3. Kneeling at the Lord's Supper

III. Kneeling at the Lords Supper.

This is an idol too, for it is contrary to the institution, and to the second Commandment: Christ and his Apostles did use a table gesture, and therefore so should we. For it is said, while they did eat, edentibus illis (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:22). But if while they did eat, then also while they did sit, for these two are conjoined (Mark 14:18), while they sat and did eat, and though they did not sit upright, but with leaning, yet it was the table gesture then used in feasts and banquets; and if we sit according to the custom of the country where we live, we imitate aright, and it were apish imitation to sit otherwise, as it is [illegible] to use white wine, or red, the wine of Judea, or the wine of France.

Objection, But we may pray in the act of receiving, therefore we may kneel.

Answ. Kneeling is not the only prayer gesture, for the publican stood and prayed (Luke 18:13). Though Moses and Samuel stood before me (Jeremiah 15:1). The Prophet Elijah as it seems sat (1 Kings 18:42); neither is prayer the principal exercise of the soul in the act of receiving, but rather meditation, the eye not only beholding, but the mind attending upon the sacramental elements and actions, making present use of them by meditation, upon the analogy between the signs, and the thing signified, in which, though the soul may send up short ejaculations, and darts of prayer to heaven, to strengthen her own weakness, yet this need not take her off from her principal work of meditation and application of the things represented in the sacrament, neither does ejaculatory prayer require any change of gesture.

Objection. But no gesture can be too reverend, great and reverend, dreadful mysteries, (says one) must be received with great and dreadful humility of soul, and humiliation of body.

Answ. Groveling upon the ground with their faces in the dust, is a more forlorn, dejected posture than kneeling. And therefore by this argument they ought not to kneel, but rather to hide their faces in the dust. But the Apostle condemns voluntary humility (Colossians 2:18), for it is no true humility, but hypocrisy and superstition disguised with the name and vizard of humility. It is gross hypocrisy for us to pretend to more holiness, reverence, and devotion in the act of receiving than Christ himself, or than the Apostles did, when Christ himself was there bodily present with them. We must follow the example of Christ and his Apostles, except where they had special reasons, which do not concern us: for the Apostle alleges the institution against all abuses (1 Corinthians 11:23), and he propounds to us for imitation the example and custom of the primitive churches, for those churches were intended by Christ as patterns to succeeding ages (1 Corinthians 11:16; 1 Corinthians 14:33; 1 Corinthians 16:1; 2 Timothy 3:14). There is sometimes in superstitious persons a legal bondage, and slavery of spirit, and this they take to be dreadful humility. But a spirit of adoption is more suitable to the sacrament, than such a legal spirit, and obedience is the best humility. That which comes nearest to the rule and to the institution, is the best and humblest way, and most accepted of the Lord. Peter it is like, thought himself very humble, when he said to Christ, you shall never wash my feet, but it was a foolish and proud humility, and Christ reproved and checks him sharply for it: therefore let kneelers take heed of such deceitful, proud humility. It is the manner of all feasts and banquets, even when subjects are invited to a prince's banquet, they do not use to kneel while they are eating, but they sit down with him, as David and Jonathan did at King Saul's table. The sacrament of the Passover was an holy supper, and yet they did not kneel in the act of receiving, though the Paschal Lamb was slain in manner of a real sacrifice, and the slaughter of beasts, and the shedding of blood was more dreadful than the pouring out of wine, but yet they were not wont to kneel at the sacraments, and sacrifices of the old Law.

It is a dangerous symbolizing with the Papists, who kneel before their breaden God. It gratifies and hardens them, by giving countenance to that error, but grieves and offends many a precious saint. And indeed it was the opinion of the bodily presence that brought in this custom of kneeling, and to deny that, and yet to kneel, is such a piece of idolatry and contradiction that some of the Papists professed that they would be torn in pieces with wild horses, rather than do it, if they did not believe that Christ is there bodily present. Costerus the Jesuit confesses, that if the substance of bread remain, the idolatry of the Papists is more intolerable than the Egyptians was, in worshipping of an ox, or a crocodile.

And it is a going backward in religion, for the first Reformers in the very dawning of the day did reject this Popish practice. Mr. Knox one of the first and chief instruments of the Reformation in Scotland, calls the cross in baptism, and kneeling at the Lords Supper, diabolical inventions, and being demanded by the Council of England, why he did not kneel, he answered, because Christ's action was perfect, and it was surest to follow his example, and when they said, they were sorry to find him of a mind contrary to the common order, he replied, and I am sorry that the common order is contrary to Christ's institution. And in King Edward's time, in those first glimmerings and breakings forth of light, there is this rule in the Book of Common Prayer, set forth in his time, Anno 1549, as touching kneeling, knocking the breast, and other gestures, they may be used, or left, as every man's devotion serveth, which was a very necessary indulgence for tender consciences. And shall we be more violent in these times of greater light, when we should be more tender, more light should work more love.