Perth assembly Containing 1 The proceedings thereof. 2 The proofe of the nullitie thereof. 2 [sic] Reasons presented thereto against the receiving the fiue new articles imposed. 4 The oppositenesse of it to the proceedings and oath of the whole state of the land. An. 1581. 5 Proofes of the unlawfulnesse of the said fiue articles, viz. 1. Kneeling in the act of receiving the Lords Supper. 2. Holy daies. 3. Bishopping. 4. Private baptisme. 5. Private Communion.

Perth assembly Containing 1 The proceedings thereof. 2 The proofe of the nullitie thereof. 2 [sic] Reasons presented thereto against the receiving the fiue new articles imposed. 4 The oppositenesse of it to the proceedings and oath of the whole state of the land. An. 1581. 5 Proofes of the unlawfulnesse of the said fiue articles, viz. 1. Kneeling in the act of receiving the Lords Supper. 2. Holy daies. 3. Bishopping. 4. Private baptisme. 5. Private Communion.

Table of contents

Title page

TO THE READER.

THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSEMBLIE HOLden at PERTH in August, Anno Dom. 1618.

Wednesday the 26. of August, the second day of the Assemb•y.

Thursday 27. Aug. the third day of the Assembly.

THE NVLLITY OF PERTH ASSEMBLY.

THE ARTICLES PRESENTED TO the Assembly Aug. 27. with some quotations added for confirmation.

THE OATH DISCVSSED.

§

KNEELING IN THE ACT OF RECEIVING THE SACRAmentall elements of Bread and Wine, proved vnlawfull.

Kneeling, considered, as it is a breach of the institution.

Kneeling considered, as it is a breach of the second commandement.

Kneeling not practised in the auncient Kirk.

Kneeling not practised in the reformed Churches.

REASONS AGAINST FESTIVALL DAYES.

The description of a festivall day.

1. Reason against festivall dayes.

The second Reason.

The third Reason.

The fourth Reason.

The fifth Reason.

The sixth Reason.

The seventh Reason.

The 8. Reason.

The iudgement of the Reformed Kirkes.

Of Confirmation.

Of Bishoping.

Of the Administration of the Sacraments in priuate places

§

§

[Page]

[Page]

PERTH ASSEMBLY. CONTAINING

1 The Proceedings thereof.

2 The Proofe of the Nullitie thereof.

2 Reasons presented thereto against the receiving the fiue new Articles imposed.

4 The oppositenesse of it to the proceedings and oath of the whole state of the Land. An. 1581.

5 Proofes of the unlawfulnesse of the said fiue Articles, viz. 1. Kneeling in the act of Receiving the Lords Supper. 2. Holy daies. 3. Bishopping. 4. Private Baptisme. 5. Private Communion.

EXOD. 20.7. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vaine, for the Lord will not hold him guiltlesse that taketh his name in vaine.

COLOS. 2.8. Beware lest there be any that spoyle you through Philosophy & vain deceit, through the traditions of men, according to the rudiments of the World, and not of Christ.

MDCXIX.

TO THE READER.

[Page]

[Page]

THE externall worship of God, and the government of the Church (Gentle and indicious reader) are like Hippocrates twins: they are sick together, in health together: they liue together, they die and dwine together. As long as the government of the Church of Scotland stood in integritie, as it was established by lawes, civill and ecclesiasticall, according to Gods word, so long was the worship of God preserved in puritie. Since the former government was altered, and the insolent domination of Prelates hath entered in by unlawfull meanes amongst us; popish rites and superstitious Ceremonies have followed, and are like to prevaile universally. They haue verified in their persons their common tenent, No Ceremony, no Bishop. The libertie graunted to our Church, to indict and hold generall assemblies from yeare to yeare and oftner pro re nata, was the cheife bulwarke of our discipline. This bulwarke was broken down to the end a more patent way might be made for their exaltation. When vote in Parliament (the needle to draw in the threede of Episcopall authoritie) was concluded, to the great griefe of the sincerer sort, many protestations were made, that no alteration in discipline, or divine service was intended: many cautions and limitations were made to bound the power of the minister voter in Parliament. They were ordayned to be countable to the generall [Page] Assemblies, for the manner of their entrie and behaviour in this new office: But like bankrupts, not being able to render accompt, they laboured that no accompt should bee made at all: that is, that there should be no ordinary generall assemblie to take accompt. Some few extraordinary Assemblies haue been convocated of late yeeres at their pleasures, for their purposes, and according to their device, constituted as they thought good: wherein they procured, or rather extorted with terror and authoritie, a sort of preheminence aboue their bretheren. They were Lords in Parliament, Councell, Session, Checker, Lords of Regalities, Lords of temporall lands, Presenters to benefices, modifiers of Ministers stipends, grand-Commissioners in the high Commission. Was it wonder then if so great Commanders commanded the Assemblies constituted, as is said, and carved to themselues a spirituall Lordship, when their worthy brethren were banished, imprisoned, confined, or deteyned at Court, that they might the more easily effectuate their purpose. They haue broken the caveats made with their owne consent, violated their promises, and haue sought preheminence both in Church and Common- wealth, with the ruine of others, and the renting of their mothers belly. Wee haue notwithstanding been so silent hitherto, that the world hath iudged our silence, rather slumbring and slothfulnesse then true patience. They are not satisfied with the wrongs already committed, but do still provoke us with new irritant occasions: and specially by obtruding upon us superstitious will-worships, and polluted inventions of men. It behooveth us therefore to set pen to paper, and say somewhat for the surer stay and better information of professors, tenderly affected to the sincerity of religion, lest they bee deluded with the glorious name of a pretended and null-Assemblie, [Page] or seduced with temporizers, swallowing up all abhominations or corruptions whatsoever. The meanes of printing and publishing are to us very difficill: wee wish therefore every good Christian to take in good part our meane travels, and not impute unto us want of good will, but of meanes, if they be not served hereafter continually after this manner. Wee shall bee ready God willing for our owne part, as need shall require, and opportunitie will serue, to defend the cause we maintaine against any of our opposites their answers, or replies whatsoever, worthy of answer. Wee haue seene of late some Pamphlets, which haue rather exposed their authors to laughter and contempt, then deserved any serious Confutation. In the Epistle before Basilicon Doron his Maiestie protesteth upon his honour, that hee misliketh not generally all Preachers, or others, who like better of the single forme of Policie in our Church, then of the many Ceremonies in the Church of England: and are perswaded that their Bishops smell of a papall Supremacie, that the surplesse, the corner cap, and such like, are the outward badges of popish errours. And that he doth equally loue and honour the learned and graue men of either of these opinions. His Maiestie useth this Provision, that where the Law is otherwise, they presse by Patience and well grounded reasons, either to perswade all the rest to like of their iudgement, or where they see better grounds on the other part, not to be ashamed peaceably to incline therunto, laying aside all preoccupied opinions. Wee are able to proue that no Ecclesiasticall law hath been made in any free and formall Assemblie for the alterations by-past, or presently intended, either in Government or Ceremonies. The ratification of civill Lawes already made, or to be made, cannot rectifie the Ecclesiasticall, as long as [Page] wee are able by good reason to impugne their authority, and evince the vicious constitution, the informall and unlawfull proceedings of these Assemblies, where the said Ecclesiasticall Lawes are said to haue been made. Put the case that no exception might be made against the Law, his Maiesties provision permitteth us to perswade others with well grounded reasons. The verity of our relations, and validity of our reasons, we refer to the tryall of every iudicious Reader, making conscience of his oath, promise, subscription, and puritie of his profession.

THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSEMBLIE HOLden at PERTH in August, Anno Dom. 1618.

[Page]

TVesday the 25 of August, 1618, the first day of the Assemblie. The generall Assemblie was indicted by his Majestie to be holden at Perth the 25. day of August 1618. Intimation was made twentie dayes before by open proclamation with sound of trumpet. For obedience to the proclamation and his Majesties particular missiues, the persons following conveined at the said Burgh the appointed day: his Majesties Commissioners my Lord Binning Secretary. Lord Skoone. Lord Carnegie. Their Assessours Sir Gideon Murray Treasurer Deputy, Sir Andrew Ker of Pharnihirst, Captaine of the guard. Sir William Olphant the kings Advocate, and Sir Wil. Livingstoun of Kilsyth. Noble men, the Earls of Louthiane, Lord Ochiltrie, Lord Sanquhar, Lord Boyde. Barons: Waughtoun, Lutquharne, Glen-vrquhart younger, Clunie-Gordoun, Boningtoun-woode, Weymis, Balvaird, Bilcolmie, Balcarras, Balmanno, Bombie, Blackbarronie, Lagg. Burgesses: for Edinburgh David Akinheid George Fowlis. For Perth Iames Aedie, Constant Malice. For Dundie; Mr. Alexander Wedderburne younger, Robert Clay-hils: for Aberdine, Mr. Iohn Mortimer. For Sterling, Christopher Alexander: for S. Androes, Iohn Knox, Thomas Lentroun: for the Vniversity of S. Androes, Doctor Bruce. Bishops, all except Argyle and the Iles. Ministers, Commissioners from presbyteries.

According to the ordinance, and laudable custome of this Church anent the sanctification of her meetings by fasting and prayer, intimation was made vpon the Sabboth preceding in the Church of Perth of a fast to be observed the first day of the assemblie: but the fast was little regarded, sauing that two sermons were made. The first was made in the morning by Patrik Bishop of Aberdine. His text. Ezra. 7.23. he observed and enlarged this ground, [Page] that nothing should be done or determined in the Church by any superiour power whatsoeuer, but that which is according to the commandement of the almightie King. The other sermon was made at the tenth houre by Iohn Archbishop of Saint Andrews in the lytle Church. His text. 1. Cor. 11.16. was very pertinent, but he ranne quicklie from it. He discoursed the space of two houres first in defence of ceremonies in generall. Next, of the fiue articles in particular. His best arguments for proofe or improbation was some testimonies cited out of Calvin, Martyr, Beza but perverted. The said Arch Bishop in his discourse, made ample protestation that he vnderstood not of the intended novations before they came of his Majestie. Item, that his Majesty would haue had these fiue Articles registred as Canons in the booke of the generall Assemblie, without either reasoning or voting: but by his meanes his Majestie was put of, till the consent of the Church should be obtayned. This his protestation he confirmed with a dreadfull execration, that the curse of God might light on him, and his, if he had not spoken truely. Immediately after the said discourse; was holden the first Session of this assemblie in maner following.

There was set in the litle Church a long table, and at the head thereof a short crosse table. At the crosse table were set chaires for his Maiesties Commissioners and the Moderator. At the syde of the long table were set forms for Noblemen, Barons, Burgesses, Bishops and Doctors. The Ministers were left to stand behind them, as if their place and parte had been onely to behold.

The Arch-bishop placed himself at the head of the table in the Moderators chaire beside his Majesties Commissioners. After prayer he notified to the assemblie, that Maister Thomas Nicolson ordinary Clark had dimitted his office in favour of Maister Iames Sandelands Aduocate. He commended the said Maister Iames, as a man qualified for that office, and readie to further the brethren in their particular affaires: And so without formall voting or lyte he tooke him sworne and admitted him Clerk. The Brethren were ordained to giue in their commissions to him after the rising of this session.

After that, Doctor Young, Deane of Winchester, by birth a Scotishman presented his Majesties letter, directed to the Lords of the privie Counsell, and the Bishops. This letter was twise read in open audience. Terrours were mixed with allurements to mooue the assemblie. After the reading of his Majesties letter the Archbishop had a speach, wherein he protested, that neither he nor the Church of England had craued these nouations, nor geuen counsel thereanent, and that it was against his will, that euer they were [Page] motioned. Yet now he is perswaded, that his Majestie would be more glad of the consent of this assemblie therevnto, then of all the gold of India: assureing them on the other parte in case of their refusall, the whole estate and order of our Church will be overthrown, Some Ministers will be banished: other some will bee deprived of their stipend and office; and all will be brought under the wrath of authority. He advised them rather to consent in time, then afterward to beg favour by offering conformity, and finde none. He alledged a letter written to him by a banished minister, M. Iohn Sharp, requesting liberty to serue God in his own countrey, and offering to submit himselfe in all things. But the letter was neither read nor seen. O, sayd he, I know when some of you are banished, and others deprived, yee will blame us, and call us persecuters; but we will lay all the burden upon the King. And if you call him a persecuter, all the world wil stand up against you.

After his owne speach, he required Doctor Young to speak, if so be, hee had intention or commission to that effect. The Doctor after his preface of insinuation, layd out the proceedings of the last assembly holden at S. Androes, the taunt and reproches breathed out at Court against the same: his Maiesties high displeasure kindled by occasion thereof, like a flame of fire ready to consume all, except it were quenched in this present assembly by condiscending to the fiue articles. Hee taxed the state of our Church, whereof he was ignorant. It pleased his wisdom to bring in the Puritan and the Papist, like Herod and Pilat conspiring Si non contra Christum Deminum, tamen contra Christum Domini. In end with words framed for the purpose and uttered in a mourning maner, hee went about to catch consent to the fiue articles.

The ministers defenders of the established order perceiuing the drift of these discourses, and all other meanes to be prepared and disposed for dashing of simple men, modestly required foure things. 1. That none be admitted to vote, but such as are authorized with lawfull commission. The Archbishop answered, hi [...] Maiesty had written to noble men and Barons willing them to be present at this assembly, if any man had any exception against them, they should be heard. It was replyed that they were not to except against their honorable persons or presence; but earnestly to [...]rave that the order of the Church might be observed: whereby it is provided that without commission none haue place to vote in generall assemblies.

2. That the liberty of the Church be not broken in the election of the Moderator, and that a lawfull lite be made to that effect. It was answered by the Archbishop that, this Assembly is convocate [Page] within the bounds of his diocesse he would understand who will take his province over his head. So he intruded him selfe in the Moderators office without election.

3. That the articles proponed in short and generall summes, might be put in forme, and amply extended as his Majesty would haue them inacted, that they may be the better aduised and considered. The pretended Moderator answered, let alone these toyes, trouble us not with needlesse questions, we shall speak of these things in the priuy conference.

4. That some of either opinion may be set apart to collect, and put in order the reasons of either side for the more sure & easie information of the assemblies. The pretended moderator reiected this also as impertinent.

He proceeded at his owne pleasure without advice or information of the provinces or presbyteries to the nomination of the priuy conference, before that the Clark had received the commissions. Hee nominated besides his Majesties commissioners, their assessours and the noble men, all the Barons except three▪ all the Bishops, the Commissioners of Edinburgh, Perth, Dundie, 37 Doctours and other ministers. The most parte was such, as were already resolved to yeeld. Others were not experienced in the state of our Church, some few of the other opinion were taken in, to try the force of their arguments in private, that in publick they might either be evaded, or suppressed. After the said nomination the conference was appointed to convein at 3. afternoone and the assembly at 8. hours in the morning. So endeth the first session.

The conference convenied at 3. afternoon. His Majesties letter was read again. The Moderator aforesaid seconded the same with many terrours. To make them goe quickly to worke, he affirmed that foure articles were already concluded in the Assemblies holden last at Aberdine and S. Andrewes respectiue, howbeit not in forme as his Maiesty required: that kneeling allanerly rested to be consented unto. For assisting of his declaration a minute was read containing the poynts conferred upon at the places foresayd. And no further evidence was produced for probation of the alledged agreement. But particularly mention was made, that his Highnesse altogether refused cautions and conditions added by the said Assemblies as frustrations of his Highnesse intentions. And as was affirmed by the said Moderator, his Maiestie was still offended at that Assembly holden at S. Andrewes. For removing of that offence the Moderator aforesaid would haue had the Article of kneeling voted in the conference without reasoning. But after much businesse and earnest dealing, the said Article by plurality of [Page] votes was put to reasoning. For clearing the state of the question, the Ministers defenders of the established order, required againe that the sayd Articles might be extended to the full, and put in perfect forme. 2. That the party of the other iudgement, would proue them necessary and expedient for our Church, according to the revealed rule, Affirmanti incumbit probatio: or otherwaies improue our former order already established, as defectiue, superfluous▪ or confused. 3. That time and place might be granted to all, having calling and interest to reason freely, and heare reasoning in presence of the Assembly for their better direction. 4. That the reasons of moment might be proponed and answered in writing, and some few of either side appointed to put them in due forme and order.

The Moderator notwithstanding of the reference of these conditions to the privy conference, reiected them: and as for the party pursuer, and party defender in the reasoning, he determined by himselfe, that the Ministers defenders of the established order must either proue the Articles to be impious and unlawfull, or else they must proue disobedient to his Maiesty. It was replied, That poore subiects neither ought, nor conveniently could dispute a question so affected with disobedience to their Soveraigne, as was there alledged. But if reformation be intended, and the truth of the Articles proponed be sincerely to be searched so farre forth as they may proue good and expedient for this Church; the order agreed upon by his Maiestie at Perth 1597. cannot of reason be refused, viz. That matters touching reformation of external government be proponed, ordine & decenter animo aedificandi, non tentandi, for searching the truth the undoubted ground of true unity. Notwithstanding of whatsoever could be alledged, the Ministers standing for their possession, were forced to be persuers, and either to obiect against the said Articles, or else to be reputed disobedient to his Maiesty, and to haue no reason on their side. The time being spent, some few reasons were alledged by the Ministers, which were cut off rather by cavilling and quarrelling at mens persons▪ then solidly answered. The conference was appointed in the morning at eight houres, notwithstanding the said houre had been appointed for the second Session of the Assembly.

Wednesday the 26. of August, the second day of the Assemb [...]y.

THE privy conference convened at 8 houre in the morning. Much time was spent with the Bishops discourses, and other preparations for making way to summary reasoning. Some [Page] few Arguments were proponed by the Ministers against kneeling in the act of receiving the sacramentall elements of bread and wine; but answered as before. The pretended Moderator to cut off reasoning instantly required, that kneeling might bee voted in the conference. The Ministers alledged that the proper use of the conference is to prepare and put in order matters that are to be intreated in the face of the Assembly; and therefore required that the Articles might be formed: and after long debait it was concluded by plurality of votes, that they should be formed. The rest of this short time was spent in naming of Bishops and Doctors for forming and extending the Articles and Acts that were to passe thereupon. The conference was appointed to conveine at 4. afternoone.

The Assembly being frustrate of their diet in the morning, assembled at 4. afternoone at the call of the Bell, by the Moderators expectation. He shewed unto them, that that houre was appointed for the conference allanerly. But seeing they conveined, hee thought good to make known to them, that the foure Article [...] formerly condescended upon at Aberdine and S. Andrewes, as also the fift Article against kneeling, after long reasoning were concluded in the conference, and ordained to be formed and produced before them. And so hee desired them to depart to the end that matters might be exped, for ending the Assembly the morne. But opposition was made in the contrary, that kneeling was not voted, and the other foure Articles were neither reasoned nor voted. After the removall of the Assembly, the act of kneeling as it was formed, was read in presence of the conference, The pretended Moderator urged that kneeling should be voted. It was answerd, that it was an intolerable novelty in this Church, a great prejudice to persons, purposes, and priviledges, and a presumptuous usurpation of a few to vote and conclude under the colourable pretence of a conference, matters of weight belonging to the whole Church. They required therefore that according to order, reasoning and voting might be reserved to the full Assembly. The pretended Moderator answered, First, that it was the custome of the Lords, of the Articles in parliament to proceed after that manner. Next, that he would not spare to commit twenty preiudices to please the King. And thus kneeling was put in voting without regard of the Assembly, and concluded by plurality of votes. The rest of this short time was spent in talking upon Symony, the planting of the Church of Edinburgh, and order to bee taken with beggars. The conference appointed the Assembly to conveine the morne after Sermon.

[Page]

Thursday 27. Aug. the third day of the Assembly.

WIlliam, B. of Galloway made a Sermon, his Text Rom· 14.19. His doctrine was far contrary to that which he taught before the estates of Parliament An. 1606 He set at naught the ancient order of our Church, sometime highly commended by himselfe, and extolled his new light. He presumed to teach them a new kinde of Catechisme, under whom he himselfe might be as yet catechised. The second and last Session of this assembly began after dinner▪ and ended this day.

The Kings Commissioners, and the Bishops, masters of this Assemblie, determined to end all this after noone: and hauing the assise enclosed for that effect, assured them that out of that house they should not go untill his Majestie were satisfied of his desire. The pretended Moderator earnestly aggreadged the nncessity of yeelding and instantly urged present voting without furder delay strongly enforcing, that his Maiestie behoved to bee satisfied, and assureing them, that his Highnesse would accept of no other answer but yeelding. To effectuate his purpose, hee blew out many threatnings in most peremptory maner. Hee insulted uppon the ministers assembled, as if they had been hirelinges, saying, I know you all well ynough. There is neuer a one of you will suffer so much as the losse of your stipends for the matter. Think not but when the act is made I will get obedience of you. There is none of you that voteth in the contrary mindeth to suffer. Some men, said hee, pretend conscience and feare more to offend the people then the King: but all that will not doe the turne. Albeit he had formerly affirmed in the case of requiring consent, that although the act were made, his Majestie would be mercyfull in vrgeing obedience thereto. And they knew him to be more fauourable to his brethren then any Bishop of England. Hee tooke it also vpon his conscience, though it was not trew that there was neither lass nor ladde rich nor poore in Scotland some few precise persons excepted, who were not onlie content but also wished that order of kneeling to be receiued: whereof he had profe and experience in his own citie of S. Andrewes, and in this Town since he came hither. Hee made mention of a pamphlet casten in the pulpit at Edinburgh, wherein it should haue been affirmed, that the Bishops were bringing in Papistry, and that good professors will fight in defence of their own religion. By way of answer thereto, he confessed that the ceremonies [Page] make not the separation betwixt us and the Romane Church, but their Idolatry, the which if the Romanists would forsake, they would meet them mid-way, and ioyne with them. And as if the Ministers had known any such professors disposed to fight for the religion, or had been of purpose to ioyne with them, he disswades them to leane to such words, for he had seen the like of that before time at the 17. day of December. Hee wished if such a thing should happen, it would please his Maiesty to make him a Captaine, never any of these braggers would come to the field.

After these blasts and terrours, the Ministers with modest importunity insisted that the matters depending might be better cleared by further reasoning and advisement; so much the rather, because these matters had not been reasoned in full Assembly, for the information of all that had interest. After much dealing, and many earnest speeches and desires to be heard, some fashion of liberty was granted to a few, but with such checkes and limitations to the partie that preased to propone and reason, that quickly they were cut off and sourely rebuked, rather borne downe with authority, then satisfied with reason. His Maiesties chiefe Commissioner, & pretended Moderator, straitly enioyned them either to propone a new reason, or else to hold their peace, when as the argument either had▪ not been proponed in conference; or if proponed, not answered; or if answered, not suffered to be replied unto. And suppose all this had been done in the conference, yet all was new to the full Assembly, and ought to haue been repeated and fully discussed for information of all voters. Yea many Ministers had not so much a [...] accesse to heare or propone one argument: they had no seates provided for them, as the other party had: Gentlemen thronged in before them. The defenders of the Articles were permitted to discourse as long as they pleased, to gybe, mocke, and cavill, so light account made they of the matters in hand, or the fearfull schisme ensuing upon such disorders, that their behaviour was offensiue to the beholders. The best arguments and answers were taken from the authority of the Kings sword. Hee will ranverse all, except we yeeld; or the authority of his word; as when it was alledged out of Zanchius upon the fourth commandement, that things indifferent abused to Idolatry should be altogether removed. The pretended Moderator opponed the iudgement of the King of Great Britaine, to the iudgement of Zanchius, or any of the learned. In a word, the pretended Moderator professed plainly, that neither their reasons nor their [Page] number should carry away the matter. These Articles must be concluded, and should be concluded, although there were none but the eleven Bishops, with the authority of his Maiesties Commissioners, they shall impose them. After some few reasons proponed and answered, as is said, it was confessed, that if his Maiesty could haue been pleased, or put off, they would haue reasoned against these Articles, and the introducing of them in this Church. Doctor Lyndesay being posed in conscience, confessed that they had neither reason, nor Scripture, nor Antiquity for them, yet to avert rhe Kings wrath of this Church, yeelding was best. Kneeling was chiefly agitate. Some velitation there was made against Holy dayes. Nothing spoken of the three other Articles, boasting and posting confounded all.

The ministers not being permitted to reason and pursue their arguments verbally with such liberty, as of reason should haue been granted, and fearing prejudice in voting, gaue in some difficulties in writing, to be considered and removed, before the articles should passe in voting, like as they were ready, if place had been granted to present in writing particular reasons against every one of the said articles, as was plainly professed. But for cutting them short of that intention, the presenter of the said difficulties in a bosting manner was commanded to subscribe the same, and rebuked as not haveing commission. They suspected a protestation, against the proceedings of this Assembly, for preventing whereof they had declamed before against the protestation subscribed at the last parliament, as treasonable, and seditious. But when it was perceaved, that he sought a penne for subscribing of the same, the Moderator receaved them. Two of them was read, but no wayes respectted; the rest were suppressed.

The ministers notwithstanding of the preceding terrours most humbly and earnestly requested his Majesties Commissioners, that the concluding of the articles might be continued, which their reasons in writing were sent to his Majesty, and answer returned. But this humble request was dispysed.

Before the roll was called, his Majesties letter was read again in open audience of the said assembly, no doubt to the end the last impression might incline the voters to consent. The ministers defenders of the established order required againe, that none might haue place to vote, but such as were authorised with lawfull commission: but that order could not be admitted. Yea the pretended Moderator answered, that if al Scotland were there present they should haue vote.

[Page]The question put in voting was thus formed. Whether will yee consent to these articles, or disobey the King? the words chosen to distinguish the votes were: agree: disagree: non liquet. The question proponed was affected with this strait condition: he that denyeth one, denieth all. The question being thus contrived, the Moderator certified them, that whosoever voted against the articles, his name should be marked and given up to his Majesty. For gathering the votes, he took the roll in his owne hand from the Clarke, to whom of office it belongs so to marke the votes, that accordingly he may forme the acts truely as his oath and office bindeth him. First were called his highnes commissioners, and their assessours; then the Noblemen, Bishops, and Barons; then the Doctors and Ministers, last of all the burgesses. The Doctors and Ministers were called on without order. He called first on those, of whom he was assured to be on the affirmatiue side without respect of the order of Province or Presbytery, as for example, the Arch Deacon of Sanct Androes and Mr. Patrik Galloway a man of many pensions were ranked with the Ministers of the North. Some wanting commission were called and voted affirmative: diverse others having commission of whose negative they were assured; were omitted. In calling on the names, he inculcate these and the like words: haue the King in your mind: remember of the King: looke to the King. In the end by plurality of votes the fiue articles were concluded and consented unto. 1. Kneeling in the act of receaving the sacramentall elements of bread and wine. 2. five holy dayes: the day of Christs nativity, Passion, Resurection, Ascension, and the Penticost. 3. Episcopall confirmation. 4. Private Baptisme. 5. Private communion. His Majesties Commissioners and their assessors: all the noble men, except one: all the Barons except one: all the Doctors except D. Strang: all the Burgesses and a number of Ministers voted affirmative▪ one noble man, one Doctour, and fourty five Ministers voted negative: some few, non liquet.

THE NVLLITY OF PERTH ASSEMBLY.

[Page]

THE generall Assemblie hath vsuallie met, since the reformation of the religion, according to the indiction of time and place made by the former Assemblie. And if it happened that any Assemblie was to be holden Pro re nata, premonition was made in dew time by his Majestie, and the Commissioners of the Church, and the occasions set down expresly, to the effect Commissioners might be sent instructed according to the qualitie of the busines to be intreated. Nevertheles after diuerse reports given out by such as stand in credite in Church affaires, that his Majestie was so incensed against the last Assemblie holden at Sanst-Androes that there was no hope of any other Assemblie: This Assemblie beyond expectation was proclamed to be holden within twentie dayes after the proclamation made at the market crosse of Edinburgh, without any advertisement giuen to the Presbyteries anent the matters to be handled.

The acte of chattouris of old were voyd, and of none effect, when the meanest member haveing vote was neglected, contemned, or not lawfullie warned. Such like the acte of Provinciall synods, when the mean [...]st suffragane was not regarded with lawfull citation, according to the rule Contemptus unius plus obest, quam multorum contradictio. Neuertheles for lack of lawfull warning▪ and conuenient space to provide and prepare Commissionars, there was absent from that Assemblie, foure dioceses viz. Orknay, Caithnes, Argyle, and the Iles, beside diuerse presbyteries, whose interest was as proper and necessary in the general assemblie as of any suffragan in synod or particular member in the chaptour.

The generall assemblie, the highest judicatorie Ecclesiasticall within this realme, hath ever after exhortation made by the last Moderator lyted, and lawfullie elected a new Moderator according to diuerse acts continuall custome and practise of this Church. The which presbyteries hath been so regarded, that the conuention holden at Perth by his Maiesties missiue the last of Feb. 1596. although frequented by his Maiesties presence [Page] with a great number of the nobilitie, Barons and Burgessis with the Commissioners from euerie presbyterie was for the defect aforesaid no further acknowledged to be a lawfull Assemblie, then the generall Assemblie holden at Dundie the yeare following 1597. declared the same, that is, to be a lawfull extraordinary Assemblie. Neuertheles no moderator was lawfullie elected in this Assemblie, but the place vsurped by him who had practised against the matter there proponed, and not as yet determined, and consequentlie, who ought to haue been secludid from any authoritie in respect of the preiudice commited by him.

By order established, acts standing in force and continuall custome free of all controversie and quarrell, all and everie one of the ordinary members of a generall Assemblie, having place and power to vote, or capable of moderation, are and should be authorized with lawfull commissions from inferiour Assemblies viz. Presbyteries, Burghs and Vniversities, according to the acte made anno 1537. Neuertheles the Bishops, a great number of noble men and Barons, and some Ministets, hauing no lawefull commission presumed to carrie themselues as lawfull members of the said Assemblie.

Whereas the proceedings of the Assemblie ought to be free without preoccupation either with terrours or allurements. This Assemblie was preoccupied with Sermones, Letters, harangues with allurements on the one side, and terrours on the other.

No other ought to be chosen members of the priuie conference but such as are authorized with commission to be members of the Assemblie. Nevertheles the pretended moderator did nominat for the privie conference such as he pleased, before the commissions were deliuered, and consequentlie not dewlie informed, who were the just members of the Assemblie.

According to the rule, Totum est maius sua parte, the Assemblie is greater then the conference: and according to another rule Turpis pars omnis toti non congrua. It is an absurd conference that disagrees from the whole Assemblie, Neuertheles in that Assemblie some few named by the pretended Moderator, not chosen by the Assemblie, not only according to the custome of the priuie conference concurred with the said Moderator for preparing and digesting of matters to be proponed in dew order, but tooke vpon them to reason, vote, and conclude the matters properlie belonging to the whole Assemblie.

It had been the commendable care of Godly Emperours, and their honorable deputs in general Councels, to provide that nothing [Page] be done violently, nor extorted by terrour, but that time▪ and liberty be granted for reasoning upon matters proponed▪ and that the booke of God be layed open for finding out the truth. Agatho writing to the Emperour Constantine adviseth him to grant free power of speaking to every one that desires to speak for his faith which he beleeveth, and holdeth that all men may evidently see that no man willing or desirous to speak for the truth was forbidden, hindered or rejected by any force, threatnings, terrour, or what soever else might avert them from so doing. Conforme to this advice, the Emperour answereth as followeth. By God almighty we favour no party, but shall keep our selues equall to all, no way making necessity in any point. Nevertheles in this assembly, the necessity of yeelding was inforced vnder no lesse paines then the wrath of authority, imprisonment, exile, deprivation of Ministers, and utter subversion of the estate and order of this Church. Such as by the providence of God had their mouthes opened to reason, were checked, quarrelled, rebuked, boasted, interrupted, and for their discouragement, it was plainly professed that neither the reasoning nor the number of voters should carry the matter away. The party defender was forced to persue. The collecting and putting in order of the reasons of either side was refused.

In free and lawfull assemblies private reasoning is not sufficient, but it is requisit that there be also free reasoning in publick for the full information of all who haue the right of voting. Nevertheles in this assembly publick reasoning was hardly obtained, and when it was obtained, it was not full and free to propone, and persue with replyes.

In all free and lawfull assemblies, humble requests for mature deliberation in maters of great importance hath been heard, & granted. But in this assembly humble supplication for continuation till matters were more ripely considered, or till his Majesties answer was returned to the petition of the defenders of the established order, was peremptorily refused.

Pope Leo excepteth against the second Councell of Ephesus, call Praedatory, that Dioscorus, who challenged the chief place, keepeth not Priestly moderation and would not suffer the synodall letters of the West to be read. In all free and lawfull Assemblies good advisements hath been heard & followed. But in this Assemblie some difficulties presented in writing to be considered and removed before the voting, were peremptorily rejected.

In all free and lawfull Assemblies publick voting should be [Page] free of all terrours according to the rule, nihil consensui tam contrarium est, quam vis atque metus quem comprobare contra bonos mores est. Nevertheles in this Assemblies, his Majesties letters were read the fourth time, immediatly before the publick voting, to move the Assemblie. The pretended Moderator threatned to mark their names who dissented, and breathed out many terrours and threatnings, and so he made good in publicke, that which he profest in private, that he would commit twenty prejudices to further his Majesties purpose.

In all free and lawfull Assemblies the estate of the question to be voted, ought to be so formed that it carry with it no danger. Nevertheles in this Assembly the matter to be voted was proponed with sensible danger, agree, or be reputed disobedient to his Majestie, that is, either make a constitution to bind all Ministers, and professours of this reformed Kirk to returne to these fiue articles which they haue vomited, or else yee shall be reputed disobedient.

As the acts which are to passe in voting should be distinguished in number: cleare in order, particularly expressed from point to point, because they should contein directions of certain actions to be performed, &c. So the matters offered to voting should be distinctly, clearly, and particularly proponed. Nevertheles in this Assembly all was shut up in a confused caption a multis interrogatis, and voted at once voting in one session. Iustly therefore may their conclusions be called Leges Saturae.

In all free Assemblies such order is observed in calling the names of the voters, that no publick prejudice be committed. Nevertheles in this Assembly neither the accustomed order of Provinces, nor Presbyteries was observed; but such were called on first, as were knowne to be affirmative voters, to discourage and disperse the negatives.

Leo sayeth Epist. 25. that some that came to the Councell of Ephesus were rejected, and others were brought in who at the pleasure of Dioscorus were brought to yeeld captiue hands to their impious subscriptions. For they knew it would be preiudiciall to their estate, unlesse they did such things as were injoyned them. It is crimine falsi in gathering of votes, either to passe by them, who haue place and power to vote, or to admit such as are not lawfullie authorized. Nevertheles in this Assemblie not only were some past by who were knowen resolued to vote negative, but diverse others also disposed to vote affirmatiue were admitted, or rather brought in without commission.

[Page]In all free and lawfull Assemblies, not onely Ministers, but all others of whatsoeuer rank, ought to be authorized, with cō mission, or els they haue not the power of voting. Neuertheles in this Assembly, persons of all ranks not authorized with commission, were admitted to vote, as may be seen by the induction following.

It hath pleased his Maiesty in former times to send but some few Commissioners in his Highnesse absence, to concurre with the Assembly, and to propone his Highnesse desire thereunto, &c. Neverthelesse in this Assembly, not onely his Maiesties Commissioners, but also their Assessours gaue euery one vote, whereas his Maiesties selfe being present; never clamed furder, then the power of one vote.

At Edinburgh in Iuly 1568. it was ordained that Barons should be chosen Commissioners in Synodall assemblies. At Dundie in March 1597. after the full establishment of Presbyteries, it was appoynted in presence of his Maiestie, that Barons should be chosen Commissioners with consent of Presbyteries, and that one Baron onely should be directed out of the bounds of a Presbytery. Neverthelesse in this Assembly, the Noblemen and Barons had neither commission according to the old act, nor according to the new.

In the yeare of God 1568. it was ordained that Burgesses should be chosen Commissioners by the Councell and Kirke-session of their Burgh coniunctly. And in the yeare 1597. that they should be chosen with consent of the Presbytery. Item, that every Burgh haue power to direct but one Commissioner, except Edinburgh, to whom it was permitted to direct two. Neverthelesse in this Assembly, neither of the said acts were observed.

At Montrose 1600. it was statuted and ordained, that none of them who shall haue vote in Parliament in the name of the Church, shall come as Commissioners to the generall Assembly, nor haue any vote in the same▪ unlesse they be authorized with commission from their own Presbyteries to that effect. This act was never repealed, no not at the pretended assembly holden at Glasgow, but by the said assembly they stand countable to every generall assembly for their proceedings. Howbeit the Presbyteries were spoyled of their authority in many things at the sayd pretended assembly: yet of the power of election of Commissioners they were not spoyled. Neither is there any other order of election of Commissioners, and constitution of the mēbers of the assembly set down by any act of our Kirke, their [Page] was established Anno 1597. Nevertheles in this assembly, they not onely presented themselues without commission, but sate as Lords over-ruling it. They had practised the ceremonies against the established lawes before they were proponed to the Assembly, they ought therefore to haue been secluded and sharply censured; but they usurped the place both of Iudge and party.

At S. Andrewes in Aprill 1582. it was thought expedient that Presbyteries should not be astricted to direct their Moderator in commission, but whom they iudged fittest for the purpose. That constant Moderators should be constant members of the generall assembly, is a forged clause foysted in an act of a pretended assembly holden at Linlithquow the yeare of God 1606. The which assembly neither the Church then did, nor the Bishops now will stand to. Nevertheles in this assembly, some Moderators of Presbyteries voted without election, and onely by vertue of the forged clause of the act aforesayd. If any Presbytery directed their Moderators in commission upon ignorance and errour, having respect to the forged clause aforesayd. Their ignorance and errrour is not lawfull consent. It is in the meane time to be remembred, that the present Moderators are not of the quality of these constant Moderators, but of a new Edition set out at Glasgow, viz. They are the Bishops Deputes placed by them in Presbyteries.

The Assessours to his Maiesties Commissioners, the Noblemen, Barons, Bishops, Burgesses, and Moderators imposed upon Presbyteries with some Ministers voting without warrant, being substracted from the number of affirmatiue voters, the negatiues will not be found inferior in number to the affirmatiues authorized with commission. And suppose inferiour in number, yet not in weight, for the negatiue voters adhered to the iudgement of the Church, heard no reasons for the novelties proponed, were not overcome with perswasions or terrours, as was the affirmatiues.

The affirmatiue voters authorized with commission, either had their commissions procured by their Bishops, or else were mercenary Pensionars▪ or Plat-servers for augmentation of stipends: or gapers for promotion: or of suspect credit for benefite received or hoped for▪ or had subscrybed other private Articles in private more dangerous then the present Articles: or had been threatned privatly by their owne diocesian Bishops with deposition: or were not well informed in their judgment for lack of full and free reasoning: or were circumvented with [Page] promises made to them, by theit Bishops, that they should not be urged with the practize, if they would only consent to make an act to please the King: or were terrified with the publick threatnings before mentioned. Iudge therfore whether their votes should be pondered or numbered.

In omnil us causis pro facto accipitur id in quo quis alium terrefacit quo minus fiat. In this Assembly the affirmatiue voters confessed that they assented not simpliciter to the Articles proponed as knowing truths, but onely to avert the wrath of authority, standing in their owne Iudgment against them, and not for them, in respect of the estate of this church. Hence it may be clearely seene that their votes were only affirmatiue in respect of their feare, but negatiue in respect of their iudgment, and duetifull affection to this Church.

Other informalites may be observed, but these are sufficient to proue the nullity of this pretended Assembly whereby the established estate of this Church is so farre prejudged, or rather simple people for their facility indangered, if they upon the pretended authority of this Assembly shall adventure to make defection from their former profession confirmed by so many and well advised Assemblies, and blessed by the experience of Gods great loue in his best benefites, or to violate their solemne oath, and subscription. The pretender may as safely professe that he wil alter his profession, or violate his oath, and subscription, suppose there had been no Assembly at all. But to detaine simple people in their bygaine revolt, it will be cryed out and inculcat that some few persons (and to make them odious they wilbe called mall-contents, troublers of the estate, seditious persons, and what not? for the which contumelies and reproches account must be made one day) that they may not, nor should not iudge upon the nullity of the Assemblies. It is trew by way of iurisdiction or superordination (as they call it) no private man should presume so to doe, for that iudgment belongeth to another free, and lawfull Assembly. But by the iudgment of discretion every christian man ought to iudge how matters of religion are imposed upon him, and by what authority. If thou mayst not discerne as a iudge, thou mayst discern as a Christian. If yee shall admit indifferently whatsoever is concluded under the glorious name of an Assembly, then may wee be brought to admit not only the English ceremonies, but also Lutheranisme, and Papistry. If Ministers giue way to their Parochinners to practize the obtruded Ceremonies at their pleasures. If sworne professors intangle themselues againe with the superfluiities, [Page] whereof the Lord hath made them free, let the one and the other take heed how they defend themselues from the iust challenge of back slyding, and the rest of the inconveniences, that may ensue on their change.

If the Parliament by acts, authorize matters affected with such informalities, and nullities, matters of themselues so contrarious to our profession, their ratification of a vitious thing can not be a rule to a Christian manes conscience. But it is to be hoped, that the Lord shall so dispose the hearts of stats-men to the loue of the truth, quietnes of the Church and Country, and peace of mens consciences, that no unreasonable burthen shall be knit upon the members of Christs bodie by any deed of theirs under the name of a benifit to the Church. Invito beneficium non datur.

Consider three things: first the nullity of this Assembly. 2. Thy own oath and subscrption, how it admits or abhors this change suppose the Assemblie had been lawfull. 3. If the particulars offered can be made lawfull, or expedient by any Assemblie whatsoeuer.

THE ARTICLES PRESENTED TO the Assembly Aug. 27. with some quotations added for confirmation.

FOR somuch as wee haue been debarred of accesse, and from heareing the proceedings of the conference, their reasonings, consultations, and advisements, anent the Articles proponed to this generall Assemblie: whereof all and euery one of them so neerlie toucheth vs in our christian resolution and offices of our Ministerie. In most humble manner wee present to your considerations the particulars here after specified, in the feare of God intreating your favourable answer to the same.

1 The articles proponed, if they be concluded, they doe innouate and bring under the slander of change the estate of this Church, so advisedlie established by Ecclesiasticall constitutions, acts of parliament, approbation of other Kirkes, and good likeing of the best reformed christians without and within this kingdom, and so evidentlie blessed with happie successe and [Page] sensible experience of Gods greatest benefits by the space of 58 yeares, and aboue; so that wee may boldlie say to the praise of God that no Church hath injoyed the trueth and puritie of religion in larger libertie. And vpon some such considerations, it pleased his gratious Majestie to continew the Church of England in her established estate, as may be seen in the conference at Hampton Court, and Thomas Sparke his booke written there vpon. Ipsa quippe mutatio, etiam quae adiuvat utilitate novitate perturbat: quapropter quae utilis non est, perturbatione infructuosa consequenter noxia est, sayeth Augustine Epist. 118. That is euen a change that is helpfull for utilitie, perturbeth with the noveltie. Wherefore consequentlie a change that is not profitable, is noisome through fruictles perturbation. Rarher a Kirk with some faulte, then still a change, It is said in the conference at Hampton court.

2 The receiuing again of these articles so justly rejected, and so carefullie, and long kept foorth of this Kirk, greeveth reformed professours tenderly affected to our reformation, and giveth occasion to our adversaries to reproove our separation from them, of rashnes, levitie, and inconstancie, and not onely hindereth their conversion, but strengthens their hope of our furder conformity with them. Quoties non mutarunt suam quisque senten [...]iam? Quod aedificant bodie, cras destruunt. Hodie lapidem locant in fundamentum, coementoque confirmant, quem postero dic eruunt, & conterunt. Vbique revocationes, emendationes, novi foetus, aliae atque aliae, quoties nova sententia placet, assertiones: alius deturbat alium, confusio confusioni permiseetur: atque interim scinditur incertū studi [...] in contraria vulgus. Nec adhuc [...]rnimus aliud, est quis nisi mente captus dicat istiusmodi artifices reaedificare Ecclesia Dei, quibus omnia incerta fluxa, instablia, contraria: quibus nulla dogmatum constantia, nulla animorum consensio, Antdidagma Coloniens. Pag. 4. That is, How oft haue they not changed every one their opiniō: that which they build to day, they demolish to morrow: they place this day a stone for a foundation, and make it sure with morter which they pull vp the day following and bruse in peeces: euery where there is revocations, corrections, new births, diuerse assertions, as oft as a new opinion pleaseth any of them: One throweth down another: Confusion is mingled with confusion; and in the meane time, the doubtfull vulgars are seuered in contrarie factions. Neither do wee as yet perceiue any other thing: and who will say except such a one as is besyde himselfe, that such artisans reedifies the Kirk of God, to whom althings are vncertain, flowing, vnstable, contrarious, who haue [Page] no constancie in the heads of doctrine no consent of myndes. &c.

3 They cannot stand in one profession with brotherlie kyndnes, peace, and loue which must bee tenderlie kept amongst the members of Christs body, as the same consists of stronger, and more infirme as may appeare in the apostolicall rules following. First, all things are lawfull to me, but all things are not profitable. I may doe all things but I will not be brought vnder the power of any thing. 2. Let every man be fully persuaded in his owne my [...]d. 3 Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne. 4 Let euery one vnderstand according to sobrietie as God hath dealt to euery man the measure of faith. 5 Take heede least by any means this power of yours be an occasion of falling to them that are weake. 6 Through thy knowledge shall thy weake brother fall, for whom Christ died. 7 When yee sinne against the brethren, and wound their weake consciences, yee sin against Christ. 8 Whatsoeuer yee doe, doe all to the glorie of God. 9. Giue no offence, neither to the Iew nor to the Graecian, nor to the Kirk of God. 10 Please all men in all things, not seek [...]ing your owne prosite, but the profit of many that they may be saved. 11 Cause not your commoditie to be evil spoken of. 12. Let all things be done, honestly, and in order▪ Things indifferent (put the case mans inuention were of that nature) in the case of scandall, cease to be indifferent, and are as things morall. Perkins. Galat. 2.3.

4. They giue way to humane inventions, and bring the wrong key of mans wit within the house of God whereby toyes and trifling Ceremonies in number and force are multiplied as mens wits are variable to invent. Who requires those things at your hands.

5. The admitting of some openeth the do [...]e to the rest, and the multitude of such make us inferiour to the Iewes in two respects. 1. Their Ceremonies were all divine. 2. In number fewer then rituall Christians doe obserue betwixt the Pasche, and the Pentecost, Gerson complaineth, quod multitudine levissimarum ceremoniarum vis omnis Spiritus Sancti quem in nobis vigere oportuit, & vera Pietas, Sit extincta. That with the multitude of frivolous ceremonies true piety was extinguished and the force of the Spirit which ought to be powerfull in us. Iewel Apollog. Pag. 116. Sed quamvis hoc neque inve [...]iri possit, quomodo contra fidem sunt, ipsam tamen religionem servilibus oneribus p [...]munt, ut tolerabillior sit conditio Iudcorum, qui etiamsi tempus liberta [...]is non agnoverint, legalibus tamen sarcinis, non humanis presumtionibus subjiciuntur. August. epist. 119. Howbeit it can not be found how [Page] they are contrary to the faith, yet they presse downe religion it self with servile burdens, so that the estate of the Iewes is more tolerable, who howbeit they did now acknowledge the time of their liberty, are subject notwithstanding to the burdens of the Law, not to the presumptions of man.

Quanto majus accedit cumulo rituum in Ecclesia, tanto majus detrahitur, non tantum lil ertati Christianae, sed & Christo, et ejus fidei. Confes. Orthodox. Cap 27. That is, The more that the heap of rites and Ceremonies in the Kirk increaseth, the more is derogated, not only from Christian liberty, but also from Christ and his faith. Learned and graue men may like better of the single forme of policie in our Kirk, then of the many ceremonies of the Kirke of England. Epist. before Basilicon Doron.

6, Matters of that nature bring inevitably with them disputations, divisions, contentions as may be seene in all Kirkes, where such coales of contention gets entry. The Pascha of the Primatiue Kirk, The Interim of Germany, the rent of the Kirk of England, our owne experience since the strife of the externnall gubernation began among us &c.

7. They hinder edification, for how meckle time and zeale shall be spent uppon the inbringing and establishing of these, as much leasure and opportunity shall Satan get to sow and water the tares of Athisme, Schisme, Popery, and dissention. Consider the sentences following. 1. Let us proceede by one rule, that wee may mind one thing. Philip. 3.16. 2. Let us follow the truth in loue, and in all things grow up in him, who is the head, that is Christ. Ephes. 4.3. Giue no place to the Devill. 4. If yee be otherwayes minded God shall reveale the same to you. 5. Feede my sheepe. 6. Take heede to your selues and to the flock. 7. Let no root of bitternes spring up to trouble you. 8. Fulfill my ioy that ye be like minded, haueing the same loue beeing of one accord and of one iudgement, that nothing be done through contention or vain glory, but that in meeknes of mind every man esteem other better then himself. 9. Do all things without murmuring and reasoning. 10. It was needful for mee to write unto you, that yee should earnestly contend for the faith, which was once giuen to the Saincts. 11. While men slep [...] the enemy came, sowed his tares amongst the wheat, and went his way.

8. They bring a sensible blot either upon the happy memory of our godly and wise predecessours, in so far as wee depart from that reformation, so wisely brought in, appointed & established by them, or else upon our selues, by resuming again of dangerous superfluities without reason, rejected by them, for weighty and necessary causes, Magnum est hoc Dei munus, quod una est religionem[Page]puram, et eutaxian, doctrinae videlicet retinendae vinculum, in Scotiam intulistis. Sic obsecro et obtestor, haec duo simul retinete, ut uno amisso alterum non diu permanere posse semper memineritis. Beza epist. to M. Knox. This is a great benefit of God that yee haue brought into Scotland true religion and good order, the band that retaineth doctrine, at one time, so I beseech you and obtest that yee retain these two together, so that yee remember, that if the one be lost, the oher can not indure long. And againe he saith quam recte illud, quod disciplinam simul cum doctrina conjungitis, obsecro, et obtestor ut ita pergatis ne vobis idem quod tam multis eveniat, ut qui in limine impegerint progredi non possunt, immo etiam interdum ne velint quidem, quod longè miserimum est. How well was that done, that yee conjoyned Doctrine and Discipline together, I beseech you and obtest, that yee go forward, lest it happen to you which is befallen to many, that could not make a progresse, haueing stumbled in the very entry, yea sometime were not willing which is most lamentable.

9 They set loose the filthy mindes and mouthes of fleshly livers to triumph against the most sound and best reformed professours, and to reioyce in their rotten opinions, and restored opportunities of sensuall observations of guising, gluttony, carrels, &c.

10 They are declared by this Church to be contrary doctrine, as may be seen in the 1.2. and 3. chapters of the first book of Discipline, in these words: We iudge that all doctrine repugnant to the Evangell, should be utterly suppressed as damnable to mans salvation. In the bookes of Old and New Testament we affirme that all things necessary for the instruction of the Kirk, and to make the man of God perfect, is contained and sufficiently expressed. By contrary doctrine we understand, whatsoever men by Lawes, Councels, or Constitutions haue imposed on the consciences of men without the expresse commandement of Gods word, as keeping of holy dayes commanded by man, the feast of Christmas, and other feasts.

11 The Commissioners of Presbyteries here convened sufficiently understand, that neither the Presbyteries from whom they haue their commissions, nor the particular Churches of this Realm either require, are willing, or consent to admit these novations. Consitentur Theologi nihil esse per Synodos Ecclesijs invitis obtrudendum. The Divines do confesse that nothing should be obtruded upon Churches against their will.

12 The Commissioners of Presbyteries here assembled, understanding the alienation of them from whom they received commission, from these Articles, can by no warrant oblige nor [Page] bind their unwilling Presbyteries, and Congregations to their votes. Ecclesiam dissentienlem & invitam obligare quis potest? Who can bind a Church disassenting and unwilling.

13 There stand in force divers acts of parliament in favour of our present order, Ia. 6. Parl. 1. cap. 8. Ia. 6. Parl. 6. cap. 68. & cap. 69. Item, the first act of the Parliament Anno 1592.

14 The Ministers of this Church by order of the same printed and inserted before the Psalme booke at their admissions respectiue promise in the presence of God, and of his congregation assembled, to abhorre and utterly to refuse all doctrine alledged necessary unto salvation, that is not expresly contained in the Old and New Testament, and according to the graces and utterances that God shall grant unto them to professe, instruct, and maintaine the purity of the doctrine contained in the sacred word of God, and to the uttermost of their power to gainstand, and convince the gainsayers, and teachers of mens inventions. Item, to submit themselues most willingly to the wholesome Discipline of this Kirk, by the which they were then called to the office and charge, promising in Gods presence obedience to all admonitions, secretly or publickly given, &c.

15 The subscribers of the confession of faith by their oath therein contained, promise and sweare to continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of this Church, and to defend the same according to their vocation and power, all the dayes of their liues, under the paines contained in the Law, and danger both of body and soule in the day of Gods fearefull iudgement: and to abhorre and detest all contrary religions, but chiefly all kinde of Papistry in generall, even as they are now damned and confuted by the word of God and Kirk of Scotland, but in speciall the Popes fiue bastard Sacraments, whereof Confirmation is one, with all rites, ceremonies, and false doctrines added to the true Sacraments without the word of God: his absolute necessity of Baptisme, &c. Which confession and practise following thereupon, is come to the eyes of the world in print, and solemnly renewed in the covenant celebrated in the generall and provinciall Assemblies, Presbyteries, and Kirk-sessions in the yeare of God 1596. And how shall any man be heard to speak against that whereunto he hath formerly sworne and subscribed? See the conference at Hampton-court. For the better understanding of their last Articles, I will set down a short discussion of the Oath.

THE OATH DISCVSSED.

[Page]

THE Religion, Doctrine, and Discipline received, beleeved, and defended by the Kirk of Scotland, and namely the publick ministration of Baptisme, and the Lords Supper, sitting at the table in the act of the receiving the bread and wine of that Sacrament, the observation of the Lords day, and the examination of children, for the first time at the ninth yeare of their age, for the second at the twelfth, for the third at the fourteenth, excluding and abhorring private baptisme, private communion, kneeling in the act of receiving the Supper, holy dayes, or feasts of Christmas, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and sending down of the Holy Ghost: were brought in at the reformation of religion, and enioyed ever since in manner and forme as followes.

After due tryall and advisement taken of the heads in generall and particular aboue written, the whole Church was of one heart and iudgement concerning the same, and every man was permitted to heare reasoning, and such as would were permitted to reason, every man professed himselfe to be perswaded in his own minde.

The particulars to be embraced and followed, and the corruptions to be avoyded, were by Ecclesiasticall authority in free, full, and lawfull generall Assemblies, publicke confessions, and solemne protestations aduisedly established.

The estates of Parliament agreeing in iudgement with the Kirk concerning the said matters by their acts ratified and approved the Kirk constitutions, and appoynted civill penalties against the transgressors of the same, with prouision of order whereby they might be called, convicted, and punished.

The sayd unity of iudgement authorized by the constitutions of the Kirk, and lawes of the Countrey, and the whole particulars established by these bands, having been tried by practise, and otherwayes, haue proved expedient, profitable and necessary by the space of fiftie nine yeares, and now iustly haue acquired the force of good and commendable custome.

For our furder confirmation of the sayd religion, doctrine, and discipline in generall, and in the particulars before named, all and every one of all estates of this Realme haue solemnly sworn, that they shall continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of this Church, and shall defend the same according [Page] to their vocation and power.

Notwithstanding of these fiue obligations, viz. unity of judgment, and opinion: Ecclesiastical authoritie reiterated & confirmed by many famous Assemblies: Many civill lawes: Nine and fifty yeares practise and custome universally commended: and the sayd solemne oath divers times repeated, the pretended assembly holden last at Perth, received certain formes formerly excluded and abhorred.

Queritur, if one or moe Preachers or Professours in the sayd Kirk, standing to the Kirkes former iudgement; and able to defend the same by good reason, at least seeing no warrant in the contrary, may dispense with the sayd oath, or follow the plurality of preachers, & professors dispensing with the same in the assembly. And what power may compell the alteration of iudgement, or loose the sayd oath in any case aforesayd? Leaving the full answer to the wise and well reformed Christian walking before God, and looking for a crown upon the glorious day of our Lord. For present reformation we shall consider the sayd oath: first in the persons, takers of the same. 2. The matter whereto they sweare. 3. The forme and manner, whereby they are bound. 4. The force and effect of that forme for making sure mens particular deeds.

The persons takers of the oath are all baptised Christians of perfect age, able to examine themselues, and so to eate of the Lords Supper, honoured with callings, and all professours of Christian fellowship, of Christ the searcher of hearts, and of life and iudgement eternall, free of madnesse, and of all restraint of superiour power in this case, understanding periury and the paines thereof, at their owne liberty, and free of all coaction: as at length may be seene in the confessions of faith registred in the Acts of Parliament, printed in the booke of Discipline before the Psalmes in meeter, the confession of faith subscribed by the Kings Maiesty and his houshold, published by open proclamation and yet standing in print. And in the covenant celebrated by the generall and provincial Assemblies, and by the Presbyteries, and particular congregations, but more summarily in the heads underwritten, acknowledged and confessed by themselues.

§

WE all, and every one of us after long and due examination of our consciences in matters of true and false religion are now [Page] throughly resolved in the truth by the word and Spirit of God.

Wee beleeve with our hearts, confesse with our mouthes, subscribe with our hands, and constantlie affirme before God, and the world, that the faith and religion, received, beleeved, and defended by the Kirke of Scotland, the Kings Majestie and three Estates of this realme particularly expressed in the confession of our faith, established and publickly confirmed by sundry acts of parliament, and now of long time hath been openly professed by the Kings Majestie, and whole body of this Realme, is only the true Christian faith and religion pleasing God, and bringing salvation to man.

To this confession, and forme of religion wee willingly agree in our consciences in all points, as unto Gods undoubted trueth and verity.

Wee willing to take away all suspition of hypocrisy and double dealing with God and his Kirke, protest, and call the searcher of hearts for witnesse, that our minds and hearts doe fully agree with this our confession, oath, and subscription.

Wee protest that we are not moved with any worldly respect, but are persuaded only in our conscience through the knowledg and loue of Gods true religion printed in our hearts by the holy Spirit, as wee shall answer to him in the day, when the secrets of all hearts shal be disclosed &c.

Before and at the tyme of their solemne protestations, it was well knowen to all the promisers, Swearers, Subscribers, that 1. At Edinburgh, the 18. day of Octob. 1581. And from the reformation to that year it was resolued, and by common consent [Page] concluded that in tyme cōming no sacrament be ministred in priuate houses, but solmnely according to the good order hitherto obserued. 2. At Edinburgh in Ianu. 1560. it was declared by this Kirk that Christ sat with his disciples at a table, whē he instituted the supper, and that sitting at table was the most convenient gesture to this holy action. 3. That the Popes fiue bastard sacraments, whereof Confirmation is one, with all rites ceremonies and false doctrines added to the ministration of the sacraments were abhored. And that examination of children, aftet the maner agreed vpon in the Kirk, was sufficient to unite baptized infants with the Kirk in the participation of the Lords Supper. 4. That at Edinburgh in Ianuar. 1560. the Kirk judged vtterlie to be abolished from this Realm, keeping of holy dayes such as the feast of Christmas &c. Imposed vpon the consciences of men without warrant of Gods word, and many other things of the like nature condemned by preaching, and corrected by publick censures of the Kirk. Hence it is euident that no exception can be taken against the persons promising, swearing and subscribing, for despensing with the said oath.

The matter whereunto they bind themselues by oath is the religion, doctrine and discipline receiued, beleeued and defended by the Kirk of Scotland. In respect of this matter, the oath is partlie assertorie, and partly promissorie. They affirme as followes. 1. That it is Gods vndoubted truth and veritie grounded onelie vpon his written word. 2. That it pleaseth God, and bringeth salvation to man. 3. That they are now throughly resolued in this truth. 4. That they detest all vain allegories, rites, signes and traditions brought into the Kirk without, or against the word of God and Doctrine of this true reformed Kirk. Such assertions can not be loosed, an assertorie oath can not be dispensed with, for it is already past. Assertorij juramenti materia in necessitatem transijt. They haue all alreadie sworne that they are persuaded in their consciences in the points aforesaid. This persuasion is not to be performed, but is already past and sworne. We can not therefore go in the contrary except we will be perjured. The promissory part is, to continew in the obedience of the doctrine and Discipline of this Kirk, or to defend the same. The indurance of the said continuance and defence is all the dayes of our liues. The execration whereby they inforce the truth and promise of their oath is, under the paines contained in the law, and danger both of body and soule in the day of Gods fearfull judgement. This continuance and defence in respect of the worthines of the matter affirmed, and of the nature of an oath and [Page] promise, and in respect of the indurance, and execration adioyned, leaveth no place to alledge the events of posterior accidents incident to the matter sworne to, to loose or dispense with the said oath, or promise, as it may be clearly seene in the nature of an oath.

The formes whereby the foresaid persones are bound to continue, and defend the said religion are 1. Publick profession before God and the world 2. Printed and published confessions. 3. Subscription. 4. Obedience to the lawes of the Country. 5. Christian subjection to the order of the Kirk. 6. The solemne covenant. lastly. The oath. All these formes amongst all people, but specially amongst Christians are reputed for strong bands. If wee consider the zeale of our Christians to God and his trueth, the oath may be called juramentum affectionis, the oath of affection. If their willingnes to cleaue to their bretheren in sincerity of profession it is voluntarium et quasi conventionale, it is voluntary, and as it were by paction. If their loyalty to his maiesty and reverent obedience to the Kirk it is judiciale, an oath before a Iudge. If suspition or any other sort of undutifulnes, it is Purgativum, an oath of purgation. If the fulnes of the forme, it is not simple, but componed, haueing a most fearfull execration expressed. If yee consider the matter sworne to, viz. The religion, Doctrine, and discipline, as it is affirmed for undoubted trueth, it is assertorium, an assertory oath. If the continuance in defence of the doctrine and discipline, it is promissory, Whereby the particular acts of their future continuance and defence are bound to be established in religion, doctrine, and discipline. In respect of the which establishment and future continuance and defence, it is a thing bygone, and past in rem judicatam, worthy of the said continuance and defence, but nowayes subject to the changes accessory to the persons by oath addebted to these duties. The matter affirmed in this oath, concerneth God, our brethren and the rest of our own soules in the course of profession. The duty that wee performe to God, is to take him to be Iudge and witnesse of our sincerity and constancy of our profession. The duty that wee doe to our neighbours is to put them in assurance of our brotherly disposition and carriage in the communion of Sanicts. The honour and the ease that we bring to our selues is, that we lay, a [...] it were, God in pawne for us who hath the cleare konwledge of most secrete things, and is the undoubted patrone of verity, full of all justice, and power to punish perjurie.

The force and effect of this forme being considered in the [Page] persons swearers upon whom God principally hath laid the law of swearing, should be a strong cord to restrain us from the variable inconstancy and customable changes that falleth in the world for the reasons following. 1. An oath is the golden cord, whereby we are bound to sacred verity, and the sacrificing knife whereby we cut away superfluous controversies. 2. The effect of an oath is a most solemne and sure obligation, and therefore by the consent of all the Doctors the oathes of compulsion, and hurtfull, in matters prestable, and not impious, are to be keept. 3. A lawfull oath by God alone may be loosed, who is the chief CVI for whose sake it is taken. 4. It is a note of the Antichrist to dispense with oathes. It was well said, that dispensations nihil aliud sunt quam legum vulnera. What is more religious in religion then an oath? What shalbe the force of bands or contracts? with what coards shall societies be knit if men shalbe freed from their lawfull oaths, or rather forced to violate them?

To elude the oath the temporizer objecteth that all oathes of inferiors are made, salvo jure superiorum, seeing therefore the King & the Kirk, our superiours, haue made those innovations, wee are freed of our oath, so far as innovation is made. Answer, that an oath made by the inferior, with knowledge and consent of the Superiour can not afterward be loosed by the Superiour. The Canonist giveth this example, a scholer is sworne to his Creditor not to departe from the schoole beyond the boundes and limits agreed on betwixt him and the creditor, before he make payment at the appointed day, his father commands him to returne home. If he contracted the debt for his study, he had the tacite consent of his father. For setting him to schole, he did assent to all necessaries serving for his studies. The father here is by his owne tacite consent spoiled of his authoritie in recalling his sonne. But farre more when he geueth his expresse consent. In the present case, wee had the consent both of the King our father, and the Church our mother, yea they went before us in example, subscribed, and sworne the Confession aforesaid themselues. The Bishop of Elie in Tortura Torti answering to Matheus Tortus adviseing his Majestie to graunt libertie of conscience hath these words, Pag. 81.82. Integrum jam hoc illi non est: nam quod cum ea qua decet reuerentia dictum volo, non semel perjurus sit, sed bis si te audiat. Qua enim (siqua est fidei bis datae conscientia) vel conscientia vel fide, ferret in regnis suis ritus vestros, vel usum eorum publicum, qui suscepta primum Scotiae, suscepta dein Angliae corona regia, utrobique solenni ritu jus [...]r [...]ndum Deo praestitit, de conservanda in statu suo illa colendi Dei[Page]formula, nec alia quam quae in regnis suis tum publice recepta, & utriusque gentis legibus stabilita esset. Quarum etiam se tum legum quoque, non minus quam religionis, sanctissimè in se suscepit defensorem fore? Eo autem consilium hoc tuum tendit, ut novator sit, ut periurus, ut uterque sit: esset enim uterque, si utroque hoc tam gravi crimine, vel coronae suae, vel etiam vitae securitatem redimeret. The Bishop is bold to affirme that his Maiesty cannot permit liberty of conscience, because he was twise sworne to maintain the forme and manner of Gods worship receiued and established in his kingdomes. If his Maiesty may not permit another forme of Gods worship then that which was received already, nor the use of Papisticall rites, farre lesse in the Bishops iudgement, may his Maiesty inioyne, or command other formes and rites. As for our other Superiour, the Kirk, it cannot be denied but persons of all estates haue subscribed and sworne since the yeare of God 1580. The oath and subscription was universall Anno 1580. 1581. 1582. & anno 1590. When the generall band was made for the maintenance of true Religion, and his Maiesties state and person. The said confession was published with the generall band, and subscribed. So againe anno 1596. when the covenant was renewed in the generall Assembly, in the provinciall Assemblies, in Presbyteries and particular Congregations, the oath was universall. Besides the universall oathes and subscriptions, upon divers occasions, some particular persons at divers times haue subscribed. So, a particular rank of persons, as for example schollers passing their degrees, since the yeare 1587. subscribed and swore the confession of their faith at their Laurocation. In like manner, every Burgesse at his admission protested before God to defend the religion then professed and authorized by the Lawes, to his liues end. In like manner, particular Presbyteries, and Synods of late yeares: as for example, The Ministers of the Synod of Lowthian assembled at Tranent anno 1604. subscribed the confession of faith. The two pretended Archbishops now liuing, were present and subscribed with the rest of their bretheren. Any man may see, that few are excepted, who haue not made their personall oath. And least any man think himself exemed, let him consider that the generall Assembly, the Kirke representatiue made a solemne oath by holding up their hands, at the renewing of the covenant anno 1596. This oath of the Kirk representatiue obligeth them all who were living, to the maintenence of the purity of religion in Doctrine and discipline as it was then professed. [Page] Yea the oath representatiue of Ioshua, and the Princes of Israel representing Gods people oblished their posterity: and therefore many hundred yeares after was the famine sent upon the land for the violation of this oath made to the Gibeoni [...]s and Sauls seven sonnes were hanged. The yong ones were not excepted in our oath: for the Parents did binde for them, when they were baptised, to bring them up in the confession of faith, as it was then professed in the Kirk, as grounded upon, and consonant unto the covenant of grace made betwixt God and men for themselues and for their seed. So yee see the oath of the Kirke of Scotland was partly personall and partly reall. Is any Assembly, never so lawfull, free, and formall, able to free us of this oath, let be a pretended Assembly, disturbed, and divided in it selfe, and drawing down in one session, these things which were builded up in many yeares, and by many famous and notable Assemblies, consenting in one heart. But as I haue sayd, our oath was with consent of the Assembly and Kirk of Scotland. Seeing we are sworne severally, how can the same persons assembled together in one body collectiue, dispense with this oath, seeing they haue sworn to defend during their liues. To consent to any alteration, is not to defend during their liues, but rather to betray the cause, and incurre perjurie. If they may not violate their oath assembled collectiue, farre lesse may a generall assembly representing onely the collectiue body free them of their oath, least of a null and unlawfull Assembly.

They alledge they haue not violated their oath, because the substance of Religion is kept, and onely some indifferent points altered. But I answer. First that an oath cannot be said to be kept, vnlesse it be kept in all the parts and contents, and in the forme and manner expressed, Nam juramentum servandum est in forma specifica. Wee swore to keepe the same forme or worship that was vsed in the Kirk of Scotland, and specialie in the use of the sacraments. This specification (the Kirk of Scotland) admitteth neither English, Lutherane, nor Romane rites in the worship of God different from our profession. Next our oath was in a matter of religion which is not changeable as statutes of republicks and corporations are. And euery point of the confession of a faith is a note of profession, whereby wee professe our selues to be distinguished either in substance, or puritie of religion from others. Confessions of faith should not be changeable as Hilarius complained of his tymes Annuas & menstruas fides de Deo decernimus. Thirdly put the case, the points of our profession that are innouated were matters indifferent, as they [Page] were not so vnderstoode at the tymes of our oathes and subscriptions, but were declamed against, as points of plain papistrie, yet seeing indifferent things abjured for their abuse may not be receiued how can wee receiue them, except it were proued, that our oath was at the begining vnlawfull; or that our former formes are become vnlawfull, not expedient for edification of the Kirk, Or lesse edificatiue then the ceremonies presently vrged. It was plainely confessed in the last pretended Assembly, that they were not expedient for our Kirk, & that they yeelded to hold off an outward and externall inconvenience, a matter uncertaine and depending in the effect vpon Gods providence yea a matter now denied, as importing tyrannie for so is it constantly, reported. In rhe meane tyme our assertorie oath is alreadie past, and wee become perjured if wee come in the contrary. This is a high degree of perjury, when not onely we contravein our oath by practise, but make Lawes in the contrary, and thereafter inveigh against our oath as Puritanisme. If sincere and constant professours shall be still pursued for their constancie in their profession, and the conscience they make of their oath: Do we not expone the whole Nation to a woefull vengeance, and perpetuall ignominy.

The unlawfulnesse of every one of the Articles shall be proved, as need shall require, and opportunity will serue.

§

§

[Page]

KNEELING IN THE ACT OF RECEIVING THE SACRAmentall elements of Bread and Wine, proved vnlawfull.

IT hath been the uniforme and constant order of this Kirke, since the reformation: tha [...] the communicants should receaue the sacramentall elements of bread and wine, sitting at the table. In the second head of the first booke of discipline, are set downe these words. The table of the Lord is then rightly ministred, when it approcheth most neare to Christs owne action: but plaine it is, that at that supper Christ Iesus sat with his disciples: and therefore wee doe iudge [...]punc; that sitting at a table, is most convenient to that holy action. In the generall Assembly holden in December 1562. It was ordeined, That one uniforme order be observed in the ministration of the Sacraments, according to the order of Geneva. And in December, Anno 1564. It was ordeined, That Ministers in ministration of the Sacraments, shall use the order set downe in the Psalme bookes. In the Assembly holden anno 1591: it was ordained, That an Article should be formed, and presented to his Maiesty, and the estates, craving order to bee taken with them, who give or receive the sacrament after the Papisticall manner. In the Kings confession of faith, subscribed and sworne, by persons of all estates: are contained these words: We detest all the ceremonies of the Romane Antichrist added to the ministration of the Sacraments; we detest all his rites, signes, and traditions. This laudable order was altered at the pretended Assembly holden last at Perth in August anno 1618. The tenour of the Act followeth as it was formed by some of the Bishops, and their followers. Since we are commanded by God himselfe, that when we come to worship him, wee fall downe and kneele before the Lord our Maker: and considering withall, that there is no part of divine worship more heavenly and spirituall, then is the holy receiving of[Page]the blessed body and bloud of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ; like as the most humble and reverend gesture of the body in our meditation, and lifting up of our hearts, best becommeth so divine and sacred an action. Therefore, notwithstanding that our Church hath used since the reformation of religion, to celebrate the holy communion to the people, sitting, by reason of the great abuse of kneeling at the worshipping of the Sacrament by the Papists, yet now seeing all memory of by past superstition is past, and no perill of the same againe is feared: In reverence of so divine a mystery, and in remembrance of so mysticall an union as we are made partakers of, thereby doe ordaine, that that blessed Sacrament be celebrated hereafter meekely and reverently upon their knees. This alteration is to us unlawfull, for that which hath been established by so many lawes, Civill and Ecclesiasticall, by so long custome, and prescription of time, confirmed by our oathes, and subscriptions, wee may not lawfully alter. But so it is, that sitting at the table in the act of receaving, hath been established by lawes, custome, long prescription of time, and confirmed by oathes and subscriptions as is evident by the former diduction. It is notwithstanding expedient to descend further in opening up the unlawfulnes of kneeling. 1. as it is a breach of the institution. 2. as it is a breach of the second commandment. 3. as it is with out example and practise of the ancient Kirk. 4. as it disagreeth from the practise of the reformed Kirks.

Kneeling, considered, as it is a breach of the institution.

THE manner of Christs proceeding, from the paschall supper to the Eucaristicall, is to be observed, for the better understanding of the Institution. Before and in the dayes of Christ, the Paschall supper consisted, of two services or suppers, and a conclusion.

After the ordinary washing of their hands, they sat downe to the first service, and eate the Paschall lamb with unleavened bread. Then they rose to the washing of their feet; thereafter, they sat downe againe to the second supper or service, and did eate of a sallet, made of soure hearbs, and dipped in a composed liquor, as thick as mustard. Iudas after he gat a sop of this second service, he went out immediatly. In the conclusion of the second service of the Paschall supper, the Lord of the house took an unleavened cake of bread and blessed it, after this maner. Blessed art thou o Lord our God, King of the World, who hast [Page]sanctified us by thy precepts, and hast given us a commandement concerning the eating of unleavened bread. Christ likewise took the bread and gaue thanks. The Lord of the house, after thanks-giving brake the bread, and gaue it unto the company, saying, This is the bread of misery, which our fathers eat in Egipt: whosoever hungreth let him come neare and eat, whosoever hath need, let him come neare and celebrate the Passeover. Christ after thanks-giving brak the bread, and gaue it to his disciples, saying, take yee, eat yee, this is my body that is broken for you. Therafter the Lord of the house tooke the cup, and blessed it after this manner. Blessed art thou O Lord who hast created the fruit of the vine, after he had tasted the cup he gaue it to the nearest and so it was caried from hand to hand. This cup was called, the cup of praise and thanks-giving, because they sung a Psalme after it. Christ took the cup likewise, and after he had given thanks gaue it to the nearest of his disciples, saying, take ye, drink ye all of this; for this cup, is the new-testament of my blood &c. the cup was caried from hand to hand, the supper ended they sung a Psalme. Morneus lib. 1. de missa cap. 1. and Beza In Met c. 26.20, do set downe this maner of proceeding, as observed before by Munsterus, Paulus Burgensis, Tremellius, Cassander, and Iosephus Scaliger. Iosephus Scaliger setteth downe de emendat. temporum. lib. 6. a paschall canon, forbidding, to take any meat or drink after the cup of thanks-giving. This discourse being premitted the breaches of the institution are to be considered.

The first breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of that commendable gesture of sitting, used by Christ and his Apostles, at, and after the Institution. Christ and his Apostles sate at table, after the forme of their usuall sitting at ordinary bankets and feastes. They sat at the first service of the Paschall supper. Baradius, Swarez, Iansenius, and others affirme, that there is no circumstance in the text, Exod. 12, to inforce standing at the Passeover. Next, suppose the circumstances there expressed did import standing, yet it was not inioyned as an ordinary rite, but as many other circumstances, belonged only to the first Passeover in Egipt, as to eate with haste, and with loynes girded up, and to sprinkle the lintill and two sideposts of the doore with blood, as Beza hath observed Annot. in Mat. 26.20 and Scaliger in the late edition of his books de emendatione temporum Lib. 6. p. 534. sayeth the like: put the case, that this gesture continued longer, yet long before the dayes of Christ this gesture was changed. Scaliger produceth out of the rituals of the Iewes,De emendat. temp. lib. 6. p. 539 their words: Quam diversa haec nox à ceteris noctibus quod in aliijs noctibus semel tantum l [...]vamus in hac autem bis. Quod in reliquis noctibus[Page]comedimus sive fermentum sive Azimum in hac autem onmino azyma. Quod in reliquis noctibus vescimur oleribus omne genus in hoc autem intybis. Quod in omnibus noctibus tam edentes quam bibentes vel sedemus vel discumbimus in hac autem omnes discumbimus. How farr different is this night from other nights? other nights we wash once, this night twice: other nights we eate leavened or unleavened bread, this night onely unleavened. Other nights we eate all sorts of hearbs, this night onely Cicory. Other nights as well eating as drinking, we either sit or sup; this night we all sup, that is, sit leaning. In his first Edition he sayth, That the b [...]oke Kiddush pesach, out of which their words are alledged, is a little elder then Christs time. It is cleare then, that Anakeimenon discumbentibus, cannot be translated, standing, neither did ever any translator so translate the word any where. It is sayd likewise, they sate downe at the second service after he had washen the disciples feet. And whilest they did eate, edentibus illis, Math. 26.26. Mark. 14.22. Christ tooke bread and blessed, &c. If whilest they did eate, then also whilest they did sit. As these two are conioyned, Mark. 14.18. The phrase imports, that nothing intervened betwixt the eating and the celebration of the sacrament: it was ministred therefore unto them sitting. This is so evident that never man doubted of it till this last yeare. Even these who affirme but against the truth, that they stood at the first service, confesse that they sate at the second, and the celebration of the Sacrament. M. Iohn Mare in Math. 26. saith, Tametsi agnum typi [...]um dominus [...]tans comederit ritu legis, sedens samen communicavit. That Christ sate, and he brings in an old verse to this effect: Rex sedet in coena, turba cinctus duodena. Se tenet in manibus, se cibat ipse cibus. The Bishop of Chester Desence pag. 248. confesseth, That it is true, Christ did administer the sacrament in a kinde of sitting gesture, and that in the same gesture the Apostles did receiue it.

That sitting was institute, I proue it by two reasones. First, the gesture that Christ retained in passing from the conclusion of the Paschall Supper, that he did institute: sitting he retained, therefore sitting he did institute. In the conclusion of the Paschall Supper some things were changed, other things were retained, a third sort were neither changed, nor retained as belonging to the institution, but onely of occasionall necessitie which could not conveniently be changed, but were done necessarly: as for exemple, vnlevened bread because there was no other, the circumstance of the time, the parlour and such other circumstances belonging to the Passeouer, they were retained of necessitie, by reason of the present occasion of the Paschall Supper and could not conveniently haue bene changed. But as for the [Page] gesture of sitting, he might haue changed it, in standing, or kneeling without working any miracle, if it had not been his minde that we should receaue the sacrament of the Eucharisticall Supper, with the same gesture the Iewes receaued the Paschall Supper. The second reason, we are bound to imitate Christ, and the commendable example of his Apostles, in all things wherein it is not evident, that they had speciall reasones mouing them thereto which doe not concerne vs. Yea it is grosse hypocrisie for us, to pretend more reuerence and deuotion in the act of receving, then the Apostles did when Christ was present, or the Apostolick Kirks did lately after the Institution. Wherefore doth the Apostle propone the custom of the first Kirks. 1. Cor. 11.16. 1. Cor. 14.33. 2. Tim. 3, 14. If they did not oblige us to imitation? When Christ was in the state of humillitie they sate: he was worshiped vpon extraordinary occasiones. Math. 9.18. and 8.2, and 14.33. and 20.20. Ioh. 9.38. they were not now in any common action, or at an ordinary Supper, they had now reason to kneele if they should haue kneeled at all. After his resurrection, when he was in Emaus with some of the disciples, it is said Luk. 24, 30. that as he sat at meate with them, he tooke bread, blessed it, brake it, and gaue it unto them. This place is interpret of the Sacrament by Augustine, Paulinus, Esychius, Theophilactus, Beda, Euthimius, Hieronimus, all aledged by Bellarmin De Eucharist. l. 4. c. 24. and Gregorius de Valentia De legitimousu Eucharist. cap. 7.: they aledge also some of our owne writers to the same purpose but so it is, they were sitting when Christ gaue them the bread, whatsoeuer be the interpretation of the text, yee see they acknowledge sitting at table. Last of all, after his ascension and glorification in the heauens, the Apostlick Kirk sate at table. The manner of the partaking of the table of devils was by formall sitting at table in the house of the Idole:1. Cor. 8.10. Iohnathan the Chalde paraphrast Amos. 2.8. interpreteth the garments wheron the vsurer sate beside euerie Altar, to haue bene bedds prepared in the houses of their gods, to sit on when they feasted vpon things sacrificed to Idols. The people of Israel sate down to eat and drink at the Idelatrous feast of the golden calfe. The Apostle compareth the partaking of the Lords table, and the table of deuils. 1. Cor. 10.21. Next, they sate at the loue feasts: we can not thinke that they rose from the tables, either before or after the loue feasts, to receaue the Sacrament seuerally out of Pauls hand. Bilson sayeth, they sate at table Obedience p. 460 and to this purpose alledgeth Augustin: Epist. 11 [...] Non debent fratres mensis suis ista miscere sicut faciebant quos Apostolus arguit & emendat, we may se then Christ instituted [Page] it, the Apostlick Kirks followed it, no different respect of the state of Christs humility or glory brought in any other gesture.

It is objected that the sitting of Christ and his Apostles was not upright but sitting with leaning. If we imitate the example of Christ, we should sit after the same maner.

Answer. It was the custom receaued amongst the Iewes before and in the dayes of Christ, descending from the Romanes, or as others alledge from the Persians, Ester. 1. the table was situate in the midst of the hall or parlour, and the beddes about the table except the part that was free for the seruice of the table: They sat upon the beddes somewhat leaning toward the table and their feet lying out at the out-side of the bed [...]s. The beds of the rich and wealthy were so high, that it behoved them to ascend by steps. There was a space between the beds and the walles of the Hall or Parlour, that servants might haue roome to stand at the feet of the guests, and make service. They that stood behinde to serue, were sayd, stare à pedibus, to stand at their feet, as Petrus Ciacconius proveth out of Seneca and Suetonius. De Triclivio By this discourse we may understand, first, that when Mary stood at Christs feet, Luk. 7.38. she lay not groueling at his feet,Discourse of kneeling. p. 1351 as the Bishop of Rochester perverteth the gesture. Next, that Christ and his Apostles used at supper the gesture used at ordinary suppers. If we sit therefore according to the received gesture of the Countrey wherein we are, we imitate aright, and it were Apith imitation to sit otherwise. It is indifferent whether we use white or red wine▪ we are no more bound to the wine of Iudea, then to the wine of France, at the ministration of the Supper: these are but nationall differences. Thirdly, there is so little difference betwixt the one fashion of sitting and the other, that both the words, diseumbers and sedere are translated indifferently, to sit, in the English translations. The delicate and sinfull woman, Ezek. 23. is sayd to sit in a glorious bed, and a table spread before her. Iosephus translateth the sitting of Ioseph [...] brethren by the word Kataclinein, signifying, halfe silling, balse leaning, howbeit upright sitting was the gesture used in Iosephs time, a man standing leaning, is sayd to stand as well as when he stands upright, siclyk sitting. Leaning is a position of the body common to sitting or standing. The Iewes themselues at this day sit upright at their Pas [...]hall supper.

There is a difference betwixt customs brought into the Kirk by invention of men, and the custome brought in by Christ, and entertained by his Apostles; as there is a difference betwixt [Page] the Lords day and the Holy dayes invented by men. It is safer for mans conscience to imitate Christ and his Apostles, then to depart from them, and imitate the custome of Kirkes, which may erre. Yea, Christs example seconded with the practise of the Apostles, is equivalent to a precept as I haue sayd. Yea this gesture may very well be comprehended under the expresse precept of Christ in the institution, Hoc facite, doe this: that is, hoc totum facite, doe all this. For wee must not thinke that nothing belongeth to the institution, but that which is mentioned in Pauls narration, 1. Cor. 11. for then a table should not belong to the institution: no doubt our Saviour instructed them how to discerne the Lords body, how to eate and drink, before he commanded them to eate and drinke. But the Evangelists, and Paul writes of the Sacrament as of a thing knowne to the Kirke by practise, presupposing a table, and the communicants convened and sitting at the table.

The second breach of the Institution made by kneeling in the act of receauing, is the taking away of the vse of a table. Christ and his Apostles sat at table. 1. Cor. 10. Luk. 22. wherfore serves the name of a table if we kepe not the proper use and imployment of it? The fathers call it the Lords table, the heavenly table, the sacred table, the mysticall table, the spirituall table, the Rationall table: whereto serue all these commendations, if in the mean time it be not used as a table, but rather as an altar? If it be not used as Christ and his Apostles vsed it, that is by sitting at it to receaue of the dainties set vpon the table? The Sacrament is called a Supper and therfore a table is answerable to it. It is neuer termed a Sacrifice in the Scripture. We sit at tables, but not at altars: we eat and drink at tables, but not all altars. The ancients called this table an altar, but vnproperly & in respect of the cōmemoration of Christs sacrifice. This improper speach was dangerous, & hes proven hurtful to the Kirk transforming indeed a table into an Altar. If we reteine no more but the name of a table, the Papists can, and do [...] giue that name to the lidd of their Altar. The people of God had an altar for the sacrifice, and a table for a feast. Siclyk the Ethnicks. So Christians haue one altar for one sacrifice, to wit, Christ who is Preist, Altar, and Sacrifice Heb. 13.10. and a table for the feast after this sacrifice once made, to wit, the Sacrament of the Supper. As the Israelites and the Ethniks sate at the tables of their feasts made of things sacrificed, so do we at our sacred feasts, to distinguish betweene an Altar and a table, a sacrifice and a Supper made of the thing sacrificed. A dressour [Page] or Cupboord may serue as well for disposing of the elements, and reaching them to the communicants as a table. If a table should serue, to no other vse but to sett on these Elements, and reach them from the table; Christ and his Apostles vsed not the table after that maner. As it serued them to the Paschall Supper, so it serued to the Eucharisticall.

The third breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of that mysticall rite representing Christs passion, to wit, the breaking of the bread. The Apostle sayes not, The communion of one bread; but, The communion of one broken bread hath in it a mystery of our unity. When the bread is carved in little morsels before it be presented to the table, it is not the sacramentall and mysticall breaking in the use of the Sacrament which ought to bee performed after the thankesgiving according to Christs example. Augustine sayth: Cum illud quod est in Domini mensa benedicitur & sanctificatur, Epist. 59. ad Paulinum. & ad distribuendum comminuitur. When that which is blessed on the Lords table, sanctified, and broken in small peeces to be distributed, &c. This breaking was needfull both for mystery and distribution. The breaking of the bread was thought so needful in the Sacrament, that it was called, Breaking of Bread. The Syriack interpreter translateth the breaking of bread Eucharist, Act. 2.24. and 20.7. Pareus on 1. Cor. 11. proveth at length this rite not to be indifferent, but a thing commanded. Where kneeling is practised, we read not in their Service-bookes of this breaking of bread after thankesgiving: whereby the passion of Christ is not set forth to the communicants as it ought to be.

The fourth breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the change and restraint of the commandement given to many in the plurall number, Eate yee, drinke yee: to one in the singular number, Eate thou, dainke thou. Fenner in the doctrine of the sacraments, expresseth the pith of this phrase in a liuely maner. It is fittest (sayth he) to note out the fellowship and communion of the Church in this worke, the person of Christ by the Minister, bidding all his guests with one loue as from him to bee mer [...]y, and eate with faith one spirituall meat together. Our faith is further succoured, when we may together, and with one heart, apply our selues to the meditation and fruit of this speech of Christ by the Minister, which in the particular speaking doth loose that our working together, and maketh the mindes of Christians hang the longer in the waiting for this sentence, and the comfort of it, and their minds are offered unto greater occasions of slips and with drawings, by humane infirmity, when these things are prolonged, [Page] which may more effectually be done together and speedily.

The fift breach of the institution made by kneeling, is, the altering of the enunciatiue words of Christ, This is my body which is broken for you: whereby he declares his comming in the flesh and suffering for sin, the maine ground of our redemption, and, changing them in a prayer to blesse our body and soule. The body of our Lord Iesus Christ which was given for thee, preserue thy body and soule unto everlasting life. The Papist in this poynt goeth neerer to the institution: for hee giveth not the Eucharist, except the host be first consecrated at some Masse, with these words, This is my body. This prayer inserted betwixt the thanksgiving and the distribution, and repeated to every communicant, is idle battalogie. The use of the prayer and thanksgiving for the use of the elements, indureth all the time of the action. Christs words in the institution containe partly a command, partly a promise, partly institution. Christs promise is contained in their definitiue words, This is my body that is given for you: This is my bloud which is shed for the remission of the sins of many. When the forme of the words is altered, the promise is obscured. It is not enough to rehearse the words of the institution in the prayer immediatly preceding the action, but in the action every rite and ceremony should haue the words of the institution concurring. Let the word be ioyned with the element, and so it shall be a sacrament, saith Augustine.

The sixt breach of the institution made by kneeling, is the taking away of the distribution that ought to be amongst the communicants. When Christ said, Take yee, eate yee, he insinuates that they should take and divide amongst themselues. The word Edoke [...] he gaue, doth not import that he gaue immediatly. The Disciples in setting the bread before the fiue thousand, Mark. 6.41. gaue the bread to the fiue thousand, Math. 14.19. the fiue thousand distributed among themselues. Cajetanus uppon Math. 26. acknowledgeth, that the Disciples were in so great distance from Christ, that their hands could not meet with his hands, Beza sayth,Epist. 2. that howbeit Christ had sitten in the midst, as Painters make him to sit, yet in respect of the manner of their sitting, it behoved either Christ to rise and come to them that were farre distant, or them to come to him, if he had given the elements to every one in their own hands. Tossaus sayth, that Christ gaue to the two neerest,In Mat. 26 and they reached to them who were further off. In the first booke of Discipline penned Anno. 1560. it is ordained that the Minister breake the [Page] bread, and distribute the same to those that be next him, commanding the rest every one with reverence and sobriety to break with other, because it is neerest to Christs action. Further, we haue a plain precept, Luk. 22.17. Divide it amongst you, speaking of the communion Cup, and not of the Paschall. The Evangelists make mention of foure things belonging to the communion cup. 1. Thankesgiving. 2. Distribution. 3. Assertion that it is his blood. 4. A protestation that he will not drink of the Vine untill the kingdom of God shall come: the assertion that it is his blood, is set down afterward by Luk. v. 20. the other 3 are set down in this 17. vers. It is therfore the same cup. Next, if it had not been the cōmunion cup, and consequently the last, the communion cup behoued to haue come after: but that cannot agree with the protestation: for how could Christ protest of the Paschal cup that he would drink no more of the fruit of the wine, If he drank after it of the Euangelicall cup. The paschal canon interdyted to eat or drinke after the cup of thanksgiuing or praise, the cup of praise in the end of the paschall Supper was changed as I haue said into the Eucharistical cup, & was all one with it: and the protestation of not drinking, more agreeth with the Canon made of the last Paschal cup all one with the Evangelical. This cup was caried about from hand to hand, and diuided amongst them by them selues. The two Evangelists doe not so much as mention the cup of the Passeouer and yet make mention of this protestation of not drinking more of the fruite of the Vine. The verses immediatly proceeding the protestation, make mention only of the cup of the Lords Supper. Math. 26.28. Mark. 14.24. Fulk saith, the demonstratiue pronomen (this) Math. 26.29. declareth, that be spake of the [...]ine in his hand that is of the communion cup. If there was two cups then either the words of the protestation were repeated, or set downe by Mathew and Mark out of the owne place, and wrongfully applyed, but none of these two is to be admitted. Thirdly Luke omitteth the mention of thanksgiving and the commandement to drink of this cup verse 20. howbeit both be expresly set downe by other Evangelists, and the analogy with the actiones concerning the bread requireth the same. Whairfore rhen did he omit them? even because speaking before of the same cup▪ verse. 17. he had made mention of these two points, he eschueth to repeat them as already mentioned. And wherefore made he mention of the cup verse. 17. even that the protestation of not drinking more verse. 17 mig [...]t be ioyned with the protestation of not eating more verse. 16. [Page] he maketh mention of the assertion of his blood verse 20. because it was not yet spoken of. The other 3. points are omitted as alreadie spoken of verse. 17. this inversion of order and making mention of the cup of the communion before the order of Institution, was observed long since be Lib. 3. de consensu Evang. Augustine and in Mat. 26 Euthymius, and is acknowledged not only by our own diuines, but also by Barradius, Ians [...]nius, and other learned papistes, Theobaldus Meushius Desensio harmoniae generalis. obserueth a constant continuall inuersion of the order in this chapter of Luke. Operae pretium est in his advertere hysteron proteron Lucae contrarium. Augustine sayth, anti [...]ipavit ut so [...]t. There is a cleare instance verse. 21. after the words of the Institution it is said, Behold the hand of him that betrayeth me, is with me at the table. Now it is cleare, that Iudus went out immediatly after hee receaued the Soppe. Zacharias Harmon. Evang. lib. 4 cap. 156. Chrisopolitanus obserued herein a recapitulation of some things pretermitted before. (Quod post calicem datum, traditorem commemorat pretermissa recapitulare videtur. Beza in his annotationes conjectureth, that the verses are transposed, and that the 19. and 20. verses should be subjoyned to the 16. and that the 17. verse should be subjoyned to the 19. and 20. Bilson Obedience pag. 495. and Iewel Of privat Masse, division 8. against Harding and many other diuines, disputing against the priuate masse, exponeth the words Luk 22.17. diuide it amongst yo [...] ▪ of the cōmunion cup. That wch is spoken of the cup should be meant also of the bread, for as Christ said, Take yee, drink ye, so said he, Take ye, eate ye. Tindal Pag. 477 in his tractate of restoring the L. Supper, requireth that euery man break & reach forth to his neighbour. This distribution amongst the communicants was commanded, no doubt to nourish loue, and to be a bond of vnion amongst the communicants and agreeth best with the nature of a feast, where signes and tokens of amitie are interchanged. Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat. lib. 1. sayth it was permitted to every one of the people, to take a part of the Eucharist. Etiam Eucharistiam cum quidam ut mos est diuiserint, permittitur uni [...]uique ex populo partem ejus sumere. When Tertullim sayeth, We receaue it of no other hands, but the hands of our presedents, or rulers, he meaneth not simply of pastores but of any governours Ecclesiasticall whatsoeuer. and suppose he meane only of pascores, yet he confesseth it to be tradition and no scripture, as Iunius hath observed vpon that place. Howsoeuer this was the custome in Africa to receaue it out of the ministers hand, yet not so at Rome and every where: for Iustinus Apol. 2. telleth vs how the Deacons gaue to euery one of them that were present, part of the bread and likwise of the wine.

[Page]In the liturgie of S. Iames, it is said that the Deacons lift up the dishes and cuppes to impart to the people. It came to passe afterward that the Deacones dispensed not the bread, but the wine only, the ridiculous reasons whereof are set downe by Aquinas Part. 3. quaestr 82. art. 3. this superstitious custome, of taking it out of the Ministers hand, did grow afterward to Superstitious receaving in at the mouth, and in some parts to the drawing of the wine out of the cupes with silver pipes, the minister ought not, howbeit he might commodiously, giue the elements out of his owne hand to every communicant, because it is against the institution and purpose of Christ, willing the communicants by this rite, to interteine communion amongst them selues. Whatsoever action or command is inclosed within the institution, may not lawfully be broken: but that the communicants should distribute amongst themselues, was both an action at the first supper, and a precept, as I haue proven. This precept and action by consequence dischargeth kneeling, because that gesture and this distribution is no wayes compatable.

Christs generall precept, doe this maketh the actiones of the first supper precepts. The particular precept divide it amonngst you leaveth no place to any tergiversation.

The seventh breach of the institution made by kneeling is, an unnecessary deviding of the communicants, making populous congregationes to receaue on many dayes whear they may receaue in one. Every particular congregation ought to be convened Epi to auto into one place, at one time to communicate togither as far as is posible. Although all the faithfull communicate with Christs body spiritually, yet they only communicat Sacramentally, who haue their communion sealed by the outward action of eating of one Sacramentall bread it being a commandement of the Apostle, that every one should tary one upon an other when they assemble them selues to celebrate the holy Supper, it followeth that they should receaue togither, Ambrose expounding these words, sayth, Expectandum dicit ut multorum oblatio simul celebretur et omnibus ministretur, they must tary that the oblation of many may be celebrate togither, and so be ministred to them all. Leo writing to Dios [...]orus, gaue him this advice, that where the Church was so litle, that it was not able to receaue all the people to communicate togither, the Preist should minister two or three communions in one day▪ Calixtus De consecrat. dist, 2. [...]eracta. ordained, that consecration ended, all communicate, that will not stand excommunicate, for so the Apostle determined, and the holy Romane Kirke observeth. See more of this [Page] purpose in Iewels sermon at Pauls Crosse.

The eight breach of the institution made by kneeling is, the altering of the purpose of the institution, or nature of this Sacrament. It was instituted to be a supper, a spirituall feast: it was the will of Christ therefore, that we should behaue our selves as ghuests invited to a banket. Ghuests invited to a banket, even to a Princes banket kneele not in the act of backeting. They are invited indeed to a spirituall refreshment, but the Sacramentall Supper should cary the resemblance of a supper, in the formes and fashions therof, or els it could not rightly be called a Supper; for it is not only the matter, that is, the dainties and foode, that maketh a banket, but also the ordering of the ghuests, and kindly interteinment of them. The Sacrament of the Passeover was also a holy Supper, and the people of God vsed it so: they kneeled not in the act of receaving of it. When they receaved the law of the Passeover, they bowed the heads and worshipped. Exod. 12.27. Yet did they not so in the eating of it. They were more reverent and devout, in hearing the law of it out of the mouth of Moses then in the participation of it.

Let no man object against us, the examples of some kirks, where some of the former breaches are made without kneeling: seeing kneeling hath made them all, and seeing we haue the institution, standing to us in force of a command, wherin nothing should be altered, in matter, forme, or order; nothing added; nothing diminished: for divine institutions admit, neither addition nor diminurion saith Pareus in 1. Cor. 11. the Apostle alledgeth the institution against all abuses, that which I receaved of the Lord, that haue I delivered unto you, 1. Cor. 11.23. Doubtlesse (sayth Pareus) he receaved this history of the institution from the Lord, with other revelations, when he was ravished to the third heavens. It is not my invention. (would the Apostle say) but the Lords ordinance, concredit unto me to be kept as a iewell. It is not for nought, that the Evangelistes with one consent doe set downe the forme of this institution, and that the Apostle trieth all corruptions in the Supper by it, as by a rule. Ciprian saieth Epist, 3. lib. 3. we must follow the trueth of God, and not the custome of men. And in an other place he saieth when the channels ar corrupted we should run to the fountain. It is not so much our purpose to taxe others as to defend our selues

[Page]

Kneeling considered, as it is a breach of the second commandement.

KNeeling in the act of receaving the Sacramental elements, is not only a breach of the institution in the Gospell, but also of the second commandement of the law.

The first breach of the commandement made by kneeling is, the sinne of Idolatry. Idolatry is committed in this act divers wayes. The Papists kneele in the act of receaving, because they beleue verely, that the bread is transubstantiat into Christs body, and upon this supposition of transubstantiation and bodily presence, they kneele. This is the grossest idolatry that ever was in the world. The Lutheran kneeleth upon his supposition of consubst [...]ntiation, and Christs reall presence by consubstantition: this also is idolarrie and the supposition false. A third sort kneele for reverence of the Elements, not giving to the Elements that high kind of worship called commonly cultus latriae, which the Papist giveth, but an inferior kinde of worship due (as they thinke) to consecrate creatures: this also is Idolatry.

Kneeling for reverence of the elements, is Idolatry, because it is a religious worship of a creature. It is not civill worship they giue in the act of receiuing the sacred Elements: the matter and motiue of their reverence is a matter of religion, to wit, because the elements are holy signes and seales: it is therefore religious worship. Religious worship is divine worship. All manner of worship pertaining to godlinesse and religion, is religious worship.Defence of Perkins 2. part. pag. 1180. Divine or godly worship is all manner of worship pertaining to godlinesse and religion (saith Doctor Abbots.) Divine worship is proper to God: therefore religious worship, or worship of religion is peculiar to God alone. Augustine saith▪ Apostolus & creaturam laudat & eitamen cu [...]tam religionis exhibere vetat. Contra Faust. lib. 14 c. 11. The Apostle commendeth the creature, forbiddeth neverthelesse that worship of religion be yeelded to it. And again he saith,Contra 2. epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 4. Quis dicat non debere observare Christianos ut uni Deo religionis obsequium serviatur: Christians are to obserue that with the dutie of religion they serue God onely. Peter and the Angell refused religious worship. If it may not be giuen to Angels and Saints, farre lesse may it be given to dead elements and sencelesse creatures. To kneele for reverence of the elements, and a religions estimation of them in the mind, is to determine adoration in the creature. Some honour r [...]doundeth to God, or [Page] Christ, but that convoy by redundance, is common to all respectiue, and dependant worships given to dead and sencelesse things: for Creatures without sence are not worshipped absolutely for holinesse, vertue, or any other excellencie inherent in themselues, but for their coniunction with, or representation of the persons represented, in whom the excellency is intrinsecally: and this the Papist will grant, not onely of his Images, but of all sacred things also. They are worshipped onely in respect of the person, yet notwithstanding of this dependant and respectiue worship, they affirme the sacred things are worshipped per se, howbeit, not propter se, by themselues, howbeit not for themselues; because by themselues they haue relation, or coniunction with or representation of the persons adored: that is, they haue in them a cause of adoration, howbeit a dependent cause. Swarez sayth, Honor illis exhilitus non in illis sistit, In Aquinatem. Tom. 1. Disput 51 sect. 3. sed in ipsas personas propter quas adorantur, redundat. That the honour determined in the Images or sacred things, redoundeth notwithstanding to the principall. He that honoureth a mans image, honoureth it for his sake whose image it is. This transient worship is convoyed to the principall, onely mediatly: God will haue no mediate creature to go between him and his worship: he will not communicate a glance of this worship to any creature. Civill worship is convoyed mediatly to the person of the Prince, by bowing to sencelesse creatures, as to the chaire of Estate, the cloath of Estate, the Kings letter and seale, because the estate thinkes it expedient for Princely Maiesty that these things be reverenced, which serue in a speciall manner for the Princes use, as signes of his presence or pleasure. But the ceremonies of the Court, and mediate civill worships, are not rules of religious adoration. For as Augustine saith, Multa de cultu divino usurpata sunt, quae honoribus deferuntur humanis, Lib. de civ. Dei. lib, 10. cap. 4. sive humilitate nimi [...], sive adulatione pestisera. That too great humility or pestiferous flatterie, may be the originall of many humane honors and courtesies. God hes inhibit mediate religious worships.

It may be objected, that holy things ought to be reverenced.

Answer. True, but not worshiped. Veneration is one thing, Adoration an other. Adoration belongeth to persones. Veneration to things perteining to persons, and is nothing els, but a religious respect, or reuerent estimation of things perteining to the vse of religion, a preservation of them that they be not lost; a decently vsage of them according to their kinde. This veneration or reverence, is a respectiue or relative reverence giuen them [Page] for Gods sake. Kneeling for reverence of sensles creatures, is, to take the proper gesture of relatiue adoration, and apply it to relatiue reuerence. For religious kneeling in all the Scripture is a gesture of adoration, and soveran worship. Augustine, speaking of the brasen serpent, Sacred writings, and the bread in the Sacrament, sayeth. De trinit. lib. 3. c. 10. honorem tanquam religiosa habere possunt, stuporem tanquam missa non possunt. They may haue honor as maters religious, but wonder, as maters of me [...]vell they can not haue. When Ezra read the booke of the law Nehem. 8.3.4.5. the people stoode vp, but when he praised God they bowed themselues and worshiped the Lord with their faces toward the ground. Here ye see veneration and adoration. submissiom, and recognition of some other thing more excellent. The altar, the offerings, the Preists garment, were holy, yet the Iewes worshiped them not. The uncovering of the head, is a gesture of reverence, and yet the Gentiles had their heads covered when they worshiped their Gods, as Brissonius proveth. Fo [...]mulae lib. 1. Drusius proveth the like Preterita. 1. Cor. 1.4 of the Iewes, that they couered their head when they prayed to God. But kneeling was ever holden among all nations for a proper gesture of adoration. either ciuile or religious.

The Ministers of Lincolne in the third part of their defence laid to the charge of their Church representatiue, that kneeling is intended for reverence of the elements. I refer the reader to their proofes: for the present let it only be observed, upon what occasion kneeling was urged. In their first reformation it was left free. Gardiner, Boner, and other Papists sought to make the first booke of common prayer odious, amongst other things for want of reverence to the Sacrament. The Papists made insurrection, and challenged proudly in their Articles a reformation, for reverence of the Sacrament: and on the other side, some, inconsideratly fixed railing libels at Pauls-cross, and other places, terming the Sacrament lack of the box, the Sacrament of the Halter, round Roben &c. These proceedings moved Rid [...]y in his preachings at Pauls-Crosse to proceede so far, that the cheefest papists seemed to desire no more, but that his practise might be answerable to his doctrine. This stirre made also Cranmer, and Ridly, at the second revewing of the booke of common prayer, to inioyn kneeling, with this reason; that the Sacrament might not be prophaned, but holden in a holy and reverent estimation. They feared to offend superstitious people in a time of strong opposition, untill they were better taught, neither was their judgement cleare in this cause: for they thought it not idolatry to worship the consecrate elements, with an inferiour kinde of [Page] worship, and for the relation they haue to the thing signified, providing they yeeld not unto them soverain or godly worship, as they called it. They were but newly come forth out of the darke denne of popery, and could not see all things in the first dawning of the day.

In the late act, we are ordeined, to kneele for reverence of the divine misteries. I see not wherein this differeth from the Bishop of Rochesters argument. Discourse of kneeling pag. 124. that great and reverent dreedfull misteries, must be receaved with greate and dreedfull humilitie of soul, and humiliation of body: therfore in the act of receauing we must kneel. If this argument were good, then the Sacraments and sacrifices of the old law should haue been thus worshipped: And if we will measure by the sight, the sacraments and sacrifices of the old Law were more dreadfull then the sacraments of the new. For the slaughter of beasts, and Sheding of blood, was more dreedfull, then the pouring out of wine. The auncients held the sight of this Sacrament, not only from pagans, but also from the Catachumenists, they preached darkly, they wrote darkly, to the same end. This doing was not commendable, it made the mysterie of this Sacrament both dark and dreadfull. Augustine hes already said, they may be honored as matters religious but wondred al as matters of marvel they can not. But to returne to the purpose, to kneel for reverence of the mysteries is nothing els but to worship the mysteries.

Wheresoeuer the publick intent of a Kirk is to worship the Sacrament, every privat man following that intent, is formally an Idolater. If his priuat intent be divers from the publik, yet he is still materially, & Interpretatiuè an Idolator. If a man receiue the Eucharist in the papisticall Kirk on his knees, howbeit he kneel not vpon the supposed conceit of transubstantiatiō, but his own privat intent, he is materially guilty of their grosse Idolatrie. Ismenias stouping down before the King of Persia to take up a ring, which he let purposly fall, was not excused▪ because this stouping in common vse, was the adoring of the King of Persia.

Kneeling directed to the bread and wine in the hands of the Minister, is idolatrie, howbeit the inward motion of the minde and affection of the hart be directed only to God, or his Son Christ, as the only object of adoration. This immediate convoy of worship to the principall obiect, is nothing else but that finer sort of Idolatry and relatiue worship, which Durandus, Holcot, Mirandula, Alphonsus, Petrus Cluniacensis, and others, giue to their images. They say Images are not otherwise adored, then that before them and about them, are exhibite the externall [Page] signes of honor: the inward affection is directed onely to the principall object: as the services done at a funerall show, to one emptie coffine, as if the corps were present. See Bellarmine De iimaginibus cap. 20 and Swarez in Aquin. Tom. 1. disp. 54. sect. 3. when it is said therfore to varnish this second intent that the elements are not Objectum quod, the thing it self that is worshiped, nor objectum in quo, or, per quod, in the which, or by the which, but objectum a quo significativè the obiect or signe moving vs vpon the sight thereof, to lift vp our hearts to the spirituall object of faith. This kinde of relatiue worship will not be found different from the relatiue worship of Durandus and the rest: For Bellarmine and Swarez draw Durandus and the rest from In illa, et per illam Imaginem, in and by the image, to Circum and coram, about, or before the Image. Swarez sayth ibid. disput. 53. sect. disp. 54. sect. 4 that the image is neither the formall, nor the material, the total, nor the partial object of adoration in their opinion; but that only at the presence of the images the principal called to remembrance by the image is adored, that the image is an occasion, amids, a signe stirring up a man to adore the principall. Their adoration then was also abstract from the object, as they pretend theirs to be. The bread and wine or any other creature whatsoeuer, differeth not in this present case, for howsoeuer they were ordained of God to be signes and seals of his graces, yet they are not in statu accommodato ad adorandum; they haue no such state in the seruice of God, as that by them, or before them God or his sonne Christ should be adored. Next If this kinde of relatiue worship were to be allowed, then all the holy signes both in the old and New Testament should haue serued to the same vse. Then they who are far distant from the table should kneel, for the Elements are to them, objectum a quo significatiuè. Then at the sight of the sunne or any bewtifull creature, we should kneel seeing they put vs in minde of Gods incomprehensible bewtie. And seeing many of them doe allow the historicall use of images, we may fall down before the Crucifix, providing the action of the minde be abstracted from the image. Thirdly all the parts of Gods worship ought to be direct, and not oblique. Perkins Idolatry. p. 677.678 sayth, it is idolatrie to turne, dispose, or direct the worship of God, or any part thereof to any particular place or creature, without the appointment of God, and more specially, to direct our adoration to the bread or the place where the bread is, what is it lesse then Idolatrie.

Kneeling before the elements referred directly to Christ. is, either a gesture signifying the humble submission of the mind in generall, whereby we make obeysance, as if he were bodily present: or else it signifieth more particularly our humiliation [Page] In prayer: this is but a speciall, the former was a generall; The like reasons serue against both. It is trew we can not kneell to God in prayer, but there are many things before us, a Kirk, a house, a wall, a tree, a starre, &c. But we set them not before us purposly; we are by no direction tyed unto them, they stand only before us by casuall position, neither can we chuse otherwise to doe. It is true, likewise, that God directed his people under the Law to bend and bow themselues toward the Ark, and the Temple wherein the Ark was, and the Mountaine whereon the Temple was situate: partly least that rude people should turne their worship another way; partly because of his promise to heare them when they shold pray toward the Temple, or the Ark; partly because of his singular maner of presence in the Ark: he was said to dwell between the Cherubines, the Ark is called his foot-stoole? and sometime the face of God; the glory of the Lord. It is reason, where God is present after an extraordinary maner, as when he spake out of the bush, and the cloud, that odoration be directed to the place of his extraordinary presence. The Altars; the offerings and other holy things wanted the like presence, and the like promise. The Ark and the Cherubines upon the Ark, were not seene: and therefore could not be readily abused to idolatry.

The Sacramentall elements haue neither the like presence, the like promise, nor the like commandement. Worship is tyed no longer to any certaine thing or place on earth. Ioh. 4.21.22. Adoration is tyed in the new Testament to the manhood of Christ, the true Ark and propitiatory: and is caried to that place, in which we certainly know the said manhood to exist substantially sayeth Perkins, Idolatry pag. 677.678.700 701. and therefore it is, that wee lift up our eyes to the heavenes, where he is, and direct our very externall worship unto him.

It is objected, and said, that wee may pray in the act of receaving; therefore wee may kneele in the act of receaving. Answer. This objection insinuates that kneeling is the proper and onely commendable gesture of prayer, and therefore the Bishop of Rochester exponeth the standing of the publican Luk. 18.11.13. to haue been kneeling, because (sayeth he) the Iewish custome was to pray kneeling. But if he had remembred the Lords owne saying Ierem. 15. though Moses and Samuell stood before me &c. he might haue understood that they prayed standing as wel as kneeling. Drusius observeth, In Mat▪ 6. that of old they prayed standing, that therfore prayers were called stations, or standings. And Rabbi Iuda had a saying, that the world could not subsist without statiōs or standings Sine stat [...]nibus non subsisteret mundus. And where it is said, Abram stood before the lord: [Page]Manabem, an Hebrew Rabine expoundeth it, he prayed before the Lord. Next the prayer meant of, is either some publicke prayer uttered by the Minister, or the mentall prayer of the communicant. As for the prayer of the Minister in the act of distribution, it is flat against the institution, as I haue already sayd. The Minister is ordained by the institution to act the person of Christ, and pronounce the words of promise. This is my body: as if Christ himselfe were pronouncing these words, and not change the promise into a prayer. Fenner in his principles of Religion Pag. 95. layeth this down as a ground, That in the second commandement we are forbidden the practise and use of any other rite, or outward meanes used in the worship or service of God, then he hath ordained, Ioh. 4.22. 2 King. 18.4. and that by the contrary we are commanded to practise all those parts of his worship, which he in his word hath commanded, and to acknowledge onely the proper use of every rite and outward meanes which the Lord hath ordained. Deut. 12.32. 2. King. 17.26. Further, we are forbidden by the second commandement to pray by direction before any creature, This publicke prayer is but a pretended cause of kneeling, as the Ministers of Lincolne make manifest in their abridgement: for no Canon of our neighbour Kirke hath directed any part of this kneeling in the act of receiving, to be assigned to the said prayer. In populous congregations, where there is but one Minister, the communicants sit a quarter of an houre before the Minister repaire to them with the sacrament. And last, the prayer is ended before the delivery of the elements. As for our Kirk, no such prayer is ordained to be uttered by the Minister; therefore no such prayer can be pretended. In the late Canon it is sayd, That the most reverent and humble gesture of the body in our meditation and lifting up of our hearts, best becommeth so divine an action. Meditation is not prayer, and the heart may be lifted up by the act of faith and contemplation, as well as by the action of prayer; so that neither publick nor mentall prayer is expressed in our act. But let the words be interpreted of mentall prayer, even mentall prayer is not the principall exercise of the soule in the act of receiving the sacramentall elements: the minde attending on the audible words, the visible elements, the mysticall actions, and making present use of them, men should not be diverted from their principall worke and meditation, upon the Analogie betwixt the signes and things signified. The soule may send up in the meane time some short ejaculations and darts of prayer to heaven to strengthen her owne weaknesse, and returne to her [Page] principall worke of meditation and application of the benefites represented. These short ejaculations of the minde are onely occasionall, as a Christian feeleth his owne present estate, and are incident to all our actions both civill and religious: In the act of receiving our earthly food, in going out the way, in hearing the word. If a man be moved inwardly, when he heareth, that the word was made flesh, shall he kneele as they do in the Romane Kirke? If a man should kneele at every inward motion of the minde, when he heareth the word, what confusion would there be in the congregation? A man looking occasionally to a crucifix, may remember Christ, and send up some ejaculations, shall he therefore kneele? The three children prayed mentally no doubt when they were brought before the golden Image, but lawfully they might not kneele before it. Perkins destinguisheth notably betwixt publick, private, and secret worship: Idolatry pag. 70 [...]. the secret and mentall worship must be yeelded to God, and the signes thereof concealed from the eyes and hearing of men, as Nehemiah when he prayed in presence of the King, Nehem. 2.4. In a word, the Institution, and the second commandement hinder kneeling at this time, suppose mentall prayer were the principall exercise of the soule. I heare there is alledged a third sort of prayer, to wit, that the very act of receiving is of it selfe a reall prayer. Is not this as much as to say, that craving and receiving is all one? Bellarmine De Missa▪ l. 2. c. 4. sayth, That prayer of i [...] selfe, and of the own proper office, doth impetrate, and that a sacrifice hath the force and power of obtaining, or impetrating: because it is, Quaedam oratio realis, non verbalis, a certaine reall prayer, not a verball. We may forgiue him to say this of the sacrifice of the Masse, where there is an offering of a sacrifice to God. But Bellarmine was never so absurd as to call the act of receiving from God, a reall prayer to God.

Their other obiection that we may praise God in the act of receiving; therefore we may kneele, may be answered after the same manner. There is no publicke thankesgiving ordained to be made at the delivery of the elements: mentall praise therefore must be meant. Mentall praise is no more the principall worke of the soule, then mentall prayer; what was sayd of the ejaculations of the one, let it be applied to the short e [...]aculations of the other. The name of Eucharist given to this Sacrament, helpeth them nothing: for it is a name given by Ancients, and not by the Scripture. Next, as it is called Eucharistia, so it is called Cyril. ep [...] 10. con. Nestor. in cō [...]cil. Ephesin [...] Eulogia: for the words, he gaue thankes, and he blessed, are indifferently used by the Evangelists. Some parts of [Page] this holy celebration stand in thankesgiuing, as the beginning and the end: and therefore is the whole action denominated from a part, saith Exercit. pag. 517. Causaubon. Eulogia & Eucharistia utra (que) vox à parte una totum Domini actionem designat. It followeth not that all the parts of this holy ministration are actions of thankesgiving.

Obiect. What we may craue of God upon our knees, we may receiue on our knees.

Ans. It is false, I may on my knees, Giue us this day our daily bread; but I may not receiue it on my knees. The people of Israel prayed for food, yet they were not esteemed unthankfull, for not kneeling when they received the Manna.

It is again objected, that in the act of receauing, we receaue from Christ an inestimable benefit, ought not a subject kneele when he receiveth a benefit from a Prince to testifie his thankfulnes? Answer, this relation from Christ to the Sacrament, as betweene the giver and the gift is common to all the Sacraments both of the old, and new law, ordinary, and extraordinary. Next we receaue the mysticall pledges, not out of the hands of God himselfe or his Son Christ immediatly, but out of the hand of the Minister. The person who receaveth the gift from the King, is supposed to receaue it immediatly: and suppose mediatly, yet ceremonies of Court, & mediate ciuil worships, are not rules of religious adoration; which should ever be immediate. Thirdly the manner of delivery of the gift and the will of the giuer, are to be considered. If the Prince call his Nobles to a banket, it is his will that they sit at table with him, as Iohanathan and Dauid sat at King Sauls table. Christ hes declared by the Institution, after what maner he wold haue vs receaue these mysticall pledges. Kneeling cannot agree with the actions and precepts of the Institution.

The second breach of the second commandement made by kneeling, is, the shew of conformity with the papists. The Lord forbade his people to be like the Gentiles, Leuitie. 18.3. and 19.27 & Deut: 12. the christians were forbidden to decore their houses with bay leaves, and greene boughes, because the paganes vsed so to doe, or to rest from their labours, those dayes that the Paganes did. If conformity in things not haueing state in Idolatrous seruice, but onely glanceing at the honor of the Idoll, be condemned; far more is conformity in the grossest act, wherin the life and soul as it were of their Idolatrie standeth, Such as is the gesture of kneeling among the papists. And for this cause Hooper On Ionas [...]n. 6. in his sermon before King Edward, for [Page] the same cause condemned this gesture. This outward conformity tickleth the papist, and offendeth the godly.

The third breach of the second commandement made by kneeling is, the reteining of a monument of vile idolatrie. All humane inuentiones polluted with idolatrie, except they be of necessarie vse, ought to be remoued from Gods seruice. This gesture had a spot of profanation from the beginning, being at the first birth in this act dedicat to Idolatrie. The brasen serpent set up at Gods own command, was not spared when it was abused. We detest the very garment of a theese, or a whore, though it be innocent. Biza Epist. 8. sayeth, many things may be tollerate for the weake, which may not be restored after they are tane away. He commendeth them, who haue abolished kneeling amongst other things tanquam apertas Idolomanias.

The fourth breach of the 2d comandement made by kneeling, is, the continuall occasion and danger of idolatry. Wee are forbiden all occasions and provocations of idolatry. There is a naturall pronnesse in all men to idolatry; great ignorance in the common people, and Superstition rooted in the hearts of men: Papistes daily increase, the idol of the bready God is still in great accompt in the Romane Kirks round about us, and in private corners amongst us: and yet men are not ashamed to say, that all memory of former superstition is past, and no perill is to be feared againe. The virgines in Cyprians time granted they walked with yong men, talked with them, went to bed with them, but when it came to the act they absteined. Cyprian Lib. 1. ep. 11. answereth, Nou est locus dandus diabolo: nemo diu tutus periculo proximus. i. Place should not be given to the devill, no man is long safe who is neare the point of danger. The Belgick Kirks in their Synods permitted not liberty of kneeling, for the same respect of bread-worship as may be seene in, the harmony of their Synods, set forth of late by Festus Homius Cap. 13., Liberum est stando, sedendo, vel eundo caenam celebrare non autem geniculando ob artolatreias periculum. If a lawfull use could be devised yet this danger cannot be eschued. Information by preaching is a sufficient remedy: meate doth not nourish so fast as poyson doeth corrupt. The watchmen are some time ignorant, or negligent, many want doctrine. It is better to fill up the pitt, then to set one beside it to warne the passengers that they fall not in, such ceremones ought to be appointed, which by their goodnes and edification may help the preaching of the word, and not such as the word must daily haue need to correct. The strength of many poore Christian soules should not be tryed by bringing [Page] them to the very brink of danger.

The fift breach of the second commandement made by kneeling, is, a shew of wisdome in wil-worshipe and humility, Coloss. 2.23. a worship is set up by mans voluntary devotion in a principall part of Gods service, under colour of humility. We ought to come indeed, and receaue with humility these misticall pledges: but is there no reverence and humility, but in kneeling? Swarez Tom. 1. Disp. 51. sect. 1. sayth that humility and adoration are distinguished, in their proper motiues and respects, in propriis honestatibus et motivis. It was not manerly for the disciples to use any gesture they pleased at Christs table. It was his honor to command, and their humility to obey. Sitting was not pomp, glorious pride, or prophane gesture, as men are not ashamed so to call it; because it was obedience to the Lord. This their pretended humility, is a naturall humility; like unto Peters, when he refused that Christ should wash his feet. Obedience is better then sacrifice. Fenner in the doctrine of the Sacraments.Pag. 130 hath a notable saying, [that the whole honor of the Sacraments is, that they remaine unto the Church of God in that simplicity he left them; and that no action here is worth any thing, but by reason of Gods word, which is sanctified to a profitable use, and made an instrument of the working of the holy Ghost.]

Object. There is no new worship appointed, but an action already appointed for Gods service is applyed to the said Supper. Answ. The parts of Gods worship may not be applyed to other when comlines, commodiousnes, institution, and command will not suffer. A man may not kneele all the time of the Sermon; he may not reade in the act of receaving; baptisme may not be ministred in the midst of the communion, and many such instances might be alledged. Aquinas sayth, 2.2. quest. 81. ad 5. Superstuum in his quae ad divinum cultum pertinent esse potest no secundum substantiam quanti, sed secundum alias circumstantias, puta quia cultus divinus exhibetur cui non debet exhiberi vel quādo non debet vel secū dum alias circumstantias prout non debet. That superfluity in things pertaining to the worship of God, is to be considered, not according to the quantity, for we cannot worship God exceedingly enough: but is to bee considered according to other circumstances, viz. when the worship of God is not exhibited to whom it ought to be exhibited, or when it ought not, according to other circumstances, as it ought not to be exhibited. By superfluity he meaneth excesse, a vice in all morall vertues. To bee short, a rite Sacramentall, devised by man, pretending humility, and shouldring out other rites instituted by God, cannot [Page] be but presumptuous wil-worship. Such is the gesture of kneeling, as we haue already proued.

Obiect. The Eucharist is a part of Gods worship, therefore we ought to kneele in the act of receiuing.

Answ. In a large sence every act whereby God is honoured may be called the worship of God, as oathes, vowes, sacrifices, &c. But adoration is the worship of God in a strict sense. Kneeling is the gesture of adoration, but not of every part of Gods worship. Receiving, eating, drinking in the sacrament, are parts of Gods worship, but they are not gestures of adoration. All the Sacraments both of Iewes and Christians, were parts of Gods worship as well as the Eucharist, and yet they kneeled not in the act of participation.

Obiect. The Eucharist is a sacrifice, and congeries sacrificiorum, a heape of sacrifices, a commemoratiue sacrifice, a sacrifice of a broken and contrite hart, of praise, of praier, of almes, therefore this Sacrament should be receaved with kneeling, sayeth the B. of Rochester Discours. p. 84.: and therfore the gesture of kneling is rightly applyed to such a kinde of worship.

Answer. The actions aforesaid are called sacrifices, onely by analogie and metaphoricallie▪ they are not proper sacrifices: the invisible Sacrifice by the which a man offereth himselfe by contrition, inward devotion, mortification is the daily Sacrifice of a christian. Rom. 13.1. we offer our selfes to be sacrificed when the word is preached. Rom. 15. we kneele not when we giue almes. These improper and metaphorical sacrifices, are not acts of adoration. Swarez. tom. 1. disput. 51. sect, 2. Est autem ridiculum dicere Elecmosynam esse actū adorationis. The paschall lambe was slaine in the maner of a reall sacrifice, and yet notwithstanding of this immolation, they kneeled not at the eating of the paschall lamb. The Sacraments of the old and new Testament were alyke in representation, significatition, and exhibition. Of prayer and praise we spake before in particular.

Kneeling not practised in the auncient Kirk.

THE former two breaches are sufficient of them selves, howbeit kneeling were otherwaies warranted by the practise of the Kirk: but as it had no warrant from Scripture, & reason, so likewise it wanteth the warrant of antiquity. When the Arrians denyed Christs true divinitie, the orthodoxe Kirk acknowledging his diuinity, kneeled not in the act of receiuing which was expedient if it had been lawfull: because the Arrians [Page] debased the Sonne of God. It was the custome of the kirk to stand in time of publick prayer vpon all the Lords dayes in the yeare, and euery day from Easter to Pentecost, as witnesseth Tertullian, Cyprian, Basilius, Ierome, Augustine, Hugo de sancto Victore, Anselmus, the Council of Nice, the 6. Council of Carthage, The Council of Constantinople, Quinisextum, the Council of Turone. The testimonies are set down in the B. of Rochester his discourse. Bellarmin closeth all vp in one generall, to wit, that in his time fiue hundreth years were not past, since the rite to pray standing & not kneeling on the Lords day had ceased. De cultis sanctor. c. 11 If they kneeled not in the time of praier where this gesture is most requisit by their own confession, because of the joyfull memory of Christs resurrection, far lesse did they kneel in the act of banketting and receiving the inestimable giftes offered vnto vs in this sacrament, a matter of great joy. Wherefore serued the signification of standing in prayer, if it was controlled with the gesture of an humble penitentiary at the sacrament? The testimonie alledged by the B. of Rochester Pag. 177 out of Tertullian, that they that were to be baptized, must pray with often prayers, and fastings, and kneelings, and watchings, proveth neither kneeling on the Lords day in tyme of prayer, or the act of baptisme, but only declareth what were the exercises of preparation on the dayes preceding baptism. In the assembly holden last at S. Andros, stā ding or kneling in time of publik prayer was left to euery mans liberty. In the Assembly holden at Perth, they haue tane away this liberty in the act of receiving. They left liberty in the act of publick humiliation, and hes tane it away in the act of mentall meditation. Let any man therfore judge of their intention. The authors aboue rehearsed make not all mention of prayer, when they speak of standing: but generally they speak against kneeling on the Lords day. Tertullian De Coron. milit. sayth generally de geniculis adorare, to adore vpon the knees upon the Lords day is vnlawful. He sayth not orare, but adorare. Hierom Contra Luciferanos. his testimony also is general against adoration on the knees. Pope Alex. the 3. hath their words. Quoniā diebus autē dominicis & alijs praecipuis sestivitatibus suis inter pascha & Pentecosten genuum flexio nequaquam debet fieri: Decretal. lib. 2. tit. 9. de ferijs cap. nisi aliquis ex deuotione id velit facere in secreto. In consecrationibus autē Episcoporum & Clericorū ordinationibus consecrans & consecratus tantum genua flectere possunt secundum quod consecrationis modus requrit. Vpon the Lords day and other cheese festivities, and betwen Ester and Pentecost there ought to be no kneeling, except one will doe it in secret of devotion. In the consecration of Bishops and ordination of clergie-men he that consecrateth [Page] and he thet is consecrated, may only bow their knees, so far as the forme of consecration requireth. If this was the only exception, it followeth that in no other case, they did kneel on these dayes. Exceptio firmat regulam in casibus non exceptis. They received the communion usually vpon the Lords day: and therefore it was called the day of bread Chrysost. hom. 5. de resurrectione.. Yea and in some places only vpon the Lords day, as Iewel observeth Artic. 1. Divis. 25. out of an Epistle sent from the councell of Alexandria in the defence of one Macarius. Tertullian expresly affirmeth, that the maner was to stand at the receaving De orat.. Dionysius Alexandrinus writeth to Xistus concerning one who standing at the table had often receaved the holy food in these words. Nonne solennior erit statio tua si ad aram Dei steteris accepto corpore Domini. Euseb. lib. 7. cap 8. Chrisostome Homil. in Encenijs. sayth, Stemus trementes & timidi demissis oculis renata autem anima gementes siue jubilantes corde. Let vs stand trembling, &c. The Alyssines receiue the sacrament standing euen to this day, as also the Muscouites, howbeit drowned otherwise in great superstition, receiue the Sacrament standing.

Oject. the Ethincks objected to Christians that they did honor Bacchus and Ceres; and Averroes, that they adored that which they did eate. Theodoret saith Dialog. 2. the misticall signes are adored. Augustine in psal. 98 no man eateth that flesh before he adore it. Ambrose Lib. 3. cap. 12. de spirit. sanct. we adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries Chrysostome sayth, Homil. 24 in 1. Cor. let us imitate the Barbarians, thou beholdst him not in a manger, but on an Altar. And again, Homil. 7. in Mattheum they are like Herod, who adore not the Eucharist.

Answ. It followeth not they adored, therefore they kneeled. The Ethnicks did mistake the reuerend and graue behauiour of Christians at the receauing the Sacrament, as they did many other things both in Iewes and Christians: they gaue out that they were worshippers of the clouds, of the Sonne of the crosse, of the head of an Asse, of the slaughter of infants. Augustine sayeth. A Cerere & Libero paganorum dijs longè absumus quamvis panis & calicis sacramentum nostro ritu amplectimur. Contra Faustum. We are far from Ceres & Bacchus the Gods of the Pagans, howbeit we imbrace the Sacrament of the bread & the cup after our rite. When Theodoret sayth the mystical signes are adored,Obedience- p. 534.557. he meaneth by adoration, reuerend and religious handling, as becometh so great mysteries: and so Bilson: exponeth Theodoret, and to this purpose alledgeth the glosse of the Canon Law, De consecrat. dist. 3. venerabilis. In hoc sensu possumus quamlibet rem sacram adorare, id est reverentiam exhibere. Anastasius sayth,De consecrat. dist. 1. Apostolica. Dominica verba attentè audiant, & fideliter adorent. Let them diligently heare, & faithfully adore the word of God. The word [Page] adoration is sometime taken in a large sence for veneration; so do all our Divines expone Theodoret, or else his phrase were absurd: and indeed none of the Fathers used that phrase but he. Chrysostomes Homilies on Mathew are a supposititious worke. The rest of the testimonies alledged make mention of adoration, not of the Sacrament, but of Christ in the Sacrament: and they are to be understood of spirituall and internall adoration, common to this sacrament with other sacraments. Augustine sayth, The flesh of Christ is adored either in the sacrifice, or otherwise by faith Fulk. 1. cor. 11. sect. 18.. The adoration is as the eating, the eating is spirituall and by faith. Augustine speaking of the veneration of this sacrament, sayth, Epist. 118. Contemptum solum non vult cibus ille. That meat misliketh onely contempt, as Manna did lothsomnesse. Ambrose speaketh of all the mysteries of Christian Fulk. 1. cor. 11. sect. 18. Religion. Chrysostom is to be understood of spirituall reverence Fulk ibid.: and therefore he useth emphaticall speeches of ascending up to the gates of heaven, even of the heaven of heavens, like Eagles. For the same Chrysostome sayth, Hom. 14. in Marcum. that we adore Christ in Baptisme. None of all the testimonies alledged expresseth any gesture of the body, let be kneeling.

Obiect. For an humble gesture are alledged Origen Homil. 15 in divers. locos.: Thou therefore humbling thy selfe, imitate the Centurion, and say, Lord I am not worthy, &c. Cyrillus of Ierusalem In cateches. mystugogic., Then after the communion of the body of Christ, come also to the cup of his bloud, not reaching out thy hands, but falling on thy face in manner of adoration and worship, say Amen. Nazianzen in Epitaph. Gorgonia. sayth, his sister fell down before the Altar, and called on him who was worshipped on the Altar.

Answ. Origen directs the words to be sayd as well when the preacher entreth into our house, as when we receiue the sacrament. Bilson, Obedience. p. 540. Further, Possevinus a learned Papist, acknowledgeth that worke to be counterfeit Riveti specimen critici sacri. lib. 2. cap 13.. The Catechismes attributed to Cyrill of Ierusalem is a booke newly sprung up, and unknown to the Ancients. It was not to be found in Hardings time, but in writing. See Moulins translated Part 2. pag 65.. This counterfeit Cyril sayth not, Cade pronus, fall down on thy face; but, accede pronus, come inclining, or bowing thy body; as men use to doe when they make courtesie. Nazianzens sister was sick in body, and sicke in minde: her fact was private, and in the darke of the night, she was not in the act of receiving the sacrament, she blubbered with her teares the fragments of the sacrament received before. Christ is honoured at the Altar, or communion-table, by the administration of the sacrament celebrated to his honour and [Page] worship, in remembrance of him: his mercies are there layd foorth in the mysteries. Yee see no testimony can be alledged for geniculation. The Councell of Constantinople holden under the Emperour Basilius, hath these words: Iesus Christus panis substantiam mandavit apponi, ne scilicet humana effigie figurata idolatria introduceretur. For eschewing of Idolatry, the Lord commanded the substance of bread to be set on without any humane shape. The proofes already made for standing upon the Lords day, for 1000. yeare in the Kirk, do evince that geniculation had no place in the act of receiuing all that time. It was therefore followed upon bodily presence and transubstantiation.

Kneeling not practised in the reformed Churches.

THE Lutheran Kirkes do acknowledge reall presence by way of consubstantiation: it is no wonder therefore that they approue kneeling. The reformed Kirks as they haue damned bodily presence, so haue they reiected this gesture of kneeling in the act of receiving. The Kirk of Bohemia hath retained this gesture since the dayes of Iohn Husse. In their confession exhibited to King Ferdinand, An. 1535 it is thus sayd, Cap. 15. Ministeri verò Dominicae caenae verba referentes plebem ipsam ad hanc fidem hortantur, ut corporis Christi presentiam adesse credant. The Ministers are willed to stir up the people to beleeue that the body of Christ is present: the poorer sort amongst them, as they haue rejected the errour of reall presence, so depart they from this gesture. In our neighbour Kirk some of their defenders of kneeling will not haue us inquisitiue of the manner of Christs presence in the sacrament. Hooker Eccles. polic. lib. 5. sect. 67. And the Bishop of Rochester commendeth the simplicity of the Ancients, which disputed not whether Christ was present Con, sub, in, or trans, in this Supper. Discours. pag. 35. Sutton in his Appendix to his Meditations on the Lords Supper, condemneth likewise this diligent search of the manner of Christs presence. If the manner of Christs presence be not determined, there can arise no other but a confused worship of such a confused and determinate presence. The Papists acknowledge that there ought to be no adoration but where there is acknowledged a bodily presence in the sacrament. Hence it is that they proue mutually the one by the other.

[Page]It will not follow that we may change sitting into kneeling, because the ancient Kirk and some reformed Kirks haue changed sitting into standing; because kneeling maketh so many breaches both in the institution, and in the second commandement, and is no wayes a table gesture. By standing wee accommodate our selues to a table to participate of the dainties set thereon, standing was never abused to idolatry as kneeling hath been. We are not bound to imitate other kirks further then they imitate Christ. Our sitting is not Scotish Genevating, but a commendable imitation of the Apostolicall Churches, and obedience to Christs institution.

They flee up at last to the Kirk triumphant; and alledge for kneeling the 24. Elders falling down before the Lambe, but how conclude they this, that they that are called to the Supper of the lambe kneele at the Supper of the lambe? and seeing the blessed soules shall not be clothed with their bodies before the resurrection, how can they conclude, materiall geniculation of the blessed Saints in heaven? all creatures in heaven, in earth, and under the earth; are said to bow their knee at the name of Iesus, that is, to acknowledge his soverain authority, howbeit the celestiall Angels, blessed soules, and infernall spirits, haue not knees to bow with. The everlasting felicity of the children of God, is the Supper of glory▪ doe they drink continually of that felicity upon their knees? thowsand thowsands stand before him, many shall come from the East, and from the West, and sit at the heavenly table with Abraham, Isaak, and Iacob: may we not then conclude sitting and standing, as well as they doe kneeling, if we looke to the letter of parables, visions, allegories and prophesies? But Symbolicall Theologie is not argumentatiue. Last, how will they proue evidently that the falling of the 24. Elders before the lambe, is to be interpreted of the Kirk triumphant, rather then of the Kirke Militant?

[Page]

REASONS AGAINST FESTIVALL DAYES.

FRom the beginning of the Reformation to this present yeare of our Lord 1618. the Kirk of Scotland hath diverse waies condemned the observation of all holy dayes, the Lords day onely excepted. In the first chapter of the first booke of discipline penned anno. 1560. the observation of holy dayes to Sancts, the feast of Christmasse, Circumcision, Epiphanie, Purification, and other fond feasts of our Ladie are ranked amongst the abhominations of the Romane religion, as hauing neither commandement nor assurance in the word. It is farther affirmed that the obstinate maintaineres & teachers of such abomination should not escape the punishement of the ciuill Magistrate. The book aforesaid was subscrybed by the Lords of secret Councell. In the generall Assemblie holden at Edinburgh anno. 1566, the latter confession of H [...]lv [...]tia was approued; but with speciall exception against some holy dayes dedicated to Christ; these same very dayes, that now are urged. In the Assemblie holden anno 1575. complaint was made against the Ministers and Readers beside Aberdine, because they Assembled the people to prayer and preaching vppon certain patron and festival dayes. Complaint likewise was ordained to be made to the Regent vpon the Town of Drumfraies for vrging, and convoying a Reader to the Kirke with Tabret and Whistle to read the prayers all the holy Dayes of Yoole, or Christmas vpon the refusall of their own Reader, Item an article was formed to be presented to the Regent, craving that all dayes heretofore keeped holy in tyme of Papistrie beside the Lords day such as Yoole day, Saints dayes, and other like feasts may be abolished, a civill penaltie appointed against the observers of the said dayes. Banquetting, playing, feasting, and such other vanities upon the dayes foresayd is condemned. In the Assembly holden in Aprill anno 1577. it was [Page] ordained that the Visitor with the advice of the Synodal Assembly, shall admonish Ministers preaching or ministring the communion at Easter and [...]hristmas. Pasche, Yoole, or other like superstitious times or Readers reading, to desist, under the paine of deprivation. Dedicating of dayes was abjured in the confession of faith penned anno 1580. An Article was formed in the Assembly anno 1581. craving an act of Parliament to be made against observation of feast dayes, dedicated to Saints, and setting out of bone-fires. In the Assembly holden in February anno 1587. it was humbly moved to his Maiesty, that Pasche and Yoole was superstitiously observed in Fyffe, and about Drumfrets. In the Assembly holden anno 1590. his Maiesty in open audience of the Assembly praised God for that he was borne to be a King in the sincerest Kirk in the world: sincerer then our neighbour Kirk of England: for their service was an evill-sayd Masse in English: Sincerer then Geneva it selfe: for they observed Pasche and Yoole. In the Parliament holden anno 1592. the act of King Iames the third anent the Saturday and other vigils to be kept holy from Even-song to Evensong was annulled. Item, the act made by Queen Regent granting licence to keepe Yoole and Pasche. In the Assembly holden anno 1596. when the covenant was renewed, superstition and Idolatry breaking forth in keeping of festivall dayes, setting out of bone-fires, and singing of Carrols, is reckoned amongst the corruptions which were to be amended. The Pulpits haue sounded continually against all festivall daies. The Censures of the Kirk haue been put in execution in all due form against the observers. In the pretended Assembly holden at Perth in August last past, it was concluded, that hereafter every Minister shall make commemoration of the inestimable benefits received from God, by and through our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ, his Birth, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and sending down of the Holy Ghost upon the dayes appoynted for that use. That they shall make choyce of severall and pertinent Texts, and frame their Doctrine and exhortation accordingly. This their conclusion was ratified and allowed by act of Councell, and proclamation was made thereupon, commanding cessation and abstinence from all kinde of labour and handy-worke upon the fiue dayes aboue written, that every one may the better attend the holy exercises which are to be kept in the Kirke at these times. But first we will premit the proper description of a festivall day.

[Page]

The description of a festivall day.

PIscator describeth a Festivall day in this manner, Galat. 4.9 10.11. Festum proprii loquendo est publica & solennis ceremonia mandata à Deo, ut certo anni tempore cum singulari loetitia obeatur ad gratias agendum Deo pro certo aliquo beneficio in populum suum collato. A feast in proper speech is a publick and solemne ceremonie commanded by God to bee celebrated a certaine time of the yeare, with singular gladnesse to giue thankes to God for some certaine benifit bestowed on his people. Hooker intreating this argument intituleth the subiect festivall dayes. Hee maketh festivall solemnity to be nothing els, but the due mixture, as it were, of these three elements; Praises set forth with chearefull alacritie of mind: delite expressed by charitable largenes more then common bounty: and sequestration from ordinary labors. Policy. lib. 5. sect. 7. By these descriptiones wee may see that the sabboth day is not properly a festiuall day. The ordinary sabboth is weekly: the festivall is anniversary. We may fast upon the ordinarie sabboth, but we cannot fast and mourne upon a festivall day. Nehem. 8.10. for that were to confound fasting and festivall dayes. The Councill of Laodicea inhibited to celebrate the feasts of martyres in Lent, for the same regard upon the ordinary sabboth all the parts of Gods worship may be performed as occasion shall offer. Vpon the festivall dayes we are bound to the commemoration of a particular benefite. Proper texts, Epistles, Gospels, Homilies, and sermones are framed for the misterie of that day. So that the ordinary sabboth is morall and for the worship of God in generall, the festivall is misticall. Esentialia festi, the essē tiall parts of a festivall day are cessation from work: hearing of the word: participation of the sacraments. Commemoration of divine misteries may be performed upon the ordinary sabbath, but to make up a festival day Bellarm. De cultu sanctorum. lib. 3. cap. 10 requireth a determination of a day, signification and representation of the misteries wrought on such dayes. Scaliger Addenda prolegomeni [...] in lib. de emendat. temp. observeth that the ordinary sabbothes were never called Chaggim as the anniversarie solemnities were.

1. Reason against festivall dayes.

Six dayes shalt thou labour and doe all that thou hast to doe.] These words are either a command to doe the works of our calling [Page] as many both Iewish and Christian divines doe interprete: or els a permission, as others doe interpret. If they contein a command, no countremand may take it away. If a permission, no human authority may spoile men of the liberty that God hath granted unto them, as long as they haue any maner of worke to doe for the sustentation of this life. The Muscovits therefore say very well: that it is for Lords to keepe feasts, and abstien from labour. The Citizens and Artificers amongst them upon the festivall dayes after divine service, do betake themselues to their labour, and domestick affaires, as Gaguinus reporteth.Cod. lib. 3. [...]it. 12. l. 4. It may be objected that Constantine the Emperour made a law that none but the Prince may ferias cōdere, erect an idle day: the Prince then may inioyne a day of Cessation. Answer. The Lawes of the [...]od. are not rules of theologie. A Prince may not inioyne Cessation from Oeconomicall and domestick works but for weapon shewing, exercise of armes, defence of the country or other publick works and affaires. But that is not to injoyne a day of simple Cessation, but to inioyne a politick work in place of the oeconomicall. Every particular member ceassing from their particular work exerciseth another work serving for the preservation of the whole bodie. The curse that Adam shall eate with the sweate of his browes, is mitigated by the permission of six dayes labour. The Lord permitteth unto man six, lest he devoure the seventh day which is sanctified. What if the Kirk representatiue injoyne a weekly holy day, as another sabboth, ought the Kirke to be obeyed? what power hath the Kirk representatiue, to inioyne an anniversary day more then a weekly or hebdomadary holy day. If a day of simple Cessation from all maner of work Oeconomicall and politicall may not be inioyned, a festivall day may not be inioyned. I say further that the poore craftsman can not lawfully be commanded to lay aside his tooles, and goe passe his time, no not for an houre, let be for a day as long as he is willing to worke, and perhaps urged with the sharpnes of present necessity. And yet farther that he ought not to be compelled to leaue his worke to goe to divine service except on the day that the Lord hath sanctified.

The second Reason.

It is the priuiledge of Gods power to appoint a day of rest, and to sanctifie it to his honour, ] as our best Divines Perkins, Gal. 4. Willets Synops. pag. 50 [...] & Rom. 14 controvers. 4 Kuchlinus in [...]atechis. Holland. de diebus [...]estis. mainteine. Zanchius In 4. p [...]ae [...]ept. col. 655 affirmeth that it is proper to God to choose any person or any thing to consecrate and sanctifie it to himselfe, as it belongeth to him alone to justify, Catechismus Hollandicus saith [Page] no wise man will deny that this sanctification belongeth onely to God, & that it is manifest sacriledge to attribute these things to men, which are onely of divine ordination. Willet sayth: It belongeth onely to the Creator to sanctifie the Creature. In the booke of Ecclesiasticus, cap. 33.7.8. it is demanded, Why doth one day excell another, when as the light of every day of the yeare is of the Sun? It is answered, By the knowledge of the Lord they were distinguished, and he altered seasons and feasts. Some of them hath he made hie dayes, and hallowed them; Some of them he hath made ordinary dayes. The common tenent of the Divines was acknowledged by the pretended Bishop of Galloway in his Sermon at the last Christmas. It may offend you, sayd he, that this is an holy day. I say there is no power either civill or Ecclesiasticall can make an holy day: no King, no Kirk: onely the Lord that made the day, and distinguished it from the night: he hath sanctified the seventh day. The like was acknowledged by M. P. Galloway in his Christmas Sermons. If the speciall sanctification of a day to an holy use dependeth upon Gods commandement and institution, then neither King nor Kirke representatiue may make an holy day.

The observers of dayes will say they count not their anniverserie daies holier then other dayes, but that they keep them only for order and policie, that the people may be assembled to religious exercises. Answer. The Papists will confesse that one day is not holier then another in its owne nature, no not the Lords day: for then the Sabboth might not haue been changed from the last, to the first day of the weeke. But they affirme that one day is holier then another, in respect of the end and vse; And so doe wee. They call them holy dayes: and so doe wee. They vse them as memoriall signes of sacred mysteries whereof they carie the names, as Nativitie; Passion; Ascension. &c. And so doe wee. The presence of the festivitie putteth a man in minde of the mysterie, howbeit he haue not occasion to be present in the holy Assembly. We are commanded to obserue them in all points as the Lords day, both in the publick Assemblies, and after the dissoluing of the same. Yea it is left free to teach any parte of Gods word on the Lords day; but for solemnitie of the festiuall, solemne texts must be chosen: Gospels Epistles, collects, Psalmes must be framed for the particular service of these dayes, and so the mysticall dayes of mans appointment, shall not onely equall, but in solemnity surpasse the morall sabboth appointed by the Lord. Doth not Hooker say that the dayes of publick memorials should be cloathed with the outward robes of holines, They aledge for the warrant of anniversary festivities [Page] the Ancients, who call them Sacred and misticall dayes. If they were instituted only for order and policie, that the people may Assemble to religious exercises, Wherefore is there but one day appointed betwixt the Passion and Resurection? fortie dayes betwixt the Resurrection and Ascension? Ten betwixt the Ascension and Pentecost? Wherefore follow we the course of the Moone as the Iewes did, in our moveable feasts making the christian Church cloathed with the Sunne to walk vnder the Moone, as Lib. 2. Dist. 4. unmer. 48. Bonauentura alludeth? Wherefore is there not a certain day of the moneth kept for Easter, as well as for the nativitie? Doth not Bellarmine giue this reason out of Augustine that the day of the Natiuity is celebrate only for memorie, the other both for memorie; and for sacraments. De cultu sanct. Lib. 3. Cap. 12. Ille celebratur solum ob memoriam, & ideo semper die 25. Decembris: at l [...]fe celebratur ob memoriam & sacramentum, & ideo variatur. If the anniversarie commemorations were like the weekely preachings, as the two forenamed preachers made the comparison, why is the husbandman forced to leaue his plough at the one, and not at the other? Why hath the one proper service and not the other? Why did not M. Galloway curse the people for absence frō the one, as wel as from the other? Whey are the dayes of the one changeable, and not the other. To make solemne commemoration of Christs nativitie vpon any other day, then upon the putatiue day of his nativity, would be thought a great absurdity; siclike of his Passion, Ascension. &c. And last, how could M. Galloway affirme that the evidence of Gods Spirit appeared in the Christmas Sermons that are extant, more liuely then in any other Sermons?

Next it may be objected that the people of God might haue indicted dayes of fasting at their owne determination, and an interdiction of all kynd of work. Answer. They had a generall warrant from God. Ioel. 2.15. to proclaime a generall fast, according to the occurrence of their calamities and other affaires of the kirk. The light and law of nature leadeth a man to this observation of an occasionall fast: nature teacheth him presently to withdraw his hand and heart from worldly affaires, and to lift them up to God to deprecate his wrath when his judgement is aboue our heads. The like may be said, by analogie, of thanksgiuing, that we ought to praise God in the mean time whē we receiue the benefit. But to make of the occasionall dayes of fasting, or feasting, aniversarie and set festivall and fasting daies is without warrant. It remaineth therefore that it is the Lords soueraignty to make or ordaine a thing to be holy. God first sanctifies by commandement and institution: man sanctifieth [Page] thereafter by observation, applying to an holy use the time sanctified by God. It was a part of the Idolatry of the golden calfe to proclaime a holy day. It is numbred among one of Ieroboams sins that he ordained a feast after the deuise of his own heart 1. King. 12.33 [...] Musculus, Loci. communes praec. 4. sayeth If any man shall attempt to make holy at his pleasure the things that God hath not Sanctified, is not only Superstitious, but challengeth vnto himself, that which belongs onely to God. When God blesseth and sanctifieth a day, then may man looke for a blessing in sanctifieing it

The third Reason.

Wee come from priuiledge to fact. As de jure none may, so de facto None did, appoint holy dayes vnder the law but God, and that either by himself, or by some extraordinary direction. Therefore none can be allowed vnder the Gospell without the like warant. Seeing the tymes vnder the Gospell are not so ceremonious, as the tymes under the law. Against this reason two instances are commonly alledged the one of the dayes of Purim instituted by Mordecai: the other of the feast of dedication instituted by Iudas Maccabeus, and graced with Christs presence, as is alledged, Ioh. 10. But the answer is easie.

The dayes of Purim were simply called the dayes of Purim: not the holy dayes of Purim. They are neither called Chag, nor Mogned, nor Gnatsarah as the other anniuersarie feasts are called in the old Testament. No mention is made of holy conuocations on these dayes nor divine service proper to them, notwithstanding of their returne to the temple, and promise that the memoriall of the dayes of Purim should not fall from among them, nor perish from their seede Ester 9.27.28, It is true that now a daies they read the booke of Ester. And therefore call it the feast of Megilla, after the reading wherof they spend the rest of the time in revelling, more madde then the Gentiles were in their Bacchanalis. This reading was not the first institution, but an addition of the later Iewes, The dayes of Purim were instituted onlie for ciuill dayes, and the ordinance required no farther, but that they should make them dayes of feasting and joy, and sending of portions one to another, and gifts to the poore Ester 9.19.22. to be documents and testimonies of their fasting and crying, that is in remembrance of their fasting and prayers, by which they obtained that deliverance. At the instant time of their deliverie, it is sayd they rested, but in the Edict when the daies were made anniversarie, rest from all kind of worke was not forbidden: therefore Hospinian De origine sestorum I [...] daicorum, sayth, In festo Phurim operari [Page]prohibitum non est: they were not forbidden to work. And Willet compareth it with the fift of November, Synopsis controversie of holydayes. and affirmeth the like. Next, it is to be considered, that Mordecai is thought to be the pen-man of the book of Ester, and consequently a Prophet. He was one of the 120. masters of the great Synagogue, amongst whom were both Priests and Prophets, Ezra, and his society, Daniel & his companions, Zachary, Malachy, &c. Thirdly, it appeareth, Ester 9.28. that it was an order to endure, as long as the feast dayes appointed by the Lord himself, and in no case to be altered. Holy daies of Ecclesiasticall constitution are not of such a nature, as Against the Rhemists Apoc. 1.10. D. Fulk acknowledgeth. Whatsoever therefore was the quality of these dayes, whether holy or civill, the warrant was more then ordinary.

The feast of Dedication, whereof mention is made, Iohn 10. some take for the dedication of the Temple in Zorobabels time, as the Cent. 1. Col. 244. Magdeburg Centuries. So likewise Chrysostom, Theophilactus, Cajetanus, Abulensis, Euthymius, and others, as Comment in Evangel. Tom 3. lib. 4. cap. 16. Barradius reporteth. But let it be meant, as is alledged: If the feast of dedication in Salomon and Zorobabels time was anniversary, then the Maccabees did follow the example of these who had Propheticall direction. If they were not anniversarie, as indeed In Ioh. 10 Toletus leaveth it as uncertaine, then this annuall memory was an addition of the Pharisees, who enlarged the glory of this feast, as they did their Ph [...]lacteries. Iunius Ioh. 10 relateth out of the Talmud, that the wise men decreed that the eight dayes of that feast should be yearly dayes of ioy. By the wise men are meant the Pharisees, who were called Sapientes Israelis. The renewment of the Altar, and of certain other decayed places, was honoured by them with an annuall memory, whereas the whole Temple, with all the implements and furniture thereof in Salomon and Zorobabels time had not the like honour. Neither doe we read that any annuall memory was instituted by Hezekias after the prophanation of the Temple by Ahaz and Prias: nor by Iosias, after that it was polluted by Manasses & Amon. Christs walking in Salomons Porch, maketh nothing for approbation of this feast. He had remained in Ierusalem from the feast of the Tabernacles, and came not up of purpose to keepe that feast. He taketh old of the present opportunity to thrust his sickle into a thicke harvest.

Wee haue to consider for a generall answer to all instances alledged from the Iewish Kirk, first that they had extraordinary directions which wee want. They had prophets by office, or commission, who ended in Malachi. They had prophets who [Page] were only prophets by the Spirit as Daniell, David, and Salomon, who indured after the dayes of Malachi, as Drusius in 2. Pet. [...] 21. afirmeth They had Vrim and Thummim under the first Temple, and in place thereof, a slender voyce sounding from the heaven, called Bathkol, under the second Temple, as Tremellius in Act. 12.22. hath observed. Next the Pharisees and degenerating Iewes filled their Kalendar with fond feasts of their owne invention, as the festivities of the Equinoctiall and festivall dayes, other wayes called the feasts of the Tekuphas: or converted any ancient order into a solemne feast, as the day appointed for carying wood to the Temple to maintein the fire of the altar Nehem. 10.34. they turned into a feast called the feast of Xylophoria. A holie day is to be observed not by a few but by all: but all were not appointed to bring wood, but those only who were designed by lot. It is no wonder therefore that they took the like course with the dayes of Purim. But wee are not to imitate the Pharises, and fond Iewes.

The fourth Reason.

The observation of anniversarie dayes pertained to the ceremoniall law: but so it is that the ceremoniall law is abolished. The anniversarie dayes were distinguished from the morall sabboth. Many were the preheminences of the ordinary sabboth aboue the anniversary. 1. It was more ancient, given to Adam in the state of innocencie. 2. vttered by Gods owne mouth. 3. Written with Gods owne finger in durable stone. 4. The Lord himself in a manner rested on it, when as he rained not Manna that day. 5. It was more strictly observed, then the other holy dayes, therefore some say it was called Shabbath, Shabbathon. Therefore likewayes the Iewes measured unto it a sabboth dayes journey. 6. Other holy dayes were celebrated either in remembrance of a by-past benefite, or to signify somthing to come. It excelled them in both, faith De cultu sanctorum, lib. 3. cap. 11 Bellarmine. 7. Other holy dayes gaue place unto it The Iewes made a Canon, that two Sabbothes should not concurre together propter olera & propter mortuo [...], that is, because they could not keepe in that hote region their sodden meats two dayes together; nor the bodies of the dead unburied for stink, and putrifaction. Therefore they transferred this sabboth of extraordinary solemnity immediatly proceeding the ordinary sabboth to the ordinary sabboth. They were drawne to it, it was never drawen to them, See De exercitat. p. 482. Causabonus. In a word, the Iewes held it in greater estimaton, then the rest. They called it. The Queene of the holy dayes, [Page]and the secrete of the living God. The three solemnities called Regalim were Temple feasts. They were bound to celebrate them at the Temple the publick theater of all the Iewish ceremonies The Apostle calleth them Weake and beggerly elements Galat. 4.9.10. The elements of the world Coloss. 2.20. Shadowes of things to come Coloss. 2.16.17. The Apostle saith not the observation of Iudaicall dayes, but simpliciter, the observation of dayes served to the people of God for a typicall use, and a rudiment of religion. If the observation of some anniversary dayes was prescribed to the Iewes, as elements and rudiments for their instruction; it followeth that the observation of anniversarie dayes is of it selfe a rudimentary instruction; otherwayes the Apostles reason will not hould. The Apostle condemneth difference of dayes as he condemneth difference of meats. To esteeme some meats cleane, and some uncleane is Iudaicall, howbeit we obserue not the same difference, that the Iewes did. Dayes and meats are parallelled together, to esteeme one day holier then another, not so discerned by the Lords commandement must be also Iudaicall. The Kirk vnder the Gospell hath past the rudiments; and therefore the observation of anniversary daies doth not beseeme her. To substitute other dayes in place of the Iewish, a Christian Pas [...]e and Pentecost for the Iewish, is but to substitute rudiments and elements ro the Iewish, & not to chase away, but to change the Iewish holy dayes, as Bellarmine doth De cultu Sanctorum c. 10. Non est sublata sed mutata significatio [...]et discretio dierum. The Iewish frankincense was a perfume: the Popish is a simple frankincense without any other ingredient. The Iewish lights were of oyle: the popish of wax and yet wee charge them with Iudaizing. The Iewes had no anniversary dayes, but such as were abrogate, They were abrogate not only as shadowes of things to come, but also as memorials of bygone benefites. Even as they were dayes of remembrance they belonged to the pedagogy of the law. Converted Iewes may not lawfully obserue the Iewish festivities, even as remembrances of bygone benefits. In every respect all their anniversary dayes are abolished, and they had none other, but such as were abolished. Therefore in every respect they belonged to the ceremoniall Law. The observation therefore of anniversary dayes even in respect of remembrance was to the Iewes pedagogicall, rudimentary and elementary, and counsequently ceremoniall. The Bishop of Chester Defence of the ceremonies pag. 64. confesseth that all the solemne feasts were of a ceremoniall nature. If the Iewes had no anniversary solemnities to indure after Christs comming when they should be converted to Christianisme, [Page] how can the observation of anniversary dayes be taken up by Christians.

The fifth Reason.

The prerogatiue belonging to God in the old Testament, was transferred to Christ, God and Man, the law-giver in the new Testament, one that was faihfull in all the house of God. But so it is, that Christ neither by his own cōmandement, nor by direction of his spirit inspiring the Apostles, instituted any other day but the Lords day. If there had been any other dayes dedicated to Christ, the Apostle spoke unproperly and obscurely when he sayd, he was ravished in the spirit upon the Lords day. If there had been a day for his Nativity, another for his passion, he should haue sayd, he was ravished in the spirit upon one of the Lords dayes. Seeing Iohn out-lived the rest of the Apostles, It followeth that there was no other holy day observed in the Apostolicall times. Neither was the institution of the Lords day so much a new institution, as a change of the ordinary Sabboth. The extraordinary Sabboths were in every respect ceremoniall. The ordinary Sabboth had both substance and ceremony. By reason of the substance it was changed into the Lords day answering analogically to it. The morall use of the ordinary sabboth was for the service of God in generall both private and publick. The mysticall use was to be a memoriall of things bypast, and a shadow of things to come. The morall use indureth, the mysticall uses are evanished. Christ appeared the first day of the weeke, and every eighth day thereafter untill he ascended, saith In Genesin c. 2.2. Iunius. And that therefore the Apostles delivered to the Kirke the observation of this day from Christs example and institution,, which he confirmeth with the iudgement of Cyrillus and Augustine. The blessing of the seventh day was translated to this day instituted by Christ, because all sanctification floweth to Christians from Christ. But it is sufficient that the Apostles inspired by his Spirit, haue recommended this day to the Kirke.

There is another reason to proue that there were no other dayes appoynted in the Apostles times. The Apostle had occasions to treat of holy dayes, reasoning against the observation of Iewish dayes, they direct them to no other as the purpose required. The Apostle condemneth not onely the observation of the Iewish daies, nor the Iewish observation of the Iewish daies to a typicall use. For the converted Iewes did not obserue them as shadowes of things to come, for then they had denied Christ: but he condemneth observation of dayes as a Iewish [Page] custome and rite, as a pedagogicall and rudimentary instruction not beseeming the Christian Kirke. Zanchius In 4. praecept. p. 171 speaketh to this purpose after this manner: Magis consentaneum est cum prima institutione & cum scriptis Apostolicis ut unus tantum dies in septimana sanctisicetur. It is more agreeable to the first institution, and the writings of the Apostles, that one day of the weeke onely be sanctified.

Against this Argument is first alledged, that the Apostle compareth with the observation of dayes, Rom. 14.5.6. Answ. The Apostle beareth with the infirmity of the weake Iewes, who understood not the fulnesse of the Christian liberty. And the ceremoniall law was as yet not buried. But the same Apostle reproveth the Galatians, who had attained to this libertie, and had once left off the observation of daies. Next, the Iudaicall dayes had once that honour, as to be appointed by God himselfe: but the anniversary dayes appointed by men haue not the like honour.

It is secondly obiected, that seeing the Lords day was instituted in remembrance of Christs resurrection, the other notable acts of Christ ought likewise to be remembred with their severall festivities. Answer. It followeth not that because Christ did institute in remembrance of one benefite, therefore men may institute for other benefites. 2. Christs resurrection was a benefite including the rest, as an accomplishment of the worke of redemption, and answered anagogically to the common benefit of creation by the beginning of a new creation. 3. We deny that the Lords day was appointed to celebrate the memory onely of Christs resurrection. For then the Lords resurrection, the proper subiect of all Homilies, Sermons, Gospels, Epistles, Collects, Hymnes and Psalmes belonging to the Paschall seruice should be the proper subject of deuine seruice euery Lords day. Then the Lords day shovld be a festivall day: and it were vnlawfull to fast on it. It was instituted for the remembrance of all his actions, and generalie for his worship. Athanasius, sayth Homilia de semente. In Sabath [...] conuenimus ut Dominum Sabathi Iesum adoremus. Wee conuene on the Sabboth, that wee may adore Iesus the Lord of the Sabboth. Augustin De verbis Apostol. serm. 15. sayth Domineus hic dies id [...]irco dicitur, quia eo die Dominus resurrexit, vel ut ipso nomine doceret illū Domino consecratum esse debere. It is called the Lords day, because the Lord rose that day, or that the name might teach us, that it ought to be consecrate to the Lord. It is called the Lords day, either becase the Lord did institute it: as the dayes of Purim are called Mordecaies dayes, in the second of the Maccabees, and the [Page] communion is called the Lords Supper: Or els because it was instituted to the Lords honour and worship. The Iewish Sabboth was the Sabboth of the Lord our God. The Christian sabboth is the Sabboth of Christ our Lord, God and Man. The name of Lord was more frequent in the mouths of Christians in the Apostlick times, then the name of Christ as Rhenanus In Tertul. de corona militis. hath obserued. When it is called commonly the Lords day, it is all one, as if it were commonly called Christs day, Changeing the title but not the purpose. If the ordinary sabboth be Christs day appointed by himselfe or his Apostles at his direction, for the remembrance of all his actions, and for his worship in generall; to diuide his actions, and appoint anniversary and mysticall dayes for their remembrance, is superstitious wil-worship, and a Iudaicall addition to Christs institution. Christs day answereth analogicallie to the morall sabboth. It may be applied to the remembrance of Christs resurrection seeing he rose that day and in some sort to b [...] a signe of the heavenly rest. But that is typus communis & factus. A common type fitted to resemble such things: But not typus distin [...]us appointed by God for that end. It resteth then that Christs day, or the Lords day is the Christian sabboth, a continuation of the morall sabboth, and to be obserued in a morall maner for all the paise of Gods worship in and through Christ, and not in a misticall maner, for the joyfull remembrance of Christ resurrection onely.

It is thirdly objected that Paul kept the feast of Pentecost, Act. 20. & 1. Cor. 16. I answer. It was the Iewish Pentecost, whereof mention is made in these places, Paul needed not to haue travelled to Ierusalem, for he might haue observed the Christian Pentecost euery where Bellarmin himself wil not be so bold as to affirme that it was the Christian Pentecost, Francolinus De horis canonicis cap. 84, putteth it out of doubt, and sayth, it is against the common exposition of the interpreters, for sayeth he, Tune temporis non erant celebres christianorum festivitates cum Euangelium non esset ad huc plenè promulgatum, the festiuities of Christians, were not as yet celebrated, for the Gospell was not yet fully published.

It is fourthly objected out of the Epistles of Policarpus & Pollycrates, extant in the history of Eusebius and out of Beda following Eusebius, that the Apostles kept the feast of Easter. Answer. Beda was but a fabler, and a follower of fabulous reports: Eusebius was little better treading vnknowne foot-steps, as himself confesseth in the beginning of his storie. The Epistles alledged are counterfeit: for it is said in these Epistles that Iohn was a Priest and bare on his forehead the Patalum that is the golden [Page]plate like that of the high Priests Exod. 37.36. But no man will graunt, sayth Scaliger, Elenth. Triheres. c. 25. Neutrum concedit, quisciverit nullam Christi Apostolum sacerdotem fuisse, & nulli preterquam Summo Sacerdoti Petalon gestare licuisse. That either Iohn or Iames bare it, who vnderstand that none of Christs Apostles was a priest: and that it was lawfull to none, but the hie priest to beare the golden plate. And yet these Epistles are the eldest records that Eusebius can ground vpon. The Bishop of Elie in his sermon taketh needlesse pains to prove the antiquity of Ester. But when he proveth it to be Apostolicall, he shooteth short. His eldest antiquity is the counterfeit Epistles before alledged. His proofe out of scripture Psalm. 118.8. & 1. Cor. 5.7.8. are very weake For the first testimonie is applyed to euery Lords day, and is not to be restrained to Pasche day. Christ crucified and refused of the builders was demonstrate to be the corner stone. For that day he was demonstrate to be the son of God by his resurrection according to Dauids Prophesie, To day haue I begotten thee, applied to the resurrection by the Apostle Act. 13.33.

The Lords day is the day that the Lord hath created, let us exult and reioyce in it. Christ instituted it; David prophecied of it. Psal. 110. where it is called the day of the Lords Assemblies. Many memorable things were done under the old Testament upon this day, to declare that it should be an excell [...]nt day under the new Testament, specially Circumcision was commanded on the eight day as a sacrament of that day, saith Iunius, In Genes. 17.12. Quia Sacramentum fuit diei illius octavi quo dominus Iesus Christus resurrexit, following in this conceit the Ancients, Cyprian, Ambrose &c. If it be true that is affirmed by the Councill of Constantinople Conc. Constant 6. Can. 8. it would appeare that the Lord hath of purpose heaped his wonderfull works upon this day: for there it is said that Christ was born on it: The star shined to the wise men on it: Christ fed 5000. with 5 loaues and 2 fishes on it: Christ was baptized on it, rose on it, sent down the H. Ghost on it: one it the light was created, Pope Leo likewise saith, Dies dominica tantis dis [...]nsationū mysteriis est consecrata, ut quicquid insigne admodum est constitutum in terris, in hujus diei dignitatem sit gestum: id est. that the Lords day is consecrate with so manie misteries dispensed on it, that it appeareth that whatsoever potable thing was done on earth, was done to the honour of this day. So if the prophey of David should be aplied to any precise day, it should be applied to the Lords day. But seeing the words are to be understood, as well of David as of Christ, the day is taken for the time indefinitely, wherein David was made King, and the Corner Stone [Page] of Gods people. The other testimony importeth not the celebration of Ester feast upon any anniversary day, but rather the Apostle teacheth us to celebrate this feast of the Passover all the yeare long, with the vnleavened bread of sincerity and turth. Doctor Fulk in his answer to the Rhemists upon the same place citeth Augustine, referring this feasting not to the celebration of Ester, nor to the receiuing of Pasche communion, but to our whole life. It is therefore onely the Bishops conjècture that the incestuous person was cut of against the feast of Ester, that a little leaven might not leaven the whole lump. His last proofe is taken from the custome of baptisme and the Eucharist ministred upon Pasch day, as if they had been ministred only on that day. It was the decree of Pope Innocentius in the Lateran Councill that all should communicate at Ester. The Christian Sabboth was called the Lords day, the day of light, and the day of Bread. The day of light because of baptisme ministred ordinarily on the Lords day: for the Ancients called baptisme, Light, or illumination. The day of bread because of the administration of the Supper ordinarily upon the Lords day, as Iunius In Genesin c. 2. proveth out of Chrysostome ▪ baptisme was tyed of ould to Pentecost, as well as Ester. It was an evill custome disallowed both by ancient and moderne Divines. It was not so in the Primitiue Kirk, as Cassander beareth witnes. Expositio de author. consue. bapti Infant. adulti. Apostolorum doctrinae consentientes nullo temporum aut locorum delectu statim post fidei professionem ab Apostolis vel Apostolorum discipulis baptismi sacramento in Ecclesiam Christi captabantur. I will now frame an argument against this conceit of Apostolicall tradition and observation of Pafch. The Apostles were led all their life time by the infallible direction of the Spirit. If they had accorded on the observaton of Ester they had not disagreed on the day. But their most ancient records, the bastard Epistles aboue mentioned report that Philip and Iohn kept the fourtenth day of the moone, as the Iewes did, and Peter the Lords day following the fourteenth day of the moone. It is well said in the preface to the harmony of confessions; that the old contention about the celebrating of Ester tossed very hotly the space of two hundred yeares or thereabout, betwixt the Greeks and the Latines, was long since of us thought worthy of laughter. Whitaker saith, De scriptura quaest. 6 c. 9. Magnam quidem de hoc re olim fuisse contentionē sed sine causa: ut mirū sit de re tantilla, et pene nullius momenti tantas et tam graves fuisse dissentiones, wondring at their frivolous contention. The golden number invented to find out the new moone, for observing the right day, after that they accorded upon one day hath often failed, and [Page] notwithstanding of all the rules set downe by the Councill of Nice for uniformity in keeping the day, it hath been differently observed through mistaking, as Bellamine himselfe De cultis Sanctorum. [...].12. confesseth. So God suffered the Christian world to wander, notwithstanding of their golden number; to let the world see such customes had not his allowance. He suffered not the Iewes to wander in such incertainties, after he had appointed them unto the keeping of their Passeover.

Lastly, they reason with Augustine, Epist. 118 á posteriori, that seeing the Lords Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, & comming down of the holy Ghost, is celebrated with anniversarie solemnity, through all the world, they must needs haue been ordained either by the Apostles, or by generall Councels. But so it is, that those dayes were solemnly kept before there was any generall Councell. It must follow therefore that the Apostles ordained them. Answer. Augustines dis-junction is not necessary: For many customes crept in, and prevailed thereafter universally, which were neither ordained by the Apostles, nor generall Councels. Socrates in his History sayth, Lib. 5. c. 22. I am of opinion, that as many other things crept in of custome in sundry places, so the feast of Easter to haue prevailed among all people of a certain private custome and observation: insomuch that not one of the Apostles hath any where prescribed so much as one rule of it to any man. The successe & event hath manifestly declared unto the world, that of old it was observed, not of Canon, but of custome. And a little after, They that keepe Easter the 14. day of the moneth, bring forth Iohn the Apostle for their Authour. Such as inhabite Rome, and the West parts of the world, alledge Peter and Paul for themselues, that they should leaue such a tradition: yet there is none of them that can shew in writing any testimony of theirs for confirmation and proofe of that custome. Thus farre Socrates translated by Doctor Hanmer a formalist,See farther in Socrates in the same chapter. for answer to Augustines rule. In the dayes of Iustinus Martyr, that is, in the midst of the second age after the Apostles, there is no mention made of any other holy day then the Lords day. In his second Apologie he seemeth to affirme, that the Christians had onely two times of publicke meetings: the one ordinary upon the Lords day: the other extraordinary and uncertaine, viz. when any was converted to the Christian faith, and baptized. As for the questions extant among Iustinus workes, the learned do not acknowledge them for his. In Augustins rule there is no mention of the nativity day. As for the other foure daies mentioned, put the case they were universally observed in Augustines time, that is, in the fift age after the Apostles, yet except they were [Page] perpetually observed, Augustines rule will not helpe them. If If they cannot proue Pasche to be Apostolicall, how will they proue the Penticost, the Passion, Ascension day to be Apostolicall? There is Sermons extant amongst Cyprians workes upon the Passion and Ascension dayes. But Bellarmine himselfe confesseth these Sermons of Christs cardinall workes to be De scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis. pag. 93. suppesitions. The observing of the passion day brought into the kirk, set dayes of fasting, the Friday fast, Lenton fast, and a number of superstitions accompanying the said fastings together with the opinion of merit by fasting. Set anniversary fasts are condemned by our Divines. The right manner of fasting is to fast when some iudgement is imminent, some great worke to bee performed. And as for the private man, when hee is greatly tempted to sin, and cannot overcome his tentation, then is it fittest time for him to fast. The Paschall fasts were also abused for the Paschall communion following, as if Easter communion required greater preparation then any other communion in the yeare.

The sixth Reason.

If it had been the will of God, that the severall actes of Christ should haue been celebrate with severall solemnities, the Holy Ghost would haue made known to us the day of his Nativity, Circumcision, presentation to the Temple, Baptisme, Transfiguration, and the like. For it is kindly to remember Opus di [...]i in die sua, the worke of the day in the own day. This was the custome of old under the Law. Hooker sayth, That the wondrous works of God advanced the dayes & times, wherein they were wrought. Bellarmine sayth, That Christs acts did consecrate the dayes and times wherein they were wrought. If the principall workes of God advance some dayes above other, all the dayes of the yeare should be holy. If we should honour the memory of Christs actes, all dayes likewise should b [...] holy, because every one of them is full of his miracles, as Le [...] sayth, Epistol. 4▪ c. 4. Christ by his actions did no more consecrate the times wherein they were wrought, then his body did the Mang [...]r, or the Crosse. Not Christs action on a day, but his institution maketh a day holy. If Christs actions advance & consecrate the dayes whereon they were wrought, the dayes ought to be known. Otherwise it will fall out that we shall keepe the dayes holy that were never advanced no [...] consecrated either by Christs action or institution. But so it is, that the day of Christ nativity, and consequently the other dayes depending upon the calculation of the same, is hid from mortall men. That Christ was born the 25. day of December, is grounded upon an [Page] erroneous conceit that Zachary the father of Iohn Baptist was an high Priest, when as he was a Priest of one of the 24. orders, that is, of the order of Abijah. The Auncients made Iohn the Baptist to be conceiued the 24. of September, when Zachary as high Priest should haue offered up incense. And from the conception of Iohn they counted six full moneths to the conception of Christ, that is, to the 25. of March, when as they should haue counted but fiue full moneths. This opinion of Christs nativitie on the 25. day of December was bred at Rome. Scaliger sayth, De emendat temporum lib. 6. Post seculum Constantini, Romae haec observatio instituta & tempore Chrysostomi Constantinopolin derivata est, That this observation was instituted at Rome after Constantines time. Chrysostom in his Homilies upon the Nativity saith, That ten yeares agoe before the making of the sayd Homily, the 25. day of December, was made known to the Orientall Kirkes by the Occidentall, to haue been the day of Christs Nativity. Epiphanius testifieth, that hee was ignorant, that the Occidentall Kirk had ordained the 25. day of December to haue been the day of the Lords nativity, a little before hee made his booke against heresies. All the Kirkes of the East, and of Egypt, observed one day, for the nativity and baptisme of Christ upon the Epiphany day. Ambrose is the most ancient, who maketh mention of the 25. day of December,Canon Isagog. lib. 3.. Pag. 301. sayth Scaliger. The diversity of the Ancients observing some the 6. of Ianuary. Some the 19. of Aprill. Some the 19. of May. Some the 25. of December, argueth that the Apostles never ordained it. Bellarmine nor no other can produce a writer for 300. yeares to testifie that the Nativity day was keept. Clemens Constitutions are known to be counterfet and late, as Scaliger proveth in the same place. Because they make mention of the 25. day of december which was not receaved in his time, namely, in the Orientall Kirk. By the same argument may the counterfeit Epistle of Theophilus be rejected, for it maketh likewayes the nativity to fall on the 25, day of December, as a matter out of all doubt. Cyprians sermon on the Nativity is acknowledg by Bellarmine himselfe to be suppositious as I haue said before. Yee se then as God hid the body of Moses, so hath he hid this day and other dayes depending on the calculation of it, wherein he declared his wil concerning the other daies of his notabl [...] acts. To wit that not Christs action but Christs institution maketh a day holy. Bellarmine sayth, De cultis Sanctorum cap. 11. Dies dominica refert nobis memoriam natalis Christi et resurrectionis ejusdem, et adventus Spirit us Sancti, nam Christ us die dominica nat us est, Christ was borne vpon the Lords day. If this be true, [Page] what needeth vs an anniuersarie day after a Iewish manner. They will not suffer the ordinary sabboth, that is Christs day, serue in a morall maner for vnknown dayes: but they will set vp a mysticall day vncertain and vnknown, and equall it with the Lords day, that is, the true Christs day institute by himself. Why should we follow antiquity blinded in this point, & fost [...]r a grosse error of Zacharius hie priesthood against the expresse word of God? He was a Priest of the eight order: every order kept their course and station about the Temple from sabboth to sabboth 1. Chron. 9.25. None of them incrhoched vpon oth [...]r, but kept the order set down by David ▪ and to that effect was made a severe Cannon Euery Priest or Levit, that medled with the function of another let him die the death as Scaliger reporteth out of their ancient lawes Canon Isagog. lib. 3. pag. 298. Omnis sive Sacerdos sive Levita qui sese immiseuerit function alterius, capite luat. This order was so observed, that if any of the 24. families had failed either by famine or by the sword, the daily sacrifice ceased in the time of their function, and no other family would supply the roome. But from the instauration and dedication made by Iudas Maccabeus the 22. day of November, when the first family began to keepe their Station, there was no intermission of the daily sacrifice, no interruption of the courses, till the destruction of the Temple, as Scaliger proveth in the end of his De eme [...] dat temporum. booke. By the calculation from the 22. of November at the dedication made by Maccabeus, he maketh Iohn the Baptist to be conceived after the 28. day of Iuly, and consequently Christs birth to fall out about the end of September, an hot time of the yeare, when the Shepheards were watching in the field. Casaubon Exercit. 1. pag. 163. saith, That the custome of the Kirke of Alexandria doth wonderfully confirme the calculation of Scaliger. The day of the weeke when Christ was borne, can no mortall man know, sayth the same Canon Isagog. lib. 3 pag. 300. Scaliger. They who were of one family diuided the services among themselues, as it fell by lot: some fell to offer Incense, some to dresse the lampes, some to order the wood on the Altar, 1. Chron. 23.28.29.30.31. And the booke of the Iewish Liturgies testifies the same. So you see how it fell Zachary to offer up incense, and that he was not high Priest. If antiquitie erred so grossely in the matter it selfe, that is, in taking the 25. day of December for the day of Christs nativity, might they not haue erred as grossely in appointing any day at all? Nay let us utter the truth, December-Christmas is a iust imitation of the December-Saturnall of the Ethnicke Romans, and so used as if Bacchus, and not Christ were the God of Christians.

[Page]It is commonly obiected, that we may as well keepe a day for the nativity as for the resurrection of Christ. We haue answered already, that Christs day or the Lords day, is the day appoynted for remembrance of his nativity, and all his actions and benefites, as well as for the resurrection. Next, the one is morall and weekly: the other is mysticall and anniversary. The Lords day it selfe is no longer to us mysticall, but morall, sayth Synops pap of holy daies. Willet: and therefore Pas [...]h-day is a mysticall Sabboth, and anniversary: whereas the Lords Sabboth should be onely morall.

It is still objected, the benefits of God ought to be remembred, specially Christs notable benefits. Answ. It is one thing to remember, another thing to remember with solemne festivities. To remember is a morall duety and perpetuall: for we ought to keepe not onely an anniuersary, but also a weekly and dayly remembrance. But to celebrate an anniversary solemnity, and to keep a sabboth of rest in remembrance, it is a pedagogicall ceremonie of the Iewes. The Lord helped there vnderstanding with types and figures, their affections with instruments of Musick. Their memories with frontelets and Phylacteries to put them in mynd of Gods Law. But wee are to keepe sayeth lerome Ad Celanthiam Epist. 14. c. 1. not a literall by outward signes, but a spirituall memorie of Gods law. Euery thing set vp for remembrance of God is not acceptable to him: for so the Lutheran shall defend his images. As oft as the Gospell is preached, Christ is remembred. When the word is preached, Christ is crucified, and by the same reason, hee may be said to be borne, to rise againe, to ascend, &c. When the sacrament is ministred, Christs death and Passion is remembred, and that with solemnity. Wee cannot worship Christ privatly or publickly, but we must remember his birth and his passion. Pope Alexander 3. Decreta [...]. lib. 2. Tit. 9. cap. gaue this reason, wherefore the Romane Kirk kept not a holy day to the Trinity, Quoniam Ecclesia Romana in usu non habet quod in aliquo tempore buiusmodi celebret specialiter festivitatem: cum singulis diebus gloria Patri & f [...]io, & Spiritui Sancto, & coetera simitia dicantur ad laudem pertinentia Trenitalis. because faieth hee, Glorie to the father, and to the Sonne, and to the holy Ghost, and other such like things belonging to the praise of the trinity, are uttered daily. The Popes reason is grounded vpon this rule. Whatsoeuer is intreated or remembred in the ordinary divine service, ought not to haue one speciall holy day to celebrat the memory of the same, beside the day already discerned by the Lord. We assume, Christs nativity, death, resurrection, &c. Are not only the continuall [Page] meditation of a Christian in private; but also are remembred, and intreated in the ordinary and publick service. Every communion sunday is a passion holy day. Euery sabboth that Christs nativity is preached, is a time of remembrance of his Natiuity. But to ordain an anniversary day, or houre of rest for commemoration of his nativity, or passion, and specially vpon a weeke day is a Iewish rudiment, and a prejudice to Christian libertie.

As for the 5. day of November it is not an holy day. It is not a day of cessation from work, which is one of the chiefe elements of an holy day. The bonefires set out in token of joy are no part of Christian sanctification of the day. Bellarmine telleth vs, De reliquijs c. 4. Ignis accendi solet ad letitiam significandam etiam in rebus prophanis, that fire vseth to be kindled, even in ciuill and prophane things. Scaliger De Emendat tempor. lib. 7. pag. 713. calleth the candels and torches lightned vpon Midsomer even, the foote steps of auncient gentility. Anniversary commemoration of a benefite, with a cessation from worke, suppose for a part of a day is Iewish. To praise God with publick thankesgeving in the instant tyme of receiueing the benefit was our duetie, But to appoint an anniuersary houre of cessation and publicke commemoration, is not competent to the times of the new Testament. Willet compareth this day to the daies of Purim. Be it so, But these dayes were of a ceremoniall nature, as we haue said.

The seventh Reason.

Grant the keeping of holy dayes to haue been at the beginning a matter indiffrent, and setting aside all the former reasons, yet ought they to be abolished, because according to the rule of the Fathers, commended to us by Zanchius, Non malè igitur fecerunt qui omnia praeter diem Dominicum aboleverunt, In 4. praecept. Col. 678 Things indifferent, when they are abused and polluted with superstition, ought to be abolished. In this ranke he placeth holidayes, and therefore inferreth, that they haue not done evill, who haue abolished all other holidayes but the Lords day. When he sayth, They haue not done evill, it is all one as if he had sayd, They had done well: for they haue done according to that laudable rule. Sure it is, that in former times holidayes haue not onely been abused to i [...]lenesse and licentiousnesse, but also polluted with the opinion of worship, merit, necessity, and Iudaicall conceit, that the Divell did not tempt on these dayes, as he did on other dayes. Therefore the same Zanchius faith in the place aforesayd, If any feasts were celebrate before religiously and holily, but thereafter were contaminate with superstition and Idolatry, Col. 678. that worthily they were taken[Page]away by our Reformers, who imitate herein the example of Hezekias brusing to powder the brasen Serpent when it was abused to idolatry. And againe he sayth, The number, the abuses, the superstitions, the false worships, the will-worships of feasts so increased, that there is nothing in the Kirke so unsavoury to God, See farther in Zanchius in Coloss 2. so pernicious to men, as to sanctifie such and so many dayes. We pretend that we place no part of Gods worship in the observation of dayes. But how can wee obserue a day to the honour of Christ, and not worship him by that observation? That were to make his honour no honour. Wee vse to reason against the Papists after this manner. To dedicate daies to Saints is religious worship. Is it not then religious worship to dedicat a day to Christ? yea surely, and wil-worship. And so they were not onely polluted with wil-worship, but are at this houre of themselues a meere wil-worship.

The 8. Reason.

That which lawfully hath been abolished by civile and Ecclesiasticall lawes, and by consent and uniforme practize in the contrary without interruption, and beyond the prescription of time allowed to things moueable (put the case holy dayes were things moueable, and indifferent) and hath been borne downe by sermons of all the most reverent Preachers since the reformation, corrected with censures, and abjured by publick oaths of Preachers and professors, cannot lawfully be received, and put in practize againe. Hooker and Saravia urged for maintenance of their ceremonies, Law, custome, prescription, and craveth that the impiety and unlawfulnes of their ceremonies be proved; or els that the non-conformists conforme. May we not plead after the same manner for our former order so long established, and that they proue it was impious, and unlawfull before we make a change. And so much the rather, because we haue sworn. Our oath by it selfe bindeth more then Law, custome, and prescription: farre more when it concurreth with them. The assumption is evident by that which I haue already set downe in the beginning. If Zanchius aproved the abolition of holy dayes in some Kirks where they were, because they haue been poluted and grossely abused: much more would he and other divines knowing the trueth of our case think it unlawfull to reinduce them amongst us.

The iudgement of the Reformed Kirkes.

Of the ancient Kirks I haue spoken before. Some excuse [Page] the Ancients with good intention, because to winne the Gentiles they converted their dayes into Christian holy dayes. Others excused them with the circumstance of time, that dwelling among Paganes, they made profession before their eyes of Christs birth, Passion, resurrection &c. by observing such dayes. But the wisdome of their intention has proven folly, as the 7. reason maketh manifest. The like circumstance of time is not offered: Therefore we may not be excused. It is grosse ignorance to say that holy dayes were so many hundreth yeares before Papistry. For Papistry hath been in the Kirk ever since the dayes of the Apostles: yea the mystery of iniquitie was working in their times. The errors of the Orthodoxe Kirk were the beginnings of Papistry, at length they grew to a great masse. So how beit the whole lump was not formed, till the Antichrist came to his full strength, yet many particulars were entered before, and like brooks came into the great river. As the Antichrist was borne and did grow in yeares, so did Papistry. As for the reformed Kirks, except our neighbour Kirke, they haue abandoned dayes dedicate to Saints. Some admit dayes dedicate to Christ, some two, some fiue: But not with the full consent and good liking of the learned, But either forced by the authority of the Magistrate, or wilfulnes of the people, or because remaining in the midst of their enimies, they are not permitted otherwayes to do. Farrellus and Viret removed all holy dayes out of the Kirk of Geneva, as Calvin testifies. The same decree which banished Farellus and Caluin out of Geneva brought in other holy dayes.Epist. 118. They were all again abrogate except the sabboth day. Howsoever after came in the keeping of Pasche and the Nativity. Caluin was so far from liking of holy dayes, that he was flandered of intention to abolish the Lords day. The Belgick Kirks in their Synod holden at Dost anno 1578. wished, that onely the Lords day might be celebrate. Yea Luther himselfe in his booke de bonis operibus, set forth anno 1520. wished that there were no feast dayes among Christians, but the Lords day. And in his booke to the Nobilitie of Germanie, he saith, Consultum esse ut omnia festa aboleantur, solo Dominico die retento. It were expedient that all feast dayes were abrogate, the Lords day only retained. Howsoever forraigne divines in their Epistles & Councels speak somtime sparingly against holy dayes, when their advice was sought of Kirks newly risen out of Popery, and greatly distressed: they never advised a Kirke to resume them where they were removed, neither had they leasure to consider narrowly the corruption of [Page] every errour, that prevailed in their time, the work of reformation was so painfull to them. I wish therefore that the judicious Reader would ponder the reasons set down in this treatise. As for our neighbour Kirk standing in the midest betwixt the Roman and reformed Kirks as Bucerus once said is more liberall in their feasts,Brightman. In Apocalypsen. cap. 3. De festis lib. 1. c. 2. as in other ceremonies, then the other reformed Kirks as Gretzerus the Iesuit hath observed. Calvino-Papistae Angli ut in aliis quae ad ritus et ceremonias pertinent, longe liberaliores sunt quam puritani in Gallia, Germania, Belgia: ita et in festis retinendis longe largiores. They obserue not onely the fiue holy dayes already mentioned, but other dayes also dedicate to Christ. The feast of circumcision was not remembred in the Kalendars, but within this 500. year. Nazianzen is the first that maketh mention of the Epiphanie day. Neither was it institute at the first for the wise men. There is no homily of any farther extent for the feast of purification before the dayes of Iustinian. The feast of the Trinitie was not keept at Rome it selfe in the dayes of Alexander the 3. They keepe also a number of Sancts dayes: so that their dayes in number are moe, then the Iewes themselues observed. The reasons already alledged against dayes dedicate to Christ, may serue also against dayes dedicate to Sancts and Angels. We may looke assuredly that the fiue dayes presently urged will bring in all the rest, to make up our Conformity with our neighbour Kirk, which to us is not lawfull. They were never remoued from amongst them: we haue abandoned and abjured them. If the Apostle reproved the Galatians so sharply that beginning in the spirit, they returned to the flesh, that is to the ceremonies of Moses Law, some time ordained by God, what reproofe deserue we after wee haue begun in the Spirit, and runne so well, and so long, if we returne to human traditions & superstitiōs. To cōclude then, to esteem one day aboue another in respect of any mystery certainly known, or commonly reputed to haue been wrought upon that day. To testifie this estimation by cessation from worke. To devise a particular service to be done upon it accounting that forme or part of service acceptable to God, because it is performed on that day: is to obserue a day: and in this maner doe we obserue anniversary dayes. The same consideration may be applyed to an anniversary houre.

[Page]

Of Confirmation.

Imposition of hands, was a ceremony used in personall prayers and blessings before the Law, under the Law, and under the Gospell, Iacob imposed hands on the sonnes of Ioseph when he blessed them Gen. 48. Moses layd his hand upon Ioshua his successor; Numb. 27. The elders that were admitted to be Councellours in the great Synedrion, were admitted with imposition of hands. The Rabbins were promoved to their high degree of doctorship, by imposition of hands. In the new testament we read, that Christ layed on hands on the children whom he blessed; Math. 19.13. The Apostles gaue the gifts of tongues, Prophesying, and working of miracles, by imposition of hands: Act. 8. the faithfull indued with the gift of healing, and casting out devils, layed on hands on the persons cured. Mark. 14. office-bearers in the Kirk were receaved with imposition of hands. Act. 6. 1. Tim. 4. Paul and Barnabas when they were sent forth in a special embassage, were commended to the grace of God by imposition of hands: Act. 13. when the Chatechumenists wer throughly catechised, they were admitted to the society of the communicants by imposition of hands, Heb. 6.

Imposition of hands used in so divers actions, civile and religious, was no Sacrament, for who will admit, that the inauguration of Magistrates and Doctors, or admission of rulers to be Counsellers, is a sacrament? it was only a simple rite, and signe of limitation or restraint, specifying, or setting forth, the party, on whom wee desire God to powre his blessing: that is, it was only an indicant and demonstratiue signe of the person on whom the blessing was powred, and not a significant or declaratiue signe of the blessing or grace it selfe bestowed. A signification may indeed be devised, as some divise this analogie betwixt it and the thing signified; that the imposition of the hand, doth in some sort resemble the hand of God streatched forth for the protecting, assisting, and safe keeping, of the party: and so it may be signum factum, a signe, made and accommodate to signifie such a thing: but it is not signum destinatum, a signe instituted by God to signifie such a thing, for we haue no warrant for such a signification in all the Scripture.

The imposition of hands mentioned. Act. 8. was not ordinary, but extraordinary and temporary. The Apostles gaue the extraordinary giftes, of tongues, prophecy, and such like, for [Page] they were seene of them that stood by, and served for a general confirmation of the truth of their doctrine. The gift of sanctification and strength against all temptations of sin, and assaults of the Devill, is a grace invisible, serving for the confirmation of every Christian in particular, and bestowed onely upon the faithfull; whereas the former gifts called gratiae gratis datae by the Schoolemen, might haue been bestowed upon persons unsanctified, this place maketh Cap. 11. nothing for confirmation. The confession of Wirtemberge hath these words, Of a temporall and personall fact of the Apostles, a generall and perpetuall sacrament cannot be ordained in the Kirk without a special command of God. By the Spirit then bestowed, is meant, not the sanctifying Spirit, but the extraordinary gifts of the spirit: for no doubt the Spirit was given when Philip preached and baptized, except we will beleeue that the Eunuch was baptized by Philip without the spirit.Hieron [...]dvers. Lu [...]iser. Nisi fortè Eunuchus à Philippo Diacono sine Spiritu sancto baptizatus fuisse credendus est. Peter and Iohn bestowed the spirit in another manner, to wit, in an extraordinary manner: These extraordinary gifts of the Spirit are called simply the Spirit, not onely in this place, but also Act. 19. and Iohn 7. The Spirit was not, because Christ was not as yet glorified.

The Imposition of hands mentioned Heb. 6.2. is exponed by Theophilactus to be that wonderfull imposition of hands by the which they received the Spirit to prophesie and worke miracles. Others expone it to bee the imposition of hands ordinatory, or consecratory of Ministers in their office. A third sort take it for an ordinary and common rite, whereby the catechised were initiate, and entred into the society of the communicants. Let this third interpretation be admitted as the greatest ground of confirmation, it will not serue their turn. The Apostle opponeth the doctrine of the beginning, that is, the catecheticall doctrine of repentance from dead workes, faith, and resurrection of the dead, and eternall iudgement, to the doctrine of perfection. The Catechumenists were either Infidels of perfect age, converted to the faith, or else the children of Christians come to perfect age. The first sort were tried of their sufficient knowledge in the Catecheticall doctrine, before they were baptized and admitted to the communion. The second sort were tried before they were admitted amongst the number of communicants. They were before in Ecclesia foederatorum, in the Kirk of the covenant: they entred in Ecclesiam adultorum into the society of the elder sort, after triall of their sufficient knowledge, by a recommendation of the Kirk; the ceremony [Page] whereof was imposition of hands. Beza antithesis papismi & christianisin [...] c. 70. Zanchius & Pareus i [...] He [...] 6. The ancient Kirke received penitents within the bosome of the Kirke by imposition of hands: and it was called Impositio manuum reconciliatoria. Siclike Heretickes and Schismatickes were received with imposition of Concil Arelat. c. 8. hands. And this was done before the Conail. Laod. c. 7. communion: whereby we may see that imposition of hands was nothing else but a gesture of personall prayer, and blessing, whereby they entred or re-entred into the society of the communicants. Bellarmine De confirmat. c. 7. acknowledgeth that the imposition of hands reconciliatory, was not a consecration imprinting a character; but a ceremony furthering prayer, or a prayer upon the person. As it was nothing else but a gesture of prayer in the re-entry, so was it onely a gesture of prayer in the entry. The reformed Kirkes obserue the same order in admitting to the Lords table, either the children of Christians, or strangers from other parts: they admit them not but with prayers, and after due examination of their knowledge, and personall profession of the known truth. The Kirk of Scotland at the first reformation ordained, that children should be examined for the first time, at the ninth year of their age; for the second, at the twelft; for the third at the fourteenth: & since hath practised continual examination in the Catecheticall doctrine, with prayers reiterate, for their growth in knowledge and Sanctification; and without sufficient tryall they were not admitted to the Lords table. And this was thought sufficient, to unite the baptized with the society of the communicants. The gesture of imposition of hands other reformed Kirks, and ours also, haue omitted: because it was a rite indifferent: for it was but an indicant signe of the person admitted: and because it hath been, and is still abused to make up a bastard Sacrament; the Sacrament of confirmation, which we haue condemned, not only in the confession of faith, but also in the confession of Helvetia approved in the generall Assembly holden at Edinburgh Anno 1566. And thirdly, because this gesture of personall prayer is omitted in other cases, as reconciling of Penitents, Schismatiks, and Converts, even where Confirmation is used, that the world may see, it is not used by them in confirmation as a gesture of personall prayer and blessing, but to a further intent.

Imposition of hands was not called Confirmation vntill it was turned into a sacrament. This name of Confirmation was giuen of old, not only to the action of anoynting the forehead of the baptized with chrisme in the forme of a crosse: but also, to the giving of the cup to the communicants.Cassandri liturgica pag. 228.. But at this day [Page] it is vsed only in the first sense. and howbeit the oylie crosse be remoued, yet the corruptions which came in with it, remaine still with the imposition of hands, the only sensible matter, that is, the essence of this Sacrament in the opininion of many Schoolemen.

It is said, that hy imposition of hands and praier, the baptized receaue strength and defence against all temptations to sinne, and the assaults of the world and the devill, in confirmation. And againe, that it is a signe to certifie the confirmed of Gods favour and gratious goodnes toward them is it not then a seale, let be a signe indicant, or a simple gesture of praer; Bellarmine maketh Imposition of hands and prayer, but one sensible signe in the Sacrament of confirmation, doeth not Mr. Hutton say likewise, that Imposition of hands is one of the external means by the which the H. Ghost is giuen? and howbeit that prayer haue the cheefe force, yet Imposition of hands hath some also, otherwise, saith hee, What needed Peter and Iohn to haue travelled to Samaria? they might haue prayed in Ierusalem for the holy Ghost to the Samaritans.

The grace receaued in confirmation, is called strength, and defence against all temptations to sin, and the assaults of the wo [...]ld and the deuill. In baptisme the grace receaved is for the f [...]rgiu [...]nes of sinnes. Doe not the papists distinguish after the same maner betwixt baptisme and confirmation that the holy ghost is giuen in baptisme, to remission of sinnes, life and Sanctifi [...]ations and in confirmation for force, strength, and corroboration to fight against all our spirituall enemies, and to stand constantly in confession of our faith even to death, in times of persecution, either of the heathen or of hereticks, with great increase Rhemists act. 8.17. of grace. Hooker sayeth, Ecelesiast. polici [...]. l. 5. pag. 354. that in baptisme infants are admitted to liue in Gods family, but in cōfirmation they are inabled to fight in the army of God, and bring forth the fruits of the holy Ghost. Doct [...]r Hackwel Serm. of confirmation. saith that as in baptism they beleue remission of sins vnto justificatiō, so in confirmation, they are imboldned to make open profession of this beleefe vnto salvation doth not his opposition between baptisme and confirmation jumpe just with the opposition made by the Papists who make the principall grace of confirmation, strengh to professe the faith in time of persecution? The Papists say, the comforter promised by Christ to his Kirk, was bestowed in the Sacrament of confirmation. Is not the like said in the prayer before Confirmation; The papists say, that in confirmation they receiue the seuen fold grace of the holy spirit: wisedom, counsell, strength, knowledge, vnderstanding, godlines, feare: is not the like said in the praier before the laying on of hands; D. Hackwell Serm. of confirmation. sayeth that which [Page]the grace of the spirit hath alreadie begun in baptisme, is confirmed and perfited in confirmation. Is not this iust the popish opinion, that he is not a perfite Christian who is not confirmed? That Novatus because he was not confirmed, had not all his Christendom: that the vnuction of confirmation is the perfitting vnction. and are not all these oppositions derogations from baptisme and the Lords Supper; Christian valour and courage to resist the divill, and to professe the trueth, is it not a part of that life, and Sanctification giuen in baptisme; are not the giftes of the holy spirit given after baptisme, as a continuall performance of the promise of Gods assistance sealed vp in baptisme; In baptisme we put on Christ and all his benifits, we enter into Gods armie as well as into his familie, abrenuncing the world and the devill. Concilium Mileuitanum. m sayeth. Qui dicit baptismum in remissionem peccatorum dari tantum, non etiam in adjutorium gratiae anathema sit. Let him be anathema, who sayth that baptisme is giuen to the remission of sinnes and not to the help of future grace. Chrisostome saieth, Homil. [...]. in Coloss. the baptized was anoynted as one that was to enter into a [...]ace. Is not the Lords Supper the true Sacrament of confirmation of our faith, as well as confirmation of Charity;

If imposition of hands were onely a gesture of prayer, for strength, then it might and ought to be reiterate according to Augustine saying, Lib. 3. de bapt. cap. 16 Manus autē impositio non sicut baptismus repeti non potest quid enim est aliud nisi oratio super hominem. For we haue often need to be strengthned. The Papists say, that impositions of hands in confirmation, is an effectuall signe of grace, imprinting an indeleble charactar, and therefore it may not be reiterate, neither do they reiterate it.

In the catechisme before confirmation, it is said, that there are two only Sacraments generally necessary to salvation. Is there other Sacraments beside howbeit not necessary; Estius In lib. 4. dist. 7. sayeth, that the custome of the universall Kirk, doth proue sufficiently that confirmation is not necessary to saluation; otherwise the godly and carefull mother the Kirk, would not neglect to see this sacrament Ministred to the baptized at the point of death.

The Sacrament of confirmation was given of old immediatly after baptisme to all of whatsoeuer condition, or estate,Swarez. tom. 3. disput. 35. sect. 1. euen to infants, & when the litle ones were confirmed they had godfathers & godmothers, as they haue yet in papisticall Kirkes. Aug. Tract. 6. in 1. canonicam Iohannis. saith, Quando imposumus manus ist is infantibus altendit unusquis (que) vestrum utrum linguis loquerentur. When we layd hands on their infants ye waited whether they would speak with tongues. The Papists themselues will not imitate this toy of antiquity and [Page] yet they are little better in deferring confirmation onely to the seventh yeare of their age. Our late act. made at the last pretended assembly, ordeineth children of eight years of age to be catechised, and presented to the Bishop to lay hands vpon them. We must be like our neighbours, whether there be reason or no. Is it time to enter the Societie of the communicants and doctrine of perfection, as soone as they can rehearse like parrots, a little catechisme? we must haue god-fathers and god-mothers in confirmation, also well as our neighbours.

When the neoterick writers speak of confirming the catechised by the rite of Imposition of hands, they take imposition of hands for a signe, of the Kirk confirming them in their possession by her approbation, and not for a signe and seale of the spirite confirming and strengthening.

Of Bishoping.

WE haue abjured Episcopall government, and therfore we can not lawfully admit Episcopall confirmation, giving and not granting their office were lawfull, and that they haue gotten a lawfull calling by the Kirk to the sayd office: thirdly that we were free of our oath: and fourthly that confirmation were to be allowed, whether as a ceremony, or as a sacrament, yet it is damnable presumption to appropriate unto themselues the duty that belongeth to all Pastors.

They alledge some similitudes for their purpose: it appertaineth to the Captaine to take up the role of the souldiers, and furnish them with armor, the shepheard should mark his owne sheep &c. As if every Minister were not a Captaine in the Lords Army and a shepheard feeding the flock concredite to him Bonaventura In lib. 4. dist. 7. num. 17. confesseth In talibus nempe rationibus & convenientijs magis locum habet congruitas quam necessitas quia institutio necessitatem facit precipuè. That there is no necessity, but congruity in such reasons, and that institution cheifly maketh necessity. as for the congruities they agree as well to simple Ministers as to Bishops. Bellarmine himself saithDe confirmation [...]. Non necessario id requirit natura rei quasi aliter sieri non posset, sed quia voluit Dominus hac re honorare episcopalem dignitatem. That the nature of the thing it selfe doth not necessarily require it, but onely that the Lord wil honor Episcopall dignity by it, they are forced therefore to forsake their reasons and congruitie as unsufficient: and to take them to the will and institution of the Lord.

[Page]Our first reason then against them, is, the want of institution or example in the Scripture. They can alledge no other place Act. 8. where Peter and Iohn are sent to Samaria to impose hands on those who had bin baptized by Philip. If Phillip might haue done it, what needed the Apostles to haue travelled to Samaria for that purpose? none but Apostles imposed hands: Bishops are the only successours of the Apostles. Answer. giving and not granting that Bishops are the Apostles successours, first it is untrue that the Apostles only imposed hands, when the holy Ghost was bestowed: for Ananias layed hands on Paul Act. 9.17. he not onely cured him of his blindnes but also said the Lord hath sent me unto thee, that thou mayest be filled with the holy Ghost. 2. Peter and Iohn were sent, not onely to impose hands, but generally to advance the work begun by Philip. 3. There is no imposition of handes mentioned in that place, but extraordinary, and onely extraordinary effects are reckoned, as hath already been said. They exercised this extraordinary power not as Bishops, but as Apostles. Bishops are not their successours in their extraordinary power, for then they might giue the gift of tongues and prophecying. 4. Admitting that imposition of hands to haue been ordinary, and accompanied at that time with miraculous gifts, as accessory to the strengthning grace of confirmation; it followeth not that the Bishops succeed only to the Apostles in the said ordinary part of their power: because the Apostles being both Bishops and Presbyters, the text maketh not manifest, whether they imposed hands as Presbyters or as Bishops as Durandus Durandus in lib. 4. Dist. 7. Quest. 3. saith Ex illo textu non est clarum an Apostoli confirmaveri [...]t tanquam Episcopi vel tanquam sacerdotes: sacri etiam canones hoc cl [...]e non determinant. Augustine Quest. veteris et nov [...] testamenti. 101. saith plainly they did it as Preists. 5. Philip the Evangelist could not doe it, and will Bishops presume that they can doe more then Philip the Evangelist, the truth is it was an extraordinary and wonderfull power exercised by the Apostles.

Next confirmation belongeth not to the power of jurisdiction, but of order. Bishops and Presbyters are equall in the power of order, as not onely many schoolmen of old but also some of our opposits of late do acknowledge. If they wil say that they differ only in the exercise of rhis power; it may be easely answered, that a power granted, and never permitted to be put in execution agreeth not with the wisdome of Christ as Swarez sayth, In Aquin part. 3. quaest. 27. Si presbyteri ex vi sua ordinationis haberent sufficient [...]m potestalem ordinis ad hoc sacramentum ministrandum[Page] [...][Page] [...][Page]sine causa in universum prohiberentur illud conferre.

Thirdly, they may impose hands in ordination, therfore they may doe it also in confirmation. Armacanus reasoneth after this manner out of 1. Tim. 4.14.

Fourthly, they may minister the Lords Supper, therefore they may minister it also, for it is not more excellent then the Sacrament of the Supper. Hierome reasoneth after this manerEpi. ad rusticum Narbonensem..

Fiftly the Sacraments that are for the vtility of the people ought not to be reserved, to the Bishop, because it may often fall out that the people depart without this benefit, which they might easely haue had at home.

Sixtly, we haue the testimony of the ancients. Hierome Ibid. saith it was the custom in the orient, in Ilyricum, in Italy, in Africa, and in all places in the Apostles time. Ambrose in Ephes. 4 saith Apud Egiptum Presbyteri consignant si presens non sit Episcopus. that the Presbyters consigned, that is, confirmed in Egipt, if the Bishop was not present. Augustine saith the like Quest. veteri & novi [...]stam. 101. in the decretales Lib. 1. tit. 4. cap. 4. it is said that simple Preists at Constantinople according to the custome, did minister the Sacrament of confirmation. Turrianus reporteth that the Grecians reproue the Latines because they inhibit Preists to anoint the foreheads of the baptized with chrisme, as Swarez testified in the place aboue cited. And the Councile of Florence Sess. 25. saith Apud Grecos sacerdotes non Episcopi chrismant. that the Preists make Chrisme: to make Chrisme is more then to confirme with Chrisme. Hierom Adversus Lucifer. saith, If the holy Ghost should come downe onely at the prayer of the Bishop, th [...]se were to be lamented which in prisons, or Castels, or in far places, being baptised by Preists & Deacons, die before the Bishop visit them. The Armenians affirmed that it was lawfull to any Preist to confirme the baptized Armaehanus de question. Armanorum. lib. 11. cap. 5. If Bishops did confirme in respect of their Episcopall, and not their Preistly consecration, then the Pope can not dispence in this case and giue a simple commission to that effect: but so it is that the Pope hath dispensed in this case. Gregory excuseth him self to Ianuarius with the custome of his owne Kirk for discharging the Preists in the Ile of Sardinnia, to confirme; but he recalled his discharge, when he perceaved that offence arose thereupon. Rurall Bishops and Abbots did sometime confirm, if we speak regularly; rurall Bishops and Abbots were but simple Preists. Hooker Eccles. po [...] pag. 353. confesseth that baptisme and confirmation went commonly together. I demand then if the Bishop was present at the baptisme of every one within his diocesse.

Our opposits are forced to confesse, that it is not the proper and essentiall part of a Bishops office, but it was given them for [Page] honor of their preisthood, according to the saying of Hieromie neither was this universall in Hieromes time, for he saith Multis in locis id esse tantum factum reperimus ad honorem potiùs sacerdotij quam ob legis necessitatem. In many places, not all places it was so Advers [...] Lucifer. their honour proved prejudicall to the will of the Kirk. Balthasar Lydius saith Notae in disp. Taboritarum. p. 28. it was untolerable superstition that the Priest might annoint the breist and the shoulder, but all behoued to abstein from the forhead, except only the Bishop. Beda in psal. 26. saith Confirmatio propter arrogantiam non est concessa singulis sacerdotibus sicut et multa alia. That for the arrogancie of Bishops, confirmation and many other things were not permitted to Preists. This appropriation of confirmation to Bishops hath made confirmation that is my Lord Bishops baptisme, to be preferred to the Lords baptisme, parents must bring their children to them many miles, as if the holy Ghost could no where breath but from their fingers. they will scarce once in three yeare goe to them, and so great numbers depart this life without confirmation. They vilipend in their deeds, that which they magnifie in their words, and the solemne entrance into the society of the communicants which should be made at home in presence of their owne congregation, is taken away with their Lordly Bishoping. I end with the saying of Tindal, Obedience pag. 152. After that Bishops had left preaching then sained they this dumbe ceremony of confirmation, to haue somewhat at the leastway whereby they might reign over their Diocese. They reserved unto themselues also the christning of bels, and conjuring, or hollowing of Churches and Churchyards and of alters and superalters, and hallowing of chalices, and so forth whatsoeuer is of honor or profite, which confirmations, and the other conjurations also, they haue now committed to their suffragans: because they themselues haue no leasure to minister such things for their lusts and pleasures and abundance of all things, and for the cumbrance that they haue in the Kings matters and busines of the Realmes. One keepeth the privie seale, another the great seale, the third is confessor that is to say a privie traytor and a secret Iudas he is presedent of the Prince his Councel, he is an Embassadour; an other sort of the Kings secret Counsell. Woe is unto the Realmes, where they are of the Counsell, As profitable are they verily unto the Realmes with their Councill, as the woules unto the sheep, or the foxes unto the geese, thus farre. Tindall.

[Page]

Of the Administration of the Sacraments in priuate places

IN the ninth head of the first booke of discipline, it was thought expedient, that baptisme be ministred vpon the ordinary dayes of preaching: not that it is unlawfull to baptise whensoeuer the word is preached: but to remoue a grosse error wherewith many are deceived, thinking that children be damned if they die without baptisme, and to make the people hold the administration of the Sacraments in greater reverence. In the order of baptisme set dovn before the Psalmes in metre, it is said, that the Sacraments are not ordained of God to be vsed in priuate corners, as charmes or sorceries; but left to the Congregation and necessarily annexed to Gods word, as seales of the same. In the Assembly holden at Edinburgh anno. 1581. in October, it was ordained that the sacraments should not be ministred in private houses, but solemnly, according to the good order hitherto observed, vnder the paine of deposition, In the confession of faith the cruell judgement against infants departing without the sacrament, and the absolute necessity of baptisme are damned. This lawdable order hitherto observed, was altered in the late pretended Assembly holden at Perth. where was made an act anent the administration of baptisme in priuate houses, when necessity requireth. Item, an act anent the administration, and giuing of the holy communion in private houses to sick and infirme persons.

A Sacrament is a publick action, to be performed publickly, by publick ministers: neither can any necessity or sufficient cause be alledged, wherefore any sacred and publick action, should passe in priuate: Because Gods ordinance is to vs a Supreame law and necessity, which we ought to obey rather then foster popular ignorance and infirmity. These are Tilenus words. Syntag. pars. 2. pag. 700.

The Sacraments were appointed, not onely to be signes and seales of invisible graces, bvt also to be testimonies before the world of our piety and thankfulnes towards God, and badges of our profession, distinguishing true Kirks from false. All Sacraments are certain kindes of protestations of our faith sayeth Aquinas. part. 3. quest. 7. act. 5. They ought therefore to be conspicuous and publick.

We haue spirituall and invisible fellowship and communion with the whole Kirke. Outwardly we professe the same faith and kind of worship, but we doe not communicate with the whole Kirk in the publick exercises of religion and ministration [Page] of the Sacraments, except only mediatly in some particular congregation. Visible communion in the holy things of God, is the end of our vnion and consociation with a particular Kirke. That which we may not attain to in our communion with the whole Kirke militant immediatly? we do it mediatly in our communion with a particular congregation. This communion ought not to be violate.

The minister in ministration of the Sacraments, hath not the only and cheife interest, but togither with the minister, the kirk witnessing, consenting, approving, and concurring with praier and thanksgiving. He is the mouth, but he is not all. The keies of the sacraments are giuen to the Kirke, howbeit the exercise and dispensation of them bee concredited to the pastours.Chrysost. lib. 3. de sacerdotio. All other actions which concerned the whole Kirk, were done with consent, and in presence of the Kirke: as elections, ordinations, excommunications. By the same reason ought the Sacraments to be ministred with consent, and in presence of the Kirk, seeing they are workes of publick nature, and publick fruit belonging to all.

Sacraments ought to be preserved from contempt, neglect, and corruption. The Sacraments are irreligiously handled, when they are ministred in private places: The Imperiall constitution in Iustinian Novel. 57 dischargeth that holy things be ministred in private houses. Not onely are the Sacraments ministred irreligiously in priuate, brought in contempt, and the publik vse neglected▪ but also hereticks take occasion to corrupt the pure administration of the Sacraments by these privie practises,

The Sacraments are not tyed to the materiall Kirkes made of dead stones, but the Kirke made of liuely stones. If therefore the congregation bee in a woode, a house, or a Caue, the Sacraments may bee ministred in a house, a woode or a caue. But then the Sacraments are ministred, not in priuate but in publick because they are ministred in the sight of the whole Congregation.

Christs promise to be in the midst of two or three conuened in his name, cannot be extended to the administration of the Sacraments: for then where two only are convened, the communion might be ministred, and so the priuate masse defended. Christ reasoneth onely from the lesse to the more. If he will heare the prayers and ratifie the censures of two or thre, farr more of the whole Kirk.

Baptisme is a ceremonie initiatory of our entrance into the [Page] bosome of some visible congregation, or as Caluine sayeth Epist. 185. It is a sacred and solmne introduction into the Kirke of God, and is a testimony of our heauenly burgesship, vnto the which those are written vp, whom he adopteth to himselfe, It ought therefore to be publick.

Baptisme is a signe of Christian profession before the world; it is called therefore the stipulation or interrogation of a good conscience. 1. Peter. 3. it ought therefore to be publick.

The Congregation should make fruit of the ministration of Baptisme, in remembring their owne baptisme, and the promises made in baptisme repeated unto them: it ought therefore to be publick, seeing the comfort and benefite in some respects should be common.

Not only the parents, but the Kirk presents the infant before God and concurreth with the minister in prayer for the saluation of the infant, as Tertullian sayeth, vt manu facta ambire gratiam pro baptizando possumus. It ought therefore to be publick.

Priuate baptisme hath sprong of the opinion of the necessity of baptisme, and doth still foster the same damnable opinion. In the ancient Kirk two solemne times were appointed for baptisme, to wit, Pasche and Pentecost, whereby many died without baptisme. Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 21. many delayed baptisme till their latter age. The Clinicall baptismes, that is baptismes in the bed were not of that accompt that publick baptisme had. When the opinion of the necessity of priuate baptisme prevailed, then followed many absurdities, the defence of baptisme by women, baptisme by a pagane, baptisme with puddly water, and disputation whether the mother should be baptized for the safety of the infant in the mothers belly, that is, whether they should be renati antequam nati, get the sacrament of the second birth, before they get the first birth.

In private baptisme the doctrine of baptisme is omitted, for hast to saue the soule of the infant, as is thought, and so the Sacrament is not ministred according to the dignity of it: and this hath bredd a negligent and carelesse ministration of baptisme in publick. The Trullian Synod Can. 59. decreed, that baptisme Nullatenus, in no case be ministred in a priuate oratory if it be done otherwise, let the Clergie-man be deposed, the laikes excommunicate, If in no case, where was then the case of necessitie?

Private baptisme hath bred a new kind of baptisme, that is, a baptisme by supposition. For if the childe baptized in private [Page] convalesse they baptize it over again, in case they doubt it was baptized in a right forme, saying, If thou be not baptized, N. I baptise thee in the name of the Father, &c. What if the childe was already baptized? is not the publicke baptisme rebaptization? but the decree of Alexander the third is warrant sufficient for this conditionall baptisme.

Baptisme was solemne in the primitiue Kirk, as we may read of Iohn baptized in Iordan, and Christs Disciples baptizing, and the new Converts in the Actes: some were not baptized in any visible Kirke, because they had not the occasion, as the Eunuch, and the Centurion. No man will deny but in the infancy of a Kirke, a private baptisme may be tolerated: but we speak of a Kirke constituted. When the Kirk of God was in families, no wonder that circumcision was ministred in families: but after that the Kirke was constituted among Gods people, the ministration of circumcision was publick, and is at this day ministred in the Synagogue, where a Synagogue is to be had. The Lord appoynted a precise day for circumcision, which might not be prevented. It was no wonder therefore if they had not ever opportunity of a solemne convention. There is no precise day set down for baptisme. The mark of circumcision howbeit secret, was permanent, and easily tried, baptisme is not so. The Kirk therefore ought to be assured of the baptisme of such as are reputed fellow-heires with whom they must haue the communion of Saints and visible cōmuniō of holy exercises. As any particular member is cut off from their fellowship by excōmunication with consent, and in the presence of the Kirk, 1. Cor. 5 4.5. so ought every particular member be received in their fel. lowship with their knowledge and consent convened together.

The Lords Supper ought to be publicke, we haue a spirituall union with the whole Kirke; but because it is not possible to celebrate a sacramentall communion with the whole Kirk militant, the Lord hath appoynted us to celebrate a sacramental communion with some particular Kirke. We that are many, are one bread, and one body, because we are partakers of one bread, 1. Cor. 10.17. We cannot then be one body sacramentally, except wee bee partakers of one bread. Other feasts may be private in private houses, but the Lords Supper ought to be publicke, 1. Cor. 11.12. When yee convene to eate, tarry one for another, 1. Cor. 11.33. Synaxis a word signifying as much as Synagogue, was one of the names given of old to this sacrament.

This sacrament is a bond of loue, a sinew of publick assemblies, [Page] a badge of our publick profession. The Kirkes interest, the dignity of the sacrament, and other generall reasons before mentioned, may be applied in particular to this sacrament, to proue that the ministration thereof ought to be publicke.

The communion was sent to the sicke in the time, or immediatly after the action in Iustinus Martyr his time. It became afterward to be reserued for the use of dying persons. Augustine who misconstrued Ioh. 3.5. for the necessity of baptisme, did also misconstrue the words of Iohn 6. Except a man eate the flesh, &c. for the necessity of the Eucharist. This erroneous opinion of the necessity of the Eucharist, made the ancients to giue it not only to aged persons departing this life for their Vi [...]ticum, that is, their voyage uictuals, but also to infants and babe [...], and that for the space of six hundred yeares: yea some put the Eucharist into the mouthes of the dead, lest they should want their voyage victuall. Such horrible prophanations of the holy Sacrament proceeded of this opinion of necessity: and yet in all antiquity we read not that the communion was celebrated at the sick mans bed side. The consecrated bread was onely sent to him.

Clinicall communions haue not onely bred, and still do foster the opinion of absolute necessity, but also of opus operatum, of a preposterous confidence in the last voyage victuall, of coldnesse in the publike service of God, when we are in health, of distrust of our salvation, if we want it at that time. Calvin sayth, Epist. 361 Difficillimum est hic cavere ne alios superstitio, alios ambitio & vana ostentatio ad petendum sollicitet.

They say the sick should not be left destitute of comfort. This reason ariseth of the opinion of necessity, as if there were no other meanes to comfort the sick,, or as if the comfort of the publick communion indured onely for the present time, and not for the time to come. There is a faire occasion offered, Iam. 5. of private communion, and yet there is no mention made of it in that place. If the vow, and desire of baptisme may supply the want of baptisme, then may also the vow and desire of the Eucharist doe the like; seeing the Rh [...]mists On Iohn 6. sect. 8. acknowledge, that they do eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of Christ, which ioyne in heart, and desire, with the partakers of the Sacrament. To communicate spiritually and mystically, is necessary, but not sacramentally, when it cannot be done conveniently, and without breach of order.

Some Diuines condiscend thus farre, that the communion [Page] may be sent to the sick in the time of the publicke action. But Tilenus sayth, Syntag. part. 2. pag. 722. Whatsoever necessity be pretended, scarce any sufficient cause can be rendred, wherefore the publicke action should passe in private, because the ordinance of God is of supreme necessity. The comforts of the infirme ministred out of order, doth rather foster the publike infirmity of the Kirk, then heale the private infirmity of the sicke.

FINIS.

Information about this book

Title statement

Perth assembly Containing 1 The proceedings thereof. 2 The proofe of the nullitie thereof. 2 [sic] Reasons presented thereto against the receiving the fiue new articles imposed. 4 The oppositenesse of it to the proceedings and oath of the whole state of the land. An. 1581. 5 Proofes of the unlawfulnesse of the said fiue articles, viz. 1. Kneeling in the act of receiving the Lords Supper. 2. Holy daies. 3. Bishopping. 4. Private baptisme. 5. Private Communion.

Calderwood, David, 1575-1650.

Edition statement

1619

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A17583

ID [STC]

STC 4360

ID [STC]

ESTC S107472

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

99843172

ID [PROQUEST]

99843172

ID [VID]

7885

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A17583)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 7885)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 1059:15)

Source

— Perth assembly Containing 1 The proceedings thereof. 2 The proofe of the nullitie thereof. 2 [sic] Reasons presented thereto against the receiving the fiue new articles imposed. 4 The oppositenesse of it to the proceedings and oath of the whole state of the land. An. 1581. 5 Proofes of the unlawfulnesse of the said fiue articles, viz. 1. Kneeling in the act of receiving the Lords Supper. 2. Holy daies. 3. Bishopping. 4. Private baptisme. 5. Private Communion., Calderwood, David, 1575-1650..

Extent

[6], 101, [1] p.

Printed by William Brewster],. [Leiden :: MDCXIX. [1619]. (By David Calderwood.) (Probable printer attribution and place of publication from STC.) (Reproduction of the original in the Library of Congress.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.