arose upon the end­ing of the Sermon. Secondly, St. Austin implies, that after the Beginning of the Com­munion Service, they constantly used a Ge­sture of Adoration (which sure no sober man can think to be sitting) until the whole was ended; worshipping God without any Interruption, in Prayers, Supplications, Inter­cessions, and Thanksgivings, partaking of the Holy Supper, offering, and devoting them­selves to God; So he, Epist. 59. ad qu. 5. And long before him, His Country-man Ter­tullian speaks more home, and particularly to this purpose. De Orat. c. 12. Where he reprehends the irregular carriage of some in his Church, who sate after part of those Prayers were ended. Vel propterea in nobis reprehendi meretur, quod apud Idola celebra­tur. Eo apponitur irreverentiae crimen, etiam ipsis nationibus, siquid saperent, intelligen­dum. Siquidem irreverens est assidere sub conspectu, contra (que) conspectum ejus quem cum maximè reverearis ac venereris. Quanto magis sub conspectu Dei vivi, Angelo adhuc Ora­tionis astante, factum istud irreligiosissimum est; nisi exprobramus Deo, quod nos Oratio [Page 11] fatigaverit? That is, ‘The Gesture of sit­ting after Prayers, therefore deserves to be reproved, because it is used in the Idol-Temples. Add hereunto the Sin of Irre­verence, which the very Heathen, if they were wise, would take notice of: for it is irreverent to sit in his presence, whom Thou dost highly honour, and regard. How much more irreligious is this Ge­sture, in the sight of the Living God, the Angel of Prayer yet standing by, unless we think fit to upbraid God, that our Pray­ers have tired us?’ Where, in his men­tioning the Angel of Prayer to stand by, he seems to allude to that Passage in St. Luke, chap. 1. 11. where we read, that the Angel Gabriel appeared to Zachary the Priest (as he was officiating in the Temple) standing on the Right side of the Altar of Incense; or else, to that Vision of Saint John, Rev. 8. 3, 4. Wherein he is said to have seen an Angel standing at the Altar, having a golden Censer, to whom there was much In­cense given, that he should offer it with the Prayers of all Saints.

Thirdly, as to the Gesture of Standing, there is more to be said for it; for there be clear Testimonies of Antiquity, that this [Page 12] was the received Gesture at Divine Service for many Ages; especially, on the Lords Day, and some other Solemn Feasts then cele­brated.

But whereas some great Champions of the Non-Conformists have confidently affirm­ed, that there was no Kneeling at all, but Standing only used in the Church, from the year 150 to the year 1220. when the De­cree of P. Honorius first came forth; as it makes little for them, could it be proved, so will they be found also not a little mista­ken in the Thing it self, which they so con­fidently assert. First, if it could be made appear, it makes against all those who sit at the Communion, or at any other part of the Publick Service. But secondly, upon bet­ter Examination, we shall find this Gesture of Standing not so generally used, as they would bear us in hand; whether we regard the parts of Divine Service, or the times and places in which it was performed. St. Austin I am sure, who is one of their prime Wit­nesses, durst not be so confident, but mo­destly tells us, ut autem stantes in illis die­bus, & omnibus Dominicis oremus, utrum ubi­que servetur, ignoro: That is, ‘Whether this Custom of Standing [between Ea­ster, [Page 13] and Whitsontide] and on every Lords Day, be every where observed, I cannot tell. Epist. 119. c. 17.’

I shall endeavour therefore to lay down the Truth in this particular, as near as I can, out of the best Authors, I have met with; and then I shall shew how this ancient Custom of Standing at Divine Service doth by no means prejudice the practice of our Church at this day, which is, to kneel at the recei­ving of the Communion. My Propositi­ons shall be four.

PROP. I. The Primitive Church used Standing at Divine Service, on the Lords Day, and some others, especially, between Easter, and Whitsontide, which practice was afterwards confirmed, and commanded by the first General Council held at Nice; the Twentieth Canon whereof runs thus, [...]. That is, ‘Because there be some who kneel on the Lords Day, and in the days between Easter, and Whitsontide, that all things may be alike observed in every [Page 14] Diocess, it seemed good to the Holy Sy­nod, that all should make their Prayers unto God standing.’ Now, this Canon of the Nicene Fathers enjoyned this Gesture universally, for Uniformity sake; or revi­ved it, where it had been before laid down; but that it was long before observed, will appear by the Testimony of Tertullian, De Cor. Mil. cap. 3. Die Dominico jejunium ne­fas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. Eadem immunitate à die Paschae in Pentecosten usque gaudemus, that is, ‘We count it unlawful to fast on the Lords Day, or to worship kneeling; we enjoy the same freedom from Easter till Whitsontide.’

Notwithstanding, that Advocate of Non-conformists is much mistaken, who under­standeth [Statio] in Tertullian, of Publick Prayer; and supposeth, that the Lords Days were call'd, Dies Stationum, from the Posture of Standing, then used in Divine Service; Whereas it is clear by several Pas­sages in his Writings, that by [Dies Statio­num] he means, Set and Solemn Days of Fasting, wherein Divine Seruice was drawn out to an extraordinary length. The Simi­litude being taken from the Stationes Mili­tares, The standing of Soldiers on the Watch, [Page 15] or Guard, when the Enemy was at hand, and ready to assault them. The reason was, be­cause when they kept those Stations, or Watches, they fasted all the while. Si Statio de Militari exemplo nomen accipit (nam & militia Dei sumus) utique nulla laetitia, sive tristitia obveniens castris, stationes militum rescindit. Nam laetitia libentius, tristitia soli­citius administrabit disciplinam. Tert. de Orat. cap. 14. that is, ‘If our Christian Stations [or Fasts] take their name from the Army-Pattern (for we are Gods Mili­tia) sure neither joyful nor sad Accidents which befall the Camp, take the Soldiers off from their constant Watches, for Mi­litary Discipline is observed more chear­fully by the joyful, more carefully by the sad.’ A little before, he hath these words concerning the same Subject. Similiter de Stationum diebus, non putant plerique Sacri­ficiorum orationibus interveniendum, quòd Statio solvenda sit accepto corpore Domini. Ergo devotum Deo obsequium Eucharistia re­solvit, an magis Deo obligat? Nonne solen­nior erit Statio tua, si & ad aram Dei stete­ris? accepto corpore Domini, & reservato, utrumque salvum est, & participatio Sacri­ficii, & executio officii; that is, ‘Likewise [Page 16] touching our publick fasting Days [or Sta­tions] many think it not then fitting to communicate in the Service of the Holy Eucharist, because their Fast must end, when they have taken the Lords Body. But doth the Eucharist dissolve the Duty and Devotion, or the stronglier obliege us to perform it unto God? Will not thy Fast [or Station] be the more Solemn, if thou stand also at Gods Altar? If thou take the Lords Body, and reserve it, both Duties are preserved inviolate, as well the partaking of the Sacrifice, as the perform­ing of the Service?’ Also, De Cor. Mil. cap. 11. Jam, & Stationes, aut alii magis faciet, quam Christo? aut & die Dominico, quando nec Christo? that is, ‘Will the Christian-Souldier keep his Fasts, and Watches to any other, rather then to Christ? Or on the Lords Day, when none are kept unto Christ?’ For he had told us at the Third Chapter before, Die Dominico jejunium nefas ducimus; On the Lords Day we judge it unlawful to fast. Besides, in his Tract de Jejunio, he mentions, Quartae sex­taequé feriae Stationes; that is, the Fasts [or Stations] of Wednesday, and Friday, which are generally known to have been of old ob­served [Page 17] for Fasting Days, throughout the Christian Churches.

But however he be mistaken in this Parti­cular, by a mis-interpreting of [Dies Stati­onum] in Tertullian, for the Lords Days, yet the Thing it self, That Christians stood at Prayers on those days, is witnessed by the concurrent Testimonies of Saint Cyprian, Jerome, Chrysostome, and Augustine, for the Elder Times; by Venerable Bede, and his Schollar Alcuinus, for the Middle Age; yea as low as Anselme, and Hugo de S. Vict. which last flourished near the middle of the Twelfth Century. The same is witnest also by three of the Councils; viz. by the Sixth Council of Carthage, held there by 217 Bi­shops. An. Dom. 419. Can. 20. By the great Council of Eastern-Bishops assembled in Trullo, a large room of the Emperors Palace so called at Constantinople. Can. 90. It was held in the year 680. And lastly, by a Council of Western Bishops, assembled at Turone, by the com­mand of Charles the Great. An. Dom. 813. Can. 37. I think it not material to set down all their words. It will be sufficient to tran­scribe the words of this last Council, and the last Doctor named, whereby it will ap­pear that this custom continued very long, [Page 18] even in these Western parts. The Thirty se­venth Canon of the Council of Turone begins thus: Sciendum est, quòd exceptis diebus Do­minicis, & illis Festivitatibus, quibus & uni­versalis Ecclesia, ob recordationem Dominicae Resurrectionis, solet stando orare, &c. that is, ‘You are to know, that excepting the Lords Days, and those Festivals on which the Universal Church, in memory of our Lords Resurrection, is wont to pray stand­ing, &c.’ And Hugo de S. Vict. observes, that the People stood at Prayer, untill the Collect, Domine Deus Pater, qui nos ad princi­pium &c. that is, O Lord, our Heavenly Father, which hast safely brought us to the Beginning of this Day &c. Which is the last Collect, at Morning Prayer, in our English Liturgy, at the first Service. Between which, and the Second, or Communion-Service, the People went forth of the Church, as he there tells us, His finitis, omnes exeunt; that is, These Prayers being ended, all depart. Now, of these Prayers at the first Service, he further saith, Et haec omnia in Dominicis, & caeteris festivis diebus stando dicuntur, propter memo­riam Dominicae Resurrectionis, cum quo om­nes Sancti spe consurrexerunt; that is, ‘All these Prayers are said standing, upon the [Page 19] Lords Days, and some other Festivals, in memory of our Lords Resurrection, with whom all the Saints are risen in hope.’

When, and upon what Reasons, this Gesture came afterwards to be left off in these Western Parts, I cannot as yet learn. Whether it were changed into kneeling, as the more humble, and reverend Gesture; or that kneeling was taken up in opposition to the Greek Church (wherewith this of the West was then at variance) which used standing in Divine Service, and yet useth it: or, because the Ground, and Motive thereof ceasing in time (viz. The testifying of our Saviours Resurrection to the Infidels) and be­coming every day less pressing, as the World came more, and more in to the Faith of Christ, the Gesture of standing, which de­pendeth thereon, vanished by Degrees, and was alter'd into that of kneeling; I can­not determine; but shall leave it unto those who have read more, and can judge better.

I shall add only three Testimonies, which the Adversaries to kneeling at the Commu­nion urge in favour of their Non-Confor­mity, and then examine briefly what strength there lies in each of them. The first is taken [Page 20] out of Justine Martyr, in the place forecited, at the latter end of his second Apology; where, describing the manner, and method of Divine Service at the publick Assemblies, he tells us, that after the Sermon was ended, [...], &c. The peo­ple rose up altogether, and sent up their Pray­ers unto God, which when they were finisht, Bread and Wine (with water) were brought, or offer'd. Then the Bishop in like manner sendeth up Prayers, and Thanksgivings, [...], with his utmost devotion, the People joyfully attesting their consent, by saying, Amen. Then distribution is made to every one of the Elements so consecrated, or blest &c. In which words, say they, there is not the least mention of any alteration of the peoples Gesture to kneeling, after they once rose up, upon the ending of the Sermon. To which I answer: First, This is but a Ne­gative Argument, and proves nothing. No change of Gesture is here mention'd, there­fore none there was. Secondly, as there is no mention of changing their Gesture into kneeling, so (much less) of any change there­of into sitting▪ which is now so eagerly con­tended for; for we use to rise from our seats, that we may kneel to Prayers, but ne­ver [Page 21] to sit at them. Thirdly, I shall prove anon by sufficient Witnesses, that the People fell down, or kneeled at some part of the Communion-Service, and used a Gesture of Adoration, in the Act of Receiving.

The second Testimony, is that of Dionysi­us Alex. in Euseb. Eccles. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 9. Where writing to Xistus Bishop of Rome, concerning one who desired Rebaptization, because he had been formerly baptized by the Hereticks in a wrong Form, with a Baptisme, as he said, full of Impiety, and Blasphemy; He tells Xistus, that he durst not Rebaptize him, although troubled in mind about it, because the Person so baptized by Hereticks had often communicated, heard the Eucharistical Service in the Church, and said Amen, with the Rest, [...], that is, Standing at the Holy Table, and that he had reached forth his Hand to partake of the Holy Food. To which I an­swer, First, That the word [ [...]] may well be rendred by juxta sistere se, vel adesse, and so signifie rather his presence at the holy Table, then his manner of Gesture. Ruffinus therefore rendreth it thus, Quòd tamdiu in Sacramentis nobiscum particeps fu­erit; That he had been so long time Partaker [Page 22] with us in the Sacraments. And again, Neque audet ultra ad mensam Dominicam accedere; Neither dares he any more approach unto the Lords Table. Secondly, the Party might well stand near the Lords Table, at some part of the Prayers, and yet change his Ge­sture in the Act of Receiving: Which that it was the Custom, I shall shew anon.

The third Testimony is that of Theodoret, Eccles: Hist. l. 5. c. 17. Where he brings in Saint Ambrose thus speaking to the Empe­rour Theodosius, or rather thus admonishing him by his Deacon, when he was entring in­to the Chancel, to receive the Communion, which was allowed to the Clergy only, Exi, & sta cum aliis laicis, [...], Go forth and stand with the rest of the Laity. But this proves not, the Laity stood when they actually received, but that they waited for it in that posture.

PROP. II. The Priest or Minister, who officiated at the Lords Table, stood at some Parts of that Service. Which is ap­pointed also by the Rubrick in our Commu­nion Service to the Priest that consecrates, agreeably to this ancient Practise. Those ancient Constitutions, which go under the [Page 23] name of Clemens, lib. 8. ca. 12. thus in­form us, [...]; that is, The Bishop cloathed in a white shine­ing vestment, and standing at the Altar pray­ing. Saint Augustine also tells us the same, Quis audivit aliquando Fidelium, stantem Sa­cerdotem ad Altare, dicere in precibus, offero tibi sacrificium Petre, vel Paule? that is, ‘Which of the Faithful ever heard the Priest standing at the Altar, to say in his Prayers, I offer sacrifice to thee, O Peter, or to thee, O Paul?’ St. Chrysostome wit­nesseth the same for the Eastern Churches, when he makes this complaint, which we read, ad Ephes. Hom. 3. [...], that is, We stand in vain at the Altar. There is none to communicate.

PROP. III. It appears notwithstand­ing by several good Authors, and by many of the same Witnesses which are produced for standing, that when Divine Service was celebrated on other Days (besides the Lords Day, and the time between Easter and Whitsontide) the People kneeled; yea, even on the Lords Day, at some part of the Pray­ers; [Page 24] and more particularly, at some part of the Communion-Service; the Minister also, who officiated at the Lords Table, joyning with them in the same Gesture.

Origen. Hom. 5. in Num. Qu [...]d genua flectimus orantes, & qu [...]d ex omnibus coeli plagis ad solam Orientis partem conversi Orationem fundimus, non facile cuiquam, puto, ratione compertum. Sed & Eucharistiae, sive percipiendae, sive eo ritu quo geritur explican­dae, quis facilè explicet rationem? Et tamen omnia haec operta & velata portamus super hu­meros nostros, c [...]m ita implemus ea & exequi­mur, ut à magno Pontifice, atque ejus filiis tra­dita, & commendata suscepimus. that is, ‘That we kneel, when we pray, and pray­ing turn to the East alone, amongst all the Coasts of Heaven; it will not be easie for any one I think, to assigne a certain reason. So also for the Ceremonies, wherewith the Eucharist is celebrated, or received, who can render a ready Reason? Yet all these we carry covered, and wrapt up up­on our shoulders (alluding to the Levites, who so carried the Parts and Ʋtensils of the Tabernacle) when we so execute and perform them, as we have received them delivered and commended unto us, by [Page 25] the great High Priest, and his Children, that is, by Christ and his Apostles.’

Saint Jerome expounding those words of the Apostle, Ephes. 3. 14. Flecto Genua; I bow my knees, &c. hath these words, Haec autem spiritualiter exponentes, non statim juxta li­teram orandi consuetudinem tollimus, quâ De­um genu posito suppliciter adoramus, &, fixo in terram poplite, magis quod ab eo poscimus, impetramus. Legimus enim & Paulum in littore sic orasse, & geniculationes in Oratione praeceptas. That is, ‘When we expound these words in a Spiritual Sense, we do not presently take away the custom of praying according to the Letter, whereby we hum­bly worship God upon our bended knees; and fastning them to the earth, the easilier obtaine that which we beg of him, for we read, that Paul so prayed on the Shore; and that kneeling is commanded in Prayer.’

Saint Aug. de Curâ pro mortuis, cap. 5. Orantes de membris sui corporis faciunt, quod Supplicantibus congruit, cùm Genua figunt, cùm extendunt manus, vel etiam prosternun­tur Solo, & siquid aliud visibiliter faciunt; quamvis eorum invisibilis voluntas, & cordis intentio Deo nota sit; nec ille indigeat his [Page 26] indiciis, ut humanus ei pandatur animus; sed his magis seipsum excitat homo ad orandum, gemendumqu [...] humili [...]s, atque ferventi [...]s. Et, nescio quomodo, cùm hi motus corporis fieri, nisi motu animi praecedente non possint, eisdem­que rursus exteriùs visibiliter factis, ille inte­rior invisibilis, qui eos fecit, augetur; ac per hoc cordis affectus, qui, ut fierent ista, praecessit, quia facta sunt, crescit: that is, ‘Those who pray, order the Members of their Body, as becometh Suppliants, when they bow their Knees, or stretch forth their hands, or lie prostrate on the ground, or what other Gesture they use visibly, although their will and intention of Heart, which are invisible, be known to God; so that he needs not these outward Signes, whereby the mind of man should be dis­covered unto him. Yet by such Gestures, a man quickens and stirs up himself, to ut­ter his Prayers and Sighs the more hum­bly and fervently. And, I know not how, though these Gestures of the Body de­pend upon some precedent motion of the Mind, yet that inward, and invisible motion is increased and strengthned by these out­ward visible Gestures; and that affection of the heart, which preceded them, is there­by augmented.’

Caesarius Bishop of Arles, who flourish­ed in the latter end of the Fifth Century, hath these words. Hom. 12. Qui vult Mis­sas ad integrum cum lucro animae suae celebra­re, usque quo Oratio Dominica dicatur, & Benedictio populo detur, humiliato corpore, & compuncto corde, se debet in Ecclesiâ continere. That is, ‘He that will celebrate the whole Liturgy to the gaine of the Soul, ought to abide in the Church, until the Lords Prayer be said, and the Blessing be given to the People, with an humbled Body,’ (viz. kneeling) and a contrite heart. The same Father entitles his Thirty fourth Ho­mily, De genibus flectendis in Oratione; Of kneeling in Prayer, wherein he thus admo­nisheth the People. Rogo vos, & admoneo, fratres charissimi, ut quotiescunque juxta Al­tarium à Clericis oratur, aut oratio Diacono clamante indicitur, non solum corda, sed eti­am corpora fideliter inclinetis. Nam dum fre­quenter, sicut oportet, & diligenter attendo, Diacono clamante, Flectamus Genua; Maxi­mam partem populi, velut Columnas, erectos stare conspicio; that is, ‘I intreat and ad­monish you, my dear Brethren, that as often as the Clergy pray at the Altar, or Prayer is enjoyned you by the voice of [Page 28] the Deacon, you would loyally bow as well your Bodies as your Hearts. For whilst I oft, and diligently (as behooves me) observe you, whilst the Deacon cries aloud, Let us bend our knees, I see the greatest part of the people, to stand as stiffe as the Pillars in the Church.’ Where­by it appears, that this Exhortation of the Deacon, and consequently the Gesture of Kneeling at some part of the Publick Prayers, was very anciently used, since it is mentio­ned by him, as a Thing used of old, not new­ly introduced at that time into the Church. Again he saith; ‘I would faine know of Them that will not kneel, nor bow down their Heads, if they should sue for any needful Thing to the Judge, or any other Person in Power, whether they would supplicate standing, and holding their Heads in an upright posture?’ Lastly, he presseth us with the example of our Savi­our. Orat prostratus in terrâ Medicus, & non inclinatur aegrotus? Orat, qui judicatu­rus; Et orare dissimulat judicandus? That is, ‘The great Physician prayes, lying pro­strate on the Earth, and shall the diseased Sinner disdain to bow? He thus prayes, who is to judge us; and shall he that is [Page 29] to be judged make slight of it?’ No man, saith he, Can drink of an earthly Spring, un­less he stoop, or bow down; so no man can drink of Christ, the living Fountain, and the River of the Holy Ghost, unless he bow down in all humility.

5. Alcuinus, who flourished in the lat­ter end of the eighth Century, in his Book de Divinis Officiis, cap. 18. tells us, Ponti­fex veniens ante Altare, sive (ut in alio Ordi­ne legitur) transiens in dextram partem Ec­clesiae, infra thronum, dicit, Oremus. Et Di­aconus, flectamus Genua: That is, ‘The Bishop coming before the Altar, or (as an­other Rubrick hath it) passing to the right side of the Church, below his Stall, saith, Let us pray; then the Deacon cries, Let us kneel.’ A little before he saith, Pro peri­culis hujus vitae, & pro Haereticis, & per om­nes alias Orationes genua flectimus, ut per hunc habitum Corporis mentis humilitatem at­tendamus; Excepto, quando pro perfidis Ju­daeis oramus; that is, ‘We kneel, when we pray against the Perils of this life, when we pray for Hereticks, and throughout all the rest of our Prayers, that so by this Gesture of Body, we may wait on the hu­mility of our mind; except only, when [Page 30] we pray for the unbelieving Jews.’ The reason whereof he subjoyns; Because they bowed the knee mockingly to our Saviour, thus doing a good work amiss. The Christians therefore avoided kneeling, when they pray­ed for them, to demonstrate their hatred against dissembled Services.

6. Anselme (or Hervaeus) on Ephes. 3. 14. commenting on the same words with St. Jerome, saith, Per flexionem Genuum in­telligimus humilitatem Supplicantis; nam ad hoc solent in Oratione flecti Genua, ut humili­tas interior denotetur, & humiliori supplica­tione affectus Orationis commendetur, that is, ‘By the bending of the knees, we un­derstand the humility of the Suppliant, for we therefore use to bow our knees in Prayer, that we may signifie our inward Humility, and recommend the Devotion of the Prayer, by the humble Gesture of the Suppliant.’

7. Hugo de S ^to. Vict: de Off. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 2. In the place forecited; When he had told us of the posture of Standing at Prayers on certain days, he immediately subjoyns, In aliis autem diebus▪ Genua in terram fixa tenemus, dum dicuntur Preces quae dicuntur propter levia peccata; Et dum dici­tur [Page 31] poenitentialis Psalmus, Miserere mei Deus, qui propter gravia peccata frequentatur, that is, ‘But on other days, we kneel down upon the ground, whilst those Prayers are uttered, which are made for our lighter Sins; Also, whilst the Penitential Psalm, Miserere mei Deus, (viz. the 51.) is re­peated for our more grievous Transgres­sions.’

The Council of Turone, held by the Western Bishops, under Charles the Great, and Leo the Third, not only mentions, but commands the same Gesture of kneeling; in the forecited Canon 37. Sciendum est, quòd exceptis diebus Dominicis—Fixis in terram Genibus, suppliciter Dei clementiam nobis pro­futuram, nostrorumque criminum indulgenti­am, deposcendum est. Cujus rei in Evangelio ipse Dominus nobis debit exemplum. Sed & Stephanum Martyrem, & Apostolum Paulum eadem fecisse, liber Actorum Apostolorum testis est, ex quibus intelligi datur, oportere Christianum humiliter ad terram posterni, ne fortè illi dicatur, Quid superbis terra, & ci­nis? that is, ‘You are to know that except­ing the Lords Days—We must humbly on our bended knees implore the mercy of God, to be helpful to us, and crave [Page 32] the pardon of our Sins; whereof the Lord himself, in the Gospel, hath given us an example. The like doth the Book of the Acts of the Apostles witness of Ste­phen the Martyr, and Paul the Apostle; by which ye may understand, that a Christian ought to prostrate himself hum­bly to the Earth, least it be said unto him, Why art Thou so proud, O dust, and ashes.’

Yea, long before most of these Testimo­nies, we have the practice of the Christian Soldiers under Marcus Antoninus, to com­mend this Gesture unto us; and that, con­firmed by an eminent Miracle. Thus Justin Martyr, at the end of his second Apology, re­lates the Story, out of the Epistle of the Emperor to the Romane Senate: That he with his Army, being exceedingly distrest for want of water, in the borders of Germany; the Enemy also being near, and ready in far greater Multitudes to assault them; the Christian Soldiers, who were in his Army, being called forth by him, [...], casting themselves down upon the Ground, prayed for the Empe­ror, and his Army, that God would relieve and comfort them in their distress, as having [Page 33] now wanted water for the space of five days; [...], As soon, saith the Emperor, as they cast them­selves on the Ground, and prayed unto the God whom I knew not, immediately water came down from Heaven, very cool, and refreshing on the Romans, but upon their Adversaries, haile accompanied with fire, [...], that is, Yea we immediately felt the presence of God, upon their Prayer, as of an invincible, and immortal Deity. So highly did God approve, and reward the Prayer of these Christian-Souldiers, which was attend­ed by this humble Gesture.

But the most principal Testimony of all (which therefore I have reserved last) is that of St. Chrysostom, in 2. Ep. ad Cor. Hom. 18. in Morali. pag. 647. Edit. Savil. Where relating the particulars of the Communion Service, he thus speaketh; [...]. [Page 34] That is, ‘One may see how the People beareth no small part in the publick Pray­ers. For Prayers are made both by Priest and People, for the Possessed and the Peni­tents; all uttering one, and the same Prayer, Prayer full of compassion. Then, when we have excluded those from the sacred Rails, who are not in a capacity to par­take of the holy Table, another Prayer useth to be made, whereat we cast our selves down on the Ground alltogether, and rise up alltogether:’ Which practice of the Greek Church, thus recorded by St. Chry­sostom, w [...]ll agrees with what I before al­ledged, touching the Latine Church, out of Caesarius, and Alcuinus, who both witness, that the People were admonished to kneel, when the Bishop, or Priest administred at the Altar.

PROP. IV. What ever Gesture was used at the Publick Prayers (which was vari­ed, as we find by the Precedent Testimonies) yet this is sufficiently clear, that the Com­municants [Page 35] always used a Gesture of Adora­tion at the Receiving of the Sacrament; thereby testifying that religious Honour, and Divine Worship, which they owed and ac­knowledged due unto God the Father, who gave; and to his Blessed Son our Lord Jesus Christ, who is therein given unto us, with all his Merits and Graces, and the Benefits of his Passion; Which I hope will be judg­ed to come home unto our purpose, and serve to justifie both the Practice, and Pre­cept of our Church, in using and enjoyning the Gesture of kneeling, whereby we now usually express the Act of Adoration.

1 That ancient Author of the Book, De Cardinalibus Christi operibus, among St. Cyprians works (who ever he were, he was an Orthodox Doctor, and contemporary as well with St. Cyprian, as with Cornelius Bishop of Rome, to whom he dedicates his work) in his Tract, De Coena Domini, hath these words: Pauperes spiritu ad hoc myste­rium eligit, & diligit Spiritus Sanctus, & eorum, qui pompatic [...], & gloriosè sacris se Al­taribus ingerunt, obsequia detestatur; that is, ‘The Holy Ghost loveth, and chooseth such to be Partakers of this Sacrament, as are poor in Spirit; and abhorreth the [Page 36] Servic [...] of those, who pompously, and proudly press unto the holy Altars.’ And after speaking of the Communicant, he de­scribes him thus. Inter Sacra Mysteria, ad gratiarum actiones convertitur, & inclinat [...] capite, munditiâ cordis adeptâ, se intelligens consummatum, restituens Peccator sanctifica­tam Deo animam, quasi Depositum custoditum fideliter, reddit, & deinceps cum Paulo glo­riatur, & laetatur, dicens, Ʋivo jam non ego, vivit verò in me Christus. That is, ‘While the Sacrament is administring, the Com­municant applies himself to Thanksgiving, and having bowed his head, and conceiv­ing himself to be now perfect, upon the cleansing of his heart, the reconciled Sin­ner entirely commits his sanctified Soul, as a Depositum, into the hands of God; and thence forward glorieth, and rejoy­ceth with Paul, saying, It is not I that live now, but Christ liveth in me.’ Now this Bowing of the Head, here mentioned, was a Gesture of Adoration, at the receiv­ing of the Sacrament; and that proud man­ner of approaching, or pressing unto the Holy Table (or Altar; as the phrase of old was) which he so much condemns, seems too applicable unto Those, who make choice [Page 37] of Sitting at the receiving of the Sacrament, upon presumption of their Coheirship with Christ.

Cyril Patriarch of Jerusalem, Orat. Mystag. 5 ^ta. thus instructeth the Communicant, how he should approach to the holy Table, at the receiving of the Sacrament: [...]; That is, ‘When thou approachest [the Holy Table] come not with thy hands rudely stretcht forth, nor with thy fingers parted wide asunder; but support­ing thy right hand with thy left, as being to receive the King [of Heaven] and hol­lowing the Palms thereof, so receive the Body of Christ, saying withall, Amen—Then approach to receive the Cup of [Christs] Blood, not rudely stretching forth thy hands, but bowing thy self, and saying, Amen, after the manner of Divine Worship and Adoration.’ Where these [Page 38] three Things are observable. First, That the manner of partaking the Sacramental Bread and Wine, had a peculiar Reverence annext to it, exprest by a particular Posture of the Hands, and whole Body; to contra­distinguish it to our own ordinary Repast at meales. Secondly, That the Communicant in the Act of Partaking, bowed himself af­ter the manner of Adoration, to express his inward Devotion unto God. Thirdly, That at the same time, he said, Amen; thus testi­fying his Assent to that Short Prayer, where­with the Sacrament was delivered, and thereby shewing that he joyned with the Mi­nister in it. And sure kneeling, which is a Gesture of Worship, well suits with Prayer, which is a part of Worship.

Ambr. de Sp ^u. S ^to. lib. 3. cap. 12. Quâ ratione ad Incarnationis Dominicae sacramen­tum spectare videatur, quod ait Propheta, A­dorate Scabellum pedum ejus, consideremus, Legimus enim alibi, Coelum mihi Thronus, Terra autem Scabellum pedum meorum. Sed nec terra adoranda nobis est, quia Creatura est Dei. Videamus tamen, ne Terram illam dicat adorandam Propheta, quam Dominus Jesus in Carnis assumptione suscepit. Itaque per Scabellum, Terra intelligitur; per Ter­ram [Page 39] autem, Caro Christi, quam hodiè quoque in mysteriis adoramus, & quam Apostoli in Domino Jesu adorarunt. Neque enim divisus Christus, sed unus, Neque cum adoraretur tan­quam Dei filius, natus ex Virgine negabatur. That is, ‘Let us consider, how that of the Prophet, worship his Footstool, may seem to belong unto the Mystery of our Lords Incarnation. For we read elsewhere, Hea­ven is my Throne, and Earth is my Foot­stool. But neither is the Earth to be wor­shipped by us, as being the Creature of God. Let us see nevertheless, whether the Prophet doth not say, That Earth is to be worshipt, which the Lord Jesus as­sumed in his Incarnation. By the Foot­stool therefore, is the Earth to be under­stood; and by the Earth, the Body of Christ, which to this day we also wor­ship in the Sacrament, and which the A­postles worshipt in the Lord Jesus. For Christ is not divided, but one and the same. Neither when he was worshipped, as the Son of God, was he denied to be the Son of the Virgin.’

Augustine commenting on the same words of the Psalm (the 98 with him) viz. Psal. 99. 5. hath these words. Quaero, quid sit [Page 40] Scabellum Pedum ejus; & dicit mihi Scri­ptura, Terra Scabellum Pedum meorum. Flu­ctuans converto me ad Christum, quia ipsum hic quaero, & invenio quomodo sine impietate adoretur Terra, sine impietate adoretur Sca­bellum Pedum ejus. Suscepit enim de Terrà Terram, quia Caro de Terrà est, & de Carne Mariae carnem accepit. Et quia in ipsà Carne hic ambulavit, & ipsam Carnem nobis man­ducandam ad salutem dedit. Nemo autem Car­nem illam manducat, nisi priùs adoraverit. In­ventum est quemadmodum adoretur tale Sca­bellum pedum Domini, & non solùm non pec­cemus adorando, sed peccemus non adorando. That is, ‘I enquire, what is meant by his Foot-stool, and the Scripture tells me, the Earth is my Foot-stoole. In the midst of my waverings, I turn me unto Christ, for him I seek here; so I find, how the Earth his Foot-stool may be worshipt without Impiety; Because he took Earth of the Earth, for Flesh is of the Earth, and he took Flesh of the Flesh of Marie. And because he conversed here in the Flesh, and gave us his very flesh to eat un­to Salvation. Now there is none who eateth that flesh, but first worshippeth or adoreth. We have found then how this [Page 41] Footstool of the Lord may be adored, so that we shall not only not sin in adoring, but sin by not adoring.’

Theodoret in his second Dialogue, which he calls [...], brings in Eranistes an Eutychian, and Orthodoxus a Sound Believ­er, discoursing together concerning our Sa­viours Incarnation. Among other Passages of that Dialogue, he puts these words in the mouth of Orthodoxus, which, as they make against the Doctrine of Transubstanti­ation, so they are express for a Gesture of Adoration, at the receiving of the Sacra­ment. The words are these, [...]. That is, ‘The Sacramental Elements [viz. Bread, and Wine] after Consecration, depart not from their proper Nature; for they con­tinue in their former Essence, Shape, and Form; and are visible, and tangible, as they were before; but they are considered [or regarded] for such as they are made, and believed, and are adored as those ve-very [Page 42] things which they are believed to be.’ Which last words, though they can­not justly be extended to justifie that Ado­ration which the Church of Rome gives unto the Host, (as being grounded on the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, which is here expresly denied) so they must needs import thus much, that the consecrated Elements were received with an Adorative Gesture.

Joan: Climacus, who lived towards the latter end of the Sixth Century, relates a Story of one, who (it seems) being Posses­sed, and brought to the Communion, uttered there some blasphemous words: whereup­on he saith afterwards; If those foul and im­pious words be esteemed as mine, [...], What is the Reason that I adore, when I receive the heavenly Gift (meaning Christ in the Sacra­ment) can I at the same time both bless, and blaspheme? Thus he, lib. 30. Graduum per­fect. p. 298.

Hitherto also may we refer that Story which Greg. Naz. tells us of his Sister Gor­gonia, in his Oration on her, viz. That be­ing sick, she carried with her some of the consecrated Mysteries [or Sacramental Ele­ments] which she had reserved, and then in [Page 43] the stilness of the night, when her Disease gave her a little Respite, [...], She kneeled, or fell down before the Altar, and with a loud voice called on him whom she worshipped; and in conclu­sion she was made whole. Sure, she did now in her Sickness, what she, and others did in their Health, when they come to the Lords Table, that is, Fall down, and kneel. And Peter Martyr, contr. Gaudmerum, Object. 38. expounding these words of Nazianzene, which were misapplied by the Romanists to justifie their Adoration of the Hoast, yet confesseth, Super altare coli quidem Chri­stum, sed coli in Symbolo, sicut in Symbolo sig­nificatur. ‘That Christ is worshipped upon the Altar, but worshipped in the Signe, as he is represented in the Signe.’ Which is all that we intend or desire. The same is confirmed by another Story, which Sozomen tells us of a certain woman, a Ma­cedonian-Heretick; who coming to the Sa­crament only to please her husband (who had threatned to put her away in case she conformed not to the Catholicks) took the Bread from the Bishops hand (the Bishop was St. Chrysostome) [...], and holding what [Page 44] she had received, bowed down, or prostrated her self as to prayer; But whilst she was in that posture, she conveyed the Bread away; her maid thereby privily stealing a piece of common Bread into her pocket. Sozom. Eccles. Hist. lib. 8. cap. 5.

But there is none speaks more home and clear for this Gesture of Adoration, at the receiving of the Sacrament, then St. Chry­sostome, two passages of whom I shall set down. The First in his Twenty fourth Ho­mily, on the 1. Epist. to the Cor. in Mor. Where speaking of the Wise men from the East, who adored our Saviour in his In­fancy, he adds these words. [...]. That is, ‘This Body the Wisemen reverenced, even when it lay in the Man­ger, and approaching thereto, worshipped [Page 45] with great fear, and trembling. Let us therefore, who are Citizens of Heaven, imitate at least these Barbarians—But thou seest this Body not in the Manger, but on the Altar; not held by a woman, but presented by the Priest—Let us therefore stir up our selves; and shew far greater re­verence then those Barbarians, least by our careless, and rude coming, we heap fire on our Heads.’ The second Passage we have in his third Homily, on the Epistle to the Ephesians, in Morali. [...]. ‘The Royall Table is set forth—the King him­self is present, and dost thou stand gaping? Thy garments are foule, and makest thou no account of it? But they are clean; why then fall down, and communicate—When thou seest the Chancel doors open­ed, then suppose that Heaven it self is un­folded from above, and that the Angels descend.’

By these Testimonies it sufficiently ap­peareth, [Page 46] that the Primitive Christians recei­ved the Sacrament with an adorative Ge­sture; and this was so commonly known, that the very Heathen took notice of it, and (among other Slanders, wherein they asper­sed Christians) charged them with wor­shipping of Ceres, and Bacchus, the supposed Deities of Bread, and Wine; whereof we can assign no other probable Reason, than the Christians Bowing, or Adoring, when they received the Bread, and Wine at the Commu­nion. St. Aug. is my Author.

Now this forementioned Gesture, which the Greeks call [...], and the Latines Adoratio, was the most humble Gesture of Reverence, and therefore in holy Scripture, is oft joyned with [ [...]] falling down to the Earth. Mat. 2. 11. & 4. 9. Act. 10. 25. Herodotus observes of the Eastern Nations, that the manner of Equalls, was to kiss one another on the Cheek at meet­ing; Of Inferiors, to kiss the hand of the Superior; but of Suppliants and Pe­titioners, who would express the great­est Humility, to bow themselves before him towards the Earth. So we read in Ho­ly Scripture, that Abraham bowed himself to the Hittites, when he petitioned them [Page 47] for a Sepulchre, wherein to bury Sarah his Wife. So Jacob to his elder Brother Esau, when he petitioned him to be favourable to him, and accept his present. So the Pa­triarchs to Joseph, when they petitioned him for a supply of Corn, in the time of Dearth. So David to King Saul, when he pleaded his Innocency; So Nathan the Pro­phet, and Bathsheba to David, when they supplicated him in behalf of Solomon &c. This Gesture therefore was used by the Pri­mitive Christians, in their most Solemn Pray­ers and Services, wherein they endeavored to express the greatest Piety, and Humility. And more especially at the receiving of the Holy Sacrament, the Auncients rightly judging, that the Solemnity of the Eucha­rist was the chief part of that publick Wor­ship, which was due unto God only; since the Place where the Eucharist was celebra­ted, was peculiarly entituled, The Place of Prayer. So Saint Augustine tell us, Sermon. 237. de Temp. Post Sermonem fit missa Ca­techumenis, manebunt Fideles. Venietur ad lo­cum Orationis. ‘After Sermon, the Pray­ers for the Catechumens are said, The faithful tarry behind. Then we come to the Place of Prayer.’

By this Gesture also the Christians of old made a publick profession of their faith, that Christ was God, and man in one, and the same Person, and present by his Divine Power in the Sacrament; thus honouring the Son, as they honoured the Father, according as we are commanded, Jo. 5. 23: and as every one is bound to doe, who believes in him aright, that He is God manifested in the Flesh. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Without a sound and right Faith, we are no fit Partakers of this Sacrament; and that Faith, which we have in our Heart, we are to express outwardly, upon every just Occasion; and especially in the Acts of God's publick Worship, wherein we testify, and make known to others, what we inwardly acknowledge. For it is not sufficient to be­lieve with the Heart, we must confess also with the Mouth, as we read, Rom. 10. 10. and consequently, we are to profess the same Be­lief by our bodily Gesture, as well as by our Speech, seeing there is the same reason of Both, namely, the outward witnessing of that Belief which is within. And this is more especially requisite, when Sects, and Heresies arise, which corrupt, and pervert the Articles of Faith concerning our Saviour, either denying his God-head, or dividing his [Page 49] Person, as some then did, and as others at this Day do. To oppose, and contra-distinguish themselves unto These, the Christians of those elder Times adored Christ in the Sa­crament, thus honouring him and his Fa­ther, [...], with the same un­divided worship (as Naz: tels us in that O­ration which he made to the 150 Bishops assembled at Constantinople) thus openly testifying their Belief in him, as coeternal, and consubstantial to the Father, and wor­thy of the same Honour with him. The same Father thus elegantly expresseth it in his [...], or Sentences, which he thus put into Greek verse.

The sense whereof is this. He is a fool, who worships not the Eternal word of God equally to his heavenly Father. He is a fool, who [Page 50] worships not the Word incarnate appearing amongst us, equally to God the Word in heaven before his Incarnation. Such an one, either separateh God the Word from his Father, or the humane nature from the Word.

These are the chief of my witnesses, who give the most clear and pregnant Testimonies concerning the Practise of the Auncient Church in this Particular. To them I shall add some others, who though they speak not particularly for a Posture of Adoration, yet when in more general Termes they either press, or mention the use of an humble and a reverend Gesture, they cannot in reason be thought to mean any other, than what the former more expresly declared.

Dionys: Eccles: hier: cap: 3: cals the Sa­cramental Bread and Wine, which are pla­ced on the holy Table, [...], Ve­nerable, or adorable Signes: [...], the Vene­rable [or, adorable] Signes are set on the Divine Altar, whereby Christ is represented, and partaken of.

Origen in his fifth homily, in diversos-Quan­do sanctum cibum, illudque incorruptum acci­pis epulum; quando vitae poculo, & pane frue­ris, [Page 51] manducas & bibis corpus & sanguinem Domini; tunc Dominus sub tectum tuum ingre­ditur; & tu ergo humilians teipsum, imitare Centurionem, & dicito, Domine non sum di­gnus ut intres sub tectum meum. That is, ‘when thou partakest of the holy food, and immortal Banquet, when thou enjoyest the Bread, and Cup of life, thou eatest and drinkest the Body, and Bloud of the Lord, then the Lord entreth under thy Roof. Thou therefore, humbling thy selfe, imitate the Centurion, and say, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my Roof.’

Cypr: Testim: ad Quirinum, lib. 3. 94. Cum honore & timore Eucharistiam accipien­dam, that is, the Eucharist is to be received with feare and honour. For which he cites 1 Cor. 11. 27.

Ambr: [or rather Hilarius] in 1 Cor. 11. 28. Devoto animo, & cum timore accedendum ad Communionem docet, ut sciat mens se reve­rentiam debere ei, ad cujus corpus sumendum accedit. Hoc enim apud se debet judicare, quia Dominus est, cujus in mysterio sanguinem potat, qui testis est beneficii Dei. Quem nos si cum disciplinâ accipiamus, non erimus indi­gni sanguine & corpore Domini—non inultum [Page 52] scientes, corpus Domini negligenter accipere. that is, ‘The Apostle teacheth us to ap­proach unto the Communion with fear, and a devout mind, that our Mind may know, we owe reverence to him, to the re­ceiving of whose Body we draw near, for this he ought to judge within himself, that it is the Lord, whose Bloud he drinketh in the Sacrament, which is a testimonie of God's favour. Whom if we receive with Discipline, we shall not be unworthy of the Bloud, and Body of the Lord—know­ing that to receive the Body of the Lord in a negligent manner, will not be unpunished.’

The Discipline which he speakes of, is the outward Order, and Carriage prescribed by the Church. Whereof St. Cyp: long be­fore him speaks in his Tract De Orat: Dom: Sit Orantibus Sermo & Precatio cum Disci­plinâ, quietem continens & pudorem. Cogi­temus nos sub conspectu Dei stare. Placendum est divinis oculis, & habitu corporis, & modo vocis. that is, ‘Let the speech and Prayer of Supplicants be with Discipline, shewing tranquility & modesty; Let us consider, that we stand under the Eye of God? We must please his Divine Eyes, both with the Gesture of our Body, and the Tone of our Voice.’

Eusebius Emesenus (or rather, Gallica­nus) hom: in secundam Dom: post Epiphan: Quando ad Christi Sacramentum accedimus, & fragilitatem nostrum consideramus, quid a­liud dicit unusquisque nostrum, nisi non sum di­gnus ut intres sub Tectum, non sum dignus ut corpus & sanguinem tuum suscipiam in ore meo. ‘When we approach to the Sacrament of Christ, and consider our frailty, what else saith every one of us, but this, I am not worthy Thou shouldest enter under my Roof; I am not worthy to take thy Body and Bloud into my mouth.’

Eligius Episc. Noviomensis, who flourisht about the middle of the seventh Century, hom: 15. Cum timore, & compunctione mentis, omni (que) reverentiâ debemus accedere ad Altare, & ad mensam corporis, & sanguinis Christi, & di­cere humiliter cum Centurione, Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum. ‘We ought to approach unto the Altar, and to the Table of the Body, and Bloud of Christ with fear, and compunction of mind, and all Reverence; and to say humbly with the Centurion, Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldest enter under my Roof.’

Damasc: de Orthod: fide l. 4. c. 34. [...] [Page 54] (viz: Sacramentum) [...]. Let us come with all fear, and a pure Conscience, and an assured Faith, and that which we believe without doubting shall be altogether done unto us; and let us honour it (viz: the Sacrament) with all Purity of Mind, and Body.

Alcuinus de Divin. Off: Licet omni tem­pore peccatores nos esse ex corde cognoscere de­beamus, tunc quàm maxim [...] confitendum est cùm illo sacro mysterio celebratur remissionis Gratia, & indulgentia peccatorum, & cum humilitate, & cordis contritione dicendum, &c: ‘Although at all times we ought from the Heart to acknowledge our selves Sinners, then especially we ought to confess it, when the Pardon of Sins is celebrated in that holy Sacrament, and with humility and & contrition of Heart to say, &c.’

Observe here 1. Foure of these Witnesses inculcate the example of the Centurion in the Gospel for a Paterne of approaching to the Holy Table, whose humility was as exem­plary, as his Faith; as who durst not come in Person to our Saviour, but sent the El­ders of the Jews to petition in his behalfe; [Page 55] and after, would not be so bold as to invite, or even to admit him into his house; but sent Friends to excuse it.

2. Others call the Sacramental Bread and Wine, Venerable, or Adorable Signes, (which Epithete shews, that Veneration is due at the receiving of them) and say, They are to be received with honour, and feare (both which affections are best exprest by the Ge­sture of kneeling) with Devotion also, and reverence, and not in a careless Posture. Also, with Discipline, (i. e.) according to Order, and not as every man fancies best.

3. That then chiefly we are to confess our Sins, and our frailty, to shew contrition of Heart, and to crave Pardon. And I suppose that no impartial Person will deny, but that kneeling is a Gesture very sutable to express all These.

4. Some of them expresly commend an humble Posture of Body, such as kneeling questionless is.

I shall conclude these Testimonies with an Argument drawen from the Gesture used at the Baptisme of the Adulti, which we are told is kneeling. And sure the same, or grea­ter reason will prevaile for the same Gesture in the use of this other Sacrament of the [Page 56] Lord's Supper, which, I presume, the Non-Con­formists themselves hold at least worthy of the same kind, and degree of honour. Tert: de baptismo, in fine thus tels us. In­gressuros Baptismum, orationibus crebris, jeju­niis, & geniculationibus, & Pervigiliis orare oportet, & cum Confessione omnium retro De­lictorum. ‘Those who are to be admitted by Baptisme, must pray with Fasting, and watching, and kneeling; and with Confes­sion of all their past sinnes.’ Now, we come to the Communion also with fasting, and prayer and Confession of Sins; why then, should not the same Gesture of kneeling be as well made use of? Gaudentius Bishop of Brixia, an ancient Doctour of the Church testifieth the same in his 9th Sermon, of the Eating of the Paschal Lambe, where speaking of Baptisme, he saith, Ore Dominum confite­mur, laudamus, benedicimus, obsecramus, ma­nus supplices ad Coelum tendimus, pedibus ad Ecclesiam currimus, & Ʋnam Trinitatis Dei­tatem flexis ad terram genibus adoramus. ‘We confesse the Lord with our Mouth, we Praise, we Bless, we beseech him, we stretch forth our suppliant hands to Hea­ven, we run to the Church, and adore one Godhead in the Trinity, on our ben­ded knees.’

Thus much we have received touching the Practise of the Primitive Church. But if we come down to our times, and examine what Gesture the Churches of Christ at this Day make use of at the receiving of the Eu­charist, we shall find it generally the same with what they use at their most solemne Prayers, viz: standing or kneeling. 1. The Greek Church (which is so largely spred through the Turkish Empire) still reteineth standing at the publick Service, which shee received from her Auncestours, and is much scanda­lized at the Latines for their irreverent sit­ting in their Churches. She useth the same Gesture of standing at the receiving of the Sacrament; yet with a low bowing of the Body, or gentle bending of the knees of the Communicants, as their Rituals shew. And with the Greeks accord other remoter Chur­ches, which are not of the Latine Commu­nion; viz: the Muscovitish, Abyssine, and Ar­menian. 2. In Muscovy the People stand to­gether, the whole time of Divine Service in the Body of the Church, and some in the Church-porch; for Pew or Seat they have none within their Churches. When the Sa­crament of the Lord's Supper is celebrated, first, they confess themselves of all their Sins to the Priest. Then, come they to the Church, [Page 58] and are called up to the Communion-Table, which standeth like an Altar a little removed from the upper end of the Church. Here, first they are asked of the Preist, whether they be clean, or no? If they answer yea, they are taken to the Table, where the Preist beginneth with certaine usual Prayers, the Communicants standing in the mean Time with their Armes folded one within another, like Penetentiaries or Mourners. When these Prayers are ended, the Preist delivereth the Bread and Wine to the Communicants that stand in Order, speaking the usual words, Eate this &c: Drink this &c. While this is doing the Communicants unfold their Armes. 3. In the Churches of Armenia, the People sit not at all, but stand, or kneele. So wit­nesseth Joh: Avediowites an Armenian Preist, borne in Parma in Armenia the Great, in his Relation of the Religion and Customes of the Armenian Christians. 4. The Abyssine Christians demeane themselves most reve­rently in their Churches. No man may laugh, walke, or talke therein. They suffer not Dogges to come into their Churches, or Church-yards. They suffer no man to sit in their Churches. The Aged and weake are permitted Crutches to ease themselves with­all. [Page 59] Godignus de rebus Abassynorum. lib. 1. c. 21. At the celebration of the Sacrament, after it is given in both kinds to the Priests, and others of the Clergy, who stand at, or near unto the Altar—Postea datur Seculari­bus qui stant juxta portam principalem, tam viris quam mulieribus. Dum datur commu­nio, aut aliud quippiam officii fit, omnes stant erecti—That is, ‘Afterwards it is given to the Laity, who stand by the Chancel-door, both men, and women. Whilst the Com­munion is given, or any other Service is done, they all stand upright.’ So we read in the Ethiopick Liturgy, set down by Franc. Alvarez in the Portugal Tongue, and trans­lated by Cassander into Latine, viz. cap. 1. p. 28.

But if we come nearer home, and look into the Practice of those Neighbour Churches in the North, and West, which have reformed themselves from the Errors, and Superstitions of the Church of Rome, we shall find them somwhat varying indeed in this circumstance of worship; yet so, that they generally observe that Posture, which the Scriptures tell us was used anciently in Prayer, viz. kneeling, or standing.

Most of those Churches which hold to the [Page 60] Augustane Confession (being the first Pro­testants, and most properly so called) thought not fit to alter the Gesture which they found so generally and so anciently practised in the Western Church, & which they judged very agreeable to the Action in hand, but retained kneeling at the receiving of the Eucharist, w ^ch they generally practice at this day; and those few who use standing, adore at the receiving by the bowing of their heads, or bodies. Now these Churches are the most considerable for number & Quality amongst those of the Re­formation, as being spread through the two large Kingdomes of Denmarke, and Sweden, the great Dukedome of Saxony, and Marqui­sate of Brandenburg, & through the most part of the Principalities and free Cities of Ger­many which imbrace the Reformation; toge­ther with a great part of Prussia and Poland.

2. The Bohemick-Churches (which have spread themselves not only through the large Kingdom of Bohemia, & some neighbouring parts of Germany, but even into Poland also) retaine the same Gesture of kneeling, as appears by the 13. Article of their Confession, Entitu­led, De Coena Domini, Of the Supper of the Lord. The words are these. Ministri Dominicae Coenae verba referentes, plebem ipsam ad hanc fidem hortantur, ut corporis Christi praesentiā [Page 61] adesse credant, & procumbentibus interim in genua distribuunt. Plebs autem ipsa cum grati­arum actione sumit, in hymnis & canticis spiri­tualibus beneficia Dei recolens, totam se in hoc impendit & exerit, ut juxta Christi verbū hoc faciat in ejus commemorationē. That is, ‘The Ministers rehearsing the words of the Lords Supper, exhort the people to this Faith, that they believe the presence of Christs Bo­dy, and then distribute it unto them, as they kneel down upon their knees; The people receive it with Thanksgiveing, rehearsing the Benefits of God in Hymnes & Spiritual Songs, & wholly imploy themselves in this, that they may celebrate it according to Christs command, in remembrance of him.’ And these Churches deserve to be well regard­ed, as being much ancienter then Luther; for planted they were by John Husse, and Jerome of Prague, who suffered Martyrdom at Con­stance. Yea; the Members of these Churches were so considerable many years ago, that the Council of Brasil thought fit to allow them the use of the Cup in the Sacrament, whence they got the name of Calixtini.

3. The Reformed Churches of Poland, meet­ng by their Delegates in several Synods of theirs, earnestly endeavoured to agree upon some uniform Gesture at the receiving of [Page 62] the Sacrament; but foreseeing that some of the ignoranter sort of People would be hard­ly weaned from that whereto they had been so long accustomed, they left it free from them to receive kneeling, or standing; but absolutely rejected and forbad sitting, as very unfitting, and very scandalous, because they observed it to have been affected, and used by those who turned Apostates to Ari­anisme, and other blasphemous Sects, which denied the God-head of our Saviour. This was unanimously agreed on by the three sorts of Churches, which were setled in that large Kingdom; viz. Those of the Helvetick, Augustane, and Bohemick Confes­sions; who (as they tell us in the Preface to their Synodical Acts) after many sharp, and tedious Conflicts with the Tritheites, Ebio­nites, Anabaptists, and other Sectaries, which at last with much ado they rid their Hands of; and after some unhappy Bickerings a­mong themselves, whereby they had given advantage to the Adversary, and hindred the progress of the Reformation, thought fit to meet together, and then upon an ami­cable Conference of several other particulars, chiefly relating to the Eucharist, which had been the main Subject of their difference. [Page 63] The Title prefixt to their Acts agreed on in their first meeting at Sendomire. A. D. 1570. is this, Consensus mutuus in Religionis Chri­stianae capitibus inter Ecclesias majoris, & mi­noris Poloniae, Russiae, Lithuaniae, & Samogi­tiae, quae juxta confessionem Augustanam, Fra­trum Bohemorum, & Helveticam, aliquo mo­do à se dissentire videbantur. That is, ‘The mutual agreement in the points of Christian Religion, between the Churches of the Greater, and Lesser Polonia, Russia, Lithuania, and Samogitia, who in their several Confessions (viz. the Augustane, the Bohemick, and Helvetick) seemed to dissent from each other.’ They met after­wards at Cracow, A. D. 1573. on Michael­mas day, when and where it was thus de­creed. Conclusum est, ut secundum morem Primitivae Ecclesiae libertati Christianae Cere­moniae inter nos permittantur; monitis tamen Fratribuss ut siqui Sessione in Sacra Coena u­tuntur, eam Ceremoniam Arianabaptistis pro­priam relinquant. That is, ‘It is conclu­ded, that according to the custom of the Primitive Church, Ceremonies amongst us may be left to Christian Liberty; yet so as to admonish the Brethren, that if any use sitting at the Lords Supper, they leave [Page 64] that Ceremony as proper to the Ariani­zing Anabaptists. Another general Synod of theirs, assembled at Petricow, A. D.’ 1578. inculcates the same. Exoptandum, & optimum quidem esset, ut per totum Poloniae regnum in omnibus Evangelicis Ecclesiis iisdem ritibus sacra Synaxis celebraretur. Et certe non esset ea res adeo difficilis; quod ad ipsos Ministros, & prudentiores homines, Il­lico in unam certam formam consentiremus. Sed quia vulgus & homines simpliciores mu­tatione rituum offenderentur—Proinde Cere­monias libertati Christianae donamus, ac per­mittimus, ut stantes vel genua flectentes Pii Sacramentum corporis & sanguinis Christi sumant. Sessionis verò ad mensam Domini, quia praeter Ritus in omnibus per Europam Evan­gelicis Ecclesiis vulgò consuetos, Illi inter nos primi Authores extiterunt, qui omnia temerè in Ecclesiâ immutantes, & sine scientià Chri­stum quasi imitantes à nobis ad Ariani­smum perfidi Transfugae facti sunt; quare hanc propriam ipsis (ut Christum, ita & sacra ejus irreverenter tractantibus) & tanquam minus honestam ac religiosam, simplicioribus (que) admo­dum scandalosam Ceremoniam rejicimus. That is, ‘It were best, and to be wisht, that the Holy Communion should be cele­brated [Page 65] with the same Rites in all the Evan­gelical Churches throughout the whole Kingdome of Poland. And truly the Thing were not so difficult, as to the Ministers, and the wiser Sort. But because the Vul­gar, and unlearned Sort would be offen­ded with the change of their Ceremonies—Therefore we leave and permit them their Christian liberty, so that the Godly may take the Sacrament of the Body, and Bloud of Christ either standing, or kneeling. But, for sitting at the Lord's Table, because these first introduced it amongst us, who, differently from the Rites commonly re­ceived in all the Evangelical Churches throughout Europe, altering all things rashly in the Church, and foolishly, pre­tending to imitate Christ therein, became perfidious Revolters from us to Aria­nisme; therefore we reject this Ceremo­mony as peculiar unto them (who as un­reverently handle Christ, as they doe his Sacraments) and as being not so decent and religious, but very scandalous to the Simple, and Ignorant.’ Lastly, Another General Synod of Theirs held at Wlodeslau. A. D. 1583: confirmes the same. —Quod at­tinet ad Ceremonias Coenae Domini; Sententia [Page 66] jam olim in Sendomiriensi Synodo agitata, & Conclusio in Generali Cracoviensi atque Pe­tricoviensi Synodo facta & repetita, in hoc e­tiam Wlodislaviensis Synodi Consessu appro­bata est; nempe, ne in usu sit Sessio ad mensam Domini in ullis hujus nostri Consensus Eccle­siis Poloniae, Lituaniae, &c: Nam haec Caere­monia (licet cum caeteris libera) Ecclesiis Christianis, & Coetibus Evangelicis non est usitata, tantumque infidelibus Arianis, cum Do­mino pari Solio sese collocantibus, propria. Cùm itaque Sessio potissimùm occasione, & ma­lo auspicio illorum, qui miserrimè ex nobis ex­ciderunt, & Dominum, qui nos redemit, ab­negârunt, in consuetudinem irrepsit aliquot no­stris Ecclesiis; Rogamus & Hortamur omnes istos Coetus & fratres nostros in Domino, ut Sessionem commutent in Ceremonias nobis in Ecclesiis Evangelicis per Europam consuetas; sc: ut administretur Coena Domini Stantibus, vel genua flectentibus (cum Protestatione con­tra Artolatriam Papistis consuetam) Quem utrumque Ritum, prout in quibus Ecclesiis hactenus usitatus est, nobis liberum, sine Scanda­lo, & Vituperatione invicem relinquimus, & approbamus. That is, ‘As to the Ceremo­nies of the Lord's Supper, the Decree debated long agoe in the Synod of Sendo­mire, [Page 67] and the Determination made and repeated in the General Synods at Cra­cow and Petricow, is approved also in this Session of the Synod of Wlodislau, viz: that sitting at the Table of the Lord be not used in any Churches of our Communion, in Poland, Lituania, &c. For this Cere­mony, (although free as the rest) is not used in the Christian Churches, and Evan­gelical Assemblies, but is proper only to the Infidel Arians, who seat themselves in the same Throne with the Lord. Seeing then that sitting crept up by degrees into a Custome in some Churches of Ours, cheif­ly by occasion, and the evil Advice of Those, who wretchedly fell from us, and denyed the Lord, who bought them; we entreat, and exhort all those Churches and Brethren of Ours in the Lord, that they change their Sitting into such Cere­monies as are used by us in the Evangelical Churches throughout Europe, viz: that the Supper of the Lord be administred to such as stand, or kneel (with a Protesta­tion against the Bread-worship used by the Papists) both which ceremonies, accor­ding as either hath been used by us in our Churches, we indifferently leave free, and [Page 68] approve to be used without Scandal or Blame.’

4. The Reformed Churches of France, and others which follow the example of Zurich and Geneva, do for the generality (as far as I can learn) communicate stand­ing, yet with a Bow, or low Reverence at their approach unto the Table; where they take the Sacrament in both kinds, in an am­bulatory Posture, passing from their Seats to the Table, and from thence (after they have communicated) to another part of the Church. And this Gesture they use not as condemning that of kneeling, but being well nigh necessitated thereto in many places, by the great number of Communicants, which otherwise could not be dispatched in any competent time.

5. Of all the Forreign Churches, which go under the name of Reformed, I can find but one which useth sitting, or forbiddeth kneel­ing, viz. The Church of Holland, with the most of her Confederates; (For in West-Friesland they receive standing, as in other Calvinian Churches.) Thus we read in the Harmony of the four Synods of Holland—Liberum est stando, sedendo, vel eundo Coenam celebrare; non autem geniculando, ob [...] [Page 69] periculum. Pag. 33. That is, ‘It is left free to celebrate the [Lords] Supper, Standing, Sitting, or Walking; but not kneeling by reason of the Danger of Bread-worship.’ What force there is in this Reason, especially to us at this day, shall be seen anon. In the Interim we may observe, that they think not this Decree so necessary, but it may be changed upon bet­ter consideration; for thus they say in the Conclusion: Articuli hi ita mutu [...] consensu sunt constituti, ut si utilitas Ecclesiarum aliud postulat, mutari, augeri, & minui possint, & debeant. That is, ‘These Articles are so setled by mutual consent, that if the good of the Churches require it, they may and ought be changed, augmented, or di­minished.’

6. Our neighbour Church of Scotland, being wrought upon by some Zelots of late days, practised sitting also for some few years, till kneeling was enjoyned by the Synod of Perth, and so continued till the be­ginning of these unhappy Troubles, which I list not now to remember. But sure the ef­fects thereof have not been so pleasing or advantageous to these Nations, as to cause any sober Christian to be an over-eager Ad­vocate [Page 70] for sitting, or a severe Condemner of kneeling; whenas we have seen to our Grief, that the introducing of sitting, with too many other Novelties, unsetled all, and never left working till it had well-nigh buri­ed both Church and Kingdom in the same Ruines.

Let me adde, that whatever the Practise of these two Churches be, or have been, yet both their Confessions commend humility and reverence at the receiving of the Sacra­ment, both which are certainly better exprest by kneeling, then by sitting. Confessio Belg. thus —Art. 35. Huic nos Sacramento sacro-Sancto in coetu populi Dei cum summâ humili­tate, & reverentià communicamus, memoriam mortis Christi Servatoris nostri cum gratia­rum actione sanctè celebrantes, & fidei religi­onisque Christianae confessionem publicè ibi profitentes. That is, ‘We communicate of this most holy Sacrament in the Assembly of the people of God, with the greatest humility, and reverence, sanctifying the memorial of the death of Christ our Sa­viour with Thanksgiving, and making publick Profession of the Christian Faith and Religion. Confessio Scot. Art. 21. thus’ —Hoc liberè & ultro confitemur, nos [Page 71] inter Christum in aetern [...] ipsius substantiâ, & elementa in signis Sacramentalibus distinguere, adeo quòd nec signa loco rei signatae adoramus, nec adoranda putamus; nec despicimus, aut, tanquam inutilia, aut vana interpretamur, ver [...]m cum omni Reverentià illis utimur. That is, ‘This we freely and voluntarily confess, that we distinguish between Christ in his Eternal Substance, and the Sacra­mental Signs or Elements, so that we neither adore the Signs instead of the Thing signified, nor think them fit to be adored. Neither on the other side, do we despise them, or esteem them unprofita­ble and vain, but we use them with all Re­verence.’

We are likewise to observe, that all the forementioned Churches, which use or en­joyne kneeling at the receiving of the Sa­crament, deny and openly protest against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation, and the A­doration of the Hoast, and therefore con­ceive neither of them to be favoured, or countenanced any way by this Gesture.

We have seen the Judgment of the Pro­testant, or Reformed Churches attested partly by their publick Confessions, and partly by their Practise; both which are visible at [Page 72] this day. It will not be amiss to adde here­to some few Testimonies of the most eminent and leading Divines amongst those Church­es, especially such, who either framed or fol­lowed, or (at least) favoured the Model of Geneva; whom we shall not find so fierce against the Gesture of kneeling, or Adorati­on in the Act of receiving, as some of their Disciples at this day would bear us in hand, many of whom utterly reject it as unlawful. And perhaps their Judgment may be more prevalent with some amongst us, who have their Persons in so great Admiration, as in comparison of them, to despise the Judg­ment of their Mother the Church of England, and to disobey her commands.

1. Calvin. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 17. §. 37. Disputing against the Papists, who give Di­vine honour to the Sacramental Signes, up­on this pretence, Christo hanc venerationem deserimus, We give this worship unto Christ. Answers thus —Si in Coenâ hoc fieret; dice­rem, Adorationem eam demum esse legitimam, quae non in signo residet, sed ad Christum in coelo sedentem dirigitur— ‘If this were done at the celebration of the Lords Sup­per’ (for the Papists, we know, worship the Sacrament, when it is carried about in Pro­cession) [Page 73] ‘I would say, That Adoration only is lawful, which doth not stop in the Sa­cramental Signe, but is directed unto Christ sitting in Heaven.’ In which words, he clear­ly justifies, and approves the Practise of all those Protestant Churches, which openly re­nounce Transubstantiation, and the Adora­tion of the Hoast, which is built on that Te­net; directing their worship in the Act of kn [...]eling at the Sacrament, solely, and imme­diately to Christ in Heaven.

2. Beza, Epist. 12, confesseth —Genicula­tio, dum Symbola accipiuntur, speciem quidem habet piae, & Christianae Venerationis, ac pro­inde olim potuit cum fructu usurpari.— ‘Knee­ling, in the Act of receiving the Sacrament hath truly the face of a godly and Chri­stian Worship, and therefore might be heretofore profitably used▪’ Now, I would faine know, why this Gesture may not be used as piously and profitably at this Day, as in those auncienter Times; especialy, by us of this Church and Nation, amongst whom there is far greater Danger of apostatizing from the Faith and Feare of Christ to Athe­isme and Profaneness, than of reverting to Papal Superstition. The same Beza confes­seth, that this Custome of kneeling was not [Page 74] derived from the Papists; but rather (as he thinks) their Superstitious and Idolatrous Bread-worship took beginning from this Cu­stome. Wherein he will be found to be mi­staken, for that was grounded on the Opi­nion of Transubstantiation, as by and by I shall make it appear.

3. Peter Martyr: loc. Com: Clas: 4. c. 10. §. 50. Quemadmodùm August: admone­bat, sistendum non esse Gradum in Carne, sed accedendum ad Divinitatem; ita hîc ego mo­neo, adorando, cùm percipimus Eucharistiam, non esse consistendum in Symbolis, sed adoran­dum in Spiritu, & Veritate Christum seden­tem in Coelis ad dextram Patris. Quod quia simpliciores non intelligunt, propter confirma­tum, & roboratum errorē Transubstantiationis, existimarim non esse inutile, si ab adoratione externà, puta à Prostratione, vel Genu-flexio­ne temperaremus, quoad isti docerentur. A­doratio interna potest absque periculo adhiberi, neque externa, suâ naturâ, esset mala. Mul­ti enim piè genu flectunt, & adorant, illis Ver­bis Evangelii auditis, & Verbum Caro fa­ctum est. Nec tamen ipsa Verba dicenda sunt adorari, verum significata. Quod idem hic fieri quid prohibet, modò non adorentur Sym­bola, sed quod per illa significatur? Verum [Page 75] hoc tempore, ob praedictam Causam fortassis A­doratio externa non est opportuna, nisi frequens de his rebus esset in Concionibus mentio. ‘As August: admonished, that we should not stop in the Flesh (of our Saviour) but ap­proach to the God-head. So doe I here admonish, that in our Adoration, when we receive the Eucharist, we stop not in the Signes but adore Christ in Spirit, a [...]d and Truth, now sitting in Heaven at the right hand of his Father. Which because the more ignorant Sort understand not, by reason of the Errour of Transubstantia­tion, which is so rooted in them, I should not think it inconvenient to abstain from outward Adoration, viz: from Prostra­tion, or kneeling, till such were instructed. The inward Adoration may be used with­out Danger, neither is the Outward evil in it's own nature. For there be many who piously kneel, and adore, when they heare those words of the Gospel, The Word was made flesh. Yet those words cannot be said to be adored, but that which they signify. What hinders, but the same may be here done, so the signes be not adored, but that which is signified by them? Yet at this Time, for [Page 76] the Cause fore-alleaged, perhaps out­ward Adoration is not so Seasona­ble, unless these Things be frequently inculcated in our Sermons.’ In which words he sufficiently justifieth the Practise of our Church, wherein 1. The kneeling, or Adoring at the Sacrament is directed to Christ alone in Heaven, not to the Bread, and Wine. 2. The People have been instructed above these hundred yeares in the nature of the Sacrament, and the object of worship; and are so far from the Doctrine of Tran­substantiation, or practising any Adoration to the Outward Signes, that too many have run into the contrary extream of slighting, & profaning it, either by thinking there is no Vertue or Presence of Christ in it, or by car­rying themselves in that careless manner at it, as if they believed none.

4. Musculus loc: Com: De Coenà Domini. Non sic pueriliter desipimus, ut quod Dominus mensae accubitu per occasionem Veteris Pas­chatis in hac est Sacramenti istius Institutio­ne usus, ad hoc esse factum existimemus, ut normam nobis, & exemplum ad novi Paschatis Communicationem accumbendi praescriberet; quemadmodum nec in eo nobis posita lex est, quam sequamur, quòd non manè, sed vesperi [Page 77] Sacramentum hoc instituit. Deinde non tam est commodum, ut ingens Communicantium mulritudo ad mensas accumbat in Ecclesia, quàm er a [...] Domino, ut cum paucis, duodecim viz: Discipulis, ad unam mensam accumberet: that is, ‘We are not so childishly foolish, as to think, because the Lord sate [or, leaned,] at the Table at the Institution of the Sacrament, upon occasion of the old Passeover, therefore it was done to the end, that he might prescribe us a Rule and Paterne of sitting at the Partaking of the New Passover; as hee appointed not us a Law to follow, in that he instituted not the Sacrament in the Morning, but in the Evening. Besides, it is not convenient, that a great Company of Communicants should sit at Tables in the Church, as it was for the Lord to sit at one Table with a Few, viz: with twelve Disciples.’

5. Daniel Chamier, De Euchar: l. 7. c. 11 § 10. Ipsa illa Celebratio est Actus religio­sus, ac proinde separari nequit ab Adoratio­ne Christi.— ‘The Celebration of the Sa­crament is a religious Act, and therefore cannot be separated from the Adoration of Christ.’ Againe cap. 2. § 9. Ado­ramus in Eucharistia, sed non adoramus Eu­charistiam, [Page 78] that is, ‘We doe not adore the Eucharist, but wee adore at the Eucha­charist, or in the receiving of it.’ Now, what fitter Gesture to express this Adoration by, than kneeling? sure, sitting was never counted proper for Worship. The same Au­thor: lib. 8. cap. 2. §. 22. Nemo unquam sic insaniit, ut omnes Circumstantias actio­num Christi dixerit observandas—si sumpsisset Panem nec addidisset, Accipite, edite; tam certè importunum esset urgere perpetuum E­sum, quàm Accubitum: Et si non tantùm accu­buisset, sed etiam dixisset, Accumbite; tam seriò accumbendum esset, quàm edendum. Sed neutrum est. Accubuit, non jussit accumbere. Dedit Panem, & jussit edere. that is, ‘No man was ever so mad, as to affirme that all the Circumstances of Christ's Actions were to be imitated, and observed:—If he had took Bread, and not added, Take, Eate, it had been as absurd, and unreasona­ble to press a perpetual Eating, as a perpe­tual Sitting. And if he had not only sate, but said also, sit ye, we ought to have as se­riously applyed our selves to Sitting, as to Eating. But it is neither so, nor so. He sate; hee commanded not us to fit. He gave Bread, and commanded us to eate.’ [Page 79] Let me adde; He bad his Disciples to doe it in remembrance of Him, and his Passion, which Remembrance, or Memorial is to last till Christ come again, as the Apostle tels us. 1 Cor. 11. 26. And Consequently, the com­mand binds the Church until his second comming, at the World's End.

6. To these I shall adde the Testimony of a Noble Frenchmam, a great Enemy to the Superstitions of Rome, and as Famous for his Pen, as he was for his Sword. It is Philip Mornay du Plessis, in his Book of the Masse, wrote on purpose to confute the Po­pish Errours in this Point. viz: lib. 4. cap. 7. pag. 732: where we find him easily distin­guishing thus▪ upon Saint Ambroses words. Adoramus in Mysteriis, non Mysteria: in Sa­cramentis, non Sacramenta: Creatorem in Creaturâ Sanctificatâ, non ipsam Creaturam: that is, ‘We adore at the Mysteries, not the Mysteries themselves; at the Sacraments, not the Sacraments themselves: the Creatour in the Creature which is sancti­fied, not the Creature it selfe.’

7. Yea, Mr. Cartwright himselfe the first Great Champion of the Non-Conformists, in his first Reply. pag. 131, 132; acknowlegeth again and again, that Sitting at the Commu­nion [Page 80] is not Necessary. And though he say, that kneeling is Dangerous; he saith not, It is unlawful. Now, if it be confessedly lawful, even in his Judgment, who was the first great Stickler against the Ceremonies of the Church, methinks all should conforme to that Practise which hath been so generally received a­mongst us, since the Reformation; and obey lawful Authority, when it is thereby commanded. As for the Danger, pretended to be feared; may not it be justly esteemed, a Feare, where no Feare is? when the very same Authority which commands kneeling at the Sacrament, forbids the Adoration of the outward signes or Elements, and open­ly declares it selfe against the Romish Do­ctrine of Transubstantiation?

Having thus shewen the Judgment, and Practise of most Christian Churches through­out the World, as touching the Gesture u­sed at the receiving of the Sacrament; toge­ther with the Opinions, and Testimonies▪ both of the Auncient Fathers, and some Mo­derne Divines: My next work shall be, to draw some Observations from those Histo­rical Passages, which may serve to justify the Practise of the Church of England in this Par­ticular. To which I shall add some other [Page 81] Reasons, drawen partly from Scripture-Grounds, partly from the nature of the Duty, or Service, which this Gesture doth accom­pany.

1. Though it be not cleare in the Gospel, what Gesture our Saviour, and his Apostles used at the receiving of the Sacrament, yet that which they used at the Eating of the Passeover is expresly set down, viz: lying, or leaning on Couches, according to the Cu­stome of the Jewish Church at that Time; which they thought fit to conforme unto without the least Scruple, or Affectation of Singularity. So did they likewise in singing of the Hymne after Supper, and other Cir­cumstantials, which were then generally pra­ctised, and enjoyned by the Sanedrin, though without any express Command of God for them. And all this, that they might not give just cause of offence, whereof our Saviour was very tender, where the thing enjoyned, or used, was not absolutely sinful, or extream­ly scandalous; yea, though sometimes he was not obliged therto in strict Justice; as ap­pears in the Case of paying the Tribute-mo­ny, Mat. 17. 24: which although he was not bound to, as himselfe protested unto Peter, yet rather than give offence in so smal a mat­ter, [Page 82] he bad Peter discharge it for them Both, and wrought a miracle to that purpose. Now though our Saviour, and his Apostles used that Gesture at the Passover, which was then generally practised in the Jewish Church; yet they could not be ignorant that it was a dif­ferent one from that commanded by God, and practised by his People at the first Institution of that Feast; for that was Standing, as appeares clearly enough by comparing the Circumstances set downe, Exod. 12. 11, 28: which cannot agree with sitting or lying down, but with standing only. But Philo's words are ex­press, who tels us the Israelites were com­manded to celebrate the Passeover in Egypt, having their loynes girt, [...], and standing on their feet in a steady posture. A Gesture suited to the pre­sent Exigent, when they were to be ready for an hasty march out of Aegypt. [See Philo de Sacrif: Cainis & Abelis. Maimon: in Cor­ban Pesach: cap. 10. S. 15. Babyl. Talm. in Pesachim. cap. 9.] This Beza also also informes us of, as the general Opinion of the Jewish Doctours, in his Annot: upon Mat. 26. 20. Jubet Dominus Agnum à stan­tibus calceatis, & ad iter accinctis, cum festi­natione comedi. Exod. 12. 11. Sciendum est [Page 83] igitur, illa, ut & mandatum de Postibus, & superliminari aedium sanguine aspergendis, ad illam unicam noctem pertinuisse, qu [...] fuit Israelitis quàm celerrimè ex Aegypto migran­dum. Quod summo consensu Doctores omnes Hebraeorum testantur. That is, ‘The Lord commands the Paschal Lambe to be eaten in hast, by such as stood, were shod, and their loynes girt for their Journey: Ex. 12. 11. Ye must know therefore, that these Cir­cumstances, together with the Command of sprinkling the Doore posts and lintels of their houses with Bloud, belonged to that night only, wherein the Israelites were to depart hastily out of Aegypt; which all the Hebrew Doctours testifie with one Con­sent.’ Methinks this Conformity of our Sa­viour and his Apostles to the Custome then received by the Jewish Church, though with­out any particular warrant, or Command of God under the law, yea contrary to the Gesture used by the Israelites at the first Ce­lebration, by God's particular Injunction; (the one being a Posture of Hast, or moti­on; the other of Rest) should be looked on as the best Patterne of Imitation for all Chri­stians at this Day, that in such indifferent Things as these they should readily con­forme, [Page 84] and apply themselves to the Practise of the Church wherein they live, especially when determined, and enjoyned by law­ful Authority, least otherwise they chance to incurre the Guilt of Scandal, and Schisme, and Disobedience to their Supe­riours.

2. The Apostle sharply taxeth the Corin­thians, 1 Cor 11: for their unseemly Car­riage at the receiving of the Lord's Supper, because they used the same freedome, and boldness thereat, as at their ordinary meales, in their own Houses; whereas they ought to have made a great difference between the one, and the other. He tels them, they might use a liberty at home, but when they came into the house of God, they ought to consi­der in whose Presence they were, to what Table they approached; and what an holy food they were to be made Partakers of. Else, they should be justly accounted Despisers of the House of God, the Church, unfit, and unwelcome Guests at his Table, and unworthy Communicants, such as discerned not the Lord's Body from their common Food —Have ye not Houses to eate, and to drink in? or despise ye the Church [Page 85] of God? vers: 22. He that eateth, and drink­eth unworthily, eateth and drinketh Damna­tion (or Judgment) to himselfe, not discer­ning the Lord's Body. vers. 29. Now this may well serve to awaken all sober Chri­stians to a due regard of their Carriage at this holy Sacrament, that so a visible Diffe­rence may appear in their Behaviour at This, and at the taking of their common Food; least they give too just an Occasion unto o­thers (who observe them) to think, that they value, and honour the One, no more than the other; and, which is worse, induce the ruder Sort (who judge by what they see) to esteem the Sacrament accordingly. We have had too many, and too sad instances of this Indifferency in several Places, where sitting hath been of late years in use amongst us. And I have been informed by some Eye-witnesses, that in Holland (the only forreigne Church, in a manner, where this Gesture is practised) this Abuse is too too frequent; and though taken notice of, and inveighed against by the Ministers, yet without effect; so powerful an Influence hath this Custome upon them. They there­fore who so earnestly plead for this Gesture, might do well to consider, and apply to [Page 86] themselves that Charge of the Apostle, which they so frequently urge against the Ceremo­nies of the Church, Abstaine from all appea­rance of Evil. 1 Thess. 5. 22: and, the Instance of Sitting at meat in the Idols Tem­ple, whereby the weak and ignorant were by Degrees imboldened to eate Things sacri­ficed unto Idols, in honour of those Idols. This presumptious knowledge, and over-free walk of Theirs, becomming a stumbling-block to the weak and Ignorant, 1 Cor. 8. 9, 10, 11. Now, they stumbled in giving too much ho­nour to a false God; Ours, in giving too little honour to the True. That auncient Father Justin Martyr tels us, what value the Primi­tive Christians put upon the Lord's Supper. [...]. That is, We doe not receive these, as common Bread, and Drink, but as Jesus Christ our Saviour was incarnate by the word of God, and took flesh, and bloud for our Salvation; so we are taught that the food which was consecrated by him through the Prayer of the Word, and by [Page 87] which being converted into our Substance, our flesh and bloud are nourished, are the very flesh and bloud of that incarnate Jesus. Saint Aug: comes somewhat more home, when expoun­ding those wordes of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 11. 29: he thus saith. —Apostolus indignè dicit ac­ceptum ab eis, qui hoc non discernebant à caete­ris Cibis, Veneratione singulariter debitâ.-The Apostle saith, the Sacrament was unworthily received by them, who discerned (or diffe­renced) it not from other meates, by a vene­ration peculiarly due to it. Therefore, in his Judgment, it was to be received with a Ge­sture different from that which we use at our ordinary Meales; also, with such a Ge­sture as expesseth Veneration, or Worship; and such an one, is kneeling.

3. The Primitive Church studiously avoi­ded that Gesture at the receiving of the Sa­crament, which they used at their ordi­nary meales, as thinking it not reverent enough; and, to put a distinction between their spiritual and their corporal Repast, be­tween the Service of God, and the Serving themselves at Table. Whence that aun­cient Canon of the Council of Laodicea, con­firmed many yeeres after, and revived in the Council of Trullo, whereby the lying upon [Page 88] Couches at the Communion, and the love-feasts which accompanied it, was absolutely forbidden in the Church, because that was the ordinary supper-posture in those Easterne Countries. Tertullian indeed speaking of the love-feasts, which followed the Eucharist, tels us that the Christians of his Time used a Supper-posture at them. Apolog: cap. 39.- Non prius discumbitur, quàm oratio ad Deum prae­gustetur, &c. Before we sit [or lie] downe, we pray unto God, &c. and a little after —Aequè oratio convivium dirimet—Prayer like­wise ends the Feast. But he tells us not, that this was done in the Church, much less, that they used the same Gesture at the Com­munion, which preceded it. Yea, he els­where saith, that it was different from it; when he mentioneth —Stationem ad aram Dei, in quâ Dominus adoratur, & sacrificio­rum orationes fiunt—Standing at the Altar of God, where the Lord is adored, and such Prayers are made as belong to the Sacrifices. Now standing, we know, was never used or accounted for a Supper-posture. And if sitting had been necessary, how durst the Primitive Church change it into standing? the example whereof is so invidiously urged against the present custom of the Church of England.

[Page 89] 4. The Church of Christ always looked upon the Communion-Service (whereof the Receiving is a part) as a principal part of Divine Worship, wherein her Children re­newed their Covenant with God, and offered up themselves an holy living Sacrifice, which is our reasonable Service—We profess to yeeld the unbloody Service in the Church of God, and to partake of the Mystical Blessings, and by that means to be sanctified, as being made to communicate of the Holy Flesh, and Precious Bloud of Christ the Saviour of all. Cyr. Ep. ad Nestorium. Act: Conc: Ephes: Tom: 1. c. 14. Nos servitutem, quae [...] di­citur Graecè, sive in quibusdam Sacramentis, sive in nobis ipsis debemus. Aug: de Civ: Dei: lib. 10. c. 4. That is, ‘we owe Service to God, which the Greeks call [...], part­ly in the Sacraments, partly in our own Persons.’ And Calvin. Inst. l. 4. c. 14. §. 1. defines a Sacrament, Testimonium Divinae in nos gratiae, externo signo confimatum, cum mu­tuâ nostrae erga ipsum Pietatis testificatione. That is, A Testimony of God's favour to us, confirmed by an outward signe, with a mutual witnessing of our Duty towards him. Indeed, this offering up of our Selves, (which is most solemnly done in the Sacrament) is [Page 90] the true, and daily Sacrifice of the Christian Church, the Mystical Body of Christ thus of­fering up her Selfe by Christ her high-Priest, and Head, unto God the Father, as Christ once offered up himselfe to the same Father for his Body the Church. Now in such a pu­blique, and solemne worship, as this, the A­doration of the Body must needs goe along with the Devotion of the Soule; else, it will be lame, and imperfect. Wee shall shew our selves ashamed of God, and deny to profess him before men. God giveth grace to the humble, but resisteth the Proud; and will not vouchsafe to accept ought of ours, un­less we first offer up our Soules, and Bodies entirely to him. The Primitive Christians therefore constantly used the same lowly, and reverential Gesture at the receiving of the Sacrament, which they did at the Pray­ers that accompanied it; whether Standing, (as on the Lord's Day, and all Dayes of pu­blique Assemblies between Easter and Whit­sontide) or kneeling, as on other Dayes.

And when the Western Churches thought good to turn standing into kneeling at all publick Prayers, on what Day soever, they used the same lowly Gesture at the receiving of the Sacrament; and the Chancel, or Place [Page 91] where the Communion was celebrated, was called, by way of Eminency, The Place of Prayer. Certainly then, a Prayer-Gesture is most proper for this part of Divine Service. All those therefore who think kneeling a fit posture for Prayer, and practice it at other parts of the Publick Service, cannot with any reason refuse to use it at the receiving of the Sacrament; unless they will contra­dict the Judgment, and condemn the practice of the Christian Church in all Ages.

5. When the Church anciently used stand­ing in Divine Service on the Lords Days, as the most proper Gesture, whereby to testifie their Belief in the Resurrection of Christ, yet when the Communicants approached un­to the holy Table to receive the Sacrament, they used constantly to express their Thank­fulness, and Reverence in a Gesture of Ado­ration, by bowing their Faces, and Bodies to the Ground; wherein as they shewed their great Humility, so they shewed withall their high esteem of the Heavenly Gift, which there, and then God vouchsafed to bestow o [...] so unworthy Receivers; which serves for a good Pattern to us at this Day, that we express the same Reverence by a like Ge­sture of Adoration. And seeing that now [Page 92] the Western Churches, and ours in particular, usually expresseth the act of Adoration by kneeling, what fitter Gesture, then that for this holy, and solemn Service.

6. The far greater part of the Protestant Churches at this day, receive the Sacrament kneeling; and those who receive it standing, when they receive, make a reverential Bow at their approach to the Holy Table. As for Sitting, the Gesture which is so much contended for, and affected by our Non-Conformists, it was never heard of in the Christian Church, till of late years, and then used but by one Forreign Church (that of Holland) which goeth under the name of Reformed. Whose practice herein, sure no wise and sober Christian will esteem so considerable, as to judge it should give law to all the rest. Were it not far more equita­ble of the two, that this should rather con­form to the major part? as those few Churches in the Primitive Age, which kept Easter on the Fourteenth Day of the First month, on whatsoever day of the Week it fell (though they had Apostolical Tradition for it) yet for Peace and Orders sake, readily conformed to the greater number, which kept it always on the Lords Day, as it was [Page 93] generally agreed on in the first general Coun­cil held at Nice.

7. Those few Churches and Divines which commend sitting as the fittest Gesture, or dislike kneeling at the Communion, neither think that necessary, nor this unlawful. They commend sitting, as that which they suppose most consonant to the Primitive Practice, and to the nature of a Supper. the groundlesness of which conceit hath been in part demonstrated, and shall be far­ther. And they mislike kneeling meerly for the danger, or scandal thereof, as that which they think countenanceth the Romish Ado­ration of the Hoast, and confirms the Papists in their Idolatry, and Superstition. Now if this Reason might pass for tolerable, and be allowed at first, whilst such Adorations were in daily view to provoke the Refor­mers, or at least fresh in memory, and the Peo­ple newly weaned from such Superstitions, so as to make some few Churches, and Doctors to lean unto the other extreame; yet it can­not be rightly judged to have the same force at this day, when the People general­ly (especially those who condemn kneeling) are so far from Popery, that they are running apace into Prophaneness, and Irreverence, [Page 94] and contempt of Divine Service. How many be there amongst us, who have neglected the very substance of the Duty, in not re­ceiving the Sacrament for many years? how many, who think themselves above the Ordinance? Yea, many, who deny the whole mystery of our Redemption, by en­tertaining old Heresies concerning our Savi­viour, whose death is therein comme­morated, and the Benefits thereof applied unto the worthy Communicants. As for our first Reformers, they were so far from thinking it scandalous to re­taine kneeling at the Sacrament, that they did it on purpose to avoid the scandal, which otherwise would have been given to the Papists, and to stop their blasphemous mouths, who vilified the Sacrament given in our Church, with the odious, and igno­minious Names of Bakers Bread, Vintners Wine, Profane Elements, Ale-cakes, and such like reproachful Terms. Wherefore to testifie their due esteem thereof (the Bread and Wine being consecrated to so blessed and holy a use, as is the Communion of the Body, and Bloud of Christ) and repel the slander of such virulent Tongues, they thought fit to shew their inward regard of [Page 95] it, by their outward Reverence in Kneeling. Thus, as Physick is necessary for the Patient, not essentially, as his daily food; but acci­dentally, because of his present Infirmity; so kneeling is prescribed, as a necessary Ge­sture at the receiving of the Communion, partly to vindicate the Church from the slanders of the Papists; partly to reform, or prevent the irreligious Behaviour of the Profane. And the same prudent course did the Church of Christ take in the anci­ent times, at that other Sacrament of Bap­tisme; wherein she first used a threefold im­mersion, by an Apostolical Tradition, to ex­press her Faith in the Trinity, and her De­testation of the contrary Heresies of Praxeas, Hermogenes, and Sabellius. But when the Arians afterwards abused this Rite to the countenancing of their error, touching the diversity of essence amongst the three Persons, the Orthodox Christians, to shew their dis­like thereof, used a single Immersion; yet not condemning the other. So Greg. the Great, and Conc. Tol. 4. Can. 5. When A­r [...]anisme was scattered, the Church freely used either one or other, as they thought fit. So though some few Churches thought fit to use standing, or sitting at the Commu­nion, [Page 96] in the beginning of the Reformation, the Adoration of the Hoast being then fresh in memory, the better to avoke the People from it, and to shew their own Abhorrence of it. Yet now, on the rooting out of Po­pery, and the setling of the Reformation for so many years, the case is much altered. It is a good Rule in the law, Causâ sublatâ, tolli constitutionem ex causâ illâ ortam—That the cause being taken away, the constitution grounded thereon, sinks with it. The Chirur­geon deals otherwise with a foule sore, then with a wound that is come to Agglutinati­on. How much more reason is there to re­tain kneeling amongst us, who have had it appointed by our first Reformers, and found it continued ever since, until these late un­happy Distractions, wherein we have wel­nigh lost the Very Substance of Religion, to­gether with the Ceremonies.

8. The Protestant Churches of Poland, though differing in some other Particulars, yet when they met together at several Times and Places, to agree (amongst other Points, which they accounted either most material or most feizible) upon some uniforme or­der in the receiving of the Sacrament; though they permitted Standing thereat to some of [Page 97] the Helvetick Confession, who had been anci­ently used to it (for those of the Augustane, and Bohemick, always communicated kneel­ing) and could not so soon or so easily be induced to break their old Custom; yet they absolutely condemned sitting. The Reasons whereof are remarkable, and to be well heeded by us of this distracted Na­tion, whose case and condition doth so near resemble Theirs. 1. They tell us, that none scrupled at kneeling, but the sim­pler and more ignorant sort. 2. That some affected sitting out of a foolish mistake, and pretence of imitating Christ therein. 3. That this Gesture of sitting was contra­ry to the Practise of the Evangelical Church­es throughout Europe. 4. That it was in­troduced by the Arianizing Anabaptists, who revolted from them, and fell into se­veral Blasphemous Errors, touching the Trinity, and our Blessed Saviour, and hand­led Christ as rudely and prophanely, as they did his Sacraments, by setting themselves in the same Throne with him, as if they had been his Equals; and therefore it was fit to be left unto them, as a marke of Distincti­on, whereby they might be discerned from the Orthodox Professors. I would to God, we [Page 98] had not too much Ground of saying the same at this Day, when so many People a­mongst us, have been drawn away and mis­led into several Blasphemous Errours (touch­ing Christ especially, and the Trinity) and are like to continue therein, and increase in number, as long as they see such Unconfor­mity, and Disobedience in several of the Mi­nistery. For how can we think, in any Rea­son, to reduce these Sectaries unto the Ʋnity of the Faith, whilst so many amongst us break the Ʋnity of the Church; and can neither accord with their Brethren, nor obey their Superiors? Our Arguments will prevail little; and our Authority, less. Were it not far better, after the example of these Polonian Churches, to leave sitting unto the Sectaries, as a Character of difference, least otherwise we seem to countenance them in their Errors? Especially, when that fancy of reigning with Christ here upon Earth, hath so strongly possessed many of their Brains, that it hath set them upon desperate Pro­jects to make good, and fulfill their Dreams. I hope that I shall not be thought to speak without Reason, when I have told you, that Mr. Archer, the late Chiliast, hath the same Ground for sitting at the Communion, who [Page 99] would have it then used, as a Badge, and Cognizance of Christians believing in Christs promise of coming to Reign on this Earth again, and to take them into a familiar and a kind of equal Conversation with him; which Conceit of his methinks, may not be unfitly dasht by that Check of Augustus, which he gave to one who entertained him meanly, I did not think that you, and I had been so familiar. It is worthy also our ob­servation, that as the multiplying of Sects, and Heresies in Poland, was the unhappy fruit of the Dissension of those Churches, (especially about the matter of the Sacra­ment) so it proved the happy occasion of u­niting them together. God grant, we may learn wit by their example.

9. The nature of the Service, if well considered, requires the most humble, and reverential Gesture. For in the receiving of this Holy Sacrament, we are made Par­takers of all the Benefits of Christs Death, and Passion, which therein are conveyed un­to us, and thereby applied. We therein al­so offer up our selves, both Souls, and Bo­dies, with all that we have, or are, unto God, in the nature of a Peace-offering, or Sacrifice of Thanksgiving, for the many [Page 100] great unspeakable Benefits, bestowed upon us through Christ, when he offered up him­self unto his Father a Propitiatory Sacrifice upon the Cross. Therein we receive a Par­don of our Sins past; Power to subdue Corruptions, and overcome Temptations for the time to come; Peace of Conscience arising from Both, and a certain Pledge of our Resurrection to a Life Eternal. Do not all these, do not any of these, require as much Humility, as Thankfulness? And is it not fit to express that Humility (especially, in the Publick Service, where God is most ho­noured, and requires us to honour him in the eyes of men) by the lowliest demeanour, there­by to shew, and testifie our inward Devotion? If we were to receive a Pardon, or any con­siderable favour from an earthly Prince, we would not make the least scruple to re­ceive it kneeling; but rather condemn any one of unsufferable Pride, and Arrogancy, Folly, and Ingratitude, who should think much to use that humble Gesture. Nay, if we were but admitted to kiss the Kings Hand, we would readily kneel to receive so easie, so ordinary a Favour. Children use the like Gesture, when they aske their Pa­rents Blessing; and when a Subject doth Ho­mage to his Prince, he performes it with [Page 101] the same Reverence. Shall we then doubt, or deny to perform the same, when we receive a Pardon from the Great King of Heaven and Earth, the King of Kings, sealed unto us in this Sacrament? When we receive the Gift of Eternal Life, conveyed unto us by Christ, of whom we are therein made Partakers? When also we do solemn homage unto our Lord, and Saviour, by devoting our selves wholly to his Service, who once devoted him­self a Sacrifice to God for our Salvation? Sure, there is strength in this Argument, if either Reason, or Religion may be judge. For thus God himself argues with his People by the Prophet Malachi. A Son honoureth his Father, and a Servant his Master. If then I be a Father, where is mine honour? and if I be a Master, where is my fear? Ye say, the Table of the Lord is contemptible. And if ye offer the Blind for Sacrifice, is it not evil? And if ye offer the lame, and the sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy Governor. Will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person, saith the Lord of Hosts? Ye brought that which was torne, and the lame and the sick. Thus ye brought an Offering; Should I accept this of your Hand, saith the Lord? I am a Great King, saith the Lord of Hosts, and my name is dread­ful [Page 102] among the Heathen. Mal. 1. 6, 7, 8; 13, 14.

And if we look upon Scripture-Patternes, we shall find that the most eminent Saints, and Servants of God have used the lowliest Gestures on any of these Occasions, and that not only unto God in Person, but to his Deputies also who represented him; to his Princes, Preists, and Prophets. When Abigail came to aske pardon of David, for her hus­band Nabal, she bowed her selfe to the Ground, and fell at his feet. 1 Sam. 25. 23. So did Joseph's Brethren to him, when they were caught in a supposed Theft. Gen. 44. 14. Yea, so did Absalom (as wicked and proud, as he was) upon his returne to his Father. 1 Sam. 14. 33: when the same Abigail would express her thanks to David for signifying by his Messengers his intention of marrying her, she used the same Gesture. 1 Sam. 25. 41. The like used Abraham to the Hittites, when they granted him the Sepulchre he pe­titioned for. Gen. 23. 12. So did Jacob: Gen. 47. 31. Jehosaphat also, and his People, on good Newes. 2 Chron. 20. 18. When Jo­seph brought his Sons to be blest, he thus ex­prest his Desire, Gen. 48. 12. Bathsheba, and the Prophet Nathan did the like, when they [Page 103] petitioned David, in behalfe of Solomon. 1 King. 1. 16. 23. Jacob thus exprest his respect to his Elder Brother Esau. Gen. 33. 3. Salomon his Duty to his mother Bath­shebah, 1. King. 2. 19. Araunah his homage to King David. 2. Sam. 24. 20. How much more Reverence is due, when all these meet together, as they doe in the Sacrament, wherein we receive a Pardon, and a Blessing, and have our Interests in the Kingdome of Heaven renewed and confirmed to us; where­in we offer up thanks-giving for the grea­test of Favours; petition the great God for Grace, and Glory in behalfe of our Selves, and others; and performe Solemne Homage to our Soveraigne Lord, and Master?

But more especially we find these lowly Gestures used at the Sacrifices. So the Israe­lites, when they blessed God thereat, by King David's command. 1. Chron. 29. 20. The like they did at the firing of the Sacrifice; whereby God's acceptance was signified, 2 Chron: 7. 3: and 1 King. 18. 39. Heze­kiah also, and his People, at the solemne Sacri­fice. 2 Chron. 29. 29, 30. Now, in the Sa­crament there is not only a lively represen­tation, and a grateful Commemoration of that great Sacrifice which Christ offered up­on [Page 104] the Cross for our Redemption, (where­of all these were but imperfect Types, and Shadowes) but also an effectual Application of all the Benefits thereof, unto every worthy Communicant. Therein also we offer up unto God all that we have, or are, the Sacri­fices of Praise, and Almes, as the Apostle cals them, Heb. 13. 15, 16. Our Bodies also, and our Soules. And have we not reason to use the same lowly Gestures at the time when so manifold a Sacrifice is offered up unto God?

Especially, when we find several Prophe­cies of these Gestures to be used towards our Saviour, which sure we cannot present him with at a fitter Time, than when so so­lemne a Service is performed to him —I have sworne by my selfe, that unto me every knee shall bow. Isa 45. 23: which the Apostle ap­plies unto our Saviour. Rom. 14. 11. They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him—Yea, all Kings shall fall down before him. Psal. 72. 9, 11. Every knee must bow, none excepted. Not the vilest, and most barba­rous, those in the Wilderness: not the high­est amongst men, to whom all others bow; Kings are not exempted. All then are comprehended and obliged to this Service; [Page 105] except we intend by refractory Irreverence to contadict those Prophecies, and nullifie them as far as lies in us.

10. The most proper Gesture for Prayer is kneeling, as that which is the most hum­ble and devout. And this Gesture is recom­mended to our imitation by the most emi­nent persons, and the most exemplary Pat­terns in both Testaments. By King Solomon, a great Prince; by Daniel, a great Prophet; and by Ezra a famous Priest, under the Law: by Saint Peter, and Saint Paul, the two great Apostles; by Saint Stephen, the first Martyr; and by Christ himself, the great Pattern of Perfection under the Gos­pel. Neither is this denied by the Non-Conformists, who allow of kneeling at Pray­ers, both by their Judgment, and Practice at other times. For though there be too many at this day, who are so wretchedly careless and irreverent, as to fit at them; yet I hope there is scarce any of them so strange­ly impudent, as to plead for sitting at Pray­ers, as the most fitting Gesture, or to con­demn kneeling. Now it is most clear, that in our Church of England, the very same Authority which enjoyns the Communicant to kneel at the receiving of the Sacrament, [Page 106] enjoyns the Minister, who gives it, to deli­ver it with a Prayer; and which is more, the Receiver is to testifie his assent to that Prayer, by saying Amen, at the close, accord­ing to the ancient Custom of the Church. This is attested, not only by those antient Constitutions, which go under the name of the Apostles, but also by Cyril of Jerusalem, for the East; and by Saint Augustine for the West, as the practice, and general usage of the Christian Church. Const. Apost. lib. 8. cap. 13. thus directeth the Service— [...]. That is, Let the Bishop give the Oblation [of Bread] saying, The Body of Christ; and let him that receiv­eth it, say Amen. Then the Deacon having taken the Cup, and delivering it, let him say, The Bloud of Christ, the Cup of Life; and let him that drinketh, say Amen. Cyrill of Jerusalem tells us the same, in his Instructi­ons to the Communicant, Orat: Mystag. 5 ta. The Place before cited— [...]. [Page 107] That is, Receive the Body of Christ, saying withal, Amen. Then approach to receive the Cup of [Christs] Bloud, bowing thy self, and saying, Amen, after the manner of Divine Worship, and Adoration. Saint Augustine also witnesseth for his time, saying Ʋniversa Ecclesia accepto sanguine Christi, dicit, Amen. That is, The Ʋniversal Church at the receiv­ing of the Bloud of Christ, saith, Amen. So he Resp. ad qu. Orosii, 49. Methinks, they who scruple not to kneel at other Prayers, should make as little question to kneel at this; which though a very short one, is a very solemn, and material one: especially, when at the same time, if they really be such devout Receivers, as they would be thought to be, they lift up their Hearts in secret Prayer, and Praise unto God; in Praise, for the great Benefits there bestowed, Christ, and his Merits; and in Prayer, for a Blessing upon the Sacrament, that it may prove ef­fectual to those ends for which God appoint­ed it, and that themselves may for the fu­ture walk in some measure answerable to so great, and undeserved mercies. Sure kneeling will best suit both with that publick Prayer of the Minister, and this private one of the Receiver, as that which best expresseth both [Page 108] his Humility, and his Thankfulness. Now if any are pleased to cavil that the Minister who officiates, and pronounceth the Prayer, stands at the same time when the Communi­cant is enjoyned to kneel, they have as much reason to except at him, when he useth the same Gesture at the pronouncing of the Blessing, which is a like short Prayer; at Parents also; when they bless their Children; and at the Priests under the Law, who used the same Posture, when they blessed the Peo­ple at the Passover: 2 Chron. 36. 27. Yea we read that Jacob sate upon the Bed, when he blessed the two Sons of Joseph in the same Prayer-Form. Whereas they, with their Father Joseph, received the Blessing with a very low Bow. Gen. 48. 2, 12.

11. The more worthy any Creature, or Ordinance of God is in it self, or the nearer Relation it hath unto God, the more ho­nour, and reverence is due thereto. So the parts of the Tabernacle, and Temple, viz. The Court, the Holy Place, and the Holy of Holies, had several Degrees of Holiness, and were regarded accordingly. The Levites might officiate in the outward Court; the Priests only in that which was called Holy; the High-Priest only might enter into the [Page 109] Holy of Holies, and that but once a yeare. So for the Sacrifices; some of them must be eaten by any whom the Officer would invite; some by the Priest alone; and o­thers must be entirely offered up unto God, and consumed upon the Altar. Now the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, hath been always accounted the most Sacred, and So­lemn Ordinance of God in the Christian Church, and Christ himself hath taught us, that his Body, and Bloud are therein contain­ed, and communicated unto us thereby. Whence it will follow, that we owe a pro­portionable Reverence thereto, and are to honour God thereat, with the greatest Hu­mility, and Devotion. When the Angel of the Lord appeared in the Bush, Moses was forbid to approach too near, and com­manded to pull off his Shoes, because the place, whereon he stood, was Holy Ground, Exod. 3. 5. Shall we then irreverently ap­proach unto that Table, whereat the Lord of Angels is present attended by those Heavenly Officers; present, in so near, so strange, so mysterious a way? Moses then hid his face at that dreadful sight, ver. 6. and shall we come to the Sacrament with bold Looks and Gestures, as if we were Christs Fellows [Page 110] and Equals? When Jacob saw God, but in a night Vision, he was presently struck up­on his waking, with an awful Regard, which made him say, How dreadful is this Place? this is no other, but the House of God, and this is the Gate of Heaven—Gen. 28. 13, 16, 17. Shall not we be alike affected at the Sacrament, and ready to express our Regard of it, wherein we are admitted, not only to his House, but to his Table; not only see the Gate, but eat the Bread of Heaven, the Celestial Manna? The Antient Fathers of the Church have therefore upon all occasions, endeavoured to strike an awe in us, and work a due regard toward the Sacrament, by the high, and venerable Ti­tles which they bestowed thereon. Chrysost. in 1 Cor. 10. 16. calls it, [...], Dreadful Mysteries— [...] —The awful, and most dread­ful Cup; and the whole Service, wherein Christ is offered up representatively, instead of the slaughtered Beasts under the Law, he calls— [...], A Service much more dread­ful, and Majestical, then any under the Law. Greg. Naz. calls it, [...], The Copy or resemblance of Great My­steries. [Page 111] Saint Aug. de Verb. Dni. Serm. 28. calls it, Coeleste & venerabile Sacramentum, The Heavenly, and Venerable Sacrament. Greg. M. Dial. 4. c. 58. tells us, that none of the Faithful doubt, but that at the time of Consecration, ad Sacerdotis vocem Coelos aperiri, Angelorum choros adesse, The Heavens are opened at the voice of the Priest, and the Quire of Angels present. Dionys. (as before) calls the Sacramental Signes, [...], Venerable or Adorable Signes. The Communion-Table is also ho­nored with the Titles of, [...], Holy, Mystical, dreadful, royal. Sure, these ancient worthies of the Church▪ were much mistaken in the misap­plying of such Holy, and Honorable Titles to the Sacrament, with the Service, and Ta­ble that attend it, if no manner of awe­fulness, or veneration were due unto it: or they are much mistaken at this day, who think the Ordinance so mean, and the Ta­ble so contemptible (as those in the Pro­phet Malachi's time did) that any careless Posture is good enough for it, and kneeling too good.

Adoration indeed is due unto God alone, but a Religious Reverence is due unto such [Page 112] Creatures, and Ordinances of his, as have a peculiar Relation unto him, and in regard thereof, are styled Holy; to his Day, his House, his Word, his Service, consisting in Prayers, and Praises. All which, if taken by themselves, are of the same Nature with o­ther Days, Houses, Writings, and Services. Yet the Non-Conformists, I presume, allow of some difference between the Church, and their Private Houses; between the Bible, and other ordinary Books; between the Service of God, and of Men, and scruple not to make that difference appear by their outward Carriage, and Demeanor. How then comes it to pass that the Blessed Sacra­ment of his Supper, that most Holy, and So­lemn Ordinance, which he left us as a pious Memorial of his Passion▪ when himself was now to leave the World, should be thought unworthy of any peculiar Reverence, but have the same neglectful Gesture used at it, as at our ordinary Meals?

Neither will the same Persons deny, but that at the time of Receiving, they yield an intentional Reverence, or Adoration of Soul unto God. I would faine know then▪ why they will not express it at the same time by an answerable Gesture, such as kneel­ing [Page 113] is, whereby to testifie their own Devoti­on, and excite that of others. They allow of lifting up the Hands, and Eyes in Prayer, with other significant expressions of their Zeale, and Devotion; why not as well of kneeling at the Sacrament, whereby to ex­press their Humility? I hope, they will not say, they have none to express, or that they are ashamed to own it in Publick. There is no Pious Affection, or Disposition of the mind, but, if it be reall, and hearty, will en­deavour to shew it self outwardly upon all good occasions. Godly Indignation in the Publican commanded his hands to knock on his Breast. Luke 18. 13. Faith moved the Womans hand, to touch the Hem of Christs Garment. Mat. 9. ver. 20, 21, 22. Charity stretched forth the Samaritans hands, to bind up the wounds of the half-dead Traveller. Luke 10. 34. Sorrow for Sin caused Peters eyes to poure forth streams of bitter Teares. Mat. 26. 75. Zeale, and Earnestuess to know the will of God, and the way of Salvation, fixt the eares of Lydia to attend the word of God, preached by Saint Paul. Acts 16. 14. And Hope lifteth up pure hands unto Hea­ven in Prayer, in confidence of Gods Pro­mises. I. Tim. 2. 8. And shall Humility on­ly [Page 114] be Idle, and uneffectual? Shall it have no power, or force at all, to demonstrate it self in acknowledgment of so undeserved Mer­cies, whereof it is made Partaker in the Sa­crament, by some significant Gesture at the receiving thereof, in some measure propor­tionable to the pious and lowly affection of the mind? I hope, they will not reply, that no significant Ceremonies are to be used in Gods Service, whereas some of their Fore­fathers have supplicated for Sitting, as a Gesture fit to set forth Rest, and the accom­plishment of Ceremonies in Christ: Others disputed for it, because it is best agreeable with our Coheriship. And others have urg­ed standing, as better consorting with the Eucharist, which is a Sacrament of Thanks­giving. If notwithstanding all this, they disclaime significant Ceremonies, sure they are very uncertain Oracles to hearken un­to, and as unconstant Guides to fol­low.

12. All things indifferent, which are to be used in the Service of God, are in the Disposition of the Church. But the Gesture in the Act of receiving the Sacrament is such an Indifferent Thing; as having neither Precept, nor Prohibition, nor express Deter­mination [Page 115] in the Scriptures. Ergo. The truth of the Proposition is confest by Mr. Cart­wright himself, in his first Reply, pa. 18. I know no man (saith he) who ever denied, that the Church may make Orders in such Thinges as are not specified, and precisely de­termined in the Word of God. And the truth of the Assumption is sufficiently clear from Holy Scripture. For neither in the Gospel, nor in St. Pauls first Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. 11. Where the order and manner of the Celebration is very punctu­ally set down; nor elsewhere in holy Writ, is there one word to be found touching the Gesture which our Saviour and his Apostles used at the first Institution; or, which the Primitive Christians, in the Apostles days, used at the celebration thereof; though the Apostle, in the place alledged, exactly sets down the other circumstances of Time and Place. Much less is there any Precept touch­ing this particular, to bind the Church in all succeeding Ages. Doubtless, if the Gesture which Christ and his Apostles used at the first had been material, or necessary for our Imi­tation, it would have been left somewhere upon Record, that so we might have had a certain Pattern to follow. But seeing it is [Page 116] not, why should we not think it left free to be determined by the Church consonantly to those Apostolical Rules of Decency, Or­der, Edification, and Peace, which are pre­scribed? Rom. 14. 19. 1. Cor. 14. 26, 40.

These Reasons, duly weighed, will serve to answer most of those Objections, which have been urged against kneeling at the re­ceiving of the Sacrament. Yet for the bet­ter clearing, and confirming of the lawful­ness, and fitness, and consequently of the ne­cessity of using this Gesture, when com­manded by lawful Authority; I shall set down such Objections, as I have met with, and sub­joyn their Answers for farther satisfaction.