TRICOENIUM CHRISTI, IN NOCTE PRODITIONIS SVAE. THE THREEFOLD SUPPER OF CHRIST IN THE NIGHT THAT HE WAS BETRAYED. Explained by EDWARD KELLETT, Doctor of Divinity, Canon of Exeter. Balducus in praefatione in jobum, Multa damus, aliis neque visa, neque audita, quae meis sensibus attemperavit spiritus ille, qui, ubi vult, spirat. Veruntamen; quia spiritus prophetici, subjecti sunt prophetis; ideo me, & omnia mea, tam scripta quam scribenda, subjicio censurae Ecclesiae Anglicanae, libentissimè. LONDON, Printed by Thomas Cotes, for Andrew Crook, at the green Dragon in Saint Paul's Church yard. 1641. Christ and the institution of the Eucharist in three registers THE THREE FOLD SUPPER OF CHRIST 3 Christ with bread and wine before 11 kneeling disciples 2 Christ and the 12 disciples at the Last Supper at the moment when Christ predicts his betrayal an inset of Christ washing the feet of the 12 disciples 1 Christ and the 12 disciples being served at the Last Supper By Dr. Kellet. London Printed for Andrew Crook. 1641. W. M. sculpsit. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE SIR JOHN FINCH, BARON OF FORDITCH, LORD KEEPER OF HIS MAJESTY'S GREAT SEAL, AND ONE OF HIS SACRED COUNSELL. MY Miscellanies, I offered, unto Aaron (your elder Brother) who is set over us, by our most gracious King; as a ruler of the House of God; I now think it convenient; to offer unto you, as to Moses, a second part of my Studies; such as they are, God bless them to be, as a spur to your devotion, and as a partiary means of your salvation; and then I have my desire, in this world. Let others joy in other matters: Your worth is known, you are inwardly endowed with an excellent spirit; able to discern evil from good, shadows from substance. To you therefore do I fly; stand but you in the gap, and defend what I have written, I ask no more, and desire no less, as you knew the particulars study of my youth; and of late (to my wonder) recalled and recounted the very Books; in which they were written; so now I beseech your Honour to accept with portion of the Studies of my old age. Lastly, you vouchsafed to me many special particulars, whereof our Western parts take notice; which binds me forever to acknowledge, and be thankful unto you; and to consecrate the best part of my endeavours to the honour of your name, which I pray to God, may be as glorious in heaven, as it is on earth; and that in the mean time, you may daily grow up more and more into favour with God, and his sacred Majesty, and as you do with all good men. Your Honours at Command to serve you, EDWARD KELLETT. TO THE READER. READER, Be thou gentle, or ungentle, I will tell thee my faults, and accuse myself; which sometimes findeth more love, than self-love doth. In erring, there are divers degrees; and there is a difference between a deviation, a digression, and a divagation: a deviation may be but a little way off, like the exorbitancy of a wheel out of the wont tract, or road, though still running on in the high way; every Writer thus erreth oftentimes: And there may be a digression, which is a fetching of a remoter compass, either for necessity, or delight; as to see some fenced Castle, or royal Court, or some excellent Monument; which being viewed, men return to their old way: this is not much discommendable, since few men write, without using this liberty: But a Divagation is of larger extent, and, in effect, may be compared to the trailing of an Hare, and, after he is started, to the pursuing of him, in all his wily turne-abouts, and doubles, over hills, over dales, thorough bushes, buyers, and thorns, till he be quite tired. I could not avoid, but use frequently many Deviations, and divers times, some digressions. The third sort, namely, Divagations, I use only on great occasions; if that be a fault, I yield, and confess it; yet let one say truly, I do no where expatiate; but if thou follow me, thou wilt find some pleasure; and I doubt not of good men's approbation, when in quest and search after truth, I follow a Papist, as Pererius was; or a stiff Opinionist, and overrigid Lutheran, as Illyricus was, and follow close to the heels the enemies of Truth, which way soever they take, since the investigation of Truth, is a more refined Recreation, and of a more spiritual refreshment, than the deceiving, sensual, and temporary sports or pleasures can be. For all this, if thy nature cannot brook with such extravagancies, skip clean over them. And yet, good Reader, I have a greater fault. Thou wilt meet with some passages nervous, and ponderous; others not polished, but savouring of my Common-places, and not half digested: then followeth one point ad amussim, accurately handled, & add subtle examinatum, as Censorinus phraseth it, unto Caerillius, anacomized to the utmost: by and by another point remiss, languide, and with a distinct, loose-flowing vestment: yet I will not despair of thy favour, when thou considerest, that I have continued constant writing, in moist and rotten weather, when a mist, or cloud hangs over my understanding, in weakness, and in sickness: the first never departing from me, the second, seldom, in grief of mind, and pains of body, by the Gout, and Stone, and divers other infirmities; in the distraction of thoughts between Study, on the one side, and avocations , on the other side. Lastly, I assure thee, I had rather make another new Book, then revise this again: My faults make me crave thy pardon; and, good Reader, pray for me, whose age and imperfections are hastening to the grave. Thine in Christ, EDWARD KELLETT. LIB. 1. The Contents of the first Chapter. Par. 1THe occasion of this Discourse. Fol. 1 Par. 2 The presumptuous ignorance of some Caco-zelots. Fol. 2 Par. 3 The state of the Question. ibid., Par. 4 Four points propounded, Three preparatory. One decisive, and determining. Par. These Preparitory. 1 What course the Jews took at their ordinary meats. 2 What they used to do at their Festivals. 3 What they especially practised at their Passover. Par. 4 The main point is, what Religious, or civil rites our Saviour more particularly observed, when he kept the Passeover, in the night of his apprehension. ibid. The Contents of the second Chapter. Par. THe jewish strictness in often giving of thanks. Fol. 3 Par. 2 The duty of thankfulness exhorted unto. ibid. Par. 3 Ingratitude condemned. Fol. 4 Par. 4 The Jews at their Feasts began their banquet with blessing of a cup of Wine, what the particular words were, Poculum bibatorium, every one drank in order; our most blessed Saviour scorned not to follow that custom; The custom of the Table of the King of Sweden. ibid. Par. 5 The Master of the Feast among the jews, consecrated the Bread: the very words of Consecration translated, are set down. Fol. 5 Par. 6 Some recreations were at their festivals: and wise holy discourses: sometimes riddles were propounded: our Saviour's divine Tabletalk. ibid. Par. 7 The duty of thanksgiving appointed by the Apostle for all our do. ibid. Par. 8 The temperance of the Primitive Church at their repast, and at Feasts also, proved by Tertullian, and Minutius Foelix: also their Prayers, and singing, and sober retiring. Fol. 6 Par. 9 Our age in a double extreme: some over-prodigally feast it: the immoderate use of Tobacco taxed. ibi. Par. 10 Some are inhospitable; in hospitality under pretence of devotion disliked. Fol. 7 Par. 11 The mean in eating, and drinking commended. ibid. Par. 12 Mirth and Feasting, practised on the Lord's day in Tertullia's time. Fol. 8 Par. 13. Holy Hester her baaquet of Vine: the brethren of joseph were temperate, though the vulgar hath it, Inebriati sunt cum eo: josephs' liberality, and full table, was not intepemrate or immodest. ibid. Par. 14 Christ feasted on Sabbath days. ibid. Par. 15 Ahashuerus his moderation, and Law, wished for to be in use. Fol. 9 The Contents of the third Chapter. Par. 1 DIvers were the prescribed Customs of the Passeover. Fol. 10 Par. 2. Seven famous Passovers mentioned in the old Testament, the first in Egypt, the second in the Wilderness. ibid. Par. 3 The differences betwixt the first and second, in Maimonides his judgement: only one of his differences proveth sound. ibid. Par. 4 A true distinction of the particular Eremitical Passeover of some unclean, from the general Passeover in the Wilderness: also a distinction of both these, from the Egyptian Passeover. ibid. Par 5. The Third Passeover under joshua. Folly 10 Par 6 The Israelites for forty years, eat no bread but Manna. Folly 11 Par 7 Manna commended. Folly ib. Par 8 The Israelites bought water, and meat, in their Peregrination, but not bread; nor Corn had they of the Nations, till they came to the planes of jericho, though Masius seemeth to think, they forbore only to eat of the corn of Canaan. Folly ib. Par 9 The fourth Passeover in the days of Samuel. Folly ibid. Par 10. The deplorable estate of Israel, when Samuel entered on the government. Folly 12 Par 11. Samuel reform the Ecclesiastical estate. Folly ibid. Par 12. Reformation wont by former Precedents: David concurred with Samuel: Solomon followed David's Will Nuncupative; and received from him in writing what the Spirit had taught David: David guided by his Seers, by Samuel, by Aaron. Folly ibid. Par 13. All preced●ntiall reformation must be according to Gods first guidance: David dwelled with Samuel. Folly ibid. Par 14. Samuel dedicated things of worth, to the enriching of the future Temple. Folly 13 Par 15 Samuel, one of the sacred Trium-viri. Folly ibid. Par 16 Samuel governed the state politic: he was a circuiting, or itinerant judge. Folly ib. Par 17 The nice distinction of Latria, and Dulia questioned. Folly ib. Par 18 The Parliament of Mizpeh: the sacred water: samuel's burned offerings accepted: in likelihood, about this time was the great Passeover kept. Folly ib. Par 19 Samuel a King, Priest, and Prophet. Folly 14 Par 20 Josephus defended against Salianus. Folly ibid. The Contents of the fourth Chapter. Par 1 IN the fifth great Passeover specialized to be kept by Hezekiah; the unsanctifyed in part eaten it; and in the second month, by dispensation divine; and the Priests and Levites only killed the Passeover. Folly 15 Par 2 The King's prayer accepted both for the unclean Priests and people, and the people healed at the good King's prayer. Folly ib. Par 3 A voluntary Passeover to supply the imperfection of the former. Devotions half performed are to be renewed and quickened. Folly 16 Par 4 The Priests and Levites prayers accepted of God for the people. Folly ibid. Par 5 Religious thoughts must be produced into Acts. Folly ib. Par 6 In the sixth glorious of josiah, were most royal offerings, both for the Pascha, and also for the Cagigah, which exceeded the offerings of Hezekiah. Folly ibid. Par 7 Salianus against Vatablus, both reconciled. Folly ibid. Par 8 The Masters of the family killed the Passeover; but the Priests slew the Festival offerings: Levites might not sacrifice, without divine inspiration, or great exigents: any Levite might sacrifice the proper Passeover for his own family, or for the impure. Folly 17 Par 9 In what sense Priests are said to profane the Sabbath, the Temple, Sacrifices, and Circumcision chase away the Sabbath. Folly ib. Par 10 The seventh extraordinary great Passeover was fore-prophesied by Ezekiel, but not accomplished, till the return from captivity, in the days of Ezra, and Nehemiah. Folly 18 The Contents of the fift Chapter. Par 1 THe registered Passovers of the New Testament: Passovers were duly kept, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the custom of the Feast, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yearly: The joseph and his spouse, and thrice sacred Virgin, observed the Passovers: thrice every year, all males were to appear before the lord Folly 19 Par 2 Maimonides his opinion, who might stay at home. Folly 20 Par 3 Maimonides in divers points erreth. Folly ibid. Par 4 Calvin Misopineth: It is unexpressed whether Christ were carried to the Passeover, till he were twelve years old: Some Children forwarder than others: At twelve years of age Christ ascended. Par 5 Divers reasons that Christ at twelve years of age took the Passeover: he was a strict observer of the Law: they came to the principally for devotion: None was ever so well prepared to receive, as our Saviour. Folly 20 Par 6 The second Passeover, which the New Testament recordeth Christ to have honoured with his , was eighteen years after: then Christ cast out buyers and sellers out of the Temple, and did many miracles, which Nocodemus believed, and the Galileans: Christ then received the Passeover, though so much be not expressed: the confession of the Jews; that Christ strictly observed their Passovers. Folly 22 Par 7 The next years is pointed at, Joh 5.1. after this there was a Feast of the Jews: Melchior Canus reproved: Zeppers distinction of feasts amended. Folly ib. Par 8 Holy days appointed by the Church are sanctified by God, to God: the Feast of Purim, from Hamon's magical Lots, allowed: Queen hester's decree confirming the ordinance of the Jews: the feast of the dedication was of man's appointment: our most heavenly Saviour honoured it with his presence, words, and works: What, and of what this Dedication was; Zepper doth ill confound Encaenia with Renovalia. Folly 23 Par 9 He is too strict against Encaenia, or feasts of Dedication. All dancing is not forbidden: Encaeniare knowne to be all one with novam vestem endure: Revels or Feasts for the Dedication of our Churches lawful, and ancient: the lawful prescriptions for this point wise and holy. Folly ibid. Par 10 Maldonat his insolency taxed: Canus and Cajetan confuted by Pererius. Folly 24 Par 11 The Feasts of the Jews mentioned, Joh. 5.1. was not the Penticost, nor the Feast of Tabernacles, but the Passeover. Folly 25 Par 12 Pererius is too vehement, and confuted. Folly ibid. Par 13 The next Passeover Christ went not to Jerusalem: the lawful reason thereof: the Jews come to him, because he came not to them. Folly ibid. Par 14 Sacraments upon exigents, may be deferred. Folly 26 The Contents of the sixth chapter. Par 1 IN what manner Christ kept his last with its particular rites, cannot be sooner found than by the Jewish observation of the Sabbath in those times. Folly 27 Par 2 The Jews had a liberty at the first to choose a Lamb, or a Goat for the proper rasted Paschall Sacrifice. Folly 28 Par 3 A Lamb and a Kid are not all one, against Paulus Burgensis. Folly ib. Par 4 The difference between the Pascha and the Chagigah. Folly ibid. Par 5 The reason of some Jews, and some late good Christians confuted. Folly 29 Par 6 Rupertus his overnice observation. Folly 30 Par 7 The Lambs or Kids in the Aepyptian Passeover, were culled out four days before. Folly ib. Par 8 This was also a temporary rite, divers reasons, why they then chose the Lamb, or Kid so long beforehand in their first Passeover. Folly ib. Par 9 Hunnius erreth in this point. Folly 31 Par 10 The str●king or sprinkling of the blood on the two side posts, and upper doore-post was not any of the durable rites, but appropriated to the first Passeover. Folly ib. Par 11 Sprinkling of blood much used of old. Folly ib. Par 12 Empty houses in Goshen, needed not be sprinkled. Folly ib. Par 13 The Angelus exterminator could not hurt, when the blood was sprinkled. Folly 32 Par 14 Such a sprinkling as this was used in no other Sacrifice. Folly ibid. Par 15 The Jews general consent, that such spinkling was never after in use, Folly ib. Par 16 A true reason, why this ceremony ceased. Folly ib. Par 17 Christ was the door thus be sprinkled. Folly ib. Par 18 Hannibal his imitation Folly 33 Par 19 The first Posseover was eaten in great haste. Folly ibid. Par 20 The succeeding Passovers were not eaten in such haste. Folly ib. Par 21 Fair means, and foul were used to hasten the Israelites out of Egypt. Folly 34 Par 22 Vitablus his opinion of the four Ensigns, under which the Israelites marched. Folly ib. Par. 23 They went out rather been cincti, than quintati. Fol. 34 Par. 24 Reasons why they went not only five by five in a rank Fol. ib. Par. 25 Yet some went well armed, and some unarmed. Fol. 35 Par. 26 The most probable manner of their departure out of Egypt described at large. Fol. 36 Par. 27 The Israelites had abundance of lesser standards, but four chief ones in several quarters. Fol. 37 Par. 28 They eaten the Passeover in great haste with their loins girt. Fol. ib. Par. 29 Lose hanging vestments used ordinarily by the Jews: Close, well-girt apparel on special occasions. Fol. ib. Par. 30 Their haste is proved from their being shod, the Hypallage of Calceamenta in pedibus, instead of pedes in calceamentis, paralleled. Fol. 38 Par. 31 Going barefoot, was a sign of sorrow. Fol. ib. Par. 32 Wearing of shoes, or sandals betokened haste. Fol. ib. Par. 33 The staff in their hand, did argue their haste. Fol. ib. Par. 34 (In their hand) these words do not signify that their staves were never out of their hands. Fol. ib. Par. 35 jacob's staff passing over Jordane. Fol. ib. Par. 36 The usefulness of a staff. Fol. 39 Par. 37 The Talmudist say, it was not eaten in such haste ever after. Fol. ibid. Par. 38 Nor was there any need of such haste. Fol. ib. Par. 39 A twofold haste, simple and comparative. Fol. ib. Par. 40 The words, Exod, 12.35. Ye shall keep this service, denote rather the substantials, than the accidentals of the Passeover. Fol. ib. Par. 41 A specious objection, that all the precepts of the Passeover were to be kept; the answer thereunto, from a known distinction; from the authority of Maimonides; from other learned Christians, skilled in Hebrew criticism, from the sacred Text. Fol. 40 The Contents of the seventh Chapter. Par. 1 SOme think the Jews in the Egyptian Passeover did discumbere in signum libertatis: not so. Fol. 42 Par. 2 Josephus misunderstood, and misapplyed. Folly ib. Par. 3 Christ was to keep it in things necessary, not in the vanishing rites: Christ did something at his last , which cannot be evinced to be done at the first . Fol. ib. Par. 4 The Jews borrowed the fashion of discumbing from the Romans, saith Josephus; but that was of later times. Fol. 43 Par. 5 Julius Caesar feasted the Romans on twenty two thousand Triclinia. Fol. ib. Par. 6 The Indian's beds, Discumbing was used in India by the brahmin's: Philostratus proveth it: the armies of the Romans never pierced into the heart of India: the Indian discumbing mentioned but as of yesterday, in comparison with the first Passeover: and rather a resemblance of the Roman fashion, than the same. Fol. ib. Par. 7 The Romans imitated the Grecians, and the Grecians the Asiatiques: most anciently the Romans did eat sitting; so Alexander ab Alexandro, and Isidorus afterward women did sit, though men lay down, saith Varro. Fol. ib. Par. 8 Annarus King of Babylon, & Nero discumbed with their harlots; this was Labentibus moribus. Fol. 44 Par. 9 Discumbing practised by the Primitive Christians: even women discumbed, as Tertullian professeth: Tertullian ad Nationes, enlightened an obscure place of his Apologetique. Fol. ib. Par. 10 The Grecians did also sit at feasts first of all. Fol. ib. Par. 11 Accubation was in free prosperous times. Fol. 45 Par. 12 Curius Manlius first brought in triumph from Asia the Triclinia. Fol. ibid. Par. 13 Banqueting beds in Ahashuerus his days. Fol. ib. Par. 14 Discumbing was not in use with any Nation, before, at, or along while after the first Mosaical Passeover. Fol. ib. Par. 15 The lying down of Angels in men's shapes, Gen. 19.4. was not upon feasting, but upon sleeping beds. Fol. 45 Par. 16 Mr Broughton censured. It is more probable that the Israelites did sit, than lie down at the eating of the first , for divers reasons. Fol. 46 Par. 17 Yet it is not expressly, either set down, or to be determined. Fol. ib. Par. 18 No place of the Old Testament enjoined them to stand at the eating of the Passeover: No place of the Old or New Testament testifies that they did stand: no necessary consequence can produce so much. Fol. 47 Par. 19 Yet it is most probable, that they did stand: divers reasons for it; yet none of these reasons demonstrative, but probable. Fol. ib. Par. 20 At the succeeding Passovers, they did not Discumbere: Philo and Josephus are to be interpreted of later times. Fol. 48 Par. 21 No particular posture can be proved from any of the great Passovers. Fol. 49 Par. 22 They might not go out of doors in the first Passeover, till the Angel had examined their doors: After, they went forth: this ceremony of not going out of doors, was only temporary: Abroad they might go, home they might not go. Fol. ibid. Par. 23 Christ and his Disciples went forth. Fol. 50 Par. 24 The Master of a scant family, and the next neighbour to his house, were to join together, and to enter commons. Fol. ib. Par. 25 If they had strayed fare, the danger had been greater. Fol. ib. Par. 26 There being no such danger of an Abaddon in future times; they chose any of the Vertuosis, whether they were friends or kindred, though their dwellings were further off. Fol. 51 The Contents of the eight chapter. Par. 1 The perpetual rites of the Passeover were instituted at several times. Fol. 52 Par. 2 The general perpetuity excluded not just Dispensations: Fol. ib. Par. 3 In what Cases Dispensations were permitted. Fol. ib. Par. 4 Our blessed Sacraments may be deferred Fol. ibid. Par. 5 Change of Rites might not be. Fol. ib. Par. 6 Even included permission is Legal. Fol. 53 Par. 7 Some rites of the unordained in Egypt, & prescribed in their journeying. Fol. ib. Par. 8 In extremities a Kid might serve for a Passeover. Fol. ibid. Par. 9 A Kid doth not so exactly typify our blessed Saviour, as a Lamb doth. Fol. 54 Par. 10 The Paschall Lamb must be unspotted. Fol. ib. Par. 11 Particoloured things in high esteem. Fol. ib. Par. 12 Most s●eepe spotted about Jewry. Fol. ibid. Par. 13 The Heathen vilifying their own gods. Fol. ib. Par. 14 The perfectness of the offering to be made to God; the imperfections signed out. Fol. 55 Par. 15 The bodily perfection of aaronical Priests, Fol. ib. Par. 16 Diversifying in colour, no blemish, but an ornament. Fol. ib. Par. 17 There may be spots without blemishes. Fol. ib. Par. 18 Blemishes without deformity. Fol. ib. Par. 19 Christ was blemished, but most unjustly. Fol. 56 Par. 20 Blemishes of birds: a little reputed blemish hindered not the Lamb to be the Passeover: an ill blemished spotted Lamb might not be the Passeover Fol. ib. Par. 21 Difference between spotted, and particoloured. Fol. ibid. Par. 22 The Paschal lamb must not be a female one, but a male: a male implieth perfection. Fol. ib. Par. 23 The Lamb must be under a year old; the Lamb of one hour above a year old was to be refused, the son of a year. Fol. 57 Par. 24 The impurity of creatures, till seven days be passed over them the strangr effects, co-incident to the number of seven. Fol. ibid. Par. 25 The Jews think a Lamb of nine days might be the Passeover. Fol. ibid. Par. 26 It might be a offering. Fol. ib. Par. 27 Reasons why it might not be a Paschall Lamb. Fol. 58 Par. 28 A proportionable number was to be chosen to the eating of the Paschall Lamb. Fol. 58 Par. 29 The exact number is not, cannot be set down. Fol. ibid. Par. 30 Maimonides saith, they ought to agree of the number, before they chose their Lambs. Fol. ib. Par. 31 The fellow-communicants were called the sons of the Society. Fol. ib. Par. 32 It is more probable, that at the first Passeover, they chose their Lamb first, and company afterward. At the first Passeover, the next neighbour, or neighbours were brothers of the Society, or members of that brotherhood. At the after Passovers, they were not so strict, nor was it a durable Rite to have the next neighbours. Fol. ib. Par. 33 Sometimes ten, sometimes twenty made up the full number, saith josephus: most commonly ten: Cestius the Roman Precedent his policy. Fol. 59 Par. 34 Thirteen were at Christ's last Passovers eating, even Christ and his twelve Apostles. Fol. ib. Par. 35 The Romans imitation of these Ceremony- sodalitates. Fol. ib. Par. 36 Rex convivii, in Macrobius, dominus convivii, in Gellius; modimperator, in Varro. Fol. 60 Par. 37 The numbers no where fixed, and certain; but ab libitum; varied as it pleased▪ the ●●●efe Ruler of the feast, etc. Fol. ib. The Contents of the ninth Chapter. Par. 1 NOn-admittance of strangers to the Passeover: divers sorts of servants, & strangers: servants of the seed of Israel, their estate●, and privileges: servants of forgaine Nations; their hard conditions: hired servants; and their differences from others: the hired servant might not be forced to be circumcised. Fol. 62 Par. 2 Maimonides falsely opineth, that the seed of Abraham were only to be circumcised. Fol. 64 Par. 3 There were three sorts of strangers in Israel: two sorts of Aliens: Adam's six▪ Precepts to all the world: Noah's additional inhibition: the Law of Moses is a branch of the Law of Nature: Bishop Andrew's commended; and excellent passages of his Work transcribed: The Roman Laws borrowed from the Jews, in Tertullia's judgement; The twelve Tables, and their supposed perfections: their imperfection, in precept: the fragments only remain of them: some semblance between the four first Commandments of the first Table in God's Law, and between the Roman Laws. Regalitives rejected: Gothofredus preferred: Comparisons between the Gentiles keeping the Saturday; and Christians, the Sunday: Saturday was the Sabbath of the Romans; kept with joy, and feasting, as our Lord's day: A large Treatise concerning the Lord's day: the Christians pray towards the East; the Reasons thereof: The holy Communion Table justly placed at the East end of the Chancel; ignorant, and irreligious Censurers taxed; and objections answered: the promiscuous use of the words, Altar, and the Lords Table: The Commandments of the second Table of Moses followed by the Papyrian Law, and twelve Roman Tables; except the tenth Commandment only: a foreigner unfixed might not eat of the Passeover: a sojourner, or stranger, whose males were circumcised, might ea●e thereof, and so might their sons: only Circumcised ones might eat the Passeover all other was forbidden: women were held as circumcised in the circumcisinn of the Jewish males. Fol. 65 The Contents of the tenth Chapter. Par. 1 THe year of the world, in which the Passeover was first instituted. Fol. 90 Par. 2 The month of that year. The old jewish account of the years, and the new; anons sa●●●, & vulgaris. The year preceding the seventh sabbatical year. viz. the 48. year after the old jubilee, and the second year before the new Iubile●; brought forth sufficient fruits for three years. Fol. 91 Par. 3 The Magnalia performed, in the Month of Abib. Fol. 94 Par. 4 The Passeover, upon some other occasions extraordinary, might be kept on another month. Fol. ib. Par. 5 The proclaiming of festival days commanded both by Moses & some Heathen. Fol. 95 Par. 6 The appointed ●●y for the Passeover. Fol. ib. Par. 7 It was the fourteenth day of the month, not al●●ble or, dispensible with. Fol. ib. Par. 8. The full Moon. Fol. 96 Par. 9 The jews hope that the Messiah shall deliver Israel, the same day that Moses did, and that the Passeover was kept. Fol. ib. Par. 10 Tertullian explained. Fol. ib. Par. 11 The jews unlawfully altered the day of the Passeover. Fol. 97 Par. 12 Christ are the Passeover on the fourteenth day of the month, the jews on the day following. Fol. 98 Par. 13 The strict observation of the Jewish festivals: a trap laid for Christ: and broken taxations are payable to Princes against the opinion of Pharisaical zealot Galilaeans. The misunderstood story of the Galilaeans slain by Pilot explained, Fol. ib. Par. 14 Before the jewish Passeover, our blessed Saviour was crucified. Fol. 99 Par. 15 Christ kept the Law exactly. Fol. 100 Par. 16 The hour of the day that the jewish Passeover was kept in, the several beginnings of the day by several Nations. The jews began from the Eveneng. Fol. ibid. Par. 17 In the New Testament the reckoning was from the morning. Fol. 101. Par. 18 The hour of the day, was a lasting fixed Ceremony: It was to be slain between the two evenings: the divers meaning of the word, Evening: Maymonides reproved. Fol. ib. Par. 19 It was to be eaten between Sunset, and any time till towards the morning: against the opinion of Scaliger: It was usually eaten after the beginning of the second Evening, and not long after sunset. Fol. 102 Par. 20 The fixed hour more explained. Fol. 103 The Contents of the eleventh Chapter. Par. 1 IT was a lasting Ceremony to keep the Passeover at jerusalem, and not as any man fancied: yet this precept binded them not, till they came to jerusalem; and notwithstanding, under good distinctions, may truly be said, to be no fading, but fixed Ceremony. Fol. 105 Par. 2 A most memorable passage from Munster, concerning the last great fast of the jews, The jews keep no now; because they are outed from jerusalem. Fol. ib. Par. 3 The jews were to root out the Names, and Places, where Idolatry had been: Cities were sometimes so called from the Idols, in that place worshipped. Fol. 106 Par. 4 Not till David's time, was the particular place known, where the Temple should be. Fol. 107 Par. 5 David's great care for the Temple so soon as he was enthronised. Fol. ib. Par. 6 That hard place explained (We have heard of it at Ephrata, we found it in the fields of the wood.) Fol. 108 Par. 7 The Psalm 132. not made by Solomon, but David. Fol. 109 Par. 8 Solomon kept the first Passeover at jerusalem. Fol. 110 Par. 9 The Israelites left all their cities, even almost empty, to go to Jerusalem; and eat the Passeover, God kept them: when they forsook him, all mischief fell upon the City, the Temple the People. Fol. ibid. Par. 10 Five things in the first Temple; which were not in the second: the fire from heaven, which lighted on the Altar: the Urim and Thummim was not in the second Temple: Bathchol, and its signification: the Ark was not in the second Temple: in this third the Ark Ribera includeth the two other of those famous five things. Fol. 111 Par. 11 Divers reckon, and estimates, what those five things were: Ribera censured: the Jews confuted. Fol. 113 Par. 12 The last Temple had more glory than the first, by the presence of Christ, our Messiah, and it is cleared by divers memorable particularities. Fol. 114 Par. 13 The Passeover from the restauration of the second Temple by Zorobabel, till Vespasian and Titus destroyed it. Fol. 116 Par. 14 The miseries at the Passeover, when the second Temple was destroyed, and the ensuing calamities of the captive jews. Fol. 117 The Contents of the twelfth Chapter. Par. 1 THe Paschall Lamb was to be eaten in one house, and slain not in the Temple, but in the house commonly. More Lambs might be eaten in one great house. It might not be eaten without doors. No salvation without the Church. Schism is forbidden. Fol. 118 Par. 2 Not only the Priests, but the people of Israel might, kill the Paschall-Lambe: the people might not slay any other Sacrifice: nor the Levites ordinarily, but the Priests only. Every one in the Congregation of Israel, did nat slay the Passeover; but the Chief, in one household. Maimonides rejected. Bellarmine truly avoucheth this duty of offering the Paschall-Lambe, to belong to the privilege of the firstborn, before Aaron, or his sons were chosen to be Priests. Fol. 120 Par. 3 The Levites might offer the sacrifice of the Passeover for the Priests, if the Priests were not sanctified, and the Priests might slay the Paschall-Lambe, for the people, if the people were not sanctified. Fol. 221 Par. 4 Whether the head of the family himself must of necessity slay the Passeover; or whether he might depute another in his place; Barradius rejected, for saying Christ himself slew the Passeover. Fol. 122 Par. 5 A strange story out of Suidas. Fol. 123 Par. 6 The Apostles prepared the Passeover before Christ came. Fol. ibid. Par. 7 The Passeover was not slain, at the Altar near the Temple. Fol. ibid. Par. 8 The roasting of it whole, is another fixed Ceremony. Fol. 124 Par. 9 They were to eat it roasted with fire. Fol. ib. Par. 10 They were not to eat it raw. Fol. ib. Par. 11. Not sodden at all with water. Fol. ib. Par. 12 The head was to be roasted with the legs. Fol. 125 Par. 13 They were to roast the Purtenance also. Fol. 126 Par. 14 The Jews came not empty, but offered according to their abilities: and Christians are, to equalise, if not to exceed them. Fol. ib. The Contents of the thirteenth Chapter. Par. 1 BRead and water imply all necessary foot; and sometimes, full store. Fol. 128 Par. 2Vnleavened Bread was not to be eaten with the Passeover, and the flesh of the Passeover, not to be eaten, with any other, save unleavened bread. Folly 129 Par. 3 Maymonides. confuted. Fol. ib. Par. 4 Spure herbs must of necessity, be also eaten with the Passeover. Fol. ib. Par. 5 When leaven was permitted; when the use of it forbidden. Fol. ib. Par. 6 The Israelites eaten no leavened bread; from their coming out of Egypt, till they trod on the borders of the Land of Canaan. Fol. 130 Par. 7 Leaven betokeneth, either good or evil. Fol. ib. Par. 8. Illyricus his criplex fermentum. Fol. 131 Par. 9 How unleavened bread is called bread of affliction. Fol. ib. Par. 10. What are the best Monuments. Fol. 132 Par. 11. The precepts of bitter herbs is a durable Rite. Fol. ib. Par. 12 Why bitter herbs were to be eaten. Fol. ib. Par. 13 Christ eaten this Passeover with bitter herbs, and the Mystical signification. Fol. ib. Par. 14 The bitter herbs mentioned in the Law. Fol. 133 Par. 15 The Jews used herbs for meat, as well as for sauce. Fol. ib. Par. 16 Salt, and Vinegar were not only the Jewish sauces. Fol. ib. The Contents of the fourteenth Chapter. Par. 1 THe not breaking of a bone, was a perpetual Ceremony: Not a bone of Christ was broken. Fol. 114 Par. 2 The marrow of the Paschall Lambs bones, might not be taken forth: the Mysteries thereof; and of not breaking of a bone. Fol. ib. Par. 3 No part of the flesh of the Lamb was to be carried out of the house. Fol. 115 Par. 4 The Reasons and the mysteries thereof. Fol. 135 Par. 5 The Table-tlake was another Concomitant, fixed rite; & what it was in particular. Fol. 136 Par. 6 Gods great care of keeping memorials. Fol. ibid. Par. 7 Whether they sang at the Passeover or no: and what they did sing. Fol. 137 Par. 8 Instructing of youth in the Principles of Religion, necessary. Fol. ib. The Contents of the fifteenth Chapter. Par. 1 The ceremonies after their Tabletalk. Fol. 138 Par. 2 They continued to eat unleavened bread seven days. Fol. ib. Par. 3 But it seemeth the Israelites were not bound to keep the festival, at their first Passeover, or Exodus, though they did eat unleavened bread. Fol. 139 Par. 4 Nothing was to be left till the morning. Fol. 140 Par. 5 They burned the remainder of the Passeover if any remainder were: Reasons thereof: Holy Sacramental relics not to be profaned: the Romans Protervia, or Feast of frowardness. Fol. ib. The Contents of the fixteenth Chapter. Par. 1 THe Jewish custom to wash their feet, especially at feasts. Fol. 14● Par. 2 The Jews did not stink more than other men; against Cardinal Baronius; Mr Fuller taxed also. Fol. ib. Par. 3 If the Emperor Marcus said so, probable reasons for his imaginations at that time Fol. ibid. Par. 4 Of Judas his stink, ewhen he was dead, out of Cedrenus; and the jewish Nation defended. The great number of the Jews long ago and now: from whom the Americans descended: the Tartars came not from the Israelites. Fol. 149 Par. 5 The Pharisees marveling at Christ's not washing before meat: the double sin of Pharisees in washing. Fol. 14 is Parnell 6 Women in the Primitive Church washed the feet of Saints. Fol. ib. Par. 7 In the Old Testament they only presented water, but washed not the feet of their guests Fol. 150 Par. 8 The great sinner is the first recorded to have washed another's feet, even Christ's: and the great Saviour is first recorded to have washed many men's feet. Fol. ib. Par. 9 They sometimes washed and bathed their whole bodies, & anointed them also. Fol. 151 Par. 10 The Jews used more than ordinary blessings at the Passeover; a particular explication thereof. Fol. ib. Par. 11 The reasons why I handle at large the jewish Passeover Fol. 152 Par. 12 Christ kept all the fixed rites preparatory, and the Sacramental Ceremonies: and the subsequent perpetual customs. Fol. ibid. Par. 13 Christ a perfect observer of the Law; yet not bound to the jewish voluntary undertake, or will worship. Fol. 153 The Contents of the seventeenth Chapter. Par. 1 A Just Tractate against Pererius the jesuite, concerning the correspondency between the jews and the Romans in their feast. Fol. 154 Par. 2 The Romans imitated the jews, not the jews the Romans in their suppings, feast, against Peretius. Fol. ib. Par. 3 The jews not infected with the manners or superstitions of other Nations, Fol. 155 Par. 4 Pererius enterferes, jewish, Roman customs, in festivals Cosin-Germans. Fol. 156 Par. 5 Conquerors condescend to the fashions of the conquered; divers particularities instanced in. Fol. ibid. Par. 6 Pererius his 13 specialties; wherein the jews (as he says) imitated the Romans: The place a Parlour, an upper Chamber, supping Chamber. Fol. 158 Par. 7 Christ and his 12. Apostles lay on three beds at his last supper: judas the Traitor signed out a Supper. Fol. ib. Par. 8 The ancient Romans supped in the open air, without any Tables. Fol. 159 Par. 9 Christ, and his twelve Apostles supped in a guest-chamber: houses in ancient times builded with flat roofs. Fol. 159 The Contents of the eighteenth Chapter. Par. 1 PErerius, his second Particular: the Romans feasted not, till they had washed. Fol. 161 Par. 2 Washing among the Heathen twofold: sacred: unsacred. Fol. ib. Par. 3 Reasons, why the ancient Romans often washed; first, because they used not much linen: secondly, to remove their sweat. Fol. 162 Par. 4 The divers manners, places, times of bathing among the Romans: bathing used among the Romans, most commonly before meals: the sign of the Cross much used in the Primitive Church: divers hours of bathing; stately baths amòng the ancient Romans. Fol. 163 Par. 5 The Jews used to wash, and bathe themselves, long before Rome was founded: Apocryphal Scripture is to be preferred, before any humane authority whatsoever: divers costly kinds of Bathing: white Doves among the Jews, sacred, and inviolable. Fol. 165 Par. 6 The Jewish traditions not derived from the RomanVsance; but expositions of Moses Law; commanded many kinds of washings: Maymonides his Exposition of the Law of washing. Fol. 166 Par. 7 The difference between the Jewish, and the Roman washings: Fol. ib. The Contents of the nineteenth Chapter. Par. 1 PErerius his third Ceremony: Romans anointed themselves before feasts: so might the Jews, but not ordinarily: the Pharisee reproved for not anointing Christ: Maries, anointing Christ, was of devotion, not fashion. Fol. 167 Par. 2 Romans used unctions before feasts. Fol. 168 Par. 3 True joy rests in virtue, not in vice. Fol. 169 Par. 4 The Grecians used anointings at their feasts. Fol. ibid. Par. 5 Several oynments for several parts and uses: Alexidemus, and Cleopatra's, and Aesop his son, excessive prodigality. Fol. ib. Par. 6 Olives were of divers sorts; and for divers uses: Oil Olive commended. Fol. 171 Par. 7 Jews used anointing before the siege of Troy: Jews, Syrians, anciently abounded with Oils: Oil good for outward, inward uses: Oil, some sacred, some of common use: The divers uses of sacred Oil: Kings. Priests, sacred things anointed, with it: The composition of it: David anointed King, with God's oil. David anointed King twice. Fol. 172 Par. 8 The Jews commonly anointed only, head and feet, the Babylonians anointed all their body. Fol. 173 Par. 9 The Jews used anointing, after washing: Ashers dipping of his feet in Oil. Fol. 174 Par. 10 Mary Magdalen washed Christ's feet with tears. Fol. ib. Par. 11 Jews anointed their heads, before ever the head of Tolus was found. Fol. 175 Par. 12 Women among the Jews in Spain the best perfumers. Fol. ib. Par. 13 Anointing the head ordinary among the Jews. Fol. ib. Par. 14 Myrrh and Nard, precious ointments: Nard taken sometimes for an berbe, sometimes for an Ointment. Fol. 176 Par. 15 Anointing Corporal, Spiritual. Fol. 177 The Contents of the twentieth Chapter. Par. 1 PErerius his fourth Ceremony. Fol. 178 Par. 2 Romans and Jews at their feasts, changed their . Fol. ib. Par. 3 The Romans Tricliniary Ornaments; wearing apparel; Larding, and cramming, purple; scarlet, cloth of gold, silver; Lex vestiaria. Fol. 179 Par. 4 The Bed-ornaments of the Jews. Fol. 180 Par. 5 Ornaments of Idols; Levites, Priests, Highpriest; Tabernacle. Fol. 181 Par. 6 Wearing apparel of the Jews; variety thereof for divers occasions; for, 1. Gifts. 2. Appearance. 3. Disguise. 4. Sorrow, or Mortification; Sackcloth: feasting; white apparel: extraordinary apparel approved at feasts; comely always: new-fanglednesse taxed, in French, English, Spanish; English, in part defended; diversity of apparel for several ages, degrees: abundance of apparel a blessing: the excess taxed. Fol. 181 Par. 7 Changing of apparel at feasts, practised by the Jews before the Romans: Romans bad more than one garment on at feasts: the wedding garment not the only garment: fashions at sacred civil feasts, different. Fol. 183 Par. 8 Wedding garment, What? Fol. 184 The Contents of the one and twentieth Chapter. Par. 1 PErerius his fift Ceremony; bodily posture: the ancient Jews, and Romans sat at Feasts. Fol. 186 Par. 2 Discumbing at feasts. Fol. 187 Par. 3 Pererius his 6. Ceremony omitted. Fol. ib. Par. 4 Pererius his 7. Ceremony; supping on high beds: The woman standing behind Christ. Fol. ibid. Par. 5 Pererius his 8. Ceremony; Fasting : washing of feet practised, in Abraham's days. Fol. 189 Par. 6 Pererius his 9 Ceremony, lying in the bosom: Abraham's bosom. Fol. ib. Par. 7 Pererius his 10. Ceremony: highest rooms at feasts: the chiefest guests sat in the chiefest and highest rooms: which place in discumbing was the highest? whether Christ in the Supper, at Bethany, sat in the highest room? Christ had the middle place; and is said most commonly, to be in the midst: highest in situation, not always highest in dignity. Fol. ibid. Par. 8 Parerius his 11. Ceremony. Three on a bed; Triclinium, whence so called: How many beds, at feasts: Σ sigma, what it was: Biclinium: how many guests on a bed. Fol. 291 Par. 9 Whether Christ and his 12. Apostles at his last supper discumbed, on three beds. Fol. 192 Par. 10 Order of discumbing; Jesuits in this point dissent among themselves: fair collections from the Scriptures, lawful. Fol. ibid. Par. 11 How fare the Apostles discumbed, the one from the other. Fol. 193 Par. 12 The words, dividite inter vos, not to be understood of the Eucharist: Edentibus illis, interpreted: Eucharist in stituted, after the Paschall Supper: Christ gave bread and wine to his Disciples severally. Fol. ibi. Par. 13 Pererius his 12. Ceremony: the Romans and Jews eaten in Common: the Romans huge platters, Aesop's, Vitellius Platters: Trojan Boar. Fol. 194 Par. 14 Romans and Jews, in their feast, had divers dishes: the Roman, carving of fowls: Egyptians and Jews great platters: M. Anthony's immania pocula: Vessels of the Sanctuary, vessels of desire. Fol. 197 Par. 15 Romans did lie, not sit on bed's discumbing, Pererius affirmeth, denyeth it: Romans Supper at times, continued from night till Morning; Romans changed their posture, in discumbing: Rosinus his description of the Romans discumbing: ancient Romans temperance at feasts: Roman fashion in drinking at feasts. Fol. 198 Par. 16 Pererius his 13 Ceremony: the Romans, in their feasts appointed: Magistrum potandi, Regem vini; modimperatorem: the manner of the Grecian, and Latin jolly drinking. Fol. 199 Par. 17 The Epitome of all Pererius his twofold mistaking: the conclusion directly, against Pererius. Fol. 200 The Contents of the two and twentieth Chapter. Par. 1 HOw Christ with his 12. Apostles, kept his last Passeover: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: two Disciples prepare it: Christ with the 12. eat it: in the Evening, they sit down. Fol. 201 Par. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expounded S. Matthews Evangelisme, written in Hebrew: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, its divers significations; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, interpreted; The Apostles, in the description of the Lords Supper, single out words, properly signifying, lying down. Fol. 202 Par. 3 Our English Translatours excused. Fol. 203 Par. 4 Sitting Communicants censured. Fol. ibid. Par. 5 As they did eat expounded. Fol. 204 Par. 6 The use of the word Verily: Amen, its divers acceptions. Fol. ib. Par. 7 Future things are to others unknown; to Christ known. The Table and its rites sacred, even among the Heathen. Fol. 204 Par. 8 Judas not necessitated to betray Christ: the manner of Christ's detecting him traitor. Fol. ib. Par. 9 What was done in the first Paschall-Supper: judas detected for a Traitor in a generality; Disciples inquire. Fol. 205 Par. 10 judas discovered for a Traitor, in a mixed manner: good for judas not to have been borne. Fol. ib. Par. 11 Thou sayest, is no full discovery of judas, to be the Traitor: Simon de Cassia his error: judas, his treason not discovered till the second Supper; divers reasons thereof. Fol. 206 The Contents of the three and twentieth Chapter. Par. 1 CHrists hearty desire, to eat his last Supper. Fol. 208 Par. 2 The words (before) after, until, unto, from, etc. are particles, sometimes inclusive, sometimes exclusive. Fol. ib. Par. 3 Donec, or until, negatively used, de futuro. Fol. 209 Par. 4 Kingdom of God, what. Fol. ib. Par. 5 He took the Cup, not the Eucharistical Cap, first of the vine, spiritual Nectar: Turk's place eternal felicity, in sensual Pleasures. Fol. ib. Par. 6 Maldonates' error, concerning the Cup. Fol. 210 Par. 7 Spiritual Tabletalk at Christ's last eating of the Passeover. Fol. 211 Par. 8 Methodus rerum, aut Historiae, not always observed, in Scripture: the Original, of greatest authority: nothing to be altered, in the Scriptures. Fol. ibid. The Contents of the four and twentieth Chapter. Par. 1 Minister's or attendants, at Christ's last Passeover: the blessed Virgin Mary no attendant, difference between Apostles, and Disciples: Disciples might attend. Fol. 212 Par. 2 Bishops, Presbyters, succeed the Apostles, the seventy: Names of Apostles and Disciples, confounded: S. Augustine questioned. Fol. 213 Par. 3 Whether any of the 70. Disciples, were Apostates, other Disciples, beside the 70. Some of them backesliders: the 70. Disciple were the future Presbytery Idolatar: the 70. Disciples who they were, whether there were 72. Disciples. Fol. ib. Par. 4 Divers legal Types of the 12. Apostles, 70. Disciples. Fol. 215 Par. 5 The Master of the house was not excluded, he might wait on Christ, also some of the household might be attendants. Fol. ibid. Par. 6 Attendants, Male, and Female; three degrees of Male-attendants: divers offices of Attendants; Christ and his Apostles had their Attendants. Fol. 216 Par. 7 Some of the 72. were Christ's Attendants, to here his Tabletalk; Servitors, animated instruments. Fol. 217 Par. 8 The Synopsis, or sum of all. Fol. 218 LIB. 2. The Contents of the first Chapter. Par. 1THree premises. Fol. 224 Par. 2 Christ's, and his Apostles Temperancie. Fol. ib. Par. 3 The Paschall Supper a Sacrament Type of the New Old Testament. Christ eat of the three Suppers sparingly Fol. 225 Par. 4 Christ did seldom eat flesh, Christ eaten Butter and Honey. Christ's knowledge to refuse the Evil, and choose the Good: The words, Ad scire ipsum interpreted. Fol. 226 Par. 5 The jews blasphemy against Christ. The words Emmanuel, aend Samuel, whence derived. That Christ was God, proved from Scriptures, Rabins; and the word Emanuel. Difference between Emmanuel, and Samuel. Fol. 227 Par. 6 The jews blasphemy against Christ's Mother. Fol. 227 Par. 7 Christ borne according to the Scriptures: borne of a Woman, not of a Girl. The Nobility of Christ's Birth wherein in consisted. Fol. 228 Par. 8 Christ a Stone. ibid. Par. 9 Gnalam, or Glialam: and Gnelem, what it signifieth. Fol. 229 Par. 10 Emmanuel. jesus. is a name of Nature. Imposition. ibid. Par. 11 Mary a Virgin; Aaron's Rod; Christ borne of a Virgin by Miracle; a threefold Union in Christ. Fol. 230 Par. 12 Christ made but one meal in one day. The aspersion of Gluttony, in him rejected. Christ fasted, even to a miracle: oft times. Christ as God knew all things. Fol. 233 Par. 13 Why Christ sought fruit on the Figtree? How Christ seemed ignorant of many things. Admiration is of doubtful and great things In Christ a threefold knowledge: Divine: Infused: Experimental. How Christ is said to wonder. No man's knowledge ever equal to Christ's. Fol. 234 Par. 14. Why Christ cursed the Figtree? Fol. 235 Par. 15 Christ's hunger, rather Vluntary than necessary: Christ under-prised Temporal food in respect of spiritual. Christ's abstinence from flesh. Fol. 236 Par. 16 Difference between Christ's eating before his Death. A double Digestion after his Resurrection. ib. The Contents of the second Chapter. Par. 1 THe ancient Romans eaten four times a day. Fol. 238 Par. 2 The Apostles temperancy in meat and drink: A double daily refection allowed by God. The Apostles provision not costly. Fol. 239 Par. 3 The Disciples of Christ fasted often. The place, Act, 27.33. clecred. The woad All in Scripture, often used for many. ib. Par. 4 Fasting much used in the old Testament. Fol. 240 Par. 5 Poenicentia Nineveh what it is. Hearty devotion the Salt of Religion. Why the Ninivits made their beasts to fast. ib. The Contents of the third Chapter. Par. 1 ILlyricus his errors concerning fasting Confession, and beating the breast in fasting. Fol. 242 Par. 2 Rising in the night to serve God. Christ shall come at midnight. A Jewish Tradition. ib. Par. 3 Bowing down the head in fasting. Fol. 243 Par. 4 Shaving the Head. Beard. ib. Par. 5 Calixtus fourfold fasting. Jejunia quatuor temporum. ib. Par. 6 Illiricus his absurd Division of a religious fast into crupclosum jejunium Holy. Hypocritical. Fol. 244 Par. 7 Fasting taking for innocence of life. S. Augustine, and S. chrysostom falsely taxed by Illyricus. Jejunium generale. ib. Par. 8 Illyricus wild positions concerning fasting. Fasting not always a sign of, but sometimes a means to a contrite heart, rending of garments. ib. Par. 9 Washing of guests feet. Fol. 245 Par. 10 Rending of clothes: ib. Par. 11 The Ceremonies of fasts. Lutherans crapulous repentance. ib. Par. 12 Illyricus his two Reasons against fasting. The colder the climate, the hotter the stomach. Germans must fast proportionably to the jews. Fasting must tame▪ not disease or kill the body. ib. Par. 13 Illyricus plays the Didapper. He denies Fasting to conduce to Prayer. Why Christ and his Apostles did fast. A broken heart sometimes goes before Fasting, sometimes follows after fasting. God oft commutes eternal punishment into temporal. Fasting not always a sign of a contrite Heart. Fol. 246 Par. 14 A body weakened by fasting is more fit to pray. Preparation before the Sacrament necessary. Illyricus and Luther taxed. Fasting, the best way to please God. Two extremes in fasting. Some fast too much; some fast not at all. Illyricus an Epicure. The best Christians fast to pray, and pray to please God. The Contents of the fourth Chapter. Par. 1 Sick and old folks exempted from fasting. Fol. 249 Par. 2 Night meditations advance day-studyes. ib. Par. 3 The trouble of the body disturbs not the intention of the mind. Homer falsely cited. The belly an importune evil. ib. Par. 4 A difference betwixt Ordinances at Fasting, and Feasting. Fol. 251 Par. 5 Fasting, a voluntary, not natural action. Divers ends of the same fast. ib. Par. 6 Sorrow prepareth us to prayer. The Apostles did not neglect fasting. A difference between neglecting, and not performing. Hypocritical not true fasting faulted in the Jews. Christ fasted; and why? ib. Par. 7 Sorrow a Concomitant of fasting: fasting and mourning, two distinct things. Fol. 252 Par. 8 Illyricus maketh Nature, Custom, and Chance, the ground of fasting and prayer. Prayer not the only remedy for all evils. Fides sola & solitaria saveth not. Saving faith is not separated from other Theological virtues. Fol. 253 The Contents of the fifth Chapter. Par. 1 ALL in fasting must afflict their souls. Fasting commanded in the old and new Testament. Fol. 254 Fasting is more than a temperate sober life. Par. 2 Divers effects of sorrow. Divers efficient causes of fasting. ib. Par. 3 The Germans little practice Fasting. The singular commendation of Fasting by Athanasius. S. chrysostom. Leo Magnus. S. Ambrose. Bellarmine. Fol. 255 Par. 4 A parting blow at Illyricus Fol. 256 The Contents of the sixth Chapter. Par. 1 What several Evangelists wrote concerning the several Suppers. Fol. 257 Par. 2 The Supper of the Lord, instituted after the second, or common Supper. ib. Par. 3 Why there is no express mention of a second Supper. Consequential divinity, Proved, Approved. Creation of Angels: and when. Infant's Baptised. Scripture not always tied to express terms, Joh. 21.25. expounded, reasons thereof rendered. Fol. 258 Par. 4 Divers reasons why the name of a second Supper is pretermitted. Fol. 262 The Contents of them seventh Chapter. Par. 1 THat there was a second Supper at the Jewish Pascall. Proofs from the old Testament. Unto the Paschall was annexed the Chagigah. Fol. 263 Par. 2 Difference between the first and second Supper. Maimonides, Schaliger, Beza, and Baronius erred in this point. Fol. 265 Par. 3 The first Supper when it begun. Fol. 265 Par. 4 The different m●ate● at the First, Second, Supper. jews, and Gentiles at their great feasts did eat two Supers. ib. Par. 5 Christ's gesture at the Paschall Supper. Coena Domini Tricoenium Christi. Christ in his last Passeover kept the Ceremonies of the Jews. Coena Dimissoria, what it was. Fol. 266 The Contents of the eight Chapter. Par. 1 Proofs from the New Testament for a second Supper. Fol. 268 Par. 2 Proofs from the Fathers, especially Saint Cyprian. Cibus inconsumptibilis. ib. Par. 3 The second Supper was Fibula Legis & Evangelii. Fol. 269 Par. 4 Inter, or between, evinceth a Triplicity. Saint Augustine, Theophylact, Damascen. ib. The Contents of the ninth Chapter. Par. 1 Proofs from the Protestants for a second Supper Kemnitius, Beza 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza awry▪ Scaliger commended. Fol. 271 Par. 2 Divers kinds of sauces at the second supper. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth. ibid. Par. 3 Bellaria expounded, Bacchus his Bellaria. Rich wines. Scaliger and Beza censured. Fol. 272 Par. 4 A description of the Ceremony of the Passeover. Poculum Hymneseos. Things in the description of the Paschall Supper Redundant, and Deficient. Embamma, what it was. At what time of supper Christ washed his Disciples feet. Benediction, at what time of supper used. What kind of herbs were eaten at the Passeover. The second supper when it began. ib. The Contents of the tenth Chapter. Par. 1 Proofs from the Papists. Baronius amiss in some points of the Paschall Supper. Baronius, Lucas Burgensis, Sebastian Barradius, and Maldonate, prove a second Supper. Fol. 275 Par. 2. Maldonate doubteth, whether the Paschal be called a Supper: Piscator censured. Fol. 276 Par. 3. Tolet, Suarez, Bellarmine, prove a second Supper. Fol. 277 Par. 4. Bellarmine censured; S. Cyprian cleared. ib. Par. 5. Adam Conizen, and Scapleton, prove●● second Supper. Poculum bibatorium. The Tricoenium accomplished. Fol. 278 Par. 6. Christ was present at the First, or Paschall Second, or common Supper. ib. Par. 7. The Jews at their solemn feasts, had double Commons. ib. Par. 8. When the second Supper began, about six of the clock at night. How long the second Supper lasted. When it ended. Fol. 279 The Contents of the eleventh Chapter. Par. 1 WHat was Said Done at the second supper the first quarter. Christ began the Chagigah with saying of grace. Grace and thanksgiving a prime duty at feasts. Fol. 280 Par. 2 The form of Grace at The eating of Manna. Other feast. The Paschall Festivity, Fol. 281 Par. 3 The jews began their second Supper, with the cup of Charity▪ Wonderful great grapes. ib. Par. 4 An hymn was sung after the Grace cap among the jews. The hymns in the New Testament sung after the Eucharist Fol. 283 Par. 5 The discourse at the second Supper. ib. Par. 6 The Apostles contention before they received the blessed Eucharist. The Apostles contend for superiority. ib. Par. 7 When Christ began to wash the Apostles sects. Osiander rejected▪ Saint cyril rejected. The jews began their second washing at the beginning of their second supper, Christ in the middle of it. Baronius argument confutes Osiander. Fol. 285 The Contents of the twelfth Chapter. Par. 1. WHat was done, or said, the second of the third quarters of the hour in the second Supper. Christ beginneth to wash his Disciples feet. The Scribes book Commanded frequent washings. The Jews used much water for purifications, both Legal; Prescribed. Fol. 290 Par. 2. S. Peter the Primate, and Prince of the Apostles, Whether S. Peter lay on the discubitory bed above Christ. Fol. 291 Par. 3. Whether Christ washed S. Peter's feet first of all. Whether judas was washed at all. No washing of the feet: no partaking of the Eucharist. ib. Par. 4 S Bernard's Pedilavium no Sacrament: Christ's washing his Apostles feet, an example of humility. Whether judas was first washed. ibi. Par. 5 All the Apostles were first washed. Uncertain who first. It matters not. S. Peter's Privilege. Fol. 292 Par. 6 S. Peter and Christ's Dialogue. Obedience required. john the Baptist called a fool, Peter's double denial reproved. Fol. 293 Par. 7 Bodily washing, Spiritual washing. ibid. Par. 8. Christ kissed his Apostles feet, even judas his feet. Fol. 294 Par. 9 Whether Christ at the second Supper had on a supping garment. Whether he had on a Cloak as Barradins, thought. 3 Vestments, as Buthymius, thought. 5 As some others have thought. Christ at his Passion had— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. Par. 10 The last quarter of the seventh hour, or the third part of the second Supper. What was done, or said in it. The first passage is Christ's Question. His Diversion. Fol. 294 Par. 11. The title of Lord, Master, forbidden to the Apostles. The difference between Rab and Rabbi: Ambition forbibden. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attributed to Man God in the Old New Testament. How God Man Christ. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Lord. Fol. 295 Par. 12. Woshing of feet imports humbleness of mind. Christ's Precept, and Example to be imitated. Lorinus his story. Christ the most perfect example of all. Seneca his advice. The difference between Examplar. Exemplum. Examples move more than Precepts. The Worthiness, Unworthiness, of the Administrant addeth nothing detracteth nothing from the Sacrament. ibid. Par. 13 Motives to Humility Fol. 296 Servants equal to their Masters in participation of Troubles. Blessings. Servants inferior to their Masters in Civil, Moral, Oconomicall, affairs. ibid. Par. 14 Nor worders, nor Krowers: but Doers enjoy happiness. Fol. 297 The Contents of the thirteenth Chapter. 1 THe Par. 2. Passage in the 3. quarter of the second Supper, is, the gradual detection of the Traitor. The first degree. I veds not chosen. judas like an Ass kicked against Christ. The second degree. judas a Horseleech, a bloodsucker. Fol. 298 Par. 2 judas aimed at in the Individuum vagum. One of you, etc. The third degree. judas. a bold, shameless, impudent man, a brazen face. Fol. 299 Par. 3 Peter beckoned to John. Becks have their language. S. John understood S. Peter's beck. S. John, S. Peter's Mediator to Christ. D. Colin's vindicated. ib. Par. 4 The first detection of judas his uncleanness. Fol. 300 Par. 5 The 2. detection; he lifted up his heel against Christ. God fore-knew judas would be a Traitor. He predestinateth no man to sin. Why Christ would choose judas. The Book of God's Predestination cannot be opened. ib. Par. 6 The 3. Detection of judas. One should betray him. Christ's Passions, and perturbations free from sin. ibid. Par. 7 The fourth and last Detection of judas. He it is to whom I shall give a sop. Many questions concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1. Whether it were Bread or flesh. Diogenes saying the Megerians. Nonnus holdeth that 1. The thing delivered was Bread. 2. It was dipped in Wine. 3. It was Sacred and Divine. The Egyptians Custom. Pope julius wholly forbade the Intention of the Bread in the Wine. S. Augustine mistaken. Fol. 331 Par. 8 The Morsel was Part of the second Supper, Not of the blessed Eucharist. S. Bernard, Soto, Ludulphus, S. Augustine. S. Hilary. Soto mistaken in Bucella. Salsamento. Wine in all three Suppers. In the second Supper great varieties. The Sop not dipped in Wine. Fol. 332 Par. 9 The second Quaere concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Whether judas received the blessed Eu●●charist in it or no? Authorities that he did. S. Augustine, Nonnus, Dominus, a Soto; and Aquinus from chrysostom, Dionysius, S. Hirerome, and S. Bernard think so; and Soto says that Haymo, and Remigius thought so. Fol. 333 Par. 10 Soto his note upon the words. Edentibus illis. He makes the Tricoenium complete. Fol. 334 Par. 11 Barradius, S. Hierome: Eugenius; S. Cyprian: Euthymius, Equinas think so. S. Cyprian thought the sop to be the Sacrament, ib. Par. 12 S. Augustine thought Christ praised the Eucharist, by Word. Deed. S. Augustine saith, judas received it. Theophylacts wild Crotchet. Fol. 334 The Contents of the foureteenth Chapter. Par. 1 AVthorities, that judas did not receive the blessed Eucharist. Hilarius, Rupertus, Innocentius, 3. Theophylact, Tatianus, Alexandrinus, Gregorinus, Pachymeres, Turian, Maximus, Ludolphus, Baradius, Beza. The ground of S. Augustine's, and many other famous men's errors concerning this point. Fol. 336 Reasons to prove that judas did receive the blessed Eucharist. Par. 2 The 1. Reason. Fol. 337 Par. 3 The 2 Reason. ib. Par. 4 The 3 Reason. Fol. 338 Par. 5 The 4 Reason. Par. 6 The 5. Reason. Christ never shown any extraordinary favour to judas. S. Augustine reports strange courtesies of Christ to judas. judas borne at Marmotis, as saith S. Bernard. Much holiness required to the participation of the body and blood of Christ Notorious wicked men not to be admitted to the Communion. 338 Par. 7 The 6. Reason, when the Devil first entered into Judas. The prime intention of the compilers of our Liturgy concerning those words— Lest the Devil enter into you, as he did into Judas, etc. Satan entered into judas at several times. Fol. 339 The Contents of the fifteenth Chapter. Par. 1 Reason's proving that judas was not present at the Eucharist. The 1. Reason drawn from Christ's own Example. Examples pierce deeper than words. Legal Conjunction. Fol. 343 Par. 2 A second Reason drawn from the levitical Leper, Leviticus 14.46. ib. Par. 3 A third Reason drawn form the levitical Priests, Ezeck. 44.23. ib. Par. 4 The fourth Reason drawn form Christ's purging the Temple, from profane things, Mark 11.11. ib. Par. 4 The fourth Reason drawn form Christ's purging the Temple, from profane things, Mark 11.11. ib. Par. 5 The fifth Reason drawn from David's example, Psal. 26. Fol. 344 Par. 6 The sixth Reason, judas a Devil, joh. 6.70. ib. Par. 7 The seventh reason drawn from 1 Cor. 10.20.21. The cup of the Lord, and the cup of Devil's opposite. ib. Par. 8 The eight Reason drawn from Christ's washing the Apostles feet, joh. 13.2. The Schoole-mens opinion. ib. Par. 9 The ninth Reason drawn from, Heb. 10.26. Fol. 345 Par. 10 The tenth Reason, from judas his being excluded from Grace, at the end of the second supper. ib. Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traitor's detection. The 1. Occurrence, Satan's entering into judas. When and how Satan entered into judas. Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traitor's detection. The 1. Occurrence, Satan's entering into judas. When and how Satan entered into judas. Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traitor's detection. The 1. Occurrence, Satan's entering into judas. When and how Satan entered into judas. Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traitor's detection. The 1. Occurrence, Satan's entering into judas. When and how Satan entered into judas. Par. 11 The subsequent or concomitant occurences after the Traitor's detection. The 1. Occurrence, Satan's entering into judas. When and how Satan entered into judas. S. Augustine saith Affectu tantum & Voluntate. Ludolphus. Essentially Not into his soul. But into his body. Tolet not corporally; but taking a quiet possession of him. Theophylact: Occupavit Cor ejus. Cyrill: praecipitem egit. Origen: Egit ut Ascensor equum. Item Judas totum Satanam suscepit in se: After the sop. ib. Par. 12 How judas was tempted: Temptations are either 1 Ascendentes Inward. 2 Obrepentes Outward. 3 Immissae Darted in by Satan himself. ib. Par. 13 Three Conclusions, 1. Conclusion, the temptations of the world, are several from the Devils. Three kinds of tempters 1 The World. 2 The Flesh. 3 The Devil. 2. Conclusion. The temptations hath three degrees 1 Beginning. 2 Proceeding. 3 Consummation. Or thus, Consider 1 The Primitive Motion. 2 The Assisting Commotion. 3 The Plenary Agreeing. Or thus, 1 Suggestion. 2 Delight. 3 Pleasure. 3 Conclusion. The Devil is the Author and cause of all, and every temptation. The Devil a tempter. The World, and Flesh the Devil's Instruments. Fol. 347 Par. 14 How the temptations of the Devil be known: from the temptations of the World, and the Flesh. Fol. 348 Par. 15 Satan's temptations are Many. Manifold. Which temptations are grievous, and fiery: Which temptation is the worst, and most dangerous? How the World Flesh Satan tempteth. The same sin may be of the World. Flesh. Devil. Fol. 348 Par. 16 The creatures of God tempt us not primarily, but by casualty: the stars, and heavenly influences tempt no man to sin; no more does any earrhly thing in its own Nature. What temptations be from Satan: the variety of Satan's temptations. Fol. 349 Par. 17 All men have been tempted, even the spiritual: not Christ himself, nor his Apostles free from temptations. The manner of Satan's temptations. ib. Par. 18 Satan may enter into a man oftentimes. judas his state after Satan's second entrance into him. Fol. 350 The Contents of the sixteenth Chapter. Par. 1 CHrists sentence of separation of judas, That thou dost, do quickly: Wither those words were spoken to the Devil, or to judas. Origen Cyrill Ambrose thinks they were spoken Either to the devil, or to judas. Augustine saith it was Verbum Non Imperantis sed Exprobrantis. The Apostles thought them spoken to judas. 354 2 The Apostles nesciency Christ himself knew judas also knew and some think S. john knew Wherefore Christ spoke these words, That thou dost, do quickly. 3 The Apostles misunderstanding Christ's words. The words were spoken not privately, but openly. ib. 4. Christ needed nothing: for Himself. his Apostles. Christ would have the Church plentifully provided of temporals. ib. 5. Cook's Reports censured. judas carried the bag. Fol. 355 The money in the bag to be employed for Christ. Apostles. Poor. Par. 6. judas his speedy Egress. His receiving the Sop imports Oral manducation. Par. 7 Lanterns, and torches import Outward light. Inward darkness. judas his Egress at night. At what hour of the Night judas went forth. Selneccerus his Distribution of the Night-watches. What was done in every several watch. Selneccerus censured. The crowing of the Cock about what hour of the night. ib. Par. 8. Two questions concerning this Cocke-crowing. 1. Question. Whether this Cock did crow Naturally or by Divine Motion. Christ's look upon Peter was operative, and Virtuous, Corporal and Spiritual. S. Augustine censured. Peter's three denials, when, and where. Fol. 357 Par. 9 2. Question concerning this Cock-crowing. How the different Relations of the several Evangelists may be reconciled. Here are handled 4. Quaeres. 1. Quaere, whether Christ said, as S. Mark, or as S. Matthew and S. Luke hath it. Fol. 344 Par. 10 The 2 Quaere, whether S. Peter's threefold denial was accomplished, before the Cock crowed at all, or before it crowed twice. ib. Par. 11. The 3. Quaere: How oft S. Peter was questioned, or by others affirmed to be Christ's Disciple. ib. Par. 12. The fourth Quaere: How many times Peter denied Christ. ib. Par. 13. Answer to the 1. Quaere. Fol. 359 Par. 14. Answer to the 2. Quaere. ib. Par. 15. Answer to the 3. Quaere. Cajetan thinks S. Peter was 7. times examined: thrice by Women, four times by men. ib. Par. 16. Answer to the fourth Quaere. Cajetans' frivolous objection. Fol. 360 Par. 17. Three sorts of people questioned Peter. Peter's threefold denial, and the manner thereof. ib. Par. 18. The Divers Relations of the Evangelists reconciled. Fol. 361 Par. 19 The Paschall Common Supper lasted about 1. quarter 3. quarters of an hour. All the levitical Ceremonies performed between 6. and 7. a clock at Night. Fol. 362 LIB. 3. The Contents of the first Chapter. Par. 1A Preface by way of Admonition to the Unlearned. Invocation of the Learned. Fol. 522 Par. 2 Reasons of the word Tricoenium, and, why I call the Work Tricoenium Christi. A threefold Supper farther proved. The Papists offended for calling the third Supper, the Supper of the Lord. A deviation concerning Maldonat the Jesuit his Life, and Doctrine. The ancient fathers, both Latin and Greek, call the third Supper, the Supper of our lord Fol. 523 Par. 3 A discourse concerning the Agapae, or Feasts of Charity. They succeeded in the place of the Chagigah, or second Supper. When Eaten. The Eucharists before Tertullia's days eaten in the Morning: The Agapae in the Evening. The Eucharist and Agapae in the Primitive Church were kept near about the same time. Christians falsely accused for eating Infants at their Agapae. The Agapae kept on the Lord's day. What scandals were taken by the Gentiles against the Christians Agapae, Fol. 526 Par. 4 The second Eucharist, and not the Agapae (as the Papists think) is meant by the Supper of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11.20. The Agapae never practised before Christ's Ascension. The Agapae at first, were used holily and religiously: sometimes Severally from Jointly with the Lords Supper. The Corinthians did eat them before the Lord's Supper. They were celebrated by the Corinthians in the Church. Each Schism of the Corinthians supped a part, by themselves. The poor neglected by the Corinthians in their Agapae. The primary end of the Agapae, the relief of the poor. Fol. 229 Par. 5 Charity modestly covereth a multitude of sins. The ill fashions of the Corinthians in receiving the Lords Supper reproved. Casaubone censured in two points. First, that the Corinthians received the Eucharist in the Morning. Secondly, that the Eucharist ought to be called a Dinner, or a breakfast, rather than a supper. The Churches, both Western and Eastern, did receive the supper of the Lord fasting in the fourth Age. On good-Friday the Church used to receive it thrice. That use broken by Pope Honorius, and the Counsel of Tarracon. Pope Eutichianus, his Decretal against such as received the Sacrament not-fasting. Some Churches of Africa, and some Egyptians received it about Eventide not-fasting. In the second age of the Church, in Tertullia's time they received it, some at Night, some as Mealetime, and some ere Break of day▪ We receive the holy Communion in the Morning in remembrance of Christ's Resurrection. Fol. 530 Par. 6 In the Primitive Church they did lie on beds, when they did eat their Love-Feasts. Love-Feasts forbidden to be kept in the Church by the Laodicean Council, ancient Fathers, and later Divines. Kneeling in the time of solemn Prayers, and administration of the Supper, commended by Calvin. Fol. 533 Par. 7 In S. Cyprians, and S. Augustine's days, some received the Eucharist every day others at certain times only. S. Augustine's Rule, Let every one follow the custom of the Church, wherein he liveth. Eudemon Johannis by Casaubone reproved. A Christian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or holy complying to avoid Schism, and for concord's sake, was practised by the ancient Fathers, by other Christians, and by Calvin himself; and commended by Causabone. Rigaltius, and others. Calvin's good advice to Farellus. His divine temper against Luther. Fol. 534 Par. 8 The holy Kiss usually at the blessed Sacrament. Forborn on Good-Friday. The Kiss of Charity, why so called. 'Tis called holy to discriminate it, from false amorous, and civil kisses. Why the holy Kiss was omitted on Good-Fry-day. Divers kinds of kissing. Some of salvation, some of Adoration. Divers manners of Kissing. Some kiss the lips, or mouth, former parts, and hinder parts of the shoulder, cheeks, bands, bacl of the hands, the feet, and the toe. The reason of Kissing the Pope's toe. The Penitents in Tertullia's days did kiss the very footsteps of other Christians. Kissing of a Tablet, or holy Board. The reason thereof. Holden by the ears in kissing used among Heathen, and among Christians. The reason thereof. Joah held Amasa by the beard, and kissed him. The custom of kissing one another at the receiving of the Sacrament continued till S. Augustine's days. The manner of kissing in Prester John's Country, and among the Persians. Fol. 536 Par. 9 When the Agapae began and ended, uncertain. Not to be eaten in the Church, and in the Chancel. The use, and abuse of them, even in the Apostles times. The abusers of them termed spots and blemishes in the abstract. The words, breaking of bread, and breaking of bread from house to house. Act. 2. verse 44, 45, 46. interpreted. The degrees by which abuses crept into the Agapae. Fol. 538 The Contents of the second Chapter. 1 DIvers ends, why the third holy Supper was instituted. 1 Reason. To substantiate the preceding type. The diference between fulfilling of a Law, and realizing or consummating of a type. Tertullian censured. Hierome applaeuded. The Passeover was a figure of the Eucharist, and of Christ's Passion. All figures are not Antytipes. 541 2 2. Reason. To confer more grace upon it, than was given unto the Jews. The figure must come short in excellency to the thing figured. The verity and effect of the Lords Supper in us. 542 3 3. Reason. To prefigure Christ's death, and going out of the world. All Sacraments of the old Law, were figures of the Eucharist: and did typify Christ's death. 543 4 4. Reason. To be a Remembrance to us of Christ's death, till his coming again. Tholy Eucharist not only sealeth, and signifieth Grace; but also conferreth and exhibiteth it by itself in the true use thereof. How fare forth this effect is to be understood; Why Christ received the blessed Sacrament before he went into the Garden. Christ had degrees of devotion. Not to faint in Prayer. The blessed Virgin Mary not so full of Grace, but that she was capable of more latitude. 544 5 5. Reasons. To unite us to Christ. ib. 6. Reason. To breed brotherly love; and to unite us one to another. Hence the Communion of Saints. the Eucharist called Communion. 7. Reason. To be an Antidote against daily sins. The Eucharist called Panis supersubstantialis; and by S. Ambrose, Panis quotidianus. 8. Reason. To further our spiritual Life. 9 Reason Because it is the Sacrament of spiritual charity, and filiation. The Contents of the third Chapter. Par. 1 What course Christ took in the perfiting of this third, or last Supper, First he removed Judas. The ceremonies of the Grecians at their Sacrifices. S. Augustine's error, who thought Judas did eat the bread of the Lord Sacramentally. A more probable opinion, that Christ did not institute the blessed Eucharist till Judas was gone forth. After what words Christ began his third Supper. The word When, doth not always note the immediation of times, or things consequent. Fol. 547 Par. 2 A discourse (by way of digression.) The first part thereof. Concerning the division of the Bible into Chapters and Verses. Neither the Evangelists, nor the Apostles divided their writings into Chapters and Verses. Neither Christ nor his Apostles in the new Testament cited Chapter, or Verse of the old Testament. Probable, that the Books of the old Testament were from the beginning distinguished and named, as now they are. And began and ended as now they do. The Jews of old divided the Pentateuch into 54. Sections Readins, or Lectures. The jewish Section is either Incompleate; termed Parashuh, or distinction, signed with three P.P.P. Complete, styled Sedar, an Order marked with three S.S.S. All the Jewish Lectures read over once a year. The first Lecture, what time of the year it began. At what place of Scripture every one of the 54. Lectures gins and ends. Six Books of Psalms according to the jewish division. Every Lecture of the Law consisted of 136 verses. Antioch rend the Law in pieces. God more regardeth every Letter of the Law, than the stars of Heaven. Fol. 549 Par. 3 Puritans taxed, who tax our Church for mangling the Word of God, and patching up a Lesson. The Books of the Bible, were not at the first divided by Chapters, nor the Chapters, by Verses, as now they are. The jews had by heart all the old Testament. Fol. 551 Par. 4 Traskites censured. The jews shall be converted to Christians; not Christians to jews. Secondly, the second part of the Digression. Against filthy prophaners of Churches and Churchyards; more especially against them of the City of Exeter. Nero be-pissed Venus' tomb. The Heathens very zealous against such profanation. Caecilius his opinion, concerning Vespasian forbade it. The Author's Apology. His petition, both to the Clergy, and Laity of Exeter. God's Law, Deut. 23.12. against filthiness. The Cates, and the Birds cleanliness. God and his holy Angels walk in the midst of our Temples. That Law of God, not Ceremonial, or judicial, but Moral. The Esseni diligent observers of it. Cleanliness a kind of holiness. Uncleanness in the Camp was an uncleanness in the Jews themselves. God commandeth cleanliness, and sweetness for man's sake; not for his own. Vncleanlinesse makes God turn away from us. God a lover of internal and external cleanness. The Abrahemium the first Churchyard in the world. jacobs' reverence to the place where he slept. Some places more holy than other. The Author's exhortation in this respect to the Magistrates of Exeter. Par. 5 Campanella The Friar examined, and censured. He learned Art magic of the Devil. Every one hath his Tutelary Angel, as Saint Hierome and Campanella are of opinion. Campanella healed of the spleen (as he saith) by charms. The name of a Friar more scandalous than of a Priest. Proverbs and taunts against Friars and Monks. A Friar, A liar. Friars railed against, both by Ancient and Modern Writers. Priests and jesuites at debate who shall be the chiefest in authority. Friars Deify the Pope. Friars lashed by Pope Pius the second. Campanella a prisoner for twenty years together. The jesuists nipped by the Sarbonists: banished by the Venetians: scoured by Peter de la Marteliere in the Parliament of France. Fol. 556 Par. 6 The third part of the Digression concerning Conventicles. The usance of the Zelots at their Conventicles. The effects of them. None of God's children in ancient time ever practised them, unless in the days of persecution. jews to be imitated in Sabbath Lectures. Every one must labour to be Christi formis. Tertullian short of the truth concerning the force of Laws. Reason and Religion must be regulated by authority. General rules must be stamped by the approbation of public Authority. Orders must oversway Subjects, and their Religion. Singularity condemned. Guides of the Church a gift of God. Fol. 557 Par. 7 The Law of Moses anciently divided into Books, but not into Chapters and Verses. Elias Levita saith, it was first divided into Chapters and Verses by the jews of Tiberias. The New Testament divided by the Ancients otherwise than now it is, both in Chapters and Verses; witness Caesarius, Euthymius, Heinsius, Nonnus, Suadas, Cyrill, Sextus Senensis, the Arabic Translators, and Junins, Heinsius and Junius opinion concerning the ancient divisions. The Syriac Translation of the New Testament disliked by Bellarmine, and others. In all probability not delivered by Saint Mark to the Churches of Syria, and Egypt. How the Acts of the Apostles; the first and second Epistles to the Corinthians, are divided into Chapters by the Arabic translation. How the four Evangelists are divided into Chapters by Ammonius. The division of the four Gospels not of Divine institution; but of the Church's ordination. Fol. 559 Par. 8 The blessed Eucharist instituted immediately upon Judas his Excommunication. The Sacrament of the Lords Supper instituted, not whilst the Apostles were eating the second or common Supper: yet before they departed out of the Coenaculum: Estius in this point taxed. The practice of the Eastern Churches at the time of the Celebration of the Lords Supper, and the reason thereof. Salianus taxed profane persons to be excluded from the very beholding of holy Mysteries. Fol. 561 Par. 9 When Christ was about to celebrate the Sacrament of the New Law, what Order he used: How he began: How he proceeded. Certain things may be determined certainly; probable things can be resolved on but probably. Aristotle's sayings preferred before other Philosophers. Small degrees of knowledge that are agreeable to reason, are to be embraced: from small beginnings many times follow strange Conclusions. Plato's divine history of Socrates, and Alcibiades. Homer's story of Minerva, and Diomedes. Salt Sea-water may be made fresh divers ways. Divers curious instances to this purpose. Art may imitate Nature. Divers rare instances to this purpose. The Island Arethusa near Hispaniola. and divers Rocks near the Island Navazza on the borders of America, being in the midst of the Salt-sea, send forth fresh waters. The reason why the Salt-sea sendeth forth fresh fish. New inventions are to be admired. Many things may be perfected, which yet seem incredible. Gunpowder may be made of riverwater. The Turks have found it. Of Oil distilling from Alume-hils: the Spaniards have practised it. Why not of our Bath-waters? More benefit by this invention than by the discovery of the man in the Moon: or the Lord Verulam's new Atlantis: or Campanella's Northern Island. The best loadstones in the East Indies, in China, and Bengala. The art of flying thought possible by Campanella. The man in the Moon added much to this Invention. Two ships of equal burden and shape, yet of unequal sailing: two clocks of the same making, yet not of the same running: Campanella's reason thereof. Light will peep in at a little hole: The West Indies found out per minima indicia. Matters of greatest moment have many times the smallest beginnings: divers dainty instances to this purpose: especially the discovery of the Gunpowder treason. Where evident Scripture faileth, strong presumptions, or tradition, or reason may carry it. Truth (saith Democritus) is hid in a deep well. Matters of faith and not to be grounded upon the bare opinions of men. The Church not bound to do many things which Christ did, especially in circumstance of time. They who defer Baptism till thirty years of their age (as Christ did) are taxed. Christ had many reasons so to do. Christ's administration of the Eucharist a Pattern not for the circumstance, but for the substantial form thereof. Divers Circumstances wherein we differ from Christ in administering the blessed Eucharist. Altars in Scripture sometimes called Tables; Tables sometimes termed Altars. Fol. 562 The Contents of the fourth Chapter. Par. 1 THe second Particular of the fifth General; Wherein is showed that the blessed Eucharist was instituted in the same room, wherien they eaten the Paschall, and Common supper. That room was a large upper Chamber, well furnished, and prepared. In that room, The 120. Disciples, Act. 1. were gathered together. Fol. 569 Par. 2 The third Section or Particular of the fifth General, showeth, that the most holy Eucharist was not instituted whilst the Apostles were eating the second or common supper. but after that supper. The inadvertency of this point, hath bred many Errors. Aquinas his gross opinion disliked by Estius. Both the bread and the wine were alike administered after supper. ib. Par. 3 What gesture or posture our Saviour used at the institution of the blessed Eucharist, uncertain. Ludolphus twice taxed. Hugh Broughtons' wild Irish opininion touched at. More probable he did institute it on a Table, that on the Pavement: 'Twas not the usual fashion in Christ's time, for the Jews to eat their meat on the Floor. Fol. 571 Par. 4 The fashions of divers Nations in taking their suppers were divers. The fashion of the Turks, and Eastern parts of the World. Ancient Romans. Their three sorts of Tables. Cylibantum. Cartibulum. Urnarium. Jews, who had also divers kinds of Tables. A round Table. Aretius' his story of King Herod; and of the precious Charger which Christ used at his Supper. Sermo Domini in Coenaculo. A Table at the consecrating of the blessed Eucharist, not of absolute necessity. Most probable the Table Christ used was a square Table. Beza taxed for expounding the word (Table) metaphorically. Origen buried the Scriptures in Metaphors, and Allusions. King David's Table, Psalm. 23.5. what it was. The jews made much used of Tables. Fol. 573 Par. 5 The fourth Section or Particular of the fifth General. Which shows, That the blessed Eucharist was instituted on a Table. What manner of Table it was, our blessed Saviour instituted the blessed Eucharist on, is uncertain. The Table of Shittim wood, Exod. 25.23. What allegorically it signified. The administering, and receiving of the Eucharist called the Supper of the Lord. Christ's Table in his Kingdom. The jews Tables in Christ's time were not on the ground: but standing Tables. The use of Tables is to eat and drink on them. To serve Tables, what it is. The most holy Eucharist in Ignatius his days was celebrated on Tables. Christ given For us, in the Sacrifice; Per modum Victimae. To us, in the Sacrament; Per modum Epuli. Banquet's most commonly se● on Tables. Altars are for Offerings, and Tables for eating. Christ the Altar, Offering, and Priest. Christ used a table at the first Consecration. The Christians in the Primitive Church in times of persecution used tables, where ever they came. They made use of unconsecrated tables, cups, and vessels. The name and use of Altar vindicated. The Devil had tables erected to him by the Gentiles. God had tables erected to him by the Christians. Fol. 576 Par. 6 The fifth Section, or Particular of the fifth General, wherein is showed, that the holy Eucharist was administered by Christ on a distinct table. Truth commanded: not forbidden to be searched out. A fling at Campanella, who ascribes sense to stocks and stones; and reason to bruit beasts. Of two opinions, the most probable is to be preferred. Most probable, the Deifying Sacrament was celebrated at a distinct table. Proved by arguments. 1 With reference to the parties Recipient. De maximis maxima cura est habenda. Domitian's folly. Nothing equal to Christ's Body, and Blood. 2 In regard of the party Administrant. Christ risen up from the Paschall Table to wash the Apostles feet. Probable, he did the like to wash their Souls, Christ's humility at his Prayers. A story of a devout Cardinal. Christ's holy Gesture when he blessed any thing. At the first institution of any great matter more reverence is used, than afterwards. divers instances to this purpose. All Christ's Actions, as well as his person, pleased God. Fol. 579 The Contents of the fift Chapter. Par. 1 IN the first point, Bellarmine is silent; Aquinas affirmeth it; Soto seemeth to incline to the contrary opinion; Luther resolveth he took it not. Many Canons of the Church command the Priests to receive first. So doth the Council of Toledo. So did the Law of Moses. Soto his proof is ridiculous. Sain● Hierome is express for the affirmative that Christ did Receive first. So is the Gloss on Ruth. 3. So is Soto in his answer to the objection to the contrary. So is Barradius. So is S. chrysostom. So is Titus the Abbreviator of him. So is Isychius, and the old Rhymer. Fol. 587 Par. 2 A double eating of the Sacrament, Spiritual, and Sacramental. Christ received himself both ways. So thinks Aquinas, Soto, and Alexander Hales. To receive Sacramentally without the increase of Grace, how it happens. Incapability of Grace happeneth two ways. 1 When a sinner puts an Impediment against it. 2 When one is fall of Grace before hand. So Christ. Dominicus Soto Confessor to Charles the first. Christ might take the blessed Eucharist for example sake. Gregorius de Valentia treadeth in Soto his steps. Durandus faith, the Apostles did Con coenare, but not Concelebrare cum Christo; whom Cajetan approves. Lucas Burgensis is express, that Christ did receive first So are many of the Fathers. Divers collections for the Affirmative, Bishop Lake puts it out of question. Fol. 589 Par. 3 The first Section of the seaventh General: Wherein is declared what posture Christ used when he consecrated the Eucharist. All Gestures in Religious worship reduced to two heads. Some belong to Hope, as the lifting up of the Eyes and Hands. Humiliation, as the uncovering of the Head, beating of the Breast, bowing of the Knee. Some gesture or other is necessary at the receiving of the holy Sacrament. What gesture Christ used, cannot be demonstrated. Certainly the Devoutest. In old time they used to pray sometimes kneeling, sometimes falling down on their faces, sometimes standing, and sometimes bowing down their heads. Fol. 590 Par. 4 According to the degrees of Hope, Fear, there are degrees of Worship. The Publicans gesture, Luk. 18. descanted on. God gave to Man a lofty countenance. Whence called in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Fourfooted beasts have seven Muscles in their eyes: Man but six. Why the eyes are called by the Hebrews Oogon. Naturally what one Eye doth, but do. Eyelids, and the differences of them in Men, Beasts, and Birds. One Eye in the singular number often used in Scripture for both. Fol. 591 Par. 5 Falling on the Face, and Kneeling in Divine worship. Examples thereof. And diversity of Opinions concerning the same. Men have kneeled unto men. Examples thereof. In thanksgiving, and Blessings they ordinarily stood up, with Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven. Variety of gesture according to the variety of affairs, commendable, and necessary. A fixed gesture is not essential to a Supper, Feasting, not gesture, makes a Supper. Fol. 593 Par. 6 Adoration and the Degrees thereof. 1 Degree, Uncovering of the Head. 2 Degree, Bowing of the Head and Face. 3 Degree, Kneeling. 4 Degree, falling on the face. 5 Prayer, Kneeling, Prostration, Rising again, Standing in adoration what they signify. Jacobus de Valentia his degrees of adoration rejected. Others preferred. 1 Reverence and its Act. 2 Veneration and its Act. 3 Worshp. 4 Adoration. Adoration produceth 1 An act of the Intellect. 2 An act of Will. 3 Bodily Acts, bending, kneeling, Prostration, etc. Probable, when Christ instituted the blessed Eucharist, he prayed and kneeled. Prayer, and thanksgiving, almost one. Two motives to Prayer, Fear and Hope. The fruits and gestures thereof: both joined together in prayer. Fol. 594 Par. 7 By the ancient Heroes, and Semidei, are meant famous Men and Princes of renown. Secundei (saith Trithemius) successively rule the World. Pagan Gods were very men. Arnobius, and Minutius Foelix do mention the places of their Births, Countries, etc. Alexander wrote unto his mother De Diis Hominibus. Tertullian wrote of Saturn that he was a Man, the Father and Son of a Man. The Heathen Gods were borne and died. The Heathen to preserve the memory of their Heroes, made Statues and Images of them. Minutius Foelix reproveth their manner of Deifying Men. The ancient Romans made an absurd decree, that the Emperor might not consecrate a God without the consent of the Senate. The very people did one day Deify a God, and the next day Vndeified him. Tiberius' the Emperor approved Christ to be a God. The Senate reject him. Fol. 595 Par. 8 The Pagans had several kinds of worshipping their consecrated Gods. First they did lift up their eyes unto them. Secondly, they blessed them. Thirdly, they did sacrifice unto them. Fourthly, they did set their Idols upon their Beast, and Cattle. The lepid story of the Image of Isis set upon an Ass' back. They made Caroches, and Carts to caray their Images upon. They made Beds in their Temples in honour of their Idols. They doubed them over with silver and gold. They clothed them with costly garments. The story of Dionysius his sacraledge. The story of the Knave that stole away Jupiter's golden eyes out of his head. Fol. 596 Par. 9 Another kind of Adoration of Idols, at distance. To kiss the hand in passing by the Idol. So did Cecilius worship the Image of Serapis. A Creditor by the Law of the twelve Tables might-cut in pieces his condemned Debtor, who was not able to pay him. The rigour of that Law commuted into shame. The manner of shaming such debtors. There is a civil death of a man's honour, and good name; as well as a corporal death of the Body. Fol. 597 Par. 10 Their fashion of Adoring their Idols, was either at Distance, or Close by. Adoration at distance was divers, either of Idols in heaven, or on Earth. If they adored the Celestial bodies, 1 They looked up towards the Heavens. 2 They did in heart give the honour to the Creature, which is due only to the Creator. 3 Their mouths did Kiss their hands. 4 They prayed unto them, either audibly, or tacitly. If they Adored their Images on Earth, 1 They stood before their Images, somewhat off. 2 They solemnly moved their right hand to their lips. 3 They kissed the forefinger joined with the thumb. 4 They turned about their body on the same hand. 5 They did draw nearer, and kiss the Images. They kissed not only their Lips, and Mouths: but other parts of their bodies also. Fol. 598 Par. 11 The manner of saluting one another among the Persians. The story of Polyperchon. Adoration, whence so called. The reason why in adoration they aid both bend and kiss. The reason why they put their hands to their mouths in adoration. The ancient Romans had a house dedicated to the Sun. A greater Obeliske dedicated to the Sun. meaner to the Moon. Kings adored before either Sun or Moon. The Persians worshipped the Sun. The manner how. The buckler of the Sun, what it is. Servius Tullus built a Temple in Honour of the Moon. The Manichees adored the Sun and the Moon. Fol. 599 Par. 12 The original of Adoration. Kings and Princes had not their original of worship from the adoration of Idols or Images; as Mr Selden openeth. But Statues and Images had the beginning of their adoration from the exemplary worshipping of Kings, and famous Heroes: as Geverard Elmenhorst proveth from Saint Cyprian, Athenagoras, and Alexander's letter unto his mother. About Serug his time, they begun to draw the pictures of Magistrates, Tyrants, etc. About Terah's days, they made Statues and Images. Statues were made 1 Of Clay, by the Potter. 2 Of stone, by the Mason. 3 Of silver, gold, etc. by the Goldsmith. 4 Of iron, by the Blacksmith, And other Artificers. The divers Appellations of Images made for Gods. Heroes. Kings. Wisemen. Well-deserving men. The cause of Adoration sometimes Greatness. Goodness. Adoration, a Reward for the dead. Illective for the living. Both Men and Women for some evident privilege of Virtue, were deified. The first inventors of every thing profitable for men, Deified. Jupiter, so called a juvando. Jovis, Jovi, Jovem, Jove, corrupt derivations from Jehovah. Fol. 601 Par. 13 The Cities, Countries, and Places of the Heathenish gods are known, where they were Borne. Lived. were Buried. The great variety of gods and goddesses, among the Heathen. Saturnen the ancientest among the Heathen Gods. Jupiter borne and buried in Crete. 300 Jupiter's. The famous Heroes, and Princes were in the World before their Images. Statues were at first comforts. are now sacred relics. Common people pray unto, and publicly consecrated Images. The mouths of the Image of Hercules many Images at Rome worn bare by kissing. Fol. 602 Par. 14 In ancient times living Kings were worshipped, and adored. Sons of God, Gen. 6.2. were sons of Princes. Elohim, the name of God; appliable to Princes. Great men in ancient times adored for their wickedness, Men reverenced, and adored for their Name. In ancient time great story of Kings. Nine in one battle, Gen. 14. Usual in India for Subjects to kiss their Kings by way of Worship. Some Kissed their hands, yet did not adore. Adored, yet kissed not their hands. Adorare, to worship, used for Orare, to pray, both in Scripture, profane authors, and Fathers: Praying to an Idol, maketh it a false God. The true God only must be prayed to. Prayer used for Adoration. Adoration for Prayer. The story of the Father, (Wisdom the 14) for the untimely death of his son. Fol. 603 Par. 15 The story in the Mr of the Ecclesiastical History, concerning the Original of Idols. Idolatry had divers inventours. The Egyptian Idolatry the worst. That place of Scripture; Then began men to call upon the Name of the Lord, Gen. 4.26. vidicated from the misinterpretations of Bellarmine and Waldensis; who apply it to a Monastical life. Others who gather from hence the Original of Idolatry. Examined at large, & truly interpreted. No Idolatry before the flood. Enos was Called a God. Held a God for his admirable virtue and justice. His sons called the sons of God, Gen. 6.2. So Adam: so are Kings, and their Officers; so are Christians. Enos the first who called upon God, by the name of Jehovah. How God was not known by the name of Jehovah to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Two conjectures of the Author. Many words in the Hebrew Bible signify contrary things; to excite our minds to a diligent search of the right meaning. Authorities that Idolatry was not before the flood: Silianus, Cyrill, Irenaeus, etc. The fi●st Idols had their primitive Adoration from the Adoration of Kings. The latter Kings, etc. have had Adoration from some kind of Adoration derived from Idols. When Christ celebrated the holy Communion, 'tis probable he fell down on his face. Falling on the face is the most forcible Gesture exciting to Devotion. The prostration of the body is the elevation of the soul. Christ in the celebration of his last Supper varied his gestures as occasion required. The Church ought to imitate Christ in those things which she commands. Fol. 605 The Contents of the sixth Chapter. Par. 1 THe first Action. He took bread. Christ never took any thing into his hand in a religious manner, but it was bettered. Ignatius was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the child whom Christ took in his arms. Christ's Scourge had more virtue, than an ordinary whip. Christ's touch importeth virtue. Fol. 614 Par. 2 The second Action, He blessed the bread. What it is to bless. Many kinds of blessings. God's blessing, what it is. The effects of God's blessing. Joseph a Prophet. Christ's blessing of the five loaves caused their multiplication, not in Number but in Magnitude. Christ's blessing is like God's blessing; it consisteth not in mere words. It is effectual in operation. Christ's blessing of the bread, was not the consecration of his Body. Parent's blessing. Priest's blessing; and the effects thereof. Illyricus would have altered the doctrine of the Keys. Christ's benediction consisted partly of Prayer. Thanksgiving. Giving of thanks, and blessing, sometimes used promiscuously. Piscatot's observation. How God Blesseth. How Christ Blesseth. How Man blesseth God. Why the blessed Sacrament is called the Eucharist. In the Celebration of the blessed Sacrament Blessing Giving of thanks all one. The power of blessing greater than the power of Nature. Man's blessing of God, a superlative kind of Thanksgiving. Christ's blessing of God, what it is. The virtue of Christ's blessing. Man's blessing of Man, what it is. Christ's thanksgiving, and blessing in the Sacrament, what it was. The Jews had distinct Graces for their Suppers. Christ's benediction of the Bread in the Sacrament, not the consecration of it. Lyranus. Hugo, Innocencius, and S. Ambrose taxed in this point. The properest use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst men. How Christ in the blessed Sacrament did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Bless. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Givethankes Probable that Christ's blessing was not without Imposition, or lifting up of his hands. Heave Wave offerings in the old Law, typs of this. Possibly Christ might use Elevation and waving of the bread at the Benediction. Fol. 614 Par. 3 The third Action, He broke it. The end why he broke it. Maldonat (saying breaking of the bread, and giving of it is all one) is exploded. Christ in breaking the bread, following thee Hebrew custom. Breaking of the bread did properly signify the breaking of his body on the Cross. How Christ's body was broken. Breaking of the bread showeth the ancient custom of imparting the Sacrament to the standers by. Lorinus, in saying, the bread was cut with a Knife, is against three Evangelists, and S. Paul. The ancient Fathers do not use the term of Cutting, but Breaking of bread. The Not-breaking of the bread in the Sacrament, is a trasgression of the first Institution. The Church of Rome herein censured. The practice of the Primitive Church: both in receiving of the Bread and Wine. The Papists taxed for bearing the Laiety the Cup. Broken, and divided, not all one, as Gaspar Sanctius ridiculously thinks. The Rabbin that taught Baronius, direct against Lorinus. The form of bread at the jews ordinary Feasts, described by Baron. cut Lozing-wise. The form of the Panis discussatus, religiously used among the ancient good Christians. A cross, or Christ crucified on the Cross, was in ancient times impressed on the mystical bread. The picture of a Dove, of the Holy Lamb, and of a Shepherd with a sheep at his back; and the mystical signification of them. Fol. 619 Par. 4 The fourth Action. He gave it to his Disciples. He himself gave it to every of his Disciples particularly. The consecrated bread given by Christ, was unleavened bread. We may consecrate either Leavened, or unleavened bread. It is probable, Christ gave the Cup Himself to every of his Disciples. Musculus censured therein. Aquinas saying. The Sacrament is many things materially, but one thing formally. He gave it to his Disciples. The Communicants at this Eucharist, were none of the common Disciples, but only the eleven Apostles. They in some sort represented the rest of the Priesthood only. Christ never gave power to any Layman to administer his sacred body. Common persons are not to meddle with holy things. God's judgements upon such profane persons. Christ at this Eucharist gave his Apostles power to Consecrate the sacred Eucharist. After his Resurrection, and before his Ascension, he seconded this power. The Apostles in another regard represented the whole company of all his Disciples, and Christians in general. Christ, when he Consecrated the blessed Eucharist, represented the body of the Clergy Idealiter. But when he received it, he represented the whole body of the universal Church, both Clergy and Laity. The Apostles, qua Apostoli Discipuli represented the body of the Clergy. Laity. Fol. 21 Par. 5 Secondly, His words. First word: Take. He said, or Saying, were not spoken by Christ: neither are they part of his Consecration. The words of Consecration were onely-these; This is my Body, etc. Innocentius the third, his opinion concerning Christ's Consecration of the blessed Sacrament, censured. A second and third opinion, related by Aquinas, censured. Lucas Brugensis thinks Christ used more words in the Consecration. When, or at what time Christ said those words, Take, etc. Christ gave the Hallowed bread not in Promise, but in exhibition. john the Baptist called a fool. Epictetus' saying. Christ put not the blessed Sacrament into the Disciples mouths, but into their hands. In the Primitive Church, the Christians received it into their hands. So did they in Tertullia's time. So did they in Cyprians days. Taking is by the hand. Cases may fall out, wherein the hallowed food may be put into the Recipients' mouths. We are not bound to do all, whatsoever Christ did at the first Celebration. We must do all, whatsoever he commanded us to do. Authorities for taking the blessed Sacrament into our hands. The Tripartite History. chrysostom, Cyprian. Tertullian. The Schismatics in old time divided not themselves from the Catholic Church in this respect; as S. Augustine witnesseth. Nor Novatus; as Ruffinus recordeth. The Christians in ancient time reserved the Sacrament. Some reject things really tendered unto them. Fol. 623 Par. 6 The second word: Eat. It is probable that Judas did receive the Sop into his Hand. Mouth. Many of the Fathers did think so. Sinnes revealed grow more sinful. Carolostadius his fancy by most Divines disliked, disploded. The Future tense is never used for the Present tense, but the Present tense is often used for the Future in Scripture. Fol. 627 Par. 7 The third word: This is my body, which is given for you, etc. Transubstantiation roved at. The farther Disquisition thereof wittingly and willingly forborn. The Author's Apology for the same. His Valediction to the remainder of his Miscellanies. Resolves to spend the remainder of his days in holy Devotion, and continual Praying. The Moors of Morocco Pray six times every twenty four hours. The Lord's Prayer highly commended, and preferred before all other Prayers. It ought to be used by every Christian at least seven times a day. The Church of England commended: Unto which the Author submits himself, and all his Writings. Bishop jewel, Bishop Andrew's, Bishop Morton, Bishop White, and incomparable Master Hooker, have written Polemically the controversies of the Lords Supper: unto whose unanswerable Writtings the Author referreth all scrupulous Christians for their better satisfaction. The Contents of the seventh Chapter. Par. 1 THe Word of God hath omitted to set it down in particular. 'Tis probable, they did kiss their right hand, and so received it. An evil custom of false complementing by kissing the hand in jobs days. In adoration our hands must be lifted up. Our voice lowly, and submiss. In great Agonies it is lawful to cry aloud, and roar. Probable it is, the Apostles received the heavenly Sacrament humbly kneeling on both their knees. Tertullian is punctual against Sitting, even after prayer. The Heathen after their prayers, and some even at their prayers, did use to sit upon their Altars: Their servants had three Sanctuaries to fly unto from their angry Masters. Numa's Law, to sit at the time of adoring their false gods. A reason, why no passage, either in the Evangelists, nor Apostles, commandelh Adoration at the Sacrament. How the ancient Fathers are to be understood, when they say, The holy Eucharist is to be adored. Fol. 635 Par. 2 Reasons, proving that the Apostles received the blessed Eucharist kneeling. Par. 1 Reason. Most sacred reverence is to be exhibited to most sacred things, Par. 2 Reason. The Fathers of the Primitive Church received it kneeling. Par. 3 Kneeling doth edify the simple. Par. 4 It is an Ecclesiastical custom. The manner of Reverence used both by Priests, and Lay people in S. Chrysostom's days. God will be worshipped as well in our body, as in our Spirit. The Penitents in Tertullia's time did kneel down at the receiving of Absolution. And it was the common practice of all other Christians in his days to worship God kneeling: Except from Easter to Whitsuntide, and on the Lord's day. Divers of holier times, had knees as hard as horn by their continual kneeling at God's Worship. An admonition to stiffe-kneed Pure-trants. Fol. 637 Par. 3 Reasons why the devouter sort did forbear kneeling betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide. 1 The Church did so appoint it. 2 Hereby the people did show themselves thankful. Whitsunday, whence it hath its denomination. Kneeling imports Repentance, and sorrow for sin. Standing, implies thanksgiving for the pardon of our sins. The divers usances of divers Churches in the Primitive times concerning Fasting, and Feasting on the Lord's day: Kneeling and Standing at the time of Prayer: and the reasons thereof. In the Primitive Church, they baptised not any, except the sick, but at Easter and Whitsuntide The newly baptised stood to express their thankfulness to God for their baptism. The people in some Churches stood praying at the Altar (on every Sunday between Easter, and Whitsuntide) in remembrance of Christ's Resurrection. The Christians in the Primitive Church prayed, Recto vultu ad Dominum; to confront the Heathen, who fell down flat on their faces, when they adored their false Gods. Fol. 638 Par. 4 The great variations of the Primitive Churches concerning the eating, or not eating of flesh offered to Idols, A just discourse to that purpose. A good Rule for the peace of the Church. Why our Church hath commanded Kneeling at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament: when the Primitive Church hath commanded Standing. Churches have great power committed unto them. The Church upon just motives may change her Orders. The meaner sort of all people Ecclesiastical and Civil, are bound to obedience; are not to Order. Peter Moulin found fault with the precise Ministers of our Church of England. The day of Christ's Resurrection the first day of his joy after his Dolorous passions, Why the Fathers made Sunday their Holiday. Why they forbade Kneeling and Fasting upon that day. What indifferency is, according to S. Hierome. A thing indifferent in itself, being commanded by the Supreme Magistrate, or Church, is no longer indifferent to thee. Variety of Ceremonies, not hurtful, but beneficial to the Church of Christ. The Bishop of Rome taxed; by Cardinal Palaeotus excused. Rome Christian in too many things, imitateth Rome Heathen: in public prayer, cometh short of it. Heathen Rome began all their business in the world with this Prayer, Quod foelix faustumque sit, etc. The greater power the Pope and his Cardinals have; the more need they have to pray to God before their public meetings in their Consistory. Kneeling at receiving the holy Eucharist, never disliked as a thing of its own nature evil or unlawful. In the Primitive Church after Whitsuntide they used to kneel. Kneeling at the blessed Sacrament, not prescribed by Scripture; but authorized by tradition; confirmed by custom; observed by Faith. In the Primitive Church when they received the Sacrament Standing Kneeling they prayed Standing. Kneeling. Our Factionists would follow the Primitive Church in one thing; but leave her in another. Fol. 639 Par. 5. A third Reason. At the first Institution of things Sacred, Profane, the solemnity is greater than in the sequel. Every new thing hath a golden tail. Proverb. Popular Lecturers have sunk even below scorn. All sins of former times have descended down upon our days. An Epiphonema, or Exclamation against the profane pretenders of Devotion now adays. The lowest humiliation is too little for the house of God. They cried Abrech, or how the knee before joseph. He that boweth himself most before man, is most right in the sight of God. Divers examples of Prostration and Geniculation, both out of the old and new Testament. A Viceroy of Ireland devoutly fell on his knees, and asked an archiepiscopal Benediction. The Heathen kneeled down to worship their very Idols. S. Hieromes saying. By Kneeling we sooner obtain what we ask at the hands of God. Not lawful for any to sit in the porch of the Temple, but only the Kings of David's loins. The humble gesture of the jews, when they came in went out of the Temples. The Primitive Church kneeled to the Altars. Altars, the seats of the body and blood of Christ. The Cross in Chrysostom's days did always use to remain upon the Altar. An Angel an assistant, when Christ is offered up. Ambrose. To this day we worship the flesh of Christ in the Sacrament. Idem. No man eateth the blessed Sacrament, before be have worshipped Christ in the Sacrament. Augustine. Constantine the Emperor in his Soliloquies with God, pitched on his knees, with eyes cast down to the ground. K. Charles partaketh of the body and blood of Christ, with as much Humility as the meanest penitent amongst his subjects. His holy and devout gestures at the participation of the Lords Supper, turned the heart of a Romanist to embrace the truth on our side. In origen's, Arnobius, and Tertullia's days, the Saints never met in holy places about holy things, without decent reverence. The Papists in kneeling, adore the very materials of the Sacrament. Yet the abuse of a thing, taketh not away the right use. Proved by divers curious instances. Christian's may lawfully use many artificial things, though invented by Heathenish Gods, and Goddesses. To argue from the Abuse of things to the whole removing of the use, is ridiculous. Illustrated by some particulars. Veneration of the Sacrament, is accorded on all sides. In the very Act of receiving it, it is lawful to kneel down and worship Christ in it. Calvin himself holdeth that adoration to be lawful. The Lutherans are divided in this point. Illyricus denieth Christ to be worshipped in the Eucharist. Brentius and Bucer hold, That then we must worship Christ's body. Luther himself styleth the Eucharist, Sacramentum venerabile, & Adorabile, Chemnitius saith, None, but Sacramentaries, deny Christ to be adored in the Sacrament. Chemnitius acknowledgeth these Theses. 1. Christ God Man, is to be adored. Arrians deny this. 2. Christ's humane nature for the hypostatical union with the Divinity, is to be adored. None but Nestorians will deny this. The Apostles worshipped the Humane Nature of Christ. Adoration precedeth Communication; by the judgement of S. chrysostom, and S. Augustine. Christ's flesh, as made of earth, may be said to be God's footstool. So is the Ark. All the Angels of God do Worship Christ. Christ is to be adored always, and every where. Augustine, Ambrose. Nazianzene, and Eusebius Emissenus are Chemnitius Co-opinionists. Not the material Elements, but Christ only in them, is to be adored. If we must adore Christ when we celebrate the divine Sacrament; much more did the Apostles. Habitual not (always) Actual Adoration of Christ 〈…〉 ●●●●ired of the Apostles. The Apostles worshipped Christ: 1 When he had newly performed any Super-humane work. 2 When they begged great matters of him. 3 When he did heal some who were vehemently afflicted. 4 When he conferred any extraordinary blessing on their souls: As he did when he instituted the new Sacrament. Master Hooker termeth Kneeling an Adorative gesture. No kind of Worship accepted, that is not sometimes conjoined with Kneeling. Gregory Nazianzens Story of his sister Gorgonia. Eusebius Emissenus, and Origen say, Christ is worshipped in the Sacrament. Kneeling at the Communion, commanded by the Book of Advertisments, set down, set forth by Queen Elizabeth; by the Laws of the Realm, and the Queen's Majesty. Injunctions. They defraud the Knees of their chiefest office, and honour, who refuse to bend them at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament. Fol. 645 The Contents of the eight Chapter. Par. 1 WHat gesture we are to use at the Administration of it to others. Receiving of it ourselves. Both handled promiscuously. The English Liturgy our best guide. At the Repeating of the Law, the people must kneel. Receiving of the same, the Israelites did no less. Never Patriarch, Prophet, Evangelist, Apostle, nor holy Man, nor Christ himself prayed sitting, when there Was opportunity of kneeling. The Monks of Egypt did pray sitting. The rule of Saint Benedict mentioneth Sitting at the Reading of three Lessons. Rising up at Gloria Patri, etc. Several gestures are to be used both by Priests and People, upon several occasions. The Priests never kneels, while the people stand; but he may stand when they kneel. Great reason why they should kneel at the receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ. No superstition, nor idolatry, then to kneel: but obstinate irreverence, if not blaspemy, not to kneel. Prayer most an end used with bending of the knees. The Pharisee stood Christ kneeled when he prayed. The Rubric of the Communion Book is to be followed by all obediently. Fol. 652 Par. 2 The Minister is to deliver the Communion to the people kneeling in both kinds. into their Hands. Maximus would have Men to wash their hands Women to bring clean linen that will communicate. The nicety of former times questioned. The sixth Synod, Canon 3. against it. The consecrated bread must be carefully delivered, and received. To let any crumb or particle thereof fall to the ground, accounted a great sin by. Tertullian and Origen. Pope Pius the first, punished those who let any of the Lords blood fall upon the ground or Altar. S. cyril of Jerusalem gives a caveat to this purpose. Little tables set before the Communicants in former times: as now we hold linen clothes, saith Baronius. The usual fashion of receiving the Consecrated bread between the thumb and a finger or two, disliked. Receiving the holy bread in the Palm of the hand, a safer way. In Tertullia's days, the Christians did stretch abroad their hands like Christ upon the Craffe, in their prayers. Damascene would have us receive the body of Christ crucified with our hands framed like to a Cross. The right hand being upward open, and hollow to receive the bread. This accounted the safer Way. Saint Cyril commanded the same kind of usance. Other manner of taking it, not sinful. In things indifferent we must not love singular irregularity. All unseemly motions and gestures are so many profanations of the Lords Supper. Seven general rules to be observed against the profanation of the Lords Supper. The word (Amen) explained: and kneeling at receiving the blessed Sacrament, pressed. Fol. 653 Par. 3 Tenth General. What Names are given to the blessed Sacrament by the Scriptures and Fathers, the Latin and Greek Church. The hallowed bread is called in the Scriptures 1 The Lord's body broken for us: 2 The Communion of the Body of Christ. And the reasons thereof. Breaking of bread from house to house. 4 Holy bread, Blessed bread, Eucharistical bread, Heavenly bread: Joh. 6. In the Fathers. 1 Taking of the Lords body, Tertullian. 2 Earthly bread sanctified by prayer, consisting of Earthly and Heavenly things, Irennaeus. A Medicine of immortality, an antidote against death, procuring life, purging sin, driving away all evils. idem. 3 Christ's Dole to his Church, Tertullian. The plenty, abundance and fatness of the Lords Body. The Wine is called in the Scriptures, 1 The New Testament in his Blood. 2 The Blood of the New Testament. 3 The Cup of the Lord. 4 The Communion of the Blood of Christ. The blessed Eucharist consisting of both kinds, is styled in Scripture, 1 The Lord's Supper. And in what regards it is so called. The Papists dislike the frequent use of this Phrase. Casaubone confutes Justinian and Maldonate the Jesuits, and calls it The Great Supper. The most Divine Supper. The Arch-Symbolicall Supper. 2 The Table of the Lord, 1 Cor. 10.21. With us, it is commonly called Christ his last Supper. And the reasons why it is called the last Supper. In the Fathers it hath these titles. 1 The Communion of Saints, in the Apostles Creed. 2 Peace of Christ, Ignatius and Cyprian. 3 A New Oblation. Irenaeus. 4 Mystery, is a common appellation. Augustinen. 5 Life, so called by the Africans. Augustinen. 6 The Oath and strictest band of Religion. Augustinen. 7 The Mystical bread. Augustinen. 8 The holy Offering, in regard of the offerings for the poor. Augustinen. 9 The Supper of God, and the Lords Banques, Tertullian. 10 The Lords Testament or Legacy. 11 A Communion, prohibiting schism, and division; and inclining to Peace and Union. 12 A blessing. 13 A giving of thanks. 14 The Authentic performance of the Type, Theodoret. 15 The Latins name is Missah, the Mass; which word some derive from the Hebrew or Chaldee, and say, it signifies A Tribute of a Offering of the hand. Cevallerius dislikes that derivation. The Heathen Greek Priests dismissed their people with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Pagan Romans with these words, I licet, Missa est. Whence the Christian Roman Church borrows their Mass. 16 The Greek Church calleth it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. or Ministration. 17 Sacramentum Sacramentorum, etc. Nicolaus de Cusa. 18 God. Tertullian. Fol. 656 Par. 4 Eleventh General. Wherein is inquired, what speeches were used by our Saviour in the Coenaculum. After the third Supper was administered. The gracious Sermon of Christ, His Prayer to God. An Hymn. 658 Tricoenium Christie Or the threefold Supper of Christ in the Night that he was betrayed 1 The Passeover wherein I consider 1 The occasion of this Discourse. 2 The Introductories, 1 What the Jews used to do at their ordinary meals. 2 What they used to do at their feasts. 3 The Paschall Supper itself, 1 As it was observed by the Jews of those days. Here consider 1 What things the jews were commanded. Which were of 2 sorts: some were 1 Temporary. In this I consider 1 The 7. great Passovers recorded in the Old Testam. 2 The 4. Passovers specialized in the New Testament, at which Christ was present. Besides one more, from which he was absent. 3 How many Ceremonies were transitory, namely 6. 1 They might choose a Lamb, or a Goat. 2 They prepared it 4. days beforehand. 3 They bloodied their doors. 4 They ate the Passeover in great haste, shod. girt, & staved; rather standing than sitting, rather sitting than lying down at the first Passeover. 5 They went not out of doors. 6 They chose their next neighbours. 2 Perpetual: to continue during the jewish polity: & these were either 1 Propitiatory 14. 1 They were to choose a Lamb. 2 An unspotted one. 3 A Male Lamb. 4Vnder a year old. 5 A Proportionable number were to eat it. 6 All these were to be of the jewish Church. 7 It was to be killed on the first month of the Jewish year. The year of the World, when this first began, is here handled. 8 On the 14. day of that Month. 9 Between the two Evenings. 10 At Jerusalem. 11 In one house. 12 The People, and not the Levites only might kill the Lamb. 13 They must dress it whole. In this are 5. other precepts. 1 Rosy it with fire. 2 Eat it not raw. 3 Not sodden with water. 4 The head with the legs. 5 And with the purtenance. 14 Every one was to bring an Offering according to his ability. 2 Sacramental, properly only 3. 1 To eat the Passeover. 2 To eat it with unleavened bread. 3 To eat it with sour herbs. 3 Subsequent ceremonies, 6. 1 A bone was not to be broken. 2 The flesh was not to be carried out of the house. 3 The Tabletalk appointed. 4 They continued the feast of unleavened bread seven days after. 5 They were to leave none of the flesh until the morning. 6 What was left, was to be burnt with fire. 2 What they performed voluntarily. 1 They washed 1 All of them their hands. 2 Many their feet. 3 Some their whole bodies. 2 They consecrated their 1 Wine. 2 Bread. 3 Flesh. 3 They imitated 13. of the Roman fashions saith Pererius A full entire tractate against Pererius, who groundlessly holdeth, that the jews in Christ's time did conform themselves in their feast to 13. fashions of the Romans. 2 As Christ and his Apostles kept it. So fare as the Old Testament enforced. New Testament hath related. Whether at the eating of the Pascall Lamb were any servants present and administrant. The sum of all, as it were in a picture. 3 The third Supper, or Supper of the Lord: the most blessed Eucharist. Vide lib. 3. TRICAENIUM CHRISTI, IN NOCTE PRODITIONIS SVAE. The threefold Supper of Christ, in the night that he was betrayed. LIB. 1. CHAP. 1. The Contents of the first Chapter. 1. The occasion of this Discourse. 2. The praesumptuous ignorance of some Caco-zelotes. 3. The state of the question. 4. Four points propounded, Three preparatory. One decisive, and determining. These Preparatory. 1. What course the jews took at their ordinary meats. 2. What they used to do at their Festivals. 3. What they especially practised at their Passeover. 4. The main point is, what religious, or civil rites our Saviour more particularly observed, when he kept the Passeover, in the night of his apprehension. PARAGRAPH. 1. WHen I administered the thrice-blessed Sacrament of the body and blood of our Saviour jesus Christ, to my Parishioners, among many other things, I bade them take heed of the leaven of those refractory Ignorants (swarming otherwhere) who at, and in the receiving of the holy Communion, where so devour prayers are made, where so sacred things are conferred, refuse to kneel; and to their chief objection, that they must imitate our Saviour, and his Apostles, who did not kneel, but sit, or lean, or lie down? PARA. 2. I Answered, that these presumptuous silly ones, know only the outside, and not the inside of these mysteries; that it is not clearly revealed in any place what posture was used, or what was the bodily situation at the giving, or taking of the body of our Lord: but to build their pretended conformity on uncertain, and unknown things, is not conformable to reason, much less religion, since they, by so doing, do make their imagination their only original, their crooked will their only rule. PAR, 3. THen did I enlarge the point, that Christ, and his holy Apostles (except Indas, who went out before the Eucharist was taken) were altogether at three Suppers in one night, in that night in which he was betrayed; and that those Apostles certainly, and Christ himself partaked of all the three suppers; that they kept not one constant form, but varied their gestures; that there is no firmness of consequence to argue, that whatsoever was done at the first supper, the same was done at the second; or whatsoever was at the second supper, that it continued in the same fashion, until the end of the third supper; that these several Suppers were not in the same degrees of holiness, and were attended with proportionable Rites, and different ceremonies; That the eating of the Paschall Lamb, was the first Supper; That their joynt-eating of common food was their second Supper; That the institution of the Eucharist, and taking of it was their third supper, called by the * 1 Cor. 11.20 Apostle, the Supper of the Lord. To some intelligent people, which heard me, these things seemed, though new and strange, yet probable, and analogal to faith; others, hung between doubt and belief: but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ecce Rhodus, Ecce salius, here is the man, here his leap; Nunc specimen specitur, nunc certamen cernitur, now is the trial, you may see it, as Mnesilochus phraseth it in Plautus; what I said, I am ready not only to say again, but to prove, and justify: God the truth, and learned men the Disciples of truth, being judges; Indocti procul este viri, procul este profani. Let men unlearned, and profane, Be fare from hence, they judge in vain. PAR. 4. THat I may bear the whole truth before me, necessary to the unfolding of what our Saviour practised from the beginning of his eating of the Paschall Lamb, till he had finished the most sacred Eucharist; I intent, (under the divine benediction) to handle four points, three preparatory, the fourth definitive, and decretory. 1. What the jews of those times did, at their ordinary meals. 2. What they then did at their Feasts, or Festival days. 3. What the jews were wont to observe at their eating their Passeover. 4. What courses in particular our blessed Saviour took, and used, the night of his apprehension. The Prayer. ASsist me therefore, I beseech thee, O omniscient, supremest intelligence, most wonderful Vni-Trinity, Trin-Vnity, transcendent in fullness of knowledge; and, O sweet Saviour, most blessed Lord, whose cause I handle, whose truth I search, and disclose, take the veil of ignorance from before my face; let me see with thy piercing eyes; let my fleece be wet with thy dew from heaven, distil upon me some drops of thy Divine knowledge, power thy sacred ointment, and spreading oil upon my head, and fill me with humble veracity, for thine own Names sake, O Saviour jesus, God and man, the gracious Mediator between God and Men. Amen. CHAP. II. The Contents of the second Chapter. 1. The jewish strictness in often giving of thanks. 2. The duty of thankfulness exhorted unto. 3. Ingratitude condemned. 4. The jews at their Feasts began their banquet with blessing of a ●●p of Wine, what the particular words were, poculum bibatorium, every one drank in order: our most blessed Saviour scorned not to follow that custom; The custom of the Table of the King of Sweden. 5. The Master of the Feast among the jews, consecrated the bread: the very words of consecration translated are set down. 6. Some recreations were at their Festivals: and wise holy discourses: sometimes riddles were propounded: our Saviour's divine Table talk. 7. The duty of Thanksgiving apppointed by the Apostle for all our do. 8. The temperance of the Primitive Church at their repast, and at Feasts also, proved by Tertullian, and Minutius Foelix: also their Prayers, and singing, and sober retiring. 9 Our age in a double extreme: some over-prodigally feast it: the immoderate use of Tobacco taxed. 10. Some are inhospitable; inhospitality under pretence of devotion distiked. 11. The mean in eating and drinking commended. 12. Mirth, and feasting, practised on the Lord's day in Tertullia's time. 13. Holy Hester her banquet of Wine: the brethren of Joseph were temperate, though the vulgar hath it, inebriati sunt cumeo: josephs' liberality, and full table was not intemperate, or immodest. 14. Christ Feasted on Sabbath days. 15. Ahashuerus his moderation, and Law wished for to be in use. PAR. 1. THe jews were never wont to eat, or drink without Prayers, blessings, or giving of thanks, especial thanks for especial blessings: sometimes shorter ejaculations were in use, sometimes longer devotions; if they are but of Nuts, Plumbs, Apples, Grapes, or the like, they had Peculiares preculas apt short prayers. Zorobabel poured forth thanks for wisdom given unto him, 1 Esdras, 4.60. 1 Esdras 4.60. The Psulmist was abundant in thanksgiving, above any other duty, both for ordinary and extraordinary blessings, inviting all the Host of Heaven and Earth, reasonable, sensible, vegetable, yea inanimate creatures to praise the Lord. PAR. 2. GIfts of mind, body, and fortunes, are to be received with blessing of God; general favours of the Almighty look for a return of thanks, yea are more to be esteemed, as being more common. That the heavenly Creatures move constantly in their Spheres, that the Sun shineth, that the Moon poureth down the supernal influences; that our preservation with the means thereof is continued, deserveth from us the Sacrifice of praise unto God: every grace of God unto us must be answered with a grace, or thanks from us to God: all Rivers run into the Sea, saith * Eccle●● 1.7. Ecclesiastes, Chap. 1.7. Unto the place from whence the Rivers come, thither they return again. Adfontem (saith Saint a Bern. in cap. jejunij, Serm. 1 Bernard) unde exeunt flumina, revertuntur, ut iterum fluant; Flummis aqua, si stare caeperit, & ipsa putrescit. & inundatione facta superveniens repellitur: sic plane, sic gratiarum cessat decursus, ubi recursus non fuerit, nec modo nihil augetur ingrato, sed & quod acceperat, vertitur ei in perniciem: Rivers return to the fountains that they may flow again: if they begin to stand they grow to decay: even so grace ceaseth when it is not returned: and to the ungrateful man nothing increaseth, but what he received turns to his overthrow. Out blessed Saviour spent a good part of his time, in this holy duty; for brevity sake, I will infist only upon one place, b joh. 6.11. job. 6.11. Christ [gave thanks] and then distributed the bread to his Disciples. The Apostle gives a reason, God hath created meats to be received with thanksgiving c 1 Tim. 4.3. 1 Tim. 4.3. It was God's intention; they were created to that purpose, or end; and they go against God's intention, who are unthankful. He that eats, and drinks, and let's grace pass, Sits down like an Ox, and riseth like an Ass. PAR. 3 THe ingratitude of the receivers indeed infecteth not the meat, but their receiving is unclean, and filthy; even their mind, and conscience is defiled, as God saith in another case, d Tit. 1.15. Tit. 1: 15. Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving e 1 Tim. 4.4. 1 Tim. 4.4. For it is sanctified by the Word, and Prayer, ver. 5. So sanctified that the devil cannot use it, to the hurt, either of our souls or bodies, by stirring us up to sin, so soon or so much, as if it were received thankelesly. Aquine saith truly, Satan had power over the creature, yea, over us, by our sin; this power is taken away from Satan, through Christ, by prayer, & thanksgiving: ingratitude is one of the greatest sins to humane society, cùm ingratum dixeris, omnia dixeris, you cannot say worse of a man; Viper is a fit Emblem of the unthankful. This have I pressed the rather because the Apostle saith, ver. 6. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, (which otherwise they are likely to forget, or neglect) thou shalt be a good Minister of jesus Christ; which God grant me to be! Standeth it not with reason that if God blessed them for us, we should bless him for them? Creatures taken without thanks are as flesh in our mouths, or in sacrifices without salt, unsavoury; see f Levit. 2.11. Levit. 2.11. The returning of thanks is naturally just, saith g josephus' Antiquit. juda. c. 4.6. josephus, Et pro compensutio●e rerum jam factarum, & pro invitatione futurarum, thereby man is recompensed for what is passed, and alured to be more kind afterward; with God this is approved; Cessonte gratiarum actione cessat decursus gratiae, God is not gracious when man is ●nthankefull. How easy, how cheap a thing doth God expect, when he is pleased with thanks? And what can we return unto him, if we return not thanks? h Psal. 116.22.13, 17. Psal. 116.12.13. What shall I render unto the Lord for all bis benefit 〈◊〉 towards me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the Name of the Lord; See also ver. 17. in every thing giving thanks, for this is the will of God in Christ jesus concerning you, i Thes. 5.18. 1 Thes. 5.18. Who offereth praise glorifieth God, k Psal. 50.23. Psal. 50.23. The jews I fear will rise in judgement against us unthankful Christians, forgetful of our duty, of our Saviour's actions, and example, who was thankful both in public and private to his heavenly Father. PAR. 4. I Come now unto the second point; what the jews did then at their Feasts, or Festival days: whether the jews were at marriage Feasts, or other more solemn feasts? this they did generally, as appeareth by the Thargum of Onkelos: the Master of the Family began with the blessing of the cup, which being filled with Wine, he took in his right hand, and said, Benedictus sis, tu Domine Deus nos●●r, qui cr●●● fr●ctum vi●i●; blessed be thou O Lord, our God, who createst the fruit of the Vine; then he drank, and gave every one to drink; for it was the fashion of the jews to have poculum bibatorium, or as a Bolducus in job. 1.4. Bolducus fathereth the word upon Oleaster, bibale, a cup before their meals; jobs children's Feast ran round, In orbem transibant Dies convivii, b job. 1.5. job. 1.5. and the jews at their Festivals did drink in orbem, every one partaked of it: To which fashion Christ alluded, both in his second and third Supper, (as by his grace shall appear) when he said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves, c Luk. 22.17.20. Luk. 22.17. and again v. 20. He gave them the cup after Supper, and said, drink ye all of it, or more properly, All of you drink of it, d Mat. 26.27. Math. 26.27. At the late great King of sweden Table, a credible eyewitness informed me, that they are no part of their food, till the Divine, or Chaplain of honour had given God thanks by a cup of blessing, which was first tasted; this was in imitation of the jewish custom continued by Christ. PAR. 5. THen did the Master of the house take up a loaf of bread in both hands, and consecrated it thus. Benedictus sis tu Domine Deus, qui educis panem è terra, bessed art thou, O Lord, our God, for bringing forth bread out of the earth: Then did he eat, and give every one a morsel of bread; which sacred ceremonies being ended, they fell to their other victuals. In imitation whereof, when excellent bread hath been served in at my table, of Wheat, which grew by manurance of most barren ground with Lime; I have often said, praise, and thanks be to our gracious God, who hath taught us to make bread of stones, and blessed us in the work of our hands, etc. PAR. 6. SO, when they were eating, or in the Feast time, as it is probable, they had some recreations, as the good Father of the Prodigal child had music, and dancing e Luk. 15.25. Luk. 15.25. so it is certain, they had many wise conferences, and heavenly discourses: happy are these thy servants, saith the f 1 King. 10.8.5. Queen of Sheba unto Solomon, which stand continually before thee, and hear thy Wisdom; for she spoke of the attendance of his Ministers, at his Table; it is also likely she spoke these words as she was at meat caroufing with him: g Esth. 7.2. Est. 7.2. On the second day, at the banquet of Wine; began an happy discourse for the Jews, which furthered their deliverance; in the royal Feast of Ahashuerus, when the heart of the King was merry with Wine he sent for Vasthi, when she would not come, Memucan the last of the seven wise Princes, who knew the Times, spoke first, and made an Oration, h Esth. 1.16. Est. 1.16. tending to this end, that all women should give their husband's honour, both great and small, ver. 20. And that every man should bear rule in his own house, ver. 22. taking down the imperiousness of unruly women. Sometimes they propounded riddles, as Samson, i judg. 14.12. Judg. 14.12. dum in solutione mentis acumen exercerent, interea convivialia jurgia, & intemperantiam vitarent; While they busied their brains to unfold the riddles, in the mean time, they might avoid all quarrelling, and imtemperance, which are too often the effects of feasting. When Christ was at any feast, it was seasoned with Divine discourses; see Mat. 9.12. Luk. 7.36. Luk. 10.38. etc. Luk. 11.39. Luke 16.9. Job. 12.3. Christ about the midst of the Feast of Tabernacles (you must not conceive it in the midst of dinner, or supper) went into the Temple, and taught most heavenly Doctrine. k joh. 7.14. john 7.14. PAR. 7. What the Apostles practised appears by their Precepts, l 1 Cor. 10.31 1 Cor. 10.31. Whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God; To which that is conformable, m Col. 3.17. Col. 3.17. What ye do in word, or deed, do all in the name of the Lord jesus, giving thanks to God even the Father by him; This they did at their meals, especially at their Festivals. PAR. 8. THe guise or order of the Primitive Church followeth: first for their ordinary meals, they had but poor commons, risen with appetite, pur as coenas, sine animalibus coenas suppers without flesh, a Clem. Alexand paeoa. 1.11. Clemens Alexandrinus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Let our Supper saith he, be small and short, fit for men that watch, and not with variety of mingled meats; the Grecians call prodigal men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, well signifying their end, i. as it seemeth to me, saith Clemens, whilst they esteem them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, void of salvation, by the elision of the letter [σ] Sigma. Tertullian most signisicantly to the prodigal intemperate Romans saith thus, nostras coenulas sugillatis, cum vestris ructibus acescat aer, you find fault with our short small suppers, when the very air groweth sour with your belchings. And yet the parsimony of the ancienter Romans was exemplary, of which more hereafter; take only one testimony out of b juvenal. satire. 11. ver. 77. etc. juvenal. Haec olim nostri jam luxuriosa senatus Coena fuit: Curius parvo quae legerat horto, Ipse foc is brevibus ponebat oluscula, quae nunc Squallidus in magna fastidit compede fossor. that is, The now luxurious suppers of the Senate Of old were mean: Curius (when as he eaten) With a small fire cooked such few berbes, which he Pick● from his narrow gardens hus bandry, As now a dirty Ditcher loathes to eat; Though loaden with cold Iron, and Gyves full great. Secondly for the feast of the old Christians, c Minut. Foelix, in Octavio, pa. 391. Minutius Foelix saith thus, Convivia non tantum pudica colimus, sed & sobria; nes enim indulgemus epulis, aut convivium mero ducimus, sed gravitate bilaritatem temperamus, casto sermone, corpore castiore, pudorem non fancy, sed meute praestamus, that is, our Feasts are observed with shamefastness, and sobriety, we do not indulge, and glut ourselves with dainties or draw out at length the banquet by bibbing of wine; but we mingle and temper mirth and gravity together, using chaste speeches, in more chaste bodies; our minds out-blushing our faces: d Ter●al. in Apolog. cap. 39 Tertullian more at large showeth the whole form of feasting thus; Non priùs discumbitur, quàm or atio ad Deum praegustetur; editur, quantum esurientes capiunt; bibitur, quantum pudicis est utile; ita saturantur, ut qui meminerint, etiam per noctem sibi adorandum esse; it a fabulantur, ut qui sciant, Dominum audire; post aquam manualem, & lumina, de Scriptures sacris, vel de ingenio proprio, canitur; been probatur quomodo biberit; aeque oratio convivium dirimit; inde disceditur,— non in eruptiones lasoiviarum, sed in candem curam modestiae & pudicitiae, ut qui non tam coenam coenaverint, quam disciplinam, that is, we sit not down till we have first prayed to God; grace is the first dish we taste of, we ear only to satisfy nature; we drink no more than is fit for chaste people; we so eat and drink, as remembering we must rise in the night, to worship God; our discourse is as in the presence of God; after washing of our hands, by candle light we sing either some Psalms, or other holy Hymns, or songs of our own invention; by which we see, that we have not drunk much; Prayer also concludeth the banquet; from whence we depart, not running into lascivious course of chambering and wantonness, or sporting ourselves, in the deeds of darkness; but impaling ourselves within our wont bounds of modesty, and shamefastness; as if we had made our suppers, rather of discipline, and religion, then of ordinary meats. PAR. 9 OUr age is much faulty in both extremes, of Prodigality, and covetousness, neglecting the golden means of liberality. Some with the glutton far deliciously every day, make their belly their God, join dinners to suppers, and prorogue suppers till the morningstar, and light approacheth, to dim the candles; turning with Heliogabalus night into day, and day into night; their appetite makes raw digestion, and their foul stomaches, by being overladen, do surfeit: the meat which is left behind in the dish, is more behooveful, and healthful to the Cormorant, or intemperate Epicure, then that which he devours; Plures occidit gula, quam gladius, The two fore-fingers and the thumb, Kill more, than battle, sword, or gun. The earth, air, and water afford not enough for their gluttony, and though saucy Art, second Nature, nor eye, nor desire is satisfied: the creatures groan under their gross abuse; these are swinish Epicures, prodigal consumers of God's blessings. Tobacco, the never unseasonable Tobacco, the all-usefull Tobacco, good for meat, drink, and clothing, as they say; good for cold, heat, and all diseases; this must sharpen their appetites before meat, must heat it at their mere, and close up their stomach after meat, being the only curious antipast, sauce, and post-past; wine, and beer must wash down the stench of that weed, and it again must dry up their moist fumes. PAR. 10. ANother sort there is who call themselves the generation of the Just, that fall into the other extreme, who are as unhospitable as Caucasus, as covetous as Euclio, these, to save spending, spend whole Festivals in the saving, hearing (as they call it) of the word, and to turn out their poor friends, and kindred, shut up their doors, and prick up their ears to needless repetitions. Fasting on the Lord's day is affected, because good cheer is costly; an health at their own table is damnation, though they will carowze four times the quantity, even to the overthrow of health at another man's board. Some will lay up more devout Peter-pences at the years end, out of thirty pound certainly, with the voluntary contributions, then charitable hospitable men can do, with 200. pounds per annum: the root of all evil yields them their desired fruit, and they live as if Mammon were the only God they serve, and lecture it only to pick up Mammon; Mammon may be had, and kept, and used without sin, yet Mammon must not be served, for ye cannot serve God and a Mat. 6.24. Mammon. PAR. 11. But happy is he who keepeth the middesse; first for meat, what need a Christian solicitously provide for that which makes his ordure? Secondly, for sauce, S. Bernard alloweth no sauce, but salt; a stomach dieted to a continual appetite, is the best sauce b Clem. Alexand●. paeda. 2.1. Clemens Alexandrinns saith, they do effeminate bread, who sift away the bran; I am sure the one-way bread, the second bread, groweth not mouldy so soon, and is both heartier and passeth speedyer through the body. As for drink, water was the only drink, till the flood, 2000 years or thereabouts: Vino vis adhibetur sapientiae, Wine offereth violence to wisdom: Venus in vinis, ignis in igne furit: Fire joined to fire is not more mad, than lust, if store of wineed hath had; which is almost all one with that in Valerius Maximus, proximus a Libero patre intemper antiae gradus ad inconcessam Venerem esse consuevit: Wine in the immoderate use is Sanguis Gigantum, the blood of the Giants; Fel draconum the gall of the Dragons; Principum tenebrarum, the gall of the Princes of darkness: So the Manichees over-bitterly condemned wine wholly, though it be to the intemperate, Venenum terrae, the very poison springing from the earth; yet moderately and physically taken, it is the blood of the grape, c Eccle. 50.15 Eccle. 50.15. and cheereth God and Man, d judg. 9.13. judg. 9.13. To age especially and some sick people. Aquavita, or strong water, in the abuse is, Aqua mortis, the bailiff of death, the executioner, leading men to destruction. Tobacco is good for few; the hourly, daily use is good for no complexion: oh that we would use these not otherwise then Physic! It is not an 140. years since Sack was sold only in Apothecary's shops. A little contents Nature; the eye is greater than the belly: Summa medecinae, abstinentia, the abbreviation of all Physic is abstinence: youth groweth taller with slender fare, then with cramming: diseased foul bodies, the higher fed, the more unhealthy they are; Convivia Veneris sunt praeludia, said Accursius; Feasts make way for lasciviousness; Venture vino plenus despumat in libidinem: Bacchus is a Pander unto Venus; the gut pampereth the groin; gula est vestibulum luxury; You go into the house of Luxury, by, and over the threshold of Gluttony: but, se non satiare cibis, studium est sanitatis; to eat sparingly is to study health; qui multum vult comedere, comedat parum, as Ludovicus Cornarus both directed and practised; a slender diet brings one to a good stomach: a cheerful healthful life, a painless old age. If thy appetite enlarge itself, put thy knife to thy throat, saith Solomon, a Pro. 23.2. Pro. 23.2. that is, Teach thyself temperance. I deny not but we may eat of the fat, and drink of the sweet, Neh. 8.10. and make great joy, ver. 12. and refresh ourselves at feasts in a higher degree, then at our ordinary food; otherwise there is no difference (post sacra peracta) between ordinary, and extraordinary refection. PAR. 12. DIe Solis laetitiam curamus, & laetitiae indulgemus, saith Tertullian, in Apologetico: jacobus Gothofredus upon Tertullian, ad Nationes, 1.13. thus, Die Dominica ab omnipressura, id est, a ritu, qui moerorem aliquem inferret, Christiani aberant & abstinebant; hinc jejunium, & geniculatio, ea die, interdicta; and when the heathen objected against the Christians, that they did curare otium & prandium, Tertullian denyeth it not, but doth compare our Dominical feasting, to the saturnal feasts of the Gentiles, in imitation of the sabbatical feasts of the jews. PAR. 13. HOly Queen Esther kept a banquet of Wine, b Esth. 5.6. Cap. 5.6. The brethren of joseph were merry, harmelesly merry with him at his Feast; the vulgar makes the worst of it, when it saith, inebriatisunt cum eo, c Gen. 43.34. Gen. 43.34, Though the letter will bear it, and the Septuagint accord to it; yet Vatablus learnedly expounds it thus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shacar. Hinc videmus lautius fuisse Convivium, in quo large, & hilariter, praeter quotidianum morem, excepti fuerint; hoc ènim significat verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— In mensis hospitalibus major erat indulgentia; neque tamen hic notatur ulla intemperies, sed honesta, modestaque liberalitas: Hence we discern that Joseph kept a plentiful Feast, in which they were above the ordinary fashion, largely and cheerfully entertained; for so the word [Shacar] signifieth both messes, Wine and Mirth did exceed, when hospitality spread the tables for her guests. In this passage Moses toucheth not at any distemper, but denoteth honest, and modest liberality, for these were holy Patriarches, Fathers of the twelve Tribes: and never any of them was overtaken with that devil drunkenness. PAR. 14. CHrist himself was at divers Feasts, and that on Sabbath days. Christ went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath day, (a pure, and chief Pharisee then entertained him) to eat bread, that is, to dine, and refresh himself; for by bread any sort of food is to be understood, d Luk. 14.1. Luk. 14.1. Yea, it is likely that there was a very great feast, for divers guests were bidden, and they chose out the chiefest rooms, ver. 7. and Christ gave them good counsel. ver. 8. and feasted the Pharisee himself, who invited him with wholesome Doctrine, ver. 12. and one that was at meat replied holily, ver. 25. On the Sabbath toward the evening, he was honourably entertained at Bethany, by Simon the Leper, Lazarus sitting down at supper, Martha serving, Mary anointing him, saith Lucas Brugensis, in his Itinerary; and the Apostles accompanied him, Math. 26.6. Mar. 14.4. John 12.4. Six days before the Passeover. Tolet also accounteth, that Christ was feasted, on the Sabbath day at night: Christ also turned more water into Wine, at a marriage, than there was need of, a joh. 2.7. joh. 2.7. PAR. 15. OH! that Ahashuerus his law were in force, that none should be forced, b Esth. 1.8. Esth. 1.8. or rather that men would force themselves to be a law unto themselves! then might Temperance rule in our Feasts, and innocent mirth mixed with edifying discourses, be heard at our Tables; and charitable hospitality be better practised in our houses; which was the good fashion of the jews, and of the Primitive Christians. Who desireth to read more of the frugality of the ancients, let him have recourse to Franciseus de Mendoza, in his Commentaries on 1 Sam. 9.2. Sect. 4. etc. The Prayer. GOod God, grant that I may be really, and truly thankful to all, and every one, to whom received courtesy bindeth me; to thee above all, for all thy blessings vouchsafed unto me, concerning either this life, or the life to come: It is thyself, most gracious Father, that crownest the year with plenty; though the fields of Corn do as it were laugh, and sing: thou haste pleased to give me enough, not for need only, but for recreation: and I beseech thee, that I may make a right use of thy creatures, by taking them soberly and religiously, giving due thanks to thee, their and our Creator, Through jesus Christ our Lord, Amen. CHAP. III. The Contents of the third Chapter. 1. Divers were the prescribed Customs of the Passeover. 2. Seven famous Passovers mentioned in the old Testament, the first in Egypt: the second in the Wilderness. 3. The differences betwixt the first and second, in Maimonides his judgement: only one of his differences proveth sound. 4. A true distinction of the particular Eremitical , of some unclean, from the general Passeover in the Wilderness: also a distinction of both these, from the Egyptian Passeover. 5. The third Passeover under joshua. 6. The Israelites for forty years, eat no bread but Manna. 7. Manna commended. 8. The Israelites bought water, and meat, in their Peregrination, but not bread; nor Corn●●ad they of the Nations, till they came to the planes of Jericho, though Masius seems to think, they forbore only to eat of the corn of Cana●n. 9 The fourth Passeover in the days of Samuel. 10. The deplorable estate of Israel, when Samuel entered on the government. 11. Samuel reform the Ecclesiastical estate. 12. Reformation went by former Praecedents: David concurred with Samuel: Solomon followed David's will nuncupative; and received from him in writing, what the Spirit had taught David: David guided by his Seers, by Samuel, by Aaron. 13. All Praecedentiall reformation must be according to Gods first guidance: David dwel● with Samuel. 14. Samuel dedicated things of worth to the enriching of the future Temple. 15. Samuel one of the sacred Trium-viri. 16. Samuel governed the state politic: he was a circuiting, or itinerant judge. 17. The nice distinction of Latria, and Dulia questioned. 18. The Parliament of Mizpeh: the sacred water: samuel's burned offering accepted: in likelihood, about this time was the great Passeover kept. 19 Samuel a King, Priest, and Prophet. 20. Josephus defended against Salianus. PAR. 1. THe third question succeedeth; what the jews were wont to observe, at their eating of their Passeover. That there were divers usances appointed at the eating of the Passeover, is evident, a Numb. 9.3. Num. 9.3. In the foureteenth day of this month at even, ye shall keep the Passeover, in his appointed season, according to all the Rites of it, and according to all the ceremonies thereof ye shall keep it. PAR. 2. BEfore I descend unto the particulars by precept, I wish you to consider what was observed in seven famous Passovers, which are specialized in the old Testament; and in divers also of the new Testament. The first Passeover was in Egypt set down at large, Exod. 12. of which more conveniently hereafter; the second Passeover was in the Wilderness, b Numb, 9.5. Num. 9.5. There were some defiled by dead bodies, ver. 6. And were kept bacl, that they might not offer an offering of the Lord, in his appointed season, and by especial direction of the Lord, the unclean by reason of a dead body, or one in a journey afar off, were to eat the Passeover, the foureteenth day of the second month, ver. 10, 11. The reason why they were put bacl, was; because the defiled by the dead were unclean seven days, c Num. 19.11. Num. 19.11. And the unclean were forbid to eat of holy things, d Levit. 7.20. Levit. 7.20. as after also appeared by the Dialogue of Ahimelech with David, e 1 Sam. 21.4. 1 Sam. 21.4. PAR. 3. THe second general Passeover differed from the first Mosaical, in three points, saith Maimonides: whereas in the first Passeover there must be no leavened bread in the house, f Exod. 12.15. Exod. 12.15, And they were not to carry forth aught of the flesh abroad out of the house, ver. 46. And both clean and unclean did take it (as in such a promiscuous great multitude, and in so great an hurry, and haste (without miracle, some men and women were unclean) for there were about six hudred thousand men, besides women, and children, g Exod. 12.37. Exod. 12.37. In the second, saith he, they might have leavened bread in the house; they might carry it out of the house, (though he hath no proof for these two points, as hereafter more at large) they might not keep it in uncleanness, which last passage is evident h Numb. 9.6. Num. 9.6. PAR. 4. THe particular Passeover of the unclean, when they were in the Wilderness, is not discerned to vary from the general in aught; but that the general Passeover was kept in the first month, and the particular, in the second month: these Eremitical Feasts both of them, had another eminent distinction from the first great Passeover, at their Exodus, viz. that the unleavened bread of these two, was made of Manna, and in the Egyptian Passeover, their unleavened bread was of common come only, of which see the proof, in the next . PAR. 5. THe third remarkable was under Joshuah: the holy Sacraments themselves being wholly omitted, during their Itinerary, not of Circumcision only, but of the Passeover, that being but once generally celebrated, namely, the year following, which was in the first month of the second year, a Num. 9.1. Num. 9.1. Thirty-nine years after, Joshuah at their passing over jordan, by God's appointment reestablished them, b Iosh. 5.10. Josh. 5.10. Those sacred ceremonies were not dead, but only slept. PAR. 6. THe unleavened bread, with which they are the Passeover, the fourettenth day of the month at even, in the plains of jericho, was of Manna, as the second great Passeover was, for they did eat of the old corn of the Land, on the morrow after the Passeover, unleavened cakes, and patched corn, in the same day, ver. 11. and the Manna ceased on the morrow, after they had eaten of the old corn of the Land, neither had the children of Israel Manna any more, ver. 12. That the Israelites in their peregrination were willed to buy water, and meat of the Edomites for money, is proved c Deut. 1.6. Deut. 2.6, But they were not commanded, neither needed they to buy corn of them; for Manna supplied the room of it, and was better than Corn, and the best flower of Wheat. PAR. 7. When the partial, and gluttonous mutineers said in a contemptuous loathing, d Num. 11.6. Num. 11.6. There is nothing at all, besides this Manna, before our eyes; as it proveth, by their own confession, they had no other Corn but Manna; so though their rebellious murmuring had not broke forth, God himself testifieth e Deut. 29.5. Deut. 29.5. I lead you forty years: your , and shoes are not old; ye have not eaten bread, nor drunk Wine, or strong drink: and the divine estimate judgeth better of it; witness these Eulogies, f Neh. 9.15. Neh. 9.15. God gave them bread from Heaven, for their hunger; and g Psal. 78.23.24. Psal. 78.23. God commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, and ver. 24. God reigned down Manna upon them to eat, and gave them of the Corn of Heaven, and ver. 25. Man did eate Angels food, as made by the power of God, and ministry of Angels. PAR. 8. THe moderate h Masius, is Iosh. 5.12. Masius, on Josh. 5.12. Inclineth, that the Israelites abstained, it not from other bread, yet from the bread of Canaan, till they were Circumcised, and till they had kept the Passeover; that they abstained from the bread of Canaan, till then, is out of doubt; they could not eat it, till they came toward the borders of Canaan, and about that time Manna ceased: but the place of i Deut. 29.5. Deut. 29 5, Joined with Deut. 2.6. seemeth to me demonstrative, that they are no corn at all, of any other Nations, till they came to the plain of Jericho. PAR. 9 THe fourth great Passeover k See 2 Chro: 35.18. recorded (though questionless between Joshua and Samuel many more were observed) if probability may take place, was in the days of Samuel, at Mizpeh, l 2 Kin. 23.22 2 King. 23.22. Surely there was not holden such a as Josiah kept, from the days of the judges that judged Israel (over whom Samuel was the last Judge) nor in all the days of the Kings of Israel or Judah: consider the change of the phrase: there was none from the days of the judges, nor in the days of the Kings of Israel, or judah: and then we may both fairly conclude for the negative, that no King of Judah or Israel, kept so great a , as Iosiah's was; and affirmatively, that in the days of the judges, such an one was kept: and lest you might stagger, or be uncertain, it is expressly determined, m 2 Chro. 35.18. 2 Chron. 35.18. There was not like unto that which josiab celebrated, from the days of Samuel the Prophet: whence conjecturally we may infer, that in the days of Samuel, there was a most famous , equal to Iosiah's, if not superior, and in likelihood it was at Mizpeh. PAR. 10. A Farther enquiry may perhaps delight you, of Israel's estate, at that time, a Iosh. 18.1. Iosh. 18.1. all Israel assembled together at Shiloh, and set up the Tabernacle of the Congregation there, joshua being Precedent: Shiloh was God's place, where God set his name at first, b jer. 7.12. jer. 3.12. And the Ark was in Shiloh, and there settled till the sins of Eli, and his sons, made it errand, so God forsook the Tabernacle of Shiloh, c Psal. 78.60. Psal. 78.60. Whereupon all things went to wrack; the Philistines overcame Israel in battle; the Ark in which they trusted, being sent for from Shiloh did not help; but the Israelites were again overthrown, the Ark was taken, the high Priest broke his neck, his children died sudden, and violent death's: the Tabernacle was separated from the Ark, if not destroyed, Rulers, Priests and people sinful: a very anarchy was in jacob, and that which was worst of all, God was offended with them. PAR. 11. IN this deplorable estate, Samuel entereth on the government; and first for the Ecclesiastical estate, he brought it into good order, for d 1 Chro. 9.22 1 Chron. 9.22. Samuel, Samuel the Seer, was ordainer, and founder of Rules, and Orders for the Levites, in the set offices: though David be mentioned as joynt-reformer with Samuel, and named in the first place, before him (as Kings are above Priests) yet if David had not followed his advice, it would never have been said, David and Samuel did order it. PAR. 12. IT is true that every latter reformation of Religion went by former precedents: King josiah said, e 2 Chro. 35.4 2 Chron. 35.4. Prepare by the houses of your Fathers, after your courses, according to the writing of David King of Israel, and according to the writing of Solomon his son: Again, f 2 Chro. 29.25 2 Chron. 29.25. The Levites were set in the house of the Lord, with Cymbals, Psalteries, and Harps, according to the commandment of David, and of Gad the King Seer, and Nathan the Prophet, as the Lord commanded; the song began with the Trumpets, and instruments ordained by David, ver. 27. And they sang praises to the Lord, with the words of David, and of Asaph the Seer, ver. 30. This was in Hezekiahs' Passeover: Solomon before them, ordered the sacred things in the Temple, he did not order those things by his own will, but by the last words of David, Ecclesiastical affairs were ruled, as you may discern, if you compare, g 1 Chro. 23.27. & 1 Chro. 24.3. 1 Chron. 23.27. with 1 Chron. 24.3. And he was instructed for the building of the house of God, h 2 Chro. 3.3. 2 Chron. 3.3. Neither was Solomon ruled by David's mouth-speech alone, but David gave to Solomon his son the pattern of the porch, and other particulars, i 1 Chro. 28.11. 1 Chron. 28.11. And the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit, ver. 12. Whence justly resulteth, that David had especial divine Revelations from God; and it is likely, that from the day of the first unction by Samuel (when it was said, k 1 Sam. 16.13. 1 Sam. 16.13. The Spirit of the Lord came upon David, from that day forward) that he made divers of these gracious and divine Psalms, and took on him the extraordinary thoughts of heavenly things: yea, David himself framed the services of the Levites according to their manner under Aaron their Father, as God commanded him l 2 Chro. 24 19 2 Chron. 24.19. PAR. 13. THus winding up from the bottom to the to ppe, all true reformation, must rest in him, from whom all order did spring, that is, God; As in the making of the Tabernacle, there was nothing left to the invention of Moses, m Exod. 25.9. Exod. 25.9. According to all that I show thee, after the pattern of the Tabernacle, and after the pattern of all the instruments thereof, so shall ye make it. Which is re-confirmed in the New Testament; For see (saith God) that thou make all things according to the pattern shown thee in the Mount, a Heb. 8.5. Heb. 8 5. So, out of doubt, David had his patterns to follow: I named before the Spirit, which taught him, and the direction of his Seers, and Prophets with whom he conversed, and the example of Aaron. Last of all, I say (that I may return from whence I digrested) it would never have been said that David and Samuel ordered such and such things: if David had not rather followed samuel's pattern, or directions, than Samuel david's: For Samuel was the ancienter both man and judge, and Prophet, yea, a known Prophet of the Lord, unto whom, in trouble David resorted in private, b 1 Sam. 19.18. 1 Sam 19.18. And both he and Samuel went, and dwelled at Naioth, in Ramah, and were both together, ver. 22. When it is likely he received instructions from Samuel, concerning the future Temple. PAR. 14. FOr most certain it is, that Samuel the Seer had dedicated divers things of worth, which were employed on the enriching of the Temple, c 1 Chr. 26.28 1 Chron. 26.28. When David was but in the poor fortune of a Reversioner: and it is as certain that David and Samuel ordered divers things, d 1 Chro. 9.22 1 Chron. 9.22. as I said before: Yea it is added to good purpose, Samuel, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Samuel videns, Samuel the Prophet; both to distinguish him from other samuel's who were not Prophets (if any such men were) and to intimate, that his joynt-reformation with David was determined, and agreed on, before hand with a divine consent, flowing from the spirit of prophecy. PAR. 15. IN somuch that Samuel is counted one of the Trium-viri, e Psal. 99 6. Psal. 99.6. which were the great instruments of God's glory in Zion, whom the Lord answered when they called on him; nor can any wise Christian think, but Samuel, who in express terms is said to order the porters, f 1 Chro. 9.22. 1 Chron. 9.22. Had fare greater care of greater matters. Thus much for the state Ecclesiastic, which Samuel reduced to good order, as a Seer. PAR. 16. SEcondly, for the state Politic, which he governed as a judge; when in his Circuits, which he yearly kept, as a Judge Itinerant to Bethel, Gilgal, and Mizpeh, he had spoken unto all the house of Israel g 1 Sam. 2.3. 1 Sam. 2.3. And counselled them to put away the strange gods, and Ashteroth from among them, and to prepare their hearts, and serve God only (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith the Septuagint. PAR. 17. NOw to show that both dulias and latria, belong only to God, and that the distinction is over nice, and overvalued, Christ saith to Satan [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] and when the Israelites had done so, ver. 4. Then Samuel bade them gather all Israel to him, and promised to pray for them. PAR. 18. Whereupon a dyet, or parliament was gathered at Mizpeh, ver. 6. The people drew water and poured it out before the Lord; though they drew it perhaps to drink, as thirsty men (for it was no Sacrifice) yet being drawn, they would not drink, but poured it before the Lord, as David did his longed-for water, h 2 Sam 23.16 2 Sam. 23 16. etc. They abridged their own desires, thwarted their own appetites; certainly they fasted, and confessed their sins; then also did Samuel offer a offering, wholly unto the Lord, and Samuel cried unto the Lord, and the Lord answered him, ver. 9 To which place the Psalmist alluded, i Psal. 99.6. Psal. 99.6. yea, but what is all this to the Passeover of Samuel? or where did Samuel keep the Passeover? I answer that in all probability, it was about this time, the offering of a sucking Lamb, wholly for a offering, might be no hindrance but that both he, and all the Israelites might keep a great Passeover before, at, or after this great reformation, though it be not described: for other reformations of Joshuah, Hezekiah, josiah, were accompanied with receiving a solemn Passeover, and so might this. I am sure a Eccle. 46.14. Ecclesiasticus 46.14. It is said of Samuel that he judged the congregation, by the Law of the Lord, and that in all causes, saith Tostatus. PAR. 19 THough the causes, concerning the divine Law, belonged to the high Priest, yet some unusual privilege was granted to Samuel, who was both a Levite, and a Prophet, and an extraordinary Priest, saith the great Salianus, in his Annals; let me add, that he was a judge also; and that the judges had a regal power; Samuel being herein a Type of Christ, a King, Priest, and Prophet. Lastly, let the words before cited have their due consideration, b 2 Chro. 35.18. 2 Chron. 35, 18. There was no Passeover like to that of Josiahs', from the days of Samuel the Prophet; and though we cannot punctually say, it was in such a year of Samuel, yet this resultance is unforced, and may run among the likely ones. In the days of Samuel the prophet, there was a like to Josiahs'. PAR. 20. I Cannot omit that c josephus' l. 10. c. 5. josephus agreeth with the Scripture in sense; A Prophetae Samuelis temporibus, in hunc usque diem (saith he of josiahs' ) nulla talis festivit as celebrata fuit: he hits upon an excellent reason, quia tum omnia juxta praescriptum legum, & antiquas consuetudines peragebant; which words (as cited by Salianus) may have reference to the days, either of Samuel or josiah. Salianus churlishly finds fault with josephus, as if he accused of Sacrilege, and of breaking Laws, and neglecting ancient customs, in the greatest Festivity and Sacrifice; both Hezekiah, josaphat, Asa, Solomon, and David himself; yet Salianus himself both supinely passeth over the of Samuel, inhering in smaller matters, and doth not observe, that josephus hitteth exactly the Scripture strain, namely not so much accusing others of Sacrilege, neglect, or contempt, or any positive mischief, as saying in a comparative reference, that upon reformation, there was not every way so absolute, as josiahs' was, since the great , in the days of Samuel: Nulla [talis] Festivit as, which words of his may, Commodo sensu, be well expounded; no since samuel's was ever so real, and exquisite, for substance, manner, and matter, and so perfectly circumstantiated; which the Scripture, before josephus fully declared. And so much for the fourth great , which would not have been omitted by all writers, for the place thereof, if it could have been necessarily, and demonstratively proved from hence; but indeed the argument is only probable, not apodictical, or necessary; and yet I thought fit to enlarge this point, because some matters momentuall are couched in it, and divers things conjoined, which lay scattered, and therefore not usually observed, as parts of one history. The Prayer. MOst gracious Father, thine especial love to us hath vouchsafed to engird, and encompass us thy servants of great Britain, not more with the Ocean, than with a Sea of prosperity and gladness; here is no leading into captivity, no complaining in our streets; peace is within our walls, and plenteousness within our palaces; the breath of our nostrils, the light of our Israel, is upheld, and comforted by thee; his most gracious spouse, his most fruitful Vine brancheth forth joy for the present, and manifold stronger assorances for the time to come. Most hearty we bless thee for this thy mercy, and humbly desire the continuance of it upon our most Sacred Sovereign, and upon his most gracious Queen; Upon our most hopeful Prince, and royal Progeny, and upon us by them, for the mediation and merits of thy beloved only Son, in whom thou art well-pleased, even jesus Christ our only Advocate, and Redeemer; Amen. CHAP. IU. The Contents of the fourth Chapter. 1. In the fifth great Passeover specialized to be kept by Hezekiah; the unsanctifyed in part eaten it; and in the second month, by dispensation divine; and the Priests and Levits only killed the Passeover. 2. The King's prayer accepted both for the unclean Priests and people, and the people healed at the good King's prayer. 3. A voluntary Passeover to supply the imperfection of the former. Devotions half performed are to be renewed and quickened. 4. The Priests and Levites prayers accepted of God for the people. 5. Religious thoughts must be produced into Acts. 6. In the sixth glorious of josiah, were most royal offerings, both for the Pascha and also for the Chagigah, which exceeded the offerings of Hezekiah. 7. Salianus against Vatablus; both reconciled. 8. The Masters of the family killed the Passeover; but the Priests slew the Festival offerings: Levites might not sacrifice, without divine inspiration, or great exigents: any Levite might sacrifice the proper Passeover for his own family, or for the impure. 9 In what sense Priests are said to profaine the Sabbath, the Temple, Sacrifices, and Circumcision chase away the Sabbath. 10. The seventh extraordinary great Passeover was foreprophecyed by Ezekiel, but not accomplished, till the return from captivity, in the days of Ezra, and Nehemiah. PAR. 1. THe fifth great Passeover was in the time of Hezekiah, a 2 Chro 30.15. 2 Chron. 30.15, For I pass by Hezekiah his precedent reformation, of taking away the high places, and breaking the Images, and cutting down the groves, and breaking in pieces the brazen Serpent, which Moses had made, to which the Israelites burned incense, b 2 King. 18.4 2 King. 18.4. I omit also the preparatives to this great , and begin at the 15. verse. Where it is said, The Priests and Levites were ashamed, for their sins, and the sins of the people, and sanctified themselves: And the people received the , though they were not sanctified, and in the second month: Wherefore the people themselves, or the Masters of the families, killed not their Lambs, for the (as was their wont guise or custom, at other times) But the Levites had the charge of killing the Passeover for every one that was not clean, ver. 17. PAR. 2. Four other things are most observable about this . First, that they who were not cleansed, and yet did eat the , otherwise than it was written, were prayed for by the King, and the form of Hezekiahs' prayer was, The good Lord pardon every one, that prepareth his heart to seek God, the Lord God of his Fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary, ver. 18. etc. And that you may know the great power of the hearty prayers of a King, even of Hezekiah (as well as of David, and Solomon in other cases) The Lord hearkened to Hezekiah, and healed the people: For the King's heart was clean, when the Priests, Levites, and peoples were unclean. PAR. 3 THe second passage is this, that whereas other passovers lasted but seven days, what was wanting in the former part of their more perfect sacrifice, was supplied in their voluntary assumed devotions: the whole assembly took counsel to keep other seven days, and did keep other seven days with gladness, ver. 23. Yea, a great number of Priests (belike, before unsanctifyed) sanctified themselves, ver. 24. By which redoubled acts both of priests and people, we are taught, if our prayers, or our own wand'ring thoughts, or the sierce suggestions of Satan, not to give over, but to reunite our forces, to renew afresh our endeavours, to double the times of our holy exercises: and be thou assured, good Christian, though the devils temptarions do trouble thee, and vex the; these repeated, and more perfect prayers of thine; do more afflict and torment him, and all his infernal crew. PAR. 4. YEt that is not all, nor the chiefest joy, but toward the end of this Festival, (that the people may know also the efficacy of Sacerdot all benediction) both the Priests and Levites arose and blessed the people, and their voice was heard, and their prayers came up to his holy dwelling place, even unto heaven, ver. 27. which was the third observable punto, in this great Passeover. PAR. 5. THe fourth, and last memorable passage was, that after all this was finished, All Israel, that were present, broke the Images in pieces, cut down the groves, threw down the high places, a 2 Chro. 31.1. and Altars, a 2 Chron. 31.1. Whence we may learn, that good sincere hearts are more devour, after their religious exercises; that holy performances make deep impressions, and bring forth fruits of amendment, and end in no end, but reformation: Reformation, I say, not popular, which is never aright; but regular, general, wherein Inferiors are guided by Superiors, and these by God's Word. PAR. 6. THe fixed most glorious was in the eighteenth year of the devout Josiah, as appeareth b 2 Kin. 23.21 2 Chro. 35.1. 2 King 23.21, and 2 Chron. 35.1. etc. Toward which were given for offerings, 37000. Lambs, and Kids, and for other offerings, 3800. Oxen; the first fort was of the flock, merely for the Pascha, and them the Master of each Family killed, and they were roasted whole, and eaten by the family, as God commanded by the hand of Moses; the second sort were of the herds, 3800 Oxen (some say Calves among them) these were for the chagigah, for the Feast offerings, and other offerings; some of these holy offerings they sod in pots, cauldrons, and pans, and divided them speedily among the people; of the other part, they made whole burnt offerings (of which the people had no portion at all, but the fire consumed all) observe further, things were prepared the same day, to keep the Passeover, and to offer burnt offerings on the Altar of the Lord, c 2 Chr. 35.16 2 Chron. 35.16. And unto the Pascha was annexed the Chagigah; after their eating the with sour herbs, they made up the rest of their supper, a Rear, or a second supper, as you may well call it, with other comfortable, and pleasant meats, according to the Law; this exceeded Hezekiahs , both for number of paschal and other offerings, and for being kept in a more legal way, for the time, viz. in the first month, and because all sorts of men were more sanctified, at the beginning of Iosiah's , then at Hezekiahs'. PAR. 7. ERe I part with this , I cannot let slip; that there is a great question, between two learned men, Vatablus and Salianus, viz. Whether it belonged to the Priests only, or to the Levites also, to offer sacrifice. Vatablus saith, Levitae immo laverunt Pascha, & mactabant victimas, The Levites slew the , and killed the beasts for sacrifices. Salianus a 2 Chr. 35 11 confuteth him saying, Nusquam invenies hostias â Levitis jugulatas; mictatio hostiae vel maxime ad Sacerdotes pertinet (so it should be read) you shall no where find, that the Levites killed the Sacrifices, the slaying of them most properly belonged to the Priests, b 2 Chr. 29 22 2 Chro. 29.22. They, that is, the Priests (as is truly expounded) killed the Bullocks, and Lambs, received the blood, sprinkled it on the Altar: This duty is laid on the Priests, the sons of Aaron c Levit. 1.5. Levit, 1.5. etc. Again, Num. 18, 3. The Levites shall keep thy charge● and the charge of all the Tabernacle; only they shall not come nigh the vessels of the Sanctuary, and the Altar, that neither they, nor you also die. No less than death is menaced, if the Levites come nigh the Altar, which they must do, if they sacrificed aright. Both may be well reconciled thus; first, I say, that the ordinary continued duty was committed by God to the Priests only; and the Levites by their place, were not to meddle in sacrifices; yet if Levites were divinely inspired by God, to do so, they might, and did; so did Samuel, a Levite, offer a whole offering, d 1 Sam. 7.9. and in exigents, the priests were helped by the Levites, e 2 Chro. 29.35. 2 Chron. 29.35. The priests were so few, that they could not flay all the offerings, wherefore, their brethren the Levites did help them, till the work was ended; now the flaying of beasts belonged to the priests, the sons of Aaron, f Levit. 1.6. Levit 1.6. As this, upon extremity, was practised by the Levites; so were the other duties also; and Salianus saith well in this point, Nunc ex necessitate duntaxat, propter multitudinem victimarum, non ex officio, id munus usurpabant; Not the place or office of Levites, but necessity privileged them for this time, and for this Worke. PAR. 8. LEt me add, when priests and Levites were too few, when Sacrifices were superabundant, as in the jewish passovers, which were to be killed on a set month; on a set day of that month, on a set hour, towards the end of the day, on the first part of that hour, when all the Lambs could not be brought nigh the door of the Tabernacle; not only every Levite, chief of an house, but every Master of a Family was allowed to be as a priest, for that time; his servants as under Levites, his house, as a Temple: That this was one true reason of communication of that power to the Levites, and the people, appeareth by the contrary practice, when the Sacrifices were few, when they kept the , g Ezr. 9.19. Ezr. 6.19. The Priests and the Levites were purified together; all of them were pure, and killed the Passeover, for all the children of the captivity, and for their brethren the Priests, and for themselves; the Priests and Levites killed all the Lambs h see 2 Chron. 29.21. likewise: The sons of Aaron, offered a sin-offering for the Kingdom and the Sanctuary, and for judah (for the number of the sacrifices was but 21) and they killed the bullocks, and received the blood, and sprinkled it on the Altar; but when the Sacrifices and Thanke-offerings increased, when the priests were too few, the Levites helped, as the Scripture said before; yet if the people were unpure, they might nor, they did not, use their privilege; their prerogative ceased: and not the impure people themselves, but the Clerus Dei must reconcile the people: the Levites had the charge of killing the passovers, for every one that was not clean, to sanctify them unto the Lord, i 2 Chro. 30 17 2 Chro. 30.17. Yet did the only right, in ordinary, belong to the priests, to which sacrificing of beasts by the priests, Christ alluded k Math. 12.5. Math. 12.5. When he said, on the Sabbath days, the priests in the Temple profane the Sabbath; which is more forcible than if he had said, they observe not the Sabbath, because God commanded their sabbatical duty of sacrificing, l Num. 28 9 Num. 28.9. etc. Which not Levites but priests fulfilled. m Levit. 1. Levit, 1.6. PAR. 9 THey profane the Sabbath not simply, but by an improper locution, because if either Priests, or any others had killed, flayed, or cut a sunder any beasts, any where else, it had been a sin; but the law privilegeth the Temple, from the Law of the Sabbath (the wiser Jews held in Templo non esse Sabbatum, there is no Sabbath in the Temple, and a rule they have, that Circumcision chaseth away the Sabbath, for it was exactly kept on the eight day, though the eight day happened to be the Sabbath) it sanctified all the laborious works of men's hands, done in it, done to the worship of God, and his service (which is perfect freedom) makes those handy-workes lose their name of servile works. Away then with those halfe-Jewes, strict Sabbatarians, who will not have bells rung on the Sabbath days, nor water carried in pitchers, or pails to fill the font, nor the raw air of the Church to be sweetened with frankincense, perfumes, or wholesome odours, nor the decent ornaments of the Priests to be put on; they are ignorant, that the Temple privilegeth, if not sanctifieth such works; and what is done in ordine ad Deum, as tending towards the worship of God, is no way forbidden; when their imperial censoriousness, and scorn (the daughters of pride) are forbidden, for never had the common people liberty to judge their Priests; oh! how humble was Hannah to erring Ely! The heathen were very strict in keeping of their Holidays, yet, saith e Macrob. Sturnal. 1.16. Macrobius Vmbro denied him to be polluted, qui opus vel ad deos pertinens, sacrorumve causâ fecisset, vel aliquid ad urgentem vitae utilitatem respiciens actitasset: Scaevola denique consultus, quid Ferijs agiliceret, respondit, quod praetermissum noceret; Wherefore, if an Ox fell into any dangerous place, and the master of the family did help him out; or if a man under propped a broken beam of an house, to keep it from ruin, he seemed not to break the holy day, saith Scaevola: which words I have the rather related, to show, not only, as f Clem. Alex. Strom. 5. Clemens Alexandrinus hath it, Philosophia peripatetica ex lege Mosaicâ, & aliis dependet Prophetis; but even the very Roman Priests borrowed much of Moses his Law; and in likelihood, even from the Gospel his particular instance, that mercy is to be showed to the Ox in need, g Luk. 14.5. Luk. 14.5. Which of you shall have an Ox fallen into a pit, and will not strait way pull him out on the Sabbath day? which is all one with that, which Scaevola delivereth after to the Romans. PAR. 10. ANd now I come to the seventh extraordinary great Passeover, when the Israelites came out of the Babylonish captivity; for the Passeover appointed in Ezekiel, was only in Vision, where there is mention indeed of the first month, and foureteenth day of unleavened bread, Seven days, and other offerings for the feast, to be provided by the Prince, h Exek. 45.21. Ezek. 45.21. but what Ezechiel fore prophesied, was not accomplished in his time, but about 150. years after, it was performed by Ezra, which is the last famous Passeover specialized in the old Testament: when they were freed from bondage, and had dedicate the Temple, i Ezra 6.19. Ezra 6.19. they kept the , for all the children of the captivity, and for their brethren the Priests, and for themselves. And so much for the seven more eminent Passovers recorded in Scripture, from the first Mosaical Passeover, which he kept through faith, k Heb. 11.28. Heb. 11.28. to this of Ezra. The Prayer. O Lord God, thou only art pure, and none of us can be pure enough, sanctify us I beseech thee unto thyself, and teach and help us to cooperate thereunto with thee; inform us inwardly, and outwardly; square us according to thy Canon, make us strive for perfection pleasing to thee, but from the wild reformations of the ignorant people, good Lord deliver us. Amen, O Amen. CHAP. V The Contents of the fift Chapter. 1. The registered Passovers of the New Testament: Passovers were duly kept, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the custom of the Feast, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yearly: The just joseph and his spouse, the thrice sacred virgin, observed the Passovers: thrice every year all males were to appear before the Lord. 2. Maimonides his opinion, who might stay at home. 3. Maimonides in divers points erreth. 4. Calvin misopineth: It is unexpressed whether Christ were carried to the Passeover till he were twelve years old: Some Children forwarder than others: At twelve years of age Christ ascended. 5. Divers reasons that Christ at twelve years of age took the : he was a strict observer of the Law: They came to the Passeover principally for devotion: None was ever so well prepared to receive, as our Saviour. 6. The second Passeover, which the new Testament recordeth Christ to have honoured with his Passeover, was eighteen years after: Then Christ cast out buyers and sellers out of the Temple, and did many miracles, which Nicodemus believed, and the Galileans: Christ then received the Passeover, though so much be not expressed: the confession of the jews, that Christ strictly observed their Passovers. 7. The next years Passeover is pointed at, joh. 5.1. after this there was a Feast of the jews: Melchior Canus reproved: Zeppers distinction of Feasts amended. 8. Holy days appointed by the Church are sanctified by God, to God: the Feast of Purim, from Hamon's magical Lots, allowed: Queen hester's decree confirming the ordinance of the jews: the Feast of the dedication was of man's appointment: our most heavenly Saviour honoured it with his presence, words, and works: What, and of what this Dedication was: Zepper doth ill confound encaenia with Renovalia. 9 He is too strict against encaenia, or Feasts of Dedication. All dancing is not forbidden: encaeniare knowne to be all one with novam vestem endure: Revels or Feasts for the Dedication of our Churches lawful, and ancient: The royal prescriptions for this point wise and holy. 10. Maldonat his insolency taxed: Canus and Cajetan confuted by Pererius. 11. The Feast of the jews mentioned, joh. 5.1. was not the Pentecost, nor the Feast of Tabernacles, but the Passeover. 12. Pererius is too vehement, and confuted. 13. The next Passeover Christ went not to Jerusalem: The lawful reason thereof: The jews come to him, because he came not to them. 14. Sacraments, upon exigents, may be deferred. PAR. 1. THe Passovers in the new Testament, honoured by divine remembrance, are these: the first Passeover was, when Christ was about twelve years of age, unto which I make these my approaches: That there were yearly passovers both before, and after the birth of our Saviour, I doubt not: that joseph the foster father, and the most holy Virgin, yearly, and duly at the set time, received the unless there were just, and legal impediments, I willingly grant: certain it is, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the Feast, a Luke 2.42. which custom was Annual, on the foureteenth day of the first month: yea, it is not only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, according to the custom of the Feast. but more distinctly, and plainly, v. 41. they went unto Jerusalem, unto the Feast, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yearly, per annum, annuatim: the vulgar of Hentenius, and Sa●tandr●anus hath it per omnes annos; whether our Saviour was yearly carried, when he could not go, or went himself, so soon as he was able to go, is not expressed: some think yes, because they imagine his gracious mother (who loved him so tenderly) would not go to the Feast without him: others think, she left him sometimes behind her, with some especial friends, which caused the good old man, and the sacred Virgin, to seek him among their kinsfolks and acquaintance. b Luk. 2.44. Luke 2.44. rather than among others when he was wanting: clear it is, c Exod. 23.17. Exod. 23.17. Tribus vicibus in anno, conspicietur omnis masculus tuus, ad facies dominatoris domini: three times in the year all the males shall appear before the Lord God, which is repeated, d Exod. 34.23. Exod. 34.23. all this seems to make for Christ's often, and yearly ascent. PAR. 2. YEt if we may believe Maimonides, in Chagigah, cap. 2. little children might stay at home, though every Child which could hold his father by the hand, and go up from the entrance of the City unto the high place of the Temple (which was a steep ascent) not to be performed by very young children, must appear before the Lord: also besides little children, and women, the deaf, dumb, blind, lame, the fool, the defiled, the uncircumcised, the old, and the sick, the Hermaphrodite, and the servant, were excused if they ascended not; to this effect saith the jewish professor. PAR. 3. BUt he is awry in divers points: first, the women near to Jerusalem, were not exempted from coming, nor they in Jerusalem, from partaking of the Feast: secondly, their son, daughter, man servant and maid servant, the Itenerant Levite and stranger, the fatherless and widow were to ascend, and rejoice at the Feast of weeks, e Deut. 16.11. Deut. 16.11. and so at the great in all likelihood. Thirdly, their Hebrew servants certainly every one that could, did celebrate the ; for if they were circumcised, they were bound to keep the whole Law, as Saint Paul divinely expoundeth it, f Gal. 5.3. Gal. 5.3. though their bought, and uncircumcised servants might not come. PAR. 4. CAlvin, and his numerous Soldurii, or devoted men unto him, think none ascended to jerusalem, under twenty years old, viz. only those, qui transibant sub censum, who paid tribute, or were taxed, yet Christ went up at twelve years of age, and the jewish professor who knew better than Calvin what the Jews practised, vary from him: Tostatus thinks that the males, when they came to years of discretion than they all ascended; though it cannot be defined what year punctually children come to the years of discretion, because some are both riper witted than others, and better bred, and of stronger complexions, and so forwarder by fare then others: Caesaribus virtus contigit ante diem: yet I hold more probable, that as soon as children had strength to go so fare, and were instructed, and knew what belonged to those Solemnities, then commonly they did first celebrate those Typical Festivities so, (that I may wind up all, to my purpose) I conclude that if our heavenly Saviour ascended, or was carried up to Jerusalem, after the first year of his age, till he was twelve years old, it was more than was expressly by the Law enjoined: but because then he did ascend, I resolve it was most convenient for him, then to ascend, if not necessary, infallible consequences prove his ascent, g Luk. 2.43. Luke 2.43. The child jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem (therefore he ascended up hither) and ver. 46. they found him in the Temple, therefore he went up to Jerusalem, and was in the Temple. PAR, 5. BUt whether he kept that , which is made so glorious by the recorded presence of him, is made quaestionable: for the Negative, I see nothing but his duodecennall age (which yet is above answered) and the not mentioning of his receiving it, when less matters are mentioned, which is also of no great weight, since both omissions are of great matters, as of the Angels in the creation, when smaller things are insisted on, and besides are very frequent, see a joh. 20.30. & 21.25. joh. 20 30. Joh. 21.25. for the affirmative, thus I argue, first, from authority, b Theophilact in Luc. 2. Theophilact on Luke 2. Simul venit Christus cum parentibus in jerusalem, ut per omnia ostendat se non adversarium Deo, neque repugnantem his, quae a lege posita fuerant; Christ came to jerusalem fully to manifest that he was no adversary, either to God, or the established rules of the Law: Servavit ipse legem, quam dedit, saith B●da, he oserved the law which himself gave, ascendit tanquàm homo cum hominibus ad offerenda Deo sacrificia, as a man, he went up with other men to offer sacrifices unto God: Ludolphus the Carthosian, Laboranit puer Iesus itineribus longis, & vadit, ut honoret patrem coelestem, in Festis suis observans humiliter legem, Dominus legis; Christ when he was yet but a child underwent long journeys, to honour his heavenly father; and being Lord of the Law humbly kept the Law in his own feasts: of our late adversaries Barradius saith, Paschale agebat Festum, he kept the Feast of the : and Franciscus Lucas Brugensis, in Christ's Itinerary, Celebrat Pascha cum Parentibus. Secondly, from reason, many were the civil & politic causes why the people went to Jerusalem, and there might be mixed causes, consisting both of religious & worldly thoughts, or actions, whilst many a man laboured to improve his journey, but iter hoc Festi celebrandi causâ tanti susceptum est, saith Beda; and so much is intimated by the words of Scripture: they went up to jerusalem yearly, at the feast of the , ver. 41. after the custom of the feast, they went up to jerusalem, ver. 42. and when they had fulfilled the days (viz. of the Feast) they returned, ver, 43. which all laid together, fairly imply, that they came to Jerusalem for devotion sake principally, if not only, and were at the eating of the Paschall Lamb, in the appointed season, to wit, in the night of the foureteenth day of the month Abib, and stayed there duly, till all the rest of the days of that Festival solemnity were expired, and so soon as their holy duties were performed, presently they repaired homeward. Neither did our Saviour's extraordinary stay in the holy Temple savour of aught, but Religion, which he expressly calleth his Father's business, vers. 49. briefly thus, Christ came purposely to Jerusalem to offer up, and be partaker of the Passeover, and other offerings; therefore he would not frustrate his own ends; see a parallel of the last point, ver. 39 they brought Christ first to Jerusalem, and presented him to the Lord, vers. 22. and it is said vers. 39 When they had performed all things, according to the Law of the Lord, they returned; nothing was left undone. The second reason is thus shaped, none ever was so well prepared to eat the as Christ was; therefore I rather resolve, that he did take it; the antecedent is thus evinced, first, his bodily health and strength was proportionable to his age, if not above it, in his infancy, the child grew, c Luk. 2.40. Luk. 2.40. in his adolescency, or juvenilitie, jesus increased in stature, verse. 52. no bodily imperfection, or weakness put an obex to the receiving of the ; concerning the qualification, disposition, and state of his soul (even in his childhood) he was not only come to the years of discretion, knowing good from evil, but was capable of the greatest mysteries, he waxed strong in Spirit, was filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him; and a little after the time of this , jesus increased in wisdom, and in favour with God and man, vers. 52. increased in wisdom (though he was filled with it before) increased in favour with God (though before he was strong in Spirit, though before the grace of God was on him) Lastly, he increased in favour with men both before, and at, and after the Passeover (there is nothing to hinder this exposition) lest you may think, that men's perverseness might have put him bacl, or been exceptive against him, e. say now who can, that ever and one was so perfectly prepated as he, or that being so divinely adapted for it, he took it not. PAR. 6. THe second that Christ is recorded, in special, to have sanctified by his presence, was, about the beginning of miracles, which Jesus did, and about the first year of his public ministry; and about eighteen years after, the last mentioned : for from Cana of Galilee Christ went down to Capernaum, and continued not there many days, a joh. 2.12. john. 2.12. For the jews Passeover was at hand, and jesus went up to jerusalem, ver. 13. There cast he out buyers and sellers out of the Temple, ver. 14. And did divers miracles, which when they saw, many believed on him at the Passeover, in the feast day, ver. 23. About which time Nicodemus seeing his Miracles, confessed Christ to be a Teacher come from God; and by reason of the greatness of Christ's miracles, that God was with him, b joh. 3.2. joh. 3.2. Yea, the very Galilaeans having seen all the things, which he had done at jerusalem at the Feast received him, c joh. 4 45. joh. 4.45. But it is not specialized, no not in this neither, that Christ received it; yet I have read none, who deny, that Christ now received: And this shall make me content with this only proof, that he did receive, Christ came not to destroy, but to fulfil the Law, c Math. 5.17. Mat. 5.17. Therefore he being at jerusalem at that time, when that branch of the Law was to be fulfilled, he omitted it not, he broke it not, he fulfilled it, and received the . A most observable passage is in d Sebastian Munst. Annot. in Mat. 12. Sebastian Munster, (as that Gospel is in Hebrew, and by him set forth, and dedicated to Henry the eight) where Nizabon of the jews fiercely objecteth against us Christians, Si Christus odivit Sabbata, solennitates, & Neomenias, quarè suscepit super se legem judaicam, circumcisionem, Sabbatum, & Vniversam legem Israel, cunctis Diebus suis? If Christ hated our Sabbaths, solemn Feasts, and New Moons, why did he undergo, or fulfil all the Law of the jews? Circumcision, the Sabbath, and the Universal Law of Israel, all the days of his life? Munster excellently retorteth it, if Christ observed their whole law (as is here confessed) why do they, why did their forefathers accuse him of Sabbath breaking, and condemn him as a transgressor of the Law? their present confession is ground enough to conclude, he strictly solemnised this ; and was unjustly both accused and condemned. Whosoever preferreth not the searching out and finding of a truth, before a little pains in reading, may pass over the next argument, and many other in this Book. PAR. 7. THe next year, the next that Christ was present at, is pointed at, in these words, e joh. 5.1. john 5.1. After this there was a feast of the jews, and jesus went up to Jerusalem: If any object that here is no mention of the ? I answer, there is none expressly, and further add, both that there were many other Feasts of the jews; and that the diversity of expositors, and expositions seem to make the point more full of scruple, than I conceive it to be, f Melchior Caenus, loc. come. 11 c. 5. ad 5. Melchior Canus approoveth Cajetan for holding that this Feast of the jews was a Winter Feast, and so could not be the Feast of Easter, Canus himself addeth, Nihil interest, sive dicas fuisse Festum dedicationis Templi secundi sub Zorobabele, quod celebrabatur, tertiâ die mensis Adar, hoc est, Februarii, sive potius Festum sortium, quod Iudaeis solenne erat, 14 & 15. die ejusdem postremi mensis: That is, It mattereth not, whether it was the Feast of the dedication of the second Temple, under Zorobabel, which was kept on the third day of February, or the Feast of Lots, which was observed by them, on the 14. and 15. days of the same February, so he may cross the torrent, and invent a new crochet, he can be content to leave it in a certain uncertainty. It must be acknowledged that it is said a feast of the jews. and that the jews had many feasts, some Stata, some Conceptiva, saith Zepper, but, say I, their Conceptiva, were Stata also: therefore thus they may be better divided: Some were of primitive divine institution, as besides other, the three famous feasts of the , Pentecost, and Tabernacles, to which there was due a most strict obedience yearly: Thrice in a year shall all your male children appear before the Lord God, a Exod. 34.23. Exo. 34.23. viz. Once at each of these feasts: And there were some other posthumous feasts afterward, casually, and incidentally appointed, as the Feasts of the dedication, and of Lots, etc. made by men, pro re natâ, as occasion served, yet no way against God's Law divine. PAR. 8. ANd howsoever some frothy-mouthed ignorants rail against holy days, and say, none can make holy days save God only, who is holy: I say, when the Church of God maketh holy days, it is never done against God, or besides his will, but they are lawfully made, and are holy to God, and God may be said, mediately, to make them holy. Concerning the Feast of Lots, thus. When the jews were wonderfully delivered from the cursed plots of Haman; and evil fell on him who evil thought, they called those days Purim, b Esth. 9.26. Esth. 9.26. By reason of the Magical Lots, which Haman used, calling in the great Abaddon, to help the jews destruction; And the jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves to them, so as it should not fail, that they would keep those two days yearly, ver. 27. This was the decree of Esther, confirming the ordinance of the jews, ver. 32. Will you say, this was profane, or unlawful? So concerning the feast of Dedication, c 1 Mac. 4.59. 1 Mac. 4.59 judas and his Brethren, with the whole Congregation of Israel ordained, that the days of the dedication of the Altar should be kept in their season, from year to year, by the space of eight days Was the dedication of the Altar profane? were no days holy but Sabbaths? what was his feast of eight days, wherein one Sabbath at least was included? Though they esteem not of the Church's power, in making holy days, yet Christ in his time did observe those holy days, and sanctified them with the presence of his own words, works, and person, d joh. 10.22. joh. 10 22. It was at jerusalem the Feast of dedication, and it was Winter; there Christ did miracles, there did he plainly avouch himself to be God: To that feast of the Maccabees, do our late translators apply the words of Saint john, and with them agree Maldonat, and some others; yet if it were at the dedication of the whole City of jerusalem, when the decayed Walls were repaired, as Theodorus Mopsuestiensis opineth (though the dedication of the City Walls is not so holy a thing) or if it were the dedication of salomon's Temple, which was in this place aimed at, e Cyril. in Graeca Catena. Cyril rather embraceth; though it will be hardly proved, that the day of salomon's dedication was kept holy, and festival, after his Temple was destroyed, and after the new building of another Temple, and new dedication: Lastly, if it were the dedication of Zorobabel, when the Israelites came from Babylon, and Persia f 1 Esd. 7.7. 1 Esd. 7.7. (Where they offered to the dedication of the Temple, 100 Bullocks, 200. Rams, 400. Lamb's) I say, which soever of all these dedications it was, it is all one to our purpose; since Christ did honour the feast of the dedication, with his own presence, and with wonderful both words, and deeds; and that feast of dedication was at Jerusalem, and it was Winter, as I said before, from g joh. 10.22. joh. 10.22. Encaenia facta sunt, I cannot but tax Zepper, lib. 9 c. 9 Who maketh encaenia, and Renovalia to be Synonoma's, whereas Renovations must differ from dedications: and all feasts were often renovated; yea, some annually, some, often in a year, as the New-Moones, or the Feasts of the Calends. PAR. 9 THe same Zepper, faults those meetings of people, at the feasts of dedication of Temples, and especially the dancing at those times, as provocations to venery. How temptations may arise from the Dutch dances, I know not, they may be like those ungracious ones, h Exod. 32.6. Exod. 32.6. Or like the Herodian dances, though I was never any dancer; I know a harmless use may be made of dancing; himself confesseth Antiquitùs saltationes illae sacris populi veteris adhibitae sunt, nullaque ferè olim sacra, sine his, peracta fuerunt: the ancient jews used those dance, and there were scarce any holy times, or duties, performed without them; and he bringeth these instances, judg. 11.34. 1 Sam. 18.6. 2 Sam. 6.16. judeth 15.14. Since Christ he citeth a Theodor hist. Ec●le. 4.27. & Tripartit. hist. 6.48. Theodoret, and the Tripartite history, and I am sure God turned David's mourning into dancing) b Psal. 30.11. Psal. 30.11. And the good Father and prodigal penitent had dancing, c Luk 15.25. Luk 15.25. And that churlish Euclio, the elder brother faulted it, and that the rather commends it, especially since the pitiful old man represented God our merciful Father; and Christ found not fault with dancing, when he said, We have piped, and ye have not danced d Math. 11.17. Math. 11.17. But rather commends it, so e 1 Cor 4.17. 1 Cor. 4.17. When the Apostle speaketh of piping and harping, giving a distinction in sounds, whereby it may be known what is piped, or harped; it is very probable, that he alludeth unto the piping, and harping unto dancers, whose tunes guide the measures: But, to be brief, it is not dancing, that we so much strive for, in our Revels, or Feasts of dedication; as all other lawful Recreations, post sacra peracta, with friendly neighbourhood, and harmless good fellowship, and wise modest moderate feast, to the refreshing of the poor, and indigent; to the cutting off all needless, and litigious Lawsuits, when so many friends do meet to be merry, with putting on of their best apparel; insomuch, that encaeniare saith f August. ●ract. 48. in johan. Augustine, was vulgarly known to he all one with Novam vestem endure, to deck themselves in their best apparel, which the Country man calleth the putting on of the Apostle-day : which Feasts in both Testaments were kept with joy, and the Lord made them joyful, that I may speak in the Scripture phrase g Ezr. 6.16.22 Ezra 6 16.22. Without sin; if we follow the prescribed rules of our most sacred Sovereign King Charles (who is Inter primos primus, the glory, and chief of Princes) and of his most learned Father, King james of happy memory, who did holily what they did, to keep the judaizing Reformers from further madness. Even in Constantine's time the Encaenia were every where celebrated: Dedicationum Festivitates per urbes singulas, templorum nuper exaedificatorum consecrationes, frequentes Episcoporum in unum conventus, peregrinorum longè ab exteris regionibus accedentium concursus, mutuae populi in populum benevolentiae: And all holy exercises are particularly recounted by h Euseb. Histo. Eccle. 10.3. Eusebius,: So on the Anniversary Feasts in remembrance of the dedication of our Churches, after sacred exercises performed; Festivity, mirth, and jollity may be used: Rhenanus, on Tertullian, de Coronâ militis, thus; Mos commessandi in dedicationibus Templorum, & Natalibus Divorum diebus, antiquus esse cognoscitur; the custom of feasting on the days, when Churches were dedicated, and on the birthdays of Saints, is known to be ancient: but in all the Scriptures, no holy men ever feasted on their birth days; Pharaoh, and Herod did, of all the Feasts in the year, only the birth of our Lord, and of his forerunner, are kept holy, the rest are the Feast days of their obit's. Rhenanus is justly taxed by Pamelius, for applying that to their birthdays (for such was indeed the custom of the heathen) which ought to be said of their death-dayes, for they were anniversarily observed; and both those good customs we may, and do keep without sin, etc. PAR. 10. I Come to the jesuite Maldonate, and nearer to the point in hand: Magnâ nos Iohannes molestiâ, contentioneque liberâsset (saith he) si vel unum adjecisset verbum, quo, quis ille Iudaeorum dies fuisset Festus declarâsset, that is, Saint john might have rid us of much trouble, and strife, if he had added but one word declarative, what that Feast day was: saucily, boldly, malapertly written, Plus quàm pro censurâ, satis pro imperio, over-censorious, and imperiously enough. Will the jesuite prescribe to the Almighty a better course than he hath taken? will he grudge if the divine Scripture hath left some points dubious, enveloped, and fit to be enquired after? will he tax the holy writ of deficiency? when as Nature (which is nothing but the right hand of God) doth neither abound in superfluities, nor is wanting in necessaries? Or is it a molestation to dive into the harder places of the word of God? or if it be a strife, is it not an holy strife, to overcome error, to trace after the truth? The jesuites impudence being reproved, I approach to the matter. I will not touch at all the jewish feasts, either primary or secundary; but such only as have Patroness, and defenders, that they are meant by these words, a joh. 5.1. joh. 5.1. There was a Feast of the jews: you heard before the opinion of Cajetan, and Canus, see them excellently confuted by the learned b Perer. disput. 1 in joh. 5.1. Pererius. ●AR. 11. SOme of the late Writers held, it was the Feast of Tabernacles, saith Maldonat; but levi conjecturâ, as he professeth his judgement; and there indeed he is in the right: Many have held that it was the Feast of Pentecost, so Cyril. 2.123. chrysostom, Hom. 35. Euthymius, Author Historiae scholasticae, Aquinas, Lyranus, Hugo Cardinalis, Carthusian, thus, Communiter dicitur, quòd erat solennitas Pentecostes: Pentecoste, opinor, saith Theophylact; but Tolet proveth at large by the series rerum, & ordo historiae, by the passages of those times, it could not be Pentecost, which is strongly confuted also by the Itinerary, in Franciscus Lucas Brugensis: Canus also; and Cajetan hold it not likely, that it was Pentecost: Pererius refuteth it thus: after the other precedent Passeover, Christ both stayed in judaea, and thence after went into Galilee, and in his passage conferred with the woman of Samaria, four months before the Harvest, c joh. 4.35. joh. 4.35. But the Harvest in judaea was before Pentecost, d Levit. 23.10. & 16. Levit. 23.10, To the end of the 16. verse. So this Feast of the jews could not be Pentecost: Jrenaeus thinks the Passeover was meant in this place; so Rupertus, Barradius, Tolet, and many others. PAR. 12. PErerius in his vehemency for the Passover, mightily overlasheth, and (disput. 1.) he is peremptory; Nusquam, sive inveteris, sive in novi Testamenti Scripturâ reperire est aliud Festum, nisi Pascha, appellari Festum simplicitèr, & precise; that is, in no place of the Old, or New Testament, is any other Feast: But the called precisely, singly, and simply a Feast: but the great scholar is certainly in a great error, for the Feast of Tabernacles is called simply, and precisely a Feast e joh 7.8.10.11.14. joh. 7.8.10, 11.14. verses: But I remember not that ever the Feast of Pentecost was called a Feast singly, and directly: And I am sure the Passeover is called so divers times, more than any other Feast: View these proofs, f Luk. 2 42. Luk. 2.42. They went up to Jerusalem, according to the custom of the Feast; and that feast was the Passeover, as is proved by the precedent verse: Again, The jews would take jesus by subtlety, and kill him, but not on the Feast day, g Math. 26.5. Mat. 26.5. And by that word Feast is the Passeover meant, as appeareth ver. 2. Lastly, if you look for the use of the same word, in Saint john, you shall find in h joh. 13.29. joh. 13.29. Buy those things we have need of against the feast, but by the word [Feast] only the Passeover is meant in that place, as is evident ver. 1. Briefly, sum it thus; Pentecost is never called by itself, a Feast: the Passeover is divers times, above other feasts solely, and simply called a Feast; therefore by these words of the Evangelist, joh. 5.1. There was a feast of the jews, and jesus want up to Jerusalem; Pentecost was not understood; but the Passeover, in the fairest way of argumentation, must be meant: It is prefixed, After this there was a Feast of the jews, that is, after all things before recorded in the 2, 3. and 4. Chapters, Christ ascended again into the Holy City, healed him who lay at the pool of Bethesda thirty and eight years, ver. 9 And did livers other things. PAR. 13. THe next being the third, after Christ's public ministry, Christ went not to Jerusalem, nor did take the Passeover, at least, in its appointed usual time, and place: nor was he at the following feast of Pentecost; being seven weeks after: A reason was this; The jews sought to kill him, john 7.1. i joh. 7.1. And therefore he walked in Galilee; and therefore he would not walk in jury, ibid. But certainly the Scribes came to him from Jerusalem, to Galilee (because he did not at these feasts, come to them) and he disputed with them about keeping the Tradition of the Elders, a Math. 15.1. Mar. 7.1. Math, 15.1. Mar. 7.1. See the many admirable things done by Christ, in the space of six months, namely, from the Passeover, till the Feast of Tabernacles, in the excellent Itinerary of Christ, made by Franciscus Lucas Brugensis: When the murderous rage of the jews was somewhat cooled (though still the jews hated Christ b john 7.7. joh. 7.7.) About the midst of the feast of Tabernacles, jesus went up into the Temple, and taught, ver. 14. PAR. 14. THe exact keeping of the Passeover was not so strictly appointed, but many occasions might cause it to be differred; Christ was not bound to cast himself into the mouth of danger, whilst they ravenously thirsted for his blood; but, as sometimes he withdrew himself, by disappearing, and passed through the midst of them, so here he thought fit, not so much as to come among them. Nor is our spiritual so merely necessary, or so absolutely commanded, but it may be omitted sometimes, though never neglected, much less contemned; Sickness, local distance, danger, and the astonishing, or stupifying consideration of sins unrepented of, may excuse one from receiving, for a while: I dare not pronounce that profound humility to be sin, When Peter fell down at jesus knees, saying, depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord, c Luk. 5.8. Luk. 5.8, I suppose Christ was seldom nearer joined to him in love: And I have known him, who in holy thoughts of his own unworthiness sinlesly (as I conceive) abstained. Want of Charity is a sin; not receiving, when men want Charity, is not sin; to receive then, were a double sin: d Math. 8.8. Math. 8.8. The Centurion said, Lord, I am not worthy, that thou shouldest come under my roof; yet none in Israel had so much faith, as he: To the woman of Canaan, who accounted herself as a dog (unworthy to eat bread at the Table) content with the crumbs which fell from the Master's Table, e Math. 15.27. Mat. 15.27. Christ said, her faith was great, and, be it unto thee as thou wilt, ver. 28. Subjecting his power to her desires. And thus much of the third , during Christ's public manifestation, by our blessed Saviour, or omitted, or privately kept. The Prayer. MOst gracious God, and blessed Saviour, who hast commanded all those who are heavy laden, to come unto thee, and hast promised to refresh them, and hast apppointed thy blood of the Testament to be shed for many, for the remission of sins, be merciful unto the sins of us all; make us walk strongly, and Christianly, by the strength of thy Sacraments, all the days of our lives; and let us so feed on the holy consecrated signs, that we may never be separated from the thing signified, even holiness itself, jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. CHAP. VI The Contents of the sixth Chapter. 1. In what manner Christ kept his last with its particular rites, cannot be sooner found then by the jewish observation of the Sabbath, in those times. 2. The jews had a liberty at the first to choose a Lamb or a Goat for the proper roasted Paschall Sacrifice. 3. A Lamb and a Kid are not all one, against Paulus Brugensis. 4. The difference between the Pascha, and the Chagigah. 5. The reason of some jews, and some late good Christians confuted. 6. Rupertus his overnice observation. 7. The Lambs or Kids, in the Egyptian Passeover, were called out four days before. 8. This was also a temporary rite, divers reasons, why they then chose the Lamb, or Kid so long before hand in their first Passeover. 9 Hunnius erreth in this point. 10. The striking or sprinkling of the blood on the two side-postes, and upper doore-post was not any of the durable rites, but appropriated to the first Passeover. 11. Sprinkling of blood much used of old. 12. Empty houses in Goshen, needed not be sprinkled. 13. The Angelus exterminator could not hurt, when the blood was sprinkled. 14. Such a sprinkling as this was used in no other sacrifice. 15. The jews general consent, that such sprinkling was never after in use. 16. A true reason, why this ceremony ceased. 17. Christ was the door thus besprinkled. 18. Hannibal his imitation. 19 The first Passeover was eaten in great haste. 20. The succeeding Passovers were not eaten in such haste. 21. Fair means, and foul were used to hasten the Israelites out of Egypt. 22. Vatablus his opinion of the four Ensigns, under which the Israelites marched. 23. They went out rather been cincti, then quintati. 24. Reasons why they went not only five by five in a rank. 25. Yet some went well armed, and some were unarmed. 26. The most probable manner of their departure out of Egypt described at large. 27. The Israelites had abundance of lesser standards, but four chief ones in several quarters. 28. They eaten the Passeover in great haste, with their loins girt. 29. Lose hanging vestments used ordinarily by the jews: Close, well-girt apparel, on special occasions. 30. Their haste is proved from their being shod, the Hypallage of Calceamenta in pedibus, instead of pedes in Calceamentis, paralleled. 31. Going barefoot, was a sign of sorrow. 32. Wearing of shoes, or sandals betokened haste. 33. The staff in their hand, did argue their haste. 34. (In their hand) these words do not signify that their staves were never out of their hands. 35. jacobs' staff passing over Jordane. 36. The usefulness of a staff. 37. The Talmudists say, it was not eaten in such haste ever after. 38. Nor was there any need of such haste. 39 A two fold haste, simple and comparative. 40. The words, Exod. 12.25. Ye shall keep this service, denote rather the substantials, than the accidentals of the Passeover. 41. A specious objection, that all the precepts of the Passeover were to be kept; the answer thereunto, from a known distinction; from the authority of Maimonides; from other learned Christians, Skilled in Hebrew Criticism; from the sacred Text. PARAGRAPH. 1. THe last Passeover which Christ kept comes now to be handled; what our most blessed Saviour did six days before the , see most exactly, and curiously set down in each particular, in Christ's Itinerary, made by a Franc. Lucas Brugens, in Itinera. p. 16. 17 Franciscus Lucas Brugensis, pag. 16. and 17. and b Selneccer. fol. 440. etc. Christian Padagog. Selneccerus, in his Christian Pedagogy, fol. 440. etc. The absolute full manner, how he received that last Jewish Passeover, cannot be perfectly understood; many, many things are omitted; I doubt not, but more is omitted then written, or infallibly deducible from things written: we have no surer rule than the Jewish observation of eating the Passeover, in the days of our Saviour; for, as I said before, certainly he transgressed not the Law: here Reader, siste gradum, stay and consider, because inopina are graviora; I give thee warning, I will not go the nigher way into Canaan, which I could in a short time, but with the Israelites, by the conduct of a pillar of smoke, and a pillar of fire, I intent God willing, to lead thee to, and through jordan; yea, through the deep Seas on dry foot; through the thorny, and troublesome Wilderness, up hill and down hill, adversaries on every side: if thou wilt walk along with me, I doubt not, but God will vouchsafe unto us, both Manna and quails, which shall fit thy taste, being most heavenly food, in comparison of the Garlic, Onions and fleshpots of Egypt: if thou faintest, give over, return; leave me to God my guide, and to my industrious companions: neither shall we ever contentedly find out, what the Jews of our Saviour's time did observe in the eating of the Passeover, till we have handled these two points. First, what they were to do expressly. Secondly, what they did voluntarily perform, without particular precept. In the first point, let us weigh these two parts. First, what was temporary and peculiar to the first Passeover. Secondly, what was eternally observable, during the Law Mosaical. In the first Section of the first part, these were the particular ceremonies annexed to the first Mosaical Passeover. 1. They had a liberty to choose a Lamb, or Goat. 2. They praepared it four days before hand. 3. They strooke the blood upon the doors, and posts of their houses. 4. They eaten the Passeover in haste, which was only in Egypt, saith Maimonides: At other times, they had not so great cause to eat it speedily; and other Ceremonies depend on this. 5. They went not out of doors. 6. They who had small families were to fill the company from the next house. PARA. 2. THe first Section, in the first part of the first point is this, the Jews had a liberty to choose either Lamb or Goat, for the Egyptian or Mosaical first . PAR, 3. TO say, as Paulus Brugensis doth, that a Lamb, and a Kid are all one, or they might not offer a Kid, as others impute unto him, is ridiculous; for the disjunctive is observable, c Exod. 12.5. Exod 12.5. ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats: Two distinct words in the original; both might be, either might be; neither is excluded. There are two memorable places often to be used in this treatise, proving that divers sorts of Cattle, and beasts, were offered at the , d Deut. 16.2. Deut. 16.2. Thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover unto the Lord thy God of the flock and of the herd; more apparently and distinctly, e Num. 28.19. Num. 28.19. And two young Bullocks and one Ram, seven Lambs of the first year without blemish, and one Goat, besides the offerings in the morning, verse. 23. PAR. 4. SO, f 2 Chro. 35.13. 2 Chron, 35.13. other divers holy offerings they had at the , but they differed much from the Paschall Lamb. For first, they roasted the with fire; but other holy offerings they sod, ibidem. Secondly the Paschall Lamb was killed the even or night before, and eaten, or burnt with fire morning, but the other feast offerings continued divers days usque ad finem septemdialis Festi. 3. None of the other Sacrifices, Bullocks, Heifers, Goats, or Kids, etc. no nor other Lamb, or Lambs themselves, which were offered, and eaten, after the first night (though offered on the Feast of ) was the Paschall Lamb, but rather Paschall Sacrifices, and the matter of feasting with much joy; and not celebrated with so ardent devotion as the Paschall Lamb: insomuch, that the whole Feast seems to have the denomination from the Paschall Lamb, the first dish of that Feast, the especial type of Christ, and forerunner, and type of our Sacrament. Likewise one Kid of the Goats was commanded to be offered, for a Sinne-offering in the beginning of their months g Num. 28.15. Num. 28.15. in Festo Calendarum, Noviluniis, or new Moons, or Neomenian Festivities; therefore against Brugensis it is most apparent, a Lamb, and a Kid were not all one, one was offered at one time, and another at another time, and both sometimes in one Feast, and a Kid might be the peculiar , in Egypt: the Jews themselves generally agree, that not a Goat, but a Lamb, was ever after their Paschall oblation, in token of their great delivery. PAR. 5. THough a most specious objection to the contrary ariseth, h 2 Chro. 35.7 2 Chron. 35.7. where the holy King Josiah gave to the people thirty thousand Lambs, Ob. and Kids, all for the offerings? yet it is thus fairly allayed. Sol. He saith not expressly, neither can deduction lead that Kids were then the proper ; but both Lambs, Kids, and Bullocks are for the universal paschal offerings of that Feast, as is in the same verse reckoned all together, as the magnificent donary of that good King; though the Lambs only might be at that time, the roasted , spoken of vers. 13. the Sacramental , so i Deut. 16.2. Deut. 16.2. immolabis Domino Phase de ovibus, & bobus, where we must not conclude, that Oxen, and Calves there and then, were to be offered as the peculiar ; the holiest of holy offerings; the sacred Sacramental : but Oxen and Calves were to be esteemed offerings, in a large sense, as conducing to the Feast of the Chagigah, and as general Sacrifices, whose way was to be prepared by the true and proper offering of the Paschall Lamb. Yet say some, both Jews and late Christians, that in those tumultuary times, Ob. at their going out of Egypt, when all things were huddled up in haste, when fear, doubt, danger, and amazement encompassed them, they might serve their readiest turn, with either Kid or Lamb, at that time? But this is non causa pro causâ, Sol. and they bring a shallow reason to confirm an apparent truth: the Scripture voucheth expressly, that at the first they might take out of the Sheep or from the Goats, k Exod. 12.5. Exod. 12.5. But against their reason it is observable, that they were not confined to any short time, but might take leisure enough with mature deliberation, before they chose their , and at the choice of it: Besides, the Sacrifice was to be chosen, on the tenth day of the first Month, l Exod. 12 3. Exod. 12.3. and slain on the foureteenth day, between the two Evenings, vers. 6. four whole days they were to keep it by them; and therefore they preferred not the Kid to be the for want of time; nor made they their choice in the confused hurry; for the great hurliburly was in the night of their Exodus, and not till the destroying Angel had passed over their houses, and their choice of the was four days before: I rather take this to be the cause, the Israelites were under the most heavy persecution of the domineering Egyptians, and mercilessely as it were condemned to the Brick-kills, which bondage is called the Iron Furnace, a Deut. 4 20. Deut. 4.20. the midst of the Furnace of Iron, b 1 King. 8.51 1 King. 8.51. which is the hottest place; and every Shepherd being an abomination to the Egyptians, c Gen 46.34. Gen. 46.34. though the Israelites had some Flocks, d Exod. 10.9. Exod. 10.9. and the Egyptians themselves had some Flocks, e Gen. 47.17. Gen. 47.17. yet it is not likely that the Israelites had Lambs enough of their own, no nor of the Egyptians borrowed Lambs (if they borrowed any) for this great ; but the sacrifice in this scarcity of Lambs, was supplied by Kids, even by Gods own allotment, or appointment; which afterward might not be so, when they had sufficient Lambs. PAR. 6. RVpert's observation is too nice, that a Lamb, or a Kid might be the Passeover, to signify Christ, qui in se est Agnus, sed nobis est Hoedus, quia nostra peccata in se luenda suscepit, that is Christ in himself is a Lamb, but to us a Kid, because he took upon him the punishment of our sins, as if agnus dei non tollit peccata mundi, f joh. 1.29. joh. 1.29. as if he were not brought as a Lamb to the slaughter, g Esa. 53.7 Isa. 53.7. and his soul made an offering for sin, vers. 10. for the transgression of my people was be smitten, verse. 8. As for Hazael 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, caper emissarius, or scape-Goate, the holy writ is express, h Levit. 16.22 Levit. 16.22. the Goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities: It was a Goat, not a Kid, aries not hoedus, and if it had been hoedus it took not the punishment of their sins (for it was a scape-Goate, and lived) but their sins were laid on the head of it, but Christ his own self bore our sins in his own body, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (to) the Tree, or (on) the Tree, i 1 Pet. 2.24. 1 Pet. 2.24. and Christ died for our sins, k 1 Cor. 15.3. 1 Cor. 15.3. PAR. 7. THe second ceremony peculiar to the first Pesach, was this; The Lamb or Kid was prepared, and in a readiness four days before. PAR. 8. THis circumstance is wholly omitted, at the repeating of the Law, l Levit. 23. Levit. 23. nor is any such ceremony mentioned (though many others are) m Deut. 16. Num. 28. Ezra 6. 2 Chro. 30. and 35. Deu. 16. Num. 28. Ezra. 6. 2 Chron. 30. 2 Chron. 35. The was prepared for our Saviour, by his disciples, but the day, in the night whereof it was eaten, n Matth. 26.17 Matth. 26.17. etc. Many were the reasons why they took so much time, for this Egyptian , and not ever after: First, that by beholding the Lamb, they might be put in mind, to prepare themselves, and all other things also, for their journey, and not Reason. 1 be taken tardy, nor adjourn all things over to the last: quoties agnus balatum emittebat, toties quasi Tubae sonitus, exitur as castrorum acies excitabat, that is, as often as the Lamb bleated (saith Rupert) it served in stead of a Trumpet, to stir them up, to the raising of their armies, at least in affection. Secondly, to show to the Reason. 2 Egyptians, that they feared them not, nor cared to displease them, by setting aside, so long before hand, those Kids, and especially Lambs, for to be sacrificed and eaten, which the Egyptians could not abide to be slain, much less to be eaten; for this was abomination to them, because they worshipped them as Gods, there being no such occasion in future times, they needed not to store up their Lamb's Reason. 3 four days before the Sacrifice. Thirdly, that they might have fair time to search and examine, if there were any manner of legal defect, inward or outward, grown Reason. 4 or growing. Fourthly, if they had been to seek their sacrifice, the last day they might perhaps have miss of it. So many Lambs or Kids, and those every way perfect, were not presently to be found, and then the Apollyon or exterminating Angel would have punished their defect. Fifthly, that the presence of the Lamb Reason. 5 for four days might minister unto them discourse of God's great favour to them, by the means of that freeing them from the death of their firstborn, and giving them this as a sacred earnest of their delivery from captivity, and vassalage in Egypt. Sixtly, what the Jews wanted, they were permitted by God to borrow Reason. 6 or take of the Egyptians: Now if they wanted Lambs or Kids as is likely they must needs provide them four days before hand, because in the three day's antecedent among the Egyptians, was continual darkness. And though the Israelites had light, where they dwelled, yet the Egyptians saw not one another, neither risen any from his place for three day's o Exod. 10.23 Exod. 10.23. neither do I think, that the Israelites had been able to see to choose Lambs or Kids, if they had gone into the Egyptian Territories, where one might feel darkness, or darkness might be felt, Exod. 10.21. Exod. 10.21. Therefore they must needs, and did provide the Lambs and Kids four days before hand. Seventhly, to put them in mind, that as they provided themselves for a departure, so it was to an holy departure, Reason. 7 and the beginnings of labouring for Canaan must be sacred, and their first footing not to be moved, till God had been devoutly served, which cannot be done suddenly, nor hastily, nor was here done, without four day's preparation, and diligent circumspection. Reason. 8 Lastly, the Lamb was to be chosen, and as it were in their sight for four days, perhaps to signify either that Christ was publicly to be seen, known, made manifest by his open works of his ministry, about four years, he was offered up (a day being set for a year in Scripture phrase) or else to foresignify that Christ should come four days to Jerusalem before the passion; and so he did when they cried Hosanna, as if they had found the perfect Sacrifice; their redeemer being in sight, and welcomed with the extraordinary applause of the multitude, that went before, and that followed after, p Matth. 21.9. Matth. 21.9. from the mount of Olives to the City, and through a good part of it, from the City into the Temple, even in which temple the children tontinued crying, and said, Hosanna to the Son of David, verse. 25. Now the most of those reasons saying in future times (for they were gone out from among the Egyptians) and they needing no such testimonies of the faith, they had no such stinging threat, as the death of their firstborn, nor wanted such a spur to quicken their preparation, for a speedy journey) as they were not commanded, so neither did they practise in future times, to gather up the Lambs four days before hand. PAR. 9 AEGidius a Aegid. Hunnius' comment. in Matth, 26. Hunnius hath it thus, Apostoliparant agnum, masculum, anniculum, immaculatum, & per quatriduum â reliquo grege separatum, mactantes juxta legem, that is, the Apostles prepare a Lamb, a male of a year old, without spot, separated four days from the rest of the flock, slaying it, according to the Law, in which opinion, he is both singular and singularly false, and did not distinguish the temporary rites from the perpetual. PAR. 10. THe third ceremony peculiar to the first was, the striking or the sprinkling of the blood on the two side-posts, and upper doore-post of the house, Exod. 12.7. Exod. 12.7. PAR. 11. THe sprinkling of blood was an ordinary ceremony, in the levitical Law, and sometimes it was done with the finger alone, b Num. 19.4. Num. 19.4. Eleazar shall take of the blood with his singer, and shall sprinkle the blood of the red Heifer, directly before the Tabernacle of the Congregation, seven times: Sometimes sprinkling was used by other mediate things, c Heb. 9.19. Heb. 9.19. Moses took the blood of Calves and goats with water and scarlet Wool, and Hyssop, saying, this is the blood of the Testament, which God hath enjoined unto you, and he sprinkled with blood both the Tabernacle, and all the vessels of the Ministry. In the old Testament it was enjoined unto the people as a part of their Covenant, to be sprinkled with blood, to which words of Moses our Saviour alludeth in his consecration, d 1 Cor. 11.25 1 Cor. 11.25. This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is shed for you, or as it is varied, e Matth. 26.28 Matth. 26.28. This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins. PAR. 12. ANd in this third ceremony these things are farther observable as most probable: first that those houses in Goshen needed not to be sprinkled where no people were, where no Lamb was killed, where all the inhabitants entered into other houses, to make up the full number in Communicants. PAR. 13. SEcondly, in the houses that were sprinkled with blood, according to the Law, (whether the doors were open or shut, it was all one) the destroyer was not to do harm but was to pass by it, and to enter no other way, or open whatsoever, though the entrances might be many, and questionless were many, by the chimneys, by the windows, and other in-lets of air. PAR. 14. THirdly, that the striking of the blood on the two side-posts, and upper doore-post of the houses was used in no other Sacrifice. PAR. 15. FOurthly this punto is most certain, that this ceremony was only peculiar to this Passeover and to no succeeding Passovers, for they had not the same cause. The general consent of the Jewish Rabbins is, that it was never used after: f Beza, ad Matth. 26.20. Beza saith, Summo consensu, Doctores omnes Hebraurum testantur, that is, the Jewish professors, with an universal agreement, witness that the sprinkling of the doore-posts, and lintel, and superliminary belonged only to that night when they were to go out of Egypt. PAR. 16. THe reason following maketh it apparent, this was commanded to prevent the destroying Angel, and to keep the firstborn of the Israelites from being slain, as the firstborn of the Egyptians were slain, which is most firmly grounded, on g Exod. 12.13. Exod. 12.13. The blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are, and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the Plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, and it is also confirmed h Heb. 11.28. Heb. 11.28. Through faith Moses kept the Passeover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn, should touch them. When this occasion was removed, and no such cause of fear, they omitted ever after that ceremony, and Sublatâ causâ totali, tollitur effectus, nor was ever mention made afterward of this ceremony, as practised from that time, but the words to the Hebrews seem to restrain it to the first by Moses rather then by others. PAR. 17. I Dare not say, that the sprinkling of the side-posts, and upper doore-post, had no reference unto Christ, who saith of himself i joh 10.7. joh. 10.7. Verily, verily, I am the door of the Sheep; and, without that addition, ver. 9 I am the door, I am sure this door was be sprinkled with blood, on all sides, before, and behind; his head, and his arms, as the superliminary, both sides of him, as the side-posts, and his feet as the threshold; Mundans aerem, terramque suo sanguine, cleansing both air, and earth with his blood, and all mankind in them, of such as believe in him; which was a more perfect smell, or unction, than the precious ointment of Aaron was, that run down upon his beard, and went down to the skirts of his garments, Psal. 133.2. l Psal. 133.2. For this trickled from his bloodyed head, crowned with sharp thorns, his indented, and as it were furrowed bacl, by the tearing whips, and rods, his broad-wounded side, so broad that Thomas the Apostle put his hand into it, l joh 20.27. Joh. 20.27. his pierced or rather digged hands and feet for so the Hebrew will bear it, Psal. 22.16. I saw trickled even to the ground, this is a better sprinkling, than all the levitical sprinklings, for by it our hearts are now sprinkled from an evil conscience. In the old Law all parts of their doors were sprinkled with blood, to turn away the Apolyon, or Abaddon, the destroying Angel, but the thresholds of their doors were not bloodied, m Heb. 10.22. by which omission perhaps was signified, that no sacred or holy thing should be cast on the ground, or trodden under feet; which truth our Saviour divinely ratifieth, n Matth 7.6. Matth. 7.6. Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before Swine, lest they trample them under their feet: neither do I remember any where that the Threshold or the ground were sprinkled in any of the levitical Services, but men and all the people, a Heb 9.13. & 19 Heb. 9.13. and 19 and the book in the same verse, and the Tabernacle, and all the vessels of the Ministry, verse. 21. but Christ (spirituale illud ostium, that spiritual door) was sprinkled all over with blood, and by the blood sprinkling of him we are saved from the exterminator, or destroying Angel. Two things more let me observe e●re I shake hands with this point: first, that only one door they did strike with blood, on the two side-posts, and on the upper doore-post of the houses, b Exod. 12.7. Exod. 12.7. (the door in the [singular) throughout all the Chapter, yet door of [house's] and vers. 13. posterns, backe-doores, or other outlets needed not to be stricken with blood, but as I guess, only the great street door, or fore door, or the door in the high way of the death inflicting Angel. Secondly, this type must be cast into the number of those types, which were soon to fade away, and were never performed but once, as the offering up of Isaac, as Jonah's resemblance, as Sampsons' carrying away the gates of Gazah, and the figure of the Lion, and the Bees, out of the eater came meat, out of the strong came sweetness, other Types of our Saviour were yearly, monthly, weekly, daily to be performed, as sacrifices and the like. PAR. 18. IT may be the witty Hannibal had heard how the destroying Angel was to pass over the houses, marked with blood, and in part imitated it; for he commanded the Tarentines to keep within doors, and write their names on the doors; all houses whose doors were not written upon he pillaged, and gave over to direption, so d Livius, lib. 25 Livius, and Polybius specializeth the incription [Tarentini] that was the ward-word. I am sure Master George Sandys in the relation of his travails begun, Anno 1610. saith thus, during our abode at Cairo in Egypt fell out the feast of their Byram, when in their private houses they slaughter a number of sheep, which cut in gobbets they distribute unto their slaves and poorer sort of people, besmearing their doors with their blood, perhaps in imitation of the Passeover, so fare he. PAR. 19 THe fourth ceremony peculiar to the first Paschatizing was, They eaten their Passeover in haste; I shall proceed too hastily if I do not distinguish on the word [haste] haste is twofold, simple; comparative: they eaten the first Passeover simply, in all haste possible, God commanded it; time, place, and the occasions so required it; and accordingly they performed it: And in this first Passeover, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [in haste] doth involve, tremulous, fearful, sudden, and confused motions, upon the apprehension of some solid, great danger; Mephibosheth's nurse fled in haste, and in the flight lamed him, e 2 Sam. 4.4. 2 Sam. 4.4. The Syrians fled in haste, and cast away their vessels, and their garments, f 2 King. 7.15. 2 King. 7.15. Concerning the second kind of haste, I say, they are the Passeover ever after in haste, yet not absolutely, but only referentially, in respect of their slower eating of their common meals; or in respect of their continued feasting, at other Sacrifices, which were eaten with grave majesty, and devour, during solemnities: In Egypt they eaten that in confused haste, caused through danger, and fear; the same radix is used, Deut. 20.3. Deut. 20.3. do not tremble, or do not haste which words are Synonyma's, in the judgement of our last translatours, and the immediate consequents prove, that terrors wenre annexed to such haste. PAR. 20. IN the like haste was it never eaten afterwards; for they had not the same cause of terror, or spur to hasten them; yet for ever after they might eat it in more haste than their ordinary food, and that first in remembrance of their prime president: Secondly as it was a Sacrifice or a Sacrament, not to be retarded, or demurred upon too long: thirdly, because it was as a preparatory, or antipast to a second supper: A sacred mess beginning with sour herbs, their Paschall Festivals, which in Deuteronomy God enjoined: of which (volente Deo) more hereafter: where, I say, the eating of the Passeover, in the fore-described haste, was peculiar to the first , in that one proposition two are involved, one affirmative, the other negative, the affirmative, that it was eaten speedily then, and very speedily: the negative, it was never after eaten in such haste, as the first was, for than it would be of peculiar, more common, and indeed, not peculiar, Gratia quae datur omnibus, non est gratia, a courtesy done to all, is no especial favour done to any one. Concerning the positive, or assertive part, thus; that it was commanded to be eaten in haste, is notified, g Exod 12.11. Exod. 12.11. ye shall eat it, in Festinatione or Festinanter, in haste, or hastily, that the things commanded were suitably performed, is also evidenced, ver. 28. the Israelites did as the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron, which is most remarkably repeated, so did they; certainly Moses forepropecied to Pharaoh, and it came to pass h Exod 11.8. Exod. 11.8. All these thy servants shall bow down themselves unto me, saying, get thee out, and all the people that follow thee, therefore the Egyptians did humbly beg them to go forth in haste. PAR. 21. IOsephus saith, josephus' lib. 2. cap. 5. the Egyptians went by troops to the King's palace, crying out that the Israelites might be suffered to departed; and as certain it is, the Egyptians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out of the Land in haste, Exod. 12.33. Exod. 12.33. And the Israelites were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves any victuals, vers. 39 so all things were done in great haste, greater haste with any convenience could not be made, the Israelites longing to be gone, some Egyptians using fair means, some violence, to thrust them out of Egypt in haste. PAR. 22. A Main objection against the speedy departure of Israel out of Egypt, Ob. Exod. 13.18. in a confused manner, may be taken from Exod. 13.18. where it is said the children of Israel went up harnessed (or by five in a rank, as it is in the margin) out of the Land of Egypt, quintati, say some, armati ascenderunt, saith the vulgar, Militari ordine, Vatablus in Num. 2.2. in battle array, as Tremellius varieth it, Vatablus from a learned Jew addeth, they marched under four ensigns: the first was Reubens, whose banner was a Man, signifying Religion, and reason: The second standard was Judah's, and it was a Lion, denoteing power, as in after times, Pompey the great his arms was Leo ensifer, engraven on his fignet: The third distinct colours were Ephraim's of an Ox, intimating patience, and toilsome labour: The fourth was Dan's, bearing an Eagle, betokening wisdom, agility, and sublimity from whence it is likely, the Towering Romans had taken after divers descents, their Eagle, their pares aquilas (each side having their pares aquilas in their civil wars) and their spread-eagles, under Constantine, and since. PAR. 23. But for men to be first marshaled, in such military order, and to march in such equipage, will take up too much time, to be said to be done in confused haste: therefore there was no such disorderly speed, as I before established? PAR. 24. I Answer, first, though the same Hebrew word may signify (armed) as Josh. 1.14. ye shall pass (armed) or marshaled by five, Sol. joh. 1.14. as it is in our margin: likewise Phinees came to the outside of the (armed) men, or the men ranked by five that were in the host of the Midianites, and Amalekites, a judg. 7 11. judge 7.11. etc. Yet the Chaldee turneth it (girded) and the word may also well denote the girding under the fifth rib, in all three places: The 70. do render the same word, Iosh. 1.14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, well-girt: nor am I the first, who observed this double interpretation; Aben Ezra, said of old, Hebraeos praecessisse accinctos, per Quinos, that the Hebrews took their journey by Five, and girded also under the fifth rib: or thus, their loins being girded (which declareth the haste, that they were appointed to make) for the girding of loins, is to make way for haste; of which more hereafter. Secondly, if they had gone in single ranks, only by Five and Five (as many do opine) the first five had come to the bank of the red sea, long before any one of the last threescore thousand had stirred, one foot; for as they traveled, they went from Ramese, and pitched in Succoth, which is but eight miles from Succoth, to the edge of the Wilderness of Etham, b Num. 33.6. Num. 33.6. And that was about eight miles more; from Etham to Pihahiroth (which is about 16. miles) where they emcamped by the Sea, as it is, c Exod. 14.1. Exod. 14.1. between the Wilderness and the red Sea; so they had but three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mansions, or Stations, and they were in all, about 32. miles, till they pitched by the Seashore; And fifty hundred thousand men, marching along in their single files by five and five, will take up more length than thirty and two miles. Therefore it cannot be rightly understood, that they marched only five, or by five abrest, or in front, and no more, but they might all, and did all go more abroad, and took up a larger breadth, with their loins girt, as they were commanded, and commanded as a token of haste: Certain it is, the Land of Goshen is not (in the shortest cut, and the nearest way) above two hundred miles from Jerusalem, toward the South-west: and if all, and every one of them, and their young ones, beasts, and carriages had gone the directest way from Goshen to jerusalem, Five only by five, without multiplied files, or ranks, the first five perhaps might have been in the sight of jerusalem, before the last five had been out of Egypt. PAR. 25. YEt I do not deny, but that some of them did go armed, yea, and in military form; for God himself mentioneth the armies of Israel, before the eating of the Passeover, a Exod 6.26. & 12.17. Exod. 6.26. & 12.17. Therefore some such thing there was, resembling martial discipline: Again, in the beginning of their march, they are called the Hosts of the Lord; All the Hosts of the Lord went out from Egypt, b Exod. 12 41. Exod. 12.41. Moreover, that the jews had weapons, and fought with them, when they slew the Amalekites, is demonstrated, c Exod. 17.13. Exod. 17.13. joshuah discomfited Amaleke, and his people, with the edge of the sword; and it is probable, they had these their weapons, either of their own in Egypt, or else borrowed them of the Egyptians; For the Egyptians lent unto them such things, as they required, d Exod. 12.36. Exod. 12, 36. And in common sense and wisdom, if they had wanted weapons, and armour, they would have required them, and might have had them. That the red-sea cast up the heavy armour, and weapons of iron of the Egyptians, was a miracle, if true it were; but it seemeth rather to smell of a jewish fable, or a dream of Josephus the Historian: Indeed Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the Sea shore, e Exod. 14.30. Exod. 14.30. Or lip of the sea, in the Hebrew phrase, and might take some spoils from some of them; even such as the Egyptians could not put off, and such as were not over massy, or weighty, to sink down their bodies; (they sank into the bottom, as a stone, f Exod. 15.5. Exod. 15.5. As lead in the mighty waters, ver. 10. Wherefore, as it is ridiculous for some to say, they were all unarmed, and unarmed went up out of Egypt, so it is vain to imagine, that all were armed. PAR. 26. IN mine opinion, we may describe their Exodus, or departure most probably, thus: God gives a charge to Moses, and Aaron, g Exod. 6.13. Exod. 6.13. And these are that Aaron, and Moses, to whom the Lord said, Bring out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt, according to their armies, h Exod. 6.26. Ezod. 6.26. And in the following verse, it is (not needlessly) repeated. These are that Moses, and Aaron, called Princes, judges, and Rulers of the people, both the civil, and the Ecclesiastical governor's, as Saint Paul applieth the Scripture i Act. 23.5. Act, 23.5. Called gods; k Exod. 22.28. Exod 22.28 So Moses and Aaron, were their two Princes; Nothing was done, but by their conduct: The divine Writ phraseth it thus; The children of Israel went forth with their armies, under the hand of Moses and Aaron, l Num. 33.1. Num. 33.1. The united hand of them, or, the hand of Moses upheld by Aaron, or, the hand of Moses, and Aaron, upheld by God. These two Princes did not like Alexander the great, and the greater Swede, put themselves in jeopardy, and fight, like common soldiers; but they chose a gallant young general, even joshua, who led the battle, with some chosen men, and fought with Amalecke, whilst Moses and Aaron, and Hur, stood on the top of the hill (a place of sufficient safety, and security) with the rod of God, in the hand of Moses, m Exod. 17.9. Exod. 17.9. etc. And though this were done, after they were out of Egypt, yet we may guess at the order of things precedent, by things consequent. Suppose therefore joshuah leading the vanguard with armed men, Princes of the Tribes, heads of thousands in Israel, n Num. 1.16. Numb. 1.16. Preparing the way to their followers; And these went more than five in a rank, with doubled, trebled, retrebled files, and more, and broader, as occasion advised them to dilate, or contract their forefront; sometimes like a Moon crescent, sometimes perhaps like a wedge, or in other several forms and shapes, wider, or narrower, more open, or closer, as the reason of war directed. In the midst of their army, we may conjecture, were placed their weaker ones, their children, and women, and the mixed unarmed multitude (which some do equal in number to all the men of war) with their carriages, and beasts, flocks, and herds, and very much cattles, o Exod. 12.37. Exod 12.37. Not an hoof was to be left behind, p Exod. 10.26. Exod. 10.26. For though it be said, q Psal. 105.37. Psal. 105 37. There was not one feeble person among their Tribes (which excluded sickness) yet none can deny, but children and women were weaker than men; and the unarmed are weak, being compared with the armed; and though in their first setting out not one was feeble, yet afterwards, with marching, divers were faint, feeble, and weary, and became hindmost, and being in the Rear, and feeble behind them, were cut off, r Deut. 25.18. Deut. 25.18. Among which weaker, and affrighted sort, might be Miriam, and Zipporah, and other famous heroinae, who, to hearten the fearful multitude might sing joyful songs of deliverance, and administer prophetical comfort; sure I am, that the people he brought forth with joy, and his chosen with gladness, or singing, f Psal. 105 43 Psal. 105 43. Thus, as some of the Egyptians were glad at their departure, ver. 38. So, out of doubt, were some of the Israelites also; In cantu electos suos (as Cajetan reads it) cum jubilo, saith Vatablus: And yet, before this came to pass, there might be, and was an hurrying haste, and confusion; for the words of the Psalmist, have more especial reference, to what was done, when they had safely passed over the red sea, t Exod. 15.1. Exod. 15.1. Where Moses and the Israelites sang unto the Lord, and Miriam, the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand, and all the women went out after with timbrels, and dances, Miriam, and the women answering Moses, and the men, ver. 20. Now as Miriam performed a joyful part, when the danger was passed: So, since God himself, u Mic. 6.4. Mic. 6.4. saith, He sent Moses, and Aaron, and Miriam before the Israelites, recording her joining in commission (as it were) with those two great Princes and Leaders; I hope I have not much erred, to place this prophetess Miriam, as a consorter in the beginning of the uprising of their army; Indeed, God afterwards appointed the Tabernacle, to be in the midst of the camp of the Levites, w Num. 2.17. Numb. 2.17. And the unclean were put out of the Camp, x Num. 5.2. Numb. 5.2. etc. And Amaleke smote the hindmost of Israel; all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary, y Deut. 25.18. Deut. 25.18. Lastly, I opine, that the other part of armed men, and warriors under other Princes of the Tribes of their Fathers, z Num. 1.16. Numb. 1.16. led the rearward, securing (as fare as in them lay) the unarmed, casting themselves betwixt the mixed multitude, and danger; supplying the room of a Portcullis to a gate of a City; the mighty men of war opposing themselves as a floodgate, to keep the waters from overflowings; and the perilous, from doing perilous things; which part of warre to act, that is, to secure a flight, or retreat, requireth most skill, incurreth most difficulties, makes, as it were, a Parthian fight, and is reserved as a glory, for the ablest men. PAR. 27. AS for Vatablus, and his jews, their relation is of the Muster, when God commanded Moses to set the army in order: Every man of the children of Israel shall pitch by his own Standard, with the ensign of his Father's house, a Num. 2 2.. Numb. 2.2, So, besides the particular four eminent Standards; First, of Judah on the East (for he is first in place, ver. 3 Whatsoever the jew, or Vatablus hold) under whom were quartered the other two Tribes of Issachar, and Zabulon; Then the Standard of Reuben on the South, under which the Tribes of Simeon and Gad did march; Then followed the Tabernacle of the Testimony, and the Levites were in the midst of the Camp, under their own Standards, ver. 17. In the third eminent chief place, was the Standard of Ephraim, to the West, and by it were the Tribes of Manasseb and Benjamin governed. In the fourth quarter, was the Standard of Dan, to the North, and under it were ranged the Tribes of Asher and Naphth●li. So they pitched by their Standards, and so they set forward, every one after their Families, ver. 34. They had of the lesser sort, Innumera penè vexilla, abundance of Ensigns; every Colonel, perhaps every Captain, and other inferior officers: That this was the order, at their first departure from Egypt cannot be proved: Some imperfect resemblance might there be; but now at the Muster, was the march made exquisite, and perfect. PAR. 28. MOre punctually, concerning the nimble eating of the Passeover, remember in general, both the general reason immediately subjoined. It is the Lords Passeover; and the special reason; For, I will pass through the Land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the first borne: So, if you will avoid the death of your firstborn, kill the Passeover speedily, roast it quickly, eat it nimbly, come not out of the house. Lastly, forget not the unusual Ceremonies, proving the speedy dispatch; Thus you shall eat it, ver. 11. with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, your staff in your hand. PAR. 29. COncerning the girding of the loins in the first place. That the jews used to wear ordinarily lose hanging vestments, is evinced, because on extraordinary occasions, they girded their to them; for pendent, and discinct are more offensive to travellers. When Eliah was to run before Ahab, He girded up his loins. b 1 Kin. 18.46 1 Kin. 18.46. Gird up thy loins, said Elisha to his servant, c 2 King. 4.29. 2 King. 4.29. when he sent him in haste. When Peter was commanded, d Act. 12.7. Act. 12.7. To arise up quickly, he was also then commanded, First, to gird himself, then to bind on his sandals, ver. 8. Which is another preparative to travail; and the second hastening ceremony, enjoined to the way-fareing Israelites. PAR. 30. THey were also to eat this Passeover with shoes on their feet, as our last Translators well expound their meaning: indeed, if you weigh the words in the original, there is an Hypallage, they seem to cross and contrary the sense, Habebitis calceamenta in pedibus, ye shall have shoes on your feet, instead of this, habebitis pedes in Calceamentis, ye shall have your feet in your shoes; but this is cleared by the Hebrew Idiotism otherwhere, e judg. 20.48. Judg. 20.48, Miserant civitates omnes in ignem, where the Scripture intends only this, miserant ignem in omnes civitates, they fired all the Cities. I will not nicely stand on the difference between Calceamenta, and Sandalia, Shoes, and Sandales; A shoe was more complete than a sandal, and of more defence for the foot PAR. 31. GOing barefoot (that I may press to the point) was a sign of much sorrow, assumed by David, when (out of question) he might have had shoes or Sandales) to express his woeful expulsion, from his own Country, by his rebellious son, f 2 Sam. 15.30 Isa. 20.2, 3, 4. 2 Sam. 15.30. And distressed captives used it in their bondage, in another Country, Isay 20.2, 3, 4. verses. PAR. 32. BUt wearing shoes or Sandals, betokened also a readiness to be walking, g Isa 5.27. & Mar. 6.9. Isay 5.27. Mar. 6 9 The Apostles in visiting the places of their jurisdiction, were allowed by Christ to be shod with sandals, as the Israelites here were to have shoes on their feet, as a token of their preparation for their speedy Exodus, or forth-going: Neither had the twelve Apostles only at their Mission, a kind of conformity for their feet, with the twelve Tribes, at their setting forth for Canaan from Egypt, but both sorts were commanded to have a staff; the Apostles had so, h Mar. 6.8. Mar. 6.8. And the Israelites. i Exod. 12.11. Exod. 12.11. PAR. 33. THe third ceremony of their preparedness, to their journey was, that they were also to have a staff in their hand; and that, not to set up in a corner; not out of sight, safely kept; not lying by them, or among their carriages, but in their hand. PAR. 34. YEt by these words (in their hand) I would have none to think, that they never left holding their staff in one hand, or other, during the eating of that Passeover; for than they must have eaten it very unhandsomely; and both cut and eat with one hand only, at one time, which would have hindered, and prolonged their supper, rather than shortened it: But here, this is reckoned, as a speedmaking ceremony; and therefore, if now and then, or for the most while, they held the staff in their hands; and yet now and then let it rest, or lean on it, for the nimbler dispatch of their supper, the intent of the Law was fulfilled. PAR. 35. A Staff in their hand: perhaps to put them in mind, that as Jacob passed over Jordan with his staff, k Gen. 32.10. Gen. 32.10. So should they with their staves; the Israelites doing as their Father Israel did. PAR. 36. BEsides, a staff in a man's hand secureth his footing, preventeth sliding, or falling; It is an ornament to youth, a crutch, yea, a very third leg to age; it is a stay to the whole body; it helpeth natural infirmities, and accidental occurrences, l Zach. 8.4. Zach. 8.4. Every man with his staff in his hand for very age. And so much for the first assertive part, That the first Passeover was eaten in haste, in great haste, absolutely. PAR. 37. THat it was not eaten in such haste ever after, the Talmudists strongly aver: m Beza, ad Mat. 26.20. Beza saith, that the sprinkling of the blood upon the door posts, the eating the in haste, with shoes on, the men being girded, with staves in their hands, were practised only this one night of the first , and in this, saith he, all the Jewish Doctors do fully agree. PAR. 38. ANd indeed, what needed the sprinkling of the posts with blood, when no Angel was to destroy; and when they had no doore-posts in the Wilderness to be sprinkle? What needed their loins to be girded, when they were at rest? What needed shoes on their feet when they moved not, nor needed to move? What needed a staff in their hand, when no journey was toward? What needed eating in extraordinary haste, when there was no danger, nor trouble, nor discontent, nor offence, growing by the stay, or by the eating leisurely, or, cum decenti pausâ? The prime reason why they were commanded to eat in haste, with those un-retarding ceremonies, being to prevent imminent mischiefs, arising from delays (which was not so, nor likely, nor scarce possible to be so, in succeeding ages) we may fairly conclude they did not in any future times, commonly use these posting ceremonies, but they were proper to their first Paschatizing. This is undeniable, the quickening ceremonies were neither repeated, nor commanded, at the reviving of the Law, Levit. 23. Nor can be showed to be precepted, or practised, at any other Passeover, in any other place, of the Old, or New Testament. PAR. 39 ANd so much sufficeth to have spoken of eating the first in haste, in great haste simply: with its running, moving ceremonies, appropriated to it; and never after, in such perplexed speech performed: though ever after, the was eaten in more haste, then common food, or the food sacred, at other Festivities; in haste, not absolute, but referentiall. PAR. 40. THough it be said, n Exod. 12.25. Exod. 12.25. When ye be come to the Land which the Lord shall give you, ye shall keep this service; yet the words have no alliance with the immediately preceding transeunt ceremonies of sprinkling of blood (which is of all men confessed to have ended for ever, in the night of their departure) and therefore, by parity of reason, the words comprehend not the other temporary ceremonies, but only extend to the main business; to the substantials, rather than the Accidentals; to the durable, and not to the vanishing, short, occasional observances: To the Real Sacrifice, to the Lords , as it is called, ver. 27. and not to the partly Semi-diarian, partly Vespernall, fading rites of one night: All which were begotten, borne living, dying, dead, and buried, within twelve hours: which ritual shadows comparatively deserve not the great name of God's worship: the word is in the Original, [Hagnabadah] translated by the 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Latria is the highest part of God's service: Santandreanus, and Hentenius, do ill to render it, Ceremonies: the more learned and wise Montanus, in his Interlineary, expounded it, opus a work; opus hoc this Work; which is very well expressed by our last translators, ye shall keep this service; And the service is to be denominated, from the major, or better part, from the chief work, rather than from the appendent rites. PAR. 41. AN objection more, and that seemingly a strong one against mine opinion, is, a Num. 9.3.12 Num. 9.3.12. Where we read, Ob. Ye shall keep the Passeover, according to all the rites of it; and according to all the ceremonies thereof shall ye keep it, and according to all the ordinances of the Passeover, ver. 12. Now though the Words (Rites, and Ordinances) are divers translations of one reading, in the places above cited, yet there are also two distinct words, in the Hebrew; one, for the Rites, another for the Ceremonies; the Interlineary renders them, Statuta, and judicia, Statutes and judgements, the vulgar of Hentenius, and Santandreanus, Ceremonias, & justificationes, Ceremonies, and justifications, Statuta, & rationes, as Tremellius: the 70. have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in the 14. verse. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: from which diversity and extent of words may seem to be inferred, that not only the lasting, and more necessary Rites of the Passeover, were re-appointed, but the minutest Ceremonies, the least tittle of them must be still observed; and therefore the eating with loins girded, with staff in hand, with shoes on their feet, were not peculiar to the first , but were re-observed, at this second , the year following. I answer, Sol. the Scripture full often restraineth the word (all) to all, of some one kind; to all, that are necessary; to all, that were to endure; to all, that were convenient; juxta omne, quod convenit ei, as the Chaldee Paraphrase hath it. Secondly, look over the whole Chapter, and you shall find none of the Ceremonies before mentioned, of being, shod, girt, and having staves once mentioned; but there is express mention of the month, the day of the month, and the time of the day, towards even, also, they were appointed to use unleavened cakes, and bitter herbs; and nothing was to remain, nor a bone to be broken. And these were of the lasting ceremonies; all other, I say, all other of the same kind, that were to continue, as, that it must be a male Lamb; not above a year; roasted, and with a competent company of receivers, and the like, are involved, and included, in the diversity of words, in the seeming universality, cited in the objection: But it cannot sink into my head, that by these varied words, and repeated (all) b Num. 9.3. Num. 9.3. Was ever intended, they should choose their offering four days before; and sprinkle the doore-posts with blood; when they had few or no doore-posts, perhaps, scarce Tents some of them; or, that they must eat it girt, shod, with staves in their hands, or the like hastening ceremonies. Maimonides having used this very objection, Maimonides, in Korhan Pesach c. 10. Sect. 15. in the end resolveth, that the choosing of the Lamb on the tenth day, the sprinkling of blood with a branch of Hyssop: and the eating in haste (to which the three forecited Ceremonies concur) were not necessary in future times, but were drowned, before they had passed the red Sea, and that the Commandments, c Num. 9.3. & 12. Num. 9.3. and 12. concern the body, and substance of the : not the minuter Circumstances. In the learned Annotations, on the Pentateuch, Imprinted by Robert Stephen at Paris, 1541. the words (juxta ritus suos, & omnes ceremonias suas, celebrabitis illud. i. according to its Rites, and all its Ceremonies shall ye observe it, are thus expounded, Celebrabitis illud, observando ritus & Ceremonias peculiares illi, i. Ye shall celebrate it, by observing the Rites and Ceremonies peculiar to it.) Some were peculiar to the first , which were not to the second; and the second had some difference from the following ones. Lastly, the words of Num. 9.3. etc. may be thought to distinguish the Law Rites and Ceremonies of both first, and second , from the rites due to other Sacrifices; so that the Rites, Customs, or Statutes, or other Offerings, should not be intermingled with the Passeover; but the Paschall Ceremonies are to be exactly kept; kept a part, and peculiarly severed from the other, rather than that th●y do enjoin an exact parity, and equality in every degree, of the second Passeover with the first, when the causes did differ, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as fare as the East is from the West. The Prayer. O Blessed jesus, our only true Passeover, sacrificed for the sins of the whole world, who by abolishing all levitical Rites, Types, and Shadows, hast declared, that thyself art the fore-signified substance, grant us, we beseech thee, so to eat thy flesh, and so to drink thy blood, that we, leaving the meaner rudiments, and all now-unnecessary Ceremonies, may in all pureness of heart, heartiest devotion, and in the devoutest way, & manner, approach to thee, worship thee, and enjoy thee, our food spiritual, our never-fading joy, our Celestial happiness. Amen. Amen. CH●P. VII. The Contents of the seventh Chapter. 1. Some think the jews in the Egyptian Passeover did Discumbere in signum libertatis: not so. 2. josephus misunder stood, and misapplyed. 3. Christ was to keep it in things necessary, not in the vanishing Rites: Christ did something at his last Passeover, which cannot be evinced to be done at the first Passeover. 4. The jews borrowed the fashion of Discumbing from the Romans, saith josephus; but that was of later times. 5. julius Caesar feasted the Romans on twenty two thousand Triclinia. 6. The Indians beds: Discumbing was used in India by the brahmin's; Philostratus proveth it: the armies of the Romans never pierced into the heart of India: the Indian Discumbing mentioned but as of yesterday, in comparison with the first Passeover: and rather a resemblance of the Roman fashion, than the same. 7. The Romans imitated the Grecians, and the Grecians the Asiatiques: most anciently the Romans did eat Sitting; so Alexander ab Alexandro, and Isidorus: afterward women did sit, though men lay down. saith Varro. 8. Annarus King of Babylon, and Nero Discumbed with their harlots; this was, Labentibus moribus. 9 Discumbing practised by the Primitive Christians: even women discumbed, as Tertullian professeth: Tertullian ad Nationes enlightened an obscure place of his Apologetique. 10. The Grecians did also sit at Feasts first of all. 11. Accubation was in free prosperous times. 12. Curius Manlius first brought in triumph from Asia the Triclinia. 13. Banqueting beds in Ahashuerus his days. 14. Discumbing was not in use with any Nation, before, at, or along while after the first Mosaical Passeover. 15. The lying down of Angels in men's shapes, Gen. 19.4. was not upon feasting, but upon sleeping beds. 16. Mr. Broughton censured. It is more probable that the Israelites did sit, than lie down at the eating of their first Passeover, for divers Reasons. 17. Yet it is not expressly, either set down, or to be determined. 18. No place of the old Testament enjoined them to stand at the eating of the Passeover: No place of the Old or New Testament testifies that they did stand: no necessary consequence can produce so much. 19 Yet it is most probable, that they did stand: divers Reasons for it; yet none of these Reason for it; yet none of these Reasons demonstrative, but probable. 20. At the succeeding Passovers, they did not Discumbere: Philo and josephus are to be interpreted of later times. 21. No particular posture can be proved from any of the great Passovers. 22. They might not go out of doors in the first Passeover, till the Angel had examined their doors: After, they went forth: this Ceremony of not going out of doors, was only tomporary: Abroad they might go, home they might not go. 23. Christ, and his Disciples went forth. 24. The Master of a scant Family, and the next neighbour to his house, were to join together, and to enter Commons. 25. If they had strayed fare, the danger had been greater. 26. There being no such danger of an Abaddon in future Times; they chose any of the Vertuosis, whether they were friends, or kindred, though their dwellings were further off. PARAGRAPH. 1. I Cannot pass to the other points, without doing the main scope and chief intended work great wrong, till I have handled these Questions. 1. Whether at the first Passeover, the jews did lie down on their Discubitory beds, or couches, or sit, or stand. 2. What was practised at all other the succeeding passovers? Some hold, Quest. that the jews did Discumbere, or lie down at the great passover in Egypt: and one Argument is drawn from the Rabbins saying, that they were wont, Discumbere, in signum libertatis, to lie down, in token of Liberty. I Answer, Answ. this may be retorted on themselves; for the Israelites, at their first Pasach, were not freed from their Masters, and therefore could not use that gesture, in token that they were actually manumitted; but they were then servants, and, within a short while, to be set at liberty; this Argument (if unquestioned in its chief ground) may prove their discubation, at the succeeding passovers; but whilst they were bond slaves (as at the first they were) it evinceth nothing against us. PAR. 2. THe second Argument is from josephus, saying, Discumbebant, non sedebant, they lay down, and did not sit? I answer, Josephus restraineth not his words, to the first , nor extends them to it; but that is our present inquiry. PAR. 3. THe third Argument is this; Christ kept the Law exactly; but Christ, and his Apostles did lie down at the eating of the , in the night of his betraying; and therefore the Law of the first was, that the jews should eat it, lying on their beds? I Answer, that the first proposition must be distinguished upon; namely, in things necessary, absolute; in Ceremonies durable, Christ did keep the Law; but the antiquated Rites of providing the Lamb, four days before the slaying of it, etc. he broke, he was not bound to keep; Secondly, we may not conclude, whatsoever Christ did, at the eating of the last , was commanded at the first of all; for his was eaten in an higher Chamber; and just thirteen was their number; which no man can prove, or probablize, was so done, in the first : thirdly, I say to the assumption; what gesture, what vesture Christ, and his Apostles used most, at the eating of his fatal , cannot be fully determined; the adversary proveth Ignotum per ig●otius, obscurum per obscurius; both this Assumption, and the manner, and form of their supping on beds, with its several Ceremonies, must be more fully explained in its proper place. PAR. 4. I Now inquire only the Original of that Custom; and thus I search after it: The jews borrowed the fashion from the Romans, saith a josephus' 6.6. josephus, Sane, ex quo Iudaei â Romanis subjugati sunt more Romano coenare didicerunt: from the time that the jews drew under the Roman yoke, they supped as the Romans were wont, saith a most credible Author, Petrus Ciacconius, cited by his very friend b Baronius, ad An. Christi. 34. Para. 37. Baronius; It is true, that the Victi do oftentimes, transire in mores Victoris, the Vanquished do learn the manners of the Vanquisher; and receive not only Laws, but Usances and Customs from them: but the Romans meddled not with the Asiatic affairs, for a thousand years after the first , not so much as began the subjugation of the jews, till a good start of time after it: and supposing it so, the jews were scarce warm on their feasting beds, in the days of our Saviour, according to the Roman fashion. PAR. 5. NOr was the fashion common at first, but to the better sort; though before our Saviour's Incarnation, julius Caesar, one day, feasted the people, on twentie-two thousand Triclinia as c Alexand. ab Alexand. gen. dier. 6.6. Alexander, ab Alexandro reporteth; and Suetonius relateth, that in the Augustan age, Tiberius feasted the people at a thousand Tables: But it will be cleared hereafter, that the Romans in this point, rather imitated the Syrians, than the Syrians them. PAR. 6. THe Indians certainly used to take their repast on their beds; and, some say, they also imitated the Romans, whose power was fare spread and formidable to all the world; Potos terra excipit in lectis, quos ipsamet substraverat, d Philostracus, lib. 3. postn. ed. saith Philostratus of the Indians, that is, the drunkards lay down to sleep upon the bare ground: but these were not lecti convivales, Banqueting beds, on which they feasted, but Somniferi, their Repositories for sleep: yet two or three leaves before, he speaketh, of a Feast made by the Wise men to the King thus; Terra her bis substrata erat, long etiam mollioribus, quàm sunt nostri lecti,— discubuer unt velut in coenaculo; that is, the earth was spread over with herbs fare more soft than our beds are; they (lay down) as it were, in a supping parlour: So Discumbing was then used in India among the Brachman's: yet this withal must be considered, that the Roman armies never pierced into the heart of India, but stuck about the banks of Euphrates: but if they had over-runne India, and if the Indians had imitated the Romans, in their refreshments (which cannot be proved) yet both Appollonius, and those Indians were not borne, till the Emperor of Rome began; and those Emperors were but of yesterday, in Comparison of the Egyptian first . PAR. 7. LAstly, the Words of Philostratus do not evince the Tricliniary accubation; but only earthen beds, with some show of resemblance, rather than the true form: I rather think the Romans followed the Grecians; and the Grecians imitated the effeminate Asiatiques: the Romans took most of their Laws, and most of their Customs from the Greeks'. 1. Concerning this particular posture of Discumbing, e Alexander ab A●exan. gen. dier. l. 5. c. 21. Alexander ab Alexandro, thus, a principia, Majores nostri (sedentes) epulabantur, Laconum more; that is, in the beginning, our Ancestors feasted (sitting) as the Lacedæmonians used: apud veteres Romanos, non crat usus accumbendi, saith Isidorus; the Ancient Romans were not wont to (lie down) at meals: Afterwards, when the men did lie down, the women sat, saith the Great Varro; Quià turpit vis●is est in muliere accubitus, because it was a filthy unseemly sight for a woman to lie down, saith he; afterward none but the next kindred of womenkind, might Accumbere neither among the greater men. PAR. 8. YEt Annarus Babylonia Rex cum 150. psaltrile (accubans) coenitabat, saith Alexander ab Alexandro, Annarus King of Babylon supped with 150. Psalterists or Minstrellests (lying down) with them: even among the Romans, Suetonius saith of Caligula, pleno convivio, sorores singulas infra se vicissim collocabat, uxore suprâ cubante; that is, at a great feast, he placed every one of his sisters, one after another, below himself; and his wife (lay) above him: Nero mixed himself with Harlots, on their Feasting Beds; in ipsis lectis, cum viris cubantibus, foeminae sedentes, coenitabant; men and women supped together, the women (sat) the men (lay) on their beds, saith the same Alexander ab Alex. but this was labentibus moribus, when the Empire was increased and good Discipline was corrupted. PAR. 9 YEa Tertullian himself acknowledgeth, that discumbing was practised by the good Primitive Christians; and (cap. 39 Apologet.) mentioneth, Triclinia Christianor 'em, the parlours of Christians, and otherwhere he confesseth, that even women did accumbere (lie down) at meals by the men: And to the carping objection of the Heathens, Tertall Apologet. cap. 7. he answereth fully, holily and truly: the words of Tertullian are these; Vescere libenter, intere à discumbens, dinumera loca, ubi mater, ubi soror, (supple torum presserit) nota diligenter, ut cum tenebrae ceciderint Canine, non errs; piaculum enim admiseris nisi incestum feceris: the supply hath firm ground from his own words, in another a Tertul. ad Nationes. 1 7. place, dinumera loca, ubimater, aut soror, torum presserit: Which words of Tertullian may bethus' translated; eat willingly (the flesh of an Infant) in the mean time, as thou (liest down) observe the especial places, where thy mother, or thy sister reposeth herself on the bed; mark it diligently, that when the dogs have tumbled down, and put out the Candles, thou mayst be sure to constuprate thy Mother, or thy sister; It is an heinous offence, not to be Incestuous: lest these words of Tertullian should be mistaken, or misapplyed; you are to be informed, that in that part of the Chapter, Tertullian, to the confusion of the Heathen, most wittily, and divinely frameth his discourse, by way, not of truth, or granting, but by way of supposal; as if a Christian Prelate should say these words to an Heathen newly Christianized; eat the flesh of Infants, drink their blood, commit Incest, do such horrid, and dismal sins, and live for ever: you would not buy, saith Tertullian, eternal life at so dear a rate; nor would you believe him: therefore, you are to think, we Christians neither do such evil, nor believe such words, not say them b Tertul. ad uxorem, v. 5. Tertullian again (ad uxorem) discumbit cum marito in sodalitiis, saepè in popinis. I return to the old Romans, who were wont to (sit) at meals, so c Virgil. Aeneid. 8. Virgil, Perpetuis soliti patres (considere) mensis, that is, It was their guise in Ancient time, To sit at board when they did dine. And again, Vivoque (sedilia) saxon, The rocks did sometimes afford them refreshing places, at their meat: and yet Virgil saith of Aenem, before Rome, or Romans were, Ind toro pater Aeneas sic orsus ab alto, Then old Aeneas, Virgil. Aeneid. 2. from his lofty bed, Thus 'gan his tale; when first be had well fed. PAR. 10. THe Graciant also, at first, did fit, and not lie down onbeds; I observed before, that in the beginning, the Lacedamonians fashion was to sit: they of Crete held it a horrible thing to lie down at meat, saith Alexander ab Alex. ibid. King Alexander eaten his ●eate sitting, saith he, and yet within three leaves after, (even in the same forecited Chapter) he saith, fertur Alexander Macedo, appetente nocte, coenâsse, & primo diluculo, prandio accubuisse: Alexander of Macedon supped at early night, and lay down to dinner, at the first shine of morning. PAR. 11 ACcubation was in free prosperous Times, if not delicate, and luxurious: Terentius, Varro, and Hannibal, in their Misery, supped (standing) and Cato, after Pompey's death, in the Civil wars, did not discumbere, as he was wont, but sat: The Romans made their way to Asia through Greece, partaking of the Grecian fashions, as the Greeks' did, of the Asiatic effaeminatenes; Antiqui torum ex palustri uluâ, & ex stramento, vel ex cespite fuisse, saith the often cited a Alexand. ab Alex. l. 5. cap. 25. initio. Alexander ab Alex. their beds were made of reeds, or of Sea-grass, straw, stubble, or turf, than they left those homely Country fashions; and had first square, then round Tables, to dine, and sup on; which fashion, saith he, I believe, they borrowed from the Lacedæmonians. PAR. 12. AFter this, Cneius Manlius carried in Triumph, upon the Asian Conquest, amongst other things, aeratos lectos, & Triclinia, bedsteads of Brass, and Feasting beds; and then did voluptuousness increase among the Romans, of which hereafter; but the Asiatiques used it, long before the Romans. PAR. 13. BEsides what before I related of Annarus, King of Babylon (which story. I hold to be uncertain) sure I am, that in the days of Ahashuerus, they used accubation of bed-repasting; for Hest 1.6. the very banqueting beds with their furniture, are described, and Hest. 7.8. Haman was fallen on the bed whereon Ester was; Est. 1.6. & 7.8. and at the banquet of wine, it was a feasting bed; Est. 3.15. the King, and Haman sat down to drink, (jasheba) sat in likelihood, on their feasting beds: yea, an hundred years before the reign of Abashuerus, and Ester; Ezekiel prophesied; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and he so describeth a wicked woman, that in her you may conjecture at the custom of the Jews, and that the Jews did not take up that custom of feasting beds from the Romans, (for this was within a while after Romulus) but the Romans, or Grecians might take it from the Jews; howsoever b Pererius, in joh 13. ●. Pererius is confident, that herein the Jews followed the Roman usance; the words of Ezekiel are these, cap. 23. vers. 40. etc. They came, for whom thou didst wash thyself, painted thy eyes, and deckedst thyself with Ornaments; and sattest upon a stately bed, and a table prepared before it, c Ezek. 25.40. etc. whereupon thou baste set mine incense, and mine oil: all which ceremonies were after used in the Roman feasting; if you except painting of their eyes; higher than this, I cannot bring the Custom. PAR. 14. BUt this was long after the Egyptian Passeover; and therefore let them, who imagine the Israelites lay on beds, at the first Passeover, produce one Author or other, sacred or profane, that at that time, any Nation under heaven used to lie or lean on beds, at their feasting; and then they shall say something, though not fully Conclusive. PAR. 15. Indeed it is said of Angels, in the shape of men, Gen. 19.4. Gen. 19.4. before they (lay down) but it is plain that it is not meant of lying down on feast-beds (for their supper preceded) but of their beds, to rest on, all night: and I never found any expositor otherwise interpreting it; the intention of the Sodomites may prove, that their villainies were ordained, not at suppertime, but at bedtime: But indeed the manner of Accubation, or discubation at meat was not in use any where for many centuries of years after. PAR. 16. THe second part of the first question was, whether the Israelites did sit at the first Passeover? M. Broughton in his General view of the holy Scriptures, concerning the Ceremony of sitting, and standing at the Passeover, Pag. 120. thus distinguisheth. This is the consent of the Jews, they of fit years did fit, those that were young did stand, unless they were bid to sit; if all this be granted (for he taketh it up on trust, and specializeth no authority) yet his following discourse savoureth of madness, not of truth, or sobriety, Pag. 121. he saith, Christ sat with his Apostles after the manner of the wild Irish, on the ground: did they so Hugh? Where is thy proof? Where is any likelihood? First, they are it in an upper Chamber, the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) signifying a large upper room furnished, and prepared, Mar. 14.15.) and so it was above ground: Secondly, lying all along on the ground affordeth liberty, and ease for one to lie on another's breast; whilst they sat on the ground, their posture must be upright, and is not so well accommoded for leaning; but S. john did lean on Christ's breast, therefore than he sat not on the ground. Christ washed the Apostles feet; and he (arose) to do so; did they then sit on the (ground?) and did he kneel to wash and wipe them? Another perhaps would find fault with M. Broughtons' impropriety of language, for saying Christ, and his Apostles sat, after the manner of the wild Irish; when he might better have said (if he could have said it verifially) the wild Irish fit after the manner of Christ, and his Apostles; ye cannot be partakers of the Lords (Table) and of the Table of Devils, 1 Cor. 10.21. where he intimateth, that they are their Sacred morsels on Tables, or as they were taken from the Consecrated Tables. Have the wild Irish (tables) to eat on, when they sit on the ground? The hand of him who betrayeth me, is with me on the Table, saith Christ, Luk 22.21. Was a guest-chamber sought? Was a large upper room furnished, and yielded up to make ready there, as is to be gathered from, Luke, 22.11.12. and in the end, shall they sit on the ground, and eat the Passeover? Hath M. Broughton been so drenched in his Heathen Greek, that he forgetteth that all the Greek words (used in the New Testament) describing their posture, at the eating of the Paschall Lamb, do in their Native signification, imply rather lying along, and recumbing, than sitting? Was the Passeover ever eaten by such, as sat on the ground? Did ever any Jew, any ancient Grecian or Roman, yield authority to M. Broughton, for his so wild Irish a conceit? Though Ludolphus the Carthusian went too fare that way; yet doth he not fully agree with him: but of this God willing in the third book, more at large; indeed e Clem. Alexan. paedagog. 2.3. Clemens Alexandrinus speaking against costly utensils, and excess, saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rich drink bringeth danger with it; polished glass teacheth us both to fear, and to drink; the costly beds were insolentium deliciarum argumenta, invidiae, mollisque ignaviae insidiosa commoda, signs of excessive pleasure, ensnaring benefits of Envy, and soft sloth,— sed vide, but behold, Christus in vili catino cibum sumpsit, & fecit discipulos super herham accumbere, & pedes eorum lavit linteo accinctus; Christ did eat his meat in a poor platter; and made his Disciples lie along on the grass, and washed their feet, he being bound with a Towel; some have had so little wit, as to apply all this to his last supper, and it may be Hugh Broughton, and Ludolphus drank of this cup of intoxication: but whosoever readeth Clemens himself in the place, will find that he speaketh not of Christ's last supper only, or any one supper only, but of the continued course of Christ's life, and that by an induction, or enumeration of particulars, he proveth Christ to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and evinceth his being a stranger to pride. As for the first Passeover there cited in the Margin, Mat. 14.19. where it is said that he bade the multitude to sit down on the grass; and Mar. 6 39 where we read the Apostles made all to sit down upon the green grass; these passages have no reference to Christ's last supper, and therefore are nothing to the purpose, though the words following do reflect on the second supper, immediately after the Paschall. I hope they had no grass growing in an upper Chamber. I hope there is a difference between the thousands of Disciples, and his twelve Legates â latere, his most holy Apostles: divers actions are fitted to divers places: and Clemens addeth, Christ asked water out of the Samaritans earthen waterpot, john 4.7. distinct people, distinct places; distinct occasions must not be indistinctly huddled together, and falsely applied only to Christ's last Supper. And yet I must needs declare for my part: I judge it fare more probable that they did sit, than that they did lie down at this first Passeover. First, for that the Passeover was to be eaten in haste; but sitting is a gesture more accommoded for haste, than the manner of discumbing was, or could be: Secondly, sitting at Feasts was before this time in use; the brethren of joseph (sat) before him, at a feast, Gen. 43.33. which custom of sitting we must not think was introductory, but explanatory, it was not only then used because only then expressed; but this posture or gesture, did declare the Common practice of them, in those times. Thirdly, sitting was in use by the same Individual people, who are the Passeover; For the Israelites, even almost as soon as they were gone out of Egypt, at the Feast of the golden Calf; I say, the people (sat down) to eat, and to drink, Exod. 32.6. Which the New Testament alsorelateth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the people (sat down) to eat, and to drink, 1 Cor. 10.7. where the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) differenceth the gesture from discumbing. Fourthly, the fashion of (sitting) at meat, was in use afterwards: Saul being a private man (sat) with Samuel, at a feast and Sacrifice, 1 Sam. 9.22. Yea, saul's servant also: we will not (sit down) saith Samuel, till David cometh, 1 Sam. 16.11. David might (sit) with Saul at mere, 1 Sam. 20.5. and Abner did, ver. 25. So it is more than likely the Jewish people did (sit) at other feasts, and meals, rather than (lie down) jer. 16.8. Thou shalt not go into the house of feasting, to (sit) with them, to eat, and to drink. PAR. 17. BUt I will not determine, that they did (sit) at the Passeover; first, because it is not where so expressed: Secondly, because they were to have their staff in their hand; and this was (as I may so call it) a running banquet; a speedy sacrifice; where delay was dangerous, and haste commanded. To the truer observation whereof, as fitting was more commodious, than discumbing; so (standing) was more proper than fitting. And thus I am devolved on the third branch of the first question. PAR. 18. WHether the Jews did (stand) at the eating of the first Passeover? Both the affirmative, and Negative have many Noble Authors. It is an hinge, on which great matters do hang; and yet I hope to clear all difficulties, by these Theses following: First, it is no where in the old Testament, expressly commanded, that the Israelites should (stand) at the eating of the first Passeover. Secondly, is not where in old, or New Testament directly said, that they did stand; who thinketh otherwise, let him produce his proofs, and places. Thirdly, there can be no necessary consequence framed, to prove, they did stand; make trial who will. PAR. 19 YEt I hold it most probable, that they did (stand) at the eating of their first Passeover; and these be my reasons. First, Eph. 6.11.13.14. verses, there is mentioned of (standing) and a command to (stand) with loins girt, etc. but all this was in allusion to the eating of the Passeover; as by divers other particulars beside standing, it appears, though it may be answered: first, that there is no allusion to the Israelites, in some particulars there expressed; nor is it likely, that the jews had Brest-plates, shield, helmet, and sword; at least, not all of these; which the Apostle wisheth in the spiritual panoplia, generally. 2. If the Apostle had his Principal allusion to that place, or custom; yet Symbolica Theologia non est argumentativa, an argument from a simile is no good Divinity, but saith Cornelius Cornelii â lapide, Apostolus sanè huc (i. to the Israelites gesture) allusisse, velpotiùs Allegoricum bujus loci sensum dedisse videtur: Surely, the Apostle seemeth to have alluded hither; or rather, to have given the Allegorical meaning of this place. 3. It seemeth that S. Paul putteth the Christian Soldier, into the posture, not of a Traveller, or a moving, journeying, way-faring man; as the eaters of the Lamb were to be, and were: but of an armed, prepared, Sentinel, watchman, or Soldier, or combatant, bound to keep his place, and not to go away, or show his back (as the Israelites did) for there is no Armour for the back in all that spiritual Armoury: but all is as for a Combatant, or warrior, who is to be spiritually as well furnished as the defendant is in the lists, bodily. My second reason is because their staves were in their hands; what needed fitting men have staves in their hands? and they were to go forth in haste; but men are readier to go, when they stand, than when they sit: and they were to eat it in haste, but hasty meals are commonly made by people standing, rather than sitting: sitting employeth some continuance, therefore in all likelihood, they sat not but stood: and yet who peremptorily concludes, that the Israelites (stood), because they were shod, girded, and had a staff, do not enough consider that our gallants in times of peace, in the midst of ease, and Court-glory, do sit at meat, booted, and spurred, some perhaps girt with a sword, when they intent no journeying. Barradius thinks it credible that the Israelites did (sit) at the Passeover in Egypt, with staves in their hands; which I hold not so credible. The third reason is this the Master sits down to meat, the Servant makes ready supper, girdeth himself and serveth, Luk 17.7.8. but the Israelites were now servants, and made ready the Passeover, and waited for a signal of departure, and therefore sat not in ease, but (stood) in expectancy. Fourthly, they had packed up their householdstuff, and perhaps that householdstuff, on which they would otherwise have sat, even their kneading-troughs, being bound up in their , upon their shoulders, Exod. 12.34. and the Aegypcians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out of the Land in haste, ver. 38. and the Israelites were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, ver. 39 these places prove a busy stirring, and removal, rather than a reposed sitting, either at or after meat. Fiftly, some say Christ (stood) at the eating of the Paschall lamb, and therefore at the first, the Israelites are it (standing:) but a man may answer, argumentum claudicat utroque poplite, is lame in both knees, is divers ways awry; neither will any be able to prove that Christ and his Apostles are it (standing;) neither, if they did (stand) will it follow that such was the gesture of the praecedent Passovers; but rather of the Passeover, at that time. Besides, as at the Egyptian Passeover, it is more likely that they did (sit) than (lie down,) and stood rather than sit: so, at our Saviour's last Passeover, when we come to it, it will appear that it is least probable, that he and his Apostles did (stand;) probable, that they did (lie down) more probable, that they did (sit) most probable, that Christ did stand administering; and both he and they (kneel) at the receiving of the Sacred Eucharist. Nor was our Saviour tied to the entire conformity, with the first Passeover: none of these Arguments (we see) are demonstrative; but must be cast into the number of the probable ones. PAR. 20. NOw Idesoend to the second Question; what gesture the Jews used, at the succeeding Passovers? Some Rabbins say they did discumbere, in signum libertatis adeptae, lie on beds, to signify their freedom from Captivity; but Authori mendaci, vera dicenti cautè credendum est; we must beware of a liar, even when he speaketh Truth, saith Adam Contzen; that they were at liberty, I confess, when they were over the red Sea; but that they used any Accubation, in token thereof, cannot be proved: That they (sat) at feasts, in their profane deifying of the golden Calf, I proved before; and feasting-beds were not used, long after: Philo, and Josephus are recited for their Accubation; but that their testimony reacheth to the Eremitical , or their into the holy-land, I deny. PAR. 21. IN the forecited seven Passovers of note, there is no mention of standing, sitting or lying down, nor consequence of infallible deduction for either of them: so nothing is de fide, in this point: Humane relations, and probabilities must sway all; my opinion is this; that they varryed their gestures, pro re natâ, as time, and occasion prompted to them: Since no particular gesture was precepted, it seems all was left at large: Innius saith, the jews observed all the succeeding passovers (except the first) Sitting. And so much of the fourth Ceremony, peculiar to the first Paschatizing, viz. the eating of the , in (haste) with a declaration of its annexed appendances, and questions, and distinctions elucidarie. PAR. 22. THe fifth Ceremony appropriated to the first Passeover, was this; They went no, out of doors; None of you shall go forth of the doors of his house, until the morningt Exod. 12.22. This is coupled, or linked with the other Ceremonies ; of taking a bunch of Hyssop, and dipping it in the blood which is in the Basin, and striking the Lintel, and the side-postes; all which belonged necessarily, only to the first ; and so the reason, why it was peculiar to the first , is this viz. The exterminator Angelus, was ready to destroy them, and had power to slay them, if they stirred abroad; when this cause was taken away; when the evil Spirit was, at the succeeding passovers restrained, or wanted his Commission to destroy, they might, and did go forth of the door of their houses, and each man, who was in another's house, might go home to his own house. Yea, but it is said, vers. 24. Ye shall observe this thing for an Ordinance unto thee, and to thy sons for ever. I answer, the words are to be interpreted of the main substantial slaying of the ; not of this particular Ceremony, as followeth, in the 25. verse. Yea, but it is said, Deut. 16.7. Thou shalt roast, and eat in the place, which the Lord thy God shall choose, and thou shalt turn in the morning, and go into thy Tents? First, I answer, it is confessed, the Greeks', and Chaldee expound it, unto thy dwellings; yea, when the Israelites had fair houses, they were called Tents, 2 Chron. 7.10. Solomon sent the people away into their Tents: and 2 Chron. 10.16. Israel said unto Israel; every man to his Tents, O Israel; and they went to their Tents accordingly, that is, to their own houses, Cities, and Tribes: God slyleth the Church, the Tents of jacob, Mal. 2.12. and the Tents of judah, Zech. 12.7. But to the point; this verse demonstrateth not the proper Paschall Lamb, but some other Paschall Offering is here interserted, which was usual at their second supper; for the paschal Lamb was to be roasted; but that which our Translators turn here (roast) is in the Hebrew (seethe) not assabis, roast, but coques, seethe; so is it in the Hebrew: So Montanus interlineary hath it; and Pagnines Margin, and the Greek, thou shalt boil, or seethe: yet nearer to the point; This precept howsever extendeth not to the second, and third passovers; but to the Hierosolymitan passovers, viz. And the place which thy Lord thy God shall choose. Again, they are not strictly forbidden to stir out of their doors (which was the Type, in the first ) but only, thou shalt turn in the morning, and go into thy Tents; abroad they might go, home they might not go; and this may be a reason: This might be eaten any part of the night; and till it were eaten, or consumed by fire, they might not go home but upon just occasions, they might go abroad: If any one reply, that the words of the first are very strict; None of you shall go forth of door of the his house, until the morning: and we must not stretch, or torture the sacred Text, let him but consider, for all the seeming strictness of words; that all, and every one of the Israelites went out of their doors, that very night, in the first : Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron by night, Exod. 12.31. and vers. 42. It is a night of observations unto the Lord, from bringing them out of the land of Egypt; this is that night of the Lord, to wit, to wit, to be observed for ever, for the slaying, and eating of the , and the going out, a little after mightnight; but not to be observed for ever, for not going out of their houses by night, after the eating of the . PARA. 23. FOr in the great , which our Saviour at his passing out of this world, observed; not only judas went out of the house, before day, joh. 13.30. Judas having received the Sop, went immediately out, and it was night; but all Christ's Apostles went our, the same night; and Christ himself went out; and, in that night, before the dayspring, he was betrayed: In respect of which darkness, Judas came to seek him with Lanthernes', and Torches, joh. 18.3. and in that night, all of them were offended, because of him, Mar. 14.27. I conclude the keeping within doors till the morning, was none of the durable Ceremonies of the , necessarily observable; neither was the exact strictness, according to the Letter, performed, in the first itself; and therefore both the words, and the matter must be limited according to the practice; and it may be thought to be fitliest placed, in the number of temporary Ceremonies, appropriated to the first . PAR. 42. THe sixth transient Ceremmony of the , was, Exod. 12.4. Let him and his neighbour next unto his house, take it, according to the number of souls; an holy order, as the case stood. PAR. 25. FOr if they had wrangled, and rambled fare off, the evil Angel, who watcheth such opportunities, might have taken them straggling, and whilst they sought to join themselves to remoter Company, they might have been lost, and destroyed; aliquod bonum, propter vicinum bonum; the next neighbour in this case, was the great good; hence neighbours are taught not to be overthwart neighbours; communicating neighbourhood is the best; agreement amongst next neighbours is commended, especially in things concerning the Service of God; I was glad, when they said unto me, we will go into the House of the Lord, Psal. 122.1. Oh come, let us worship and fall down, and kneel before the Lord our maker, Psal. 95.6. Innocentius (Epist. 97. ad Augustinum) Communibus, & alternis plus agimus orationibus, quàm singularibus, out privatis: vis unita fortior; Sacred exercises seek not corners, but delight in public meeting; private Corner-Conventicles, in a gracious time of peace, argue distempered, factious brains; and Conventicles, are places of Repartition forsooth, for divers families, were never in use, or allowed, but in times of persecution; and now are both scandalous, and hurtful: God commanded next neighbours to join in piety, Vique alior alii de religione docerent, Contiguas piet as jussit habere domos. Saith Stigelius, that is, And that of points religious they might the better tell, By piety they charged were like neighbours near to dwell. PAR. 26. YEt this could not be a durable, and fixed Ceremony, but was appropriated to the Egyptian Passeover; for how could the master of the family, and his next neighbour, or neighbours take it together, when all they, who dwelled fare off, went to Jerusalem; and most had no houses there; but went to their several friends or kindred, or hired houses, perhaps fare distant, one from another; so that they, who were next neighbours, in the several Tribes, Cities, Towns, or Villages, might sojourn fare asunder, whilst they were Commorant, for that week, at jerusalem, to observe the : Besides, no Angel of destruction having the like commission to slay them, they might, in after times, seek out kindred, or friends more remote, leaving the like liberty to their next neighbours. The Prayer. ALmighty God, with whom is no variableness, nor shadow of change, whilst all sublunary things are alterable; yea the Sun and the Moon, and the Stars, and the whole host of heaven, are subject to dissolution; God who dost Religions, for several people, with divers rites, as with interchangeable garments, of many coloured needlework; guide us, we humbly entreat thee, so to make use of them, which concern us, that we may look through the transitory trash of this world, unto the never-fading joys, which thou hast prepared for them which sit at thy right hand, for jesus Christ his sake. Amen. CHAP. VIII. The Contents of the eight Chapter. 1. The perpetual Rites of the Passeover were instituted at several times. 2. The general perpetuity excluded not just Dispensations. 3. In what Cases Dispensations were permitted. 4. Our blessed Sacraments may be deferred. 5. Change of Rites might not be. 6. Even included permission is Logall. 7. Some Rites of the unordained in Egypt, and prescribed in their journeyings 8. In extremities a Kid might serve for the . 9 A Kid doth not so exactly typify our blessed Saviour, as a Lamb doth. 10. The Paschall Lamb must be unspotted. 11. Particoloured things in high esteem. 12. Most sheep spotted about jewry. 13. The Heathen vilifying their own gods. 14. The perfectness of the offering to be made to God; the imperfections signed out. 15. The bodily perfection of aaronical Priest. 16. Diversifying in colour, no blemish, but an ornament. 17. There may be spots without blemishes. 18. Blemishes without deformity. 19 Christ was blemished, but most unjustly. 20. Blemishes of birds: a little reputed blemish hindered not the Lamb to be the Passeover: an ill-blemished spotted Lamb might not be the Passeover. 21. A difference between spotted, and particoloured. 22. The Paschall Lamb must not be a female one, but a male: a male implieth perfection. 23. The Lamb must be under a year old; the Lamb of one hour above a year old was to be refused, the Son of a year. 24. The impurity of Creatures, till seven days be passed over them: The strange effects co-incident to the number of seven. 25. The Jews think a Lamb of nine days might be the Passeover. 26. It might be a offering. 27. Reasons why it might not be a Paschall Lamb. 28. A proportionable number was to be chosen to the eating of the Paschall Lamb. 29. The exact number is not, cannot be set down. 30. Maimonides saith, they ought to agree of the number, before they chose their Lamb. 31. The fellow-communicants were called the sons of the Society. 32. It is more probable, that at the first Passeover, they chose their Lamb first, and company afterward. At the first Passeover, the next neighbour, or neighbours were brothers of the Society, or members of that brotherhood. At the after-passeovers they were not so strict, not was it a durable rite to have the next neighbours. 33. Sometimes ten, sometimes twenty made up the full number, saith josephus: most commonly ten: Cestius the Roman Precedent his Policy. 34. Thirteen were at Christ's last Passovers eating, even Christ and his twelve Apostles. 35. The Romans imitation of these Ceremony- sodalitates. 36. Rex convivii, in Macrobius; dominus Convivii, in Gellius; modimperator, in Varto. 37. The number no where fixed, and certain; but ad libitum; varried, as it pleased the chief Ruler of the Feast, etc. PARAGRAPH. 1. NOw do we come to the Paschatizing Ceremonies, which were ever observable, during the Law Mosaical. Before I speak of the Rites of lasting observation in particular; I think fit to observe these things of them more generally: First, some of these were instituted, Exod. 12. Some Num. 9 Some, Deut. 16. PAR. 2. SEcondly, Some of these durable Rites were dispensed withal, by God himself; and yet the Rites are perpetual, when there are no just causes to the contrary, the perpetual Law is, Exod. 12.6. Thou shalt kill the Passeover, on the fourteenth day of the first month. PAR, 3. THe dispensation on the same, or like regards, is likewise perpetual, Num. 9.10. If any of you, or your posterity shall be unclean, by reason of a dead body, or be in a journey, afar off; he shall keep the to the Lord, on the fourteenth day of the second month, ver. 11. And I think also, if any had had any great sickness, or were bedridden, though within four miles of jerusalem; or had dangerous wounds, bruises, fractures, dislocations of joints, where taking fresh air, or travelling might call into adventure a man's life, or health; or if a man stood in fear of his life, or were threatened, or sought to be destroyed (which was our Saviour's case) they might differre,, and omit the that month; for those reasons also are equi-pondiall with the Causes specialized, and dispensed withal; Parium par ratio est, the same reason, the same favour. PAR. 4. SO now, upon inextricable perplexities, even our most sacred mysteries, and Sacraments, may be likewise, adjourned, or put over. PAR. 5. INdulgence is granted of time in Cases of necessity; but there is no licence to exchange Rites, or to introduce new matters momentuall; much less was a total omission, or neglective disrespect, permitted; for, the standing Law, and its intention was for the eating of a Lamb; and so the general practice was, ever after; but in case of necessity, at the first Passeover, either a Kid, or a Lamb was accepted, as I proved before; and no doubt, in exigents it might be, it was done afterward: a particular reasonable dispensation, especially by him, who made the Law, hindered not, but the Law may be esteemed, and be called, intentionally, perpetual, whiles the Law of Moses was in fore. PAR 6. THirdly, permission is either express, or involved, an instance of the included permission is this: the was to be eaten in their houses, Exod. 12.7. but they had no houses in the Wilderness; the best had but Tents; perhaps, some lay sub dio; and had only the Canopy of Heaven, to cover them; yet under the name of houses, observation of the in their Tents, was inclusively allowed, commanded. PAR. 7. SOme of the perpetual Rites began sooner, some later; the Major part by fare were instituted in Egypt; and there were first practised: the eating of the , in the second month, was first permitted in the Wilderness, and practised: but the perpetual Ceremony of eating that jewish Sacrament at Jerusalem, was only precepted in their journey thitherward, Deut. 12.5. Deut. 16.2.7. but not performed, till they came to Jerusalem; for, as they were commanded, before they came thither, they were legally to offer it at the Tabernacle, at the door of it (as before they sprinkled the blood, on their doors) Levit. 17.3. Whosoever killeth an Ox, or Lamb, in the Camp, or out of it; and bringeth it not to the door of the Congregation, that man shall be cut off from among God's people, verse. 4. But this also was of later ordinance; for in Egypt, they had no Tabernacle erected, but had liberty to slay them, in their own houses; Moreover, the eating of their common Supper was appointed▪ as they were journeying; (of which hereafter) and not practised, in the tumultuary haste of the Egyptian . And now, I must proceed to the particular durable Ceremonies, which were not to expire, till the expiration of the jewish Commonwealth. PAR. 8. ANd thus, I do reckon them up in order, as they were used, though not exactly, in the order prescribed. 1. They were to choose a Lamb for that Sacrifice: I determined before, that at the first Passeover, it might be either Lamb, or Kid; and I hold it probable, that in cases of necessity, when there were not Lambs sufficient, they might follow the first precedent; and rather than they should want a Sacrifice, the Kid should be (uccedaneall, and supply the Lamb's stead; a Lamb rather than a Kid; a Kid rather than none: Again, when there were store of Lambs, yet Kids also might be offered; offered, I say, as other Paschall offerings to make up the sacred Festival, which continued seven days; not as the proper paschal offerings, being the substance of their great Sacrament, and the Type of ours; the Kids might be the boiled offerings, not the roasted; or, if roasted, not roasted in the beginning of the Feast, on the fourteenth day of the first month; or if then they were roasted; they might not be, they were not, the Paschall offerings; whose bones must not be broken, whose remainder must be burnt with fire before morning: for, as I before, from the jewish consent, and practise, declared, generally, and in the intent of the Law; though Kids might be used in necessity, and want of Lambs, yet only the flock, not any of the herds, must send forth that offering; and among the flocks a Lamb, not a Kid must be the proper Paschall Sacrifice. PAR. 9 THis being a confessed Truth, shall need no more proof but this; that a Kid doth not so punctually typify our Saviour, as a Lamb doth; in many particularities, Christ is called a Lamb of God, john 1.29. and our Passeover, 1 Cor. 5.7. there is no mention before or in his life; nor since his death of a Kid, as the Resemblance of him dying; but often, of a Lamb; and though in the old Testament, all Sacrifices did figure out him; some, more evidently, others, more obscurely, and among the rest, the Kids; yet nor Kid, nor any other Sacrifice, did so lively adumbrate our Saviour, in so many near specialties as the Lamb did. PAR. 10. SEcondly, it must be an unspotted Lamb; your Lamb shall be without blemish, Exod. 12.5. PAR. 11. THe Jews say, a Lamb that is spotted in Wool, or skin only, without other Blemish, is to be accepted; and this reason is for them, the best things are to be offered to God; but the spotted, speckled, or particoloured sheep were most set by, in the land of Canaan; and it is plain, judg. 5.30. 1 Chro. 29.2. diverse-coloured things were so high esteemed; jacoh made for his beloved joseph, vestem polymitam, a Coat of many colours, Gen. 37.3. and though the Hebrew read it, in exposition, particularum; yet even those particulae might be polymitae, that is, particolouted. More especially concerning sheep, Mercer thinks, the shepherds were called, Nochedim, or Nokedim, Amos 1.1. that is, keepers of spotted Cattle; and though Drusius judgeth rather, they were called Nochedim from the Artificial marks, with which they were wont (as now they are) to sign, and distinguish both sheep and beasts; deriving the word from the Hebrew radix, Nacad, which is rendered, signare; yet he confesseth, others think, they were called Nochedim, from keeping of such Cattles, as had natural spots. PAR. 12. HE citeth also David Camius thus; punctis, & notis pleraeque pecudes aspersae sunt, most of their sheep were speckled: and these spots were not artificial marks, or signations, but Natural; because Camius referreth us to jacobs', and Laban's sheep, Gen. 30.32. Where certainly, the sheep were not signed by men, or in wool, or fell, (as the Countryman speaketh) but were as they were yeaned, of distinct, natural Marks; and most were spotted; therefore more apt for such sacrifices, than others. This I am sure of, advantageous Laban chose out for himself, and his sons, both the spotted, and all the particoloured at one time, and at another time, or times, left not one to jacob, Gen. 30 which he would not have done, if he had not thought that way profitablest: and I am sure also, jacob desired the spotted ones, for his hire, ver. 32. which he would not have covenanted; but that he hoped; it would turn to his gain; as it did by the approbation of the Almighty, who only knoweth what is best. PAR. 13. TErtullian, Tertul. ad Nation. 1.10. as Rigaltius hath it, better than Gothofredus, Enecta, & tabida quaeque, mactatis; de opimis autem, & integris supervacua esui capitula (Gothofredus hath it, without sense, supervacua sui capitula) & ungulas, & plumarum, setarumque praevulsa, & si quid demi quoque, habitu●i non fuissetis: he varieth in his Apologet. Tabida, & scabiosa, mactatis; sacrificatis, quae domi quoque pueris, vel canibus destinassetis. He justly taxeth the heathen, for not giving to Hercules the third part of the tenth; and for sacrificing the worst things, to the gods; even those offals, which the Emperors forbade to be given to their Soldiers, saith Gothofredus; and which they would at home have given to the boys, or to the dogs; even the rotten, cothed, pining, scabbed, felon-stricken, and infected Creatures. PAR. 14. THree objections there are against this opinion: First, that the Paschall must indeed be free from any manner of imperfection whatsoever: Thou shalt do no work with the first-ling of thy bullocks; (it might make him weak, or weary) nor shear the firstlings of thy sheep (which being shorn is of less price) if there be any blemish therein; if it be lame, or blind, or have any ill blemish, thou shalt not sacrifice it, Deut. 15.19, etc. And thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Lord thy God, any bullock, or sheep (or goat) wherein is blemish, or any ill-favourednesse; for it is an abomination, Deut. 17.1. Whatsoever hath a blemish, ye shall not offer:— it shall be perfect, to be accepted,— blind, broken, or maimed, having a Wen, or scurvy, or scabbed,— a bullock, lamb, or kid, that hath any thing superfluous, or lacking, in his parts, or bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut, you may not offer, Levit. 22.20. etc. The red heifer, Num. 19.2. was to be, without spot; wherein is no blemish, upon which never yoke came. PAR. 15. SEcondly, the Sacrifice must be like the Sacrificer, without Blemish, Levit. 21.17. etc. Whosoever he be, of Aaron's seed, in their generations, that hath a blemish, he shall not approach to offer the bread, or food of his God; not blind, lame, flat-nosed, or blowne-up, or having any thing superfluous, not broken-footed, or broken-handed, or crooke-backed, or a dwarf, or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or scabbed, or hath his stones broken. PAR. 16. TO the first, I answer; a little change, or diversifying in colour is no imperfection; nor ill-blemish, or ill-favourednesse, which are both the words, and intention of the Law; deformity inward or outward, was to be removed: But many have most delight in speckled, particoloured creatures: Is not the Peacock proud of his Tail? and most variously feathered birds most glorious in show? hath not Spain, of late, solicited, and obtained some of our pied or speckled Bulls, and sparked, or splatted Kine? what if I say, this diversity is no blemish at all, but an Ornament? PAR. 17. THere is a spot, with a blemish; and some blemishes are greater, some less; sinful things are called bespotted, the wicked are in the abstract, spots, 1 Pet. 2 13. jud. vers. 12. On the contrary the Virgin Saints in heaven, were sine macula. Rev. 14.5. without fault; yea, in the Church, on earth, non est macula, Cant. 4.7, There is no spot, and yet I may say also, there are spots, without ill-blemishes; and there are blemishes in comparison, with exactest perfections which yet are graces, in Relation to deformities, or full imperfections. PAR. 18. TO the second objection, I answer; a little mole in the face, or, a little redmarke in hand, or body, excluded not a Priest from Sacrificing: in corpore quantum velis puro, aut integro, naevus aliquis effruticat, verruncula exurgit, aut lentigo sordescit, saith b Tertul. contra Nation. 1.5. Tertullian, caelum ipsum, nulla serenit as tam colata purgat, ut non alicujus nubecule flocculo resignetur; as he addeth the perfectest body in the world, hath some little frecke, wart, or pimple, or wan leotell; in the clearest sky, is some little cloud: The speckle, or mole, in the face of Venus, was esteemed as a grace unto her; as a foil, adding more lustre to a precious stone, and not a blemish: the blemishes forbidden, in the Priests, or offerings, were blemishes tending to deformity: the Roman nose; the Austrian lip, are highly honoured; unspottednesse argueth freedom from any ill-blemishes, excludeth not change of colours; spottednesse implieth a (remarkable) imperfection; damneth not a graceful decorum: yea, nor things of a middle Nature, or indifferent middesses, between deformity, and fairness; perfection and imperfection. A Lamb (broken) in any part, a weak, sickly, poor, or shorn Lamb, was the spotted or blemished Lamb, in the eye of the Law, though the colour of it were all white: and the perfect Lamb both inwardly, and outwardly was the unblemished Passeover, according to the strict Law, though the wool and skin were particoloured. PAR. 19 THe third objection is; our Saviour was adumbrated by the Paschall Lamb most significantly? What of that? But Christ was without all shadow of imperfection? True, nothing truer; therefore the Pascall Lamb must be likewise? I answer, the most significant ceremonies were not in all, and every punto like; likeness in every minutest Re, aut Reculâ, differeth not much from selfe-samenesse; it was enough for the Type to be without any real deformity, or ill-blemish; but such a blemish as seems a blemish to some, and not so to others, is not to be required in the Lamb, or Paschall offering, for even the substance itself, the perfectly immaculate Lamb of God, was thus blemished, and many ways blemished; his eating with Publicans, and sinners was (esteemed) as a blemish or fault, Mar. 2.16. He was worse blemished, when they said, Mar. 11.19. he was a glutton, and a wine-bibber: and yet none of those, were true blemishes; but divine condescents heavenly favours, and most fair fruits of unspotted humility, and communicated charity: So, in an under degree of comparison, (without disparagement to our most glorious Saviour) the particoloured Lamb, for the Paschall offering, might be thought blemished, by some; and yet indeed not truly blemished; Christ are such an unspotted Lamb; offered himself, an unspotted Sacrificer, an unspotted Sacrifice. PAR. 20. THe Rabbins make the offering of Birds, answerable to the offerings of Beasts, in this point; and more particularly avetre, that small blemishes in Turtles, or Doves, exclude them not from being holy Sacrifices; as if they lost by casualty, some of their feathers; but if they were blemished by the loss of a wing, leg, or eye, this very offering (though of the poor themselves) was to be rejected from God's Altar, as a forbidden Sacrifice. So much be said to distinguish what blemishes, or spots, were accepted, what rejected; and that a Lamb with a petite, or reputed blemish, might be; and an ill-blemished, spotted Lamb, might not be the roasted Paschall offering. PAR. 21. THere is an apparent difference, Gen. 31.8. between the spotted, and particoloured; though all the spotted were particoloured, yet all the particoloured were not spotted; for one half of them might be white, the other half black: likewise, of spots, some might be ornamental, and lovely, some ill-favoured and ugly; deformity excluded the Lamb, from being the Passe-over; a little, shallow, putative blemish, admitted it. PAR. 22. SOme think an Ew-lambe might be the great Paschall offering; perhaps, in necessity, such a matter was dispensed withal; not in ordinary, and usual practice: But the word signifieth, and so it is translated, a Male-lambe, and Hee-kid: an Ew-lambe had but imperfect reference unto Christ, who was not Agna, or Agnella, but immaculatus Agnus, qui tollit peecata mundi; though he came of a woman, without man; yet was he not to be a woman, but a man: costlyer things were to be offered still; and the best, if they were to be had; but the male is stronger, worthier, costlier; and without necessity, (which dispenseth with great matters) was one of the durable Rites of Paschatizing: if the Lamb had been a Fee-Martyn, (as my Neighbours call it) that is, of both sexes; it must not be offered; nor one, that is of neither sex, discernible; nor yet one, that is cut, or a weather-Lambe: Indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seh) doth comprehend both sexes, in Grammatical construction; & tam Agnam, quam Agnum significat, saith Cornelius â Lapide; it signifieth as well the Eew, as the Ram-Lambe, yet the perpetual silence, in the Scripture, that ever an Eew-lambe was the eminent Paschall-Lambe; though there was manifold occasion, to utter so much; and though on less occasions, in another sacrifice, mention is mude of an Eew-lambe; and the usual practice, in the general opinion, probablizeth, a Male-Lambe was to be that offering; a Ram-Lambe was to be the Paschall Lamb; perhaps, in extreme Neces-sity; and perhaps not. Mal. 1.14. Cursed he deceiver, who hath in bis flock 〈◊〉 Male, and voweth, and Sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing; where (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Male) implieth perfection, and is opposed to corruption; as unfit for sacrifice, especially in this chiefest offering. PAR. 23. A Gain, the Paschall-lambe must be under a year, the Rabbins say well, and truly; if the Lamb had been, but one day (I say, but one hour) above a year old; it might have been used amongst the subsequent Paschall-offerings; but it was super-annuated, for a Paschall Lamb: I add, it was, and was to be, under a year old, somewhat: viz. Anno currente, non completo; the full year, not fully expired. Exod. 12.5. It runneth thus, in the Hebrew; a Male-lambe, the Son of a year, that is, not entering into the second year; so, Levit. 14.10. There is mention of an Eew-lambe, the daughter of her year, that is, before the entering into, or the inchoation of the second year: which words, you are to take exclusively; and inclusively: exclusive, that the offertory be not above a year old; and inclusively; that it might be, any reasonable Time, within the year. PAR. 24. YEa, but what is that reasonable Time? Man, under seven days was counted unclean, and was to be circumcised; beasts, for a whole week, were esteemed unclean, and as it were in their blood; but in the beginning of the second week, when one entire Sabbath had also, in a sort, sanctified them; they might offer them without sin, Exod. 22.30. Seven days it shall be with his mother; on the eight day, thou shalt give it me; also, Levit. 22.27. It shall be seven days, under the dawn; from the eight day, and thenceforth it shall be accepted, as an offering made by fire unto the Lord: see admirable mysteries concerning man, and other things, Macrobius, Saturnal. 1.7. in Macrobius, accomplished by seven. PAR. 25. THe jewish Doctors have delivered, that a Lamb, from the ninth day, inclusively, to a whole, full years age, exclusive of the last day, may be the great Paschall offering. PAR. 26. BUt mine opinion is, although God accepted Lambs for burnt-offerings by fire; after they began to be nine days old; yet a Lamb of nine days old, was not to be admitted, for the eminent Paschall-offering; nor doth the Scripture any where evince, or intimate so much. PAR. 27. MY reasons are; First, a Lamb, at nine days old, is no good meat; it is like a Chick in the Eggshell; the flesh is rather slime, and uncocted jelly, than substantial food; and the bones rather tender gristles, than firm, hard, bones; but God would not prescribe unwholesome green meat in his most solemn feasts; yea, did not: again a Lamb but of nine days old, when it is roasted, is but a poor roast: Two men may easily eat that up; yea, one man with a good stomach; if the unsavoriness of the food do not turn his stomach; but the Passeover was to be provided to serve a whole household, Exod. 12.13. and if the household be too little for the Lamb; it was to be food for two households, ver. 4. And in the intention of God, it was to be so great, even for two households, that a consuming fire was appointed to burn the remainder, when any was left. Tradition hath delivered, that ten in number, were chosen out, for the eating of the chosen Lamb: thirteen were at the eating of Christ's last Passeover: A Novendiall Lamb could not suffice so many, as the Law in general intended; so that there could be a remainder even of the flesh, with the bones, combustible: therefore, the Paschall-Lambe must be somewhat under a year; somewhat above nine days old. PAR. 28. MOreover, there was to be a proportionable number, so nigh as could be guessed at; yea, and according to the good, or bad stomaches of the receivers; if they were great eaters, there might be fewer, if the assembly in one house had tender weak appetites, they were to be more in number. PAR. 29. NO certainty of number was of institution Divine, but accidental, and occasional; the express words notify so much, Exod. 12.3. etc. They shall take to them every man, according to the house of their Fathers, a Lamb for an house; and if the household be too little for the Lamb; let him and his neighbour next to his house take it, according to the number of the Souls; every man according to his eating, shall make your count for the Lamb. PAR. 30. IF any inquire whether they chose the Lamb first, and the number after; or the number first, and then the Lamb proportionable: Mamonides relateth, that they might not choose the living Lamb, till they were agreed on the number of the communicants; much less might they kill it till then; but when the receivers, and the set number of them were known, and resolved on; then they chose a Lamb, proportionable to their Company; a greater Lamb for the greatest assembly, and a lesser, for the less. PAR. 31. ANd those fellow-eaters they termed, brotherly participants, the sons of the society; they might call them filiot contuberniorum (for they did sort themselves, per contubernia, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, per sodalitia, (saith jesephus) amongst which was, (as Demosthenes said of the Grecians in another kind) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, princeps fratriae. PAR. 32. BUt by the words of Scripture, before recited, it is more than probable, that in the first Passeover, the Lamb was first chosen, and then the company sought out, conjecturally-adaequate, for the entire eating up of that sacrifice; and four days after, they had time to make choice of more, or less of the next neighbouring Communicants: yet, for all this, if the traditionary consent of the Jews be true, we may reckon the selected (I say not, always a certain) number of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or sacred feast, to be one of the durable Rites of the Passeover; though afterwards, they did not always admit into their society, their next neighbours only not ante-elect the Lamb. PAR. 33. IF any yet be more inquisitive, what was the exact number of the Communicants, in the common practices, at the Passeover? I answer that neither by Divine nor humane Laws, was there always a stinted number: a joseph. de Bello judaico, 6.31. josephus saith, there went not less than ten, and sometimes twenty people concurred to the eating of one Paschall Lamb: yet the same Josephus b Id. ib. 7.17. elsewhere seemeth to restrain the number to ten, and this is his relation; Cestius the governor of the Jews, (who was c Caesar's Register, Auditor, or Secretary, or accountant. Rationalis Caesaris, as other Precedents of Provinces were, and gave account to the Emperor of all their public proceed of note) was willing to certify Nero the Emperor, the number of all the Jews; to which purpose he dealt politickely with the Highpriest, and compassed his desires by him; and so by the number of Paschall-Lambes, which were slain at one Feast; the Certificate of the Highpriest being, that there were two hundred fifty six thousand, and reckoning ten to every Lamb he found, that the number of the Jews by poll, arose to three thousand thousand, and seventy thousand of them who celebrated the Passeover. PAR. 34. MOst certain it is, our most blessed Lord, and Saviour eaten his last Passeover, with his twelve Disciples, Mat. 26.20. He sat down with the twelve; the twelve Apostles, with him, Luk. 22.14. PAR. 35. AMong the Romans, they had some resemblance of this custom; Cato Censorinus (in Cicero, de Senectute) saith, Sodalitates were instituted, when he was Quaestor, that is, the companies of a Corporation, or brotherhood; adding, epulabar cum sodalibus, modice, I eaten a bit with the Company. Quintilian, Tempestiva convivia, & pervigiles jecos, advocatâ sodalium turbâ, solutus, & effluens agebam, that is, I was at times extraordinarily merry, with a company of good fellows: Macrobius (Saturnal. 1.7.) Convivarum numerus neque minor quàm Gratiarum sit, neque quàm Musarum numerosior, that is, a knot of good fellows must not be less than three, nor above nine: Gellius (13.11.) Nec loquaces convivas, nec mutos legere oportet, that is, at a feast, you must not make choice of such guests, which are either as prating as parrots; or as mute as fishes; incipe â Gratiarum, & progredere ad numerum Musarum, ibid. from Varro, that is, begin with the number of the Graces, which were but three; and exceed not the number of the Muses, which were nine: discumbit cum marito in sodalitiis; saith Tertullian, (ad uxorem, 2.6.) speaking of a Christian wife, and Gentile husband; discumbit, cum marito, in sodalitiis, saepè in popinis; she went with her husband, sometimes to Feasts; oft to the Taverns: Plautus, (in Sti. Act. 3. Scen. 2.) when the parasite handsomely had begged a Supper; Epignomus had no better way to put him off, then by saying, here with me, nine other stranger sup; the parasite replieth, he desired not to be in the chiefest bed, scis tu me esse imi subsellii virum, you know me sir very well, a seat, or a low stool will be good enough for me, and serve my turn: these sodalitates were broken off, Lege Liciniâ, Arator (l. 1. Hist.) saith, the twelve Apostles, are venerabilis orbicuti●s, a company, which the whole world should reverence; Eusebius (de vitâ Constantini, 4.12.) calleth the meetings of Saints, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Catalogue of Christians; and Constantine himself, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Council or College. PAR. 36. THe Master, or chief of their Feasts was called, Rex Convivii, by Macrobius, Locis supra citatis. Dominus Convivii, by Gellius, Locis supra citatis. Modimperator, in Varro, Locis supra citatis. PAR. 37. IN their common Feasts, the jews tied themselves to no strict number; joseph feasting had the number of eleven, or more, at one Table: besides the Egyptians, who fed by themselves, belike at a second Table, ester's banquet held but three, the King, herself, and Haman: If we consider Jobs children's banquet, there were ten, besides their wives, and their fisters' husbands; which in likelihood, they had; and Origen (lib. 1. in job) affirmeth it; In orbem transibant dies convivii, they feasted one another round, that is, contigui, non interrupti, saith Bolducus, (in job 1.) but Ahashuerus his royals Feast; first, to the Nobility, for 180. days, Ester 1.4. and after, unto all the people, in the palace of Shushan, ver. 5. was in wonderful numbers: to the Sodalitates, or Sodalitia; it seems our blessed Saviour alluded, when he said, Luke 9.14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, facite illos discumbere discubitus, per Quinquagenos, make them sit down, by fifties in a company, as is rendered faithfully to the sense, by our last Translators; for Christ could have fed them, if so he had pleased, without sorting them to their Tithings, or Divisions, or half hundreds. Aulus * A. Gellius, Noct Attic. 13.11. Gellius requiring four things to a perfect feast; sets this in the first place; Si belli homunculi collecti sunt; If jolly good fellows be gathered together; Homer allowed ten: Plato more. PAR. 38. Avgustus' his Supper is famous; Sueton. (p. 127. post. medium secundi libri) It was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, where six men were at the Table, in the habit of six gods; and six women, in the habit of six Goddesses, Dum nova divorum coenat adulteria, as the Satyriall Poet galled him, Whilst the old Heathen gods adulteries He imitates, supping with new supplies, Of feigned, yet known whoring deities. Lucius Verus Imperator, praeter exempla majorum, cum duodecim, solenni convivio, primus accubuit, saith Alexander ab Alex. (5.21.) yet, what did Augustus, as is cited immediately before? Convivium majores nostri solenne instituerunt, idque Charistia appellaverunt, cui praeter cognatos, & affines, nemo interponebatur; ut si qua, inter necessarias personas querela esset orta, apud Sacra mensae, & hilaritatem animorum fautoribus Concordiae adhibitis, tolleretur, saith Valerius Maximus (2.1) that is, they were wont in old time, to keep a solemn Feast, which they called Charistia, at which none but children and kinsfolks were present; to the intent, that if there were any quarrel between any friends, the matter might be taken up by some Referees, and umpires in the midst of their Feasting and merriment. It may be from hence sprang the Custom, in our Western parts on little-wiving Sunday (such are the terms) for all married children to bring Cakes to their Parents, and to be merry, and feast with them: Cùm paucissimi convivae erant, non minores tribus; cum plurimi, non ultranovem, in eâdem mensâ, eisdémque lectis coenitabant, saith he, there crossing himself; unless you interpret him favourably, by distinguishing of common, and extraordinary Feasts: saying, (that I may English his words, when the guests were fewest, there were not less than three; and at the most, not above nine did sup at the same Table, and on the same beds: the Grecians used to sup, four or five together: It is an old proverb; Six make a Feast; seven a brawl; Turba plerunque turbnlenta est, saith Gellius (13.11) from Varro, that is, a rout most commonly turns into a riot. I would choose always, if I might, the number of the four Evangelists, at an ordinary repast; I cannot abide to eat my morsels alone: at a great solemn Feast, the number of the twelve Apostles, seemeth fit to me. The Primitive Christians continued their course of meeting Per sodalitia, by fraternities, even at the time, that Rome was arrived to its highest pitch of glory: Pliny (10.97.) wrote to Trajan, that the Christians confessed, they were wont to meet before day, to adore, worship, and sing praises to Christ, as God, then to receive the Sacrament, binding them, as it were, from all evil, and to all manner of goodness; when these things were ended, they departed, and met customarily again, to eat meat together promiscuously, but innocently. This was at their Love-feasts, which then were taken, after the blessed Eucharist. The same truth is also confirmed by Tertullian, in Apologet. (cap. 2.) Belike Trajan had heard of such meetings; for saith Plinius to him, secundum mandata tua hetaerias esse vetui; betaeriae, hoc est, ipsa sodalitita vetia erant, saith b Baron. ad An. Christi. 104. Num. 4. Baronius; when Pliny had forbid them, according to the mandate of the Emperor; the Christians did forbear such meetings. To this effect, Caius Plinius secundus: But I fully believe, that after Trajan his Edict, Conquirendi non sunt, that Christians should not be enquired after: and much more, after that Persecution wholly failed, and Peace was restored to the Churches of God, the Christians met again, as they were wont, and more boldly, more publicly, celebrated both Divine, and Humane Offices, and renewed their sodalitates or fraternities. The Prayer. O Lord, our good God, a little doth content our natural bodies, yet superabundance of provision thou hast prepared for us; yea, thy mercy hath permitted us; to recreate ourselves sometimes, even with Feasting; and holy thanks be ascribed to thy name therefore; yet we meekly beseech thee, O gracious God, that we never so eat, or drink, to sustain our weak nature, but we may always keep ourselves in appetite, and strong desire, to feed on the Divine food at thy heavenly Table, with all the most blessed society, of our beautified Predecessors, the Participants, and Communicants with jesus Christ our Lord in his Kingdom. Amen. CH●P. IX. The Contents of the ninth Chapter. 1. Non-admittance of strangers to the Passeover: divers sorts of servants, and strangers: servants of the seed of Israel, their estates, and privileges: servants of foreign Nations; their hard condition: hired servants; and their differences from others: the hired servant might not he forced to be circumcised. 2. Maimonides falsely opineth, that the seed of Abraham were only to be circumcised. 3. There were three sorts of strangers in Israel: two sorts of Aliens: Adam's six Precepts to all the world: Noah's additional inhibition: the Law of Moses is a branch of the Law of Nature: Bishop Andrew's commended; and excellent passages of his Work, transcribed: The Roman Laws borrowed from the jews, in Tertullian's judgement; The twelve Tables, and their supposed perfection: their imperfection, in precept: The fragments only remain of them: some semblance between the four first Commandments of the first Table in God's Law, and between the Roman Laws: Rigalitius rejected: Gothofredus preferred: Comparisons beeweene the Gentiles keeping the Saturday; and Christians, the Sunday: Saturday was the Sabbath of the Romans; kept with joy, and feasting, as our Lord's day: A large Treatise concerning the Lord's day: the Christians pray towards the East; the Reasons thereof: The holy Communion Table justly placed at the East end of the Chancel, ignorant, and irreligious Censurers taxed; and objections answered: the promiscuous use of the words, Altar, and the Lords Table: The Commandments of the second Table of Moses followed by the Papyrian Law, and twelve Roman Tables; except the tenth Commandment only: a foreigner unfixed might not eat of the Passeover: a sojourner, or stranger, whose males were circumcised, might eat thereof, and so might their sons: only Circumcised ones might eat the Passeover: all others were forbidden: women were held as circumcised in the circumcision of the jewish males. PARAGRAPH. 1. ANother Paschatizing Ceremony of durability, which is the sixth, was, the non-admittance of strangers; or the admittance of the jewish Church only: the express Laws concerning this point are some inhibitory, some mandatory. The negative precepts are; first of all, Exod. 12.43. This is the Ordinance of the Passeover, there shall no stranger eat thereof: Secondly, ver. 45. A foreigner shall not eat thereof; an hired servant shall not eat thereof. The precepts affirmative are these; Exod 12.44. Every man servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall be eat thereof: and ver. 48. When a stranger shall sojourn with the, and will keep the Passeover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised; and then let him come near, and keep it, and he shall be as one borne in the Land— One Law shall be to him that is home-born, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you, ver. 49. The same, in effect, is repeated, to show it is a lasting Rite of the , Num. 9.14. If we deeply consider the occurrent, and emergent particularities, comprised in the affirmative, and negative precepts; I dare say, we cannot open, nor understand the business, as it ought to be understood; unless we take notice, both of the divers sorts of servants, and divers sorts of strangers, in the jewish Law. Servants were thus to be distinguished; first, such as were of the seed of jacob: secondly, servants of other Nations. The first kind of servants were in a fare better estate, than the latter, and had divers privileges above other servants: a powerful man might take some true, or supposed offenders, for bondmen; otherwise, the brethren of Joseph had needless, and false suppositions, in their heads; for they feared, lest they should be taken for bondmen, Gen. 43.18. Any man might make himself a bondman, We will be my Lords bondmen, Gen. 44.9. If a jew did sell himself to a stranger, or sojourner; he himself, if he grew able, or any of his kindred might redeem him; if not, he was to be, as a yearely-hired servant, he shall not be ruled with rigour; he, and his children shall go out, in the year of jubilee: the reasons of these privileges followeth, Levit. 25.55. For unto me, saith God, the children of Israel are servants, they are my servants; as if he had said, the Israelites indeed were Pharoahs' bondmen, Exod. 6.21. Thou wast a bondman, Deut. 15.15. But I have redeemed you, out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh, Deut. 7.8. therefore they shall be no longer bondmen. God's service is perfect freedom; and now, (saith God) Exod. 4.22. Israel is my Son, even my first borne; let my Son go, that he may serve me, ver. 23. If a jew did sell himself to any of his brethren, the jews; he was not to be compelled to serve as a bond servant, Levit. 25.39. He shall be with thee (not only as an hired servant, but) as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, ver. 40. which was higher in Privilege, than the servant-Iew, which was sold to a stranger: and no doubt, they used their brethren-servants the jews, better that they did servants of other Nations; or than Masters of other Nations did use their servants. The jews; even to this day, the hardhearted jews are more compassionate on distressed jews, than Christians are on Christians. As concerning the servants of foreign Nations, they were of four sorts. 1. Bondmen, or bought-servants. 2. bondmen's children. 3. Captives. 4. Hired servants. The three former were almost, of one condition. 1. They might be used with rigour; they were kept hard at work, most times, in the more uncomfortable places, of their houses, or outhouses; many, in one house; God redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, Deut. 7.8. which, for extremity of hard usage, is called the iron furnace, Deut. 4.20. Solomon saith of himself, Eccles. 2.7. I got me servants, and maidens; & had sons of mine house, etc. that is, children of my bondmen and bondwomen; in a sort distinguishing them from sons of the bed; or rather from the children of free-women. 2. They were not to be dismissed, at the year of jubilee, Levit. 25 44. etc. Thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids shall be of the Heathen, that are round about thee; and of the childrdn of sojourning strangers begot in your Land; ye shall take them as an inheritance, for your children after you, to inherit for a possession: they shall be your bondmen for ever: Such were the Gibeonites. Josh. 9.23. Ye are cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen: yet none will deny, but Captives, and other bondmen might be sold, and redeemed; if so it pleased the owners, and Masters of them. Aristotle (Ethic. 5.) Servus est Possessio Domini; a servant is the Master's possession; vobis erunt in possessionem, they shall be to you for a possession; as it is according to the Hebrew, in the place of Leviticus last cited: and servants were reckoned among salomon's possessions, as is in Eccles. 2.7. Now upon valuable considerations, such possessions might be sold; yea, he might (if so it pleased him) manumize any of his servants; and was not hindered, from giving freely freedom, and liberty to either male, or female, if he would be so gracious unto them: the words are rather Permissive, then Coactive, that is, thou mayst keep him for ever, for thy vassal, if thou wilt, him, and his; but it is left to thy choice, to make him a freeman, if thou pleasest, him or his: The last sort of servants; were the hired servants; and they were hired as they are with us, by the day, or by the year: these were in a better estate than bondmen; God had a more especial care of them; the impoverished jew was to be, as an hired servant, Levit. 19.13. The wages of him that is hired, shall not abide with thee all night, until the morning. You may understand this of the day-labourer. Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor, and needy, brother, or stranger; at his day, thou shalt give him his hire; neither shall the Sun go down upon it, for he is poor, Deut. 24.14. etc. This you may understand of the Covenant servant, hired a year; who was to be paid quarterly, or yearly, as was conditioned: Tob. 4.14. Let not the wages of any man which hath wrought for thee, tarry with thee, but give it him out of hand; the hired servants had bread enough, and to spare, Luk. 15.17. Bread, that is all things sufficient, and competent; in which regard, the Prodigal son resolved within himself, to bespeak his father thus; Make me as one of thy hired servants, ver. 19 The faithful and wise Steward, Ruler of the household, was to give them their portion of meat, in due season, Luke 12.42. and blessed he was for doing so, ver. 43. he was not to beat the Man-servants, and Maidens, ver. 45. the Steward was to call the Labourers to give them their hire; even, in the Evening of the same day, Matth. 20.8. and among hired servants, some had more favour, than others, ver. 14. One difference more there was, between the hired servants, and the bondmen: bondmen's children or Captives: the hired servants might not be compelled, or enforced, to be circumcised. Maymoinides saith, if a jew bought a manservant of the Heathen, he might retain his servant, a whole year, though he were uncircumcised then if he would not be circumcised he must sell him again to his Heathen-Master; but if the servant, whilst he was with the Heathen conditioned, and articled with the jew; that he should not force him to be circumcised; then the Master might keep his new servant still, in the uncricumcision; but if the servant bought with money, had these privileges, the hired servant was much more free; Religion in people of full years, and discretion, and of a degree approaching to liberty, was not to be enforced; but their souls were left free, and they were to have it by election, and choice, without violence, or coaction. But the jewish gloss of Maymonides, in my opinion, corrupteth the Text; sure I am, God said to Abraham, Gen. 17.13. He that is borne in thine house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Himmol, Immol, Circumcidedo, circumcidentur, ver. 12. Why the children of Abraham should prefer the Covenant, between Master and Man, before the Covenant between God and Abraham, I see no reason: As sure it is, Abraham circumcised Ishmael, and all his servants, as God commanded, ver. 23.: Wherefore, not only they, that were bought with money, and the Captives (whose condition was all one) were to be circumcised; but Omnis servus, dominatus; every son of the bondman, or of the Captives, all their children, and children's children, that were Masculine, were to be circumcised, and were circumcised, Gen. 17.12. these Vernae or Vernaculi, household slaves, commonly with us called Villains; whose tenure is said to be in villainage, had no wrong to be circumcised, on the eight day: for if Abraham did circumcise his own children; should he spare his bond children? If he circumcised himself, should his servants escape? If he were content, should they complain? The children were young, and it was a deed of charity, to bring them within the Covenant; the men were of age sufficient; and it was honour to them, to be of the family of Abraham, and to have the seal of God: All were to be circumcised, except the hired servant, whom they used for their need; but had little, or no propriety in him, or to his person, but rather to his labour. PAR. 2. MAymonides again is awry, and wringeth blood from the Text, whilst he voucheth, that Circumcision was appointed to Abraham, and his seed only; Thou and thy seed after thee, Gen. 17.9. The seed of Ishmael was not bound, saith he, but in Isaac shall thy seed be called, Gen. 21.12. Esau also, saith he, was excepted from Circumcision; for Isaac said to Jacob, Gen. 28.4. God give thee the blessing of Abraham, even to thee, and thy seed with thee: but the jewish Doctor did forget, that Abraham circumcised Ishmael, and that the succeeding seed of Ishmael were circumcised; he forgot also, that Abraham did circumcise all bought with his money, Gen. 17.23. and yet the jew dares not say, all they were of the seed of Abraham: He forgot thirdly, that Abraham circumcised all; all the men in the house, borne in the house, ver. 29. Were those home-born slaves of the seed of Abraham? Fourthly, he forgot, that Esau was cicumcised; concluding Isaac to be a breaker of God's Law, by omitting his young son Esau his Circumcision. Epiphanius, de mensur â, & ponderibus, about the middle of the book (as I proved in my Sermon, at the readmission of a relapsed Christian, into our Church from Turkism, and is entitled, A return from Argier) Epiphanius, I say, acknowledgeth Esau's Circumcision and saith, the jews themselves do father the invention of that Attractory instrument, whereby circumcision was made, in effect, uncircumcision, upon the wicked Esau, and his first practice on himself. Lastly, the jewish Rabbi forgot that the Esavites, or: Edomites were circumcised, and therein imitated their father. As for the places of Scripture tortured by Maymonides; this may be said of them, concerning that place, Thou and thy seed; I say no jew shall ever be able to prove them spoken, Quoad externas omnes ceremonias, exclusive, & absolutè for many Proselytes came into the jewish Church, and were circumcised: Secondly, if you take the word naturally, for the seed, and generation, which flowed from Abraham, Ishmael was of the seed, and Ishmael was circumcised; and the jew should prove, which he cannot, that no Ishmaelite was circumcised. The next objection is; in Isaac shall thy seed be called, that is, called to be more blessed, more holy, more preferred, more prosperous in this world, more beneficial to others, for the world to come; from Isaac, and his seed shall Christ come; yet Christ came of Ruth the Moabitesse, who was of the seed of Lot; I know not that ever he came from any Ishmaelite; the Apostle, Gal. 3.16. interprets thus; he saith not, unto seeds as of many, but as of one; and to thy seed, which is Christ. Lastly, Isaac said to jacch (as in the Jews objection) God give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee, and thy seed with thee? I answer, Gal. 3.14. S. Paul applieth the Blessing of Abraham Thus; That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentles through Jesus Christ; and so it did; for Christ came not from Esau, but jacob: Secondly, the blessing of Abraham was, the promise that he should be the heir of the world, Rom. 4.13. This indeed befell not Ishmael, or Esau; but Isaac, and jacob, and their seed, yea the Apostle saith expressly, Rom. 4.9.10.11. Blessedness came not upon the circumcision only, but upon the uncircumcision also. So much for answer to Maymonides his crotchet; whereof, the one part may satisfy any jew; and the other part any Christian. PAR. 3. I Must now proceed to distinguish of strangers also; for strangers, in the beginning of this point seem to be; both rejected from the Passeover; and admitted to the Passeover; which some reconcile thus. In civil things was one Law both for Jews, and strangers; but say I, these were matters of Religion; and so we have but slippery footing: secondly, Exod. 12.48. concerning not a civil business, but about taking of the Passeover itself; it is said, One Law shall be to him that is home-born, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you. Wherefore, I hold it best, to fetch the beginning of mine answer a fare off, that it may be more fit: there were three sorts of strangers, in the jewish government; 1. the mere Alien. 2. the n Concerning this sojourning or Forrenour, strangers in the business of eating the Passeover: see Chap. 9 Pargra. 10. Foreigner. 3. the Sojournour, or the Profeselyte. The mere Alien was also of two sorts: first, such an one, who would make no manner of profession of holiness; no conformity, either with the Jew or other holy Patriarches doctrine, before the days of Abraham: and such the Jews might not converse withal; but slew them every one, as unworthy to breath, or live, so soon as he was descried, or known. The second sort of mere Aliens, were such as acknowledged the Law of Nature; and kept the tradition of Adam, and Noah; and lived in a fair way of Religion, though discrepant from the Jew. The Jews say, Adam gave these six Precepts to be kept for ever. 1. The first against Idolatry, against the adoring of Sun, Moon, and Stars; and against Images; To this the two first Commandments may be reduced. 2. The second was, against the blaspheming of the Name of God; our third Commandment containeth this; for if we may not take the name of God in vain; much less may we blaspheme the Name of God; and the blasphemer of the Name of the Lord, was stoned, Levit. 24.11.14. 3. The third Precept, say the Jews, of Adam was against bloodshedding: it may be this was given, upon the murder of Abel; if sooner, Cain had the greater sin: to this accordeth our sixth Commandment, Thou shalt do no murder. 4. The fourth Precept of Adam was opposed to unjust, carnal copulations; our seventh Commandment is correspondent to this. 5. The fifth traditionaty mandate of Adam was against stealing; and to that our eighth Commandment answereth exactly. 6. The last supposed Precept of Adam, was a charge to punish malefactors. But what needs this Precept, say I, when the breach of any Commandment, had intentionally the punishment annexed to it, to be inflicted on the malefactor? Noah gave a seventh Commandment, say the Jews, and it was this, not to eat the blood. It is true that God commanded Noah, Gen. 9.4. Flesh with the life thereof which is the blood thereof shall ye not eat; but every precept which was given to a Patriarch, was not commanded by the Patriarch to others; much less to all others, for to be observed for ever: if the heathen should not yield to observe all these Laws, the jews did interdict them; yea, flew them outright, as hated Atheists, and professed enemies of God; the murder of whom was a pleasing sacrifice of God Almighty. If the heathen were content to make a profession to these points of Religion, though they kept a loof off, from the other parts of the jewish Credo; yet they dwelled among the jews, and sojourned in their land; and were the Aliens, or mere strangers, who were not yet admitted to the jews Passeover: I have made the best of these jewish subtle speculations: but in truth the Law of Moses is but a branch of the Law of Nature; and both Gentiles and jews had all the Law of Nature, written in their hearts, though some more plainly, others more obscurely. PAR. 4. THe Author of that excellent work, whosoever he was, called a Pattern of catechistical Doctrine, Pag. 122. etc. showeth, first, that the jews had the effect of every Commandment in them, before the Law, as 1. Gen. 35.2. Put away the strange gods. 2. Gen. 31.34. Idols; Gen. 35.5. Earrings. 3. Gen. 25.3. Swear by the Lord God of Heaven. 4. Gen. 2.3. And Exod. 16.23. Rest of the Sabbath. 5. Gen. 27 41. Days of mourning for my Father. 6. Gen. 4.9. Cain hideth his kill of Abel. 7. Gen. 38.24. The whore Thamar to be burnt, and 34.3. 8. Gen. 44.7. God forbidden we should steal. 9 Gen. 38.20. judah kept promise, not lying, or deceiving by untruth's. 10. Gen. 12.17. and 20.3. It was sin to look on a woman, with lust after her. Vide (si libet) plura hâc de Re, apud Nicolaum Hemmingium, in libro de lege Naturae. Secondly, not only the jews, but the Gentiles also had the same law by Nature in their hearts; though some of the Commandments, more manifestly, than other some, Manifestly six, namely, the 3.5.6.7.8.9. Somewhat obscurely, four, as 1.2.4.10. For the most manifest Commandments; the third was a Law of the Egyptians, as Diodorus Siculus faith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, swear not, nisi morieris, lest thou die; let me add, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He who sweareth, and nameth, Eccles. 23.11. for Reverence to the Name of God; this word [God] is not in the Greek, but wholly forborn; nor in Hentenius, and Santandreanus; though the Bishop's Bible, and our late Translation have expressed it, according to the sense, without difference of Character; and though the precedent verse doth necessarily cause it to be understood of God. Drusius on the place thus; the jews do so scrupulously, if not superstitiously observe the precept, that they do not write in their letters, the name of Elohim, which name yet is communicated to the Creatures; but the proper Name of God, they called jehovah, which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the word of four Letters; they are so fare from naming; that they know not this day, how it is to be read, or pronounced. Furthermore, it is very likely, that the Heathen imitated the jews; for the Religious among them did forbear to speclalize, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but contented themselves with the reserved sense and understanding, saying only, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Suidas. The fifth, Homer saith of one, that had a misfortune, it was Quia parentes non honoravit, because he honoured not his Parents: the fixed is a Rule even in Nature, Homicîda, quod fecit, expectet, let the murderer expect murder: the seventh Stephanas, out of Nicostratus, Fuge nomen moechi, si mortem fugies; avoid Adultery, as thou wouldst death: the eighth Demosthenes against Timocrates, repeateth it as Solon's Law, in the very words; Thou shalt not steal. The ninth in the twelve tables, Tarpeio saxon dejieatur, cast him down from a high rock, who giveth false testimony. For those they had somewhat obscurely. For the first, Pythagoras said; if a man come and say, I am God, let him create another world, and we will believe him. For the second they agreed, that every god should be worshipped, as he himself thought good; and this is the very foundation of the second Commandment. For the fourth, little can be found; but sufficient for their condemnation; they know that numerus septenarius est Deo gratissimus, the number of seven is most pleasing unto God, and it was numerus quietis, a number of rest; and thence they might have gathered, that God would have his rest that day: and so saith the Doctor the seventh day after birth, they kept exequiae; and the seventh day after death, the funeral; which words were mistaken, or misprinted: the tenth their Laws never touched, yet the scope of them was, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non concupiscere, Thou shalt not covet; and Menander saith, they should not covet so much as a button; so he most deeply and divinely. PAR. 5. ANd yet because the Author bringeth but one instance, and specially out of the Roman Laws; I hope mine ensuing discourse will not be ill accepted, by the intelligent Critic; but he will taste of my glean; and thank God, and pray for me, Tacitus (Annal. 3.) saith the twelve Tables were compounded, and made ac citis quae usquam egregia fuerunt, from Greece and other parts. Indeed there were at first but ten tables of the Roman, answerable to the number of God's Laws, being only ten: afterwards, the Decem-viri added two tables more, quae leges Romanorum proprias continebant, which contained the proper Laws of the Romans; the ten Tables being taken from other Cities, and Lawmakers; and as by the sequel will appear, principally from the laws of God: that the Sibyllae were well acquainted with the jewish affairs, is most apparent; that the Romans esteemed the Sibylline books, as the Oracles of God; the Romans themselves do confess; and the keeping of them Tarquinnius Superbus committed Duo-viris, sive Duumviris Sacrorum, who were the most eminent Patricians; but because Marcus Tullius gave Petronius Sabinus leave to transcribe that book, which contained Secreta civilium sacrorum, the Mysteries of the civil Laws; Tarqvinius caused Marcus Tullius to be so wed up in a sack, and cast into the Sea. To conclude, by what streams soever, the Romans had their Laws, conveyed, or derived unto them; most certain it is, the fountains, and heads of their Laws, they had from the Law of God; Phocylides writeth so many divine passages, that you may imagine, he was acquainted with Moses, or his Law; and so did divers of the Greek Poets, in whom the Romans were well versed. PAR. 6. TErtullian (Apologet. cap. 45.) Scitis ipsas leges quoque vestras, quae videntur ad innocentiam pergere, de divinâlege, ut antiquiore, formam mutuatas; which words of Tertullian, since neither Rhenanus, Pamelius, Cerda, junius, Albaspinaeus, Regaltius, nor any other, ever explained in particular; suffer me to exercise my Tyrociny, that way; in amplifying this unperformed, this unattempted passage: Cicero (lib. 1. de Oratore) bringeth in Crassus strongly thus avouching; fremant omnes licèt, dicant quodsentio; Bibleothecas meherculè omnium Philosophorum, unus mihi videtur 12. Tabularum libellus, si quis legum fontes, & capita viderit, & authoritatis pondere, & utilitatis ubertate, superare: Take exception, who will, I will speak what I think, assuredly, that one little book of the 12. Tables, if a man have recourse to the head-springs of the Laws, is to be preferred before the Libraries of all the Philosophers, both by the strength of its authority; and abundance of benefit. Well Rhetorized Tully; you knew some would chafe at your hyberbolical strain; and laboured to prevent it, by fathering it on Crassus: Tully knew what belonged to an Orator, Rhetori concessum est, sententiis utifalsis, audacibus, subdolis, captiosis, simodò verisimiles sint, & possint ad movendos animos hominum, qualicunque astuirrepere, saith Aulus Gellius (1.6.) A Rhetorician may lawfully use any false presumptuous, subtle, captious passages, so long as they carry with them some colour of truth, and can cunningly wimble themselves into men's minds, by way of persuasion: now, not only— pictoribus, atque Poëtis, but even to Rhetoricians, quidlibet audendi sempêr datur aequa potestas; Painters in painting, Poets in Poetry, Have always had an equal liberty. It must needs be acknowledged that the Romans had a very high esteem of them; and even till Cicero his time, the Roman youth did learn them by heart; discebamus pueri duodecim Tabulas, ut carmen necessarium (not as our children do, idlesongs) yet presently after, Cicero (2. de legibus) confesseth, Nemo eas jam discit, so that that custom ceased in Cicero his age: other learned men do differ from Tully, and Crassus: Yet Alexander ab Alexandro (Gen. dier. 6.10.) saith, some of them are made parùmconsultè, & nimis severè; quaedam duriter, & inhumanè; multa velut immitia, & agrestia refellenda sunt; multa incuriosè, & subrusticè, partim insolenter, nonprobabili, nec recto judicio, eâdemlege decreta videntur, & constituta; that is, some of them are made inconsiderately, and too too severely; some are to harsh, and inhuman; many things are to be repealed, as savouring of too much cruelty, and barbarity; many things in the same law, seem to be decreed, and established carelessly, and rudely; and partly, in an unusual strain, without probability, without a rectified judgement. This was a ridiculous Law of the 12. Tables, si injuriam alterifaxit, viginti quinque aeris, poenae sunto, that is, if one man do offer an injury to anorher, let him be ammerced 25. pieces of money: an impudent fellow on L. Nerutius delighted to strike men in the faces, and presently his man had in readiness 25. pieces of brass to satisfy them; which was in all about a groat: and Phavorinus, in Gellius (Noct. Attic. 20.1)) finds fault with divers other: I must confess that I am sorry, that all the world cannot produce the whole and entire twelve Tables, that we might the better judge of them; or the copies of them; though some say, the writings of Hermodôrus the Ephesian, the first interpreter of the Decemvirall Laws, are extant; yet these threescore and ten years, since Alexander ab Alexandro related this; we cannot find them, not in these searching and most learned days. The points which concerned public Religion are almost wholly lost; it may be the latter Romans dealt with the Laws of their devout Numa; and with part of the Ius Papirianum; as the former Romans did, with those books of Numa; which they found buried by himself; and being taken up, divers hundred years after his death; when they were informed that they were discordant from the then professed Religion, they burned them. If they had been kept transcribed and published; I confess, I had rather have seen them, than all the Triumphal monuments, that ever were brought into the Capitol. It may be they perished, when Rome was sacked; wherefore you may not expect a Totall conformity to the first Table of Moses his Law; yet observe somë remnants tending that way: Cicero (de devinat. lib. 1.) Romulus made a Law, that no man should be ushered into the throne either of Kings, or Magistrates, but by Heavenly approbation. Cicero (2. de leg.) hath divers Laws touching Religion (it is likely from Numa) separatim nemo habessit Deos, neve novos, sive advenas, nisi publicè adscitos, privatim colunto; let not any man deify new gods, or strange gods; nor privately worship any, but those publicly received. How little do these differ from the first Commandment, Exod. 20.3. Non habebis Ders alienos coram me, Thou shalt have none other gods but me: and these words of the second Commandment, Exod. 20.5. Non adorabis, neque coles ea; Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them; nor had they Images, in Numa his time (if my memory fail me not) Carmeli Deus colebatur, cui nec Templum erat, nec simulachum; sed aratantum, et divinus cultus; that is, the God of mount Carmel had neither Temple, nor Image; but only an Altar erected unto him, and was Worshipped with divine worship, as Alexander ab Alex. (4.17.) That on the by. And whereas the letter of the Law ran, Sacra privata perpetuò manento, Cicero (ibid., interprets that the Fathers should teach their Children, and derive unto them their received Religion. Franciscus Baldwinus jurisconsultus (In lib. de legibus Romuli) citeth this as the fixth; deorum fabulas, necredunto, let them not believe the Poet's fables, concerning the Gods: and as the seventh, Dees peregrine's, praeter Faunum ne colunto, let them worship no strange gods, but Faunus. Romulus did think, the Fables which the Ancients reported of the gods, containing their sins, and shame, to be filthy, unprofitable, mis-beseeming good men; much more the gods: suffering nothing to be ascribed unto them, but what was agreeable to their happy Nature, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Si dii vitiosa faciunt, non sunt dii. Answerably Euripides, in Bellerophonte: how agreeable is this to our third Commandment? Non assumes nomen domini tui in vanum, Exod. 20.7. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thy God in vain: did not they take their gods Names in vain, who told of their adulteries, incests, rapes, murders, and the like odious and shameful things, which Romulus forbade? Which rectified Nature abhorrerh, the very mention of, and corrupted Nature delighteth in, as a provocative of sin, and a defence of it; what is to take their god's name in vain, if this be not? PAR. 8. A Gain, concerning the Sabbath day's Service, they had a resemblance of it: the great Rigaltius hath these words from Tertullias first book ad Nationes, cap. 13. Vos certè estis, qui etiam in laterculum septem dierum, recepistis, & ex diebus ipsum praelegistis, quo die, lavacrum subtrabatis, aut in vesperam differatis, aut otium, & prandium curetis, quod quidem facitis, exorbitantes & ipsi â vestris ad alienas religiones; that is, you certainly are they, who have received Sunday into your register; and fore-chose that day especially; on which day you bath not, or bathe late, you give yourselves to ease, and eating; which you do, wheeling off from your own, to other men's Religions. But sure Rigaltius is amiss; for the learned Jacobus Gothofredus, from whom Rigaltius had Agobardus his manuscript of Tertullion, in stead of ipsum hath it ipsorum: and the true sense is this; you assuredly are they, who have received Sunday into your Calendar, or Registry; for, one of the Seven days of the week; and out of those days have chosen one; on which day ye bath not you selves, or defer bathing till night; or give yourselves to rest and good cheer, which ye do in imitation of other Religions: the sum of the controversy is; Rigaltius intimateth, that the Roman Sunday was to them, as the Jewish Sabbath: Gothofredus accounts their Saturday, called Dies Saturni, to be, as their Sabbath; which is the truest opinion: Gothofredus, in his notes on that Chapter, among many other excellent things, observes; that Tertullian compareth the Gentiles keeping of their Saturday; as the Christians keep the Lords day. First, by their not coming at all to their bath, that day. Secondly, or coming late, (some Colonies anniversarily clothed with sackcloth, sprinkled with ashes, pray to their Idols; their shops, and Baths shut up, till near nine, saith he (adversus Psychicos, cap. 16.) their nine is all one, with our three of the clock, in the afternoon: Thirdly, he compareth the rest, and the banqueting of the Gentiles on their dies Sabbathi or Saturday, with the rest and banqueting of the Christians, on our Lord's day; quare ut ab excessu revertar; qui , & diem ejus nobis exprobratis, agnoscite vicunitatem, non longè â Saturno, & Sabbatis vestris sumas; wherefore, that I may return from my diversion; you Gentiles, who cast into the teeth of Christians, the adoring of the sun, from their strict observation of the Sunday; confess that you, and we disagree very little; we keep our Sabbath's, on Sundays; ye, on Saturnes-dayes, or saturdays: the day of the Lord, or Sunday is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Isidorus Pelusiota, in his Epistles; a day of rest, and remission; the word [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] is sometime taken, in an ill sense; here it is not; the Apostle complaineth he had not (rest) in his spirit, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 2 Cor. 2.13. or it may be taken for bodily Rest, and repose; 2 Cor. 7.5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, our flesh had no rest; or it may be taken for liberty, opposed to durance, so S. Paul, Act. 24.23. had (liberty) that his friends might come unto him, was permitted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gothofredus might have observed another parallel, in the beginning of the chapter; alii solem Christianum Deum aestimant; quod innotuerit ad orientis partem, facere nos precationem; vel, die solis laetitiam curare; quid vos minus facitis? nun plerique affectione adorandi, aliquando etiam coelestia, ad solis initium, labra vibratis? some others say, the Sun is the God of the Christians, because it is commonly known; we pray towards the East; and are merry, and refresh ourselves on Sundays; you are like to us; you do little less; most of you affecting the adoration, sometimes of heavenly things, at Sun rising, do mutter, or pray; he saith not, in die solis; but, ad solis initium; or (as it is varied in cap. 16. Apologet.) ad solis ortum; and this they practised as well on any other day, as Sunday; for Sunday was not their holiday, or Sabbath day, but Saturday which I marvel that the great Rigaltius erred in, for these considerations. First, that the same Chapter affordeth divers passages, that Saturn's day was, as it were the Gentiles Sabbath; therefore their Sunday was not so. Secondly, that Gothofredus from josephus (lib. 2. contra Appionem) and from Clem. Alexandrinus (5. Strom.) had before hand published, Saturni Diem, seu Sabbatum, otio, & quieti ubique Gentium, judaeorum imitatione assignatum fuisse; that Saturn's day or Saturday was the Sabbath, or resting day of the Gentiles in all places, which they borrowed from the Jewish custom. Thirdly, Tertullian in his Apologeticke, (which is an elucidary to the books, ad Nationes; and the amplified, and refined comment on them) cap. 16. hath it; Aequè si diem solis laetitiae indulgemus, aliâ longe ratione, quàm religione solis, secundo loco ab iis sumus, qui diem Saturni otio, & victui decernunt; if we indulge and be merry, on Sunday; we do it not in any religion to the Sun; or its day, as the day of the sun, but as the Lords day; and we are alike, or next to those, who consecrate aturnes day to repast, and rest. Fourthly, Sidonius like wise (Epist. 2. l. 1.) acknowledgeth so much; that the Gentiles kept Festival the day of Saturn, and termeth their profuseness, luxum Sabbatarium. I am sure, the Noble and holy Lady Paula (in S. Hieromes time) and her company, even on the Lord's day; after Sacred services were ended; vel sibi, vel caeteris indumenta faciebant; as reformed Churches abroad do seem to confine the sabbatical day to the sabbatical exercises; as witnesseth Hierome (ad Eustochium, Epist. 27.) and esteem us little better than Jews, for our strict sabbatizing: Also her (feasts) were turned into mourning, and her Sabbaths into reproach, for Antiochus Epiphanes had by letters commanded, that they should profane the Sabbaths, and Festival days, 1 Mac. 1.39. etc. Yea, many Israelites profaned the Sabbath, ver. 43. Augustine (de Civitate Dei, 6.11.) usque eò sceleratissimae gentis consuetudo convaluit, ut per omnes jâm terras recepta sit, victi victoribus leges dederunt, that is, the custom of that most wicked Nation hath been so prevalent, that it is now generally received almost by all Nations, the vanquished have given Laws to the vanquisher: these words doth S. Austin cite out of Seneca, of the general observation of the Jewish Sabbath. Fiftly, Philo (in his book, de vitâ Mosis) glorieth, that all the Eastern people kept their Sabbath, forgetting that the Chaldaeans did mock at the Sabbaths of jerusalem, in the days of jeremy the Prophet, Lam. 1.7. Sixtly, Macrobius (Saturnal. 1.7.) at the end affirmeth, that the Saturnalia were more ancient, than the City of Rome: that Macrobius speaketh not of the weekly sacrifices, I confess, but his Author's words may mean more, than he did: Lucius Accius, in his Poetical Annals, thus, Maxima Pars Graium Saturno, & maximae Athenae Conficiunt sacra,— that is, The Greatest part of Greece, yea Athens height, To Saturn on his day, their incense light. Cumque diem celebrant, per agros, urbesque fere omnes, Exercent epulis laeti.— that is, And when both town and Country, their holiday do keep, They most an end do feast it, until they go to sleep. Every Saturday, their Servants might rejoice with them. He farther relateth from Cicero, Septenarium numerum rerum omnium fere modum esse, that the number of seven is the measure almost of all things. The very vast Ocean observes this number, the first day of the Moon's tining, the Ocean is more full, than usual, it decreaseth somewhat on the second day, the third day leaveth it less, and daily it diminisheth, to the seventh day, the eighth day is like the seventh, the ninth equalleth the sixth, the tenth day answereth to the fifth, the eleventh to the fourth, the twelfth to the third, the thirteenth to the second, the fourteenth day is as the first day. So much for the two first weeks; till the full of the Moon: the third week the Ocean keeps his course, according to the first week, and the fourth week doth as the second did: and so the weeks and months run round with the Ocean. Seventhly Seneca (Epist. 95. somewhat past the middle) confesseth they did accendere lucernam Sabbatis, light their Tapers on the Sabbath days, and faulting them, for so doing; because nor God wants light, nor men take pleasure in the steam, or stench of Lamps, or Candles; confesseth withal, their Religious observation of the Sabbaths, by the Romans, for the point was, quo modo d● sint colendi? How God ought to be worshipped? Tibullus, (lib. 1. Eleg. 3. pag. 84.) is firm proof, that he observed Saturn's day, as the holy day; whether we read it, as it is, in the body of his works. Saturni, aut sacram me tenuisse diem, that is, Or that unto Saturnus old, I used his holiday to hold. Or, whether it be, as Joseph Scaliger the Prince of Critics, in his Castigations on the place, saith, it is better— Omnia dira Saturni Sacrame tenuisse die, that is, Or that to Saturn, on his day, I used to feast, to pray, to play. Thus much with Gothofredus, and the most learned Cerda, against Rigaltius his needless alteration of Tertullian, by which the day of the Sun, or Sunday, is unjustly made to be the Gentles day of rest, or Sabbath, which indeed was on their Saturday: and yet, if Rigaltius his reading, be supposed to be the best, it affordeth Testimony; that the Gentiles had some knowledge of the weekly honour, due to God, one day or other; in that they observed a Sabbath * The return to this Point, after the ensuing digressions, you shall find below, Paragraph the 9 Chap. 9 which reacheth proof enough to my main intention. I cannot yet end the business of the Lords Day, but have divers of mine own observations to set down, and come nearer to the purpose: the controversy against the Sabbatarians; concerning both the day, and the Recreations then lawful; hath been so unanswerably handled, by Bishop White, and other most learned Doctors, that much cannot be added; somewhat shall, in a mixed way; nor will I blot out mine own observations, though others also have lighted on some of them. First then, I say, the Sabbatarians do grossly, & infantiliter, childishly expound S. Austin; whilst they would violently hale him to their sides, against all manner of Recreations; and nothing is more common, than S. Augustine's authority produced against any Recreation, on the Lord's Day: I profess his authority moved me much; till I read him himself, and saw him misunderstood, even by great ones, and chief among the Sabbatarians. The first place is on the enarration of the 91. Psalm, on the Preface of the Psalm, Melius est arare (in Sabbato) quam saltare; 'tis better to go to Blow, than dance on the Sabbath Day; but S. Augustine speaketh of the jewish Sabbath, or Saturn's day, of the first day after the creation, when God is said to rest: Let me add unto him; To Blow on that Sabbath, the jewish Sabbath was not amiss in a Christian, but to Dance on the jewish Sabbath, was an approving of the old first Sabbath, and as it were a renouncing of the Christian Sabbath. See the place who will, and he shall find that S. Augustine spoke not of the Lords Day, or Dies solis, Sunday, nor of the Christians day of rest, properly; but of the Metaphorical spiritual Sabbath of the daily Sabbath, or rest of a good conscience; view his words, In cord est Sabbathum nostrum, multi enim vacant membris, & tumultuantur conscientiâ, Omnis homo malus Sabbatum habere non potest, ipsa tranquillitas, Sabbatum est cordis; our Sabbath is kept in our heart; for many have bodily rest, who are troubled in conscience; an evil man hath no Sabbath; Inward tranquillity is the Sabbath of our heart. What is this to the question of the Lords day? His words there are these; Ecce, & hodiernus dies Sabbati est, hune in praesenti tempore, ot● quodom corporaliter languido, & fluxo, & luxarioso celebrant judai, Behold, even this day is the Sabbath day: The jews keep this day, at this present time, idly, lazily, and luxuriously, so he: But our question is concerning the Lords Day, the memorial not of the Creation, but of Christ's Resurrection, which S. Augustin doth not name, nor mean, not so much as point at, nor the least way censure, for fair Recreations in this place. The second place extorted from S. Augustin, is in his Book, De decem chordis, cap. 3. almost at the beginning, It is in his tenth Tome, and is thus cited by Zepper, Legum Mosaicarum Forenstum, 4.9. Satius est operari, quàm spectaculis interest, mulieres near, quâm tota die, impidicè saltare? I answer, First, I find not those words, in that Book, Satius est operari, quàm spectaculis interest: Secondly, if Augustin hath said so, the beholding of bloody spectacles (which were in viridi observantiâ, in greatest request, and permitted most even by some Christian Emperors) was sinful in itself, and condemned by many Fathers, and reacheth not against fair recreations, post sacra peracta, after Service is ended. Thirdly, the words indeed are thus truly translated. It is said to thee, that thou spiritually observe the Sabbath, not as the jews; who observe the Sabbath, by being carnally idle, applying their minds, to trifling toys, and luxury; a jew should do better, to go about his profit, in his ground, than (inthesauro) in the Exchequer, or perhaps in his Countinghouse, to be seditious, and their women, on the Sabbath day (or the women on the Sabbath day) the words will bear it, were better card, and spin, than impudently to dance, the whole day, in their new Moons: but thou art spiritually to keep the Sabbath, in hope of future rest; which God hath promised thee, who doth what he can, to obtain that rest, though it seem laborious what he doth; yet if he refer it to the faith of the promised rest, he hath not truly the Sabbath, in re, but in spe, not in possession, but in hope: but thou wilt rest, that thou mayst labour, when thou oughtest to labour, that thou mayst rest. So fare he. The like he hath toward the later end of the first Chapter. Observe, First, he speaketh of the Christians spiritual Sabbath, with an eye looking forward, to the eternal promised Sabbath of Sabbaths, as he phrazeth it in his first Chapter. Secondly, he speaketh of the jewish carnal Sabbath, he speaketh not one word, of the Lords Day, or Sunday, neither doth he fault any recreations of Christians on that day. Thirdly, he telleth not, what a Christian, but what a jew should do, not simply, but comparatively, rather be busy, and profitable in his ground; than seditious; and their women, rather card and spin, than the whole day in their Festivals, and Feast to dance immodestly, but what are their new Moons, and solemn jewes-feasts to us Christians? They shamefully wrong S. Augustin, and wrong the unlearned Readers, who produce this testimony, to confute seemly recreations, of Christians, on the Lord's Day, after the holy Service is ended. Fourthly, let the indifferent judge, whether S. Augustine's later passages, in this testimony, do not rather afford a patrociny for labour, than the former words did condemn fit refresh. Lastly, good Reader, when thou readest in the Fathers, or from the Fathers, aught concerning the Sabbath, I pray thee search, and examine, whether they speak of the jewish Sabbath, or of the Christian Quiet; very seldom do they call the day of Christian rest properly to be Sabbatum: They do often say it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, dies dominicus, our Lord's Day, or Sunday. So much be said to vindicate S. Augustin, from divers too jewishly addicted, in our days against our lawful Sports. Secondly, that most learned Prelate, the last Lord Bishop of Ely, citeth Theodoret on Ezechiel the 20. as saying, that no other Nations, but only the jews observed the Sabbath Day. He meant, no Nation kept the Sabbath, to the same end, and with the same strictness that jews did. 2. Indeed no Nation, but the jews only kept the Sabbath at that time, which Ezechiel speaks of, viz. at their coming out of Egypt, Ezech. 20.10. etc. yet many Nations did afterwards keep the Sabbath day. 3. No Nation kept it as a particular Law, and as a sign of a distinct republic; as Israel did, sit signum inter me, & ipsos, to be a sign between me and them, saith Theodoret in the very words of the text, ver. 12. yet is he, Totius historiae ignarus, blind in all history, who denieth, that other Nations imitated the jews, in observation of a Sabbath; In which regard, the most reverend Prelate, (the Eye of our Time's; and one, who for all religious learning, may be called, Arca Foederis) In the same page 156. saith, If any Heathen did observe the jewish Sabbath, they did it not, by the light of natural reason, but by imitation of God's people. But because the living Library, in his Margin, in the same place, quoteth Josephus, contra Appionem lib. 2. and Clemens Alexandrinus, (stromat. 5.) as denying Vrbem ullam Graecorum, sive Barbarorum ex Judaico ritu, âdiei septini cessatione ab opere suo, in suos mores suscepisse. That any city of the Grecians, or Barbarians, did use the fashion of resting from their work on the seventh day; from the custom of the jews; I thus answer them, If they said, and meaned, that the jewish Sabbath, with all its circumstance, and severe strictness (which the words, ex judaico titu, will well permit) was never received by any Heathen cities, or by the immediate delivery of God, as the jews had it; then they are in the right; but particularly Josephus, in the same Book, against Appion, declareth the clean contrary, avouching that every Nation, Greek or Barbarous, observed the Sabbath in imitation of the jews; and Clemens, Alexandrinus in the same cited book saith expressly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Septimum diem esse, sacrum non solùm sicut Hebraei, verum etiam Graci: Not only the jews, but the Gentiles also know, that the seventh day, is the holy day, and he proveth it by divers reasons and authorities; but Clemens ibidem, exceedeth, when from Plato his tenth Book, de Repub. he would prove, that Plato did fore-divine of the Lords day, page 437. Again, though that Mundus eruditionis, that world of learning, saith; the Grecians and the Romans observed for resting days, the one, the eight day; and the other, the ninth day, and saith it well enough, to oppose the simple Sabbatarians, who horribly incline to judaisme of late, and will not remember, that the jews, shall be turned to be Christians, but that the Christians should be converted Proselytes of the jews, was never foretold nor expected; yet the most learned Lord Bishops words, if they be rightly printed, must be interpreted of some of the Romans, and some of the Grecians; and not of the greater part: Or secondly, of the extraordinary days of rest, and not of the ordinary, and continued weekly Sabbath. Plutarch in the later end of Theseus' life, saith indeed, the Athenians did make the solemnest, and chiefest sacrifices unto Theseus, on the eight of October: and do further honour him, every eight day of every month; but first, this was Athens alone: Secondly, this honouring of Theseus, on the eight day, hindered not their other observations of the seventh day, which they constantly, also kept, as I have demonstated. Thirdly, in the same place of Plutarch, it is said, they worshipped Neptune, or did sacrifice to him on the eight day of every month, because the number of eight is the first Cube, made of the even number, and the double of the first squared, which reasons are ridiculous. Lastly, as we have holy days, besides our Lord's Day: so had they multitudes of extraordinary Festivals, which were not properly, such days, of sacred rest, as the jews observed: Romish Pestivalls, on the Ideses of their months: See at large set down by Alexander ab Alexandro (Genialium dierum, 3.18.) singulis Idibus, saith he) ibidem, which Ideses jump not exactly, with every eight day: a Graces, singuli● Calendis dii vener antur. The gods are worshipped by the Grecians, every Calends. Macrobius in the like place, maketh not the ninth day a general rest; Indeed, saith he, Nundina est Romanorum Dea, a nono die nusceritium nuncupata: qui lustric●● dicitur quo die infants lustrantur, & nomen accipiunt. Sed is maribus nonus: Octavus est faeminis; Nundina is a goddess of the Romans, so called from the ninth day that infants were borne, which day was called Lustricus, because on it children were purged, and first named; but in men children it was the ninth day, in women children the eight day; it may now be used for the Christening day, Idem Macrob. 1.11. Nonis juliis diem festūm esse ancillarum, vulgò notum est; it is commonly known, that the Nones of july is maid's holiday: Dio Cassius placing the weekly Sabbath among the special observances of that Nation, doth not say, that no other Nations kept their Sabbath day, but rather pointeth at this, the Sabbaths were given more especially to the jews; that they were the first Nation that kept the Sabbaths, and generally and strictly observed them. Secondly, the Sabbatarians, unto their forced expositions, invent lies that they may further their seeming devotions; but God needs not man's lie to uphold his truth. Who but the Father of lies suggested those horrid untruths, which are published concerning the evils that befell upon Glastonbury, for profaning the Sabbath, which the Inhabitants thereof, and we the neighbours do know to be false, almost in every point. Thirdly, is it not known generally, how dangerously many fell into judaisme, and turned Traskites, the most ignorant of all Heretics? and would bury in the Dunghill, chines of pork or puddings, or any swine's flesh, which their neighbours courteously bestowed upon them; they further bragged, they would know the saved from the damned by their looks, the Lords day they regarded not, and were as obstinate as the jews, laughing at imprisonment, and punishment, as a good poor man complained of his wife to me; and was it not time, that the supreme Magistrate should look to them? If we consider the Scripture of the new Testament, which must first be heard, we shall find that Christ doth not diminish, but rather augment the weight, force, and power of divers other commandments, concerning Murder, see the strictness, Matth. 5.21. etc. and concerning Adultery, Matth. 5.28. etc. and Matth. 5.24. are choice Rules for swearing; and for other matters in that Chapter; but he not where commanded a more rigorous keeping of the Sabbath: Indeed he said, Matth. 24.20. Pray, that your flight be not on the Sabbath; this evinceth not, that he intended a stricter observation of the Sabbath, than the jews admitted; but sensu primo, his well-wishings were, that they might meet in their flight, (which was to be both sudden, and remote, even out of Judea with no impediment) either from their opinion of the Sabbath, who (then) thought, they might not travel on that day, above two miles; which they accounted a Sabbaths days journey, Act. 1.12. or from any other Crosses whatsoever; and that Christ meaned not, in that place, to improve the strict Religion of the Sabbath, fairly resulteth from the other words, in the first place; Pray that your flight be not in the Winter, that is, cold, wet, stormy weather, or short days; nor on the Sabbath, when ye are unprovided to fly, by reason of your full bellies, and store of , or your over-strict opinion; for in these Cases, many more will die, than if the flight were at other times. Mark 13.18. He wholly leaveth out the mentioning of the Sabbath; and only saith, Pray ye, that your flight be not in the Winter: when he mentioneth an impediment from the Sabbath; himself meaneth not, that it is unlawful, to fly farther than two miles, to save one's life; but argueth from their opinion, at (that) time: but in all other places of Scripture, where he speaketh of the Sabbath, though the Mosaical Law was then of force, and the Sabbath strictly to be observed; he inveieth against the jewish rigour, and reduceth it to an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: our Church of England runneth the same way, and is not jewishly zealous. In a book of Canons, Printed 1571, by john Day, pag. 15. It is said, Every Sunday and holiday; the Parsons, Vicars, and Curates shall come to Church, so timely, and conveniently, in due season; that the Parishioners, having done their businesses, may come together, etc. Lo, a permittance of doing worldly business, before they come to Church; and obiter, pag. 13. on other times, the Parsons are to use their Bows, and shafts only: more to the former point; in the advertisement made upon Queen Elizabeth's command, 1584. among the Articles for administration of Sacraments, it is said; in all Fairs and common Markets falling upon Sundays, there shall be no showing of wares, before the service be done. Lo, here also is no disallowing of showing wares, after service is done; but rather an involved indulgence, and permittance. Besides, Christ defended his Disciples, for plucking, and eating some ears of corn, which the Pharisees condemned, Matth. 12.1. but Christ proved the lawfulness thereof, by David's eating the shewbread, in an exigent, which otherwise was unlawful, ver. 3.4. Secondly, by the Priests, who profane the Sabbath, and yet are blameless, ver. 5. by reason that Christ was greater, than the Temple, and Lord even of the Sabhath day; which Lord accepteth more of mercy, than of Sacrifices, ver. 6.7.8. and not fearing their accusation, he both miraculously healed the man's withered hand, on the Sabbath day; and since every one of them, who should have a sheep fallen into a pit, on the Sabbath day, would lay hold of it, and lift it out; how much better is a man, than a sheep? wherefore saith Christ, it is lawful to do well, on the Sabbath day, ver. 11.12. S. Mark 2.27. addeth remarkably, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: and S. Luke speaking of the same Story, saith, Christ propounded to them, this quick question; Is it lawful on the Sabbath day, to do good or to do evil, Luke 6.9. apparently implying, that not to do a good work on the Sabbath day, was to do evil. Again, when the Ruler of the Synagogue answered with indignation, because Christ healed one, on the Sabbath day, Christ called him hypocrite, Luke 13.25. confuting him, by his own, and their general practice; Doth not each one of you on the Sabbath, lose his Ox, or his Ass from the Stall, and lead him away to watering? Observe first, nor Ox, nor Ass can take much hurt, if they be not wrought, though they drink not, from Sunrising. to Sunset; yet for covetousness, or for pity, they did lose them: Secondly, they might have loosed them, though themselves had not led them away, to the watering places; for Nature teacheth beasts to know their drinking places; but they would (lead) them away thither, which they needed not; and being done for lucre, was certainly a breach of the Sabbath. And john 7.22. The jews did on the Sabbath day, circumcise a man, about which they used many Ceremonies, of preparation, of abscission, of washing, of stopping the blood, and applying of salves to heal the would; though it were but one little part, to be wounded, and made whole; and are ye angry with me, saith Christ, because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath day? Every member of his body; and I doubt not also, but he healed the ulcers of every ones (soul) whose (bodily) parts he healed. In 1 Cor. 16.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is well translated, On the first day of the week; on the Sabbath day, Christ did not take up already made, but newly made clay, and healed the blind, Joh. 9.14. so that, not only the main work of healing, or doing good; but all necessary, or convenient helps, conducing thereto may be used, on the Sabbath day, without profanation thereof; for Christ anointed his eyes, and sent him to the Pool Siloam, and there he washed. Again, it is said, Matth. 28.1. In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn, toward the first day of the week, and Mark 16.1. When the Sabbath was passed; the words are most observable, and may involve within themselves; not only, that the Sabbath of that week, was at an end, and passed; which was true, and no man questioneth; but even this deeper sense; when Christ's rest in the grave had supplied, and substantiated the Typical Sabbath, adumbrating his rest; for the Sabbaths were shadows of things to come, but the body was Christ, Col. 2.17. and his Resurrection from the dead, on the beginning of the first day, in the week, had given life to an holy rest on the Lord's day; then ended, and passed, not only the Sabbath of that week; but all, and every Sabbath for ever, of the Mosaical Law was abolished: Men were no more obliged to them; when Christ arose, the Sabbaths lay down, and began to taste of their eternal periods: as it was sin, not to have observed the legal Sabbaths before; so after Christ's Resurrection; it had been a greater sin, to observe it: the Ceremonial Law was languishing all Christ's life; was dead, at Christ's death, in most things; but after his Resurrection, and the promulgation of the Gospel was deadly. The next Sabbath day of the jewish Church, not after Christ's death immediately; yet after the Lord's day was consecrated, by Christ's Resurrection; was the first Sabbath, that was needlessely kept, and continued: and now the Apostle, in the same place to the Colossians, is bold to infer, that no man should judge them, in respect of an holy day, or New-moones, or of the Sabbath days, ver. 16. And if any had judged of them amiss, they need not to esteem it: and in all the Apostolical Writings, is no incitement to observe the Sabbaths any longer, but the Lords day; which Christ himself chalked out unto us, by his oftener appearing on that day, than on the jewish Sabbaths: yea, but S. Paul, Rom. 9.29. called God the Lord of Sabbath; it should be read Sabaoth, and the Apostle quoteth it, from Esay 1.9. Where it is jehovah Tsebaoth, in the Original; in the Greek, as it is in S. Paul; in the Latin, Dominus exercituum; and jehovah exercituum, in our English, The Lord of hosts, and so should be read, in Rom 9.29. for the same words truly transtated, jam. 5.4. The Lord of Sabaoth, or the Lord of Hosts; yea but, Act. 13.14. the Apostle went into the Synagogue, on the Sabbath day and preached? and S. Panl, Act. 17.2. reasoned with them, three Sabbath days? And again, Act. 14, 4. He reasoned in the Synagogue every Sabbath day? I answer, the Apostles relapsed not to judaisme, but laboured to convert the jews to Christianity, and reasoned, out of the Scriptures, to convert both jews and Gentiles unto Christ. Secondly, no (place) is excepted, but one may (any where) endeavour the salvation of souls; and what place is fit, than the Church? or, where are men better prepared to receive instruction, than there? Paul kept not the jews Sabbath. These were my thoughts, when I read our last, and best English Translation; but when I consulted with the Original, Greek Text, Luke 18.12. I was more confirmed in mine opinion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, I fast twice in the week; there cannot be two fasts in one Sabbath, but in a week, they might fast twice or more; and therefore Sabbatum, is there taken for a week. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Know then, the Hebrew Schabbath, and Schabbathon, have produced, with a milder pronunciation, the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. so used every where, both in the Translation of the 70. and in the new Testament; thence issued the Latin Sabbatum, and never Sabbathum, and doth sometime signify a Week, according to the Hebrew Idiotism; and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is used for one Sabbath, Matth. 12.1. and this Sabbatum is properly called the Sabbath of days. But otherwhere, there is mention, of the (day) of the Sabbath, Luke 13.16. and Luk. 14.4. yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, are all one, Luke 13.14. The Sabbath day is the primary expression from the fourth Commandment; or the same day was the Sabbath, Luk, 5.9. Much more may be said of the Sabbath, viz. as that the Primitive Church, and holy Fathers, did seldom, or never call the Lords day, the Sabbath day; and I could wish, we would follow their example. S. Augustin (ad januarium) saith thus; in one place, men receive the Sacrament, on the Sabbath, and on the Lord's day; in another place, they take it only, on the Lord's day: Behold a main difference between the Sabbath and the Lords day; the Sabbath was not the Lord's day; nor the Lord's day the Sabbath; but they were two distinct names, and things. Likewise, though (Morale) natural points out only (a) set day, for the service of God; yet Morale disciplinae guideth us to do, as God our Teacher did prescribe, that is, on the seventh day to worship him, rather than on any other day, though the Jewish Sabbath expired, at Christ's death, yet one day in the week was the Lords. But I hasten to the words, Matt. 28.1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is translated by most learned men; In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn, towards the first day of the week; but the interlineary hath it excellently, and properly, Vespere autèm Sabbatorum, in the Plural, Lucescenti in unam Sabbatorum; and this agreeth with my Interpretation; that not only that Hebdomal Sabbath was passed over, but all the jewish Sabbaths were now ended, and passed; none ever more needing to observe them; when one of the Christian Sabbaths (as, in a good sense, they may be called) or Holidays began to dawn; which in other places is called the Lords day, (Drusius on that place) saith, that a late Interpreter hath turned it, extremo Sabbato, or extremo Sabbatorum, as Illyricus hath it, that is, as I conceive, the last jewish Sabbath, that ever was; though perhaps they understood it not so In Mark 16.1. it is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not only peractâ die Sabati; but peracto Sabbato; or, cùm peractum Sabbatum transiret, saith the Interlineary. The end of one kind of Sabbath was the beginning of another; or rather, the beginning of the Lords day, was the consummate end of all other Sabbaths: If the publishing, the abrogation of the Mosaical Sabbath, was not intended by the Holyghost, by those words; I am much deceived; and yet herein I submit myself to my Superiors. It might have been said, and would in all likelihood; if it had been spoken only of the weekly Sabbath, viz. In the end of the Sabbath, or, of the, or that Sabbath day; but, in the end of the Sabbath, cannot but have reference, as the case stood, to the expiration of the Moisaicall Sabbaths; the Latin Translations have it, Vespere Sabbathi: observe the natural day, in the jewish account, began at the Vespers; The (Evening) and the morning were the first day, Gen. 1.5. and the Paschall day was both to begin at Even, Exod. 12.18. and the Sabbath day among the rest, began at Eventide; for it is said, from Even to Even, you shall celebrate your Sabbath's, Levit. 23.32. And that was the reason, why the Jews besought Pilate to have the legs of the crucified broken, and that they might be taken away, that the bodies might not remain, on the Cross, on the Sabbath day, joh. 19.31. Which it must have done, if they had not taken them down, before the beginning of their Sabbath, by the Vespers: observe further, though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be truly, and literally interpreted, and is by some in un●m Sabbatorum; which accordeth with, Gen. 1.5. Where it is said, & fuit Vespera, & fuit Mane, Dies unus, as it is in the interlineary; yet I think, it may be better interpreted, the first day, for indeed it was the first day of the world; and the evening and the morning made the first day, saith our last and best Translation (unum and primum often concur in one, and adhere together) Vatablus agreeth, ex Vesperâ, & Mane completus fuit Primus Dies; or, as others have it, fuit Vespera, & fuit Mane diei primae; for instead of the word (first) the Hebrew usurp the word (one,) Cardinalem numerum pro ordinali, the principal for the initial; the chief, for the first, in number, or order; as if he had said, the (first day) was passed, so fare Vatablus: If therefore you read it, according to the letter, in the end of the Sabbath's, as it began to dawn: in the first of the Sabbaths, (than you have the end of the Jewish Sabbath, and the beginning of the Christian Sabbath) the last of the old Sabbath's, and the first of the New Sabbath's, the Christian Sabbath beginning in the Morning, the Jewish, at the Evening: observe in the third place, that as every other Jewish Sabbath had one Vesper, and but one: so, this last Sabbath that ever aught to be among them, had two Vespers, the first of them ordinary, and usual, to make up a natural day; their Sabbath day beginning with one Vesper, the other subsequent Vesper was ordained, to bury their last Sabbath, that ever the Jews should have; their Sabbath was begun with darkness, and ended with darkness, our Christian Sabbath began with the dawning of the day, and with light; and cannot have two Vespers, their latter Vespers being but half of a Natural day without light, and ending in darkness: as their Law itself was obscure, and transitory, fuller of plights, and veils than the Gospel: the Scripture being cleared that not the Mosaical Sabbath, with its strictness, and rigour, is now in force; but the Lords Day in remembrance of Christ's Resurrection: what then was the Church to do, but to abolish Judaisme, punish Traskisme, and animate the godly in good courses? PAR. 8. AFter this long divagation; or extravagancy; that I may return with some effect: I must cross two bypaths, and therefore, I pray you suffer two digressions more: one from the words of Tertullian, which shall not be impertinent for these times; another in defence of Authority, for placing our holy Tables at the East: Tertullian is so plain (ad Nationes, 1.13.) quod innotuerit, ad Orientis partem, facere nos precationem; or (as he after varied it) quod innotuerit, nos ad Orientis regionem, precari (Apologet. cap. 16.) that is, It is commonly or certainly known, that we pray towards the East; that Gothofredus justly referreth: Some need not doubt any longer of that point: Junius was much awry to think Tertullian spoke Ironically; and Gretzer did well to reprehend, him for it: for not Tertullian alone but many other holy learned Fathers, give in their verdict with Tertullian, that the Primitive Church (to which we ought to conform even reformation itself) used to pray towards the East, or bending that way. First therefore let us prove that they did so. Secondly, let us show the reasons why they did so: Origen sideth with Tertullian in giving no reason why they did so; yet saith, they did so; and we must needs do so, (in lib. Num. Hom. 5.) In Ecclesiasticis observationibus sunt nonnulla hujusmodi, quae omnibus quidem facere necesse est, nec tamen Ratio eorum omnibus patet; nam quòd genua flectimus, orantes; & quòd ex omnibus caeli plagis, ad solam Orientis partem conversi, orationem fundimus, non facile cuiquam puto ratione compertum, that is, there are many things, in the Ecclesiastical constitutions, which all indeed must needs do, and yet the reason of them is not manifest unto all; for why we do bend our knees in time of prayers: and why of all the coasts of heaven, we turn our faces duly towards the Eastern part, while we do pray: I suppose no man can readily render a reason: what Origen ascribeth to Ecclesiastical observations, we find written in the Apostolical Constitutions, (2.61.) Nor do I agree with Origen, saying, ibid. that they who know the reasons, must also know, sibi velanda haec, & operienda, that these things are covered unto them, as it were with a veil: other Fathers have revealed the reasons; and we may, and (God willing) will pluck away the Curraine: Epiphanius, adversus Ossen, hear sin, inter Elxai errores posuit, quòd ad Orientem orare, suos sectatores prohibuit, that is, it was Elxai his error to forbid his followers, to pray towards the East. Prochorus (cap. 5.) in the life of S. john the Evangelist, saith that the holy Apostle, at his praying, sighing, or sobbing turned towards the East; the like he saith of Linus; and of S. Paul. I close up this first point briefly, because all the proofs, for the second point, viz. why they prayed towards the East, do infallibly demonstrate the precedent, namely, that that they did pray towards the East; every 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a cause cannot be given why a matter is so, if the matter be not so. S. Basil. (de S. sancto, cap. 27.) referreth to make us think of the Creation, we all look to the East, when we pray, but few of us know that in so doing we wish, and desire our old Country namely Paradise; which God did frame in Eden, to the East: if S. Basil had thought that Christians inhabit in the East, beyond Eden; by his reason they should turn their faces Westward; if his words may be restrained only to us of the Western Church, the words may pass for currant: Damascene (the side Orthodoxâ, 4.12.) useth Basils' reason amongst others: the like I answer to the full, Cerda who allegeth this reason; when Christ was on the Cross his face was towards the West; therefore the Churches converting themselves, as it were to Christ hanging on the Cross; did look Eastward: but the Eastern Christians, which lived beyond jerusalem, could not look toward the East, as it were to see Christ's face; unless their imagination either framed a Cross, and a Christ, on the East of them; or else supposed themselves to be, on the West of jerusalem: Caelius Rodiginus (antiquar. Lection. 12.9.) saith, the Jews worshipped towards the West; and therefore the Christians did, toward the East: Pamelius doubteth of the Jewish posture: Indocus Clichtovaeus, on Damascene (de fide Orthodoxâ 4.13. who might lead the way to Caelius Rodiginus) thus; the Jews by God's appointment worshipped God to the West, and he prooveth it fully by Ezekiel, 8.16. Where it is counted the greatest of many abominations, in that Chapter: their backs were toward the Temple of the Lord and their faces towards the East, and they worshipped the Sun towards the East: and Clitchtovaeus holds it probable that the Jews were commanded to worship toward the West, to recall them from the Idolatry of the Gentiles, who in their adoration bended towards the East: But Idolatry being rooted out by Christianity, and there being no occasion to fear the imitation of Ethnics; as the Jewish Circumcision was turned into the more convenient Baptism, the Paschall Lamb into the thrice blessed Sacrament; the Sabbath into the Lord's day, so the praying toward the West, by the Jews was more aptly changed to the praying Eastward by the Christians: Clemens Alex indrinus (Stromat. 7. ante medium pag. 520.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Diei Natalis Imago, est Oriens, that is, the East is, as it were the birth day of the day, and from thence the light springeth; therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ad ortum matutinum, habentur preces, we pray towards the East: justin Martyr (quaest. ad Orthodox.) with us, the most excellent things are destinated to the honour of God; it were better for all, (if it were so in our times) but in the opinion of men, the East is better than the other parts, and therefore in the time of prayer, do we all turn toward the East: this reason was taken from the Apostles (saith justin Martyr) not because they thought the Climate of the sun, to be the Habitacle of God; but for the reasons now specialize. Hyginus (de limitibus) the Ancients builded their Temples toward the West; afterward they changed all Religion, to that place, from which place of heaven, the earth is enlightened: surely Hyginus borrowed the first part of his words, from Clemen Alexandrinus, in the place above cited, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. The most ancient Churches, looked towards the West. S. Hierame (ad cap. 6. Amos in flne) from the 67. Psalm thus reads it, Psallire Domino, qua ascendit super Caelum caeli, ad orientem; unde (saith he) in mysteriis, primùm renunciamus ei, qui in occidente est, nobisque moritur cum peccatis; & sic versi ad orientem, pactum inimus cum sole justitiae, & ei servituros nos esse promittimus, that is, Sing unto the Lord, who ascended above the Heaven of Heavens, at, or in the East, whence in our Sacraments, we first renounce Satan in the West; and then turning to the East we covenant with Christ and promise to serve him; but this is not done, without prayers: Ambrose likewise, Ad Orientem converteris, qui enim renunciat Diabolo, ad Christum convertitur; illum directo cernit obtutu; the initiate is turned toward the East, for he who renounceth the Devil, turneth to Christ, and seethe Christ directly: Dionyfins Areopagtia (de Hierarch. Eccles. cap. 2.) Turning to the West thou shalt abjure Satan; then turning to the East, thou shalt praise God. These three last Authorities evince; that the turning to the East, was not casual or indifferent, or done without special Reason; but that it proceeded from a Religious observation of those holy times, even in the height of Divine Mysteries, I will close up the point, with the learned Father Damascene (de fide Orthod. 4.13. Non simpliciter, & fortuitò ad Orientem adoramus, that is, we do not simply, ignorantly, or casually adore God, toward the East; but upon good Motives, did they so: First, because God is an intelligible Light; and our Saviour is the Son of righteousness, Mal. 4.2. and Christ is called Oriens, The dayspring from on high hath visited us, Luk. 1.78. Therefore, the East is to be dedicated unto him, in our Adoration. 2. Secondly, he who bestoweth every good gift largely, willingly, lovingly on us, is to receive from us omne praestantius, every thing that was most excellent; such was the Adoration, towards the East, supposed to be; see the most learned Commentary of judocus Clitchtovaeus, on this passage. 3. Thirdly, God placed Eden in the East, and cast out man to the West; therefore desiring our old habitation, and sighing for it, towards it we worship. 4. Moses his Tabernacle had the veil, and propitiatory on the East; and the Tribe of judah as the most honourable Tribe, encamped on the East; and in the most famous Temple of Solomon, the Porch was towards the East. 5. Christ being Crucified looked towards the West; and we in fervent desire, sighing after him, worship towards him; Christ in his assumption ascended toward the East; and so his Apostles worshipped him; and so shall he descend to the last judgement, at his second coming; for Act. 1.11. This same jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come (in like manner) as you have seen him going into Heaven; say the blessed Angels; and this they learned from Christ himself, Mat. 24.27. As the lightning cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; (so) shall also the coming of the son of man be: If it be objected speciously, that it is to be understood, de modo, non de situ, & positione corporis? First, I answer, I only cited Damascens argument. Secondly, in mode, situs, & positio Corporis potest intelligi. Thirdly, the unusual, doubled phrases, shall so come, and in like manner, point out variety of matter, in the manner, for I think not fit, to exclude the manner, nor his ascent to the East. 4. Situs corporis may be understood two ways; either, pro positione corporis quiescentis; this the Text doth not mean; or, propositionis corporis moti, vel moventis sese; and of this posture is the Text to be interpreted; for Christ, in his body shall come from the East, toward the West. 6. Damascen acknowledgeth, there is no express command in Scripture, to pray or worship toward the East; by saying it is an Apostolical tradition: and an unwritten Apostolical Tradition (if it be so certainly) binds us as well, as if it were written: see most of these pointsamplified by the learned Clitchtovaeus, upon Damascene: Concerning the two last arguments of Damascene, which Clitchtovaeus wholly omitteth, I will only say this, omitting many things: that our dead are buried with their fear toward the East, that at the Resurrection their faces may be that way prepared, as it were to behold the glorious second coming of our Saviour, so much expected, so much desired: Thus much be spoken in defence of Christians praying toward the East; which may be done at many fit times; and fitly though we officiate the Liturgy, at the North-side of the Communion Table. From whence likewise the Canonical appointment of the Commandments, to be set on the East-end of every Church, and Chapel; and the placing of our Communion Table, (our wooden Altars) our Sacred boards toward the East exactly (as the Propitiatory was, in the old Law) is justly defended; and found answerable to the Primitive usance; Henceforth let that blaspheunous Gentile, stock, or stone, who seeing a most reverend, holy, and learned Bishop, at his entrance into the Church, decently to bend, stoop, and do reverence to God alone, toward the East, where the memorial is, of the holiest of holies; and where Christ is really spiritually, most ineffably present at, and in our Sacrament: I say, let him (who said in a mock, that he could find in his heart, to go to leapfrog, over that devout Prelate) know his abominable pride, confess his blasphemy, and repent for his Atheistical in devotions: likewise that idle busybody, that irreformable reformer, who not only pryeth too boldly into the Ark; but hath sucked in most venomous hatred, and mightily laboured to spread his poison against our Church, and Church-Prelates, the upholders under our gracious King of our Ark, yea and against his Sacred Majesty. I say, Naviget Anticyres, let him take Hellebore, and purge himself throughly first; and recant his wicked errors; his greasy and unmannerly comparison; that the standing of our holy Table, close to the inside of the East, of our Chancel, is like a Butcher's board, or a dreffer in the Kitchen: Jeasting, and jeering at the best, is but the froth, and some of a scurrilous wit; of an irreligious shallow brain, which never was acquainted with the true inward comfort, and joy of the holy Ghost; and therefore breaks out like scabs from a corrupt body, into outward, uncomely, and scandalous making of sport; whilst the mocker is mocked at, many times, most bitterly, and fiercely. Lastly, let those super-nice people, who because we are commanded to stand at the north-side of Table, do take exception at the placing of the East-side of the Lords Table, close to the East-wall, within the Chancel; I say, let them go to school, and be better catechised, and know what reverence, in the most holy days, next to the times Apostolical, was used toward the East: oh consider, say they, by the Rubric of our Liturgy established by Act of Parliament we are appointed to stand, on the North side; but as our late directions run; we cannot stand on the North- (side) but on the North- (end) of the board; if the East-side of it do touch the East-wall of the Chancel: such is their opposition. I answer, to the point thus. 1. We, the Obedient sons of the Church of England, do no ways infringe that Divine Liturgy, which our Churchmen did frame; and they our Martyrs sealed with their blood; which Royal authority directed and established; which Parliaments yielded unto and confirmed. 2. In how many other points, the giddy-seeming-precise ones, do little esteem of Princes, Parliaments, or Church; let their omission of prayers appointed; their jeering contempt at the holy Liturgy, and their writing against it declare. 3. The Churchmen in appointing, and the civil Authority in ratifying these words, The Priest standing on the Northside of the Table shall say, &c. cannot so much as probably be evinced, to have intended, either that the Priest might not bend sometimes toward the East, or that they meant only a long Table, excluding a square Table; or that a Table a little more long than broad, may not be said to have four sides: a decent Table is indeed appointed: but is not a square, Table a decent Table? yea, most decent, in a very small square Chancel? If Ecclesiastical Authority had commanded the use of a square Table, (as nothing hindereth it) all their frivolous exception, and distinction between the (sides) and the (ends) of the Table had vanished: But irregular curiosity will now speak by rule, and measure (though otherwise it abhor both reason, rule, and measure) a Communion Table not fully square, must be said to have not four sides; but two sides, and two ends: grant we it so, in a long table, much longer than broad; & confess we that properly enough one may be said to sit, or stand at one end; and another at the other end; and others to be on both sides of the table; yet are we not bound to such strictness of terms, in tables almost as broad as long: a trencher is called Quadra; whether the trencher be perfect square, or somewhat more uneven, be equilateral, or different: Mensa also doth signify a square table, as well as a long one: Mensae primi saeculi, the tables of the first age, were first quadratae, foure-square; than orbiculatae, round, saith Alexamder ab Alexandro (genial. dier. 5.21.) yea even in round tables, as we now call them, the fairer they are, the more squares they have; and these small squares are, and well may be called (sides) If one of these curious ones had before his house, a court as long again as it is broad; he would call the two longer spaces, the (sides) of his Court; and the two narrower the two (ends,) he would be loath to say the court had four (sides,) yet in Scripture phrase, Exod. 27.9, etc. The (holy) Court is said to be placed, or made, on divers (sides,) the Southside, and North-side, each an hundred cubits, the Westside and the East-side each fifty cubits, they are called (sides) not (ends;) though two sides were shorter by half, than the other two sides: briefly, that may be called square, which (approacheth) to squareneffe; and those things to be Quadrangular, which have not four equal Angles (exactly:) and none but refractory spirits would find a knot in a Bulrush; by falsely imagining, that to place the Lords Table at the East-side of the Chancel, doth contradict the Rubric in our Liturgy, established by Religion; though it call the two ends, (sides:) If it be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, truly observed, out of our 82. Canon, that at the time of celebration, the Communion Table is appointed to be placed in Church or Chancel; where may be most convenient for the Minister, and the people: I answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, boldly yet humbly; that now with us it is judged by our Ordinary, that the decent Communion Table shall be placed at the East-end of the Chancel; and being so, is held to be placed in so good sort, as thereby the Minister may be more conveniently heard of the Communicants, in his prayer, and administration, and the Communicants also more conveniently, and more in number may Communicate with the said Minister; as I have found lately by experience; and it may be better judged whether people do sit, or lean, or kneel. Secondly, I, for my part do abhor singularity, as well as those who would break or cloy the Canon; let me live and die an obedient son of the Church of England my holy Mother, and I shall be sure to find God my Father. Fourthly, I doubt not, but all the Altars erected by holy men in Scripture, were foure-square: I am sure, there were but two standing lasting Altars allowed; either in the time of the Tabernacle or of the Temple; and both of them were to be, and were exactly foure-square: The Altar of the burnt-offering shall be five Cubits long and five Cubits broad; the Altar shall be foure-square, Exod. 27.1. And a Cubit shall be the length of the Altar of Incense; and a Cubit, the breadth thereof, foure-square shall it be; Exod. 30.2. If our Sacred board be not called the Altar, yet is the Altar called the Table: Augustine, (Serm. 113. de Diversis) saith, Cyprian's Tombstone was termed his table, and Cyprian's Table, God's Table; In eodem loco mensa Deo constructa-est; tamen mensa dicitur Cypriani, non quia ibi est unquam Cyprianus epulatus, sed quià immolatus est, that is, In the same place, there is a table erected to God: nevertheless, the same Table is called Cyprians Table, not that ever Cyprian did eat there, but because he was sacrificed, or Martyred thereon: yet nearer to our purpose, Isa. 65.11. They prepare a Table, by the word Table, is not only meant; that they furnished tables with meat and drink to refresh themselves in the Idols Temple; but by the Table, the Altar, on which they sacrificed, is also understood: which Sacrifices on the Altar always preceded their feasting; and part of their feast were relics of their offering: Nearer yet than so, 1 Cor. 10.21. There is mention of the Table of the Lord, and the Table of Devils: Consider, that the Apostle speaketh, de immolatis, of things offered, whether by the Jews to God; or by the Gentiles unto Devils, and it resulteth well enough, the Altar of the Lord may be as well understood, as the Altar of Devils: And yet more near than so, Ezek. 41.22. The Altar of wood is called, the Table that is before the Lord. But most plainly and nearest of all, Mal. 1.7. The Altar of the Lord, and the Table of the Lord, are all one, what is termed Altar, in the first place, is termed, the Table of the Lord in the same verse: Contrarily, what is directly the Table of the Lord, vers. 12. is, in the words following, truly interpreted to be the Altar of the Lord, whose fruit and meat was contemptible; whose offering was torn, lame, and sick, whilst they vowed, and sacrificed a corrupt thing, nor doth Haymo, Remigius, or S. Hierome dissent: shall this Table now have but two sides, and two ends? shall not this Altar have four sides? So may our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (as chrysostom calleth it) our sacred Table, be truly enough said to have four sides; though some peevish ones will difference the ends, from the sides, it is truly called a Triangle, though the latera be inaequalia: and yet, if the sincerely-weake Brethren, (and not those false-brethrens, who, in their own conceit, are the most intelligent, pure, Apostolical, and strongest Christians, censoriously judging all things, and yet call themselves, and their fellows, the weak Brethren) if any truely-tender-conscienced Ministers do take up a scandal at the reasonable reformation in this point; I see nothing, but they may remove their scruple of Conscience; either, by making the longer sacred Table foure-square; or, by setting one end (as they call it) of their narrower Communion Table, toward the East; and to officiate Sacred duties, on the North-side, as our Church did order; and Parliaments, with Royal consent, above all, did establish: yet let me be bold, to advise any good man, to avoid the imputation of self love, and selfe-conceite; by requesting the leave of his reverend Diocesan, before he attempt any public Reformation: If any faithful, and learned friend, doubt, or fear; that this passage will not be well-allowed? I answer; I speak but my private opinion, with all subjection; if the Diocesan, allow it not; much less do I; leave is first to be obtained, or if they dislike it, let them blot it out: and thus much also of this Digression. PAR. 9 I Return from the fourth Commandment kept, as well by the Gentiles, on Saturday; in imitation of the Jewish Religion, (though perhaps the most part of them knew not so much) as by the Christians, on Sunday: I now come to the precepts, and observation of the Romans, concerning the fift Commandment, Honour thy Father and thy Mother, in which point, let me say truly, they were as strict, yea, more strict, than the Law of God: the seventh Law of Romulus, as Balwinus recordeth from a most old table, was this, viz. Parentum liberos omne Jus esto relegandi, vendendi, & occidendi, that is, let Parents have absolute power over their children, either to banish, sell, or kill them, at their pleasure: Halicarnassaeus (lib. 2.) more particularly amplifyeth it: the Roman Lawgiver granted, (as I may so say) all power unto the Father over the child, even whilst the child lived, either to imprison him, or whip him, or make him work like a clownish husbandman, or kill him; yea, though he were grown up to the chief Magistracy: or three times, to make sale of him for gain; which is repeated, and inserted into the twelve Tables: which great power no people under heaven, except Roman Citizens exercised, or practised upon their Children; and which in truth was greater, than the power they had over bondslaves, for, if (they) were once freed, they were ever freed: Festus recites this only Law of Romulus: If a youth, or maid beat their Father, and there be an outcry, let them have no protection of the Laws. The Patria Potestas, the power of Fathers over their Children, given by the 12. Tables, was excessive; and was, in after times, moderated: Cùm â priscâ severitate descivissent, secuti interprete jus naturae, caverunt, ut liberi Parentes alant, aut vinciantur, that is; when they began to leave off their ancient severity, the expounders of the Law following the Law of Nature; provided, that Children should maintain their (impotent) parent; or else, should suffer durance for it; saith Alexander ab Alexandro, (Genial. dier. 6.10.) Faciendum id nobis, quod Parentes imperant, saith Panegyris to her sister, in Plautus his Stichus (Act. 1. Scen. 1.) We must do that which our Parents command: Further, the children were to hold the persons of their Parents (sacred) according to their latter Law, as the Tribunes were of old. The Romans were strict against Murder, and after that horrible sin committed, they would not have the offender to be killed, till hëe were condemned publicly; for the Antecedent private Revenge was held another murder: Thou shalt do no murder. Parricidas omnes capite puniunto, let all Parricides be beheaded or hanged. Plutarch hath an odd crochet; viz. That Romulus made no Law, against such, as killed their Fathers; as thinking none would be so wicked: but you heard, even now, from Festus, of a Law, against such as did but (strike) their Parents: and M. Maleolus was the first Roman condemned, for killing of his Mother, and sewed in a sack, and cast into the Sea: and L. Hostius was so served, for killing of his father. To these days saith Alexander ab Alexandro (Genial. dier. 3.5.) this is the Punishment of Parricides; a Cock, an Ape, a Viper, and a Man, are altogether sewed up, in one sack, and cast into the waters: Lege Pompeiâ, a Dog was also sewed up with them; so Modestinus (de Parricidiis) But, it may be well observed, that Romulus esteemed omne Homicidium to be Parricidium; all murderers are accounted Parricides; all murderers were to die the death. Another branch against murder is from Pandulphus Prateius (in veteri jurisprudentiâ) deprehensi in Homicidio statim puniuntor, the Murderers must be put to a speedy death. Lex Numae de Parricidiis; si quis hominem liberum dolo sciens morti duit (aut det) parricida esto, that is, Numas law of Parricides, saith, if any one feloniously kill a free Denison, let him be accounted a Parricide: A Parricide (with r) differeth from a Parricide (with rr) a Parricide is he, that killeth father or mother; a Parricide he that flayeth any man: Ius Regium was, Ne mulier, quae praegnans mortua esset, humaretur, antequam partus ei excideretur; qui contrà faceret, spem animantis cum gravida peremisse videretur, that is, the King's Law was, No woman that dies great with child, shall be buried before her child be cut out of her, he that shall presume to do the contrary to this Law; shall be found guilty of the death, both of the Mother, and the child. The Seventh Commandment: Thou shalt not commit Adultery. Lex Numae, Pellex Innonis aram ne tangito; Numa's law, let not a strumpet presume to come near the Altar of juno: Ius Regium, thus; Adulterii convictam vir, & cognati, utivolent, necanto; the King's law thus, Let the husband and Cousins of a woman convicted of Adultery, kill her, at their pleasure: Lex Julia ranked Adultery with Treason, saith Alexander ab Alexandro (Genial. dier. 4.1.) Plerique Philosophi prodidere, adulterium perjurio gravius esse Crimen, ibid. that is, the Philosophers, most an end, have accounted Adultery to be a more heinous sin than perjury: Sempronius Musca C. Gallum flagellis cecidit, that is, Sempronius Musca caused C. Gallus the Adulterer, to be beaten with rods: Opilius Macrinus Adulteros tàm perniciali odio prosecutus suit, ut deprehensos ignibus cremaret, ib d. that is, Opilius Macrinus prosecuted Adulterers with such deadly hatred, that he caused all those, that were taken in the fact, to be burnt with fire: Aulus Gellius (10.23.) citeth the Law from Cato▪ In adulterio uxores deprehensas, jus fuisse Maritis necare, that is, the husband might lawfully kill his wife, that was taken in Adultery: But the Romans Laws (as made by partial men) favoured men too much, Cato ibid. In Adulterio uxorem tuam, si deprehendisses, sine judicio, impunè necares; Illa te, si Adulterares, digito non auderet contingere, neque jus est, that is, If thou chance to catch thy wife in the Act of Adultery thou mayst lawfully kill her, without any farther judgement; but if thou shouldst chance to play the Adulterer, she shall not dare, neither shall it be lawful for her, so much as to touch thee with one of her fingers: This was the old Law; and the julian Law was also too indulgent to men in this sin: Romulus thought adultery sprang from drunkenness; therefore a Matron, who did but open a bag, in which were the keys of the Wine-Cellar, was starved to death; as Fabius Pictor hath it, in his Annals; and Cato reporteth, that kindred, neighbours or friends, were wont to kiss the Women, that they might know whether the women smelled of wine, for wine enrageth lust, perhaps that pretence was a fence, cloak, or colour, for their often kissing. The eight Commandment. Thou shalt not steal. If any stole, or cut Come by night, the man must die; the boy be whipped, or pay double damage: this Law was mitigated afterwards: It was Cato his complaint, Fures privatorum furtorum, in nervo, & compedibus aetatem agunt; fures publici, in auro, & purpurâ, Gell. that is, poor thiefs who have committed private thefts, do spend their days in begins and fetters, whilst public thiefs do swish it up, and down in gold and Scarlet. The Decemvirall Laws permitted the (known) thief to be killed; who either stole by night, or by day, defended himself with a weapon, at his apprehension, Gell. (11.18.) And very strict were they to other thiefs; though now, saith Gellius, (ibid.) a league illa Decemvirali discessum est, that Decemvirall Law is now antiquated, and out of date, the apparent thief must pay fourfold, what he stole; the thievery not fully manifested, paid but double: Sabinus resolveth that the Master is to be condemned as a thief, who only (bids) his servant steal; Servos manifesti furti prehensos verberibus affici, ac de saxo praecipitari, Decemviri jusserunt, Aulus Gellius (noct. Attic. 11.18.) that is, the Decemviri commanded notorious thiefs to be scourged, and cast down headlong from a high Rock: Furtum, saith the same Gellius, (ibid.) sine ulla attrectatione fieri potest; sola ment, atque animo, ut furtum fiat, annitente, that is, theft may be committed without taking away any thing; if a man do but only assent or consent unto the committing of theft: Incujus , consiliove furtum factum erit, duplici actione ●ene●ur, saith, from the old Law, Antonius Conteus a Lawyer. (Lection. subcisivarum juris Civilis, 1.14.) He that shall assist, or advise a thief in his thievery is liable to a double action. Alexander ab Alexandro (Genial. dier. 6.10,) Furta lex Romanorum usque adeò aversata est, & tàm severacorrectione plectit, ut furem manifestum in servitutem tradat illi, cui furto quid surreptum foret, this the Law of the Romans did so deadly detest, and so severely correct, and punish theft, that it compelled the notorious thief, to become (his) bondslave, who had any thing stolen away from him. Thiefs disturb, Ius gentium, by turning men out of their own possession; and are enemies to humane Society; breakers of Laws Divine and Humane: Cicero, pro Caecinnâ, qui per tutelam pupillum fraudâsse, ejusque rem furatus esse convinceretur, infaniâ notatus duplionis poenam subiret, that is, If any Guardian shall be convicted of any cozenage, or theft committed against his ward, let him be branded for an infamous person; and let him undergo the penalty of restoring him two for one. Admirable was that their Law, Rei furtivae aeterna authorit as esto; at any time, from any man, I may challenge, and take, what was stolen from me; yea, though the possessor had lawfully, and for good consideration, bought it from the thief. The manner of searching after things stolen, was better, and more rational, than any practice, we use; which as some malicious villain hath been found, to bring secretly into his enemy's house, the thing reported to be stolen, and sought for; and himself to drop it down slily in some corner there, that others might find it; and so the suspected one might be found guilty. Dioxippus, that noble Champion, or Fencer, was little better used by the the envious Macedones, in Curtius (9 pag. 303. for, purposely they stole away a golden Cup from a Feast, and accused him to the King; Dioxippus could not abide to be held, by Alexander, or his envious enemies, as a thief, and killed himself. It was one of the worst deeds, that ever Alexander, or did, or countenanced. But the Roman Laws, which they took from the Grecians, in the days of the Decemviri, appointed; that the searcher should make oath by the gods (the keepers of the Laws) that he did search, in hope to find the things feloniously stolen from him; and then, he should come naked into the house, of the party suspected, covered only to preserve modesty; whereupon, the suspected party, or parties were to permit him, to seek in all suspicious places of theirs, locked, or unlocked, within doors or without. The ninth Commandment, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour: Qui falsum Testimonium dixisset, è Saxo Tarpeio dejiceretur, that is, if any one shall bear false witness against his neighbour, let him be cast down headlong, from the Tarpeian rock; the rock was of an huge height: Dejectio è rupe, siuê â Saxo Tarpeio, per carnificem facta est, praegressâ verberatione, jussu Magistratûs; this hurling, or tumbling down from the Tarpeian rock, or stone; was done by the Executioner, when first he had whipped the malefactor, at the command of the Magistrate; Freemen were so served, saith Appian; (De Bello civil 3.) Cicero, (lib. 4. de Republ.) Siquis actitaverit, sive carmen condiderit, quod infamiam, flagitiúmve alteri precetur, capite punitor, that is, If any one shall compose, or rehearse a Libel, which may redound to the disparagement of a man's fame, or good name, let him be beheaded, let him die the death: Metius Suffetius Albanus, pactum, atque condictum, cum Rege populi Romani perfidè rupit; & binis quadrigis vinctus in diversa nitentibus Laceratus est, Gell. (20.1.) Metius Suffetius Captain of the Albans, did perfidiously violate his promise, and agreement which he made, with the King of the people of Rome; wherefore being tied, by the arms and legs, to two Chariots, each drawn with four horses, that were driven two clean contrary ways, he was rent-asunder, for his labour: Coelius (ad Favorinum ibid.) testifieth, that the Law of casting Liars from the Tarpeian rock, was abolished; and if it had continued, they had had few false witnesses: acerbitas plerumque ulciscendi males●cii, bene, & cauté vivendi, disciplina est, that is, vehement, sharp punishment of offenders teacheth people to live well; — At tu dictis Albane maneres, Virgil Aeneid. 8. Perhaps it might be better thus; — At tu pactis Alban stetisses, But Duke of Alba, you should have observed, Your own compacts, from which you falsely swerved; For it was Metius Suffetius, Dux Albanus, to whom he spoke: Patronus si clienti fraudem fecerit, sacer esto; if the Patron falsify the trust, which the client puts in him, he is outlawed; the Patroness esteemed their Clients above kindred, saith Gellius; Afterward, Lege Corneliâ, a false witness was confined to some Island, and all his goods forfeited; to this Commandment may this be reduced; Qui terminum exarâssit, ipsus, & boves sacri sunto, He was to die, who broke the old boundaries, making false bounds; he, and his innocent Oxen, for ploughing of a lie, yea, the abstainers from witnessing what they knew, were to be Intestabiles; might neither be witnesses, in any ensuing cases, nor might any witness for them: briefly, Polybius (lib. 6.) so great Religion did the Romans place in an oath; that they therein exceeded, and excelled all other Nations; Polybius himself condemning his own Countrymen, and administering occasion to the world, that Graeca fides might be taxed, and run into a Proverb. Concerning the tenth Commandment, no Laws of man ever established it; for no Law of man could ever punish it; an inward unlawful thought unrevealed, is above man's judgement; Cogitationis poenam in foro nostro nemo luat; let no man be punished, by our Law, for thoughts only, say the Civilians; a transient ill imagination, strangled, ere his birth, is subject only to God's Tribunal. Heathens might, and did counsel well; but they were never able to strain so high; this is a Commandment, which subjecteth all the world to guiltiness. Heaven were not so hard to be obtained but for this; Non concupisces, Thou shalt not lust, or covet. The Apostle, who knew not sin otherwise, knew it by this Law, Rom. 7.7. In other Commandments, the (Act) in this, the (Intention) of the Act, though the purpose fail, is forbidden: In this Commandment, the Primitive, transient ebullition; the thought, though corrected presently, is condemned; yea, the very suggestion entertained (though speedily rejected) is condemnable here; not as a suggestion, not as resisted; but as entertained, and too [late] resisted: of thoughts there be divers sorts; In morosâ cogitation, there is delight; this is condemned in every law; in volatili, or volaticâ cogitation, where there is no rest, no complacency; yet because, we permitted a noxious thought to supervolitare, it is sinful. If any one should prudently, cautelously, and lovingly advise me to examine; whether, in every of the other Commandments, the (Intention) of breaking them, be not a violation? I answer, the (Intention) doth; the intention to the contrary, is a breaking of any Commandment; for Intention implieth a consent; there is the (thought) of the heart, Act. 8.22. the lodging of vain thoughts within us, is not only disliked, Jer. 4.14. but their very first approach, or salutation is forbid, in the tenth Commandment; and not only the expulsion of them, is precepted, but a quelling of them, at the motus primo-primi, whether arising inwardly, or contorted by Satan. To be (tempted) of Satan, is no sin; else Christ had sinned; but it is a sin, if we take not the shield of faith, whereby we may be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one, Ephes. 6.16. we are not only bound to resist; and that always; but if we so carelessly resist, that he give us a veni; or, our soul receiveth never so little a spot; if any of his darts do but, as it were, raze our skin; then this imperfect resistance is a sin, not as it is a resistance; but as it is imperfect: there is a thought, without voice; even this is condemned, in the tenth Commandment, though it make no impression on the body, and there is a thought with a voice, Eccles. 10.20. this is a violation, if it be evil, of (any) of the Commandments; there is morosa cogitatio mali, which nestleth in a man; and there is transvolans cogitatio; this later is condemned, by the last Commandment; there is a (thought) of evil, and there is an (Imagination of a thought, 1 Chron. 29.9. Gen. 6.5. the very (imagination) of an ill thought, breaketh the last precept: but Cogitation is only as an abortion of the consent, or intention; and is forbid only in the tenth Commandment; In the other Commandments, is forbid intentio, etsi non consequaris; in the tenth, cogitatio, etsi non sequaris; saith a great Divine of our Church, and he citeth S. Augustin thus; Magnum fecit, qui non sequitur malum, sed non sic perfecit; nam cogitare probibetur; we are bound, by this Commandment, to keep the tablet of our hearts, and souls, from being dirted or soiled though never so little; the very listening to Satan's temptations; and the first thought of evil is sin, and here interdicted; for God accounteth that to be voluntary, not only what is committed, but what is intended; yea, the very cogitation, which is not hindered by the Will; when it is bound to hinder it; the thought halfe-received, half rejected: the very seed, as is were, of sin, and the first degree of entertainment thereof, subjecteth a man to this Commandment, and not to the breach of others. And thus much concerning the Roman Laws correspondence with the Laws Divine; from whence the Egyptians took them; and the Grecians from them; for Clemens Alexandrinus (Stromat. 6. pag. 457. saith well of the Grecians, that they were, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they did (steale) from all sorts of Writers, and the Romans had most from the Grecians. PAR. 10. MIne old task is not yet ended; after the businesses concerning the mere Alien, are thus done off; I am, by my proposed Method, to treat of the stranger, or b See above in this Chapter, Parag. 2. foreigner; were he a professed Traveller, were he a Tradesman, or Merchant, rather errand than fixed; he might not be forced to Circumcision; he might not partake of the Passeover, Exod. 12.45. A foreigner shall not eat thereof. The thing that died of itself, was to be given to the stranger, that is in thy gates, that he may eat it; or thou mayst sell it unto an Alien, Deut. 14.21. these two sorts of strangers might be so served; but not the third sort, as I think: the third sort of strangers; the Sojourners, were such, as also continued, and dwelled among them, within their gates; these if they, and their Males were circumcised, and desirous to eat the Passeover, were not excluded from those sacred benefits: Let him come near, and keep the Passeover, and he shall be, as one borne in the Land, Exod. 12.48. and when they died, they were not buried, in the burial place of strangers; which was a distinct coemiterium, Matth. 27.7. but were buried among the jews; Where thou diest, I will die, and there will I be buried, Ruth. 1.17. Yea, if a stranger, or one borne in the Land, should have eaten leavened bread, any of the seven days of the Paschall Festivity, even that soul shall be cut off from the Congregation of Israel, Exod. 12.19. These so journing strangers, in later times, were called Proselytes▪ and had many privileges, Num. 15.14, 15, 16. One Law, and one manner shall be for you, and for the stranger, that sojourneth with you. See also, Num. 9.14. The jews called strangers, Sojourners, or Proselytes, within their Covenant; and obedient to the jewish Law, Righteous strangers: of holy strangers, and converts was our Christian Church also compounded; the jews did compass sea and land to make one Proselyte; and yet (that people may fear without good causes, to change the Religion, in which they were bred) what saith Christ? Matth. 23.15. Ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. Devoute Proselytes came and dweit at Jerusalem, Act. 2.5. and 10. verses, Act. 13.43. Religious Proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: this is confirmed, Esay 14.1. The strangers shall be joined with Israel, and they shall cleave to the house of Israel; yea the very sons of strangers have Gods gracious promise, Esay 56.3. Let not the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the Lord, say, the Lord hath utterly separated us from his people: the devoute sons of the stranger within the Covenant, God will bring to his holy mountains, and make them joyful, in his house of prayer; the offerings, and sacrifices shall be accepted upon God's Altar, vers. 7. Thus do I pass from the described several sorts of servants, as likewise of strangers, and close up all for the reconciling of these seeming contradictions mustered up in the front of this Chapter, by observing two points of moment. 1. First, what indulgence soever is granted, what grace offered, what favour permitted, it is only to such, as were circumcised; the proof reacheth home, No uncircumcised person shall eat thereof, Exod. 12.48. And the very approbatory precepts contain so much; the servant bought with money may eat the Passeover, when he is circumcised; and the sojourning stranger, when all his Males be circumcised, he may keep it, as is above cited. Thus the negative Precepts; No stranger shall eat thereof; a foreigner, an hired servant shall not eat thereof; all these, and if there be more, must be understood of such as are uncircumcised: for if any of these had been admitted into the bosom of the jewish Church; and writ their Covenant with the blood of their Circumcision, and sealed it with the seal of God's people, than had they an interest in the Passeover. 2. The second thing promised to be premised, is this; How strict soever the Letter of the Law seemeth to carry it; that not one, but circumcised people might eat thereof, yet neither were women circumcised, nor yet were they excluded from eating the Passeover: that the men Idaealitèr represented the women; and the women were (as I may so say) circumcised in the men; see proved in my Miscellanies: concerning the second part of the disjunction, it is true; the Passeover might be eaten by men alone without women; so was that most holy Passeover, celebrated by our most blessed Saviour, & nor women, nor disciple at large, but the Apostles, the 12. Apostles only eaten it with him: of which, God willing hereafter: that only women by themselves ever observed it, I have not read, I do not believe; though the Master of the family supplied the room of the firstborn; yet the privilege of the firstborn, or of the Priest, to sacrifice the Passeover, was never permitted to women. If it be objected, that Zipporah, Exod. 4.25. circumcised her soon, and might she not, as well slay the Passeover? I answer, the difference is great; for, first, Moses was at the point of death, and could not circumcise him: secondly, it was fit, that she, who in likelihood, had hindered Moses from circumcising him, should now do it herself: thirdly, no Expositor ever doubted, but all this business was translated, by the power, and direction of God, or of the Angel, both showing the cause of God's wrath against Moses; because he, who was to give the Law to others, was a breaker of the Law, given to him by Abraham, for the circumcision; which though God forbore, whilst Moses continued a private man, among the Heathen; yet now, that he was governor Elect, going as it were, to be installed, with the rod of God, in his hand, Cum baculo Pastorali; lest he should give exemplary scandal by his sinful omission; God sent upon him, in the Inn, and by the way exemplary punishment; and said, in effect, Zipporah, thine husband shall die, if thou circumcise not his son; whereupon of two evils, she choose the less, as she apprehended: fourthly, Again, extraordinary actions are ill precedents for a common course; yet give me God so directing, I will allow a woman sacrificing; give me a good Angel so advising, and I will commend a layman; as Manoah a Danite, the father of Samson, offering a burnt-offering to the Lord, and acting the Priest's part, Jud. 13.6. fifthly, and lastly, there were many, who were circumcised, that are not the Posseover; as the seed of Esau, but none might eat the Passeover, except the circumcised: therefore, I am (persuaded) he should not heretically err, that saith, as in our Sacrament of Entrance into the Church, upon great exigents, the Laity may Baptise, though Regularly it belong to the Priest's office: so the jewish Sacrament of Circumcision, in extremity, might be performed by others, though the administration thereof properly appertained to the firstborn, head of the family, or Priest. If any think I presume too fare? I answer; first, I speak but my own persuasion, and that humbly with subjection: secondly, not only the lay-men, but Christian women have often in extreme necessity baptised with us, and not been hindered, nor punished: thirdly, Vorstius on Bellarmine (De ministro Baptismi) confesseth; Inter ipsos Evangelicos benè multos●esse adhuc, qui●etiam laici●, ac feminis (non tamen inc●dulis) in casu necessitatis, officium baptizandi concedunt; that is, among the professors of the Gospel, there are very many, even to this day; who, in a case of necessity, do grant the office of Baptising, even to lay-men, and to women themselves; so that they be not Infidels; though indeed withal, he saith, the greater, and better part descent: fourthly, Tertullian (De Baptismo;) Hierom (contra Luciferianot) & allipassim; lead the way to my persuasion; insomuch, that Vorstius saith to their authority; Nimia patrum solicitudo pro Regulâ perperam hic affertur, that is, the Fathers too much care for Baptism, is not to be pressed upon us, as a Rule to follow: yet, nor may the extraordinary Baptizer consecrate the Body, and Blood of our Lord; nor the extraordinary Circumciser (without express Revelation Divine) sacrifice the Beasts offered at the Altar; a nullity followeth in both, joined with horrible presumption, and intrusion upon the Sacerdotal dignity: that most commonly an household, or households, mixed of men, and women together, did celebrate the Passeover together, was the confessed practice; Domatim, and the next family, domatim, do evince so much; the thrice-blessed Virgin went up, with Joseph to celebrate the Passeover; did they do it, in several houses, or, not together? The Aethiopians to this day, use to circumcise their very women; I had rather, you should read the words, and manner; in Dancianus â Goes (de Aethiopum moribus, pag. 69) than in me: Johannes Leo verifieth as much, of the African women, that the Turks Circumcise them; It is in his eight book, of the African History: but I never read, that either God Commanded; or the jews used female-Circumcision, or Circumcision of females. The men of the Hebrews, who had many other Privileges above the women, in this bore the brunt, both for their Redemption, and Circumcision, and not their women; and the men represented the women. To conclude; as any one, truly, and justly admitted a Proselyte into the jewish Congregation, might be partaker of the holy Passeover; and might be part of that selected number of people, who were prerequired to consummate, or consume that solemn Passeover; whether they were he, or she-Proselyte: so no man uncircumcised in the flesh; no man or woman, as I think, who had plainly revolted from the jewish Religion (though their males were circumcised) were to be numbered among the Society of Communicants, at the Passeover. This I am sure of, Ezech. 44.9. No stranger uncircumcised in heart, nor uncircumcised in the flesh, shall enter into my Sanctuary, saith God, of any stranger, that is among the children of Israel; the bringing in of such, was an abomination, verse the 7. Most summarily thus; Servants or strangers of any kind; if they were true members of the jewish Synagogue; might be partakers of their Sacraments; or strangers of any kind, if they were uncircumcised in heart, or flesh, and separated from Israel's God, might not partake; nor be part of this sacred number, at the eating of the Passeover. Now it is high time for me, after so many points, and so many digressions, handled in this Chapter; to begin a new matter, and Chapter; but not, till I have ended with a Prayer. The Prayer. HOly, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts; blessed be thy glorious name, for guiding me, through briars, thorns, and obscure thickets of the Wilderness, in a day by a pillar of Cloud; and in the night, by a pillar of fire; it hath been thy good Spirit, O God, which hath lead me, and inspired into me, thoughts above myself: good Lord, I humbly beg, for a continuance of thy favour; yea, and increase of thy grace; lead me, O Lord, from knowledge to knowledge, from virtue to virtue; illuminate my dull understanding, sanctify my perverse affections, and give me a Progress in all good courses, from grace to grace; and by thy effectual multiplied graces, guide me, good Lord, unto thy glory, for the merits of jesus Christ. Amen, Amen. CH●P. X. The Contents of the tenth Chapter. 1. The year of the world, in which the Passeover was first instituted. 2. The month of that year. The old jewish account of the years, and the new. Annus sacer, & vulgaris. The year preceding the seventh sabbatical year, viz. the 48. year, after the old Jubilee, and the second year before the new jubilee; brought forth sufficient fruits for three years. 3. The Magnalia performed, in the month of Abib. 4. The Passeover, upon some other occasions extraordinary, might be kept, on another month. 5. The proclaiming of Festival days commanded, both by Moses, and some Heathen. 6. The appointed day for the Passeover. 7. It was the fourteenth day of the month, not alterable, or dispensable with. 8. The full Moon. 9 The jews hope that the Messiah shall deliver Israel, the same day that Moses did, and that the Passeover was kept. 10. Tertullian explained. 11. The jews unlawfully altered the day of the Passeover. 12. Christ eaten the Passeover on the fourteenth day of the month, the jews on the day following. 13. The strict observation of the jewish Festivals: a trap laid for Christ: and broken taxations are paiable to Princes, against the opinion of Pharisaicall-zelot Galilaeans. The misunderstood story of the Galilaeans slain by Pilot, explained. 14. Before the jewish Passeover, our blessed Saviour was crucified. 15. Christ kept the Law exactly. 16. The hour of the day that the jewish Passeover was kept in: the several beginnings of the day by several Nations. The jews began, from the Evening. 17. In the new Testament, thereckoning was from the morning. 18. The hour of the day, was a lasting, fixed Ceremony: It was to be slain between the two evenings: The divers meaning of the word, Evening: Maymonides reproved. 19 It was to be eaten between Sunset, and any time, till towards the morning; against the opinion of Scaliger: It was usually eaten, after the beginning of the second Evening, and not long, after Sunset. 20. The fixed hour more explained. PARAGRAPH. I. THe seventh durable Rite of Paschatizing, was, it must be killed on a set month, in the first month of the jewish year: but first, let us touch at the year of the world, when these great matters came to pass: In those remoter ages, which truly may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fabulous, for multa confingifabulosa coeperunt, saith S. Augustin (De Civit. Dei, 18.8.) We have little beside Scripture, but only uncertain conjecture; yea, too many uncertain conjectures upon Scriptures; even they which would seem to have rocked the Cradle at the Creation, to have taken off the swaddling of time, and to have nursed the world in her infancy, and registered year by year, all forepast affairs, with incredible exactness, do yet incredibly differ, concerning the year of the first great Passeover: Sure I am, it was 430. years, after the Hebrews beginning to so journey, Exod. 12.40. Even just so long, after the preaching of the Gospel to Abraham, Gal. 3.8. After the Promise made to him, and his seed, that is, Christ, Gal. 3.16. I say, the Law was given full 430. years, after the Covenant confirmed, Gal. 3.17. even the selfsame day 430. years, was the eating of the Paschall Lamb, and their arising to go out of Egypt; and the selfsame year, (within fifty days of their Paschall solemnity) was the Law given on mount Sinai; for, though God reckoned unto Abraham no more than 400. years, Gen. 15.13. with which number the new Testament exactly accordeth, Act. 7.6. (so that we may not so much as imagine an error, or mistaking) yet God accounted not to him, the thirty years of Abraham's fore-journying, or current troubles, both in Egypt, and in the rest of his travels, or peregrenation (as he did by Moses, and S. Paul) but points out the time, when the mocking of Ishmael, the ●oune of the Egyptian Hagar, was to be so apparent, that Sarab herself saw it, Gen. 21.9. Which mocking the holy writ esteemed as a persecution, (He that was borne, after the flesh persecuted him, that was borne after the spirit Gal. 4.29.) from this scourge of the tongue, or vexation by other mis-behaviour no more, nor less, than 400 years were expired to the departure of Israel, out of the house of bondage. And yet there were in an undeniable account, full 430: years, to a day, from Abraham's first arrival into Canaan; till his seed began to journey, toward their promised Patrimony, in the Land of Canaan: distingue Tempora, & concordabit Scriptura, distinguish the times, and the Scriptures will easily accord: God began one aeri or account, from Abraham's first footing in Canaan, at his being 75. years old; and thence to the first Passeover, were 430. years: God also took a second Epocha or ground of an account, from the time of Ishmaels' notorious abuse of Isaac; from which time, 400. years were to flow before the seed of Abraham were freed from the Egyptian servitude: I am sure also it was about the fourscore, and first year of Moses his age; and about the 84. of Aaron's life, Exod. 7.7. Concerning Moses his coequals, and contemporaries, S. Augustine hath planted a dainty discourse (de Civit. Dei, 18.8) Ludevicus Vives of old, and the most learned Leonardus Coquaeus, have watered it of late; and though much may be graffed on, or superadded, to make it more fruitful, or tasteful, yet because this falls in only, in transitu, on the Buy, I pass it by, and refer you to them, and their records of antiquity: in fair computation the Passeover was, in the 54 year of joshuah, after the Universal undage, in Noabs' time, 797. years, in the days of Alman, who was the Hercules of the Germans, (for Varro reckoneth up 44. Herculesses') and from whom the Almans, at this day, took their name; about the times of the Trojan Teucer, and Greek Amphictyon, before Christ's incarnation 1536. years; and in the year of the world's Creation. 2453. So much be said concerning the year of the world, which passed away: let us now fall downward, and enlarge ourselves upon the first month, of the year; which was indeed the lasting Ceremony of the following Passeover. PAR. 2. YEt let me, on the Buy, observe a fault in the great emendator of times: I will not determine at large, that quaestion, which hath exercised so many great Wits; whether the world was created in the Spring, or in the Autumn; yet I cannot but gently censure the error, of that great Censor of times, Josephus Scaliger, who in his fift book, de emendatione Temporum, (pag. 368.) discourseth, to this effect: the more ancient opinion was, that the world was created in Autumn; but, by a later opinion, it was made in the Vernal aequinox, or spring, because all things did then grow, bud, and increase, which in the Autumn decrease, and whither: otherwise, say they, why was the earth commanded to spring, branch, and bud forth; that with the first frosts of Autumn it should be nipped, and leave growing? But, this is a vain, fond, and foolish argument, saith Scaliger; though I was sometime of that opinion; harken to his reason, for if this be true, saith he, when God bade the trees produce their fruit; there must needs have been grapes, and other fruits (which are not ripe, but in Autumn) even then in the Vernal aequinox, which is most absurd. I answer. First, a man must not lightly change his opinion, if he do, let him not censure it for an idle, babbling, or uncomely opinion; but part with it fairly, without laying an aspersion of folly, on the argument, which before was prevalent with him, lest it reflect folly on himself, to be so simply misled. 2. Secondly, Scaliger might have considered, Adam was created, not a child, but a perfect man. 3. Thirdly, that God, out of the ground form every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air Gen. 2.19. And that God could easily create ripe fruit, as trees at any time whatsoever; that on every tree in Eden fruit did grow, and of every tree in the garden, man might freely eat except of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; Gen. 2.16. therefore there was fruit on that tree also, otherwise there needed no inhibition, and if Adam had not eaten of that forbidden fruit, we had not fallen. 4. Fourthly, God gave man every herb bearing seed, or seeding seed, Gen. 1.29. and every green herb was for meat, Gen. 1.30. but because Scaliger instanceth in (grapes) he might have considered, Gen. 1.11.12. God said let the earth bring forth grass; the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit, after his kind; whose seed is in itself on the earth, and so it was: are not Grapes fruit? is not the Vine a Tree? judg. 9.8. The trees went forth to anoint a King over them, and the trees said to the Vine come thou and rule over us, ver. 12. and the Vine refused to be promoted over the Trees, verse, 13. see Ezek. 15.2. and 6. 5. Fiftly, the powerful will of the infinite Creator, was as the Father; and the earth like a fruitful womb of a Mother, which brought forth full-growne creatures; why were not ripe Grapes created as well as other Autumnal fruits, ripe also? 6. Sixthly, if Adam had not fallen, it is more probable, that trees should have borne fruit all the year; some ripe, some halfe-ripe: some blossoming, some budding; as divers trees do now, in divers parts of the world: as Aaron's rod, Num. 17.8. was budded, and brought forth buds, and bloomed blossoms, and yielded Almonds: Ver erat aeternum, placidique tepentibus auris, Mulcebant Zephyrinatos sine semine flores, saith Ovid, (Metamorph. 107. and 108. verses,) that is, The lovely Ver kept still in lively lustre, The fragrant valleys, smiling meads, and pasture, And Zephyre did sweet musky sighs afford; Which breathing through the Garden of the Lord, To seeds gave vigour; verdure to the field, That verdure, flowers; those flowers, sweet savour yield. As joshuah Sylvester, our English Duke Bartas, in his Eden, Fol. 219. hath excellently translated him: I am sure, the tree of life in the Celestial Jerusalem, bore twelve manner of fruits; and yields her fruit every Month, Rev. 22.2. And the earthly Paradise was a type of the heavenly. 7. Seventhly, if it should be absurd to say that our Autumnal fruits, were ripe and perfect, at the Creation; as the contrary is most probable; yet, it is not absurdissimum; thousands of matters are more absurd; I am sorry to see Scaliger, in the superlative of Censure, for little or nothing; so that I cannot forbear to say of him, as he said (pag. 568.) of Aben Ezra, En jecur Criticum, see how a Critic may err. Lastly, S. Ambrose (Hexam. 1.4.) saith expressly to the main question; In hoc principio mensium, quo Pascha, jussu Dei, celebrabant judaei, calum & terram fecit Deus, that is, in this beginning of Months, at what time the Jews did celebrate the Passeover, according to God's Commandment, God created the heaven, and the earth also, Athanasius (quaest. 17.) Eodem Die, quo Christus in utero virginis conceptus est, in mundi principio, Deus creavit Adam, that is, the same day on which Christ was conceived in the womb of the Virgin, God, in the beginning of the world created Adam. Again, Damascene (de fide Orthod. 2.7.) in the spring, Deus fecit universa, God created the whole Universe. Briefly, (for I remember my promise at the beginning) of the same opinion, are Leo, (the Possi. domini. Ser. 5. and 9) Beda, (de ratione Temporum, cap. 40.) cyril Hierosol. (Catech. 14.) Gaudentius, (tractat. 1. de Paschae observatime) and jacobus Salianus; (in his apparatus, ad Annales Ecclesiasticos veteris Testamenti cap. 4.) citeth forty Authors, or thereabout, that the world was created at the Spring; and yet in my opinion, very simply, and superficially confuteth joseph Scaliger, viderit Lector. Now to return to the former point; of the variety of the years, and their several beginnings and end, with the divers accounts of divers Nations: see Alexander ab Alexandro (Gen. dier. 3.24.) and how many occasions, and some foolish trivial ones, caused some to begin their year, from such a Day; but I must apply myself to the Israelitish computation: that the Jewish account of beginning the year, and month, was different from that before established, appeareth by the express words, Exod. 12.2. This month shall be unto you the beginning of months, it shall be the first month of the year to you; as if he had said; it hath not been so heretofore, it shall be so hereafter. But, whether the Israelites in their Egyptian captivity, reckoned according to the old Hebrew account, or according to the Egyptian account, may be doubted; howsoever an alteration is established by God himself. And now by this means, you may know which is the first month, when Paschatizing was to be kept: that month whose fourteenth day or full moon, falls, either upon the Vernal aequinox, or after it, the same is the first Paschall Month; and hence it cometh to pass, saith Cornelius a Lapide; that the New-moon of the first month, can neither be, before the eighth day of March; nor after the fifth day of April: So that if it fall out that two full Moons are equally distant from the Equinoctial, as may be, though very seldom, not the praecedent full Moon, but the subsequent, designeth out the first Month: Indeed the year began before that time, in September, and that Month did run out into our October: that month is called (Tisri) which signifieth in the Chaldee, the Beginning; and the beginning of their year it was. It is remarkably said Exod. 28.16. Of the feast of Tabernacles, that it is the feast of in-gathering, which is in the end of the year. It was said of old, Supremum inferioris tangit infimum superioris, the top of the inferior thing toucheth the bottom of the superior; 2. Esdr as 68 Iacob's hand held from the beginning the heel of Esau; Esau is the end of the old world, and jacob the beginning of it, that followeth ver. 9 and the end of one year past, toucheth the beginning of the year following: two minutes are not fare a sunder, the first determineth the preceding year, the second giveth life, motion, and account to the succeeding year: Vbi desimit Philosophus, incipit med cousin; the Physician gins where the Philosopher ends, where one year ends, the other year gins; that part of time which determineth the old year, initiateth the new; The same feast of Tabernacles, which is said to be, Exod. 23.16 in exeundo annum, in the going out of the year, as the Hebrew runneth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Beizeth Hasshânab, is said also to be (as it is in the Interlineary) in revolutione anni, Exod 34.22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Tekuphath Hasshânah, at the Revolution of the year, as it is in the Margin of our last Translation: And though it be said in the body of our Bible, At the years end: yet the years end is the Revolution of the years beginning: the words differ more than the sense: i That is, when all things are buried at the return of the year. Quando redeunte anni tempore cuncta conduntur, saith Hentenius in his Vulgar; and Santandreanus; which sign out not the past, but present renewed year: Where it is said, Exod. 23.16. In the end of the year; you must not understand the words of the Jewish year, which God hath newly established, but of their old computation. September which was termed anciently the first month, is now the seventh month, saith the Chaldee Paraphrase, on 1 King. 8.2. Where the seventh month is called also Ethanim; though the usual name was Tisri; as now the first month here instituted is called by the Hebrews, Abib, and in the Chaldee tongue, Nisan; and ordinarily consisteth part of March, part of April; the New-moon beginneth the first day of the Month, as the Month did of the year. The Sacred things most of them were accounted from the Annus Sacer; and the Scripture most times accounteth by this Sacred year, and yet we may not deny, but the year is truly distinguished, in vulgaren, a●t Civilem; into the vulgar or civil year: & Sacrun vel Ecclesiasticum, the sacred or Ecclesiastical year: Some holy things were accounted even according to the common year, as the Jubilee by Gods own appointment, Levit. 25.9. and it is generally agreed; the Common year, Quantùm adpublica negotia, & res saeculares pertinet, Moses, ut priùs erat, reliquit, saith Ribera, on Hag. 2.1.) k That is, so far as it concerned public businesses, and secular affa●res, Moses left it, as he found it. and he proveth it by josephus, (Ant. 1.4.) The Jubilee was a sacred, most sacred feast: For though Civil things, divers great Civil affairs were transacted in it: yet they were in ordine ad Religionem, and in respect of the Jubilee, which was as it were, a Sabbath of Sabbaths: and after 7 sabbatical years fully complete, the fiftieth year was the great Jubilee, which was blessed of God, with extraordinary favours: for though the year precedent, being the 49. year, and the last of the 7. sabbatical years, they did not sow, nor reap: yet the corn growing in the 48. served both the remainder of the same year, and the whole sabbatical year of the 49. year; and for the year of Jubilee: Nor let any man wonder at the great increase of the 48 year; God is able to raise up children of stones unto Abraham, Mat. 3.9. much more superabundancy of Corn out of the earth. But who doubts of God's power? Let us see what he hath promised; let us see, what he hath done, Levit. 25.21. I will command my blessing on you, in the sixth year, and it shall bring forth fruit, for three years; was he not able to perform his promise? or, was he not as good as his word? He spoke the (Word,) and it was made, He commanded, and it was created; as is divinely said in another case; He who made all things of nothing could easily crown the sixth year, with an increase for three years, and without doubt, performed it. Let us now see, what he did at another time, 2 King. 19.29. Ye shall eat, this year, of such things as grow of themselves, and in the second year, that which springeth of the same; in the third year, sow ye, and reap. In the first of these years, they gathered in (as I think) the cadiva, or, that which grew from the fall of the precedent harvest, the selfe-sowen corn, self grown corn, as my Neighbours call it: the year also following, and the earth without tillage, manurance, or sowing, of its own accord, brought forth sufficient corn for them; the Hebrew verily hath it, Germinatum sponte; which words may signify, either the Cadiva of the second year, or corn miraculously springing up the second year, which I hold to be more likely. The English is somewhat uncertain, ye shall eat this year such things, as grow of themselves, and in the second year, that which springeth of the same; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [the same] hath not reference to the year; for than it must be said, in the same; not, of it, certain it is, all ploughing and sowed corn is excluded. PAR. 3. THis month of Abib, was the chiefest month of the year, wherein the Magnalia, the wondrous things of God were vouchsafed to the jews; therefore worthy to be the first of months; for the Israelites this Month escaped many of the Plagues, inflicted on Pharaoh, and his people; and eaten the Passeover; and came, though hastily, yet safely out of Egypt; miraculously passed the Red-sea, on foot, the waters being, as two fir me walls on the right hand, and on the left. This month, they found the comfortable safe conduct, of the Pillar of cloud, by day, and of fire, by night. In this month they first passed over jordan, and came into the Land of Canaan, josh. 4.19. In this month was Christ conceived, and suffered and arose; and that even in the Jewish 70. Jubilee, as a great Hebraizer resolveth; which was the last Jubilee, that ever that Nation, or land joyfully observed: Ambrose (de Paschae mysteriis, cap. 2.) thinks, the Passeover is the beginning of the year, in the Spring; that giveth first Being, to the first month; the renewing of buds, flowers, and herbs, the overcommer of winterly night, and darkness; the recoverer of our Vernal jubilation, or joy in the spring: On this time, God made heaven and earth, (as is before touched at) enlightening the day, with the sun's heat; In this month, the corn in those parts, began to be eared; and therefore the month, and the word Abib, do signify an care of Corne. PAR. 4. NOw, though this were a perpetual durable Ceremony, that the Passeover should be eaten, on the first month of the year; yet, upon extraordinary occasion, both the Passeover was kept, and to be kept, on the second month, Num. 9.11. (the people being unclean) and this we may truly call, a second, Succedaneall Passeover; when the Israelites were indisposed, for the receiving of it, in the first appointed season: Hezekiah also kept his great Passeover, in the second month; whereof two other Reasons are given; First, because the Priests had not sanctified themselves sufficiently, 2 Cor. 30.3. Secondly, the people had not gathered themselves together in Jerusalem, duly as they ought, in the first month. These things adjourned the Passeover over to the second Month. 1. The People's uncleanness. 2. The insufficient sanctification of the Priests. 3. The paucity and absence of people from the due place of offering: observably it is said, Deut. 16.1. Observe the month; Abib, and keep the Passeover unto the Lord thy God; for in the month Abib the Lord brought thee forth out of Egypt. So much be spoken of the month of the year, which was to be the first month: Now, let us consider the day of the month, when the Paschall Lamb was to be offered; which is another of the durable rites, generally to be observed. PAR. 5. THere were feasts of the Lord, even holy Congregations, which they were to proclaim to be holy, Levit. 23.2. Yea, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons, vers. 4. Among the Grecians Plato (11. de Legibus) and Plutarch, (in the life of Solon; mention such a custom, as proclaiming by a praeco, or crier; of holy times, and Sacred Feasts: among the Romans Cicero (2. de Legibus) mentioneth the same; Date linguam praeconi, is grown to an adage, that is, give a tongue to the Crier, or make the Crier proclaim: the Crier bade them abstain from strife and brawling, and to separate from their lips all obscene speeches, job cap. 1. vers. 5. Mittebat ad filios, job sent to his sons; Mittebat quoque, as the Hebrew bears it, Misso nuntio, eos accersebat, saith Vatablus; He sent a Messenger to call them: Psal. 81.3. Blow up the Trumpet, in the New-moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn Feast-day: more punctually, Exod, 23.6. Aaron made Proclamation, and said, To morrow is a feast to the Lord, Praeconis voce clamavit, he made the crier proclaim, as the Vulgar hath it. This Proclamation might well be made by an under-Officer, or Cryer; though the Hebrew ascribeth the Proclamation to Aaron, as being appointed by his authority, as our King proclaimeth, what his Officers proclaim in his Name; and it is his Proclamation, though others read it, and proclaim, and Preach it. The very name of their holy day's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, mogned, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes of the radix 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, jagnad, to appoint a fixed time; likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Michea, from their being called together; nor were they summoned only, before the feasts, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they might know the appointed times, but even at, and in their feasts they did blow with Trumpets over their burnt-offerings, and over the Sacrifices of their Peace-offerings, that they might be to them, a memorial, before the Lord, Numb. 10.10. PAR. 6. AS the first month of the year is called the appointed season for the eating of the Passeover, Num. 9.2. So in the 14. day of the month, at Even, ye shall keep it, in his appointed season, ver. 3. Month, day, evening of the day, are styled by God, the appointed seasons: things out of season are less regarded: Beneficia moment is valent, a courtesy is more acceptable at one time, than at another; the hitting of the punctum, & articulus Temporis, the point and minute of time; and the striking sweetly upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a seasonable hint, or fit opportunity, is very gracious. PAR. 7. IF any desire a proof, that the Jews were commanded to keep, and did keep the Passeover, on the 14. day of the first month, he shall find the words expressly, Exod. 12.6. Ye shall keep it, (to wit, the Paschall-offering) until the 14. day of the month, and the whole assembly shall keep it, between the two Evenings; Num. 28.16. In the 14. day of the first month, is the Passeover of the Lord; and in the 15. day of this month, is the feast, ver. 17. And this Ceremony was so durable, that they, who were dispensed withal not to keep the Passeover, in the first month; were not yet dispensed withal, but they did keep the Passeover, on the 14. day of the next month. One reason may seem to be touched at; Exod. 12.40. etc. just that day, 430. years, that they came into Egypt, to sojourn, even the selfsame day it came to pass that all the hosts of the Lord went out of the Land of Egypt; but they were not to go forth, till they had ended their Paschall solemnity. PAR. 8. ANother reason might be, it was plenilunium; and both Naturally, they had more light, in the night, to go forth, with that confused mixed multitude: the full bright-moone-light being almost of the sun-light: God brought the Israelites out by night, Deut. 16.1. And it is probable, the Moon might, that night, supply the room, and office of the Pillar of fire, which is spoken of in the next Chapter; and though it be said, Exod. 13.4. This day ye came out, in the month, Abib, yet Deuteronomie toucheth at the beginning of their going forth, and Exodus, of the end of it; the first in fieri, the second in facto esse: and mystically Plenilunium, saith Rupertus, indicabat illam Temporis Plenitudinem; the full moon did point at the fullness of Time, spoken of, Gal. 4.4. When the (Fullness) of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law; to redeem them that were under the Law, (to a better redemption, than the Israelites were now redeemed unto) that we might receive the Adoption of sons, whereby we are now no more servants, as it followeth ver. 7. This also by some, will be thought a good reason, or a strong confirmation of the Praecedent. PAR. 9 MAsius on joshuah, 5.10. Hoc unum addam memorabile sanè quod in Thalmude scriptum reperi, ubi de anni principio disputatur, celebrem fuisse, & veterem opinionem àpud priscos judaeos; qui Dies vertentis anni Israelites fuisset libertatis Aegyptiacae initum, eundem olim ip sit fore initium quoque libertatis, quam essent â Messiah recepturi, that is, I will add this one thing, and that verily is a memorable one; which I found written in the Jewish Talmud, where the beginning of the year is handled; that it was a famous, and common received opinion, among the Ancient Jews; that Messiah should begin to deliver them, on the selfsame day of the year; that God, by Moses, delivered them out of Egypt. How excellently it accordeth with the truth of our Religion, every man seethe; saith he; since within 24. hours of the kill of the Paschall-Lambe, our most blessed redeemer was crucified, and by the sprinkling of his blood, saved us. Yea, Eugubinus (on the 12. of Exod.) assureth us, that the Jews of these Times do fully believe, that the Messiah shall come exactly, on that day, on which the Passeover was offered, when they fled out of Egypt; which most exactly is squared to our blessed Saviour, though the Jews, who have yet a veil before their faces, do not, or will not see this clear light. PAR. 10. TErtullian cast it in their teeth, (in his book, Adversus judaeos, post medium) thus: Hoc Moses initio primi mensis novorum facturos nos prophetavit, cum omne vulgus filiorum Israel advesperum, agnum esset immolaturum— &c adjecit, Pascha esse Domini, i. passionem Christi, quod it à quoque adimpletum est, ut primâ die azimorum interficeretis Christum; & ut prophetiae implerentur, properavit dies vesper am facere, i. Tenebras eff●ce●●●, quae media die fastae sunt, that is, Moses did prophesy, that we should do this, in the beginning of the first month of new things, when all the children of Israel, pellmell, or the whole assembly of the Congregation (as our last Translation hath it) were commanded to kill the Paschall-Lambe, in the Evening; and be added, It is the Lords Passeover (that is to say) the Passion of Christ; which was even so fulfilled, in that ye crucified Christ, on the first day of unleavened bread; and that the Prophecies might be fulfilled, the day hasted to make the Evening (that is to say) to cause darkness, which came to pass, at Midday: and before, he saith, In passione Christi, at the Passion of Christ (as Rigaltius, and Pamelius, read it better, than it was in Rhenanus) Primis men sis novorum, is plain enough; and, as needing none explication, is omitted, and unexplained, by all those three learned men; and it showeth the new occurrences and strange effects begun, near about their going out of Egypt. But why Tertullian should say, Initio primi mensis novorum, which were not done, till the tenth, and fourteenth day, I see not; unless Tertullian thinks, it was foretold by God to Moses, by Moses, to Israel, on the first day of the month, what was to be done, and was done afterwards, in the tenth and fourteenth day. The sum of Tertullia's meaning is, that Christ was slain, as the Passeover was, in the first day of unleavened bread, toward the Evening; the day hasting to make the Evening, by the midday's turning dark, to adapt the substance to the figure, and fulfil the prophecy; and therefore, the sacrifice was called the Passeover of the Lord, Exod. 12.11. that is, the Passion of Christ, which was accomplished, above all other Evenings, between the two Evenings; the one miraculous, Cùm media dies tenebresceret, saith Tertullian, when the midday waxed dark; and lasted so a long time. The other natural, toward the shutting of the day, Exod. 12.14. This day (viz. the fourteenth) shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a Feast to the Lord, throughout your generations; and doubling the precept, ingeminateth, you shall keep it a feast, by an ordinance for ever; therefore were the jews to blame, to shift off the day, and to translate the Feast, which was nailed to the jewish policy, for ever. Though this fourteenth day of themoneth, was never dispensed withal by God Almighty (for aught that we can learn) and therefore was one of the rites of perpetual durability; yet the jews presumed to change it as is now to be explained. PAR. 11. MOst holily did our Saviour say to them, Matth. 15.3. Ye transgress the Commandments of God, by your traditions; and verse 6. Ye make the Commandment of God, of none effect by your tradition; and ver. 9 In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines, the Commandments of men: what the jews before, and in our Saviour's life did practise; their Successors followed to an hair. Sebastian Munster (in his Tractat. called, Translationes anni, fixioner, pag. 141.) bringeth in a jew, giving a reason, why they varied from God's appointment, thus; Sapientes roboraverunt verba sua, plus quà ea, quae sunt legis; our Rabbins, and Wise men have more regarded their own Interpretations, than the letter of the Law. So I expound. In sensis favorabili; they trod in the steps of their Fathers, preferring their own Traditions before the precepts of God. More particulatly, the said Munster, in his Book, where he handleth the Hebrew Calendar, thus; Patet, apud Judaeos duplicem haberi Paschae rationem, unam ●egitimam, quâ juxta legem Mosaicam, etc. It is apparent that the jews kept a double account of their Passeover; one lawful, by which, according to the Mosaical Law, it was appointed to be killed, towards the end of the fourteenth day, and to be eaten toward the Evening, which began the fifteenth day. The other account was (full of Law) invented by the Lawyers; and for foolish causes erected against the Law of God; by which they put over, for one or two days, their New-Moones, or Calendar of their months: other where, in the same book, he promiseth to show, with what frivolous reasons they endeavoured to palliate, or varnish over this changing of Feasts; and to excuse the Transgression of the Divine Law. PAR. 12. MOst specially to our purpose, Munster, ibid. thus. It is plain, that Christ did eat the Passeover, the lawful Passeover, with his Disciples, on the fifth day of the week, at even; and he annexeth his Reason; because Christ fulfilled the Law, which established that time; but the jews abstained from entering into the Judgement Hall, on the sixth day of the week, Joh. 18.28. that they might eat the Passeover, that day at even, according to the decrees of their fathers; for the jews, saith he, tooth and nail, hold fast the traditions of the Elders, eating the Passeover, on the sixth day of the week; or on the preparation of the Passeover, Luke 23.54. but translating the Feast of the , from the sixth day, to the Sabbath day; which, by reason of the concurrence of two feasts, is called an High Sabbath day, Joh. 19.31. I will a little enlarge the arguments of Munster. The jews led Christ, from Caiphas, unto the Hall of Judgement, and it was early, and they themselves went not into the Judgement Hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the , Joh. 18.28. therefore, they had not then eaten it, though Christ, and his Disciples had eaten the , the night precedent; for, after the threefold Supper of Christ, judaical, Ordinary, and Eucharistical, Christ passed the brook Cedron, entered into a Garden, was apprehended late at night; and the next morning, lead early into the judgement-hall, or pilate's House. Secondly, joh. 19.14. It was the preparation of the Passeover, and about the sixth hour, when Pilate sat down on the judgement-seate, and when he delivered Christ unto them, to be crucified, ver. 16. The preparation of the , differeth from the eating of the , and precedeth it; wherefore, the jews had not eaten the before; and none can think with reason, that the jews, after they had once apprehended him, would, or did dismiss him, that he might eat the ; but they kept him, in safe-custody, after Judas had once betrayed him; and Judas betrayed him not, till Christ, and his Apostles, and Judas among them, had celebrated the , which the jews had not. PAR. 13. A Third Argument may be this; when they consulted to take jesus, and kill him, they said, Matth. 26.5. Not on the Feast-day, lest there be an uproar among the people; they were so superstitiously addicted to their seeming-strict observation of their Feasts; that if they had taken, or killed any man, in such a solemnity, it would have made an uproar, or mutiny; therefore it was told to Christ, as an unusual, and offensive matter, that Pilate had mingled the Galilaeans blood with their Sacrifices, Luke 13.1. as I conceive, these Relators intended to have made this bloody deed of Pilate, an occasion of a new commotion, & consulted with Christ, to that end: judas Galilaeus, Act. 5.37. risen up, in the days of Taxing; and the days of taxing were about the birth of our Saviour, Luke 2.1. etc. Then Judas Galilaeus stood up, and he would have the freeborn of the jews, the sons of God forsooth, to pay no tribute; though he perished, and all, as many as obeyed him, were dispersed, as it there followeth; yet those scattered ones continued, and propagated their Heretical opinions, after judas Galilaeus, his death; and most especially, they prevailed in Galilee: In the time of Christ's public teaching, the Pharisees laid a double trap for Christ, about this point, Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not, Matth. 22.17. They fully supposed, he would have answered, yea, or no; and if he answered, yea; their emissary-Disciples would have taken advantage, as if Christ had favoured the Romans, not the jews; the Prince, and not the people; and so might have stirred up the giddy people against him; if Christ had denied it, to be lawful, to give tribute; the Herodians (whom also they sent) would have seized on him, as an author of rebellion, as a follower of judas the Galilaean: but Christ did then most divinely break their net in pieces, and established the lawfulness of paying Tribute; so soon as he was borne. joseph, and the thrice-blessed Virgin did, in all likelihood, pay Taxation-money for him, as well as for themselves; that joseph was taxed, no man may doubt; that Mary also was taxed, is proved from the words, Luke 2.5. joseph went up, to be taxed with Mary; for that holy Virgin was the only daughter, which had nor brother, nor yet sister, saith Aeuthymius on john; and heir of her father, and had land by him, saith Lyranus, (on Luke 19.25.) and Eusebius Emissenus at large, in his Homily, of the Nativity of Mary. The Tax was to be done, Capitatim, by poll; and so our Saviour not excluded. I am sure, as by precepts, he upheld the Magistrate's authority, Matth. 22.17. so, he paid tribute for himself, and for Peter, the then Representative body of the Church; and rather wrought a miracle, than he would not pay Tribute, a Fish, after a wonderful manner bringing money in his mouth: nor did he appeal from the judgement seat of Caesar; his Apostle appealed unto it, and both S. Paul, and Peter called for obedience of the people to their Magistrates, both Civil, and Ecclesiastical; but, after Christ, and his Apostles were dead, who signed this obedient Truth, with their blood, and opposed the deniers of tribute: then the Galilaean opinion of Zelotes prevailed amain, as witnesseth Josephus (Antiq. 18.2.) and again (antiq. 20.3.) and once more (De Bello judaico. 7.29.) insomuch, as to that one particular amongst others, both jews, and Gentiles do ascribe the besieging of Jerusalem: Now the remnant of those scattered Mutineers, who sometimes followed judas Galilaeus, in likelihood, came up to Jerusalem, to worship (with intentions too-high swollen, and revolting) whom Pilate prevented, by mingling their own blood, with their own sacrifices. pilate's act indeed had been a most ungodly act, if he had not had most certain intelligence of their resolved rebellion: but Christ found no fault at all with Pilate, but confessing that the Galilaeans were sinners, and great sinners (Tertullian, ad Nationes, 1.17.) calleth Commotions, and conspirations against Princes, Crimina Vaesaniae, frantic sins) yet addeth, other Galilaeans (understand it, of the same factions) were as great sinners; and even of themselves, who related this prodigious act (for he knew their thoughts marching along, in all likelihood, with those rebellious ones) he saith, Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish, Luke 13.1. etc. So much for the explanation of that misunderstood story, and the third Argument. That the jews apprehended not Christ, on their Feast-day, for fear of an uproar; but, after he, with his Disciples had received the Passeover; and before themselves received it; they took him, they crucified him. PAR. 14. Again, joh, 13.1. Before the Feast of the Passeover, jesus knew that his hour was come, that he should departed out of this world. These words (before the feast of the Passeover) cannot be meant of that Passeover, which Christ and his Disciples were to take: for, they had celebrated their Passeover before, and Supper was ended, ver. 2. (at least, the Paschall Supper, if not the common supper also) And Christ arose from Supper, and laid aside his garments, and took a Towel, and girded himself, and afterwards poureth water into a Basin, and began to wash the Disciples feet, and to wipe them, ver. 4.5. Therefore the words (before the Feast of the Passeover) must of necessity point out the jewish Passeover, then drawing on, before the feast of the Passeover (the other words are but a parenthesis) he loved his own unto the end, ver. 1. For indeed, before the jewish , he was apprehended, condemned, crucified, and cried, Consummatum est, It is finished; He prowred out his life for them; He loved his own unto the end, before the feast of the . So, there were two distinct passovers, on two distinct days. To this purpose, the words, Luke 22.7. Go, and prepare us the ; and Mark. 14.2. Where wilt thou, that we go, and prepare, that thou mayst eat the Passeover? and Matth. 26.18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, My time is at hand; I say, the words (having the Emphasis fixed to the pronoun) declare that Christ took not the , when the other jews did; that his time was so marked out from their time; and, in their first Native sense, and intention, imply Christ's , not the jewish . PAR. 15. AS, on the contrary, it is said of this , in the year, when Christ was put to death, Joh. 11.35. The jews Passeover was nigh at hand; for though Christ's was a day nearer; yet the words, Pascha judaeorum, was nigh also, & might punctually sign out the lewish , as divers from Christ's ; divers from the true-right ; contrary to the Law, contrary to Christ's practice, Pascha judaeorum, justly to be taxed for being out of order, and opposed to Pascha Legale, or Pascha Mosaicum; for Christ kept the Law exactly, ad unguem, saith one. And Beza, on Matth. 26 17. Thus, Impium est, existimare, Christum â legis praescrip to vel tantillum discessisse; It is impiety to think, that Christ erred one jot, from the prescript Law. Again, Stet illud, legem prorsùs â Christo fuisse observatam; let it never be questioned, but Christ did exactly observe the Law, with all the durable Ceremonies thereof, and this rite, among the rest, that he celebrated the , on the fourteenth day of the month; though the Nation of the jews, following the Commandments of men, rather than the letter of the Law, observed it, on the fifteenth day, presently after Christ was buried. I will not meddle with that controversy of the Christians, which perplexed the East, and West Churches, till, from almost the Apostles days, even till the time of Constantine; whilst, in mine opinion, Polycarpus, and Irenaeus were more moderate; as leaving all Churches to their former practice, than such as made more garboils, and contentions, than the matter was worth. I would the Church had never known those differences, while the orientals kept their Easter, in die 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, on the day of his Passion; but the Western Churches, in die 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, on the day of his Resurrection. See the Epistle of Cummianus (de Controversiâ Paschali) set out, by the most learned Bishop Usher, in his Sylloge of old Irish Epistles, pag. 24. You have heard the discourse of the year of the world, that the Egyptian was first kept, on the first month of the year; and on the fourteenth day of the first month, being the only Legal day. Let us now descend, to speak somewhat, of the hour of the day. PAR. 16. THe division of the day is into 1. Natural, consisting of 24. hours; and 2. Ardificiall, distinguished by four watches, and consisting of 12. hours; Are there not twelve hours in the day, Joh. 11.9. saith Christ (which he accounteth not from Sunrising to Sunset; or, from light, to darkness, which varied; but from the set watches, the four known watches) as is known to all. The Persians, and Babylonians began their day, from Sunrising, ending it at Sunset: the Umbrians, and Hetu●ians began the day, at six of the clock, and ended it at six of the next day: the Romans, from midnight to midnight following; beginning at the last part of the first night; and ending with the end of the first part of the night succeeding. The Egyptians, and Athenians reckoned the day, from one Sunset, to the other: the common people from the morning light to darkness; so Alexander ab Alexandro, (Genial. Dier. 4.20.) I marvel that he saith nothing of the jewish or sacred account; which was this: in the old Testament, they accounted the Evening, from the beginning of the day natural; God himself began so to account it, Gen. 1.5. The Evening and the morning were the first day; not only were so (called) but (were) so, for darkness was upon the face of the deep, for 2. before God said, let there be light, and there was light, ver. 3. likewise ver. 8. God called the Firmament, Heaven, and the Evening and the Morning, were the second day. The French, and the Grecians, preferred the nights before the days; and held, that the nights were before the days, saith Alexanderibid. According to the former sacred account, the Festival days were appointed, to be kept; from Evening to Evening, Levit. 23.32. Ye shall afflict your souls, at Even; from Even, to Even, shall ye celebrate your Sabbath. PAR. 17. But in the new Testament, after, or rather at Christ's Resurrection, began a new reckoning; the day was reckoned from the morning, or, toward the beginning of light, joh. 20.1. The first day of the week, Early, when it was yet dark, Mary came to the Sepulchre: and Mar. 16.1. etc. When the Sabbath was past— very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they came to the sepulchre, at the rising of the Sun; which is thus varied, Matth. 28.1. In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn from which three places, compared together, resulteth, that the Sabbath indeed; as the day began to dawn; and the days are reckoned, from the breaking of the morning, about, or a little before Sunrising: but let us draw nearer. PAR. 18. THe hour of the day, was another of the durable observations, belonging to the Passeover. It is a general rule, Num. 9.3. Ye shall keep the Passeover, in the appointed Season: which words extend to the month of the year, to the day of the month, and to the hour of the day, what hour of the day, it was to be killed and eaten, is now inquirable. Concerning the first point, it is most apparent, that the Passeover was to be slain, between the two Evenings, Exod. 12.6. The whole Congregation shall kill it in the Evening, according to the Original, it is to be read, between the two Evenings, in the dual number: for the clearing of which intricasie; know, that the word (Evening) is not here taken, as it is, in the first of Genesis for the whole night, or the half of the natural day, consisting of twelve hours, because some distinct things are appointed to be done, in this evening, as the eating it, and some distinct things appointed to be done in the night, as the burning of the remainder, before the morning: so that, the Evening here comprehends not the whole night; yea, the two Evenings involve part of the precedent day, and therefore cannot be interpreted, for the darke-halfe of the natural day, opposed to the other lightsome half thereof: but the first Evening is here taken for the time (towards) the Evening, when the Sun was yet in their Horizon, though past its middle declination; the day being fare spent, and the Sun hastening to its lodging; any time between three of the clock, and six, might the Lamb be slain. Thus are our afternoone-devotions called Vespers, or, preces vespertinae: Evening prayers, though begun, and ended sometimes, divers hours, before Sunset; so Suppers are called Vespernae, by Tertullian, though ended, in Summer Evenings, long before Sunset; this, I say, was the first of those two Evenings, Exod. 12.6. being used for late day, or early night; somewhat improperly so called, beginning, at the end of three of the clock, and ending, at the end of six of the clock. I cannot agree to Maymonides; that immediately, so soon as it was Noon, began the Evening; or, that they might kill the Passeover any time, after twelve of the clock till six; for he may be confuted by this; that the daily Evening Sacrifice, was always slain before the Passeover, and that sacrifice in all took up about one hours' time; and in their greatest haste, or businesses, the daily Evening Sacrifice, was never offered near high-noon; in exigents perhaps; about two of the clock, and then, how could the subsequent Passover be sacrificed, within a while of Midday? Secondly, the word [Evening] or the second of the two Evenings, before mentioned, is used more properly, for that space of time, which we call Twilight. In Scripture phrase, it is termed, the lodging of the day, Jud. 19.9. and is a mingled compound, or partaker, both of some light of the day departing, and of some darkness of the night encroaching; which Twilight dured somewhat more, than an hour. Observable is the place, where the Evening, and Sunset are Synonyma's and of the same signification, josh 10.26.27. They were hanged on the trees until the (Evening) and at the time of the (going down of the Sun) they took them down off the trees; and Deut. 16.6. Thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover at Even, at the going down of the Sun; at the season, that thou camest forth out of Egypt, or, begannest to comforth out of Egypt, inchoatè, non completè; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, say the 70. thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover of the Evening; the Original hath it, Sacrificabis Pesach in Vesperâ circa ingredi ; Thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover, in the Evening, about the Sun's entering in at Sunsetting; Occumbente sole, as it is in the Interlineary, How then was it lawful to slay the Passeover (as Maymonides saith) any time after midday was passed? The words, Occumbente sole, may signify the last quarter, the last watch of the day; from three, till fix: and the Septuagents, Pascha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may well denote the (approach) of the Evening, from that time. Lastly, the Hebrew phrase, Circa ingredi , doth intimate; in my judgement, the descending of the Sun; almost out of our sight; or, rather the Time, about which he is entering, as it were, towards, or, into his lodging; which may well be reckoned, from the second quarter of the Sun's declination, but cannot without violence, be extended to the beginning of the first quarters declining, immediately after Noontide, as the jew would have it, Luke 9.12. when the day began to wear away. Briefly, the slaying of the Passeover, was to be, between these two Evenings; not on the fourteenth day before the first Evening, that is, not before three in the afternoon (that had been a breach of the Law) not after the beginning of the second Evening; no, nor after six of the clock; for than they should have had no time sufficient to kill it; flay it, wash it, disembowell, or paunch it, dress it, and roast it, that they might have eaten it, in the appointed season. In other terms conceive the matter thus; these words (between the two Evenings) may be taken, either Divifim, or Conjunctim, disjoyntly, or jointly; disjoyntly, for the two Evenings of one day, distant far asunder: the first Evening beginning from the Sunset of the precedent day; and ending in the first hour of the night succeeding (which evening begun the day, with the jews) the second Evening of the same day beginning, about three of the clock, in the afternoon, ending in Sunset; which Sunset closed up the preceding day, and opened the Evening of the day following. These words (between the two Evenings) are not thus meant, in this place; nor used for the two divided, and separated Evenings of one day; but, the two Evenings are to be taken, Conjunctim, jointly; namely, as the end of the last Evening of one day, is the beginning of the first Even of the next day; one Evening almost, if not immediately touching the other. Between these two Evenings of two several days, was the Passeover to be slain, and prepared. This is the Reason, why the Passeover is said to be kept, sometimes on the fourteenth day of the month, sometimes, on the Feast of unleavened bread; which feast was, in the beginning of the fifteenth day of the month, and not before; because, the first Evening partaked of the fourteenth day; the second Evening of the fifteenth day; like as our Evangelist saith, Christ was crucified, on the third hour, Mark 15.25. which Matthew, and Luke imply, was about the sixth hour, because he was crucified, and hung on the Cross, about both those two times; so, the Passeover is said to be kept, both in the fourteenth, and fifteenth days, because, between the last Evening of the fourteenth day, and the first Evening of the fifteenth day, it was to be killed, and prepared. PAR. 19 THe next inquiry is, what hour it was to be eaten? Some say, it was to be eaten in the night; and that therefore, it is called▪ Exod. 12.42. a (night) of Observations; or, a night to be much observed unto the Lord, of all the children of Isael, in their generations. If they mean that they might eat (some) of it, in the night, none will oppose them; for clear it is, they might eat, any time of the night, any part of it, conditionally, that all might be eaten, or consumed with fire, before morning. But if they speak, exclusively, as if it might not be eaten till the dark night was in, or say, it might not be eaten about Sunset; nor in the first Evening of the fifteenth day, I cannot subscribe unto them. The Angel did do the great mischief to the Egyptians, in the night: no time is unseasonable to do good-service, when that hand of Heaven pusheth as on, or ministereth deliverance; God will be served, both night and day. The Christian Agapa, or feasts of Charity were at night: quis solennibus Paschae abnoctantem securus sustinebit? who without jealousy can endure his wife to be absent all night at the solemnity of the Passeover? saith Tertullian of an Heathen, concerning his Christian wife. Pervigilium Paschae celebrari putat Hieronymus, quia Iudaeorum traditio est, Christum in media nocte venturum, in similitudinem Aegyptii temporis, unde reor (ai● Hieronymus traditionem Apostolicom permansisse, ut in die vigiliarum Paschae, ante noctis dimidium, populos dimittere non liceat, expectantes adventum Christi; & postquam illud tempus transierit, securitate praesumpta, Festum cunctis agentibus diem; saith Rhenanus, (in argumento, lib. 1. Tertul. aduxorem) that is, 〈◊〉. Hierome thinketh that therefore the vigil of Easter was kept, because the Jews had an ancient Tradition, that Christ should come again at midnight, as the destroying Angel did in Egypt; whence I suppose, saith S. Hierome, the tradition of the Apostles hath still continued, that on the vigiles of the Passeover, or on Easter Eve, it is not lawful to dismiss the people before midnight, who then expect the coming of Christ; but when that time is once past, they all then securely, without any fear keep Holiday. PAR. 20. THat the Passeover was to be eaten, at a set fixed hour, needs no more proof than thus, Luke 22.14. When the hour was come, he sat down and the 12. Apostles with him, to eat the Passeover, (for indeed he did eat it with them) as the precedents, and consequents do demonstrate: Hora was constitutum Tempus esui agni; when it is said, job. 13.1. Christ knew that his hour was come, that he should departed out of this world: significantly he alludeth to the set hour of the eating of the Passeover, ut transeat ex hoc mundo, as the Vulgar hath it: A Transitus, or departure there was in the two Passovers, both Typical, and substantial, and at a determined hour also; what that hour of eating the Passeover was in precise terms, I think is, Mat. 26.20. determined; When the (Even) was come; Horam manducandi Paschae designat, he means the hour, of eating the Passeover, saith Beda. The time of (killing) it, was in the Dual, inter Duas vesperas, exactly; between the two Evenings: the (eating) was, ad vesperam, in that night, Bagnereb, in the singular number: they might not (eat) till the sun was set, and the second evening entered; which was within a while of the sunset, or vanishing out of their Horizon; and toward the beginning of the night. Some conclude they were not to eat the Passeover till the beginning of the first hour of the night, because till then they might not eat unleavened bread: but they must eat unleavened bread with the Passeover. Edit agnum hora Noctis prima, he eaten the Passeover the first hour of the night, saith Maldonat, (on Matth. 26.2.) and nothing forbade but it might be eaten, after the first hour; though not before the evening say I, most properly, sub vesperam, in the twilight, as Hunnius stemmeth the time, Tempus constitutum esui agni, fuit crepusculum vespertinum, inter sextam & septimam horas vespertinas, nostro more numerandi; the set time for eating the Passeover, was the Evening-twilight, between six and seven of the clock at night, according to our manner of computation, saith Franciscus Lucas Brugensis, comedere agnum post solis occasum, est legem ignorare, to eat the Passeover, after sunset, is to be ignorant of the Law, saith Scaliger; (de emendat. Temp. 6. pag. 568.) yet was it eaten in vespera, post solis occubitum, in the evening, after sunset, saith Hugo Cardinalis, Cùm coepisset noctescere, when it began to be night, saith Faber Stapulensis, Oecolampadius, the translator of Theophylact (on Mat. 26.) thus, Cùm esset Tempestivum, accubuit; When the season was come, he sat down: so it was not only the time, but the seasonable time, the prefixed time: It was not only opus diei in die sui, the work of the day in its day, but opus illius horae, in hora sua, the work of that hour in its hour. Dionysius Carthusianus, cum facta esset hora vespertina feriae quintae, in qua hora agnus Pascholis secundum legem manducabatur, when the evening hour of the fifth Festival was come, in which hour the Paschall Lamb was eaten according to the Law, directly against Scaliger it is said, They shall eat the flesh in that (Night) rested with fire, Exod. 12.8. It is not et âdem vesperâ, in the same evening, but Nocte, in the same night, according to the Hebrew and Greek; which I marvel Scaliger observed not, and ver. 10. Ye shall let nothing of it remain till the morning; therefore they might at any time of the night eat of it; and that which remaineth of it till the morning you shall burn with fire, if they might not eat of the Paschall-Lambe any time of the night when they pleased, they would have been commanded presently upon the eating of the Lamb, to have burnt the remainders: But the precept unto them, to keep the remainders till toward the morning, includeth permission, that they might eat of it, any part of the (night) before the morning to save the burning thereof. The eating of it, at the (beginning) of night, or in the Evening, was repeated after the first Passe-over; and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or practice was by the Jews accordingly performed. They who might in uncleanness exchange the month, repriving the Lamb for a whole month; they who did put off and translate the day; even they always observed the hour of the night, and eaten it in the evening; nor might they eat one bit of it, either before sunset, or after Sunrising; the beginning to eat of it, must be in the Evening, Exod. 12.8. They shall eat the flesh in that night roasted with fire. The Prayer. O Good, and gracious, my Lord God; when I consider and recount within myself, that of the Ceremonies, belonging to the Passeover of the Jews, there was not any one idle, unnecessary or unsignificant, I admire thy wisdom; but when I weigh, what an happy change of Sacraments, thou, O God, hast made for us Christians; fewer in Number, easier to be performed, fuller of Divine energy, I am astonished and ravished with the riches of thy love, exceeding to us, and most humbly beg at thy mercy-seat, that Jesus Christ our Passeover, who was once slain for us, may be my daily food, remitting my sins, replenishing me with goodness; so perfecting all my courses, in this life, that I may be thought worthy, and accepted through him, to be a Communicant, at his Table in the world to come, for his All-sufficient merits sake. Amen, and Amen. CHP. XI. The Contents of the eleventh Chapter. 1. It was a lasting Ceremony, to keep the Passeover at jerusalem, and not as any man fancied: yet this precept, binded them not, till they came to Jerusalem; and notwithstanding, under good distinctions, may truly be said, to be no fading, but fixed Ceremony. 2. A most memorable passage from Munster, concerning the late great fast of the jews. The jews keep no Passeover now; because they are outed from Jerusalem. 3. The jews were to root out the Names, and places, where Idolatry had been: Cities were sometimes so called, from the Idols, in that place worshipped. 4. Not till David's Time, was the particular place known, where the Temple should be. 5. David's great care for the Temple so soon as he was enthronised. 6. That hard place explained, (We have heard of it at Ephrata, we found it, in the fields of the wood.) 7. The Psalm 132. not made by Solomon, but David. 8. Solomon kept the first Passeover, at jerusalem. 9 The Israelites lef● all their Cities, even almost empty, to go to jerusalem, and eat the Passeover, God kept them: when they forsook him, all mischief fill upon the City, the Temple, the People. 10. Five things in the first Temple, which were not in the second: the fire from heaven which lighted on the Altar: the Urim and Thummin was not in the second Temple: Bath-col, and its signification: the Ark was not in the second Temple: In this third the Ark, Ribera includeth the two other of those famous five things. 11. Divers reckon, and estimates, what those five things were: Ribera censured: the jews confuted. 12. The last Temple had more glory than the first, by the presence of Christ, our Messiah, and it is cleared by divers memorable particularities. 13. The Passeover from the restauration of the second Temple by Zorobabel, till Vespasian and Titus destroyed it. 14. The miseries at the Passeover, when the second Temple was destroyed, and the ensuing calamities of the captive jews. PARAGRAPH. 1. BEfore that prefixed time (whereof in the 10. Chapter) they might come; after it, they might not come; and they must come, dwell they fare, or dwell they near; after God had fixed his Temple at Jerusalem, to * See this (after some intervenient digressions) specialized, Chap. 11. Parag. 8. Jerusalem must they come; which is the next point. For another fixed and durable Ceremony was, they were commanded to keep the Passeover at Jerusalem: the month, day, and hour was duly to be observed; and that not every where, or any where, as every man, or Master of a family did fancy: they had no liberty to choose their place; but it was to be performed at jerusalem, Deut. 12.8. Ye shall not do, after all the things which ye do here this day, that is, every man whatsoever seemeth good in his own eyes. Indeed, it was not so commanded, at the first institution of the Passeover, nor could it be kept there, till they came thither: but they celebrated it first in Egypt, then in the wilderness of Sinai, Num. 9 5. In joshuahs' time they are the Passeover in the plains of jericho, josh. 5.10. For they were not yet arrived at Jerusalem: It is also confessed that Jerusalem was not particularly named to be the only place, where the Passeover was to be eaten, till after and a good while after they were seated in jerusalem; but by the general indetermining words, (the place which the Lord thy God shall choose) jerusalem was undoubtedly meant, and intended by God, and therefore I am not afraid to place this Ceremony among the fixed ones, and say, it was eternal, â parte post, not â parte ante, in intention, not in execution; eternal from the first convenient, and possible observation there; not to be performed, till the Israelites possessed jerusalem, nor to be performed otherwhere, after they were throughly settled in Jerusalem; and this is the only Reason why the Jews of these times observe not the Passeover, because they cannot do it in the Temple at Jerusalem. PAR. 2. MVnster (de fide Christian. & judaeor. pag. 26. in fine) which voctate is placed before S. Matthews Gospel in Hebrew) hath a memorable story, and thus trippeth up the Jews; quid quaeso, juvat vos magna illa poenitentia, quam fecistis, Anno Christi, 1502, quando vos Iehudaei omnes, in cunctis habitationibus vestris, & in cunctis terris vestris, & in universa Captivitate poenitentiam fecistis, quatenus veniret Messiah, ferè integro anno; Puer & senex; parvuli & mulieres; qualis nunquàm facta est poenitentia, sicut fecistis, in diebus illis, etc. what did your great penance profit you, which you shown in the year of our Lord, 1502, when all you jews in all your habitations and Lands, and in your universal Captivity dolefully behaved yourselves, that the Messiah might come, tepenting almost a whole year; young and old, men and women, with so great a repentance, in those days, as there was never the like; yet nothing was revealed unto you, you were nothing the nearer, insomuch as it was a wonder, an hissing, and clapping of the hands to all that heard, that neither your Law, nor repentance, nor prayer, nor alms, that you daily do, do profit you: but it is a plain and evident sign that the Messiah is come. I might easily instance in divers other things, which the Jews of these days, do keep as exactly as did any of their forefathers; but the Passe-over they omit, and profess they omit it, because it is to be observed in no place, but in jerusalem. Deut. 16.2 Thou shalt Sacrifice the Passeover in the place, which the Lord shall choose to place his Name there; and ver. 5. thou mayst not Sacrifice the Passeover within any of thy gates; but, ver. 6. At the place which the Lord thy God shall choose to put his Name in (the reduplication is not needless, but intimateth a stricter observation) There shalt thou Sacrifice the Passeover; and thou shalt roast it, and eat it in the place, which the Lord thy God shall choose, as it followeth. See this point (and not only the Passeover, but for many other great matters, concerning the Service of God, to be performed, where God should choose his place) strictly commanded, and largely explained, Deut. 12. from ver. 5. to the 14. inclusive. PAR. 3. OBserve also that the Israelites were not only to destroy the Altars of other Nations, break down their Images, cut down their groves, and burn their graven Images with fire, Deut. 7.5. But they were further commanded utterly to destroy all the places wherein the Nations served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every green tree, Deut. 12.2. Yea, to destroy the names of them out of that place, ver. 3. which the Rubenites performed, Numb. 32.38. Nebo and Baalmeon (their names being changed) they (that is the Rubenites) called their names by the names of their Cities, which they builded; for so it may be read, though the sense of divers translations be but one. Here is a sure, fair, and easy answer to the first part of the most learned M. Selden his question, de diis Syris (syntagm. 2. cap. 11.) ab urbe, an â monte, cognomine dictus Nebo? was the reputed god Nebo so called from the City, or from the mountain called also Nebo? I answer, the Idol was not so called from the City Nebo, but the City was so called from the Idol; the names of Nebo, and Baalmeon, (being Cities so named from Nebo, and Baal) were changed, as was said before; and therefore changed, because the names of Idols were not to be mentioned, but they were to destroy the names of them out of that place, Deut. 12.3. and Exod. 23.13. Make no mention of the Names of other gods, nor let it be heard out of thy mouth. Gaspar Sanctius (on jer. 48.1.) handleth the point thus: An Nebo, Babylonicus Deus, nomen Civitati dederit, Nominis ipsius communit as nihil affert conjecturae, sed quicquid est, obscurum est; whether Nebo the god of the Babylonians gave the name of the City or no, the commonesse of the name proves nothing, it is an obscure point; but I think I have cleared it; that the Idol gave the name to the City. If the Israelites had lived on mount Nebo; I doubt not but they would have changed the name of that Mountain also. As for the second part of his question, in likelihood that great hill was so denominated, from the reputed Deity of Nebo, there worshipped: Nabo or Nebo, was an Idol, saith S. Hierome: Numen etiàm erat Nebo, seu Nabo, Nebo, or Nabo, was also an Idol, saith my honoured friend (that living Library) Mr. Selden. Mountain's might partake of their Deities Names; Princes did, Daniel was called Belteshazzar, according to the Name of my God, (which was called Bel) saith that great Tyrant, Dan. 4.8. as the beginning of his own name, Nabuchadnezzar was derived from Nebo, the god of the Babylonians; S. Hierome makes autèm, & ipsum Idolum est, Nabo is the same Idol; whence I think, the full-read Mr. Selden said, haud alium Nebo a Chamos, & Belo Phegorio jure forsan putes; verily you may suppose and that not amiss, that Nebo was none other but Chamos, and Bel, the Idol of the Phegorians. Chamos is out of my road at this instant, I pass by him; but Baal, Bel, or Belus, was one supposed god, and Nebo another: Baal signifieth Dominus, a Lord, and intimateth Bel, or Belus his domineering. Belus is called Nimbrotus in ancient Histories, saith Montanus (on Isa. 46.2.) and Nimbrotus is but the corruption of Nimrodus, Gen. 10.8. Nimrod began to be a mighty one, on earth, a mighty hunter before the Lord: For he chased the Nations, and subdued many countries, a famous warrior he was. But Nebo was the first inventor, and teacher of Chaldee Discipline, and Astrological predictions. Nebo or Nabo, is rendered Vaticinator, a Prophecyer; the verb Naba is interpreted, to speak or speak out; the sign of the Noun Nabo, showeth some great Majestical thing: namely, the very faculty, and virtue of divining, as native and proper to Nebo, which he imparted to the followers of the Chaldaean Discipline, saith Montanus, ib. Bel was renowned for a Captain, Nebo for a Scholar, both of them afterwards esteemed to be gods, and divers deities, Isa. 46.1. Bel boweth down, Nebo stoopeth, and ver. 2. They stoop, they bow down, even Bel, and Nebo, even those two: their Images (we have it, Idols) the vulgar, simulacra, so Vatablus; their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, their graven Images) were on the beasts. S. Hierome interprets Nebo, to be Prophecy, or divination, in the abstract; but I follow Montanus, who was the greater Hebrician; and he who makes Nebo, to signify a diviner; a god esteemed to have the spirit of foretelling, and prophesying of things to come. It is said remarkably, Esa. 15.2. He is gone up to the high places to weep, Moab shall bowl, over Nebo; that there was an Altar on Nebo the 70. say; that there was mourning for Nebo, the judicious Mr. Selden confesseth, expounding the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commonly rendered, super by propter, that they mourned for the City or Country, I will not deny; and I think they wept also, over their bowed Bell, and stooped Nebo, their Captive Images, as People weep over their dead; they bowed and stooped before Bel, and Nebo, but now Bel bowed, and Nebo stooped before them. PAR. 4. SO much, if not too much, to evince, that no places, where the heathen gods, or Idols were worshipped, nor any other place which man or men should choose, was to be the place of the true Gods great worship, but that place only which reserved as secret, within the closet of his own breast, for a long time after they were gone out of Egypt, even until the days of David: then the Lord revealed himself more plainly, that the place so often before spoken of, was to be in the Temple; and the Temple in Jerusalem, unto which God appropriated most of his Service, and among the rest, the observing of the Passeover there, and no where but there, when once they had began there. PAR. 5. FOr the jebusities inhabited Jerusalem divers years, after David was King in Hebron, 2 Sam. 5.6. in which City of Jerusalem when David was once quietly settled, I am fully persuaded that the thought of nothing more than of fixing that individuum vagum, that wand'ring Ark; and reducing those often foreprophecyed general words (the place that God would choose) to the choosing of some such determined place, as God should particularly design, and mark out: See 2 Sam. 7.1. etc. At that time God did thus fare proceed by the Prophetical mouth of Nathan, and revealed unto David, 2 Sam. 7.10. etc. that God would appoint a place, and David's son should build an house for God's Name; and Solomon by Name▪ 1 Chron. 22.9. Yet David rested not, but was very inquisitive, and most eager, to know the special place, that he might provide Materials for the future building of it, Psal. 132.1. Lord remember David and all his afflictions, by which he meaneth not all the Troubles, and crosses, that David had, in all his life, but all his holy-afflicting cares, that he had about things Sacred, and the worship of God; or his unresting griefs, prayers, and alms, after he had made a vow, till God had declared, where the Temple should be. They enquired not at the Ark of God in the days of Saul, 1 Chr. 13.3. but there was an hearsay that jerusalem was to be that place, saith Cajetan; and therefore so soon as ever David was made King by all the Tribes of Israel, the first thing that ever he is recorded to have done, after he was thus chosen, was to recover jerusalem from the Jebusites, 2 Sam. 5.3. and 6. verses. In the fixed Chapter, see his great care to bring the Ark into the City of David: yet when God had smitten Vzzah, David was afraid of the Lord, and said, How shall the Ark of the Lord come to me? So he carried it aside into the house of Obed Edom; but when he discerned, that the Lord blessed Obed Edom, and all his household; then David went and brought up the Ark of God, from the house of Obed Edom, into the City of David with gladness; then David danced before the Lord, with all his might, and Michal despised David in her heart. When it was thither brought, and set in the midst of the Tent which David had pitched for it, 1 Chro. 16.1. and the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord remained under Curtains, 1 Chro. 17.1. David did not like those slack, covetous ones, of whom God complaineth, Hag. 1.4. Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your sieled houses, and this house lie waste? But he said Lo I dwell in a house of Cedar, but the Ark of the Lord dwelleth within Curtains, 2 Sam. 7.2 Whereupon he intended to build the Lord an house, but was forbid, 1 Chro. 17.4. Yet David rested not here, but having only a promise, I will ordain a place for my people, ver. 9 and desirous to know the particular place, now, as is most likely, did he make that binding vow and oath to the mighty God of jacob; that he would not come into the Tabernacle of his (New-builded) house, nor climb up to his bed, nor sleep, nor slumber, till he knew the Vbi or settled place of the Temple. If you ask why he named (jacobs') God, rather than the God of Abraham? Cajetan saith, it was for the likeness of the oath that jacob made when he saw the Ladder reaching from earth to heaven, Gen. 28.21. The Lord shall be my God; and this stone which I have set for a Pillar, shall be God's house; this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven, saith he, ver. 17. Cajetan addeth, that David believed the tradition of the Elders; that the Temple should be built in the place where jacob saw the Ladder; but Cajetan; and the tradition (if so it were) are both deceived: for Bethel, or Luz was not nigh the place of the temple, at jerusalem, he should rather by this last reason, have called on the God of Abraham, who sacrificed on mount Moriah, where certainly the Temple afterward stood. They are much awry, who think David made this oath and vow to find out the Ark at Shilo, or Cariathiearim, or Abinadab's, or Obed Edom's house, or the threshing-floore of Araunah; David's prayer was, saith the Margin in Vatablus, Deus institutum suum de Templo perficiat, that God should once be pleased to bring to pass what he had purposed concerning the Temple: all other places wheresoever the Ark had been, were sufficiently, known to David before, and needed not to be sought for, or enquired after, anxiâ animi solicitudine, with such carking and caring, as David did now; in Tremellius his phrase: but to find out the exact place, within which the Temple should be circumscribed, Hic labour, hoc opus est, this David so struggled for, that he might prepare things necessary for the Temple. PAR. 6. THe issue followeth. Lo, We heard of it, at Ephrata, we found it, is the fields of the woods, ver. 6. An Ephramite is all one with an Ephrathite, as the Interlineary reads it. judg. 12.5. (should it not rather be an Ephrathite?) I am sure jesse the father of David, is as well called an Ephrathite of Bethleem judah, 1 Sam. 17.12. to signify he was not of the Tribe of Ephraim, as a Bethleemite, 1 Sam. 16.1. Aneestors of David, Boaz, Obed, jesse got riches and power in Ephrata, and were famous in Bethleem, Ruth. 4.11. as is most probable. In Ephrata was David borne, & ibi unctus in Regem, and there he was anointed King saith Mollerus. At Ephrata had he this Revelation, where the Temple should be; Lo! we heard of it at Ephrata, and according as we heard we found; we found it in the fields of the Wood; in the fields of the woody places, about Jerusalem: Campos Sylvae nominat Hierosolymam, quae cincta erat montibus Sylvosis, & olivetis: He calls Jerusalem, the fields of the wood,, which was environed with woody mountains, and groves of Olive trees, saith Mollerus, on mount Moriah, was the Ram caught in a thicket, by his horns, Gen. 22.13. yet there might be fields by the wood. The place; which God so long, so often, promised to choose, is now revealed to be found; and found to be, in the fields of the wood; upon one of the mountains of Jerusalem, was the Temple to be founded, and accordingly was founded. So soon, as God heard the petition of David, and satisfied his desire, by revealing the particular place, it standeth with fair Reason, that David then broke out into these words, 1 Chron. 22.1. This is the house of the Lord God; this is the Altar of the burnt-offerings of Israel; which words, though they may well be applied to the Altar spoken of, 1 Chron. 21.26. yet they may be extended to the place of the Temple, also. David foreknowing the place of the Temple, prepareth abundance for the building of it, as it is in the Contents, before the 22. Chapter. That it was David's prayer to find out, the especially-designed place of the Temple. None will deny, that David did imprecate unto himself some mischief, if he did lie down on his bed, or sleep, before he knew that place, is proved by the form of the words, oath, and vow, in Hebrew, viz. si introjero, si ascendero, si dedero; If I go in; if I shall climb up; If I shall give; which being imperfect sentences, you must understand, this or the like sense; then may some evil come unto me; thus David swore, and ratified his oath by his vow also. PAR. 7. But whether David himself recorded these things of himself, or his Son Solomon related them of his Father David, and from him, is more questioned, then necessary to be known, or resolved. The jewish Doctors ascribe this Psalm to Solomon; so doth the late learned Musculus; I will help them to some Arguments. First, the immediately, and subsequent Psalms have this inscription, Canticum graduum, ipsi David; a Song of degrees of David; this Psalm hath only this Canticum graduum, a Song of degrees. Secondly, David was wont to say of himself; Why hast thou forsaken me? My help cometh of the Lord. He doth not say, Why hast thou forsaken David? or, David's help cometh of the Lord. Thirdly, Saith Musculus, the later words of the Psalm are wholly salomon's; and therefore he fathereth this Psalm on Solomon. To the first Argument, I answer; many, yea most Psalms were made by David, and yet do not bear the Image, or Superscription of his name. The 125.126.128.129.130. and others, have only his Frontispiece, Conticum graduum, a Song of degrees; as this, the 132. hath, and yet were not salomon's. Again, when Solomon builded so glorious things, and made the 127. Psalm; it is written, in the forefront, Canticum graduum ipsi Selomon; which word, if it had been added in this verse, should have had force, to make me think, Solomon had indicted this Psalm. To the second, I answer; the Argument is only probable, for Psal. 18.50. It is said, God showeth to his anointed, to David, and to his seed; yet David made that Psalm. So David was the Author of the 144. Psalm; as appeareth also by that inscription; and yet, it is said, in a manner, as of a third person, ver. 10. God delivereth David his servant from the hurtful sword. To the Argument of Musculus, I answer, though Solomon use the like form, 2 Chron. 6.41. etc. yet he might do it, imitating the holy words of his Father David, as David in some part, and a lose off, imitated the prayer of Moses, Num. 10.35. and admirably enlarged it, Psal. 68.1. etc. My opinion is, that David was the Author of this Psalm; and God revealed unto him, that the especial place, which God so often promised to choose, was his Temple; and his Temple was to be, at Jerusalem, and, in such a part of Jerusalem. I have not dwelled in any house, since I brought Israel out of Egypt; but have walked in a Tent, and in a Tabernacle, 2 Sam. 7.6. If he did dwell he dwelled mobiliter, still ready to remove, saith Cajetan. Spoke 1 saith God, a word to any of the Judges of Israel, why have ye not built me an house with Ceders? 1 Chron. 17.6. or, spoke I a word, to that effect, with any of the Tribes of Israel? 2 Sam. 7.7. But he promised David to apppoint the place; and David knew certainly the very Vbi of the Temple, at Jerusalem, Psal. 68.29. David mentioneth by name, The Temple at Jerusalem, 1 Chron. 28, 11. David gave to Solomon the pattern of the Porch, etc. and the Pattern of all that he had, by the Spirit, ver. 12. etc. All this (said David) the Lord made me to understand, in writing, by his band upon me, even all the works of his pattern, ver. 19 And by the same Spirit, he did foresee, not only several positures, of the parts of the Material Temple, but also, the formal parts, even the particulars of God's Service. See, 1 Chro. 23.6. and 27. verses, 1 Chro. 24.3. 1 Chron. 25.1. etc. 2 Chron. 8.14. 2. Chron. 25.27. and 30. verses. Yea, by the same Spirit, did he foresee the removing of the Ark, out of the City of David, into the Temple, and rejoiced at it, as Abraham did, to see Christ's days, a fare off. We will go into his Tabernacle, we will worship at, or, towards his footstool, Psal. 132.2. Incurvabimus nos scabell● pedum ejus. We will bend ourselves low before his footstool, as Vatablus reads it. PAR. 8. AFter these profitable, and not unpleasing discourses, not wholly upon the By; but trenching along upon the main point, I return, reassuming, that though the Passeover was not to be kept at Jerusalem, till the Israelites quietly enjoyed it; yet that was the place so often foretold of. David had it revealed unto him, and prepared for the building of the Temple; and David did, in spirit, foresee the particular, both form, and matter of the Temple, with the service of God, though David lived not, to see a Passeover kept there; but Solomon made his dedication, in the seventh month, and in the first month of the year succeeding, the fourteenth day of the month, he kept the first Passeover at Jerusalem: as he also observed the daily offerings, and the sabbatical offerings, and offerings on the new-Moones, and on their solemn Feasts, three times in a year; even in the Feast of unleavened bread (which was the feast belonging unto the Passeover) 2 Chron. 8.13. for, though it be not where expressly said, that Solomon kept the Passeover at Jerusalem: yet it is not to be questioned, but he, who was so strict, to provide the daily Sacrifice, and other things according to the Commandment of Moses (as is ibid.!) did also himself observe it yearly, according to the Law. Neither do I remember, that Solomon is said to have kept ever, after the Dedication, or the Feast of Tabernacles, or the Feast of weeks, or any other of the jewish Feasts observable at Jerusalem; but rather, he is truly presupposed, to have so done, then punctually specialized; for, why did he build the Temple, if not, that the appointed Sacrifices should be performed? and they were appointed, to be performed yearly; and therefore certainly were observed, whilst the jewish policy lasted; whereupon, I have reckoned the sacrificing, and eating of the Passeover, at Jerusalem, to be one of the durable Rites thereof; which Paschall offering (as I said before) the jews, since the destruction of the Temple, even to this day, have not observed; because, that the Passeover was to be kept only in Jerusalem. PAR. 9 ONe objection seeming very strong, is against the continual observation of the Passeover, at Jerusalem; and this it is. Did all the Israelites, in all the twelve Tribes, leave their several houses, in their several Villages, Towns, and Cities; and all the men, and some women ascend up to Jerusalem, as it were inviting their enemies to their undefended habitations, and for a whole week, besides their dies exitus, & redbitus (their days of going and coming) expose their young ones, and their cattles, and wealth, to danger? I will answer, in the words of holy writ, Exod. 34, 24. No man shall desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before the Lord, thy God thrice in the year. Vult intelligi, ut securus, quisque ascendat, nee de terrâ suâ sollicitus sit, deo promittente custodiam: God would have them understand, that every one might safely go up to Jerusalem; nor need care for their lands; God having promised to keep them, saith S. Augustin, (quaest. 161, in Exod.) Again, it is thus promised, Levit. 25.8. Keep, and do my judgements, and ye shall dwell in the land, in safety; which is repeated, ver. 19 the Land shall yield her fruit, and ye shall eat your fill, and dwell therein in safety; absque ullo pavore, without any fear (as the vulgar of Santandreanus hath it, in the first place) nullius impetum formid intes, fearing not man's forces, as it is in the 19 verse; so likewise Huntenius. The interlineary varieth it thus; ad fiduciam, & ad confidentiam, even to trust, and confidence. A mutual Covenant, as it were, was between God, and the Israelites; if they regarded God, and things divine, God kept, and cared for them, and their humane affairs. Oh let not us neglect things sacred, and spiritual, and God will watch over our temporals, for our good. If it were said to the jew, Exod. 23.15. None shall appear before me empty: much more is it said to us, saith chrysostom, (Homil. 1. in 2. Epist. ad Timoth.) yet alas, who thinks of this to practise it? Another use also may be made of this. When thou comest into the Church, if the poor lie not at the porch of the Temple; but be absent, yet the poor man's box is present. That thou mayst obtain mercy, show mercy; woe worth the times; the voluntary offertories are ceased; prescription, and custom, even against the Almighty, are commonly esteemed the only guides of Devotions; but when the children of Israel did break the Covenant of their God; when their will-worship, was preferred before the prescript of God's Law; when the tradition of men, carried it, above the Commandments divine, when the Isrelites made, as it were, the salt of the Covenant unsavoury, than God held himself discharged from the Covenant of salt. Then did the Nations trample over them, and lead Israel captive; and there was none left, but the Tribe of judah only, 2 King. 17.2.6 18. verses. After Senacherib took all the fenced cities of judah, 2 King. 18.13. And Hezekiah, became Tributary to him, ver. 14. but in Zedekiah his days (who did evil in the sight of the Lord, 2 King. 24.19) Nabuzaradan burned the house of the Lord, and the King's house, and the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house, and broke down the walls of Jerusalem, round about, 2 King. 25.9.10. And now could no more Passeover be kept in Jerusalem, till the restauration of the Temple, by Zorobabel. No sooner was the Feast of the Dedication of the house of God, kept for the Service of God which is at Jerusalem, but they kept the Passeover, Ezr, 6.16.18.19 verses; which holy duty they continued all the time of the second Temple; till the destruction of it, by Vespasian, & Titus. ' Some indeed would have three Temples; salomon's, Zerubabels, and Herod's; but these know not what the ancienter jews acknowledged, that Herod's work was but an enlargement of the second Temple; which second Temple being made, not without much opposition, as it is to be seen in Ezra, and Nehemiah, and perhaps by a form prescribed, and limited by the Heathen Monarch's: was not so large, as the first Temple; but was, at the last, gloriously ampliated by Herod. PAR 10. AGainst the learned, and acute opinion of Genebrard (on whose side, are Elias Levita, David Kimchi, and Rabbi jacob) the jesuite Ribera struggleth hard (on Hag. 1. and 2. Chapters) canvasing this point; whether the five things were wanting, in the second Temple, which were in the first Temple? Genebrard, and many others, of great note, say, that the fire from heaven, which lighted on the Altar, Levit. 9.24. was not in the second Temple. Ribera affirmeth it, from the authority of, 2 Macc. 1, 19 but say I, that was rather water than fire. No fire, but thick water, ver. 20. and, if at the shining of the Sun; a great fire was kindled, either the Sun's heat might naturally burn the subjacent combustible things, as it doth the Phoenix and her deathbed of Spices; or, if it were an heavenly fire extraordinary, it was a new fire, like that of Elijabs (whose fire did kindle, at the end of Eliah his short prayer, whether the Sun shined or no, 1 Kin. 18.38.) or like those descending fires (which expected not the shining, heating, or kindling from the Sun) 2 King. 1.10. and 12. verses; the old sacred fire of the Altar, it was not. And herein Ribera was foully deceived (that I may not now question the authority of the second Book of Macchabecs) How apt Naptha is to conceive fire, every Scholar knoweth; even as apt as Pitch, Brimstone, or Powder; it being a kind of liquid bitumen; but Nehemiah himself called this thing Napthan, 2 Macc. 1.36. which little differeth from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek, or Naptha in Latin; and out of doubt, pointed plainly, that Art, and Nature concurred without miracle, to kindle that fire, though the King of Persia understood not so much. 2. The Vrim, and Thummim was not in the second Temple; say the whole streams, with Genebrand. Ribera opposeth it, grounding only on josephus. But the great vaunter of his own Nation, is not a fit man to cross the current; and yet josephus himself (Antiq. 3.9.) confesseth, that 200▪ years before he writ so; the virtue of them failed; God being angry for the prevarication of his Laws; as if they angered not God, above 200. years. And yet, if it were so, there is no mention of them, near the days of our Saviour; nor were they in the Temple, with him; and, after bis death, at the destruction of the Temple, other Monuments, and sacred reposites being found, the Ark was not found. Some, as polluted, were put from the Priesthood; and the Governor told them, they should not eat of the most holy, till there stood up a Priest, with Vrim, and with Thummim, Ezra. 2.69. which is repeated, Nehe. 7.65. Now, though the Governor did hope, that the Lord would give the same privileges to the intended second Temple, as he had to the first: yet, since we know no such thing, we need not believe it; but may firmly conclude, that at the building of the second Temple, they then had them not; though they stood, in expectance thereof; and if they had them, in likelihood; we should have heard of it. Some writ, saith Vatablus, on this last place; that this must needs be understood of Christ; for the Vrim, and the Thummim, which Moses put in the breastplate, were not in the second Temple. Montanus thinks, Tempore Iremiae desiisse, that they ended, in the days of jeremy the Prophet; and the reason of not finding them again, he ascribeth to this; Id agente Deo, ut hominum genus sanctiorum, etiam, rerum quae novi Testamenti tempore oblata sunt, desiderio, & expectatione afficerentur: It was Gods good will, and pleasure so to have it, that men might be affected with the desire, and expectation of more holy things, which were offered, in the time of the new Testament; you shall find the decay of the Vrim, and Thummim, confirmed by the Tractat Jomah, Rabbi Salomoh; Joseph Ben-Gorion; Abrabureb in his Commentary on Pirke Aboth; and Rab. Aben-Ezra. Against single josephus, the jews themselves administer an unanswerable argument, viz. that in the room of Vrim & Thummim, succeeded another kind of Oracle; which the Commentator of the Talmud Text, from the Sanhedrim, thus describeth. The voice from heaven was not heard, but the Echo thereof, and therefore they called it Bath-col, the daughter of the voice. This voice shown, what was to be done, or omitted, foretold future things, and revealed what was to be thought of things passed. Happy, most happy was that time, when that voice was heard, saith Rabbi Solomon. Most of this I had from Balthasar Bambach, in the third of his four most profitable Tractates. I hope, I shall be charitable enough, though I suspect this reflecting voice, the juggling of the Priests, in the old Law; I am sure, Ben Syra, when he tells of the voice, that came from heaven to David; let Rhehoboam, and jeroboam, divide the Kingdom; when David seeing the truth of Mephibosheths' cause, did right him but by halves, and said, Thou, and Ziba divide the land, 2 Sam. 19.29. I am sure, I say, he doth not establish Bath-col, but speaks of an unreflected voice, upon that peremptory injustice of David, who did rather, in part, uphold his own errors, than right Mephibosheth; Thou, and Zibà divide the land; let Rehoboam and jeroboam divide the Kingdom. To which let me add, that the Prophets also did, in a sort, supply the decay of the Breastplate. 3. The Ark was not in the second Temple. So Genebrard, Lyra, Carthusian, Dorothous' Martyr, cited by Ribera. By the Ark is meant, both the body of the Ark itself, and the Pedestal, or Subpedaneall being a chariot on which the Cherubims stood, 1 Chron. 28.13. beside, and the Propitiatory, which was over the Ark; and the Cherubims, and the voice of God which came from over the Propitiatory. The Ark was not all of pure gold; the cover, or Propitiatory was all of pure gold, called by the 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, placamen, operculum, by the Vulgat, oraculum. Ribera thinks it not improbable, for one to say, that it was a while kept in the second Temple, His only ground is the second Book of Macchabees. But himself saith, perhaps the controversy is sooner ended, if we remember, the same jeremy foretold, that in the time of the New Testament, the jews should not remember the Ark, jer. 3.16. In those days, they shall say no more the Ark of the Convenant of the Lord; neither shall it come to mind, neither shall they remember it, etc. But, by his leave, this ends the controversy little the sooner; for it might be in the second Temple, & yet not, in the time of the New Testament: Just, as Josephus said before of the Vrim, and Thummim, if he said true. In secundo Templo (saith Gaspar Sanctius, on the place of Jeremy.) Arca Domini non fuit, in the second Temple, there was not the Ark of the Lord. Porchetus (part. 1. victoriae contra Hebraeos, cap. 4. fol. 19) thus; In libro Talmud, qui dicitur [joma] dicitur, in Sanctuario secundo non fuit Arca; in the Book of the Talmud, which is called [joma] it is written: In the second Temple, there was no Ark. And Tradition saith, that with it was taken away the pot of Manna, the Chrismatory, or vessel of oil; the rod of Aaron, with the Almonds, and Buds, the golden emrod's, which the Philistims offered, 1 Sam. 6.17. With the golden Mice, ver. 18. and Coffer holding them. Comestor, said, that the Ark was carried in triumph of Titus, and is now kept at Rome, in the Church of S. John of Lateran. Ribera himself (on the fabric of the Temple, 2.2.) saith, this is false, and disproves it by josephus. Christopher Castrus (on jeremy 3.) proveth, Satis, superque, very abundantly, that the Ark was not in the second Temple. Chrysost. oratione. 3.3. adversus judaeos denieth the heavenly fire, the Vrim, and Thummim, and the Oracle from the Propitiatory to be in the second Temple. Now the Propitiatory was a part of the Ark; and the Divine presence gave answers from the Oracle; and therefore, some needed not to make distinct things of the presence of God, in shining, or in a cloud; in the oracle of the Propitiatory, and in the Spirit of Prophecy; for, the divine Presence answering from the Propitiatory, was the Prophetical Spirit; and when the Ark, and propitiatory were not in the Temple restored, no more was the presence of God, or the Oracle, following from the Spirit of Prophecy. Ribera made the Ark comprise these three last things. PAR. 11. A Man might weary himself, and the Reader, in the several reckon of the five things wanting. Galatinus running one way, the later jesuites another way. Porchetus (primâ parte victoriae contra Hebraeos, cap. 7. fol. 19) hath accounts divers, all from the Talmud, saying, these five things were wanting; Vrim, Thummim, Archa, Ignis, Deitas, & S. Sanctus: the Vrim, and Thummim, the Ark, the holy Fire, the Presence of God, & the Holy Ghost. Again, he recknoneth these from the Talmud; Archas Cherub, Ignis, Sechina, or Dietas, S. Sanctus; Vrim & Thummim, the Ark, the Cherub, the Fire, the Sechina, or Presence of God, the Holy Ghost, the Vrim and Thummim; from the gloss of the Talmud he reckoneth, Ignis, Oleum, Vnctionis, Archa, S. Sanctus, Vrim & Thummim; the Fire, the Holy anointing Oil, the Ark, the Holy Ghost, the Vrim, & the Thummim. Ribera doth not amiss, by answering three, to esteem that all five be answered; but he doth ill, to call it a fable of the jews; and is not able to prove, that the heavenly fire, Vrim, & Thummim, and the Ark, were in the second Temple. These things I have purposely enlarged, to confound the obstinate jew; the first Temple had these glorious things; which the second Temple wanted, till Christ came. The first exceeded the second, in all outward glory; for, Ezra. 3.12. Many of the Priests, and Levites, and chief of the fathers, who were ancient men, and had seen the first house when the foundation of the second house was laid before their eyes, wepts with a loud voice: for, the Temple lay destroyed, not sixty years, saith tremble; and these ancients wept only, because they saw the second Temple could not be equal to the first. Augustin (De Civit. Dei, 18.28.) Ex quo instauratum est, nunquàm ostenditur habuisse tantam, gloriam quantam habuit tempore Salomonis: Since the time, that the Temple was renewed, it could never be proved, that it had so great glory, as it had, in the days of Solomon: No, say I, though you add Herod's structures, and so S. Augustin meaneth. See this confirmed by Galatinus (4.3.) Blame not me, if I oppose the learned Ribera; since his brother jesuite Christopher Castrensis, on the place, maintaineth the contrary to him; and refutes him by name. Likewise, I have seldom observed the wary Leonardus Coquaeus, humani aliquid pati, to have erred like a man; yet his lukewarm fort âsse, peradventure, that Herod's Temple exceeded salomon's, is unseasonable, too hard of digestion, and to be spewed out. Though Ribera (on Hag. 2. num. 45. etc. from the two josephus, preferreth Herod's Temple, and great charges; yet David gave more, than ever Herod was worth. See 1 Chro. 29.3.4. 1 Chro. 18.11. especially, 1 Chro. 22.14. and 16. verses, an 100000. talents of gold; and a 1000000. talents of silver; besides, what Solomon, and the Princes, and people offered. Hag. 2.9. The Prophet saith, the glory of this later house shall be greater than the former, and the desire of all Nations shall come, and I will fill this house with glory. This all jews confess; yet they deny the Messiah is come, of whom principally those words must be understood; though they may be applied, Sensusecundario, in a second sense, to the Church, the body of Christ; as the 70. and Augustin sense it. But, Rupertus, Lyranus, Burgensis, Vatablus, Galatinus, Rabbi Abiba, misprinted Aniba, and Beda cited by Leonardus Coquaeus, Ambrose (lib. 3. epist. 12. & Cyrill. (in Gen. lib. 15.) expound these words of the Messiah. So Adrianus Finus (in flagello Judaeorum, 5.2. johannes Eckius, and Paulus Palacius; these are cited by Ribera. Aquinas (on 29. of Esay) Hugo, Dionysius, Isidorus, are also cited by the consenting Christopher Castrensis to this purpose, Leonardus Coquaeus excellently illustrateth this point; and, above all, the Prophet Malachy 3.1. correspondently, Statim venit ad Templum suus dominator, quem vos quaeritis; & angelous Testamenti, quem vos vultis; The Lord whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his Temple; even the messenger of his Covenant, whom ye delight in. And now, let me say, in honour of my dear Saviour, that he was a Light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of God's people Israel, Luke. 2.32. that the glory of the second Temple in him, and by him, was fare greater, than the glory of salomon's time, Judge by these comparisons. PAR. 12. 1. THE jews had the presence of God in a cloud, or in the brightness, Christ was Emmanuel, God with us; we had the presence of God in Christ. God's presence to them was separable, and separated; God's presence to Christ, by Hypostatical Union, was inseparable; if God's presence, in Nube, or nubeculâ judaeorum, in the (Cloud) of the jews, was such a Prerogative, much greater was the presence, in the flesh of Christ, with which he was clouded, Christopher Caster: Sicut in Templo Salomonis, Praesentia dei nebula aliqua, aut fulgore declarata, dicebatur gloria dei, Templum illustrans, & inhabitans: ita, dispensatio Carnis assumptae cum patibulo triumphantis (ut ait Hieronymus, epist. 150. ad Hedibiam, Quaest. 9) quae est nubecula, quâ tectus est sol justitiae, filius dei, gloria verè dicitur, & illustriorem reddit posteriorem hanc domum, quàm illam priorem, suo in eam adventis; that is, As in salomon's Temple, the presence of God, appearing in a cloud, or brightness, was accounted the glory of God, inhabiting the Temple: So, the Incarnation, and Triumph on the Cross (as Hierome phrazeth it) which is the Cloud, wherewith the Sun of Righteousness, the Son of God was covered, is truly called glory; and maketh the glory of the second house, by his coming into it, more glorious, than ever was the glory of the first house. It is not more old than true, Quod Sol in Nube, Deus in Carne; God in the flesh, was like the Sun in a cloud. When Christ was first brought into the Temple, the Prophetical Spirit came upon Simeon, Luke 2.27. and of extraordinary thanks giving upon Anna, ver. 38. Was the presence of God in a Cloud, glorious in the first Temple? Much more was the presence of God in Christ, of Christ in a Cloud, superabundantly glorious, Mat. 17.5. A cloud over-shadowed them; and a voice out of the cloud said, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased: this voice came to him from the excellent glory, 2 Pet. 1.17. Was it not a glorious cloud received him out of their sight? Act. 1.9. Again, was the presence of God in fulgore, in brightness, such a great Privilege of the first Temple? Certainly, the presence of God in Christ, who was the brightness of God's glory, and the express Image of his person, upholding all things by the Word of his power, Heb. 1.3. was much more illustrious and glorious; and the presence of Christ, in the bright cloud, when his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light, Mat. 17.2. was more resplendent. 2. The fire falling from heaven upon the Altar, made the people shout and fall on their faces, Levit. 9.24. But when God bringeth in his first-begotten into the world, he commanded all the Angels of God to worship him, Heb. 1.6. Was it ever so said or done in the first Temple? was the heavenly fire in salomon's Temple? Did not also both a sound from heaven, fill all the house where the Apostles were sitting? and did there not appear cloven tongues, as of fire, and sat on each of them? Act. 2.2. etc. which of these Miracles was greatest? The fire of the Altar was to be kept in by humane help, and Art: this Sacred fire of tongues or grace, needed not Art. 3. But the Jews had their Vrim and their Thummim, in salomon's Temple; God indeed spoke to our Fathers, at sundry times, and in divers manners; but he hath spoken to us by his Son, the heir of all things, by whom he made the world, Heb. 1.1. etc. By his Son, whose Name is called wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace, Isa. 9.6. Was the Vrim and the Thummim on the breastplate of the High Priest? True, but Christ was in the bosom of the Father, Joh. 1.18. Were they to hearken to the Vrim, and the Thummim? much more were they to hearken to the words, which came from heaven, concerning Christ, and concerning the Apostles, Hear ye him, Mat. 17.5. The Vrim and the Thummim by its resplendency, guided only some causes, some people; Christ was the true light, and lighteneth every man that cometh into the world, joh. 1.9. Whose light was greater, whose glory more firm, or lasting? Though it did prophecy, yet we have a more (sure) word of Prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in dark places, 2 Pet. 1.19. Fourthly, the first Temple had the Ark and propitiatory; what did that Ark figure out, but our Saviour? the keeper of our Sacred things; before whom the Cherubins do cover their faces; and in whom are hid all the Treasures of wisdom and knowledge, Col. 2.3. And in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, ver. 9 As for the Propitiatory of the levitical Law, we have a better in the Law Evangelicall, Christ forgiving us all our Trespasses, Col. 2.3. etc. He is our Peace, Ephes. 2.14. We are accepted in Christ the beloved, in him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace, Eph. 1.6. See our privilege preferred before the Jewish, in many Chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Gods Son is our propitiation, 1 joh. 4.10. 1 joh. 2.2. Fiftly, Had they an ointment? We have an Unction from the holy one, 1 joh. 2.20. 6. Had they the Pot of Manna? Moses gave not that bread from heaven, but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven; the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven; I am the bread of life, saith Christ. He that cometh to me, shall never hunger, joh. 6.32. Had the jews their Altars, one of Incense, the other, of sacrifice? had their Altar of burnt-offerings, divers Privileges, strange, and wonderful? Fire from heaven, fire, which never went out and yet consumed not the wood, of which the Altar was made? grant also that their Altar never stanke, nor the place about it, nor the holy meate-offerings, and that never was fly there abouts, nor did women ever suffer a plunge, or abortion, by the smell of the sacred offerings; nor did Scorption or Serpent approach the place: nor ever wind so boisterous, but that a Constant Pillar of smoke, was Pyramidally ascending; grant also the traditionary miracle of the second Temple, upon Herod's enlarging of it that it never reigned in the day time, till all the work was ended, lest the labourers should be hindered, but shewred down sufficiently, in the Night season; grant all this, say I, and whatsoever more the factious Jews invent, or believe for the glory of their adored Sanctuary, yet, for all this, our Privileges go beyond theirs, and weight more than theirs, though they were tried in the balance of their own Sanctuaries. For we also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heb. 13.10. and this Altar is Christ, say Ambrose, and Bernard, from those words, Revel. 6.9. I saw under the Altar. Again, Moses, and Aaron's Altar was made of Shittim wood, and this wood was overlaid with Cedar, by Solomon; Altar vestivit Cedro, the Altar he clothed with Cedar, and the Cedar he covered with gold; we likewise have a golden Altar, on which the prayers of all Saints were offered, Rev. 8.3. And this Altar signifieth Christ, saith Dr. Estius, and we must offer living Sacrifices, Rom. 12.1. Medullata sacrificia, Sacrifices that have no marrow; better than those which had horns, and hooves. Nor was Christ only an Altar, but on this Altar, did he offer the most blessed incense, and the most blessed Sacrifice, that ever was offered; himself was both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an offering on the Altar of Incense, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Eph. 5.2. A bloody Sacrifice, on the Altar of the Cross; in both a sweete-smelling Savour unto God; an expiatory sufficient offering for the sins of the whole world. Nor, was he only the holy Altar, and the holy offering: but he was also the most holy Priest, and hath an unchangeable Priesthood, Heb. 7.14. He was made not after the Law of a Carnal Commandment, but after the power of an endless lise, ver. 16. We are sanctified, through the offering of the body of jesus Christ, once for all, Heb. 10.10. He offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever, ver. 12. By one offering, he hath perfected, for ever, them that are Sanctified, ver. 14. He hath obtained a more excellent Ministry than Moses, Heb. 8.6. (yea, or Aaron either) and is the Mediator of a better Covenant, which was established, on better promises, ibid. the same Saviour being Priest, offering, and Altar which was in no other Law. Now, would I ask any indifferent man, which Testament had the better privileges? Or, what was there in their first, that we have not by Christ, in more ample manner fully accomplished in the second Temple? Seventhly, to conclude, as they had their Passeover, so Christ our Passeover is slain, 1 Cor. 5.7. If they had Prophets, we have had Prophets, if they had a voice from heaven, we had many; if they raised some dead, many more were raised in the New Testament; for one miracle that they had, we have had hundreds; and the Gospel of Christ hath lasted longer, than both their Temples, with all their Jewish Policy: yea for Numbers of each side, we have, and yet do exceed them by millions. PAR. 13. ONce more, I return from my Bypaths, and Diversions. The Passeover continued all the days of the prosperity, during the second Temple; nor did the Annual sacrifice cease at Jerusalem, whilst the Temple was purified, yet must you not think, that the proper Passeover was tied and fastened to the Temple, but rather the Sacrifices of the feast, belonging to the Passeover. It is a confessed and yet proved truth, that the Passeover was not bound to be slain, and eaten in the Temple, but might be, must be performed in their private houses at Jerusalem; but the rest of all the Sacrifices which were to be offered, during the feast of unleavened bread, which endured seven days, all those were commanded as well as other Sacrifices, to be killed in the Temple, at Jerusalem, Deut. 12.13. Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thine offerings in every place that thou seest, but in the place which thy Lord shall choose, in one of thy Tribes: There thou shalt offer thy offerings, and there shalt thou do all that I command thee, ver. 14. I will not deny but sometimes upon some extraordinary occasions, the Passeover might be slain in the Temple: but, that was not often, or necessary-legall; nor might ever, or, was it ever eaten there, but in any other part of the City. PAR. 14. Mark the judgements of God, in these two points, (though many are most observable.) First, he who undertook, and performed, to keep their Cities, during their absence at Jerusalem, whilst they truly served him: the same Almighty God caused the Romans, to fall upon their Cities, and to besiege Jerusalem, whilst they were there, when once their sins were come to maturity. josephus (de Bello judaico, 6.4.) is either wronged by transcribers; or wrong in his account (which is not likely) when he saith that the day of unleavened bread fell on the 14. of April. The City was full of people observant of the Passeover: and Titus besieged them, and they valiantly beat him off. One of the 3. Factions, viz. the Zelotes were slain, upon the day of unleavened bread, every one of them, by jochanan, the head of other mutineers, who closely sent armed men into the Temple and filled it with blood. They broke the Covenant, and therefore the bond between God and them, was now of none effect. Nor was the siege ended, till toward the end of September; the Temple being fired, and the people in it, on the tenth day of August; even the same day, that it had been burnt once before, by the King of Babylon, as Baronius collecteth from josephus, the City was burned after; and mount Zion forced on the Sabbath day, being the 8. of September, A stone was not left upon a stone, in Jerusalem. The second point, which I observe is this; that whereas the Jews cried fiercely, when they would have Christ crucified, His blood be on us, and on our Children, Mat. 27.25. Titus, as the Jews were taken, even five hundred a day and more, caused them all to be crucified: Ita ut jam spatium Crucibus deesset, & corporibus Cruces; so that there was not room for crosses, nor crosses enough for their bodies, as josephus an eyewitness relateth it, (de Bello judaico, 6.12.) Lastly, I have either credibly heard or read, that whereas Christ was sold for 30. pieces of silver, the Captive Jews were sold, 30. of them for one piece of silver; and more particularly, for judas Rupertus observeth, that for the 30 pieces of silver; which judas took to betray Christ, he had just as many Curses Prophetically denounced against him, Psal. 109.6 etc. though I will not avouch, that Rupertus hitteth the exact number, or that every curse in that Psalm is appropriated to Judas only, excluding all other of David's enemies. Yet, I dare say, most of them, fully reflect upon judas. So much concerning this sixth Ceremony, this durable Rite: that the Passeover was to be kept in Jerusalem only, after the Temple was once erected. The Prayer. MOst infinite and incomprehensible God; sometimes, above all the rest of the world, in jury wert thou known, thy Name was great in Israel, in Salem was thy Tahernacle, and thy dwelling place in Zion, Salvation was of the Jews, unto the Jews were committed the Oracles of God, and the Sacraments of the old Law, but blessed be the glory of thy mercy to us, the partition wall is now broken down; and thou, O blessed Saviour, didst die, (out) of the gates of Jerusalem, with thy face to us-ward, and the hour now is, when the true worshipper shall worship the father in Spirit and in Truth; and that not in Jerusalem alone, or in any other especial mountain, or valley, but every where art thou called upon, and every where art praised. The heathen adore thee O God; and the Islands rebound thanks unto thee, for enlarging thy Kingdom, for spreading thy arms of mercy, to embrace them, and for bringing them unto thy fold: O blessed Saviour, the only shepherd of our Souls; O Jesus Christ the Righteous, who didst give thy life for thy sheep, and who by tasting death for all men, dost bring us to life again. All praise, honour, and glory, be ascribed unto thee, the most holy, indivisible Trinity, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. CHP. XII. The Contents of the twelfth Chapter. 1. The Paschall Lamb was to be eaten in one house, and slain not in the Temple, but in the house commonly. More Lambs might be eaten in one great house. It might not be eaten without doors. No Salvation without the Church: Schism is forbidden. 2. Not only the Priests, but the people of Israel might kill the Paschall-Lambe: the people might not slay any other Sacrifice: Nor the Levites ordinarily, but the Priest only. Every one in the Congregation of Israel, did not slay the Passeover; but the Chief, in one household. Maymonides rejected. Bellarmine truly avoucheth this duty of offering the Paschall-Lambe, to belong to the privileges of the firstborn, before Aaron, or his sons were chosen to be Priests. 3. The Levites might offer the Sacrifice of the Passeover for the Priests, if the Priests were not sanctified: and the Priests might slay the Paschall-Lambe, for the people, if the people were not sanctified. 4. Whether the head of the family himself must of Necessity slay the Passe-over; or whether he might depute another in his place; Barradius rejected, for saying Christ himself slew the Passeover. 5. A strange story out of Suidas. 6. The Apostles prepared the Passeover before Christ came. 7. The Passeover was not slain, at the Altar near the Temple. 8. The roasting of it whole, is another fixed Ceremony. 9 They were to eat it roasted with fire. 10. They were not to eat it raw. 11. Not sodden at all with water. 12. The head was to be roasted with the legs. 13. They were to roast the Purtenance also. 14. The Jews came not empty, but offered according to their abilities: and Christians are, to equalise, if not to exceed them. PAR. 1. THe next Ceremony of continuance was, In one house it shall be eaten, Exod. 12.48. etc. That there were some houses in which no Lamb was eaten is apparent. Indeed it is said, Exod. 12.3. They shall take every man a Lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a Lamb for an house; yet there is added, ver. 14. If the house be too little for the Lamb, let him and his neighbour next to his house, take it according to the Number of the souls: Whence, I justly infer, that, that house stood either empty, or at least some few weak people might be in it, which were unfit to be Communicants, in the Egyptian Passeover. I am persuaded that the posts of that door were besprinkled with some blood, for fear of the destroying Angel; which was not performed afterwards; and the non-Communicants might stay in them, and by the blood be freed from danger. Secondly, I infer where the family was too little, or small in number, the Passeover was not eaten in that house; but they are it in another house where there was a competent number together. Cornelius â Lapide, the Jesuit, concludeth hence, Agnum non in Templo, sed in domo immolatum esse; that the Lamb was not slain, in the Temple, but in the house, both now and ever after; but I answer, if he restrain himself to the most common, usual custom, I hold with him; if he exclude extraordinary occasions, and think it was never otherwise; he shall give me leave to descent. That these words, [a Lamb for an house] doth necessarily include this meaning, either that no house was without the slaying and eating of a Lamb; or that two Lambs might not be slain, and eaten in one house, I cannot believe: there were not more, than one Lamb killed or eaten in one house, some say. Dr. Willet, (on Gen. 12. quest. 7.) is peremptory; there was not more than one lamb killed in one house; and elsewhere (on Exod. 12. quest. 12.) in his third answer to an opinion, which he otherwise justly confuteth, letteth fall these words, though the household were never so great, one Lamb might suffice to have every one a part, it was not provided to fill their bellies, ît was lawful for them afterward, to eat other meat, it was prescribed to be used as a Sacramental commemoration of their deliverance; and so to be a food, rather for their souls, than their bodies. The first two sentences only give matter of exception. I say then, the company in one house, might be so great that one Lamb only could not afford to every person one bit. Salomons daily provision was; 1 King. 4.22. etc. 30. measures of fine flower, and 60. measures of meal, 10. fat Oxen, 20. Oxen out of the Pastures, 100 sheep besides Hearts, Roebucks, Falo-deer, and fatted Fowl. Can one Lamb afford one morsel a piece, for a Paschall Sacrifice to every one of this household, and daily eaters? a Wheate-cornes weight of the Lamb could not have been sufficient for every one, but some would have wanted. Again we never read, that if the family were overgreat, and super-numerous, they were commanded to divide their companies and go to other houses; but if they were too few, they went to the next house. So one Lamb was not killed in some house or houses; but for all this, two or more Lambs might be eaten in one house, in another house. Besides, God appointed rather of the two, that they should have too much, rather than too little, and took order for the burning of the remainder; whence fairly resulteth he intended every one should have some, and a competency, yet some might be left. If the Sacred Morsels had been scant, and some had wanted to eat, it had been a great sin, the un-eating souls shall be cut off, Num. 9.13. The man that is clean, and is not in a journey, and forbeareth to keep the Passeover, the same soul shall be cut off from God's people. In other Sacrifices, the Primitive appointment was that some parts of them were to be burned, and others eaten; the Priest being to have his share, Levit. 7.30. etc. But in the Passeover all of it was to be eaten, if they could eat all, and the remainder was to be burned; not only the bones but the flesh also. Maymonides (on Corban Pesach, cap 9 sect. 1.) saith, two companies might eat two Lambs, in one house; but they must not be mingled; nor look one company upon, or to another. By the same reason, say I, in several rooms there may be several companies,, and several Lambs according to the numbers of the family; proportioning the Lambs to the fraternity, or the fraternity to the Lambs; from five, six, or more, both companies, and Passovers. Christ and his College of Apostles are the Paschall Lamb in an upper-chamber; yet the Master of the family, and some other with him, might eat their Passeover otherwhere, in the same house: In one house it must be eaten, therefore it might not be eaten without doors, sub Dio, in aprico, not in Bowers, not in Tents purposely erected, but in their standing houses. No eating without the house, figureth this proposition; no Salvation is without the Church. Non habet Deum patrem, qui non habet ecclesiam matrem. He hath not God for his father, that hath not the Church for his mother. I could wish those factionists, to whom the very name of the Church is odious, that they would remember this lesson, God is not their Father, if the Church be not their mother: they that are cut off from the Church by excommunication, are in a most fearful estate, and are excluded from this sacred Supper. The beasts, and beastly men which were not in the Ark, were all drowned. In (one) house it must be eaten; Schism, and separations are herein forbidden. In one house or room as some interpret it: the Chaldee interpreter hath it most significantly, In one company; as if there might be divers rooms, and divers Lambs, and divers societies; but only one Paschall-Lambe, in one room, and one company. More Lambs, in populous families, might be eaten in one house, upon no occasion might one Lamb be eaten in two houses. There was Vnus in unâ domo agnus, one Lamb in one house saith Adam Contzen the Jesuit: not unicus, one only say I; yes, saith he; and he proveth it by Exod. 12.3. and inferreth that the Lamb was provided, four days before. What of that? the provision of the Lamb, four days before, was none of the durable Rites; but served them then, against the present exigent, the place in Exodus, doth not evince, that every house must have a Lamb, but rather the contrary. For if the household be too little for the Lamb, let him and his Neighbour next to his house take it, ver. 4. So that one of their houses must be empty, and have no Lamb in it. Nor do the words contain, that some populous full families, and supernumery, might not have more Lambs, as I said before. It must be (eaten) it had been a mock if some had been present and not eaten. It was ordained for use, not for show. At what age the young Jews began to eat the Paschall-Lambe, cannot exactly be defined: this I hold, to be most certain. They that were of sufficient discretion, to judge of so holy Mysteries, and fitted to receive, those did eat it; but because some come to ripeness, and understanding before others: there was no fixed time of their age appointed. I also conclude, upon probability, that the young children that unclean persons, that the over-oppressed with grievous pains or sickness, being unable to receive, and eat it, I say, none of these were present in the room or place where the Passeover was eaten. In other rooms of the same house, they might be; there is no likelihood that they were shut out of doors. The next durable Circumstance was this. The people might kill the Lamb; the immolation of the Passeover was not appropriated to the Priesthood. PAR. 2. THat the people might not presume, themselves to sacrifice, but that they were to bring their offerings unto the Priests, and they to offer and slay them, is confessed by all; and apparent in many places, both of Exodus, and Leviticus, Heb. 7.27. The High Priest did offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: Heb. 10.11. Every Priest standeth ministering, and offering many times the same sacrifice. It was the sin of Corah, that being but a Levite, he would usurp the office of Aaron and his sons. much less might the people dare, to slay their Sacrifices. The Levites might not come nigh the vessels of the Sanctuary, and the Altar, that neither they nor you also die, Num. 18.3. Aaron and his Sons shall keep the Priest's Office, for every thing of the Altar, ver. 7. Yet either Priest or Levite, or any Layman, the head of a family, might officiate the slaying of the Passe-over. As the former is true, for the general; so for this their Jewish Sacrament, for the Passeover in especial; no Israelite (caeteris paribus) who had competency of means, and company, and other requisites, was excluded, but might slay it. Every master of the household, either slayed, or appointed others to slay the Passeover, jubente Lege, by the letter of the Law, saith josephus (Antiq. 2.6.) Omne vulgus filiorum Israel, all the whole assembly of the Congregation of Israel, as before I cited out of Tertullian, against the Jews. Philo (in vitâ Mosis) Vniverso populo celebrante laetas epulas, quisque se gerit pro Sacerdote; when the whole assembly doth celebrate the Passeover, every one doth execute the Priest's Office: again, (lib. 3. de vitâ Mosis) Non (ut alias) plebeii homines victimas adducunt ad Altar, mactandas â Sacerdotibus, sed Tota gens sacrificat; the Laics do not (as at other times) bring their Sacrifices, to the Altar, to be slain by the Priests, but the whole Nation doth offer sacrifice. Idem, (in lib. de Decalogo) popularitèr singuli sacrificant, non expectatis sacerdotibus; ipsipermissu legis fungentes sacerdotio, quotannis, per unum diem. The same Philo, in his book of the Decalogue saith, every one do offer Sacrifice not expecting their Priests; but they themselves, by the permission of the Law, do execute the Priest's office, one day, every year. By which, or the like words, neither josephus, nor Philo, do mean, that universally all, and every jew killed the . But every Master of a Family, sufficiently complete in number for the eating of the Paschall-Lambe, he was the Priests in that business, unless sickness, or some other casualty of moment, caused him to depute another to that office; Agnus Paschalis non â Sacerdotibus, sed â multitudine immolabatur; the Paschall-Lambe was slain, not by the Priests, but by the multitude, saith Kemnitius. He might have expressed the matter, handsomer: for, there is a double apparent untruth in his words, as they present themselves, to the first apprehension. No doubt, some Priests killed some Paschall Lambs, namely, such as were to serve their own houses, and the Master of each house, was selectus è multitudine, Chosen out of the multitude; and represented the Priest, on the one side; and the multitude, under him, on the other side. Indeed the Scripture phrase doth afford him some Patrociny; for, Exod. 12.6. It's said, The whole assembly of the Congregation shall kill it; where, the whole assemly, & Congregation, hath reference to the particular assemblies, in every private house, where the Lamb was to be slain; where, one man stood, Idaealiter, by way of representation, for the rest; for, it is most incredible, that all, & every one, of the assembly of the Congregation, could actually slay the Lamb. Shall we think there were ten slayers to every Lamb? Ten or more, even as many, as were to be eaters of it? Was every Lamb, a julius Caesar, stabbed by multitudes? no, no; one in each family, sufficed for that business. Now as we have avoided the one extreme of such as do think, that every one indeed, of the whole Nation, did actually sacrifice (though I will readily confess, that every of that Nation might sacrifice, and not one was excluded; but any one, who had a convenient house, and company under him, might then act the Priest) for himself, and perhaps; any man deputed, might do it for his Master, or, at his appointment. So, we must avoid the other extreme of Maymonides, who avoucheth, that the Priests killed the Lambs, and flayed them; and the provider of the Lamb brought it dead to his house, and roasted it, and are it. But this is a gross error of the jewish Doctor. The Priests might kill for their own families, who will deny it? and they only might kill other Sacrifices (for that is our of question) but he wanteth proof to conclude, that the Priests only did slay the Passeover, for all the people; and if some few Priests, at some extraordinary time, or occasions, had perchance done so: yet the Priests did in trude, and usurp the more common right, and did ill, to monopolise, that office. Bellarmin (de missâ, 1.7.) Pascha non offerebatur â solis sacerdotibus, sed â multis, non sacerdotibus; many that were not Priests (I say, nor Levites neither) slew the Paschall Lamb; and he giveth an excellent reason; Hoc sacrificium institutum fuit, antequàm familia Aaron determinabatur ad sacerdotum; & ideò quantùm ad hoc sacrificium, mansit antiquum privilegium, ut omnes patres familiâs sacerdotio fungerentur; Before the Aronicall Priesthood was appointed, and chosen, after the Egyptian , and before the Priesthood of Aaron, the chief of the family, the firstborn, the fathers of the households had the right, and exercise of the Priesthood annexed unto the privileges of their Primogeniture; which ancient Custom they observed in this point, not only at the first Passeover, but ever after; even when the Priesthood was settled on Aaron, and his sons, or families, unless they were defiled, as 2 Chro. 30.17. or else, some other great occasion interceded. PAR. 3. THe first objection to the contrary. Yea, but it is said, 1 Esdr as 7.12. The Levites offered the Passeover, for all them of the Captivity, and for their brethren the Priests, and for themselves? I answer, as it is in the precedent verses. They that were of the Captivity, were not all sanctified together: but the Levites were all sanctified together. Want of sanctification might make them unfit, who otherwise had right enough to have discharged the duty. The second Objection, Ezra. 6.20. The Priests, and the Levites were purified together; all of them were pure, and killed the Passeover, for all the children of the Captivity, and for their brethren the Priests, and for themselves? I answer, the Priests, and Levites extraordinary sanctification in the pollution of the multitude, reached them out an handle, on just opportunity to do that, which others might have done, if they had been truly sanctified. This answer is confirmed, 2 Chr. 30.17. Many in the Congregation were not sanctified; therefore the Levites had the charge of killing of the Passeover, for every one that was not clean; and the unclean did eat it, but not kill it. And God heard the voice of Hezekiah praying; the good Lord pardon every one, that prepareth his heart, to seek God, though he be not cleansed, according to the purification of the Sanctuary, ver. 18. and 19 Observe, I pray you, the force of the illative, Therefore, Therefore the Priests had the charge of killing the Passeover. Why? first, because many in the Congregation were not sanctified. Secondly, They killed the Passeover for every one, who was not there; it is not said the Levites or Priests killed the Passeover, for all, and every one of the Congregation (the clean might sacrifice for themselves, and their families) but for every one; that was not clean, did the Priests and Levites kill the Passeover. Lastly, some interpret the immolation by the Priests, and Levites only, of the Paschalia sacrificia, the Paschall Sacrifices (so Barradius termeth them) and not of the great : Sacrificium Pascha, the sacrifice of the ; but because, there may seem little difference, in this distinction: I rather diversify it thus. They slew, and flayed the sacrifices of the Chagigah: not of the Sacramental Pascha; of the Herd, not of the flock: or, if they did sacrifice any of the flock, Lambs Wethers, or Rams, these were not for the first dish of the first Course, the first night of the Paschall solemnity (which was to be an unspotted Male; under a year old, etc.) but for the other second dishes of the second course; or, for other days, of their great Septemdiale Festum, Festivity of seven days. PAR. 4. BEllarmin (de missâ, 1.7.) Paterfamiliâs per se immolabat, reliqui per patrem familiâs; paterfamiliâs propriè, & per se immolante; reliquis per illum immolantibus, & voluntate, & participatione in sacrificium consentientibus: The Master of the Family, killed the , by himself; others, by him, and in him; he properly, they, as Consentients, and Co-parthers: yet Bellarmin determineth not, whether the eldest, or chiefest of the Family, were bound personally to do it himself; so bound, that he could not depute another in his room. I, for my part think, that, as the Primogenitus, or Firstborn did willingly, and most ordinarily perform the duty, in his own person: So, there were divers dispensable occasions, which might permit him, to consign over that office, of preparing the , for some times, to another, in his place, and, as his substitute, with vicariall power. Barradius (more peremptory than Belarmin) saith, Christ himself slew the . Where is his proof? That Christ himself [might] have slain the , I deny not: he had a double right unto it; first, as Paterfamilias, or Master of the Family: secondly, as he was a Priest spiritually, of the order of Melchizedek, and had the fountain of all authority, and Priesthood in him, as he was the eternal Priest; but, â posse ad esse non valet consequentia; from what he (might) have done, to what he actually did do, is no good consequence; or, he might have done it; Ergo, he did do it, is no good Argument: and the question is not, de jure, of the right; but, de facto, of the deed. This perhaps might be one reason, why he designed others to slay the ; lest, if he had slain it himself; some misjudging people might have been deceived, and perhaps thought him to be a Priest lineally descended from Levi, or Aaron (who were not excluded from slaying the , in their own houses) but Christ's pedigree is not counted from Levi, or his sons, Heb. 7.6. nor is he to be called Priest, after the order of Aaron, ver. 11. but appertaineth to another Tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the Altar, ver. 13. For it is evident, the Lord sprang out of Judah, of which Tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning Priesthood, ver. 14. Aquinas (part. 3. quast. 22. Art. 1. ad secundum) thus; Quia sacerdotium veteris Legis erat figura sacerdotii Christi, noluit Christus nasci, de stirpe figuralium sacerdotum, ut ostenderetur, non esse omnino idem sacerdotium, sed differre, sicut verum â figurali; that is, Because the Priesthood of the old Law, was a figure of the Priesthood of Christ: Christ would not be borne of the stock of the levitical Priests, that it might appear, that his Priesthood, and theirs was not all one; but that they did differ, as the truth from the shadow. PAR. 5. SVidas, on the word jesus, saith; the jews kept among their Archiva, or Registries, that Christ, about thirty years of age, was chosen a Priest of their Law, and thence taught in their Synagogues. It is truth, they delivered him the Scripture to interpret it, Luke 4. but, whether to entrap him; or else, in admiration of his learning, or, indesire to hear Novelties; none knoweth. Certainly, Priests were Hereditary, not Elective; and Interpretation of Scripture belonged not to the Tribe of Levi only; for, Act. 13.15. Paul, who was of the Tribe of Benjamin, was requested to exhort. PAR 6. HE, who diligently readeth the divine story, shall find, how: First, the Disciples were careful to have the provided, Matth. 26.17. Mar. 14.12. Secondly, our Saviour harkened to their request, as there it followeth. Thirdly, Christ made an exempt of his Disciples, retaining some with himself, and he sent others, to make ready the . Fourthly, those two, whom he sent, were none of the meanest, but rather the chiefest of his Apostles, S. Peter. and S. john, as it is, Luke 22.8. Fiftly, in the sacrificing of the , you may observe these distinct gradations; in terms unconfused and propriety of Language. 1. The preparing of the may imply, the choosing of a fit legal Lamb. 2. Then succeeding the slaying of it. 3. There was the making of it ready, that is, flaying, paunching, washing, dressing, and roasting it. 4. Lastly, followed eating of it. Sixtly, when the Disciples had made ready the Passeover, it is likely that S. Peter, & S. John went out to meet him; for he cometh in the Evening with the 12. Mark 14.17. and the Preparers went from him forth before, as it is, vers. 16.7. Most certain it is, Christ appointed his Disciples to prepare, and make ready the Passeover, (in which is necessarily included the immolation) and himself came not, till the Evening, that is, till the exact hour; when all things were made ready; and when it was to be eaten. PAR. 7. IT is a great misprision of M. john Weemse of Lathoker, that the Lambs of the were killed, at the Altar, and brought home to their houses; and his proof is lame, from Luke 22.7.8. that the Master of the house caused them to bring bacl the Lamb to his house; for, what intimation is in that place (yea, or in any place of Scripture) that it was so generally either precepted, or practised? there is no mention of Altar, or bringing bacl of the , but rather the contrary. The Apostles were to prepare it; the place inquired, and resolved upon, was an house: the preparation was in an house; the manducation in a guest Chamber, ver. 11. One Altar (for there was but one) could not receive so many thousand Paschall Lambs, as was killed, within a few houses. But, in their houses was the slain, and in their houses flain; there was it eaten. In all the Evangelists, the preparation, even from before the slaying, to the eating, seemeth to be included, within the compass of the House, and the jewish professors run with might, and main, for the democratical immolation; but the people never slew any sacrifices, on the Altar. PAR. 8. THe next durable ceremony, is the roasting of it whole, Exod. 12.8. They shall eat the flesh roasted with fire, and ver. 9 eat it not raw nor sodden at all with water, but roast with fire, his head, with the legs, and with the purtenance thereof. In which divine words, five precepts are comprehended. 1. Thou shalt eat the flesh roasted with fire. I omit the natural reasons; that roast meat hath less crudities, than boiled meat; that it is wholesome feeding, that it is best for supper-meate, and more hearty food, and more pleasant to taste: I omit Reasons congruentiall; that some might have wood nearer, than they could have water; the waters might be troubled by accident. PAR. 9 Mine opinion is, the mystery lay in these things. Principally to signify, the extremity of heat, pain, and affliction, and as it were the torrid Zone, under which Christ laboured, sweat, and languished, upon the Cross. 2. To put them in mind, how the Israelites themselves were, as I may so say, toasted and roasted in the Brickilnes of Egypt; and in the Lime-kilnes thereof. Here, the difference is to be observed, between the Primary Paschall-dish, and the other Paschall-Solemnities; between the , and the feast of the ; between the Sacrament, and Sacrifice. The offerings might be either sod, or baked, or roasted, or otherwise dressed; the , the Lamb must be roasted: 2 Chron. 35.13. At the great Passeover of josiah, they roasted the Passeover with fire, according to the ordinance. PAR. 10. SEcondly, this was the next precept. Eat it not raw, Exod. 12.9. In this point, you may not think, that the Israelites would have eaten raw gobbets of beasts slain; if they had not been forbidden; they needed no inhibition, to abstain from raw flesh; or, that God esteemed them, as Cannibals, or, as dogs, to gnaw on raw-undressed flesh; but, by raw, halfe-rosted, or raw-rosted is meant; and by not raw, is meant not green, as we use to call it; not, in his blood; the blood, or bloody-gravy may not swim in the dish, or besmear the mouth of the Eaters; as is practised at the Tables of many wanton stomaches. The spiritual meaning might be against luke warmness in Religion; against halfe-services in holy things. God will not have body alone, or soul alone, he will not have half thy prayers, whilst the great Compasser of the earth, and wanderer of the world, hath the other part of thy straying conceptions, Thy devotions must be entire, Matth. 22.37. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, with all thy soul: and with all thy mind. It is added, Luke. 10.27. With all thy strength; To walk in all God's ways, Deut. 10.12. God findeth fault with the Angel of the Church of Sardis, that his works were not perfect before God. Rev. 3.2. God likes not the Laodicaean temper, Rev. 3.15. Thou art neither hot, nor cold; I would, thou wert cold, or hot; so then, because thou art lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold; I will spew thee out of my mouth. Raw meat is undigestible, and commonly spewed up again. To these things used among men, God alludeth, and therefore, forbiddeth raw-meate. Hither you may refer those precepts, Levit. 19.19. and apply it, against the Hypocrites of our days, who are, forsooth, all for the first Table; God's Religion is their only care; but they esteem not the duties of the second Table, these cleanse the outside, but not the inside, PAR. 11. THe third precept was this. Not sodden at all with water; the Hebrew runneth, Not sodden sod in water; washed it must be in water (perhaps hot water) and rinsed it might be, to cleanse it from filth; or blood; soaked also it might be, for the better defecation; parboiled it might not be, much less sodden. Maymonides saith, it might not be so much as basted, or dripped with water; yet, in his opinion, it might be basted, or smeered with wine, oil, or any other liquor. Butter was permitted, in all likelihood to keep it from burning, they were to eat roasted flesh, not scorched, or burnt Lamb; especially in the Land that flowed with milk, and afforded much butter. He is distempered, who thinketh that God prescribed distempering food; meat parched like coals, rather than well-ordered, well-cooked meat, in so extraordinary a sacrifice, and Sacrament. In the great Passeover of the good jasiah, other Sacrifices indeed were boiled in several instruments: but the Passeover, the proper Passeover was roasted, 2 Chro. 35.13. The virtue in sod meat is extracted, in roast meat contracted. Sod meat spends its strength in the pottage, or some part of it, in bettering the broth, more than the roast doth. (I have heard of some, who have spoilt their meat, to make good pottage,) If any one ask, what was the substance of this shadow? and why water was forbid, and fire permitted? I am loath to give this reason; that the great inundation by waters was passed, but the fire of conflagration was pointed at; or, that Moses his taking out of the water was here remembered, as past; and the fiery Pillar, fiery Serpents, and fiery trial of them, was prefigured; or, that Christ did baptise with the holy Ghost, and with fire, Mat. 3.11. or, that the cloven tongues, as of fire, Act. 2.3. were secretly resembled. This I am sure of; an ancient Divine makes this Divine application, Justinus contra Tryphonem judaeum) Christus in Cruce nihil habuit aquae, idost, nihil mitigationis, nihil solatii in poenis; sed tam dolore, quàm amore nostrifuit assus, & tostus; Christ on his Cross had no water, that is to say, no mitigation, no comfort in his torments; but he was toasted, and roasted, as well with the grief, as for the love of us. No marvel, he thirsted, and said, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? At his agony in the garden, Christ was so inwardly fired, and roasted, as justinus phrazeth it, that he sweat great drops of blood: nor were those grumi sanguinis, sine guttis aquae, those drops of blood, without drops of water, in all likelihood; so when he was as on the spit of the Cross, and when they digged his hands, and his feet, did not both water, and blood gush forth? I am sure, when his side was pierced, there flowed out, both blood, and water, joh. 19.34. PAR. 12. THe fourth precept involved, in this Ceremony is, the head must he roasted with the legs. I shall noterre from the matter, though I miss the main intention, if I say; the whole roasted Passeover on the spit, did some way resemble our Saviour, on the Cross; the spit being a shadow of the lignum arrectarium; and both the fore-legges and hinder legs bored through, and strained; or otherwise it had been an unhandsome sight. Each part of his was to endure affliction. [Roasted] judgement must begin at the house of God, I Pet. 4.17. If they have done these things in a green tree, what will they do in the dry? Luk. 23.31. joh. 13.16. The servant is not greater, than his Lord; neither he that is sent, greater than he that sent him. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you, joh. 15.20. Matth. 10.24. The Disciple is not above his Master, nor the Servant above the Lord; and ver. 25. It is enough for the Disciple, that he be as his Master, and the Servant as his Lord; if they have called the Master of the house Beel-zebub, how much more shall they call them of the household? Luk. 6.40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, perfectus omnis erit; every one shall be perfected, as his Master. God had only one son without sin, none without punishment, Revel. 3.19. As many as I love, I rebuke, Heb. 12.6. Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son, whom he receiveth; answerable to that, Pro. 3.12. Whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a Father, the son, in whom he delighteth: and in our Saviour roasted whole, was God well pleased; no rent in his coat; no schism in his body: no separating Button-maker, no leader of such obstinate ignorants, to the all-permitting Amsterdam; no Buchanan, no Knox; the whole in●●re body, without partiary divisions, must be roasted together. PAR. 13. THe fift, and last appendent precept, to this Ceremony, was; they were to roast the Purtenance also. This may also touch at the whole Service of God; and signify their Totall delivery; so that no good thing should be left behind, no quarter sacrifices; no halfe-sacrifices please our God; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, either all or not at all: whether in the Lamb, or by itself; or one side of the Lamb, I will not determine: the purtenance; not the guts, and garbage; not the gall, not any thing unsavoury, uncleanely, or unwholesome: I will, for my part, not envy the feasts of those dainty ones, who use to eat the guts of Larks, and Wood cocks new-killed, young chickens in the shells, not yet, or newly pipient; and raw-bacon: Ingeniosa gula est,— Bello crudelior omni Luxuria incumbit— that is, The gut for dainties, witty is; hence fare More Cruel Luxury doth flow, than war. The Lights are good food, easy of digestion: some love them above all other inwards; the Liver, and Heart, are principal parts, healthy, and strong: no good thing was to be cast away: one part might please one, another part might be desired by another; here was variety; the head of the company, the Mr. of the society might eat the choycer-bits: the meaner people might eat the courser, and more refused, or lesse-desired morsels. This sacrifice was like nature; it neither abounded in things superfluous; nor was wanting in things necessary. So much for the 13. preparatory Ceremony, of continuance, before the eating of the Passeover. PAR. 14. THe 14. and in my Method though not in Nature, the last durable Rite preparatory was; that every one, was to bring an offering, according to his ability, the proofs are these: Deut. 16.16. Three times shall all thy Males appear before the Lord, in the feast of unleavened bread, and they shall not appear before the Lord, empty; 17. Every man shall give as he is able; according to the blessing of the Lord thy God, which he shall give thee. The like precept for the gift at the Passeover, is, Exod. 34.18.20. and Exod. 23.15. which is thus enlarged, Eccles. 35.1. He that keepeth the Law, bringeth offerings enough, and so on to these words, ver. 6. The offering of the Righteous maketh the Altar fat, and the sweet savour thereof is before the most high; and so forward to the 10. ver. Give unto the most high, according as he hath enriched thee, and ●s thou hast gotten; give with a cheerful eye: a reason of strong consequence is annexed, in the words following; for the Lord recompenseth, and will give thee seven times as much. In this point, two things are observable from the Jewish professor. First, that every man of ability came into the Temple; the great first day of the Feast; and there, and then, was to make his offering, a burnt-offering, either of fowl, or beast; yet if sickness hindered him by the way; so that of necessity, he came tardy at the beginning, yet his first day of appearing in the Temple, (what day soever it were) was to him, the day of his offering; and as the first day of the feast, to others. Secondly, no man was bound to bring his offertory, on the other days of the feast, though he appeared often in the Court, and holy Convocation, yet if any man would, it was accepted; and the more Religious the people were, the more they gave, proportionable to their worth: remember the royal gifts of Hezekiah, for offering day by day, during their great Passovers, 2 Chro. 30.24. and of Josiah, 2 Chro. 35.7. and the most munificent offerings of Josiahs' Princes, ver. 8. Tea, to the people Hezekiah said; Come near, and bring Sacrifices, and thanksgivings; into the house of the Lord; and the Congregation brought in sacrifices, and thanksgivings; and as many as were of a free heart, offerings, 2 Chro. 29.31. And the offerings were more, than the Priests could kill, ver. 34. It is most remarkable, what even the most learned Mr. Selden confesseth, and what is a known truth; that one way, or other, the jews did pay, by God's appointment, the fift part of their whole estate unto the Lord, and his Priests, annually. Let the Sacrilegious tithe-robbers, seriously weigh that point: we have too many so devout forsooth, that they give to God their ears; yet so profane and covetous, that they will afford God nothing but their ears. A single scute, or farthing, they will not offer, (how rich soever they be) unless the Law compel them; unless their Priests be at their becks; deuce, duties, or Revenues, they cannot abide to near of; yet God hath done more for us Christians than he did for the jews; and therefore out return unto the Lord ought to exceed theirs. It was a wellweighed collection of Chrysostom's, that a good Christian, when he considereth what the jews paid to their Priests, and Levites, will think more is due from him: even Horace condemned himself, for having been, Parcus deorum cultor, & infrequent, a spare, and seldom worshipper of God: David would not offer to the Lord, but, that which cost him enough for it; nor would the Father of the faithful, consecrate his Churchyard, or Abrahemium, for a burying place, till he had paid for it. But, we have a late generation of Religion-framers, who; as I said before, give nothing willingly unto God, but their ears, which cost them nothing; and have found (as they think) the cheapest way to heaven, that ever was thought of by any unless Atheists; by keeping all to themselves; as if no Recognition, by goods, were due to God, for his Creation, Universal Dominion, general preservation, and particular blessings upon men. The jews gave God of his own, as much as they were able, let Christians look to it; and that they may the better look to it; (at least, for the payment of their tyths) let them consider, what Augustine writeth (Serm. 219. de Tempore) let us give thanks to God therefore, because he gave us good Corn; and let us think of offering, or rather restoring bacl the tithes to God; he who payeth no tithes, invadeth another's goods. St. Hierome (on the third of Malachi) what I said of tithes, which were wont of old, to be paid by the people, to the Priests, and Levites; is commanded also to the people of (our) Church; viz. not only, to pay tithes; but to sell all, and follow Christ; All in affection, and habit; not always all actually; yet must the taught man communicate unto him, that teacheth in all good things. While thou withholdest thy due, thou deceivest thy brother, thou defraudest God of his due; yea, dost mock with him, thou deceivest thyself. But, be not deceived, God is not mocked, Gal. 6.6. if thou payest not God, God will pay thee; as we have opportunity, we must do good to all men, especially to them, who are of the household of faith, Gal. 6.10. Lastly, Origen (Homil. 11. on Num. 18. Tom. 1. pag. 209. etc.) how doth our justice exceed the justice of the Scribes and Pharises? (as it must, or else in no case shall we enter into the kingdom of Heaven, Matth. 5.20.) if (they) dared not to taste of their fruits before the Tenths were separated for the Levites: and we do no such things, but so abuse the fruits of the earth, that nor Priest, nor Levite, nor Altar partake of it: It is convenient, and profitable, that firstfruits should be paid, to the Priests of the Gospel; for the Lord hath so ordained, that they who Preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel: Contrarily, it is unconvenient, unworthy, and impious; that he, who worshippeth God, and goeth into his Church, and knoweth that the Priests, and Ministers wait at the Altar; doth not give the firstfruits to the Priests, of those fruits of the ground, which God giveth by his sun, and his rain; I think such a soul hath no memory or mind of God; nor thinketh nor believeth; that God gave those fruits, which he so hideth, as strange from God: For, if he believed them, to be given of God; he would also know, to honour God, by rewarding his Priests: what Christ would have done by the Pharises; more, and more abundantly, would he have his Disciples to perform; and very earnest he is, for the first f●uites of Corn, and beasts; and not for the tithes only: so fare Origen. The Prayer. Whether it were thy will, O heavenly Father; that thy precept to the Jews, of roasting the Lamb whole, who did secretly insinuate unto us; that halfe-Services please not thee; that the Sacrifices of our souls, without the body, or the body alone, without the soul, are disliked; or, whether by it, thou didst typify that thou hatest division, schism, partialities, and delightest in perfect, entire unity; or, whether thou didst intimate both these: I humbly beseech the for Jesus Christ his sake, that I may please thee, both with my soul, and with my body; and that I may ever be defended, and preserved from any singularity, defection, and obstinacy, and may by thee be strengthened to keep the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace. Amen. CHAP. XIII. The Contents of the thirteenth Chapter. 1. Bread and water imply all Necessary food; and sometimes, full store. 2. Unleavened Bread was to be eaten with the Passeover, and the flesh of the Passeover, not to be eaten, with any other, save unleavened bread. 3. Maymonides confuted. 4. Sour Herbs must of necessity, be also eaten with the Passeover. 5. When leaven was permitted; when the use of it forbidden. 6. The Israelites eaten no leavened bread; from their coming out of Egypt, till they trod on the borders of the Land of Canaan. 7. Leaven betokeneth, either good or evil. 8. Illyricus his triplex fermentum. 9 How unleavened bread is called bread of affliction. 10. What are the best Monuments. 11. The pracept of bitter herbs is a durable Rite. 12. Why bitter herbs were to be eaten. 13. Christ eaten the Passeover with bitter Herbs, and the Mystical signification. 14. The bitter Herbs mentioned in the Law. 15. The Jews used herbs for meat, as well as for sauce. 16. Salt, and Vinegar were not only the Jewish sauces. PARAGRAPH. 1. I Come now to the Ceremonies properly Sacramental, they were three. 1. The Eating it. 2. With unleavened bread. 3. With sour herbs. I refer the discourse concerning the eating of the flesh of the Passeover, until I handle the first of the 3 suppers; or it may be, I may touch it on the By, in the interim. Bread and water imply all necessary food; and sometime full store: Elisha said unto the King of Israel, set bread and water before them, 2 King 6.22. and he prepared great provision for them, ver. 23. Not against the intent of the Prophet. But here bread is taken properly, as the two other things. Cyprianus (in Serm. de Caena Dom. pene in principio Parag. 2. p. 500) Christus finem legalibus Ceremoniis impositur us, parari sibivoluit Pascha; & ex consuetudine Legis, ea quari, quae solennitas exigebat, assum agnu●●, panes ezymos, lactucas agrestes; that is, Cyprian (in his Sermon, of the Supper of the Lord, almost in the beginning) Christ being about to put an end to the Legal Ceremonies, would have the Passeover prepared for him; and those things to be provided, according to the Custom of the Law, which the solemnity of that feast did require, namely, a roasted Lamb, unleavened bread, sour ●erbes. PAR. 2. WE may not imagine, they eaten the flesh of the Paschall, without unleavened bread; nor yet unleavened bread alone, in that supper, without the Paschall-Lambe: but were to be both served in, and eaten together; the end of roasting was for eating; and the manner of eating the Lamb, was with unleavened bread; Exod. 12.8. They shall eat the flesh roasted with fire, with unleavened bread; and this precept is repeated, Levit. 23.6. Numb. 28.17. At the Even, the 14. day, was the Passeover of the Lord (to be slain) and to be eaten, the other Evening (which began the 15. day) with unleavened bread. PAR. 3. MAymonides saith, the Passeover may be eaten; if they cannot get unleavened bread, nor sour herbs? I answer, it is not then truly, and perfectly the Passeover; the infinite wisdom of divine providence, so sweetly ordained this Sacrament, that where Ewes and Lambs were fed, there must needs be grass, and other herbs; and naturally, some wild herbs sprout up, rather than the choicer herbs; and may be sooner gathered, picked, washed, and minced, than a Lamb could be roasted: In less time, also might the flower be made unleavened, either bread, or cakes, or wafers: likewise, the leavened Mass presupposeth the unleavened, for if any flower be to be had at all, it is unleavened, before it is leavened. So that the Jew need not suppose the want of unleavened bread, if they had any corn at all; ye shall eat the Passeover with unleavened Bread, and with bitter herbs; therefore, whatseover the Jew saith, they might not eat it, without either of these. PAR. 4. BOth unleavened bread, and bitter herbs, must not only be present; but eaten, and eaten with it; else it was but an adulterate Passeover; and a great spot, or maim was in that Sacrifice; was the flesh of the Passeover to be, without bread, especially in a Land of Corn, Deut. 33.28. They may as well remove bread, from being one of the materials, in our Sacrament of the Eucharist. PAR. 5. IN the Sacrifice of thanksgiving, they were to offer unleavened cakes, or wafers, Levit. 7.12. and yet, besides the cakes, he shall offer for his offering, leavened bread, with the sacrifice of thanksgiving of his peace offerings, ver. 13. And in the new meat offering, or the first fruits unto the Lord, they were to bring two wave-loaves, of fine flower, baken with leaven, Levit. 23.16, 17. And yet Leaven was wholly forbidden, in divers things, Levit. 2.11. No meate-offering, which ye shall bring unto the Lord, shall be made with Leaven, for ye shall burn no leaven, in any offering of the Lord made by fire? I answer, these words, and they immediately following do evince; leaven is not excluded from all offerings, but only in burnt-offerings, on the Altar: As for the oblation of the first-fruits; ye shall offer them unto the Lord, but they shall not be burnt on the Altar, for a sweet savour; why so? because the two wave-loaves of the first fruits were to be baken with Leaven, Levit. 23.17. Briefly, thus with Origen: leaven was forbidden, ad sacrificium, non ad sacrificii ministerium; ad sacrificium, non ad esum, that is, it was forbidden in the Principal sacrifice, not to the subservient ministers: again, Levit. 23.18. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread; which is varied thus, Levit. 34.25. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my Sacrifice with leaven: Lastly, in the Passeover offerings, unleavened bread was excluded even from their houses, and coasts, in the feast of seven days, which feast was called the feast of unleavened Bread, Exod. 12.17. PAR. 6. THat the Israelites used any at all, from their going out of Egypt, till they came into the Land of Canaan, I do not see proved; sure I am, God saith, Levit. 23.10. When ye be come into the Land, which I shall give you, leavened bread was permitted to be offered, ver. 17. So, the Law of meat offering, and drinke-offering was prescribed; When ye be come into the Land of habitations, Numb. 15.2. and ver. 18. And when you come into the Land whether I bring you, than it shall be, etc. Likewise for the leavened wave-loaves of their first fruits; this was not fulfilled in the wilderness where they had no corn growing, but the Law was to take force when they came into the borders of Canaan, where corn was. They carried no Leaven out of Aegupt, and within 33. days, they were fed with Manna, till they tasted of the old corn of the land of Canaan, Josh. 5.12.40. years did they eat Manna, Exod. 16, 35. In this journey, from Ramesis to Succoth, or, at their resting places there, they baked unleavened cakes of Doughty, Exod. 12.39. Josephus saith, the Israelites lived on unleavened bread, till they had Manna: It appeareth not, that they are leavened Manna; nay rather, it is probable that they did never leaven it; For no Manna was kept above two days, none above one day except the sabbatical Manna, which was a wonder; and (except the re-memorative and miraculous Manna, reserved in the pot for future times) besides the taste of Manna, was like wafers, made with honey, Exod. 16.31. If it had been leavened it would have been bitter or sour: clean contrary to the taste of honeyed things: again, Manna needed no preserving by leaven: it was steadfastly good, till the time by God appointed; corruption could not seize on it: on the other side, all the leaven in the world could not keep it from stinking, and worms, and putrefaction, if they spent it not, by its appointed time: to put leaven into Manna, was to mingle things profane with sacred: Dr. Willet (on Exod. 12. quest. 15.) hath these words; it is to be considered, that in this first Passeover, they were not commanded to eat unleavened bread seven days: neither did they intent so much; but they carried their dough forth unleavened, not for any Religion but for haste, therefore that prescription, to abstain from leavened bread seven days, ver. 14. belonged to the perpetual observation of the Paschall, but the other Rites prescribed unto the 14. v. appertained to the first Passeover: If Dr. Willet, do mean only, that the Israelites did eat unleavened bread the night of the Passeover; but were not necessarily bound to keep the feast of 7. days, of unleavened bread, till they came into Canaan: I will not much oppose him, both because it is so appointed, Exod. 13.5.6. and because they had no leisure till they were past the Red-sea, to keep much feasting: but withal, he doth well to acknowledge it very likely; that from the hour of their departure, they are no leavened bread, for the next 7. days, and after: for they baked unleavened cakes of the dough, ver. 39 That the Israelites eaten the roasted Passeover, with unleaved bread; I find generally confessed; this durable ceremony bound them, even in Egypt, and in the wilderness, Numb. 9.11. and ever after. PAR. 7. LEaven may very well signify two things; yea, two disparate, if not contrary things: briefly it may shadow out both good and evil: you shall find it taken in the good sense, Matth. 13.33. The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven; so Luke 13.20.21. The Kingdom of God is like a Leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened: thus leaven implieth an effectual good, unseen operation, and communication of its proper virtue, continuance in things mingled with it; a spreading or growing from a small matter, to a great; a diffusive grace. Again, leaven doth shadow-out, a godly affection, mingled with some grief, as the Psalmists heart was leavened, Psal. 73.21. For so the word signifieth; the Radix is all one with that of Levit. 7.13. Indeed, our Translation readeth, Thus my heart was grieved; acescit cor meum, saith the Interlineary, My heart waned sour; and perhaps, this may be the reason, why, after deliverance from grief, and sorrow, the devout and godly duty of thanksgiving, was appointed to be offered with leavened bread, Levit. 7.13. As leaven may be taken, and is taken in an ill sense; so, our bread, in our Paschatizing must be unleavened. Leaven is taken for malice, and froward affections, 1 Cor. 5.8. Leaven is taken for erroneous opinions; Take heed and beware (both are specialized) of the leaven of the Pharisees, and saducees, Matt. 16 6. And the leaven of Herod, Marks 8.15. Leaven is taken both for a corrupting, infectious disposition; and for a proneness, and inclination of the subject corruptible; for corrupted nature; for the whole mass of us deformed, and soured; Purge out therefore the old leaven (not, that we may be newly-leavened, but) that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened, 1 Cor. 5.7. Unleavened bread, is more pure, more natural, more free from art, and humane devices; and though Tostatus say, Leavened bread is Saporosior, & stomacho salubrior, more savoury, and more wholesome for the stomach; yet I say, dainty, tender natures prove it otherwise; and unleavened bread doth signify incorruption; Let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice, and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity, and truth. 1 Cor. 5.8. PAR. 8. I Llyricus, upon the word, Fermentum, or leaven, thus, There is a threefold kind of leaven found in holy writ. 1. Pharisaicum, quod significat corruptelas doctrinae, Pharisaical, which signifies corrupt doctrines, or opinions. 2. Apostolicum, quod est regnum coelorum, Apostolic, which increaseth to the Kingdom of God. 3. Malitiae, & versutiae, quod est morum perversitas, of malice, and craftiness, which perverteth good manners. PAR. 9 BEsides all this, you shall find, Deut. 16.3. Unleavened bread, is called, even the bread of affliction, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Some are headstrong in belief, that the meaner sort of men, and the poor common people were wont to eat unleavened bread among the jews; wherefore Cajetan calleth it, Panem paupertatis, the bread of Poverty; but proof hereof is wanting; Pauperum est carere commoditate fermentandi panem, poor men most commonly do want the benefit of leaven for their bread, saith Cornelius â Lapide: but I know the poor use leavened bread for their own use more than the rich: Pauperum est, saith he, uti pane subcineritio qui azymus est, statimque fit, & coquitur; It is for poor men, saith he, to eat unleavened cakes, baked on the coals, which are made, and baked, on a sudden: but, if he had kept a great house, he might easily have known, that as well (though perhaps, not so often) leavened cakes, as unleavened, are baked on the hearth, or under embers, or set up against the sides of the Oven; and are often baked, before the oven be stopped. Amongst us, the most of our poor, and rustics eat leavened bread; weak stomaches, and rich men, eat unleavened bread; but is not unleavened bread called here, Bread of Affliction? Yes, yet by these words you are not to think, that unleavened bread is undervalved, or held to be naughty, bad bread, or worse tasted; but it is called Panis afflictionis, bread of affliction, per appositionem; as unleavened bread was appointed by God, to be the record, and monument of their affliction in Egypt: This reason is expressly added, ibid. Thou shalt eat unleavened bread, with the Passeover, even the bread of affliction; for thou camest forth of the land of Egypt (in pavere, in fear; as some read it; cum trepidatione, with Trembling; as others read it) in (haste, say we) That thou mayst remember the day when thou camest forth,— all the days of thy life: the bread of itself was not bad; but was only to be a remembrance of their affliction passed, rather than leavened bread; because they had not time to leaven their bread; for it was not leavened, because they were thrust out of Egypt. PAR. 10. THe same things are the best monuments of themselves; thus, the pot of Manna, and Aaron's rod, Heb. 9.4. Next unto these, not things unlike; but semblable, proportionable, and like are fittest to be remembrancers; who hath a dear child, or friend, that is absent, if he see a thousand that have no lively resemblance of him, he doth not so readily think on him; but if he see one, who is very like unto him, yea, but his lively picture, he quickly calls his absent beloved, to his present remembrance. Leavened bread they had none, in that burly-burly; unleavened they had; therefore unleavened bread was the apt, and fit, than leavened bread, to call to mind the great affliction in Egypt; when they had the like unleavened bread before them. So much for the second Sacrametall Ceremony; unleavened bread. PAR. 11. THe next Sacramental, and durable ceremony; was, The was to be eaten with bi●ter herbs, Exod. 12.8 With unleavened bread, and bitter herbs they shall eat it: though there be no mention of this precept reiterated, Deut. 16. yet there is no doubt but it was of stable continuance; and perhaps is so presupposed, and therefore omitted in Deuteronomy: you shall find it particularly commanded, Num. 9.11. Eat it with unleavened bread, and bitter herbs; indeed in the Hebrew, it runneth thus, Super infermentatis, & amaritudinibus comedent illud; yet the general Exposition runs to our purpose; Cum lactucis agrestibus, say some; Cum herbis amaris, say others; and among the rest, the learned Hebrew Observations, Printed at Paris, by Robert Stephen, 1541. PARA. 12. LActucae agrestes valde amarae sunt, saith Rabanus Maurus (in his second Book of Numbers, Chap. 2.) Carnes agni cum Lactucis agrestibus sunt edendae, ut cùm corpus redemptoris aceipimus, nos pro peccatis nostis in fletibus affligamus, quatenus ipsa amaritudo poenitentiae abstergat â mentis stomacho perversae amorem vitae; Id. ibid. Wild Lettuces are very bitter; and the must be eaten with them, to that end, that we afflict ourselves, with sorrow and weeping, when we receive the blessed Sacrament of our Lord's body; and that the bitterness of Repentance may wipe off perverse desires: furthermore, by the bitterness of these herbs, the Jews were wont to retain, as it were, a taste of their sharp torments, in the time of their pressures in Egypt; of which these bitter herbs were a proper, adapted, re-memorative monument. PAR. 13. THus did Christ himself (for our good, and his Disciples) eat the Paschall Lamb, both literally with bitter herbs, and Mystically, in bitterness, compounded of desire and sorrow, Luke 22.15. With desire, I have desired to eat this Passeover with you, before I suffer; and yet, not only Christ himself was troubled in Spirit, and testified, and said; Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me, joh. 19.21. but his Disciples also, as they were at the board with him, were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them, to say; Lord, is it I? Matth. 26.22. Likewise, he was offered up, and slain; in amaritudinibus; what had he else tendered unto him, on the Cross, by his enemies, but bitter things? Vinum myrrhatum, wine mingled with myrrh, was amarissimum, most bitter, saith S. Augustin; he was served with sour, sharp Vinegar, more than once; gall likewise was presented unto him; what is more bitter? Lam. 1.12. Behold, and see, if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow, which is done unto me, wherewith the Lord hath afflicted me, in the day of his fierce anger; Lam. 3.15. He hath filled me with bitternesses, and made me drunken with Wormwood; it is Merorim, in the Hebrew, which, I presume, I may well render, implevit me moeretibus, implevit me amaritudinibus, saith the Vulgar; by which phrases, a sorrowful soul, in fear, pain, and anguish is described; and so were the Jews, at their Exodus in true bitterness, between Hope, and Doubt; between present danger, and future liberty; or, if you please so to call it; between the affected, present liberty, and the likelihood of being over-taken, if Pharaoh should pursue them. PAR. 14. THe bitter herbs mentioned in the Law, are Cazareth, Gnolshen, Tameah, Charcabinah, and Meror; any one, or all of them together, saith Maymonides. If you wish to know, the English words, infallibly answering to the Hebrew, I think, it cannot be done: It is most likely that Sorrell, Cichory, wilde-Lettuce, tansy, Endive, or the like, were ingredients of that bitter salad. Beza, (on Matth. 26.) makes these herbs to be a kind of sour salad; and saith, the jews had a pleasant Condiment to eat with them; but, say I, even by his own authority, the Condiment was at the (second) supper; and there, the sauce might be more artificially tempered for the : and yet the herbs prescribed to the first supper, that is, to the eating of the roasted Passeover, must needs be bitter, and eaten (quatenus amarae) as they were bitter, being memorials of their bitterness in affliction (though, after they were passed the red-sea, their sorrows were sweetened with much joy) their lives were made bitter with hard bondage, in mortar, and brick, and, in all manner of service in the field; all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour, Exod. 1.14. a more exact, and adequate record, or resemblance of their bitterness, could not be invented, than these bitter herbs; being to be eaten, at the first supper, and service of the Lamb; which, neither Baronius, nor Beza, sufficiently distinguished, though they acknowledge a second Supper likewise at the same time. PAR. 15. IN that hot Country of judaea, they had herbs for cooling sauce; yea for, meat also; Hence is mention of a dinner of herbs, Pro. 15.17. yea, even some weak ones did eat herbs, Rom. 14.2. the tithe Mint, and Rue, and all manner of herbs, which the jews paid, and were bound to pay, Luke 11.42. were not for sauce only, but for food. PAR. 16. THat they used salt, as their sauce, no man doubteth; can that, which is unsavoury be eaten without salt? job 6.6. To this the Apostle alludeth, Col. 4.6. Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt. Bernard (ad Nep.) prudenter sobriéque conversanti satis ad omne condimentum sal, cum fame, that is, salt, and hunger is sauce enough for a wise, and sober man: likewise, for Vinegar, Boaz said to Ruth, Dip thy morsel in the Vinegar, Ruth. 2.14. Our blessed Saviour, on the Cross, had Vinegar, more than once tendered unto him; and you may marvel at the abundance of Vinegar, which they had on Mount Calvary; as shall be manifested (God willing) when I have ended my Tractat, of Christ's descending into hell: Nec cibus ipse juvat, morsu fraudatus acceti; said the Poet, Nor doth the meat good unto me, Which from the taste of Vinegar is free. The Prayer. GRant, gracious God, I meekly beseech thee, that I may purge-out the old leaven; that I may be a new Lump, and unleavened; and that I may keep every day holy, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice, and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity, and truth; that so I may be accepted of thee, for jesus Christ his sake. Amen. CH●P. XIV. The Contents of the fourteenth Chapter. 1. The not breaking of a bone, was a perpetual Ceremony: Not a bone of Christ was broken. 2. The marrow of the Pascall Lambs bones, might not be taken forth: the Mysteries thereof; and of not breaking of a bone. 3. No part of the flesh of the Lamb, was to be carried out of the house. 4. The Reasons, and the mysteries thereof. 5. The Tabletalk was another Concomitant, fixed rite; and what it was in particular. 6. God's great care of keeping memorials. 7. Whether they sang at the Passeover, or no; and what they did sing. 8. Instructing of youth, in the principles of Religion, necessary. PARAGRAPH. 1. THat Salt, and Vinegar only, were the jewish sauces, Mr. Weemse cannot prove: that they had other sauces, will be proved from the Scripture, from the Jewish Ritual, from learned men (God willing) when I handle Christ's second Supper. So much for the rites properly, and substantially Sacramental. The first subsequent fixed Ceremony (you may, if you please, call it Concomitant) was this; Ye shall not break a bone thereof, Exod. 12.46. which is confirmed to be perpetual, by Num. 9.12. You shall not break any bone of it: and it had most apparent reference unto our Saviour; the bones might be picked, and scraped, broken, not any one must be, Psal. 22.14. All my bones are out of joint, saith the sweet Singer, in relation to our Saviour's Passion; and ver. 17. I may tell all my bones; and, they pierced, or rather, digged my hands and my feet, ver. 16. and yet for all this, not one bone was broken; the Soldiers break not the legs of our Saviour (as they did of the Malefactors) joh. 19.33. One of the Soldiers indeed pierced his side, and forthwith there came out blood, and water, ver. 35. For these things were done that the Scriptures should be fulfilled; a bone of him shall not be broken: and Psal. 34.20. He keepeth all his bones, not one of them is broken. PAR. 2. THe marrow might not be taken forth; perhaps to intimate, that man may not be too-busie, with God's secret counsels, with pearls wrapped up, and enclosed in his own breast: for, as in the breaking of the bones, some marrow is diminished; so, in the determining of hidden things, God's wisdom is too-much entrenched upon, undervalved, and by humane reason, or conjecture, broken in pieces: wherefore, God will have some, and the daintiest, and chiefest things, as the marrow in the bone, reserved from man's curiosity, which man must not seek after: other hard matters there are, that he may exercise his wit upon, and pick upon; see Deut. 29.29. though it had been a young Lamb, whose bones are little, and no harder, than some sinews; yet they must forbear, from the eating of them; for they were bones, though tender. In the slaying of the passover, they were to take heed of breaking a bone; at the taking out of the entrails, at the cutting out of the heart, liver, and lungs (for they were to be washed, and cleansed) they were to take heed, lest they broke a bone; they were so to spit it, and fasten it on the Spit, and take it from the Spit, that no bone of it was to be broken: Lastly, they were neither so to eat of the flesh, nor so to carry and to burn the remainder, that any bone at all was to be broken: In a mystery, this might signify, that not one Article of our belief; not one main point, which upholdeth Christianity (as the bones do the body) may be broken; but must be preserved entire; yea, it might imply, that no one Commandment of God is to be broken, I am. 3.10. Whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point (if he break but one bone) he is guilty of all: how can those words be reconciled? To keep the whole Law, and yet to offend in one point? I answer, to keep the whole Law, except one point only. In like sort, our blessed Saviour saith, Matth. 12.31. All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men; but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven; you may say, Is not the blasphemy against the holy Ghost, a sin, and blasphemy? I answer, it is, but the native proper sense of the words, implieth only this; that all blasphemy shall be forgiven, except the blasphemy against the holy Ghost. Lastly, the not breaking of the bone might typify; that, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one title shall in no wise pass from the Law (no, not from the law of the Passeover) till all be fulfilled, Matth. 5.18. The jews do constantly avouch, that the Almighty hath more care of every word, syllable, and letters of the old Testament, than he hath of the stars in heaven: and the jews themselves have been so excessively, even to a prodigy, careful and diligent, that they have reckoned, how many times every several letter in their Alphabet, is to be found in all the old Testament. Again, I will not say, but that, by the not breaking off a bone, may be meant, either a hard place of Scripture, is not too-much to be forced, 2 Pet. 3.16. or else, that no words of Christ were superfluous, or vain; no promise of his should be broken, but remain firm, Matth. 24.35. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. PAR. 3. ANother durable Rite of the subsequent, was; Thou shalt not carry forth aught of the flesh abroad out of the houses, ver. 46. This the Rabbins expound thus; not only, they may not carry forth, aught of the flesh, to another house; or to others, without any house, in the open fields, or streets; but they must not carry that, from one company, which belonged to another company; nor might they carry it from the whole, that were present, to the absent, that were sick; nor might they carry it out of the Passeover-Chamber. PAR. 4. ANd these may seem to be the Reasons. 1. If aught of the flesh might have been carried forth, some unclean body might have touched it, or met with it. 2. Or Legally unclean might have employed it, to profane uses. 3. Or, notoriously professed enemies of the Church, might have vitiated it. 4. It had not need, to have been brought in, if it might have been carried out. 5. The remainder of the flesh needed not to have been burnt, if it might have been exported: The mysteries may be these: Secretior a non divulganda, von communicanda in vulgus; the mysteries of God's Word, are not to be divulged, nor made known unto the rascall-many; Cast not pearls before swine, nor bread unto dogs: unfit recipients must not be dispensed withal, through any favour, to take it; no not at the second or third hand, or bound; No communion of light with darkness: Concord and Communion are to be found, within the pale of the Church: Christ made an exempt of Disciples from the jews; of the Apostles, from the Disciples; of three, viz. Peter, james, and john, from the rest; and yet revealed not all things to them; because they were, for a while, unfit. At night commonly, both Coelestiall-ill-influences, and infernal Spirits do more hurt; this was in the night; To go away, Sacris non peractis, before service was ended; (from the first word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, silence; till the last word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ye may departed in peace) was a sin; A sin censured, in the Primitive Church, by Excommunication, as appeareth, in the fourth Council of Carthage; this Sacrifice was not ended, till all was consumed; To eat part, and carry away part, is but half a sacrifice: Let them look to this, who carry abroad the consecrated Host, till it incline to rottenness, or come to an ill favour: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, vocat Menander; the Poet Menander calls the night, The Mother of all Mischief; Amor illicitus, is called ovum noctis, Lust is called, the night's Egg; Post solis occasum, Noctem esse 12. Tabulae decernebant; the twelve Tables decreed, that, after Sunsetting, it should be accounted night, as Alexand. ab Alex. Genial. dier. 6.10. PAR. 5. THe Tabletalk was the next fixed subsequent Ceremony: Maymonides saith, the religious Tabletalk began not, till the cloth was removed from the Master of the Feast, at the end of the first Supper: And after blessing, then, the younger fort enquired; why, the preceding Supper was so discordant, and divers from all other Suppers, with double washings, without baked, boiled, or stewed meats, without any herbs, save bitter ones: As the youth enquired (according to that, Exod. 12.26.) So the head of that society; (you may say, he was Rex, sacrorum Architriclinus, King of the Ceremonies, Sewer, or Master of the feast; Gentleman-usher, Chaplain in Ordinary, or, Marshal of the Hall; or Symposiast, pater discubitus, Initiator, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who placed the guests, according to their worth; Nomarcha Coenae, the Ruler of the Feast, according to that of Exod. 13.8. made remonstrance, of what God had done, to deliver them, from the house of bondage: nor might any of their Tabletalk, be irreligious, or vain, or carpingly censorious, or provoking to wrath; nor was it, as at other times, with Riddles, or other delightful good discourses; nor roved they at large, at all sacred conferences; but was empaled in, and confined, to the well-seasoned Relations, as the Memorial then lead them; of the plagues in Egypt; of the destroying Angel; inhibited to destroy their Firstborn; of the Seas retiring; and the Two walls of water (forgetting their natural Fluidity) on the right hand and on the left; of their haste, and fear, and of Pharaohs hardened heart, mollified by his drowning; and Gods carrying them, on eagle's wings. Aulus Gellius (Noct. Attic. 13.11.) Nec loquaces Convivas, nec multos legere oportet; guests must not be tattling like Geese, nor mute, as Fishes; and the discourses must be jucunde, & invitabiles, delightful, and profitable; not perplexing, or troublesome; the Master, or Lord of the Feast, must be, Non tam lautus, quàm sive sordibus; neat, and cleanly: Macrobius (Saturnal. 7.1.) handleth the point, more at large; as a few, mute letters dispersed among many vowels, in societatem vocis facilè mansuescunt, do make an easy pronounciation; so, some few unlearned, delighting in the company of more learned, either accord with them, if they can; or, are delighted, with their discourse: Timotheum, clarum hominom Athenis, & principem Civitatis, ferunt, cùm coenuvisset apuà Platonem, eoqui convivio, admodùm delectat ●s esses, videssetque eum postridiè, dixisse, vestrae quidem Coenae, non solùm in praesentiâ, sed etiàm postero die jucundae sunt; that is, It is storied of Timothy, a famous man of Athens, and one of the chief of that City; that having, on a time supped with Plato, he was wondrously delighted with that Feast; and meeting him, by chance, the next day; he told him, that his Supper did relish a long time after; a Philosopher's banquet; as Cicero (lib. 5. Tusquaest. PAR. 6. HOw great a care God had of continuing the Memorials of his favour to the Israelites, appeareth, by appointing the pot of Manna to be kept; and Aaron's rod, which budded likewise, Iosh. 4.5. etc. Twelve men took up twelve stones, every man, a stone upon his shoulder; that this may be a sign among you; that when your children ask their fathers, in time to come, saying, what mean you by these stones? Then ye shall answer them, that the waters of Jordan were cut off, before the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, when it passed over Jordan; the waters of Jordan were cut off, as it is pithily repeated ver. 7. See to the same purpose, Iosh. 4.20. etc. Quoties Christiani agapis vescebant, fidem Psalmis pascebant, ait Tertullianus; that is, as oft as Christian did fill their bellies together, with good cheer, they fed their faith with fing of Psalms: Cyprianus (lib. 2. epist. 2.) Nec sit velhora convivii gratia coelestis immunis; Sonnet Psalmis sobrium convivium, that is, at all your sober Christian Feasts, let Grace be Salt, and Psalms the Music: what joshua did, was, in imitation of what God commanded, Exod. 12.35. When ye be come to the land, which the Lord will give you, you shall keep the Passeover; and when your children shall say unto you, what mean you by this Service? that ye shall say, It is the Sacrifice of the Lords Passeover, who passed over the houses of Israel, in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. ver. 27. Though such discourse was not directly appointed, at the first Egyptian , because of their affrighted haste; yet I doubt not, but both they, and their children knew, why this Feast was thus kept; and ever after, it was to them, a speaking memorial of their deliverance; concerning which, their children were taught to inquire of their parents, and their parents were used to relate unto them all their passed sears, sorrows, and deliverances, with their enemy's destructions, Exod. 13.8. Thou shalt show thy son, in that day; and 14. When thy son asketh thee, Thou shalt say, etc. So Deut. 6.20. etc. When thy son asketh thee, in time to come,— Thou shalt say to thy son, we were Pharaohs bondmen in Egypt; and ver. 7. Thou shalt teach them diligently to thy children, and shall talk of them, when thou sittest in the house, when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. The Spouse, Cant. 2.9. saith of Christ, My beloved is like a Roe, or a young Hart, behold, he standeth behind our walls, he looketh forth at a window, showing himself through the Lattesse; Which words the Targum thus Paraphraseth, to our purpose, as it is set forth, by the learned Edmund Rivius; The Congregation of Israel, said, in the time, when the glory of God was revealed in Egypt, in the night of the ; and when he slew all their firstborn; God ascended upon swiftest lightning, and ran like ae Roe, or young Goat, and protected, and defended the houses in which we were, and stood behind our wall, and looked through the Lattesses, and saw the blood of the Passeover, and of the Circumcision imprinted, as it were, on our portals; and behold from the highest heavens, and saw his people eating the , roasted with fire, with wild Lettuce, and unleavened bread; and spared us, and gave no power to Apollyon, to destroy us. These are the declarative say of the Church, as the Targum imagineth; in answer (forsooth) to the question, like enough to be propounded, at the eating of the : but in truth, Delrio most divinely (on the place) adapteth the words to our Saviour's Incarnation; which the obstinate jew, will not believe to be accomplished. PAR. 7. IF any Psalm were sung, at their , after David's time, or in it; I presume, it was the 78. Psalm; in which was a full relation of God's wonders in Egypt; and he teacheth them, what he had learned of others, ver. 3.4. as God commanded them, ver, 5.6. though God commanded them, in other places, to teach their children; yet this place, of Exod. 12.25. may be also aimed ar. Till David's time, I suppose; they at the , did recite Moses his song, Exod. 15.1. I will sing unto the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse, and his rider hath he thrown into the sea, etc. Then follows Miriams' Amaboeum, ver. 21. Miriam answered them; sing ye to the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse, and the rider hath he thrown into the sea; as in our Cathedrialls, some excellent voice cheerfully beginneth some heavenly ditty, and then the whole choir repeateth, and resoundeth the same; not without a joyful quickening, and reviving of devout affections. PAR. 8. FRom this place, of children questioning, and Fathers teaching, what belonged to sacred duties; we may learn that instructing of youth, in principles of Religion, is very ancient; God acknowledgeth it, in Abraham, Gen. 18.19. Nor was Adam negligent in that duty, as may be probablized, from Gen. 4.3.4. and 26. vers. Die thy wool well, and it will never change colour: Quo semel est imbuta recens servabit odorem Testa diu.— saith the Poet, that is, The barrel long doth keep her primer sent, Of that same liquor which it first did vent. Timothy learned the holy Scriptures from a child, 2 Tim. 3.25. It is the relation of the jews, that they did instruct their children, in the commandments, so soon as they could eat bread: They shall give me leave to doubt of that: but this of Maymonides seemeth more true; that they, at the first, gave them but a little quantity of the ; and so trained them up by degrees: and certainly, at the , they had the whole discourse of their Case, at the first ; each Ceremony affording variety of talk, some more, than others; and this they did yearly; using fewer words, when all were before well instructed; but discoursing more at large, where people were more ignorant; the Master of the family being the Speaker in that Parliament. So much be spoken, concerning their Tabletalk. The Prayer. MOst merciful, and gracious God, who stintest the punishments of thy servants, and sayest unto the devourer, hitherto thou shalt proceed, but shalt go no further; thou shalt bruise, and wound, but shalt not break one bone: I bow the knees of my soul unto thee, and humbly do supplicate unto thee; that, since I have offended, and deserved punishment; thou wilt be pleased, to remember mercy, in the midst of punishing; and to restrain the fury of Abaddon: and good Lord, for jesus Christ his sake, commute the eternal torments, which I have merited into the temporal chastisements, which thou inflictest on me; and then, gracious God; whatsoever I shall suffer; I shall joy, that thy wrath will end, in loving kindness, pity, and compassion, most holy mediator, say; so be it; and my soul, do thou answer. Amen, Amen. CHAP. XV. The Contents of the fifteenth Chapter. 1. The Ceremonies after their Tabletalk. 2. They continued to eat unleavened bread, seven days. 3. But, it seemeth, the Israelites were not bound, to keep the Festival, at their first Passeover, or Exodus, though they did eat unleavened bread. 4. Nothing was to be left till the morning. 5. They burned the remainder of the Passeover, if any remainder were: Reasons thereof: Holy Sacramental Relics not to be profaned: The Romans Protervia, or Feast of frowardness. PARAGRAPH. 1. WHen that sacred Conference, and Supper was ended, or almost ended, I judge, other lasting, subsequent Ceremonies of the Passeover, to be these. 1. That they continued their eating of unleavened bread, for seven days after. 2. That no part of the Passeover, was to be left till the morning. 3. That they burned with fire the remainder thereof, if there were any remainder. PAR. 2. THe next fixed, subsequent rite, was, the continuing to eat unleavened bread, seven days, Exod. 12.15. Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day shall ye put away leaven out of your houses; for, whosoever eateth leavened bread, from the first day, till the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel: most effectually is it precepted, and ingeminated, ver. 17. Ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day, have I brought your Armies out of the Land of Egypt, therefore ye shall observe this day, in your generations, by an ordinance for ever, Exod. 12.17. In the first month on the 14. day of the month at Even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the 21. day of the month at Even, ver. 18. see it further ratified, the 19 and 20. verses; No precept whatsoever concerning the Passeover, is so largely and fully precepted: Levit. 23.5. On the 14. day, is the Lords Passeover, and on the 15. is the feast of unleavened bread: But how cometh it to pass, that there is a memorial for the 15. day; and in Exodus, for the 14. day? I answer this place of Leviticus discriminateth the Sacramental Passeover, from the festival solemnities of the Passeover: the Passeover was indeed to be slain, on the 14. day toward night: so both Exodus and Leviticus, speaketh of the immolation, and of the preparation; yet was not the Passeover eaten or to be eaten, till the even; or between the two evenings, when the 15. day began; and then did they eat both the Passeover, and unleavened bread, as both Exodus and Leviticus accord; nor might they eat the Passeover, without unleavened bread, nor unleavened bread, in reference to that feast, without the Passeover; nor either till the beginning of the 15. day; and though the Sacramental Passeover was ended that night; and the analecta, or remains (if any) were burned, ere the morning; yet the Paschall-festivity continued with unleavened bread, and other sacrifices, full 7. days inclusive, including the Sacramental Passeover: Likewise Numb. 28.16. is exactly the same distinction; In the 14. day of the first month is the Passeover of the Lord; in the 15. day of this month, is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten: killed on the 14. eaten the beginning of the Evening of the 15. day: for on the first minute of the second evening, began the first minute of the 15. day. PAR. 3. NOw though it be generally confessed; the eating of unleavened bread seven days, was one of the lasting Ceremonies; yet some question; whether this was commanded, to begin at the first Egyptian Passeover? That much feasting was then commanded, I cannot think; that they went out only with unleavened bread, is apparent; that they are only unleavened bread, till Manna did fall, josephus saith: But they are not unleavened bread, with a religious intent, but for want of other bread, saith Dr. Willet: if he speak of the last 23. days; I confess they had no religious respect, in the eating of unleavened bread: for they had no precept to eat unleavened beyond 7. days, in any sacred relation: yet consider, that the observation of 7. days eating unleavened bread, was enjoined, before they went out of Egypt; and so they undoubtedly observed them. Oh, but saith Dr. Willet, they went out in haste? I answer, haste and Religion may stand together; yea, they had been irreligious, in that point, if they had not hasted; they had haste, and were in all haste, till the Armies of Egypt were drowned; Now this being 7. days, from the eating of the Paschall-Lambe; the inhibition of leavened bread conduced more, to hasten their haste: For unleavened bread, or manchets, or cakes are sooner made, than any flower or bread can be leavened; make ready quickly three measures of fine meal saith Abraham, to Sarah, Gen. 18.6. She could not so soon have leavened, and made it ready, for eating: Moreover the eating of bread, of unleavened bread, of unleavened bread for want of other, or for necessity, excludeth not devout intents, or performances; if a Religious observation was appointed, a natural duty may concur with an holy end: At all their feasts, they satisfied nature, either wholly or in part; these civil or natural respects did join hand in hand, with devout and Sacred intentions. Lastly, the Divine Scriptures are to be understood literally, as they offer themselves, in their first sense to the hearer, or reader, (if there follow no inconvenience, or absurdity) therefore in the commandment to eat unleavened bread 7. days, is included a sacred duty; and an holy observation might be performed, though they had no other bread to eat, though they were in want, and necessity, and haste: See this precept of eating unleavened bread 7. days, recommanded, Deut. 16.2. etc. that you may not doubt, but it was eternal, pro statu illius politiae; not absolutely, but periodically eternal. PAR. 4. ANother subsequent, fixed ceremony was this; Exod. 12.10. Yet shall let nothing of it remain until the morning. This precept was not absolute, and irrespective, even at the first Passeover, if it had been exactly necessary, there needed no second annexed command in default thereof, viz. that which remaineth of it till the morning ye shall burn with fire, ibid. In this sixth precept, the first of these two observe; that the Israelites might eat of the Passeover often, if their stomach served them, till almost the very morning: and I have read it as a tradition that the last meal, which they eaten, that night was a bit, or morsel of the Passeover; as, the last draught they drank that night, was of Sanctified wine. Certainly, great reason there was, that nothing should be left until the morning; for the Egyptians might have profaned it; dogs might have torn it; and if there were any part left, some perhaps might have worshipped it. As it was to be roasted whole, so they might eat it wholly, if they could conveniently without gluttony, excess, or any other intemperancy; and if the number of Communicants had been great, and the Lamb but little, and adequate for them. Voluntary offerings might be eaten, on the first day, and if any remained, it might be eaten, on the second day; but on the third day; the remainder of the flesh was to be burnt with fire, Levit. 7.16. etc. If any flesh of the Sacrifice of Peace-offerings be eaten at all, on the third day— it shall be an abomination, Levit. 7.18. The flesh of the Sacrifice of Peace-offerings for thanksgiving, shall be eaten the same day that it is offered; he shall not leave any of it until the morning, Levit. 7.15. he might eat of it any part of the day, or any part of the night: the strictest Law of all was for the speedy consuming of the Passeover; of all other, that must not be kept, lest it be dis-religionized, or adored: let them consider this precept, who long keep the blessed Sacrament, never without some possible danger; sometimes likely, sometimes apparent, from worms, thiefs, mice, nastiness, mouldiness, stink, etc. And yet, because God never liked intemperance, rather than they should play the gluttons, and cram their guts too full; he commanded them to burn that, which was left; and this was an unchangeable, closing, and parting ceremony. PAR. 5. THe next subsequent, fixed ceremonic was this; they burned the remainder of the Passeover, if any remainder were; no sin it was to burn it; a sin it had been not to burn it. Flesh, if any were left, and bones were certainly to be burned; no Passeover was exempted from this conclusive Ceremony, and binding precept; not fading by time, till the death of the Messiah. junius questioneth whether the skin were burnt with fire? and resolveth for the affirmative: I think the skin and entrails, with its ordure were removed, a good while before the eating of the flesh; and if they were burnt, (as doubt may be made of the wool and of the skin) they were burnt either before the manducation of the Sacrament, or in another fire, after the end of all: for if they were burnt after the full end, of their Paschatizing banquet; no shadow of reason evinceth, or probabilizeth, that the Sacrae reliquae, sacred relics of the flesh, (if any were) or of the bones, (for whose not breaking such strict order was given) were consumed, in the same fire, which the retrimenta, & excrementa Naturae, the retriments, and excrements of nature, or ordure, were: Reverend opinion, or estimate of things, once sacred, persuadeth the contrary. Heathens would say, such a mixture were an abomination. Divinis rebus suus constet honos intemeratus, let holy things be attended with reverence: as the whole Lamb was roasted with fire, so the residue or remainder, was to be burnt with fire; they burned the remainder thereof with fire, if any remainder were, Exod. 12.10. Ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning; and that which remaineth of it, till the morning, shall ye burn with fire; it is repeated thus, Numb. 9.12. They shall leave none of it unto the morning; nor break any bone of it; the coupling of these together, doth show, it was an eternal ceremony; though junius opineth, this ceremony seemeth to be peculiar unto this first celebration of the Passeover. This excellent reason about this point may be given, Levit. 7.15. The flesh of the Sacrifice of the Peace-offerings for thanksgiving, shall be eaten the same day, that it is offered; he shall not leave any of it till the morning; but the Passeover was an Eucharistical Sacrifice: Cornelius Cornelii â lapide, maketh this ceremony to be perpetual: for it seemeth not consonant to so great a devout Sacrament, that the dogs might gnaw the bones thereof; nor other profanation to be used to any part of it: it's an old Proverb used by Aulus Gellius (13.16.) Inter os, & offam, between the mouth and the morsel, many mischances may come; which is all one with that, Multa cadunt inter calicem, supremaque labra, that is, Between the cup, and upper lip, Many times the Wine doth drip. or, Full many dangers quickly slip. But how many sort of abuses, or profanations might be used, to the relics of that Sacred banquet, if they had not been burnt who knoweth? therefore God who only did foreknow, did also provide an antidote to such horrid abuses, by burning what was left: the Romans had one kind of Sacrifice which was called Protervia, Frowardness, in that feast it was the fashion; that if any thing had been left of the banquet, or feast, it should be consumed with fire; this made Cato (who was no common jester) when Albidius had wasted his goods, and at last had his house burnt, to scoff, saying, that he did Proterviam facere, offer the Sacrifice Protervia, and what he could not eat, he did burn; Macrobius (Saturnal. 2.2.) This also amongst other parts of devotion among the Romans, it seemed, they borrowed from the Paschall-Lambes remainders burned. So much for the prescribed ceremonies of the Passeover, whether temporary or perpetual. The Prayer. LOrd, thy Law was the guide of performance unto the Jews for the ceremonies, and Service of their Passeover; thy Prescriptions, their directions, give me grace, good Lord, still to look up to thy Commandments, and to regulate my thoughts, words, and works, thereby; through the mediation of my blessed Lord, and Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen. CHAP. XVI. The Contents of the sixeteenth Chapter. 1. The Jewish custom to wash their feet, especially at feasts. 2. The Jews did not stink more, than other men; against Cardinal Baronius; Mr. Fuller taxed also. 3. If the Emperor Marcus said so, probable reasons, for his imaginations at that time. 4. Of Judas his stink, when he was dead, out of Cedrenus; and the jewish Nation defended. The great number of the jews long ago and now: from whom the Americans descended: the Tartars came not, from the Israelites. 5. The Pharisees marveling at Christ's not washing before meat: the double sin of Pharisees, in washing. 6. Women in the Primitive Church washed the feet of Saints. 7. In the old Testament they only presented water, but washed not the feet of their guests. 8. The great sinner is the first recorded, to have washed another's feet, even Christ's; and the great Saviour is the first recorded to have washed many men's feet. 9 They sometimes washed and bathed their whole bodies, and anointed them also. 10. The jews used more than ordinary blessings at the Passeover: a particular explication thereof. 11. The reasons, why I handle at large the jewish Passeover. 12. Christ kept all the fixed rites preparatory, and the Sacramental Ceremonies; and the subsequent perpetual Customs. 13. Christ a perfect observer of the Law; yet not bound to the jewish voluntary undertake, or will-worship. PARAGRAPH. 1. ANd now am I fallen upon those rites, and ceremonies of the Passeover, which were not of expesse command; either fading or fixed, but of voluntary undertake; and those have I mustered up from josephus, Philo, the ancient Ritual; from Fagius, Beza, and Baronius; and especially from that Rabbi of Rabbins, Moses Ben-Maymon, and I reduce them, to these two heads. 1. Their washings, and anointings. 2. Their reiterated blessings: these two belong partly to the first, and partly to the second Supper. First concerning their washings, they are well known to have been in much request; pedibus de more lotis, saith josephus (de bello jud. 6.31. This was an ordinary usance, at times unsacred; Nor may we think, they omitted washing, at hours of greater devotion; for the Jews placed much Religion in manifold washings: at common meals, they were cleanely-fowle, even to superstition: Baronius (ad An. Christi, 57 Num. 107. etc.) proveth that Jews, Gentiles, and holy Primitive Christians were wont to wash before they prayed. PAR. 2. BUt it is an incredible report, that above others, gravis foetor corporibus eorum inhaeret, their bodies did stink above ground, which he avoucheth, (ad An. Christi, 72. Num. 31.) It may be, some called them foetentes judaeos, stinking Jew's: as our English calleth those stinking companions, who are wicked and offensive: Besides, some uncleanly might be so called properly; that the Nation were, so, all, or most I deny; though we apply it to those, since the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or dispersion of them: I knew but two Jews, in all my life; both Teachers of Hebrew in Cambridge; with one of them, I was well acquainted, but never did I smell any ill smell from them, more than from other men; though I was one of their Auditors, and very familiar with one of them. PAR. 3. IF Ammianus Marcellinus say true, that the Emperor Marcus passing through Palestine to Egypt, complained that the Jews did stink; and were worse than the Marcomanni, Quadi, Sarmatae; yet this is no proof, that the Jews were natural stinkards; or inwardly had noisome, mal-odorous bodies; but many other accidental occasions might cause the Emperor to say so; he might pass through judaea, in a very hot season, when a little ill smell disperseth itself, 2. He spoke comparatively, preferring the cold Germans, Bohemians, and Scythians, before the sweaty-open-pored Jew's. 3. He might dislike the Jews more than those other, for their unruly tumultuating, and pressing upon him, with so much company, that the steam of them was offensive, as is often done amongst us, in narrow rooms. 4. It may be some poorer petitioners of them might be noisome, (as those of the Jail are amongst us) and their smell might be, by that means unhealthy, yea infections; was not the like at our Assizes in England? namely at Exeter in Devon, under the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Anno 1586, vide Stows Annals, fol. 1218. 5. The rebellious Jews were often slain by thousands, and by thousands crucified; and they might lie unburied, and so corrupt the very air, as he passed by: If any pious soul shall fear an inconvenience, and shall either from report or likelihood, or desire, persuade itself; that it is generally observed to be thus, in the places, where the Jews dwell; and if we hold it, as one brand of the curse, that lieth upon them, since their crucifying, and rejecting the Lord of Life, it maketh much for the honour of our Saviour? I answer, I know no such general observation, nor ever heard of it, till now: nor was there ever any threatening of such matters denounced against them; if they left their stinking when they were washed in the laver of regeneration, and turned Christians, (which the accusers of them will not grant) I would confess both the matter, and the cause; nor would any argument prevail so much with them, (if stinking Jews were never changed to savoury Christians) to turn inoffensive converts. johannes Baptista Montanus, in his Consilia (pag. 331.) saith indeed, Totum genus Hebraeorum est ferè melancholicum, quia sanguinem habet crassum, & hepar calidum; the whole Nation of the jews is for the most part melancholy, because they have gross blood, and hot livers; yet these distempers make not, in my opinion, os olidum, a rammish smell, or a stinking breath, foetidum anhelitum: Moreover, if the jews the now out casts of the world live in homely places; and through covetousness, be not cleanly, but sordid, nasty, and stinking, this is not their nature nor yet general: again, divers who have lived among the jews, smell no such matter, or make no such complaint; I would hold it, (if it were true) as one brand of the curse, that lieth upon them, since their crucifying the Lord of life, and say, it made much for the honour of our Saviour; if it were sure or probable that when they shall be turned to Christ, their breaths shall stink no more, than they did before Christ's death: Lastly, nor Marshal, nor Tacitus, nor any other, that I have read, though they hated the Jews, taxed them for this matter; and God needeth not the lie of men, to uphold his Honour, or Cause. PAR. 4. CEdrenus reporteth from Papias; and Papias from others relations, that when Judas died, in his own ground, praefoetore, illud desertum remansit, & inhabitatum, usque ad hodiernum diem, by reason of his stink, that field continued desert, and not inhabited to this day. If thus it were (as there is no likelihood of it) and if people could not pass by, without stopping their noses (as they say) shall we judge the worse, or the like, of the whole Nation? Other reasons might move Marcus to say so, if he did say so, as Ammianus Marcellinus, no friend to Jews, but great enemy to Christians, hath perchance, in spleen, related: Yet me thinks, the great Baronius, who lived at the same time in Rome, with so many thousand Jews, who are allowed to have, in that famous City, four Churches; might have sought some better grounds, ere he had proclaimed; Judaei etiam foetoris signo infames, Naturâ ipsâ in eos inclamante; the jews are infamous, for their ill-smelling bodies, naturally; the whole Nation (and though the now accursed seed, yet still the carnal seed of Abraham) should not be so charged, without better grounds; give the Devil his due, & let us rather pray, for their conversion, (for converted they must and shall be, ere the world's end) yea, howsoever Mr. Fuller (in his sacred Miscellanies, 3.13.) passeth a presumptuous and uncharitable verdict upon the jewish Nation; that as it doth live now in vastatione, & horrendâ in Terras omnes dissipatione, so, vivet perpetuò, sine ullâ reditûs spe; yet others have proved, and I do second them; that before the end of the world, the dispersed jews shall be gathered together, and become one flock with us under Christ; and have their polity, and government, perhaps even in the holy Land; see, and deeply ponder, Rom. 11.25. etc. and more especially, Luk. 21.24. and among humane Authors, Barradius (tom 3. pag. 576.) Aretius, & Estius, on Rom. 11. and Dionysius Carthusianus, on Luke 21. Let us, I say, rather pray for their conversion, than load the Nation with unjust aspersions; for the fault perhaps of some few, whose abhorred Covetousness persuades them, to exchange sweetness and cleanliness, which is not unexpensive, for that cheap, sordid, nastiness, and fulsome-accidentall-ill-breathing smells; which would be alike disliked, in any of any nation, that would be so basely penurious. Purchas in his Pilgrimage of Africa (8.8. Paragr. 4) relateth, from Mt. George Sandys, that the jewish men are of indifferent statures, and of the best complexions (pag. 1306.) that the jewish women (about Constantinople) are generally fat, and rank of the savours, which attend upon sluttish corpulency, (as it is, in the next page) here, not nature but idleness causeth the stink, I must add that a very learned man a great traveller, who was inwardly and familiarly acquainted with many of the jews, (as himself seriously professed to me) could never discern any such odious smells, or rank nastiness by them: Sir Edward, the Bishop Sandys, his elder son, (who loved not our Clergy as a Bishop's son should) towards the end of his relation, could not have passed over the remarkable difference of the jews, (if such it were) above other nations; when he highly commendeth some of them, with whom he was well acquainted, as seeming to want no grace, but the faith of a Christian: Indeed their dispersion is most just, which they called for, and more upon themselves; when they cried, Christ's blood be upon us, and on our children, Mat. 27.25. Yet who so shall consider their number and power, will say, it is not so ill with them as the world imagineth: Benjamin of Tudela, in Navarr, ended his journey, (1173.) and relateth huge numbers of them at that time; he maketh first mention of the jews residing at Barcelona; then, he proceedeth to this effect; at Gerundam he found a small congregation of jews; at Narbona almost 300. jews. at the town of Baetiras, a company of students; at Mount-peslier, the most famous Disciples of the wise men of that age: at Lunel, an holy assembly of about 300. jews; at Bea●caire, 40. jews, and a famous University of them; at Nogres about an 100 of their wise men; upon the bank of the river Rhone, divers Rabbins, jews; at Arelatum, 200. jews, at Marseillis, two Colleges of almost 300. jews; at Genoa, about 20. jews; at Luca almost 40. jews; at Rome almost 200. jews; at Capua, almost 300. jews; at Naples almost 500 jews; at Salernum, almost 600. at Malti, about 20. jews; at Benevent, almost 200. jews; at Malchi, 200. jews; at Aesculum, almost 40. jews; at Throne, almost 200. Israelites; at Tarentum, almost 300. jews; at Barnediss, about 10. jews, dyers of scarlet; at Otranto, almost 500 jews; at Corfu, one only jew, at Larta, about 100 jews; at Achilon, about 10. jews; at Patra, almost 50. jews; at Lepantum, almost an 100 jews, at the mountain of Parnassus, almost 200. jews; at Corinth, almost 300. jews; at Thebes about 2000 jews; at Aegriphon, about 200. jews; at jabusteria, almost an 100 jews, at Robinica almost an 100 jews; at Kuxopotamos, about 50. jews; at Gardegis, a few jews inhabit; at Armilon, about 400. jews; at Bissina, almost an hundred jews; at Seleucia, almost 500 jews; at Melrisi, almost 20. jews; at Darnea, almost an 140. at Canistolin, almost 20.200. jews, at Pera, and thereabouts; at Rodoston, almost 400. at Gallipoli, almost 200; at Calas, almost 50. at Mitilene, in 10. places the jews have their Synagogues; at Chios, almost 400. at Samos, almost 300. at Rhodos, almost 400. at Cyprus (as it were a College) divers jews; at Antioch, some glass-makers; at Laodicea, almost 200. jews; at Gebal, almost 150. jews; at the Temple of Ammon, almost 200. at Biroth, almost 50. jews; at Tsidon, almost 20. at Tyrus, almost 400. at Akadi, almost 200. at Schizeria, or Caesarea, almost 10. jews besides 200. Cathaei, or Samaritine Iewes; at Lux, one jew a Dyer, between the mountains of Gerizzim, and Ebal, about an 100 Samaritans; under the Tower of David, 200. jews, or thereabout; at Bethleem 12. jews, at Beth-Gabarim, 3. jews; at Shunem, 300. at Nob, 2 jews, Dyers; at Ramas', 3. jews; at joppa, 1. jew, a Dyer; at Askalon, almost 200. jews; 40. Karites, who sticked closely, only to the Scriptures; and almost three hundred Samaritans; at Jisreel, one Dyer; at Tiberias, are about 50 Jews; at Aschath almost 20. jews; at Alma 50. jews; at Damascus, almost 3000. Israelites; almost 200. Karaites; Samaritan Jew's 400. at Gilead, almost 60. jews; at Tadmor, in the Wilderness, almost 2000 jews; at Kiriathaiim, one only jew, a Dyer; at Aram Tsobae, almost 1500. Israelites; at Balits', a competent number of jews; at Kalagaber, almost 2000 jews; at Rakia, about 700. at Hanane, about 20. jews; at Gozen, almost 200. at Netsibi, about 1000 jews inhabit; at, or in the Isle of Omar, the son of Alcitab, almost 4000 at Ashture, 7000. jews, and three Synagogues; at Rohoboth, 2000 jews inhabit; at Charthemis, almost 500 at Aliobar, almost 2000 at Harda, almost 15000. jews; at Okbera almost 10000 jews; at Bagdad, almost 1000 jews live; and there, they have ten Synedria, or Consistories; and at Bagdad, 28. Synagogues of the jews: at Resen, almost 5000. Israelites: twenty miles from Nebuchodonozars' Palaces, are 20000. jews; at Hila, almost 10000 Israelites, with four Synagogues; at Naphan, almst 200. Jews, and a Synagogue; at Alkotsonath, about 300. jews; at the village of the Wilderness, five Doctors; at Kupha, almost 7000; at Elnebarum, almost 3000. with a Synagogue. The Rhechabite jews dwell at Thema, having cities well fenced, and a Territory towards the Northern Mountains, of sixteen day's journey, and are under no governors of the Gentiles; there have they almost 40. Cities, 200. Villages, Castles an 100 in these places, 300000. Jews, or thereabout do dwell, and Thanai is their Metropolis, being fifteen miles long, and fifteen miles broad; at Tilimas', are about 100000. jews; at Cebar are almost 50000. at the river Vira almost 3000. jews; at Nasetum, about 20000. at Botsra, almost 2000 at Samura, almost 1500. at Susan, 7000. jews, and 14. Synagogues; at Rebadbar, were about 20000; at Vanah, almost 4000 at Molhath, are four Companies of the jews; at Aria almost 25000. at Haphton, more than an 100 Companies of the jews are, which were of the first Captivity, by Salmanaser. Here, the Jews called David, Alroi, their Messiah, and under took to conquer jerusaelem, and was a notorious Witch, or Necromancer, working false miracles, and wonders; at Hemdane, almost 50000. at Tabreztaan, almost 4000 at Ispahaan, almost 15000. at Shiphaa, almost 10000 at Gina, almost 8000. at Samarcant, almost 50000. in the Cities of Nesbor, four Tribes are said to reside; the Tribe of Dan, Zebulon, Asher, and Naphthali, which Salmaneser carried away; and at Nisbor, the jews professed to the King of Persia, Nec regem, nec principem ullum è gentibus nobis praefectum habemus, but one Prince who is a jew; at Nikokris, almost 500 at Ratiphas, 5000. at Haonla, almost an 100 at Dugbijim, 23000. at Gingaba, almost 1000 at Zebid, a few jews; at Adan most Israelites, and many of those of Adan, came into Persia, and Egypt; at Halava, almost 300. jews. In the city Konts, at the beginning of Egypt, about 30000. jews; at Python almost 20. jews, at Misraim, almost 2000 at Goshen, almost 3000. at Albubijgh about 200. at Munziphta, almost 300. at Rimerae, almost about 700. at Lambala, almost 500 at Alexandria, almost 3000. at Damiata 200. at Tunis, 40. at Messana, almost 200. at Palermo, almost 1500. He doth not particularly specialize any in Germany, or France, as he returned; the whole sum, being in probability above a Million; concerning which itinerary, observe; I have followed the names of mine Author, though the places be not all so called, at this day: again in the single sums, I have not included the jews, whom he aims at, in the words, Justus Caetus judaeorum; or, Sacer Coetus; virique sapientes; or, exiguus Coetus; or, most Israelites, which are indefinite, and may be many thousands; or the like; though I wonder, that he would specialize some places, where there was only, one jew, a Dyer, as, at Kiriath-jearim, and at joppa, and two jews Dyers of Scarlet, or Purple, as, at Nob; and three jews, as at Ramas'; and yet seldom sets down an exact number, by almost, or about, or somewhat above; It had been, but a little more absurd, to have said; at joppa, were almost two Dyers; at Nob, almost three; at Rama, almost four; whereas there was but one, at joppa; but two, at Nob; but three at Ramas'. Moreover, how could he know the set number of 7000. jews, at Susar; and 5000. at Kaliba; at Tunis, 40. at Damiata, 200. and yet otherwhere be ignorant, of the certain number of some few, who lived together? As at Biroth, he accounteth almost 50. jews; at Zidon, almost 20. at Ashtha, almost 20. at Schizeria, almost 10. By the same way, and means, by the which he came, to the certain knowledge of some greater number, as 7000. he might have sooner come, to the exact knowledge of 20. but, it seemeth, he affected obscurity, and concealed somewhat, what he might have revealed, for a Superfuge, if need were: certainly, he endeavoured to increase, rather than decrease the number of the jews; as the putting into the account of only one, in one city, doth prove; and that, in most of his reckon, he setteth more, than the perfect number, and then minceth it, with the word (almost;) Therefore, when he saith, almost, or about, or more than such a sum; I do of such uncertainties, one with another, make a certain stint. Constantine l' Empereur ab Oppicke, judiciously finds fault with Benjamin for many things; for his Metachronismes, and fables; for saying, that Romulus stood in fear of David, and joah, and made vast underground Caves, to lie hidden in; for feigning, or increasing the number, or power of the Jews, in remote places; where lies are not so easily found out; because, he would answer Christians, who count them, as vassals, and vagabonds, and would persuade us, they have Kingdoms, and free power over them, in the East; consult with him. Let me add; Benjamin little thought, that we should search throughout all the East, as it were by a Candle, and know every corner of it, even fare further, than Benjamen traveled; for, he came, but to the Western borders of China; whereas the Countries, and Lands, on the East of China, are known to many Christians now. Moreover, he erreth grossly; saying (pag. 39) The Samaritans want these three Letters, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the name of Abraham, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the name of Isaac, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the name of jacob, and use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for them; and make this to be, as it were the Shibboleth, to try who were the true Israelites; but Scaliger, against Serarius, hath vouched; that the Samaritans themselves, under their own hands, have described unto us, the whole Alphabet, and have sent unto us, the names of the patriarchs, with the same letters (which Benjamin saith, they want.) So Constantine l' Empereur (pag. 170.) Again, in the Samaritan Pentateuch, purchased at a dear rate, by that holy, and learned Archbishop Usher, to be seen (through his kindness) by any learned Linguist; all those three letters, are to be seen: in Prologo Galiato, cited in the beginning of Hentenius his Edition of the vulgar, S. Hirome, thus; Samaritani etiam Pentateuchum Moysis totidem literis scriptitant, figuris tantùm, & apicibus differentes; the Samaritans writ the Pentateuch of Moses, with twenty two letters, as the Hebrews do; differing only in figures, notes, and accents; and afterward, unto Esdras his time, the Hebrew and Samaritan Characters were the same; so he, also (Tom. 3. pag. 6.) in the beginning of his Preface to the Book of the Kings; but the Patriarches names were written long before Esdras; therefore they had the same letters with the Hebrew, and were writ with them: many Kings and Princes, through the mediation of great friends, or, for the gainful considerations, or for the particular worth of some eminent deserving jew, have given them sometimes power, and authority, to rule over their fellow- Jews, in such, and such places; as, one of our Kings gave unto a Jew power, in our own land, to govern, and reigle all the jews here; for, to that effect, I read the King's Patent, as it was drawn, out of darkness, and published by M. Selden; who like the Sun, hath enlightened many obscure places, both in divine, and humane literature, and is indeed Mundus eruditionis; so Amurath gave Tiberias, a city in Palestine, to Alvarez Mendez, a jew, as our Brerewood, in his Inquiries (cap. 13.) proveth from Boterus; but such authoritle is fare from an absolute Monarchy, not having Crown, Sceptre, Sword, Chair of Estate, or any great solemn ceremony annexed unto it. My Pen having traveled, with Benjamin, over most parts of the world, is not yet so weary, but it means to describe unto you, very briefly the present estate of the jews, who are multiplied to such numbers, that our great Geographer, M. Brerewood (as a reverend Divine Master Rogers, hath vouched, (pag. 31.) of the Protestant Church) saith; there are now so many of them, that they are able to people all Europe; but there is no such thing, in M. Brerewood, nor any such thing deducible from him; and if so it were written, it had been awry; for the peopling of Europe, as it ought conveniently to be peopled, is more of moment, than is imagined; and requireth greater numbers, than are in the world of jews; and yet, it must be acknowledged, they abound in numbers, and, like bad weeds sprout up apace, and, if they should come safely, from the four parts of the world, from the four corners of the earth, to its Centre, the midst of the world, about Jerusalem: I say, their promised Canaan might very well bereplenished, by their recollected multitudes; I should not do my duty, to the omniscient, true, and only God, if I laid not open the ignorance, and folly of their false god jupiter. Among Divines, it is known by some, and taken as granted by others, that about Jerusalem, is the midst of the earth: jupiter was so stupid, and ignorant, that he knew not so much; but as Strabo saith: jupiter willing to find the perfect middle of the earth, let fly two Eagles, one from the East, another from the West: and these eagle's meeting at Pythya, a town in Greece, taught thereby their Jupiter, that Pythya was the middle of the world. But might not one Eagle fly swifter than another? Might not one find more, and better prey, and be longer a feeding on it than another? For, they were not able to fly over half the world, without baiting; and one Eagle might wander, from the right way, or line, and fetch compasses, more than another; and could not he, who is said to let go the Eagles, one from the East; another from the West, have easier measured it himself, than trust two unreasonable creatures with that discovery? You, say the Scythians, to Alexander, in Curtius (lib. 7 pap. 212.) would, if you could, hold the East in one hand, and the West in another: did you so, jupiter, by the two Eagles? And, did you let them fly, both at the same time? Did they fly both night, and day, and make their way, through darkness? If the Eastern Eagle were cast off, at their Sunrising; our Western Eagle was then cast off, about our midnight; oh wise Eagles, and foolish jupiter! oh mad people, to believe in such lies, in such gods! And if this former opinion should be true; I dare say, there are more jews now living, than ever were, at any one time of the Nation, since it was a Nation; the whole land of Canaan, the promised Land, the holy Land, being leffe than England; and being but two hundred miles long; or (as M. George Sandys saith (lib. 3. fol. 141.) not more, than an 140. and, where broadest, not fifty, as he saith: Indeed, if the Tartarians be the seed of Israel; as Postellus, Genebard, and others hold; they, and the other jews, might throughly inhabit, and people all Europe; for the Tartarians by themselves, have a long time, and do yet hold, at this day, a great part of Asia, in subjection, saith M. Brerewood (pag. 94. and 95.) they overspread half the vast continent of Asia, or there about: all the great Nations, from the rivers Wolgba, and Oby, Eastward; and from the Caspian sea, the river Oxus, the countries of India, and China, Northwards, are contained, under the appellation of Tartars (though Lipsius calleth them Scythians) and yet, without those bounds, many Tartars there are, both toward the West, and South: see the Epitome of Ortelius. fol. 99 and Doctor Heylin. pag. 649.) Campanella (de sensu rerum, 4.19.) saith, perchance Nature may temper and make fit, such powers, in some places, as may, or shall frame a perfect animal; and God can presently infuse a soul, into that fair Fabric, as he doth into the womb; this he writeth, as if America perhaps were so peopled; but he correcteth himself, saying, we have no certain History, but of Adam; and the Art: to make perfect animals, is not yet found out, saith he, Avicenna judged, that America was peopled, from our Hemisphere; but, I think it impossible, saith Campanella; yet he recounteth from Plato, that the Atlantic Island, in the Ocean, did join together both Hemisphaeres; yet had the inhabitants of that Island (if any such were) two Hemisphaeres: they did sail over the seas, in the days of Noah, to America; and the memorial of it is lost, saith Campanella; how then, good Friar, came you to know it? Or, how date you so peremptorily assert it, when it is unknown? From Island to Estotilant, is, a short, but by-Sea; and shorter, form Estolilant, to the main Continent of America; and so, from China, to japan; and there is a nearer passage, to sail, from japan, to Quevera; intimating that from these parts, they embarked, and peopled America; but Newfound Land, which is Estotiland, is not so near a cut, as Campanella phancieth from Island: but our deeper, and better Geographer, M. Brerewood, saith, it is very likely, that America received her first inhabitants, from the East-border of Asia: concerning Island, he mentioneth not a word: and it is confessed, Quevira is not much distant from Tartary: and though both Ererewood, and Campanella confess, that some of the new world are circumcised; yet Circumcision came not from Island, or Greeneland, to Estotilant, but the Tartarians (since they received Turkism, and not before) have been, and are circumcised; they be no remaynders of the old Israelites, as he proveth at large. If the Tartars had descended from the true Israelitos', questionless they, with the other jews, were able to people fare more, than all Europe: but M. Brerewood wholly explodeth that fable, though upon powerful reasons, be opineth, the Americans descended from those, who are now Tartarians; especially because Scythia was held, of old, to be Officina hominum, and never were overcome, but abound in men; the mother of inundations, through their infinite multitudes; Curtius (7. pag. 216.) saith, the Asiatickes believed, that the Scythians were invincible, but they were overcome by Alexander; and though they were held Invicti, yet their armies did not always prosper; they tried contrary fortunes with Cyrus: in may be better said; Scythia was never overcome, or over-runne, nor they expelled their Habitations, others possessing them; but they increased to incredible numbers, and might send forth thousands, when both Friesland, and Greeneland could not set forth hundreds. And it is certain, saith Brerewood (pag. 97.) and, without all doubt, that the Tartarians coasts of Asia, are continent with America, or, at most, disjoined, but by some narrow channel of the Ocean; but a main, wild salt sea is between Greeneland, and Estotilant, say I: I could wish all you consult with M. Brerewood himself, whosoever do think, that the Tartarians are the seed of Israel; for he learnedly disproves it: and you, who imagine the Americans are non-Adami; for he strongly probabilizeth, if not evinceth, they descended from the now- Tartarians in old time called Scythians; for the name of Tartarians was not heard of in Europe, till 1212. saith Ortelius his Epitome. I will end this my ᵇ digression, as Benjamin endeth his Itinerary; Deus misericordiâ suâ maximâ nostri, & illorum misereatur; atque cùm in nobis, tum in illis, istan● impleat Scripturam, Deut. 30. si convertaris, iterum colliget te ex omnibus populis, quò disperserat te Deus dominus tuns: God, of his great mercy, take compassion, both on us, and them; and let him fulfil, both in us, and them, that Scripture, Deut. 13.2.3. If thou shalt return unto the Lord thy God, and shall obey his voice, according to all, that I command thee this day, thou, and thy children, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul— Then the Lord thy God, will turn thy Captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return, and gather thee; from all the Nations, whether the Lord thy God, hath scattered thee: There is only this diversity of Intention, in our prayer; I pray, that the veil upon their heart, may be taken away, 2 Cor. 3.15. I pray for their conversion unto Christ; and then, if it be Gods will; for their glorious return unto Jerusalem (which is likely enough) he prayeth for their temporary Messiah, and consequently, for obstinacy in judaisme, and yet prosperity in Judea; which will never come to pass. So much, in pity of the wronged Jews, and commiserable, against Baronius: Our Saviour's saying, that the Scribes, and Pharisees were like unto white Sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within, full of all uncleanchesse, Matth. 23.27. did not aim, at their bodily uncleanness, inward, or outward, but within are full of hypocrisy, and iniquity, saith he, ver. 28. they had unclean souls, fair pretensions, soul intentions: but indeed, before fore they crucified our Saviour, they delighted in manifold washings, as other Nations did, and in our Saviour's days, they were overnice: They found fault with Christ's Disciples, for not washing their hands, when they eat bread, Matth. 15.2, but Christ excusing his Disciples, reproved them, ver. 11. Not' that, which goeth into a man, defileth a man; but that which goeth out of the month, defileth. To the jews hands unwashed and defiled, were all one, Mar. 7.2. The Pharisees, and all the jews, except they wash their hands oft, or diligently, and that, up to the elbows, saith Theophylact (on Mar. 7.3.) do not eat; yet, as Theophylact argueth, It was not written in the Law, Lavandum Cubitaliter, hoc est, usque ad cubitum; no command enjoined washing, from the elbow, to the end of their fingers; but it was a Tradition of the Elders, and that they followed: They eat not; when they came from the Market, except they wash: many other things they have received to hold; as the washing of cups, and pots, brazen vessels, and tables, Mar. 7.4. and many other such like things do ye, saith Christ to them, ver. 8. Note the words, They have received to hold; they were not bound to it; the tie is from themselves; they needed not but they have (received) to hold; both to hold, and to practise; I have seen Oxen, to draw up upon the Cart their own great load; and an Ass will stand till he hath his full burden; the Law was such a yoke, as neither they, nor their fathers were able to bear; and yet the Jews were worse yoked with Traditions. PAR. 5. When a Pharisee besought Christ to dine with him, and Christ wen● in, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, recubuit, he sat down to meat; the Pharisee, when he saw it marvelled, that he had not first washed before dinner, Luk 11.37. etc. and Christ himself could not escape some inward dislike, even to the admiration, or, rather astonishment of such a Pharisee, as seemed to be a quarter-disciple of Christ: the Pharisees themselves made clean the outside of the cup, and platter, Luke 11.39. which they performed not for civil, or moral cleanliness, which is comely, and commendable; but for a traditionary purification; and therefore, Christ replieth, ibid. Your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness; but from Matth. 23.25 etc. it may be more, than probabilized, that the Jews washed not so much the insides, as the outsides; sure I am, Christ saith in the same place, They, within are full of extortion, and excess: not ye, but they; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, plena sunt, they are full; no man will doubt, but these words were spoken obliquely, and referentially of the Pharisees; but it is most significantly spoken, and expressly of the pots, and platters themselves; not in the second, but in the third person; They within are full of extortion, and injustice; as if their pots, and platters receiving bribes, and filled with the effects of wrong and rapines, might be produced, as evident witnesses of their oppression: If they had cleansed the inside of the cup sufficiently, our Saviour would not have said unto them, ver. 26. Thou blind Pharisee (blind in not seeing the double foulness, of the insides of your platters, or cups; neither the natural, nor accidental foulness opposed to neatness, or cleanliness; nor the moral foulness, which is contradistinct, or opposite to cups, and platters, lawfully acquired, or possessed) Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse that which is within the cup, and platter; cleanse that first; whether (bodily filth, or soule-spots) that the outside of them may be clean also. If Christ had not meant at all, that the cups within were full of extortion, when his speech was to the Pharisees; he would have said; ye, and not they: but he spoke in the third person plural, not in the second; therefore, the very pots, and platters, were dumb, deaf, and finlesse accessories, or attestates to the oppression, and wrong committed by their owners, and masters the Pharisees; I am not ascended very high, Pedibus de more lotis, saith Josephus They were wont to wash their fear. PAR. 6. SAint Paul approved those widows, which lodged strangers, and washed the feet of the Saints, 1 Tim. 1.5. Tertullian, (ad uxorem, 2.4.) testifieth that the Christian women did, and that their Gentile husbands disliked them, because they did, aquam sanctorum pedibus offer: Hierome (in his Apologet. against Ruffinus) propositum nobis est, pedes luvare veneratione, non merita dissentire; we are resolved, to wash our feet, with worshipping; not to boast of our merits. Christ himself gently did chide Simon the Pharisee, for administering no water for his feet, Luke 7.44. the rather, I think, for that he was a water-foule Pharisee; which sect was over-scrupulous, in manifold washings: feet commonly are less white, than men's hands, especially in hot countries, or with labouring, or wayfaring men, and smell worse than their hands do; Thou, O Pharisee, hast been so fare from washing, and wiping of my feet, that thou hast not afforded me water. cold water, the cheapest of all dishes, to wash; or linen to wipe them; but this woman hath drawn water, hot water, from the fountain of her eyes; and hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them, with the hairs of her head; using her tresses, in stead of a Napkin. PAR. 7. ABraham, and Let only afforded water, but washed not the feet of their guests: Let a little water, I pray thee be fetched, and wash your feet Gen. 18.4. even ye your own selves; and I will fetch a morsel of bread: so Gen. 19.2. Lot wisheth the Angels, in men's shapes, to wash their feet; the Levite, and his wife washed their own feet, Judg. 19.21. The washing of our feet conduceth to health, cleanliness, and recovery of strength, and was next in goodness to a , saith Montanus: joseph's Brethren had water given them, but they washed their own feet, Gen. 43.24. Abraham's servant, and the men that were with them, had water given them to wash their feet: Aaron, and his sons were to wash their own feet, Exod. 30.19. So did both they, and Moses, Exod. 40.31. It was a dainty compliment of her (who complemented once, before her betters, when so cunningly she bespoke a reversion, 1 Sam. 25.31.) even of Abigail, the Super-witted- Abigail, upon the pleasing message, to be David's wife; to bow herself, on her face, to the earth; and to say, ver. 41. Let thine handmaid be a servant to wash the feet of the servants of my Lord: It was a Courtly air, and blew sweet from Carmel, and the humblest temptation, that I have heard of; but for all that fair semblance; I remember not that ever any, in the old Testament, were wont to wash their guests feet, or of travellers: that the Apostles had washed, before their beginning to eat the Paschall-Lambe, some parts, or others of their bodies, is probable enough, from Christ's saying to Peter, joh. 13.10. He that is washed, need not save to wash his feet: these words were spoke at the second Supper; and it seemeth, they were washed before; and if reference be not had to their Baptismal Regeneration, the words ran fairest, for their first washing ordinarily practised, before the was eaten; though commonly the jews washed again, at the beginning of their second Supper; of which, God willing, hereafter. PAR. 8. THe great sinner, I think, began this kind of humility, and was the first recorded in holy Writ, that washed another's feet: the Saviour, the only Saviour of the world, first fully accomplished that Ceremony, by washing the feet of many, even of all his Disciples, and even of awicked Judas among the rest. Heliodorus (being the Greek Sir Philip Sidney) or, that noble knight, the English Heliodorus, lib. 2. Aethiop. Hist. Haec lavabat pedes, & p●lverem abstergebat; she washed my feet, and wiped away the dust: Eusebius (3.15.) Calceamenta quoque pedibus tentabat educere, quae nunquam, nisi â religiosis resolvi consueverunt; non solùm pedibus de more lotis, sed totis etiam nonnullis corporibus: that is, they did not only wash their feet, as the usance was, but some of them did also wash their whole bodies, saith Josephus. PAR 9 THat bathing was used for cleanliness, none but slovens will deny; you shall find it used to that end, 2 Sam. 11.2. and Neh. 4.23. But, of this hereafter, against the much-erring Peterius: that it was appointed to Naaman, by an especial command, to a religious purpose, is apparent, 2 King. 5 10. Wash in jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean, clean from the inherent and cutaneall harm: that there were also divers Legal or levitical Purtfications, by water, is evidenced, Heb. 9.10. but, that bathing of their whole bodies was used by the jews, before the beginning of their feasts, or at them; I cannot find, though it be probable, that some superstltious precise ones, might voluntarily take up such a fashion, which josephus seemeth to point at, or, it might be done by some, in the latter times of the Emperors, for the Romans were wont to bathe ere they feasted: but this custom sprang up, after jewish Bathe: In Plantus his days, they washed both their hands and feet. Plautus (in Persa, Act. 5. scena. 1.) Hoc age, accumbe— date aquam manibus, apponite mensam, go to, sit down— give us some water some body, for our hands, set dinner on the Table, and (scen. 2.) Locus hie Tuus est, hic accumbe, ferte aquam pedibus: praebe 'tis, puer, this is your place, sit you here, bring some water for our feet, you sirrah, boy: as Baronius well amends it: the Grecians did so with more cost: Plutarch, in Photions' life relateth, that Photion found in his friend's house, choice baths of wine, and odoriferous spices, to wash the feet of their fellow-feasters, and taxeth it for prodigality: They did not only wash but anoint themselves at feasts: Athenaeus (lib. 15.) saith, the Athenians were wont to anoint the feet of delicate Persons: the Romans had to most parts of their bodies appropriate, especial and curious ointments, Baccarimum Aegyptium, Phoenicium, Nardinum: Nar do vina merebere, saith Horace, in his invitation of Virgil, to a feast, (Garm. lib. 4. odd. 12.) that is, I will requite thy Nard so fine, With a whole tearse of Campaigne wine. Never do we read, that Christ, in his life, used natural or artificial, sweet odours, but at feasts that ointment of pure or liquid nard, which was poured on Christ's head. Mar 14.4. Was very precious and costly: and that Nard also, with which Mary anointed the feet of jesus, was so rich that the odour of the ointment filled the house, john 12.3. who pleaseth to read learned, and worthy curiosities, on this point, let him have recourse, to Fulvius Vrsinus, in his Appendix, to Petrus Ciacconius his Triclinium; nor shall I pass by it, but discourse at large of anointings, when I wrestle with Pererius. PAR. 10. SEcondly, concerning their blessings; at the eating of the Paschall-Lambe, the jews used much blessing: blessings were in ordinary use: therefore, at extraordinary feasts, and especially at this feast of feasts, they were not wanting, 1 Sam. 9.13. The people will not eat, till Samuel be come, because he doth bless the Sacrifice; afterwards they eat that are bidden: Maymonides saith, all communicants at the Passeover, were to take off 4. consecrated cups of wine; rich or poor; men or women; they might take 5. if they would, but then they must say, Psal. 136. O give thanks unto the Lord, etc. each cup contained above a quarter of a pint, as I guess: the blessing of the wine was none other than that which was used in ordinary form; blessed art thou O Lord, which drawest wine out of the Vine: a fourth part of an Hin of wine, was exactly proportioned, for a drinke-offering, with the offering or Sacrifice of one Lamb, Numb. 15.5. The Sacred Paschall-flesh, and bread was not eaten without drink: The consecration of the bread was thus, at the Passeover; Blessed art thou O Lord our God, King of the Universe, in the eating of this unleavened bread, this is the bread of affliction, which our fathers eaten in the Land of Egypt; quisquis esurit, accedat, & Paschatizet; whosoever is hungry let him eat of this Passeover; Cuicunque opus est, accedat, & Paschatizet: whosoever ought or must take it, let him approach, and take this Passeover: when the Table was furnished with the Paschall-Lambe, with unleavened bread, and sour herbs, and wine; then did they eat and drink, and properly keep the Passeover, and fell to holy discourses: That our most blessed Lord, both washed when need was; and blessed all things as he ought, let no Christian doubt; that he strictly observed these agraphall traditions of men, according to the jewish form, cometh not into my Credo. PAR. 11. BUt Reader, thou wilt perhaps say; here is much ado, about an antiquated ceremony? but what is the jewish Passeover, or the knowledge of the Rite of it now to us? I remember a story of the old Poet, who made an unpleasant beginning, when he saw the people offended; started up, and desired them to hearken patiently unto the end; and the end should declare, that the beginning was not to be disliked: the like say I now concerning my Tractate, which may be thought a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or needless piece of work, let them attend the issue, and application, and what resulteth from this discourse, and then they will not so readily mis-judge it: besides, if I never made any digression; but to clear some questioned difficult, or unusual point; let thy delight or benefit (good Reader) make thee remember the old proverb, that the farthest way about, is the nearest way home; and the old verse of Ennius, Vnus homo nobis cunctando restituit rem, that is, One man to us, by long delays, Did all our fortunes strangely raise. Again, S. Paul saith, 1 Cor. 5.7. Christ our Passeover is Sacrificed for us; and there is no small resemblance between the Type and substance; to inhere so long on the Jewish customs, were impertinency, if our blessed Saviour had followed none of them; but as they hold out a Lantern, and alight to make Christ's actions better known; so is the disquisition necessary, and the dwelling so long on them, pertinent to many purposes? But, I answer, without the knowledge of what belonged to the jewish Passeover; without distinguishing what were the temporary; and what were the fixed and lasting Rites of this Passeover; thou shalt never be able to know what our Saviour did practise, when he eaten the Paschall Lamb, with his Disciples, immediately before his death, Luk. 9.31. Moses spoke of Christ's decease, which he should accomplish at jerusalem, Moses was the schoolmaster to bring unto Christ, Gal. 3.24. The ignorance of Moses his Law, draweth on with it, the ignorance of Christ's actions: And by the exact discerning of the intention of the Law; what Rites were to continue; thou mayst be sure, that Christ observed all, and every one of them; whether praeparatory, Sacramental, or subsequent. PAR. 12. FIrst Praeparatory; he sent his Disciples, for the choosing of a Lamb. 2. It was an unspotted one. 3. It was a Male-Lambe. 4. It was under a year old. 5. He had chosen before hand a fir number, to eat it. 6. None excluded out of the jewish Church; none uncircumcised did eat of it. 7. He kept it on the first month of the year. 8. He kept it, on the 14. day; for than it was killed. 9 At the Even; that in the beginning of the 15. day it was all ready. 10. This was to be and was at jerusalem. 11. It was in one house to be eaten with well-fitted, religious Tabletalk, concerning the Passeover. 12. Not the Priests levitical, but by Christ's appointment, the Apostles killed and prepared, or caused the Passeover to be killed, and prepared. 13. They did dress the Passeover whole; roasted with fire: throughly roasted; not sodden at all, with water: the head with the legs, the quarters with the purtenance. So, for the two Sacramental Ceremonies. 1. Christ and his Apostles did eat the Passeover with unleavened bread. 2. Neither were the bitter herbs wanting. Lastly, for the subsequent Rites perpetual; not any one was omitted. 1. A bone was not broken. 2. No part of the Sacrifice was carried out, of that private Sacrary. 3. The tabletalk was most holy. 4. They continued the feast of unleavened bread; and if Christ had lived longer, he would have performed the Hebdomadall observation of that Paschall-feast, with unleavened bread. 5. They left none of the flesh, till the morning. 6. What was left, was burnt with fire. PAR. 13. ALL these points of fixed duration, were exactly observed, in Christ's last Passeover: For otherwise he had been a breaker of the Law: but as I proved before, by undeniable arguments, in divers passages and places; Christ followed the Law of God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, answering number of precepts, with a like number of performances: he could not have helped us law-breakers but by keeping all of it: Christ was the only true observer of the Law, Gal. 4.4. God sent forth his son, made of a woman, made under the Law, to the intent that he might fulfil the Law. Gal. 5.3. And when Christ was circumcised, he was made a debtor to fulfil the whole Law; I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor, to keep the whole Law: chrysostom (Homil. 16. in Mat.) thus; Christus implevit legem; primb quidem, Nibit Transgrediendo legalium. 2. Justificando, per fidem, quod lex per literam facere non valebat, that is, Christ fulfilled the Law, first of all, in that he transgressed none of the Rites of the Law. 2. in that he justifieth us by faith, which the Law according to the letter, could not do: As for the other fading, and vanishing ceremonies, he was not bound to them; what is likely he did, shall (God willing) appear better hereafter: To this liberty was every man left; and shall we now have Christ tied? Christ was not tied: likewise for the ceremonies, which the jewish Church voluntarily assumed unto themselves to perform; we cannot think that our blessed Saviour was bound to obey, and keep them: he who so often chid them for will-worship, in preferring humane traditions, before the precepts of God, would not be an observer of any, but such as best pleased him, and were sorted to times, and occasions. So much for the first Supper; the Passeover of the jews; wherein you may see, what Christ observed, and what not; so fare, as the Old Testament affordeth us any light. The Prayer. O Thou immaculate cleanser of the world, and purifier of mankind, without whom nothing is holy, nothing clean; wash not my feet only, but also my hands, and head, and heart; and purge, and mundify my besported soul, that I may faithfully love, and please thee here, and when I shall hence departed; I meekly beseech thee, to array me in the fine linen, clear, and white, which is ordained for thy Saints, through jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. CHAP. XVII. The Contents of the seventeenth Chapter. 1. A just Tractate, against Pererius the jesuite, concerning the correspondencit, between the jews, and the Romans in their feast. 2. The Romans imitated the jews, not the jews the Romans, in their suppings, feast, against Pererius. 3. The Jew's not infected with the manners, or supperstitions of other Nations. 4. Pererius enterferes, jewish, Roman customs, in Festivals Cousin-Germanes. 5. Conquerors condescend to the fashions of the conquered; divers particularites instanced in. 6. Pererius his 13. specialties; wherein the jews (as he says) imitated the Romans: The place a Parlour, an upper Chamber, a supping chamber. 7. Christ and his 12. Apostles lay on 3. beds at his last Supper: judas the traitor signed out, at Supper. 8. The ancient Romans supped in the open air, without any Tables. 9 Christ, and his 12. Apostles supped in a guest-chamber: houses in ancient times builded with flat roofs. PARA. 1. ANd now having handled the Rites of the jewish Paschall Lamb; and shown what were transient; what were permanent; what selfely undergone by a traditional sumpsimus; having also showed, that Christ observed all the durable ceremonies of the Passeover, and every of them; and that he conformed himself to the free, and voluntary observations of the Passeover, no further than he thought fit; as not being bound to them, on the one side; nor bend against them on the other side; when they were not against reason, or conveniency: my proposed method calleth me to other matters, of mayner intendments, and consequences, viz. what was said or done, (so fare as is revealed in the New Testament) particularly (in) and (at) Christ's last Paschall supper; which was the first of those three Suppers, at which he was present, in the same night that he was betrayed: but even this point also cannot have its perfect explanation; unless as we have manifested how, and when Christ followed the jewish Rites of Paschatizing; so we also search, and determine wherein Christ did symbolise, with the Roman fashions, in feasting; since in many specialties, the jews and Romans accorded in their feast; and our blessed Saviour abhorred singularity, and did swim with the Current of those times, for outward Civil usage, deportment and behaviour, in things decent. But lo! here am I to enter into the Lists, against Benedictus Pererius, that most learned and famous jesuite; who is as a Giant, and one of the sons of Anak; in Comparison of whom I may seem as a grasshopper, Num. 13.33. he is a very Goliath, a man of war from his youth, 1 Sam 17.33 which Pererius, in his labours on S. john, and in that work of his, of which Vere dici queat, fuisse hoc opus nostrum, quod nunc Typis mandatur, Trigenario study, & curâ elaboratum, atque confectum; (that I may translate his own words, in his Preface, to the fourth Tome) I say, in that work of his; of which it may be truly said, that he was 30. years studying, making, mending, polishing, and perfecting it. PAR. 2. IN the fifth Tome of those his select disputations, (disput. 39 Pag. 266.) on john the 13. he determineth in the Contents of the Chapter, thus; Judaeos Christi Tempore, more Romanorum suas egisse Coenas, & Convivia; that the fashions, customs and usances of feast in those times, were borrowed by the jews of the Romans; and then he beginneth thus; Ante omnia illud nos quasi fundamentum supponentes iis, quae dicenda sunt, affirmamus; judaeos, quo tempore Christus Dominus vixit in Terris, in suis Coenis, & conviviis agendis, seruâsse morem Romanorum: above all things, laying this as a foundation; we affirm, that the jews, in Christ's time, kept the manner of the Roman supping, and feasting: But this very foundation is laid upon the sands, say I; or is like to a foundation, which mouldreth away, of its own self: a better foundation had been this; and better than this no man can lay, that the Romans borrowed most of those customs from the jews; and not the jews from the Romans, as will appear in the particularities, mentioned by Pererius, when we shall fall upon them: in the mean while let us take a survey of the reasons, which induced him to supposit, or suppone that foundation: Is mos jampridem (quacunque Romanum patebat imperium) praesertim autem apud Genter orientis (inter quos Iudaei numerabantur) invaluit; wheresoever the Romans ruled especially among the Eastern Nations, (among whom the jews were reckoned) this custom of supping (like the Romans) was in force [jampridem] if by (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 jampridem) he mean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, long since; I answer, not very long before the jews stood upon equal terms, in their capitulations, with the Romans; see 1 Maccab. 8.22. etc. again on the 62. year before Christ's birth, did the jews first lose their liberty, as appeareth by Salianus; and that time was not long before, to induce a general custom. 3. He cannot prove that all the Nations overcome by the Romans, feasted or supped, as they feasted and supped. 4. I stand forth, to justify, that the jews used most of the festival and vespernall ceremonies, before the Romans did: Gens Hebraeorum (saith Pererius) jam inde à Pompeio Magno; Romanorum imperio subjecta, corum mores, & instituta, quae patriis legibus minimè repugnabant, vel adulationis vitio, vel ambitiosa aemulatione libenter suscepit; that is, the Hebrews either to flatter the Romans, or ambitiously to imitate them, followed their fashions, where they were not against the jewish Laws? I answer this is most likely to be true in some things; yet cannot be verified, in such things, as the jews had in Practice, before they knew the Romans: Besides Pompeius his victory over Jerusalem, was but in the same year, that Augustus Caesar was borne, as their own Salianus chronologizeth; and therefore, there was time, little enough, to introduce new, and general customs. PAR. 3. IVdai● solenne fuit, Gentium, quibuscum versarentur, vel quarum dominatu regerentur, moribus, & superstitionibus infici, that is, the jews were wont to be infected, with the manners, and superstitions of other Nations, with whom they conversed or by whom they were ruled, saith Pererius; not more than most other Nations were, say I; yea, the jews in the Captivity of Babylon, were taught by God, jer. 10.11. in the Chaldaean language, to confute the Chaldaeans themselves; and if some were infected, yet many remained most holy, pure and undefiled, as Daniel, etc. The Jews who lived at Rome, in the days of the Emperors, so fare prevailed with the heathen Rulers, that they forbade them to be troubled or called into question of Law, on the Jewish Sabbaths; So eager were they, not to degenerate in that matter: Pererius addeth Christi tempore, Rex Herodes, in the days of our Saviour Christ, King Herod, (who first, of the Aliens, reigned over the Jews) was wholly addicted to obey, and gratify the Romans, who made him King; and introduced many, many things into custom according to the Roman guise; and so did his Successors? I answer, violent and sudden alterations, are either never, or rashly attempted by New-made Princes, especially intruders, — Mitissima sors est Regnorum, sub Rege novo,— that is, Most gentle is the people's state, Under a King that's crowned but late. Especially if there be a crack, or flaw in the new-crowne. 2. Insensible, and slow changes are guarded with safety. 3. Herod could not, in favour of the Romans induct any customs, which the jews before observed, though his heart was never so much set to gratify the Romans: yea, but there were in judaea, (saith Pererius) a great number of garrison Soldiers, and after Archelaus his removal, Indaea was governed by Roman procurators? I answer, the Roman Praesidiary Soldiers, of all, were most unfit to bring in new customs of civil behaviour, into other Countries: one Legion was called Rapax from its unjust preying on all, that came to hand; they were fleshed in blood and cruelty; and many times did outrage the Countries; and mounted up, even to those Crimina vesani●, frantic sins; as Tertullian aptly termeth Rebellion, and murder. Lastly, the procurators, which followed Archelâus, were (as I may so say) but Hesterni, of yesterday; and these customs were introduced, before Archelâus was removed. PAR. 4. HAec itaque, cùm vera sint, (sunt certe vero admodum similia) plane consequens est, quae Romaniservabant in Coenis, & conviviis, eadem servare judaeos, id temporis, fuisse solitos; that is, since therefore these things are true, (as indeed they are very like to be true) it plainly followeth, that the Jews at that time, were wont to keep the usance, of the Roman supping, and feasting: here Pererius Humani nonnihil passus est, speaks like a man; these two propositions do enterfere, Hac vera sunt; eadem sunt vero admodum similia; these things are true; and the same things are likely to be true; if they were true undoubtedly true, what need he care for the (likelihood) to truth? Nullum simile est idem, nothing that is (like) another thing is the very (same) thing; if it be only (like) to truth; it is not (absolute) truth: again; if the things were only probable, or likely; he could not safely say, as followeth; planè consequens est, etc. probabiliter consequens est, it is a plain consequent, &c, It is a probable consequent, had been enough; planè consequens est, must of necessity proceed, from unquestioned, and unquestionable verities; the certain sequel is at odds with an uncertain ground. Lastly, I will willingly confess, the Jewish, and the Roman customs were Cousin germans, and almost the same in the festivals, and suppers: But against Pererius, I am now to prove; that the Romans borrowed those customs from the Eastern Nations, among which the Jews were numbered; and the Jews were not imitators, or Apes of the Romans. PAR. 5. HOw large a field I have to expatiate in; if I should take a full liberty to show that Conquerors have condescended to the fashions of the conquered, who seethe not? I will be brief: Justinus (Hist. lib. 12. penè in Initio) Alexander habitum Regum Persarum, & diadema (insolitum anteà in regibus Macedonicis) velut in leges eorum, quos vicerat, transiret, assumit; quae, ne invidiosiùs in se uno conspicerentur, amicos quoque suos, longam vestem auream, purpureá; mque sumere jubet, ut luxum quoque, sicuti cultum, imitarensur: that is, justine, almost at the beginning of the 12. book of his history, thus: Alexander that he might as it were subject himself to the Laws of the Persian Sophies, (whom he had Conquered) took on him their garb and Crown, (an unusual thing among the former Kings of Macedon) and lest he might chance to be envied by his Nobility, and Courtiers, for so doing; he commanded them also to wear long robes of gold, and purple; that so they might imitate, and follow the Persians, as well in their luxury, as in their bravery. Q. Curtius (6. pag. 153.) Alexander â victoris insignibus, in devicti transivit habitum, & ille se quidem spolia Persarum gestare dicebat, sed cum illis quoque mores (eorum) induit; that is, Alexander leaving his accustomed ornaments, went habited like the conquered; and indeed, he said, he wore the spoils of the Persians, but with them he also assumed, and put on their manners, and all the Camp believed; and reported, that more was lost by the victory, than gotten by the war; (Pag. 154.) and Alexander was always, bello, quàm post victoriam, clarior, more famous in War than after his victories, saith Curtius, (8. pag. 253.) again, Alexander mores Persarum assumpsit, quos propter mores tales, vicerat; sed ne solus vitiis eorum, quos armit subegerat, succubuisse videretur, militibus suis permisit uxores ducere; that is, Alexander imitated the manners of the Persians, whom by reason of such manners, he had overcome; and because he would not be thought, to be the only man, who would yield to their vices, whom he had overcome by Arms; he gave his Soldiers leave to marry any of the Captive women, whom they lust: Thus Asia corrupted Greece, Greece also being conquered, corrupted Rome; even old Crones, did wantonise with their Graecisme, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, My life, my soul;— — Non possum forre, quirites, Graecam urbem— saith juvenal, very tartly, that is, I cannot I, O Romans sure, The Grecian Language well endure: And Horace before him, most truly, Graecia victa suum victorem cepit— Greece overcome her Conqueror overcame: Macrobius, (Saturnal. 3.13.) Triumphales viros, victores gentium, Luxuria vicit, that is, Luxury hath conquered and triumphed over the triumphant Conquerors of Nations, Let us briefly touch, how the Asiatickes corrupted the very Romans; for almost the first six hundred years, ab urbe conditâ, from the foundation of the city; the forthright; and plain Romans had no Bakers, nor Milles; nec pane sedpulte victitabant, they fed not on bread, but on beans or barley, mingled with water, sometimes with honey. It is not a thousand years since Sugar was first found, by the Arabian Philosophers, or Physicians; none of the four Empires, no not the Roman itself, till its declining ever knew the use, or heard of the name of Sugar, (though now it be Temperamentum omnium medicamentorum, the sauce of Physic) honey was their prime, if not only sweetner: Martial (lib. 14. Epigr. 222. ad pistorem Dulciarium) Mille tibi dulces operum manus ista figure as, Extruit; huic uni parea laborat apis. that is; That curious hand of thine a thousand shapes, in paste Hathraised; for that thy hand the sparing Bee doth haste. I come now roundly up to the point: Florus (rerum â Romanis gestarum, 3.12.) Syria prima nos victa corrupit; mox Asiatica, Pergameni regis haereditas; Illae opes, atque divitiae afflixere saculi mores, mersamque vitiis suis, quasi sentinâ, rempubls. pessum dedere; famem luxus fecerat, hinc seditio; that is, Florus saith, Syria, after it was vanquished, did first of all corrupt us; then the Asiatickes, the offspring of the Trojans; their wealth and riches afflicted the manners of the world, and have utterly ruinated, and drowned our Commonwealth, in her own vices, as it were in a kennel, or sink of all filthiness; Luxury brought forth famine, and famine was the mother of sedition; who now corrupted one the other first? Rome Syria? or Syria Rome? justine (Lib. 36.) saith, Licinius Crassus was attentior Attalicae praedae, quàm bello; Licinius Crassus was more attended to the wealth of Attalus, then to the wars with Aristonicus: and in the end of that book; sic Asiafacta Romanorum, cum opibus suis, vitia quoque Romam transmisit; that is, when Asia was become a Province to Rome, it sent thither its vices, together with its riches: Alexander ab Alex. (Genial. Dier. 3.11.) Luxuriae peregrinae (invictum malum ad effoeminandos animos) ab Asiatico exercitu in Romam primùm invectae; mores infecerunt; Foreign Luxury (an invincible evil, to effeminate men's minds) being first brought to Rome, by the Asiatic Armies, infected the sound manners of the Romans; from this servile imitation of the Conquered, and against it issued forth all those excellent Laws; by which the Romans were forbid to have such sumptuous suppers, and clothing: The Fannian, Orchian, Didian, Oppian, Cornelian, Ancian, and Junian Laws; Tiberius Caesar would have repressed the immoderate spending by a new Law; but when he saw, he could not well compass it, he held it better to omit that, he could not handsomely bring to pass, then vainly to attempt it: Lastly, the Romish imitation of the Jews, caused the Poet justly to complain, O utinàm nunquàm Iudaea subacta fuisset, Pompeii bellis, imperiove Titi! Latiùs excisae gentis contagia serpunt, Victoresque suos Natio victa peremit: that is, O that Judaea never bade been won, By Pompey's sword, nor yet by Titus' Ram: Then had not sins of Jews been Romans bane, Nor Nations Conquered been the Conquerors want. Now let the Reader judge, between divers the recited passages of Pererius; and me, whether the Romans borrowed these customs, of the jews, or the jews of the Romans. Lastly, more particularly, concerning the gesture of (discumbing) at their feasts, and Suppers; Rosinus (Antiquit. Rom. 5.28.) Manavit hie mos accumbendi, ad Romanos, ut verifimile est, post Asiam devictam, Graciamque cognitam: that is, this custom of (accumbing) was in all probability derived to the Romans, after the conquest of Asia, and their acquaintance with the Grecians; and the Grecians had it from the Asiatickes, as they had most of their superfluities; what said Alexander to his Soldiers? Curtius (7. Pag. 251.) view my whole Army; He, who a little while since, had nothing besides his Armour, now lieth on silver beds, and they load their Tables, with gold: But of this more hereafter. PAR. 6. I Am to follow, foot by foot, inquest after Pererius, in 13. specialties; which he determineth, were derived from the Romans, to the jews, or other asiatics; but both of us agree that the same customs were in use, among the Nations: which consent serveth both our turns for our main intentions, to prove the particulars used by our Saviour, and the Jews then living; yet the Reader, I hope will not judge the disquisition, unlearned, vain, or unprofitable; because it shall give light, to many passages in this book: Primò, saith Pererius, Locus, in quo caen●s, & convivia agebant Romani, appellatur coenatio, coenaculum, conclave, & Triclinium, that is, the place in which the Romans were wont to feast, and sup, is called a Parlour, or upper-roome, a closer, a supping-Chamber? I answer, this was true in the later times of the Romans; but at their beginning, before all Italy was subdued; the plain, military, homespun Romans, did use to dine and sup in their Kitchens, or near them; and the place was called Atrium, from its blackness, and sooty smoakinesse; others made their refections, sub Dio, in the open air; in the end they came to sup in Apollo; and had goodly, large, costly dining-Roomes, and supping-chambers, even in one house, with the proportionable rates, to be spent, in the several Halls, or Chambers of that house; see Plutarch, in Lucullo: but grant we all this; what is his inference? PAR. 7. THe place also in which Christ, with his Disciples, kept his last Super: S. Luke calleth, Coenaculum grande, stratum, stratum tribus lectis; unde, (Triclinii) nomen ductum est; Tribus autèm lectis, discubuisse Christum, & Apostolos, illud indicio est, quòd cùm essent Tredecim, omnes tamen in caudem patinam, cibum sumentes, manum inferebant; ut ex illis domini verbis licet intelligere; qui intingit mecum manum in paropside hic me tradet; id autem est, unus ex vobis tradet me; omnes enimex eâdem patinâ cibum capiebant: non itaque illis verbis Dominus, unum aliquem certum discumbentiam designavit: Tredecem porrò ex unâ, & eâdem paetina cibum omnes capere, si mensae fuissent perpetuae, nequaquam potuissent: This proveth that Christ, & his Apostles lay on 3 beds; because though they were 13. all are out of the same platter, as appeareth in Christ's words: Who dippeth his hand with me in the Platter, he shall betray me, that is, one of you shall betray me: for all are meat, out of the same platter: besides thirteen could not eat, out of one, and the same platter, if the Tables had been long-sided: First, I say, if all this were granted; mine undertake are no way praejudiced; but how lamely do his proofs creep? Christ and his Apostles lay, on three Beds; because thirteen put their hands into one platter; which they could not do, if it had been a long Table: For all this, they might have lain on four, or five beds; yea, or on two beds; yea, or on one; if it had been of compass, and large: For their Tables were fitted to their beds, (and some fitted their beds to their Tables) and some of them were round enough, like an halfmoon; some like a Σ sigma; and might have been capacious enough. Secondly, the Platters were very large, and were sometimes removed from one place of the Table, to another; and yet Judas might so lie, that both Christ, and the Traitor, might, at the same time, dip into the platter. Thirdly, why doth Pererius say, that Christ did not sign out, any certain one of the Discumbents? When he said; He, who dippeth the hand, with me, in the platter, shall betray me, Matth. 26.23. Did ever any other Interpreter deny, but he signed out Judas particularly? Though after, ●here was a more manifest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when Christ took a Sop, and said, he would give it to the Traitor, and did give it, joh. 13.26. Yet the former words, in the Paschall-Supper, Matth. 26.23, made such an impression on the heart of judas, that he said, Master, is it I? ver. 25. Theophylact, on the place; Manifestè proditorem reprebendit, quoniam cum reprehenderetur, non emendabatur; propterea manifestat illum, dicens, qui intinxerit mecum; that is, He doth manifestly reprove the Traitor, because when he was reprehended, he was nothing amended; and therefore, he doth manifest him, saying, He that dippeth his hands with me. A man may therefore justly marvel at Pererius, denying, that Christ by these words, did sign out one certain Traitor. PAR. 8. But I come to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the Point, matter in question, between Pererius, and me: How homely, and poor the Roman people were, at first, hath been, in part, touched at: I will further say; Prandium, & Coena, in propatulo fiebat, quià palam coenitare, dedecus non erat; secretò verò coenitâsse probro, & ignominiae fuit; They dined, and supped, in the open air, under the Canopy of heaven; because; it was no disgrace, to sup openly; but it was ignominious, to sup secretly. Then say I, they eaten their meat, by the fires, in their Kitchens; Hyeme ad focum, aestivo verò anni tempore, in aprico coenitabant, in Winter, they supped by the fires side; in Summer, in the open air: sometimes they supped in other rooms, close by their Kitchings; which received smoke, and blackness from their fires, and from those fuliginous noy somnesses both smelled, and seen: those places were first called Atria; though afterward, such inward reserved rooms were called Atria which nor smelled of soot, nor were blacke-coloured: that the ruder, and first Roman people did eat, without any tables at all, may well be collected from Alexander ab Alex. (Genial. Dier. 5.21.) in the beginning. I will not deny afterwards, the dainty fitting of their rooms, and chambers; who knoweth not Lucullus his Summer-house, and his Apollo? and the horrible excess of later times. PAR. 9 IT is true, what Pererius saith, that the place, where our blessed Lord supped last of all, with his Apostles, is called Coenaculum grave, stratum, a large upper-roome, furnished, by the vulgar; and if he had consulted with the Greek, he should have found, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, doth signify more, than Coenaculum grande stratum tribus lectis; more than a large, upper-roome furnished with three beds; that is, to say, a room so furnished; ut nihil deesset, sive ad usum, sive adornatum, that nothing was wanting, either for use, or ornament; some Greek Copies, after (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) furnished, have also annexed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, prepared; this the Syriac followeth; and Origen hath it, paratum, prepared; Hierome, Mundatum, made clean: It was also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an upper Chamber, Luke 22.12. In the Syriake Helitho; so called, from the ascending up the stairs; which higher rooms they usually let, and set out, keeping the lower rooms for themselves: you may call it, if you please 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quod subductum sit â solo; because it was aboveground, above stairs; and is properly opposed to an under-roome, or a room placed on the earth: I am sure it is, in the vulgar of Hentenius, and S. Andreanus, 1 Sam. 9.21. Assumens' Samuel Saulum, & puerum ejus, introduxit eos in Triclinium, & dedit eis locum, in capite eorum, qui fuerant invitati; that is, And Samuel took Saul, and his servant, and brought them into the Parlour, and made them sit in the chiefest place, among them that were bidden; Vatablus hath it better, in Coenaculum: Triclinia were not then heard of: the 70. have it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which word is likewise, Mark 14.14. and is well interpreted, a guest-chamber: the Hebrew hath it, Liscatab, Cubiculum, a Chamber, as the Interlineary turneth it, though the Margin supplieth, Coenaculum, a Supping-roome, with Vatablus. Some may think, that this Feast, or Sacrifice of Samuel, and Saul, was, Sub dio, in the open air; but they are much deceived; for though the houses, in those times, and places were made plain, that people might walk securely on the top of them, because they were appointed to make battlements for their roof, lest they brought blood upon their house, if any man fall from thence, Deut. 22.8. and though the house tops were places to walk in, and refresh themselves, as David did, 2 Sam. 11.2. and places for private Prayer, as S. Peter used them, Act. 10.9. and a place of secret conference, as Samuel used it; who communed with Saul, upon the top of the house, 1 Sam. 9.25. when Samuel would not suffer so much as saul's own youth, to hear what passed between them, ver. 27. Christ commanded his Disciples, Mat. 10.27. What ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops: Aegidius Hunnius (on the place) saith, the jewish housetops were plainer, than ours, sensed, suis peribolis, with battlements, ut iis commodè inambulari possit: I say, if the house top, bade not been a convenient place, for such a matter, Christ would not have bid them preach it there; yet, I no where can find, a footestep, or sign of proof, that Samuel and Saul feasted, in solario, in the face of the Sun; but rather went into the house, or into the Parlour, as our best Translations excellently render it: That the house, where Samuel then rested, was on an Hill, is apparent, 1 Sam. 911. and whereas it is said, ver. 25. When they were come down from the high place into the city; the Bishop's Bible doth as sensibly expound it, When they were come down from the H●ll: but, for the manner of eating, it is no sooner said, Samuel brought them into the Parlour; but it is added immediately; He made them sit, in the chiefest place, among them that were bidden; as if the Palour, the Parlour only had been the place of refreshment, and feasting; and their places, the chief places in the Parlour, yea the chiefest places. Now in this first point, it is plainly demonstrated, that the jews had their Coenacula, Parlours, or Supping-roomes, before ever Rome was heard of, or Romulus borne: The later Nation of the Romans, might indeed follow in this point; other people, or these very jews; or by the dictate of Nature, might concur with others, in fitting themselves, with decent Supping-places; but that the jews did imitate the Romans herein; or took up this Custom; either to flatter the Romans, or ambitiously to be like unto them; Portrius affirmeth; I deny: let the Reader judge. The Prayer. GRant, good Lord, that I am not highminded, that I have no proud looks; but wean my soul from losty thoughts, and let my utmost ambition be, that I may be a doorkeeper, in thy house; and lie down, at the feet of the meanest of thy Saints, whilst they sit, with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, at thy Table, in the kingdom of Heaven; grant this, most merciful God, for jesus Christ his sake. Amen. Amen. CHAP. XVIII. The Contents of the eighteenth Chapter. 1. Pererius, his second Particular: the Romans feasted not, till they had washed. 2. Washing among the Heathen twofold; sacred, unsacred. 3. Reasons, why the ancient Romans often washed: first, because they used not much linuen: secondly, to remove their sweat. 4. The divers manners, places, times of hathing among the Romans: bathe used among the Romans, most commonly before meals: the sign of the Cross much used in the Primitive Church: divers hours of Bathing; stately Baths among the ancient Romans. 5. The Jews used to wash, and bathe themselves, long before Rome was founded: Apocryphal Scripture is to be preferred, before any Humane authority whatsoever: divers costly kinds of Bathe: white Doves among the Jews, sacred, and inviolable. 6. The jewish traditions not derived from the Romane ●●sance; but expositions of Moses Law: commanded many kinds of washings: Maymonides his Exposition of the Law of washing. 7. The difference between the jewish, and the Roman washings. PARAGRAPH. 1. SEcondly, saith Pererius; the Romans feasted not, till they had washed; and often, from their Baths, went to their victuals: and some do guess from those words of Joh. 13.10. He that is washed, needeth not, save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: that the Apostles before the last Supper, had washed their faces, heads, and hands: Certainly, Mar. 7.3. It is said, all the jews eat not except they wash their hands often? I answer, what Pererius hath (Crebrò) is, diligently, or, as it is in the Greek, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with their fist, which implieth hard rubbing, scouring, and neat cleansing: Pererius proceedeth; the Pharisee did marvel, that Christ washed not, before dinner; and it was a solemn thing, with the Jews, before meat, to wash their faces, hands, and feet? I answer, the words of Saint john do as well signify, that the Apostles washed their whole bodies; yea, more properly, before that great Feast; then that they washed only their faces, heads, and hands, as some conjectures, in Pererius, hold: If any stand up, and reply: Why did Christ then wash their feet, which were clean, and but newly washed before? I answer; first, would they think fit, that Christ should wash rather dirty, and stinking feet, than clean? Secondly, we cannot properly imagine, that the Apostles came, with unwashed feet, to that great Festival, because it was contrary to the Custom of those times. Thirdly, Christ, for this end, more chiefly washed their feet, to give them an example of Humility. joh. 13.14. etc. and therefore, it was not a needless work, to wash them, though they were clean before. PAR. 2. I Will but point at the washings (esteemed sacred) in Aeneas his time, I may not touch such things, — Donec me flumine vivo, Abluero— Until in living River, I make my members shiver. As himself saith, of the Sacrifice, to the Supernal Deities; but when they sacrificed to the infernal Deities; sprincklling with water was sufficient; Dic, corpus properet fluviali Spargere lymphâ, saith Dido, Go, bid him hasten to the river side, Let water o'er his body lightly glide. And Virgil relateth, when Misenus was upon burial, — Spargeus' roar levi, — He doth with water new, His body all-bedew. And in another place of Aeneas, being in hell, as he feigneth: — Corpusque recenti Spargit aquâ— These things you shall find, in Macrobius, (Saturnal. 3.1.) Concerning the Romans, and their unsacred washings, or bathe; somewhat, to good purpose, may be said, which Pererius omitted. See, what I said before, of their washing; for the first, they only washed their hands; Virgil (Aeneid. 1.) Dant famuli manibus lymphas— The servant with a Basin stands, Of water pure, to wash our hands. In after times, they washed their feet also; Scaliger saith, some washed their whole bodies. PAR. 3. THe Roman Communality, at first, used not much linen; Lini usus, apud Romanos, erat rarior, saith Rosinus (Antiq. 1.14.) And therefore, they had need to wash away oftener, the sweat, and filth of their bodies; (Breeches they had not, till about Christ's time) and it is confessed, that, at first, they had no Tablecloths of linen; but brushed away the analecta, scraps, or fragments; or, with a Sponge, wiped their Tables; afterwards▪ they used course woollen : It was long, ere the common people came to use choice linen Tablecloths, and napkins; even, in Marshal's time, some of those , homely, and homespun furniture was used; before the Capitol was so called: the jewish whore, in salomon's time, Pro. 7.16. Had decked her bed, with cover of Tapestry, with carved works, with fine-linnen of Egypt; and the good wife, maketh fine linen, Prov. 31.24. A second Reason, why the Romans were wont to wash and bathe themselves, was, to cleanse, and remove a way their sweat, after their morning walkings, after their rough exercises; and this they esteemed (and that deservedly) very wholesome: Seneca (Epist. 86.) saith, Scipio Africanus, had balneolum angustum, tenebricosum, ex consuetudine antiquâ non videhatur majoribus nostris calidum, nisi obscurum; abluebat corpus laboribus rusticis fessum; terram ipse subigebat; nunc pauper sibi videtur, ac sordidus— nisi aquam argenteâ epistomiâ fuderunt: that is, Scipio Africanus had a little dark bath, according to their ancient Custom; our Ancestors accounted it not hot, except it were obscure; he washed his body, being wearied with country-labour; be himself held the Plough; but now (forsooth) every one thinks meanly, and basely of himself, who hath not his silver Basin, and Ewer, to wash in: even Baths of the common people; but in the baths of free men, or their sons called Libertini, eò deliciarum venimus ut nisi gemmas calcare nolumus; olim (saith he) ibid. & paue● erant balnea, nec ullo cultu exornata— qui priscos mores urbis tradiderunt, brachia, & crura quotidie abluebant: caeterùm toti nundinis lavabantur— Hoc loco, dicet aliquis, liquet immundissimos fuisse; quid put as illos oluisse? saith Seneca; militiam, laborem, virum; postquam munda balnea inventa sunt spurciores sunt; that is, we are come, to that height of niceness (forsooth) that we must have them paved with precious stones; In time of yore (saith he) in the same place, there were, but a few Baths, and those but homely neither. They which writ, of the ancient manners of the Romans, say, that they were wont to wash their arms, and legs daily, but market-days, they washed their whole bodies. But here, perhaps, some one will say, It should seem, that those ancient Romans were very nasty; but what, think you, did they smell of? I'll tell you, saith Seneca; they smelled of warfare, they smelled of labour, they smelled of manhood; but after that the Baths began to be more cleanly; men themselves became more filthy. Plautus (in Sticho) posteaivilavatum, âpilâ: the Poet Plautus (in his Comedy, entitled Sicibus) saith, after I came from Tennis-play, I went to wash the sweat away. Artemidorus, speaking of the Romans, saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: after labour, or warlike exercitations, the Romans bathed themselves. You are further to observe, that the Romans, â primis originibus, cùm pauca essent balnea, & nullius cultûs, rarò lavabant: that is, in the first beginning, where there were but a few baths, and those, God wots, but homely ones neither; they used to wash themselves, but seldom; and, being weary, washed only their arms, and thighs: all their bodies they washed only, in Nundinis; at fairs, markets, or times of leisure: see Alexander ab Alex. Genial Dier. 4.20.) which he borrowed from Seneca. In the later times, they rung a Bell, when the fit hour was to come to the Baths: Lucian, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Campana sonàt, the Bell rings: Martial (lib. 14. Epigr. 163.) Red pilam, Sonat aes Thermarum, ludere pergis? Restore the Ball, to the Keeper of the Tennis-court; the Bell rings in, to call us to the bath; dost thou offer to play longer? or thus, Leave off your play, give me the Ball, The Bell unto the Baths doth call. See to this purpose, Adrianus junius, (animadvers 3 11. Martial his words evince punctually, their exercising, before bathing, and their being called to the Bath, by the sound of a Bell; then did they first go, into the hot-bath; and from the hot, into the coole-bath: Petronius thus; Intravimus balneum, & sudore calefacti, momento temporis, ad frigidum exiimies; after sweeting, we passed speedily, from the hot bath, to the cold. Though Apollonius Tianaeus called hot baths, Senectum hominum, man's old age; yet were they, in great use: and so may our natural baths be very useful, and healthful, for many diseases, if people would be guided by good, and learned Physicians, and prepare their bodies fittingly; but, if ignorant people will drop into the baths, so soon as they come into that City; and, without advice, physic themselves; no marvel, if many are rather worse, than better, partly, through the ill airs, which arise from those mineral waters; partly through their bodies imbibing, by the opened pores, more ill humours, than they can sweat out. Seneca indeed reproveth hot baths; in a strain, as hot, as the baths, that he findeth fault withal, as if they were, almost as boiling cauldrons, to cast condemned bondmen into; I deny not some excess that way; yet the better sort had their divers partitions, or cells, Caldaria, for their hot-water; Tepidaria, for their lukewarm Bath; Frigidaria, for their last cooling Bath, and cleansing water: Martial (11.3.) A Sinvessanis conviva Philostratus undis, etc. Philostratus came from the Bath, and Supper, where he was invited at Sinvessa, a city of Campania. That they were wont to bathe about dinnertime, is proof enough. Tertulian (in Apologet. cap. 40.) statim pransuri, balneis operamini; ye go into the Bath, a little before dinner. I marvel, that the accurate Rigaltius leaves out the words (Statim pransuri) which Rhenanus, Pamelius, and Cerds have; and I almost as much marvel; why Pamelius (in his Annotations) rendereth it thus, Pransuri, pro, pransi; before dinner, for, after dinner; Since the more wise, and temperate, went not into the Baths, upon full stomaches; to use violent exercises, or speedy bathe, upon liberal meals, and crammed guts, is very unwholesome. PAR. 4. I Wen●l (Satyrâ primâ) justly faulteth him— qui deponit amictus Turgidus, & crudum pavonem in balnea portat; who, having first crammed full guts, doth forthwith doff his , with undigested Peacock then into the Bath, he goes, adding, Hinc subitae martes, atque inteslata senectus,— Hence early, hasty, unprovided deaths: Spartianus (in vitâ Severi, & Lampridius, testifieth, that the Romans used to bathe, before meals; you may well interpret it before dinner, or supper-times. Tertullian (de poenit. cap. 11. exquirit● balne●● latiores, hortulani, maritimive secessus,— conquirito altilium enormem sagin●m, defacato senectutem vini; that is, seek out the more private-retired-choyce-garden-Baths, or baths, by the seaside; provide for thyself, the extraordinary unkindely-fat of frank, and crammed creatures etc. drink a cup of good old Sack; hence you see, Bathing preceded Eating; Martial (3.44.) In Thermas fugio, Sonas ad aurem, Piscinam peto, non licet natare, Ad coenam propero; tenes euntem, etc. that is, I wash i'th' bath, thou buzzest in mine care, I Swim i'th' ponds, thou dost me pester there, I haste to sup, thou stopp'st me like a Bear. Thus you see the approaches to their Suppers also: Vsitato more, ante Caenam, balneis utebantur; item, post ambulationes, exercitationes, operas, saith Rosinus (Antiq. 1.14.) according to the usual fashion, before Supper, they went into the bath: so did they in like manner, after their walkings, exercises, and labours: none conversant in Roman history, will deny, but that divers places of divers exercises, were near to several Baths: Tertullian (cap. 3. de coronâ Misitis) ad lavaera, ad mensas, ad lumina, ad cubilia, ad sedilia, quaecunque nos conversatio exercet, frontem crucis signaculo terimus; that is, when we go into the Bath; when we go to Supper; when candles are brought into the room; when we go to bed; when we sit down, in our chairs; what exercise soever, almost, we go about, we wear our foreheads with the sign of the Cross, from whence, (omitting the Lawful use of the Cross, by the Christians of those times, almost upon every occasion) I collect Bathing was, before Eating; Eating before Candle-light; Candle-light before bed (and yet I cannot but add, against Puritans of our Times; that the Cross was so honoured, in the days of the best Christianity, after the Apostles; that the Heathen termed those holy Christians, commonly, Crucicolas, as well, as Christicolas:) Martial (11.53.) Coenabis belle, juli Cerealis, apud me, Octavam poteris servare, lavabimur unà. Scis, quam sunt Stephani balnea juncta mibi; that is, Pray (Julie Cerealis) sup with me, And welcome shall you be; At eight a clock, into the Bath we'll go, How near to Stephen's Bath, I dwell, you know. Rich men had their Baths in their houses; and meaner sort, hired Baths for their guests; as Martial did here, of Stephanus; then followeth julius Cerealis his Supper, better set forth by Marshal's Pen, than it was served in, by his servants: the same Martial (lib. 10. ep. 41.) speaks, of the seasonable hours of Bathing in Nero his Bath, Temperate b Hora Scil. octava. haec Thermas; nimios prior hora vapores, Halat, & immodico sexta Nerone calet. The Baths at 8. a clock are mild, at 7. the vapours toil, And Nero's , with fervent heat, at 6. a clock, do boil. Alexander ab Alex. Hora Balnei, hyeme, nona; aestate, octava fuit; at winter they used to go into the at 9 a clock; in the summer at 8. The Emperors changed the hours; no bathing was allowed in the night, but in corrupter times: In days of devotion, among some Roman Colonies: Balnea, & tabernacula, in nonam usque eluduntur for clauduntur saith Rigaltius; the baths and Taverns were shut, until 9 a clock; and Tabernacula are taken for Taberna; the testimony is in Tertullian (contra Psychicos, cap. 16.) and again, (in Apolog. cap. 42.) Non lavo sub noctem Saturnalibus, nè noctem, & diem perdam; attamen lavo, debitâ, horâ & salubri, quae mihi colorem, & sanguinem servet; that is, I use not to bathe myself in the Evenings during the Saturnals; lest I should lose both the day and the night; nevertheless I go into the at a seasonable, and healthy hour; which will preserve my colour, and my blood: in the first passage, he implieth, that the Romans bathe about twilight, in their Saturnals, Marcus Agrippa made 170. baths, for the Romans. In the eighth of the Roman Empire, were made most costly, and Princely baths; Thermae Agrippinae, Neronianae, Domitianae, Alexandrinae, Gordianae, Severianae, Aurelianae, Constantinianae, etc. a great number of Thermae, doth Rosinus recount (pag. 35.) yet all, after our Saviour's time; Publius Victor reckoned above 800. so great was the later luxury, and prodigality; Statius (5. Sylvar.) — Argento felix propellitur unda, Argentoque cadit, labris nitentibus instat, Delicias mirata suas,— that is, The spont of silver was, the pavement silver; Silver the brims, all the bath over silver Except the waters, wondering at their silver. Plinius (3.12. and 13.3. witnesseth, the baths were paved with silver. PAR. 5. GRant we therefore that the Romans exceeded the jews, in number, and sumptuousness of baths, in the Augustane times, and after; yet the Jews in Christ's time, or before, took not their custom of washing or bathing from the Romans, nor intended any flattery or imitation of them, since the jews observed such things long before, from the tradition of the Elders: and the tradition of the Elders had some shadow of practice from times long precedent, and from some precepts in the Law, which they extended too much, at their pleasure: In the Babylonish Captivity, the example of Susanna may give us some light: For, grant it be not Canonical: yet God forbidden we should think every passage in the Apocryphal to be untrue, or without ground of practice, in those days: for my part, ●professe, I ascribe to the Apocryphal more than to any mere humane authority: Susanna as it is, ver. 15. was desirous to (wash) herself in the garden, for it was hot, and she said to her maids, ver. 17. Bring me Oil and washing balls, that I may wash me: It seemeth this was the practice of those times, (yea, though they were in bondage) and good women used, both Oil, and washing Balls: Poppaea, in the Roman story, used milk, which by its fatness hath a cleansing power: the Romans used divers sorts of Oils, and I find there was such an Officer, as was called (Olearius) from his performing the duty of anointing; as well, as from buying or selling of Oil: the matter was not strange to any; the word and the name as of a peculiar Minister in their vocation, is rare; but to the Oil, in the story of Susanna, are added washing-balls, not used by the Romans near those times, for the washing of their bodies, so fare as I remember: the whore, in Ezekiel, did wash herself for her adulterers, and painted her eyes, Ezek. 23.40. and sat upon a stately, or honourable bed, and a Table prepared before it, whereon was set God's Incense, and his Oil, ver. 41. And the Adulterers or drunkards, put bracelets on their hands, and beautiful Crowns upon their heads, ver. 42. This was also in the Nonage of the Romans, when their name was scarce known throughout Italy: The holy Spouse said, Cant. 5.3. I have (washed) my feet, how shall I defile them? the Bridegroom's eyes, were as the eyes of Doves, by the Rivers of waters, washed with milk, ver. 12. Lest some may perhaps think that Solomon washed his eyes, or face, with milk, (which our Translation will not bear) let it be observed; the Original applieth it, to the Doves themselves, and to white Doves, whose wings are said to be covered with silver, Psal. 68.13. and which were highly esteemed; so that no man out-raged them, or killed them: Tibullus (Lib. 1. Eleg. 8.) Quid referam, ut volitet crebras intacta per Vrbes, Alba Palaestino sancta columba suo? that is, Through many Cities the white Dove divine, Doth fly securely to her Palestine. Joseph Scaliger, forsaking his own Copy, varyeth it thus; Alba Palaestino sancta columba Syro, making Palaestinus Syrus, to be as Psyllus Paenus, the sense is all one: The Jews hold their white Doves inviolable, and Sacred: upon what ground, the white Doves were so privileged by the jews, I see not, unless they had reference unto the Holy Ghost, appearing in the likeness of a Dove: or, some Eulogy of the Doves in Scripture, or that Noah his Dove, or other Doves mentioned in Scripture, were white: Bathshebah, in David's time washed herself, 2 Sam. 11.2. Not her face, and her hands only, but bathed her body; the Chaldee interpreter (in 2. Eccles.) holdeth that Solomon had costly baths, and fit for so great a King: before this the daughter of Pharaoh came down, to wash herself at the River, and the maidens walked along by the River side, Exod. 2.5. By how much the Countries of Babylon, Egypt, and judaea were hotter than the City of Rome, by so much more need had they, of oftener washings. And these causes continuing, from the beginning of the world: I determine, though the latter Romans in the Casarean Principality, or Augustan days, and afterwards; as fare exceeded the Jews in sumptuousness, and magnificence of baths: as the Mistress of the world might outgo her servant, in attire: yet the jews took not their first bathe, or washings, either of their bodies or of some parts from the Romans; as Pererius groundlessly supposeth. PAR. 6. Consider what before I said, of the jewish often washings, and of Christ's ascribing those Customs, not to the Romans, but to the tradition of the Elders. For not one of all the traditions of the Elders, was derived from the Roman usance, but was peculiar to their own Jewish Nation, and opposed to all other Countries, being expositions, though farre-fetched, and violent, of the Mosaical Law, and the Mosaical Law commanded very many Purifications, and washings, Exod. 30.21. Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands, and their feet, at the Laver of brass, whensoever they go into the Tabernacle of the whole Congregation: they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: it shall be a statue for ever, to them. Levit. 15.5. Whosoever toucheth the bed (of any man, having a running issue) shall (wash) his , and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the Even: and the like is commanded in divers verses following: and when a man is cleansed from his issue, he shall bathe his flesh in running water, ver. 13. The like precepts follow concerning the uncleanness of women: Levit. 16.26. He that let go the Goat for the scape-Goate, shall wash his , and bathe his flesh in water. Levit. 17.15. Every soul, that eateth that which died of itself, or that which is torn of beasts, shall both wash his , and bathe himself in water, Numb. 19.17. For an unclean person, they shall take of the ashes of the burnt-Heifer of Purification for sin, and running water shall be put thereto, in a vessel: and the Clean shall sprinkle on the unclean: and on the 7 day he shall purify himself, and wash his , and bathe himself in water, ver. 19 In which washings and bathe of their bodies: the tradition of the Elders was so strict, that the bathing was of none effect; if any part or the least particle of the body, but so much as the top of his little finger, were not washed: yea, he must wash not only his head, but all his hair, and every lock of his head, which the tradition of the Elders esteemed as his body: Maymonides expoundeth Moses his Law thus: In every place where is mention made of bathing the flesh, and washing the garments of the unclean; you must understand it of laving the whole body in water: when they washed themselves in their , the Law was not satisfied, unless the water did sink through their , to wet their whole bodies: or if any part were kept by the , from being washed. So, the were rather lose, then girt, or so girded, that the water, for all that had free passage. PAR. 7. THe jewish washings looked up higher, than the Roman, these respected only bodily neatness, and cleanliness, and strength, but the jews purifications or washings lead them up to sanctification, and betokened their being cleansed from sin, Exod. 19.10. and 14. verses: sin is of a defiling nature, repentance is a cleanser, not only our are made white in the blood of the Lamb, Revel. 7.14. But our hearts are washed from an evil Conscience, and bodies washed with pure water, Heb. 10.22. Christ cleansing his Church in the Laver, or washing of regeneration. Ephes. 5.26. alludeth to the Priestly washing and cleansing in the brazen Laver; and to their bathing, is reference made, 2 Cor. 7.1. Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit; much Niter, Camphire, and Soap, are not so cleansing, as a contrite and a repenting heart: and now, if Pererius were living, would I refer it to his own judgement; whether the jews did imitate the Romans, or the Romans the jews; sigh long before there was any Roman, the jewish Nation used such frequent bathe; and by the appointment of God, their Lawgiver, upon more occasions, than all the Lawgivers else, of all Nations, enjoined to their people. The Prayer. MOst gracious Lord Jesus, I meekly implore thy divine goodness, thoroughly to bathe my soul in thy blood, and by thyself to purge my sins; that I may be presented by thee, unto God, without spot, or blot, and so partake of thy rich blessedness, in the world to come. Amen, Amen. CHAP. XIX. The Contents of the nineteenth Chapter. 1. Pererius his third Ceremony: Romans anointed themselves before feasts: Son might the Jews but not ordinarily: the Pharisee reproved for not anointing Christ: Maries anointing Christ, was of Devotion, not fashion. 2. Romans used unction before feasts. 3. True joy rests in virtue, not in vice. 4. The Grecians used anointings at their Feasts. 5. Several ointments for several parts and uses: Alexidemus, and Cleopatra's, and Aesop his son, excessive prodigality. 6. Olyes were of divers sorts; and for divers uses: Oil Olive commended. 7. Jew's used anointing, before the siege of Troy: Jews, Syrians, anciently abounded with Oils: Oil good for outward, inward uses: Oil, some Sacred, some of common use: The divers uses of Sacred oil: Kings, Priests, Sacred things anointed with it: The composition of it: David anointed King, with God's Oil. David anointed King twice. 8. The Jews commonly anointed only Head, and feet, the Babylonians anointed all their body: 9 The Jews used anointing, after washing: Ashers dipping of his feet in Oil. 10. Marry Magdalen washed Christ's feet with tears. 11. Iewes anointed their heads, before ever the head of Tolus was found. 12. Women among the jews in Spain the best perfumers. 13. Anointing the head ordinary among the jews. 14. Myrrh and Nard, precious ointments: Nard taken sometimes for an Herb, sometimes for an Ointment. 15. Anointing Corporall, Spiritual. PARAGRAPH. 1. THe third Ceremony, which both jews and Romans used; and in which (as in all the 13.) saith Pererius, the jews did imitate the Romans, and followed their Precedents, was this; the Romans being well anointed lay, or sat down to feasts; that the same was practised by the jews, we may judge; because Christ said to the Pharisee, who had invited him, Luke 7.46. Mine head with Oil thou didst not anoint: and the Lord saith, Mat. 6.17. When thou fastest (anoint) thine head, and wash thy face, that thou mayst seem not to have fasted but dined: therefore Mary the sister of Lazarus, poured ointment on the head of Christ, as he sat at Supper; which unless it had been the fashion in banquets, Marry Magdalen durst not have done: so fare Pererius. I answer, Quid hoc ad Parmenonis suem? What is this to the purpose? If all be yielded how doth this evince, that the jews herein followed the Romans? which is the main Quaere of mine, and the groundwork laid by Pererius. To his arguments I thus answer. 1. If it had been usual at every meal, and at every invitation, to anoint the head of guests; the Pharisee would not have omitted that Ceremony towards Christ: At their more solemn feasts; the custom of the wealthier sort, may be granted to be such; not at their daily repasts; and to guests of prime note, of upper-most rooms, at feasts, Mat. 23.6. of the chiefest seats, not to the men imi subjellii, as the Parasite, in Plautus, phraseth it. 2. Christ found fault with his omission accidentally; and as he reproved him not, at the first sitting to meal, so we may think, he would have wholly passed by that point, of the Pharisees incivility, if the Religious act of that devout woman had not ministered a fair occasion of fault finding. 3. Our Saviour was to be reputed, above any ordinary guest; and his entertainment to be above any feasting; for he never eaten with any, but he fed their souls, more with grace and goodness: then they fed him, or his Apostles with bodily food: therefore justly was the Pharisee reproved, because on so momentuall occasions, and times, and persons, fit for the best entertainment; both for the matter, and the manner of their welcome, both Real, and Complemental; he neglected that Ceremony, of anointing our Lord. 4. The penitent woman's act had not been so glorious, if the fashion had been ordinary or daily, at every meal: To the second instance of Pererius, I say; the Lord commandeth the Faster to anoint his head) as if he were very merry, cheerful, or going to a feast indeed) as if he feasted; not as if he dined only, as Pererius hath it: for they had many dinners, and many suppers, in which they used none anointings; and where joy and mirth were not always seen attendant, at the Table, nor to be discerned by their looks, as Christ would have it seen in him who fasted before God; and seemed not to fast before men: to the third instance, I say, the fact of Mary pouring ointment on the head of Christ, was rather heroically devout and divine, than a matter of fashion; she durst have done that holy deed, if anointing had never been used, in feast; for, her end was heavenly; Against the day of my burying hath she kept this saith Christ, joh. 12.7. and I doubt not but she had supernal inspirations, directing her to do so; if we shall argue from a singular fact, to a general usance, (as Pererius doth) than one might as well conclude, that washing one's fear with tears, and wiping them with the hairs of a woman's head, without ceasing, was the custom of those times, because the himbled penitent did so, Luk. 7.44. PAR. 2. BEsides, let the difference be observed: according to Peterius, the anointings of the Romans, preceded their feasts; but the anointment of Christ was in Suppertime, by his own confession; and so, no imitation was taken up, by the jews, from the Romans in that point; which recoileth on Pererius his main ground: that Unction, and anointing before feasts, was usual among the Romans, is a confessed truth; less proof will serve: Martial. 8.77.) — Assyrio semper tibi crinis amomo Splende at, & cing ant florea seri a caput; Candida nigrescant vetulo Christalla Falerno, Et caleat blando mollis amore torus: Qui sic vel medio fivitus vixit in aevo, Longior huic facta est, quam data vit a fuit. that is, With choice Assyrian gunune, let thy locks always shine. Let flowery garlands eke compass that head of thine: Let thy clear Venice glasses be crowned with Bacchus' brown, Whilst wanton Venus tosses upon thy beds of Down; Who thus shall live and die, though in the flower of's age, Hath run a pleasant race, beyond dame Nature's stage. So held the Epigrammaticall Epicure. PAR. 3. BUt the sober Orator Tully (5. Tuscul. quaest.) saith divinely, Vnus dies benè, & ex praeceptis Philosophiae actus, (understand him of true Philosophy, which differeth not from our Theology) peccanti immortalitate est anteponendus; that is, one day spent well, and according to the Rules of Philosophy, is to be preferred before a world of wickedness: Omnis iniquit as est stultitia, all iniquity is folly, say I; Et omnis stultitia laborat fastidio sui, saith Seneca; and every folly is a burden to its self: continual joy is found commorant among the actions of goodness, and wisdom; (Rejoice always, and again I say rejoice in the Lord, Phil. 4.4.) the greek Philosopher Musonius hath a dainty acquaint sentence; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. which cannot be better translated than by the words of Cato; in his Oration to the Knights, and Horsemen, at Numantia, about Biscai in Spain, (from whom Musonius, as it seemeth borrowed the matter) si quid vos per laborem recte feceritis, labour ille â vobis citò recedit; benefactum â vobis, dum vivitis, non abscedit; si qua per voluptatem, nequiter feceritis, volupt as citò abibit; nequiter factum illud, apud vos, semper manebit; you shall find this in Aulus Gellius, (16.1.) If by labour you do any thing well; the (labour) shortly vanisheth from you; but whilst you live, the (good (deed) departeth not from you; if you do any thing unlawful, though pleasure; the pleasure soon fadeth; but the foul fact will still remain with you. Thus much on the By, against that lose voluptuous Poet, Martial, and his fellow-hog-Epicures: Seneca (Epist. 86.) Parum est sumere unguentum, in his die, terque renovetur, ne evanesecat in corpore; quid quod odour, tanquàm suo, gloriantur? Horace (2. Serm. satire. 3.) describeth a fordid Clown, from him not anointing himself; Quantulùm enim summae curtabit quisque dierum, Vngere si cauleis olco meliore, caput que Caeperis, impaexa faedum porrigine?— that is, Tell me, I prithee, how much from thy sum Well each day shave, if that with sweeter butter Thou baste thy meat; and with more costly gum Thou daub thy pate, which Dandraff-scurfe doth utter. PAR. 4. THe Grecians also used anointings at their feast; Thyestes (Versu. 944. etc. in Seneca's Tragedy, Act. 5. Scaen. 2.) Verne capiti fluxererosae, Pingui madidus crinis amomo, Inter subitos stetit horrores, that is, My rosy Vernal Crown dropped from my head, My bayre with fattest ointments moistened, Through sudden horror, upright startled. Martial (lib. 5 Epigr. 65.) Pinguescat nimio madidus mihi crinis amomo; let my moist hair be far, with store of Oil or Gum. PAR. 5. ANtyphon witnesseth, that the ancient had several Ointments, appropriated to several uses, of each several part; you shall find it in Athenaeus (lib. 15.) — Vnguento Aegyptio, pedes livit, & crura: Phaenicio, buccas, & ubera: Sisymbrino, utrumque brachium; Amaracino, supercilium, & comam: Serpellino, cervicem, atque genna: that is, — He doth Anoint His feet and legs, with Oil Egyptian; His cheeks, and breasts with Oil Phoenician, And both his Arms, with ointment Sisymbrine, Watermint. His brow, and hair, with Oil Amaracine, Marjerome. His neck and knees, with ointment Serpilline. Savoury. Who also there affirmeth, that Oleum Nardinum, was Oleum pretiosissimum; oil of Nard was the most precious ointment: the like saith Theodoret (on Canticles 1.) That they were wont to anoint their heads with Nard, every one that hath read Horace and Tibullus, can well witness: Plinius (13.3.) most bitterly inveigheth against the women of those times, who mingled ointments with their drink; etiam in potu unguenta addunt; tantaque amaritudo est, ut odore prodigo fruantur, ex utraque parte corporis; that is, they temper even their drink with ointments; in so much, that they stink with it, both before and behind: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Aelian (12.31.) they mingle their wine with Myrrh, before they drink it: Juvenal (satire. 6.) Cum perfusa mero spument unguenta Falerno, that is, Their ointments mingled with Falernian wine, Do make it froth, and brisk, neat, sweet, and fine. Plutarch, (toward the beginning of his Symposia) relateth; that Alexidemus being but a youth, poured an excellent ointment, which was brought to Thrasibûlus, into a great cup, or platter, and mixing it with wine, drank it up; and is there censured for it; yea, they were grown to that height, that not only Cleopatra drank a precious pearl called an Union, of great esteem, and rated at Centies His: which is, of our money, about fifty thousand pound, and would at the same meal, have dissolved, and supped up such another, if she had not been hindered; (see Macrobius, Satur. 3.17. in fine) but afterward their more ordinary men, and women, did swallow down dissolved pearls; some for Physic, and some for Luxury; Filius Aesopi, detractam ex aure Metellae, Scilicet ut decies solidûm exsorberet aceto, Diluit insignem baccam,— saith Horace, that is, Aesop, the Tragic stage-player, had a son, Who for to swallow one most costly draught, took from Metella's ear, a precious stone, And it, dissolved in Vinegar, off quaffed. Lastly, Martial taxed one, (and no great one, no doubt, more did so) Ventris onus puro, nec te pudet, excipis auro, that is, Fie, fie, for shame, thou makest of gold, A pot, thine excrements to hold. As for their Massy cups of gold; they inlaid, and inset them, with gems, and shining-glister of diamonds, plucked off from Sardonychata manus, their fingers full of gold-rings; Behold a cup mixed of Pearls and gold, inlaid with Schythian, precious, shining mould, Which made bare many fingers, young and old, at that, Epigram, in Martial (14.109.) may be rendered, viz. Gemmatum Scythicis, ut luceat ignibus aurum Aspice, quot digitos exuit iste calix! This is also confirmed by the testimony of Plinius (37.2.) Juvenal (satire. 5. vers●● 42.) Nam Virro, ut multi, gemmas ad pocula transfert, that is, with many more to embosse their cups, unjewell all their fingers.— A digitis— & (satire. 10.)— pocula sumis. Gemmata.— The jews had spiced wines, of the juice of the Pomegranate; Cant. 8.2. and Prov. 9.2. Wisdom herself had her mingled wine; but so excessive prodigality, I read not, that they had: their very meat being carved up, made a sweet perfume in the whole room: So saith Plutarch (in Antonio.) Athenaeus (lib. 15.) adviseth, unguenta in compotationibus deligenda, quae caeput minimè gravent, a stringant nonnihil, & refrigerent; that is, to make choice of such ointments, at their merry-meetings, which might not make the head heavy; but might be somewhat astringent and cooling. PAR. 6. Oils were for divers uses, and of divers sorts; the ground of all, was the oil-olive; and this was in great plenty, amongst all Eastern Nations: all Ointments, of sweet composition had this, for their chief temperament, or prime ingredient: the manifold additions of other juices, or fat simples, which Dionysius (de Coelesti Hierarchiâ, cap. 4.) calleth, Collationem spirantium suaviter materiarum, habentem in se affatim odoratus qualitates, a composition of most sweet, and odoriferous simples, might truly be called the anointing Oil: but the simple oil-olive is of that nature; that I never knew any; who at the first taste liked it; and I never knew any, but after a little use much commended it: and I have read, that as Sugar is heating, being mixed with cold things, and cooling amongst hot things; so the oil-olive also heateth cool bodies, and cooleth hot bodies; Calx fervet in aquâ, in oleo, frigida est, Lime burns in water, but is quenched with Oil, saith Augustinus (de Civit. Dei, 21.7.) It is good inwardly; its glibery, unctuous quality remooveth poison, and is a present remedy, if presently taken; it refresheth the spirits, both Natural, Vital, and Animal; it conduceth to health, as above all other things, best agreeing to our humidum radical: it is also a good nourishment; Alexander Aphrodisiensis saith, Nulla in oleo exuperat qualit as; sed medio potius constat Temperamento; in Oil there is no superfluity of any quality, but is of a middle kind of temper; it is called, Oleum laetitiae, the oil of gladness; because it exhilarateth men, and maketh them look pleasantly, and merrily; it is good outwardly; it assuageth swell, easeth pain, suppleth illaffected humours; and is a greater healer in the true use of it: Splendet, & nitet supra reliquos colores; semper ad superficiem emergit: In oleo optimum est, quod supernatat; in melle, quod in imo est: optimum Vinum in dolii medietate consistit; Macrobius (Saturnal. 7.12.) that is, it shineth, and is bright, above any other colour; it always swims, at the top of all other liquors: In oil, the best is at the Top; in honey, the best is, in the bottom; and in wine, the best is in the middle: it congealeth sooner than wine, which is of an hotter nature, or vinegar which is of a cooler nature: see Aulus Gellius (17.8.) and was much used for sauce, as Gellius, ibid. If wine stand long, in an half empty vessel, it groweth worse; but oil when it is half spent, is best, sweetest, and savourest; Macrobius (Saturn. 7.12.) P. Licinius Crassus, and julius Caesar being Censors, forbade any to sell unguenta exotica, foreign or outlandish ointments, as the Lacedæmonians banished such out of their City: Alexander ab Alex. (3.11.) Plutarch (in Alexandro) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God gave Oils to mankind, to refresh them, after their labours, Oil was ordained ad nitorem, alacritatem, & agilitatem corporis, for the neatness, alacrity, and agility of the body: Plinius (13.1.) Hactenus in odoribus habent pretia sylvae; erantque per se, mira singula, juvitque luxuriam ea omnia miscere, & è cunctis, unum odorem facere; ita reperta sunt unguenta, that is, hitherto woods have been in request, for the making of perfumes; but, whereas every several thing, by its self, was admirable; it much increased their Luxury, to have a sweet perfume, made by the composition of them all together; and by this means, ointments were first found; after in the same book, he confesseth the Romans had their anointings, from the Grecians, and the Grecians, from the Persians. So much concerning the anointings of other Nations, and especially of the Romans, at their feasts. PAR. 7. BUt, that the jews did take their forms, or fashions of anointings, from the Romans; that against Pererius, I stiffly deny: it was Patrius Mos judaeorum, ut qui laetitiae vacare, aut comptiores, gratioresque vellent prodire aliquò, lavarent faciem, caputque ungerent, saith Franciscus Lucas Brugensis; that is, it was the country-fashion of the jews to wash their faces, and to anoint their heads, when they intended to be merry, or to make themselves neat and handsome, to go among their friends; and he bringeth instances, before the burning of Troy; and therefore the jews took not up this custom of anointing to ingratiate themselves, with the Romans: that the jews, and Syrians abounded with store of Oils, in very ancient times is apparent; the blessing of Ashur was to dip his foot in Oil, Deut. 33.24: that is, he was to have abundance of Oil, as jacob before in another point blessed him: That his bread should be fat, Gen. 49.20. The Land of Canaan is called a Land of oil-olive, Deut. 8.8. Israel sucked honey out of the rock, (where the Bees had built their Honi-combes) and Oil, out of the flinty-rocke, Deut. 32.13. the rock poured me out Rivers of Oil, Job. 29.6. Not, as if honey or Oil did Naturally, but Miraculously spring, and flow out of the rocks, as waters did sometimes, in the Israelites necessity, Exod. 17.6. When God turned the hard rock into a standing-water; and the flintstone into a fountain of waters, Psal. 114.8. Numb. 20.10. etc. But stones and rocks being naturally barren, were made by God's extraordinary blessing, fruitful; to bear Olive, and Palmtrees, and they to send forth their fruits: Nor can we reasonably imagine, that this superabundance of Oil was only for outward or only for inward use, but rather for both: questionless, the Widow's little Oil in the Cruse, 1 King. 17.12. Was to be eaten; not to anoint; as the case then stood, in the great famine; and the other Widow (the relict of a son of the Prophets, who was a good man, yet died indebted) who had nothing in the house save a pot of Oil, 2 King. 4.2: kept not that Oil by her, for anointing, but for eating; and so the pot of multiplied Oil, which filled many vessels, may well be thought to be used in or for food: for there are very few things in the world; if any so agreeing to the primigenium humidum, or the radical moisture in mankind; so corresponding in nature with it, so naturally cherishing it, as oil-olive, Isa. 1.6. In the Lamentation, that extraordinary wounds, bruises, and putrifying sores, were not mollified with ointment, is a confession involved, that Oil or ointment is a mollifier and healer; the good Samaritane poured in Oil into the wounds of him who fell among thiefs, Luke 10.34. Of Oils also among the jews, some were Sacred, some of common use: jacob poured Oil on the top of a Pillar, Gen. 28.18. As it were consecrating the place to God's worship, and he reiterated this Ceremony, Gen. 35.14. Though, when the Law was given by Moses; no Religious Pillars (without God's especial Command, for Solomon erected many) might be erected, Levit. 26.1. And the Pillars made by heathen, were to be destroyed, Deut. 12.3. break their Pillars, other Sacred Oil was to anoint the Highpriest, and his sons, and things Sacred as the Laver, Exod. 30.23. is the receipt of sweet Myrrh 500 sheckels; sweet Cinnamon 250. shackles; sweet Calamus, 250. shackles; Cassia, 500 shackles; oil-olive an Hin; it shall be an holy anointing Oil unto me, throughout all your generations, ver. 31. Upon man's flesh shall it not be poured; neither shall ye make any other like it, after the composition of it, whosoever compoundeth any like it; or whosoever putteth any of it upon a stranger, shall be cut off, ver. 32. * Nota. Yet this inhibition hindereth not, but their Kings might be anointed with this Holy Oil; though Saul and jehu were anointed out of a brittle Vessel; which might denote the short continuance of their Reign: and David and Solomon were anointed out of an Horn, which implieth both abundance, and lastingness; yet the jews cannot thence fairly infer, that the Oils also did differ, in specie in kind: perhaps not in Individuo, in the particular, since the consecrated Oil was made in great quantity, and was of a lasting strength, and might be renewed by Samuel; if so there were not 120. years, between Saul and jehu, their several unction; when David bemoaned saul's death in these words, 2 Sam. 1.21. As though Saul had not been anointed with Oil; he acknowledged his Unction, and signified, it was with more than common or profane Oil; all being done by Samuel, at God's especial Commandment: For the service of God, see cakes tempered with Oil, and wafer's anointed with Oil, Exod. 29.2. and oiled bread, ver. 23. The morning, and the evening Sacrifice of a Lamb, were to have a tenth deal of flower, mingled with the fourth part of an Hin of beaten Oil, Exod. 29.40. This holy quaternion, of fine wheat, salt, wine, oil, were of much use in the service of God, Ezra, 6.9.7.22. and if I mistake not, the chiefest of these was Oils: pure oil-olive was beaten for the Lamps, Levit. 24.2. Will the Lord be pleased, with ten thousand of Rivers of Oil? Mic. 6.7. The Vulgat and 70. do ill to read it, in ten 1000 of fat Goats, when the Hebrew hath it, In myriadibus torrentium Olei; the best or fat of Oil was given to holy uses, Numb. 18.12. In this matter I should find none end, if I make it not up myself: Psal. 89.20. With holy Oil have I anointed David; in Oleo sanctitatis meae vuxi eum, I have anointed him with the Oil of my holiness, as the Interlin. turneth it; In Oleo Sanctitatis meae, as Vatablus his Margin hath it, Ritu solenni, adhibito Oleo Sancto, quo Reges, & sacerdotes inungi solent; after a solemn manner, with holy Oils such as Kings and Priests do use to be anointed with all; so Mollerus on the place; who also well observeth that it is called both holy Oil, and Gods holy Oil, and that God did do what Samuel did; neither was samuel's action only accounted Gods action; but when David was twice anointed, after Samuel his death: First in the 2 Sam. 2.4. The men of Judah anointed David King over the house of Judah. 2 Sam. 5.3. All the Tribes of Israel anointed David King over Israel, yet this was done not by mere motion of men only; but by known inspiration Divine, and directions before prophesied of; they anointed David King over Israel, according to the word of the Lord by Samuel, 1 Chro. 11.3. Or by the hand and appointment of Samuel; for Samuel was dead divers years before; nor could it be done by all the Tribes; save only by vote, and consent; but David was anointed personally, by some Priest, Prophet, or Seer; who had a lawful authority so to do: Nor do I doubt but as the precious ointment which was poured on Aaron's head was so plentiful, that it ran down upon the beard, and went down to the skirts of his clothing, Psal. 133.2. So the Royal anointing was in like plenty; the Kings themselves kneeling or bowing down before the Priests or Prophets, who anointed them; as by picture is described, in our old Bishop's Bible, on 1 Sam. 10. So much for the Sacred use of Oils, by the Jewish people. PAR. 8. COncerning the Oil for common Unction, whether simple or compound. I read not in Scripture, that the jews did ordinarily anoint any other parts of their bodies, but their heads, and feet: indeed Ester (according to the Custom, of those times, and such Virgins) was purified six months, with oil of Myrrh, and six months, with sweet odours, and with other things, for the purifying of women, Est. 2.12. which Vatablus, thus expresseth, (on the third verse) Det mundatoria earum (i) quibus sordes corporis detergere solent, & cutem suam ungere, etc. Let him give them their Mundatories, that is, those things for their Purification, wherewith they are wont to scour off the filth of their bodies, and to anoint their skin; & on the 12. verse; twelve months were to pass, ere they came in to the King; in the mean time, dabant operam ungendae cuti, prioribus sex mensibus, oleo myrteo; posteriori semestri, aromatibus ungi solebant; they took great care, in anointing their bodies, the first fix months, with the oil of myrtles; the last half year, with oils of Spices; and with other Purificatories, which women used; which use cannot well be restrained to head, and face, and hands, and feet; but was applied to other parts of their bodies also; but, here you may truly say; This belonged to the Babylonish, rather than to the jewish fashions. Also, Wisd. 2.7. Let us fill ourselves with costly wine, and ointments; let no flower of the spring pass by us; let us crown ourselves with Rosebuds, before they be withered: In these words, Let us fill ourselves with costly wine, and ointments, I say, these jews preceded the Romans, in drinking ointments mingled with wine. Secondly, I doubt not also, but they anointed themselves, more, than head, and feet; the vastness of their intentions, going beyond the common practice, probabilizeth as much; Impleamus, Let us fill ourselves; Holcot, on the place, thus; Ad vinum addunt unguenta, id est, electuaria, ad jucundè bibendum, & secundum hoc unguentum pertinet, tàm ad gustum, quàm. Tactum; aliter exponitur de unguentis ad ungendum corpora, & fancies, ut magis resplendeant, & suaviùs redoleant, & mollius tangi possint; & sic pertinent ad delicias, tam visus, quàm tactus; that is, to their wine they add ointments; that is to say, electuaries, that they may take the more delight in drinking, and in this respect unguent belongs, as well to the taste as to the touch: In another respect it is to be understood of ointment, to anoint the body and the face; that they may glister the better and brighter, and smell the sweeter and in palpation, feel the softer, and so it belongs to the delight, as well of the sight, as of the touch. PAR. 9 THeirvery being crowned, at their festivals, did argue their anointing of their hands, as appeared before in the feast of Thyestes; and I hope shall plainer appear by and by: that holy Susanna at her bathing, used also anointing, is proved before; Wash thyself and anoint thee, as Naomi instructed Ruth, Ruth 3.3. So David arose from the earth and washed, and anointed; but whether the whole body in both these places, be to be understood; or some especial parts, may justly be questioned. Theophylact, (on Mat. 6.17.) Prisci in gaudii signum, habebant ungi post lotionem: our Ancestors in token of joy did use to anoint themselves, after their bathing: Ezek. 16.9. God alludeth to the fashions of the jews, who anointed after washing. I conclude, some few upon some extraordinary occasions, might anoint their whole bodies; but I find it not written of the general practice: the jews questionless used the medicata unguenta, and the compounded ointments, Nard, and other: And the house was filled with the odour of the Ointment, Job. 12.3. again jer. 8.22. Is there no Balm in Gilead? and jer. 46.11. Go up into Gilead and take Balm: directly inferring, that there was a great medicinal virtue, in the Balm, especially of Gilead: that the washing of feet was usual among the jews, is proved before: I read not of the anointing of their feet practised in special, throughout the whole Testament: Ashurs dipping of his foot in Oil, implieth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, principally, in the Native sense, the anointing of his feet with Oil above other parts; but fore-prophecyeth the abundance, in which he should as it were swim. PAR. 10. THe woman indeed in the Gospel, Luk. 7.37. used a most civil, decent, heavenly method in her devotion; she began to wash Christ's feet with tears; she did wipe them, with the hairs of her head; she kissed his feet and anointed them, with the ointment? I answer, this fact was extraordinary; she making ointments which were before, the instruments of sinning, now to be effects of devotion: nor doth Christ find fault with Simon, the Pharisee, that he afforded not ointment, for Christ's feet, (which, if it had been common, it is likely he would have done) but Christ saith only, ver. 46. Mine (head) with Oil, thou didst not anoint, Irenaeus, (3.14) among the peculiaria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or peculiar passages, which S. Luke alone hath recorded, reckoned this; Quomodò apud Pharisaeum, recumbente Christo, peccatrix mulier osculabatur pedes ejus, & unguento ungebat; that is, how when our Saviour went into a Pharisees house; to eat with him, A woman that was a sinner kissed his feet, and anointed them with ointment; and it may be therefore peculiarly insisted, on the anointing of Christ's feet; who because it was not an usual thing, which was now done in Galilee; and differed from the other latter anointings, near Jerusalem, towards his death, (where is no mention of the anointing, especially of his feet) and because this woman, contrary to the common custom, durst not presume to anoint Christ's head; but began her religious humiliation, with anointing of his feet, as if she were then unworthy, to come nigh his head. PAR. 11. BUt the anointing of the Head, among the Jewish Nation, was long in frequency, before ever the Capitol was heard of, or the head of Tolus found: So, the Romans might imitate the Jews, but the Jews could not be, the Apes of the Romans, which Pererius in a sort saith: when our Saviour said to Simon the Pharisee; Mine head with oil thou didst not anoint, thence is fairly deduced, that at festivals guests of the better sort, were wont to have their heads anointed, (as we have aquam manualem, water to wash our hands tendered unto us) if no such thing had been in use, upon such occasions, Christ would not have challenged him, for the neglect of that courteous duty, Luke 7.46. Also from Christ's advising or commanding the true penitent, in the usual hours, and times to anoint his head, Mat. 6.17. that he may seem rather to be merry, than in the sight of men to fast, is involved, and included; that in the days of mirth and festivity, (when there was no cause of mourning, fasting, or humbling of their souls) in such jovial, and genial days, they did anoint their heads, expressing thereby their inward rejoicing: Hierome (on the place) thus: juxta Ritum provinciae Palaestinae loquitur, ubifestis diebus solent ungere capita; he speaketh according to the usance of the Land of Palestine, where upon festival days, they were wont to anoint their heads; and indeed so did all the Eastern Nations, before the Romans were a People. PAR. 12. IN samuel's days, he foretelling that a King would take their daughters to be Confectionaries, 1 Sam. 8.13. (as now in Spain the women are the best perfumers, or Milliners) is proof enough, of the use of anointing, even in those days, which custom of women's preparing perfumes, and sweet Ointments, continued even in Christ's time; yea even of applying them: for we read not of any man, that at feasts anointed any, or any whilst they lived; divers women anointed Christ; nor did Simon the Pharisee grudge at the woman, for anointing him, (for that, as it should seem, was usual and lawful, and an Office reserved rather for women than men) but because she being a sinner, presumed to anoint him, a sinner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a notorious sinner which he disliked, and Christ defended 1 Sam. 8.14. when he threatneth that the King will take away their Olive-yards, no man can deny, but the use of Oil, was in esteem; for the King would not seize, on the worst things. PAR. 13. IN David's time, the use of anointing their heads, was usual, Psal. 23.5. Thou hast anointed mine head with oil: Inpinguâfli in olio caput meum; he speaketh not here of the Regal, sacred Unction; but of a Festival anointing; for these words precede, Thou hast prepared a Table before me; and these words follow, my cup runneth over; because they were wont to drink liberally, and plentifully at their feasts; Judai quoties excipiebant convivas bonoratiores, quos splendidè tractare volebant; eos perfundebant, vel balsamo, vel aliis unguentis fragrantibus, ut ità exhilerarentur; nàm cerebrum, & spiritus suavi odour, mirabilitèr reficiuntur; & excitantur saith Mollerus; that is, the Jews, as often as they entertained their best friends, to whom they desired to give the royallèst welcome, did use to cast balm, or some other fragrant ointment, upon their heads, to make them the more merry; for, the brain, and spirits of men are wonderfully refreshed, quickened, and stirred up, by sweet ointments. Again, Psal. 92.10. I shall be anointed with fresh oil; where he speaketh de futuro, and not, de praeterito, of the time to come, and not of the time past; of the holy oil (as the Scripture phrazeth it, Psal. 89 20.) where with David had been anointed, Psal. 141.5. Whether you read it; Let the righteous smite me, it shall be a kindness; and let him reprove me, it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break mine head; or thus; Let the righteous smite me kindly, or reprove me, let not their precious oil break my head; I am sure, the anointing of their heads in those times, is proved in the Interlineary, it is thus rendered, Percutiat me malleo justus in misericordiâ, & increpet me; oleum capitis ne frangat caput meum; that is, Let the righteous smite me, with a Mallet, in mercy, and let him reprove me; let not the oil of the head break my head. The best, and principal oil, with which they anointed their heads is there pointed at, Psal. 104.15. Ad nitere faciendum sacies ab oleo, oil doth make man's face to shine; oil of joy is opposite to mourning: Esay 61.3. In the same David's time, Anoint not thyself with oil, saith Joab to the wise woman of Tekoah, 2 Sam. 13.2. which inhibition, in a case extraordinary, argueth; that anointing of the (head) at least; was ordinary; The anointing of the (head) might be, without the Unction of the whole body; but, they never anointed their bodies, unless they anointed their heads also: semblably, Mic. 6.15. Thou shalt tread the Olive, but thou shalt not anoint thee, with oil; which menace argueth, they should not do; as they were wont to do; for, they were wont to tread out the Olives, and to anoint themselves. S. Hierome, on the place, thus; Prodest tibi, errore cognito, ne habeas discipulos, ne caput tuum oleo ungas peccat●rum, etc. 'Twere good for thee, since thou once knowest thine error, to shake off thy followers, lest thou anoint thine head, with the oil of sinners; when grief, and sorrow was passed, when David's first child by Bathshebah was dead, David arose from the earth, and washed, and annoited himself, and changed his apparel, and went into the house of the Lord, and worshipped God; then, he came to his own house, and did eat, 2 Sam. 12.20. In the days of Solomon, it was part of his Divine Proverbs; ointment, and perfume rejoice the heart, Prov. 27.9. more punctually, Eccles. 9.8. Let thine head lack none ointment; where, an ordinary, if not a daily use thereof is advised: Athenaeus reporteth, Possidonius his History; Apud Syros in epulis Regum, ubi datae coronae sunt convivis ingredi quosdam cum utriculis unguenti Babylonii, qui mensam circum-euntes, accumbentium coronas eo errorant, aliud praeterea nihil conspergentes, that is, Among the Syrians, at the banquets of their Kings, they use to crown their guests with crowns; certain Servitors came in, with little bottles of Babylonian ointment, who going round about the Table, do besprinkle the crowns of their guests, with that, and with nothing else; but sure, the guise of those times, was to anoint their hair, and their heads: you heard what Thyestes said, as is before cited; and, the whore, in Ezekiel, prepared beautiful crowns, for her lovers, at her Festivals, Ezek. 23.42, nor was oil wanting, or Incense, in the precedent verse; and we may well think, they were there for use, and not for sight only. PAR. 14. Mine hands drop with myrrh, and my fingers with sweete-smelling myrrh, Cant. 5.5. saith the Spouse; The Bridegroom's lips, like Lillyes, dropping sweet-smelling Myrrh, verse. 13. Because of the savour of thy good ointments, thy name is ointment poured forth; therefore, do the Virgins love thee, said the Spouse to Solomon, Cant. 1.3. Ointment, even in the abstract; oil poured out, not enclosed; not unlike the Poet, who said Fluere, excusso Cinnamafusa, vitro; While the King sitteth at the Table, my Spikenard sendeth forth, the smell thereof, Cant. 1.12. saith the Spouse; out of question, foresignifying what in aftertimes, was to be done, when Christ was to be anointed: Nard, may be taken, as well for an ointment, so called,— Nardo vina merebere, saith Horace, to Virgil; as for an herb, Pliny (12.12.) describeth it: S. Bernard taketh it, as an herb, whose lownes causes him, to discourse of humility: Philo judaens, thus; Nardus medicus est fructus Syriae, & Indiae praestantissimus; eolore rufo, comosus, odoratis simus, saporis amari, snavitatem odoris diutissime retinens, calefacit, exiccat, viretque perpetuo, miscetur antidotis, & efficacissimas vires, ad quam phorimos morbos babet; that is, spikenard is a most excellent Plant, growing in Syria, and India; of a red colour; full of branches, and leaves; most odoriferous, bitter in taste, and continues fragrant in smell, a very long time; it is hot and dry in operation, it continueth always green; is an excellent ingredient in your dosies; and is a Sovereign Medicine against most diseases: of its use, in Compositions, or unguents he speaketh not here, though some were more thick, some more thin, all appliable to Unctions. PAR 15. ASI will not deny, in these places, abundance of choice metaphors, and spiritual meanings; so, I will not wholly abolish the literal sense; but freely confess. 1. That both Solomon, and his Spouse, were gloriously attired, so gloriously, that our Saviour thought not fit of any Art, or Artsman, to approach, in borrowed beauty, to the Natural beauty of the Lily, the work of Gods own hand, I say unto you, that even Solomon, in all his glory, was not arrayed like one of these, Mat. 6.29. 2. Immediately after, the Holy Ghost had said literally, of Solomon, Psal. 45.7. God thy God hath anointed thee, with the Oil of gladness, above thy fellows; the spirit addeth, ver. 8. All thy garments smell of Myrrh, Aloes, and Cassia; so, for the Church, her clothing was of wrought gold; she shall be brought unto the King, in raiment of Needlework, Psal. 45.13. etc. And the smell of the Spouses Ointments, was better than all spices, Cant. 4.10. And, as Aaron's sweet perfumes descended upon his garments, as it is in the Hebrew; So the very of those great-ones were not untouched, but sweetened with those spreading sweet Ointments, Who is this that cometh out of the wilderness, like Pillars of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all powders of the Merchant, saith our last Translation, Cant. 3.6. All manner of Spices of the Apothecary, as it is, in the Bishop's Bible▪ pigmentarii, of the perfumer, saith the Vulgat, good part thereof was, about their vestments, some purposely, some casually, all with comfort, decency, and sweete-smelling. But, the (head) above all, did they anoint. So much be said, for the anointing of the Head, in Salomons time, before Rome was out of the shell, or pipient. Let, who will now take up the bucklers, in defence of Pererius, for this third ceremony: I am ready to maintain the jews that custom, long before the Romans; and did not so, to flatter or imitate the Romans; and the Romans might imitate the jews; or other Syrians, or the anointed Grecians: Yet, what needed all this stir, by Peretius, about anointings, at the feasts of Romans, and jews? when no Evangelist, no Apostle, no holy father, (so fare as my memory beareth) ever said that Christ and his Apostles, were anointed, at the eating of the Paschall-Lambe; either a little before, or whilst they were ear-ring, or presently after? since no Ceremony of Pascharizing, either transient, or permanent, or voluntary; so fare as is to be proved implieth such a business: and no Precept, no example of Scripture, no tradition of Elders, invited them thereunto: besides if I should not be too great a digressour I could quaere whether at any great sacred feasts and festivals, the Jews were wont to be anointed? since the prime end of them was devotion; and this festival was of this sort: though I am ready to acknowledge, at the lesse-sacred festivities, and solemnities, at solemn invitations of their better friends, and kindred, they were accustomed to Unctions; especially, the able, sufficient-rich-ones; who used that exercise more frequently, and some perhaps daily; without some intervenient occasion to the contrary. The Prayer. BLessed Saviour, the venry Christ and Messiah anointed, anointed of the Lord, with the Oil of gladness, super-eminently above any, or all other Creatures, in the lower or higher world; I beseech thee of thine infinite mercy, to pour thy healing Oil, into the wounds of my soul; and so anoint me with Oil, that I may have a cheerful countenance; and smell sweet, and be pleasing to thee; O Lord my God, through Christ who is a sweet savour for us all: So be it, O Lord; so be it. Amen, and Amen. CHAP. XX. The Contents of the twentieth Chapter. 1. Pererius his fourth Ceremony. 2. Romans and Jews at their feasts, changed their . 3. The Romans Tricliniary Ornaments; wearing apparel; Larding, and cramming, purple; Scarlet, cloth of gold, silver; Lex vestiaria. 4. The Bed-Ornaments of the Jews. 5. Ornaments of Idols; Levites, Priests, Highpriest; Tabernacle. 6. Wearing apparel of the Jews; variety thereof for divers occasions; for, 1. Gifts. 2. Appearance. 3. Disguise. 4. Sorrow, or Mortification; Sacke-cloath: feasting, white apparel: extraordinary apparel approved, at feasts; comely always: new-fanglednesse taxed, in French, English, Spanish; English, in part defended: diversity of apparel, for several ages, degrees: abundance of apparel, a blessing: the excess taxed. 7. Changing of apparel at feasts, practised by the Jews before the Romans; Romans had more than one garment on at feasts: the wedding garment not the only garment: fashions at sacred civil feasts, different. 8. Wedding garment, What. PARAGRAPH. 1. THe fourth ceremony, on which Pererius insisteth, now followeth: Quartò, saith he, Romani accubituri mutabant vestes, quòmundiores, viz. & hilariores convivarentur; in antiquis marmoribus Romanis, accumbentes in Tricliniariis lectis, magnâ ex parte, veste duntaxat unâ, super nudo tecti conspiciuntur; that is, fourthly, the Romans before they went to dinner, or supper, did change their garments; to the intent they might be the more cleanly, and merry, at their feast: In the ancient, marble statues, among the Romans, they that lie on their Tricliniary beds, are for the most part, seen to have but one only garment upon their bare skin: These points he insisted on; they changed their ; the ends were two, to be cleanlier; to be merrier: Lastly, great part of the ancient Statues, represent the discumbents, with one only vestment, to cover their bare skins: that this was observed in the feasts of the Jews, is plainly signified in that parable in the Gospel, Mat. 22. Who came in to the feast not having a wedding garment, and therefore was cast out into outer darkness: thus fare Pererius? I answer, (supposing, though not granting all this to be true) it is more probable that the jews, long before did the like; let us come to the proof by these degrees. PARA. 2. FIrst, let us consider the costly hang, in the room, where the Romans feasted, and their tricliniary ornaments, as the Mediastinus, the Scullion, or varlet of the house attended his Office in the Kitchen; so the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Lectisterniator, or Chamberlain, decked their neater Chambers, and beds, with hang, curtains, carpets, tapestry, and coverlets, according to the estate of their masters; stragulâ veste, auro, & murice Tyrio depicta probè consternunt, saith Apuleius (lib. 10.) they deck their beds with coverlets, and their hang of Arras, or tapestry, their aulaea, were of Babylonian painted work; many of the Egyptian fashioning; and the Egyptian hang were more curious; Marshal. (14.150.) Haec tibi Memphitis tellus dat munera, victa est Pectine Niliaco jam Babylonis acus: that is, The Land of Memphis sends these robes to thee, Babylon's needle now is blind, I see. — Spartâna chlamys, conchylia Coa, Your Greek Mandilion, and your Coos purple, are reckoned by Juvenal, (satire. 8) as their choice householdstuff: Martial (14.135.) Hic opus est pictis accubuisse toris; Here they need to sit on tapestry: Acu pictis, Pavoninis; coverlets wrought with needles shadowed like Peacock's feathers: Quid Tyrio recubare toro? saith Tibullus (Eleg. 1.) their very beds were covered with purple; scarlet tapestry did overspread them: Plantus (in Stycho, act. 5. Scenâ 3.) saith, the Merchant Epignomus brought Lectos eburatos, auratos, decked with ●vorie and gold, tùm Babylonica peristromata, sella, & tapetia, also Babylonian hang, or Curtains, seats, and tapestry: Lucian in the banquet of the Lapithae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, let us spread the purple Coverlets, and lie down upon them: purpurâ quis non jam Tricliniaria facit? who hangeth not his supping room or Parlour with purple or Scarlet? saith Pliny (9.39.) Romulus did wear scarlet or purple, saith Pomponius Laetus; and so other both Kings and Consuls: but Pliny (in the place last cited) saith, Lectulus Spinther was the first who used dibapha Tyria in praetextâ the double-ingrayned-throughly-dyed purple, in his gown or robe, yet prodigality did sprout▪ up apace; for Lucullus his discubitory beds were adorned with purple; and himself served in dishes of gold and silver, set with rich precious stones, the spoils of barbarous Nations, as you may find in Plutarch (in Lucullus his life) Cajus Vrbinus and others knowing Metellus Pi●● his will, when they invited him to Supper, Vltra Romanorum, ac mortalium usque morem, they did beyond example, adorn their houses, with Arras, Tapestry, and costly hang, and built stages for Players; the ground was sprinkled with saffron; and other things done, as in a most stately Temple of the Gods; more particularly, a painted gown for the most part, was his garment, when he lay down feasting, saith Macrobius, (Saturnal. 3.13.) from the authority of Salustius: about the same time they did conquirere altilium enormem saginam, as Tertullian phrazeth excellently that excess (the Poenit. cap. 11.) or rather I will speak more to the purpose in the words of Tertullian (lib. de Pallio cap. 5.) Aufidius Lurco primus saginâ corpora vitiavit, (it may be, he speaketh of their larding of meats) & coactis alimentis in adulterinum provexit saporem; which later words can be understood of nothing else but the enforced cramming; which is not so kindly wholesome or pleasing a taste, as when naturally they feed themselves fat, as God taught them to eat; rather than as man compelleth them; Aufidius Lurco was the first, who by larding, and cramming, gave the flesh of creatures a new, but more adulterate savour. PAR. 3. ANd thus we cast our eyes on their wearing apparel, which is the second point inquireable. Seneca (in Thyeste, ver. 953.) Libet & Tyrio saturas ostro Rumpere vestes; that is, It pleaseth me, in sunder for to pull My robes, with Tyrian die drenched to the full. What the Roman Court used, Seneca imputeth to the Grecian: and perhaps justly: Marshal (14.154.) saith, Ebria Sydoniae fuerat de sanguine conchae, Their robes were drenched, as in a flood, With the Sydonian shell-fish-purple blood. And their Wool, which was died in Tyrian, or Sydonian colour, was drunk with the liquor of the shellfish; as Seneca, before, said, they were glutted with it: behold the excessive gluttony, and drunkenness, even in their Scarlet-colours: Plinius (4.48.) saith of old, they were wont to die their wool, and , with so divers and sweet colours, that the cloth did equal the best of flowers, or herbs: purple, and scarlet, was the robe of their Senators, that extraordinary robe, distinguishing the Patricians, from the Plebeians: optatus (lib. 5.) cum pretiosus inficitur colour, Natura saepè convertitur; dum continctione vellus candidum purpurassit; sic alba lana Regalem transit in purpuram; that is, the nature of wool seemeth to be changed, when it is richly died; the candid fleece is impurpled by the intinction; and the white wool is turned into the Royal scarlet. So, scarlet was the peculiar ornament of Kings, in other Countries. Seneca (de tranquilitate, cap. 1.) non spendeat toga, nec sordeat quidem; let not thy garments be too rich, nor base neither: it may be he gave advice to the time for moderation, and repressing excessiveness: I am sure Nero forbade the use Amethystini, ac Tyrii coloris, of violet and purple-colour, saith Suetonius (lib. 6.) and vestes auratae, cloth of gold was forbid to any, except to Emperors, Princes, or great ones; when before the use was over-common: cloth of silver was called vestis Attalica, as invented in Attalus his dominions; and cloth of silver; yea, cloth of gold was worn by the Roman Knights: Tibullus (Eleg. 1.) speaketh of a victorious soldier, and horseman, Totus & argento contextus; totus & auro, Insideat celeri conspiciendus equo: that is, Him on a swift Steed placed, you might behold, Clad whole in cloth of silver, and of gold. After the Empire was settled in the Caesarean Line, riot did overflow, but the more sober behaviour of the Ancients, disliked such intemperance, and kerbed them, decreeing Leges Vestiareas. PAR. 4. THe third, and next step is, to consider the Bed-ornaments of the Jews, the good housewife so much commended, clotheth all her household with scarlet, Prov. 31.32. she maketh herself cover of tapestry: Solomon his bed, (on which he did discumbere) was covered with purple, Cant. 3.9. though it be read in our last translation; Solomon made him a Chariot (a bed, as it is in the Margin) yet the precedent words of the seventh verse, Behold, his bed, and the subsequent words, ver. 10. The midst thereof, being paved with love, for the daughters of Jerusalem; enforce me to think it was not meant of his Chariot; but is meant of his bed: the Hebrew word (Aphirion) being no where else in Scripture, affordeth conjecture to many interpretations: Kimchi, and Jarchi, S. Ambrose, with others, expound it, per Thalamum, aut lectulum, a bed; others read Conopaeum, or conopium, of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Canopy: most certain it is, that Solomon had most choice, costly, and curious Bed-ornaments; in so much, that the comeliest, and fairest among women, Cant. 7.8. was compared to the Curtains of Solomon, Cant. 1.5. After this Abasuerus perhaps imitated Solomon: for at his feast were white green, and blue hang, fastened with cords of fine linen, and purple, to silver rings, and pillars of marble; the beds were of gold and silver, upon a pavement of red, and blue, and white, and black marble, Est. 1.6, The representative whore in Ezekiel, sat upon a stately (or honourable) bed, Ezek. 23.41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. sedisti in lecto pulcherrimo, as Vatablus rendereth the 70. sedisti super lectum honorabilem, as he rendereth the Hebrew; and expoundeth all thus: In thoro egregio, vel pulchro, benè ornato, & inclyto; which the common whore interpreteth, Prov. 7.16. saying of herself, I have decked my bed, with cover of tapestry, with carved works, with fine linen of Egypt, and she perfumed also her bed, ver. 17. This was long before Romulus was borne; and therefore if the Jews, in our blessed Saviour's time, were so excessive in their chamber, and bed-ornaments; they borrowed not those fashions, of the Romans which themselves used long before; but the Romans imitated the luxury, and prodigality of the jews, and other Eastern Nations. PAR. 5. I Might spend much time, if I reckoned up all that may be said, either of the women's abundant cost, in adorning their Idols; or, of the sacred attire of the Levites, Priests, and especially the Highpriest, and the Tabernacle; briefly thus, 2 King. 23.7. In the house of the Sodomites, women wove hang for the grove, Ezek. 16.16. Of thy garments thou didst take, and deck the high places, with divers colours; Thou takedst thy broidered garments, and coveredst Images; Ezek. 16.8. The Idolaters clothed their Images, with blue, and purple, jer. 10.9. yea silver spread into plates, is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Vphaz, the work of the workman, and hands of the founder: Tenues, & subtiles bracteae, seu crustae inducurtur ligneo simulacro, quibus imbracteatur; that is, their wooden Images are curiously over-laid, and embellished with gold foil: that I may speak in the phraize of Ammianus Marcellinus: concerning sacred ornaments: Aaron's holy garments, were for glory, and beauty Exod. 28 2. so were the garments of his sons, verse 40. made, and wrought, by all that were , whom God had filled with the spirit of wisdom, vers. 3. At the making of the Tabernacle, they offered gold, silver, and brass, blue, purple, and scarlet, Exod. 25.3. etc. see Exod. 39, 2. etc. and they made the tabernacle, with ten curtains of fine twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet; with Cherubims, of cunning work; Exod. 26.1. And not only the door but the very Court of the Tabernacle, was enclosed with rich, broad, and long hang, Exod. 27.9. etc. And for the very gate of the Court shall be an hanging of 20. Cubits of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, wrought with needlework: Moses used purple, and scarlet wool, to besprinkle things sacred, or to make them sacred, Heb. 9.19. PAR. 6. BUt I descend to the wearing apparel of the Jews: the Jews had variety of apparel, (I think I may say above other Nations) fitted to all occasions. 1. For gifts. 2. For appearance in public. 3. For disguise. 4. For Mortification. 5. For feasting. 6. For several ages and degrees in wonderful plenty. 1. Joseph gave Benjamin, five changes of raiments, Gen. 45.22. Naaman brought with him as a present, ten changes of raiments, 2 King. 5.5. 2. josephs' garment was changed, and he shaved himself when he appeared before Pharaoh, Gen. 41.14. And Pharaoh arrayed joseph in vestments of fine linen, or silk, ver. 42. So Daniel was clothed with Scarlet, by Belshazzar his Command, Dan. 5, 29. and Mordecai was clothed with the royal apparel which the King did wear, Est. 6.11. 3. Saul had raiment for disguise, 1 Sam. 28.8. and jeroboam wife in all likehood 1 King. 24.2. the widow of Tekoah put on a new mourning apparel, 2 Sam. 14.2. when she undertook to be a curious Masker. 4. In sorrow, squalid apparel was used; Zech. 3.3. joshuah the highpriest was clothed with filthy garments, and God promised him, saying, I will thee with change of raiment: David lay, all night upon the earth, 2 Sam. 12.16. and afterward changed his apparel, and came into the house of the Lord, and worshipped, ver. 20. In adversity also many lay in sacke-cloath, and ashes, Est. 4.3. etc. Cloth of sackcloth was worn in days of tribulation, Revel. 11.3. Yea, it was next their very skin, job 16.15. I have sowed sackecloath upon my skin; penitents sat in sacke-cloath and ashes, Luke 10.13. jacob rend his and put sackecloath upon his loins, Gen. 37.34. Hierome (Epist. ad Lucinium; fol. 69. literâ, 〈◊〉.) saith, ego insignia paupertatis, & quotidiana symbola, id est, signa poenitentiae tibi, & sorori tuae, nisi, quatuor Ciliciola apta proposito, & usibus vestris; that is, I have sent thee, and thy sister 4. hayre-cloathes, or Sacke-cloathes, the ensigns of poverty, and liveries of daily penance, fit for your use, and purpose: for haircloth, or sacke-cloath was the induments of penitents. 5. Eccles. 9.8. Let thy garments be always white, saith Solomon; where he speaketh of times of joy, and feasting, as appeareth both by the precedent, and subsequent verses: be always neat, handsome, cleanly; but especially, at mirth, and feasting; always white; not always white; as whiteness is opposed to blackness; but as white is taken for well-coloured, shining, exquisite; and is contra-distinguished to base, beggarly, sordid, or foul; Solomon had linen yarn, brought out of Egypt; the King's Merchants received the linen yarn, at a price, 2 Chro. 1.16. So that they might frame the cloth, according to their own desires: other phrases are used, jam. 2.2. &c, goodly apparel, and gay-clothing, is contra-opposed, to vile raiment: Philo lib. 2. de vit â Contemplatiuâ) saith, the jews are wont to feast in white apparel, which in likelihood they practised, from the cited place of Solomon; yea, saith Philo, the very attendant waiting-boyes, at those their feasts, were tenuissimas & candidissimas praecincti tunicas, clad in very thin and white garments; anteriore parte, ad genua demissas; posteriore ad poplites; the fore part reaching to the knees, the hinder part to their hams: The Lord threatneth in the day of his Sacrifice, (which was commonly a day of feasting) to punish such as are clothed with strange apparel, Zeph. 1.8.) which may be well interpreted of such as wear not apparel appropriated to the Sacrifice, answerable to that of him, who was punished for not having a wedding garment; unto this place of the Prophet Zephanie, might our Saviour allude, in that parable, Revel. 3.18. I counsel thee to buy of me white raiment that thou mayest be clothed; the wicked woman, Ezek. 23.40. decked herself with ornaments, against the feast of her lovers: Pelagius was wont to say; Gloriam vestium, & Ornamentorum Deo esse contrarium; the glory of vestments and ornaments, is contrary to God. S. Hierome (in his first book against him) poseth him thus; quae sunt rogo, inimicitiae apud Deum, si tunicam habuero mundiorem? I prithee what offence is it to God, if I wear, on my back an handsome garment? The linen of the Spouse was fine, clean, white, Revel. 19.8. Was not Solomon, being clothed in his royal apparel, heard of God, and accepted at the Dedication of the Temple; both publicly, by day, 2 Chro. 7.10. and secretly by night, ver. 12. aswell, if not more than any other, who wore meaner apparel? Was not our blessed Savour, his coat of an extraordinary texture, or working? yet, none ever so accepted, as He: for in him was God well pleased, supereminenter: Hierome (ad Eustochium) vestis nec satis munda, nec sordida, & nullâ diversitate nobilis sit; that is, let not thy garments be overnice, nor yet sluttish, nor variegated like a Peacock, with divers colours. I judge this passage misprinted: It ought rather, as I guess to be read; Vestis nec nimis munda; since, non satis munda, doth signify little else; but sordida, & maculata; and mundities, or cleanliness, was always allowed for good; though niceness, and over-neatnesse be, in excess, and faulty: a foul imputation hath been cast, by the seeming grave Spanish, on the French; and on the English especially, for new-fanglednesse, and dayly-varyed shapes, and fashions of their apparel: But Ribera, (on Zephan. 1.8) saith the Spaniards are Hujus vanitatis supra modum studiosi, qui suis relictis, aliarum Nationum vestibus utuntur; the Spaniards are exceedingly vain, to follow the fashions of other Nations, and leave their own guise: his fellow Jesuit Christopher Castrus, on the same place, taxeth the same Nation of the Spaniards, for the same point, of following the humours of other Nations, in their apparel: In quo vitio maximè sunt Hispani, qui vestibus, & idiomate gentium, quibuscum agunt, delectantur, that is, the Spaniards, of all other are most to blame to delight in the like apparel of other Nations, and to use their language: This I observed that I may wipe off part of the blot, from the English, for their imputed affection of new-fangled apparel. 6. Concerning the diversity of garments, for several ages, and degrees, among the jews; I may truly say, Versicolores vestes, & acu-pictae; Raiment of needlework, with divers colours, were in great use, with the jews, before Rome was ever heard of: the very youth of jerusalem were brought up in scarlet; Lam. 4.5. Phrygionicae vestes, the Phrygian needlework wrought about, with divers colours, was worn as is mentioned Psal. 45.13.14. The King's daughter is described as adorned with them: So Tamar, David's own Daughter, being a Virgin had a garment of divers colours upon her: for with such robes were the King's daughters, that were Virgins apparelled; 1 Sam. 13.18. The good housewives' clothing is of silk, and purple, Pro. 31.22. Ezek. 27.20. They had precious for Charets: likewise more especially the valiant men did wear Scarlet, Nah. 2.3. Sisera his mother expected, that he should have spolium tincturarum, spolium tincturarum acu intertextum; tinctum his intertexta, as it is, in the Hebrew, judg. 5.30. A prey of divers colours, of divers Colours of needlework; a prey of divers Colours, of needlework on both sides, meet for the neck of them, that take the spoil; as our last translation rendered it: So then, about their necks, they wore those glorious Ornaments, like Collars of SSSS esses: soft raiment was the clothing of delicate persons, in King's houses, Matth. 11.8. Purple-rayment was on the Kings of Midian, judg. 8.26. Captains and rulers were clothed, in blue, Ezek. 23.6. Gabriel Palaeotus (de sacris Consistorii Consultationibus, pag. 369.) maintaineth from Augustine his authority; quod deceteos, qui aliis praesunt, gloriosoes, in conspectu populi apparere, nè, si nimiae dejectionis servaretur humilitas, regendi frangeretur authoritas; that is, it behoveth them, who are set over other, to appear glorious, before the People; lest by overmuch humility, the authority of government be broken in pieces; but part of that gloriousness consisted in gorgeous apparel, as besides what is above written, may be seen, by Isaiah his description of Christ, Isa. 63.1. and Act. 2.21. Herod was arrayed in royal apparel, Jam. 2.2. A rich man is described by being in goodly apparel; and Mordecai went in Royal apparel; Est. 8.15, Compendiously thus: the several uses, and employments of manifold garments, among the jews, and others of former times, pro re natâ, as occasion guided them, may be imagined by the infinite store of them, then heaped up; and this store may be found in the wicked man's wardrobe, job. 27.16. Though he beape up silver as the dust, and prepare raiment as the Clay; he may prepare it, but the just shall put it on, ver. 17. God promiseth apparel in great abundance, to the Israelites, Zech. 14.14. and yet, upon abuse, the women are taxed for their excess herein, Isa. 3.22. are reckoned up changeable suits of apparels, and Mantles, and wimples, and fine linen, and hoods, and veils, ver. 23. Ezek. 27.24. They were rich, in broidered work, and in chests of rich apparel. PAR. 7. NOw, let us closely grapple with Pererius, in these 3 points. 1. First, who changed their clothes, at their feast, first, the jews, or the Romans? Pererius saith, the jews took up this fashion from the Romans; yet he hath not one shadow of proof: But I have manifested that the jews did at such times of feasting, change their apparel, long before ever the first stone of Rome was laid; and that the Romans did imitate the fashions of the jews, and other Eastern Nations, in apparel and feasting. 2. The second point from Pererius his words is questionable, whether the Romans had on them, one only vestment, when they feasted? I answer, if Pererius mean; they had only, one feasting vestment, I will not dislike him; but since he saith from the authority of the statues, that for the most part, that only vestment was upon their bare, or next to their skin; he shall give me leave, to descent: and to conclude from his own words, since the statues were only so, magnâ ex parte, for a great part; it is probable, from a great part of, and other statues; they might have more , to cover their naked bodies: again as they might have but only one feasting garment, & that only on their bodies, in excessive hot weather, so it is likely they had more than one garment, to keep away the cold; their evenings being naturally cool; & their suppers being taken late, in the Evening. 3. The 3 point disputable, from the opinion of Pererius is, whether that place in the parable, Mat. 22.1. 1. A man had not on a wedding garment, doth prove; that the jews had only one garment, on their bodies, when they feasted; he saith, this is plainly signified, in that parable: I distinguish, the feasting garment was only one, for every one; yet is there no sign, or footesteppe of proof, that the jews had only one vestment a piece, on their bodies at their feast. 2. Though the intruder were most justly punished; because he had not on the Nuptial indument, yet it is a sound proof (and he is not condemned for it) that he came to feast in his own (as others were wont.) 3. Suppose the jews had on them only one garment, at their Nuptial feasts; yet, it is not to be evidenced, that they had it in their other sacred, or civil feasts; for their ceremonies varied, Ezek. 16.7. etc. God speaketh to jerusalem, and alludeth even to their marriage ceremonies; yet intimateth more garments, than one on them; thou art come to Ornament of Ornaiments, or, excellent ornaments; I clothed thee with broidered work; I girded thee about with fine linen; I covered thee with silk; I decked thee also with ornaments; thy raiment was of fine linnea, and silk, and broidered work; of thy garments, thou didst take, and deck the high places; and tookest thy broidered garments, and coverest them: Christ's practice is most plain against it, joh. 13.4. Christ risen from supper, and laid aside his garments, and took a towel, and girded himself; and ver. 12. After he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, he sat down again; it is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, garments, in the plural number, in both verses: again, here at this great sacred feast: there is no mention of any especial feasting indument: I acknowledge that both the jews, and after them, the Romans after their purifications, Pedilavians, or bathe, did put on clean , oftimes: but there were both some bathe, without feast, and many feast, without bathe; and neither feast, nor bathe, were always accoutred, with change of vestments; and different were the fashions, at Sacred feasts, from those, at civil feasts: we read indeed, Mark. 14.51. There followed Christ, a young man; having a linen-cloth cast about his naked body; and he left his linen cloth, and fled from them naked: Yet this was not a feasting or Nuptial garment; but seems to be a bed-syndon, caught-up, on the sudden; When the putting on of his other apparel, would have bred more delay, than the young man would endure; in that whirlwind of state, against our blessed Saviour. PAR. 8. BUt concerning the Nuptial garment instanced upon, by Pererius; and the inference thereon; let us hear the testimonies of our adversaries, and his friends: Barradius (Tom. 3. pag. 483.) thus; solebant Convivae vestibus indui coenatoriis; quibus induti sumebant cibum linteati; that is, the guests were wont to be clad, with supping or feasting garments; and these being on, they took their meat, in another linnen-indument; which garment is here called the wedding garment; because at marriage feasts, all discumbed, clad in syndons; and in the end, (though somewhat interfering, with his own former words) I doubt saith Barradius, whether this custom were among the jews, for we are not to ascribe the Roman customs to the jewish Nation: and herein, as also in the plurality of vestments, he crosseth Penerius; who will have this Roman custom to be imitated by the jews: Franciscus Lucas Brugensis, speaking of the young man, who ran away naked; and holding it very unlikely, it should be S. john the Evangelist; who using this syndon, for a supping garment, forgot for grief, to put on his daily garment, holdeth it incredible (to say no more) Apostolis fuisse vestis coenatorias, alias, â quotidianis, aut ●o● c●nasse amictes syndons, super nado, ut nibil amplius dicam, saith he, that is, that the Apostles had supping garments, different from their usual apparel; or, that they did sup, with only a linen garment, upon their bate skin: if Pererius his best friends forsake him, and leave him naked; it is no matter of censure; if I manifest his manifold mistake: Mine own opinion is this; Concerning that Nuptiall-garment, it was not all, and wholly alike, on every one; nor exactly of the same cloth, stuff, linen, colour, cost, length, or breadth; the poor and little short people could not have it, or have it sitting, as the rich and taller people had: what if I should think? that the nuptial garment was some choicer garment of any kind, linen, stuff or , silk or velver; or any other chief indument; opposed to daily or sordid, bare, ragged, or cheap apparel; different from the ordinary wearing; set apart, for sacred or civil feasting? whereby, they might testify, their unusual, good respects; and credit both the bridegroom, bride, and themselves: And so the delinquent instanced in, by Pererius, might justly be cast into outer darkness; for coming in sordid, torn, or common apparel; when he had costlyer and better: for there were few but had some better, than other: arguit impudentiae, (saith Hierome) quòd vestis sordida munditias polluerit nuptiales; that is, he doth check him for sauciness, that would presume to disgrace; the nuptial cleanliness, with his slovenly garments: and yet the guests were taken, de sepibus, angulis, & platêis, and from the very highways, whose poverty might not excuse them, from having a wedding garment. So much if not too much of the fourth Parallel, or comparison; which Pererius idly, and groundlefly; even in this his most elaborate work maintaineth, that the jews borrowed from the Romans the custom of feasting-apparell; whereas the jews did wear white-feasting-garments; before the head of Tolus was found; or Romulus borne into the world. Pardon (good Reader) my former prolixity; and I promise, to be more brief, with Pererius; in the subsequent points. The Prayer. INfinite, and incomprehensible God; thou art clothed with light, as with a vestment; and with immortality, as with an everlasting garment; I do not desire to be clothed in soft raiment, nor precious attires; to cover my nakedness, my uncleanness: Let my humble desire be heard, at thy mercy seat, that I may be clothed with the wool of the immaculate Lamb of God; and be arrayed in the of Christ; that I may partake of his blessing, and be accepted for his sake; and not reproved for wanting of the wedding garment, at the feast of the Lamb with his Spouse: say Amen, O blessed Saviour; and let all the Children of the Bride-Chamber (whom it concerneth) redouble, Amen, Amen. CHAP. XXI. The Contents of the one and twentieth Chapter. 1. Pererius his sift Ceremony; Bodily posture: the ancient Jews, and Romans sat at feasts. 2. Discumbing at feasts. 3. Pererius his 6. Ceremony omitted. 4. Pererius his 7. Ceremony; supping, on high-beds: The woman standing behind Christ. 5. Pererius his 8. Ceremony; feasting : washing of feet practised, in Abraham's days. 6. Pererius his 9 Ceremony, lying in the bosom: Abraham's bosom. 7. Pererius his 10. Ceremony; highest rooms, at feasts; the Chiefest guests, sat in the chiefest and highest rooms: which place, in discumbing was the highest? whether Christ, in the Supper, at Bethanie, sat in the highest-roome? Christ had the middle-place; and is said, most commonly, to be in the midst: highest in situation, not always highest, in dignity. 8. Pererius his 11. Ceremony; three on a bed: Triclinium, whence so called: How many beds, at feasts: Σ, sigma, what it was: Biclinium: How many guests, on a bed. 9 Whether Christ and his 12. Apostles, at his last Supper, discumbed, on three beds. 10. Order of discumbing: jesuites, in this point, descent among themselves; Fair collections from the Scriptures, lawful. 11. How fare the Apostles discumbed, the one from the other. 12. The words, dividite inter vos; not to be understood, of the Eucharist: edentibus illis, interpreted: Eucharist instituted, after the Paschall Supper: Christ gave the bread, and wine to his Disciples severally. 13. Pererius his 12. Ceremony; the Romans and Jews eaten in Common: the Romans huge Platters, Aesop's, Vitellius Platters: Trojan Boar. 14. Romans, and Jews, in their feast, had divers dishes: the Roman carving of fowls: Egyptians, and Jew's great Platters: M. Anthony's immania pocula: Vessels of the Sanctuary, vessels of desire. 15. Romans did lie, not sit on beds: discumbing, Pererius affirmeth, devyeth it: Romans Suppers at times, continued, from night till Morning: Romans changed their Posture, in discumbing: Rosinus his description of the Romans discumbing: ancient Romans temperance, at feasts: Roman fashion, in drinking at feasts. 16. Pererius his 13. Ceremony: the Romans, in their feasts appointed; Magistrum potandi; Regem vini; modimperatorem: the manner of the Grecian, and Latin jolly drinking. 17. The Epitome of all Pererius his twofold mistaking: the Conclusion directly, against Pererius. PARAGRAPH. 1. THe sift point singled out, by Pererius, wherein he saith, the jews observed the custom of the Romans, concerning their bodily Posture, in their feasting. 1. Pererius acknowledgeth that the ancient jews at supper, and feasts did sit: Eccles 31.12. If thou (sit) at a bountiful Table; Prov. 23.1. if thou (sit) to eat with a Ruler: judg. 19.6. The Levite and his Concubine (sat) down, and did eat and drink both of them together, 1 King. 13.20. They (sat) at the table; Gen. 43.33. the brethren of Joseph (sat) before him, 1 Sam. 20.5. To morrow is the new moon or Kalends, and I should not fail to (sit) with the King, at meat; Exod. 22.6. The people (sat) down, to eat and to drink; and risen up to play; so fare Pererius. Let me add, the Apostle citing that place of Exodus, readeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they sat down, which shaketh off tricliniary accubation, and properly signifieth Session. 2. The ancient Romans were wont to (sit) at feasting, saith he, Perpetuis soliti Patres considere mensis, saith Virgil. that is, It was their guise, in ancient Time, To sit at boards, when they did dine. And Pererius grounds himself on Philander, and Mercurialis: Marcus Varro indeed and Servius affirm, that both men and women among the Romans, anciently supped (sitting) in process of time, the men did (lie) along, at their feasting, and the women (sat) still, at last both men and women, lay along on beds, when they supped, and feasted: he adds, Virgil, at the latter end of his first book of Aeneids,— Pictis discumbere lectis,— To lie along on painted beds; This last authority addeth no force to the point of (sitting) at feasts, but rather weakeneth it: Secondly let me add, in all those places of Canonical Scripture, the Radix Jashah is used, which seldom, very seldom, by itself, proveth discumbing, but sitting. Thirdly, more places may be added, Prov. 9.14. She (sitteth) at the door of her house, on a seat, in the high-places of the City: jer. 3.2. In the ways hast thou (sat) for them, which two places cannot possibly be interpreted, of tricliniary accubation: Lastly, in 1 Sam. 20.5. it is doubled jashab, Esheb, sedendo sedebo, by sitting I will sit. PAR. 2: THirdly Pererius saith, the jews in Christ's time, did not feast (sitting) but (discumbing) praeter morem Romanorum, quem ipsi tum imitabantur, contrary to the usance of the Romans, whom they did imitate: the misprinting of (Praeter) is the least fault, it should be, juxta, propter, or secundum morem Romanorum, quem ipsi tunc imitabantur, according to the usance, etc. as the sense convinceth, and his subsequent proofs declare: fourthly, the Romans feasted and supped, Non sendentes inscamnis, vel sellulis, sed accumbentes in lectis, not sitting upon benches, forms, stools, or chairs; but lying along on beds, saith he, as he proveth by many authors, and by the Marble Statues to be seen in divers Palaces of Italy, sternantur lecti, Caeciliane, seed, saith Martial. (8.67.) The discumbing-beds are fit, Pray good Caecilian sit. Not only (out) of Suppertime, as here, but even (at) supper, sometimes was Session, even in the midst of accubation, upon the beds, as the woman in Ezekiel, Veiashabt, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, sedisti in lecto pulcherrimo, she sat even on a stately bed, Ezek. 23.41. yet the stately bed on which she sat with a table prepared before it, as there followeth in sign of a feasting bed, is also called ver. 17. the bed of love, into which the Babylonians came to her: So Hest. 3.15. the King and Haman, jashbee, (sat) down, that they might drink: As I easily grant this manner of Jewish and Roman feasting, so, nor he, nor any of his, shall ever be able to prove, that the Jews did take up that custom from the Romans; though perhaps, in some few or small Ceremonies, of their feasting, some few who had been at Rome, or were inwardly acquainted with the Romans, might conform themselves to the Romans: For not only other Asiatickes, but the very jews used that custom, before ever Rome was thought of: much less will it ever be evicted, that the jews in their Sacred Paschalls, had any resemblance, with the profane feast of the Romans, which is the main point now in question. See the first book, (7. Chap.) what there I prove or disprove. PAR. 3. THe sixth point, wherein Pererius intended to show, the assimilation or correspondence of the jews, unto the Romans, either he choir forgot; and so I must let it die with him; or he did not mark it, or mis-marked it; and than it hath its answer under one of the other points. PAR. 4. SEptimò, saith he, the Romans were wont to sup, and feast; & accumbere in altis lectis, seu thoris, to lye-downe, on high-beds, Ind thoro Pater Aeneas sicorsus ab alio: Christ also did sup, at the Pharisees house, on an high bed: for the great sinner, Luk. 7.38. Stood at his feet behind him, weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the Ointment: Id autem fecit (saith Pererius) non procumbens, necgenibus nixa, sed (ut dixit Lucas) stans retrò, secus pedes ejus; quò evidenter ostenditur altitudo lecti, in quo discumbebat Dominus, that is, she did not that falling down, or kneeling on her knees; but (as S. Luke saith) standing behind jesus, at his feet, by which word, the height of the bed, on which our Saviour lay, is plainly shown: First, to the word of S. Luke, in which the pith, and marrow of his Argument consisteth: I say, with Lucas Brugensis on the place: the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, stans, or standing; is not necessarily to be taken, as opposite to lying down, or sitting: It may be taken, for any Posture; ut sit idem quod existens, & manens, and may signify, being, or remaining; as it often used: See Psal. 34.3. Who shall stand in his holy place? Yea (saith he) we may not doubt, but that she cast herself down, on the ground, to the feet of Jesus; which did either touch the earth; vel non perindè alte distabant; or were not very high above it; which killeth Pererius his opinion, in the eye: Cyprian (in Serm, de ablut: pedum) goeth further, saying; suum etiam caput sternebat calcandum pedibus jesu,, pro suppedaneo; she laid down her head under Christ's feet instead of a footstool, for him to tread upon; though the scripture mentioneth not, either her falling down to the ground, or her offering her head as a footstool, to be trod or trampled on, by our blessed Saviour; yet, that holy ecstasy of Repentance, might carry her, so fare, or farther: Maldonat, fellow Jesuit with Pererius, saith of her, Non dicitur stetisse, quod rectâ in pedes steterit; stetisse, id est, constitisse dicitur; she is not said to have stood, because she stood upright, on her feet; but she is said to have stood; that is to say, to have been there; the discumbing bed was not so high, that the woman standing upright, did kiss his feet, and wiped them with the hairs of her head: Mine own opinion is, she used the humblest gesture, that a contrite soul could suggest unto her; if she did cast herself down to the ground, as was usual, in adoration, if she risen on her knees, and wept, and prayed; yet because the principal posture, was, her standing, (though even standing, she might stoop, and weep, over the feet of our blessed Saviour, and wash, and wipe, and anoint them) it is said she was (standing) and stand she might in that sort, though the bed were very high: again, that Christ lay, on an high-bed; and that the custom of feasting, on high beds, was taken from the Romans, by the Jews: Pererius will never be able to demonstrate. Lipsius saith, Mensa collocabatur rotunda, humilis; there was placed, a low round Table; how then were the Toralia, alia? or the Torus, altus? how was the bed high: sigh the beds were not higher than the Tables? That the Romans used at first round Tables; I will confess with Lipsius, but that then, they had their fair discumbing beds, and from them did eat the meat, on those Tables; I will not believe; if the Table were round; or (which is less) of an oval form; the beds must be framed, in such sort, that the conveniency of eating, at those roundish tables, might not be hindered; but they must all come to their meat, at a fair proportionable distance; and so one side of a bed, at least made some what round, and orbicular, to come near to the round table; or else one who was farther off, must reach, and stretch himself, more than others did; to take hold of his meat: but I have not read in profane History, of the sides of their beds, made hollow and concave; or proportionate in roundness to their tables; nor doth Roman antiquity mention, that or Table, or beds were so inequally framed, that it were pain and trouble for some to come to their victuals, and easiness, and pleasure to others; such feasting was never generally observed; it would have bred strife for the easier places; whereas their main endeavours aimed at content, and all were fellows at feasting: again, one Swallow makes not a summer; one proof evinceth not a custom, or fashion; and it yet remaineth, to be evinced by Pererius, that the Romans had higher discumbing beds, than the ancient jews: Lastly, though I cannot directly evince the Negative, that Virgil had no ground, but his imagination, for high-beds, in those ancient times; yet I held it probablest, he Poetized in that point, rather than historified; writing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, at large; rather than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, verity, in exactness: but supposing all perfect truth: Pererius his collection is not sound: for if Aeneas, a great governor, did lie down and discourse from an high-bed; it followeth not that others then did so: and as I said, if other Latins, trojans, or Romans, or Jews in Christ's time, did so; or (if they did) that they did so in imitation of the Romans. PAR. 5. EIghtly, saith Pererius, solebant Romani coenaturi, & cónvivia inituri priùs detrahere sibi sole as; & nudis pedibus accumbere: the Romans when they were about to go to Supper, or to feast; were wont first of all, to pluck off their patens, and to lie down ; Christus etiam in ultimâ Coenâ, nudos Apostolorum pedes lauâsse creditur; & Magdalena nudos coenantis Christi pedes lavis, & unxit; Christ also at his last Supper, is supposed, to have washed his Apostles bare feet; and Mary Magdalen did wash and anoint the bare feet of her Saviour Christ, as he was at Supper? I answer to the phrase; why not rather, Lavit, than Lauâsse creditur? especially, sigh it is expressly said, joh. 13.12. that Christ washed their feet, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lavit pedes eorum, saith their own Vulgar; Marry Magdalen washed not his feet, so properly, as Christ washed the Apostles: but to the main; though both jews, and Romans were wont to feast , yet Pererius makes it not good, that the Jews borrowed the Custom of the Romans; which ought, chiefly to be handled: poor Cotta, to prevent farther stealing of his shoes (as he pretended) and yet to be like others at, or in, their Suppers; Excalceatus ire coepit ad coenam; Martial. (12.89.) He'gan to go unshod to Sup. And Martial. (3 49.) Deposui sole as,— I doff my sandals; at a feast of Ligurinus: Servi soccos detrabunt— Lectos sternunt, coenam apparent; my Servants pluck off my Pinsens; they make the beds, and provide Supper; saith Menedemus (in Heautontimor. Act. 1. Scen. 1.) Nor can we fairly suppose, but both Mary Magdalen washed Christ's naked feet; and Christ washed the bare-feetes of his Apostles; nor was the pedilavium of the Romans so ancient, as the Custom of the Jews: In Abraham's time, was there use of it. PAR. 6. NInthly, the Romans were wont at their feasts, to place below them, near their bosom; their Children, or dear friends: So did Christ to john, the chiefe-disciple, whom Christ loved; Ambrose, Nonnè tibi videtur Christus incidisse in collum joannis, quandò Ioannes erat in sinu, cervice recumbens reflexâ? Do not you think, that Christ leaned on john's neck, when john lay, in his bosom, looking backward? So fare Pererius: I answer, that granting all this to be true; yet Pererius his main intendment proceedeth lamely, that the jews did so, in imitation of the Romans; yet, is it likely that from the custom of discumbing on the breast of their friend, in their Suppers; was the phrase, borrowed of being in Abraham's bosom; yea even that divine speech, in which it is said, that the Son came out of the bosom of his Father, joh. 1.18. PAR. 7. Decimè, Rex Sacrorum, who was chiefest among the Roman Bishops, in, their Episcopal Suppers, which were most stately, and excessively profuse, possessed the highest of the middle bed, none lying above him: Likewise, the jews, as places of great honour, amant primos recubitus in coenis, Matth. 23.6. the uppermost rooms, at feasts; as our Translation rendereth it; and therefore they were much desired, by Pharisees: and truly, Christ, in the Supper, made to him, at Bethanic, lay down in the first, and highest place of the bed; for Mary Magdalen could not have poured the Alabaster box of Ointment, on his head, if Christ had lain in the middle-place; nor would john have lain in his bosom, if Christ had been in the lowest place of the bed. So fare Pererius: I answer, what he saith besides; that Christ persuaded the guests, who chose out the chiefest rooms, not to sit down, in the highest rooms, Luke. 14.7.8. But to sit down in the lowest room, ver. 10. seemeth to prove that Christ himself did not affect the highest rooms (and perchance possessed it not) for he would not go against his own advizoes, nor practise that which he faulted in the Pharisees. Indeed, it is a wellweighed argument of Pererius, that the resting of S. john upon the breast of our Saviour, both show that our blessed Saviour jesus Christ did lie above S. john: But that Mary Magdalen could not pour the Ointment on his head, if Christ had sat in the middle part of the bed; I see no reason to persuade it: Sure I am, one sinner stood at his feet behind him; and began to wash his feet with tears; and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them, with the ointment, Luk. 7.38. And it is as sure, that a woman, having an Alabaster box of very precious Ointment, poured it on his head, as he sat at meat, Math. 26.7. and it was her intention to anoint his body, Mark 14.8. and it is most likely she did so; for she came aforehand to anoint his body to the burial: but at their burials, they were anointed all over; and she anointed the Lord with Ointment, job. 11.2. Nor see I any thing to the contrary, but wheresoever any one lay in any bed, or any place of any bed, their heads, bodies, and feet, might be anointed by them, who stood behind them, if they would be at the cost and labour, and if the discumbent would permit it, the beds were not so broad, but they might reach over them: that some place was higher and some lower, on those beds, or, that some were chief, some mean, is confessed. They chose out the chief rooms, Luk. 14.7, there was a lowest room, vers. 9 and an higher, above the lowest, ver. 10. and an highest room, ver. 8. which was above the higher, and the comparative degree might be manifold in its latitude. That the chiefest place was due to Christ, in very many regards, wheresoever Christ supped, none will deny, that the prime place was offered unto him (for the most part) if not always, I verily believe: But some assume it as a truth, that the middle place was the chiefest in dignity: Cicero (lib. 9 Epist. ad Familiares in the last Epistle) telleth of a merry supper, that he was at, in Volumnius Eutrapelus his house, that Atticus lay above Cicero, and Verrius below him; yet Cicero was in dignity above Atticus: and in the luxurious Supper of Metellus, pontificis maximi, the Archbishop so called by Macrobius (Saturnal. 3.13.) though the Triclinia lectis eburneis strata fuerant; the Parlours were adorned with beds of Ivory, and both the Antipast and supper are set down, with almost incredible particulars; yet which is the highest place, or chiefest room, is not described: Nine were on two beds, it is likely, four on the one; Quintus Catulus, Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, D. Syllanus, Cajus Caesar, Rex Sacrorum: and on the second were five men, Pub. Scaevola Sextus, Quinius Cornelius; Pub. Volumnis: Pub. Albinovanus; & Lucius julius Caesar Augur: In tertio Triclinio, were six women: four Vestal Virgins; Popilia, Perpennia, Licinia, Aruntia; and the wife of the Archpriest, and Sempronia, one of their mothers-in-lawe; yet, who sat highest or chiefest in either of these tricliniary beds, is, rather to be guessed-at, then determined: But, I stand not much on these things: and yet it standeth with fair likelihood, that Christ took not the highest place for the reasons, , and for his great humility: for as he would be baptised of john, though john had need to be baptised of him, Matth. 3.14. And as he said unto john, suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us, to fulfil all righteousness; whereupon, John suffered him, ver. 15. Likewise, he might do in giving the upper-place to one of his Disciples or friends; and might allege the same reason, and then who durst deny him? especially consider the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, Matth. 20.28. in which regard also he condescended to wash all his Apostles feet; even judas his also, and subjected himself, and witnessed a good confession, under Pontius Pilate, 1 Tim. 6.13. For Christ was rich, yet for your sake, he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich, 2 Cor. 8.9. Luke 22.27. I am among you as he that serveth; all this, and more than this did Christ do, to give his Disciples examples of humility, & to take them off, from that ambitious humour, which so oft he found fault withal in them, even that very night, Luk. 22.24. Barradius saith expressly, Christ had the (middle place) of the bed, which was the chiefest place; Peter was above, john beneath in Christ's breast, yet me thinks, somewhat more might be said, not altogether improbably for Christ's being in the middle place, at Supper, as he was in other things, at other times: I omit, that he was the second person in the Trinity; that he was the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Mediator between God and man; nor stand I upon this point that he saith; where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the (midst) of them, Matth. 18.20. For it is not spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, bodily, or locally, but Metaphorically, and by a figure: More appropriately, Christ sat in the (midst) of the Doctors, Luk. 2.46. After his Resurrection Jesus stood in the (midst) of his Apostles, joh. 20.19. So, the doors being shut, jesus came, and stood, in the (midst) joh. 20.26. After his Ascension Christ was in the (midst) of the 7. golden Candlesticks, Rev. 1.13. and walked in the (midst of the 7. golden Candlesticks, Rev. 2.1. and in the (midst) of the throne, and of the 4. beasts; and in the midst of the Elders, there stood a Lamb, Revel. 5.6. To conclude, I see no proof; that the highest in situation, was the highest in dignity: For salomon's mother was not above him, though she was on his right hand, 1 King. 2.19. and Zebedees' children were to have been below Christ, if Christ had granted one to be on the right hand, and another on the left. Secondly, I see no proof that Christ was the highest or uppermost on the discumbing bed. Thirdly, I see no proof that this was the jewish custom, that the chiefest man should have the highest place: Pererius his own words are, judas discubuit in primo loco extremi lecti, qui proximus erat Christo, ad sinistram ejus; that is, judas lay in the highest place of the lowest bed, which was next to Christ, on his left hand; yet who dare say judas Iscariot was any way above the 4. Apostles, who are presupposed to lie under him? Lastly, if so it were, I see no proof, that the Jews borrowed that fashion from the Romans: I must be brief and pass over to another matter. PAR. 8. THe eleventh point insisted on by Pererius, standeth on these divers branches. 1. The Romans feasting, lay 3. on every bed; and all the guests were a triple-trine, for the honour of the nine Muses; yet, Non rarò, often (saith Pererius) 4. or 5. did lie on one bed; concerning four on one bed; Horace saith, Saepè tribus Lectis videas coenare quaternos, that is, Oft times you may see 12. on 3. beds sit, On each bed 4. and 4. themselves they fit. Again, though the Romans were wont to make 3. beds, at a feast; from whence the place of the feast had the name of Triclinium; yet sometimes 4. sometimes 5. beds were made, even to 10, yea, to 30. as Philander: so fare he. I answer, all this discourse is full of generality, ambiguity, and if not total impertinency, yet nothing to his main purpose; that the jews imitated the feast of the Romans: let me rove a little after the Rover: about Vespasianus his time, they had but one bed called sigma, Σ, from the form thereof: the Greeks', and after them the Latines named it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, stibadium; so Pliny, and this encompassed three sides of the feasting Table: Martial. (10.48.) Stella, Nepos, Cani, Cerealis, Flacce, venite, Septem sigma capit,— that is, Come to my house, you five be bold, My Table well will seven hold. Idem. (14.87.) Accipe lunatâ scriptum testudine sigma, Octo capit, veniat, quisquis amicus erit. that is, Accept this Table sent from me, Like a New-moon, 'tis shaped you see; Eight guests, I know, it well will hold, Let every friend come and be bold. Concerning the correspondence of guests to the Muses, it held sometimes, but the old adage cited by Alexander ab Alexandro (5.21. crosseth it; Septem Convivium; novem Convicium facere; that is, seven make a feast; nine, a frey; when they had the fewest guests, they had not under three; when they were the most at their ordinary repast there were not above 9 at the same board, on the same beds; yet extraordinarily, and at great feasts they had more discumbents, often they had but two beds: Plautus mentioneth, Biclinium, a Room, wherein two beds, or two Tables stood: julius Caesar had his Biclinium, as he passed the Provinces; yet Suetonius, (pag. 35.) in julio Caesare, saith; he feasted daily, Duobus Tricliniis; one, on which Cassocked Soldiers, with Philosophers, or Cloake-men did lie; on the other lay gowne-men and the chiefest of the Provinces: sometimes but one only lay on one bed, saith Cicero (in Pisonem) only Volumnius Eutrapelus, and his Cytheris lay on one bed, when Atticus, Cicero, Verrius, lay on a second bed; sometimes 4. sometimes 5. lay on one bed; the most usual course was indeed, for three beds; see Alexander ab Alexandro (Genial. dier. 5.21.) Macrobius, at that great feast of Metellus, placed four men on one bed, five on another, six women on the third bed: Lucius Verus Imperator, praeter exempla majorum, cum duodecem, solenni Convivio, primus accubuit; that is, Lucius Verus the Emperor, was the first, that contrary to the custom of his Predecessors, sat at a great feast, with twelve in his company, saith Alexander, ibidem: I think I should puzzle any of Pererius his friends, to bring me a Patteme (if that of the Emperor Verus be not one) that five lay on one bed, five on another; and but three on a third bed, as Pererius saith, Christ and his Apostles did. PAR. 9 THe second branch of Pererius his eleventh point, in Christ's last Supper, it is believed, that Christ and his Apostles did lie, on 3 beds. I answer, it is well, he ascribes it to belief; no proof infallible can be made; the most probable may be signed out, to be so: Secondly, when he saith, in Christ's last Supper, as the words may be spoken, or written; if fairly interpreted, for the last night of refreshing, that ever he had, before his death, or, for the last meal, that he are meat, with his Apostles: So Pererius had done more Schollar-like, more properly, more truly, to have distinguished between the 3. Suppers; the Paschall, the Common Supper; and the blessed Eucharist, which indeed was the last Supper only; though also it may be styled, the close of the great Supper, or the like, in the opinion of his own friends. PAR 10. A Third branch is this; concerning the order of discumbing: in the middle-bed lay three: Christ in the first place; john in the middle; Peter, in the third place: and therefore might fitly signify to john, that he might question Christ, concerning the traitor; So Pererius: Aquinas more sound reasoneth, that Petrus was remotus â Domino, Peter sat remote from his Master; and the Scripture is full, that Simon Peter beckoned to john, that he should ask, who it should be, of whom he spoke, Joh. 13.24. Such beckoning needed not, if Peter had lain close by john, and touched him; and if Peter's head had reached to John's breast, as john's did to Christ's breast, for such was their manner of discumbing, even in Pererius his own judgement: but (beckoning) signifieth a local distance, where speech cannot be so conveniently had, as might have been, if Peter lay on the same bed, with S. John, and under him. Barradius is express, that Peter lay above Christ, and john below him; Peter had the highest place, in that place, or bed, saith Maldonat; and Christ might lie, on Peter's lap; as john did on Christ's, who can reconcile these discordant Jesuits? for the highest place of the lowest bed; which was nearest to Christ's left hand, lay Judas: for so could Christ easily give him, the dipped sop, saith Pererius. Conjectures, when will ye leave off your vastness of conjecturing? I doubt not but they were so placed, that Christ might have given to any one of his Apostles bread; yea, or meat, if he would: nor was the distance so fare, but they might have reached one to another, if they had resolved, and stirred to do so; especially they, who lay on the middle-table. It is most true, what the Divine Saint Austin saith (Contra Maximinum Arianum, 3.3.) In the Scriptures, ex eo, quod Scriptum est debemus etiam colligere, quod non est Scriptum; from that, which is written, we may collect that, which is not written; yet, we must not look for Figs on the Vine; nor Grapes, upon the Olive-tree: the Genuine fruit, the unforced collection, the fair resultance, is highly commendable: Te●tullian (de pudicitia) satius est sapere, in Scriptures sanctis, quod minus, quam contra; Humanae sapientiae pars magna est, velle quaedam nescire; that is, it is better, in the Scriptures, to be wise, a little too little, than too much; It is a high point of wisdom, in men; to be willingly ignorant of some things; or, to that effect, saith julius Scaliger: Basilius (in Regulis brevioribus, regula 235. and 261.) Nè nos ingeramus ad ea, quae ad nos non spectant; let us not meddle, with those things, with which we have nothing to do. PAR. 11. THe last branch of the eleventh Point, is more crooked, and out of the way, than the rest: Quoniam Apostoli (saith Pererius) diversis & dissitis locis discumbebant; proptereà, non potuit Christus, manu suâ omnibus, & singulis, eucharistiam exhibere, sed dixit, accipite, & dividite inter vos: that is, because the Apostles lay in divers, and several places; therefore Christ could not deliver the blessed Eucharist, with his hand, to all, and every of the Apostles; but said; Take this, and divide it among you? I answer, they were not so fare divided one from another, but that, by Pererius his own Confession (in the twelfth point) the Apostles are, out of the same platter with Christ, as is not obscurely signified, by those words, Matth. 26.33. and his parallel, with the Roman fashion, implieth so much. Secondly, though the Romans had great dishes, very great; yet had they, at their Tables, more, than one dish; and eaten of such meat, as they fancied, and not always all, out of one dish; and, though the whole Paschall-lambe were placed in one dish (and that had need be a great dish; especially, if it were a great Lamb, and almost a year old (for they might choose such an one) as I said before:) yet, I doubt not, but the sour herbs were in another; and that, in the common and second Supper, there were more, than one dish. PAR. 12. LAstly, how supinely doth this great Scholar confound these Suppers! Supposing the blessed Sacrament, to be, whilst they were eating; either the paschal Lamb; or, of the second Supper, whilst they were discumbing, at the second board together; of which, at large, hereafter. I think the Reverence; yea, the adoration due to Christ present; and by his opinion, due to the Sacrament, at the elevation; should have made him distinguish the several Suppers; or, is it likely, that Christ would change, the old Sacrament of the Paschall-Lambe, into the more blessed Sacrament, of his body and blood, disannulling the former; and, till the world's end, establishing the latter; and cause his Apostles, to show no more devotion, than they did, at their usual repast? Or, did Christ say, Accipite, & dividite inter vos, take this, and divide it among you, as it is, Luke 22.17. because, Christ would not give to all, and every one of his Apostles, the Eucharist with his own hand, as discumbing aloofe-off, from him: must this great Rabbi Pererius, be put to his A. B. C? Must he be new catechised, in the Principles of Religion? What S. Luke saith; Dividite inter vos; was not any part of the Eucharist, which, Nota. in the same Saint Luke, is afterwards consecrated; both the Bread, ver. 19 and the Wine, ver. 20. but, it was part of the Wine, at the Paschall-Supper; which they were bid to take, and divide, between themselves, as appeareth from the 15. verse, to the 19 Indeed, both Saint Matthew, and Saint Mark, have it; edentibus illis, as they did eat; but, what saith that learned Franciscus Lucas Brugensts, on the words, Matth. 26.21. Edentibus illis? Non tam de comestione ipsa, hoc est, actu comedendi, quàm de convivio, hi● sermo est; The Evangelist here speaketh; not so much of the eating itself; that is to say, of the very act of eating, as of the Feast: and, on the same words, ver. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as they did eat; Quod non de actu coenandi, aut comedendi, intelligendum est; sed de coenâ, sive convivio ipso; quasi diceret, Coena adhuc durante, mensa nondum ablata; non est verisimile, quod novum, & sacrosanctum corporis sui cibum, miscuerit jesus, cum cibo profano. So he: which words are not to be understood, of the act of Supping, or of eating; but of the Supper, or Feast itself; as if he should say; whilst Supper did yet last; or, before the Table was removed: It is not likely, that Christ mingled the new, and thrice-holy meat, of his most blessed body, with profane meat: but, of this, again, hereafter: I rather interprer, edentibus ipsis, before they were parted, from the feast, or, before they removed, out of that room. Maldonate, on the words; they are not to be understood, Quasi durante adhuc Coena id fecerit, statim perana est, antequam surgerent, antequâm mensurae, & ciborum reliquiae removerenter; that is, as if Christ spoke those words, whilst the Supper lasted; but presently, after Supper was ended; before they risen from the Table; before bread, and salt, and the fragments were removed: Beza dislikes not this Interpretation, quùm autem cibum sumpsissent, when they had done eating: for, it is clear, that the blessed Sacrament was administered, after Supper; post agnum typicum, expletis epulis, corpus dominicum datum discipulis, saith the Ecclesiastical Hymn; Ergo, post Coenam, & epulas omnes; therefore after Supper, and all Feasting, saith Barradius, (Tom. 4. pag. 64.) Luke 22.20. Likewise also, he took the Cup, after Supper; the word (likewise) implying; that after Supper also he took the Bread; Saint Paul, 1 Cor. 11.25. After the same manner, he took the Cup when he had supped. Lastly, to me it seemeth most probable; that Christ gave to every one of his Apostles present, a piece of that bread, which he broke into several parcels, and gave the Sacramental bread to them himself, with his own hand; and said, Take, Eat: but the wine was all, in one cup, and undivided, and all the rest might take it, one after another; after he did perhaps give to one alone the Cup; as was the fashion among the Jews; where, the master of the Family began, and every man did not take it particularly, from the hand of the Governor of the Feast; but, it went round, and one received it, in order, after another, and from another, in Orbem: and yet, perhaps, the word (likewise) may import, that he did in like manner, by the Cup; as he did, by the Bread; for, he might reach it, to every one of them; thereby distinguishing it, from all other Cups, and drink, as taken from his most sacred hands immediately; and, by the same hands, given to every one of his disciples, that were present; wholly abrogating the old Sacrament; wholly superinducing, and establishing the most blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist: but of these things, more at large; if it please God, in the third Book. PAR. 13. THe twelfth point instanced by Pererius; the Romans eaten all of the same platters, and in common, which seemed more civil, and friendly, saith, Pererius; and to that purpose, used great platters; Pliny (15.01.) mentioneth the vast charges of Aesop, the Tragedian; he paid for one platter, sestertium centies; and Aesop, the Tragedian his son, was so prodigal, ut uniones ace●o liquefactos coenis apponeret; he would have pearls dissolved in Vinegar, set before him, at Supper; as Pliny observeth. Tertullian (de Pallio) relateth of the same Aesop's; the father, with costly, melodious, prating-chirping birds; sexcentorum millium patinam conflavit; the meaning is, one dish of birds, cost him, six hundred thousand sesterces; whereupon. Saint Hirome, (ad Salvinam) giveth his seasonable Counsel; procul sint a conviviis tuis, aves; quibus amplissima patrimonia avolant; let not such birds be, at thy feast, on whose wings most large patrimonies fly-away, and come to nothing: the son, to outvie the father, Margarita vel ipso nomine pretiosa dehausit, ciedo ne mendiciùs patre coenasset; Drank dissolved precious stones, lest he should sup more poorly, and more beggarly, than his father; and because, he was most admirably pleased with the taste, he gave to every one of the guests, one dissolved pearl, Margarite, or union, saith Pliny, (9.35. & 35.12.) & the foresaid Pliny mentioneth the capatious platters of Vitellius; which, for the immense, & huge greatness, Mutianus called Paludes, Fens, Marshes, Moors, or Ponds: I answer, if those Tablevessells had broth in them, or spoon meat, Mutianus fitly styled them. Pools; if dry meats did stuff them up; he might have rather called them. Cookes-stalles, or Butchers-dressers. Certain it is, the Ramanes used great platters, or rathercauldrons, than platters: Martial (13.81.) maketh mention of lata patella (though a broade-little-platter, is not so proper) Quamvis lata gerat patella Rhombum, Rhombus latior est tamen patella. When Marshal invited julius Cerealis to Supper (lib. 11.53.) one dish could not hold, the poor Poet's meat; and the same Martial (10.48.) reckoneth up, at his feast, more variety, then could well be comprehended, in one dish: Martial (4.46.) Sabellus, at his Saturnalia, had store of diversities to eat, and Septenariam Synthesin, a nest of seven Cups, and had he but one platter? Plutarch (in Antonio) saith, not only whole Boars were brought in, to their Tables, but all that was boiled, or roasted, was served in whole; therefore, they must needs have monstrous great dishes, to carry them in; yea Cincius, who persuaded the Fannian Law, objected as a fault, to that age, that they were served, at their Tables, porco Trojano; not with a whole Boar only, at one time roasted and served in; but with a Boar stuffed inwardly, with other beasts; by pudding, or other delicates; and therefore called the Trojane Boar; because the Trojan Horse was so stuffed, lined, and great, and ready to burst, with armed men, saith Macrobius (Saturnial. 3.13.) and there, he reckoneth, among many other things, before Supper, patinam ostrearum peloridum, a platter full of monstrous-great-huge Oysters; and at Supper, patinam pisicum, patinam suminis, a dish of fish, and a dish of tripes, with abundance of other meats; which, of necessity, were to be in several dishes: Pliny (lib. 33.11.) saith, there were in Rome, in his time, above fivehundred chargers, è centenis libris argenti; weighing an hundred pound weight apiece, of silver; and Drusellanus had so great a Charger, that, before it was framed, they first built a shop of purpose, to work on it; the old former shop was too little; and yet, this Drusellanus was but a servant of Glaudius; which vast platters began, about the days of Sylla: Gellius (Noct. Attict. 15.8.) thus, praefecti popinae, atque luxuriae negant coenam lautam esse, nisi cum libentissimè edis, auferatur, & alia esca melior, & amplior succenturietur; that is, the Masters of Ordinaries, or Taverns, and guides of luxury, say, it is no choice supper; unless, even then, when you eat heartiest, that dish be taken away, and other meat be brought, in the room of it, and that meat be, both better and greater; and this, among them, was accounted, Flos coenae; the chief grace of a full supper: the same Gutnals maintained, that no bird might be wholly eaten, but such, as a Lark, or Nightingale; and, unless, there were such plenty of other birds, and crammed foul, that the guests might be fully satisfied, with their very rumps, and thighs, they held it but a poor feast; and that they had no palate, who did, or do eat, any part of the wings, breast, or body: So much, out of Gellius from Phavorinus: Aureus immodicis Turtur te clunibus implet; Martial, (3.59. that is, The golden-feathered Turtle doth thee fill; With her fat-swelling buttocks (fed with skill:) juvenal, (satire. 5. ver,. 166.) speaks, as of a choice favour, that one should give— Aliquid de clunibus apri, a taste of his gammons; when as, to others, Veniet minor altilis; others should be served, with courser far: Seneca (Epist. 47. Cùm ad coenandum discumbimus, alius sput a detergit, alius reliquias temulentorum subtus colligit; alius, pretiosas aves scindit, pectus, & Clunes, certis ductibus, circumferens eruditam manum, in frusta excutit; Infelix, qui huic uni rei vivit, ut altilia dicenter secet, nisi quòd miserior est qui hoc voluptatis causâ docet; quàm quinecessitatis discit; that is, when we lie down to Supper, one servant wipeth away the spittle; another stoopeth down, and gathereth up the offals, or remains of such, as are drunk; a third carves up the costly birds; and guiding, here and there, round about, his skilful hand (and crooked little finger) after a set, and constant form of cutting, divides into several pieces, the breast, and buttocks, that is, their thighs, and rumps; unhappy man! who liveth only, to carve up fowls handsomely, and decently; but, he is more miserable, who (teacheth) it, for voluptuousness; than he, who (learneth) it, for necessity sake: I will only glance at that beastly monster of men, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that unclean spirit, Tiberius Caesar; who created a Magistrate, called, forsooth, â voluptatibus; an Inventor, Procurer, and guide of new pleasures, fresh delights; as it is, in Suetonius: and though, these abuses were justly taxed by Seneca; yet, it grieveth me to say, but that, I both find it so, and think that Seneca, the Philosopher, was a very compound of Sin, as bad, as any, whom he disapproved: Cornelius Tacitus (qui Antiquitatum canos collegerat, as Tertullian (ad Nation, 2.12.) phrazeth it; who gathered up the very hoary hairs, which fell from Antiquity; and was the best humane Historiographer (except, when he speaketh of the jews, or Christians) that ever wrote, relateth many observable passages concerning him: Suilius accused him, for defiling of a Prince's bed, (An. 13.10.) and he was justly banished by Claudius, saith Suilius, ibid. and when Claudius was dead, he made a most spitish, and revengeful invective against him, in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; he was railed at, by Agrippina herself, who pocured Seneca his return from exile, for quarrelling, and debating the rule of the whole world (Annal. 13.3.) Suilius further accused him, that he had cozened men of their Legacies, and such also, as died without children; he was further complained on, by Suilius, that he had got, within four years, two thousand thousand, three hundred forty three thousand, seven hundred, and fifty pounds; even three thousand times, three hundred thousand Sesterces, which a● ounteth, of our Coin, to, 2343750. pounds; and though the informer Silius, was condemned into exile, yet, saith Tacitus himself, it was not without spot, or touch on Seneca his credit (Annal. 13.10. in initio) Seneca further, consented to the Parricide of Agrippina (Annal. 4.2.) (not considering, that if he killed his mother, he would not stick at the murder of his Schoolmaster) yea, he was accused by others, that the thought, to win the people's hearts, and the report was, saith he, (Annal. 15.14. in fine) that Subilus Flavius, with the Centurions, in secret council (not without Seneca's privity) had determined, that after Nero had been slain, by the help of Piso; Piso also should have been slain, and the Empire delivered to Seneca, as to one just, and upright; to this end, he made pleasant gardens, — Magnos Senecae praedivitis hortos, saith juvenal, (satire. 10.) and, in gardens, and stately buildings, he did almost exceed the Prince (Annal. 14.14.) but, what saith Seneca himself, in his own defence; he confesseth in his Oration to Nero (Annal. 14.14.) that Nero had enriched him, with infinite wealth; and by confessing, that he was once content with a little, he secretly acknowledgeth, that of late, he was more covetous; and could not deny, but he abounded, in scope of grounds, and usury, in many places; (Italy, and the Provinces were drawn dry, by his excessive usury, Annal. 13.10.) and his usury extended even into our Britain, as Lipsius recordeth it; that he was dimmed, and dazzled with wealth, that he spent his time, in gardens, and houses of pleasure; that he could not sustain the burden of his riches, and longer; yet, when he was put (for being found manifestly privy to the conspiracy, Annal. 15.14. perhaps for the cunning affecting of the Empire) to death; almost, at the last breath, he complained against Nero; neither did there remain any thing, saith he, to be done (Annal. 15.14.) after he had murdered his Mother, and Brother, but that he should add the death of his Master, and Tutor: but what saith Tertullian (Apologet cap. 12.) Seneca convitiatus est Deos, he railed at the gods; see a fragment of it, in Augustine (De Civ. 6.10.) from whom Lipsius hath taken it (Elector 2.18.) if he jeered at the Roman gods, (or Idols rather) I commend him; Cyprian thus; Pudeat te eos colere, quos ipse defends; pudeat de iis tutelam sperare, quos ipse tueris; one may be ashamed to worship those Gods, whom himself defends, or lock for help from them, whom yourself do help and maintain; his master Tertullian (ad Natisnes. 1.9.) pudeat, deos ab homine defendi, it is ashame that gods should need man's Patrimony, and be upheld by them; yet while men continue the profession of the same Religion; it is unfit to mock at their own Religion but so did Seneca, who showeth no token, any where in his undoubted works of approving the Christians, and raileth downright, at the jews, as being Natio Scelestissima, likewise Cornelius Tacitus, doth lay cruel aspersions, both on jews & Christians; and calleth the Christian Religion, Maleficium; though he confess they were falsely accused by Nero, for firing Rome, (An. 15.10. And yet they were most direfully punished both day, and night: but you will say, his books are Divine? It is true, that never any profane Heathen man wrote better; though Gellius (12.2.) senselessly and horribly, profaneth his works; but take my opinion withal; till he saw himself decayed in Court-credit, or till he repent of his ill courses, he wrote none of his diviner works; but toward his end, because his wealth could not uphold him, for the present; he laid a foundation for future estimation, by writing most excellent books, and Epistles; but in his flourishing times, he was very wicked; for Dion (in Nero's life) recordeth: Seneca was most Covetous, and that which was an effect of his Covetousness; he did unjustly accuse too many, unto Nero; and so begged their goods; and Dion accuseth him in particular; that Seneca played the Adulterer, with julia, the Daughter of the ever-honoured Germanicus, and was not his excess abominable, when he had, as Dion saith, five hundred Caedar-Tables, standing on Ivory feet, to feast upon? PAR. 14. THe Apostles also at the last Supper, eaten out of the same dish with Christ, saith he, for Matth. 26.23. where judas is said to dip his hand with Christ in the dish: I answer, because he did, doth it therefore follow they had but one dish? and because (he) did so, did (all) so? and every one? The sauce of the Paschall-Lambe, was to be of divers sorts of herbs; who ever said, they were served in with the Lamb, in the same dish? Besides, they must needs have more Platters, to hold their second, or ordinary Supper, and the sauces thereunto belonging; such as was the dish, in which Christ dipped the sop before he gave it to judas; and the ordinary Supper was made up, both of the flesh of the Heard, as well as of the fold, and could not conveniently be comprised in one dish. The Egyptians used such great Platters, as may be gathered, from Cleopatra her bankers, and the jews had as great, and former correspondence with the Egyptians, before the Romans. Briefly, I do not see any inkling of any great Platters, in Christ's time, among the Jews, save such ones, as might hold the whole Paschall-Lambe, but such Platters were, no doubt, even from the first eating of the Paschall-Lambe; which was long before the Romans were a people or Nation: when salomon's daily provision or for one day, was 30. measures of fine flower, and 60. measures of meal, and 10. fat Oxen, and 20. Oxen out of the Pastures, and an 100 sheep, besides Hearts, and Roebucks; and falo-deer, and fatted foul, 1 King. 4.22.23. I cannot choose but think the Jews had great Platters, and this was, before Romulus was borne: Neither did ever Roman King, Consul, or Emperor, for daily provisions, come nigh Solomon; wherefore, the jews could not take this Custom, from the Romans; but the Romans might imitate the jews: twelve silver chargers were offered, Numb. 7.48. of 130. shekels weight, after the shekel of the Sanctury, and they must needs be great: afterward, Cyrus' re-delivered to the Israelites, to carry to Jerusalem, 30. chargers of gold, a 1000 chargers of silvers; 30. basons of gold; silver basons, of a second sort, 410. Lastly, if we grant all this, yet is Pererius never the nearer his main conclusion; that they borrowed this fashion of the Romans: Judg. 5.25. She brought forth Butter in a Lordly dish; Phialâ magnatum usa est, she made use of a plate, fit for a Prince; which (saith Peter Martyr, on the place) was very great; Poculis enim peramplis, ac patentibus, insignes vini solent accipi: For great men do use to be entertained, in very great, and spacious cups, pieces, or vast drinking bowls. Cicero (in Antonium) mentioneth Anthony his immania pocula, vast drinking bowls, in Conviviis magnatum consueuê unt sub finem, afferri majora pocula; towards the end of the banquets of Noble men, greater cups did use to be brought forth: in Cratere insignium, in a goblet of Noble men, as Vatabl is hath it, making it to be a drinking-cup: Tremellius hath it, In simpulo magnificorum, in a Chalice of honourable magnificoes; or persons, id est, amplè, ut ad satietatembiberit; that is to say, saith he, that he might drink his fill. All are in one error; the Lordly dish was not to drink in, but to eat on; who gives butter, in a great drinking vessel? The Lordly dish was either some great or costly platter: R. David kimkis expoundeth it, in mine opinion, fare more likely that jabel, after she had given him drink, now sets something for to eat: and in this sense Peter Martyr expungeth the word (phiala) which is often used for a (drinking) vessel, rather than an (eating) one; unless saith he, by (phiala) genus vasis intellexerimus, in quo & ipse Cibus apponi soleat; that is, unless (phiala) may be taken for a Platter, out of which we eat meat: in the great feast, or Supper, (as the 70. have it) which Belshazzar made to a thousand of his Lords, Dan. 5.1. though Belshazzar, and his Lords, his wives, and his Concubines did drink, in such sacred vessels, as were fit, to contain, and handsomely redeliver the wine; yet, I presume they drank not, in basons, and Chargers, of which they had store, from jerusalem; and I doubt not, but they did also eat, out of such holy vessels, as were convenient to hold the meat; though so much be in drinking, and carousing, than in eating: Nor could this great feast be without great platters, and chargers: I am sure, some of the vessels of the house of God, were great; 2 Chro. 36.18. and are called goodly vessels, or vessels of desire. PAR. 15. THe close of the 12. point in Pererius his resemblances, is this; the Romans did lie, not sitting on the beds, but stretched themselves along, resting on their left elbows, or on pillows, or cushions, sometimes with legs stretched out at length: now and then the ham of the right leg leaning on the left knee; then with feet folded up interchangeably; at some times weaving one leg within another, as if they sat on benches; that I may use the old words of Pemponius, in a bodily posture, and gesture, like to Tailors; and as Turks, and other Eastern people use to sup, that is, crosslegged: concerning this fashion he expresseth nothing of the jews imitation of the Romans, Secondly, he denyeth and yet confesseth the sitting on the beds; the truth is, the greater part of their time spent in feasting, they did lie all along; thence hath it the name of discubitus; yet because they could not so conveniently eat or drink, lying at full length; as if they sat up, it must fairly follow, they did rise up, and sit sometimes also, as, sick people with us, when they keep their beds, are raised up right, or almost upright even unto their middle: that they may, as it were sit, and most commodiously eat and drink: So did both Jews, and Romans; they changed their gestures, and postures, as was easiest for them; or else, we must acknowledge them, to be fools; for nature delighteth in variety. I would not wish one a greater torment, than to lie along all the feast time, without any manner of sitting up: their Suppers were sometimes, from night to morning, Martal, (7.9.) In lucem coenat Sertorius: Sertorius useth for to sup, till the night set, or, till darkness fly, and day be up: Martial, (1.29.) Hesterno foetêre mero, qui credit Acerram, Fallitur; in lucem, semper Acerra bibit. that is, Who ever thinks Acerra stinks, with wine he drank o'er night, Is much deceived; Acerra drinks, until it be day light. If they had eaten, and drank (lying along) it had been a woeful Supper; it would rather have choked them than afforded them delight, and ease; therefore as they did, most an end discumbere, during their times of discoursing; so divers times they rested their bodies on their elbows; and their elbows on pillows, or cushions; and at other times they sat upright; and they may be truly said to fit, even then when they are as truly said to lie on their beds: See what weapons, I used, in the sift grapple with Pererius. That I make not mine own, ipse dixit, or affirmation, for the guide unto error; I have learned this, from that great Antiquary Rosinus, who (Antiquit. Roman. 5.28.) describeth the Roman discumbing, partly from books; partly from monuments, thus they lay with their heads somewhat lifted up, pillows at their backs: If more lay upon one bed, the first lay at the head of the bed, whose feet reached behind the back of the second; the second man's neck and pole, being to the Navel of the first man, a pillow being between, and his legs lay at the back of the third man; and so the third fourth and fifth; when they had ended eating, they laid down their heads; on the bolster, and sometimes they sat bolt-upright: He who will see more rarities, concerning this point, let him have recourse to Dionysius Lambinus, in his edition on the fourth Satire, of the 2. book of Horace, who hath exceeded all other in this point: the same Rosinus (cap. 29.) saith, from Macrobius, and Plutarch; Veteres foris coenitare, nec mensam omninò tollere, sed semper aliquid, super eâ reliuquere, consueuêrunt; our Ancestors were wont to sup, without doors, and removed not the Table, but always left something upon it: Rosinus (cap. 30.) confirmeth another custom, which before I touched at from Peter Martyr; A parvis calicibus incipiebant & in capaciores desinebant; they began with small Cups, and ended in full bowls; Nature being glutted with great draughts, at the beginning, the feasters drank the less, and if they do but as it were kiss the cup, drink a little at first; 4. spoonfuls, (which was the measure of a Cyathus) they might afterwards drink larger draughts, and greater quantities: And they commonly used this form of speech; Bene te, Bene me, Bene, etc. God bless thee, and God bless me, God bless our friends, and all the company. Pitissando releverunt omnia mihi dolia, saith he, in Terence; concerning the women, by simpering, and sipping, they drew all the liquid linings out of my hogshead, or Tuns, (he saith not amphoras, which were 30. times, less vessels) they left no liquor, in the vessels, either greater wooden vessels, or less Jugges, or stone vessels: who desireth to know more of these points, let him; saith Rosinus consult with Justus Lipsius, Hierome Mercurialis, Coelius Rhodiginus. PAR. 16. THirteenthly, saith Pererius; the Romans, in their feasting, appointed Magistrum potandi, seu Regem vini, (for so they called him) a King of good fellows: That the Romans had it (always) thus, may be denied, or for the most part may be justly questioned: as in ordinary feasting; the master of the family; or he at whose charge the feast was made, or his substitute, or especially deputed friend or the chiefest man, in esteem was called the governor of the feast, (such a superintendent, was the Architriclinus, in the Nuptiall-feast, at Cana of Galilee, Job. 2.8.) So I cannot imagine, this was practised daily, at their suppers; but on some great momentuall occasions, they might have one; I mean, both Jews and Romans, who might have such titles given unto him: In Varro, the Ruler of the Feast is called Modimperator: out of doubt, Christ was Rex Sacrorum, the King of the Ceremonies; which was a name of high account, given by the Romans, to chief men: Christ was also Pater-familias; and the chiefest in the Tricoenium; and in a large sense, he who is Rex mundi, the King of the world, may be called, Rex Vini, the King of wine; but to intimate, (much more to say) that Christ was Magister Potandi, the master of drinking; or, King of wine, Rex Vini, in the Roman sense, doth derogate from our Saviour; and if Pererius apply it not that way; it needed not to have been mentioned at all; when we speak of the Paschall-Supper: I cannot pass by that heathenish observation; Numero Deus impare gaudet, God affects not the Even, but the Odd number; and amongst men, their inclinations bended that way, in very many matters: in the very point of bibbing, and carousing, the Grecians had a kind of diverbium; Plautus (in Sticho, Act. 5. Scen. 4.) hath it thus; Cantio est Graeca, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 'tis a Greek Caroll, drink thou three, or else, five cups, end not thy quaffing, in four cups: In the beginning of the same Scene, is the manner, and form of the Jovial indulging, by the Roman Servingmen,— Cado te praeficio, Sticho, O Stichus, I make thee Ruler, and master, over my wine, and wine vessel; and there, he entitleth him to be, Strategus Convivii, the General of the feast; then follow their familiar options, and frolickes; when they drank, Bene vos, Bene nos; Bene te, Bene me, Bene nostram etiam Stephanium; that is, God bless you, and God bless us, God bless me, and God bless thee; And may our sweetheart likewise have, Life, health, prosperity, I do Crave. The Latins excess of drinking (which began after the Jewish Compotations, and good-fellowship) I handled before; and so I quit this matter. PAR. 17. AS the Epitome of all; Pererius saith two things: first, I have disputed these things briefly, concerning the manner of supping, and feasting; of the old Romans, and of the jews, in the time of Christ: he should have said of the ancienter Jews, and latter Romans; for it is most certain that some of these ceremonies were used by the jews, before Rome had a Being: nor hath Pererius exactly proved; nay, scarce so much as probablized, that any one of these Jewish customs was borrowed from the Romans: Secondly, (saith he) I touched those points which may seem to confer much, to illustrate the History of Christ's last Supper: I answer, if he understand by Vltima Coena all that was done at the three Suppers, in the night that Christ was betrayed, he speaketh somewhat to the point: But Pererius did not so much as dream of the second, common, or ordinary Supper; and erred concerning the discumbing at the Paschall: and for the most holy of holies, the third Supper, the Supper of the Lord, the Eucharistical Supper; Pererius against all authority, against sense, likelihood, reason, or devotion, avoucheth; that the Apostles took it, as they did discumbere on their beds; for who can think, that our most glorious, most wise Saviour, would sit on a bed, or lie on a bed; and then, and there, administer that heavenly banquet, the food, and refreshment of men's souls? who descended from his discubitory bed, in the second Supper, and put off his , and girded himself to wash the feet of his Disciples; was he more cleanly, in Ceremonialibus; or Moralibus? in Matters of Ceremony, or Morality; then reverend or Devout, in Sacris? in point of Religion? — Credat Judaeus Apella, Non ego,— Believe it Apella, of the jewish seed, It ne'er shall come into my Christian Creed. Hac hactenùs: So much for this. PAR. 18. MY Conclusion is directly opposite to Pererius, and is thus briefly determined, viz. the jews in Christ's time, did not either through flattery or emulation, keep the Roman fashion at feasts, and suppers; but rather the jews kept, their own old custom, which the Romans borrowed from the Grecians, and the Grecians from the Asiatickes. The Prayer. O Thou Eternal truth, who knowest that in this Controversy with my adversary; I principally sought after thy mistaken verities; not after any vanity; I adore thee with my soul for such Patefactions; as thou hast vouchsafed unto me; and in most submissive manner beseech thee to pardon my errors; and to guide me in the true way, which leadeth to life everlasting; for Jesus Christ his sake; who is the way, the truth, and the life. Amen. CHAP. XXII. The Contents of the two and twentieth Chapter. 1. How Christ with his 12. Apostles, kept his last Passeover: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: two Disciples prepare it: Christ with the 12. eat it: in the Evening, they sit down. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expounded: S. Matthews Evangelisme, written in Hebrew: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, its divers significations; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, interpreted: The Apostles, in the description of the Lords Supper, single out words, properly signifying, lying down. 3. Our English Translatours excused. 4. Sitting Communicants censured. 5. As they did eat expounded. 6. The use of the word, Verily; Amen, its divers acceptions. 7. Future things are to others unknown; to Christ known. The Table and its rites sacred, even among the heathen. 8. Judas not necessitated, to betray Christ: the manner of Christ's detecting him, Traitor. 9 What was done in the first Paschall-Supper: Judas detected for a Traitor in a generality; Disciples inquire. 10. Judas discovered for a Traitor, in a mixed manner: good for judas not to have been borne. 11. Thou sayest, is no full discovery of judas, to be the Traitor: Simon de Cassia his error: judas, his treason not discovered till the second Supper; divers reasons thereof. PARAGRAPH. 1. HAving ended whatsoever I thought convenient about the Passeover; so fare as the old Testament directed, or explained, or as the voluntary practice of the jews was. The next part of my method leadeth me to handle how our blessed Saviour, with his Apostles observed this his last Passeover, (which most properly may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Passeover of the Cross) so far as the New Testament affordeth light. S. Mark describeth the Paschall Supper briefly: observe these things: first, although S. Luke saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Luk. 22.13. two Disciples went from Christ, to prepare the Passeover; yet in the Evening Christ came with the 12. Mar. 14.17. therefore they who prepared the Lamb, viz. Peter and john, Luke 22.8. went forth to meet Christ; and went bacl again to him (whilst some other of the house tended it) to signify, all was prepared; whereupon Christ knowing the Passeover was made ready, ver. 16. He cometh in the evening with the 12. not with 10. only, but with the 12. Secondly, They sat, it is added, Luke 22.14. When the hour was come he sat down: So they might be in the house before; and might both say and do divers other things; yet, till the exact appointed time of the Passeover, they sat not down to eat it. Thirdly, he sat down and the 12. Apostles with him, ver. 14. the circumstance of that number is exactly instanced upon also, Matth. 26.20. Though other where, it is likely that more than 12. did feast with Jesus, Matth. 9, 10. Sinners sat down with Jesus, and his Disciples, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Fourthly, S. Mark useth the phrase, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (as they sat) Mark. 14.18. which is all one in sense with that, Matth. 26.20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he sat down with them, both words being derived, from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to sit down. PAR. 2. I Cannot omit, how the learned do interpret the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Maldonate thinks, that at the Paschall they did not discumbere but sedere: Barradius judgeth it more likely to be so: accordingly, our late translation rendereth it, he sat down, Matth. 26.20. They sat and did eat, Mark. 14.18. He sat down, and the 12. Apostles with him, Luk. 22.14. Moreover, Irenaeus (31.1.) saith S. Matthew wrote his Evangelisme in the Hebrew tongue: and I am sure in the Hebrew Gospel, according to S. Matthew, set out by Munster it is said, he sat; jashab gnal hashulcan, sedit ad mensam, He sat at the Table, as Munster translateth it; yet in the Greek the words which properly signify sitting are not used in the text, nor any one of them: the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is often used, when no (lying down) can be understood, Matth. 19.28. When the Son of man, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, shall sit in his glory; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ye also shall sit; Mark. 10.37. grant that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; we may sit, one, on thy right hand, another on thy left; and (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) signifieth (sitting) at meat, as opposed, in my opinion, to (recumbing) Gen. 43.33. They (sat) before him; and in those times, it was not the Egyptian guise, to lie all along at meat; Exod. 32.6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The people (sat) down, to eat, and to drink; which words are repeated, 1 Cor. 10.7. Nor were discubitory beds in fashion, in the wilderness: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, runneth to the same sense, Matth. 22.44. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (sit) thou on my right hand, excluding (discumbing) beds Matth. 26.69. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Peter (sat) without in the Palace; you must not think, he (lay) all along, basking himself against the fire; yet, Peter was warming himself, Mark. 14.67. and more expressly, Luke 22.55. The fire was in the midst of the Hall, and they (sat) down together with Peter in the midst of them; for so runneth the Original; no likelihood at all, that he (lay) along: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, also, is so to be interpreted, Matth. 26.55. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I (sat) daily, with you, teaching; Non (jacet) in molli veneranda scientia Lecto, that is, Knowledge, that brings men to renown, (Lies) not upon a bed of Down: Nor did they teach, è molli Lecto, on a feather bed: Io. 4.61. jesus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he not (stretched) himself, at length but (sat) on the well: Nor is the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) or its derivation, or descendants, once named, in the description, of the Paschall Supper; but the Apostles do single out such words, as principally import, lying along; S. Matthew, and S. Mark, the compounds of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the word used by S. Luke is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He (sat) down, Mar. 6.39. upon another occasion, the people are said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to (sit) down: and though it be said, in the time of the second Supper; after he was (set) down, again, joh. 13.12. where his thrice sitting is insinuated; yet the original runneth, in that place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was (set) down again; yet, Maldonate truly expoundeth the meaning of both words; Evangelistae verbis (discubitum) significantibus, significant (sessionem;) sicut nos nunc dicimus, Accumbere mensae, & in mensâ discumbere, cùm tamen sedeamus, non discumbamus; mutatus mos est recumbendi, verba retenta; that is, the Evangelists, by words, which signify (discumbing, or lying down) do mean (sitting) as we now adays say, to sit at the table, and to discumb, or lie at the table; when as nevertheless, we do (sit) and do not (lye-downe) the manner or fashion of (recumbing) is changed; whereas we keep the words still: Barradius also judgeth this opinion probable, Joh. 6.10. There was much grass in the place, so the men (sat) down in number about 5000. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Mark, 6.39. Jesus commanded them, to make all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; (another word implying recubation) to (sit) down by companies upon the green grass; the Interlineary erred, to interpret it, super viridi foeno, upon the green Hay: Franciscus Lucas Brugensis thus; ut verbo (discumbendi) vel (accumbendi) non necessariò significatur, quòd cubuerit, seu jacuerit jesus, inter coenandum, (quanquam ea est propria verbi significatio) ita nec significatur necessariò, quòdsederit, praesertim semper, quasi non potuer it aliquando stetisse; sed quòd convivio afuerit; quòd ex eâ, ad quam accesserat, mensâ, caenam sumpserit, nunc stans, nunc sedens, pro opportunitate— vox Syra, Semich, & stanti, & sedenti ascribi potest, significat enim proprie, innixum esse; quod quidem, tam de baculo, quàm de lecto, vel scamno, potest accipi: that is, as by the word of (discumbing) or (accumbing) we are not necessarily, to understand, that jesus (lay down) at supper time, (although that indeed, be the proper signification of the word) so, neither is there any necessity, enforcing us, to say; that he (sat,) at least that he sat (always) as if sometimes, he might not also (stand;) but the meaning is, that he was present at the Passeover; because, he supped, at that Table unto which he came; sometimes standing, sometimes sitting, as occasion served.— The Syriac word Semich may be applied; either to him that standeth, or to him that sitteth: for it signifieth properly (to lean upon) which may be understood, as well of a staff, as of a bed, or of a form or board: and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they (sat down;) in ranks, by hundreds, and by fifties; these places, were no discubitory beds, besides the green grass; and yet the Holyghost, forbeareth the properest words, for sitting, the Evangelist also doubleth the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, in a sort, as they did, at feasts; to that effect, I think, the original aught to be interpreted though our translatours, wholly skip the words, and render it only by companies, though many thousands might be by companies, which had no reference to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Piscator thus observeth, S. Mark (saith he) chap. 6. ver. 39 word for word hath it, banqueting companies, banqueting companies: it is a kind of distributive speech; as above, two, two, in a company; So, in the verse following, rows, rows; the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, per, or By, is understood; so that the sense must be, by companies, that is to say, they were so distributed, into smaller companies, as they commonly use to be, at banquets, etc. See Piscator farther (on Matth. 14. ver. 19) PARA. 3. AS this is a fair excuse, why our English Translatours do use the word (sitting) throughout all their description of the Ceremonies, in the eating of the Paschall, though the words, in the Original do signify no such thing, sensu primo, at first sight: for the learned translatours respected the sense, and significant meaning; not the propriety of the words; and in their very (discumbing) beds, there was (sitting) as I noted before, and though we should grant that most of their time was spent, in discumbing; yet sitting was in likelihood the next lasting Posture, and (under it) in much practice. PAR. 4. SO, then madness of some people, is hence apparent; who will (fit) forsooth at the receiving of the thrice Sacred Eucharist, because Christ is said, by Matthew, Mark, and Luke to (fit) at the eating of the Paschall-Lambe; nor, have they ought to insist upon, but the English Original; upon whom a just seducement hath fallen, for being deceived by an indifferent translation of such whom they will not, they dare not trust for a faithful interpretation; whilst they will be lead only by the evidence of the spirit, but, let them take heed, it be not a black spirit, transfigured into an Angel of light: I ever suspected any spirit, who shall offer to lead me into matters beyond my Capacity as God knows, the Common-peoples' capacity; and the floating imaginations of boys and girls, Apprentices, and monoglosses, cannot be, (as such) stewards of the Mysteries of God. PAR. 5. THe fifth Puncto, expressed by S. Mark 14.18. is this. As they did eat Jesus spoke; no doubt some at that instant did not eat, and to those perhaps, Christ principally spoke those words; they might pause a while; others did eat, and yet hearken also; yea chiefly hearken, yet fall again to their meat: and it seemeth Christ both are, and yet chose a fit time, to speak; One of you, who eateth with me, shall betray me, ver. 18. Ergo, he eaten; and yet it may seem probablest, that Christ spoke not much, of the act of their eating; but spoke only of them, as they were Convivae, or Convivatores, eaters together with him: Beza. (on Matth. 26.23.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, He that dippeth his hand with me, in the dish; whether it be, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (as it is read, Mark. 14.20.) it is not to be taken, as if at the very time, when Christ said these words, judas his hand was in the dish, (for this had been a manifest, and undoubted sign of the Traitor, as Erasmus rightly observeth, but it is to be referred, to the mutual daily eating together: I say, against Erasmus and Beza, the Apostles understandings being clouded with sorrow, or eclipsed, divinely, they did not take this for an unboubted remonstrance, as they suppose. PAR. 6. What said our Saviour? Verily I say unto you, one of you, which eateth with me, shall betray me: all words of our Saviour, were full of verity; nor was one more or less true, than other, yet, all words of truth are not of equal weight, goodness, benefit, or consideration; therefore when remarkable momentuall, or more necessary marters are handled, the word (verily) is perfixed; and set as a Beacon upon an hill; as a Diamond, in a Ring of gold: and sometimes the word is doubled, Verily, verily, Amen; sometimes is a kind of Prayer, 1 King. 1.36. After David had declared that Solomon, should succeed him; Benajah said, Amen; the Lord God of my Lord the King, say so too; and it was commanded to be used at the vote of the people, in cursing of sinners, Deut. 27.15. etc. and ever since used at the close of all Prayers in all Churches: likewise it signifieth, a certain asseveration, next in firmitude to an oath; thus, 2 Cor. 1.20. All the promises of God is Christ, are yea, and in him Amen; the adverbe being put, for the adjective, truly or certainly: for true, certain, and faithful; Amen, in this place, signifieth no other thing but (assuredly) by which he raiseth up their attention, to observe somewhat more than ordinary. PAR 7. I Say unto you; future things are to others unknown, but not unto me; others may be deceived, I cannot; though no man knoweth the bear't of man, except the spirit of man; though man's mind be volubilis, & deambulatoria, usque ad mort●●; slitting and roving even until death; and what he purposeth one day he altereth estsoone, and sometimes contradicteth, ere long; yet prescience Divine enlighteneth me, assureth me; I say unto you, even among the heathen; the Table was counted sacred; and the rites thereof hallowed, and it was not only a degree of friendship, but of familiarity, and most inward love, to eat daily together; and therefore Judas had the greater sin, to violate the Laws of Hospitality; the words are Emphatical; one of you who eateth with me, shall betray me. PAR. 8. BY the word (shall) let no man think that Judas by a compulsory decree of God was violently drawn, and enforced to betray Christ; that his will was haled, or bound up in fatal chains of impelling, and coworking necessity: it was indeed written, and set down; that one of Christ's company would betray him; but Judas was not compelled to do so, though it were foreprohesied, but it was foreprohesied, because judas was known willingly, wittingly, & of his own accord, resolved to betray him: I think it may with less offence be read, One of you will betray me; concerning Christ's manner of detecting of the Traitor, and the degrees thereof; because there were divers steps to it, both at the eating of the first Paschall Supper, as also divers times in the second Supper; suffer me to recollect, by way of an entire history: First, what was done, at the first Supper: then in the second book, what was accomplished, at the second Supper. PAR. 9 IN the first Supper, there was a general, mixed, especial designing out of the Traitor: In the general, Thus; after Christ had voluntarily begun, to open the gap; and said, verily, I say unto you, one of you that eat with me, shall betray me; it lessened their fears, that but one was the Traitor, but it troubled them all, that it was one of them; They began to be sorrowful, Mark 14.19. yea, their sorrow took deep root, and sprung up▪ higher, and higher; They were exceeding sorrowful, Matth. 26.22. Semi-mortui erant, they were half dead, (saith chrysostom) Christ's words, like a sword, piercing through their hearts; from this exceeding sorrow proceeded, the first disquisition, mentioned by S. Luke alone. Luk. 22.23. They began, to inquire among themselves, which of them it was, which should do this thing; judas kept his countenance, was not appalled, looked, as if he had been innocent; the traitor was not manifestly revealed; things manifest; need no secondary, after disquisitions, doubtful things are the object of enquiry; and because, they could find out, who was the Traitor, after they enquired among themselves, in more general terms; who should do this thing; they fell to a more particular, and distinct examination, proceeding, and saying one by one, Is it I? Mark 14.19. Erasmus expoundeth it, by qul intinxit, He that dippeth his hand; yet in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, is no word, that inclineth, as if Christ spoke of a deed, but rather present; In the third place, when all their search could not discover him, when humane endeavours failed; yea, every one said unto Christ, Is it I? Lord, Is it I? Matth. 22.22. judas, among the rest, here calleth Christ, Lord; as it is, in the Syriake, Mari Domine mi, My Lord; appealing to him, as to the judge of men's hearts, and interrogateth Christ, as the other Apostles did; our blessed Saviour answered the particular question, more generally; He that dippeth his hand with me in the Dish, the same shall betray me, Matth. 26.23. Origen thinks, judas little thought, his heart had been known; but, when he saw his conscience known to Christ; he embraced the opportunity of lying hid under the doubtful speech; the first arguing Infidelity; the other impudence: and this is all one, with that, which is said, Mark 14.20. It is one of the twelve, that dippeth with me, in the dish; and both these agree with that, Luke 22.21. Beheld, the hand of him that betrayeth me, is with me, on the Table; for, he could not dip his hand, with him, in the dish, if his hand had not been on the Table; and, all pointed, I think, to that, Psal. 4.9. Mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, did eat of my bread. PAR. 10. THen followeth that fearful menace to the Traitor (though then not perfectly known to the Apostles, yet, in a mixed sort, general and undefinite) Woe to the man, by whom the Son of Man is betrayed; it had been good for that man, if he had not been borne, Matth. 26.24. The Hebrews want the degrees of comparison; It had been good, that is, it had been less evil: Augustine (lib. 2. de lib. Arbitr. cap. 7. tom. 1.) thus; Si beatus es, utique esse, quàm non esse, malles; & nunc miser, cùm sis, mavis tamen esse vel miser, quam ominino non esse, cum nolis esse miser,— non tibi displiceat, imò maximè place at, quòd mavis esse vel miser, quam propteria miser, non esse; quià nihil eris— qui mavult non esse, nè miser sit, quià non esse non potest, restat, ut miser sit; that is, if thou be happy, verily thou hadst rather (be) than (not) be; and now, though thou be miserable, yet hadst thou rather be, even miserable, than not to be at all, when thou wouldst not willingly be miserable; let it not displease thee, nay, let it exceedingly please thee, that thou hadst rather have a being, though a sorry miserable one, than therefore not to have a miserable being, that thou mightest have no being at all; He that had rather have no being at all, that he might not be miserable; because, he cannot choose, but have some being; it remains, that he is in a miserable taking; and (in the beginning of the eight Chapter) Absurdè, & inconvenienter dicitur, mallem non esse; quàm miser; it is an absurd, and unseemly speech, to say, I had rather not be, at all, than be miserable; but Hierome thus; Multò melius est, non subsistere; quàm malè subsistere; It is much better, not to subsist, or, to have no being at all than to subsist unhappily, or, to have a wretched being; Victor Antiochênus, in Marcum; Christ saith, it had been good for judas, not to have been borne, because of the horrid torments, which Judas was to endure in hell; for, it is much better, not to have any being at all, than to be eternally tied to such miseries, and calamities; Lucas Brugensis reconcileth all thus; Although it be impossible, that a not being should properly be chosen, or desired; yet, if it be considered, as a Privative, or exclusive from misery, so, it is apprehended as good; and (as such) it may be desired, though in itself it be nothing; yea, the misery may be so great, that a not being may be rightly, and reasonably preferred, before a very being: but, I return unto the words, (Woe to the man, etc.) where he doth not design out the Individual; non apertè affirmat, de quo quaeritur he doth not make, or shape a direct, and plain answer, to the Question, saith Augustine; now, because none of those words did sufficiently enough declare the Traitor, (for divers might dip-together, with Christ; and, in likelihood, divers did dip) yet, did they make the galled-horse, to winch; when Christ said, It had been good for that man, if he had not been borne; whereupon judas alone replied, Master, Is it I? Matth. 26.25. and Christ replied, Thou hast said. PAR. 11. Which words (Thou hast said) though they be an Hebrew Idiotism, and plain enough to those, that are skilful, in that language; yet, in another Language, they are ambiguous, and reserved enough; The Apostles now spoke Syriac, and perhaps, were not then acquainted, with the more learned proprieties of the holy tongue; I acknowledge, that Matth. 26.64. and Luke 22.70. the words are to be taken, for the affirmation of a question; yet, it may be doubted; whether of malice, they did so interpret them; that they might the rather condemn Christ; I am sure, when Christ said to Pilate. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Thou sayest, Matth. 27.11. Pilat esteemed it not for an affirmation, for than he would, and must have condemned Christ, as publicly professing, He was King of the jews; and durst not have excused him (as he did) for fear of Caesar, his Master: The words, Thou sayest, are ambiguous; and, to any, to all of the Apostles; who likewise interrogated, Is it I? Christ might have said, Thou sayest; Christ could have said, O sordid, and wicked Judas, thou haste a long time, sat abrood, on this evil, and of late hast concluded for money; darest thou as an innocent man, interrogate me? to thy question, Is it I? take this answer, thou sayest; Terminos nobis, ac regulas tolerantiae figens & oblivion is injuriarum: Thou sayest the truth, or a truth; or the matter questioned may be here understood: a full and clear light of detection, as yet shineth not, These are all the things, which S. Matthew, or S. Mark have recorded of the words, or deeds spoken or done, at the eating of the Paschall-Lambe: If any object that I leave the business of Judas imperfect, let him consider that our blessed Saviour, during the Passeover, and till that Supper was ended, did leave the designing of the Traitor, in ambigno: so that the Apostles knew, not perfectly whom Christ meant: they might perhaps upon some of those several Indicia, or discoveries, which Christ made, guess at the Traitor, certain knowledge of him they had not: Simon de Cassiâ thinketh Christ did purposely withhold the Apostles, from understanding when he described the Traitor, lest they would have made a tumult: Aquinas, & before him Theophylact, and chrysostom think, Peter would have killed judas: yet Simon de Cassiâ might have remembered that our blessed Saviour could as well, and as easily withhold his Apostles from a tumult, and Peter from kill Judas, as he could keep the Apostles, from understanding, what he meant, by words, not very obscure; Barradius judgeth, that, if the Apostles had infallibly known judas to be the Traitor, they would have laboured to convert him. I answer, could not Christ himself have done it, more easily, if he would; and if they had laboured, to convert him; would judas have regarded their words, who regarded not the words of Christ; and who, after so many warnings, so many reproofs, and menaces, intermixed also, with many kind offices, done to him, by our Saviour; yet would not be recalled? I rather imagine, our Saviour, at the eating of the Passeover, made no exact, and perfect discovery of him; because, his sin not full, and ripe, as then, his conscience might recoil; and be on the stays; he might doubt, fear, and vary from himself: but as Treason did grow upon his soul, more and more; so were the detections proportionable; and none beyond the present intentions of judas, when our blessed Saviour spoke: degrees of detection answered the degrees of judas his entertainment of sin, and courting it; nor may a man doubt, but, at that instant, when Christ spoke in the present tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, traditur, Is betrayed, Matth. 26.24. even then the Treason was in judas; often, before Christ had foretold them, he should be betrayed; when judas began, to undertake the Treason, Christ spoke more clearly of it; and, the more his heart was hardened, the more did Christ detect him; but, a full discovery of the Traitor, was not clearly made to the Apostles, was not made at all; at least, till towards the end of the second Supper; though judas perhaps understood every word: but in the second Supper, you must hear more of this. He named him not, Ne irritaret cum, &, ut conscius agat poenitentiam, saith Hierome, lest he should stir up his conscience unto Repentance. Leo (Servant 7. the Pass.) Notam sibi esse proditoris conscientiam demonstravit, non asperâ, & apertâ eum increpatione confundens, sed leni, & tacitâ admonitione conveniens, ut facilius corrigeret poenitendo, quem nulla deformâsset abjectio; that is, he made demonstration, that he knew well enough, what was in the Traitor's conscience, in that, he did not reprove him sharply, and openly; but admonish him gently, and privily; that so he might the more easily draw him to repentance. The Prayer. WHom have I, O Lord, in heaven but thee? and there is none on earth, nor any thing, that I desire, besides thee; keep me ever, in this constant love; I beseech thee; and if thou vouchsafest unto me, but the meanest degree of glory; if I may but eat of the crumbs that fall from thy Table; my soul shall be refreshed; and, I shall for ever, magnify thy holy name, through Jesus Christ, my Mediator, and Advocate. Amen. CHAP. XXIII. The Contents of the three and twentieth Chapter. 1. Christ's hearty desire, to eat his last Supper. 2. The words (before) after, until, unto, from, etc. are particles, sometimes inclusive, sometimes exclusive. 3. Donec, or until, negatively used, de futuro. 4. Kingdom of God, what. 5. He took the Cup, not the Eucharistical Cup: fruit of the vine, spiritual Nectar: Turk's place eternal felicity, in sensual Pleasures. 6. Maldonates' error, concerning the Cup. 7. Spiritual Tabletalk, at Christ's last eating of the Passeover. 8. Methodus rerum, aut Historiae, not always observed, in Scripture: the Original, of greatest authority: nothing to be altered, in the Scriptures. PARAGRAPH. 1. SAint Luke hath most considerable varieties; Christ said; With desire have I desired, to eat this Passover with you, before I suffer; that is, I have hearty desired, to eat it with you, Luke 22.15. Tertullian (Contra Martion. 4.46.) rendereth it, concupiscentiâ concupivi; the reason of his desire, annexed by S. Luke, which is omitted by all the other Evangelists; For, I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof (donec) impleatur, (until) it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. Luke 22.16. He meaneth not, saith the learned Lucas Brugensis, that he would again at another time, eat the Paschall-Lambe (especially in the Kingdom of God) but, that he would eat it, no more, in this world; much less, Quando suppetet Pascha beatius, cibusque coelestis, in Regno Dei; since he had a more blessed Passeover, and a heavenly banquet in the Kingdom of God. PAR. 2. IT is a true Rule, that not only the prepositions, before, after, until, unto, from, and the like; which denote, or signify the bounds, & limits; either of time, or place; either initial, or final, and determinative, but all other descriptions, or circumscriptions of time, space, or place, are ambiguous, and sometimes include, sometimes exclude those very bounds assigned out: Before the day of the Passeover; the word (before) saith Illyricus, sometimes includeth, sometimes excludeth the very day of the Passeover; when it is to be understood inclusiuè: the sense is, Ante diem Pasche terminatum, vel finitum; before the day of the Passeover, was terminated, or ended; yet commonly, it is used exclusiuè so, after three days, Christ shall rise again Mark 8.31. and, after three days, he said, he would rise again, Matth. 27.63. by which expressions, is not meant that he would rise again the fourth, fifth, six, or seventh day, or any time after that; but the third day is included, not excluded; for his Resurrection was foreprohesied of, by Christ himself, that it should be accomplished, on the third day, Matth. 16.27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 raised again, the third day, and accordingly, it was performed: Christ risen again the third day, saith the Apostles Creed: He risen again, the third day, 1 Cor. 15.4. according to the Scriptures. After six days, Jesus taketh Peter, and James, and john, and bringeth them unto an exceeding high mountain, Matth. 17▪ 1. Mark 9.2. yet, is it varied, Luke 9.38. about an eight days after: The reconciliation is fair: the word (after) in S. Matthew, and Mark, excludeth dies terminales; It was not, in any part, or parcel of the six days; they were fully ended, and passed; but the preposition (after) in S. Luke, excludeth them: So Christ became obedient unto death, Phil. 2.8. and though the word (unto) be often exclusive; yet, because Christ came, not only to the gate, door, or chamber of death; but passed through them, and really, truly was dead; therefore, death is not here excluded, but included, in the word (usque) or (unto) 1 Sam. 15.35. Samuel came no more, to see Saul (until) the day of his death (usque ad) that is, from the hour, neither before, nor then, nor after. I have the more insisted, on this Rulebecause it removeth many seeming contradictions, in Scripture; which the ignorant are not able to reconcile, but swallow down, with their difficulties: and now, I descend unto the word, Donec, or until: to the further clearing of these difficult words, Donec, or until: the first is affirmative, Matth. 28.20. I will be with you, unto, or, until the end of the world: which promise proveth not, that he would not be with them, after the end of the world; but rather, that he would be much more with them, in another world, though he would not desert them here, Psa. 110.1. Sat thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies, thy footstool; gross is the man, who, hence inferreth, that Christ shall not sit at God's right hand; when Christ shall tread upon his enemies; now, he doth reign over them, even whilst there is opposition; and, shall much more hereafter, when they shall be, under his feet; here (Donec) also affirmeth, of the future times. PAR. 3. THe second force of (Donec) is negative, defuturo, for the time to come, Matt. 1.25. non cognoscebat eam (donec) peperit, He knew her not (until) she had brought forth, etc. he meaneth not, that after her sacred childbearing, joseph knew her; for, it is an Hebrew Idiotism; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 donec, the word (until) excludeth without exception, expressly, till such a time; and leaveth it implicitly, to be understood, that much less was it done, or to be done afterward: Rem nunquam factam certo tempore, exprimit non factam, quô videri facta poterat, scireque necessaria erat non factam; Excellently saith Lucas Brugensis; he expresseth a thing never done, by the not doing of it at a certain time; viz. at such a time, as in all likelihood, all others would have known their wives, upon a new marriage: but joseph did not so much; no, not at that time; much less, did he so afterward. Michal the daughter of Saul, had no child (until) the day of her death, 2 Sam. 6.23. Stupid is he, who concludeth, that she had children, or a child after her death. The Resultance is rather, and firmer thus: If she had no child (till) her death; much less, had she one after: joseph knew not the blessed, ever-Virgin Mary, till she was delivered; much less did he, after that. In both these passages, the force of (donec) is negative: So here; I will not, any more, eat thereof (till) it be fulfilled; not here; much less hereafter, in heaven; where we shall have, a more blessed Pascha, sine intybis, vel amaritudine, without any bitter Salad: the like may be said, of the word (until) in the 18 verse; but, what is the kingdom of God? Or, how is the Passeover fulfilled, in the Kingdom of God? I answer, by the Kingdom of God, in this place, is not meant the Militant Church, but the Triumphant; Origen, Euthymius, and others here appropriate it, to the future world; and in the world to come, the Passeover is thus; then fulfilled, and perfected; because the jewish Passeover, was to be eaten, with bitter herbs; and that Passeover was accompanied with a second Supper: nor, were all, and every one blessed, that took the Passeover; therefore was it, in a manner, imperfect; but, blessed are all, and every one, who are called, to the Marriage-Supper of the Lamb, Rev. 19 9 and, in that Supper, is nothing wanting; all sorrow excluded; all joy prefected; the Type being drowned, in the glory of the great antitype; an happier Supper; an happier Passeover, shall be in heaven. This manner of speech perhaps hence arose (saith Illyricus) because the Writer would determine only, for his own time; or the time, he propounded, to handle; and, cared not, to speak, of further, or remoter times, as it was principally intended, and all things were accordingly prepared; that Christ might eat the Passeover, Mark 14.12. So it is most true; Christ sat not, as an idle spectator: but, he did, indeed, eat the Passeover, and promised, never to eat it more. PAR. 4. WHat else? Luke 22.17. He took the Cup, and gave thanks, and said; Take this, and divides it among yourselves; for, I say unto you; I will not drink, of the fruit of the Vine, until the Kingdom of God shall come: that this was not the Eucharistical Cup, appeareth, by the Sequel, where he instituted the blessed Sacrament, of his body, and blood. PAR. 5. BUt, what mean these words? I will not drink of the fruit of the Vine, until the Kingdom of God shall come? What is the fruit of the Vine, which then shall be drunken? the wine saith Lucas Brugensis, Non exvirtute vitis, sed ex Dei fruitione proficiscitur, that wine shall not flow-forth, from the blood of the Vine: but from the beatifical fruition of the face of God, Psal. 36.8. They shall be abundantly satisfied, with the fatness of thine house, and thou shalt make them drink of the river of thy pleasures: inebriabuntur ab ubertate domus tuae; they shall be drunken with the plenty of thine house; as it is in the Vulgar: Bellarmine (the Sacramento Eucharist. 1.11. in fine cap. &, 4.10. saith truly, and tightly, to the purpose; the first cup of wine in Luke ended the Pascall; or the Supper of the Paschall-Lambe: So also think, Theophylact, Montanus, Beda, Cajetane, Carthusian: but if you will see the point handled at large, have recourse to the first cited place of Bellarmine: the best Nectar: I appoint you a Kingdom, that ye may eat and drink at my Table, in my Kingdom, Luk. 22.30. Math. 8.11. Many shall sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, in the Kingdom of Heaven: not as if Christ and his Disciples did place eternal felicity in sensual pleasures, as the Turks do at this day, but by these outward things the inward is sigured: Titus Bostrensis, haec eâ de causâ non asserit, quasi ullus istic denuo mensae, aut esculentis locus futurus sit, sed quod res spirituales, rebus apud nos usitatis, exprimere voluerit; that is, our blessed Saviour doth not therefore speak this, as if there should be any place hereafter, for tables, or meat, or drink, in the Kingdom of God: but that he might express spiritual things, by carnal things: things, that are frequent and usual amongst us, i. you shall enjoy all possible spiritual pleasures with me: Beza hath an old exposition upon usque quo completum fuerit, until it be fulfilled, S. Paul. saith he, 1 Cor. 5.7. best cleareth the sense, Christ, our Passeover is sacrificed for us, for from that time complete, Christ doth feast with us, and we with him, in the Kingdom of God, which truth that figure design: Beza, on Matth. 26.29. Non bibam, ab hoc Tempore, ex hoc fructu vitis, usque ad diem illum, quùm ipsum bibam vobiscum novum, in regno Patris mei: buy sermo, vel Metaphoricè accipiendus est, in posteriori membro, de convictu, ac si diceret Dominus, adhuc vobiscum vixi, ut homines cum hominibus consueverunt; ab hoc Tempore, desinet vitae istius consuetudo; siquidèm, vobiscum non ero, nisi in Regno illo aeterno, ubi aliam vitam vivemus; that is, I will not from henceforth drink, any more, of this fruit of the Vine, until the day when I shall drink it new, with you in my Father's Kingdom; this saying is, either to be understood metaphorically; in the latter member of it, concerning his manner of living with them; as if the Lord should have said, hitherto have I lived with you, as men use to do with men, but henceforth that manner of living shall surcease; for I will not be with you any more, but in that eternal Kingdom, where we shall live another manner of life: or (saith he) this is to be referred to that which is written, Act. 2. that Christ, to make his Resurrection believed, did eat 40. days with his Disciples; not for necessity; nor as other men do usually eat; because he had put off all bodily infirmity; which is signified here, under the name of the Reign of his Father: to which those words seem to have reference, Mat. 16.28. Some here shall not taste of death, (till) they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdame; So Beza: That this cup was part of the second Supper, I see no probability; the words praecedent, of eating the Paschall-Lambe, cohaering so strictly to the drinking afterward of the wine, (used also at the Paschall) do evidently evince, that all this was done at the first Supper, only of the Passeover. PAR. 6. MAldonate thinks, Christ speaks twice, of the same cup, because the words which S. Luke here useth, of the first cup; I will not drink, of the fruit of the Vine, until the kingdom of God shall come, Luke 22.18. is in substance, repeated, and applied, to the most sacred cup, Mat. 26.29. Mar. 14.25. But, Maldonate is deceived: for in S. Luke, he spoke of the wine at the Paschall, as is most apparent; and it is as apparent, that S. Matthew and S. Mark do apply the like words to the Vine Eucharistical; and there is no incongruity, to say that Christ did repeat the substance of the same words twice; on two several occasions: for he never drank of either of those cups afterward, either of that belonging to the Old Testament▪ or of that which belongeth to the new-law of grace. Secondly, the very variety of words, which are used by the several Evangelists, prove that he spoke not twice of one and the same cup, but of several and distinct cups: so much for the words spoken▪ at the eating of the Passe-over. PAR. 7. IF any object, Christ broke the Law, because by the Law their especial Tabletalk was appointed, (of which before) and the children were to ask and the men to answer, as it is Exod. 12.25.26.27. but here was no such thing at the eating of the Paschall; but other discourses which now I have recited: I answer; blessing and giving of thanks, and divers other things are omitted in words; which we may be sure were performed in deeds: and why might not this rite be performed, though it be not recorded? Secondly, I answer, if Christ at his last eating of the Paschall-Lambe, mentioned nothing concerning the deliverance in and from Egypt; I say, he therefore might well omit the type; because, he spoke of the substance, at least implicitly: of the Son of man, and his death, (to deliver mankind from hell) of the fearful woes, due to the Traitor (worse than the Egyptian drowning) of heavenly promises, and food spiritual, at the heavenly Table; (which super-coelestial Manna, fare exceedeth the being carried on eagle's wings; and being enlightened by a Pillar of fire by night, and guided by a Pillar of cloud in the day; or, their Manna on earth) of Christ's ardent desire to eat the Passeover with his Apostles, (the Law required the performance only) a fervent desire to eat it, was more than was commanded: of the voluntary death of the world's Saviour, under the covert of these words) The Son of man goeth indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vadit; of the going out of this world, to his father, john 13.1. even by the phrase of Transitus or Passeover; ut transeat ab hoc mundo, ad patrem, to pass out of this word unto his father as the Vulgat translates it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, better; then Beza his digrediatur go away: of God's determination that the Son of man should fulfil his will, of Judas his treason, against the innocent blood of Christ, which was to be fare more precious than the blood of the Paschall-Lambe, that sprinkled the doors, and the lintels; this sprinkling our Consciences; that blood delivering from temporal death; Christ from eternal: the standing-water being a wall to the Israelites, on both sides; but the flowing water and blood streaming from his side, washing and purging our souls, and preparing us for heaven; of which the terrestrial Canaan was but a Type: thus of the Paffeover; and of better than the Passeover did our Saviour discourse, according to the Law; at the eating of the Paschall-Lambe. PAR. 8. THe words which follow, Luke 22.24, And there was also a strife among them; were spoken at the second Supper: when I handle it, they shall have their explication, in their due order: and this is plainly acknowledged, that the blessed Spirit did not, by S. Luke keep Methodum Rerum, or Historiae; the History of things in order, as they were done; but upon great and just cause, (though unknown unto us) did intermingle other matters; unless we fly to that which Beza thinks not impossible, that there is a transposition of verses, that the now 19 and 20. verses, should be annexed to the 16. verse: and after them the now 17. and 18. veses, should be numbered, but this transposition and transchanging of verses, doth as much confound the story in mine opinion: and the same things might be said at two suppers: Apud Syrum interpretem, maximae merito authoritatis; in the Syriake translation which doth worthily deserve the greatest authority. (Beza should rather have given the greatest authority to the Original Greeks, from whence the Syriack was derived) the 17. and 18. verses, of Luke 22. are wanting: Contrarily in a Greek and Latin Copy of mine, saith Beza, venerable for Antiquity, the latter part of the 19 verse, and the whole 20. verse, are not read; I do say with Beza; Ego nihil mutandum censeo, I hold, that nothing ought to be altered: and yet he propounds a transchanging of the verses; but I would have nothing altered at all; nor like these shifting dislocations. The Prayer. O God, thy Word is a Lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path; the fullness of thy Scripture do I adore, the riches thereof are above silver, gold, or precious stones; good Lord grant that I may examine all my actions, words, and thoughts by it, and frame them all unto it: in thy light I shall see light, and come to the light of the living; which I beseech thee to grant for Jesus Christ his sake, who is the joy of my soul, and the blessed sum of my desires. Amen. CHAP. XXIV. The Contents of the twenty fourth Chapter. 1. Ministers or attendants, at Christ's last Passeover: the blessed Virgin Mary no attendant: difference between Apostles, and Disciples: Disciples might attend. 2. Bishops, Presbyters, succeed the Apostles, the seventy: Names of Apostles and Disciples, confounded: S. Augustine questioned. 3. Whether any of the 70. Disciples were Apostates, other Disciples, beside the 70. Some of them bacl sliders: the 70. Disciples were the future Presbytery Idolater: the 70. Disciples who they were, whether there were 72. Disciples. 4. Divers Legal Types of the 12. Apostles, 70. Disciples. 5. The Master of the house was not excluded, he might wait on Christ, also some of the household might be attendants. 6. Attendants, Male, and Female; three degrees of Male-attendants: divers offices of Attendants; Christ and his Apostles had their attendants. 7. Some of the 72. were Christ's Auditors, to hear his Tabletalk: Servitors, ammated instruments. 8. The Synopsis, or sum of all. PARAGRAPH. I. I Cannot end this first book of the Paschall Supper, till I have handled one quaere more, whether any waited in the room, whether my servants, ministers, or attendants were present besides Christ, and his Apostles, at his last Passeover? For the Negative part, these arguments may be collected. First, there is no mention of any one attendant; Ergo, none. Respondeo, the argument for the Negative, is but weak; for I thus retort it: there is no mention that there was none attendant; Ergo, some were, Argumenta â Scriptures Negative non tenent; arguments drawn from Privative Scripture, are no good Logic. Secondly, there is mention of no more, than twelve, who came with Christ, Mark. 14.17. Thirdly, there is mention only of 12. that did sit, or sup with Christ, Luke 22.14. He sat down and the 12. Apostles with him. Fourthly, Mark. 14.20. It is one of the 12. that dippeth with me in the dish. I answer to all three, that the certain mentioned number, that came, or did sit or sup with Christ, doth not exclude the unmentioned servants attendant: both may well consist together, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the sitters at meat and the attendants. Fiftly, Christ saith Luke 22.26. Let him that is chief, be as he that doth serve, and ver. 27. I am among you, as he that serveth, I am in the midst of you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as he that serveth: I answer, this rather proveth, that some did serve indeed, to whom Christ did liken himself; that Christ did not serve (as others) but was as one, that serveth; Cinctura ministrantium est; the being girded about, is a sign of service, attendance, and administering; whilst Christ was bound, and busy with water and the basin, and the towel, he might properly be said, through his own voluntary condescent, to serve and administer; and so Kings and Queens may be said, to serve, when they descend to wash the feet of the poor. Sixthly, S. Peter, and S. John's praeparation, for the Passeover, may seem to be of little weight, if all things, and every thing necessary was not throughly provided, but they must have others to attend: I answer, no preparation was so exquisite, that waiters were unnecessary; who should fill out fresh wine? who remove the dishes? who serve them in? who was to take them away? who to save or gather up the fragments? Seventhly, if any one besides the Apostles, had been there; we may think, the most blessed Virgin was there, but she was not to be an attendant? I answer out of question. Christ's most holy Mother had not attended if she had been there; though she would not grudge to wait on him; but his greatest humility would never have permitted her, to serve him; yet other attendants might be, and were in likelihood, though she were absent. Eighthly, it is not likely, Christ would have washed his Apostles feet, especially the feet of judas, if other attendants had been there? I answer if in the presence of others he did wash them all; it was an evident sign of his greater humility, and then more might take good example, contrarily, for the Affirmative. 1. It is said, Matth. 26.18. I will keep the Passeover at thine house, with my Disciples; so ver. 19 Mark 14.12, 13, 14, and 16. verses; Luk. 22.11. But there is great difference between the Disciples, and the Apostles; wherefore the Apostles might sup with him; and the Disciples wait, and eat after him in some other room; or perhaps after the 2. Supper, in the same room. I answer, indeed they were distinct, in dignity and order; and the Apostles were a choice sort, selected out of the Disciples and Peter, James, and John were exempt in great matters, out of the rest of the Apostles. PAR. 2. MOreover, Bishops succeeded the Apostles, as the Presbyters do the 70. in the Language of antiquity: and the Commission of the 12. Apostles, was more large, than that of the 70. Disciples; and had more and better promises. See Matth. 10.1. etc. and Luke 9.1. etc. And he ordained 12. that they should be with him; Mark 3.14. that is, of his house and family; Sacellani Domestici, Domestic Chaplains, in Ordinary, unto him, â sacris, the 70. were to go still before him; we read not that after their Commission was certified by them; to have brought forth wonderful effects; that ever they did eat or drink with him, if not now: and if (they) were none of the waiters, yet many (other) might, yet are the 12. Apostles called 12. Disciples, and the names are confounded, Matth. 10.1. He called unto him his 12. Disciples, and ver. 2. nameth, Simon, Andrew, james, and John, etc. who were most properly Apostles, Luke 9.1. he called his 12. Disciples together, and it is apparent; (if you compare, S. Matthew with S. Luke) that they were the 12. Apostles only: for after the Commission given to the Apostles, The Lord appointed other 70. also, and sent them two and two, before his face, into every City, and place, whither he would come, Luke 10.1. PAR 3. SAint Augustine, (on those words, Psal, 99.5. Worship at his footstool; but with him it is, enarration, on Psal. 98. fol. 230. litera. A.) thus, Scandalizati sunt quidam discipuli ejus, 70. fermê, & dixerunt, durus èst hic sermo, & recesserunt ab eo, & amplius culm eo non ambulaverunt; that is, Certain of his Disciples, (well nigh 70.) were offended, and said, this is a hard saying; and departed from him, and walked no mort with him: the words indeed he spoke, Joh. 6.60. and 66. but that they were propetly, wholly, or for the greater part of the 70. Disciples; S. Augustin shall give me leave to doubt: Ambrose (in Epist. ad Rom. cap. 8.) giveth over the 70. Disciples, as castaways, apostates, or reprobates: Epiphanius (Haeresi 51.) is more moderate, that some of them returned unto Christ, yet he secretly granteth their fall from Christ: If the fathers say true, we cannot think that any of the 70. ministered after unto Christ; viz. at his last Supper: But I first require proof, that any of the 70. peculiarly so called; did fall, either totally, or finally, from Christ: Secondly, I am sure, Luke 10.17. Even the Devils were subject unto them, through Christ's Name; and Christ said unto them, ver. 20. Their names were written in heaven, and bids them rejoice therefore. Are they reprobates, whose Names are written in heaven? And they had small cause to rejoice, if they were to be damned. True it is that many Disciples of his went bacl, yet it cannot be evinced, that any of the 70. were among the number of those backesliding Disciples. I am sure, besides the Apostles, and besides the 70; there were another sort of people; who sought him and followed him, for to satisfy their hungry guts. joh. 6.27. and in a large sense, may be called Disciples; and some perhaps followed him, for Novelty-sake; some for curiosity; others to spy bis ways; others, to question him, on the sudden, and to entrap him; Morbus, signa, Cibus, blasphemia, dogmafuerunt Causae, cur Dominum turba secuta fuit. that is, Cures, signs, meat, Doctrine, (supposed) blasphemy, By these five cords Christ drew his Company. These also, in as much as he taught them, and they followed him, and he fed them, may in a general appellation, be termed Disciples; and some of these Disciples believed not, and Christ knew who they were that believed not, john 6.64. But that any one of the 70. to whom Christ said before, that their names were written in the book of life, did Apostatise, or that they to whom the devils were subject, should be subjected to the devils (as they were if they were damned) cannot creep into my Creed, that a whole troop of 70, or the major part, chosen especially out by Christ himself, and representing Idaealiter, the future Presbyters of the Church for ever should perish everlastingly, seemeth unto me contrariant to reason, or Divinity, Let any that are uncharitable concerning the 70, remember what Christ said unto them; Luke 10.16. He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me, and ver. 19 I give you power over all the power of the enemy; but they had not power over all the power of the enemy, if they were damned. And nothing shall by any means hurt you; which words extend to more than miraculous outward operations; and design Christ's particular grace, and saving Co-operation for them: I must add, that Christ in that hour, (thanked) God, ver. 21. for revealing those things, unto babes, (for so he calleth the 70.) and opposeth them, unto the worldly wise, and seeming prudent, which were blind. Were those Babes, to go to hell, for whose Illumination, Christ gave thanks unto the father, so solemnly, so speedily? Besides, antiquity saith, Mathias was one of the 70. Disciples. So Eusebius, (1.12. and lib. 2.1.) so Epiphanius, (Haeresi 20.) and Hierome (de Scriptoribus Ecclesiast. in Matthiâ) yea, Beda, (on the Acts) saith, from Clemens Alexandrinus; that both the Competitors, joseph called Barsabas, and Mathias, were two, of the 70. chrysostom (Homil. 3. in Acta) avoucheth, that the 70. whom Christ chose, were among the 120. Brethren, who were assembled at the Election of Mathias, Act. 1.15. Clemens, (as Eusebius hath it, 2.1.) maintaineth that the Apostles did instruct the Disciples, as Christ instructed the Apostles, the seven Deacons were chosen out of the 70. Disciples, saith Epiphanius (1.21.) the 70. were exactly tythed, say I; the same Epiphanius (Heres. 20) saith that after Christ's Ascension, the 70. were great Publishers of the Gospel: James the brother of the Lord was one of the 70. and made a Bishop, by Apostolical authority, saith Eusebius (2.1.) Likewise, S. Mark, was one of the 70. saith Epiphanius (Haer. 51.) Christ had many Disciples, ere he chose the twelve Apostles; and of the Disciples, immediately, after a whole night's prayer, he selected twelve Apostles, Luke 6.13. The very Apostles, are called twelve Disciples, Matth. 10.1. and Luke 9.1. nor were they part of the 70. Disciples; for, after Christ had chosen his Apostles, out of other disciples; The Lord appointed other 70. also, Luke 10.1. Some indeed, who were called Christ's Brethren, like false brethren, did not believe in him, joh. 7.5. I cannot find, an Instance effectual, to prove; that any of the 70. were condemned: I know many reckon the disciples to be 72. but the Greek, Chaldee, and Syriack, are for the just number of 70. PAR. 4. THe twelve Patriarches, Fathers of the twelve Tribes, were in the Law of Nature, figures of the twelve Apostles: the twelve Wells of water, at Elim, where the Israelites encamped, under the Law of Moses, were types of the twelve Apostles: The 70. Languages arising from one (if they were, nor more, nor less, in number) as is commonly held, from Gen. 11.7. may then be said, to be, in the Law of Nature, types of our 70. The 70. souls, of the house of jacob, Gen. 46.27. were figures in the Law of Nature, of our 70. Disciples; which were to be in the Law of Grace. The 70. Elders, Num. 11.16. in the Law of Moses did typify, our 70. Disciples, to be chosen, by a better, than Moses: the 70. Palm trees at Elim, Exod. 15.27. did signify the like; the Law adumbrating the verity of the Gospel. Lay all, that I have writ together; and I presume, no man will now be so censorious, against the 70. as some others (without deeper considerations, concerning that point) have been; and therefore, as mine own opinion, in probability; I hope, I may set it down; that some of the 70. might minister, and attend upon our Saviour, even when Christ, and his twelve Apostles did ear the Paschall-Lambe. I am sure, the two Carthusians, Ludolphus, and Dyonysius, are confident enough, that Martialis, and some other of the Disciples, did administer unto Christ, and the twelve Apostles; and some of them brought water to Christ, saith Ludolphus. PAR. 5. ANother opinion is not improbable neither; namely, that some of the household, where Christ was entertained, might wait upon him, and his Apostles, at his Pascha 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or crucifying Passeover: He, who might command the room, might command the attendance; yea, the Master of the house himself; or the best Master, or man, in the world, would not grudge; to wait upon Christ; may I attend upon them, who attended on him: yet, concerning the owner of the house, I hold it more probable, that he, with his company, did eat another Lamb, in his own house; for Christ desired but one fair Chamber, to keep his Passeover in, with the twelve; likely it is, other rooms were in the same house, and large fair enough, to serve, to that purpose; for, he kept the Passeover also; and therefore, he did eat, either in a room, of the same house; or else he, and his joined, with some others; and ate the Passeover; in another man's house; where they had a competent company of Receivers; but, this is not so likely, for, it was not, against the Law, to have two or more Lambs, to be eaten, in one evening, in one house: See the first Book, 12. Chapter. Secondly, the Master of the house, seemeth to have been a rich man; he had a manservant bearing a pitcher of water; a great vessel, as the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) showeth, quod propriè de (gravioribus) oneribus dici puto, saith Beza; which I think, properly, is to be understood, of heavy burdens: he had a guest-Chamber, Mark 14.14. Many rich men have none such; every guest-Chamber is a costly Chamber; that Chamber was furnished, and prepared, large, and above stairs, ver. 18. which never concurred, in a poor man's house, in their great Metropolis at Jerusalem: In which large room, without annoyance, or inconvenience, among other things, was there also a basin of water, and a Towel, or Towels, large, and long enough; both, to gird our Saviour; and to wipe the feet of the twelve washed Apostles, Joh. 13.4. etc. What favour Christ could show to the owner of the house, without breaking of the Law: no man may doubt, but our Saviour did it unto him; therefore, to me it seemeth not likely that our Saviour would, as it were, force a man, and all his family, wholly, out of his own house: Christ confined his desire, to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is in Beza his oldest Copy; the under-roomes, or some other upper-roome, might serve the turn of that family; Christ came often, into men's houses; that ever he excluded his hosts, out of their own houses, I am yet to learn; Though Christ might have requited them, which greater kindnesses, by fare, if so, it had been (for, he never received courtesy, but he gave better; and more) yet, I see no probability stand forth, to persuade, that it was so; but rather, that the household continued in their master's house, and all necessary service of attendance, was presented, and performed, unto our Saviour, by some of the family: but nothing is demonstrative, or certain; and therefore, I leave every man to his own conjecture; and only show mine own, that Christ, and his Apostles, had some, to administer unto them; (and that, either some of the 70. or some of the household attended them: Hoc ultimum Pascha, this last Passover (saith the great joseph Scaliger) was like to the precedent ones, and the precedent were kept after the same manner, by Christ, as the jews kept them: (de emendat Temp. 6. pag. 571.) let me add, that the other great Feasts of the Jews, had, in the lesser matters, some correspondence, one with another; without attendants, they were not, at other their feasts, nor now in likelihood. PAR. 6. THere never were discubitory beds, and Feasting-Suppers, but there were always some administrants; let a contrary example be instanced in, from either jews, or Romans: Solomon was renowned; 1. King. 10.5. For, the meat of his Table, the attendants of his Ministers, and their apparel, and his Cupbearers; and the company received it, by the hands of the waiters, saith Hierome; Pincernae, & pocillatores, Butlers, and Cupbearers, were of great esteem, both young men, and Virgins: Hierome calleth them, Ministros vini, & ministras; fusores vini, & fusalrices; propinatores, & propinatrices, saith Olympiodorus, men, and women-servitors, powrers-out, or Cupbearers of the wine: Philo (de vitâ contemplatiuâ) reckoneth three degrees of male-attendants, lesser children, greater boys, and downy-bearded youths: Among them, the Syrians, and Egyptians, boys were, in chiefest request; Publius Mimus, of Syria, is famous: Syrians, and Moors, were Augustus his playfellows; Suetonius (in Augusto, cap. 83.) the Epigrammatists intemperate lust preferred the Egyptian boy (Marcial (4.42.) Niliacis primùm puer hic nascatur in oris, Nequitias tellus scit dare nulla magis: that is, Let my lewd Catamyte be borne on Nilus' banks, No nation hath such witty, wanton, damned prank. A sweet commendation of Egypt; but such lips, such lettuce: Seneca (Epist. 47.) superbissima consuetudo, coenantem Dominum stantium servorum turba circundat;— Cùm ad coenandum discumbimus, alius; sputa detergit; alius, reliquias temulentorum subditus colligit; alius pretiosas aves scindit, pectus, & clunes (certis ductibus circumferens eruditam manum) in frusta excutit; infelix, qui huic uni rei vivit, ut altilia decenter secet; nisi quòd miserior est, qui hoc, voluptatis causâ, docet: quàm, qui necessitatis, discit; alius vini minister, in muliebrem modum ornatus, cum aetate luctatur; effugit pueritia, sed retrahitur; that is, 'Tis a most insolent custom, that a company of Servingmen, must stand round about the Table, waiting upon their Master, whilst he sits at Supper: when we are set down to Supper, than one (forsooth) must tread-out our spitting, and spawling; another must take up that, which the drunkards have let fall under table; another carves up the costly fowls (and) carrying about his cunning hand, this way, and that way, disjoints the legs, and the wings; unhappy wretch! who was borne, for none other purpose, but to a cunning Carver; only of the two, he is the more wretched, who doth teach it, for pleasure's sake, more than he, that learns it, because of necessity; another waits on his Master, to attend him with wine; and he (forsooth) must be attired, like a Virginella, that so he may seem young; and contend with age; his youth is past; but he would feign (if it were possible) draw it bacl again: he intimateth also the censors of the guests; & obsonatores, quibus dominici palati notitia subtilis est. To them were added Tasters, and carvers, & analectae servi; which took up the remainders of Supper; or, the things, which fell from the board; more than one Analect; whereas almost the meanest householder, had one, or more, to tend on him, at Feasts; we cannot imagine, that our blessed Saviour, and twelve others, of his Apostles, were without some Administrants. It must be acknowledged, that as it is not impossible; so it is very improbable, that thirteen discumbing should serve themselves without any other assistants; we can hardly suppose such a thing, at our Refections; which yet were, and are more commodious, for such ministerial subserviency, than the discubitory beds of the jews, or Romans, especially on their feasting days: and yet more especially, on this great Feast; by how much sitting with shoes on, they can sooner, aptlier, and easier stand, and go from place to place; and move, or bring any thing to the Table, or carry and remove any thing from it; then they could, on discubitory beds; whence it was harder to arise, and more cumbersome to address them, and put on their shoes, if not their also. When our Saviour arose, to wash his Apostles feet, observe the preparation specialized (besides, what was omitted, as putting on of Sandals, or the like) He riseth from Supper; He laid aside his garments; he took a towel, and with it he girded himself, joh. 13.4.5. and, after he had washed their feet, he took his garments (put them on) and did sit down. PAR. 7. THe jews were appointed, to have a company of the younger, and inferior sort to ask questions, and hear the Rememorative Tabletalk; but, this was a fixed Ceremony; and therefore Christ omitted it not; and whom should he have, in all likelihood, but some of his 72. Disciples? For they were as children, in comparison of the Apostles, who were as fathers. Our Saviour himself mentioneth two distinct sorts, at the Table, at that Table; one greater, that sitteth at meat, and one that doth serve, Luke 22.27. and yet, even the Servitors were esteemed, and called by Crassus: the animated instruments of household affairs; Comiter servum in sermonem admit, & in consilium; & in convictum, amicum invenies; Seneca (Epist. 47.) Be affable to thy servant, in thy common discourses, in thy counsel, at meat, and meal; and thou shalt endear him unto thee, and make him thy friend. Some servants have been, even to wonder, faithful, and careful of their Masters; and have voluntarily shed their own blood, for them: So was Eros to Antonius; and in the times of the great proscriptions, many more: naaman's both maidservants, 2 King. 5.3. and his man-servants, ibid. ver. 13. gave him better advice, than himself; and being followed, proved beneficial to him above expectation. Virtue known, and always steadfast, draweth on the love of all bystanders, as the loadstone attracteth iron; and if it breed love in others, it raiseth admiration in servants. They who behold the divine worth, the glory of the Creator, the love of the Redeemer, & the sweet refreshing of the Comforter; and see it, as it were, but a far-off, cannot be so ravished with it, as God's sons, and servants, who daily discern it, and feel warmer flames of zeal, piety, and conformity, to the divine will: O Lord, I am thy servant, I admire and love thee for thyself; and in my most rectified reason, acknowledge thee, the chiefest good, the only good, such a good, as (if it were in my power) I would not alter, nor wish any way altered; I meekly praise thee, for being as thou art; for thou continuest such, as nothing can be imagined better; either, in itself, or in the common, eating its goodness, of which I have found manifest experience; and therefore, among other things; The Prayer. MY God, my God, I humbly bless thee, that thou hast prolonged my life, and sent me such a portion of health; that I have made an end of this first Book; and I entirely desire thy fatherly goodness, to continue thy gracious favours unto me; that the rest of those Works, which I have undertaken to declare thy truth; may be also accomplished, and published; and that thereby thy great name may be glorified, and the souls of the Readers, and myself edified; and that, for jesus Christ his sake. Amen. PAR. 8. BEhold then the Sum of all, that hath been delivered by me, as in a Picture. A fair upper-Chamber well furnished. A Table almost foure-square in it, decently adorned. Three Bedsteeds, with their furniture; one on each of the three sides of the Table (the fourth side standing uniclosed, and open) on which, they might either sit; or, lie down; but most probably, they sat, and lay not down, at the Passeover; which was, in a short time, dispatched; for, the first Supper was quickly ended; in the first Passeover, were no such discubitory-beds. Our Saviour, and the Apostles washing. After washing. Unleavened bread brought in. A Lamb. An unspotted one. A male Lamb. Under a year old, served in, in one dish. Sour herbs were also set on the Table: in all likelihood, salt; it being the general Condiment. All Consecrated, as well as the wine. The number of the recipients was thirteen; Christ and the twelve Apostles. All of the jewish Church. This was all done, on the first month of the jewish year. On the fourteenth day of that month. Between the two Evenings. At jerusalem. In one House. The Lamb was dressed whole. Roast with fire, Not eaten green, or rawish; but thoroughly roasted. No part sodden with water. The Head with the legs, altogether. And with the purtenance, altogether. So was it eaten; and A bone not broken. No part of the flesh earried out of the House. The Tabletalk of our Saviour, equal in goodness; if not better, than was commonly appointed. No part of the flesh left till morning: Or, If any was left, it was burnt with fire. The Servitors, or Attendants. No certainty, who they were. In likelihood, some of the Seventy; (the 70. defended) Or, Some of that household, where our Saviour Supped. BEnedictus sit Deus, qui dat lasso virtutem, & cui non sunt vires robur, multiplicat! As it is in the end of the Logic, of wise Rabbi Simeon, latinized by Sebastian Munster. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 TRICOENIUM CHRISTI, WHEREIN IS HANDLED THE SECOND SUPPER OF OUR LORD. LIBER SECUNDUS. Explained by EDWARD KELLETT, Doctor of Divinity, Canon of Exeter. NOSCE TE IPSUM NE QVID NIMIS LOVE AND LIVE D printer's or publisher's device LONDON, Printed by Thomas Cotes, for Andrew Crook at the green Dragon in Saint Paul's Church yard. 1641. THE ANALYSIS OF THE SECOND BOOK. The second, or common Supper was the second general part of my method. Herein consider 1. The Praelibanda or convenient points preceding: & they are these 1. The temperance of our Saviour and of his Apostles, though they were at three Suppers. 2. what, each of the four several Evangelists wrote of the several three Suppers. 3. Why there is no express and literal mention of a second Supper. 2. The proofs that there was appointed a second Supper at the jewish Passeover from the 1. Old Testament and the Rabbins. 2. New Testament. 3. Fathers. 4. Protestants. 5. Papists. 3. That Christ was at it. Where observe 1. When this second Supper begun. 2. What was said and done in it. 3. When it ended. 4. Whether judas partaked of the sacred Eucharist, when he took the Sop. 4. The Concomitants or Subsequent Occurrences are these 1. Satan's entrance into judas. 2. Christ's sentence of separation of judas. That thou dost, do Quickly. 3. The Apostles nesciency. 4. Their misunderstanding of Christ his words. 5. judas his egress and the time. 6. Giving of thanks at the end of the second Supper. 7. A Grace-Cup. 8. A Psalmody. THE SECOND BOOK OF THE TRICAENIUM CHRISTI; WHEREIN IS HANDLED THE SECOND SUPPER. The first Branch of the first Particular of the first General. LIB. II. CHAP. 1. The Contents of the first Chapter. 1. Three premises. 2. Christ's, and his Apostles Temperancie. 3. The Paschall Supper a Sacrament Type of the New Old Testament. Christ eaten of the three Suppers sparingly. 4. Christ did seldom eat flesh, Christ eaten Butter and Honey. Christ's knowledge to refuse the Evil and choose the Good: The words Ad scire ipsum interpreted. 5. The Jews blasphemy against Christ. The words Emmanuel Samuel whence derived. That Christ was God proved from Scriptures Rabbins and The word Emmanuel. Difference between Emmanuel and Samuel. 6. The jews blasphemy against Christ's Mother. 7. Christ borne according to the Scriptures: Borne of a Woman, not of a Girl. The Nobility of Christ's Birth wherein it consisted. 8. Christ a Stone. 9 Gnalam, or Glialam: and Gnelem what it signifies. 10. Emmanuel. jesus. is a name of Nature. Imposition. 11. Marry a Virgin; Aaron's Rod; Christ borne of a Virgin by Miracle; A threefold Union in Christ. 12. Christ made but one meal in one day. The aspersion of Gluttony, in him rejected. Christ fasted, even to a miracle: oft times. Christ as God knew all things. 13. Why Christ sought fruit on the Figtree? How Christ seemed ignorant of many things. Admiration is of doubtful and great things. In Christ a threefold knowledge: Divine: Infused: Experimental. How Christ is said to wonder: No man's knowledge ever equal to Christ's. 14. Why Christ cursed the Figtree? 15. Christ's hunger, rather Volentary then necessary: Christ under-prised Temporal food in respect of Spiritual. Christ's abstinence from flesh. 16. Difference between Christ's Eating before his Death. A double Digestion after his Resurrection. A Prayer. MOst holy Lord God my gracious Father the life of my body, the light of my soul, I do most humbly beg at thy Mercy seat, that thou wilt vouchsafe to guide a poor penitent ignorant wretch in the way of truth: O keep me from error, and sharpen my desires to love thee, to fear thee: and through all obstacles, to search and find thy divine verities. Amen. PARAGRAPH. 1. ANd yet once more, before I particularly handle the Second Supper, with its Concomitants, I must premise some necessary matters: to prevent the Cavillous objections of Adversaries. 1. The first concerneth the temperancy, and abstemiousnesse of Christ himself and his Apostles, which seemeth to be disproved from the threefold Supper, at which all they were, and all partakers of, in good likelihood. 2. The second is a Disquisition, what several Evangelists wrote of the sevenrall Suppers; and this chalketh out a way to avoid confusion. 3. The third point of inquiry is, Why there is no express mention of a Second Supper. PAR. 2. TO the first point; Because enemies to Christ and his Religion; and Epicurean Libertines who make their belly their god, and live to eat; and eat to drink: and indeed whose Bibere is (more than in pronunciation) Vivere: I say, because they are likely to say, concerning our blessed Saviour; Is this that immaculate Lamb of God, void both of Original and Actual sin? Is this He whom ye believe to have fasted forty days and forty nights? and yet cannot one Supper content him? No nor the second Supper, but was at three Suppers in one night? Fabius Gurges grew not to that height of ingurgitation: No Grecian, no Roman, no Effeminate Asiatic in one night eaten of three Suppers: Nor the Rich man, though he fared deliciously every day. It is not for nothing that they of his own time said: Matt. 11.19. Behold a man gluttonous and a wine bibber. And himself confessed, He came eating and drinking. PAR. 3. I Answer, The first Supper was only a Sacrament of the Old Testament, and Type of the New Testament; whereof they eaten but sparingly. For sacred morsels were never intended to be fill-bellies. At the second Supper, he might eat a little. We read not expressly that he eaten much; discourse, and the works of mercy, humbleness, good advice, and the clear manifestation of the Traitor was the meat he then principally eaten, for aught that can be discerned, or is revealed in terminis. But collectively and inferentially thus. 1. Cor. 11, 25. He took the Cup. Beza indeed hath it, postquam coenati sunt: after they had supped: and the Arabic, postquam sumpsissent coenam suam: after they had received their Supper; Christ and his Apostles together: but Tremellius rendereth it from the Syriac, viz. postquam coenasset in the singular: When He had supped. Therefore he did eat and sup, and was not only a beholder. He that eateth bread with me hath lift up his heel against me. john 13.18. which words were spoken of Christ and judas, and are applied to them. Therefore in probabilite, than he did eat, and eaten with judas himself: But this was at the second Supper. For one Supper was ended. john 13.2. (and that was the Paschall) before Saint john began his large discourse in the same Chapter. The third Supper being the most blessed Sacrament of the New Testament, had only a little bread, and a little wine (which they did rather taste of, then take in great quantity) and doth wipe off the aspersion of Gluttony, or Drunkenness, or of any kind of Intemperancie in meat and drink. Thus again, Never was any found fault withal, who eaten but little of the Paschall Lamb. And lest any should force himself to eat too much, the remainders (how great in quantity soever they were) were commanded to be burnt. Never were a whole company or family commanded to eat all, and every part of the Paschall Lamb; so that nothing was to be left. A mind spiritually elevated, at holy feasts, little esteemeth muchness of eating and drinking. Sure it is, that what Christ with desire desired to eat, viz. the Passeover; he did eat it; he was not frustrated in his desires; and the prosperous means led him on fairly, to the end of his intentions. The Passeover was prepared for Christ. Mat. 26.17. Where wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to eate the Passeover? Mark 14.12. Where wilt Thou, that we go, and prepare, that Thou mayest eat the Passeover? Thou principally. For Thee, emphatically. Therefore we must say, He did eat part. Besides, He said, I will not any more eat thereof. Luke 22.16. Therefore He did then eat of it, or else the speech were improper. When He dipped in the dish. Mat. 26.23. He dipped with intent to take up something, and to eat of it. That He eaten much of the Paschall Lamb, and sour Herbs, I wholly deny. And clearly, there are more passages, to prove the Apostles eating at the Passeover, than our Saviour's: As they sat and did eat Mark 14.18. (jesus fell to discourse) as they did eat, He said, Verily, etc. Mat. 26.21. In both these places, the words are spoken exclusively, concerning Christ. As if it had been said, He was none of them, that at that instant did eat. Whilst they did eat, Christ did not. At those speeches He eaten not. In conclusion; Of the Paschall Supper, He neither eaten much, nor nothing; His end approaching, and He knowing the wonderful pains He was to endure, He had little stomach to eat much. Yet duty and Religion both sharpened his desire to eat some, and his actuall-orall-manducation followed. Concerning the second Supper, it cannot be proved, that He did partake much of it; nor is there any great likelihood for it. For, He was tronbled in Spirit. john 13.21. And such have no great appetite to their victuals. Indeed He took a sop, and dipped it; and gave it to judas. john 13.26. But there is altum silentium, not a word concerning his own free eating of any thing largely, in this second Supper. Therefore no imputation of intemperancy can fasten hold on him. So in the third Supper, the Scripture mentioneth not, either that he did, or did not eat. And many think He gave it, and administered it; but are not of it himself; though I opine, He did taste of both kinds. But of this hereafter. This sufficeth to clear our blessed Saviour from any shadow of excess at any, or at all of these three Suppers in one night. The phrase of three Suppers in one night, sounding in some men's ears very profanely; but being in truth fare more holy, then only one ordinary Supper of civil men. PAR. 4. TO the other parts of the Epicureans exception, who would willingly shelter themselves under our Saviour's example, that they might be intemperate lawfully: I answer; that when I have produced what I can, to show our blessed Saviour's most temperate behaviour; I doubt not but any different man will say, that Christ went beyond all that ever were renowned in Heathen story, for their moderation in meats and drinks. First we read not that Christ ever tasted of any flesh, nor can it be evinced by deduction mediate, or immediate, except only when He aswell as all others were commanded to eat, when He are the Passeover, or was at the great Feast appointed in the Law, though He were at many Feasts, made for his sake, both by his Disciples and other jews, and partaked of them; Yet I doubt not but He was left to choose his own diet. So it is only probable, not certain, that He are of flesh at any civil Feasts, Esay●● 15, it was foreprohesied of him: Butter and Honey shall be eat; And sure He did so. But what is the meaning of the following words? That he may know to refuse the evil and to choose the good. I answer, The words in the Original are, Ad scire ipsum; as Montanus on Esay hath it in his Comment; or as it is in the Interlineary, Adsciendum ipsum reprobare in malo, & eligere in bono; And the word [That] is not mere finale nor causale, as if Butter, and Honey, or the eating thereof made one wise, or knowing, rather his knowledge made him eat Butter and Honey; but ostentionale or discretivum; as if it had been said, other young children choose not their meat by discretion, but take whatsoever is given them, But if any should offer any bad meat to Christ, He shall refuse it: if they offer good, He shall take it: He shall have that knowledge being a child, that others shall not have at a fair age. Butter and Honey shall He eat: noisome things He shall avoid. I have eaten my Honeycomb with my Honey: I have drunk my Wine with my Milk, (saith Christ) Cant. 5.1. Butter, Hony, and Honeycomb, Milk, and Wine, were foreprohesied food, and are the most agreeable things to the nature of Infants. Or this way; The words Adsciendum or ad scire, in Latin may be interpreted; Butter and Honey shall He eat; that ye may know, He chooseth the Good and refuseth the Evil. The knowledge of Good and Evil, which Adam and Eve had not in their Innocence, Christ had in his Infancy. By this choice and refusal it might be discerned: He had a prerogative above all other children; for God was with him: and his name was Emmanuel, vers. 14. He knew all things, ab instanti Conceptionis, saith the School, as soon as ever He was conceived in the womb. See Gregory de Valentia Tom, 4. pag. 254. But the Hebrew will not bear this exposition; nor the Greek nor English. It ever digression merited pardon, I hope the next will. PAR. 5. THe accursed jews do blasphmously declaym against our most blessed Saviour, against his most holy Mother; against religious joseph, calling them by most odious false names, which you may read in Munster, in his Annotations on the first Chapter of S. Matthew, toward the beginning; you shall not in my writings: Especially they laugh at us, for proving Christ to be God, from the word Emmanuel. Then (say they) Samuel is a God; for the word Samuel signifieth, Nomen ejus Deus i.e. His name is God. Read the answer in Munster, even from Rabbi Kimhi, I meddle not with that. Others derive the word Shemuel from Shaal, which signifieth to ask: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 keeping only the first radical from it. Secondly, from Min, or of the praposition. Thirdly, from the pronoun Affix, which is rendered, Him: and fourthly, from El, betokening God, I have asked him of God; and how is Samuel to be called a God, as the jews say, from this his name? When he was called Samuel, because I had asked him of the Lord, as his Mother said, 1. Sam. 1.20. is all that is asked of God, and obtained from God, God himself? But setting aside uncertain niceties of the jews, this I say: We have many more proofs both from Scriptures, and the Rabbins themselves, that the Messiah was to be God, besides the firm argument from the word Emmanuel. Secondly, I say; There was a main difference between our glorious Saviour, and his Mother; and between Hannah the Mother of Samuel, and himself. For Hannah was married, and had long, and much company of her husband; and was beloved of him more than the fruitful Peninnah. 1. Sam. 1.5. And not Rabbin ever held Samuel to be a God, whose Father and Mother were so notably known: which much varieth the case between the two children. The rather also, because the spirit of God, by the jews confession set the name of Emmanuel upon Christ. But Hannah, or Elkanah, on humane consideration entitled the child Samuel. PR. 6. BUt their more particular belchings against Christ, and his Mother, are in show more pithy, sharppointed, vivid, and specious unto any ignorant man, or ill-affected unto Christ; whilst thus they object, as it is in the first Chapter of Saint Matthew in Hebrew, and the Annotations of Munster on it, saying: Quale novum est, quod puella fit gravida, juxta morem universae terrae per copulam viri? What new thing is this; That a Virgin should be with child, by copulation with a man, according to the manner of all flesh? And thus again they rave, in Munster's Annotations on the second chapter of Saint Matthew. Si juxta verba vestra natus est (Christus) sine patre; quare ostendit vim suam in filia tredecum annorum, quae apla erat conceptui, & partui? Potius ostendere debuit potentiam suam in s●liatrium, aut quatuor annorum, quae non est apta conceptui: & tunc potuisset mundus cognoscere signum illud novum, est a saeculo inauditum. If according to your own words, Christ were borne without a Father; Why did he show forth his power in a daughter of thirteen years of age, which was apt for conception, and child bearing: He ought rather to have showed his power in a daughter of three or four years old, which was not apt for conception: And then might the world have known that New-Signe, which was not heard of from the beginning of the world? Munster saith, he answered the jews in Hebrew. Abunde magnum signum esse, Nasci de Virgin, juxta Propheitam illam Esaiae, Ecce Virgo impregnata pariet filium. It is a wonder strange enough, to be borne of a Virgin, according to that Prophecy of the Prophet Esaiah: Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a sonne● Let me enlarge his too concise answer, thus: or rather to declare mine own answer, to the blindfolded, yea blind jews. Shall Christ be borne according to the fancies of man, or according to the will of God? What Christ said to them, I wish they would observe john 5.39. Search the Scriptures: and they are they which testify of me. The very manner of his suffering and resurrection, was fore-prophesied, Luk: 24.46. Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer: And, All things must be fulfilled, which was written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets and in the Psalms concerning me, verse. 44. especially concerning Christ's Incarnation, and his Birth, All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet, saying, Behold a Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Son, and his name shall be called Emmannel, which being interpreted is GOD WITH US, Mat. 1.22. & 23. verse. I resume mine old Quaere; and turn it into this Thesis, Christ was not to be borne according to the humorous discourses, or partial reason of man; but according to the Scriptures, and the forerunning prophecies, dictated unto holy men by God himself, This is a ground work, on which both Jews and Christians do build, and is confessed by all. The denial of this Thesis preferreth man's judgement before the wisdom of God: and floating imaginations of silly ignorants, before the stable power, and perfection of Holy Scripture. Let us now assume: But the Prophets no where foretold, that Christ was to be borne of a young Girl, or child of three years or four, as the Jewish argument would enforce; But the heavenly inspired Scriptures, did fore-divine, that Christ should be borne of a Virgin of ripe years, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a woman fit for so great a work, rather than an unfit infant. Let us come to the Prophet jeremy 31.22. Foemina circundabit virum: A woman shall compass a man. Nekebak (with Koph) is not taken any where pro puellula: for a young wench of three or four years of age: but for a female of ripe year's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & Nekebah, foeminam woman, in adulta: viz. aetate, in a ripe age. Gen. 1.27. If a man would reason against God, according as the Jews do, against both him and Christ: One might say; It had been a great wonder indeed, if Adam's wife had been but three or four years of age, and had brought him forth children. But we may more truly say concerning both Eve, and the blessed mother of our Lord, God's will was his law: what he decreed, was performed: what was performed, was best of all; what God spoke before by his holy Prophets, must be accomplished, however the folly of man, would seem to project better courses. Whereas the Jews object: God hath created a new thing in the earth: A woman shall compass a man; and most carnally and cursedly say: Is this a New thing for a woman to be with child? It is the ordinariest, and commonest matter in the world. I answer. These obstinate Jews consider not, that the novelty consisteth not in this, that a woman was with child: but this was the greatest new thing in the world, that a virgin without the help of a man should be with child. Adam came into the world without the help either of man or woman; Eve of a man without any aid from any woman: other men not without the help both of man and woman: The Newest thing, the greatest wonder was, Christ was to come, and did come of a pure Virgin without the help of Man. PAR. 8. A Second Prophet divinely describeth him, calling him the stone that was cut out without hands, Dan. 2.34. that was cut out of the mountains without hands. v. 45. a stone he is called otherwhere, a living stone. 1 Pet. 2.4. A chief corner stone, elect and precious, a tried stone; a sure foundation, Esay 28.16. Christ's holy mother may be called a Mountain, a fruitful Mountain for us; from which this stone was taken without hands, or the aid of man; not without the overshadowing of the Holy-Ghost. She was Virgo à viro, virgo a part●s, semper virgo. Avirgin free from a man; a virgin after she had brought forth a man, always a virgin▪ maugre the hellish opposition of the Jews. Virgo concipies, virgo pariet, Virgo quà virgo. A Virgin shall conceive, a Virgin shall bring forth, a Virgin, a true Virgin. PAR. 9 YEa, but say the Jews Gnalmah, doth not signify a virgin. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer, 1 challenging them to show a place where it meaneth a female young child, or a gristle of three or four years old, as they expound it; and therefore say that Christ should have been borne of such a childish girl, if God would show his extraordinary power: Gnelem, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is constantly taken for a youth, or stripling, not for a tender bread and butter boy, of three or four years, unable to put on his own clothes. 1 Sam. 20.35. Jonathan took a little lad with him, yet was he not so little or young, as a trimulus or quadrimulus: but a Lad of fourteen or fifteen years, or thereabouts, a pretty page; for jonathan gave his Artillery to the Lad, and said, Go carry them to the City, verse 40. which a small child could not do. So Gnalmah, is commonly taken for a Virgin, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Woman about twelve years of age, or more. in annis adolescentiae virgo, a virgin in the years of her youth. Exod. 2.4, 5. Moses his sister, who was to watch the motion of the Ark of bulrushes, is called Gnalmah. But a child of three or four years of age could never so handsomely have insinuated herself into the company of Pharaoh his daughter; nor have wrought her mothers and her own desires, and her brothers good, so ingeniously, so suddenly, capiens consilium e're nata: cooperating with so fair an opportunity. Who would trust so little a child with so great a matter, as for to negotiate for the life of a child, and to prevent the effusion of blood? She had been impar negotio; unfit for such a business, if she had been so young, & infrarem commissam: unworthy for so great a charge. Again, Gen. 24.43. Rebekah was able to draw water out of a well, which is no work for small children, especially to satisfy both man and beasts, especially the vast camels, which when they do drink, drink very much, yet she is called Gnalmah; a virgin, fair, very fair: neither had any man known her, (saith the Spirit of God) vers. 16. implying she might have been known before, as a little while after she was known by man, in holy wedlock. The pitcher also on her shoulder probablizeth, that it was a great pitcher, greater than little pails carried in women's hands: and so unfit to be borne by a girl of four years. See more in Pagnine, who citeth to this purpose Gnalmah, being used for a full grown virgin, Prov. 30.19. Cant. 1.3. and other places. The Prophet Esaias by that word, & virginem, & adolesculam aetaie, parituram veluit dicere▪ did means a virgin: a young one, yet so old; that she might be fit to bring forth a child. If he had called her Bethulah, and only so, status tantum, non etiam aetatis, nomen fuisset: it had been a name only of condition, and not of age: it might have betokened a very young virgin. But let any show me any one place, where ever Gnalmah was used for a Virgin under five years. I confess a child may be said to be, foemina, a woman; as foemina, a woman, is opposed to mass a man▪ and a child of two years of age, may be said to be Virgo a Virgin: as Virgo a Virgin, is opposed to Marita, or Maritata, a married Woman, or Vxor, a Wife; or Concubina, a Concubine: but so it is not here. The conclusion than is this. Let Christ be borne, (as was foretold by jeremy, and Esay he must be borne) of a pure Virgin; nubilis, marriageable, and fit for such a work, and might not be borne of a child of three or four years. PAR. 10. I Hope I have stopped the mouths of the barking Jews. May I now proceed. Yet two or three things I must add out of Porchetus his victory against the Hebrews: Part. 2. c. 14. fol. 81. De virginitate Matris Dei: whereas the Jews object, that Christ's holy mother never called him Emmanuel, but Jesus: & tota Christianitas, all Christendom calls him Jesus, and not Emmannel: Porchetus answereth, aliud est nomen naturae, aliud impositionis: the name of nature is one thing; and the name of imposition another, For Nature giving a form, gives a name, as the name of Man is man, for he is called a man from the nature of man, which he doth participate. So the Messiah our Lord Jesus Christ is called Emmanuel; that is, God is with us: and is called GOD and man, by the Holy Spirit, and his Mother; and is so believed of all Christians; because he partaked of two Natures; the Divine, and the Humane. But Jesus was the name of our Saviour, secundum impositionem; by imposition: Emmanuel, and other names, according to the condition of both Natures▪ and so nothing is amiss. Again, they sometimes called him one name, sometimes another: Andrew calls him Messiah: john 1.41. Peter called him jesus, Act. 2.22. and singly Christ. Act. 2.30, 31. and Jesus Christ of Nazareth, Act. 3.6. and the same Jesus, is both Lord and Christ, Act. 2. ●6. That Jesus is the Christ, the son of God, saith john 20.31. He was called sometimes God, sometimes Lord: Thomas styled him, His Lord and his God: john 20.28. Thou shalt call his name jesus, saith the Angel to the blessed Virgin, Mat. 1.21. and they shall call his name Emmanuel; saith the same Angel. vers. 23. or his name shall be called Emmanuel, as others translate it: how was this Angelical prediction fulfilled, if they did not sometimes call him Emmanuel, God? Angels do not prophesy false things. PAR. 11. THe second is out of Mahomet's Alcoran. Marry said, how shall I have a child, when a man hath not touched me? nor have I been lascivious; The Angel from God answered, This is easy for me, both to make a miracle for men, and mercy from myself. And so it came to pass, she kept herself chaste; Et insufflavimus in eum de spiritu nostro: and we breathed into him of our Spirit, saith God: So much Mahomet himself confesseth. When the Devil speaketh truth, will the jew continue incredulous? Ebi Horarai the fellow of Mahomet, heard Mahomet say; None is borne whom Satan toucheth not, when he is borne; and therefore the child cryeth; except Mary and her Son. Much more he addeth to good purpose, as that May (as a Virgin) brought forth a Saviour, etc. But the words of Saint Augustine, cited by Porchetus, pag. 87. are worth the transcribing. The rod of Aron against the universal laws of Nature, did fitly or conveniently bring forth Almonds, which neither came from seed nor root: Shall a stick or rod contrary to nature bring forth fruit; and may not an holy Virgin against nature at the command of God, bring forth a Son? Let the incredulous jew show me, how a dry and withered rod did flourish, bear leaves, and fruit, ripe fruit: and I will show him how a Virgin may bring forth the Son of God. Let them think of Sarah their mother, who was old, and well stricken in age: Gen. 18.11. and it ceased to be with her after the manner of women, for she was 90. years old ere a Son was promised, Gen. 17.17. But is any thing too hard for the Lord? Gen. 18, 14. The jews believe (saith Porchetus) that Eve was created of the body of Adam: but they say, this was miraculous, according to the disposition of the Divine will. We say the same concerning the Nativity of Christ by a Virgin. The course of Nature is not to be enquired after in the Divine will. For Moses his rod, against the course of Nature, by the will of God, did with a touch divide the Sea. What Moses saw in a bush burning, and not consuming: what was showed to Aaron in a dry rod flourishing: what to Gedoen in his wool, and the dew: Solomon saw plainly in the strong woman: jeremy morem plainly foretells of a woman, and a man compassed, I say as most apparently speaks of a Virgin, and God: till Gabriel presented it really at the Salutation. So fare Porchetus: and so he endeth that chapter. But I will end with Simon de Cassia 1.2. Quibus anthoribus, quibus ministris fuit incarnatio? Who was Author, who were ministers at Christ's Incarnation? The Father sent, the Holy Ghost overshadowed, the Son descended: an Angel foretell: Marry agreed: So in the Virgin's womb, the increated Word, the Eternal Word, the Word with the Father, the Word in the Father, the Word from the Father, and with the Father ineffable, incomprehensible, incircumscriptible, was made flesh, flesh of flesh, in the flesh, among flesh, below flesh, besides flesh, against the flesh (he might well have added) above the flesh, in that instant when Mary said, Be it unto me according to thy Word. Luk 1.37. Nature changed her course. There was but one: a Mother, and a Virgin: a God, and a Man▪ Temporal and Eternal me● in one; Old and New kissed one another. In the same instant wherein Christ's soul was created, there was a three fold Union, (saith the same Simon) The Union of the Deity to the Soul: of the flesh to the Soul: and of the Deity to the flesh. There was a Divine substance, distinct in three persons; a spiritual substance created with three powers or faculties, and a bodily substance of the four Elements, which made one person: as the three persons have one essence or substance: so these three forenamed substances made one person of Christ. More I will not say, wonder will I more and more: abhorring ever the Jews malignant reasonings, whilst they swallow down other things above reason precontrary to it. PAR. 12. SEcondly, I read not that ever our holy Lord made above one meal in one day. He did O'meale himself perpetually (so fare as is likely) but when he fasted he fasted wholly. His Disciples were gone to buy meat john 4.8. Sure it was he was weary, weariness may come by fasting: Fasting breedeth thirst: because the natural heat by fasting feedeth strongly on the radical humour. Nor did judian the Apostata, who was a man of a spare diet, accuse our Saviour, as a Gurmandizer, so fare as my memory carrieth it. Vidi monstrum in natura (saith Plato) hominem uno die bis saturum. I have seen a monstrous thing in Nature; namely, that a man should make two meals in one day. None but such as sin against the Holy Ghost will accuse Christ of such a sin; for he did not glut himself at any time. As for their foul aspersion who said, Behold a gluttonous man and a wine-bibber, it is no more to be esteemed, than other their words, who said, joh. 8.48. He was a Samaritan, and had a Devil. Or the Scribes scandal, who said, he had Beelzebub, and by the Prince of Devils did cast out Devils, Mark. 3.22. It is good to be evil spoken of by evil men, Ab iis laudari vituperari est (saith Seneca) and it is discommendation by such to be commended. But Wisdom is justified of her children, Matt. 11.19. And with this fair sweet answer, or appeal from malicious false wise men, Christ wipeth off the false imputation of gluttony, and wine-bibbing, that it should not fasten on him. I must boldly tell you my beleese concerning my most blessed Saviour Jesus Christ Saturivit vunquam: sitivit saepe: esurivit saepe, & usque ad miraculum. When Christ did cast out the deaf, and the dumb spirit, and the Apostles could not, because that kind could come forth by nothing but by prayer and fasting, Mark. 9.29. Do not the words evince, that Christ did fast? yea, fast much, when the Apostles did not fast? Belike our Saviour had fasted much before, for in the morning, as he returned into the city, He hungered, Matt. 21.18. and came to a figtree, and looked for figs on it, but found none. And though Christ's words were only. Let no fruit grow on thee from henceforth for ever. So that it might have grown many years, and bore boughs, and leaves, and afforded shadow, notwithstanding the letter and words of the curse: yet the earth denied sap, and juice, and sustenance to the roots: the roots to the branches, and both heaven and earth conjoined to hasten its destruction: so that presently the figtree withered away, yea the figtree in the morning, was dried up from the roots. Mark 11.20. If Calvin writ that Christ knew not the tree afar off: or thought it to be another tree: or was ignorant, that fruit was not on it, Calvin much forgot himself; and it derogateth too much from our Saviour's perfection. Even the day of judgement, though he knew it not by any natural knowledge, discourse, or understanding, no more than the Angels did: yet he knew it perfectly, as he was taught of God, (which point the Angels knew not by any infused knowledge) for He knew the Father, which is a fare greater knowledge; And he was the wisdom of God, and all the treasures of divine knowledge were hid in him. Moreover he made all things, and was ever workman ignorant of his own wo●ke? Quomodo rem aliquam ignor at ipsa sapientia (saith Gregory Nazienzen) Ille saeculorum factor— ille rerum quae geruntur finis, ille ea, quae Dei sunt, non minus cognoscens, quam spiritus hominis ea, quae in ipso sunt. How can wisdom itself be ignorant of any thing? That maker of the world, that end of all things, which are done here in this world; he that knoweth the things of God, as well as the spirit of man knoweth the things that are in a man. Esay 11.2. The spirit of wisdom and understanding shall rest upon him, the spirit of counsel, the spirit of knowledge; verse. 3. He shall make him of quick understanding, under which is comprised, Omne scibile, every thing that may be known; All Theory, Wisdom reacheth to the knowledge of all divine things, understanding pierceth into all Immaterials. The spirit of God searcheth out all conclusions. To counsel belongeth the understanding, rerum omnium Agibilium: of all practical affairs and things Agible. Whosoever desires a further examination of Christ's knowledge, let them consult with the Schoolmen. Tertia part in Thomam Quaestionibus. 9.10.11.12. Amongst other things he shall find that Christ known Omnia singularia praesentia, praeterita & futura, All and every particular thing, present, past, and to come. And could he be ignorant what tree he saw? But of Christ's extraordinary knowledge we spoke before. PAR. 13. IF any for Calvin do object, why came he thither to them treme, and sought fruit, if he knew there were no fruit on it? and why did he curse the tree, when the time of Figs was not yet? Mark 11.13. To the first I answer; He took an occasion to work a miracle: and by that miracle to signify, that he would root out the jewish Synagogue for not bearing fruit. Indeed there are many places of Scripture, the resultancen whereof may seem to be this: That Christ was ignorant of many things: For he asked, john 21.5. Children have you any meat? If he knew it himself, what need he ask them? So Luke 24.41. he enquired: Have ye here any meat? But Disquisition is of matters doubtful, or unknown. And yet ere this mortality, was swallowed up of immortality; and he had an incorruptible body, and a beautified soul in a superlative degree (for he was risen from the dead) Therefore, it seems this was spoken to confirm the doubtful. Likewise in his natural life he seemed ignorant of divers things which he knew well enough; as when he said John 11.34. Where have you laid Lazarus? which words from any other man had argued nesciency. So he said, john 5.6. to him that had an infirmity, 38. verses. Wilt thou be made whole? When as both Christ, and others known; the man waited for it. Mark 7.18. Are ye so without understanding also? He questioned what he knew, that they were without understanding in that point. Mat. 22.20. Whose is this Image and Superscription, saith Christ; Yet knew he that before, and thence drew the argument to reprove the jews. Matthew. 22.12. How camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? Christ marvelled at the Centurion's faith. Matthew 8.10. whereas no man useth to marvenll at such things as are evident to his knowledge. As for Christ's words concerning the Centurion, I answer: First they were spoken (saith Aquin. 3. part. Quaest. 15.) as if the Centurion's faith were wonderful to other men; and in regard of other men's faith: Not in respect of Christ himself. Let me add. Sure it is, that Christ infused that faith into the Centurion, and therefore must needs know it: In the School terms take it thus, Christ as God knew all things; Christ as Man, and considered as a Comprehensor, had Cognitionem facialem, and was not ignorant: the same Christ as he was Viator had knowledge infused, which was great: and acquired knowledge also in matters experimental; Nor can he be blamed for having some nesciency, since Ignorantia negativa non habet formale peccati: Negative ignorance hath not the formality of sin. A second answer is, indeed commonly among men Admirans dubitat, He that wondereth, doubteth: Aristotle saith so in the first of his Metaphysics. And admiration groweth from precedent Nescience; yet Christ's divine knowledge could not wonder, nor his infused knowledge: but the experimental knowledge in Christ might wonder. Thus did he learn obedience by the things he suffered, Heb. 5.8. and therefore knew them not before. Thirdly, Plato saith, Admiramur propriè magna, we properly admire great things. And therefore the Centurion's faith being great, Christ is said to wonder; Not as if any thing were strange to Christ: but because thereby He did stir up those that followed him, to wonder at his faith: tacitly recommending the like great faith unto them. Fourthly, he is said to wonder, as he is said to be angry; not properly, but per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: assuming unto himself like passions of men, speaking of himself as other men do, and as a wondering man doth wonder indeed. Such an one did Christ resemble, when it is said He wondered: Though his name shall be called wonderful: Isaiah 9.6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. It is Admirabilis, not Admirabundus, He is one to be wondered at; not one that did wonder. The object of wonder to others, not the subject of wonder in himself. Wonderful, Efficienter, efficiently; for He only doth wonderful things. Psal. 72.18. Not wondering ignoranter, ignorantly, or ex antecedente Nescientia: & nupera consecuta cognition. Out of former antecedent nesciency, and newfound knowledge. Again, though the rest of the forenamed Scriptures seem to imply Christ's nesciency, yet indeed they do not: Christ was ignorant of nothing, though he propounded many questions, for he questioned many matters, and seemed a learner, whilst he intended to teach; and I am bold to say, that, nor Solomon, nor Adam himself, nor the best, and skilfulest of men put to them, could coequal the knowledge of Christ. Lord thou knowest all things. john 21.17. When he said to his Apostles: How many loaves have ye? Go and see: Mark 6.38. It is said indeed there, When they knew: which words argue, they knew not before: But no such word is said of Christ. And when Christ said to Philip, john 6.5. Whence shall we buy bread that these may eat? The holy spirit encloseth it with a Parenthesis, vers. 6. This Christ said to prove Philip: for He himself knew what he would do: Not only what He could do; but what he would do also, nothing was, is hid from him. Hell is open: destruction hath no covering. PAR. 14. TO the second objection, to wit, Why He would curse the tree, for not bearing fruit, when the time of ripe figs was not come. I answer briefly, That Christ did not curse the tree in any anger: nor was the tree sensible of the curse. Nor were the jews accursed for not bringing forth fruit before the due time. To say thus, were to wring blood out of the Scriptures, and in every minute particular to expect a correspondency with the Type; Whereas we must rest content, when the main intent holdeth. And yet, if I should say, That our blessed Saviour did cause the tree to whither for not bearing fruit, though the time was not come: to intimate unto us, That, if he were so severe against a plant, a tree, a mere vegetative creature for not bearing fruit: it behooveth us reasonable men to bring forth fruit, with all possible speed: since the time of bearing fruit is always present with us: and there is none hour, but we may, we must do good; and, if the holy spirit related, that the time was not come, to quicken us men; what inconvenience ariseth? And so I part with this point. PR. 15. WHen Christ had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterwards an hungered: Matthew 4.2. Yet was he not so hungry as to tempt God: or to make bread of stones, as he could have done. Wherefore God sent unto him, at the end of the temptation, the help of Divine Servitors. They will not grudge the name. Behold, Matthew 4.11. Angels came and ministered unto him; and no question brought him food. Let Ravens wait on Elias: The Angels of Heaven joy to serve Christ. jesus being wearied with his journey, said to the woman of Samaria, Give me to drink; for his Disciples were gone away unto the City, to buy meat. john 4.6. etc. we read that the woman left her waterpot, vers. 28. But that she drew water for him, or that he drank we read not. It may be he did by the water, as he did after by the meat, when they prayed him: Master eat, vers. 31. He said unto them: I have meat to eat that ye know not of. verse. 32. And vers. 34. My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work. But we read not that He did there eat. His hunger was rather voluntary than necessary. Temporal food he always under-prised in regard of the spiritual. john 6.27. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life. Matthew 6.25. Take no thought, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink. john 21.4. When the morning was come, jesus stood on the shore, and said; Children, have ye any meat? In all likelihood Christ said so to refresh his wearied Disciples; not for himself. For we do not read that he then eaten: but gave to them both bread and fish: vers. 13. So Luke 24.30. He sat at meat with the two Apostles (that were going to Emmaus) and took bread and blessed it, and broke and gave it to them. That himself did eat, I read not, I believe not. He that fed many thousands, are not then himself, for aught that is revealed: He who was the Bread of Life, and heavenly Bread, and better than Manna, yet often fasted. He thirsted also who cried out, If any man thirst, let him come to me, and drink. The water that I shall give him, shall be in him a Well of water springing up unto everlasting life. john 4.14. Indeed, Luke 24.41. he enquired, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 42. And he took it and did eat before them. verse. 43. Act. 10.41. We did eat and drink with him after he risen from the dead. Augustinus Epist. 49. Propter dubitantes cibum, & potum sumere voluit, non semel, sed saepius, ne illum non corpus, sed spiritum esse arbitrarentur; & sibi non , sed imaginaliter apparere. He received meat, and drink not once alone, but oftentimes for their sakes that doubted; left they should think him not to be a body, but a spirit: and that he did appear unto them not indeed, but only in conceit. All this was done after his Resurrection, and before his Ascension: And out of question, they did eat, and drink with Him often, fare oftener even in his natural life: Yet neither before his death, nor after his Resurrection is there any demonstrative argument, that he eaten flesh, save only of the Paschall Lamb. PAR. 16. YEt is there a great diversity between his eating as he was a mortal man before his death: and his eating after his Resurrection. Whilst he lived amongst men, what he did eat, converted, as other men's meat doth, into the substance of his body, and nourished it: for, He was like unto us in all things, sin only excepted. But after his Resurrection, as we are to know, He did not eat fantastically: so He did not delude their senses: but did orally and really. And whatsoever He did then eat, turned not into any nutriment, became not flesh, not blood, none was chymified, nor chylified; but consumed, or vanished; Whatsoever Durandus Sentent: 3. Distinct: 2. Quaest. 6. ad 2. imagineth to the contrary. Augustinus in his 49. Epist. to Deogratius, toward the beginning thus. Christus post resurrectionem cibatus est: & legimus Angelos ejusmodi escas, eodemque modo sumpsisse non ficto, & inam phantasmate: sed manifestissima viritate: nec tamen necessitate sed potestate. Aliter enim absorbet terra aquam sitiens, aliter solis radius candens. Illa indigentiâ: iste potentiâ. Futurae resurrectionis corpus imperfectae foelicitatis erit, si cibos sumere non potuerit: imperfectae foelicitatis, si cibis eguerit. Which is thus translated. Christ did eat after his Resurrection; and we read that the Angels did eat meat, and after the same manner, not in a feigned and empty fantasy: but in most apparent truth. Not by necessity: but by power. The thirsty ground drinks up the water one way: the hot rays of the Sun consume it another way. That through need, or want; This through power. A body after its Resurrection shall have but imperfect felicity, if it cannot take meat: or if it stand in need of meat. Let me add; or if it could not consume the meat in the passage, before it come to any immutation, or any degree of concoction. Some over-nicely distinguish a double digestion: The first reaching from the lips, and mouth to the taste: The second digestion from the to the ventricle, and so fare (say they) the meat came: but I say, not so fare: but either was changed into some more subtle substance: or vanished as it were into the air: or was consumed some other unknown way. But it was truly eaten. The Prayer. MOst glorious and blessed Saviour, the more I think of thee, the more I love thee: the more I search into thee, the more I adore thee. In all thy works thou art wonderful, in all thy words powerful, in all thy thoughts most holy: Frame me sweet jesus! by little and little to be like unto thee, though I be wounded with a crown of thorns, though I taste of the gall which was offered thee: give me grace I beseech thee patiently to run through these or other crosses, that thou mayest receive me into the Kingdom, and crown me with some portion of glory. Amen. CHAP. II. The second branch, of the first particular, of the first General. The Contents of the second Chapter. 1. The ancient Romans eaten four times in a day. 2. The Apostles temperancy in meat and drink. A double daily refection allowed by God. The Apostles provision not costly. 3. The Disciples of Christ fasted often. The place Act. 27.33. cleared. The word All in Scripture, often used for many. 4. Fasting much used in the old Testament. 5. Poenitentia Nineveb what it is. Hearty devotion the Salt of Religion. Why the Ninivites made their beasts to fast. PARAGRAPH. I. MOre concerning Christ's temperancy I will not say. Let me say something also concerning his most holy Apostles, but first a little of the Romans. The Romans eaten four times a day, I mean the youth, labouring men, travellers, and sick people, as they were able. The first Refection Martial speaketh of in his Epigram. Surgite jam vendit pueris jentacula pistor: Cristataeque sonant undique lucis aves. Awake, arise, hot Pudding-pies, to th' boys the Bakers sell. And crested Cocks, like faithful Clocks, the morn's approach foretell. Some called this breakfast, prandiculum. The second Refection, was prandium or Merenda: they two were all one (saith Festus) or divers words of the same signification. Their dinners were short, sparing, private; The whole day was time little enough for the busy active Roman. The more Gently bred eaten at the most but twice, as Hierom Mercurialis variarum Lectionum, 4.17. and Aldus Manutius de Quaesit. paer Epist. lib. 1. Epist. 4. proveth from many old writers. The third Supper, which of old, or at first they were wont to eat in propatulo: in the open air, or sight of all men: In after times they invited their friends to their private houses and chambers. Our men are wiser than the Grecians, saith Cicero, Epistol. ad Familiares. 9.24. The Grecians call these Suppers, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; compotationes, or concoenationes, drink together, or suppings together. The Romans style them Convivia, as it were livings together, quod tum maxime simul vivitur; because then especially men lived together. In defence of the Grecians I might say, that the Hebrews also excellently do call this Epularem congressum, this feasting of friends, from their drinking: for, from Shatath, bibere to drink, a feast is named, Mishteh, potatio, a drinking. In eating they mentioned not their friends: In their drinking they did. Haman was called ad bibendum cum Regina, to drink with the Queen. Ester. 7.1. that is ad Convivium, to feast (saith Bolducus) on job 1. But of wine and sweet meats (say I) rather then of Shamble-meates or fowl. Yet must I needs join issue with Cicero in the same place, when he saith to Paetus; Extra jocum monco te, quod pertinere ad beate vivendum arbitror, ut cum bonis viris, jucundis, amantibus tuis vivas. I would advise thee in good sober sadness (which may much conduce to thy happiness,) that thou comfort thyself with merry companions, and those that are thy true friends: nor do I refer it to pleasure (mere pleasure) but to community of life, and repast, and to the relaxation, and unbending of the mind; which is chief wrought by familiar discourse, which is most sweet and comfortable at our refections with our friends. The Romans fourth meal was Commessatio, or postcoenium a rear supper, or beover taken after supper, a night drinking. This tasted of superfluity, and was not practised of all; but was disliked by some, and them of the best sort. The moderate use of meat and drink which was practised by the Apostles, was so well known, that they who accused our Saviour himself, yet they accused not the Apostles. Indeed when the knowledge of languages was immediately and divinely infused into the Christians, and when they spoke in divers tongues wonderfully, the wonderful works of God, other men mocking the Apostles said, Act. 2, 13. These men are full of new wine, which being a foul imputation, Saint Peter wipeth it off, saying: These are not drunk as ye suppose. verse. 15. And if there had been any truth or likelihood of truth of any one's being drunk, that then was there; yet it concerned other men, and not the Apostles, the auditors and not the speakers. But the aspersion was laid on the Apostles only, and Saint Peter intended not to defend any auditor, who were not accused; but as the malicious jews said, These men (meaning the Apostles) are drunk: th' Apostle contradicteth saying, [these are not drunken] for the defence of others had been impertinent when only the Apostles themselves had been charged home with the fault. The Apostles all of them stood up with Peter (to defend themselves from so foul a crime, and false fame spread concerning them) Act. 2.14. The Raven brought Elijah bread, and wine in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening: 1 King. 17.6. Twice in a day God miraculously fed Elijah: and the Ravens left off their ravenous nature, and twice a day ministered to the Prophet. A double daily refection God alloweth: and if any one can prove that the Apostles are twice in one day; I dare say, that he cannot prove that ever they did eat a third time in one day: which inclineth to excess. Thy Disciples fast not (say the Disciples of john to Christ) Mat. 9.15. Christ answereth; Can the children of the Bride-chamber mourn, as long as the Bridegroom is with them? Where Christ tacitly confesseth, that in his life-time, his Disciples did not fast, as the Pharisees, or as the Disciples of John did fast, viz. extraordinarily, so that the people took notice of it. and yet assured them, that the time should come, when the Apostles should fast. For all this we never read of any great provision that they ever had. We read, they were an hungered, Mat. 12: 1: and did eat the very ears of corn, and Christ pronounceth them guiltless; vers: 7. Necessity and want was their just excuse: as the parallel of David and his company showeth and proveth: Neither when they had provision, was it very costly, but cheap, scant, ordinary, and easy to be had. We have here but five loaves & two fishes, say his Disciples, Matt. 14.17. and they were also Barley-bread, and two small fishes: Ioh: 6.9. At another time their store was only, seven loaves, and a few little fishes, Matth. 15.34. And when he asked for meat, they gave him a piece of broiled fish, and of an honey comb. Luk. 24.41, 42. verses. Again he asked his Disciples: Children have you any meat? and they answered him, No. joh. 21.5. And though heme kindled a miraculous fire: yet (only) fish was laid thereon, and bread, vers. 9 this was but poor entertainment for the Lord of Life, and for the company of so good, and gracious Disciples. PAR. 3. THe Disciples ministered unto the Lord, and fasted, Act. 13.2. and at the Imposition of hands upon Barnabas and Saul, they fasted, verse 3. They did give themselves to fasting and to prayer, at some especial times, 2 Corinth. 7.5. Anna (who also was a Disciple) served God with fasting and prayers night and day. Luk. 2.37. yet she lived not without sleep and some refections to strengthen nature. Saint Paul was very patiented in afflictions, necessities, and distresses: in stripes, imprisonments, tumult, and labours, in watch and fastings. 2 Cor, 6.5. he was also in weariness, and painfulness: in watch often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness, 1 Cor. 11.27. There is a strange place, Act. 27.33. This is the fourteenth day that ye have tarried, and continued fasting, having taken nothing. Aqua vorax (inquit Hipocrates) quia voraces facit. As, Pallida mors, quia facit pallidos. The water (saith Hypocrates) is said to be devouring, because it makes devouring men: as, death is called pale, because it maketh men pale. They who travile by sea, or the arms of it, or by great waters, know it, and that, not only the holy Apostle Saint Paul, and his friends, but even the Edaces nautae, & dura militum ilia, the hungry seamen, whom I have seen to eat heartily on cold dried Poore-iohns'. tough-foody-souldiers, that any strong bodies, or strong temperatures should suffer inediam & imbibesiam quarta decimana, hunger and thirst for fourteen days together is impossible to Nature; therefore when it is said, They continued fasting, having taken nothing: we must not either fly to miraculous operations, or say, they kept no set meals (such as Mariners use to take in calm weather) all these fourteen days, though they might now and then snatch in a little to comfort Nature; and eating work, and working ●ate, even as by nature the dog's lap, and drink of Nilus, and for fear of danger keep running all the while: or by a Scripture phrase, they are said, not to eat, or drink, who are spare eaters, and spare drinkers. As it is said of john the Baptist. Matth. 11.18. john came neither eating nor drinking, and yet his meat was locusts and wild honey. Matt. 3.4. And we may as well presume he lived not without drink. There is also another rule or two in Divinity, which inclines to the clearing of this point. First, what is said to be done of many, is said to be done of all. Absalon, and all the men of Israel said: 2 Sam, 17.14, when indeed he speaks only of the Counselors of war, or chief men that were with Absalon. Secondly, what is done often, is said to be done always. Luk. 24.53. The Apostles were continually in the Temple: and yet they were in an upper-roome. Act. 1.13. And were often otherwhere. So by the rule of contraries, here they are said to take nothing; for they took it but seldom; and took but a little, and took not any at all after their ordimary fashion. PAR. 4. IN the Old Testament they used much fasting, even wicked Ahab, 1 King. 21.27. put sackcloth upon his flesh, and fasted, and lay in sackcloth: and because Ahab did humble himself so before God, God did respite, and reprieve his punishment, vers. 29. The children of Israel being overthrown, Wept before the Lord until evening, judg. 20.27. And yet were overthrown the second time, vers. 25. After, all the children of Israel came to the house of the Lord: and wept, and sat there before the Lord, and fasted that day until even. And then at the third time the children of Israel prevailed against the children of Benjamin, vers. 46. I humbled myself with fasting (saith David) Psalm. 35.13: My heart is wounded within me, Psalm. 109.22. My knees are weak through fasting, verse. 24. Neither eat, nor drink three days, night nor day, said Ester to her people, Ester. 4.16. The Queen herself did so, and God sent a blessing, Turn ye even to me with all your hearts, with fasting. joel 2.12. Sanctify a fast, vers. 15. Who knoweth whether he will return, and repent, and leave a blessing behind him. The Prophet answereth vers. 18. The Lord will be jealous for his land and will pity his people. PAR. 5. SOme well-devoted of old in three whole days eaten but once, and they termed that space of time, Penitentiam Nineveh, the repentance of Nineveh. And this leadeth me to speak of that uncouth fast, jonas 3.7. Let neither man, nor beast, herd, nor flock taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water. An ecstasy of sorrow godly, and holy, beareth out seeming infirmities. The devout raptures of grace, made Mary Magdalen speak, with seeming-little sense: john 20.13. They have taken away my Lord. Which they? Iewes? or Disciples? She can name none, but strongly imagine some. And I know not where they have laid him. If Christ had been taken away, is it likely they would tell her? she remembered not his promised resurrection, but dreamt of his body's asportation, and resting otherwhere. Likewise in the 15. verse, she supposeth Christ to be a gardener, saying, Sir, if thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him? An unlikely matter that he would tell her if he removed him. Tell me and I will take him away, Did she not complain that he was taken away before? I think she should rather have thought of bringing him bacl again to his first grave, than of a second carrying him away; nor she, nor I can tell whither. I say the superabundance of her grief pouring forth those imperfect words, I doubt not made her as much accepted with Christ as ever any of her words or deeds had done before, though most rationally; Hearty devotion is as the salt of the Sacrifice and keeps all in good savour. Semblably, though Jonah 3.7. the Nineviticall clothing of beasts with suckcloth may seem ridiculous, if not barbarous: though the keeping of them from necessary food, may in the eye of the clown appear unreasonable, unseasonable, and most unconscionable: because God never looked for repentance from bruit beasts, because they could not be taught God was angry: or why: or that this was a means to pacify him: because some offended, and others were punished, which seems to taste of injustice: because a reasonable service of God is required, Rom. 12.1. not bestial. Yet since this extraordinary humiliation was performed, as it was appointed out of the depth of sorrow, out of the inmost bowels of repentance, out of a sanctified distraction, out of a measureless fear and love; God would not contemn humble spirits, nor reject contrite souls. The sacrifice of all other things must be in their sorts perfect, entire, or whole; but a bruised reed shall not be made worse: a wounded-broken heart shall be accepted: and God will esteem the blemishes as ornaments, where the intentions are profound, and surcharged with sacred fervency: whilst they would, if they could force their cattles to know God's wrath against Nineveh, by painful fasting, because they knew it not by jonah his preaching, Who can tell if God will turn, and repent, & turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? verse. 9 And God repent of the evil he had said, & he did it not. verse. 10. Daniel, 9.3. I set my face unto the Lord God, to seek by prayer, & supplications, with fasting, sackcloths & ashes. and whilst he was speaking in prayer he was divinely illuminated. The Prayer. O Lord, the seeds of all sins are in me, without thy preserving power into them I should fall: I humbly bless thy grace and goodness, for keeping me, from presumptuous sins: and do meekly implore thy divine favour to teach and direct me, that I may imitate the blessed temperancy of the Apostles, as they did of Christ, and that I may be partaker with them of Glory in the world to come. So be it, Lord Jesus, so be it. Amen. CHAP. III. The Contents of the third Chapter. 1 Illyricus his errors concerning fasting. Confession and beating the breast in fasting. 2 Rising in the night to serve God. Christ shall come at midnight. A jewish Tradition. 3 Bowing down the head in fasting. 4 Shaving the Head. Beard. 5 Calixtus fourfold fasting. Jejunia quatuor temporum. 6 Illyricus his absurd Division of a religious fast into crapulosum jejunium Holy. Hypocritical. 7 Fasting taken for innocence of life. Saint Augustine, and S. Chrysostomen. falsely taxed by Illyricus, Jejunium generale. 8 Illyricus his wild positions concerning fasting. Fasting not always a sign of, but sometimes a means to a contrite heart Rending of garments. 9 Washing of Guests feet. 10 Rending of clothes. 11 The Ceremonies of Fasts. Lutherans crapulous repentance. 12 Illyricus his two Reasons against fasting. The colder the climate, the hotter the stomach. Germans must fast proportionably to the Jews. Fasting must tame; not disease, or kill the body. 13 Illyricus plays the Didapper. He denies Fasting to conduce to Prayer. Why Christ and his Apostles did Fast. A broken heart sometimes goes before Fasting, sometimes follows after Fasting. God oft commutes eternal punishment into temporal. Fasting not always a sign of a contrite Heart. 14 A body weakened by fasting is more fit to pray. Preparation before the Sacrament necessary. Illyricus and Luther taxed. Fasting the best way to please God. Two extremes in fasting. Some fast too much, some fast not at all. Illyricus an Epicure. The best Christians fast to pray, and pray to please God. PARAGRAPH I. IF I should recount all the manifold blessings of God, which he hath apparently vouchsafed upon those, who have chastened their souls with fasting; I might spin out the remainder of all my days, ere I should handle every passage. I confess I have said somewhat the more, because Illyricus is much awry in the matter of fasting: Nae, ille, vir summus extitisset, si sua quaedam emendasset (saith our Doctor Whitaker 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.) verily he had been an excellent Writer, if he had corrected some of his errors. It may be this was one of his errors, needing amendment, which our Professor aimed at. Surely Illyricus runneth with a bias, to uphold the intemperate Germane usanses: and is many ways awry, whilst he would find out new Divinity contrary to the paths of old, or ancient Divinity, with novel new fashioned robes. Illyricus in his second part of his Clavis Scripturae; in his Tractate de jejunio (pag. 106. & in sequentibus) showeth himself a right Germane. Let me begin at the end of the Tractate, where I last left of reading him; so ascend step by step to discover his vanities. He dislikes that note of popish fasting, when they say, Mea maxima culpa: I have most grievously offended against thy divine Majesty; and beat the breast, and sometimes the face. Yet he confesseth the Jews did so in Christ's time, and instanceth in the Publican, Luk. 18.13. I had not thought any Christian would have faulted a penitent, for saying, mea maxima culpa, my sins are most heinous. Did not Saint Paul say, 1 Tim. 1.15. He was chief of sinners? Peccator omnium notarum sum, nec ulli rei nisi poenitentiae natus (saith Tertullian) I am a most notorious sinner, and borne for nothing but to repent. Ego praestantiam in delictis meis agnosco, I acknowledge mine exceeding sinfulness in sinning. The accusing of a man's self is a principal way moving God to acquit us. And David's heart smote him. 2 Sam. 24.10. And may we not think he smote his breast? PAR. 2. HE taxeth them for rising in the night to serve God; saying they did roar like bulls, oxen, or kine, in Temples. Is it possible a well-fed, a well tippled Lutheran, snorting securely, should, when he is awake, jeer at other men's midnight devotions? Indeed Tertullian ad uxorem 2.4. saith of Pagan husbands irreligious behaviour towards their wives, Quis nocturnis convocationibus, si ita oportucrit a laetere suo libenter eximi feret? Quis solennibus paschae obnoctantem securus sustinebit? Who with patience can endure to have his wife taken from his side to be present at the Christians nightly meetings, when occasion so requires? Who without jealousy can suffer her to be absent from his bed, at night, and to be present at their Paschall solemnities? Yet thence you may gather the night-devout service of the Christians. Tertullian in Apologetico. Cap. 34. Ita saturantur, ut qui meminerint, etiam per noctem adorandum sibi Deum esse. They so feast in the day time, as that they remember they must arise in the night time to serve God. It is a Jewish tradition (saith Hierome) that Christ shall come at midnight, as the Angel did in Egypt. Whence I think an Apostolical Tradition hath remained, that on Easter eeve, they dismissed not the people till midnight, expecting the coming of Christ; and after that time, boldly, and securely they feasted. To that effect Hierome cited by Rhenanus in argumento, lib. 1. Tertulliani ad uxorem. Psalm. 119.62. the Prophet David saith: At midnight will I rise to give thanks unto thee: Whilst Illyricus seemeth rather to approve more ease, and to give thanks on a good warm featherbed. At midnight, Paul and Silas prayed, and sung praises unto God, Act. 16.25. PAR. 3. Again, because some in Esay his time did bow down their heads like bulrushes, Esa. 58.5. Therefore Illyricus finds fault with the Monks for the like: and saith, Incurvant cervicem & obstipo capite velut nummos quaerentes incedunt. They hang down their heads, as if they searched for money. The high and mighty German might have remembered, Luk. 18.13. The Publican would not lift up so much as his eyes to heaven. It was David's holy joy, that his eyes were not lofty. Psal. 131.1. Indeed there is a generation, O how lofty are their eyes! and their eyelids are lifted up. Prov. 30.13. I wish Illyricus had remembered, A proud look, or haughty eyes are an abomination to the Lord. Prov. 6.17. Looking down in true fasting argueth a contrite soul, as well as a dejected body. PAR. 4. FOr the other part of his censure, that because anciently in their griefen they did shave their head, and their beard, therefore the Monks do so now: it savoureth of no learning, but is a gross mistake, or at least a fallacy. Ponit Non-causam, pro causa. Nor shave they their heads always in time of fasting, or mourning: but at that ceremony make great feasting. PAR. 5. HE findeth fault with Calixtus, for apppointing a fouren-fold fast; because there were four parts of the year. By the same reason (saith he) he might have commanded to fast twelve times, because there are twelve months in a year, or two and fifty fasts, because there are two and fifty weeks yearly: I had thought the new-fangling Magdeburgian would have added. Calixtus might have commanded three hundred and odd fasts, because so many days make a year. But Illyricus is to know, Calixtus appointed Quarterly fasts, for other ends, than only for a correspondence in number, with the parts of the year. For great holy ends. Before Calixtus his time, they fasted in Lent, which is about them twentith part of the year. After they fasted once a quarter, and the fastings were, and are called, jejunia quatuor temporum: and we fast weekly, one day in a week at least, whatsoever the Germans do. I see the stout Germane looks up to the cap of liberty, and would be under no command. PAR. 6. NOr may I well omit that when Illyricus had said, We call that a religious fast which belongeth to Religion & worship of God: he profanely addeth; This religious fast is rightly divided into an Holy one, and Hypocritical one. As if hypocrisy were a true part of God's worship: Crapulosum jejunium: a gluttonous fast, he justly condemneth, though it deserveth not the name of a fast, if it be Crapulosum, gluttonous, or stuffed up to surfeit, or vomiting. PAR. 7. BY an Allegory (saith he) fasting may signify, innocence of life: So Saint chrysostom, and Saint Augustine use it. Who when they saw that there is much mention in Scripture of fasting: yet understood not, how fasting conferred so much unto piety, transferred fasting unto abstinence from sins: building on a place of Esay, which they did not sufficiently understand (saith Illyricus) Behold novelty speaking in its own language, imputing needlessly and falsely, ignorance to those famous lights of God's Church, Saint chrysostom, and Saint Augustine, when as the place of Esay is punctual to this purpose. That the fast acceptable to God lieth much in the way of piety, Esay 58.5. etc. The answer to the interrogations can be no other than these: I have not chosen such a fast, wherein a man for a day, afflicts his soul, bows down his head, spreadeth sackcloth and ashes under him. But this is the fast that I have chosen: viz. to lose the bonds of wickedness: to undo the heavy burden: to let the oppressed go free: to break every yoke: yea not only to abstain from evil: but to do good; as followeth. It is to deal thy bread to the hungry; to bring the poor that are cast out, to thine house: to cover the naked: then shall thy light break forth as the morning; and thy health shall spring forth speedily: Thy righteousness shall go before thee (or be thy vaward) and the glory of the Lord shall be thy rearward, Now (Illyricus) doth fasting make much for piety, or not? Is there any acceptable fast, that is not pious? or is impious? or how are those Fathers without understanding in this point? August. Tract. 17. in joannem, jejunium magnum, & generale est, abstinere ab iniquitatibus: & illicitis voluptatibus seculi. This is the great and general fast; namely to abstain from the iniquities, and unlawful pleasures of the world. The same Augustine, Quaestionum Evangelicarum. 2.28. Scriptura docet generale jejunium, non à concupiscentia ciborum tantum, sed ab omni laetitia temporalium delectationum. The Scripture doth teach us, that the general fast is not only to abstain not onenly from the lust of meats: but also from all joy of temporal delights, Who can speak more intelligently? yet this hindered not, but fastings may confer much unto piety: and bodily fasting is much accepted by God, and many ways profitable; of which point hereafter. PAR. 8. IN the passages where he commenth to show, how fare we aren bound to fasting, or how fare God requireth fasting of us; he hath wild positions. 1 Since fasting is a certain outward sorrow, or an outward effect, or sign of an inward contrite, and repentant heart: and God would have us rend our hearts and not our garments: if we truly mourn inwardly, and be contrite for our former sins, out of doubt (saith he) God doth not greatly require fasting of us▪ no nor of the Jews neither. This Epicure would have his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. His bare word, to rule the world. Doth not the Scripture say, that by fasting the soul is afflicted, and humbled? and so it is not always a sign and effect of a contrite heart; but a means, and a way to make the soul contrite, and to prepare repentance. When God commanded, to rend their hearts and not their garments: speaketh to the wicked; as to the drowsy drunkards. Joel 1.5. Awake ye drunkards and weep; and howl ye drinkers of wine. These indeed did not rend their hearts; but forsooth would rend their garments. God's command is not absolutely exclusive, making it a sin to rend their garments: but rather comparative, showing, that God would rather have whole garments and rend hearts, then rend garments and uncontrite souls; And this appeareth, because God approveth, if, not commandeth rending of garments. Holy David 2. Sam. 3.31. said, not only to bloody joab who most traiterouly murdered Abner, but to all the people that were with him; Rend your clothes, gird you with sackcloth and mourn. And did not God accept Ahabs rending of his clothes, and fasting, and call it Ahabs humbling of himself? 1. King. 21.29. Hezekiah rend his clothes. Esay 37.1. Yet he was a good man, and God was with him. josiah rend his clothes. 2. Chron. 34.19. and God by Huldah the Prophetess, and she by Hilkiah his Ambassador sent josiah answer in these words, Because thine heart was tender— and thou didst humble thyself before God, and didst rend thy clothes, and weep before me; I have heard thee. verse. 27. As on the contrary, some are reprehended for not rending their garments. jeremy 36.24. For by this omission they testified their unrepentant hearts. PAR. 9 Again (saith Illyricus) the jews had a custom to wash feet: for the Region was dusty: and they went nudis tibiis bare foot. Christ washed his Disciples feet, and willed them to do the like one to another. It is not so required of us (saith he) I say, some of them were soleati, shod, as well as we. PAR. 10. THe jews were wont (saith he) in all great commotion, or angatiation of mind to tear their clothes from their breasts: God requireth not this of us. I answer, God forbiddeth it not. And when it is done in a just agony, God approveth it. Paul and Barnabas rend their clothes. Act. 14.14. Who dare think their rending of their clothes did not proceed from a rent and torn heart? The seemeing inhibitive precept made them not guilty of any sin. PAR. 11. ILlyricus his gangs, and humours, have urged me to lengthenn this digression. I return to him again, who in the same pag. 311. thus to the old matter. Such almost is the ceremony of Fasts; Because the jews were wont in every great grief to afflict their bodies, and to Fast, therefore the Lord liked it. But since we have no such custom in any grief of mind to use so great vexations of our bodies; God requireth them not, nor so great in our repentance. Let the world now judge of the Illyrican crapulous repentance. God's especial approbation of Fasting, exempteth (for sooth) the full-fed, and well tippled German, because they have no such custom of Fasting among them, who but a bold Libertine durst write in this manner? PAR. 12. LAstly, (saith Illyricus,) Two reasons, and those not contemptible ones, may be drawn from the nature, and site of the countries why we are not bound to Fast as the jews were. 1. First, here in Germany our stomaches for the circumstant cold, yea naturally are hotter; and therefore consume more meat: and can less endure hunger. 2. The second renason is; Since cold doth more afflict the Fasting, than the full stomaches, or men; if a man would here macerate himself with much Fasting, without doubt in those so great colds he would die, or fall into some most grievous disease. Some have made their belly their God; I dare say this supper intendent Illyricus may be his high-Priest. How tender is he of his God? They were never more careful to provide for Baal, than he doth for the belly. To the first reason, I say it is ridiculous. For because they are more hungry naturally, or accidentally than the jews, shall they less afflict themselves, than the jews did? If they take away from their dyet but so much as may humble them; as may tame their rebellious flesh, or may further them in the ways of devotion, this is a true and acceptable Fast, though before and after their Fasts, the Northern stomach eat more meat, than the Eastern can. Again, if the Germane can less endure hunger; yet let him endure some: let him endure but proportionable affliction, as the jews did: or as God intendeth in his precept of Fasting: and then his after-eating is of easier dispensation. To the second reason I answer, Illyricus is very cautelous, very curious in cute curandâ, in pampering his belly: For though cold weather more punish the Fasting, than the full and crammed paunch; yet, nor God, nor good men did ever command us, to macerate ourselves with Fasting, so eagerly, so vehemently, so extremely, as should bring us either to death or diseases, who do so willingly; are murderers of themselves: and if any should do so unwillingly, he is accessary to his own death, and incurreth the wrath of God, for drawing sickness upon himself. The golden means is a just tribute, due to God, payable to man. In some other matters concerning Fasting, Illyricus so playeth the Didapper up and down, in and out: that he is not worth the following; Yet I cannot wholly give him over. He denyeth that Fasting conduceth to Prayer: or is a good work of itself, but is only a sign, and effect of a sorrowful, humbled and contrite heart. And if any object; why did Christ then Fast; even he who had no sins, for which he should be sorry? Why did the Apostles Fast? Act. 13.3. of whom we do not read (saith Illyricus) that then lately they had committed any great sins, for which they should cruciate themselves with grief, and fasting? Illyricus answereth; Christ did not Fast to prepare himself to Prayer, since his flesh did not rebel against his spirit; nor needed any such castigation: But he fasted for grief of mind, and contrition of heart: because he was to be punished, as if he had committed all the sins of the world. I reply, did Christ Fast only then, when he had such dolorous thoughts? Did He not Fast to teach us to Fast? Either before, or in, or after his forty days Fast, is there any word evincing, that Christ fasted in consideration of a most doleful and broken heart? Likewise concerning the Apostles, All (saith he) that add fasting to Prayers, and pray rightly, must come with a broken heart: and then desire mercy for Christ's merit. Who denyeth this wholly? or what is this to the purpose? or how is the objection answered? The Apostles, and others fasted, and prayed that God would bless them in the calling, to which they were then separated; and to obtain the favour of God, for that especial business, though then they had no extraordinary cause to have broken hearts, as Illyricus confesseth: and no question but they implored God's mercy for Christ's sake; but their fastings, and Prayers were not here signs, or effects of broken hearts: but Signanter, fasting aided Prayer; Prayer fasting: both desired, and obtained a blessing of God upon what they requested. Most times a broken heart precedeth fasting: Sometimes fasting prepareth the way to a broken heart: as the chewing of meat doth to the speedier nourishment; As in our late, just, holy, and commanded Fast, that the Lord would vouchsafe to free the City of London, and the infected neighbouring places, from the plague: many a thousand countrymen by fasting came to a sorrowful heart, who at first came not to a fasting by a contrite heart, but by command. And truly, as God doth often commute the eternal punishment, which we have deserved into a temporary: so, when he seethe the inward humiliation of the soul, attended on with selfe-inflicted pain upon the body, the Lord doth take off some of that punishment which otherwise had laid strong hold on us. This was Ahabs' case, 1. King. 21.27. and the Ninevites, Jonah 3.7. whose voluntary subjecting themselves to punishment, diverted from them the full viols of God's wrath. Christ had compassion on such as fainted, or were tired, and lay down. Matthew 9.36. And I have (saith Christ) compassion on the multitude, because they continue with me now three days, and have nothing to eat; and I will not send them away fasting. Matthew 15.32. Illyricus cannot prove that these men fasted as a sign, or effect of their condoling contrite hearts: but they fasted to feed on Christ's holy words: they fasted to behold more of his wondrous works; and in expectancy of some divine blessing: and when Christ saw that they fasted so long, that they were like to be the worse, he miraculously fed them. verse 37. PAR. 14. MAny learned men (saith Illyricus) think, fastings were of old, and are now to be used that the weakened body might the rather obey the soul; and that a man may be fit to pray and perform divine duties. But thus, I think (saith he) and we find it by experience, that the body Rectissime curatum, tended most contentedly, and exactly, with necessary meat, drink, sleep, apparel; and other requisites is most composed, and best settled: and therefore can best of all obey, and serve the actions of the mind, and (that I may so say) will obey. He resteth not here, but proceedeth. Yea a somewhat exhilarated body, with competent meat, and drink, we find by experience, to make us better affected both towards God and Man. Hold man, hold, though thy Master hold, that when a man hath eaten moderately, he is fit to receive the Communion then when he is fasting; because after meat the head is more purged; the mouth cleaner, the breath sweeter: yet I dare say, the head is fuller of noisome fumes, the mouth no cleaner when one hath eaten: and if thy breath stink, common food maketh it no sweeter, than the Divine Eucharist: I am sure the third Council of Carthage, Canone 29. hath decreed: Sacramenta Altaris non nisi a jejunis hominibus celebrentur: That the Sacraments of the Altar should not be celebrated, but only by those that are fasting, and the seventh Council of Toledo, Canone 2. excommunicateth such as eat any thing before the performance of divine offices. It was likewise a Novel position: That when a man cometh most unprepared to receive the holy Sacrament, than he cometh best prepared; and when he is most sinful, than a sinner may most worthily receive. His very words are these in his Sermon of the Eucharist, made 1526. Ille ut aptissimus ad communicandum, qui ante & retro, est peccatis contaminatissimus, & sine peccatis mortalibus nullum debere accedere. He is fittest to communicate, who before and behind (who on all sides) is most defiled with sin: and without deadly sin none ought to come to the Communion: He meaneth not, that a new life sufficeth without contrition, confession, satisfaction, as some of his fellows say, his words run to a worse sense: For in another Sermon of the worthy receiving the Eucharist, eight years before; Optima dispotio est (saith he) non nisi ea, quâ pessime es disposit us; & è contrario, tunc pessimè es dispositus, quando optimè es dispositus. Then art thou best disposed, when art thou worst disposed, and contrarily; then art thou worst disposed, when thou art best disposed. Are not such words the means for men, to commit sins, and continue in them? and with unrepentant hearts, boldly, fiercely, impudently, to swallow up the heavenly food of our souls, the sacred Eucharist, rather than exhortations, to devout receiving? Is this way the proving and judging of ourselves? doth it teach repentance for sins past? sorrow, shame, fear, self-accusing for the present? doth it teach a steadfast resolution? and a settled purpose never to do so again? doth his way increase faith, strengthen hope, nourish charity? yet these things are expected from a worthy Communicant. What preparation was used at the giving of the Law, Exodus 19.20. etc. What sanctifying of themselves, both people, verse, 14. and Priests, vers. 22. All this preparation might have been cut off, and saved, by Luther's doctrine. They did not eat the Paschall Lamb, without divers washings, and many legal purifications: insomuch, that a second Passeover, in another month, was ordained for the unclean, by God's extraordinary appointment. Numbers 9.10. Which was practised in Hezekiah his days. 2. Chron. 30.15, 18, 19 verses. Abimelech gave the hallowed Bread, to the sanctified only, 1. Sam 21.4. etc. David professed, I will wash my hands in innocence: So will I compass thine Altar O Lord! Psal. 26.6. Saint Paul adviseth, or commandeth. 1. Corin. 11.28. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. Aug. alluded to the words of the Psalmist. when he said: Tractatu. 26. in johannem: Innocentiam ad altare pertate: peccata & si sint quotidiana, vel non sint mortifera: Carry innocence, (instead of Frankincense) unto the Altar, though thou hast committed no mortal sins, but sins of infirmity. The same Divine, Saint Augustine. Hom. 50. Tom. 10. pag. 115. Constituto in cord judicio, adsit accusatrix cogitatio, testis conscientia, carnifex timor; Ind quidem sanguis animae confitentis per lachrimas profluat, posiremo ab ipsa ment, talis sententia proferatur, ut se indignum homo judicet, participatione sanguinis & corporis Domini: qui separari â regno coelorum timet per ultimam sententiam summi judicis, per Ecclesiasticam disciplinam a Sacramento coelestis panis interim separetur. When a Tribunal is erected in thy heart, let thy thought accuse thee, thy conscience be witness against thee, thy fear and dread be thy tormentor, then let the blood of a soul confessing itself, flow out in tears; Lastly, let the mind pronounce this sentence: That a man judge himself unworthy to receive the body and blood of our Lord: That he who feareth to be separated from heaven, by the last sentence of the supreme judge, may in the mean time be separated according to Ecclesiastical discipline, from the Sacrament of the heavenly Bread: By which words, in the mean time, might well be inferred that S. Augustine differed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heaven wide from a novel Germane, who would have a man fall upon the Sacrament with mortal offences on his soul, with unwashed hands, having newly committed sins, Vastantia Conscientiam: devoratoria salutis, which lay waste a man's conscience, and worry his salvation. He avoucheth the best disposition to be the worst; and the greatest preparation the unfittest. But Augustine would have a man after mortal sin, to abstain from the most holy Eucharist, a competent time, till he had repent, till he had proved and judged himself, till he had confessed his sins, and laboured to wipe away the blots by his tears. Which truth is confirmed divinely, by our sacred Liturgi— If any of you be a blasphemer of God, etc.— unto these words— so shall ye be meet partakers of these holy mysteries, when Christ said. Come unto me all ye that are heavy laden— he meant not, with loads of unrepented sins, for, as such cannot move one foot toward Christ; to such obstinate sinners Christ is a judge and condemner: not a merciful Saviour: And the words cannot aim at that sense: for then not only the spiritual food in the Sacrament, but even Christ should be the great allurer unto sin, as being abettor thereof, which God forbidden: for then not only a window, but a door were set open to all iniquity and villainy: but the meaning of that most comfortable invitatory, is, and must be, this: All ye who have sinned, and are hearty sorry for your offences, wearied, groaning, and ready to faint under grief, for the same: yea, who find no comfort in yourselves, but are ready to be swallowed up of despair, or too much (not sins) but sorrow for sins, O come ye unto me: and this is evidenced by the gracious promise, I will refresh you, refreshing, being opposed to trembling, dejectedness, weakness, swoon, trepidations, grievings, faintings, which are fruits of the heavie-hearted sinner, and steps or breathe toward repentance: refreshing is not opposed robustae iniquitati, to strength of sinning, or boisterous coutinuing in iniquity, or triumphing rebellion: and so the sorrowful penitent is called to Christ, and not the filthy, continuing in his filthiness: nor may the sinner in flagrantia facti, in any present actual, unrepented, heinous sins approach to the holy Sacrament. See Injunction the 9 of Edward the 6. And the order of the Communion where it is said, Let a man awhile bewail his sins and not come to this holy Table. But to return to this gluttonous Germane, who will be wiser than the Church of God hath ever been: wiser than Christ, wiser than God himself. Would God ever have appointed fastings, if he could have been better served without fasting? Will God be served the worse way? Did not Christ take the best way to please God, when he fasted so long? If any course had been better, surely Christ would have used it. Deus optimus, the best God will be served the best way. In the best sort that they could, did the Chorus Apostolorum the Choir of the Apostles, yea, and the whole Militant Church seek to please God. Yet they never found out this trick: but fasted full often; which they would not have done, if by feeding until mirth, unto exhilaration, if a jolly well refreshed body had been best accepted with God. Let us observe the two extremes: One of such as fast too much till they destroy their bodies, or hurt themselves; which nor God commanded, nor do we approve. The other of such as will not afflict their bodies at all: who may be compared to the Epicurean porks. And among them is Illyricus justly reckoned. And then we shall find the blessed means, or middesse of a third sort, and those the best Christians, who fast to pray the better, and do both to please God. A beast is he, and not a man, who saith, writeth, or thinketh, that ever God appointed man to fast, till man's body was the more unfit to serve the soul: or made the soul more unfit to do holy services to God. The Prayer. O Gracious Creator, and Father of mercies, who didst appoint all things to serve man, and man to serve Thee, who also hast fitted him with such a body; as will both decay, if it be unrefreshed, and grow wanton, if it be too much pampered, I humbly beseech thee to grant me that temperance, that I may macerate my body, and so keep it under, that it may not rebel against thee, but be the apt for all holy and spiritual exercise, for the merits of jesus Christ. CHAP. IU. The Contents of the fourth Chapter. 1. Sick and old folks exempted from fasting. 2. Night-meditations advance day-studies. 3. The trouble of the body disturbs not the intention of the mind. Homer falsely cited. The belly an importune evil. 4. A difference betwixt Ordinances at Fasting and Feasting. 5. Fasting a voluntary not natural action. Divers ends of the same Fast. 6. Sorrow prepareth us to Prayer. The Apostles did not neglect fasting. A difference between neglecting and not performing. Hypocritical not true fasting faulted in the jews. Christ fasted; and why? 7. Sorrow a Concomitant of fasting: fasting and mourning two distinct things. 8. Illyricus maketh Nature, Custom, and Chance, the grounds of fasting and prayer. Prayer not the only remedy for all evils. Fides sola & solitaria saveth not. Saving faith is not separated from other Theological virtues. PARAGRAPH. 1. THe last observation in few words answereth almost all his tedious arguments, let us briefly survey them. The soul is most nearly conjoined to the body, and helped by its instruments, doth most things; Therefore if the body be out of temper, the soul cannot rightly do, as appeareth in sick and aged people. I answer, no man is commanded to fast till he come to the habit of a sick man: nor till he come to the feebleness of an old man, who hath as it were lead in his heels, and cannot lift up his legs: nor draw them after him. Yea, in all good forms or appointments for fastings, sick and old men are exempted from fasting, and left to their own liberty. The whole have no need of the Physician, but the sick. The sick are not enjoined by God to make themselves more sick by fasting: but the whole are appointed to fast; and not to exceed the bounds of mediocrity; which are transgressed if a man willingly draw sickness upon himself. PAR. 2. Again, (saith he) studious men discern in themselves most easily, if they want three or four hours of their ordinary sleep, they are the unfitter all the day. I solemnly profess the contrary. When my studies passed break off my sleep three or four hours in the night at one time; my night meditations have made me proceed further in my day studies, than I should have done otherwise. PAR. 3. THe bodily trouble doth disturb the intention of the mind (saith he) and recalleth it to the care of the body, as most truly, Odyss. 5. Ulysses saith. There is not a more importune evil, than an hungry belly: which above all things compelleth by a kind of necessity, even those who are troubled with great businesses, to remember themselves. As Cato also said: The belly wanted ears. Let me add the ingenious parable of Menenius Agrippa; That if it went ill with the stomach, or belly, all the body will pinch for it; for the stomach must be satisfied, and is, ere it satisfy other members. Concerning Homer, there's is no such thing, as is cited in the fith or sixth of the Odysseys. And yet I will not blame him: for it is a mere mistake of the Printer, which is usual. But in the seventh these are the words, post medium, versu 215. etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. vide cetera. But let me now put pensive thoughts to flight With regal cheer, and jovial delight. Nor will I dislike him because he hitteth the sense: though the word been not literally translated, importuno ventre, sed odioso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 molesto, gravi, tristi: which implieth one in greater necessity, than any one is commanded to be, during the time of his Fast, or by his Fast. Again (saith Illyricus) men are taught by daily experience, especially Students, who are men versed in the actions of the mind, that the least molestation of the body troubleth the intention of the mind: namely that I may use a ridiculous example, the biting of a little Flea, often revoketh a man from an intense meditation, and troubleth his thoughts, so he. It is a poor and silly avocation, God knoweth, to a man in earnest or study, or devotion. If he had spoken of a remiss, or lazy kind of speculation, or cursory reading, it might have passed: but that a Fleabite should trouble the intention of the mind, and often awake a man from an intense meditation, and disturb his cogitation: I believe not. A serious, elevated, high-strained amazement, overcommeth the sense of a flea-biting, and is beyond, and above the being disturbed or interrupted or drawn away by it, or any light matter. PAR. 4. But God appointed feasting at his sacrifices: and the tithes, and other things dedicated unto God, were to be eaten before the Tabernacle, that they might be the merrier, and apt to give God thanks: For the same cause Music was always used in rebus sacris, at their devotions to exhilarate, and stir up the spirit. So he. Is there no difference between the ordinances at feast, and those at fastings, Because feast were appointed, and music, when they had offered their Sacrifices, is there any show of resultance, that therefore we should be merry, and well fed at our fastings? Or did they feast, dance, or sing, whilst the Sacrifices were offered? silence with solemnity of devotion, was the anteamble, or usher to their festivals. His other reasons are these. PAR. 5. FAsting is a kind of natural thing: and therefore is not undertaken purposely for another end; but naturally floweth from another precedent cause: viz. from a contrite sad heart, so he. I say, fasting is rather a kind of voluntary, than natural thing: and is never undertaken without some end: nay divers ends may be, and are of the same fast. If some fasting proceed from a broken contrite heart, beforehand afflicted: yet all fasting doth not so. And if all did, there must be some end, even in that natural flux. PAR. 6. MAny examples thenrens are of fastings for grief, and sadness of mind, for past, present, and imminent calamities: but as a kind of sorrow, not for preparation to future prayer. So Illyricus. Answer, He seemeth to be ignorant that sorrow itself prepareth us to prayer. Doth sorrow exclude prayer? when do people pray more, or more fervently than in sorrow t In their afflictiction they will seek me early, Hosea, 5.15. Thou called'st in trouble, and I delivered thee. Psalm. 81.2. A command there is for it. Psalm. 50, 15. Call upon me in the day of trouble. And it is divinely answered. Psalm. 86. In the day of my trouble I will call upon thee. It is not likely (saith he) that Christ would (whilst he lived) have suffered the Apostles to neglect fastings, if they were so profitable exercises, for piety and prayer as some think. I answer. The Apostles did not neglect fasting: there is a great deal of difference between Not-performing, and Neglecting: Neglect hath sin wrapped up in it; bare omission may be upheld by many just reasons. Christ's dispensation was sufficient for them. And what if I should say, their attendance on Christ, and observing of him, in words and deeds, and behaviour, was a more powerful means towards piety and prayer, than their fasting would have been, without eyeing of Christ: and thereupon Christ permitted them to take the better way. Who would take up an handful of silver; when instead of it he may take up an handful of gold? Never did Christ turn from the people, and turn himself to his Disciples; and say things privately to them, but the things were of extraordinary note. But so did Christ, Luk. 10.23. showing what a happiness they had to be with him. So Matt. 13.16. Blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears for they hear: (saith Christ to his Apostles) for many Prophets and righteous men have desired to see the things which ye see, and have not seen them, and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them. verse. 17. It is varied excellently, Luk. 10.24. Prophets and Kings: So the Kings were reckoned as righteous men, more righteous than others. Again (saith Illyricus) God would not have rejected the fasts of the Jews, Esay 58.3. If they had been exercises truly preparing men to prayer, and other virtues. I answer: how blind is he that will not, or cannot see, that God findeth fault not with true fasting, which much conduceth to holiness: but with their Hypocritical fasting. Behold (saith he) in the day of your fast ye find (perhaps invent) pleasure; ye offer grievances: ye fast for strife and debate. verse. 4. Then he showeth what a fast God likes, verse, 6. And after such a fast. Thou shalt call, and the Lord shall answer: thou shalt cry, and he shall say, here am I. verse. 9 Where the Prophet of set purpose showeth, that a true fast prepareth men to pray, and God to hear. God found fault with the abuse, and not with the right use of fasting. And shall we cut down the vines, because some are drunk? God never rejected a true fast. When ye fasted and mourned, did ye at all fast unto me, even to me? Zach. 7 5. Here is both fasting and mourning: yet because they did not conduce to the ways of God, or godliness, but fasted to their own profane, and civil ends, and not to holy ends, or exercises of piety; God renounceth them. Again (saith he) Christ fasted; whose body needed no such castigation. Therefore he did not prepare himself by fasting unto prayer. I answer. Indeed Christ was the immaculate lamb of God, without either original or actual sin. But he fasted to satisfy Adam and Eves intemperate eating, he fasted to recompense our gluttony, he fasted so, to teach us to fast. And he fasted for us, not for himself; If he fasted that needed not, how much rather ought we to fast, that do need? Christ fasted not without great good causes; and to great good ends, and purposes, & the issue was divine. For had he made bread of stone: had he eat that bread, had he not still fasted, he had been surprised by the tempter, but by fasting he grew hungry. Graeculus esuriens, in coelum jusser , ibit. A man will do any thing, to satisfy nature, if his appetite be sharp set; hunger will break through stone walls; yet whereas Adam, and all we in him fell by his eating: our blessed Saviour stood out against Satan, and over came him by hunger and fasting: as I have manifested in my Miscellanies. I deny not the conjunction of other helps, for Christ. Christ in the days of his flesh, when he offered up prayers, and supplications, with strong crying, and tears: he was heard for his piety; or in that he feared, Heb. 5.7. But in the tempting Christ to eat, did the serpent's head work chief; and it was the main drift of Satan's first great temptation. PAR. 7. CHrist defineth a fast to be a sorrow, Matth. 9.15. Can the children of the Bride-chamber mourn? I answer, it is no definition of a fast, Christ speaks of mourning: as of a companion, fellow, and concomitant of fasting. Yea, some mourning may be without fasting; and therefore they be not reciprocal. But Daniel 10.3. it is so defined. I answer, it is not: it is true Daniel mourned three weeks: and as true that he did eat no pleasant bread; neither came flesh or wine into his mouth: neither did he anoint himself at all, till the whole three weeks were fulfilled; yet might he eat other bread, and other food▪ though costly or curious food, he eaten not. Illyricus might have remembered, that because Daniel did chasten himself before his God: his words (or prayers) were heard, vers. 12. Therefore his fasting prepared him to prayer, and other exercises of devotion: and prepared God to bless all. But fasting is defined to be a mourning, Zach. 7.5. When ye fasted and mourned. I answer, Here fasting precedeth mourning: where Illyricus saith Fasting is an effect of mourning, and naturally floweth from it: when it is commanded, Watch and Pray, is one a definition of the other: because they be conjoined? Fasting and mourning be two distinct things, and fall not under one definition. PAR. 8. THese be his arguments, which he thinks strong enough to withhold him from subscribing to those, who think, fastings of old were, and now are to be used, that the macerated body may better obey the soul, and that a Christian may be apt to pray, and to all divine exercises. But Illyricus objecteth against himself. Are fastings wholly unprofitable? Why are they then so often conjoined with prayers, if they be not exercises preparing to prayers? He answereth. Since these afflictions of fasting are undertaken by the prime motion of nature in great grief of mind: and then confirmed by custom in the eastern countries: it came to pass, that they did both fast and pray in troubles. Nature, custom, chance, are his grounds for fasting, and prayer: Not God, not Scriptures, not holy examples precedent: these are nothing to the frothy Germane. Moreover (saith he) the calling upon God was their only remedy for all their evils: therefore they always added earnest prayers to their afflictions that their sins might be remitted and the punishments averted. Is calling upon God the only remedy? Did not faith, and contrition, and repentance precede? Doth not fasting accompany? Shall we exclude hope? renounce charity? and make prayer to be the only remedy? Thus forsooth in some other humours, Faith alone saveth: only faith; Fides sola, & solitaria. Yet all Novelists must know; They shall sooner separate light from the Sun, heat from the fire: then they shall separate faith, true faith, saving faith from Charity, from Hope; from the fear and love of God, or from other Theological virtues. I profess that I am sorry, that Illyricus gave cause of so long a diversion. I have only censured his Tractate, de causa finali jejunii. I must be brief in the rest. The Prayer. MOst glorious Saviour, in thy feast thou wert holy; thy words full of power, thy actions full of wonder: in thy fastings thou wast divine, thou wert an hungered, and yet wouldst not eat: thou wert a thirst, and yet didst not drink: grant good Lord Jesus, that thy gracious example may be my guide, both in feasting and fasting; and that I may so behave myself in this temporary fading life, being the very valley of misery, that through the merits of thy fasting. I may gather the crumbs under thy table in thy eternal Kingdom, So be it Lord Jesus, so be it. CHAP. V The Contents of the fifth Chapter. 1 All in fasting must afflict their souls. Fasting commanded in the Old and New Testament. Fasting is more than a temperate sober life. 2 Divers effects of sorrow. Divers efficient causes of Fasting. 3 The Germans little practice Fasting. The singular commendation of Fasting by Athanasius. S. chrysostom. Leo Magnus. S. Ambrose. Bellarmine. 4 A parting blow at Illyricus. PARAGRAPH 1. ILlyricus in his first Tractate De jejunio, materiâ hactenus parum liquidò explicatâ, vera dissertatio; Having not all this while explicated the matter distinctly enough, the true dispute, etc. he beginneth with two positions boldly averred, hardly proved. At all times great hath been the superstition, and abuse of fasting, and of other afflictions thereunto annexed. Yet was there not one certain form of that fast: for it was free and voluntary, and therefore out of doubt, one did cruciate himself otherwise, than others did. And yet himself truly confesseth, they fed on no dainties: But that is one certain form (say I) And he confesseth further: To fast is to abstain from the chief commodities of the body; and to draw discommodities upon a man's self. To abstain from meat, drink, sleep, washing, anointing, change of apparel, music, mirth, and all recreations: yea to put on sordid, and ill apparel, which they call sackcloth, to lie on the ground, on ashes, dust or any other sordid place. His very definition prescribeth this form, and accordingly was it used: and yet he denyeth any one certain form. That some fasted longer, or oftener, or stricter than others, none will deny; but all did afflict their souls, or otherwise it was no true fast. Whereas he saith, it was free and voluntary: no man can deny, but some had more occasion than others had, and did fast whën others did not; yes, and fasted voluntarily: yet himself confesseth they were commanded to fast on the days of expiation. Levit. 23.27. Ye shall afflict your souls. And the Prophet gave precepts for fasting: which in like case we are to imitate. Christ foretold the Apostles should fast. Christ said; When ye fast anoint your heads: implying that men were to fast. I see fasting is commanded in the Old and New Testament, but what days we are to fast, and not to fast, by precept from God, or his Apostles I find not. Augustine, Epist. 88 ad Casularum. Yet in that Tractate he doth very well confute such as say, of old fasting was no other than a temperate and sober life. His reason is excellent. Moses, Elias, Daniel, Christ, and his Apostles, who questionless always lived temperately, and soberly; yet even they did fast certain days. Again (saith he) It is easy to discern from 2 Sam. 1.12. where they mourned, and wept, and fasted until even. from Daniel, 10.2. and from jonah 3.5 etc. that fasting is a more sour, sorrowful and hard thing, than a temperate, and sober life. PAR. 2. IN the middle Tractate, De efficient causa jejunii; Thus he discourseth, naturally, Omnibus animalibus incitum est, it is given to all living creatures; not only to live, but to live contentedly, and sweetly: and to procure pleasing things; and to fly the contrary. But in great sorrows men lead a discontented life, and desire to die; and therefore begin to neglect all things, belonging to an happy life. And in greater sorrow beat their breasts, tear their faces, and hair, as in the Southern parts women were wont to do. These sorrows are not fitly ordered by Illyricus. The sorrow which causeth men to desire death, is greater than that, when people beat their breasts: tear away the hair from their heads, and skins from their face. But I must remember my promised brevity. He returneth to his first position. When we are glad, we naturally love this life, and the things tennding to it: and when we are sorry, we hate life: fly the presence of men, and pleasures; yea embrace things discommodious. Yet custom much prevaileth in this point; for some people testify their joy, and sorrow otherwise, both by the quantity and quality, than others do. Then defineth he thus. Fasting is (in the holy Scriptures) a certain affliction of the body, and an outward sign, and effect of a mind inwardly sorrowful. or, a certain outward mourning, which voluntarily, yet by a natural motion, is undertook whilst the soul mourneth. The efficient cause of fasting is (saith he) plainly natural: though both will and custom, do some way concur unto it. His conclusion runneth to this ennd: that the torments or macerations of Fast, may, and use to arise from great sorrow of the mind, from a broken and contrite heart, from the humiliation and prostration of the soul. Thus much (saith he) of the efficient cause of fasting. Yet certainly some, if not many fast, not out of any great precedent sorrow, or natural motion: but from the motion of grace, from a willing mind to prevent evils, either of sin, or punishment, to obtain God's favour in things they desire, to tame their bodies, to prepare themselves for prayer, and holy exercises of devotion, to help the afflicted either near or fare off, to show obedience to the Magistrate; and by fasting to humble themselves more than when they began to fast; and more than they would have been humbled, if they had not fasted, to procure a blessing upon such great and difficult affairs as they intent to compass, and to adapt the mind to spiritual contemmplations. Experience proveth all this. Fasting-spittle, Saint Augustine calleth Virginem salivam, perhaps you may term, Virgineam salivam, Virgin-spittle, and is in itself more powerful than any other spittle. PAR. 3. I Would say, farenwell high and mightily fed Illyricus, butchers, cooks, musicians, bakers, brewers & taverners will extol thee: perhaps it grew from thy Doctrine, in that Hamborough are 777. Brewers, 40. Bakers, one Physician, one Lawyer. But learned men will think, that ye Germans little practice fasting for yourself confess, your northern Nations, have no such fervent affections, and do not grieve so much as others do, and do less show outwardly their affections. And therefore ye will put yourselves, to little or no bodily pain. Ye are neat men, and will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, jejunium olere, smell of fasting: ye have believed Plautus, rather than Christ, jejunitatis plenus, anima foetidat: Plautus in Mercatore. He that is given much to fasting, doth use to have a stinking breath. Plautus in his Comedy entitled, The Merchant. If Illyricus had much studied the Fathers, he would not have spoken so largely against fasting, Athanasius (in lib: de Virginitate) saith, Qui dicunt tibi, ne frequenter jejunes, ne imbicillior fias, istos Diabolus subornavit. The Devil hath suborned those who say: fast not often, lest ye grow weak. An heavy yet true censure in some cases, and to some persons. See what fasting can do, saith Athanasius, ibidem. It healeth diseases, drieth up distillations, chaseth away devils, expelleth evil thoughts, makes the mind more neat, and the heart more purified. Fasting is the food of Angels; and he who useth it, may be thought to be reckoned among the orders of Angels. What saith my crammed, and pampered Germane to this? chrysostom (Homil. 1. in Genes.) saith, God desiring that we should wash away all our sins, hath invented this help, even our fasting, which is the mother of all good things, the mistress of Modesty, and shamefastness, and the food of our souls. And in the next Homily. It is the tranquillity of our souls, the ornament of old men, the Schoolmaster of youth, and the teacher of continency. If Adam had abstained and fasted from one tree; death had been dead; or therenfore had not died, because it never had been, saith the same Saint Chrysost:) in his first Sermon of fasting: The Prophet was slain by a Lion for eating and drinking, where God said, eat no bread, and drink no water. 1 King. 13.22. Fasting is the imitation of Angels, as fare as lieth in us, a contempt of pleasant things, a school of prayer, a bridle for the mouth, and a tamer of concupiscence. It slacketh fury, curbeth wrath, appeaseth the insurrection of nature, quickeneth reason, lighteth the flesh, drives away filthy nightly intemperance. It hath revoked God's sentence, and stopped the execution of his judgements. Fast because thou hast sinned: Fast that thou mayest not sinne: Fast to receive good; Fast to retain good. The prayer of a fasting man is pleasing to God, and terrible to the devil, saith Leo Magnus, Serm. de jejunio septimi mensis. jejunium est prima virtus contravitia, saith Chrysologus. Fasting is the first, or chiefest virtue against vices. Again, what is of more virtue than fasting (saith Leo) by observing it, we draw near to God; we resist the Devil: we overcome vice. Fasting was always meat to virtue; from abstinence proceed chaste thoughts, reasonable desires, wholesome counsels. The most effectual prayer against sin is Alms, and Fasting. All vices are by continency destroyed. Whatsoever covetousness thirsteth after, pride affecteth, luxury lusteth for, fasting overcommeth. From the observation of holy fasting, begin the rules of all virtue. Leo Serm. 11. the Quadrages. Adest maximum, sacratissimumque jejunium. The greatest and most holy fast of Lent is now come: which all faithful men are bound to observe; for none is so holy that he may not be holier; none so devout, that he ought not to be more devout. Much more could I cite from the fathers; Who are those new masters, which exclude the merit of Fasting (saith Saint Ambrose) in the aforesaid 82. Epist. to the Church of Vercellis) who desireth to see more, let him have recourse to Bellarmine, Tom. 4. de bonis operibus in particulari. lib. 2. cap. 11. etc. PAR. 4. I Profess I am weary with turning after this Noveller, I am sorry it hath hindered so much my main intentions; yet because I find him an antimonarchical man, a very firebrand, and bellows for sedition: a jack of the people, teaching them rather to terrify the Princes by rebellion, than to yield any thing for quietness sake; and that the people should defend their opinions with uprisings, commotions, and insurrections (for which cursed opinions, his city of Magdeburge hath justly suffered) therefore have I spared him the less, esteeming him no other than a self-willed Epicure. The Prayer. ON great and just occasions, O blessed God, hast thou commanded us to fast: and in fasting to afflict our souls: good Lord grant that I may all my life moderately, temperately, and soberly demean myself: and yet upon just occasions may fast both privately and publicly, to serve thee, and to procure thy love, and thy blessings with thy love, for Jesus Christ his sake. Amen. CHAP. VI The Contents of the sixth Chapter. 1 What several Evangelists wrote concerning the several Suppers. 2 The Supper of the Lord, instituted after the second or common Supper. 3 Why there is no express mention of a second Supper. Consequential divinity, Proved. Approved. Creation of Angels: and when. Infant's Baptised, Scripture not always tied to express terms. John 21.25. expounded, reasons thereof rendered. 4 Divers reasons why the name of a second Supper is pretermitted. PARAGRAPH. I. The second Particular of the first General. MY propounded method leadeth me now, to examine in the second place, what several. Evangelasts wrote, concerning the several Suppers. Which being cleared, much confusion will be chased away, and the greatest dubious matters, will distinctly appear. S. Matthew Chapter 26. speaketh of the Passeover from v. 17. to the 25. inclusiuê. Saint Mark Chapter 14. doth the like from vers. 12. to verse 21. inclusiuê, also. Saint Luke Chapter 22.7. beginneth a large narrative, from the beginning of the preparation, to the Supper itself; and at the 14. verse the continuance of that Supper till the 19 vers. exclusiuè. The Passeover which the three Evangelists had described so fully, Saint john omitteth; and toucheth only at the heel, or end of that Supper. john 13.2. Supper being ended: viz. the Supper of the Paschall lamb. For neither was the sacred supper then instituted, or begun, much less ended: No nor yet was the Common supper; during which so many matters of moment were acted: (of which hereafter:) and therefore the words must be understood of the ending of Paschall. Concerning the second Supper, the common, or ordinary Supper, Saint Matthew said nothing: and Saint Mark nothing. And Lucas usus est praeoccupatione. Saint Luke recordeth the last supper before the second (saith Barradius) Tom. 4. pag. 64. concerning the history of the Supper, adding that he learned it of Saint Augustine. Yet Saint Luke admirably declareth things done, and words spoken, from the 21. vers. to the 30. inclusiuè which in fairest probability were done, and spoken at the second supper, rather than in the first, or in the third supper. Saint john writing last, and seeing memorable passages omitted in the second supper, he only points at the , making the end of it to be the beginning of the second supper. Nor doth he mention, or so much as point at the third supper at all; because it was throughly described by all the other three Evangelists: but applieth himself wholly to a large, and full explanation of things done, and words spoken at the second supper. john 13. from vers. 2. to the 30. vers. inclusively. PAR. 2. COncerning the Supper of the Lord, it is apparent, that it was not be begun till after the second supper, 1 Cor. 11.25. In the same manner he took the Cup when he had supped. Likewise also, he took the cup, After Supper. Luk. 22.20. So the first supper was ended; and then began the second. And after the second supper was ended; that is, when judas was gone forth (of which hereafter) when it was night, john 13.20. and after some little discourse, from verse 31. to verse 38. inclusiuè: Christ instituted his last, best, holiest Supper of the Eucharist. So the first supper, that is the Passeover, was ended where Saint john began his discourse of the second supper. And the blessed Eucharist was also instituted after supper; which must be understood of the ending of the second supper after their being washed. The third supper is described from Matthew 26.26. to part of the 30. verse inclusively from Mark 22. to part of the 26. verse, inclusively also. And from Luk. 22.19. & 20. verses. And this third supper they ended with an Hymn. PAR. 3. The second Supper. The third particular of the first General. ANd now two of those points which I thought fit to be premised being done; I come to handle the third and last punto, or praelibandum. And it consisteth in the answers to this question: Why there is no express mention of a second supper? I am bold to say, express mention is not necessary. A thousand matters of weight, and moment have been passed over without express mention: yet really have been performed, and are most true of their own nature. Moses passed over the creation of Angels, and Archangels, and the innumerable glorious hosts of heavenly incorporeal spirits, and doth not so much as once name them: whence the Sadduces belike did gather, that there are neither Angels nor Spirits. No express mention is there of baptising of infants, or many other matters. Consequential and inferentiall Divinity, if truly, and unforcedly collected, cannot be disapproved. Quae colliguntur ex Scriptures, perinde habenda sunt, ac si in illis scripta essent. Greg. Nazianzenus Theologiae, lib. 5. You are to esteem such things as are gathered out of the Scriptures, as those that are written in them. Quae in divinis Scripturis non sunt scripta, tractare debemus per ea quae scripta sunt, saith Origen in Matth. cap. 23. Those things which are not written in sacred Scriptures, must be handled or explained by those things that are there written. Augustinus contra Mendacium ad Consentium: cap. 10. In divinis Scripturis vera aliquando tacentur, non mentiendo, sed tacendo. Many true things are concealed in Scripture not by lying, but by omission or silence. From those things that are written, we must (saith the Divine Saint Augustine) gather such things that are not written. In the whole book of Hester there is not the name of the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit, No nor so much as the name of God; yet manifest effects are there of the divine providence, justice and mercy of God. In the whole Scriptures, there is not, in expressis terminis, a mention of the Unity in Trinity: or Trinity in Unity: yet the deductions naturally flowing are most evident for it. Thus though there be no express mention of Angels in the History of the Creation: yet by resultance, the hidden truth is enlightened; the concealed doctrine is revealed. Some of the Fathers, because no such is named in the story of the Creation, have held that the Angels were created before the world: as Hieron. in his Commentary on the Epistle to Titus 1.2. from the words. God promised eternal life, before the wood began. If any who besides the Angels? Therefore the Angels were before the world began. I answer. 1 In that place is no mention of Angels, nor intention towards Angels, or any promise to them, or for them, of eternal life. The Apostle speaketh concerning the hope of men's salvation. 2 Augustine de Civitate. 12.16. truly observeth, Promittere eo loco nihil aliud esse, quam statuere, vel praedestinare: promised in that place signifieth nothing else, but ordained or predestinated. 3 Why may I not say, if the words were taken literally for promise, it is an holy trialogisme, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost before the foundations of the world, sweetly concording and promising eternal life to mankind, though man was not as yet created. Ambrose, Hexameron, cap. 5. saith, Angels were before the creation. So Hilarius de Trinitate 12. So among the Greeks', Basill, Homil, 1. etc. 2. Origen. Homil. 4. in Esaiam, Chrysostom. & Nazianzen. Ludovicus Vives, on Augustine de Civitate Dei, 11.9. saith. The Greek Divines for the most part hold, that Spiritual things were made before corporal: and that God did use those as instruments to produce these. Others ran into another extreme, that the Angels were created after the world; as the soul of man was after his body, So Gennadius and Acatius. Yet Beda, Cassiodorus, and others are peremptory that the Angels were created within the six days. And they followed the Divine S. Aug. for after Aug. almost all the Latins (saith Ludovicus Vives de Civitate. 10.9.) and since them all the Schools say: all the Angels were created within the six days. I boldly say; Col. 1.16. By Christ were all things created, that are in heaven & earth, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: he might have specialized Angels or Archangels, Cherubims, or Seraphims, since he added: All things were made by him and for him. What some said of Origen, I may say concerning those Greek Fathers, that they rather Platonize, than Christianize: for Plato long before them in his book de mundi opificio, held the same opinion. The reasoning of Augustine de Civitate Dei, 11.9. is good. That the creation of Angels is not left out only by Moses, I think by this (saith he) it is said expressly: God ended his work on the seaventh day, and he rested the seaventh day from all his works, Gen. 2.2. And, In the beginning God created the Heaven, and the earth, Gen. 1.1. Now if he made nothing before the six days, and rested from all his work the seaventh day, than the Angels must needs be created within that time. But yet there is a plain place, Exod. 20.11. though it be not sufficiently expressed without some deduction. In six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth, the Sea and all that in them is. The Angels are in heaven, and on earth: (This is the assumption.) Therefore in the six days they were created. Psalm. 146.6. It is varied somewhat, God made Heaven and Earth, the Sea, and all that therein is. From whence you may extract the same conclusion. As man was created when all things were fitted for him: and the soul is infused into the body, when the body is prepared to receive it: so as soon as the Heavens, the Angel's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, now framed, the Lord filled it with Angels. Furthermore, it is said, Psalm. 148.2. Praise the Lord all ye Angels of his: the reason is added in the fifth verse, Let them praise the name of the Lord, for he spoke the word, and they were made, he commanded, and they were created, not only Sun and Moon, not only Stars of light, not only heavens of heavens, and the waters above the heavens: but Angels also; and first of all are Angels placed, when he had formerly said: Praise the Lord from the heavens; And so are they comprised as well as other creatures within the six day's compass of the creation. Augustine in the forecited book and chapter argueth from the song of the three children, in the midst of the fire (though it be Apocrypha tous) for in the 34. verse it is said, All ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord: and in the next verse, O ye heavens, bless ye the Lord: the subsequent verse hath it: O ye Angels of the Lord, bless ye the Lord: as if they were created, and indeed so they were, so soon as their habitation was made; and God had fitted them a dwelling place. But that was done towards the beginning of the creation: and therefore the Angels were then created. Again, though there be not express mention (in iisdem terminis sic terminantibus) In plain words and disert terms; of baptising of infants, yet the Church justly, profitably, and excellently observeth it. And thus it may be evinced by Scripture. In the Apostles time they did baptise whole households, 1 Cor. 1.16. I baptised the house of Stephanas. Lydia was baptised, and her household, Act. 16.15. So the Jailor was baptised, he and all his straight way, Act. 16. verse 33. that is, his children, as well as his household servants: Act: 2: 38. Be baptised every one of you.— For the promise is made to you, and to your children, verse. 39 This were a silly reason, if children might not be baptised: but indeed it is a strong motive, that they should bring their children to Baptism, and an argument fair enough, that children were baptised: for those to whom the promise is made must be baptised: but the promise is made as much to children as to any others, therefore children ought to be baptised. Certainly the Apostles would never have named their children, if none of them had any children, but the converts in that place being some thousands, it could not be otherwise, but many of them had children, yea and that their children were baptised with themselves: as in the same day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son, and all the men of his household, Gen. 17.26. For otherwise he had been disobedient to the holy Apostle, who said: Be baptised every one of you: But no good Christian will or can think, that those then converted were disobedient, and therefore their children were baptised. It is a ridiculous thing to think the Apostles chose out such households only, as had no little infants in them, leaving great and numerous families unbaptised, because some little children were in them. And fairelier we may conclude. In many families there were some infants. But many whole families were baptised: therefore some infants. If some, why not others? If others, why not all? And so all infants are to be baptised. Again, Baptism is necessary for us, as Circumcision was for the Jews. This is proved because of the correspondence between the Type and Antitype, which correspondency is so square and perfect between the Old and New Sacrament, that the Apostle 2.11.12. in effect designeth out Baptism, by the name of Circumcision. But their infants were circumcised, Gen. 17.27. and therefore our infants must be Baptised: Act. 2.41. In one day were added to the Church about 3000 souls, yea daily the Lord added such to the Church as should be saved, vers. 47. but children are some of those that must be saved, for of such is the Kingdom of God, saith Christ, Matth. 19.13. It is added Mark 10.15. verse. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the Kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. Lastly, lest any should cavil, these children were not very little, but such as came of themselves unto Christ, it is said in the same verse of Saint Matthew; They brought little children unto him: and some of those children so brought were infants, Luk. 18.15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: it being significantly translated in our best and last translation: They brought unto him also infants. Therefore infants according to Christ's, yea the Apostles practice must be baptised. For there is no likelihood, but in such great multitudes, as were together baptised, and divers day by day, but there were some infants. Much more may be added to this point, but Quantò diffusares est, tantò substringenda nobis erit, that I may use Tertullia's phrase ad Nationes, 2.12. The second Supper is not to be thought a fancy, because the word Second is not expressed. The Scripture is not tied to terms of method or number. I have many things to say, saith Christ, john 8.26. I have yet many things to say unto you; john 16.12. but ye cannot bear them now. So Christ spoke not all things, but concealed some. Likewise also Christ Jesus did many other signs, and them truly in the presence of his Disciples, which are not written in this book: john 20.30. And after this john 21, 25. There are also many other things which jesus did, which if they should be written (every one in particular) I suppose the world itself could not contain the books which should be writeen. But lest these words may leave a scruple in men's consciences, they are to know, that the world doth not comprehend here the whole earth, much less heaven and earth, but is used for a great compass only, as some do opine. And they have a parallel. For it was promised to Abraham that he should be heir of the world, Rom. 4.13. yet God gave him no inheritance, no not so much as to set his foot on. Act: 7.5. Neither had ever any, or all his children the hundreth part of the world. Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, world is to be taken in a more contracted sense. It is said, Their sound is gone out into all lands, and their words into the end of the world, Rom: 10.10. and yet to this day the greatest part of the world never heard of Christ: you are not to set the word World upon the tenterhooks, but to interpret it more restrainedly, and strictly in the above cited places. Rather a second sense is better: john 14.30. The Prince of the World cometh (i) of the wicked. The world may be taken for the wicked sort of men: john 1.10. The World know him not. john 14.17. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth. So here it may be: The world itself cannot contain the books. Capere non possunt, is expounded by, intelligere non possunt. And so Augustine, Theophylact, Rupertus, and Beda. For if the wicked did not comprehend (as they did not) all that himself spoke, or the Apostles, and Evangelists writ, they would not have understood them, though they had spoken, or writ much more. Capere, you must refer, non ad spatium loci, sed ad animum: you must refer the word Contain, not to the space of place, but of the mind, Mat: 19.11. All men cannot receive this saying: The same words both in Latin and Greek being in both places, and all run to this, That they could not understand. The World, by reason of infidelity, cannot receive them, saith Hierome. Thirdly, in the words of john is a strong Hyperbole, as Amos 7.10. The land is not able to bear all his words: to which place Saint john alludeth, saith the most learned Heinsius. Another vehement Hyperbole is, Gen: 41.44. Without thee (saith Pharaoh to joseph) shall not man lift up his hand, or his foot in all the land of Egypt. The reasons why Saint john used this high strain in this place may be these. 1 He knew the larned would, and easily might understand it to be an Hebrew Idiotism, and so would take no exception. 2 He thought the unlearned would believe, though they did not fully understand. 3 It is apparent he did not go about to deceive: for deceit hath false lights, false colours, false shadows, Quorsum tegmen pellacidum? He dealeth plainly, he would have made trial in likelier matters, if all truth had been to be expounded according to the letter. But from the impossibility literally, we are to fasten on a sense mystically, More positively he made use of this Hyperbole, to remove the aspersion of Flattery, Oscitancie and negligency of singularity, and of untruths, of each very briefly. 1 Lest people might think he had written already, more than was true, because friends omit nothing in commendation of their friend, Saint john excuseth himself from flattery, because he omitted many things, yea a world of things. He wrote not partially as Philinus did for the Carthaginians, and Fabius for the Romans, for which both of them are justly taxed by Polybius. The holy Apostles not spoke all, or wrote all that they could: intra veritatem steterunt: but fell purposely much short of all the truth. 2 Lest people should accuse him of Oscitancie and Neglect, in that he wrote no more, but lets them know he wrote enough, more was needless, and secretly acquitteth them for not writing all which Christ said, by affirming that his very works exceeded all writing, 3 For Singularity: to prevent this objection, Why do you pass by so many things, which the other Evangelists wrote; he presupposeth, that what any one wrote, was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, therefore he wrote other things, and nor he, nor they did write all. nor a tenth part of what they could. 4 Lastly, to remove the suspicion of Untruth, and to prove that which he wrote in the precedent verse, John 21.24. We know that his testimony is true, is, as if he had said. Not only myself, and other Apostles heard, or saw immediately such things, as I writ, from Christ himself: but know ye also that many other things, partly by the sight of the other Apostles, partly by my own sight, partly by the relation of other credible witnesses may be written, because we will not go beyond the truth, but speak and write, within compass rather than without, And now let my Christian Reader judge, whether it be necessary that every matter of moment, should be specialized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ad unum: un, a. un, as it is in the French, and what huge volumes had been compiled, beyond all that ever was written by one man, or of one man particularly, if every thing had been particularly described. Away then with that fond conceit, that express mention is necessary, and that substantial things described, are colligible by a natural flowing derivation; yet need a punctual and direct expression of words. PAR. 4. A True distinct real Supper there was in the second place, though the words of the second supper be pretermitted. And a good reason may be given for the omission in particular. The first supper quickly passed away, and there being no distance between the end of the first, and the beginning of the second Supper; besides the setting down of the meat, and furnishing of the table, no marvel though the name of the second supper was omitted. Besides, the Paschall Lamb was eaten at the common supper also: and so from the more sacred supper (as the Pesach was in comparison of the usual Supper) things done in the second Supper are ascribed, as done in the first Supper, and they two distinct Suppers are imagined but as one, or as two several courses, of one supper: when by the Law, the first supper had no flesh but the lamb, and the ordinary supper had offerings both of the herd, and of the flock, as I proved before. The Prayer. MOst infinite and incomprehensible Lord God, the first Fathers and Patriarches of the Church knew thee, by thy many glorious names and Epithets, and by thy frequent apparitions, and revelations unto them: we know them by thy holy Scriptures, in them are both milk and strong meat, there may the Leviathan sport himself, and the Lamb may wade and drink, most things thy wisdom hath concealed: all things needful for mortal men hast thou written; some in more dark terms, and some in more clear patefactions: Thy glorious self being most free, art not tied to any other expressions, than what please thee: Good Lord, let thy divine writ teach me, guide me, in all goodness till death, deliver me over to a more blessed estate: Grant this O Father for Jesus Christ his sake. Amen. CHAP. VII. The second General. The Contents of the seaventh Chapter. 1 That there was a second Supper at the Jewish Paschall. Proofs from the Old Testament. Unto the Paschall was annexed the Chagigah. 2 Difference between the first and second Supper. Maimonides, Scaliger, Beza, and Baronius erred in this point. 3 The first Supper when it began. 4 The different meats a● the First, Second, Supper, Jew's Gentiles at their great feasts did eat two suppers. 5 Christ's gesture at the Paschall Supper. Coena Domini Tricoenium Christi-Christ in his last Passeover kept the Ceremonies of the Jews. Coena Dimissoria, what it was. PARAGRAPH. I. IT now followeth, that what I have averred and avouched, I should confirm by proofs. First then I must evince: That there was a second Supper at the jewish Paschall. Secondly, that Christ was as it. Thirdly, more particularly let us weigh 1 When this second supper began. 2 What was said in it, and what was done in it. 3 When it ended. 4 Whether judas partaked of it. In the first point I will prove, That there was a second Supper at the jewish Paschall, From the Old Testament. From the New Testament. From the Fathers. From Protestants. From Papists. 1 Proofs from the Old Testament. Towards the end of the Paschall Supper, or at the end of it, the Jews usually had a larger Supper, called a common supper, as Maimonides, and the Jewish Doctors confess: which supper, though it was not enjoined at the Egyptian Passeover, when they were in so perplexed an estate, and in such hurly-burly, that it was hard to say whether the jews or the Egyptians most bestirred themselves, to hasten the Israelites abrupt departure: yet you shall find it expressly precepted: Deuteronomy 16.2. Thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover unto the Lord thy God of the flock and of the herd. The Lamb of the flock was the proper Passeover, The beast of the herd were for the festival refreshments of the second supper; some of them, even the same night, as well as for the succeeding seven days. Yea it is most observable, that both the flock and the herd are commanded, and the order expressed. First they must sacrifice the Passeover of the flock. Secondly of the herd. Thirdly is mentioned the bread, verse 3. Thou shalt eat no leavened bread with it. Vain are they then that think that they might eat none of the herd that night. With the Passeover indeed they might eat none: but so soon as the Rites of the Passeover were performed, they did eat of the herd, of which hereafter. Nor might they eat unleavened bread at either of those suppers, or feasts. For the Sacramental supper was not ordained merely as natural food at civil Feasts; Every one present had some of it, but they made not their full meals on it: every one had a little, and with fear and reverence did they approach to the beginning of it. Sacred things were sparely and warily taken, and used in respect of their eating of ordinary food. As with us, the taking of the blessed body and blood of our Lord precedeth our usual refections at dinners, and is first eaten, propter honorem corporis Dominici: for the honour of the Lords body: as S. Augustine excellently phraseth it. So the sacred partaking of the Paschall Lamb, with unleavened bread, and sour herbs was the antipast to their second succeeding supper. Apparent than it is, that unto the sacred offering of thanksgiving in the proper Paschall sacrifice, which was their first and devouter part of the night, there were to be added Peace-offrings, or Feast offerings, at the same time. Unto the Pascha was annexed the Chagigab. The herd did minister meat-offrings of more joy, and comfort, as it were at the second course; as the flock had done before of dovout thanksgiving mingled partly of joy partly of sour sorrow. For it is expressly said, Deuteron. 16.4. Neither shall there any thing of the flesh which thou sacrificest the first day at even remain all night, until the morning. Where observe, they also sacrificed the very first day at even, both of the flock, and of the herd, as appeareth by the second verse: and they roasted the Passeover: some of the herd they did also boil the same night. Deuteron. 16.7. (as it is in the Bishops Bibles) Thou shalt seethe and eat it. Coques: as the Interlineary hath it, and Hentenius, and Santandreanus. The Margin of the Interlineary hath Assabis: and Vatablus, Assabis. Vebishaltah is the word: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the 70. rendered by Vatablus, coques. Tremellius hath it coques. Our last translation, and Vatablus did interpret the word according to the use of the proper Passeover (which was to be roasted) but both the original itself, and the 70, and Vulgat, and other interpreters understood it truly, of the other Sacrifices, which might be sodden, yea some of them were precepted hereby to be boiled. PAR. 2. THe great Maimonides utterly maketh this to be a difference betweenen the first and second supper; between the more sacred and common meat. Then flesh of the Chagigah, might be served, and kept a day or two after; but the flesh of the Pascha must be eaten or burnt before morning. Both Scaliger, Beza, Baronius, and the adherents of them, though they plainly and punctually confess a second supper, yet they ascribe too much to the Jewish ritual. First was brought in, In posteriori mensa: at the second course, (saith Baronius from the ritual), Embamma ex intybis: a salad of sour herbs: That they had more salads, more sauce, and no other fresh meat of the herd, seems strange to me. No other Bellaria, junkets, were brought in, saith he and Beza. If by bellariae they exclude all other flesh of the herd, or what was offered in Peace-offerings, they are confuted by the place in Deuteronomie. Let reason try it. If the Jews at their second suppers, had no junkers, nor flesh of any other beasts but only acetarium ex intybis, & lactucis agrestibus, bitter sharp salads, it deserveth not the name of a supper. But whosoever exactly looketh into it, will find great part of that which followeth in Beza, belonging not to the first supper, (as he would have it) but to the second supper. And I am most sure, they had sour herbs enough at the eating of the Paschall Lamb. The jews having but two suppers, and having liberty to eat as little as they would of the first, so they did eat some (and that some of the Paschall was to be taken by tradition, and practice of the jews in no greater quantity than an Olive) and having no meaten, or cates, but a little unleavened bread with distasteful sauce in their second supper, were poor feasts in the first and great night of Paschallizing solemnity. Let me add. The Pascha might be eaten either at the first, or second supper, or at any time of the night before the dawning of the day. The Passeover was (that I may so speak) the standing dish, for that night's Festival. And I have read a tradition of the Jews, that they closed their appetites by eating their last bit of the Pascha, when they had satisfied themselves before, most of all with the Chagigah. For though the Chagigah was not to be brought to the Table, much less to be eaten, till the first supper of the Pascha was near ennded, or the greatest part of it legally performed: (since Bread and Wine, the Roasted Lamb, and sour herbs, or sauce, were the only permitted food at the first, of which we have spoken benfore) yet when the second supper began, they did eat more freely of the Chagigah, than they did usually of the Pascha. That God should ordain a feast for his people, and let them have only a pittance of the sacred Typical food, and go away with hungry stomaches, is against the nature of a feast; especially of the most wise, and indulgent God his appointing. Man would not serve man so. Ezra 6.22. The returned captives of Israel kept the feast of unleavend bread with joy seven days. For the Lord had made them joyful. PAR 3. THe first instant of the seven days for the eating unleavened bread, began at the beginning of the eating of the Paschall Lamb, and the was their first mess, or rather their first supper. The ending of the first was the beginning of the second; and their merry feasting continued seven days after. In this second or usual supper the Jews might eat boiled, baked, stewed-meate, as well as roast-meat. PAR. 4. IN the Passeover, or first supper they might have no other meaten but roasted, and no other roasted meat but a Lamb. In the 2. Chron. 30.21. The children of Israel kept the feast of unleavened bread seven days, with great gladness, yea seven other days also of a voluntary devotion, vers. 23. For Hezekiah gave to the Congregation 1000 bullocks, and 7000. sheep, vers. 24. More plainly, 2 Chron. 35.13. They roasted the Passeover with fire, according to the ordinance: but the other holy offerings sod they in pots and in cauldrons, and in pans, and divided them speedily among all the people. Speedily, that is, even in the same night, even in the same hour, that they began to eat unleavened bread (and the eating of the unleavened bread, immediately and presently prepared the way to the eating of the Paschall Lamb) so the boiled meat was not kept till next morning untouched; but was speedily distributed among all the people. Deeply consider the whole context, and by the effects you shall apparently discern their second supper distinguished from the first (though not by those names of number) Their Chagigah from their Pascha, and the several dress of some of all the meat, at one meal: in the beginning of the first day of unleavened bread: and several offerings at the same time made ready, the very night of the Passeover; which offerings of the herd were speedily divided unto them in the first supper; one supper did as it were touch the other. Once more I desire you to weigh this point, viz: that the beginning of the first day of unleavened bread, wa● at their beginning to eat their Paschall Lamb. For they did not eat unleavened bread till that hour; and then they did eat it with the Passeover, and with sour herbs. Duplici coenâ fungebantur in ritu Agni Paschalis. They had two suppers at the eating of the Paschall Lamb; yea all their greatest solemn feasts, as not only the Passeover, but Pentecost, and the feast of Tabernacles, whilst the Jewish policy flourished, and whilst their Temple stood, were always passed over, with partaking of two suppers. So fare excellently, the worthy joseph Scaliger de emendatione temporum, 6. pag. 571. What was granted to their other high feasts, cannot be thought to be denied to the ; which was indeed their most solemn chiefest feast, and was ordained on greatest occasions: Yea seldom did the Jews offer any sacrifice; but they also feasted. See the 1 Sam. 9.15. etc. which custom, it seemeth the heathen took from the Jews: for the heathens themselves did so. It is observable from Theophrastus' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: that when the Grecians offered any sacrifices, they used to second them with feasting, and carousing. Causabon hath observed it: which custom it seemeth they took up from the jews. Immolabisque Phase Domini de ovibus, & bobus, Deuteronom. 16.2. as it is in the vulgar both of Hentenius and Saintandreanus. Thou shalt sacrifice the Passeover unto the Lord thy God of the flock, and the herd. Vainly do some Jews think a calf might have supplied the room of a lamb, because in great families one lamb could suffice. Cornelius à Lapide truly answereth: The Paschall Lamb was not ordained to satiate every one: but that every one should have a part (I say a little part.) But besides the eating of the Lamb, they did eat other meats, with which they filled themselves, or rather drove away hunger, as I say. The constant offering for the first day, which began at the eating of the Passeover, was two young Bullocks and a Ram, seven Lambs of the first year, though one only, and that the first was properly the Paschall Lamb. The meat offering was of flower mingled with oil, and a Goat for a sin offering. Numb. 28.19. etc. Besides the Lamb (saith Cornelius, Cornelii à Lapide) alios commedebant cibos, quibus se satiabant. They did eat other meats wherewith they did satisfy themselves, namely, those immediately before by me named. PAR. 5. CHrist (saith he) as may be more fitly said, stood when he did eat the supper of the Lamb. Ribera is directly against him de Templo, 5.3. But he did Recumbere, lie down, at the common supper, which followed the supper of the Lamb, And from this common (or second supper) he risen to wash their feet, and recumbed again. So he. Of the first point I doubt, and incline rather to those who think he sat. But I forbear repetitions: and conclude with the Jesuit, That there was a common Supper after the Supper of the Lamb. Surely Ribera, de Templo. 5.3. in fine, erreth, to say, it was the consent of many, that Saint john spoke the coena Agni, when he said Christ risen from the Supper, and laid aside his garments; for the Lamb was ended before, as Saint john hath it. john 13, 1. and the 2. and there are but few who say, as Ribera relateth in comparison of others. One of these learned men of the same order, are opposite to another, and both the ground is most weak, and the matter most unlikely, if not untrue, that Christ did Recumbere, lie down, at the Passeover, which Ribera intimateth. Kemnitius in the 8. chap: de Fundamentis Sanctae Coenae ex Lucae 22.20. thus to our purpose concerning the main; though on the By he hath some errors. Absolutâ jam typicâ coenâ Agni Paschalis. Finitâ etiam, & conclusâ alterâ illâ subsequenti coenâ communi: instituit Christus novam, & peculiarem Novi Testimenti coenam, quam Paulus Dominicam appellat, & hoc est, quod Paulus & Lucas dicunt, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: The typical supper of the Paschall Lamb, being now finished, and that other common subsequent supper being concluded; Christ instituted a new, and peculiar supper of the New Testament, which Saint Paul calls, the Supper of the Lord. And this is that which Paul and Luke do say: after he had supped. And this is that which I call Tricoenium Christi; most divinely expressed by Kemnitius in other words, but fully to my purpose. And a little before; Illam etiam alteram communem coenam Christus concludit more Israelitarum (sicut Hebraeorum Commentaria habent) usitato, Accepto poculo, gratias egit, & dixit, accipite hoc & dividite inter vos. Christ concluded that other common supper, after the usual manner of the Israelites (as the Commentaries of the Hebrews have it) when he had taken the Cup he gave thanks and said: Take this and divide it among you. That the last Passeover of Christ was observed like the Antecedent ones. No man denieth this, saith Scaliger; and Christ kept the antecedent Passovers according to the same rite, custom or ceremony, as the Jews did (saith he) and indeed, otherwise he had broke the Law, which he rather fulfilled. Therefore both at other Passovers, and at his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pascha, his saving Passeover. Christ partaked of the two Suppers appointed by the Law, besides the new third one, which he instituted. Scaliger ibidem pag. 569. mentioneth the Cibaria, or dishes, which to this day the Jews call cibaria duarum coenarum, the dishes of two suppers, or duorum symposiorum, of two banquets. And the second supper was called Coena dimissoria, a dimissory supper, as the Secundae mensae, or second supper of the Gentiles (saith he) or rather, say I, the Secundae mensae of the Gentiles, were like the second supper of the jews. So much concerning my proofs from the Old Testament, that a second supper did, as it were, tread on the heels of the first supper of the Passeover, by the very letter, and express command of the Law. The Prayer. O Lord God, in thy great wisdom thou didst ordain the Paschall Lamb, principally as food for the souls of the Jews: and didst annex a second supper, for a refreshing of their bodies, grant that we may chief attend the good of our souls, and desire that spiritual meat, and for the weak, fading, transitory, corporeal nourishment, we may so use it, that we may be truly said to look up through the creatures to the Creator, and eat to live thankfully, not live to eat intemperately, for Jesus Christ his sake. Amen. CHAP. VIII. The Contents of the eight Chapter. 1 Proofs from the New Testament for a second Supper. 2 Proofs from the Fathers, especially Saint Cyprian. Cibus inconsumptibilis. 3 The second Supper was Fibula Legis & Evangelii. 4 Inter, or between, evinceth a Triplicity. Saint Augustine, Theophylact, Damascen. PARAGRAPH. 1. SEcondly, the proofs from the New Testament for the second supper are these. Matthew 26.21. Edentibus ipsis, As they did eat. Namely when Christ, ad secundas mensas discubuisset, coenâ priore jam peractâ: sat down at the second supper, the first Supper being now ended: as appeareth john 13.2. saith, Beza, whence thus I argue. The first supper was ended, john 13.2. before the discourse, and actions which followed; but after that, Christ riseth from supper verse 4. And sits down again verse 12. and did eat, and eat bread with judas verse 18. Therefore this was the common and second supper. For no man will say, that Christ at the most holy Supper of the Eucharist, would rise from it: and wash their feet and sit down again. A flying thought ought not to disturb our devotion at the receiving of so high a mystery: neither would Christ give an example of so irreverent an action during the administration of the Supper, of the holy Supper of the Lord. So it being neither the Paschall, nor Eucharistical supper, it must needs be the second-common supper, from which Christ arose, and after returned to his old place, For he did rise from supper. Again, as Saint john is punctual, that the first Paschall supper was past and ended, ere he described the second supper: So Saint Luke is as punctual, that Christ administered the sacred Eucharist after supper, Luk. 22.20. If any one say, the words, After supper, may be understood of the Paschall supper, and after it: I confess they may be stretched so fare according to the letter, yet from the sense we must necessarily distinguish, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after: may be interpreted either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, mediately or immediately. After, with some distance of time, words, and actions intercedent: or after, that is, presently after; but it cannot be meant presently after the Passeover, because S. john recordeth many things, both said and done after the Paschall, which were not performed in a short time, and so not presently after the Passeover, but mediately. Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: After supper, must necessarily have reference to the end of the second, or ordinary supper, which approaced nearer in time, to the supper of the Lord, than the Paschall supper could. Between which and the holy Supper many matters arose, and matters were begun, and ended in the second supper: of which hereafter. PAR. 2. Proofs from the Fathers, especially S. Cyprian. SAint Cyprian Sermone de Coena Domini, pag. 500 distinguisheth thus: Coen● disposita inter Sacramentales epulas, obviarunt sibi instituta antiqua & nova. Two sacramental feasts there were, the Paschall, and the Eucharist; and between them was a supper made, or placed (what could this be else but a second supper) and thus did the old and new rites meet, for as I proved before, it was one of the old rites of the Paschall, to have annexed to it a second ordinary supper: and when the Lamb was consumed, as the old tradition prescribed (which none ever proved was done, or to be done wholly at the first supper; and I have proved, it might without sin continue uneaten, or unconsumed, even in the second supper, yea till toward the morning) and which Paschall was commonly the last bit of that night's festivity (as some Rabbins affirm) Christ set before his Disciples cibum inconsumptibilem, everlasting food, (saith he.) Nor are the people now invited to elaborate, costly, and artificial feasts, (as was usual in the second supper) but immortal food is given differing from common meats, saith Cyprian. PAR. 3. Lo here the common supper; for both the Paschall and the Eucharist were Sacramental, not common meats. And this ordinary supper was tanquam fibula legis & Evangelii. The button (as it were) of the Law and of the Gospel, as one of old said of the Baptist: So long (saith he) as those meats which were provided for the feast were eaten by the Apostles, the Passeover was remembered. The most learned Father alludeth not to the Paschall Lamb itself, in his words of meats provided for the feast, but to other victuals allowed, yea commanded to be used in the second supper. Besides bread, wine, and sauce, they were to eat no meats, but only the Lamb, one single meat. PAR. 4. What if I should furthenr say, that the word Inter, or betweenne, evincenth a triplicity. The Son in Divinis, is in account betwenene them Father, and the Holy Ghost; which establisheth our belief in a Trinity of persons. That virtue is a middesse, mean, or middle between two extremes, arguenth three things: argueth two opposite vices, and the golden mediocrity, to be between two, evinceth not only a duality, but plurality. A thing done: a sentence spoken between dinner and supper, is passed over in a third parcel of time. A supper between two banquets showeth the Antipast, the main refection at supper, and the postpast. Nothing can be placed between fewer than two other preexistent things. Vnio est rerum praeexistentium; unio Inter, praesupponit duo entia. Union, is the union or coupling together of things, which formerly had a being: The word between presupposeth two things at the least. A Mediator is not a Mediator of one, Gal. 3.20. To be a Mediator between two necessarily introduceth a third, some way distinct from the other, and he officiateth his Mediatorship. None can judge between two men, or two causes, if they be not before in rerum natura, or in the world. A Supper inter Sacramentales Mensas, between the sacramental banquets, (of which hereafter) distinguisheth itself from the two banquets, and them from it: evidencing at the least numerum ternarium, the number of three. Saint Augustine lib. 5. Quaestionum super Deuteronom. cap. 24. Why did he add oxen? Deuteron. 16.2. When the Passeover was to be taken ex ovibus, hoedi●, a●t capris? of sheep, kids, or goats why is mention made of Oxen? He answereth his own question by another. Is it for other sacrifices, which were to be slain on the very days of unleavened bread? Whence I may truly collect, that on the days of unleavened bread they had other offerings. And therefore on the first day of unleavened bread, which was when the was eating, they had other provision to be eaten also, when the Paschall rites and ceremonies were ended. Theophylact on Luk. 22. Pascha stantes comedebant: quomodo igitur Dominus recumbere dicitur? Dicunt itaque quod postquam comedit legale Pascha, recubuerant more vulgari commedentes alios quosdam cibos. They eaten the standing. How then is the Lord said to lie down? They say therefore, that after he had eaten the legal Passeover; they lay down after the common fashion, eating certain other meats. Damascen de fide orthodoxa, 4. 14. In coenaculo sanctae & gloriosae Sion Christus antiquum pascha cum Discipulis suis manducans, & implens antiquum Testamentum lavit discipulorum pedes. Christ having eaten the old with his Disciples in the supping chamber of holy and glorious Zion, and having fulfilled the Old Testament, washed his Disciples feet. When besides the , the second supper appointed by the Old Testament may very well be understood, Suarez citeth Damascen thus. Expletis mysteriis ad communem coenam ventum est: having fulfilled the mysteries, they went to the common supper. But there are no such words in the cited place, nor in jodocus Clychtonaeus, the Commentary on Damascen, The Prayer. O Heavenly Father thou hast created all things for man: and blessed them for man: add these further testimonies of thy favour, holy Father, to sanctify them unto us, and us unto thyself for Jesus Christ's sake. Amen. CHAP. IX. 1 Proofs from the Protestants for a second Supper Kemnitius, Beza 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza awry. Scaliger commended. 2 Divers kinds of sauces at the second supper. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth. 3 Bellaria expounded, Bacchus his Bellaria. Rich wines. Scaliger and Beza censured. 4 A description of the Ceremony of the Passeover. Poculum Hymneseos, Things in the description of the Paschall Supper Redundant. Deficient. Embamma, what it was. At what time of supper Christ washed his Disciples feet. Benediction, at what time of supper used. What kind of herbs were eaten at the Passeover. The second supper when it began. PARAGRAPH 1. YOu heard before the opinion of the incomparable joseph Scaliger, of Kemnitius, of Beza; and yet Beza hath more to say. Beza on Matth. 26.26. on the words, Edentibus illis, etc. As they were eating, etc. Hoc est factum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: This was done after supper: he proveth it by Luk. 22.20. and the 1 Cor. 11.25. Thence he concludeth: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, this word supper in this History is called the Legal supper, which Christ abrogating afterwards, substituted his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: supper of the Lord for ever. The same Beza in Mat. 26.20. speaketh of the Jewish custom thus, Coena (Agni) peracta, consurgentes, altera pedum ablutione facta, rursum discumbentes, ad secundas mensas sese comparabant: In has secundas mensas pro bellariis inferebatur in tribulo acetarium ex intybis, & lactucis agrestibus. The supper (of the Lamb) being ended, they arose, and having washed their feet, the second time, they sat down again, and addressed themselves to the second supper. At this second supper, instead of junkets, there was brought in, in a platter a salad of Succory, Endive and wild Lettuce. Here Beza is awry, making the sour herbs or sauces, to be excluded from the first supper. Agno illo solidocum paucis azymis vescentes. Eating that whole Lamb with a little unleavened bread, not mentioning the sour sauce. He might as well exclude unleavened bread. Wiser Scaliger de Emendatione temporum 6. pag. 567. They err who think that Christ did eat the Passeover with unleavened bread, for how was it then the Passeover? Therefore with unleavened bread and sour herbs did Christ celebrate the Passeover, saith he. And indeed sour herbs were a necessary ceremony, lasting, and fixed, at the eating of this Paschall, as I proved before, and the sacrifice had been maimed, if it had been defrauded of this sauce: and properly no Passeover, if either unleavened bread, or sour herbs had been away: or the sacrifice of the herd, had not been offered, though at first supper not eaten, PAR. 2. BUt (saith Beza) from Scaliger, and he from the Jewish Ritual. At this second supper they brought instead of banqueting dishes, a platter of sauce: I reply; That sauce of sour herbs embammated, should be instead of banqueting meats, I see no reason. I doubt not but they had divers kinds of sauces at the second supper. And that Christ gave to judas a sop dipped in one of the sauces, I hope to make most probable; and this was also in the second supper. For Matt. 26.23. When judas dipped his hand with Christ in the dish, he dipped his bread (saith Maldonate.) Why not the flesh of the Lamb, say I? We dip our meat more than our bread in sauces. Likewise, when at the second Supper, joh. 13.26. Christ dipped the morsel, or sop, and gave it to judas, it was the sauce into the morsel was dipped; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifieth a mouthful, or morsel, whether of bread, flesh, or fish; yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Homer, Odies. 9 vers. 374. is used not for a soup of bread, but for a gobbet of flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, frusta humanae carnis: Gobbets of man's flesh, which Polyphemus vomited up. PAR. 3. I Confess also that, In Paschali, etc. ut est infra, they were forbid indeed, bellaria junkets, or any other meats whatsoever besides the Lamb, sour herbs, and unleavened bread, in the first Supper of the Passeover. In paschali epulo, ipse convivae interdicebantur omni genere bellariorum: as it is in the Canon of the Ritual, saith Scaliger truly, if you interpret him of the first proper Sacramental Supper, distinguished from the second ordinary Supper. Aulus Gellius Noctium Atticarum, 13.11. well expoundeth the word, Bellaria from Varro. Vocabulum Bell●ria significat omne mensae secundae genus. The word Bellaria signifieth all kind of banqueting dishes, at second course; and some of them were sweetened with honey: though Varro saith, Bellaria ea optime sunt mellita, quae mellita non sunt, those are the sweetest junkets indeed, which are not sweetened at all. Again, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: oftentimes, with these Bellaria is butter mingled as Dioscorides witnesseth, 2.83. what Plato, and other Grecians call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, aut, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Varro, and the Latins called Bellaria, we junkets, ordaintye dishes, and the sweeter and richer wines were called Bacchus his Bellaria, saith Gellius ibidem from Varro; yet both in their first Supper they had their sour herbs: Comedes azymos panes cum lactucis agrestibus; Thou shalt eat unleavened bread with sour herbs, Exod. 12.8. and in the second Supper, they might have Bellaria, dainty dishes, most likely it is they had so, made of the flesh of the herd, as best pleased them to have it cooked or dressed. Though Scaliger and Beza say, that the Acetarium, or sharp sauce, made, ex intybis, & lactucis agrestibus, of Succory, & wild Lettuce, was brought in locum Bellariorum, instead of their junkets, they prove it not so from the Canon of the Ritual, which speaketh of the first Supper of the Paschall excluding all banqueting stuff; but to the second Supper they were admmitted. Nor indeed doth the description used by the great Scaliger (from whom others take it) seem probable or coherent to itself. Thus he; in the room of junkets, or sweet meats at the Paschall feasts was brought in a platter, a sauce of Endive (yet Endive is of no bad taste, saith Cornelius Cornelii a lapide) and because the juice of them was unpleasant and sour, therefore was made a confection of Vinegar, and other sharp sauce, of I know not what ingredients, into which they dipped the unleavened bread, and those bitter herbs, it was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: to this day they make that sauce as thick as our mustard. PAR 4. A Bit of unleavened bread, the Master of the Family did first dip into that Embamma, and eaten it. Then under the Carpet, or under a Napkin kept he another part of unleavened bread, which he break into as many pieces, as there were guests. The pieces were about the bigness of an Olive, which he gave to every one in order. When therefore the Master of the Family, was about to eat the dipped Bit, he prayed; Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the world, who hast sanctified us by thy Commandment, etc. of which I spoke before. Then he blessed the wine, and drank, and gave it to him that was next him, and he to the second, and the second to the third, till it went round about to all the company; and this Cup was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; A Grace-Cup, poculum hymni; which pot was called, poculum hymnésews, because an hymn being sung after this draught, they darted; and it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that which ended Supper; for the Cannon of the Passeover directly forbade them after this song of praise, either to eat, or drink. This was the Ceremony, and Rite of celebrating the Passeover, in the days, or time of the Missias; so fare the admired Scaliger. pag. 572. etc. Yet me thinketh in this description of the Paschall Supper, somewhat redoundeth, much is deficient. That they had an Embamma or salad, of divers other herbs at the first Paschall Supper; and that they who had scarce leisure to cook their meat, and not leisure to bake their bread, yet were so curious, as to have elaborated sauces, stands not much with likelihood. Secondly, was this Embamma more pleasant, or displeasant to the taste, than the sour herbs only? If they used it to adoulce, and sweeten the soure-bitter taste of the herbs, it defrauded the intent of the Law. Beza, who borrowed of Scaliger much of that he had concerning the Paschall Supper, skippeth over the spissitude of the sauce, like mustard: and saith the Embemma; (it should have been printed Embamma) was to temper the bitterness, and sourness of the herbs, which is nothing else but to ensweeten them, and fit them for the pleasantness of the taste, or : But this is unlikely (as I said) that it might be Satura olerum amarorum, full of sour herbs. Then I say, that addition needed not, since God appointed the former, and he knew what was best; and since all (that have tasted) do know, and others may read it, as confessed, that Lactuca Silvatica, or Silvestris, wild Lettuce, is of an harsh taste of itself, sufficiently bitter for sauce. Again, he saith; that this Embamma was of such a nature, that they did dip in it both their unleavened bread, and the bitter herbs. So by his reckoning, it was the sauce, for the sauce of herbs. Things deficient in the description of the Paschall Feast used by Scaliger, are these. 1. That he maketh the second supper to consist only of unleavened bread, and wine given round to every guest, and singing of a laudatory hymn: and in the room of sweetmeats brings in his thick sauce, forgetting the meat of the herd, which was to be eaten with it, having bread to eat with that sauce of herbs; and another sauce into which both bread, and sour herbs were dipped. 2. That he maketh a double washing; first, from the daily use, that they might lie down, and eat the paschal Lamb. Secondly, Supper being done, they washed according to the Rite of the , saith he, where he maketh the time of the second washing, to be just at the end of the first Supper, or of the beginning of the Second Supper. More plainly, yet he avoucheth. Duplex est Coena incontinenter, cum duae lotiones utramque praeeant; there was a double Supper forthwith joining together without space between, incontinently; two washings preceding both of them (or rather one washing going before each of them) Barradius his argument well refuteth the opinion of Scaliger: Coenâ factâ surgit â coenâ (saith S. John) Si â coenâ surrexit jam discumbebat, & coenabat. Non ergo ante coenum (illam) exhibita est pedibus aqua. After Supper, he risen from Supper. If he risen from Supper, he had before sat down, and had supped. Therefore (the Apostles) feet were not washed, before (that) Supper. Lucas Brugensis Itinerary saith, that Christ, post agni esum, & coenam vulgarem, lavit pedes Apostolorum: after the Lamb was eaten, and the common supper, he washed his Apostles feet. As if Christ washed them when the second Supper was ended (being opposite to Scaliger) yet it is apparent, Christ sat down again, and again did eat. Augustine Tractatu in Johan. 55. reasoneth as well against this extreme of Brugensis, as he did against the other extreme of Scaligers Augustin thus: Non debemus intelligere coenam factam, veluti jam consummatam atque transactam: adhuc enim coenabatur, cum Dominus surrexit, & pedes lavit discipulis. Nam postea recubuit: & buccellam suo traditori postea dedit, utique coenâ nondum finitâ (i) dum panis adhuc esset, in mensa. We must not conceive, After Supper (to be spoken) as if Supper had been then consummated, and perfectly finished: for as yet they were at Supper, when the Lord arose, and washed his Disciples feet. For afterwards he sat down again, and afterwards gave the Sop to him that should betray him; Supper being not yet fully finished: (that is to say) while bread was yet upon the Table. Beza was more judicious in this point, saying of Christ, a mensâ consurgens, & pedibus discipulorum in medio convivio, contra quotidianum morem, ablutis rursum discubuit: agreeing with, joh. 13.4. and 12. verses. It was towards the midst of the second supper, when Christ arose to wash his Disciples feet, and after his second sitting he did eat again. Yet Beza seemeth much mistaken; saying, that the chief of the family kept some of the unleavened bread, hid under a Napkin till the end of feast: which feast being done, he drew out from under the Napkin; the other part of the bread, broken into so many pieces, as there were fellow-feeders, or friendly guests; and he first took part, and gave the rest to his companions, with this blessing. This is the bread of affliction, which our Fathers did eat in Egypt; for this Benediction was at the beginning of Supper, before the Master of the house had dipped the sop in the platter, as Scaliger well observeth; and it standeth with all likelihood, that they should be instructed thus, before they did eat, rather than afterward. 3. That he brings an authority from the Ritual of the Jews; viz. That every other night they did eat of herbs of all sorts, but in the Rite of the , only ex intybis; and yet Scaliger confesseth, that the sauce, into which both the unleavened bread, and the sour herbs were dipped; was, Satura olerum amarorum, quae aliis ejusmodi spissabatur, was full of bitter herbs, and thickened with other herbs of the like kind. Here are more herbs than the Ritual alloweth. 4. That he maketh the second Supper to be incontinently, and immediately after the first: when of necessity, we must grant a time for the administrants, or servitors to bring up, and handsomely, and orderly, to place on the board, the diversly-dressed flesh of the Herd; though the paschal Lamb was not wholly consumed, but yet stood on the Table, whilst the heavenly Tabletalk continued: and though the Tablecloth was not wholly, or fully removed, but rather cleansed. The Prayer. MOst Gracious God, who seethe not thy provident wisdom, ordering all things, in number weight, and measure, he hath blindfolded himself. The Passeover thou commandest to be eaten with unleavened bread only; Grant; good Lord, that we may cast away the leaven of maliciousness, and with all sincerity, simplicity, and singleness of heart, serve and love thee, through Jesus Christ, our Lord, Amen. CHAP. X. The Contents of the tenth Chapter. 1. Proofs from the Papists. Baronius amiss in some points of the Paschall Supper. Baronius, Lucas Burgensis, Sebastian Barradius, and Maldonate, prove a second Supper. 2. Maldonate doubteth, whether the Paschal be called a Supper: Piscator censured. 3. Tolet, Suarez, Bellarmine, prove a second Supper. 4. Bellarmine censured; S. Cyprian cleared. 5. Adam Contzen, and Stapleton, prove a second Supper. Poculum bibatorium. The Tricoenium accomplished. 6. Christ was present at the First, or Paschall Second, or common Supper. 7. The Jews at their solemn feasts, had double Commons. 8. When the second Supper began, about six of the clock at night. How long the second Supper lasted. When it ended. PARAGRAPH. 1. Fifthly, Proofs from Papists. BAronius also ad annum 34. Numero 38. is much amiss in some points: Two Suppers (saith he) were conjoined in the Paschall feast: or rather, Vnius coenae, duplex mensa; a second course at the same Supper: So fare well enough with a good interpretation. In the first was the eating of the Lamb. In the second, was the Ceremony of unleavened bread. But is it possible, that so learned a man should think, They did eat the Paschall Lamb without bread? Or first gobble in the flesh, and at the second course thrust in the unleavened bread after? was it not the express Law to eat the one with the other? The flesh roasted with fire, and unleavened bread, Exod. 12.8. Suppose we grant it to be a second course (which indeed was a second Supper) do any of us eat our flesh at the first Mess, and our bread at the second Mess? And though it be said, they shall eat it in the same night; yet no man can justly imagine, the flesh was eaten the first part of the night; and the bread was crammed in after the first service. Sense shall guide me above any Ritual, and yet the Ritual both beginneth the paschal Supper, with the consecration of the unleavened bread; and confesseth (saith Baronius) 'em tantùm in paschate, sed & in aliis maximis Judaeorum solennibus diebus, ut Pentecoste, & Scenopegia ejusmodi duplices coenas exhiberi consuevisse. That not only at Easter, but also on other great festival days of the jews; as at Whitsuntide, and at the feast of Tabernacles, such double Suppers were wont to be exhibited. Thus among the jews, you shall find Maymonides, for the second Supper; and the very Ritual itself, you have also Scaliger, Kemnitias, and Beza, for the same among the Protestants. I have begun with Baronius among the Papists. He again saith expressly: Christ gave judas the Sop in the second Supper. I touched also at Franciscus Lucas Burgensis: who again, on Matth. 26.21. Edentibus illis, thus hath it: Inter edendum; edendum autem non pascha, quod primum festinanter a stantibus comestum fuerat, sed reliquos ejus coenae cibos; as they did eat. But the was not to be eaten, which was first eaten in haste (by the Israelites) standing; but the other Viands of that Supper. The same Lucas Burgensis, on johnn 13.2. Coenâ factâ: The Supper being ended: thus: Coena, (cujus primus cibus fuer at agnus Paschalis; reliquus cibus vulgaris) facta, non ita ut mensa esset ablata, & gratiae actae.— post coenam ordinariam: sed ante sacram, & Eucharisticam. The supper (whose first service was the paschal Lamb, the rest of the dishes ordinary, or common victuals) being ended; not so ended as that the table was removed, and grace said— after the ordinary, or common supper: but before the sacred and Eucharistical supper. The same on Luke 22.20. Addit hoc Lucas, postquam coenasset, or post coenasse, or postquam coenassent, (as it is in the Syriack) ut intelligamus sacramentum hoc, non pertinu●sse ad vulgarem coenam, quae pascendo corpori subservierat. After he had supped; or, after supper: or, After they had supped— to give us to understand, that this Sacrament did not belong to the Vulgar, or Common Supper, which served for the feeding of the body. Sebastian Barradius. Tom. 4. pag. 31. After Christ with his Apostles had eaten the Paschall Lamb, In mensa recubuit, cibosque alios sumpsit. Again, ibid. It was not forbidden, but usual to eat other meats in the Paschall Supper. The same Barradius. pag. 64. speaking of the words: Post quam coenavit: After he h●d supped; They are to be understood de sola coena legali, & communi, quae secuta est legalem— Only of the legal and common Supper, which followed after the Legal: where he plainly acknowledgeth two suppers, the Legal one: and the common one following it. The same having a little before cited the Ecclesiastical hymn. Post Agnum typicum expletis epulis, Corpus Dominicum datum discipulis. After the Pascall Lamb, and second Festival Christ gave his Disciples his body mystical. He concludeth from expletis epulis, ergo post coenam & epulas omnes. The banquets being ended: Therefore (he gave his body) After supper, and all other banquets; which words prove more banqueting stuff, than a platter of sour sauce only (as Scaliger would have it) in the second supper. Fost agnum alios sumebant cibos, quos intingebant in condimentum hoc, vel aliud praeparatum, saith Barradius truly. After the Lamb they did eat other meat, which they dipped in this sauce, or some other sauce newly prepared for that purpose. Maldonate on Matt. 26.26. pag. 555. thus Come tres eodem tempore actiones fuerint, quae tres coenae vocari solent: Whereas there were three actions, which commonly they call three suppers: the first in which the Paschall Lamb was eaten, which is called the ceremonial supper. The second, the common, and usual supper: for (saith he) the Lamb being religiously eaten, because (for the most part) they who eaten of it, were not filled or satisfied, they had another supper of which they did sup to saturity; and pag. 557. at the beginning, Solebat eso jam agno, coena communis apponi. There was wont, when the Lamb was eaten, to be served in a common supper. The third supper was when Christ consecrated his Body, and Blood. So fare, well. PAR. 2. Whether the first ceremonial suppenr, be called any where a supper: I do not well remember (saith he) and yet he knew it was to be eaten between the two evenings; than which, there is no time more proper for a supper. And himself at the last words of the next page: The Lamb might be eaten at no other time than at supper. Doth not Saint john say, After Supper. John 13.2. which could not be after the third or second supper: for they were after those words spoken, but of nëcessity must be interpreted, of the first supper of the Lamb, which was théns ended. Therefore the eating of the Passeover, is justly and truly called a supper, and the first supper. I pity the peremptory ignorance of Piscator, in his Scholia on that placë, who saith, Omnino pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, videtur legendum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ac proinde vertendum, dum coena fieret: hoc est. inter coenandum: non autem coenâ peractâ. It seemeth altogether (saith he) that instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 2. Aorist. mediae vocis, which intimateth the time perfectly, though but newly passed: we ought to read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a participle of the time present. And so indeed in the Greek New Testament printed by john Crispin in the Margin we find it: and therefore that place of Saint john ought to be translated; Whilst they were at supper, or, at suppertime: not when supper was ended: for all his arguments prove the second Supper, was not ended, which no man denies; though the Paschall supper were transacted before. The second, or ordinary supper, Saint Luke, Saint john, and Saint Paul call a supper (saith he) A plain confession of a second supper, and yet not plainer than that the eating of the Paschall is called a supper. PAR. 3. TOlet on john 13.2. Annotatione 7. distinguisheth the legal supper, from the common supper. Peractâ Paschali Agni coenâ, & communi incaeptâ, saith he again. The Supper of the Paschall Lamb being ended, and the common supper being begun, he washed their feet. The most learned Suarez on Thomas: pag. 487. (saith) Augustine and jansenius do not distinguish, Coenam usualem, a coena legali. The usual supper from the legal supper; But himself doth; and again is expressed, pag. 483. Christus illâ nocte duplicem vel triplicem coenam egit cum suis Discipulis: Christ in the same night did eat two or three suppers, with his Disciples. Bellarmine de Sacramento Eucharist: 4.27. ad 2. object. saith, the Eucharist, sub specie panis proprie respondet coenae judaicae, & Agno Paschali. Under the Element of bread doth properly answer, unto the Judaical supper, and to the paschal Lamb. Where he acknowledgeth a Judaical (Supper which Suarez called the usual Supper) besides the eating of the paschal Lamb. PAR. 4. BUt Bellarmine is much to blame, to think that the Eucharist was given, in Coena sub-specie panis: at suppertime under the element of bread; and the Cup, post coenam: after supper. There was no such distance of time between them. Both Saint Matthew, Saint Mark, and Saint Paul, immediately conjoin them: and so doth Saint Luke: though somewhat (as the Copies now are) is placed, as done after the Eucharist; which by the other Evangelists is related, before the taking of the Eucharist. But no action intervened, to sever the Bread from the Cup, but the sumption of the sacred Bread, and the immediate consecration of the Wine. If Cyprian in sermone S. de Lapsis, said, Calicem offerri solere praesentibus post expleta solennia. That the cup was wont to be offered, after the solemnities were performed: which (saith Bellarmine) is, finita jam Missa. after the Mass was ended: yet he speaketh of his own time, not of Christ's Institution of both kinds: where both were given, similiter post coenam, alike after supper; and not the one during supper time, and the other after it. PAR. 5. A Damus Contzen, a Jesuit on Matth. 26. thus, Post agnum solita ceremonia absumptum, epulari soliti sunt judaei: nec in esu Sacramenti saturitatem, sed mysterium spectabant Christi etiam tempore, at que in ipsis aedibus, praeter sacrificii consumptionem, etiam convivia celebrata sunt; saith he: The Jews when they had eaten the (paschal Lamb) according to the usual manner, were wont to banquet. Neither did they so much look after saturity or fullness in the eating of the Sacrament, as after a mystery: yea even in Christ's time, and that in the very supping chamber, after the eating of the Sacrifice, banquets were also solemnised. Stapleton most excellently writeth to our purpose, in his promptuarium Cathelicum. In feria. 3. Hebdomadae sanctae. pag. 240 thus, Christus hâc ultimâ nocte mortalis suae vitae triplicem coenam peregit. Christ in the very last night of his mortal life did eat a threefold supper. In the second, common, and familiar supper, Poculum bibatorium, more gentis illius, omnibus suis propinavit. He drank a cup of charity, according to the usance of that country, to all his (Apostles) when he said, Accipite, & dividite inter vos.— Take this and divide it among you. By thus expounding them three Suppers, not only Christ's new supper shall be distinguished from the Paschall, as the truth from the figure; but the most new, and sacred mystery shall be separated from the common Supper, the common bread and wine, saith he. And now (good Reader) know, that in so abstruse a matter as this is, there is a world of diversity in several men's opinions, and therefore I may not stand to confute them all, though I approve them not all as I quote them; but I only fasten on those words which prove the main point. Of two suppers of the Jews at their paschalizing: of the third supper instituted by Christ, confessed by eminent Christian men, on all sides. And so the Tricoenium is accomplished. PAR. 6. The third General. I Have proved there was a second Supper, at the Jenwish passeouër. The next point is, That our Saviour was at both of them. This also is involved in the former. For he kept the Law exactly. And Scaligers passages are admirable to this effect, as before I cited, viz. Christ kept the , as he kept the precedent, and kept the precedent as the other Jews did. PAR. 7. BUt theny had their double commons: or second renfections, on théir gaudy days: especially at the most solemn feast of the . They fed both on the flock and on the herd: and by them was the first and second supper distinguished. Even at the wenaning of Isaak, Abraham made a great feast Gen: 21.8. At the making of the covenant with Abimeleck, Abraham gave him sheep and oxen. vers. 27. At samuel's weaning, his mother caused one bullock to be slain: and two other she carried, either for peace-offerings, or to bestow upon Ely, 1 Sam. 1.24. for part of the Priësts portion was of oblations and sacrificens. She brought also both winen and flower: (and flower) somewhat more, than the Law appointed, to make the feast, or the offering more complete. At all feasts they had great variety; and at the most solemn feasts of the Passeover, had they nothing but Lamb? If they had more, did not Christ partake? Did he sit by and eat nothing. Next Chapter after institution of the Passeover, and in remmembrancen of them Passeover, when they were come into Canaan, they did sacrificem to the Lord, all (clean beasts) that opened the matrix, being males, Exod. 13.15, so the henrd was to be slain, as well as the Lamb, in remembrance of the Passeover. More nearly, and punctually. Christ eaten of the at the first Supper, as I proved before: Christ did eat of the second supper, as I also from the Text plainly evinced. Concerning the third supper, (God willing) I shall speak hereafter. PAR. 8. ANd thus I pass to the next point. The first particular of the third General: when this second supper began whereby we may the better distinguish it from the . Thus went the time away: and these things are most certain. On Thursday immediately preceding his passion, Christ commanded to prepare the . Mark. 14.13. Peter and john went to see it done, Luk. 22.8. & 13. verses. When the was made almost ready: Peter and john return to Christ: and then in the evening Christ cometh with the twelve. Mark. 14.17. And they washed: as may be gathered from joh. 13▪ 10. And when the hourens was come he sat down, and his twelve Apostles with him. Luk. 22.14. Between the two evenings did theny enate of the , as the Law appointed. Exod. 12.6. The was eaten, and to be eaten in haste. Exod. 12.11. These things seem to me most probable, They began about six of the clock at night, and they were not much above one Quarter of an hour, ere the first paschal Supper was ended. The second Supper continued about threme quartërs of an hour, or a little more. Herein Christ washed their feet, and discoursed much. judas received not the blessed Eucharist; but went out about seven of the clock at night or somewhat after; for it was night john 13.30. Then ended completely the second supper. Whenn I come to spenake of the blessed Eucharist. I hope to probablize, how long it lasted. The Prayer. I Now behold thee O gracious Saviour, as humbling thyself, as vouchsafing, to sit, and eat after an usual fashion, a common suppenr with thy Apostles: lift up my heart, good Lord, to think of thee, as thou art glorious in thy Kingdom of heaven, and of thy great mercy make me one of them, who shall partake of the Supper of the Lamb, at thy celestial Table. Grant this for thy metits sake, O gracious Saviour. Amen. CHAP. XI. The Contents of the eleventh Chapter. 1 What was Said Done at the second supper the first quarter. Christ began the Chagigah with saying of grace. Grace and thanksgiving a prime duty at feasts. 2 The form of Grace at The eating of Manna. Other feasts. The Paschall Festivity, 3 The jews began their second Supper, with the cup of Charity. Wonderful great grapes. 4 An hymn was sung after the Grace cup among the jews. The hymn in the New Testament sung after the Eucharist. 5 The discourse at the second Supper. 6 The Apostles contention before they received the blessed Eucharist. The Apostles contend for superiority. 7 When Christ began to wash the Apostles feet. Osiander rejected. Saint Cyrill rejected. The jews began their second washing at the beginning of their second supper, Christ in the middle of it. Baronius argument confutes Osiander. PARAGRAPH. 1. The second particular of the third General. BUt the next branch of my method enforceth me to consider, what was said, and what was done, from the second Supper, to thy end of it, inclusiuè. In general, I say; much is plainly set down from joh. 13.4. to the 30. verse inclusively. And in General I say, They fell to their second Supper, and continued at it about a quarter of an hour, in all likelihood. Then Christ riseth from this second Supper, though they continued still at Supper, and was about one quarter of an hour more washing the feet of all the 12. Apostles, and putting off, and putting on his garments as may be well conjectured at, by the proportion of time to the things done, and said. Thirdly, when Christ was set down again, he began his discourses, designs out the Traitor: gives him a sop: biddeth him do quickly what he did: and upon the receiving of the sop, judas immediately went out: and these things took up the last part of the hour, or somewhat more; and in, and about that time they may well seem to be accomplished and transacted. And so the first and second Supper, took up one whole, hour, or about one quarter more rather. More particularly, concerning the first of the three quarters spent in the second Supper, this seemeth to me most probable. Scaliger citeth the Jewish Ritual thus, concerning the Paschall. Quam diversahaec nox à caeter is noctibus? In aliis noctibus semel tantum lavamus: in hac nocte bis. How divers was this night from other nights? In other nights we wash but only once, in this night twice: and this was at the beginning of their second supper▪ yet they did not break the Law: for God's Law established no such second double washing: but it was a custom and tradition of the Elders, to which Christ was not bound. And wëe find no shadow of a second washing before the beginning of the second supper: but rather about the midst of it, or rather toward the end of it. I therefore think the second supper began with thanksgiving giving to God, and blessing of the meat of the Chagigah which was newly served in: for this was fare a more necessary duty: and was as frequently used by all good people, as it was necessary. Giving of thanks was a prime duty of a feast. Tertullian in his Apologetic, cap. 39 Ne priùs discumbitur, quàm oratio ad Deum praegustetur. We sit not down to meat before we have said Grace. And this he writeth with exact reference to the second Supper of the Jews, where the like was practised, both before and in the time of Christ's conversing among men. And the grace at the beginning of the second Supper was this. Benedictus sis (Domine Deus noster) qui educis panem de terra. Blessed be thou (O Lord our God) who dost bring forth bread out of the earth. Then drank they the second round. PAR. 2. BEfore the eating of Manna the grace is thought to be this. Benedictus es (Dominus Deus noster, Rex Angelorum, Pater Coeli) qui cibasti nos pane coelesti Angelorum. Blessed be thou (O Lord our God,) King of the Angels, Father of Heaven, who hast fed us with the heavenly food of Angels. Before I shown you in the first Book, and second Chapter, the form of thanksgiving at other feasts, and in likelihood at their common meals was, Benedictus sis Deus, qui educis panem de terra. Blessed be thou (O God) who dost bring forth bread out of them earth. This was the ordinary blessing of bread, which was commonly used after the Jews came to jerusalem: and perhaps in Christ's time. But the thanksgiving for the unleavened bread in the Paschall festivity, is said to be this. Benedictus es Domine Deus noster, rex universi, in esu panis azymi. Blessed be thou (O Lord our God) King of the whole world: in the eating of unleavened bread, and no doubt a blessing was poured forth with thanksgiving to God for all their meat. PAR. 3. THe Jewish Ritual mentioneth, that they had winen at the second Supper. I say, that in all fair likelihood they had it at the beginning of this second Supper. Presently after Grace: as Bellarmine said, the first supper was ended with the wine. So say I, the second was begun with a cup of wine walking about. Soto also 4. Sentent. Distinct. 12. Quaest. 2. Art. 2. on the words. Hic est Calix, ubi insinuatur (saith he) Christum cocnam Agni consummasse, in potu non consecrato. This is the cup where is insinuated— that Christ had consummated the Supper of the Lamb in unconsecrated wine. Seneca in Thyeste, Act. 5. Scena ultima. — Poculum infuso cape Gentile Baccho. Take off this cup full of wine, Which b'inheritance is thine. It was at the beginning of the pretended feast in an hereditary cup, if I may so expound Gentile poculum: the Gentile Cup. Poculum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the cup of charity— — Paternis vina libenter This, tunc hauriatur. saith Thyestes. Let envery one within the house Drink to his God a full carouse. Scaliger de emendatione Temporum: 6. pag. 571, The second supper of the Jewens, was like the Secundae mensae apud Gentiles, the second course among the Gentiles. Nam apud illos mensis secundis libabatur, ac potio in Calais circumfere batur. For among them they were wont to have a second course, and to drink a round one to the other. Virgil saith of the rich Rhodian wine: Non ego te Diis & mensis accepta secundis: Transierim Rhodia— I cannot here pass o'er them Rhodian winen, To th'Gods and second banquets held divine. Scaliger might have added the rest, — & tumidis humasta racemis: And clustered grapes plucked from the swelling vine. It may well be thought they had also their second Supper, when Grapes were in kind, great bunches of ripe sweet grapes, so long as they would well last. Be not offended with this Digression. If Virgil had tasted of the Grapes of Escholl, he would have extolled them above the Rhodian bunches. Mr John Sanderson, our country man, travelling 1601. (as Purchas hath it, pag. 1635. relateth. In the valley of Escholl at this day, there are grapes: one bunch of them will weigh, of our weight about twenty, or one and twenty pounds, The holy Scripture, Num. 13.24. recordeth, that the Spies came to the River of Escholl, and cut down thence a branch with one cluster of grapes, and they bore it on a bar betwixt two. Lest the heavenly Scripture may suffer prejudice, and be thought hyperbolical, where it is apparently literal, I think fit to add, in another quarter of the world namely in Africa (as you may find in the second book of johannes Leo, and in Purchas from him, pag. 779.) viz. in Tagodast, a City seated on the top of a Mountain. That the Grapes thereof are red, and are for their bigness, called in the language of that people, Hen's Eggs, which is meant of the several particular grapes, not of the several bunches: for even our cold climates have bunches as big as three or four Hen's eggs. And now suppose that three hundred such single Grapes, grew upon one branch, may it not be carried between two, upon one coltstaff? So much on the by, to explain a seeming difficulty of Scripture; and yet I opine that the messengers did carry on the bar between them some Pomegranates, and Figs also, as is in the same verse, which might be so many, as to make a just and portable shoulder-burthen. I cannot omit this parallel digression, because it gravelled me in my youth, before I came to taste of Rhetoric, or much humane learning. judg. 20.16. of seven hundred men left handed, every one could sling stones at an hare's breadth, and not miss. Peter Martyr, Tremellius, and others are wholly for the hyperbole. And indeed I see no reason why the Divine Scripture may not use an hyperbole as well as humane authors; if not better: as certainly it doth, in divers places. But since we can find examples, in profane stories which do almost equal this, even in truth of things done (though the heavenly prescripts be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be believed for themselves) yet the additament of humane authority, to a doubting mind, will make the Scripture more credible, and more seemingly reasonable There was one, who before Alexander the Great, shown extraordinary dexterity by standing a pretty distance off, and did sling a pease, into, and through the hole of a board, which hole was very little bigger than the pease itself. One Aster did grave on the shaft of his arrow, Aster Philippo: and with that arrow struck out one of Phillip's eyes. See Strabo lib. 8. and Plutarch reporting this to have happened to Philip, Alexander the Great, his father. If it were not for like performances, it were incredible, what Damianus à Goes, pag. 200. saith of those of L●spland for their admirable skill. Also Florus 3.8. saith thus of the Lands of Majorca and Minorca, in Bello Balearico: Every man fight, hath three darts: who can mervell that they strike so certainly, when darts are their only weapons, and they study nothing else but to be apt slingers? The mothers give not meat to their children, till they have hit the mark she appointeth. johannes Stadius (on that place of Florus in his Commentary) saith, some think they were called Baleares, a study per fundos feriendi, from their study and practise, in exquisite striking of the mark by stones from their slings. Livy in divers books mentioneth, the great skill of the Baleareans for slingers: yet in his 38. book: he preferreth before those Islanders, certain men of Aegium Patre & Dimae, towns of Achaia, and saith of these latter. They were so skilful, that they would a great way off sling a bullet, through a garlands rings, and small hoops: nay, they would be sure to hit, not only the head of the enemy, but any part of his face they aimed at, and never fail. So fare Livy: who so believeth these strange relations, need not much doubt of the words of sacred Scripture, Judg. 20.16. Purchas in his Pilgrimage of Africa. 9.9. pag. 1499. thus historisieth of the Arabians. Their horses are lean, little, swift, laborious, and bold: and the horsemen, active beyond belief, darting, and catching with the hand the same dart, in the horses swiftest race, before it cometh to the ground: also taking up weapons, lying on the ground, while the horse is running: and in like swift race, hit the smallest mark with Arrow or Sling, Who so believeth, etc. I return. joseph Scaliger goeth on; Hebraei epulis sacrificii functi, secundis mensis gratias Deo ageb●nt, & potionem circumferebant: id quoque bodie retinent. So he. The Hebrews were wont at the banquets of the sacrifice, and second course to say Grace, and to drink round a Cup of Charity; which custom they keep even at this day. PAR. 4. POst poculum bymnus cantabatur, saith Scaliger, after he Grace-Cup they used to sing a Psalm. If he means it of the jews, he saith true, if of Christ, and his Apostles, than he misseth his mark, for the hymn mentioned in the new Testament was not sung, till the end of the third Supper; till they had received the Eucharist. For when they had sung an Hymn, they went out into the mountain of Olives, Matth. 26.30. And yet perhaps they might sing a little Hymn at the end of the second Supper: concerning which I intent to speak hereafter. Solenne fuit antiquis Israelitis, sacra, celeberrimaque Cantica Cantica à vini degustatione nichoare, saith Montanus, on Judg. 9 pag. 367. It was the usual custom, amongst the ancient Israelites, after they had drunk a Cup of wine, to begin some sacred and choice Psalms. PAR. 5 THey gave thanks; they drank wine, they did eat; they discoursed: and all this was done in the first quarter of an hour in the second Supper. But what was their discourse? Or why did Christ take occasion to wash their feet? I answer, we can know neither of these things infallibly, and demonstratively. Secondly, I answer, if we knew no ground of it, nor could guess at the reason of it, we may well presume Christ did wash his disciples feet, on great, just, momentuall motives. For many things, he knew cause, why he did so; or not so; though they be hid from us. And we must not be too inquisitive when he is silent. Before I come to demonstration, I must proceed upon three foundations probable enough. First, that the Apostles might fall out, or strive upon several occasions, though none be expressly mentioned. Seven guests make a feast; but nine feasters make a brawl, or are scandalous, saith the old proverb. Many harmless occurrences might engender debate. Secondly, that there was controversy between them, now especially in them second Supper, about superiority is most probable. PAR. 6. THirdly, that S. Luke toucheth at their contention, Luk. 22.24. I hold very likely. For though he placeth the contention after the third Supper, according to the literal Method; yet in the order of History it is to be taken in at the second Supper. And behold the ground of my conjecture. It is scarce credible that presently after the devour receiving of the most holy Eucharist, there should be dissension for Primacy. I dare say, who had such pridy, ambitious thoughts, presently upon the new Sacrament, they had been unworthy receivers thereof: which none of the Apostles were; for judas received not: of which hereafter. Again, it is said, Luke 22.21. But behold the hand of him that betrayeth me, is with me on the table. Now these words are spoken after the administration of the blessed Eucharist, what follows thence? Either we must make judas a participant of the body & blood of Christ (which though some have held, more have held otherwise, & that with greater reason) & we must make, that after the third Supper, they continued eating, the Table being yet spread, and meat thereon: (for else, why was the hand of judas with Christ on the Table?) and so in effect we must make a fourth Supper of Christ; the Passeover; the common second Supper, the most blessed Eucharist; and lastly, this Post-coenium, or Reere-Supper, which is most false and vast. Or else, we must grant, that the holy Spirit did not stand so strictly, upon the literal method in S. Luke, which is most true; as I touched at before; and may appear yet farther, because almost the same words, are described by S. Matthew, and S. Mark, Before Christ administered his most holy Supper, which S. Luke placeth after the third and most sacred Supper. Therefore I say, Their contention was before their being satisfied in the point controverted; and their satisfaction was before the receiving of the most blessed Eucharist; and the means to satisfy them, was Christ's most extraordinary humiliation. And now by these steps of conjecture, and probability, I am come to the more certain observations. That the Apostles often fell out among themselves, striving for superiority, cannot be denied. S. Peter himself, was in a manner over-curiously jealous of the company of S. john, What shall this man do? joh. 21.21. And Christ beat off S. Peter, thus, If I will that be tarry till I come, what is that to thee? The ten Apostles were moved with indignation against the two brethren of Zebedees' children, Matth. 20.24. because one would have a promise to be on the right hand of Christ; and the other on the left. And Christ took the Apostles off from their passion, saying, Whosoever will be great among you, let him be your Minister, and whosoever will he chief among you, let him be your servant: as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, Matth. 20.26, 27, & 28. verses. By the way they disputed among themselves, who should be greatest, Mark 9.34. but he told the twelve. If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all, verse 35. A primacy he denieth not among them, it was, and is necessary; but the affectation, and ambition of it, he disliketh, and sets them point blank on the contrary. Luke 9.46. There arose a reasoning among them, viz. the twelve Apostles, which of them should be the greatest? And Jesus perceiving the thoughts of their heart, took a child, and set him by him, verse 47. set him in the midst of them, and took him in his arms, Mark 9.36. and said to his Apostles; Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven: and whosoever shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Matth. 18.3. and 4. verses. It was one thought of many men: one heart of twelve Apostles; the thought of theïr heart; all thought so, every one desired it: and every one was answered. When all these most divine actions, words, and counsels were either forgotten or neglected: and after the Passeover, and at the second Supper. There was a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest, Luk 22.24. Christ answereth in words, from vers. 25. to vers. 30. inclusiuè. And when those words had not wrought fully enough on them nor humbled them sufficiently. Then, and upon this occasion (as I judge) Christ answered them indeed, and went a quicker and more piercing way, to teach them humility, knowing their contention came not from God: knowing he came from God, and went to God; Christ riseth from Supper, and laid aside his garments, and took a towel, and girded himself, poureth water into a Basin, Joh. 13.4. etc. The strife mentioned by S. Luke was before Christ washed their feet, saith Salmeron; though Barradius saith, perhaps the strife arose, because S. Peter's feet were first washed: which speech interferreth with that of Barronius next to be cited; That the Apostles never grudged at S. Peter's Primacy. PAR. 7. THis did Christ begin, about half an hour after six in the Evening, towards the end of the first quarter of an hour in their second Supper, to wash their feet; and Baronius much erred, to say, that Christ washed the Apostles feet, ante secundam mensam; when S. john is express, that Coenâ factâ, the Paschall being ended: Christ risen from Supper, and washed them; therefore it was not before the second Supper, but in it, one Supper was ended, and Christ arose from another Supper: Non debemus coenam adhuc factam, veluti jam consummatam, & transsactam intelligere. Adhuc enim coenabatur, cum Dominus surrexit, & lavit, saith Augustine, Tractat. 55. in Johannem. We must not conceit of the Supper being yet a eating, as if it were consummated and dispatched: for as yet they were at Supper, when the Lord arose, and washed them: he addeth most remarkably. Panis adhuc erat in mensa, cùm buccellam dedit suo traditori. The bread was yet on the Table, when the Lord gave the Sop, to him that should betray him. But Osiander was mad to say, Christ washed their feet before the eating of the Paschall, we have proved, Christ washed them in the second Supper. There is not so much as a shadow of likelihood, that Christ washed the Apostles feet, before the Paschall: and in the second Supper also. S. cyril in his Book, De Ablutione pedum, is in another extreme; That our Saviour washed his Disciples, after the receiving of the Eucharist. But this cannot be; for he put on his garments again, and did Discumbere, or lie down again, and entered into discourse, and gave his Sop to judas: all which did precede the Eucharist, and not follow after it. The truth is, the jews of those times, began their second washing, at the beginning of their second Supper: but Christ did so in the middle of the second Supper, or rather toward the beginning of the Eucharist preparing his Apostles to a worthy receiving, both by washing them, and giving them good advice; and I hold his Conclusion to be good, who said, Come loti● animi, puritatis, ad suscipiendum Saccramentum, necessariae, monumentum fuerit, ante Sacramenti institutionem exhiberioportuit. Since the washing of the mind, was the monument of the purity, which was necessary to the receiving of the Sacrament, it ought to be used before the institution of the Sacrament. Baronius hath a good argument against the innovating Osiander, That the Paschall Lamb being to be eaten in haste if Christ had risen from it, and washed their feet, before the end of that Supper, he had broken the Law; but he broke not the Law. Therefore it was at the second Supper; even toward the latter end thereof, that Christ by his own washing of them, prapared them by humility unto the receiving of his own last, best, and blessed Eucharist, being truly called the Supper of the Lord. If I have not guessed rightly, at the true cause, and just occasion, why Christ washed his Apostles feet; yet it is most certain, that he washed them; which, as I said, took up about another quarter of an hour of their second Supper. No man can reasonably think, that Christ did wash their feet at the Passeover; that was soon ended, as the washing and wiping was ended. Nor may it be thought that Christ would rise from the most sacred Supper of the Eucharist, to wash them. This derogateth too much from that divine Supper. Therefore the second Supper was the fittest time; and in it, indeed did Christ wash them: For, how could he wash the feet of twelve of them severally, twenty four feet in all, as they continued at Supper, in less time, than a quarter of an hour? and wipe them all (and well wiped them out of question) with that towel wherewith he was girded? joh. 13.5. weigh that time, by the time we should spend ourselves, if we were to dispatch such a business: if we wash but our own feet, and wipe them, above a twelfth part of a quarter of an hour quickly slideth away. The Prayer. O Redeemmer of mankind; thou wert pleased to wash the feet of thy Apostles, even those feet of judas, among the rest, which had trotted before, to the high Priests and Elders to betray thee, and those which were apt and ready to shed blood, even the innocent blood of thee, the Lord of life. Wash, I beseech thee, not only my feet, but my hands, my head, my whole body; and especially my heart, that I may be wholly purified; and fitted to partake of thy blessed mysteries, and by them be united to thee, my gracious and merciful Saviour. Amen. CHAP. XII. The Contents of the twelfth Chapter. 1. What was Done Said the 2. of the 3. quarters of the hour in the Second Supper. Christ beginneth to wash his Disciples feet. The Scribes book Commanded frequent washings. The Jews used much water for purifications both Legal. prescribed. 2. S. Peter the Primate, and Prince of the Apostles. Whither S. Peter lay on the Discubitory bed above Christ. 3. Whither Christ washed S. Peter's feet first of all. Whither Judas was washed at all. No washing of the feet: no partaking of the Eucharist. 4. S. Bernard's Pedilavium no Sacrament: Christ's washing his Apostles feet an example of humility. Whither Judas were first washed. 5. All the Apostles were washed. Uncertain who first. It matters not. S. Peter's Privilege. 6. S. Peter Christ's Dialogue. Obedience required. john the Baptist called a fool. Peter's double denial reproved. 7. Bodily washing. Spiritual washing. 8. Christ kissed his Apostles feet, Even Judas his feet. 9 Whither Christ at the second Supper had on a supping garment. Wither he had on a Cloak as Barradius— 3. Vestments as Euthymius 5. As some others have thought. Chr●st at his Passion had— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 10. The last Quarter of the seventh hour: or the third part of the second Supper. What was Done Said in it. The first passage is Christ's Question. His Diversion. 11. The Titles of Lord Master forbidden to the Apostles. The difference between Rab and Rabbi: Ambition forbidden. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attributed to Man God in the Old New Testament. How God Man Christ. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Lord. 12. Washing of feet imports humbleness of mind, Christ's Precept Example to be imitated. Lorinus his story. Christ the most perfect example of all. Seneca his advice. The difference between Exemplar. Exemplum. Examples move more than Precepts. The Worthiness Unworthiness of the Administrant addeth nothing detracteth nothing from the Sacrament. 13. Motives to Humility. Servants equal to their Masters in participation of Troubles. Blessings. Servants inferior to their Masters in Civil Moral. Economical affairs. 14. Nor Worders, nor Knowers: but Doers enjoy happiness. PARAGRAPH. 1. NOw let me descend to the things done and said, in this third quarter of an hour; the middle part, and second quarter of the three, allotted as it were to this second Supper. About half an hour after fix, our holy humble Saviour, beginneth to wash the Disciples feet. A little before Christ's incarnation there was a book written by the Scribes, in which they commanded frequent washings, even in the times of dinner or supper, because there were many Legal uncleannesses, which came by the very touch of divers things: and by which they were unclean till the Evening. Therefore had they store of water always in a readiness. At the Marriage in Cana, john 2.6. There were set six water-pots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the jews: Sc. aut legalem, aut traditionalem, aut convivalem, either Legal, or traditional or convivall Each water Pot containing two or three firkins a piece, non ad potum sed ad lotionem paratae aequales illae hydriae, aut vasa aquaria. Those water-pots were not prepared, for drinking but for washing. And in likelihood they had spent some good quantity of that water. For Christ commanded them to fill them: and they filled them up to the brim, verse. 7. And against the Passeover, our Saviour did foretell them they should meet a man bearing a pitcher of water, Mark. 14.13. And when it is said, He shall show you a room furnished: among other things it may well be expounded: A room furnished with store of water; for they had water always in a readiness for purifications prescribed by the Elders, as well as for legal purifications. Ciacconius is of opinion, that water was given for their feet at the entrance into the houses, yet it was to such, as were soul and unclean: for if they were clean they presently sat down, saith he. But Baronius from the Ritual saith; the Jews washed their feet twice at the Paschall Lan be: once at the eating of the flesh, and once at the eating of unleavened bread. Either the Ritual, or Baronius confoundeth matters: for they are not Paschall Lamb, but with unleavened bread first taken. Baronius should rather have distinguished two suppers, Legalem, & communem, the Paschall and Common Supper, then make one Supper of the Lamb, another of unleavened bread, as he doth in the words following: Paschalis Convivii duplexfuit Caena conjuncta: vel si dicere velimus, unius coenae duplex mensa: in cujus priori, esus agni, in posteriori vero ceremonia agebatur azymorum. There was a twofold joint supper of the Paschall banquet: or if we may so speak, two courses at the same Supper: In the former was the Paschall Lamb eaten; in the latter was the Ceremony of unleavened bread performed. Yet indeed neither was set on the board or table without the other, and they are not the flesh of the Lamb without unleavened bread. Now though this was a tradition of the jews often, yet this was their own Sumpsimus: and Christ did not wash the Apostles feet, for the same respects, that the jews washed themselves; but to give a good example of humility. PAR. 2. I Will not deny S. Peter to be first in place among the Apostles, the chiefest of them: their Primate, yea the Prince of the Apostles. Antiquity and that of the best have afforded him title sufficiently hyperbolical. Truth hath no need of false foundations, or slippery untrue superstructures: therefore when I see earnest and foolish contention, for his superiority in things which afford him no true privilege, I say this is the way to cry him down, rather than to raise him up. There is more than one who saith, that S. Peter lay on the bed above Christ, and S. john below: if S. john lay below, he could not so conveniently discern the beck of S. Peter above, as he might of any other of the Apostles, on whom he looked forthright, for Christ was between them; and the eyes of him in the lowest part of the discubitory bed, were averse from him who was highest. S. Peter's foot might rather have touched some part of S. John, (if so they lay along) than his beck be observed, whilst Christ's holy personal, corporal presence lay between them; and so eclipsed the eyes of S. John, who desired not to look much beyond our blessed Saviour. PAR. 3. LIkewise concerning the order which Christ used in washing of their feeten, and with whom he began, is made a question, a great question. Baronius saith that the Apostles never took it unkindly, that S. Peter should be set before them: but they bore it impatiently; when james or john were preferred, or had hopes to be preferred, as appeareth, Mark. 10.41. They began to be much displeased with james and john. S. Peter was first washed (saith Baronius) and he citeth S. Augustine to hold the same, on the 13. Chapter of S. john, Tractaet. 56, Indeed S. Augustine concludeth, we must not understand that Christ came to S. Peter, after he had washed others, but that he began from him, whën therefore he began to wash the Disciples feet, he came to him from whom he began, that is from Peter. And immediately before, who is ignorant primum Apostolorum esse beatissimum Petrum: That the most blessed Peter was the Primate of the Apostles; I willingly subscribe to his primacy: but that Christ was so strict in point of Ceremony, that the chiefest man should be first washed, both others and myself do deny. Peter's privilege of Chiefe-dome, was not taken away, or diminished, though Christ had washed others first, who were nearer to him or more conveniently placed. Secondly, what the most worthy father said a little before, aught to be throughly weighed, for it carrieth meat in its mouth; we must not think (saith he) that Peter among the rest did fear, and refuse to be washed; when others before him willingly or patiently had permitted it to be done to them, for so these words of the Gospel are easier taken or interpreted: because when it was said, He began to wash the Disciples feet, and wipe them with the towel, with which he was girded, it is added, therefore he came to Simon Peter, as if he had washed some before and after them came to the first, I only say (which is likeliest? the easier or the harder interpretation of a piece of Scripture? which is safest to be embraced? on the other side the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, therefore not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, than (though it be Then in our last translation) somewhat inclineth me to think, that when he began to wash his Disciples, he came therefore to Peter: for it is not said when he had washed but when he began to wash, etc. He therefore came to Peter. With S. Augustine, do agree Rupertus, and Simon de Cassiâ and Nonnus that Christ did wash S. Peter; yet Ambrose saith, Christ washed Peter last, and Ambrose is none of the hindmost in extolling of S. Peter. Some relate that Origen thinketh, and Cyprian accordingly, that Christ did not wash judas at all: because judas had no part with Christ. But it followeth not necessarily, that every one who was washed had part, because Peter refusing to be washed, was reproved by that answer. If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me: thou shalt have no part of the Eucharist with me, as Tolet expounded it. And indeed Judas had no part, nor (do I think) should S. Peter have partaked of the blessed Sacrament, if he obstinately, and refractarily had disobeyed Christ, and utterly refused to have his feet washed. Judam, qui se jam tradere proposuerat, Christus lavit, saith chrysostom: Admiror excellentem Christi clementiam, quia hujus etiam pedes lavit in proximo erat eum traditurus. Christ washed judas, who was then resolved to betray him. I wonder at the excellent clemency of Christ, who would vouchsafe to wash his feet, who was about by and by to betray him. To this effect Euthymius, Augustine, Tractat. 55. in Johannem. Hoc ad maximum cumulum humilitatis accessit, quod etiam illi non dedignatus est pedes lavare, cujus manus jam praevidebat in scelere. This may be added to the huge mass of his humility, that he disdained not to wash his feet, whose hands he foresaw would be embrued in wickedness. PAR. 4. I Will not with S. Bernard in Sermone de Coena Domini; account the Saints feet to be a Sacrament; ut de remissione quotidianorum (peccatorum) minimè dubitemus, habemus ejus Sacramentum: pedum ablutionem. To the end we should make no doubt of the forgiveness of our daily sins; we have his Sacraments, even the washing of our feet. Whether he take Sacramentum strictly, or largely; the pedilavium, or washing of feet, was no Sacrament for remission of sins. No, not as it was used by Christ; but it was an example of humility: a motive to mutual love; a preparative to put them in mind, of washing, cleansing, and purging their souls, against the receiving of the most sacred Eucharist. Which because judas did not perform, though his feet were washed, he was as it were excommunicated, when Christ said, That thou dost do quickly: and he went out immediately, and received not the most blessed Sacrament with them; but because all the other Apostles were prepared, and had learned the new doctrine of climbing up to heaven, by humbleness, all the rest received the precious Body, and Blood of Christ. chrysostom and Euthymius, Origen, and Leontius (saith Maldonate) do thinken, that Christ did first wash judas; because judas had most need: for the sick have need of the Physician, more than the sound and whole. In which regard Christ appeared first to Mary Magdalen before he appeared to any of his Apostles, or to his own most blessed Mother: for certainly, Marry Magdalen had been the greatest sinner; and perhaps stood at that instant in most need of comfort. I answer her speeches bewray her to have been amazed, rapted almost besides herself. Theophilact. on john 13. Non primum lavit Petrum, quamvis primatum discipulorum gerebat, sed forte proditor cum esset impudens, & inverecundus, ante Petrum lotus est; Though Peter was Primate of the Apostles, he was not first washed: but perhaps the shameless Traitor put forth himself (which the other Apostles would not do) and so he was first washed. PAR. 5. MY conclusions are, concerning this point. 1. There is no certainty whom Christ washed first. 2. It did not make a prerogative, to be first washed, nor mar it to be washed last. 3. All the Apostles were washed, even judas among them. 4. S. Augustine's determination that Peter was first washed, was most acute, and witty: yet I think, the words of the Apostles run more plainly, and unforcedly. That Christ had washed some others of the twelve, ere he came to Saint Peter: for it is not only said, that he began to wash his Disciples feet: but (also) to wipe them with the Towenll, wherewith he was girded; he did not begin to wipe till he had washed some; and so Christ came to S. Peter. Lastly, S. Peter hath this privilege, that there is not any one particularly expressed, or named to be washed but S. Peter only. PAR 6. THe Dialogue between S. Peter, and our blessed Saviour, before Peter yielded to be washed, is this: Lord dost thou wash my feet? Christ answered; What I do thou knowest not, but thou shalt know hereafter: thou knowest the matter, thou knowest I wash thee, but thou knowest not mine intentions. And this affordeth one Doctrine necessary for these times. Obedience must be performed (if required) though we know no reason why it is appointed, much more when we see reason: Cornelius Tacitus Historiae 1. Vbi jubeantur, quaerere singulis liceat, pereunte obsequio, imperium etiam intercidet. If it were lawful for every one to ask a reason of their Superiors commands; obedience would perish, and Authority would fall to the ground. It was spoken by a rude blunt soldier in Lucan, at the Garboils of the civil war — Rheni mihi Caesar in undis, Dux erit: Hîc socius facinus quos inquinat, aquat. Caesar my Captain is at Rhine, But in the civil broils, He is my fellow: They are like, Whom the same sin befoyles. Julius Caesar regarded not the tongues, or taunts of his Soldiers, so long as he had their arms, and swords for him. He let fall the strictness of discipline, and was (as a General) over-familiar with his Soldiers, calling them Commilitones, fellow-soldiers: Augustus disliked him for it; yet if it be well weighed, julius Caesar forbore his soldiers at the time of triumphs, and rest, more, than in the time of war; where he observed most strict discipline. A late Writer calleth S. John Baptist a fool, for denying to Baptise Christ: I say, a fool must not judge a wise man: and a religious man would find in the Baptist, heavenly humility, rather than style it folly; But Wisdom is justified of her children. Likewise, I doubt not of S. Peter's holy, humble intention; either when he refused to be washed, or when he accepted of it; for, till Peter was refractory the second time, Christ did not chide him: but perhaps, because of his double refusal to be washed, and because of his selfe-trust, he was deserted, to deny Christ at his passion thrice. PAR. 7. THe other discourse of the Dialogue, or the second part, is this. S. Peter said, Thou shalt never wash my feet, ver. 8. which indeed were words too peremptory, from such a servant, to such a Master: but when Christ replied; If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me: Peter was converted; and was not only like the Son in the Gospel, who said, He would not go into the Vineyard to work, but after repent, and went, Matth. 21.29. but out of surplusage of obedience, more than was commanded, he cried out, Lord, wash not my feet only, but my hands and my bead, joh. 13.9. The close before the washing of S. Peter, or at the beginning, to wash him, is in these two points; He that is washed, needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit, ver. 10. whence some do truly collect, the Apostles were once washed before; viz. before the Paschall Supper began. I doubt not, but Sensu mystico, he aimeth at the Spiritual washing of the soul, without which all bodily purification, and washing is to little purpose. And this sense is made good by the words following. Ye are clean, but not all; because Christ knew judas his soul was defiled with resolutions for the Treason, it is said, ver. 10. Ye are not all clean: here is spiritual uncleanness, for all the corporal washing and wiping. PAR. 8. YEa, if we may follow justinian in his Book, De Christi ago, cap. 3. He opineth, That Christ did not only wash the Apostles feet, but kissed them also. If so it were, what an un-heard of humility did Christ show, to kiss the feet of judas; which were swift to shed blood, even innocent blood, even the blood of the Son of God? To kiss the rod, even the rod which was to be cast into the fire, after correction performed? To kiss judas his feet, in a more submissive way, though he knew, that judas would kiss Christ's face, and betray him by that kiss? Both which compared together, do justly aggravate the sin of judas, and subject him to greater damnation, to offer the kiss of Treachery unto Christ, who offered unto him the kiss of love, and humility. PARA. 9 ANd now by this time, or there abouts, is exhausted, the third part of the sixth hour, or more; and the middle quarter of the hour spaced for their second Supper. I will not grant (saith Barradius) that Christ had a supping garment, for he laid down his own garments; not the supping garment, (saith he) as if Christ borrowed a supping garment, and had none of his own. And there was little honesty, or modesty to have a supping garment on his naked body (saith he) as if he might not have both his own clothes, and a supping garment also, and yet keep others on; for no good Christian will think, he stripped himself to nakedness, when he laid aside his garments: Barradius without ground, saith, Christ had a cloak; Euthymius on Matth. 26. saith, some thought Christ had on five Vestments; himself judgeth he had three. That this was at Supper time cannot be proved; and is not said. At his Passion indeed, the Pasmist foretelleth in the plural number: They shall, or will divide my garments, as it is in the Hebrew, Psal. 22.18. The 70. read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, first, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after. Our Printers of the last Translation, have it in the Singular in both places: They parted my garment among them: and cast lots upon my vesture. But because they had parted them indeed, it is said, Matth. 27.35. as in the time passed, They parted his garments (in the Plural) casting lots: and the Psalmist is divinely cited; as speaking first of his ordinary garments; secondly, of that excellent coat without seam: They parted my garments among them (there is the Plural number) and upon my vesture did they cast lots: and the Singular is meant of the goodly seamelesse coat, wrought from the top throughout, joh. 19.24. PAR. 10. AFter his washing the Apostles, resuming his garment, and recumbing again, followeth the last quarter, the third part of an hour, or somewhat over, allotted for dispatching the second Supper; and it may seem thus to be spent. First with heavenly instruction to his Apostles: then with a farther detection of the Traitor: Lastly, with the subsequent occurrences. The first point beginneth from Christ's question, and is continued with his own diversion, reinforced with holy conclusions, from vers. 13. to 17. inclusiuè. The second distinction of time, may be from the gradual detection of the Traitor, to the last consummation thereof, namely, from John 13.18. to John the 13.27. inclusiuè. Lastly, the subsequent occurrences are described from verse 28. to verse 31, inclusiuè; but of these in order. What our most sacred Saviour first said to his Apostles, after he was again laid on the discubitory bed, is discerned by that, he made this Quaere: Know you what I have done to you? which is not spoken of his action, which all knew well enough without ask; namely, that he had washed them; but of his main ends, and intentions to them unknown; even to Peter ugknowne a while; why he washed them: Then followeth Christ's own Diversion Ye call me Master, and Lord, and ye say well, for so I am. Not only many other times, but even at the preparation of the Paschall Lamb, he is called Master, Matth. 26.18. The Master saith: And during that first Supper, judas said, Master, is it I? verse. 25. Also every one of them said, Lord, is it I? ver. 22. PAR. 11. THe Apostles were forbid to be called Rabbi, or Master, and the reason is annexed; For one is your Master, even Christ, Matth. 23.8. The title Rabbi, is held to be given to them, who took their Master's degree, in the Babylonian Academies; and Rabbi, to them, who were declared to be wise men by imposition of hands in Israel. Be not ye called so; Christ forbids not honour to be given to the Magistrate, or to the Doctors, but he would not have them ambitious of it, and dislikes ambition. So Beza on the place, assisted by Augustine, and Erasmus; and indeed, he would have his Apostles to be unlike, or rather contrary to the ambitious affection, of worship, and honour, and high places, and titles, which ungraciously reigned in the proud hearts of the Pharisees. Concerning the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Lord, it hath been ascribed to men, both in the Old, and New Testament, Exod. 33.22. Let not the anger of my Lord wax hot, saith Aaron to Moses. And Sarah called Abraham Lord, as is witnessed, 1 Pet. 3.6. Likewise in the Testament of Grace, the Grecians said unto Philip, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Joh. 12.21. Lord, we would see Christ. Yet these men not affecting or desiring that great attribute were called so without sin, and the other did without sin call them so. But as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifieth, or expresseth that great, most proper name of God, jehovah: so may no man give to man; nor man accept from man, the title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lord; for God alone is the only Lord; absolute, perfect, supreme, a Lord paramount, of things that are not, as well as of things that are. Man is no other at his best, than a petty, diminutive Lord; a Lord needing these things, of which he is Lord; a Lord of a little, or no time, a weak Lord, who cannot command a disease, to go from his own body; nor so much as a tree of his to grow. A Lord by communication, partitipation A Lord that must give account as an Vsufructuary, to an higher Lord; and so a little Lord in small matters; a great servant to the greatest Lord: indeed not so much a Lord, as a slave to his passions. Christ, as he is God, is Lord; and as God and Lord is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, joh. 21.15. Lord, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Thou knowest that I love thee, saith S. Peter; yea, judas himself questioning, Is it I Lord? tacitly confesseth him to be God, that could search the reins, and judge truly of the thoughts of men. S. Thomas divinely confesseth both in one, joh. 20.28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, My Lord, and my God; and they all said well herein, for Christ is our Master, our Lord, yea, our Lord God. PAR. 12. AFter Christ reasoneth thus, both from the matter itself, and from their own confessions, If I then your Lord, and Master have washed your feet, ye ought to wash one another's feet; joh. 13.14. And by the washing of feet, he meaneth not only the bodily washing, literally; but rather the exceeding humbleness of mind, and the double diligence, which we are to exhibit unto our brethren for their good. Every superior must have his heart so prepared, that though he command others outwardly, he may deserve to himself inwardly such Christian humiliation, that he preferreth the very inferior, whom he commandeth, before himself; and grudge not any servill-seeming, base work to save the soul of a sinner. It followeth, For I have given you an example, shalt ye should do, as I have done to you, vers. 15. The man was healed, who cast up his eyes to the fiery brazen Serpent, Num, 21.8.9. verses; and happy is the man, that casteth up his eyes to follow and imitate Christ, in whatsoever he can, that in all businesses to be done, first examineth, whether they be according to Christ's precept, or example. I have seen them, who have the sweet name of jesus, pounced, stamped, and as it were inlaid, in Azure most blue indelibly, and as it were cut out on their Arms, or printed or graven. I have read in Lorinus of one, upon whose dead heart was found written, and as it were engraven: Christ is my love: or that effect. I am sure he is to be our Example, I beseech you, be ye followers of me, saith S. Paul, 1 Cor. 4.16. Yet he showeth otherwhere how they must follow him, Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ, 1 Cor. 11.1. Perfectissimum est exemplar, quod minus perfectum imitatur, saith Aquinas, 3. part. Quaest. 56. articulo: 1. ad 3. But all other Examples take Christ for their example, therefore he is the most perfect example of all. Even Seneca did advise, that a man should propound unto himself, some eminent man, as if be were present, to be a spectator of all his actions, and an example and guide unto him. But no example is so perfect an example, as Christ was and is. The School distinguisheth between Exemplar, and Exemplum, thus: Exemplar est, ex quo aliud simile facimus: Exemplum est, quod aut sequimur, aut vitamus. Exemplar, is the person from whom we take Example: Exemplum, is the thing which is propounded to us to imitate. Christ is the Exemplar, his humility is our Example. I have given you Example, that ye should do, as I have done to you. Examples certainly move more than precepts, though precepts ought to move more than Examples. For our Saviour hath most divinely instructed us, by one rule of all other like matters; and it is a lesson, not only for the multitude, but for the Disciples also: The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat, all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; not only Observe, but Do; which is a double expression of the same duty; But do not ye after their works, for they say, and do not, Mat, 23.1, 2, and 3. verses. Earthen vessels may hold rich treasure, a seal of brass makes as good a print, as a seal of gold, and S. Paul being so holy as he was above others, had been to blame to say, 1 Cor. 1, 14. I thank God I baptised none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; if the worth of the administrant had added any thing to the effectualness of the Sacrament, or ill example had diminished the power of it, to the truly prepared and devout recipient. Eliah refused not meat which was sent of God, though it was brought unto him, in the mouth, or claws, of divers unclean Ravens, 1 King. 16.6. Yet such is the perverseness of man's nature that it justifieth the School conclusions: Aquinas 1.2. quaest. 34. Artic. 1. in corpore Articuli. If those who teach all delights to be evil, be found to embrace some delights: men will be more prone to pleasures, by the Example of their works, than free from pleasure for all their words. For in humane operations, and passions, in which experience is most prevalent, examples, are more forcible, than words. I have given an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. PAR. 13. A Reason why we should stoop our souls, down to humility is added, Verily, Verily, the servant is not greater than his Lord; neither he that is sent, greater than he that sent him, vers. 16. Otherwhere Christ varieth this thus; The Disciple is not above his Master, nor the Servant above his Lord, It is enough for the Disciple that he be as his Master, and the servant as his Lord, Matth. 10.24, 25. ver. Again, Every one that is perfect shall be as his Master; or Every one shall be perfected, as his Master, Luk. 6.40. john 16.20. Remember the word I said unto you, the servant is not greater than the Lord: whence he inferreth a kind of equal participation, In troubles; if they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you, and in blessings; If they have kept my say, they will keep yours also: all these terms of equality, and likeness, are but incentives unto humility; that Masters might not domineer too much, nor servants be too much dejected; for servants are fellow-brethrens to their Lords, and Masters. In our Lord and Master Jesus Christ. S. Paul in his Epistle to Philemon, vers. 16. commendeth to Philemon his repentant servant Onesimus, Not now as a servant but above a servant: a brother beloved especially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh and in the Lord? Yet to show that the Lord is indeed, and in civil conversation among men, aught to be above the Servant; not only the inference is pregnant, Mat. 10, 25. If they have called the Master of the house Belzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household? But the doctrine drawn from their confession in the practice Luke 17.7. & 8. verses. Which of you having a Servant ploughing, or feeding cattles, will say unto him, by and by when he is come from the field, go and sit down to meat? and will not rather say to him, make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink. And in the 9 verse, Christ denyeth thanks to be given, as due to that servant, who did the things that were commanded. Here is a lawful superiority of the Master above the servant in all civil, moral, and Oeconomic affairs. S. Peter goeth one step further: Servants be subject to your masters with all fear, and not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward, 1 Pet. 2 18. And in the verses following argueth; It is their duty to take things patiently, though they suffer wrongfully, for hereunto ye were called; because Christ suffered for us, leaving us an Example to follow his steps, etc. here are footsteps of inequality; that the Master is above the servant, lest servants should grow proud, and lazy, or stand upon terms of comparison. PAR. 14. THe last part of Christ's holy conclusions in this point, is, If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them, verse 17. The worders, the knowers, are but the addressers to happiness; the Doers enjoy happiness. Not every one who saith unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the Kingdom of heaven, but he that doth the will of my Father which is in heaven, Matth. 7.21. He that heareth my words, and doth them not, shall be likened to a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand, Vers. 26. Not the hearers of the Law, are just before God, but the Doers of the Law shall be justified, Rom. 2.13. See the same practical duty, enjoined, and enlarged, James 1. from vers. 22. to vers. 25. inclusively. The Prayer. O Lord, Legal purifications cleanse not the spirit: pour down, I humbly entreat thee, but one drop of Christ Jesus his sacred blood, and it will cleanse the spots of my soul, better than milk, or much soap, better than all the Lavers in the Law: hear me O holy, holy, holy, father, Son, and blessed Spirit, for the merits of Jesus Christ. Amen. CHAP. XIII. The Contents of the thirteenth Chapter. 1. The 2. Passage in the 3. quarter of the second Supper, is, the gradual detection of the Traitor. The first degree. Judas not chosen. Judas like an Ass, kicked against Christ. The second Degree. Judas a horseleech, a blood sucker. 2. Judas aimed at in the Individuum vagum. One of you, etc. The third degree. Judas, a bold, shameless, impudent man, a brazen face. 3. Peter beckoned to John. Becks have their language. S. John understood S. Peter's beck. S. John S. Peter's Mediator to Christ. D. Collins vindicated. 4. The 1. Detection of Judas his uncleanness. 5. The 2. Detection; he lifted up his beele against Christ. God fore-knew Judas would be a Traitor. He praedestinateth no man to sin. Why Christ would choose Judas. The book of God's Praedestination cannot be opened. 6. The 3. Detection of Judas. One should betray him. Christ's Passions and perturbations free from sin. 7. The fourth and last Detection of Judas, He it is to whom I shall give a sop. Many questions concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1. Whether it were Bread or flesh. Diogenes saying of the Megarians. Nonnus holdeth that 1. The thing delivered was Bread. 2. It was dipped in Wine. 3. It was Sacred and Divine. The Egyptians Custom. Pope Julius wholly forbade the Intinction of the Bread in the Wine. S. Augustine mistaken. 8. The Morsel was Part of the second Supper. Not of the blessed Eucharist. S. Bernard, Soto, Ludolphus, S. Augustine. S. Hilary. Soto mistaken in Bucella. Salsamento. Wine in all three Suppers. In the second Supper great varieties. The Sop not dipped in Wine. 9 The second Quaere concerning the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Whether Judas received the blessed Eucharist in it or no? Authorities that he did. S. Augustine, Nonnus, Dominicus, a Soto, and Aquinas from chrysostom, Dionysius; S. Hierome, and S. Bernard think so; and Soto says that Haymo and Remigius thought so. 10. Soto his note upon the words. Edentibus illis. He makes the Tricoenium complete. 11. Barradius, S. Hierome: Eugenius; S. Cyprian: Euthymius, Equinas think so. S. Cyprian thought the Sop to be the Sacrament. 12. S. Augustine thought Christ praised the Eucharist, By Word. Deed. S. Augustine saith, Judas received it. Theophilacts wild Crotchet. PARAGRAPH. 1. I Am now come to the second passage in the last partition of time, allotted to the Second Supper; namely a further detection of the Traitor Judas, and this was partly whilst Christ washed their feet: partly after it. What I before handled in the first Supper, I repeat not; you may have recourse to it. Thus hangeth our present Cohaerence. Our Saviour having pronounced happiness, to them that do well because Judas did not so, He excludeth judas from happiness, saying in the 18. verse. I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: implying whom he had not chosen: not him who did eat bread with Christ, and (yet) lift up his heel against him, vers. 18. It is a Metaphor taken (say some) from wrestlers: who put their legs, between the legs of their adversaries, and by that means cause them to fall, and so metaphorically signifieth him who by craft and deceit ruineth another: perhaps Christ secretly compareth judas, to some horse, Ass, or other beasts, who use to kick backward. Aristotle was justly taxed for recalcitrating against Plato, as showing great unthankfulness to his Master. Christ infinitely surpassed Plato in all goodness, and Judas extremely went beyond Aristotle in unthankfulness. Qui velit ingenio cedere rarus erit. saith Martial. In contestation of a wit, Not one will yield no not a whit. Though omnis ingenii arrogantia turpis est; 'tis a base thing for a man at any time to brag of his wit. Aristotle only laboured to outgo Plato in learning, and in good same; But judas was a very horse Leech. Non missura cutem nisi plena cruoris hirudo. PAR. 2. A Bloodsucker, a sucker of innocent blood: Lutum sanguine maceratum, as one said of Tiberius. One who loved to bathe himself in blood. In contemplation whereof, after some other discourse, our Saviour was troubled in Spirit, and testified and said; Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me. That the same matter with some little variety of words might be spoken in both the first and the second Supper, no man can deny; considering the manifold relations in all the Evangelists, of the same protestations of Christ. Vbi dolour, ibidigitus; where the sore itches; there the finger scratches. The presence of the Traitor oft gave Christ occasion to touch at him: oft to forewarn him. The repetitions made him more inexcusable, as growing still more refractory, forewarned fore-armed, as is usually said; but a triple cord will not draw some. It followeth, The Disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spoke, verse. 22. This is a passage which none other of the Evangelists do touch at. Frons index animi. And the wickedness of the heart, breaketh oft out into some change, or disfiguration of the countenance. In the forehead you may find, All the passions of the mind. But belike judas, being a bold shameless man whose forehead was hardened, and his conscience seared, had such command of his passions, that his intentions could not be discerned by his looks. A man past shame, hath great advantage over a modest man, in point of contestation; judas (it seems) kept a staunch countenance, out of which the other Recumbents, could not pick his guiltiness; nor read the dictates of his heart, trafficking for blood. PAR. 3. AFter the Apostles doubting, and gazing one upon the other, when they found no signs of discovery, Peter who before was chid, about his too resolute denial to be washed, fearing perhaps, lest the aspersion might rest on himself, Beckoned to john, who was leaning on jesus bosom, that he should ask who it should be of whom Christ spoke, john 13.24. Even becks have their language. Augustine de Doctrinâ Christiana, lib. 1. cum oculis fabulamur; we discourse with our eyes: Confessionum; 8.8. plus alloquebantur animum meum, frons; genae; oculi, colour; modus vocis, quam verba quae promebam: my frown, my cheek, my colour; my manner of speaking, did make fuller expression of my mind, than did the words themselves, which I did utter. Ovid Metamorpho 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. — Nutu signisque loquuntur; With becks and signs, Th' express their minds. Proverb. 6.13. He speaketh with his feet, he teacheth with his fingers; loquens in pedibus suis: docens in digitis suis, as Montanus hath it. Digitis loquitur, saith the Vulgar. — digitis saepe est nutuque locutus Et tacitam mensae duxit in orbe notam, Ovid. Trist. 1. Oft with his fingers, oft with becks he spoke, And on the round board secret signs did make. Navius in Tarentilla,— Alii: dat digito literas. To some others he wrote letters on his finger's ends. Et potest de computo digitorum manualis loquela figurari, saith Beda, in libro de indigitatione. There may be framed a certain kind of speaking by the hand; even by an arithmetical disposal of his fingers. The wanton Tibullus was not ignorant, Lib. 1. — nutus conferre loquaces, Blandaque compositis abdere verba notis. How to confer by speaking becks, How to compose his speech. In silent language, when he intends To flatter and beseech. No marvel then, if S. john understood S. Peter's significative beckoning: and leaning on Jesus breast, said unto him, Lord, who is it? Here I could reproove the over earnest affectators of S. Peter's Primacy. I could tell them that D. Collins hath divinely weighed, not in the Baker's balance, but in the Gold smith's scales, both S. Peter and S. Paul. Let others judge, I forbear. It is in his Increpation of Eudaemon Johannes, pag. 305. & sequent: I could tell them hence, that S. Peter was glad, to make a Mediator of S. john, to interrogate Christ, which himself either dated not, o● thought inconvenient to propound: but such comparisons please not me. PAR. 4. LEt us lay the Detections altogeter, as we did in the first Supper, so in the Second: and this will be found to be the order. PAR. 5. 1 When the Devil had put into the heart of Judas Iscariot to betray Christ john 13.2. the first touch at judas is in the 10. verse. Tee are clean but not all; the foulness, or uncleanness was spiritual and appropriated to the traitor Judas only, vers. 11. This was said whilst Christ was washing, wiping, and cleansing them; after he recumbed again. 2. The next and second touch of this, v. 18. He that eateth bread with me, hath lift up his heel against me, that the Scripture might be fulfilled: think not that therefore judas sinned because it was foretell, he would be the Traitor: but it was foretold, because God fore-knew he would be the Traitor. God predestinateth no man to sin: That the Scripture might be fulfilled; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, , or That, here is used causaliter, non consecutiuè, as a cause; not as a consequence, saith Cardinal Tolet on the place) and if you inquire a reason, why Christ did choose an Apostle, whom he knew to be wicked: Cyrillus 9.10: answereth divinely. You may aswell interrogate why God made those Angels, whom he knew they would turn Devils? why he made Adam, seeing he foresaw he would fall? why he created men, whom he fore-knew that they would be damned? Let me add, the book of God's predestination cannot be opened, and unfolded: nor men, nor Angels, nor any other heavenly powers, ever read it through; it is an Ark that must not be pried into. They are most blind who gaze too much upon it. Christ chose judas when he was good, when he began to keep the bag he began to be ill. No man was ever preordained or created purposely that he should sinne, manger all Novellisme. PAR. 6. THe third punto is in the 21. verse: Jesus was troubled in Spirit, and testified; Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me, this was rather a propassio, than passio, or if you will a passion which Christ raised up himself, and voluntarily assumed. He likewise groaned in Spirit, and troubled himself, john 11.33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. justinian in libro de Ago Christiano, cap. 5. thus; Turbatur Christus, potestate, non insirmitate: cùm vult, quando vult, de quo vult. Christ is troubled by his power, not through infirmity; when he will, how he will, for what he will. His perturbation was as free from sin, as his tranquillity of mind. Augustin de Civitate 14.9. Dominus adhib●it affectiones, ubi adhibend●s judicavit. Christ assumed affections upon judgement; he who had a true humane both soul and body, had also true humane affections. Though they moved up and down in the lower part of his soul; they reached not to his mind, and spirit. PAR. 7. IN the fourth and last place, Christ, who had used general warnings; and after some more especial ones, both in the first, and second Supper: now towards the end of the second Supper, falleth (upon S. john's request) to sign the very individual man; jesus answered; He it is to whom I shall give a Sop, or a morsel, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the Sop, he gave it to judas Iscariot, joh. 13.26. And now is the detection: and the words are as significant, as if Christ had said, judas Iscariot, Thou art the man, that will betray me, unto the words, which were plain enough (because Segniùs irritant animum demissa per aures, Quam quae sunt oculis subjecta fidelibus. Those things the mind do less delight, Which pass by th' care, than what by sight:) Christ added an evident sign, and therefore did Christ, according to his promise, dip the Sop, and gave it; and himself gave it into the hands of judas; wherefore no man need doubt, but both judas himself, was now convinced in his own conscience; and his silence, and accepting of the Sop, proclaimed his consent▪ and every other of the Apostles, rejoiced that themselves were acquitted, and that the Traitor was sufficiently revealed to them. Concerning that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Sop, many questious may arise. First, whither it were bread, or whither it were flesh? The Expositors are most for the bread: but it is in the Margin of our New Translation: or Morsel; and yet it may be a Morsel of bread; and the word will bear both (as I told you before) for Opsonium, is all manner of meat; Opsopoeus, a Victualler; Opsopolis, a woman-Cooke; and Opsopolium the Shambles; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is not taken for bread only, nor its derivatives. Diogenes was wont to say of the Megarians; Obsonant quasi crastina die morituri; aedificant tanquam nunquam morituri, saith Tertullian in Apologetico. cap. 39 They eat as they were to die next day, They build as they were to live for aye. To the former part of which Diverbium of Diogenes concerning the Megarians; S. Paul alluded, 1 Cor. 15.32. Let us eat and drink, for to morrow we die: Obsonemus, quasi cras morituri. If the Spirit alluded to any Heathen Author, and not rather to to the Prophet, Esay 32.13. I am sure they did eat somewhat more than bread. Beza translates it, Offulam; Erasmus, Offulam vel bucellam. Erasmus shall hardly persuade me, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is properly Offula panis intincta juri; A bit of bread soaked in pottage. The bread in pottage is commonly so steeped, that it is unfit to be taken up, or to be given without a spoon, from one to another: but meat is ordinarily cut and dipped in the sauce, and then delivered from one to another, Ruth. 2.14. Eat of the bread, and dip the morsel in the Vinigar. Though Esau sold his birthright for bread, and pottage of Lentiles, Gen. 25.35. yet was meat sod in the pottage; and for one morsel of meat he sold his birthright, Heb. 12.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Our Bishop's Bible readeth it, for one mess of meat; Propter escam unam, as it is in the Interlineary, Vnico edulio, as Beza hath it; for Esau was Edulus, an Eate-all. The Vulgar rendereth it twice, Panem, Bread, in the 26. verse; but in the 27. verse. Buccellam, a Morsel; and because he did eat bread with Christ, as both the Psalmist foretold, and indeed was accomplished, verse 18. Therefore many conclude, it was bread, which Christ gave; but the argument holdeth not, For he did eat bread with Christ at both Suppers: and yet what Christ gave him now, at last, might very well be a morsel of meat, dipped in the Embamma, or sauce; some say in the Wine. Nonnus is thus rendered by the most learned Heinsius. Cuimanum intingens nigro liquore made factum panem praebuero, ipse me prodit. Et in poculum plenum vino intingens extremum panis, impudenti dedit judae. To whom soever I shall give a morsel of bread, soaked in the black pottage, when I have dipped it therein with mine hand, he shall betray me, And when he had dipped the tip of the bread in the Cup, full of wine, he gave it to the impudent Judas. He holdeth three things, 1. That the thing delivered was bread. 2. That the Bread was dipped in wine. 3. That this Bread, was sacred, and divine, for it followeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; post panem Deo similem: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Divinum panem: After the Bread like unto God, or the Divine Bread the devil entered into him. The Egyptians (as saith the most accurate Heinsius, pag. 464. (of which Nation Nonnus was) Intinctam vino offam exhibent. Give the bread dipped in wine, which might be done in time of necessity, as Eusebius proved from Serapion; but the Egyptians did so ordinarily; till Julius the Pope forbade it in his Epistle to the Egyptian Priests. Micrologus. cap. 19 disliketh and disproveth that custom thus; Julius wholly forbiddeth such intinction: and teacheth that the Bread is to be taken by itself; and the Cup by itself, according to Christ's institution. Again, in Canonibus, titulo de consecratione. distinctione. 2. C. cum omne; julius both refuteth, and abrogateth that custom of giving to the people the Eucharist dipped, because Christ gave to none of his Apostles such an endippid bit, but to judas only; which soaked morsel should be, as an infallible token; to sign out the betrayer of his Master: not a sign of the institution of the Sacrament. So fare the excellent Heinsius; who also citeth S. Augustine Tractat. 52. in johannem. judas took not Christ's body, when he took the Sop, as some think, who read the words negligently. In this point he is right. But S. Augustine is much mistaken in thinking, that before this Sop given, judas, and all the Apostles had received from Christ the Sacrament of his body and blood. And though otherwhere; he embraceth not the method of S. Luke, yet here he stands too strict upon it; and makes a kind of Supper after the blessed Sacrament, which hath its inconveniences, great and unsufferable; of which, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God willing hereafter. PAR. 8. I Wind up all. Suppose we, that this Morsel was Bread, that this bread was dipped in wine; yet was it not the consecrated, either bread, or wine, but part of the second Supper. S. Bernard, in Sermone. 3. de Coena Domini, Columella. 1355. is express. That the Sacrament was not given Tune, by the sop; Christus buccellam solummodò intinctam, non consecratam Judae porrexit, saith Ludolphus Carthusianus, part, 2 cap. 55. Christ gave judas only a dipped, not a consecrated sop. The reason of Soto is good. When Christ gave to the rest of his Disciples severally his body; and his blood after, sub forma Potûs; under the form of wine; we may not think he gave it to judas, dipped, or soaked; for this is not to eat and drink. Therefore the same Soto in the same place, viz. 4. Sentent, Distinct. 12. Quaest. 2. Artic. 2. thus, Hillarius & universi; Hillary, and all the rest of the Fathers with S. Augustine agree, that in, or with that sop, judas took not the body, and blood of Christ. And no man can descent from this, saith he. Yet I descent from, Soto, when he is peremptory, that the buccella, or morsel was intincta in vino, dipped in wine; for Salsamentum, was not necessary, saith he, to the eating of the Lamb. First, he is much mistaken in the word Salsamentum, which (I opine) he taketh for sauce, when it signifieth any salted thing; fish, flesh, or other salt Edulia, or victuals; or must it needs be dipped in wine, because there was not Salsamentum, or sauce? I am sure there is no salt in that inference. Secondly, they had sour herbs, and their juice (saith the Ritual) at the eating of the Paschall. Thirdly, this Institution was after the Paschall Supper. But saith he, Christ cared not for delicates. True; but first, who saith, Christ took any of that sop? Secondly, who granteth the Embamma, or sauce to be delicate? Wine was more delicate than it. It is not likely that it was dipped in water, saith he. True; How followeth it, that it was dipped in wine? They had (saith he) both consecrated, and unconsecrated wine. I doubt not but in this Second Supper, they had Esculenta, poculenta, condimenta. Meats, drinks, and sauces, of great variety. At the Pascall they had wine, as I proved fully before. At the second Supper, saith the Kituall they had wine. At the sacred Eucharist they had wine. Yet that the sop given to judas, was dipped in wine, cannot be proved, or probabilized. In Evangelio nihil habetur, the Gospel doth not at all specialize, (saith Soto himself) into what it was dipped. Conjecture therefore had been fit than the positive answer, That it was dipped in wine. PAR. 9 The third Particular of the third General. ANd now we are fallen upon the second Quaere; whither Judas received the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist with Christ, and his other Apostles, yea, or no? Authorities to prove that judas did. S. Augustine in the place last cited, is confident, that judas did receive the sacred Eucharist. And in Evangelium johannis, Tractatu. 6. post medium. Et sancta possunt obesse. In bonis enim sancta ad salutem insunt; in malis ad judicium. Qui manducat, & bibit indignè: judicium sibi manducat, & bibit. Non ait, quia illares mala est; sed quia malus, malè accipiendo, ad judicium accipit bonum quod accipit. Non enim mala erat Buccella, quae tradita est judae a Domino. Absit. Medieus non daret Venenum; salutem Medicus dedit, sed indignè accipiendo, ad pernitiem accêpit, quia non paratus accepit. Even holy things may hurt a man. For holy things in good men, tend to their salvation, but in wicked men to their condemnation. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh unto himself damnation. He saith not, that, that thing was evil, but that, that evil one receiving it evilly, received to his condemnation, that good thing, which he received For the Sop was not evil, which was delivered to judas by the Lord. God forbidden. The Physician would not deliver poison; he gave health. But he that received it unworthily, received it to his destruction, because he received it without due preparation. I answer, S. Augustine otherwhere is express, that the sop was not the Sacrament, though here he seems to conclude so. So Nonnus Dominicus Soto in 4. Sententiarum, distinctione 12. Artic. 2. thus; Because it were wonderful, that Christ by way of charity, should give his own body to him, who highly hated, and betrayed him. But let it be the Quaere, whether he did so or no? Aquinas thinketh judas did receive the Eucharist. And he made this Hymn. Cibum turbae duodenae. See dat suis manibus. But saith Barradius, Aquinas himself, was of another opinion. Where man? where? Barradius should have done well to have speciallized the place. Aquinas proves judas received it from the authority of chrysostom Homiliâ, 83. on Matth, where he saith, the Traitor was Divinâ mensâ susceptus; & ineffabile mysterium communicavit. Entertained at the Lords Table, and partaked of the unspakeable mystery. And homiliâ de proditione judae: adsuit judas, & illius sacrificii communicationem Meruit. judas was present, and was accounted worthy to be a Communicant of that Sacrifice, if so it be truly cited to my hands. Merit is not always used to signify a work of condignity, deserving eternal reward, (it were better, receperat) received. Diomysius, Ecclesiasticae Hierarchiae, cap. 3. Christus judam secum, in (Sacramentalem) Coenam perceperat. Christ admitted judas with himself, unto the (Sacramental) Supper. So Hierom. on Mark 14.23. When he had given thanks, he took the Cup to them; and they all drank of it. Soto doubteth whither it was Hieromes Commentary. I say, There is no doubt, but that all, and every one, who were present, received the blessed Sacrament. But it must first be cleared (which never can be) that judas was present. For indeed he was gone out, ere the holy Sacrament was instiruted. Bernard saith, In eadem mensâ. At the same Table, were Peter, and judas: but it must be understood, de mensâ Dominicâ, & Sacramentali: of the Table of the Lord, or the Sacramental Table, else he reacheth not to our purpose. He is of the same opinion, in Sermone de Coena, pag. 1709. Leo Sermone 7. the passione Domini, saith judas took it. Haymo, and Remigius think, judas partaked of it saith Soto; and therefore this opinion, Tanquam Sanctorum Communis, imo tanquam Evangelii affinis amplectenda est. And more peremptorily afterward. This opinion is to be received, not only as the common opinion of the Doctors; but as the opinion of the Gospel. PAR. 10. SOto hath this further note, where S. Matthew saith Coenantibus illis, accepit Iesus panem: & as they were eating, jesus took Bread, he did not use the word Supping, as S. john doth, for the eating of the Lamb; but for the whole entire Supper, consisting, ex primo accubitu: & secundo recubitu, of the first accumbing, & second recumbing. For, though the washing came between, it is called all, One Supper. Thus far Soto acutely reasoneth, Primo sedens, coenavit paschalem agnum: at his first sitting down, he supped of the Paschall Lamb; which S. john calleth a Supper, when he saith, Caenâ factâ, joh. 13.2. Secondly, he also accounteth another Supper, to consist of Christ's first accubation, and second recumbing, though the washing came in the midst of it; and he saith truly; All this was called but one Supper. But if he includeth, both the Paschall Supper, and the second Supper; all to be one Supper, he confuteth himself; for before he distinguished the Paschall Supper by sitting; the other by discumbing. If he mean, that the second Supper, which S. john speaketh of, though Christ lay down, and again discoursed, and did eat before, and did eat afterwards, and rose, and washed, and wiped their feet, and again, lay down, and again discoursed; yet all this was but one Supper, than Soto hath hit the nail on the head; the bird in the eye; Acu rem tetigit: and then necessarily the former Paschall Supper, and this other entire Supper (though consisting of many parts) make not one only, but two distinct Suppers; to which, if we add, the sacred Supper of our Lord, we have the Tricoenium complete. PAR. 11. BArradius saith; judas did partake of the sacred Supper; so Hierom in his second Book against jovinian; so Eugenius; so the Author of the Book, the Ablutione pedum in Cyprian; so Euthymius in Mat. 26. So Aquinas, part. 3. Quest. 81. Artic. 2. And Michael Aiguanus the Carmelite, lib. 4. Sententiarum, distinctione 12. Quaestione Vinea, pag. 385. PAR 12. CYprian Sermone de Coenâ Domini, prope initium. Vbi sacrum cibum mens perfida tetigit, & scleratum os, panis sanctificatus intravit parricidulus animus Judae, vim tanti Sacramenti non sustinens, quasi paleam de areâ exufflatus est, & praeceps cucurrit ad proditionem, & pretium, ad desperationem, & laqueum; Cyprian in his Sermon of the Supper of the Lord towards the beginning, thus: as soon as the traitorous mind touched the sacred meat, and the sanctified bread entered the profane mouth: the traitorous mind of judas, being not able to endure, the virtue of so great a Sacrament, was blown away like chaff from the floor; and run headlong to Treason, and the reward of it, to desperation and the halter. Where Cyprian seems to esteem the Sop to be the holiest Sacrament; contrary both to truth and more authority. For he went out immediately after the Sop, joh. 13.30. Augustine in Enarratione in Psal. 10. which with us is Psal. 11. on the third, vers. What hath the righteous done? Christus traditorem suum tanta patientia pertulit, ut ei primum Eucharistiam confectam manibus suis, & o'er suo cammendatam sicut caeteris Apostolis traderet. Christ suffered his betrayer with so great patience, that he vouchsafed to give unto him, as well as unto the rest of his Apostles, the first Eucharist, made by his own hands, and commended by his own mouth. The words o'er suo commendatum, may signify either that Christ praised the holy Eucharist, when he gave it to his Apostles, perhaps preferring it before the Paschall Supper, or their Old Sacrament. Or that Christ himself did first eat, and not by speech only, but by deed, and by his own eating of it, commended it to his Apostles, and among them to judas. Augustinus Epistolâ, 163. De Concordiâ faciendâ Scelerati ab innocentibus fuere tolerati; Traditorem enim suum, qui jam pretium ejus acceperat usque ad ultimum pacis osculum, intra innocentes secum esse perpessus est Christus. The wicked were suffered by the innocent; for Christ suffered his betrayer, who had already received his reward, to be present with him, amongst his innocent Apostles, even so fare forth as that he vouchsafed him the kiss of peace. How did judas go forth then? How gathered he his troops to take Christ? How came he to Christ? How did Christ go to meet him? He proceedeth. Quibus non tacuit, esse inter illos tanti seeleris hominem, & tamen primum Sacramentum corporis, & sanguinis sui, Nondum ipso excluso Communiter Omnibus dedit. From whom he did not conceal; that there was among them so wicked a Villain, as he was; and yet notwithstanding, he gave the first Sacrament of his body and blood generally to all; He (to wit) Judas) being not as yet excluded out of their company. Theophylact, hath a wild crotchet, on Mat. 26. That judas drank Christ's blood: but reserved, and hid the body of the Lord of show it to the jews. This is rather Divinatio quam opinio, saith Barradius, rather a conjecture than an opinion: Somnium potius quam Divinatio, say I, rather a dream than a conjecture. The Prayer. MOst merciful Saviour thou wert very merciful unto judas himself; and didst use many ways to work his conversion: but he did harden his heart the more in evil obstinacy: and played the part of a stout hypocrite, and he would not be reclaimed, but upon his detection, he grew more desperate: O father of all consolation, give me a tender heart and keep it so still, that I may be terrified with thy threaten, and comforted by thy promises, and may effectually be moved with those means, which thou hast ordained to bring me to Salvation. Amen, Amen. CHAP. XIV. The Contents of the foureteenth Chapter. 1. authorities, that Judas did not receive the blessed Eucharist. Hilarius, Rupertus, Innocentius, 3. Theophylact, Tatianus, Alexandrinus, Gregorius Pachymeres, Turrian, Maximus, Ludolphus, Barradius, Beza. The ground of S. Augustine's, and many other famous men's errors concerning this point. Reasons to prove that Judas did receive the blessed Eucharist. 2. The 1. Reason. 3. The 2. Reason. 4. The 3. Reason. 5. The 4. Reason. 6. The 5. Reason. Christ never shown any extraordinary favour to Judas. S. Augustine reports strange courtesies of Christ to Judas. Judas borne at Marmotis, as saith S. Bernard. Much holiness required to the participation of the body and blood of Christ, Notorious wicked men not to be admitted to the Communion. 7. The 6. Reason, when the Devil first entered into Judas. The prime intentions of the Compilers of our Liturgy concerning those words— Lest the Devil enter into you, as he did into judas, etc. Satanentred into Judas at several times. PAR. 1. AUthorities that judas did not receive the Sacred Eucharist are many. Clemens Apostolicarum Constitutionum. 5.13. Mysteria pretiosi corporis, ac sanguinis sui nobis tradidit, absent juda. He gave unto us the Mysteries of his precious body and blood, in the absence of Judas. Hilarius. Canone. 3. in Matth. Sine judan, Pascha (spirituali) accepto Calais, & fracto pane conficitur: dignus enim aeternorum Sacramentorum Communione non erat: The (spiritual Passeover was instituted by the taking of the Cup, and the breaking of the bread without judas, for he was unworthy to be partaker of the everlasting Sacraments. Rupertus in johan. Cap. 6 Diligentius Evangelistarum narratione, doctorumque confideratâ diversitate, citius deprehendi potest, judam huic Sacramento (Corporis & Sanguinis Christi) nequaquam interfuisse. If we will diligently consider, the History of the Evangelists; and diversity (of the opinions) of divers Doctors, we may easily perceive, that judas was not at all at this Sacrament, of the body and blood of Christ; Innocentius tertius; patet quod prius exiit judas, quam Christus traderet Eucharistiam. It is plain to be seen, that judas went forth, before Christ delivered the (blessed) Eucharist. Theophylact. on Mat. 26. citeth others for this opinion; with a good reason annexed. Quidam dicunt quod, egresso Iuda tradidit Dominus Sacramentum aliis Discipulis. Proinde & nos sic facere debemus; & males arcere à Sacramentis. Some say that when judas was gone forth, the Lord delivered the (blessed) Sacrament to his other Disciples. And therefore we also ought to do the like, and to put bacl the wicked from the Sacraments. Tatianus Alexandrinus, placeth judas his Egress, before the Sacred Mystery was consecrated. Gregorius Pachymeres, the Scholiast of Dyonisous Areopagita, Excludit Dominus, & segregat justissimè judam, qui non sanctè Convivio interfuit. The Lord doth exclude and separate judas, and that most justly, because he was not present at the banquet, so holily, and religiously, as he ought to have been. Indeed he imagineth that Christ gave panem, & Vinum mysticum judae & post discessum ejus, Eucharistiam praebuisse Apostolis. Mystical Bread and Wine to judas, and that after his going forth, he gave the (blessed) Eucharist to his Apostles. If he mean the dipped sop, which had in it a Mystery; all this may be granted: and yet our Conclusion is constant from him, that judas partaked not of the Eucharist. Turrian proveth from Dyonisius Areopagita, that judas are not the blessed Sacrament. Maximus an old Greek interpreter of Dionysius Areopagita, expoundeth him, as denying that judas took the Eucharist. But suppose I grant that Dionysius his own words be dubious, yet Pachymeres, Turrian, and Maximus say, Judas was excluded. Ludolphus the Carihusion, Cap. 55. placeth the separation of judas, before the administering of the Sacrament: and Cap. 57 Post egressum judae, after judas, was gone forth, when the clean remained with their cleanser; Christ comforted his Disciples, and made a Sermon unto them full of sweetness, and love: honeyed with heavenly honey, enlightened with light from God. Corruptus ille uter, foras missus fuerat; judas that corrupt vessel, was sent forth, whom Christ knew to be unworthy, etc. Barradius is express, that judas was excluded from the Sacred Body, and Blood of Christ. The worthy Hierome Zanchius, whose Authority may pass for many. Tom. 2. in quartum praeceptum: Lib. 1. pag, 762. truly opineth, that judas his receiving of the holy Eucharist, apertè pugnat cum historia Johannis Evangelii, is clean contrary to S. john's Gospel, and saith expressly, Lucam fecisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his narration that judas his hand was with him on the board. Beza on john 13.30. from the words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, presently went forth, gathereth a good argument, that judas was not at the sacred Supper. Quum igitur non nisi Mensis secundis sublatis, Dominus Sacrosancta sua Mysteria instituerit, Luke 22.20. Since Christ began not his Sacred Supper, till the two former suppers were ended, and since john saith, after the sop, judas went out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, continuò, statim: immediately; they have the more certain opinion, who think judas not present at the Eucharist: why S. Luke saith, as if after Eucharist, Christ said, Luke 22.21. Behold the hand of him, who betrayeth me, is on the board with me: we must explain by the other Evangelists: from whom it is apparent, that this speech was made, before the Eucharist, which was the last close of this feast. The same Beza on Luke 22.21. on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or caeterum But; Apparet omninò ex aliis Evangelistis, it is very plain by the other Evanglists, that the words, But behold, etc. were spoken in Secundis mensis coenae Legalis, at the second course of the Paschall Supper; which being taken away, and Supper being ended, as S. Luke saith in the precedent verse; Christ administered the sacred Supper. Let this authority be noted; for upon the mistaking of those words as spoken after the holy Supper, grew the erroneous opinion of S. Augustine, and many other famous men, That Judas received the Eucharist. PAR. 2. Reason's proving Judas to have eaten the holiest Mysteries are these, First, after the blessed Sacrament, Christ saith: Ecce manus tradentis me est in mensa: Behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is on the table, Luke 22.21. Therefore Judas was present also after the institution, and so received it; for none present at it were excluded. This was the great stumbling-blocke, at which the Divine S. Augustine, and many others both stumbled, and fell. Barradius answereth that S. Luke used a recapitulation. So Innocentius expoundeth it, S. Luke divers times, tied not himself to the order of things done: Apparebit (saith Maldonate) on Matth. 12.43.) non Lucam, sed Matthaeum rerum gestarum ordinem tenuisse. It is apparent that not S. Luke but S. Matthew, followed the order of things as they were done, so is it also in this place. I say, S. Matthew, and S. Mark, have the words in effect before the Consecration. Secondly, take the words as they lie in terminis, and in the History according to the letter; there followeth this notable inconvenience; that after the third Supper the most blessed Eucharist, or Lords Supper; Judas was eating with Christ still at the same Table: which upon mature consideration, no Christian will admit. PAR. 3. IVdas sat down with the twelve, and did eat, of the Cup it is said, Biberunt ex eo omnes, Mark. 14.23, And it was the Eucharistical Cup, as is apparent. If none be excepted, and if we must not limit things, where Scripture doth not, than Judas received the Divine Eucharist. I answer, S. John relateth that Judas went out immediately after, after the sop. But that sop was not the Sacrament, but given before the Sacrament: as followeth, ex ordine gestorum & verhorum Christi, according to the order and deeds of Christ, saith Barradius. Again, the word Omnes, All, must necessarily be restrained ad omnes qui aderant, to all that were present. For shall we think the absent did receive? Then must the 70. Disciples: and all in the house be included, and said to receive it, which is false. Therefore, Omnes, All, involveth only Omnes praesentes. All present. PAR. 4. THirdly, Psal. 109.8. Let another take his office, charge, or Bishopric. But he was made Priest, and Bishop at this Supper; therefore was he present: therefore he received it. I answer, this Prophecy was fulfilled in due time, when judas was dead, and not before. Again, judas was made an Apostle, long before this, Matthew 10.4. He is reckoned as one though the last of the Apostles. And the Apostle-ship comprised within itself, (as being the chiefest and greatest power) all inferior authority. And S. Mathias was not chosen in his room, as he was Priest only, or Bishop only, (the Apostleship being set aside.) But he was chosen the twelfth Apostle, with all its Rites, privileges, and authorities. PAR. 5. FOurthly, none of the Disciples, knew the secret sin of judas, so he was not deprived of the sacred Eucharist, for this cause. I answer, when the sop was given, and taken, all the Disciples knew him to be the Traitor. If not, yet Christ knew him to be unclean, joh. 13.10. and 11. vers. and knew him to be a Devil. joh. 6.70. and 71. verse. Therefore though Christ admitted judas into his company; and to the dying transient Passeover, and to the second Supper, though he washed and wiped his feet; yet it standeth with no likelihood, that our holy Saviour, would admit so sinful a soul, to so heavenly a banquet. If in defence of the Prime part of this objection it be said, that no man at the table knew for what intent Christ said unto him, That thou dost do quickly, john 13.28. Till I come purposely to handle the point, let this answer serve; All the Apostles might both know the traitor expressly, and yet be ignorant, what was the meaning of those words of Christ, for they little imagined, that judas would have betrayed Christ so soon, even that night, and they did then little imagine, that then Christ gave the Devil full power over him. PAR. 6. FIfthly, Christ admitted judas to the Paschall, and to the Common Supper; then why was he not admitted to the Holy Eucharist? I answer, favour hath its latitude: even among us, we admit some, and not others, into our company; and among them, some into our friendship, others into familiarity: to some we show curresies ina means degree, to other in an higher degree. judas was chosen as well as the rest to be an Apostle. I know whom I have chosen, saith Christ, john 13.18. But he is named in the last place, Matth. 10.4. And though he carried the bag, and kept the money, john 13.29. I account that was no favour unto him. It was not in itself, but to his courtuous soul as a snare, and stumbling-block. Nor do you ever find any steps of extraordinary favour of Christ unto him. He singled out sometimes two, and sometimes three, unto especial Services, and to be personal beholders, of his more secret, and Divine affairs. Peter, and john were sent by Christ to prepare the Passeover, Luke 22.8. Peter and john waited on him, John 21.20. He took Peter, james, and john, as witnesses of his transfiguration, Mat. 17.1. He suffered no man to follow him, save Peter, james, and john. Mat. 5.37. When they came to Gethsemani, Christ said to his Disciples, sit ye here while I shall pray; and he taketh with him Peter, james, and John, Mark. 14.32. and 33. verses He never shown judas any such token of familiarity, so fare as Scripture recordeth but kept him at a distance. Yet I confess I have read in S. Augustine Serm. 28. Tom. 10. folio. 276. strange courtesies (if truly undoubted) of Christ to Judas: he delivered him often from death: for judas his sake, he healed his father of Leprosy; his Mother (with whom Judas had been incestuous) of the Palsy: he found him often stealing, and always pardoned him: he most an end honoured judas next to Peter: he gave him his holy body, he kneeled before him; he washed his feet, he kissed him. From whence S. Augustine had all this, he revealeth not: nor is it de fide: any Article of our Christian faith. I come to my old business. S. Bema●d in Serm. 1. de Coenâ Domini, pag. 1347. saith, Judas was borne in a Village called Marmotis, sive malamors. Evil death. Besides, the partaking of the Common Supper, yea and of the Paschall also, required not so sanctified thoughts, so devout a Soul, so pure a spirit, as the receiving of the blessed Eucharist doth; therefore was he admitted to them, but not to this, by reason of his uncleanness. Both the Godly, and the wicked were to eat the Passeover, and after it, the second Common Supper: and many thousand wicked men did eat the Passeover that year; even they, who crucified Christ; and the worse sort of the jews: therefore judas might well be partaker of such a feast, where sinners were frequently participants. The old Passeover was kept, (saith Theophylact on Luke 22.) for their delivery from Egypt, and the blood of the Lamb for the preserving of their first borne. The new Passeover for the Remission of sins, and Sanctified thoughts. But because the betrayer of Christ, was not clean, john 13.11. as being the true hypocrite, washed only outwardly, not inwardly: only bodily not spiritually; and because much holiness is required to the receiving of the Body, and blood of Christ; therefore was he justly excluded from partaking of the substance, though he fed on the type, as other wicked men did also. Any one might come into the Temple; but into the Sanctum Sanctorum or holiest of all, none but the High Priest, nor he without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people, Heb. 9.7. The gifts, and Sacrifices (whereof the Paschall was one, and that a prime Sacrifice) could not make him, that did the Sacrifice, perfect, as pertaining to the Conscience, which carnal Ceremonies were imposed on the jews, until the time of reformation, Heb. 9.10.11. verses. But Jesus was made a surety of a better Testament, Heb. 7.22. And our highpriest is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, verse. 26. Therefore did Christ most justly, when before the most holy Communion, he separated Judas the defiled, from himself, and from his other Sanctified Apostles. Augustine saith excellently, de Civitate 18.49. Christus habuit Judam inter Apostolos; quo malo utens bene— Ecclesiae tolerandorum malorum praebebat exemplum. Christ had judas amongst his Apostles; whom being ill, he using well, hath left an example to his Church, to suffer evil men among them. Let me subsume; but before he came to administer the blessed Sacrament, he removed that sinner of sinners; to give us also an example, not to admit wicked men, (notoriously so known) unto the same. PAR. 7. SIxthly, in our English Liturgy, there is a specious Objection for judas his receiving the blessed Eucharist, in these words, If any of you be a blasphemer of God, an hinderer or slanderer of his word; an adulterer; or be in malice, or envy, or any other grievous crime; bewail your sins, and come not to this holy Table, lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament, the Devil enter into you, as he entered into judas, and fill you full of all iniquity, and bring you to destruction both of body and soul. Whence the inference seems fair, Therefore the Devil entered into judas after the partaking of the holy Sacrament. Therefore he took it. Dr. Mocket translating the words, addeth one word too much, viz. simul, Together, Ne post acceptum illud salutare Sacramentum, simul, intret in eum Satanas, sicut in judam. Lest after the receiving of that saving Sacrament, the Devil Together, enter into him, as he did into judas. But how can it be Together and yet after the Sacrament: neither is the word Together, in the Liturgy, and therefore he did ill to put in the word simul; by which his opinion is discerned, that he thought judas received the blessed Eucharist, and with it the Devil. I answer, the words, As he entredinto judas, make not, and evince not a perfect similitude in every particular, extending to the very circumstances of time, or designing our, at what Supper, this was said, or done, or when the Devil first entered into judas. For the holy compilers of our Liturgy, could not be ignorant, both that judas entertained, and hugged the pretended treason, before he came to Supper; Mark. 14.10. & 11. verse. And S. john speaketh as of a thing passed, even before or at the beginning of the second Supper, job. 13.2. The Devil having now put into the heart of judas Iscariot to betray Christ; which word (now) is not to be taken exclusively, as if it were not in his heart before, or else after, for even before the Passeover, Satan entered into judas, compare Luke 22.3. and 7. And before men receive the consecrated bread and wine: the Devil entereth into sinful men, who have no touch of Repentance. Let others say or think what they will, I will not lay an aspersion of nesciency, in so high a degree, as to say or think; that those holy fathers and framers of our Liturgy, did imagine, that the Sop was the Sacrament, or that Satan entered not into judas till he had taken the Sop, and did enter after he had received the blessed Sacrament, which points may seem to result from the liturgy, if the words be throughly stretched and tentred. Again, I suppose that the liturgical exhortation, is to be taken in sensu diviso, non in sensu composito; attingens rem ipsam, non expresse signans, aut comparans moment● temporum. In a divided not in a compounded sense; touching only the matter itself; not expressly signing out, or comparing the minutes of times. I explain myself thus; The prime intentions of those blessed moderate Saints the makers of our liturgy, were these. First, that unrepentant men should not dare to approach to the Sacred Eucharist. Secondly, that any man continuing in any mortal sin, eateth and drinketh his own damnation. Thirdly, that a preparatory cleansing is necessary, ere a man receive. For the soul of the comparison consisteth in this; that wicked men, in flagrantiâ delictorum, presuming to receive, whilst they lie or sit on the dregs of their sins, shall be plagued and punished, as judas was both in body and soul; by the entrance of the Devil into them. Fourthly, and lastly; that this is to be feared and may come to pass, in the time after the blessed Sacrament, taken by unfaithful, and uncharitable Christians. This is sufficient to be believed; this is sufficient to prepare, warn; admonish and terrify the wicked; this is sufficient to be practised. For God punisheth not, before the sin committed: yea seldom doth God punish, but he giveth a space to repent, between the sin and the punishment. But in my opinion, the liturgy never intended to define the time, when the Devil entered into Judas, (which was more than once, as I proved before) and neither expressed nor meant, that the time of the Devils entering into judas: and the time of his threatened entering into hardened Christians, were just, and exactly the same time, namely, after the receiving of the blessed Sacrament. For the Sop was not the Sacrament, and immediately after it, the devil went in, and judas went out. Heinsius, pag, 465. Veteres notant Dominum hac offâ: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: hoc est, ab scidisse, separasse, divisisse, a Sacro choro, traduxisse quoque judam in potestatem Diaboli: the Ancients do note, that the Lord by that sop, did cut off, separate, and divide judas, from the holy Choir (of the Apostles) and did deliver him over into the power of the devil. This proveth, that judas went out, before the holy Sacrament was administered. And how could he then partake of the Eucharist? Moreover the words (As he entered into judas) may be as a parenthesis, having an entire sense of itself, though the word of similitude reacheth not to identify the times; but only compareth the entrances themselves: and the words are full of Divine sense, though they were read; Come not to this holy Table, lest after the taking of that holy Sacrament, the Devil enter into you; and fill you full of all iniquities. Moreover the liturgy may truly be said, to compare the sins, and following punishments; though it compared not the times; who offend like judas, shall be punished like judas, though the Devil entered into judas, even before the Paschall Supper: and doth enter into Christians, after they have received: the punishment shall be all one, though inflicted at several times. Before the Passeover judas sought how he might conveniently betray him: Mark. 14.11. And before the Passeover judas sought opportunity to betray him, Mat. 26.16. Yea before he trafficked for blood; and before he communed with the chief Priests, and Captains, Satan entered into judas, Luk. 22.3. For he had resolved for the sin before, and then Satan entered. He entered also into him after he had received the sop: and this was at the second Supper. Which of those two extremes did the liturgy intimate? Again, when Satan entered into judas, is no matter of faith: or of any great consequence; nor is so propounded to us in the liturgy. Last of all, the liturgy doth not say, that judas received the Divine food, of the most Sacred Eucharist, nor can the sense of those words be deduced thence. But it saith at the utmost extension, that the devil entered into judas, after he had received the holy Sacrament. Which holy Sacrament may very well be understood of the Passeover; which was an holy Sacrament of the jews: and which judas questionless did take; and after which he took the Sop, at the second Supper, and then the devil entered into him. And yet for all this, judas did not partake of the body and blood of our Lord, which he was justly separated from, because he had sinned, and betrayed the innocent blood, as himself confessed of himself, Mat. 27.4. And this I hold to be the most satisfactory answer, to that specious objection, from the liturgy: the word Sacrament being appliable both to the Jewish and Christian Sacrament: Judas taking the former, the other Disciples taking both. The Prayer. eternal God, in Wisdom great, in greatness powerful, in power infinite in judgement most just, and yet such a gracious God, whose mercy is over all thy works, and therefore much more over all our works; have mercy upon us, deliver us from being the sons of perdition: keep Satan from entering into our hearts: but rather tread him under our feet, and lift us up to thee, and fix our scules on thee, for Christ his sake. Amen. CHAP. XV. The Contents of the fifteenth Chapter. 1. Reason's proving that Judas was not present at the Eucharist. The 1. Reason drawn from Christ's own Example. Examples pierce deeper than words. Legal Conjunction. 2. A 2. Reason drawn from the levitical Leper, Leviticus 14.46. 3. A 3. Reason drawn from the levitical Priests, Ezek. 44.23. 4. The 4. Reason drawn from Christ's purging the Temple, from profane things, Mark 11.11. 5. The 5. Reason drawn from David's example, Psal. 26. 6. The 6. Reason, judas a Devil. john 6.70. 7. The 7. Reason drawn from 1 Corinth. 10.20.21. The Cup of the Lord and the cup of Devil's opposite. 8. The 8. Reason drawn from Christ's washing the Apostles feet, john 13.2. The Schoole-mens opinion. 9 The 9 Reason drawn from, Heb. 10.26. 10. The 10. Reason, from judas his being excluded from Grace, at the end of the second Supper. The fourth General point. 11. The Subsequent or Concomitant occurrences after the Traitor's detection. The 1. Occurrence, Satan's entering into Judas. When Satan entered into judas. How Satan entered into judas. S. Augustine saith Affectu tantum & Voluntate. Ludolphus. Essentially Not into his Soul. But into his Body. Tolet not Corporally; but taking a quiet possession of him. Theophylact: Occupavit Cor ejus. Cyrill: praecipitem egit. Origen: Egit ut Ascensor equum. Item. judas totum Satanam suscepit in se: After the Sop. 12. How judas was tempted: Temptations are either 1. Ascendentes Inward. 2. Obrepentes Outward. 3. Immissae Darted in by Satan himself. 13. Three Conclusions 1. Conclusion, the Temptations of the world are several from the Devils. Three kinds of Tempter's 1. The World. 2. The Flesh. 3. The Devil. 2. Conclusion, The temptations hath 3. degrees 1. Beginning. 2. Proceeding. 3. Consummation. Or thus, Consider 1. The Primitive Motion. 2. The Assisting Commotion. 3. The Plenary Agreeing. Or thus, 1. Suggestion. 2. Delight. 3. Pleasure. 3. Conclusion. The Devil is the Author and Cause of all, and every temptation. The Devil a tempter. The World, and Flesh the Devil's Instruments. 14. How the temptations of the Devil be known: from the temptations of the World. Flesh. 15. Satan's temptations are Many. Manifold. Which temptations are grievous, and fiery: Which temptation is the worst, and most dangerous? How the World Flesh Satan tempteth. The same sin may be of the World. Flesh. Devil. 16. The Creatures of God tempt us not primarily, but by casualty: the stars, and heavenly influences tempt no man to sin, No more does any earthly thing in its own Nature. What temptations be from Satan: the variety of Satan's Temptations. 17. All men have been Tempted, even the Spiritual: Not Christ himself, nor his Apostles free from Temptations. The manner of Satan's Temptations. 18. Satan may enter into a man often times. judas his state after Satan's second entrance into him. PARAGRAPH. 1. THe Reasons also hold fairly, that judas was not present at the Eucharist. First, whatsoever the Lord commanded, himself fulfilled; for Act. 1.1. Christ began both to do, and teach. His first teaching was his doing: no teaching is compared to the first practising: Examples pierce deeper than words: he was first baptised by john, before either he baptised and, or gave authority to his Disciples, or Apostles that they should baptise any. But the Lord commanded the giving of holy things to holy people only; when he did say; Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls before swine, Mat. 7.6. Therefore he himself gave not the holy Sacrament unto Judas. PAR. 2. SEcondly, Levit. 13.46. The Leper is unclean, he shall dwell alone, without the Camp shall his habitation be. Numb. 5.2. Put out of the Camp every Leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead: accordingly, Azariah, though he were a King, yet because he was a Leper, he dwelled in a several house, 2 King. 15.5. And his Kingdom was ruled by his son jotham, as followeth. If so strict a Command was to separate such as had only bodily infirmities, and such sicknesses as are Natural; even though they were no notorious sinners: we may not imagine, that judas, (whose sin was above all bodily, and ghostly spots) was admitted to the most Holy of Holies. PAR. 3. THirdly, Ezech. 44.23. The Priests, the Levites, the Sons of Zadock, that kept the charge of my Sanctuary, shall come near to my Table, to minister unto me; they shall teach my people, the difference between the holy and profane, and cause men to discern between the unclean and the clean. Therefore much more did Christ, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) The Minister of holy things, and the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and not Man, Heb. 8.2.) By the separation of judas, teach the Apostles, and all the world, the differences between the holy and profane; between the holy Apostles, and profane judas; and caused men to discern between the unclean, and the clean; when he said, Ye are clean but not all, not judas the traitor, john 13.10. and 11. verses, and therefore he sent him forth suddenly, That thou dost do quickly: and judas went out immediately, judas being as it were excommunicated and gone, there followed the Most Sacred Supper. PAR. 4. FOurthly, did Christ when he came into the Temple look round about all things; Mark. 11.11. Did Christ cast out all them who bought and sold in the Temple, and overthrow the Tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold Doves, Mat. 21.12? Did Christ (more than ever he did before) make a scourge of small cords, and drive the prophaners of the Temple, all of them out of the Temple, and the sheep and the Oxen, joh. 2.15? Was Christ so zealous for the purification of the material Temple; and shall we not think he did look round about, before he admitted any to his most sacred Table: In this circumspection he saw judas, and cast him out. They who bought, and sold in the Temple, are held by divers, to have meant well; and to prepare the businesses the better, for the sooner and better accommoding of the sacrifices, for the service of the Temple; yet did Christ, cast out all these. Now let any man say, if he can, that Christ admitted judas, to better things than the Temple, even to his own sacred body and blood, that judas who had no intentions, even judas, whom the devil before had entered into, even Judas, who had sold innocent humane blood: or rather, the blood of the Son of God. Would Christ suffer the first institution of his last Divine Supper, to be polluted, by the presence of a Traitor? Or did judas eat of that body, which he murdered? Or drink of that blood which he caused to be shed? — Procul, o proculite profani. Away, away, fare hence departed, Each one that harbours a profane heart. Profane judas was executed. PAR. 5. FIfthly, I have not sat with vain persons; neither will I go in with dissemblers: I have hated the Congregation of evil doers. Gather not my soul with sinners, nor my life with bloody men; in whose hands is mischief, and their right hand is full of bribes, Psal. 26.4.5.9.10. verses. I will wash my hands in innocency; and so will I compass thy Altar, O Lord, ver, 6. Shall judas, who washed his hands, and bathed his soul in blood, partake of Christ, who is our Altar? Or would Christ administer the blessed Sacrament to judas, who was a vain person; a dissembler: an hated evil-doer; a sinner, a bloody sinner; in whose hands were mischief and bribes? fare was it from him. PARA. 6. SIxthly, Have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is a Devil? And he spoke of judas Iscariot, joh. 6.70. But Christ would never suffer a devil to be partaker of the blessed Sacrament of his body and blood. Therefore before he administered that, he separated judas Iscariot. Suppose the word Devil be taken for the instrument, and agent of Satan: and not the proper name of him, whom we call the devil Antonimastieè, figuratively: grant it also that judas is called a devil, because he imitated the works of the devil, joh. 7.44. Ye are of your father the devil: the lusts of your father you will do; he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth: yet we shall derogate from the purity of the first institution to imagine that Christ would, or did admit judas to taste of the super-coelestial Manna, even while judas had the thoughts of murder in his soul. PAR. 7. SEventhly, 1 Cor. 10.20, 21. verses. I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils; ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord, and the Cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lords Table, and the Table of devils. God, and Satan, have several, distinct, both Cups, and Tables opposite one to the other. Every man receiveth, either the one, or the other; none partaketh both. He, who doth partake one, doth not, may not, cannot (saith the Apostle) partake of the other, There is a wall of partition, of separation, between those two Tables. judas was discarded, ere they began to take the Lords Supper, at the Lords most sacred Table. See the Schoolman's opinion, concerning Judas his eating, or not eating. PAR. 8. EIghtly, Maldonate on john 13.2. saith, Propteria pedes discipulorum lavit, ut externe illo doceret Symbolo, non debere homines impuros, & illotos, ad sumendam sacrosanctam, ac divinam Eucharistiam accedere. Christ did therefore wash his Disciples feet, that by that external sign, he might teach us, that impure, and unwashed men ought not to be admitted to the participation of the sacred and Divine Encharist. And when all Christ's washing and wiping, made not judas clean, is there any likelihood, Christ would admit, the defiled Traitor, to the most pure Supper of his Body and Blood? PAR. 9 NInthly, Heb. 10.26. If we sinne wilfully, after we have received the knowledge of the truth (as never man after so much knowledge sinned so wilfully as judas did) there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin., but a certain fearful looking for of judgement and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries, ver. 27. Therefore the holy Sacrament being a means of remission of sins, remained not for judas to take. PAR. 10. TEnthly, and lastly, Since Christ said, What thou dost, do quickly; by which words, he did, as it were bid him be gone before Grace was ended for the common Supper; and that the graceless Traitor went out immediately; unless he came bacl again presently, which could not be, because he went to the High Priests, and gathered a band of men, he could not possibly be, at the participation of the holy Eucharist. PAR. 11. The fourth General point. The 5. Subsequent Occurrences, after the Traitor's detection. I am now come to the last point of my Method, namely the subsequent Occurrences, after the Traitor's Detection, and they aptly spread themselves, into these several branches. 1. Satan's entrance into judas. After the Sop, Satan entered into him, ver. 27. 2. Christ's sentence of separation of judas. That thou dost do quickly, ibidem. 3. The Apostles Nesciency. 4. Their misunderstanding of Christ's words, vers. 28, 29. 5. Judas his egress, ver. 30. 6. The giving of thanks at the end of the second Supper, according to the usual fashion of the jews in those days. 7. Cum libamine vini. 8. Et Psalmodiâ, Concerning the first point, viz. Satan's entering into judas. Augustine Sermone 28. adfratres in Erêmo. Christus judae panem intinctum porrigere voluit, ut cor intinctum veneno significaret— Omnino (fratres) Satanas ante buccellam, cor Judae intraverat, sed affectu, & voluntate tantum. Christ would therefore deliver the Bread (or Sop) that thereby, he might intimate (unto us) that the heart of judas was dipped in poison. Believe it (brethren) that Satan was entered into the heart of judas, before the Sop; but conceive it in desire, and will, only. This distinction is more nice, than pithy: for he was in him before, Effectu, & opere really, and indeed; when he had compounded to betray Christ; Post buccellamintravit Satanas, effectu, & opere. After the Sop, Satan entered into him really, and indeed. And it may also be truly said, that before the Sop, Satan entered into judas, effectu, & opere, really, and indeed. The devil now put into the heart of judas to betray Christ, joh. 13.2. but this was before the giving of the Sop. More especially, Luke 22.8. Satan entered into judas: before he communed with the High-Priests, before they came to the Paschall Supper. Ludolphus Carthusianus 2. Part. cap. 52. Satan entered, not forcing the door, but finding it wide open; not by his Essence, or essentially, gliding, or sliding into judas his soul. For so, (according to Augustine) God alone, who made the soul, entereth into it: but suggesting to judas, the selling, and betraying of Christ, he entered into him, by the effect of that suggestion: and after the Sop, subjugating judas to his servitude, by the effect of a more full possession. The same Ludolphus, cap. 55. Satan entereth into man's body essentially, as in the possessed with devils; God alone entereth into the soul; and essentially getteth into the mind; for the soul hath no dimensions of quantity, that any thing can be said to be in it, as contained within those dimensions; and so nothing can be in it, but that which gives it his being; and that is there by its virtue: but where God's virtue is, there is his Essence: both of them are all one in him; therefore God alone is essentially in the soul; for he alone filleth the nature, or substance, by him created: yet Satan is said to creep into men's minds, per affectum, & effectum malitie; by affecting of malice, and by effecting of it; in as much as man is seduced by him, and proceedeth to commit the evil which Satan suggesteth. Tolet saith, that Satan did not enter corporally into judas; as he doth into Damoniacks nor to put a new, more ill thoughts into him; for before he consented to those temptations. I answer, it seemeth to me, Satan possessed his very body, and that fully after the Sop; and that Satan hurried him at his pleasure: he was led captive according to Satan's own will. I doubt not, but Satan did strengthen the old suggestions; and withal put fresh, and new temptations into his soul, for he caused him to hang himself. But (saith Tolet) judas taking high displeasure to be revealed to be the Traitor, he opened his whole heart to Satan, and Satan entered into him, taking a firm and quiet possession of him. For man sinneth more licentiously, when he knoweth, that the sin which he committed secretly, is known publicly: Per scelera simper sceleribus tutum est iter, said a wicked one: Sin once known is made more sinful. Theophylact, on john 13. saith Satan; Occupavit cor ejus; sicut aliud est percutere quempiam manu foris; & aliud est, confodere gladio viscera. Satan took full possession of his heart; as it is one thing to give a man a box on the ear, and another thing to thrust him thorough with a sword. Whilst judas was one of the holy company of the Apostles, Satan had not so free access unto him; when Christ did divide, and separate him; then Satan invaded him, as forsaken of the Lord: Et ingressus est interiora cordis ejus, & occupavit animam ejus. And he entered into his very heart, and took quiet possession of his soul. Cyrill in johannem 9.19. Timens Diabolus (ut credo) ne morando locus poenitentiae detur— judam magnâ praecipitem agit celeritate, & cap. 17. judas non ut consiliatorem, sed ut cogitationum suarum Dominum, in cord Diabolum retinet. The Devil (as I suppose) fearing lest by delay judas should find Repentance, drove him on furiously. And judas entertained the devil, not as a Counsellor, but as a commander of his cogitations. Origen in Exodi cap. 15. Homiliâ sextâ, pag. 75. Tomiprimi, on, Equum & ascensorem projecit in Mare. They are horses, upon whom the Devil and his Angels do ride— Post buccellam ascensor judae factus est Satanas: after the Sop, the devil became judas his rider— Omnes mali habens ascensores, quibus aguntur, Angelos malos; & ideo feroces sunt. All evil men have evil Angels for their riders, by whom they are managed, at their pleasure; and that's the reason, why they become so furious. Origen de principiis seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 3. in the Tract. de contrariis potestatibus; judas, cum jam Diabolus misisset in cor ejus ut traderet Christum, postea etiam totum Satanam suscepit in se. judas, after the devil had put into his heart to betray Christ, received him on his back, with a full career; namely, after the Sop. PAR. 12. BUt leaving other men's opinions, let me say somewhat of mine own. The manner how judas was wrought to be the Traitor, may seem to be this. Temptations are of divers sorts. 1. Ascendemes, Luke 24.38. Why do thoughts ascend, or rise in your hearts; these are inward. 2. Obrepentes, Creeping upon us, from the creatures, and they are outward: called Mendaces vanitates, Lying vanities, jonah, 2.8. which by their false colours; insinuate themselves into our favour. 3. Immissae; darted in by Satan himself. Satan injecit se, in cor judae; as it is in the Syriac, Satan did as 'twere dart himself into the heart of judas. From judas his foul, and corrupt heart did arise, and ascend many confused cogitations of the sinful betraying of his Master. After them came creeping into his graceless soul, Desire of gain, and faultfinding, with the loss of the rich, and costly ointment; ambition to be in good esteem with the chief Priests, and the Rulers of the people, by doing them such service, as no man else would do; and these, and other circum-repent temptations found an open entrance, and pleasing entertainment in him. In the third place, Satan confirmeth all the precedent evils of sin by his own proper suggestions: Every one (Veluti contorta phalarica— as an engine of war, carrying wild-sire in it, where with timber-works were burned) was violently hurled into each corner of his heart. The devil having put into the heart of judas to betray Christ, joh. 13.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Cum diabolus jam immisisset in cor Judae; as both the Vulgar, and Beza hath it, when the devil had now as it were darted himself into, or taken violent possession of the heart of judas; the words (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) may very well signify, both passed and present suggestions. These were Immissae or Contortae tentationes, with speedy violence, like fiery darts, inflamed his soul unto such a wickedness, as man durst not own, but as animated by Satan. And to the furious instruments of war, may the word Immissae allude: as the Apostle also more evidently seemeth to do, Ephes. 6.16. when he saith, That by the shield of faith, we may be able to quench all the fiery darts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Maligni illius (saith Beza) of the wicked one: Nequissinii illius, as it is in the vulgar, of that most wicked one. If our last Translation had expressed the name of the devil, no exception could be taken; if a man look up to the 11. and 12. verses. Or else the Metaphor in the words. Satan put it, or cast it, or thrust it, into the heart of judas, may be taken from the command of God, that whatsoever touched the border of the Mountain, were he man or beast, he should surely be stoned, or shot thorough, Exod. 19.12. and 13. verses; which the Apostle, Heb. 12.20. divinely varieth; He shall be thrust thorough with a dart. So was judas his heart transpierced by Satan. PAR. 13. LEt me insert a little rag of a Sermon, which I made before the most learned, and holy Prelate, our right reverend Diocoesan, now Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells, concerning these temptations. I take three Conclusions as granted; The first Conclusion presupposed, as a known truth, is, That the temptations of the world, are sometimes several temptations, from those of Satan. If God withheld Satan from tempting of a man; yet must we be also unspotted of the world, james 1.27. For there are pollutions of the world, 2. Pet. 2.20. Beware of men (saith Christ) Matth. 10.17. well expounded by S. Paul, Phil. 2.3. Beware of evil workers. Lastly, the ranking of our enemies, under the distinct Ensigns of the Flesh, the World, and the Devil shows there are divers, and divided temptations. Sunt trio qua tentant hominem, mundus, Caro, Daemon, Three things there are which do tempt man, The world, the flesh, and old Satan. This proves the second truth also, which I assumed as granted; That the Temptations of the flesh, are oftentimes several from the assaults of the devil. If there were no devil at all (saith Origen) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, secundo; we yet should find unlawful desires, and appetites; The flesh would lust against the spirit, james 4.1. Wars and fightings come even of your lusts, that war in your members: wars upon wars; and james 1.14. Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lusts and enticed; which temptation, is there declared, by these three degrees; the Beginning, the Procedure, and the Consummation. Or thus; the Primitive Motion, the Assisting Commotion (Mota facilius commoventur) when things are once moved, they move the faster.) The Plenary agreeing, begetting death. S. Augustine varieth the phrases, though not the sense, de Genes. contra manicheos, 2.14. that the temptation of the flesh, is accomplished, by Suggestion, Delight, and Pleasure. The third Conclusion presumed, as undeniable, is this; The devil may be said, to be author, and cause of all, and every temptation, nor directly, but indirectly, not always immediately, but principally, and occasionally; Since we have never known, the lusts of the flesh; or the baits of the world, if he had not been. I am loath to go so fare as Hierom, on that of the Psalmograph, Eschew evil, and do good; who saith; Omnia mala ab instinctu diaboli procedunt; sicut bona ab instinctu Dei; All evil proceeds from the instinct of the devil as all good from the inspiration of God; for from God flow all graces directly: yet Satan, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: most properly is called the Tempter, Matth. 4. and is meant, where it is said; Lest the Tempertempt you, 1 Thes. 3.5. He begat in mankind, a disposition to sin, as a Cleaver of wood prepareth it for burning. He ministereth present matter, and concurreth in most temptations, as the Fueller layeth sticks upon the fire, and bloweth the coals, using both the World, and the Flesh, as his instruments, to set us, in Comburo (as the Spaniard phrazeth it) and to seduce us. In which regard, when we overcome the World, or the Flesh, we may be said in a sort to resist the devil; and yet he hath peculiar Temptations, by us to be opposed, Resist the devil, and he will fly from you. So much for the three Conclusions. PAR. 14. THe Question is, How shall we know the Temptations of the Devil, from the temptations of the World, and the Flesh? Some think they cannot be known. I never read them distinguished aptly enough. I wish men would rather labour to avoid all: yet I answer; The Obrepentes, or creeping Temptations, are more slow; The Ascendentes, or arising Temptations more inward, and more natural, yet more sinful; as Selfe-sowne, Selfe-growne, in the corrupt mass of Mankind. The third sort are more quick, more sharp, or less thought of: and these proceed from Satan more immediately. Once again thus; The temptations of the World, properly are, when men and women are drawn unto sin, by other folk's flatter, persuasions, threats, fashions, evil examples, or customs of the world, because of these scandals. The temptations of the Flesh, are not only carnal lusts, but all inordinate concupiscence of any worldly things. The Apostle reckoneth, even some spiritual offences among the sins of the flesh, Gal. 5.19. For the concupiscence, even of the Regenerate, hath its seat; not in the sensitive appetite, so much, as in the reasonable soul. PAR. 15. THe temptations of Satan are many: He hath Mille nocendi arts; and we may be sure, those are his, which do most cunningly, and fiercely tempt us; for there is no head to the head of the Serpent; no cunning to his cunning; his strength is in his loins, job 40.16. There is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the working of Satan, 2 Thes. 2.9. He spreadeth sharpe-pointing things upon the mire, Job 41.30. And we are that mire, or earth, upon earth, There is not his like, Job 41.33. aut potestate, aut nequitiâ; either in power, or in malice; saith Nicetas, whither his temptations be in ward, or ourward; whither he works by himself; or works by the world; or use our own flesh against us. Amongst Temptations, those are very grievous, and fiery, when internis oppugnans, de nostro; contra nos roboratur; when Satan worketh with our lusts, is strengthened by our own corruption fighteth against us, with our own weapons. But the most dangerous, and worst temptation of all, is, when the world allureth; when the flesh concurreth; when Satan spurreth on; and all three, junctis umbonibus factâ testudini; with might and main, fight against us; for the triple cord will scarce be broken: and he is a rare man, that can withsland all three. Yet once more, the world tempteth outwardly, the flesh inwardly, respectu fomitis, for Matth. 15.19. Out of the heart proceed (not only) evil thoughts, but, false witnesses, blasphemies, and the defiling sinfulness of the mouth, yea thefts, murders, and other abominations. The works of the hands; Satan tempteth, both inwardly, and outwardly; jointly, and severally; All is fish that comes to his net: the same sin is Earthly (that is of the world) Sensual (and that is of the flesh;) Devilish (that is from Satan) James 3.15. I will not end this point yet. PAR. 16. THe creatures of God, (quatenus tales, as they are mere creatures) are good and tempt us not; yea cannot tempt us. If they be stumbling-blockes to the souls of men, and a snare-trappe or scandal; it is to the unwise, Wisdom 14.11. God intendeth not primarily, it is by casualty, and the depravation of our nature: the stars, and the celestial Influences, tempt no man to sin; if they work on our bodily humours; and if man will be inclined (for his will cannot be forced; and the inclination may be bend contrarily) it is a branch of the fleshly temptation; meat, drink, beauty, silver, and gold, have not inwardly, nor outwardly, in their own nature, any tempting quality; the immoderate desire, or use, of these, are boughs growing from a fleshly root. Actus activorum sunt in dispositione patientis; every thing is, as it is taken: If they were such, we may choose, whither they shall work upon us, to our hurt; we may use them without sin. A beaten soldier, an holy resolved man will not stoop to such lures. The continual provocation; as well as the perseverance, in any sin, hath his heat, or vigour, renewed from Hell, or Satan. I conclude summarily; the sudden, cunningest, fiercest, strongest, lastingest temptations, are from Satan. More concerning the temptations of Satan; Cyprian in his Sermon, de Zelo, & livore, excellently handleth divers temptations. Augustine in his narration, on the 106. Psalm, reckoneth up other sorts: the first of Error; the second of Difficulty, to overcome our lusts. The third of tedious Dullness; all cannot be numbered in a small time. He tempts us in our meat, drink, sleep, in body, and soul; in our thoughts, words, and actions. PAR. 17. WHo dares say, he was never tempted, as he was in his devotion? He tempteth us in our best endeavours; he buffeteth Saint Paul; would winnow the Apostles; the very spiritual man must consider, he may be tempted, Gal. 6.1. They of whom the world was not worthy were tempted, Heb. 11.37. The first Adam tempted, and over-tempted; the second Adam vehemently tempted: He was in all points tempted, like as we are, Heb. 4.15. Satan hindered the Apostles from doing good, 1 Thes. 2.18. He put into the heart of judas, and all wicked men, to do evil; He walketh about seeking whom he may devour, 1 Pet. 5.8. And this, as a roaring Lyon. The roaring of the Lion, both proveth he hath a prey, Amos 3.4. and yet in the word Roaring, is also employed, hunger, and earnest desire, as in Peter; and Esay 5.29. They shall roar, and lay hold on prey; and the words (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) denote his cunning sedulity. By being a Lying spirit, he drew Ahab into error: He tempted Ananias, and Saphire, To lie to the holy Ghost: As a hunter he layeth his snares, 1 Tim. 3.7. Every temptation is a snare, 1 Tim. 6.9. Rosist the wiles of the Devil. Ephes. 6.11. He tempteth the out ward senses, by presenting unto them exterior sensible objects; sometimes real, sometimes illusive, bringing into error, and deception, our very senses; the touchstone of natural verities. Sometimes he disturbeth the Organs, of the outward senses, inwardly, that the sensible objects appear other than they are; accordingly as it is in mad men: he tempteth the Vegetative saculties, and the sensitive, both appetitive and apprehensive powers, by stirring the homors, residing in their bodily Organs; and working on the virall Spirits, in which the sensible species are contained; semblably as is done in our sleep. He tempteth the understanding, suggesting some sensible signs, or rather shadows of the truth to be understood; that is, framing either inward phantasms, or outward shapes, the breeders of fantasies; hence the Intellect glideth into an error, and the Will is directly seduced by the inveigling suggestion. PAR. 18. YEt for all this, somewhat more may be said, concerning Satan's temptations of judas: for the Scripture saith, Satan entered into judas, and that more than once. For it is the fashion of the Evil spirits, to enter into their possessed; and to go out; and then to get in again. Wherefore Mark. 9.25. Christ saith, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him: and enter no more into him. But Satan entered into Judas, and came forth; and reentered into him. First, Luke 22.3. Namely at the consultation of the chief Priests, and Scribes; when they sought how they might kill Christ, vers. 2. And this was two days before the feast of the , Mat. 26.2. and 3. verses. This entrance was more effectual to judas his hurt, than Satan's common temptations: yet here Satan stayed but a while; and went forth again out of him, playing with him as a Cat playeth with a Mouse; as an Angler doth with a fish; on which the hook hath fastened. For if he had not gone forth, some way, it would never have been said: After the Sop, Satan entered into him, John 13.27. Behold a second entrance; and that more forcible than the first. And now it seemeth to me, that Christ prophesied of judas, and the words were certainly exemplified, and actuated by judas, or upon him, which Christ spoke, Mat. 12.43. etc. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest and finding none: then he saith, I will return into my house, from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty swept and garnished: then goeth he and taketh with himself, seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last stare of that man is worse than the beginning. Beza saith, that the last words seem to him to be very obscure: let us apply them to judas, and they are plain enough: It is true that Christ vers. 45. Even so shall it be also to this wicked generation, which Prophecy concerning the jews, or the sinful men of that generation, excludeth not judas, from being here foreprophecyed of, but rather includeth him: Christ speaketh principally of one man, When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man: and the last state of that man is worse than the first: What particular man should he point at, if not at judas? though like unto judas; the jews of that generation were called the Synagogue of Satan, Revel. 2.9. Augustine Tractatu 62. in johannem. Thus, Intravit Satanas post buccellam in Traditorem, ut sibi jam traditum plenius possideret: in quem prius intraverat, ut deciperet. Satan entered into the Traitor, after the Sop, that he might take more full possession of him, that was now delivered unto him; into whom he had formerly entered, that he might deceive him. And again, Intravit nunc Satanas in judam, non ad hoc, ut dienum tentaret, sedut proprium possideret. Satan now entered into judas; not that he might tempt him as a stranger, but to take possession of him, as of his own proper goods. He was as other people, possessed with, and by the evil Spirit. I conclude, when Satan entered first into judas, he had a great hand upon him; and overruled him; yet Satan's power was stinted and confined, and limited. At the second entrance, judas was wholly given over to Satan, soul and body; traditus ei ut inemendabilis: he was delivered over unto him, as one past all hope of amendment, saith The ophylact, traditus ei, ut tortori, ut carnifici, say I; he was delivered over unto him, as to a tormentor, hangman, or jailor: nor did he come out of him till he had brought judas to hang himself; but hurried him (as a Coach is drawn by wild horses) to the Gallows, and to hell. julius Firmicus 8.19. expresseth a Natural death thus; sua morte morietur: he died a natural death: and the violent and sudden death, of the conspirators against julius Caesar, Suetonius describeth in the end of julius his life in this sort. Nemo eorum sua morte defunctus est. None of them died a natural death: among violent deaths, there are few so bad, and desperate as the hanging of one's self. For in most other deprivations of life, either by sword or poison, or drowning, or the like, many thoughts of repentance have interceded, and doubtless many a sinful soul, hath been truly sorry and contrite, and reconciled to God after a fatal blow, or inter pontem & fontem; between the bridge and the river, and the like; but he who hangeth himself, is so suddenly strangled, and his breath stopped, that he cannot call upon God, after the deed done, and hath not time to have a repenting heart, but the end of his life is the beginning of his damnation, and is taken in flagrantia facti; in the height of his unrepentable sin, especially if the knot hit right enough. Me thinks I see Judas after the taking of the sop, with hollow eyes, ghastly countenance, trembling joints, unsteady motions, overcome with covetousness, fleshed with malice, clothed with darkness, and led by the Prince of darkness, posting to the house of the chief Priests, and of the Pharisees, and Captain of the band, that he might and did betray his Lord and Master. So did that Monster of men that Terrae odium; hatred of the world, walk forward, and backward, from the feasting to the High'st Priests, and from them to the Garden. The Prayer. O Lord God, I prostrate my Soul and body before thee, humbly imploring thee that thou wouldst send thy light, and truth before me: oh let them lead me and bring me unto thy holy mountain, and to thy Tabernacle: Let not Satan trip me up, nor cast me down; nor lead me into temptation; not allure me into error; for Christ Jesus his blessed merits and meditation. Amen. CHAP. XVI. The Contents of the sixeteenth Chapter. 1. Christ's sentence of separation of Judas, That thou dost, do quickly: Wither those words were spoken to the Devil, or to Judas. Origen Cyrill Ambrose thinks they were spoken Either to the Devil, or to judas. Augustine saith it was Verbum Non Imperantis sed Exprobrantis. The Apostles thought them spoken to judas. 2. The Apostles nesciency Christ himself knew judas also knew And some think S. john knew Wherefore Christ spoke these words, That thou dost, do quickly. 3. The Apostles Misunder standing Christ's words. The words were spoken not privately, but openly. 4. Christ needed nothing: for Himself. his Apostles. Christ would have the Church plentifully provided of temporals. 5. Cook's Reports censured. judas carried the bag. The money in the bag to be employed for Christ. Apostles. Poor. 6. judas his speedy Egress. His receiving the Sop imports Oral manducation. 7. Lanterns, and torches import Outward light. Inward darkness. judas his Egress at night. At what hour of the Night judas went forth. Selneccerus his Distribution of the Night-watches. What was done in every several watch. Selneccerus censured. The crowing of the Cock about what hour of the night. 8. Two questions concerning this Cocke-crowing. 1. Question, Whether this Cock did crow Naturally or by Divine Motion. Christ's look upon Peter was operative, and Virtuous, Corporal and Spiritual. S. Augustine censured. Peter's three denials, when, and where. 9.2. Question concerning this Cock-crowing. How the different Relations of the several Evangelists may be reconciled. Here are handled 4. Quaeres. 1. Quaere, whether Christ said as S. Mark or as S. Matthew and S. Luke have it. 10. The 2. Quaere, whether S. Peter's threefold denial was accomplished, before the Cock crowed at all, or, before it crowed twice. 11. The 3. Quaere: How oft S. Peter was questioned, or by others affirmed to be Christ's Disciple. 12. The fourth Quaere: How many times Peter denied Christ. 13. Answer to the 1. Quaere. 14. Answer to the 2. Quaere. 15. Answer to the 3. Quaere. Cajetan thinks S. Peter was 7. times examined: thrice by Women, four times by men. 16. Answer to the fourth Quaere. Cajetans' frivolous objection. 17. Three sorts of people questioned Peter. Peter's threefold denial, and the manner thereof. 18. The Divers Relations of the Evangelists reconciled. 19 The Paschall Supper lasted about 1. quarter of an hour. The Common Supper lasted about 3. quarters of an hour. All the levitical Ceremonies performed, between 6. and 7. a clock at Night. PARAGRAPH. I. The second Occurrance of the fourth General. I Am now come to Christ's Sentence and separation of judas. That thou dost, do quickly. Some there are indeed, who do question, whether these words were spoken to the Devil, or to judas: the Greek, Latin, and English words will admit both, or either. Origen in Evangelium Johannis: pag. 419. Tom. 33. Vel judae, vel Satanae, potest dixisse Dominus; Quod facis, fac ocyùs: Those words of the Lord when he said; That thou dost do quickly, might be spoken either to judas or to the Devil. Cyrill in Evangelium johannis: Lib. 9.17. capite, saith; Many think it unfit, that Judas who before was many ways dehorted, should now be animated, by this speech: That thou dost do Quickly: Or, why doth he incite judas, who was inflamed of himself, and needed good counsel, rather to quench the fire? But, saith cyril, If we profoundly, and diligently consider it, the speech is not incongruous; for Satan had entered into judas his heart, and Christ spoke them to Satan; That thou dost do quickly: (To betray me) it is thy work which thou delightest to do always; do it quickly, O Satan. Thou hast slain the Prophets; entered into the hearts of the jews; stoned Gods Messengers; and spared none. I know thou canst not be quiet; wherefore what thou wast wont to do, now do. Unto the Devil who knew not the great good which should come to mankind, by the passion of Christ; who was ignorant that Christ's Cross should break the Devil's back, and power; unto him did Christ say; That thou dost do quickly: and fit it was that Christ who knew the great and many benefits, which would redound unto mankind by his precious death, and was a wellwisher of our Salvation, should hasten the time, and spur on Satan, to the accomplishment of his cursed designs: That thou dost do quickly: so much in effect, Cyrill. Ambrose lib. 2. de Cain, & Abel, saith, the words were spoken to judas; and it was Sententia praecipientis, non ut malum faceret, sed ut a consortio suo recederet. It was the sentence of one who did command him, not to commit evil, but to departed out of his Company. And because he could not be now with Christ, who was with the Devil, he had him be gone quickly. judas by all likelihood was going away from Christ of his own accord, so soon as he saw himself fully descried; the motion of him seemed slow; and therefore Christ said; That thou dost (in the present tense) do quickly. And Augustine in Tract. 62. in johan. saith; that Christ commanded not the evil; but foretold evil to judas, good to us. The distinction of Augustine; is not so quick, vivid, and punctual, as that of Ambrose. Or thus; illud verbum (fac citiùs) non imperantis est, neque consulentis, sed exprobrantis, & Revocantis ad emendationem: that saying (That thou dost do quickly) is not the saying of one, that commandeth, or adviseth, but of one that upbraideth, and calls to amendment of life, as Mat. 23.32. Fill ye up the measure of your fathers: Likewise judges 10.14. Go, and cry unto the Gods which ye have chosen, let them deliver you in the time of tribulation. So, 1 King. 18.25. Call on the name of your Gods, saith Eliah: so, Eccles. 11.9. Rojoyce (O young man) in thy youth, and let thy heart cheer thee, in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thy heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: yet the words immediately following show, it was no sad and serious counsel, but an Ironical exprobration, and holy Revocation; But know thou that for all these things; God will bring thee to judgement. This is a most apparent truth, that some of the Apostles, believed it to be spoken to judas only; and not to the Devil: for some of them thought, because judas had the bag, that jesus had said unto him; buy such things as we have need of against the feast: or that he should give something to the poor; john 13.29. which cannot be applied to Satan. Quod facis fac cito, O verbum libentius parati ad passionem, quam irati ad vindictam: Augustine Tract. 62. in johannem. That thou dost do quickly; O word of one more willingly prepared for his passion, than provided to revenge! O verbum non tam poenam exprimens venditoris, quam mercedem significans proditoris: O word that doth not so much express the punishment of the seller; as it doth intimate the reward of the redeemer, saith the same, S. Augustine, ibidem. PAR. 2. The third Occurrence of the fourth General. NOw succenedeth the Apostles nesciency, and misunderstanding of Christ's words: No man at the Table knew, for what intent Christ spoke this unto him. Here you must except our blessed Saviour himself, (who was more than mere man) for he knew for what intent he spoke, you must also except judas, who knew our Saviour's meaning, and his own corrupt intendments: and therefore accordingly, he went out immediately; no man at the table knew, for judas was gone from the table; and as he was bidden did quickly go forth: and so he must be excepted. All the rest of the College of the Apostles were ignorant, what Christ did primarily and particularly mean under those General words; That thou dost do quickly. Some think that S. john is also to be excepted, because he knew the Traitor, by the answer of Christ, and the real delivery of the Sop, according to the answer. Barradius builds upon this, as the truer answer; that S. john himself, though he knew the Traitor, did little imagine that Christ did then voluntarily desire to die: but the Traitor would have betrayed him, at some other time, and not so soon. At the first hearing of them, the Apostles thought, they were words rather of command (which they could not conceive) than words of permission. The innocent and most holy souls of the Apostles, not knowing then the entrance of Satan into judas, did not think that judas should fall so suddenly, from one extreme to another. It seems to me that after the giving of the Sop, and after Satan's entrance into judas, Christ said; That thou dost do quickly: that judas received it, and receiving it swallowed it; for though it be not said, that judas eaten it, yet if we consider Christ dipping it, we may well think, it was that Judas might eat it. After the Sop, Satan entered into him: the sop found the first entrance, Satan the next, and that immediately after. So all these things concur in a very short time. Christ's giving the Sop. Judas his Receiving it. And his eating it. Then Satan entereth. Then Christ saith; What thou dost, do quickly. Then Judas his speedy Egress. So short was the time, that the holy Scripture saith, john 13.30. as if nothing had interceded; He then having received the sop, went immediately out: he made no stay in the Supper-roome, or in any part of the house, he went hastily out. Needs must he go, whom the Devil driveth. So much of the Apostles nesciency. PAR. 3. The fourth Occurrence of the fourth General. COncerning their misinterpreting the saying of Christ, two things are apparent. 1. That the words were not spoken privately in the ear of any one alone; for some of the Apostles thought one thing, some another, concerning the understanding of them; which they could not do nor judge, if they had not heard them. PAR. 4. 2. SEcondly, though Christ needed nothing, for himself or his Apostles, but was Lord of all the creatures; and all things in heaven, air, water, and earth, would have ministered unto him, according to his pleasure, though when he sent them, without Purse, and scrip, and shoes, they lacked nothing, Luk. 22.35. though if he would have prayed for help, God would have presently given him, more than 12. Legions of Angels, Mat. 26.53. which number is a complete Army: and every one of them able to overcome a contrary complete Army: yet Christ for his Church's sake, and to show that it should ever be plentifully provided for, both to abound themselves, and to help others, and to manifest in his own presence and by his own example, that they who partaked of our spiritual, were bound in reason and Conscience to impart unto us, their temporals; therefore did our most wise, and holy Saviour, (when he had healed certain women of evil spirits and infirmities; Luke 8.2. etc. As Mary Magdalen, and joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod's Steward, and Susanna, and many others) permit them to be a pattern unto the world, to minister unto him of their substance, and to be a pattern to all succeeding ages, what they should do for the Church. PAR. 5. LEt them who think no good Clergy man good, unless he be galled and gelded in his tithes; no evil Clergy man to be evil, if he suffer them to swallow the sacred morsels; let them consider (I say) by what law their souls shall be judged? Divine, or profane? for so the most learned M. Selden calleth that Quod fari religione non tenetur. It was indeed judas who carried the bag. But these two reasons are specialized, wherefore the money was to be employed; to buy these things, which Christ, and his Apostles had need of against the feast, or to give something to the poor, john 13.29. PAR. 6. The fifth Occurrence of the fourth General. THe next point to be handled is, judas his speedy Egress: He then having received the Sop went immediately out; Joh. 13.30. Whither judas his receiving the Sop, be meant of, or in his hand: of, or in his mouth; or of, or in his stomach may be questioned. I do guess it is to be interpreted; after he had eaten the sop or mouthful; to which the hand and mouth were but instruments, yet necessary; There is scarce an Author who doth not profess his opinion, that by receiving is meant the Oral manducation accomplished, and that judas did really eat the sop. john 18.3. The Lanterns, (though lights were in them) and Torches (though flaming) shown outward light, but inward darkness. And it was Night. This deed of darkness carried darkness with it, all the way to the end. For this was their hour, and the power of darkness. Luk. 22.53. and his heart and ways, did rule the Prince of darkness. Occubuer at justitiae sol; & fulgentissima claritas sapientiae: ideo crassissima caligine complebatur, saith justinian. The Sun of righteousness, and the most shining brightness of wisdom, was now set; and therefore was he filled with a most thick Egyptian darkness. judas ipse nox erat. Saith S. Augustine. judas was night himself. judas his going forth, potuit esse horâ circiter tertiâ Noctis; saith Faber Stapulensis, on the place. It might be about three a clock at Night. PAR. 7. QVando Iudas exivit fuit Nox: quod notari solet in principio Noctis; non in medio, (saith Suarez) When judas went forth it was night; which is commonly taken for the beginning of the Night, not for the middle thereof. Coena legalis, & lotio pedum, ad Summum, per duas horas durare potuerunt: & statim secutaest institutio Eucharistiae; saith the same Suarez in Thomam. pag. 487. The Passeover, and washing of the Apostles feet, could last at most but two hours; and then immediately followed the institution of the blessed Eucharist. Stapulensis is much awry, to allow about three hours to the Paschall, and to the usual Supper; for the Paschall was but as a running banquet, quickly performed. And the ordinary Suppers of holy men extended not to that length of time. Suarez better observeth, at the utmost, they could be but two hours, Supping and washing; and then presently followed the Institution of the Eucharist. I met not with any, who ever said, it was midnight, when judas went forth. Selneccerus de passione Christi, pag. 442. thus stemmeth, and distributeth the times, by the night-watches. In the first Watch of the night, in Crepusculo, in the twilight, from the beginning of six of the clock, till the end of eight (three whole hours) were they Supping, washing, and Christ's Preaching. In the second Watch of the night (which he calleth Canticinium, which word is misprinted, or otherwise Selneccerus was very ignorant to use that word instead of Galli Cantus; or Gallicinium; or for Conticinium, which is the first part of the night; from the crowing of the Cock, which he placeth in the second part, or Watch in the night. Circiter mediam noctem, Galli primum cantum edunt; saith Barradius, Tom. 4. pag. 268. The Cocks do use to crow, first of all, hard about midnight. In the beginning of the ninth hour, he went to Mount Olivet: about an hour after, between ten and eleven of the clock, he prayed, sweated, and was comforted by an Angel. After eleven of the clock, Christ was betrayed, and taken; S. Peter cut off the ear of Malchus; the Disciples fly. In the third Watch of the night, about twelve of the clock, Christ was brought to Annas, and was boxed with the hand, or beat with the rod of an Officer, which stood by, whom Christ reproved. About one of the clock in the morning, he was brought to Caiaphas; where being bound, he was examined; and confessed himself to be God. About two of the clock in the morning, was Christ more strictly interrogated. And now the Cock crew; and Peter denied him thrice: and Christ pitying Peter looked bacl on him; and he repent, went forth, and wept bitterly. In mine opinion here Selneccerus might better have placed his Canticinium, or rather the Gallicinium, or Cocke-crowing: Selneccerus is in one extreme, and would have the crowing of the Cock in the second Watch, before midnight: Others hold the Gallicinium, or Cocke-crowing, to be only in the fourth Watch of the night, between the hours from three to four: four to five; five to six: and they are in another extreme; for Cocks crow not so much in the second Watch of the night, as in the third. And I confess, not so much in the third, as in the fourth Watch; yet seldom or never do they crow before midnight, unless it be at Christmas, as the good huswives say; or upon some extraordinary occasions, as when they be troubled with noise, or moved; or when they happen to see any accidently light, by fire, torch, or candle; or unless it be against change of weather. But most commonly, and ordinarily, and properly, at the latter end of the second Watch, or in the third Watch, and before three in the morning is the beginning of the Chaunticleering, or first crowing; which is more and more reiterated, and louder, or shriller till day. It seemeth to me, that the word of God distinguisheth, and divideth the crowing of the Cock, from the even, midnight, and morning, Mark 13.35. Ye know not when the Master of the house cometh; at even, or at midnight: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or at the crowing of the Cock, in the morning. In the fourth Watch of the night, Christ was delivered to the servants of the High-Priests to be mocked, spit upon, and many ways abused; and beaten; and this continued three hours, till six of the clock in the morning: and then was Christ condemned by a decree of the Consistory, Luke 22.66. For they came together as soon as it was day. And when the morning was come, all the chief Priests and Elders of the people, took counsel to put jesus to death, Matth. 27.1. PAR. 8. COncerning this Cocke-crowing; too not unnecessary Questions may be mooted. 1. Whither, the Cock did crow naturally of himself, or was by means Divine, spurred, stimulated, or pushed on unto it? 2. How the Evangelists different variations may be reconciled? In which, many other Quaeres are enwrapped. Concerning the first, some may probably think, that our blessed Saviour (being Valdè Naturae mists, acquainted exactly with the course of it; and divinely foreseeing, and foreknowing what would come to pass in an usual, and ordinary way) was content to let the creatures, Exercere actus suos proprios; to exercise their proper acts: S. Peter to deny his Master for fear, yet voluntarily; and the Cock to crow at his usual times. So that the Cock did not crow, because Christ had foretold so much; or because he was provoked otherwise, than of himself to crow: but because Christ fore-knew that S. Peter's denial would be about the crowing of the Cock; therefore did Christ foretell it. But I may more probably think, the whole course was above the level of Nature, and that Satan desiring to winnow S. Peter. put a great and sudden fear into him, and that Christ for a little time did desert S. Peter; and turned, as it were his back unto him. That afterward, Christ pitying S. Peter, did inwardly, and tacitly command the Cock to crow; as he in all likelihood, forbade the fish by some hidden motion, or instinct, to approach nigh the ships, where S. Peter and the Apostles toiled all the night, and took nothing, Luke 5.5. and precepted the fish, extraordinarily, and immediately, to come in troops, in obedience to Christ's Will, to this end, that his miraculous power might be the better seen, when they let down their Net for one draught; and the great multitude of fishes break their net, Luke 5.6. and began to sink their ships, ver. 7. And all this astonishing wonder was but divinely preparatory to make Peter believe the words of Christ, who promised, that thenceforth Peter should catch men, Luke 5.10. and as he commanded again, in a way best known to himself, the fish to bring a stater, or half a crown of silver in his mouth, unto the same S. Peter; and yet to by't at the bait, which was fastened on the hook, which S. Peter cast into the sea, Matth. 17.27. For I will not think that Peter cast in an hook without a bait; or if he did, it was the greater wonder. All which are things above the bounds of Nature. Likewise, when at the crowing of the Cock, Peter remembered the words of Jesus, Mat. 26.75. My opinion is, the Cock might have crowed for tie times, and S. Peter never a whit the rather have remembered the words of Christ; nor repent; but that our merciful Saviour, even in the midst of his own sufferings, remembered, and pitied S. Peter: for the Lord turned and looked upon S. Peter; and Peter remembered the words of the Lord, Luke 22 61. When Christ turned his face to Peter, and looked on him; it was an operative look, and piercing eyes, virtue flew from them; and with divine power reached to turn Peter: now Peetr saw Christ, as well as Christ looked on Peter: Peter did read his own fault in his Master's countenance; the language of Christ's looks did Peter understand; and it was not a natural, but a divine motion, which made him remember the words of Christ. Augustine de gratia Christi. 1.45. saith, That Christ's looking on Peter, was spiritual; with the spiritual eyes of mercy, reducing Peter to repentance. He looked not on him with bodily eyes; Sed hic Augustinus non tenetur: Here S. Austin was awry. I doubt not, but Christ beheld Peter both corporally, and spiritually. Indeed, it is said, Mark 14.66. Peter was beneath in the Palace warming himself. And Peter was without in the Palace, Matth. 26.69. and he was gone out into the Porch, ver. 71. which imply, that Christ and Peter were in several rooms; Christ within, and above; Peter without, and beneath. I answer, that they were in several rooms at first, none can deny: but that Peter went not up where Christ was; or that Christ was not brought down after judgement; so that he might see Peter, can never be proved: for Peter went in, and sat with the servants, to see the end, Matth. 26.58. A poor sight could he see, if he stayed still without. The first denial of Peter, was by the fire in the Hall; the second in the Porch, when the Cock crew first. No reason can evince, but at the second crowing of the Cock, both jesus and Peter might be in one room. I am sure, it was above the space of an hour, between the first and third denial, as it fully resulteth, from Luke 22.59. And upon Peter's first denial the Cock first crew. And, Then they led jesus from Caiphas unto the judgement-hall. At which time, he might very well look upon Peter, if Peter himself had not followed, into the room, where Christ was condemned, as it is most likely he did. PAR. 9 THe second point; and an hard one it is, to reconcile the different relation of the Evangelists. Herein will I first lay open to the full, their several variations. The words of jesus were; Before the Cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice, Matth. 26.75. And the same words are repeated, Luke 22.61. But it is in S. Mark. Peter called to mind the words, that jesus said unto him; Before the Cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. Hence ariseth, The first Quaere; whether Christ said, as S. Mark hath it; or as S. Matthew, and S. Luke have it? PAR. 10. THe second Quaere is, Whether S. Peter's threefold denial was accomplished, before the Cock crew at all, or before he crowed twice? For three Evangelists say in effect, the Cock should not crow at all, till the threefold negation of Peter was passed: And immediately the Cock crew, joh. 18.27. But it is in, Mark 14.30. Before the Cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice: which is repeated, verse 72. Accordingly the Cock did first crow, when Peter was in the Porch, ver. 68 And after his threefold denial; The second time the Cock crew, vers. 72. PAR. 11. THe third Quaere is; How often S. Peter was questioned, or by others affirmed to be Christ's Disciple; since the Evangelists much vary therein? S. Matthew relateth, two several maid's avouchments, that Peter was with Christ; and thirdly, the bystanders affirmation of the same, Matth. 26.69. etc. And with S. Matthew doth S. Mark agree, Mark 14.66. etc. S. Luke thus varieth it. A maid first affirmed it, Luke 22.56. Secondly, a man said, Thou art also of them. For Peter said, man, I am not, ver. 58. In the third place; Another confidently affirmed it, and Peter answered, Man, I know not what thou sayest, ver. 16. S. john storieth it differently from all, The Damsel which kept the door, first questioned Peter; Art not thou also one of this man's Disciples? And he answered, I am not, joh. 18.17. In the next place more interrogated the same thing. How many more, is not expressed; but more: Peter denied, and said, I am not, ver. 25. In the third place, Malchus his Kinsman said; Did not I see thee in the Garden with him? ver. 26. PAR. 12. THe fourth Quaere is, How many times Peter denied Christ, since from S. Matthew it may be collected, he denied it two several times, to two several maids, and once more to standers by. And S. Luke confesseth his general denials, to two several men, S. John acknowledgeth his denial to divers at once. PAR. 13. I Answer briefly to the first; the words of jesus were spoken, as they are in Saint Mark; and the word twice is to be understood, and by way of sense, is to be included in the other three Evangelists. For the holy Ghost spoke a fuller truth by S. Mark (for truth hath its latitudes) and not Evangelist did, or could lie; and what is set down, is expressly to be believed: but the other three Evangelists might omit, and otherwhere have omitted, many several words, many several matters; and some writ more largely, some more briefly; some omit more, some less: and wheresoever any affirm, what others omit, we must believe what is affirmed by any one, though all the rest pass by it. Neither Matthew, Luke, nor john, say negatively Christ spoke no other words, but these; if they, or any of them had so said, there had been an irreconcilable contradiction unto S. Mark. But they saying only; These were the words of jesus. Before the Cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice; they might understand the word (Twice) Before the Cock crew twice; which they lawfully omitted, as not being bound to express every particular: and S. Mark (who could not err in writing) hath directly taught us so to expound them. And for confirmation hereof, S. Mark names the several places, S. Peter was in, when the Cock crew twice, which they all also omitted, as being points of the By, and not on necessity to be particularly specialized: Quod subintolligitur, benè omittitur: quod subauditur, sine causa exprimitur. That which is necessary to be understood may be well omitted; That which is understood, is needelessely expressed. PAR. 14. IN this answer, you have another involved resolution to the second Quaere. The Cock crowed first, when Peter was in the Porch; and this did not strike to Peter's heart. Nor can it be proved, that Peter heard the Cock crow the first time; or, if he did hear, he might think it an ordinary Natural crowing without any reference to himself. But when his Trina negatio was passed; immediately the Cock crew the second time; and Christ turned himself to Peter, to make Peter return to him; and looked upon Peter, as if he had said, Peter I, I thrice foretell thee, thou wouldst deny me thrice, before the Cock crow twice. Thou hast denied me thrice, and the Cock hath now crowed twice; I have been a true Prophet; be not hereafter too confident of thyself: Remember my words, repent, go forth, and weep bitterly; and so he did. PAR. 15. TO the third Quaere. How often S. Peter was questioned, or vouched to be Christ's Disciple. I answer, It seemeth clearly by the Evangelists; that S. Peter was doubted of by some; and affirmed by others to be Christ's Disciple, divers times; but they must be reduced all to three only; for you are to consider all four Evangelists agree; The first, who spoke of Peter, was the Maid, the doorkeeper. The other Maid spoke of Peter, not to him, but upon her speech, a man said; Thou art also of them (saith S. Luke.) The Maids talking, and the Man's accusing, are to be held, as one enquiry, or affirmation. Than not one, after one; but divers almost at once fell upon S. Peter. They said unto him, Art not thou also one of his Disciples? joh. 18.25. who those (They) were, S. Matth. setteth down; viz. They, that stood by: which might be the very same men, that S. john meaneth; though first they interrogated, as it is in S. john; and after bluntly, and boldly affirmed it (as it is in S. Matth.) and particularly among that company might be the confident-affirmer in Luke: and Malchus his cousin, in john. So he was questioned, or affirmed to be a Disciple; once by the Doorkeeper; once by a Man from another woman's words; and the third time by Troops, or Routs; or many together; three times in all. Cajetan, on john 18. thinketh, that he was seven times under the file of examination; thrice by Maids, or Women; four times by Men. But the witty Cajetan might have considered, the Apostles relate the same thing, though in divers manners, some inhering in one circumstance, some in another: and as I said; The several relations may design out the same persons, and did; as several say of S. Peter, made up but his thrice denial. If he had well weighed this, he would not also have determined as he hath done; That S. Peter denied Christ seven times, thrice to the Women, four times to the Men; which reacheth home to— PAR. 16. THe next Quare; the fourth in number: How many times Peter denied Christ? Whatsoever Cajetans' account is, I believe that S. Peter denied our Saviour but Thrice. First, because our Lord three times insisted on that fixed number of thrice; Thou shalt deny me thrice. The first time was upon this occasion: Zachary foretold, and Christ points at the place; I will smite the Shepherd, and the Sheep of the flock shall be scattered. S. Peter professed he would not be offended; Christ replied, S. Peter should deny him thrice, Matth. 26.34. S. Peter saith, he will not; and did out-argue Christ in words. A second occasion was this. Satan had winnowed Indas, and prevailed; and would have winnowed S. Peter, but Christ prayed for him, and Satan prevailed not, to his final overthrow. But when Christ said to Peter; When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren; his fall was foreseen, employed, and foretell, before his conversion. Yet again, when the forward undertaking S. Peter avouched the contrary, Christ replied, Luke 22.34. Thou shalt deny me thrice. A third occasion was this. S Peter would know whither Christ went; Christ answered, S. Peter could not then follow him, Why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy sake, quoth the great Presumer or Promiser. Christ answered him a third time, joh. 13.38. The Cock shall not crow (or the ordinary time of Cocke-crowing shall not come) till thou hast denied me thrice. Hence I frame mine Argument, PAR. 17. IF Christ three times, so solemnly, upon so many several provocations, when his Apostle did out-crow him; did foretell, That he should deny Christ thrice, not six, not seven times, not more, not less; but only thrice: The Triple diction of Christ, was seconded with a Triple denial of his Apostle, and with no more. And the threefold cord will hardly be broken, Heaven, and earth shall pass; but Christ's word shall not pass away, Matth. 24.35. Cajetan replieth, If Peter denyeth Christ seven times, he did deny him thrice, as he who payeth seven pieces, payeth three. I answer, Christ's intent was to humble S. Peter, and to make him see his own frailty, in his over-forwardnesse. Therefore if Christ had known Peter would have denied him seven times, he would not have lessened the number of his denials, but have named all his seven denials; the rather to beat down his self-love, self-conceit, selfe-assurance. But Christ foretelling only three denials, we may not forge more, which Christ could not be ignorant of, if such were to have been, and would not have spared to tell Peter so. To the Question, or affirmation of three sorts of people. First, of a Maid: to it was made the first denial. Secondly, of a Man, upon a Woman's asseverations, was made the second denial. Thirdly, to the manifold search, or avouchments of the confused Multitude; and of other two particular men, was made one entire, and full denial. Though divers did interrogate, or affirm the same thing; yet was the answer but one, and the same. I end, as I said before. The first denial accomplished was to the Maid, the doorkeeper. The second denial, was to a single several accuser, a Man, Luke 22.58. A little while after, upon a Woman's suggestion (for though S. Matthew speaketh of a second Maid, or Woman, yet the second Maid spoke not to Peter, but of Peter to others, Matth. 26.71. and Mark 14.69. This is one of them: and then, and thereupon) a Man charged him home; and so indeed the second denial. About an hour after one confidently affirmed (as it is in S. Luke 22.59.) and others interrogated, joh. 18.25. and the Bystanders avouched. Matth. 26.73. and perhaps Malchus his cousin might be one of those troops; though pointed out singly; and they all in likelihood, came upon S. Peter so fast, one in the neck of another, as is usual when many talk together, that he answered All, and each of them, with this third resolute denial. The first, was a simple denial, I know not what thou sayest, Matth. 26.70. The second denial, upon a man's direct accusing him, Luke 22.58. After a Woman's confident avouchment, Matth. 26.71. was not single, and simple, but Juramentall, Verse 72. The third denial, upon the charge of so many, some single, some in a rout, was imprecatory, and made him both curse and swear, Matth. 26 74. and Mark 14.71. though neither S. Luke, nor S. john mention his swearing, or cursing. PAR. 18. TO conclude; though many sifted S. Peter; and though many answers, or excuses be particularly described after his second denial; yet they are to be esteemed, and accounted, but as one only; and being conjoined, must go, only for Peter's worst, greatest, third denial. That in the intention of Scripture, S. Peter's diversified answers; both to the standers by, in Matthew, and Mark, and to the confident Affimer in Luke; and to the others in S. John; and with them to Malchus his cousin, are accounted but one, whole, full denial, appeareth by this, that both Matthew, Luke, and john, upon their several relations conclude in the same words, Immediately the Cock crew; for upon his denial to Malchus his cousin, Immediately the Cock crew, Joh. 18.27. And upon the denial to the confident Affirmer, Immediately, while he yet spoke, the Cock crew, Luke 22.60.— — Thirdly, upon his denial, cursing, and swearing, to the Bystanders, Immediately the Cock crew, Matth. 26.74. And you are further to know, that at his first denial, the Cock crowed once, Mark 14.68. and after his third denial with Oath, and Imprecation, The Cock crowed the second, ver. 72. I have not heard, nor read, any man avouching, more than two crowings of the Cock. But you must of necessity establish four several crowings of the Cock, before S Peter's Repentance, unless you agree with me, in making his forecited last excuses (though veriously Historified) to be but one only denial, his third and last denial immediately, whereupon the Cock crew. The Cock cannot crow immediately, upon several occasions, but there are several Cocke-crowings. PAR. 19 ALL this discourse hindereth not me from embracing my former opinion; viz. that the judaical Paschall, was about one quarter of an hour in transacting and the usual Supper annexed unto it, was about three quarters of an hour; and so all Ceremony levitical was accomplished, between 6. and 7. or in the night: whilst of the two, by the word (about) I incline rather to the more, than to the less. For now when the even was come, he sat down with the 12. Mat. 26.20. Yea he came in the Evening with the Twelve, Mark. 14.17. It was the time of Twilight, or Twiter-light, when the light is mingled with darkness, and day with night. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 duy vespra. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vespa, qd lux & tenebra er tempore permisceantur. v. Pagin. lex in Rad. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Hebrew it is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 GNARBAIIM, by which Hebrew Dual are meant two distinct things, at the same time, viz. A mixture and partaking both of day and night, that men cannot then distinguish (as Lucas Brugensis hath it) a dog from a Wolf, which we call Owl-light. Now reckon one hour after this, or somewhat more, (for less time the two Suppers did not take up, a little more they might and did in all likelihood) than within one hour, or more, after the night had usurped on the day, and light was gone to bed till the morning: may that be fully accomplished which was said of judas, He went out and it was Night. In no place of the world when it gins to be dark, but somewhat an hour after 'tis Night. The Prayer. Merciful Lord God, I given thee most hearty thanks, for all the favours that thou hast conferred upon me, upon my Soul, my body, and my fortunes: and I beseech thee make me use them as I ought, to the glory of thy Great Name, and the eternal good of myself, and others. Lord jesus let my cry come unto thee, and hearken unto the prayer of a poor penitent soul. Amen. CHAP. XVII. PARAGRAPH 1. The sixth particular of the fourth General. The next point is the giving of thanks, at the end of the second Supper, which certainly was done according to the Order of those times. CHrist was more holy, more frequent in Benedictions or giving of thanks, than the jewish observances, usances, or Rites commanded, or practised, on any occasions; especially now at the end of this Second Supper; I have read that they had a Grace, and Responsal; and that they were these. The Master of the feast broke forth into these words, first: Benedicamus, sive gratias agamus ei, qui de suo nos cibavit, & cujus bonitate vivimus. Blessed, or thanked be God, who hath fed us, and by whose goodness we live. The rest of the guests answered: Benedictus sit ipse: Let him be blessed, or praised. PAR. 2. The seventh particular of the fourth General. SCaliger de Emend. Temp. Lib. 6. pag. 573. thus relateth the jewish Paschalizing ceremony. After the Supper the Cup went round. The first delivered it to the second; the second to the third; and so till every one of the company received it. And herein did both jews and Gentiles symbolise (saith he.) See a footestep hereof amongst the East Indians, who were wont to have a friendly Cup, called Tantali poculum (saith Philostratus) in vita Apollonii Tianaei) Tantali poculum bibendum nobis est, inde Somno indulgemus (quoth their great Jarcas to Appollonius) we must first drink round Tantalus his cup, and then we go to bed. Et amicitiae firmandae causâ, hujusmodi compotatio, apud Indos est inventa, (saith Philostratus) And this kind of drinking round, was invented by the Indians, for the continuing, and confirming friendship among them, Yet perhaps taken from the jews, for divers Gymnosophists did travail through divers Countries; and like bees gathered the honey from whatsoevenr they liked. A Gymnosophist came to Athens, and confounded Socrates in his discourse. Beda speaking of the Cup, which after thanksgiving Christ bade them take, Luke 22.17. thus hath it; Hic Calix ad vetus illud Pascha, cui finem desiderabat imponere, pertinet. Et hoc fuit quasi libamen Sacrificii Agni Paschalis. This Cup belongs unto that ancient Paschall Supper, unto which he desired so much to put an end: and this was the tasting (as it were) of the Sacrifice of the Paschall Lamb. So the two Suppers conjoined; and the flesh of the Passeover not removed until the, end of the second Supper, they ended the second Supper, with Poculum Charitatis, or Grace-Cup, which was divided among them; and presently began the Lord's Supper, nothing being mentioned by S. Luke, to be between the end of the second Supper, and the beginning of the third. Beda, saith more; So let enim cum sacrificiis fere conjungi libamen vini, they were wont (for the most part) to drink wine with their Sacrifices: nor was this Cup, the Sacred Cup of the blessed Eucharist, which was afterwards administered, as Burgensis from Hierome, and Thophylact well observeth, but it was that Poculum Charitatis, or Cup of Charity, which Christ, after the second, and before the third Supper gave unto his Disciples, and bade them divide it among themselves, Luk. 22.17. And this Cup saith Scaliger ibid. was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Et poculum hymnesecos ideò vocabatur, quond hymno post potationem decantato abibant: The Hymne-Cup; and it was therefore called the Hymne-Cup, because when they had drunk round, they sung a Hymn, and so departed the room. PAR. 3. The eighth particular of the fourth General. DEnique (saith Scaliger ibid.) post poculum Hymnus cantatur ex ritu Paschali. To conclude, after the (Grace) Cup, there was according to the Rites of the Passeover, an Hymn Sung. Et paginâ, 571. In the second Supper, they did say, certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Intercessions, and giving of thanks. Caelius Rhodiginus saith, Hymns were used to be sung to their false Gods, at their festivals. Antiquit. 5.3. Jtem. 11.19. And Alexander ab Alexandro Genialium dierum. 4.17. Jnter vescendum, laudes Diis canere assuêrant, his, quibus sacrum fieret. Pedibusque circum are as psallere, ad numerum; carminaque & hymnos canere. Hymnorum plures species fuerunt, quibus psallebant Diis, tamen hi fuere in usu frequentes. Hypingoes Dianae; Apolloni Paean; & Prosodia. Dionysio Dithyrambus. Cereri julus. Veneri Eroticus, seu Amatorius. Before they departed, or whilst they were continuing at their festivals, they were wont to sing praises to their gods, to whom they Sacrificed and dance, and chant verses, and Hymns: there were many sorts of Hymns but these more frequent: the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a song so called as proper to Diana, Paan, or Song of praise made to Apollo. Yea not only one but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, verses well tuned were song unto him. The Dithyrambus a kind of Metre song in the honour of Bacchus who was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: as being borne between the Twinedoores (as Somerset shire doth phrase it) also the julus, a Ditty to Ceres. A lovesong to Venus. Certainly the jews after their second Supper, did sing an Hymn called the great Hymn, containing six whole Psalms, from Psalm 113. to Psalm 119. But if Christ and his Apostles sung an Hymn, at the end of the second Supper, it was not that Longone; for this being no fixed rite, no commanded ceremony, Christ and his Apostles were not tied unto it: and it may be thereupon Christ put it over to the end of the most Sacred Eucharist, and to the end of his Divine Sermons in Coenaculo. For I take these two things, as confessed principles. Whatsoever Christ omitted was of Transient usances; or of the traditionary Sumpsimus, which the jews undertook more than they needed. Secondly, whatsoever he performed in the two Suppers, was of the durable Paschall Rites, or answering them some way; for when they had sung an Hymn or Psalm, They went out into the Mount of Olives, Mat. 26.30. So the Hymn was after the Sermon; the Sermon after the third Supper. For he celebrated no supper after he was in the mount of Olives. PAR. 4. AND joseph Scaliger excellently averreth, that the Legal Paschall kept by the jews the next day, was the first needless Paschall, that ever was offered. The Prayer. THy judgement is not as man's judgement, O Lord God, the supreme judge of judges, and of all things; I fear I am full of errors, though I know not any one that I have written, if I did I wound amend it. Grant good Lord, in such matters as thou seest amiss, thy pardon unto me, confirm me in all goodness, and make me a partaker of thy manifold graces, whilst I live on earth, and then I doubt not but I shall be glorified in the other world, for his sake who is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, even jesus Christ the righteous, to whom with the holy Father, and blessed Spirit, be ascribed all power, all thanks, all wisdom, and all other good things for ever, and ever: so be it. Amen. The Synopsis or sum of All. And now having ended the second Supper, give me leave, as it were in a Picture, to present it unto your eyes; as I did the first Supper. 1. THe same fair Upper-chamber was well furnished still. 2. The same Table was in it almost foure-square; decent, adorned, where they took their common repast. 3. Three bedsteads still with good furniture, encompassing three sides of the bed; on which they might either sit, or lie down for their greatest and best ease. 4. Great store of water standing by. 5. Unleavened bread sufficient. 6. The Remainders of the Paschall-Lambe not removed. 7. Store of wine, salt, and other sauce, in all conveniency still on the same Table, and Tablecloth. Then— 8. Roast meats, sod meats, baked meats, stewed meats, as I said before; Esculenta, Poculenta; Condimenta of great variety, brought in by the same Administrants for the second Supper. The 2. Supper began— 9 Christ and his twelve Apostles eating frugally, and discoursing heavenly about one quarter of an hour. 10. Contentions arising among the Apostles for superiority. 11. Christ then arose from the second Supper: put off his : girded himself: washed, and wiped his Apostles feet; All of them. 12. Put on his again; lay down, and preached humility to them; both by word and deed. 13. This Pedilavium, or washing; with the discourse concerning it, took up another quarter of an hour and upward. 14. The third quarter of an hour or more, before the end of the second Supper, was spent in the further detection of judas, and sealed up with an exact demonstrative discovery of the Traitor, by Christ's delivering of a sop to him, and his taking of it. 15. This Sop was not the blessed Eucharist. 16. Here the second and usual supper ended. 17. Satan entered into judas. 18. Christ separated judas. 19 The Apostles were ignorant what Christ meant by those words to judas; What thou dost do quickly. 20. They misinterpreted them. 21. Judas his Egress when it was Night. 22. They gave thanks at the end of the second Supper: 23. They had a Grace-Cup. 24. And if they sung an Hymn, it was a short one. 25. Thus about six of the clock they began to eat the Paschall Supper; which lasted not much above one quarter of that hour. 26. The second Supper lasted above three quarters of an hour; and about one quarter of an hour after seven in the Night, both the Paschall and usual Supper, were fully and perfectly dispached, and transacted. When I have handled the third Supper, I hope in God, to remove the curtain of obscurity, and folded preplexities: and to show you a true picture drawn almost to life, of the things done, and appeartaining to that Most Sacred Supper of the Lord. Deus in adjutorium meum intend. Lord be thou my helper. Amen. FINIS. TRICOENIUM CHRISTI. WHEREIN THE THIRD AND LAST SUPPER OF OUR LORD IS HANDLED. LIBER TERTIUS. Manu ducat me Iêsus. Christ juva: Ignoto feror aequore, plenaque ventis Vela dedi: totus langueo: Christ juva. Aut doce, Aut disce, Aut cupientem prodesse, patere, Monuit Robertus Cenalis Episcopus Abrincensis. printer's or publisher's device LONDON, Printed for Andrew Crook at the green Dragon in Saint Paul's Church yard, 1641. This third Book is the third General part of my propounded method. Wherein is contained 1. A Preface. 2. A Tractate wherein is showed 1. Reasons of the word Tricoenium: and why I call this work Tricoenium Christi. 2. Divers differences between the Agapae, and the Third Supper, or Supper of the Lord. 3. The use of the Holy Kiss at the Lords Supper. Chap. 1. 4. Certain Reasons, why the Sacred Eucharist was substituted to the aetetnall disannulling of the Passeover, Chap. 2. 5. What course our Saviour took in the perfecting of his Third, or Last Supper. And therein is showed 1. After what words Christ began this Third, or Last Supper. A digression 1. Concerning the division of the Bible into Chapters. Verses. 2. Against filthy prophaners of Churches. Churchyards. 3. Against Conventicles. Chap. 3. 2. It was instituted in the same large, upper room, wherein they eaten the Paschall; and Common Supper. 3. It was not whilst the Apostles were eating the Second, or Common Supper: but After That Supper. 4. It was instituted on a Table. 5. On a distinct Table. Chap. 4. 6. Whether Christ himself received the blessed Eucharist. 7. What posture Christ used when he consecrated the Eucharist, Chap. 5. And therein I consider his 1. Actions. 1. He took bread. 2. He blessed it. 3. He broke it. 4. He gave it to his Disciples, 2. Words employed in these words And said, 1. Take. 2. Eat. 3. This is my Body, etc. Chap. 6: 8. What Gesture the Apostles used in Receiving the holy Eucharist. Chap. 7. 9 What Gesture we are to use at the receiving of it. 10. What Names have been given to the blessed Eucharist. 11. What Speeches were spoken by our Saviour after the Third Supper, before he departed out of the Coenaculum. Chap. 8. A PRAYER. Eternal and only wise God, because on the one side Satan standeth with danger in his hands, and laboureth to inveigle us to search into curious and needless matters: and on the other side standeth our natural laziness, with distrust making men believe they can never find out such truths, as indeed may be found: I humbly beseech thee (O gracious God, and giver of all good gifts) to preserve me from both of these extremes; and grant unto me (good Lord) that I may abhor to look after things unsearchable, super subtle, and above my reach, which lie hid within the closet of thy breast; and yet may with all holy and reverend industry proceed to the finding out of Thee, Thyself in, and by thy Truth, even jesus Christ my alone Saviour, and Redeemer. Amen. TRICAENIUM CHRISTI. LIB. III. CAP. I. Which contains the first, second, and third Generals. Wherein is showed 1. Reasons of the word Tricaenium. 2. Differences between the Agapae, and Third Supper. 3. Use of the holy Kiss. 1. A preface by way of Admonition to the Unlearned. Invocation of the Learned. 2. Reasons of the word Tricaenium, and, why I call this Work Tricaenium Christi. A threefold Supper farther proved. The Papists offended for calling the third Supper, the Supper of the Lord. A deviation concerning Maldonat the Jesuit his Life, and Doctrine. The ancient Fathers both Latin and Greek, call the third Supper, the Supper of the Lord. 3. A discourse concerning the Agapae, or Feasts of Charity. They succeeded in the place of the Chagigah, or second Supper. When Eaten. The Eucharist before Tertullia's days eaten in the Morning: the Agapae in the Evening. The Eucharist and Agapae in the Primitive Church were kept near about the same time. Christians falsely accused for eating Infants at their Agapae. The Agapae kept on the Lord's day. What scandals were taken by the Gentiles against the Christians Agapae. 4. The sacred Eucharist, and not the Agapae (as the Papists think) is meant by the Supper of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11.20. The Agapae never practised before Christ's Ascension. The Agapae at first were used holily and religiously: sometimes Severally from Jointly with the Lords Supper. The Corinthians did eat them before the Lord's Supper. They were celebrated by the Corinthians in the Church. Each Schism of the Corinthians supped a part, by themselves. The poor neglected by the Corinthians in their Agape. The primary end of the Agapae, the relief of the poor. 5. Charity modestly covereth a multitude of Sinners. The ill fashions of the Corinthians in receiving the Lords Supper reproved. Casaubone censured in two points. First, that the Corinthians received the Eucharist in the Morning. Secondly, that the Eucharist ought to be called a Dinner or a Breakfast, rather than a Supper. The Churches both Western and Eastern, did receive the Supper of the Lord Fasting in the fourth Age. On good-Friday the Church used to receive it Thrice. That use broken by Pope Honorius, and the Council of Tarracon. Pope Eutichianus, his Decretal against such as received the Sacrament Not-Fasting. Some Churches of Africa, and some Egyptians received it about Eventide Not-Fasting. In the second Age of the Church, in Tertullia's time they received it, some at Night, some at Mealetime, and some ere Break of day. We receive the Holy Communion in the Morning in remembrance of Christ's Resurrection. 6. In the Primitive Church they did lie on beds, when they did eat their Love-Feasts. Love-Feasts forbidden to be kept in the Church by the Laodicean Council, ancient Fathers, and later Divines. Kneeling in the time of solemn Prayers, and administration of the Lords Supper, commended by Calvin. 7. In S. Cyprians and S. Augustine's days, some received the Eucharist every day, others at certain times only. S. Augustine's Rule, Let every one follow the Customs of the Church, wherein he liveth. Eudemon Johannes by Casaubone reproved. A Christian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or holy complying to avoid Schism, and for concord's sake was practised by the ancient Fathers, by other Christians, and by Calvin himself: And commended by Casaubone, Rigaltius, and others. Calvin's good advice to Farellus. His divine temper against Luther. 8. The holy Kiss usual at the blessed Sacrament. Forborn on Good-Friday. The Kiss of Charity, why so called. 'Tis called Holy, to discriminate it, from false, amorous, and civil Kisses. Why the holy Kiss was omitted on Good-Friday. Divers kinds of Kissing. Some of Salutation, some of Adoration. Divers manners of Kissing. Some kiss the lips, or mouth, former parts and hinder parts of the shoulders, cheeks, hands, back of the hands, the feet, and the toe. The reason of Kissing the Pope's toe. The Penitents in Tertullia's days did kiss the very footsteps of other Christians. Kissing of a Tablet, or holy Board. The reason thereof. Holding by the ears in kissing used among Heathen, and among Christians. The reason thereof. Joah held Amasa by the beard, and kissed him. The custom of kissing one another at the receiving of the Sacrament continued till S Augustine's days. The manner of kissing in Prester John's Country, and among the Persians. 9 When the Agapae began and ended, uncertain. Not to be eaten in the Church, and in the Chancel. The Use and Abuse of them, even in the Apostles times. The Abusers of them termed Spots and Blemishes in the Abstract. The words Breaking of bread, and breaking of bread from house to house, Act. 2. verse 44, 45, 46. interpreted. The degrees by which Abuses crept into the Agapae. PARAGRAPH. 1. IN things unrevealed, in circumstances omitted, a wide window, yea a door is open for diversities of opinions; and variety of opinions proveth there is obscurity in those things, about which they differ: In this obscurity we are left to doubts, and doubts are determinable by the fairest proofs. Knowledge is not so common a matter as is esteemed; many may light on a good belief, who have not any divine knowledge. Cognitio fieri non potest, nisi cognoscenda praecedant. Augustine de Genest ad litteram, Cap. 32. De non intelligibilibus non est intellectio. Doubting itself is not wholly void of all knowledge; nor doth any man know any thing truly of which he never made any doubt before, saith Petrus Pomponatius de Incantationibus, cap. 9 Plato his young youth was to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, inquisitive: Name qui nil dubitat, nil capit inde boni. For he that reading makes no doubt, Doth little profit get thereout. A sign to a nimble wit is as persuasive as a sentence to a dull brain. The institution of the venerable Eucharist, is for the substantial part thereof, set down at large by three Evangelists, and by S. Paul. But for the time, place, and manner of administering: what preparatives were used by word, or deed; with what gestures Christ did celebrate: and the Apostles receive that blessed Sacrament: what Reverence was showed; what Prayers Precedent, Concomitant, or Subsequent were made, is not directly expressed in holy Scripture. Scarce ever was there an holy subject more subject to various constructions. For we are forced to seek for the light without any shine of it: the ashes must be blown away, and hidden corners searched. Fire is produced by a strong applying of the flint to the steel; and we must be as tinder dried, and apt to entertain the least flying spark: points unwritten must be extracted, and distilled out of things written. Wherefore (good Christian people whosoever you be that are unlearned, and can talk only of our English original, forbear censure in these dubious points: be willinger to follow, than to lead: to learn, than to determine. But come you hither, (O ye inquisitive, and learned Conjecturers.) Here is work for you; and in this work, let me entreat you rather to build, than to destroy: to cut of, rather than multiply perplexities. And you (dainty Critics) the sweet Children of the Arts, and Muses; you mines, and minters of Invention, come with your nimble fancies, and pricking apprehensions, towering beyond sight: fetch light out of darkness, add improvement to learning, and truth; and strength of reason to conjecture. And you especially, (most Reverend and Holy divines) the true Epoptae, Stewards of the mysteries of God, and beholders of his secrets, who daily converse with God, and his blessed Angels: who spend not your thoughts on the stinking trash of this filthy world; whose death to the world, is life to Godward: and who are, Finita divitiarum cupiditate divites, rich, in that you covet not riches: Whilst an earthworme, or muckworme is, Medea's inter opes inops, poor (like Tantalus) in the midst of his riches. You, who bury yourselves among your books, and joy more to illuminate obscurities, than to find treasures; who pity the vanity of such as set their hearts on beasts, to keep them company, and think themselves great by daily conversing with their Inferiors; You learned souls, embellished with grace, and goodness, feeding on content, and a good conscience in this world; Reversioners to Heaven; Come, o come, bring forth your treasures both new and old; You are the Lights of the World, Heirs of Grace, having Glory in reversion, and shining as Lights in dark places; Come (I say) and further this work. Scientia fit per additamenta. Science grows by steps ●nd degree. Timotheus had never been so excellent a Musician, unless Phrynis had been before him, saith Aristotle in the 2 of his Metaphysics. And so God bless our endeavours. PAR. 2. I Hold it not amiss, here in the forefront, to show some reasons, why I term this work of mine Tricaenium. True it is, I have not read the word any where. But as true it is, I never met with Author, but he frameth some words to his present occasions; every wit inventing and adding somewhat. Horace de Arte Poëtica, almost in the beginning, concerning the inventing of new terms, intimateth there is given, and expresseth there shall be granted a power to invent new terms. — Dabiturque licentia sumpta pudenter: Et nova, fictaque nuper habebunt verba fidem, si Graeco fonte cadant, parc è detorta.— You leave may have new-coined words to choose, If that you modest liberty will use; If from the Grecian fountains they do flow, And keep the Latin cadence all a row. Let me say of myself, as Horace doth there of himself. — Ego, cur acquirere pauca Si possum, invideor? cum lingua Catonis, & Ennî Sermonem patriam ditaverit, & nova rerum Nomina protulerit? Licuit, semperque licebit Signatum praesente notâ procudere nomen. If I by chance a few new words can coin, Why should a man my liberty purloin? Since Cato rude, and Ennius harsh, of old T'enrich their mother tongue were very bold, And stamped new-words. Which for to do they saw, Both ever was, and ever would be law. I will be brief in some particulars. Pererius in Theatro rerum creatarum, cap. 19 p. 145. saith thus: Lycophron Poëta vocavit Herculem Tri-esperum, quasi Trinoctem, propter triduum, quo necando pisci intra ejus alvum immoratus est. The poet Lycophron called Hercules Tri-esper: as if he had called him, Three-nighted Hercules, by reason of the three days and three nights, which he stayed in the fishes belly, which he killed. Divinely is the story of Ionas recorded in the old Testament. In reference to which the Heathen fabulously ascribe some such thing, to one of their Hercules; for they had many so called. And in the new Testament the history of Ionas is confirmed by the mouth of Truth itself. For Christ said, Mat. 12.40. Ionas was Three days, and Three nights in the Whale's belly. Naevius termeth Nestor Tri-saeclum, because he lived towards Three hundred years. Usual in antiquity are the words of Biclinium, and Tri-clinium; why not Bicaenium, and Tricaenium? Martial. 12.78. mentioneth Trinoctiale Domicaenium. Tricaenium is not farther fetched. Ludovicus de la Cerda, on Tertullia's first Book de Pallio, Numero 252. useth the word Antecaenium, The word Pocaenium is commonly used, where a Third Supper is; shall we exclude Tricaenium? The Latins did Graecize. All nations under the Roman Empire did Latinize. And composition of several words was most frequent in both languages. It were loss of time to enlarge such a confessed truth. I deny not, but in classical authority, the only word Coena is extended to comprise the Ante-past, the Supper itself; yea, and perhaps the Post-past also. Macrobius Saturnal. 3.13. thus. Coena haecfuit. Ante coenam echinos, ostreas crudas, quantum vellent, peloridas, sphondylos, turdum, asparagos, subtus gallinam altilem, etc. The manner of the Supper was this. Before supper, Urchins, (the now meat of vagabond Gypsees) raw Oysters in abundance, Palours, the roots of Angelica, Thrushes, Sperage; covering under them a crammed Hen, with other strange delicates. Macrobius addeth, In coenâ, at Supper; Sumina, sinciput aprugnum, patinam piscium, patinam suminis, anates, querquedulas elixas, lepores, altilia assa, amylum, panes Picentes. The soused hinder teats of newly farrowing Sows, the cheeks of a wild Boar, or Brawn; a great platter of fish; a charger of fat Ducks; Teals boiled, Hares, fatted fowls roasted; wafers, loaves of bread fetched from the people dwelling about Rubicon and Ancona. Yet of both these, of all, he saith only, Caena haec fuit, this was their Supper. And the divine Apostle (though there was nothing else or eaten, or drinken, save only the consecrated bread and wine, at our blessed Saviour's receiving and administering the holy Eucharist) calleth this heavenly refection, the Supper of our Lord 1 Cor. 11.20. And behold whilst I was writing of this passage, I received a gratulatory letter from that Mundus eruditionis, that living Library, the most eminent Regius professor of Divinity, Doctor Collins Provost of our King's College in Cambridge, in these very words; So wishing you Tri-Nestora 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to your Tricaniums happy accomplishment (for he had heard of it) fearing no Martha's obstreperousnesse, while you play both Martha and Mary in one: I crave your good prayers to God. Accordingly I have prayed, and do pray to God, to bless us with increase of Grace, and guide us to his Glory. Amen. Therefore I have presumed upon the Triple Supper at which our Saviour was present in one night, the last night that he lived in this world a natural common life, viz. The Paschal solemnity, the ordinary Supper, the thrice-sacred-Supper of our Lord and Saviour, to term all three joined together, or continued, Tricaenium, the threefold Supper of Christ. To the proofs in the second book for a threcfold Supper, let me now add the words of Justinian the Jesuit on 1 Corinth. 11.20. Solet triplex caena distingui; Legalis seu typica, quâ agnus Paschalis comedebatur: Mystica, seu nova, quae spectat ad Sacramenti institutionem: tertia communis, quae ad azymorum usum inchoandum instituta erat. The threefold Supper is usually distinguished into the Legal or Typical, wherein the Paschal Lamb was eaten: the Mystical or new Supper, which belongs to the institution of the Sacrament: and the Third or common Supper, which was ordained to begin the use of unleavened bread. Though Justinian err in the order, placing the Supper of the Lord before the Common Supper; and though he err in the reason, because the Jews did eat their Paschal Supper with unleavened bread, before the Second Supper was brought in, and so the Second Supper did not begin the use of unleavened bread: yet in the main, for Three Suppers he is in the right. Nor can I well digest, that the Papists are so vehemently offended with our men, for calling the Third Supper, the Supper of our lord Estius, Franciscus, Lucas Brugensis, especially Maldonate (if the words be not fathered on him.) Any name almost better pleaseth them, than that (the Supper of our lord) In my Miscellanies, and in the second book of this Tricaenium, I have been very bitter against the maledicency and scolding of the Jesuit Maldonate. And in truth the words in his book deserve sharp reprehension, and recrimination, as being too full of spleen, partiality, calumny, and base untruth. That I wrote so eagerly against the person of the man, I am sorry: For I have been credibly informed lately by one (who in all likelihood knew the inside of such business) even my very learned good friend Mr John Salkeld, that Maldonate in his life was esteemed a moderate Papist, yea a favourer of our Religion; and after his death, that his Commentaries on the Gospels did suffer, by divers other more factious Jesuits both dispunctions and additions, with strange alterations. Da magistrum, give me my master, quoth Cyprian of Tertullian. The right reverend father in God, Richard, now Lord Bishop of Norwich, was sometimes my Precedent, whilst I was chamber-fellow with him in the King's College in Cambridge. His writings have I delighted in. His most learned Apparatus was I (on other occasions) reading: when unexpectedly (as I was writing my excuse of Maldonate) I found the same opinion confirmed by him, another way. I rather think (saith he) Apparatu 7. Paragrapho 16. that other Massipontane Jesuits did intersert into Maldonate his Commentaries when he was dead, the rail against our men; since 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Historicus Thuanus, that most true historian Thuanus relateth, that Maldonate was a most modest man. But in his Commentaries are most scurrilous revile, which could never proreed from Modesty, I date say. The same day also, I overviewing (upon other occasions) the learned Casaubone, found to my hand as casually as Abraham found the Ram, and Isaac the venison (as he said) that Exercitatione 16. cap. 32. he saith of Maldonate that he was a learned man, & sine controversiâ, acerrimi ingenii: Now, whether he meaned that out of doubt, and confessedly he was of excellent parts, and of a most keen sharp wit: or that he was a sharp-witted man, except when he meddled with controversies, I did somewhat doubt. For Casaubone could not but have read (and perhaps to it he alluded) what Aulus Gellius lib. 10. c. 15. hath written, viz. that when Antonius Julianus the Rhetorician, had heard a rich ill-bred Gentleman too too talkative in a doubtful, if not unexplicable controversy; he said privately, most facetiously, and with an exceeding bitter irrision, Adolescens hic, sine controversiâ, disertus est: If he meddle not in hard points, he is an eloquent young man. But passing by the man, let us come to the matter: the ground why I call it the Third Supper, is, because when the Paschal and the Common Supper were eaten before: the blessed Eucharist was instituted in the last place; and the same holy Eucharist is termed by the Apostle St. Paul 1 Corinth. 11.20. The Supper of the Lord: this is not to eat the Lords Supper. Concerning the Third Supper, it is nowhere in Scripture called a Supper, saith Maldonate on Matth. 26.26. and in this point falleth a scoffing thus. The Calvinists without authority of Scripture, without example of old writers, without reason, without judgement, call it a Supper, when they ought rather to call it Merenda, a beaver, if they take it after dinner: a dinner, if they take it at noon: a breakfast, if they take it in the morning. Yet Maldonate himself calleth it so: his fellow Jesuits call it so: Cyprian and other Fathers call it Canam Domini, the Supper of the lord Caena Dei, the Supper of God in Tertullian. The same Maldonate on John 13.2. Tres caenas Christus (ut nonnulli authores observarunt) illâ nocte fecit: Christ (as some authors have observed) made Three Suppers in the same night (in which he was betrayed.) The first was the Legal Surper of the Paschal Lamb. The second was the Common Supper (the paschal being ended, which was not ordained so much to satiate and nourish nature, as to keep the Legal Ceremony) that they, who had eaten the Lamb, if they wanted more meat to satisfy themselves, might be filled with ordinary meats. Consider (Reader) if these two testimonies from him do not hack one another. If it be objected, that Bellarmine saith, Dominus post ceremoniam agni Paschalis continuò subjunxit celebrationem Eucharistiae; nec distulit in aliud tempus, aut locum, ut apertè ostenderet, se nouâ istâ coremoniâ coremoniâ finem imponere veteri. The Lord after the Ceremony of the Paschal Lamb, did presently subjoin the celebration of the (blessed) Eucharist: neither did he put it over till another time or place, that he might plainly show that he did impose an end to the old (Law) by that new ceremony. From which words it may seem to result that there was not second Supper. I answer: Bellarmine speaks not of the Sacrificium agni, the Sacrifice of the Lamb, but of the Ceremonia agni Paschalis, of the ceremony of the Paschal Lamb; which may very truly be extended to the end of the second Supper. The second Supper treading (as itwere) on the heels of the first, and the Paschal Lamb or the flesh thereof standing still on the table unremoved, till the end of the second Supper. And thus Bellarmine may seem to be rather for us, than against us. PAR. 3. The Greek Fathers style it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; yea, most expressly it is called the Lords Supper, 1 Corinth. 11.20. and though Maldonate interpreteth the place of the Agapae, which out of doubt were not rightly used in those days, and were reprehended by St. Paul: yet at those Agapae was the Lord's Supper eaten: or they a little before, or after it. And St. Paul divinely teacheth them, first negatively, that they eat not the Supper of the Lord, when they eat their own supper one before another, vers. 20.21. or when some were hungry, some drunken; and that in the Church of God: whereupon he telleth them, they had houses to eat and drink in, and will by no means praise their do, ver. 22. Secondly positively; that they truly eat the Supper of the Lord, who follow Christ for their pattern, and imitate his example: and so by consequence showeth the right institution of the Lords Supper, which was his main intent fully to declare against all concomitant abuses, to that end that they might follow it accordingly. As the Eucharist came in the room of the Paschal, so the Agapae after Christ's time succeeded in the place of the Second Supper of the Jews. Albaspinaeus observationum 1. observatione 18. pag. 58. speaks timorously. I will not deny, in the Apostles time, but that the Agapae were made perhaps at or with the celebration of the Eucharist. He might have spoken boldly. Three things are certain. First, before Tertullia's time the Eucharist was given and taken in the morning. Secondly, The Agapae were in the evening. Thirdly, Yet at the first they were both about the same time. Let me say a little of each point. 1. For the receiving of the Sacrament in the morning, Tertullian ad uxorem thus: Non sciot maritus quid secreto ante omnem cibum gusts? Shall not thy husband know what thou dost eat in secret, before thou dost cast a bit of any other meat? And after him Saint Augustine would have the Eucharist eaten fasting, propter honorem Corporis Dominici, out of a religious reverence to the Lords Body. More plainly the same Tertullian in lib. de corona militis; Eucharistiae Sacramentum— etiam antelucanis coetibus, nec de aliorum manu, quàm de prasidentium sumimus; we receive the Sacrament of the blessed Eucharist even at our morning meetings, and that at the hand of no other but of our own Ministers. And Pliny, who was Rationalis Trajani, trajan's Receiver and Accountant, did certify the Emperor, that the Christians were wont to meet before day light, ut sua sacra facerent, to perform their divine service. 2. Concerning the second point, namely the Agapae, that they were kept in the evening, is as apparent. Coena nostra de nomine rationem sui reddit. Vocatur enim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, id quod Dilectio penes Gracos est. The name of our Supper showeth its nature, that it is a Love-feast: yet a Supper it was, and so he called it. Otherwhere he saith, Coenulas nostras sugillatis, you scoff at our Suppers; where, the Agapae are not wholly excluded. Otherwhere, Coena nostra vocatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Supper is called a Love-feast. Quantiscunque sumptibus constat, lucrum est pietatis nomine facere sumptum: siquidem inopes quoque isto refrigerio juvamus. How costly soever our Love-feasts be, expense for piety sake is gain; for the poor are refreshed with it. Augustinus contra Faustum 20.20. Agapae nostrae pauperes pascunt, sive frugibus, sive carmbus: Our Love-feasts do feed the poor, either with bread, or meat; one way or other. 3. The third point is as evident from 1 Cor. 11. that the Primitive Christians kept no great distance of time between the sacred Eucharist and the Agapae: For the Apostle proceedeth from the abuses of one, to prevent the abuses which might fall in the other, and speaketh as of things almost conjoined. And from hence the Gentiles objected, that Christians at their Love-feasts did eat an Infant; because the blessed Eucharist was in the same Agapae, or near the time administered; and it being called spiritually the Flesh, and the Blood of Christ, the Christians were accused that they did eat man's flesh, and drink man's blood. Albaspinaeus doth answer very shallowly, That this crime was forged, even from the days of Tiberius, as Tertullian saith in his Apologetic. I reply. All this is true, that it was a most horrid falsehood, an affected Lie, coined in Tiborius his time. But the question is not, Whether the same were true, or false; (to which only Albaspinaeus supinely but idly answereth) but from what ground or probability the rumour did arise, or how we may trace the report home to its own form, to the bed from whence it first started. I say again, It was because the Eucharist and the Agapae were conjoined, and were then kept at Night-season: thereupon they found fault with the Suppers of Christians, as sated with blood and humane flesh. And perhaps in after times this was one true reason why they are the blessed Sacrament in the morning, and the Agapae at night, to remove that objection; That in the night they feasted not themselves with the blood of an Infant. Which practice, though it staggered the report, and someway diverted it, and the Christians absoluti sunt, were acquitted; yet litura manebat, the spot was not clean taken away, as Claudius was wont to say in another case & aliquid haerebat, but something still remained behind, because the accusation was boldly vouched. Inveterate rumours are not easily wiped out. If Albaspinaeus had observed, that at their single separated Agapae there was no possibility of suspicion of Infanticide, or feeding on man's flesh, or drinking of man's blood, but that the words of the body and blood of Christ eaten, and drunken, might in the carnal misinterpretation be Caput famae, a ground (though slippery) for report, and for such a report, through their malice and infidelity; he would then have said (without a perhaps) that for a good while after Christ's time both the Eucharist and the Love-feasts did touch or kiss each the other; and that thence arose the horrid imputation, that their Suppers were accused as sceleris infames, infamous for villainies, to use Tertullia's phrase. Weigh this farther circumstance. The Agapae were kept on the Lord's day: Diebus Dominicis celebrabant Agapas, they celebrated their Love-feasts on the Lord's day, saith Albaspinaeus himself, observat. 18. and then was the most blessed Eucharist administered; that day above all other days, that time of the day, even about Supper time, in imitation of our Lord. Tertullian ad uxorem 2.4. speaketh of Pagan husband's suspicion of their Christian wives: Quis ad Convivium Dominicum illud, quod infamant, sine sua suspitione dimittet? Who can endure to let his wife go to that infamous banquet of the Lord without jealousy? What this Convivium Dominicum, this Banquet of the Lord is, falleth under enquiry. Pamelius interpreteth it, de Missa Christianorum, of the Christians Mass. Rhenanus, Junius, Mornaeus, Casaubonus Exercitat. 6. pag. 512. interpreteth it of the Eucharist. Albaspinaeus in his notes on this place of Tertullian, thus fare concludeth wittily and truly, That Tertullian speaketh of that Banquet or Feast that was infamous among the Gentiles. Convivium illud, quod infamant, are the very words of Tertullian. But they were not suspected of any incest at the Eucharist, saith Albaspinaeus, or of any unlawful lust then, as from Pliny junior and others may appear. Therefore those scandals were only taken against the Agapae, or Love-feasts. What things are objected against the Christians, in Justin, adversus-Judaeos Apolog. 2. In Tertullian Apologet. and ad Scapulam, De cultu foeminarum, in Minutius Foelix, in Eusebius 4.1. & 4. capitibus, concerning their Suppers, and Infanticide, they are to be referred to the Agapae, in which the Eucharist was neither consecrated, nor received. Thus fare Whitethorn, or Albaspinaeus. But if he had observed, either that at their Agapae only there was no possibility of suspicion concerning Infanticide, and that at the Eucharist a carnal man might so interpret it; or that the Eucharist was held by the Gentiles worse than the Agapae, so much worse, as Infanticide, and devouring humane flesh and blood, are worse than the sins of the eighth Commandment; or that the holy Eucharist and the Agapae were kept both at one time, about Supper time, in the days Apostolical: and the Eucharist being first dispatched, the suspicion for lust was laid upon the Second Supper, where they did feast, sing, and were merry: and that Tertullian Apologetico cap. 39 mentioneth the Triclintum Christianorum, the Supping-beds of the Christians, and their discumbing thereon, both men and women: I say again, he would have concluded without a perhaps, that the blessed Eucharist and the Agapae were not dissundered by much time, but rather were united; and he would not have rejected, as he did, both his own and our Heroes, Pamelius, Rhenanus, Junius, Mornaeus, Casaubone, to whom let me add that learned Jesuit Ludovicus de la Cerda, who interpreteth Dominicum Convivium, the Lords Supper, thus; Convivium Domini peragebatur, celebrabaturque sacrâ Eucharistiâ: ac tunc menticbantur Gentiles, ac dicebant, Christianos panem sacrum Eucharistiae edere intinctum sanguine jugulati Infantis: So fare Cerda. The Banquet of the Lord was kept and celebrated at the sacred Eucharist: and then did the Gentiles falsely report, and say, that the Christians did eat the sacred bread of the Eucharist dipped in the blood of a butchered Infant. I may not omit it is called Dei coena, the Supper of God, in Tertullian ad uxorem 2.6. And that Albaspinaeus in all his Observations observed not that the Agapae or Love-feasts did succeed the Second Supper of the Jews, at all their great feasts: which Suppers were for the most part contiguous, and never fare dissundered. Julian the Apostata taxed the Christians for these three altogether, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is in Petavius his Edition pag. 588. chrysostom Homiliâ 27. on the Epistle to the Corinthians, Statis diebus mensas faciebant communes, on set and certain times they kept common feast: & peracta synaxi post Sacramentorum communionem, omnes commune inibant Convivium: and when the Congregation was dismissed, after they had communicated of the Sacraments, they all met together at a common Banquet. Thus did the Agapae, or Love-feasts, succeed in the room of the Second Jewish Supper. After the Sacraments were administered they feasted altogether. PAR. 4. THe Papists say, That the Apostle speaketh of the Agapae, or Love-feasts, and not of the sacred Eucharist; as I proved before. Suffer me, I pray you, to clear the text concerning the Agapae. 1. First, I would know where any, or whoever called the Agapae, or Love-feasts, the Supper of the Lord. Tertullian indeed Apologetic. cap. 39 calleth their Love-feast, Coenam, a Supper; but that ever he or any other called it, singled by itself, Coenam Domini, the Supper of the Lord, with reference to the Sacrament, I remember not. As Agapae were doled to the poor (and what is given to them is lent to the Lord) so it may be called the Lords Supper. 2. Secondly, the Agapae, or Love-feasts, were never begun or practised by Christ, never in use whilst Christ lived on the earth, in likelihood not till after he was ascended into heaven, some short time after: so they were of a latter institution than the blessed Sacrament, though they were holy, just, conscionable, and founded on sufficient good authority, viz. Divine. 3. Thirdly, if there had been no abuse In or At the Agapae, or Love-feasts among the Corinthians, yet the rightest use of them could never produce this Consequent; That, that was to eat the Supper of the Lord, which must be the resultance from the opinion of the Papists. For none can deny but the Church did sometimes use the Agapae, or Love-feasts, holily and heavenly; And yet it was a different thing, To eat the Lords Supper. Both the Supper of the Lord, and the Agapae, or Love-feasts, might be, and have been perfectly administered, severally, and at several hours and watches of the day, or night: also jointly, and contiguously, one presently after the other: sometimes the one first, and sometimes the other. 4. Fourthly, the Agapae, or Love-feasts, succeeded indeed in the room of the Second, or Common Supper. And it is as clear as the light, that the Corinthians did first eat their Agapa's, or Love-feasts: Every one taketh before his own Supper, 1 Cor. 11.21. 5. Fifthly, These Corinthian Agapae, or Love-feasts, were celebrated in the Church. For the Apostle reproveth them, because they did not eat at Home, before they came to the Church. What, have ye not Houses to eat and drink in? or despise ye the Church of God? ver. 22. 6. Sixthly, There being divisions among the Corinthians, v. 18. it is more than likely, that the maintainers of each Schism supped Apart, by Themselves; thereby fomenting divisions, and cherishing factions. 7. Seventhly, It is probable, that the Rich supped by Themselves: For certain it is, that the Poor were neglected. Ye shame them that are poor, or that have not, ver. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, subaudi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that have no part of Supper. And this neglect was against the primary end of these Agapae, which was, principally, to comfort and refresh the Poor. Tertullian speaketh much in commendation of these Love-feasts. Inopes quosque refrigerio isto juvamus: we relieve every Poor body by that refection of ours (saith he Apologet. cap. 39) And the Confessors in Prison had not only part of the Collections of the Christians (saith Tertullian ibidem) but had part also of their Love-feasts. Tertullian ad Martyrs cap. 2. what is fit for the bodies of Martyrs, they want not; per curam Ecclesiae, & Agapen fratrum, through the care of the Church, and the charity of the Brethren. PAR. 5. EIghthly, as by the words, One is hungry, we may not imagine, that the Apostle confined his meaning to singly One, to Only One, and no other: so when he saith, Another is drunken, he appropriateth not the fault to meer-One-alone, as if no more were drunken; but modestly covering their faults, and charitably casting, as it were, a mantle over their nakedness, what was too common among them, he qualifieth, modifieth, and diminisheth, by reducing all to the singular number, One is drunken. 9 Ninthly, Though the Main abuses, if not All, reprehended by the Apostle in these Corinthians, were committed in Agapis, Before the receiving of the Lords Supper; yet because these disorders were ill preparatories unto the heavenly food of their souls, wicked in themselves, and scandalous to others; though they did receive the Lord's Supper afterwards, yet this was not the way to eat the Lords Supper. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Some interpret it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nonlicet, ye may not eat it So. Others say, that the Apostle by an usual hyperbole precisely denieth That to be done, which was not well done of the most. I like the former exposition of Vatablus and Erasmus, because the Apostle findeth fault with the Corinthians for eating the Lords Supper with those precedent ill fashions, and reduceth them to Christ's own institution of his Third and last Supper, without mentioning any thing concerning the Agapae. Neither is there involved an express denial of their receiving, but they received in ill Fashion, and after an ill Manner. 10. Tenthly, Casaubone, Exercitatione 16. cap. 31. thus. Peccatum Corinthiorum, quod reprehenditur ab Apostolo, etsi propriè ad Naturam, & substantiam hujus Sacramenti admittebatur, & erat conjunctum cum venerandi mysterii contemptu, & contumelia: in iis nempe conviviis, quae Sacramento adjicere moris erat, exercendae charitatis ergô, propterea Paulus totam illam Corinthiorum actionem, quae sacro, & communi convivio constabat, à potiore parte vocat Coenam Dominicam. The sin of the Corinthians, which the Apostle finds fault withal, though it belonged not properly to the nature and substance of this Sacrament: yet because they committed it by occasion of the Sacrament, and was accompanied with the contempt, and shame of the venerable Eucharist: namely in those Feasts, which custom added to the Sacrament, to excercise their charity; therefore Paul called all that action of the Corinthians, which consisted of a sacred and common Banquet, from the better, and nobler part thereof, the Supper of the Lord. But that great scholar is miserably deceived in this following thing. Manè, sine dubio (saith he) Corinthii Eucharistiam celebrabant, quam sequebantur posteà epulae Communes. Out of doubt the Corinthians received the Eucharist in the morning, and the Common Feast followed after. Yet the Apostle fully intimateth, that the Corinthians kept their refections in the Church, Before they received the blessed Eucharist; and some of them were kept with great excess, as I proved before. Casaubone his Sine dubio (out of doubt) is but a fancy, of which himself made no doubt; others do. Another error is in the same chapter. That what S. Paul calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Supper, should rather be termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, prandium, a dinner, if we respect the time, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a breakfast. And he allegeth this reason out of chrysostom, according to the Church's usage, which the Apostles, out of doubt, instituted of receiving of the Sacrament Early and Fasting; that Heavenly banquet, may be termed a breakfast, or a dinner. Suppose this were so, that the holy Communion of the Corinthians may be, ought rather to be called, in respect of the time of taking it, a breakfast, which they took only Saliuâ virgineâ, with Virgin spittle, or fasting (as it is apparently false) yet ought it to be termed the Supper of the Lord. For the Lord took it, not at breakfeast, or at dinner, but at night only, at the Third Supper; And this is enough to justify the title of Tricoenium. Justinian the Jesuit near the place above-cited, says, the words, Postquam coenavit, after he had supped, may be expounded not only of the Paschall Lamb, but also of the Common Supper. Nam sub finem coenae communis instituta est Eucharistia: for about the end of the Common Supper, (which was the Second Supper) Christ did institute and celebrate the Eucharist (which is the Third and Last Supper of our Lord) called by S. Paul. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: called by Dionysius Areopagita, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The most Heavenly, and Archi-mysterious Supper, as Casaubone well observed; called by other Fathers, and by Baronius and Justinian, Coena Domini, The Supper of the Lord, as you may see the proofs at large in Casaubone. Dei Coena, God's Supper (saith Tertullian ad uxorem, 2.6.) Augustine's appellation is, Communio Coenae, the Communion of the Supper, de Anima cap. 6. 11. In the eleaventh place, I think the words of Casaubone, require more proof, or are to be distinguished upon, when he saith. Out of doubt the Apostles did appoint the Church to receive the Sacrament Early, and Fasting. That the Churches did so, and did well, to do so, in later times, is confessed. That some Churches did take the holy Communion, Early, and Fasting in the fourth Age, is also confessed. It was a fault objected against chrysostom that he gave the Communion Post sumptum cibum, after the Christians had broken their fast. The Romans used this peculiar king of action; when they swore, they took up a stone, and did fling it from them, and prayed; May Jupiter throw me away, as I fling away this stone, if I speak not truth. The good old father S. chrysostom, was much moved, with that false suggestion: and thereupon, with enough, if not too much, earnestness, He perhaps alluded, to the oaths of the Gentiles, but certainly swore in Christian terms, If I have done so, let Christ cast me out of his Kingdom. In his seven and twentieth Homily in 1 Epistolam ad Corinthios, he saith, you, before you receive (the holy Eucharist) do Fast: that you may some way, or other, seem worthy to Communicate: and if that be a sound Rule in the Decretals, that None should bear witness, but Fasting: whereby they may the better consider what they swear: I judge that propter dignitatem corporis Dominici, for the honour of the Lords body no sustenance should be taken, before the blessed food (which strengtheneth our souls) be taken by us. And yet if chrysostom had administered the Sacrament after meat, he instanceth in the example of our blessed lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who administered the Communion after Supper. S Augustine himself took it Fasting, propter honorem corporis Dominici, for the honour of the Lords body; yet he add Januarium confesseth, some Churches of Africa received the Sacrament in the end of the day; others received it, both in the Morning, and in the Evening. Augustine's ad Januarium Epist. 118. cap. 4. is sufficient authority, that on Good-friday anniversarily the Church received the blessed Sacrament twice; once in the Morning, once in the Evening. Et cap. 7. Plures, & propè omnes in plerisque locis eo die Coenare consueverunt; Most, and almost all used to take it at Supper. And the privilege of this day, viz. to receive the blessed Eucharist at night, continued till the days of Pope Honorius, who broke it off. And though Augustine himself with his, were wont to fast; Then tocelebrate the Communion; Then to sup, cap. 5. yet the same Augustine ibid. cap. 6. Liquidò apparet, quando primùm acceperunt discipuli corpus, & sanguinem Domini, non eos accepisse jejunos. It is a plain case, that when the Disciples did first receive the body and blood of the Lord, they did not receive it fasting: The Apostles at first are not the Eucharist, Fasting. But we must not therefore calumniate the Universal Church, because they always take it Fasting. For it pleaseth the holy Ghost, that for the honour of so great a Sacrament, the Lords body should be eaten before other meats; and therefore, per universum orbem mos iste servatur; this custom is kept over the whole world. And the contrary custom of receiving the Eucharist after supper, was forbidden by the third Council of Carthage, Canone 29. except only on the Anniversary day of the Supper of the Lord. Yea, that very permission and indulgence of receiving the Sacrament at night, only on Good-friday at night, was disannulled, and antiquated by the Council of Tarracon in Spain. So much for the Western Church. But the Eastern Church forbade Night-offerings in the Laodicaean Council; Canon 5. and in the sixth General Council, cap. 79. So Pamelius on Cyprian. Euthychianus the Pope (you shall find it in Ivo parte 2. cap. 45.) was so strict for the receiving of the Sacrament Fasting, that he Decreed, whosoever took the Sacrament after meat, yea though it were but a petit refection, if they were youths, they should repent three days: if they were of perfect age, they should do seven day's penance: if they were Priests, or Clergymen, they should be punished for it, twenty days together. Goulartius on the same Epistle affordeth a liberty to the Pastors of the Churches; That for the circumstance of times, and places, both of old, and in our Age, they did, and may appoint the Communion to be kept, either at early Morning, or in the Day, or at Night. Adding, they were forced in time of persecution, to celebrate the Communion, not once only, but many times in one day. And some Egyptians (saith Socrates, lib. 5.) supped liberally, before they received the Sacrament, and yet did eat the holy Communion, about Eventide. Some of these have I cited out of Casaubone, against himself. For in the Morning, (saith he) it should seem, by the authority of the Universal Church, Jam inde à principio, it was a custom almost every where, to take the Eucharist Fasting. That it was so about Augustine's, and Chrysostom's days, I confess, with some limitation. But that it was so, jam inde à principio, is hardly, or not at all to be proved. Let me ascend higher, to Tertullia's time; and even here in the second Age of the Church, he is pregnant enough, that the blessed Sacrament was taken by the Christians, Fasting. Non sciet maritus, quid secretò ante omnem cibum gusts? shall not your husband know what you take secretly before any meat is tasted by you? Tertulliam ad Vxerem 2.5. The same Tertullian Apolegetic. cap. 2. witnesseth that Plinius Secundus wrote to Trajan; that the Christians had coetus Antelucanos ad canendum Christo, & Deo: Early meetings before day to sing to Christ, and to God. But sing they did at their Communions. And they did (saith Pliny) seipsos Sacramento obstringere; Bind themselves by the Sacrament; which was the Christians receiving of the Sacrament, (as Baronius opineth ad annum Christi, 104.) for they bond not themselves to any evil, but from doing evil (saith Pliny;) And this was ante Lucem; before day (saith the said Pliny.) And yet the same Tertullian de Coronâ militis, 3. cap. saith, Eucharisiiae Sacramentum, & in tempore victus, & omnibus mandatum à domino etiam antelucanis coetibus sumimus. Some received it at Night, some at Mealetime, some ere Break of day. Rhenanus on the place of Tertullian; Non solum victus tempore erant soliti accipere Eucharistiam. sed etiam in congregationibus, quae nonnunquam ante exortum diem fiebant. An ingenuous confession, That the primitive Church in the second Age was wont, at Mealetime (that is not excluding Supper) to receive the Sacrament: and yet that some times they received the same before the Dayspring. Radevicus relateth of Constantine, that either alone, or with very small company or retinue, he beheld the meetings of the Priests in the Churches before daylight. Cyprianus Epistola, 63. ad Coecilium Paragraph, 12. acknowledgeth the use of receiving in sacrificiis matutinus, in their morning sacrifices: yet faulting such as received the Sacrament with water only, as fearing least through the scent and taste of wine, they might smell of the blood of Christ; and confuting those, who receiving the Communion with water only in the Morning, yet when they came to supper, they offered mixtum Calicem, the sacred Cup with wine and water: Cyprian addeth ibid. Christ ought to make his offering about Eventide; that the hour of offering might show the Eventide of the World. I answer, The hour of the Paschall offering was exactly prescribed: But the hour, or time of administering the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist was free, and arbitrary; yet the Prophet might fitly allude to Christ, Psal. 141.2. when he said; Let the lifting up of my hands, be as the Evening sacrifice. But we (saith Cyprian) do celebrate the Lords Resurrection in the Morning: The sense is; we offer the holy Communion in the Morning in remembrance of the Lords Resurrection. For certainly (say I) he Arose in the Morning, Mat. 28.1. as it began to dawn: that is, very early in the Morning, Mark. 16.1. Early, when it was yet dark, John 20.1. and yet even Then, was the stone taken from the Sepulchre; the undoubted sign of Christ's Resurrection: and by his Arising, buried the Jewish Sabbath, which by his death was dead before. The custom of receiving the holy Sacrament at Night continued, in some places, even unto the days of Augustine, (saith Pamelius on the forecited place of Cyyprian.) So was it observed by the Egyptians near Alexandria: and by them of Thebâis (saith Socrates;) and Thebâis was a whole region, bounding on Aethiopia, Plinius, 5.9. Gregorius Nazians. Oratione in sanctum Baptisma, saith; Christ observed the Mystery of the Paschall, After Supper, and in the House:— We in the Churches, and Before Supper: And the Mystery of the Paschall, I take to be nothing else, but the holy Eucharist. For what have we to do else with the Paschall Mstyeries? The Paschall was a type: The Eucharist, the mystery typified: the Paschall, the Ceremony, and shadow: the Eucharist, was the substance, and body. Leo Magnus in an high strain, thus; The old observance in the Judaical Passeover, is taken away by the New Sacrament: Sacrifice is translated, and passed over into a Sacrifice: Blood excludeth blood: And the legal Festivity, whilst, or, as it is changed, is fulfilled. PAR. 6. IT is clear from Tertullian, that the Primitive Church had their Triclinia, as I proved before: and did lie along, or discumbere, when they did eat their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. It is also as evident, that because it was irreligious to use such gesturesin the hurches, that the Laodicaean Council forbade any to Feast, or to eat their Love-Suppers in the Churches, or in the Temples of God to make beds to lie on. Justin Martyr also is punctual, both that the people sat in Sermon time, and prayed standing: in Apologia 2. These were changeable Rites, and not observed a like in the Churches. Before I leave this place, it is considerable what Augustinus Januario Epistola 118. cap. 6. teacheth us; That the Corinthians, whom the Apostle reproved, and amended, did at their tables, mingle the Sacrament with their own meat, which was a gross abuse. And the same abuse is remembered, by Gregory Nazianzene Oratione in Sanctum lavacrum. By Epiphanius toward the end of his 3. Book of the Fashions of the Primitive Church. By chrysostom Homil. 27. on the 1 Epist. to the Corinthinans, cap. 11. By Isidore de Divinis Officiis. By Bede on Luke, 22. By Paschasius de corpore Domini, cap 19 and most amply handled by Walafridus Strabo de rebus Ecclesiae, cap. 19 So far Pamelius on Cyprian. That ill Custom is condemned by Calvin, Institut. 4.10. But the kneeling in prayers with our hats off, he there commendeth; and the administration of the Lords Supper, not fordidly and unmannerly; but solemnly, and reverently. More particularly concerning Kneeling in the time of solemn prayers he saith ibid. Parag. 30. That it is so an Humane tradition, that it is also a Divine tradition: And it proceedeth from God, as it is part of the Decency which the Apostle commendeth to us; but of this more hereafter. PAR. 7. I Now proceed to the twelfth point. In the Epistle of Cyprian, and of the African Synod to Cornelius, as it is in the first volume of the General Counsels printed at Venice, pag. 381. Nos Sacerdotes sacrificia Des quotidiè celebramus: we Priests do daily celebrate the service of God. And Augustine in the forecited Epistle to Januarius, thus; Alii quotidiè cōmunicant corpori & sanguini Dominico, alii certis diebus accipiunt, etc. Some every day receive the Eucharist, some at certain times only. In one place they receive it on the Sabbath, and on the Lord's day; in another they take it only on the Lord's day. Neither doth Saint Augustine condemn those who take it daily; nor them who choose Set-days: nor them who receive After Supper: or Sup After their receiving. Faciat ergo quisque quod in eâ Ecclesia, in quam venit, invenerit. Let every one (saith he) follow the Custom of that Church in which he liveth; Which is an holy advice in itself; but thrusteth through the loins of all self-conceited Singularists, who know not, or use not that holy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that pliable condescent, that humble yielding, that charitable, peaceable, and candid exposition of things either unknown, or doubtful; which the Fathers of the first Christian times both practised, and taught. Casaubone commendeth the Fathers for it: and wished to find it among the Jesuits; and I for my part, rather prefer a supple accordance, a reconciling, and uniting of differences, before the drawing, and stretching of the rope of Contention by both ends, and before the multiplying of alienations, or divisions; which S. Basil calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an Over-earnest desire to draw all things to the contrary part. Eudemon Johannes, that fierce fiery Devil, holds; That healing virtue, that balm for scissures or ruptures, that mild and moderate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be little less than the betraying of Truth, than the abjuration of all Christian Religion. Casaubone justly reproveth the eager, and fiery Jesuit, Exercitatione, 16. cap. 32. And not Casaubone only, but the great, and learned Rigaltius in his Observations on Tertullian de Oratione, commendeth in the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Tertullian, aswell as of other Fathers. Tanta fuit patribus charitatis cura, ut plerosque ritus ratione non bona receptos, tolerarent potius quàm rigidâ censurâ vel minimam scissurae occasionem praberent, pag. 40. The Fathers (saith Rigaltius) had so great a regard unto, or care of Charity, that they did rather bear with divers Rites, though instituted, and received upon no good ground; than they would by rigid censure, administer the least occasion of scissure or division. Yet there were ever some, who, whereas they ought to esteem, or labour to make indifferent things good; and good things, Better; do yet endeavour to make good things, but Indifferent; Indifferent matters, to be bad; and bad to be worse. But, as Rigaltius truly observeth; Hac erat, illo aevo, Christianoruni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In those days, not only the Fathers, but other Christians also used that modest, holy complying, and condescent. Neither (God be blessed) hath this latter age had all, and only rigid and inflexible Lutherans, Jesuits, and Puritans: but God hath given unto the Church moderate men, of softer metal. Calvin himself gives good advice to Farellus; Though (saith he) we be free in all things, yet let us be servants to peace and concord. I cannot but add that most divine temper of Calvin, (if the same flowed from his heart which flowed from his pen) that though Luther called him a Devil a thousand times, yet he would never say otherwise of Luther, but that he was a chief servant of God. And I hope the best, because in another case, where he was much abused, yet his complaints were moderate and modest. To establish his newfound Presbytery, which was falling to the ground, he became the busiest Polypragmon that ever was in the world of his means. He cryeth down Tithes, giveth all power (almost) to the Lay-Magistrates of Geneva, upholdeth usury, culium obsequio petens, by flattery and beggary, seeking to be reverenced; accepteth a slipend of forty pounds annually. And when the fixed honorary of Tithes was taken away, the unfixed humours of the Laics appeared. They cared not to pay him his ten pound quarterly; and if the silly man had starved for his pretty new invention, they had not much esteemed. Yet doth not he play the Boutefeau, he animateth none to rebellion, he seeketh not the change of estate, though the penurious man in his Commentaries on Gen. 47. and Gal. 6. could not but complain how slowly and ill he was paid. When they received the blessed Sacrament on Good-friday, they did forbear to kiss one another, as it was usual at other times. For the Apostle commands it Romans 16.16. 1 Cor. 16.20. and 2 Cor. 13.12. in all three places not a Lustful but a Peaceful, An Holy kiss is appointed. Greet ye one another with an Holy kiss, as it is in all three places. But 1 Thes. 5.26. it is varied, Greet ye All the brethren with an Holy kiss. Lastly, the Apostle Saint Peter showeth what manner of Kiss this aught to be: Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity: peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus, 1 Pet. 5.14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a kiss of Charity; perhaps because it was given and received when they went to their Agapae, or Feasts of Charity; a Kiss to manifest true Charity, a Kiss to settle peace, a Kiss to seal up the prayers of Christians one to another; and practised duly and reverently it was, as appeareth both by the Greek and Latin Liturgies. Origen saith, this Custom is delivered to the Churches, that After prayers, fratres suscipiant se invicem osculo, the Christian brethren kissed one another. Saint Augustine thus divinely, and always like himself; After the Lord's prayer they say, Pax vobiscum, peace be with you; and then the Christians kiss one another with an Holy Kiss, which is the sign of peace. As thy lips approach to the lips of thy brother; so let thy heart come nigh his heart; Sermone 83. de diversis. So this kiss is called Holy, to discriminate it from False, Amorous, Civil Kisses. A False Kiss, Joah gave to Amasa, with a deadly stab, 2 Sam. 20.9. A more False Kiss Judas gave to Christ; Betrayest thou the Son of Man with a Kiss? (saith Christ to the Traitor) Luke 22.48. Amorous Kisses, some of them, are wholly unlawful, such as are obscene and incite to swelling Lust: Oscula qui sumpsit, si non, etc. As it is in that voluptuous, profane, and Epicurean Poet. I forbear to English. Et quae sentiri non esse Sororia possent; saith the same experienced Lecher. Such as lewd wantoness, not dear Sisters, give. For the Kisses of Sisters ought to be modest, cold, and civil: The Kisses also of kindred, and of friends, aught to be civil, and shamefaced; Someu sed them dimidio labro: with a touch of the lip only. Martial, 2.10. Persians, Jews, Grecians, and Romans kissed their friends, when they met them. And Polydore Virgil de Jnvent. rerum. lib. 4. cap. 1 3. saith, Consuetudo nunc ubique gentium servatur, & praesertim apud Anglos, quorum mulieres, non cognatos modo, sed quoscunque generatim osculo tantum salutant resalutantque, & illud quidem primoribus (uti dicitur) labris, tam decentissimè, quàm honestissimè faciunt. It is a common fashion now adays almost through the whole world, but especially among the English; whose women do use to salute, and to resalute by way of Kissing; not their kindred alone, but generally all others, as occasion serves; and that they do in a most comely, and civil manner, only with their former lips, as the proverb speaketh. Plato his verses, ascribed to him by Laertius, cited by Aulus Gellius, Noctium Atticarum, 19.11. smell too much of paedaristia, unfit for so great, Divine, and ancient a Philosopher. Socrates was not void of fault in Kissing fair youths, which Agesilaus is noted to have avoided. Virgil was set on fire by his beautiful Alexis. Even the friendly civil kissing grew through too much use, troublesome; and was forbid by Tiberius. Yet wonderfully both practised and complained of long after, even by Martial; lib. 7. Epig. 94. against Linus; See the insatiable Marshal; 11.9. of his over-valewing the salacious kisses of his lewd boy; and the general abuse of the City in their Kissing at meetings, Martial. 11.99. It was wont to be In foro inter omnes amicos. In the market, between All acquaintance, when they met: Et levi basio; by a touch only, when it was used at the best. S. Augustine in questionibus super Genesim: quaest. 87. upon these words, Jacob kissed Rachel, Genesis, 29.11. thus; Consuetudinis fuit, maximè in illa simplicitate antiquorum, ut propinqui propinquos oscularentur; & hoc hodie fit in multis locis. It was a custom of old, especially in those days of simplicity of the ancients, for Kinsmen to kiss Kinsmen, and this is practised yet in many places. Saint Augustine had come nearer to the point, if he had said, It was the fashion for Kinsmen to kiss Kinswomen; for so did Jacob here kiss his Cousin Rachel. Yet I deny not but it was the fashion then to salute men also: Gen. 29.13. Laban kissed Jacob. Joseph kissed All his Brethren, Gen. 45.15. yea, even his dead Father, Gen. 50.1. Samuel the Prophet kissed Saul, 1 Sam. 10.1. jonathan and David kissed one another, 1 Sam. 20.41. Let me be bold to say, The kisses of Samuel, jonathan, and David, were not only Civil and Reverend kisses, as the former were, but Holy kisses, figures perhaps of what was to be in the law of Grace. For the Christians kisses were terminated in Honesty, and modest Civility, in peace and joy in the Holy Ghost; and their greetings were with Holy kisses, as I said before, different from the best and civilest kisses of other Nations, and much more holy. The omission of the Holy kiss on Good-friday may be thought to be grounded on this, because Christ was betrayed by the Kiss of judas. See Tertullian de oratione cap. ultimo: Die Paschae, quo communis, & quasi publica jejunii religio est, meritò deponimus osculum; we do for very good reason forbear the Holy kiss on the Paschall day, because we do then religiously observe, and keep the Common and Public Fast. Let no man understand it of Easter day, for than they might not Fast; but of Good-friday. For Paschaes, passio Domini est: and elegit Dominus diem Paschae, quo pateretur; saith Tertullian otherwhere, as Heraldus, Cerda, and Pamelius have judiciously observed. The Pasch, or Passeover, is the Passion of the Lord: and the Lord hath chosen the day of the Passeover to suffer on. Ignatius in his Epistles to those of Antiochia, and Tarsus, hath these words toward the end of both of them. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Salutate invicem in osculo Sancto; salute one another with an Holy Kiss; non subdolè, vel fictè, quale Judas tradidit Salvatori (saith Hierom. on Romans 16.16.) not a Traitorous, or False Kiss, such an one as Judas gave to our Saviour. And still remember, there is a great distance, and difference between Kisses of Salutation, and Kisses of Adoration; of which hereafter. Nor did they kiss only the Lips and Mouths, but both the Foreparts, and Hinder-parts of the Shoulders, the Cheeks, the Hand, the Back of the Hand, even the very Feet. See Ritterhushius on Salvianus, pag. 379. Baronius ad annum Domini 294.8. Relateth of one Praepedigna, that she fell at the feet of Caius the Pope, and according to the custom of those times, Kissed them, as it is in the Acts (saith Baronius, Numero. 10.) Claudius kissed the feet of Gabinius the Priest with joy: Maximus also kissed Caius his feet, Numero 12. Who so desires to see more concerning this point, or to know the reason, and original of Kissing the Pope's Toe; Let him read Polydor Virgil. de invent. rerum, lib. 4. cap. 13. since our blessed Saviour was betrayed With a Lip-Kisse, his Vicar is afraid: From whence, perchance, this common use did grow, To kiss his t'other end, I mean, his Toe. Quarles Divine Fancies, lib. 3.22. Tertullian de pudicitiâ, cap. 13. is plain, that the poenitents did lambere omnium vestigia, did omnium genua detinere, Kiss the knees, yea the very footsteps of other Christians; and were wont to fall down in the congregation conciliciati & concinerati, in sackcloth and ashes; which is better than conciliatis, as I suppose. Yea the very precept of Kissing one another, was used more warily afterward. For the women were kept apart from the men in the Church, and so did not promiscuously kiss: and yet for all this caution (saith Baronius, ad annum Christi 45. Numero 26.) because by the Devil's cunning, deceit crept in, among the mutual kisses of them, whether men, or women: It was a laudable fashion in some Churches to kiss a Tablet, or sacred Board. And indeed by that means, many sins might be prevented; whilst by kissing, as Plato speaks hyperbolically, the soul of one cometh to the door of the lips: and by it, is united to another's soul, and some times infused into it: and so poison is sucked in, say I. The Heathen were wont to take boys by the ears, when they kissed them. But he spoke more philosophically, who said, In osculo effunduntur spiritus ex cord: In a kiss, the spirits come forth from the heart. Plautus in Poenulo, sine, te prehendam Auriculis; sine, dem snavium. Let me hold thee by thine ears, Whilst thy lip my kisses bears. The young Sons were wont to take their parents by their ears, when they kissed them, Tibullus lib. 2. Elegia 5. — Natusque parenti Oscula comprensis auribus eripiet. Which Scaliger in his notes on Tibullus pag. 159. saith, he found, and amended from a place of Aristophanes. — The little lad, Holding his Father's ears, shall Kiss his Dad. Yea, even Christians, and those, prime teachers, and instructers of youth, taught the children so to do. Clemens Alexandrinus Stromâtum 5. pag. 402. stands in defence of it. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. We do not inconsiderately charge children to hold by the Ears such friends as they kiss; secretly signifying, that love is engendered by Hearing. Yet indeed, I esteem it as a wanton toy in children, and indiscreet fondness of parents: unfit for Christians to teach, or practise. And with reverence to Clemens Alexandrinus be it spoken; The kissing of people whom they hold by the Ears, hath not so much as a shadow of signification, that Love is ingendied by hearing: but (perhaps) rather the contrary. The Scripture pointeth at another kind of Kissing, joab took Amasa by the Beard with his right hand to kiss him. 2 Sam. 20.9. In S. Augustine his time, the custom of kissing One another at the receiving of the Sacrament, yet continued, and was not found fault withal, so much as among the Schismatics themselves, but practised by them. Augustinus Tomo. 7. contra literas Petiliani. lib. 2.23. pag. 22. saith to Petilian, concerning one of his Factionists; Cui pacis osculum inter sacramenta copulabatis, Whom you gave conjoined kisses unto, whensoever he received the blessed Sacrament. In the Country of Prester john, the ordinary custom which all Christians, Noblemen and Gentlemen use at all times of the year of saluting one another, is, when they meet together once a day, if they be almost equals, they kiss their shoulders, and embrace one another, and one kisseth the right shoulder, and another the left. Only in the week before Easter, they speak not one to another, but pass by without lifting up their eyes, much less do they kiss each other. See Purchase his Pilgrims, from Francis Alvarez a Portugal, lib. 7. of Africa, cap. 5. Paragrapho 16. pagina 1096. If Persians of equal degree did meet, they kissed one another's lips. If a superior met an inferior, he gave the inferior his cheek to kiss. But a mean Persian falling down, did worship his Better, saith Brisonius pag. 241. de regno Persarum, as Drusius citeth him. PAR. 9 BUt to return to the Agapae, from whence I have digressed. I cannot exactly find out, neither when the Agapae did first begin, nor when they wholly ended: when it was sin to omit them; when to take them. The Trullane Council in Constantinople, Anno 692. Canon 74. saith, Men must not keep their feasts of charity in the Temples, nor eat them there. Zoraras' on that Canon explaineth it; that they might not feast in the Churches, or within the bounds of the Chauncells, but in proauliis, in the Church-porches they might. Casaubone Exercitatione 16. Numero 31. in fine, Haec coena (that is the Agapae) à mysteriis toto genere fuit diversa: & postea Templis est ejecta, actandem penitus sublata. This Supper (that is to say, the feast of Charity) being altogether divers from the mysteries (of the holy Eucharist) was afterwards abandoned out of the Churches; and at length, (like an old Almanac) grew clean out of date. But at what Time, he mentioneth not. Sure I am, they were instituted by the Apostles, and practised in their times. But what year they began, or what month they were first practised, I would feign learn. Yea, the right use of them, was much abused whilst the Apostles lived: For divers Apostles found great fault with their disorders in their Agapae: The ringleaders to evil in them, are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Maculae, & vituperia; spots and Blemishes whilst they feast with you, 2 Pet. 2.13. Saint Judas also in his Epistle, verse 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, These are spots in your feasts of Charity; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Luxuriantes vobiscum, saith S. Peter: (coepulantes saith Augustine) feasting with you without fear. For it seemeth to me, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth fitlier cohere with the precedent, than with the subsequent words: yet both readings are good. They were not only spotted (for alas who is not so someway?) but very spots, in the Abstract. Abominable in themselves, and withal defiling and bespotting others, even in those banquets of charity, where should have been, and was at first much holiness. If any desire to know more exactly when the Agapae first began: I answer; It cannot be certainly known. Yet I think it probable to say, They were celebrated the first Eucharist that the Apostles took after Christ's death; or a while after, about his Ascension; When, and Where, the Church of God, had ease and rest: For Nature requireth, that the being of things precede the good or bad use of them: and when they once Are, then followeth the right, or the ill Applying of them. And the Right use, most commonly, if not always, is in time, before the Abuse; But Towards the beginning were Abuses: and At the beginning they were in Right use. Sure I am, three thousand Converts continued steadfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in Breaking of bread, and in prayers, Act. 2.42. And All that believed were together: and had All things common: and sold their possessions, and goods: and parted them to All men, as every man had need. And they continuing daily with one accord in the Temple, and breaking bread from house to house, or, at home, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart. So fare the Scripture speaketh, Acts 2.44, 45, 46. verses. The words, Breaking of bread, and breaking bread from house to house, are diversely interpreted. Some restrain them to the Eucharist. So the Syriack and Arabic Translators. Montanus wholly consorteth with them. But this opinion Beza disliketh: The Greek Scholia gather from thence, that the Primative Church used sparing diet, and lived frugally. Beza wittily distinguisheth; that the good Christians did so indeed: but that it resulteth not from this place; because the same form of words is used by the Hebrews, in their solemn and greatest feasts, as Genesis 43.25. They should eat Bread there. The truth is, Beza, and the rest might have observed, that there is not only mention of Breaking of Bread: but they did also Eat their Meat with gladness: and, as by the first words the Eucharist may be well understood: (For the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the Body of Christ, 1 Cor. 10.16? That interrogation, is in effect, a doubled affirmation) so by the phrase of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, capiebant, or, sumebant cibum, they did eat their meat, their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Love-feasts, are apparently signed out. I say with Montanus, that in those times, Eucharistiae Sacramentum repetebant assiduè: They took the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist daily: and with Beza, that by the word (Bread) the Hebrews understood all kind of meats: and will not deny, but the Hebrews did make their bread broad and thin, that they were rather broken than cut. But since there is mention both of Breaking of Bread, and eating of Meat: I shall appropriate the first to the holy Sacrament; the second, to their feasts of charity: and be bold to aver, that these words in the cited places, design both. And I wish, that Beza had noted, that though the Corinthians did abuse both, their blessed Sacrament, and their Love-feasts also by mingling one with another, and profaning the Churches in making them places of common repast: yet this was somewhat After this story in the second of the Acts; when the Agapae succeeded the blessed Sacrament; as the second Supper of the jews succeeded their Paschall. For their Breaking of Bread, was before their Eating of Meat. And I think the degrees were these. They daily continued in the Temple; There was the place of prayer, Act. 3.1. They are their Bread, their sacred Bread, Domatim, at Home, or from house to house; or, at one time in several houses. For in the Temple they could not do so: persecution, and the sword hung over them. A private house could not afford competent room, and decent spaces for above three thousand to receive day by day. And therefore they employed divers houses to that purpose. Though it be said, they were All together, verse 44. yet, (saith chrysostom) not in One place, or room; but All together in Grace, faith, charity, unity of the Spirit, and singleness of heart, vers. 46. All of them having but One mind, One heart. After this, in the third place, were their Love-feasts carefully tended, and ordered by the Apostles themselves at first; and then was no abuse. But when the number of the Disciples increased, the Apostles applied themselves to Better things, and left the guidance of Love-feasts in part to others. Then crept in partiality and discontent; and there arose a murmuring of the Grecians, against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected, in the daily administration, Act. 6.1. Their Love-feasts were daily administered, as well as the blessed Sacrament. Whereupon the twelve Apostles called the multitude of Disciples unto them, and said; It is not reason we should leave the word of God, and serve Tables, vers. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ministrare mensis (i) conviviis, or in conviviis, (saith Beza) to set forth the Love-feasts, or attend on them. And most divinely (to cut off all cavils) they appointed all the Disciples to choose out of themselves, Seven men of honest report, full of the holy Ghost and wisdom, Act. 6.3. to present them to the Apostles, both for that, and other services. The Disciples chose them: the Apostles prayed, and laid their hands upon them. Yet neither the care of the Apostles, nor the deputed authority of the Seven Deacons, whom the Apostles did appoint over this business, Act. 6.3. could keep the Christians in due course, but Satan did sow his tares, and bred divisions, and introduced innovations, so that they eaten the body of our Lord, and drank his blood with Other meats: and that in the very Temple, most intemperately, and partially, Not discerning the Lord's body: to the great scandal of others: so that the Apostles were feign to take notice of them, to reprove, and reform them. The Prayer. GRacious God, fountain of light, we miserable men are led in darkness: and wander up and down in it: we stumble, and fall, and run into an hundred by-paths, rather than in the way of truth. We see not so well as we ought. Our intellect is mistaken: our will is perverse. O thou, who inlightnest one way or other, all men that come into the world; show me thy brightness: Guide, and govern me. Into thy hands do I commend my poor spirit, with all the faculties both of my soul and body: Let thy holy rays encompass me: deliver me from both outward and inward darkness: and bring me to see thy face, for jesus Christ his sake. Amen. Chap. II. and fourth General. Wherein are demonstrated, certain Reasons, why the sacred Eucharist was substituted, to the eternal disannulling of the Passeover. 1. Divers Ends, why the Third holy Supper was instituted. 1. Reason. To substantiate the preceding Type. The difference between Fulfilling of a Law, and realizing or consummating of a Type. Tertullian censured. Hierome applanded. The Passeover was a figure of the Eucharist, and of Christ's Passion. All figures are not Antitypes. 2. 2 Reason. To confer more grace upon us by It, than was given unto the jews. The figure must come short in excellency to the thing figured. The virtue and effect of the Lords Supper in us. 3. 3 Reason. ●o praefigure Christ's death, and going out of the world. All Sacraments of the Old Law, were figures of the Eucharist: and did finally typify Christ's death. 4. 4 Reason. To be a Remembrance to us of Christ's death, till his coming again. The holy Eucharist not only sealeth, and signifieth Grace; but also conferreth and exhibiteth it by itself in the true use thereof. How fare forth this effect is to be understood. Why Christ received the blessed Sacrament before he went into the Garden. Christ had degrees of devotion. Not to faint in Prayer. The blessed Virgin Mary not so full of Grace, but that she was capable of more latitude. 5. 5 Reason. To unite us to Christ. 6 Reason. To breed brotherly Love; and to unite us one to another. Hence the Communion of Saints. the Eucharist called the Communion. 7 Reason. To be an Antidote against daily sins. The Eucharist called Panis supersubstantialis; and by S. Ambrose, Panis quotidianus. 8 Reason. To further our Spiritual Life. 9 Reason. Because it is the Sacrament of supernal charity, and filiation. PARAGRAPH 1. YEt because it is a vanity to institute any new matters, unless men be moved to it by very good reasons, and lawful inducements: Let us now examine, Why this Third holy Supper was instituted: and we shall find, that the Ends were divers. I will instance in some: and, 1. First in this; It was Appointed to this purpose, viz. to Substantiate the Preceding Type. There is great difference between Fulfilling of a Law, and Realizing, or Consummating of a Type. By Eating the Paschall Christ did as the Law commanded, and in that point fulfilled the Law: but if he had not Superinduced a Third Supper, nor given us the most blessed Eucharist to be our Evangelicall Pasch, or Passeover, he had not actuated the Type, nor accomplished the Figure, nor established the new light, and present truth, in stead of the precedent shadow. For when Christ was circumcised, though he was obedient to the Law, and thereby fulfilled that Law: yet till he instituted Baptism to be in the room of Circumcision, he did not Realize, or Substantiate the Figure: But when he had appointed new Sacraments, more full of Grace, and every way more excellent, more easy, and parable, and fewer in number, which were presigned, and fore-destinied, and presignified by the Types; Then indeed, and not till Then, were the Figures substantiated. And to return homeward, by the Eating of the most blessed Eucharist in Christ his Third and Last Supper, is Christ become Our true Paschall Lamb; Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus, 1 Cor. 5.7. Christ our Passeover is slain. I grant that S. Paul speaketh of the Crucifixion, and the Lamb was a Type of his death, and the manner thereof in many things, as I instanced in before. Yet was the Paschall Lamb a figure also of the sacred Eucharist: Magis immediatè, & principaliter ceremonia agni paschalis fuit figura Eucharistiae, quam Passionis, (saith Bellarmine de missa. 1.7.) The Ceremony of the Paschall Lamb was more immediately, and more principally the figure of the blessed Eucharist, than of Christ's Passion. Hierome on Matth. 26. and upon those words, vers. 26. commenteth thus: Postquam Typicum pascha fuit impletum, & Agni carnes cum Apostolis comederat,— ad verum Paschae transgreditur Sacramentum: After that the Typical Passeover was fulfilled, and (Christ) had eaten the flesh of the Lamb with his Apostles, he passeth over to the True Sacrament of the Passeover. Tertullian almost at the end of the fourth Book against Martion, hath an odd Crotchet, That Christ desired not to eat the Jewish Passeover, but the Evangelicall. Chrstus non concupivit vervecinam judaeorum, cùm ait se desiderare Pascha edere. He desired not to eat of a Jewish Weather, Lamb, or Sheep. But that Father did little consider Luk 22.24. I have desired to eat This Passeover; This; and vers. 13. They made ready the Passeover, (that Passeover; to eat which, he purposely went up to Jerusalem) for which purpose he sent this word to his Host, Matth. 26.18. I will keep the Passeover at thy house; which are spoken all of them, of the Jewish Passeover. For all these Passages were spoken before the Supper of the Lord, yea before the Second Supper. Besides, when Christ had desired to eat the Jewish Passeover, he did not long to eat it, quâ caro, as it was flesh; but quâ Sacramentum erat v●teris legis; as it was a Sacrament of the old Law, which he was bound to do whosoever would fulfil the Law, as Christ did: and so he did eat it, not as common profane meat; but as a sacred duty which could not be performed without eating of it. Hierome writ more sound on Matth. 26. toward the beginning, Christus finem carnali festivitati volens imponere, umbraque trarseunte Paschae reddere veritatem, dixit: Desiderio desideravi. Where he excludeth not (as Tertullian needlessly did) the first Supper, but distinctly expresseth it; and doth more than include the Last Supper. For he saith, Christ being willing to abrogate, disannul, and set an end to the Carnavalls', or carnal Festival of the Jewish Passeover, and to make the Type appear in substance, and verity, he said, Desiderio desideravi, I have much desired to eat thereof. The Passeover was a Type of the Eucharist; and principally figured out It. Bellarmine de Sacramento Eucharistiae. 4.9. A Type, but not an Antitype, (saith he,) Agnus paschalis erat figura evidentissima Eucharistiae. Ibidem. lib. 4. cap. 18. For the flesh was eaten, and the blood sprinkled upon the doore-posts signified the blood of the Eucharist, as may be gathered from Gregory: Homilia 22. It was also in another degree a Figure of Christ's Passion (saith he, ibid.) For, if the Paschall Lamb was a Figure of the Eucharist; and the Eucharist doth lively represent the Passion, it must needs from thence result, that the Passeover was a Figure of Christ's Passion. The Eucharist is not only the figure, or type of the body and blood of Christ, but the Antitype; because all Figures are not Antitypes; but only those, quae nihil ferè differunt à veritate: which very much resemble the Substance. Bellarmine de Sacramento Euchastiae. 2.15. Thus have I presumed to mend Bellarmine in this place. PAR. 2. A Second Reason of the Institution of the Eucharist, was to confer more Grace upon us by it, than was given unto the Jews. Figuratum non debet esse figurâ vilius (saith Bellarmine de Missa. 1.7.) yea (not to cloak the truth) the Figure must come short in excellency to the thing Figured: as the shadow to the body; the Type to the thing typified. Galat. 4.3. When we were children, we were in bondage under the rudiments of the world: And vers. 9 How turn you bacl to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage: And this the Apostle spoke of the Jewish Ceremonies. So, Colos. 2.17. the Ceremonies of the Law are said to be the shadow of things to come; but the body is Christ. And Heb. 10.1. The Law had a shadow of good things to come, and not the very Image of the things. But he termeth the Law of Grace, the time of Reformation, Heb. 9.10. And the Tabernacle thereof, a greater and more perfect Tabernacle, vers. 11. And Christ a Minister of the Sanctuary, and of the True Tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not Man, Heb. 8.2. Christ, not Moses. Christ hath obtained a more excellent Ministry, by how much also he is the Mediator of a better Covenant, which was established upon better promises, Heb. 8.6. Augustine in Psal. 73. Our Sacraments are pauctora, salubriora, faciliora, foeliciora; fewer, wholesomer, easier, happier. Look unto Bellarmine the Master of Controversies, and to the Canvasers of him, and they confess unanimously (what Saint Augustine taught) the fuller, and more gracious power of our Sacraments. The quarrell-picking niceties on both sides I dislike. Let one instance serve for all. Whereas in the old Law, The Sacrifices sprinkling the unclean, sanctified to the purifying of the flesh. Heb. 9.13. Ours sanctify to the purifying both of bodies and souls. Baptismus facit animam pulchram, Deo dilectam, haeredem Dei, & aperit regnum coelorum: Baptism makes a white soul, beloved of God, the heir of God, and openeth the kingdom of heaven; as the Father's phrase it. Christ sanctifieth and cleanseth the Church with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or any such thing: no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: not inclining to a spot, but that it should be Holy, and without blemish, Ephes. 5.26, 27. Aqua, quae benedicitur, purgat & illuminat hominem; The water, which is blessed, doth purge and illuminate man (saith Gregory Nyssen in lib. de Baptismo.) Caro abluitur, ut anima emaculetur; the body is washed, that the soul may be made clean (saith Tertullian de resurrectione carnis.) From whence in all likelihood Augustine tract. 80. in Johannem, propounded that assevering interrogation, unde tanta vis aquae, ut corpus tangat, cor abluat? from whence is that powerful virtue of water, that the body being touched, the soul is washed? The blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist is more powerful than over Paschal was. Tertul. de resurrectione carnis, thus, Caro corpore Christi & sanguine veseitur, ut anima de Deo saginetur; our flesh feedeth on the body and blood of Christ, that our souls may be filled, and fatted with God. Bernard in primo Sermone de coena Domini, pag. 145. Who can quell so fierce raging wild motions of concupiscence? who can bear the itchings, bite, or achings of this wound? Believe, God's grace is sufficient for men. And that ye may be secure (saith Saint Bernard) you have the investiture, that is, a new acquist and possession of the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ. For that Sacrament worketh two things in us. Et sensum minuit in minimis, & ingravioribus peccatis tollit omnino consensum: it infeebleth and diminisheth sin in the smallest matters, but in more grievous sins it wholly taketh away our consent. If any of you find not so sharp motions to anger, envy, luxury, or the like, let him thank the body and blood of our Lord; because the virtue of that Sacrament worketh effectually in him: and let him rejoice that the foulest ulcer beginneth to heal. I conclude this passage with the memorable words of our Saviour, at the institution of the holy Eucharist, Mat. 26.28. This is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Thus do the Sacraments of Grace remit, quell, and mortify sin: whereas the divine Apostle speaking of the Sacraments of the old Law, is express, Heb. 10.4. It is not possible that the blood of Goats and Bulls should take away sins. PAR. 3. A Third Reason for its Institution, was, to prefigure Christ's death, and going out of the world. John 13.1. Jesus knew his hour was come, that he should departed out of the world unto the Father; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut transeat, that he might Pass out of the world, having apparent reference both to the old and new Passeover on the Cross. All Sacraments of the old Law were figures of the Eucharist. And they did also finally design and typify Christ's death. Therefore the blessed Eucharist must needs adumbrate Christ's death also. Indeed the Egyptian Passeover, by the sprinkling of whose blood the Israelites were freed from the exterminating Angel, doth most lively typify Christ slain, and his blood delivering us. But the Paschal Lamb, which afterward was yearly slain, did more resemble the Sacrament of Christ's body and blood: and yet both the first, and the succeeding yearly Passeover, may all of them, and each of them, in a true and fitting sense, be said to prefigure, not only the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, but the very Crucifixion of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ. PAR. 4. A Fourth Cause of Christ's superinducing of the blessed Eucharist was, to be a remembrance to us of Christ's death till he cometh again: 1 Cor. 11.24. Do this in remembrance of me: so verse 25. As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lords death till he come, ver. 26. The Paschall was a memorial of their deliverance from Egypt, and of their passing the Red-sea, without danger, whilst the Sea stood, as two Crystal walls, on the right hand, and the left, and they passed through dry-footed, Exod. 14.22. Again, when in after times their children were to ask, What mean you by this service? Ye shall say, It is the Sacrifice of the Lords Passeover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivere dour houses, Exod. 12.26. etc. But the Eucharist is a memorial of our deliverance from Sin, Hell, and the power of Satan. Therefore so fare as spiritual deliverances are above temporal, as the souls are above the bodies, heaven above earth; so fare doth our holy Eucharist antecede their Paschal, and bringeth with it more certain fruit, and fuller Grace infused; not only Sealing and Signifying Grace, but Conferring and Exhibiting it by itself in the true use. I urge not this effect so fare, as to exclude Baptism from working remission of sins; nor as if the sacred Sucharist did remit the Same Individual sins which were Before remitted by Baptism, or as if it did remit sins that never were Repent of. God doth not so much. But the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord forgiveth such sins as have been committed between the receiving of Baptism, and it; and such sins as have overborne us, since our hearty Contrition and Repentance: yea, where sins are perfectly forgiven before the holy Communion; yet doth the Holy Communion Enseale and Ratify the former remission (if I may so speak) and the Eucharist (in the right use) maketh an Attrite man, a Contrite One; A Contrite man, to be Justified; A Justified man, to be Holy; An Holy man, to be More holy; and the Holiest One, to be more lively, spiritful, and prompt in religious services, than (I think) he would have been, if the Sacrament had been omitted. Thus I doubt not but if the Thrice-blessed Virgin Mary had received the consecrated Eucharist (as in likelihood she did) though she were full of Grace, according to the Angel's salutation, when she received it; yet it would not have been uneffectuall to her Good: for she was not so full of Grace, but that she was still capable of more and greater additaments of Grace. Many more Reasons there are, why Christ Jesus did superinstitute the blessed Eucharist, destroying and abolishing thereby the old Passeover. I will instance only in some of them: and that very briefly. PAR. 5. A Fifth Reason why Christ did institute this Sacrament, was, to unite us to Himself, 1 Corinth. 10.16. The cup of blessing, which we bless, is it not the Communion of the blood of Christ? The bread, which we break, is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? The cup is so necessary, that the Apostle placeth it before the bread. 6. To breed brotherly love, and to unite us to Christ and one to another. For we being many, are One Bread, and One Body; For we are all partakers of that One Bread, 1 Cor. 10.17. Hence floweth that great Article of our Creed; The communion of Saints. Hence is that Sacred Eucharist called Communio, A Communion. John 6.56. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 7. To be an antidote against daily sins. Panem nostrum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Give us this day our daily bread. Here the Eucharist is called Panis supersubstantialis, our supersubstantial, or Heavenly bread: yea (saith Ambrose) it is called Panis quotidianus, our daily bread, because it is a medicine, and a remedy, against daily sins, de Sacramentis: 5.4. 8. To further our spiritual Life. And therefore it is not only set down negatively. John 6.53. Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood ye have no life in you: but it is further positively averred, I am that bread of Life, ver. 48. and ver. 50. This is that bread which cometh down from Heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. And ver. 51. I am the living bread.— The bread that I will give, is my flesh, which I will give for the Life of the World. And most apparently in the 54. ver. who so eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal Life. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed; ver. 55. and ver. 57 as the Living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. Lastly, Cardinal Cusanus Exercitationum; 7. Eucharistia est supremae charitatis Sacramentum; The blessed Eucharist is the Sacrament of the most heavenly gift of charity. When Christ had loved his unto the end, because all the rest did not suffice to perfect Charity, unless he gave himself for all, of which the Eucharist was the wonderful mystery: Recipit se in manus suas, & in Sacramento fregit, & distribuit: He taketh himself into his own hands, and in the Sacrament broke and distributed himself. Like as if bread were alive, and should break and distribute itself, that they might live, to whom it was distributed; and itself should die by being distributed; So Christ gave himself to us, as if he did so distribute himself to us by dying, Nota. that he might give life unto us. In the same place he calleth it the Sacrament of Filiation, all doubt being taken away concerning the Filiation of God. For if Bread can pass over into the Son of God, therefore Man may, who is the end of bread. Vide Dionysi. Carthus. in Luc. 22. fol. 258. Much more may be said; but other points draw me to them. THE PRAYER. I Am not worthy (O Lord, holy Father) of the least of thy benefits, yea I have deserved that the full vyals of thy heaviest wrath should be poured down upon me: for I have many ways offended thee: and after manifold, both vows and endeavours to repent; after tears, sighs, groans; and my contrite heart hath been offered on thy Altar; yet I arknowledge my relapses and recidivations. Good God, let thy goodnesses strive against my wickedness, and fully overcome it. Cleanse me, though thou slay me: and though thou shouldest condemn me, who wholly trust in thee, yet Sanctify me thy Servant for jesus Christ his sake my blessed Redeemer. Amen. CHAP. III. and fist General. Which is divided into 5. Sections or particulars. The first whereof is contained in this Chapter. And therein is showed 1. After what words Christ began this Third or Last Supper. 2. A Digression 1. Concerning the division of the Bible into Chapters and Verses. 2. Against filthy prophaners of Churches, and Churchyards. 3. Against Conventicles. 1. What course Christ took in the perfecting of this Third, or Last Supper. First he removed Judas. The ceremonies of the Grecians at their Sacrifices. S. Augustine's error, who thought Judas did eat the bread of the Lord Sacramentally. A more probable opinion, that Christ did not institute the blessed Eucharist till Judas was gone forth. After what words Christ began his Third Supper. The word When, doth not always note the immediation of times, or things consequent. 2. A discourse (by way of digression). The first part thereof. Concerning the division of the Bible into Chapters and Verses. Neither the Evangelists nor the Apostles divided their writings into Chapters and Verses. Neither Christ nor his Apostles in the New Testament cited Chapter, or Verse of the Old Testament. Probable, that the Books of the Old Testament were from the beginning distinguished and named, as now they are. And began and ended as now they do. The jews of old divided the Pentateuch into 54. Sections, Readins, or Lectures. The jewish Section is either Incompleate; termed Parashuh, or Distinction, signed with three P. P. P. Complete, styled Sedar, an Order marked with three S. S. S. All the Jewish Lectures read over Once a year. The first Lecture, what time of the year it began. At what place of Scripture every every one of the 54 Lectures gins, and ends. Six books of Psalms according to the jewish division. Every Lecture of the Law consisted of 136 verses. Antiochus rend the Law in pieces. God more regardeth every Letter of the Law, than the Stars of Heave. 3. Puritan taxed, who taxour Church for mangling the Word of God, and patching up a Lesson. The books of the Bible, were not at the first divided by Chapters; nor the Chapters by Verses, as now they are. The jews had by heart all the Old Testament. 4. Traskites censured. The jews shall be converted to Christians; not Christians to jews. Secondly, the second part of the Digression. Against ●lthy prophaners of Churches and Churchyards; more especially against them of the City of Exeter, Nero bepissed Venus tomb. The Heathens very zealous against such profanation. Caecilius his opinion concerning it Vespasian forbade it. The Author's Apology. His petition both to the Clergy, and Laity of Exeter. God's Law, Deut. 23.12. against filthiness. The Cats, and the Birds cleanliness. God, and his holy Angels walk in the midst of our Temples. That Law of God, not Ceremonial, or Judicial, but Moral. The Esseni diligent observers of it. Cleanliness a kind of Holiness. Uncleanness in the Camp was an uncleanness in the Jews themselves. God commandeth Cleanliness, and Sweetness for man's sake, not for his own. Vncleanlinesse makes God turn away from us. God a lover of internal and external Cleanness. The Abrahemium the first Churchyard in the world. jacob's reverence to the place where he slept. Some places more holy than other. The Author's exhortation in this respect to the Magistrates of Exeter. 5 Campanella the Friar examined, and censured. He learned Art magic of the Devil. Every one hath his Tutelary Angel, as Saint Hierome and Campanella are of opinion. Campanella healed of the spleen (as he saith) by Charms. The name of a Friar more scandilous than of a Priest. Proverbs and Taunts against Friars and Monks. A Friar, A Lyar. Friars railed against both by Ancient and Modern Writers. Priests and Jesuits at debate who shall be the chiefest in authority. Friars Deify the Pope. Friars lashed by Pope Pius the second. ●ampanella a prisoner for twenty years together. The Jesuits nipped by the Sorbonists: banished by the Venettans: scoured by Peter de la Marteliere in the Parliament of France. 6. The third part of the Digression concerning Conventicles. The usance of the Zelotes at their Conventicles. The effects of them. None of God's children in ancient time ever practised them unless in the days of persecution. Jews to be imitated in Sabbath Lectures. Every one must labour to be Christiformis. Tertullian short of the truth concerning the force of Laws. Reason and Religion must be regulated by Authority. General Rules must be stamped by the approbation of public Authority. Orders must oversway Subjects, and their Religion. Singularity condemned. Guides of the Church a gift of God. 7 The law of Moses anciently divided into Books, but not into Chapters and Verses. Elias Levita saith, it was first divided into Chapters and Verses by the Jews of Tiberias. The New Testament divided by the Ancients otherwise than now it is both in Chapters and Verses; witness Caesarius, ●uthymius, Heinsius, Nonnus, Suidas, Cyrill, Sixtus Senensis, the Arabic Translators, and Junius. Heinsius and Junins opinion concerning the ancient divisions. The Syriack translation of the New Testament disliked by Bellarmin, and others. In all probability not delivered by S. Mark to the Churches of Syria, and Egypt. How the Acts of the Apostles; the first and second Epistle to the Corinthians, are divided into Chapters by the Arabic translation. How the four Evangelisis are divided into Chapters by Ammonius. The division of the four Gospels not of divine institution; but of the Churches or dination. 8 The blessed Excharist instituted immediately upon judas his Excommunication. The Sacrament of the Lords Supper instituted, not whilst the Apostles were eating the Second or Common Supper: yet before they departed out of the Coenaculum. Estius in this point taxed. The practice of the Eastern Churches at the time of the Celebration of the Lords Supper, and the Reason thereof. Salianus taxed Profane persons to be excluded from the very beholding of holy Mysteries. 9 When Christ was about to celebrate the Sacrament of the New Law, what Order he used; How he began: How he proceeded. Certain things may be determined certainly: probable things can be resolved on but probably. Aristotle's sayings preferred before other Philosophers. Small degrees of knowledge that are agreeable to reason, are to be embraced; From small beginnings many times follow strange Conclusions. Plato's divine History of Socrates, and Alcibiades. Homer's Story of Minerva, and Diomedes. Salt Sea-water may be made fresh divers ways. Divers curious instances to this purpose. Art may imitate Nature. Divers rare instances to this purpose. The Island Arethusa near Hispaniola; and divers Rocks near the Island Navazza on the borders of America, being in the midst of the Salt-sea, send forth fresh waters. The reason why the Salt-sea sendeth forth fresh fish. New Inventions are to be admired. Many things may be perfected, which yet seem Incredible. Gunpowder may be made of Riverwater. The Turks have found it. Of oil distilling from Alume-hills: the Spaniards have practised it. Why not of our Bath waters? More benefit by this Invention, than by the discovery of the man in the Moon: or the Lord Verulam's new Atlantis: or Campanella's Northern Island. The best Lodestones in the East Indies, in China and Bengala. The art of flying thought possible by Campanella. The man in the Moon added much to this Invention. Two ships of equal burden and shape, yet of unequal sailing: Two clocks of the same making, yet not of the same running: Campanella's reason thereof. Light will peep in at a little hole. The West Indies found out per minima indicia. Matters of greatest moment have many times the smallest beginnings: divers dainty instances to this purpose; especially, the discovery of the Gunpowder Treason. Where evident Scripture faileth▪ strong Presumptions, or Tradition, or Reason may carry it. Truth (said Democritus) is hid in a deep well. Matters of Faith are not to be grounded upon the bare opinions of men. The Church not bound to do many things which Christ did, especially in circumstance of time. They who defer Baptism till thirty years of their age (as Christ did) are taxed. Christ had many reasons so to do. Christ's Administration of the Eucharist a Pattern not for the Circumstance, but for the Substantial form thereof. Divers Circumstances wherein we differ from Christ in Administering the blessed Eucharist. Altars in Scripture sometimes called Tables; Tables sometimes termed Altars. PARAGRAPH 1. LEt us now consider what course Christ took in the perfecting of this his Last Supper. First say I, he removed Judas; and gave not the holiest Mysteries to that dog; nor cast that pearl before swine. The Grecians, when they began their Sacrifices, cried out, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; who is fit to be present here? To whom answer was returned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Honest, good, and harmless men. And to the same sense, they again cried out; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Holy things are for holy people. Did Nature teach them good things? and shall the God of nature practise the contrary? S. Augustine indeed Tractat. 26. in Johannem, saith; Caeteri Apostoli manducaverunt panem Dominum; Judas autem panem Domini: The other Apostles did eat Christ their Lord's body; Judas did eat the Bread of the Lord Sacramentally only; not Spiritually. I hope I shall not offend, if I descent from S. Augustine, and others in this point; because I have contrary both Authorities, and Reasons. Well then, this being presupposed, that judas was first removed; Let us now in the first place, (according to my propounded Method) examine, After what words Christ began his Third and Last Supper. Tatianus Alexandrinus in his Harmony, thinks Christ began to institute the Eucharist when judas was gone out, After those words, john 13.32. God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him. This seems the more probable, because, when judas was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, etc. The Jesuit Barradius, is of the same opinion. Yet I hold it more probable, that Christ did institute his blessed Eucharist so soon as judas went out. And it may be, for that cause chief, if not only, Christ said to judas, That thou dost, do quickly, vers. 27. because he would not have judas, who was a devil, to partake of that heavenly banquet. And then the entire discourse continuing from john 13.31. and so forward, immediately followed, After the receiving of the divine Eucharist with the blessed Apostles, when the Traitor was gone. For though it be said, when judas was gone out, Jesus said this, and this; yet it is not said, Jesus immediately said this, When judas was gone out. And it doth not exclude, but some thing might intercede: and that must then be the Eucharist. For the word (When) doth not always note the Immediation of times, or things consequent, but fairly admitteth, that such, and such words may be said; such, and such works may be done, in a competent distance. Dub. Yea, but why did S. john, mention no such matter, nor the holy Third Supper of the Lord, nor the Eucharist, nor name the Sacrament, of which himself was partaker? Resp. I answer, the other Three Evangelists had fully enough described that Last Supper of the Lord for the Substantial parts of it: and S. john would not actum agere, do that, which was done to his hand before; but wholly skipped it over; describing that, which the rest of the Evangelists, and what S. Paul omitted, namely, that heavenly discourse, which he uttered to his Disciples alone in the upper chamber. Ob. If any man say, It had been fit, that so great matters should have been distinguished by a new Chapter. Sol. I answer; O man, what art thou, who thinkest thy fantastical wit, is able to direct the wisdom of the eternal Spirit; I would not have thee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Not to think of thyself more highly, than thou oughtest to think; but to think soberly; or to be wise unto sobriety, Rom. 12.3. PAR. 2. BEsides for aught that any man knoweth; the 31. verse of the 13. of S. john, might be the beginning of a new Chapter, Long since. For neither Evangelists, nor Apostles, divided their Writings by Chapters, and Verses; nor did our Saviour, nor any of his Apostles, in any of their citations of points from the old Testament, punctually insist on Chapter, Verse, or fixed number of the Psalms. Indeed it is probable, that the Books of the old Testament were from the first divided, and distinguished, as now they are, by their several names: as Genesis, Exodus, and the like: and that they began and ended, as now they do. Yet I want proof to say, They were at first so divided into Chapters & Verses. The Jews of old time, divided the Pentateuch, or the Law of Moses, or rather the first five Books of Moses, into Fifty four Sections: you may better call them Readins, or Lectures, if you please. Of these Lectures, some were greater, or longer; others, shorter, and less. Heinsius mentioneth that among the Hebrews, there was Major & Minor parascha; the greater and the lesser distinction. Another distinction is observed by skilful Hebritians, When the Section is not so full and absolute, they phrase it a Parashah, or Distinction: and this in the Hebrew is signified by the prefixing of three P. P. P. But when the Reading is more complete, it is called or styled Seder, an Order: and it is distinguished from the former, by the trebled letter of S. S. S. And they were All read, once a year, in the Jewish Synagogues. Yet because there were but Fifty two Sabbaths, and Fifty four Readins; twice in a year, they conjoined two of the shortest Sections together: and so all were exactly and entirely read over, within the compass of one year. The Fifty second Section is a very short one; and so are divers of the later Sections. The First Lecture was usually read on the first Sabbath after their great feast of Tabernacles; and they called it Bereshith: And it began from Genesis, Chap. 1. Verse 1. and continued without interruption, to the end of the Eighth Verse of the sixth Chapter of Genesis. The Second Lecture began at Genesis 6.9. and ended Genesis 11. vers. 32. inclusiuè: and this they called Noah. The third Reading began Genesis 12.1. Now the Lord said unto Abraham, Get thee out of thy Country: and because they are the first words that ever God spoke to Abraham, so far as is recorded, this third Lecture is called Lec Lera, or Go thou: And this ended with the last word of Genesis 17.27. The fourth Parasha of the Law began Genesis 18.1. called of the first word Vajera; that is, And the Lord appeared: and ended Genesis 22. at the end of the 24. verse. The fift Reading of the Law began Genesis 23. and ended Genesis 25. at the 18. verse inclusively. The sixth Lecture began Genesis 25.19. and ended Genesis 28. at the last words of the 9 verse. The seventh at Genesis 28.10. and had its period Genesis 32. at the end of the 2. verse. The eight at Genesie 32.3. ending Genesis 36. with the 43. verse. The ninth Lecture began with Genesis 37.1. closing with Genesis 40. at the last verse. The tenth began Genesis 41.1. and ended Genesis 44.17. The eleventh Section began Genesis 44.18. and ended Genesis 47.27. The 12. hath but one S. to distinguish it: when some others have three S.S.S. This Lecture some have thought to have been read, and joined with the precedent Lecture: and so make but 53 Lectures in the Law. Others invent other mysteries; This 12 Reading beginneth Genesis 47.28. ending with the end of Genesis. The 13. Paragraph began Exodus 1.1. and ended Exodus 6. with the second verse. The 14. begins Exodus 6.3. ending Exodus 9 at the 35. or last verse. The 15. Section of the Law began Exodus 10.1. and was accomplished Exodus 13. at the end of the 16. verse. The 16. Lecture began Exodus 13.17. running out Exodus 17.16. The 17. Section began Exodus 18.1. breaking out with Exodus 20. ultimo. The 18. began Exodus 21.1. and expireth Exodus 24. at the end of the 18. verse. The 19 Lecture began Exodus 25.1. expiring Exodus 27. with the last word of the 19 verse. The 20. Section began Exodus 27.20. ending Exodus 30.11. The 21. Reading was initiated Exodus 30.12. ceasing Exodus 34.35. The 22. partida, or division, began Exodus 35.1. ending Exodus 38.20. The 23. Lecture began Exodus 38.21. ending with the end of Exodus. The 24. Lecture began eviticus 1.1. and ended Leviticus 6. with the 8. verse. The 25. Reading began Leviticus 6.9. ended Leviticus 8. with the last verse. The 26. began Leviticus 9.1. ending Leviticus 11. with the last words of that Chapter. The 17. began Leviticus 12.1. endeth Leviticus 13. at the last words of that Chapter. The 28. began Leviticus 14.1. ending Leviticus 15. at the end of the Chapter. The 29. Lecture began Leviticus 16.1. endeth Leviticus 18. with the Chapter. The 30. Lecture began Leviticus 19.1. ending Leviticus 20. with the last verse. The 31. Lecture began Leviticus 21.1. and continued three whole Chapters; ending Leviticus 24. in the last verse. The 32. Section began Leviticus 25.1. ended Leviticus 26. with the second verse. The 33. Lecture began Leviticus 26.3. and ended Leviticus 27. with the last verse. The 34. Section began Numbers 1.1. ended Numbers 4.21. The 35 began Numbers 4.22. ended Numbers 7. at the last verse. The 36. began Numbers 8.1. ending Numbers 12. with the last verse. The 37. began Numbers 13.1. and ended Numbers 15. in the last verse. The 38. began Numbers 16.1. ended Numbers 18. in the close of that Chapter. The 39 began Numbers 19.1. ended Numbers 22. at the first verse. The 40. Lecture began, Numbers 22.2. ended Numbers 25. at the 10. verse. The 41. Section began Numbers 25.11. ended Numbers 29. at the last verse. The 42. began Numbers 30.1. ended Numbers 32. at the last verse. The 43. Section began Numbers 33.1. ended Numbers 36. at the last verse. The 44. Section began Deuteronomy 1.1. ended Deuteronomy 3.22. The 45. Lecture began Deuteronomy 3.23. ended Deuteronomy 7.11. The 46. Lecture began Deuteronomy 7.12. ended Deuteronomy 11.25. The 47. Section began Deuteronomy 11.26. ended Deuteronomy 16.17. The 48. Lecture began Deuteronomy 16.18. ended Deuteronomy 21.9. The 49. Reading began Deuteronomy 21.10. ended Deuteronomy 25. at the last verse. The 50. Lecture began Deuteronomy 26.1. ended Deuteronomy 29.9. The 51. Lecture began Deuteronomy 29.10. ended Deuteronomy 30. with the last verse. The 52. Lecture began Deuteronomy 31.1. ended Deuterenomy 31. with the last verse. The 53. Section of the Law began Deuteronomy 32.1. ended Deuteronomy 32 with the last verse. The 54 and last Section of the Law began Deuteronomy 33.1. ended with the last words of Deuteronomy. This is transcribed from the Jewish Doctors, and Englished by Aynsworth: and it is observable. I might proceed to other their Readins, out of the six Books of the Psalms, as the Jews divided them, though the holy Spirit by S. Peter calleth it in the singular number, The Book of the Psalms, Acts 1 20. having reference to the first composure, and united body of them. And out of the Prophets, they had another distinct Reading, Acts 13.15. After the reading of the Law and the Prophets, Acts 13.27. The Rulers knew not Christ, nor yet the voices of the Prophets, which are read every Sabbath day. And yet by reason of one Spirits dictate, and one unity and uniformity of them all in one truth of doctrine, the holy Ghost saith, Acts 3.18. God shown by the Mouth of All his Prophets, that Christ should suffer. But now (saith Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide on that place) they are accustomed to sing that part, which they call Haprathah, Propheticam Missionem, the prophetical Sending; because that being ended, the people are sent home. See Elias Levita, in his Thisbi. The Jews deliver traditionally that every of the Lectures of the Law, or Pentateuch consisted of one hundred thirty six verses. And when Antiochus had rend the Books of the Law in pieces, which they found, and (to make sure work as he imagined) burned them also with fire: (and this, the instruments of Antiochus did monthly: 1 Macchab. 1.56, & 58. verses:) To supply this, the Jews (saith Lapide) took as many verses agreeing in sense with the former, out of the Prophets, and so read them united in the room of the other; and we may not think any one verse hath perished, much less, so great variety. The Jews say confidently, that the Lord God more regardeth, and respecteth every syllable, and letter of the Law, than he doth the Stars of Heaven. PAR. 3. THese their Deuteroseis or Traditions, I will not strictly, and rigidly examine, though the number of verses in several Lectures differ. Only I will observe these things, in, or from their former good courses. First, against the malevolent, maledicent, recalcitrating, ignorant Puritans, who reprove our Church for mangling, and cutting in pieces the Word of God: because we read in our Service one piece of one Chapter and another piece of another; and so patch up a Lesson, as they term it. I answer, In many of these Lectures of the Law, God's chosen people did do so, as appeareth in their very first Lecture, which ended at Genesis 6 8. and their second Lecture began not at a new whole Chapter, but at Genesis 6.9. verse. And the like is in divers other Readins, as by the divisions plainly appeareth. Therefore if our Church (led by such a Precedent, and by that, which is to be preferred before any humane precedent, Wel-grounded Reasons) doth sometimes begin toward the middle of one chapter, and end toward the middle of another chapter, it is not to be disallowed. We aremore to be guided by matter, than by Numbers. And if any new matter of moment do occur, (as often it doth) about the midst of a chapter, this new notable emergent point (wheresoever arising) may well begin a Lesson appropriate for that time, and occasion: as the Sunshine always appeareth most welcome from what part of Heaven soever it breaketh from under a cloud. Secondly, as I hold it most certain, that the names of the Books Divine, were called even from their very beginnings, as now they are, Genesis Exodus, and the like: So I have not seen it proved, that at the first the books were divided by Chapters; or the Chapters by Verses. Sure I am, wheresoever the holy Spirit of God, in the New Testament pointeth at, or citeth any passage from the Old Testament; though the Prophet be named, or the Law (that is, one Book of the Pentaeteuch) be mentioned: or the Book of Psalms be particularly expressed: yet never in any one of all these places, is the chapter, much less the verse specialized. Neither was there any need in those days. For the Jews got by heart, as we say, all the Old Testament: and upon the least intimation, or inkling of any matter, they as readily could recite it, as many of us can the Lords Prayer, or the Ten Commandments. PAR. 4. THirdly, whereas divers people of our Western parts have horribly Judaized of late, and have run on madly, in the by-paths of Trask, though it be generally both known, and confessed, that the jews shall be converted to us, and not we Christians to the jews: Yet I would advise them, and all other English Christians whatsoever, to beware of these horrid abuses following. It is, alas it is, too common a fault for Women to hold their children out to defile the Churchyards; more usual, and common for men to bepiss the corners of our Churches, and make them their voiding vessels, whilst some wash the filth down into their parents mouths buried nigh that place. More especially and as a wicked wonder, let me with grief, and indignation of heart ●ecount, that, whereas the City of Exeter is, by its natural situation, one of the sweetest Cities of England: and by the ill use of many, one of the nastiest, and noysommest Cities of the Land: whilst not only their by-lanes, but the High-faire street yields many offensive both sights, and savours, to the eyes, and noses of the Passers by: whilst the polluted corners of the cathedral are almost died by their urine into another colour: whilst the Churchyard hath been the draught unto many: and the very Cloisters the receptacles of their ordures. Sacrilegi in Sacrario faciunt oletum. I writ no more than what I have seen; and God thou knowest, I know there, in that kind, worse than what I have now written, which for my love to that City, I do forbear. For, in truth, it is an honourable City, and the Corporation a choice Fraternity of worthy good wealthy men. Yet let me take leave humbly to advertise them, that their holy Predecessors went not to Heaven by opposing that ancient well-founded Cathedral; but by Reverencing of It, and of their Canonical Clergy, the guides of their souls, and their Ghostly Fathers. Let them know, the Stones ought to be privileged from such filth. The Churchyard is a consecrated piece of ground. The ground is holy. Hic locus hie sacer est; hic nulli mingere fas est. The Churchyard is a sacred place; Who pisseth There, is void of grace. Extramejite, was said of old; Make water further off, and out of this place. Of all the Heathen, I never read but of Nero only, who in anger bepissed Venus, whom principally before he seemed to affect. Other Heathen were exceeding devout in their kind. For it was usual among them, not only to worship the Gods, to whom the Temples were dedicated, but they did adore the very Temples themselves. Valerius Maximus 6.6. instanceth in one adoring Julius Caesar: Tuas arras, tuaque sanctissima Templa veneratus oro. I humbly beseech your most excellent Majesty by your Altars and by your most sacred Temples, which I have always worshipped. And Josephus lib. 13. speaks of such, who did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Temple and the Sacrifice. Minutius Foelix in Octavio showeth the Pagan Caecilius his opinion, that Antiquity Ceremoniis atque Fanis sanctitatem tribuere solebat; accounted their Ceremonies and Temples Holy. And Apuleius Apologia 1. saith of one averse from Heathen Religion, si Fanum aliquod praetereat, nofas habet adorandi gratiâ manum labris admovere. If he passed by chance by any Temple of the Idols, he would not so much as kiss his hand, lest he should be accounted as one of the profane Idolaters. Vespasians forbidding the Temples to be defiled with urine of people, I pass by; because he did so for gain. And when Titus his Son, the Mirror of the World, disliked it, the Emperor his Father brought him the silver and gold, the revenue of that stinking commodity, and asked him, if that did smell ill? Too many, alas, too many of that City, daily defile that glorious Fabric: and let fly against it, as if they were sons to the Edomites, who said of Jerusalem, or Temple, or City, or both; Down with it, down with it even to the ground. I have seen the gutters reek with their urine; whilst the generality of the offenders makes the sin more passable, or esteemed as no sin, and no man seeks for remedy. So that I may very well take up the complaint of Minutius Foelix in Octavio. Ipsa errantium turba mutua sibipatrocinia praestat; & defensio communis erroris est furentium multitudo. The very troop, and numbers of erroneous people, affordeth mutual patrociny of one towards another: and the defence or excuse of the common fury or madness is, the multitude of mad men. And now judge me, and punish me, O Lord my God, if I writ these things in spleen to that civil Corporation, or to any of them: or if only the Zeal of thine house hath not at divers such ill sights and smells troubled my spirit; and enforced me now to write in hope of amendment. Never did our most holy Saviour show his just anger more in deeds than when Matth. 21.12. He went into the Temple, and cast out all them, that sold and bought in the Temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold doves, and esteemed it (for the abuse) A Den of thiefs, verse 13. and would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the Temple; Marck 11.16. Though most, if not all these things, were intended for the service of the Temple, and for the supply of the sacrifices, oblations, and gifts, by a ready and present exchange; Yet Christ made a scourge of small cords, and drove them all out of the Temple; and Sheep and Oxen, and poured out the Changers money, ando verthrew the tables: and said to the sellers of doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise, john 2.15. etc. And it may be thought if Christ had found one defiling the Temple, as our Cathedral hath been defiled, he would have struck him dead with thunder, and lightning. Wherefore I humbly desire all, both of the Clergy and Laity, to prevent that odious, rammish, and stinking custom, and now to judaise in This point, and to follow Gods own Precept, when he gave this Law to the jews, Deuteronomy, 23.12. Thou shalt have a place also without the Camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad. And vers. 13. Thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon, (or a spitstaffe, as is usually called with us) and it shall be, when thou shalt ease thyself abroad, that thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back, and cover that which cometh from thee. Observe; The easing of their bodies was not to be done, no not in the Camp: much less near the Sanctuary: lest of all In it, or About it. Yet have the enemies to our Church, emptied and eased their bodies of filth, and filled their souls with sin, by defiling that fair Cathedral, even to the great scandal of the passers-by. Again, even without the Camp, they must not leave their Ordure Above ground (as they do in too many places both of the Close, and City, and in other Towns and Villages, but especially the greatest Cities) but first with their paddles-staff they digged a place, or an hole so big, that they might bury their filth therein. Thou shalt turn bacl; Though it be noisome, and though thou wouldst fly from the uggly sight; yet to prevent a greater harm, thou shalt look on thine own corruption, and shalt cover that which cometh from thee, lest it be noisome to others, when thou art gone. The earth is best manured when such filth is covered; the lying of it open may engender infection. Go to the Cat, ye filthy Ones, and behold her ways: she seeks a secret place to unloade herself: and when she hath done, hideth, and covereth her natural uncleanness; as ashamed of that which our beastly Stinckards lay open to infect the air. Examine the Birds of the air, and they will tell thee; They defile not their nests, nor let their excrements lie to be offensive. Wilt thou, who desirest to be like Angels in obedience, saying daily, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven; be worse than Birds or Beasts in civility, and cleanliness? Lastly, consider the reasons annexed, and they are of great consequence. For the Lord thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp: to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee: Therefore shall thy camp be Holy, that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee. Deuteronomy, 23.14. Did God walk in the midst of their Camp? and walks he not in the midst of our Temples? Are not with us Angeliorationis astantes, Angels that are present, and hear our prayers? that I may speak in Tertullia's phrase: In regard of which divine presences, we are bound in conscience, when we go to Church, to prepare ourselves, as if we were climbing into heaven, to converse with God, and his holy Angels: God is there to deliver us from Sin, Satan, and the World, worse enemies by fare than the Israelites had any. There God walketh, not only to give up our enemies before us, but to tread down Satan under our feet, or bruise him, Rom. 16.20. Psalm. 91.13. Thou shalt tread on the Lion, and Adder, or aspe: the young Lion, and the Dragon shalt thou trample under feet. All this cannot choose but have a spiritual reference to the Triumph of a Christian over Satan. Neither let any man say. This was a judicial or Ceremonial Law. The annexed reason of equity, and avoiding of inconvenience, may plead for the continuance. But it was ordained only in their journeyings. I answer; Had God more care of their handsomeness, and cleanliness in their encamp, where they rested one night, and departed in the morning, than he had of their cleanly behaviour in their Cities, and settled habitations? It is not denied, but after they were fixed in Villages, Towns, and Cities, yet when their Armies were in which they might most conveniently observe, and perform in their backsides, gardens, hortyards, and other by-places? Josephus de Bello judaico, 2.7. relateth, of that most strict, and religious Order of their Esseni, that they, even in judaea, were diligent observers of the Law in this point. Therefore shall thy Camp be Holy: And in these words, Cleanness is held to be a kind of Holiness; as the near good housewife holds cleanliness to be a virtue. That God may see no unclean thing in Thee; no faedity, no uncheannesse in Thee. The uncleanness within the Camp, is an uncleanness within them. The Sunbeams are not defiled with looking on such filth: much less is the most pure eye of the Lord offended at it, in regard of himself: but God respecting the health of man, exacteth cleanliness, and sweetness from him, as preservatives thereof, and inhibiteth stinking nastiness, as the engenderer of sickness, and poison of the good spirits. Further, the sight of any one unclean thing, may make the Lord turn away from thee. The resultance is enforced much more from us, by how much our Temples are more holy, and God appeareth a more saving way amongst us, than among them. Nitoris tàm Interni, quàm Externi, amator est dous; qui est fons omnis puritatis, spiritusque purissimus, (saith Lapide) God is a lover of all Inward and Outward neatness, comeliness, and trim handsomeness; he is the fountain of all cleanness, and purity: and is a most undefiled pure Spirit. Oh heaken unto this all ye who have forgot God: and have discovered your nakedness, and defiled the holy Temple, and daily pollute the oursides of it: which God abhorreth. Sepulchers, many Sepulchers, and choice of them, were among the Heathen of old, Gen. 23.6. But in the first Churchyard, that ever is recorded, to have been in the world, for so is the Abrahemium, or burial place, which Abraham bought of Ephron called; how careful is the Scripture to preserve even the utmost bounds thereof from profane uses? The field, and the cave which was therein, (aboveground, and underground) and all the trees, which were in the field, that were in all the borders round about, were made sure unto Abraham for a possession. Gen. 23.17. Not a Tree throughout all the borders, but was consecrated from profane intrusion. More nearly to the purpose, Gen. 28.11. etc. jacob came to the City Luz: and in some by-place thereof, lay down to sleep: and because God appeared to him in a dream, and spoke to him, jacob said, Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not. And he was afraid, and said; How dreadful is this place? This is none other but the house of God; and This is the gate of heaven. Where God gave jacob some comfortable promises, even There how full of reverence, modesty, fear, and awful regard is he? But in these our Churches, and cathedrals, unto which you come, and where you have the presence of God, and his holy Angels, and all the promises of this life, and the life to come; Some of you show all immodesty, and incivility. jacob did not piss against the stones in That place, nor empty his excrements in That sacred Churchyard (for it was no other at that time.) It was not the actual house of God Then: But this stone which I have set for a pillar, shall be God's house (saith Jacob, Genesis, 28.22.) And in the mean while, he poured not urine, or siege at the bottom of it, as some of you do, but he poured oil upon the top of the pillar, vers. 18. and so with humble devotion did anoint, and so consecrate it. The Chaldee thus, Non est locus communis, sed locus in quo beneplacitum est coram deo: This is no common place, but a place wherein God is well pleased. Let those suffer according to their deservings, who pollute the places consecrated to God. That there is a great difference between several grounds, some more holy than others, is apparent: Exodus 3.5. Where God said to Moses, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from thy feet: for the place whereon thou standest, is holy ground. No not Moses himself, though a very holy man: No not Joshuah his successor, whom the Captain of the Lords Host commanded, Iosh. 5.15. Lose thy shoes from off thy feet: for the place whereon thou standest, is holy: and joshuah did so. Might not such holy and heavenly men wear so much as their shoes, because the ground was sacred: And shall profane wretches squeeze out their filth in places Consecrated? Moses and joshuah knew not at first that the ground was Holy: but the beastly ones with us do know that the Churchyard hath been separated and singled from profane abuse. The more is their sin. This fault is somewhat mended by the preaching of the Lord Bishop of that Diocese since I wrote this. And you Reverend and right Worshipful Magistrates, neglect no longer to sharpen your censures, and powers, to punish the rebellious-sordid slovens, these workers of iniquity, which stink in the sight of God, and of all good people. 'Cause to be provided public draught-houses, jakes, privies, vaults, voiders, or voydances. The charge is small; the remedy easy: The delight will be great, commendable, and a removal, or preventer of evils, perhaps of plagues & pestilences. Let not the spirit of Uncleanness be in the midst of you, but rather the God of Holiness, who can abide no unclean thing. Let all be covered; Let nothing be left open. Fellow the godly Jews: follow God's precept. Be ye cleanly I thus conclude this digression. PAR. 5. THomas Campanella, De sensu rerum, & Magiâ 4.2. thus. The time is nigh, as by the dispositions of heaven and earth I gather, or consider, in which the whole World shall return to the worship of the true God, and be the child of Abraham: not a bastard, as Macon was. (But who (say I) ever read of Macon his being the base child of Abraham?) Not the carnal child of Abraham, as the Hebrews. (Here-against say I, Is not a Base child, a carnal child? And the Jew's not so properly called Hebrews from Abraham, as from Heber, who lived long before Abraham? Genes. 11.16. And they are termed Jews from judah Abraham's great Grandchild:) but the world shall be the Spiritual Son of Abraham, because God promised Abraham, that he should be heir of the world. So fare Campanella. Indeed, the promise is Rom. 4.13. That Abraham should be the heir of the world. Do those words evince that, The world shall be the Spiritual Son of Abraham? Have they no reference to Christ, who is a greater heir, Psalm. 2.8. and 72.8. and Heb. 1.2. God hath aptointed Christ Heir of All things. And if ye be Ch●st's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and Heirs according to the promise, Galat. 3.29. Again, what dispositions of Heaven, and especially of the Earth, could he consider as prognostical, that shortly the whole world shall turn to the worship of the True God? Perhaps the Friar Campanella believed, That the world would be shortly at an end; and that God is able to graft not only the jews in again into the good Olive tree. Rom. 11.23, 24. but that All Israel shall be saved, vers. 26. Nor will we deny this: but only find fault with him for avouching he read so much in the book of the Creatures, and found Heaven and Earth so disposed. And if the Earth had sense as he fancieth: yet it hath not REason: and if it had Reason, it had no Religious Disposition. Neither can he find any prophetical disposition in Heaven to that end. He would seem to be expert in the divine Magic, as he calleth it, lib. 4. cap. 2. pag. 269. & cap. 3. pag. 276. I know (saith he) by experience, that the devils do feign, That God is subject to Fate; that when they cannot answer satisfactorily to the questions propounded to them, they do from thence snatch at an excuse. Which words, and the like of his, have given occasion to the report that Campanella was taught by the devil. I am sure himself confesseth, lib. 4. cap. 1. from Porphyry, and Plotine, that good and evil Angels are found, as daily experience teacheth: Et Ego quoque manifestò experientiam cognovi, non quando investigatione avidâ id tentavi, sed quando aliud intendebam. And I also (saith he) have manifestly known the Experience: not when I greedily, and curiously searched after it; but when I thought of other matters. Belike than he did sometimes try by an earnest investigation to find good and evil Angels; and when he looked not for them, found them: and as it sh●●ld seem, was conversant with them; as Hierom Cardan reporteth that his Father had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Devil assisting him. Idem, Libro 1. cap. 6. pag. 20. he acknowledgeth Angelos custodes singularum specierum, & nostrorum individuorum, the Angels to be Keepers of every several species, and of every one of us in particular, as S Hieome teacheth. And I have found it by trial, which I never understood before. Perhaps he meaneth, that the Angels did teach him, and that he understood so much by the Angels themselves. I am sure that Campanella de sensu rerum 1.8. in the Appendix to that Chapter, saith boldly. The soul of man, by the voice calleth unto itself even Devils and Angels. That Devils have been at thy call O Campanella, I do believe. That ever the good Angels were so familiar with thee, I will not believe. The Priest, or rather the Bee, which hath a sting, had not thus stung Campanella, if he had not compared Priests to Drones. Campanella 4.18. confesseth he was in his youth healed of the disease of the spleen, the Moon being in the wane, by the words and prayers of a woman, and that Andrew Zappavigna his Prior gave him Licence. It should seem the Prior and the Friar trusted more in Charms, than in other remedies appointed of God to that use. I am unwilling to instance, and to confute all his exorbitances; but because he being a Friar, abuseth the Priests, saying, lib. 2. cap. 23 pag. 139. That among the Bees the Priests are the Drones; let others of his faction know, that the name of a Friar hath been more scandalous than the name of a Priest. The Diverbia and taunts were too bitter to be said of All, and Every of them. A Monk is a carcase come forth from the grave, wearing his Grave-clothes, hurried up and down amongst mankind by the Devil. When a Friar is shaved, the Devil entereth into him: and Friars wear crosses on their breasts, because they have none in their hearts, as the people use to say. The common Proverb is known; He is a Friar, therefore a Lyar. Ancients have writ purposely against Friars. Of late one Watson hath laid an indelible Character of wickedness upon them. And, as it were but yesterday, Paul Harris complained to the Pope against them, and their encroaching usurpations, whilst an indifferent reader may most plainly see, That the strife between the Priests and Jesuits is not so much to save souls, as to be in chiefest authority, as to milk and stroke the poor people, and as to pick their purses by a religious Legerdemain. To these ends do the Friars claw the Pope, and almost deify him. Ex Papae Majestate Dei Majestatem intuemur, faith Friar Tom Little-bell. (For Campanella may pass for a little bell, as well almost as Campanula, de sensu rerum lib. 2. c. 21. pag. 129) When we see the Majesty of the Pope, we behold God's Majesty: And yet Pope Pius the Second had desperately lashed them, when he said, A vagabond Monk was a slave to the Devil. And yet all this could not keep that active wit from the prison, or deliver him when he was in Jail. For twenty whole years together he was a prisoner, and oft in exquisite torture, or torments, as it is in the Epistle Dedicatory. And himself saith, lib. 4. cap. 16. pag. 328. Vitam in vinculis perpetuis miserrimè ago: I live most miserably in perpetual prison. Which sore punishment (say I) without some precedent great enormous sins would never have been inflicted, if justice was observed there, if the Clergy men had been in any regard. The College of Sorbon hath often nipped them, the Jesuits. Venice hath excluded them out of their Territories. Peter de la Martiliere scoured them in the great Parliament of France about twenty six years since. The Pyramid raised to disgrace them, will never be forgotten, though it be demolished. PAR. 6. ANother error of these times is this: (I wish it were not (in some people) more than an error) that after Sermons ended, the giddy people flock together, and under the specious title of Repetition (forsooth) they repeat only their vanity. They do indeed keep Conventicles contrary to the Law; stow themselves in the house of one of the most furious Zelotes, make long prayers, filled up with their professed Repetitions; censure, rail, mis-expound Scriptures, propound foolish and curious questions, and receive back ridiculous answers; gather up sums of money to uphold faction, and to animate the obstinate Ones; breed up youth to boldness, fierceness, selfe-conceipt; and to swallow down a presumption of their own salvation. Then they proceed to declare Who shall be saved, Who shall be damned (which is more than Men or Angels, good or bad do know till toward death.) What scandals have been offered, what sins, under that Cloak, committed, every great Town knoweth; and every Christian heart lamenteth that knoweth this. But I would fain learn of these false Breehrens, or their false guides, Where ever, since the beginning of the world, or by Whom Such Conventicles were practised, by any of God's people, unless it were in the days of persecution, or where the Churches were shut up from the true service of God. When Satan was let lose, when the raging sword was drunk with blood, we read Heb. 11.37. etc. They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented: Of whom the world was not worthy; They wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens, and caves of the earth. This did they do also after S. Paul's death, during the Ten great Persecutions. But never was there heard of one Conventicle of Orthodox Christians, when religious Princes favoured the Church (as Gods holy Name be blessed they do, and long time may they prosper) and whilst the Gospel flourished (as these thousand years it never prospered more.) And will our people be wiser than all that ever went before them? or dare their profane mouths accuse our most sacred and holy King, as an enemy to the true Professors, and doctrine of Christ? than whom (God be blessed) we never had a more religious, favourable, gracious, temperate, chaste, and sanctified Prince, since England embraced Christianity. Rather than they should misspend their time in their own will-worship, edify unto evil, give scandals to the Church, call themselves weak brethren, whilst they think themselves the most learned Doctors, and devoutest part of God's militant Church: I could wish them each in their private houses (if our Liturgy and Church Service be not savoury enough, that is, not long enough for them) to do as the jews did. As they on their Sabbaths had a long Lecture, or Lectures every Sabbath day, one of which you may see before: so let these on the Lords day, or each day of the Lord, when our Church Service is ended, read the same Lecture, or Lectures, and another (if they please) out of the New Testament. Let them read, with hearty precedent prays unto God for a blessing; Read, not to prate, and to dispute, but to practise holy duties: Let them remember Psalm 25.9. The meek will God guide in judgement: to the meek will he teach his way. Let them be assured, Saving knowledge goeth up and down our streets, and there is none of years of discretion but knoweth enough to be saved, even Jesus Christ, and him crucified. There remaineth nothing but that each man labour to be Christiformis, and, as fare as our weakness will permit, to imitate Christ in holiness of life, and to be conformable to him here, in lowliness of mind, that he may perfect us hereafter. Oh, but the people judge, and say, It standeth with Reason to serve God more than the Magistrate appointeth; and whatsoever is reasonable, may pass for a Law. For Tertul, de corona militis cap. 3. saith, if the Law consist of reason, than every thing, by whomsoever brought forth, which partaketh of reason, shall be a Law. But say I, Tertullian here fell short of the truth. For the cause why Laws are in force, is, not only because they accord with Reason (though no Law ought to be unreasonable) but because the Laws are made by such as have authority to make Laws; and it openeth too great a window unto licentiousness, that every thing shall be held a Law, which every one thinks is consonant to Reason. Rather observe this distinction. If any man, whosoever, findeth any Rule, running along with Reason and Religion, if it be not crossed by his superiors, let that be, if he will, a Law to him; let him be guided by it, till he find a better Rule, or be taught otherwise by Authority. But a General Rule it must not be, till he who hath a Law-making power, do stamp it with the approbation of public authority. Order commandeth a subjection of the Inferior to the Superior. Order is relucentia sapientiae, a bright shining ray of wisdom; and participateth of the light of wisdom (saith Cusanus de venatione sapieutiae cap. 31.) Let God's people beware of will-worship, though gilded with religious pretences. Let them remember what Calvin in his Epistles saith: When men desire to worship God as themselves please, whatsoever they aver of their own, is a stinking profanation. And still (I say) Nesutor ultra crepidam; A Cobbler must not go beyond his Last. The temptation of the Serpent, (Dit eritis, yet shall be as Gods) is to this day a temptation, which Satan useth, and by it seduceth many thousands, who think they know Good and Evil; and therefore will run on in their own bypaths, forsaking the King's highway, the good and dangerless Highway; and by their Singularity do favour of arrogance, and pride. For it is agrecable to prudence, and humility, ad Majorum & Peritiorum consilia recurrere, to trust to learned Counsel; as may be gathered from Aquinas, 2 a, 2 ae, Quast. 49. Artic. 3. as it is arrogance and pride, to trust too much to a man's own self, God gave guides unto the Church, he left not every one to guide himself wholly. Whost faith fellow ye, saith the Apostle. PAR. 7. LAstly, as I said before (that I may return to my old matter:) Though the heads of the Books might have been the same from their first being written, yet the division by Chapters and by Verses is not so ancient. Elias Lovita in the preface of his book called Massoreth Hammossoreth affirmeth with the Rabbins, that the whole Law of old was but one Pasuk, or one sentence in one; all did stick fast one to another, without any distinction of verses. And that four hundred and six years after the final destruction of the City, they were divided into Pesukim, that is Verses, and Sentences, à Judaeis Tiberitis, by the jews of Tiberias. Here let me say somewhat concerning the New Testament, and its division by the Ancients differing from what is now. The learned Caesarius, brother to Saint Nazianzen, in his Questions saith, we have four Gospels, which consist of eleven hundred sixty two Chapters. Euthymius on John, bringeth the sixty sift chapter of Matthew, which is now but the six and twentieth with us. The most learned Heinsius proceedeth, Exercitationum Sacrarum cap. 13. p. 254. etc. and by divers evident proofs evinceth, that the more ancient division of our Gospels by chapters and verses, much differeth from ours. And that the Syrian Translator yet differed from all, as dividing one chapter into sour chapters; another, or the second chapter, into three chapters. Nonnus observeth not our chapters, much less verses. Suidas doth otherwise distinguish the chapters. Cyrill maketh twelve books on Saint John, as if all were concluded in twelve chapters. Who desireth to see more, let him have recourse to the cited place of that rare Scholar, and he shall find admirable curiosities concerning chapters and verses of the New Testament, and he shall not repent him of his labour. And let him consult with Sixtus Senonsis Bibliothecae Sanctae, 3. pag. 157. etc. Let me add somewhat more. The Arabic Translator is much different from all others. Francis Junius in his preface before the Arabic translation of the Acts, Arabs noster capita (nec sine judicio) aliter planè distinguit, atque in libris nostris distincta sunt: & consimiliter versus alios dividit in nostris confusos. Alios conjungit disparatos, & suâ compositione, id quod fuerat obscurius, tanquam adunatis stellis illuminant. Our Atabick Interpreter (saith Iun●us) distinguisheth, not without cause, or reason, the chapters otherwise than they are distinguished in our books. Likewise concerning the verses, he divided some, which are confounded together in our books; and joineth others together, which were disparate, and sundered. And by this his Composition, that which was more obscure, he ilustrateth and illuminateth as by a conjunction of stars. Heinsius in the forecited place concurreth with unius, that some others divisions are better than those which we now have in use (in some things.) His words are; Intelligimus eos nonnunquam meliùs, quae non haererent, divisisse: where some chapters or verses had little dependence one upon another, they sometimes better distinguished them than we do now I answer, if in some few of their variations they come nearer to conveniency than ours do (which I will not wholly deny;) yet, if I have any judgement, they have strayed worse than the Greek divisions have done in other places, whilst they strive to be menders, that aught to be but Translators. Indeed, if Saint Mark had delivered the Gospel to the Syrians (as themselves say he did;) and if their distinguishments be now such as Saint Mark left them, it would make much for their authority. Or if any of those Arabians Acts 2.11. who were at Jerusalem at Pentecost, had in the days of the Apostles translated the Gospels, and kept them since from alteration, we might ascribe much to it. But concerning the Syriack translation; Non desunt etiam quaedam in ea editione quae viris doctis & piis non admodum placent: There are somethings in that edition which holy and learned men are not well pleased with, saith Bellarmine. And I cannot easily be brought to believe, that S. Mark delivered to the Churches of Syria and Egypt, the Syriac edition of the New Testament; since neither Clemens Alexandrinus, nor that living Library Origen (who laboured more about the Editions, than ever any other did.) Nor Eusebius, nor Athanasius, nor Dydimus, nor Theophilus, nor Epiphanius, nor Hierom, nor Cyril, nor Theodoret, nor other Fathers, who were Bishops or Priests in Syria, or Egypt, since none of these Fathers, who lived there, mentioned any such Edition, or Translation, it shall pass with me, as a work of later times. The same Arabic translator maketh fifty chapters of the Acts of the Apostles; whereas we have only 28. chapters. The first Epistle of S. Paul to the Corinthians in the Arabic hath 21. chapters, having only 16. chapters with us. The second Epistle hath only 12. chapters in the Arabic, and yet we have 13. chapters in the Greek. Ammonius divided every one of the four. Evangelists into many chapters: S. Matthew into 355 chapters. S. Mark into 135 chapters. S. Luke into 344 chapters. S. John into 232 chapters. So Sixtus Senensis Bibliothecae sanctae, lib. 3. pag. 160. relateth. If such difference be in chapters, which is the mainer division; there must needs be more variant diversity in the verses; which are the subalternate differences depending on the chapters. Much more might be said, but I have wandered too long: and return to what I handled before; namely, That we have no reason of necessity, to expect, that Christ's administering of his Third and Last Supper should be distinguished by the beginning of a new chapter. For it is not so in any other of the Three Evangelists. Nor are the chapters, and verses of Divine institution, but servient to the Church's ordination, varying according to the opinions of divers ages, and in the opinion of Junius and Heinsius may be better than now they are. And yet there might be a new chapter in ancient times, when Judas went out; the old one ending, John 13.30. at these words, And it was night. For presently thereupon, in all likelihood, was the blessed Eucharist administered; and the Evangelist S. John wholly omitted what the other Three Evangelists had so fully described: And a new chapter might begin, John 13.31. Or if not, a new matter; namely, our thrice blessed Saviour his holy, heavenly, last Sermon (Sermo Domini in coenaculo,) which the other Three Evangelists very briefly touched at: but S. John declareth at large, from John 13.31. to John 18.1. Four whole chapters, and more, in a continued, and uninterrupted manifesto, or declaration. PAR. 8. LAstly, since it is apparent even to sense, and rectified reason, that Christ mingled not his most sacred Third Supper and holy Eucharist with ordinary meats; but took it by itself; as a distinct Sacrament of the New Testament, and as a glorious testimony of the Law of Grace; there is no place, in my opinion, so likely to establish our Saviour's administration of it, as immediately upon judas his excommunication, and secession. And when the holy administration was ended, to the joy of the Apostles, and to the glory of God; Our divinest Saviour broke forth into this Jubilee, and exultation of joy; Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him, viz. when his Flesh and Blood were made a glorious Sacrament of the New Law; then Christ was glorified and God in Christ. How was Christ, at that instant, glorified above other times, if not by judas his departure, and Christ giving the holy Eucharist to his holy Apostles? Or where could it be given more commodiously? As for the words, Edentibus ipsis, I have heretofore cleared them by good authority, that they are not to be taken strictly, as if, whilst meat was in their jaws, and whilst their mouths were full, and their teeth champing, Christ gave them the Supper of the Lord; nor as if we were not to receive the hallowed food, but as we are eating of some other things: nor, as if it were essential to have a co-eating: No Christian heart can think so. For it were an undervaluing of the Body and Blood of the Lord: and little, or not discerning of the Lords Body from other common meats: yea, indeed an horrid mingle-mangle. But the words are to be expounded at large. For Convivantibus ipsis, Before they had ended their Feasting: Before that nightly Festivity was broken up: Before they went out of the Coenaculum, that Supping room, Christ administered the holy Eucharist. Estius on 1 Corinth. 11.20. saith, they are not to be heard, who thought the Corinthians did in the midst of their banqueting take the holy Communion. For this were a confounding of things sacred with profane (saith he;) And that is altogether unrighteous (say I) I retort the same on jacobus Salianus, the great Annalist of the Old Testament, who in his last Tome pag. 454. conjoineth in a sort, the washing of the Apostles feet, and the Institution of the Eucharist: after both which (saith he) Secuta est Coenacommunis, Followed the Second Supper. He forgot that after the pedilavium, or washing of the Apostles feet, Christ sat down again: and gave judas a Sop, which was in the Second Supper: and discoursed, and marked out judas for the Traitor: whereupon he departed: and then Christ took, and gave the blessed Sacrament, and did not take another Supper after it. In the Eastern Churches there was a Traverse drawn between the people, who were employed in praying, and hearing: and those Priests or Deacons, which were preparing. And whilst they were preparing the bread and wine for consecration, when all was in a readiness, they drew the veil, folded up the curtains: the Priest did consecrate the heavenly Eucharist: did receive it himself: did give it to the people: One cried Sursum corda; Lift up your hearts: And the sudden rushing open of the Traverse, at the beginning of the sacred celebration, was to strike Reverence into them. (For— Segnius irritant animum dimissa per Aures, Quàm quae sunt Oculis subjecta fidelibus.— Things by the ears, do less the soul affect, Than by the eyes, what on it doth reflect. Strange sights prepare the soul for Devotion. Sudden extraordinary sights do pierce the soul to the quick.) And this was also to admonish them, that Then Heaven was open, and the Angels descending, to be present at the holy mysteries with all possible Veneration (that I may not say, coadoration) of Christ. This may be gathered from S. chrysostom in his third homily upon the Epistle to the Ephesians, and divers other places of others. If the Church of Christ, in succeeding ages did divide the holy things from the most holy, and gave most reverence to the divine Eucharist; we cannot well say, that Christ did mingle sacred things with profane (as Salanius fableth.) And, that judas was admitted to partake of those Heavenly mysteries, which the Christian Church would not suffer profane persons so much as to behold them; but kept them hid within the veil, till the Faithful were to participate of them, as the notorious wicked ones were to be excluded. PAR. 9 When Judas was gone out, the Second Supper ended, and thanks given; And when Christ went about to celebrate the blessed Sacrament of the New Law, what order did he take? How began he? How proceeded he? Here I had need to have especial care to lay a good foundation. Nam ex principiis veris non possunt sequi falsa: cùm ex veris; nil nisi verum sequatur: (saith Petrus Pomponatius de Incantationibus, pag. 318.) From True principles flow no false conclusions: Truth produceth Truth; therefore let us determine certain things certainly: probable, probably. I answer, we have no exact proofs, or demonstrations to insist upon. Sense, Reason, and Probability, must be our best guides. What is most remote from all Absurdity, is principally to be insisted upon. Petrus Pomponatius de Incantationibus, cap. 10. pag. 131. Supponitur, quod in rebus difficilibus & occultis, responsiones magis ab inconvenientibus remotae, ac magis Sensatis, & Rationibus consonae, sunt magis recipiendae, quam oppositae rationes. Suppositio patet ex tertio Topicorum; Minus malum praeeligitur majorïmalo; cum quoquo modo minus malum, sit magis bonum. This is always to be supposed, That in difficult and abstruse matters, those answers, which are most congruous, most sensible, and most consonant to reason, are rather to be approved, than allegations to the contrary. The supposition is plain in the 3. Book of Aristotle's Topics, The lesser evil is to be chosen before the Greater evil: since the lesser evil is by all means the greater good. Again ibid. Averro 2. de Coelo, saith from Alexander; That Aristotle's sayings are preferred before other Philosophers, because His are more remote from contradiction. Aristotle hath a divine saying, de Coelo, secundo, cap. 12. textu. 60. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Let us try to speak what seemeth best to us. He is rather held to be venerable, than rash, who in thirst after Philosophy, can find but small proofs sometimes in difficult matters. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; It being a good thing, both to seek further knowledge, and to embrace small hints, or degrees of knowledge, that are comfortable to Reason, as Aristotle hath it in the next Text. Oh how divine Conclusions did some Heathen draw from that small knowledge, which they had! Plato in his Book called Alcibiades Secundus: Or, de Voto; set forth by Jodocus Badius Ascentius, with Marsilius Ficinus his Arguments before many books, Folio 19 brings in Socrates teaching his Alcibiades (for indeed (leanthes did commonly, and usually say, That Socrates only held Alcibiades by the Ears, and that Alcibiades stood in awe of Socrates above all others, as Plutarch hath it in Alcibiade) How to pray; or rather, How not to pray vainly, since folly was discernible in the prime prayers, and devotions of those times. And thence Socrates collecteth, and concludeth thus. It is necessary to wait, or expect, till it may be learned, How we may behave ourselves (as we ought) both to God and Man. Alcibiades roundly replieth; When will that be, o Socrates? and who is that Teacher, or Instructor? For I would most willingly know, and acknowledge that Man, whosoever he shall be. Socrates most divinely answereth, (if his words be weighed in the balance of the Sanctuary) He is he, who hath a care of thee. And afterwards; He wonderfully provideth for thee. Whether Plato learned these truths of the Egyptian Priests, Or Jewish Doctors; Or whether he had them inspired from God; Or whether from natural Reason he collected, That good God would not leave his creatures in perpetual darkness, but would send One to teach them, to guide them, to reform their ignorances', and instruct them in their duties to God and Man: since He is He, who hath a care of us, and in a wonderful manner watcheth over us, for our Good; I say, whence he had those beams of the divine light, is hard to determine. I am sure the Scripture faith, Esay 54.13. unto the Church of the Gentiles. All thy Children shall be taught of the Lord. And Act. 3.22. A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto Moses; Him shall ye hear in All things, whatsoever he shall say unto you: and vers. 26. God sent Jesus to bless you, turning away every one of you from his iniquities. And in Heathen phrase, Plato implieth no less. For Homer said, that Minerva took away a cloud from Diomedes his eyes, that he might discern God from Man. So said Socrates to his Alcibiades, Darkness must be removed from your eyes, which now blindfoldeth you: Then other things must be presented to you, by which you may distinguish Good and Evil. For now you are unfit for such matters; And saith not the Scripture, that the Spirit of the Lord sent Christ to preach Recovering of sight to the blind, Luk. 4.18? And Christ is the true Light, who lighteneth every man that cometh into the world, Joh. 1.9. Alcibiades hoping to learn better things than he had before, humbly professeth: Let that great Teacher, Rabbi, or Instructor, remove from me, either that cloud (if he will) either the Festucam in mine eye, or the Trabem (if so he vouchsafe) or any other impediment (if he please.) For I am ready to omit nothing, what he shall command, whosoever he shall be, so I may grow a Better man.— And we will offer our Crown, and all other decent things then, when I shall know That day is come, and it will not be long ere it come by the will of the Gods. So Alcibiades. Me thinks, I hear him speak like one of the Magis in the East, and profess to do, what they did, Matth. 2.11. Or like the woman of Samaria, joh. 4.25. I know, That Messiah cometh, who is called Christ; when he is come, he will teach us All things. If Plato had not thought of a Mediator God and Man; what needed that comparison from Homer, to distinguish one from the other? If he had not known him to be God, Plato could not have writ, He hath a care of thee, and doth wonderfully provide for thee; and yet Shall come Hereafter, and must be Waited for. If he also had not thought him to be a Man, (who was to come,) he would never have ascribed unto him such offices, of a Teacher, a Reformer, an Inlightner. I think I shall not err, if I say, Plato his thoughts accorded in substance with what Zacharias said, Luk. 1.74. etc. And what holy Simeon, Luk. 2.32. and with what the Prophets prophesied of Christ. And this Digression have I insisted upon, to show, that Great doors hang on small Hinges: and from a Little cranny of light, momentuall matters may be found. That we are not to give over mining, though the vein seem to be shrunk, and shut up; and that we cannot come to the fullness of knowledge, but by degrees: and that a small degree must serve, and content us, when we can attain to no more. That the Salt water of the Ocean may be made fresh, and wholesome, and nourishing, is apparent by that excellent liquor being in Oysters, at their first taking up: than which juice the art of the Cook, or the Apothecary cannot make a compound of a more delicate taste and relish, and more grateful, and acceptable to the stomach. Whether Art can imitate Nature in this, or how fare it may proceed, let others of less employments search. This I will say; If a way were found to correct the Salt water, to separate, and remove the brackishness from it, to reduce it to the taste, and temper of fresh waters, it would be most useful, and profitable for navigation, and abundance of people might live, and do well, which for want of it do perish. Some of our men have found the way of distillation good, as Purchase hath it in his Pilgrims. Secondly, If you object, The liquor of the Oyster to be salt: I reply, it is rather saltish, seasonably brackish, to sharpen the stomach, every way inoffensive. Again; What say you to this? That the best of waters which rise on high hills and fountains, were once Salt waters; but by running through the veins of the earth, become so sweet, so refreshing, so wholesome; And may not the percolation by Art take its ground and example, from the power of Nature, as it were straining the Salt water in the earth, till it be purified, sweet, and wholesome? Again; doth not the Sun, and divine powers, exhale up vapours, even out of the Salt Sea? Did not a little cloud out of the Sea like a man's hand, become rain, a great rain, that the heaven was black with clouds, and wind, 1 Kings 18.45? And will any man doubt, but these showers of Rain waters which fell, were as sweet, fresh, and wholesome, as ours? Again, I have heard that toward the bottom of the Sea, is fresh water; if the bed of the Sea be very deep. And I have read of a River or two which keep their freshness, though they flow or run into the main Ocean a great way: the waters being unmingled, and easily distinguishable by the freshet. Moreover, Aristotle in his Problems, Section 23. Question 30. acknowledgeth that the upper part of the Sea is more salt and more warm than the lower parts. And it is so also in Pits, or Wells of water, whose thinner, lighter, and sweeter parts are exhaled up, or alembecked by the air, and the Sun, whereby both most saltness, yea, and heaviness itself, contrary to nature, floateth in the uppermost superficies of the water. And in the next question he taketh as granted, that That part of the Sea, which is nearer the Land, is sweeter than the more remote parts of it. Therefore, where Nature maketh such a diversity, and separation, and percolation; I doubt not, but Art may follow her, and extract much good out of this disquisition. Some have said, that Clay well tempered, is very effectual to addulce Salt waters. Yea, I have heard, that our Seamen have searched, and found by a brazen, iron, or wooden vessel (with a close and heavy cover, which will shut of itself, but open with a vice, and descendeth naturally by its own weight) that it being let down empty, about three or four fathoms into the Sea-water, and then and there the vessel being opened, according to Art, and filled, and shut again, and by ropes drawn up, bringeth within it, and up with it, water useful, potable, and healthy: though not so perfectly fresh as our Rivers, or Springs: but somewhat resembling the taste of the liquor in the shell of the Oyster, salso-dulce, and wholesome. What hath been invented, I know not certainly; but that Salt water may be made sweet and wholesome, I doubt not. The means may be various to the same end. Those vast Cakes of Ice, you may call them little mountains (if you please) which are seen floating in the Northern frozen parts, towards the Spring, are not above three or four fathom thick. No cold can congeal, or condensate deeper: Nor did ever Ice in deep Rivers, or Seas, reach down, and touch the earth: but other waters, some think, fresh waters did glide along between the ice and the ground; both by reason of springs, whirlpooles, and other ebullitions of waters, arising in the deeps from the veins of the earth at the bottom of the Sea, or deep Rivers; and by reason of the inflowing of those many natural Aqueducts, which tumble from our mountains, our freshets, fountains, and rivers, which do not presently lose their pleasing taste, and sweet savour, but Arethusa-like retain it for a while. Likewise, though we cannot deny, but the virtue of the Sun pierceth far deeper than four fathoms, even to the bottom of the minerals, and mines, and much below them, even perhaps to the centre of the earth; yet his rarifying power, by which he exhaleth up still the lighter and thinner water, and leaveth the heavier, and salter parts in the Sea, is contained within four fathoms depth, from the upper superficies of the Sea, that is, the Sun hath work enough, to draw so much sweet water, as to make the Sea salt for four fathoms deep. There is an Island a little from Hispaniola (the Spaniards call it Arethusa) which hath a fountain in it coming by secret passages under both Earth and Sea: and ariseth in that Island: For it bringeth with it the leaves of many trees which grow in Hispaniola, and not in that Island. Oviedo mentioneth a little Island called Navazza, half a league from which, are many rocks in the Sea, five foot deep, covered with water: out of which issueth, and shooteth up above the water of the Sea, a spout of fresh water, as great as a man's arm, that it may be received sweet and good. This was seen by Stephano della Rocca, a man of good credit. See Purchase his Pilgrim, 9.14. The fresh waters below the deep Sea, may be a partiary cause, that all the fishes of the Sea be fresh; none so much as saltish: For to those sweeter waters they can quickly descend: though the salt water affordeth them more prey, and more desire to multiply; and perhaps more desire to play therein. Thouhast form Leviathan to play in the Sea, Psal. 104.26. When fishes are dead, how little salt, in a short time, salteth them, whom the whole Sea could not season, or reduce to a relish of saltness whilst they lived. New Inventions which are profitable, I admire: and the Inventors, I do adore. Certainly, many things may be perfected, which yet we will not believe. Who would have thought, that the Riverwater should be the chief ingredient to make Gunpowder? The Turks have found it. Or, that Alum hills should distil a liquor like unto oil, and sulphur, or brimstone, whereof the Spaniards make excellent Gunpowder: as Purchase relateth, pag. 16.6. Our brackish fountains; our Baths; our Brimstony springs, or rivulets, may perhaps do the like. The Lake Mardotis, or Maraeotis, now called Buchira, (saith Master George Sandys in his Journey, Lib. 2. folio 112.) by the City of Alexandria, was by a narrow cut, joined unto another Lake fare less, and nearer the Sea; which at this day too plentifully furnisheth all Turkey with Saltpetre. (saith Purchase in his Pilgrims, part 2. chap. 8. parag. 1. fol. 900. from the said Master G. Sandys, loc. cit. fol. 113. & 114.) Whereupon I could wish that the sons of Art would make experiments in some of our Lakes, or Rivers, or Fountains, which taste of brimstone, or are likely to yield such effects, though messengers were sent both to taste of that Egyptian Lake, and to see their manner of making Saltpetre there. If there may not be more profit and benefit to mankind, if this Invention were perfected, and in use, than by the wild discoveries of the Man in the Moon; or the fancies of the Lord Verulam in the New Atlantis; or the Northern Island all made of Lodestones, found only in the brains of Campanella De sensu rerum, 1.8. (for the best Lodestones are in the East Indies, in China, and Bengala, saith our Doctor Gilbert de Magnete, 1.2, pagina 9 Who also is confident, that the Loadstone doth eat the filings of iron; and is nourished with it; as he experimentally tried and saw:) then am I much deceived. Yet give Campanella his due, lib. 4. cap. 19 from whom the Fabulous Man in the Moon took the Art of Flying. The Art of Flying seemeth possible to me (saith Campanella.) The Dancers on ropes seem to fly. If therefore a man use fit meats, and get the agility of such as walk on ropes, and procure wings like to Cranes, and knows how well to imitate them; if arms, thighs, and legs be fitted with wings, he may perhaps fly. The Man in the Moon addeth much to this Invention; yet is but a Fable. But that two Ships of equal both burden and shape, one should be you're of sailing, because he consenteth to such an end; and the other slow, and unfit for sailing, because it is more against it, and unwilling to consent unto sailing; I say, these are strange forms of expression used by Campanella, 3. in fine. As for the makers of Clocks, complaining of the same point, I say, the temper of metals is not so exact, but there may be some predominant purity in some part rather than in other. In darkness, a little hole affordeth light. The West Indies were found our, per Minima indicia, by very small discoveries. One is the beginning of number. The least weight is the beginning of weighing: and the least measure the beginning of measuring, (saith Cusanus.) A minimis maxima oriuntur. The greatest things in the world, have but small beginnings. A spark may kindle a fire. A little sprig may save a man, who is upon drowning. Statesmen have found the greatest mischiefs that ever were intended to subvert any State, by small beginnings, obscure words, and indifferent actions. Yet from These have they sought and wrought out, more hidden evils; Fear and Doubt sharpening suspicion: Suspicion animating them to a more in ward Disquisition, either by that multiplex interrogatio, the evidencer of Truth in Examinations; or by Torture, if occasion be. Where evident Scripture fayleth, strong Presumption, or Tradition, or Reason may carry it. Tertullian de Coronâ Militis; Si Legem unsquam reperio, sequitur, ut Traditio consuetudint morem hunc de dederit, habiturum quandoque, Apostoli authoritatem ex interpretatione Rationis. If I find not a Command, or Law (that women should be veiled) Tradition hath made it a custom, which sometimes shall have Apostolical Authority, because it standeth with Reason. If we cannot have infallible proofs, yet such proofs as shelter themselves Sub patrocinio Rationis, under the protection of Reason, must not be rejected. If we cannot find Verum, the Truth, (which Democritus said was hid deep, as in a Well:) yet let us take hold of verisimile, of that which hath some colour of Truth, and make much of It. I care not, if I be found fault withal, when I determine things probable, probably. I press no man to believe points of opinion, as points of Faith: nor do I go about to build Infallibility upon the sands: nor labour I to make firm conclusions upon infirm and feeble premises: or to collect certainties, from uncertainty: but let each Argument rest upon his own proper place, and own centre: Every tub on his own bottom. If we cannot come to see his Sacred Majesties own face: Let us reverence and honour it, in his stamped Image. The tribure which Christ gave of but one piece of silver, and that fetched out of the deep, sufficed for that time. Gregory Naziazen Oratione in Sanctum Baptisma, teacheth, That the Church is not bound to do divers things, which Christ did. Particularly, not in the circumstance of Time: and he taxeth them, who deferred their Baptism, till the thirtieth year, because Christ did so. Christ had many Reasons, which we know not, moving him to do, as he did: which are no grounds for our proceed. Concerning the Deferring of his Baptism, He had these causes, which we have not. He was circumcised on the eight day; we are not, and therefore we do well to haste to Baptism. He was so free both from Original, and actual sin, that he needed not at all to be Baptised. But to institute a Sacrament, and for our good, he was content to be Baptised by his servant John: Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness (saith Christ to john, Matth. 3.15.) So concerning the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist. All men, of all sides, confess, that Christ never intended, that His administration of the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist should be a pattern for the circumstances thereof, but only for the substantial form of consecration. He who will wholly conform himself to Christ's actions; yet, shall fail in many things now ingood use. Christ, and his Apostlestook the blessed Eucharist after other meats. S. Paul changeth the order; and willeth the Corinthians to eat first at home. Christ took it with his, at Night. The Primative Church guided by the Apostles, and they by the Spirit (saith S. Augustine ad Januarium) appointed it to be taken in the Morning; and that Fasting. Christ received it in an upper Chamber: We in Churches. Christ did celebrate it only on Thursday, and about seven of the clock in the Night; But S. Paul consecrated it on the first day of the week, and about Midnight, Acts 20.7, etc. We on any Day, or Hour. Christ's Sermon in Coenaculo, was after the Communion; Ours, before it. Christ had only Men in the company: we both Men and Women. Christ communicated with Priests only: we with the Laity. Christ with himself had only Twelve: we have Scores, and Hundreds. Christ on the Fourteenth day of the First month: We may at all times. Christ administered it not on an Altar. (For what should an Altar do in a private man's Guest chamber, or Feasting room?) but on a Table. But the whole Church since the times of persecution, used Altars, both names and things; and called those Altars, Tables sometimes: as Malachy did the Jewish Altars before them, Malachy 1.7. And sometimes they termed their Tables Altars. So, at our first Reformation in Edward the sixth, his Injunction the third, it is called both the high Altar before the Sacrament; and Injunction the 9 the blessed Sacrament of the Altar, and God's board; that we may learn not to set them so far at variance, as some have done; that we may not seek for knots in bulrushes, or rixari de lanâ caprinâ, pick quarrels for straws, or seek the Raising up of one, according to our fancy, by the destruction of the other. He consecrated Unleavened bread; which we are not absolutely bound to do. And whether he drank pure wine, or water mingled with wine, he hath left us free. If that our blessed Saviour's manner of consecration, for the minuter circumstances was to be our pattern only, why did S. Paul set some things in order, contrary to Christ's manner of receiving? and promised he would set other things in order, when he came, 1 Cor. 11.34. We sing a Psalm before the Communion: Christ and his Apostles did sing an Hymn after it. Bishop Morton in his defence of the innocency of Three Coremonies of the Church of England, pag. 246. thus; what the express form of Christ's Gesture was, is left by the holy Evangelists in such an uncertainty, that we may justly collect from thence, that Christ intended not to make his Gestures to be an exact pattern of necessary imitation to be continued in his Church. THE PRAYER. O Incomprehensible God and most heavenly Father, I a poor blind sinner prostrate myself before thee, confessing my manifold ignorances', wherewith I am beset. Grant me therefore, Good Lord, for jesus Christ his sake, that I may avoid all singular presumption; that I may be as ready to be recalled, as I have been to stray: that I may humbly give way to my Superiors; and may be wise to Sobriety; and yet in the mean time, may modestly inquire into such things as are necessary, and may be found. Amen. Amen. CHAP. FOUR Wherein are contained the second, third, fourth and fifth Sections, or Particulars of the fifth General. 1. The second Particular of the fifth General; Wherein is showed, That the blessed Eucharist was instituted in the same room, wherein they are the Paschall, and Common Supper. That room was a large upper Chamber, well furnished, and prepared. In that room, the 120 Disciples Acts 1. were gathered together. 2. The third Section or Particular of the fifth General, sheweth, That the most holy Eucharist was not instituted whilst the Apostles were eating the Second or Common Supper: but After that Supper. The Inadvertency of this Point hath bred many Errors. Aquinas his gross opinion disliked by Estius. Both the Bread and the Wine were alike administered After Supper. 3. What Gesture, or Posture our Saviour used at the Institution of the blessed Eucharist, uncertain. Ludolphus twice taxed. Hugh Broughtons' wild Irish opinion touched at. More probable he did institute it on a Table, than on the Pavement. 'Twas not the usual fashion in Christ's time for the jews to eat their meat on the Floor. 4. The fashions of divers Nations in taking their Suppers, were divers. The fashions of the Turks, and Eastern parts of the World. Ancient Romans. Their three sorts of Tables, Cylibantum. Cartibulum. Urnarium. jews. Who had also divers kinds of Tables. A Round Table. Aretius' his story of King Herod; and of the precious Charger which Christ used at his Supper. Sermo Domini in Coenaculo. A Table at the consecrating of the blessed Eucharist not of absolute necessity. Most probable, the Table, Christ used, was a square table. Beza taxed for expounding the word (Table) metaphorically. Origen buried the Scriptures in Metaphors, and Allusions. King David's Table, Psal. 23.5. what it was. The jews made much use of Tables. 5. The Fourth Section, or Particular of the fifth General. Which shows, That the blessed Eucharist was instituted on a Table. What manner of Table it was, our blessed Saviour instituted the blessed Eucharist on, is uncertain. The Table of Shittim wood, Exod. 25.23. What allegorically it signified. The Administering, and Receiving of the Eucharist called the Supper of the Lord. Christ's Table in his Kingdom. The jews Tables in Christ's time were not on the Ground: but standing Tables. The use of Tables is to eat and drink on them. To serve Tables, what it is. The most holy Eucharist in Ignatius his days was celebrated on Tables. Christ given: For us, in the Sacrifice; Per modum Victimae. To us, in the Sacrament; Per modum Epuli. Banquet's most commonly set on Tables. Altars are for Offerings, and Tables for Eating. Christ the Altar, Offering, and Priest. Christ used a Table at the first Consecration. The Christians in the Primitive Church in times of Persecution used Tables, where ever they came. They made use of unconsecrated Tables, Cups, and Vessels. The name and use of Altar vindicated. The Devil had Tables erected to him by the Gentiles. God had Tables erected to him by the Christians. 6. The fifth Section or Particular of the fifth General, wherein is showed, That the holy Eucharist was administered by Christ on a distinct Table. Truth commanded; not forbidden to be searched out. A sting at Campanella, who ascribes sense to stocks and stones; and Reason to bruit Beasts. Of two opinions, the most probable is to be preferred. Most probable, the Deifying Sacrament was celebrated at a distinct Table. Proved by Arguments. 1. With reference to the Parties Recipient. De maximis maxima cura est habenda. Domitian's folly. Nothing equal to Christ's Body, and Blood. 2. Inregard of the party Administrant. Christ risen up from the Paschâll Table to wash the Apostles feet. Probable, he did the like to wash their Souls. Christ's humility at his Prayers. A Story of a devout Cardinal. Christ's holy Gesture when he blessed any thing. At the first Institution of any great matter mor ereverence is used, than afterwards. Diver see instances to this purpose. All Christ's Actions, as well as his person, pleased God. PARAGRAPH I. FIrst, therefore I resume that, which before I proved, and no man can justly deny, that the upper Chamber wherein they are the Paschall, and the Common Supper, was a well furnished Chamber. For it was a Guest-Chamber Mark 14.14. which always useth to be best adorned. It was a large upper room; so large, (if Dionysius Carthusianus opine not amiss) as that it received the 120 Disciples mentioned Acts 1. vers. 15. vide Dionys. Carth. in Luc. 22. fol. 257. & Act. 1. fol. 76. Furnished, and prepared; not with meat, but with all other necessary utensils. For the Apostles themselves were commanded, There to make ready, vers. 15. and they did make ready the Passeover, vers. 16. Therefore the Table was not furnished with meat to their hands: but the room with decent householdstuff. It was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. It was not only Mensa strata, a spread Table. The whole upper Chamber was Coenaculum grande stratum, a large well accommoded room. And in it might well be lesser Tables, round Tables, Livery Tables, Tables to be used, if need were, with their fair furniture. It had been a simple, poor room, if there had been nothing else, but only what was for present use, or what is particularly specialized: were there no chairs, no stools, no cushions, no water, no linen to be spread, or spread at other boards. PAR. 2. Secondly, I hold it safest to say, Christ did not institute his most holy Eucharist as they were eating other meats; nor mixed Sacred things with Civil. For in the Law of Moses, he forbade such medleys; Deuter. 22.9. Thou shalt not sow thy Vineyard with divers seeds— Lest the fruit of thy Vineyard be defiled. Thou shalt not plough with an Ox and an Ass together, vers. 10. Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of and linen together, vers. 11. And can you think, that the most Holy of Holies, the immaculate Jesus Christ would make a mingle-mangle of Sacred and Common meat, of Sacred and Common wine, and whilst they were eating common food, did consecrate the blessed Sacrament of his Body and Blood? Obje. Yea, but it is so, according to the letter; As the● were eating. Sol. If you will go strictly according to the letter, you must also say, whilst meat was in their mouths, whilst they were chewing it with their teeth; Before their mouths were empty, Christ gave them the Eucharist. Now, let any Christian heart judge, whether it were not an indignity to the Sacrament, to be at such time administered: whether the Letter be always strictly to be insisted upon. Repl. If yet again you urge the Letter. Resp. I answer, that S. Luke and S. Paul say expressly, Christ gave the Eucharist After Supper, Luke 22.20. Likewise, 1 Cor. 11.25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which may be more largely interpreted, than thus, When He had Supped; as our last translation hath it: even thus; After they all had Supped. Therefore it was not done in Supper time, or whilst they were eating. And upon comparison of those four places, tell me now, which standeth with most reason, That he gave the blessed Eucharist, as they were chewing their meat; or that it was done after Supper? especially, S. Paul writing last of them, and being taught of the Lord Jesus himself, the manner how it was administered. I received of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11.23. Again did Christ say, Matth. 9.16. No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment: neither do men put new wine into old bottles:— but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved: vers. 17. And can we think himself would put the New sanctifying food of Grace and of his Body and Blood, into those mouths, which were eating, and feeding upon the Common food of the Old Law, even as they were Eating? Or is it likely, Christ gave Thanks, whilst they were Eating? But Thanks he gave, as many Greek copies have it, Matth. 26 26. And this Thanks began the Eucharist. Or consecrated he the New Sacrament whilst they were eating their Ordinary food? Christ blessed the bread ere he broke it, Matth. 26.26. Did they eat whilst he was blessing the bread? Ezechiel 44.23. The Priests shall teach my people the difference between the Holy and profane; and cause men to discern between the unclean and the clean. Wherefore let no man imagine that Christ would make a mingle-mangle of earthly and heavenly matters, of bodily and spiritual food; and give them his Sacred Body and Blood, As they were eating a Common Supper. Edentibus illis, may signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, properly; That the Apostles were eating, whilst Christ was discoursing: That Christ eaten little, and conferred much: and rather tasted meat, than continued Feeding, as the Apostles did. Consider these points: First, He took bread, 1 Cor. 11.23. Secondly, He gave Thanks, vers. 24. Thirdly, He blessed the bread, Matth. 26.26. Fourthly, He broke the bread, ibid. Fifthly, He gave it to them, Luke 22.19. Sixthly, He said, Take, Eat, Mark. 14.22. Were the Apostles eating all this while? The Inadvertency, or not distinguishing of this one point; That the Supper of the Lord was instituted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. After Supper; as both S. Luke and S. Paul have it in the same terms, and letters, hath bred many great errors; As, That Christ Sat at the Eucharist, which indeed (if at all) was at the Paschall: That he took and gave the Eucharist Sitting, or Leaning, because at the Second Supper they did All Discumbere: and Christ Risen up, and Lay down Again. That the most Holy and Common food, were eaten together, and promiscuously: And that gross opinion of Aquinas, justly disliked by Estius on 1 Cor. 11.25. That Christ gave his Body, in Suppertime: and his Blood, After Supper; though Aquinas seek to give a mystical reason of it. But had Aquinas considered the force of the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Similiter, Likewise) he would have been of another mind. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Likewise, twice used; Luke 22.20. Likewise also (he took) the Cup After Supper; and 1 Cor. 11.25. After the same manner also he took the Cup. In both places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which doth demonstrate, Not, that Bread was given them Before Supper was ended; and the Cup, After; which is Aquinas ill-hanged conclusion; but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 o● the word Likewise, extendeth fully, and fairly to this point; That both the Bread and the Wine, were Alike, and in the Same sort given, and administered, After supper: And this S. Paul did learn of the Lord himself, and he received it of the Lord, vers 23. And this also (which others misunderstanding, and misapplying some words of S. Luke, have held) That After the thrice blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist given, and received, they fell Again to their victuals. But in Luturgico Canone, (saith Estius) absolutè dicitur, Postquàm coenatumest, instead of the Vulgat, postquàm coenavit: post coenasse, as others have it: post cibos (saith Augustine.) Not in meal time; but After, was the Holiest of Holies administered. Consider, I pray you, these two propositions cannot consist together, but are Contradictory. 1 Christ administered the Sacrament As they were Eating; At Supper. 2. Christ administered the Sacrament to them, After Supper. Which is most likely? PAR. 3. THirdly, it must be acknowledged, that whatsoever Gesture, or Posture, our blessed Saviour had used, if it were certain that he used it, it had been Approvable, Holy, and Divine. His exemplary beginning might justly give a form to After times: And whatsoever he had done, had been admirably good. But oh the vain thoughts of men, losing themselves in unlikely conjectures! Ludolphus, without any good ground, saith, That Christ went with his Apostles into a Lower Chamber to wash their feet: which hath not so much as a foot-step, or shadow of reason. Nearer to the purpose. The same Ludolphus the Carthusian, cap. 55. is too peremptory. Mensa erat in Terrâ; & more antiquo in Terrâ sedebant ad coenam in coenaculo strato, quasi jacendo recumbentes. The Table was on the earth, and according to the Old fashions they Sat at supper on the earth as it were Lying, and Recumbing in the Furnished Room. Perhaps, Hugh Broughton from hence took his wild Irish opinion. Concerning the discumbing of Christ with his Apostles, and their Tables, see what I have written lib. 1. Tricoenii, cap. 21. Let me add my opinion (for all the world is full of opinions in so unexpressed a matter.) That they Sat not at the Sacred Supper, on Couches, or Carpets spread on the ground, or such like things; though a very learned man, my honoured old acquaintance (quem honoris causâ nomino) is a little too resolute in the point. For it is not probable, much less very probable, that our Saviour did institute this Sacrament (of the blessed Eucharist) potius supra Pavimentum, quàm supra Mensam; rather upon the Pavement, than upon a Table. For if he had instituted it Supra Pavimentum, upon the Pavement; yet had he instituted it also Supra Mensam, upon a Table: For the earth adorned with Carpets, or other furniture supplied the room of Tables. Coenaculum stratum, A well prepared Chamber employed more, than Mensam stratam, A spread Table; Mensa strata, a Table spread, is involved in coenaculo strato, in a well prepared chamber; not è contra. Certainly in so dubious a point, I hearty could have wished a more timorous kind of assertion. Christ (saith he) did administer the same, not sitting at a Table, but Lying on the floor on Couches. I answer: They never lay on the floor (at repast) but they had Tables also of one form, or other, or spread Carpets instead of Tables; for that couches were on the floor, without any Tables, seems strange to me. It is impossible to prove this Negative; Christ administered the Eucharist, not sitting at a Table: or this Affirmative, he administered it Lying on the floor on Couches. Couches were above the floor; if not always, yet most an end. And the Tables and Couches were answerable in conveniency one to another, that there might be a delightful and convenient repast with all possible ease. But it is little ease (if you make trial) to lie on Couches above ground, and to stoop for your meat and drink down to the earth or pavement, and take them from thence. Tables, that are for ease, delight, and conveniency, are, and must be, as high, if not higher, than the beds on which guests lie, or feats on which they sit. Experience daily teacheth so much. The very forms of the old Triclinia, kept as venerable Monuments to this day, do prove, Christ Sat not on the Ground; nor Lay on a low couch near the Ground. Nor was it the fashion of that Nation, in those times, to eat their meat on the Pavement spread with Carpets. Nor can it be proved that in any of all those great Feasts in the Jewish Law, whether they were sacred or profane, they did eat their meat on the Floor, or Pavement. That they did Discumbere, veste stragulâ, Sat on Carpets being uppermost: in Stratis tapetibus, with covered Tapestry, I will not deny. Juvenal Satyra 5 vers. 17. goeth further. Tertia ne vacuo cessaret culcitra lecto una simus, ait.— On my third pallet take you a place; Lest on one bed there be a void place. Horace, Sermonum 1. Satyra 4. Post medium, more fully; Saepe tribus lectis, videas coenare quaternos. Twelve sup together oft, as you may see, Four on a bed; and so the beds are three. Nor had they Beds only, and Arras; but Cushions, or Pillows. Seneca in lib. de Irâ. Quid interest quam lecti partem premas. Hone●●iorem te, aut turpiorem potest facere pulvinare? It mattereth not on what part of the Bed you lie; can a Bolster, or Pillow make you ever a whit the better, or worse? That these Beds were immediately upon the Floor, or Pavement, or near it, I deny: They were raised above the ground: and the Tables were raised decently, aptly, and for easiest use, above them. Indeed, when a great multitude followed our Saviour, and were fed miraculously by him, because it was in a desert place, and there were no beds, no rooms, no tents, no tables, Christ commanded the people to sit down on the Grass, Matth. 14.19. And there they did eat as they might, sitting down by companies, on the green Grass; For there was much Grass in the place, John 6.10. But I read not, that ever any of those times, having plenty of necessary utensils, well adorned, did eat their meals on the Earth, Floor, or Pavements: or that at any time, Christ did eat on the Ground, plain Floor, or Pavement. Nor was Queen Vashti her feast said or likely to be on the ground, Esther 1.9. In the King's feast, The beds were of Gold and Silver, upon a pavement, of red, blue, black and white Marble, Esther 1.6. and all these above the ground. Nor can it be proved, that esther's banquet was kept by lying on the Floor, on Couches. It is said, Esther 7.8. The King returned out of the palace garden, into the place of the banquet of wine: and Haman was fall'n upon the bed whereon Esther was. For Haman to have fall'n on the Earth, it had been convenient enough to his desperate estate. But to fall upon the Queen's bed, was high presumption. And to think there was no banqueting Table near that bed, is to establish an uneasy kind of eating, or drinking. Most sure it is, as in Ahashuerus his great banquet, the beds are described as raised above the Floor, and the Floor above the Earth; so the Tables must be thought some way proportionable in height to the beds, for the fit accommodation of eating or drinking. Concerning the hitching up from the bosom to the breast, the distance is so small, that we may say it was a poor hitch. And if S. John did so ascend, and if such ascending doth prove a discumbing, yet might the discumbing be (and in all likelihood it was) not on low beds, near the Earth; having only a pavementall Table; but as the fashion was, both of Jews and Romans in those times, on raised triclinary Bedsteds, with Tables somewhat higher. Though judith's maid went and laid soft skins on the ground for her,— for her daily use, that she might sit and eat on them, Judith 12.15. Yet to say, Christ did likewise, there wanteth proof. Judith did so at her ordinary refections in time of persecution. Is it fit Christ should conform himself to her in his Paschatizing? or in the great Feast of the Eucharist? For even so may the blessed Eucharist be called, as well, if not fitlier, than the Paschall, or Common Supper, or other ordinary repasts. judith and her maid only sat together at meat, if the maid did sit. But Christ instituted his Sacrament in the presence of Eleven Apostles. judith's was a kind of fast: in a place ill fitted and little prepared. Christ's Supper was in a Room well furnished, large, and above ground. If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strongly infer, that the posture was Leaning or Lying flat along; yet they infer not, that this must be on low Beds, or Couches on the Floor; but according to those times, it was on high Beds. They infer not, but some Sitting might be used sometimes; as at large they infer not, that there were there no Tables; or that the pavement was the Table, as I averred from good authority before. But supposing all this true, concerning these Two words; and that they hold strongly for Leaning or Lying at the Paschall Supper, and at the Ordinary Supper: yet it will never be proved, that either of these words are used of Christ's Third, and Last Supper, the blessed Eucharist of the Lord. And I could hearty wish, that my most learned good friend had discriminated the Third Supper from the other Two: he would then have said, it had been administered at a distinct time and place perhaps, from the former: And it will never be proved, that any of the Three was taken on the Floor, or on Couches in the Floor without Tables. PAR. 4. IT is apparent that the fashions of taking their Suppers were divers. That sometimes, some men of several Nations did eat their meat sitting on the Ground, or on Carpets or Cushions upon the ground, cannot be denied. That the Turks, and more Eastern part of the world useth it, even to this day, is granted. The ancient Roman Beds were made ex uluâ palustri, of Sea-grass, straw, stubble, or turfs, (saith Alexander ab Alexandro Genialium Dierum. 5.21.) Afterwards, the Romans made Square feasting Tables, than Roundish: and their Beds at first were Low and Short; Afterwards, their Beds, their Cupboards, their Triclinia, and Trestles were of Brass, and fare both larger and higher. Then had they Round Tables of the Citron Tree, supported with feet made of Elephants teeth. Tully himself bought a goodly one, at an unreasonable price. Seneca had many of them. In their Supping Parlours, they had Triclinia strata Tribus Lectis, Couches furnished with Three Beds; and in them were Three Tables (as Varro signifieth.) One Table was Roundish: on which they placed their Wines; This they called Cylibantum, from the Pots and Cups which the Grecians call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Another was of Stone, upheld with, or resting upon a long little pillar, which they termed Cartibulum. The Third Table was Square, which held the vessels and platters: this they called Vrnarium. Heliogabalus was the first who had Silver Tables. Most an end to this effect. Alexander ab Alexandro. The Jews in their full adorned rooms had divers sorts of Tables. The Round Table: 1 Sam. 16.11. We will not sit Round, or sit down. Non Circumsedebimus, as Vatablus translateth it, and so the Interlineary; and this was before Rome was hatched. Another Round Table you shall find, Cant. 1.12. While the King sitteth at his Table; usque quo re● in Circuitu suo; as the Interlineary truly and literally expoundeth it. And lest you might misapply this, to the marriage bed, as Kapnion doth, or to the sleeping beds, on which they were wont to rest in the night. Martin Delrius will tell you, the word is Mesebi, from the root Sabab, Circuire, to Compass: and signifieth accubationem Epularem, a Feasting accubation, the Beds being fitted Round to the Tables. He excellently addeth; The Hebrews were wont to have their Parlours, or Triclinia adorned with many such little Beds about their Tables. And the Coenaculum, or Supping room was called Domus Lectulorum, Beth-Hammittoth, The house of Beds; and that in the form of a Crown or Circle. Discumbentes sedebant in Circuitu, ut qui edunt in mensâ Rotundâ: The Feasters sat in Compass, as they that did eat at a Round Table (saith Pagnine.) I dare not say, that the Psalmist did not allude in some degree or other, to Christ and his Apostles; Psal. 128.3. Thy children like Olive plants round about thy Table. I am sure, Nonnus on Joh. 13.12. thinks, that at the Second Supper, when our Saviour washed the Apostles feet, they sat as it were in a Circle. His words are these,— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he went about the Circle of his Twelve guests; And the same Nonnus, the fourth verse after, hath it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Circulus mensae, the Circle of the Table; And what is that but a Round Table. I wish the excellent Heinsius had taken occasion from these words to have enlarged the point. This I say; I shall hardly be persuaded, if our Saviour did institute his blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist, and eat it on the Paschalizing Table (which is most improbable) that he ever intended to make that an eternal pattern, or precedent for us, which he performed on such an occasion, (of the Passeover) as never should be in use again. As before I referred it to thy judgement (Good Reader) whether were most probable, that Christ should mingle his sacred Eucharist with Common meat, or take them dividedly: So here also (Christian Reader) be thou judge, whether it be likeliest that when an upper Chamber was tightly furnished, with convenient, or desired utensils, with several Tables (as you have heard was the fashion) Christ would on the Floor administer that heavenly food, or else go to one of those Tables, fit it, call his Apostles, and There administer it? Let it not be forgotten, that Christ foreknew, the upper Chamber was decently adorned, and purposely sent to have none other but it, as fittest for his turn. And if he had not made use of the things there, if he had fate upon the Ground, or on the Pavement, or lain on a poor low Couch at the sacred food: a meaner house, a worse fitted room, higher or lower, might well have served their turns. But he would have a goodly Chamber, prepared, furnished, and large: and therefore we may well think, he made some use of the things There. Sure we are, he made use of the Water-pots, and Water-Basins, and Towel: for he poured water (which was in other vessels) into the Basin, Joh. 13.5. And when he put off his Clothes, we may think, he laid them on a Table, Bench, Stools, or Chairs, rather than on the ground, or pavement. Aretius' on Math. 26.17. saith, that Herod the King appointed to have rested in that house: and at it were hosted with him, to whom Christ sent. But when Herod was otherwise diverted, as some conceive, Christ invited himself to the same house: Fitted you may be sure, to entertain a King: and so royally furnished. For among the rest, it is reported by Aretius in the same place, that either out of Herod's, or the housekeepers apparatus or preparation, Christ used Catino ex Smaragdo, quo nullus pretiosior visus est unquam, nulla gemma nobilior, nulla species vasis mirabilior: Than which Catinus, none ever was seen more precious: no gem more costly, or noble; no vessel more wonderful. The Smaragdus is an Emerald of a green colour, making the air green about it, and by its greenness, comforting the eyes of men; it preserveth the wearer from the falling sickness: Eight grains of it drank, expelleth poison (as they say.) The Genoists in Liguria show it to this day. And the Monks of Lions in France, show the precious Charger which Christ used in his Supper. But (saith Aretius) let a man believe what he list. But because the consecrating of it upon a floor, was not impossible: and such a thing might perhaps be, as that they might receive it on their Beds or Couches; yet since they were wont sometimes to sit up, and upright on their Beds, Pro re natâ, as occasions led them: I shall never be otherwise persuaded, but if they received the holy Sacrament on their discumbing Couches, they did arise in their several turns, and kneel, and pray, and worship; and Then partaked of the heavenly food: and then reposed themselves to hear our Saviour's Sermon; which is properly distinguished from Other his Sermons: and is justly called Sermo Domini in coenaculo; Christ's Sermon in the Supping Chamber. It must also be acknowledged, that a Table was not of absolute necessity. For the Table was to do service for the Food: not the Food for the Table. And the Supper caused the use of the Table: the Table did not cause the Supper; though the Supper, by a Metonymy, is called a Table, 1 Corinth. 10.21. Lastly, though we cannot say expressly, whether the Table were Round or Square, on which Christ did eat his Second Supper, or his Paschall; or determine undoubtedly to which it was most inclining, yet I opine, (as it is in my First Book,) it approached nearer to a Square Table, having Three sides encompassed with Three Beds: the fourth side Open for the Servitors, to bring, change, or carry away such things as they were directed: and so for the third Table, it is likely it was on a Livery board or Table which stood in the same room, square rather than round. Luk. 22.21. The hand of him who betrayeth me, is with me on the Table. And as expresseth, Joh. 13.28. No man at the Table, knew for what intent Christ spoke. Which places, drawing no inconvenience with them, are literally to be expounded. And if Beza deliver them over to a Metaphor, I value not his judgement, so much as I do the judgements of a thousand Heröes, holy and learned Divines, which have been, and are in our Church of England. And let Beza take heed; for if the word (Table) be sometimes used improperly, must it therefore be so in This place, in All places? This manner of expounding, is accompanied with desperate absurdities. For why may not another expound any other words (though they handsomely answer the letter) by a Metaphor, if so be they be used metaphorically, in any one other place? And so we shall be deluded, as Origen was, and sink and bury the holy Scriptures in Metaphors and Allusions. Concerning King David, before whom God prepared a Table in the presence of his enemies, Psal. 23.5. I answer, this was not in the Wilderness: for his enemies were present; but they were absent from him in the Wilderness; nor was it a Metaphorical Table, where his head was anointed, and where his cup did overflow. Or if these Two last things were done really in the Wilderness (as they were not) why might not a light small Table be also brought forth among so many hundreds, as followed him. And yet this place is not a Record what was done, when he fled from Absalon. Neither are the words, Psal. 78.20. Thou wilt prepare a Table for me in the Wilderness: as my learned friend citeth, and mistaketh: But the mutinous, and rebellious Israelites spoke against God, saying, Can God furnish a Table in the Wilderness? And this was long before David was borne: and no way concerned him. Again, my worthy good friend hath only conjecture, That the Earth was David's Table. And this comparative inference is worse by fare; as the Floor was our Saviour's Table. For if David did so in urgent and extreme necessity; and in the desolate inhospitable Wilderness: is it likely Christ would do so where all necessary utensils were prepared for a Feast? Nor are the words of David, in Terminis, (as my learned friend supposeth) though they approach to the sense; He that sitteth at Table with me, Psal. 41.9. And if they had been so; from the correspondence between the Type and Substance, I should rather have concluded; As Achitophel did eat at David's Table: so did Judas at Christ's Table. They both did eat at a Table, and both were notorious traitors. If Beza say, Such a Table as our Saviour did institute this Supper on, or That Table was no Table indeed, but in name only, or not a Table framed of wood; I must tell Beza, that none is able to prove his Negatives: and the contrary is evinced by their common usance. And the word (Table) doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and most properly signify, somewhat to eat upon, raised from the ground. Nor can I find in any place of S. Augustine, any inclination of him to this; That the earth, ground, plain floor, or pavement, was the Table on which Christ instituted the holy Eucharist. So much against the opinion, that Christ celebrated his blessed Supper and Sacrament on the pavement, with humble subjection of my Writings to the Church of England, the uncorruptedst part of Christ's Militant Church: and with this solemn protestation, that though I differ in judgement, in this point, from the learned Doctor; yet I shall never differ from him in affection: but be ready upon better proofs to change somewhat of my opinion; and still to love him. Lastly, I shall fling water into the Sea, and misspend time, to prove that the Jewish people made great and much use of Tables, long before Christ's Incarnation, and so down to his death. PAR. 5. COncerning the blessed Eucharist, it cannot be certainly known, on what special Table it was administered; or what was the form or fashion of That Table. Two points are considerable; The first seems more than probable to me; That it was administered, or celebrated on a Table. Secondly, I hold it likely, it was administered on a Table distinct from the Paschall, and ordinary-Supper Table. Concerning the first: In the Temple at Jerusalem, they had a Table of Shittim wood; two cubits the length thereof, and a cubite the breadth thereof, and a cubite and an half the height thereof, Exod. 25.23. And thoushalt set upon the Table Shewbread before me always, vers. 30. There was no Long-square Table of Incense; but the Altar to burn Incense upon, was also of Shittim wood, foure-square. A cubit the length thereof, and a cubit the breadth thereof, Exod. 30.1. And it was two cubits high. The former Table, allegorically did signify the Table of the body and blood of Christ, as Cornelius à Lapide on Heb. 9.2. avoucheth from Cyrill, Hierome, Damascene: Therefore the Substance of the Type, was also a Table: and Christ celebrated the Iords Supper on a Table. Secondly, 1 Corinth. 11.20. it is called the Lords Supper. The Administering and Receiving of the Eucharist, is called the Supper of the lord Augustine ad Januarium Epistolâ 118. cap. 5. affirmeth, that the Apostle calleth the very Receiving of the Eucharist, the Dominicam coenam, the Supper of the Lord; So Ambrose, Pelagius, Glossator, Lombardus, Hervaetus, Aquinas, Rickelius, (saith Estius on the 1 Corinth. 11.) Theodoret and Oecumenius call Dominicam coenam The Lords Supper, Domini Sacramentum, The Sacrament of the Lord: though Estius minceth the point. But they were wont in those times, to eat their Suppers on Tables, joh. 12.2. Lazarus was one of them who sat at the Table with Christ, when Christ said; Luk. 22.30. Ye may eat and drink at my Table in my kingdom; he draweth the Metaphor, from the Tables, on which he and others were wont to feed on in those days. joh. 12.2. etc. Matth. 15.27. The dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their Master's Table. Therefore there was a distance between the Tables and the Ground. S. Mark. 7.28. varieth it thus; The dogs under the Tables eat of the children's crumbs. Therefore the Tables were not On the ground; when dogs could be under them. The rich man had a Table, from whence such crumbs fell, as would have fed Lazarus, Luk. 16.21. Therefore the Table was not On the ground, floor, or pavement, but Above it; and from it the crumbs fell lower. So, Tables being in viridi observantiâ, in ordinary use among the Jews in those days: and Christ avoiding factious singularity, and running fairly with the stream of those times in things indifferent, we may conclude, Christ fed not from the pavement at any time, for aught that is recorded, or involved; But it is very likely, our Saviour on a Table did celebrate the holy Eucharist. Tables were principally ordained to be eaten anddrinkt upon, whether at sacred or common Feasts: Take this and eat it (as from a Table) and Christ took the cup (as from the Table) and gave thanks (as they used to do at the Table) and gave it to them (as they were at Table) Drink ye all of this (as was wont to be done at the Table) Matth. 26.27. Act. 6.2. It is not reason we should leave the Word of God, and serve Tables. And these Tables were for the poor, or for their holy feasts of charity; if not for the receiving of the most holy Eucharist also. For it may be well observed, Men were chosen to serve Tables, full of the holy Ghost; of honest report and wisdom; as Stephen was a man full of faith, and of the holy Ghost, verse 5. full of faith and tower, verse 8. consecrated to that work by prayer, and imposition of hands, with as much ceremony and solemn majesty, as others were chosen to be Presbyters; nay more, viz. with the general consent, and joint action of all the Apostles. To serve at Common Tables alone, such worthy Heroes were not fittest to be destinated, or appointed, that I may use the Scripture phrase; meaner people might, and would have served the turn. But these sanctified Deacons, did not only take care of the poor, but administered at the most holy Tables, on which the Eucharist was celebrated. Ignatius Epistol. ad Trallenses, almost in the beginning; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Ye ought to please the Deacons, the ministers of the mysteries of Christ in all things; for they are not the servitors of meats and drinks, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Ministers of the Church of God: do you reverence them as Jesus Christ, whose Vicars they are. My collection is; Sacred things, yea the most holy Eucharist was celebrated Then on Tables. And in all likelihood, from the example of Christ, who consecrated the blessed Sacrament on a Table. Nor do the Apostles think it unreasonable to serve Tables, either common, or sacred, simply and absolutely: (for the works were devout) but comparatively, and referentially. They would not neglect the preaching of the Word of God, nor exclude themselves from It to serve Tables: In this sense, S. Paul said, 1 Corinth. 1.17. Christ sent me not to Baptise, but to preach the Gospel: yet both Baptising, and Serving at Tables, especially the Sacred Ones, were divine offices. Christ was given for us, in the Sacrifice; was given to us, in the Sacrament. In the first, per modum victimae, as an offering; in the last, per modum epuli, (as Bishop Andrews hath it) as in a Banquet. Who knoweth not, Banquets are commonly set on Tables? In the Feast of our great Ones, you may perhaps, find out the Jewish fashion of Feast. For as oft times our people arise, when the first and second courses are removed; and other meat, and messes carried away: and go to another Table, and Banquet of Sweetmeats, as the close of all: So very well may it be, that when Judas was excluded out of that room, and gone down stairs, and forth of doors, Christ and his Apostles might arise from their former Feasting, and at another Table apply themselves to this Sacred banquet of the Holiest, Heavenliest Sweetmeat: since more devotion was required at this most Sacred food, than at their other repast: of which hereafter. Besides, I desire to see one proof where ever any of Christ's Apostles, or any Jew of those times, did feed from the Ground, Floor or Pavement, when they did eat in any house well-furnished. I cannot omit another place, 1 Cor. 10.21. Ye cannot be partakers of the Lords Table, and of the Table of Devils. That the Apostle speaketh of the sacred Eucharist in the first place, appeareth by the precedent verses. The Cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the Communion of the Blood of Christ? The Bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ? vers. 17. Here are both Species, both Kind's. Christ blessed the Cup, and so do we, before, and in the Consecration: and this is the Communion of Christ's blood. Giving of thanks preceded consecration. The Heathen had Altars, on which they made offerings to their Gods, the Devils: and they had also Tables, from which they did participate of things Offered. It was lawful to go to the Tables and Feasts of the Gentiles, and to eat whatsoever was set before them. 1. Cor. 10.27. But they might not approach to the Pagan Altars, to partake of them; Nor eat any thing in Idolio; in the Idols Temple: Nor, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, As a thing offered to Idols; no though a man did but say so, vers. 28. Yet Christians partaked even of the Sacrifices, which were upon, and taken from the Heathen Altars, on which they were Sacrificed, if they knew it not; as the Gentiles and Jews also: Deuteronomy 18.1. etc. though not Altars, but Tables were principally ordained to eat upon; Yet they, who waited at the Altar, are partakers with the Altar, 1 Cor. 9.13. Christ could not expect an Altar in an upper chamber, of a private man. Altars were no part of chamber-furniture. The Jews might have no other permanent Altars, after their setting in Jerusalem, but two; The Altar of Incense, and the Altar of Sacrifice. Christ may be said, in a sort, to be the Altar, the Offering, and the Priest, when he was Sacrificed on the Cross. Other than a Metaphorical Altar he used not, he was not. The poor man's box or chest shall be set near to the high Altar. Injunction the 29. But he consecrated the saving Eucharist on a Table; and therefore is it called the Lords Table. And because Christ did so, all other Christians were the apt to do so, and for a while called the Church-Altars, Tables, in reference to Christ's first Institution upon a Table. For in times of persecution, they could well use none, but Tables: and therefore doth the Primitive Church oft call them Tables: and seldom Altars; unto which they were not admitted, to administer the Sacrament of the body, and blood of the Lord. Nor did they carry Altar or Altars from house to house, from City to City, from Country to Country, as they Communicated in several Houses, in several Cities, and Countries, and for a while, daily so communicated; but used the Tables such as they were, made by Art, wheresoever they came. Nor perhaps, did they stand on the particular consecration, either of Tables, or of Cups, and Vessels to hold the Body and Blood of Christ; but in the fiery furnace of persecution, were content sometimes to make use of such things as could be had, and rather made them holy, than found them holy. But he who from hence will think that the name of Altar is unlawful, or of a late invention: or that they were excluded from Christian Churches: or that there were Tables allowed, and every where set up in the Churches: Or that Altars were destroyed generally, or for the most part: Or that even Altars themselves were not sometimes called Tables, with an eye to Christ's first institution: Or that will cry-up Tables, to cry-down Altars: He knoweth not the different usances of the Church in times of persecution and cut of it; but taketh advantage of words, to set asunder things, which well may stand together; and runneth with a strong by as to his own works. Neither would I have my special friend to precipitate himself into the other extreme: or so to fix his mind on Altars, so to undervalue Tables, as to maintain, or publish that Christ did not celebrate the Heavenly Eucharist on a Table; and that he instituted it on a plain Floor, or pavement: which opinion I think was scarce ever heard off, a thousand years after the first Institution of the Sacrament. The extract, or exempt especially appropriated to our purpose, is this; Not only the Devils in a kind of imitation of God Almighty this worship, had by the Heathen, Tables erected, and consecrated to them, of which they took part, and were allowed their dividend or portion, on which they fed sometimes in the Temples of their Idols, sometimes at home. But even the holy Christians in their best perfection, had divers Tables, on which they did administer the Lord's Supper, and partaked of the holy Communion, and they were called the Tables of the Lord. For the Lord himself, and his holy Ones, a long time after him, administered the blessed Eucharist on Tables. PAR. 6. THe second point, held probable, was, and is; The holy Eucharist was administered by Christ on a Table different and variant from the Paschall, and Ordinary Supper-Table. Object. Yea, but what proofs have you for that? Sol. I answer; what proofs have you to the contrary? And why was not the Heavenly food consecrated on a distinct Table? Or which opinion is like-liest? In this so uncertain a point, we are not forbidden, but rather commanded to search for the truth, 1 John 4.1. Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they are of God. 2 Thess. 2.2. Be not soon shaken in mind, or troubled. But, 1 Thess. 4.21. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Search the Scriptures, John 5.39. Our love must abound more and more in knowledge, and in all judgement, that we may try, or approve things that are excellent. Philip. 1.9. Grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 Pet. 3.18. I can say it by experience; He who diligently searcheth for the revelation, and enlightening of the Truth, though he find not sometime that particular, for which he inquired, he shall find many excellent things, for which he did not sack; and perhaps of more force and worth, than the thing searched for: And so, O Truth — Tu, non inventa, reperta es. Remember withal, that no beast under Heaven (though never so great, and vast) hath so great and large brains as man hath, nor broader allies, lanes, or cells for the animal spirits of man to walk, or rest in; which may serve for the disquisition of deep, or higher knowledge. Yet I would have no man so given to novelty, as Campanella, who ascribeth Sense to the earth, and dry sticks. 3.14. Reason to beasts: with an hundred other vain imaginations. The craft of the Spider, saith he, de sensu rerum, 2.23. is wonderful, or stupendious; by reason she makes her net, frameth the attractory threads of her web— & egreditur ad captionem musce cum multis syllogismis; Comes forth to catch the fly with many syllogisms. And, Canes exmotu sylvae latitantem syllogisant bestiam: saepe arguto syllogismo Leporem insectantes. And the Dogs by the motion of the wood, do reason concerning the hidden beast: often chase the silly Hare with witty and subtle syllogisms. And the Aunts of necessity speak, or use their voices; and many the like uncouth positions, which he is glad at the end of that Chapter, to temper, and modify with a Quasi; Discursiva dicenda sunt rationalia. The creatures, which can discourse, are said to be Reasonable: yet so, that Man is said to be Reasonable, and not Brutes; not because Brutes do not at all use Reason: but for that they use Reason but a little. As Plants are not called Animals, because they have but a little sense. And thus will we speak (saith he.) But we understand a Man Rational in his mind; and do give Brutes only Reasonable sense; which Aquinas calleth Estimative. Is this, all this discourse come now to this? I will take a liberty to speak as I please: and so I will set up new positions, and contradict all in my way that ever was said before: and then I will so qualify it, that I will have only new terms, new expressions, and yet but old matter: that all the Reason of Beasts be but the Estimative faculty (as Aquinas calleth it.) Affected novelty, be thou humble. And though we must be humble, and sceptical, where we have no firm footing; yet if we put into the weights two opinions with their best circumstances, we are not forbid upon a diligent trial, and search of them (not in the Baker's balance, but in the exacter scales of the Goldsmith) to say such an opinion is so many Grains, Scruples, Dramms, Ounces, or Pounds better, and heavier than the other. Proceed we then to examination, whether it were a distinct Table, or no? That it was celebrated After Supper, no man can contradict. If it had been at the Paschall, or at the Common Supper, or during their turns or times, no man could deny but it had been administered at the same Table. And too many Christians not observing that point, have run into many errors, and let slide from their pens apparent mistake. But at that Table it could not be administered conveniently. And herein again I appeal to any learned man, or good Christian soul: Which is fit of the two? That the most wonderful Sacrament should be celebrated, as the Recipients Lay along, or Sat at a Table encompassed with Three beds? Or at another Table, better accommoded for their devout participation, and graced with Diviner food? With reference to the parties Recipient, these may be the Arguments. In Naturals, Morals, Politics, these Axioms hold. De minimis minima cura est habenda: & de maximis maxima cura est habenda. Of least things the least care is to be taken: and of greatest things, the greatest care. Upon this ground, we prefer the Body before Raiment: the Soul before the Body; the joys of Heaven, above the pleasures of Earth; the love of God, above the love of Men. Charitas est ordinata: Charity proceeds by Order; and chieflyest looketh to things most necessary. When Martha was careful, and troubled about many things, Christ said to her, One thing is needful, and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her, Luke 10.42. Seek ye First the Kingdom of God, Matth. 6.33. Take no thought for the morrow. I have seen a natural fool hold up his arm to receive a blow, which was aimed at his head. And he is little less than an Idiot, who bestoweth more care on small, or poor things, than he doth on great and better things. Domitian was a fool to bestow his time in killing of Flies, when the care of the whole Roman Empire lay on his shoulders. The Roman Empire was not disturbed by a Fly. The particular nature will destroy itself, to preserve the General: Fire will descend, rather than there should be a Vacuum: Things will rather suffer any evil, than vacuity. All, and every particular nature by itself, and with others, doth so abhor vacuum, vain emptiness, that they all concur to remedy it against their own private inclinations, and dispositions; to keep as it were their Commonwealth whole and sound. For they Themselves are preserved, when the Generality is preserved. Air hath been seen impetuously, and forcibly to leap down into the bottom of the gaping Seas, and into caverns of the earth, against nature descending to inhibit Inanity. To this effect excellently Campanella de Sensu Rerum. 1.9. though I like not his Collections or Diductions therefrom. Concerning Christ's Body in the first place. And shall we think, that any thing in the earth, is equal to the precious Body and Blood of Christ? We are not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold,— but with the precious Blood of Christ, 1 Pet. 1.19. Heb. 9.14. The Blood of Christ purgeth our consciences from dead works, to serve the living God. 1 Joh. 1.7. The Blood of Christ cleanseth us from All sin. He washed us from our sins in his own Blood, Revel. 1.5. and hath made us Kings and Priests unto God, as followeth. His Blood was, and is of infinite merit. And if there should be created as many worlds of people, as there are now people in this world, and if God had made the like covenant with them, as he hath done with us; though every one of those were great sinners, yet if they did repent, and believe in Christ, every one should be forgiven, and saved; and for all this God should remain a debtor to the Cross. For between Finite and Infinite, is no proportion. Will not the thought hereof stir us up to more solemn devotion, when we receive It, than when we take our common repast? I shall never be persuaded the Apostles were so regardless, so uncivil, as to take so heavenly a benefit, without humble thanks, prayers, and sublimated devotions. And what is held sordid, and slovenly among us, to lie along, or sit, when people receive it from us ordinary Ministers; must it not needs be much worse, when the Lord of heaven admini●red his own Blood, in his own Person, if the Apostles did so? Therefore I shall hardly believe the Apostles partaked of that heavenly food either sitting or reposing themselves on their discubitory beds. Concerning his Body: How admirable things are spoken of it, Joh. 6.50? This is the Bread; and it is very likely, he pointed at his own Self, when he said Those words. And the Antithesis following evinceth, he spoke not of Temporal food. But above all, the declarative positive Asseveration, in verse 51. seemeth to prove so much, etc. to the fifty-ninth verse. This is my Body which is Given for you, Luk. 22.19. This is my Body, which is Broken for you, 1 Cor. 11.24. He eateth and drinketh Damnation, who discerneth not the Lords Body, verse 29. A poor discerning there is of the Lords Body, if they shall ear It with no more preparation, no more devotion, than they do Other meat in the same order and manner, and at the same Table sitting, or discumbing. Let me empty my soul into thankful humble prayers; and my body be poured out as water on the earth by lowest prostration: yet I shall think I am not enough dejected, or mortified. Luk. 5.8. Peter fell down at Jesus knees, saying, Depart from me, for an a sinful man, O Lord. Did he so, when he faw but a great draught of fishes, and was astonished at it? verse 9 Therefore let no man imagine, he would sit, or lie along, in a careless, indevout posture, when he Beheld, and Received the food of his soul, by which his sins were remitted, and the sinful old man pardoned, and sanctified. S. Paul, when he administered the holy Communion, preached unto the Disciples, and continued his speech until midnight, Act. 20.7. And when they had received the Sacrament, S. Paul talked a long whole, even till break of day, verse 11. That the Breaking of Bread, was the Giving and Receiving of the holy Communion, is proved; First, because it was on the First day of the week; that is, the Lords day. Secondly, And the Disciples were gathered together to Break Bread: which in the Scripture phrase, is the Eucharist. Thirdly, S. Paul preached before, and preached after, which was not usual at common meals, if the Eucharist had not preceded. Fourthly, he preached till Midnight. But then they were wont to fall to their common meat. Fifthly, it was a sacred Farewell of S. Paul with the Disciples; and so in likelihood, he both took the heavenly Viaticum himself, and imparted it to Others. Beza on the place acknowledgeth, That after the mysterious celebration, they used to eat common food. So the Eucharist (in his opinion) was first. But Augustine Epistola 86. saith, The bread videtur esse Eucharisticus, seems to be Eucharistical, or the bread of the Lords Supper. And this exposition is confirmed by Act. 2.42. They continued in Breaking of Bread, and Payers. For though they were not sparing of their material bread and meat one to another, yet this place seemeth spoken of Spiritual food only. So the Syriac translation; using in this Chapter, the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; with whom agreeth the Arabic Interpreter (saith Beza) in sense, though not in the same words. Which Syriac Interpreter Beza assenteth not unto, for restraining it to the Eucharist. But Beza might have considered, that the communication of things Temporal, or of both Spiritual and Temporal mixed together, followeth at large, verse 44. etc. Lorinus, Luther, Calvin, Gagneius, Salmeron, Gaspar, Sanctius, Montanu: therefore better interpret it of the Eucharist. Lorinus proveth it by Luk. 24.35. He was known of them in Breaking of Bread. Which Cajetan wittily, but groundlessly saith, was a wonderful Breaking of Bread, without hands or knife; For, it should seem he forgot, it is said, verse 30. As he sat at meat with them, He took Bread, and blessed it, and Broke it, and gave to them. Again, it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which may be translated, In the breaking of That bread; even the Bread Eucharistical: For of it do Augustine de Consensu Evangelistarum, 3.25. chrysostom Homilia 9 ex variis Matthaei locis, and many others, both Fathers and new Writers expound it. In all the Communions recorded in Scripture, either more apparently pointed at, or more reservedly described, not One was celebrated on the Ground; not One upon an Altar; What then remaineth, but they were celebrated on Tables? And to return to the old place; When S. Paul preached in an high chamber, even three stories high, could you there look for an Altar? or could they there, and then, so many as they were, sit, or lie on Couches on the Floor, and take that saving food from the plain floor, or pavement? No man will imagine it. Did S. Paul fall on Eutychus to recover him, Act. 20.10? and did he use no humble Gesture when he gave and received the blessed Eucharist? In regard of the party Administrant, thus we may proceed to argue. Did Christ rise up, to wash their feet? and did he not rise up when he washed their Souls, and gave them heavenly food, food better than Manna? Oh how reverend, lowly, and humble was Christ, when he was at his prayers? When he prayed, he kneeled down, Luk. 22.41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pitched, or settled on both his knees. He fell on the Ground, and prayed, Mark. 14.35. He fell on his Face, and prayed, Matth. 26.39. His Face adored of men and Angels. He fell so for us, and that we may learn so to do; since the Disciple is not above the Master. And can we imagine, that He, or his Apostles sat, or lay reached out at length, when he gave them the saving food of his Body and Blood? Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego. Believe't Apella of Jewish seed; It never shall come into my Creed. I have read of a late devout Cardinal, who being on his deathbed, and almost dead, yet did strive to go out of his bed, and to kneel on his knees, because he judged it sinful to receive the food of his soul lying all along; and so by others he was helped up, and staying till he had communicated kneeling on both knees This is an example worthy to be imitated, though he were a Cardinal. When Christ blessed any, his Gesture was most holy, with eyes and hands elevated. Did he bless and consecrate the holy Bread no otherwise than if it had been to have been still but ordinary bread? When he consecrated the heavenliest Food, can we think he sat still? At the first institution of any great matter, is more reverence exhibited, than afterwards. Abraham made a Great Feast that day, that Isaac was weaned, Genesis 21.8. When Christ received his Baptism, how humbled he himself to John the Baptist; the Creator to the creature, the Master to the servant? And he took a long journey, even from Galilee to Jordan to be Baptised of him. Matth. 3.13. and questionless put off some of his , if not all, and descended into Jordan; and by his own flesh sanctified the River Jordan, and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin: as (before our Communion book was made) Ambrose and Beda, on Luke 3. and Chrysostom and Hierom have it on the 3 of Matth. Christ's Actions, or Passion at Baptism, were ratified for good from Heaven. The Heavens were opened, the Spirit of God descended like a Dove, and lighted upon him (on him alone, and not on any others) to show there was no mistake. And a voice from heaven was heard, saying; This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; Matth. 3.16. and 17. verse. Both his Person, and all his Actions, well pleased God. Let us therefore parallel the Sacraments, and consider but the first Institution of the sacred Body, and Blood of Christ; and let any Christian-devout-soule judge whether Common, and ordinary posture befitted it; and not rather a more Solemn, Divine, Devout, and Heavenly gesture? And, that in likelihood to be rather on another Table, than as they Sat, or Lay on their discubitory beds. So much be said to probabilize that the holy Eucharist was celebrated not on the same Table where the other Two Suppers were eaten upon, but on another Table. Thus, Christ being in all likelihood come to another Table, prepared, and well-furnished with Bread and Wine; am I brought home to the next point of my propounded method. The Prayer. MOst blessed Saviour, who damnest no man causelessly, who Redeemest, and Savest great sinners most mercifully; who makest them gracious and good in this life, whom thou intendest to make glorious in the life to come: Oh prepare my heart to serve thee here, to fear and love thee, that through all worldy affairs, I may look up still to thee with whom only true joys are to be found, for thy glorious names sake, O heavenly Lord jesus. Amen. CHAP. V. Which containeth the sixth General, wherein is examined Whether Christ himself received the blessed Eucharist? And first Section of the seventh General; wherein is showed, what Posture Christ used, when he consecrated the Eucharist. 1. In the first point, Bellarmin is silent; Aquinas affirmeth it; Soto seemeth to incline to the contrary opinion; Luther resolveth, he took it not. Many Canons of the Church command the Priests to receive first. So doth the Council of Toledo. So did the Law of Moses. Soto his proof is ridiculous. S. Hierom is express for the Affirmative that Christ did Receive first. So is the Gloss on Ruth, 3. So is Soto in his answer to the Objection to the contrary. So is Barradius. So is S. chrysostom. So is Titus the Abbreviator of him. So is Isychius, and the old Rhymer. 2. A double eating of the Sacrament, Spiritual, and Sacramental. Christ received Himself both ways. So thinks Aquinas, Soto, and Alexander Hales. To receive Sacramentally without increase of Grace, how it happens. Incapability of Grace happeneth two ways. 1. When a Sinner puts an Impediment against it. 2. When one is full of Grace before hand. So Christ. Dominicus Soto Confessor to Charles the fifth. Christ might take the blessed Eucharist for example sake. Gregorius de Valentia treadeth in Soto his steps. Durandus saith the Apostles did Con-coenare, but not Con-celebrate cum Christo; whom Cajetan approves. Lucas Burgensis is express, that Christ did receive first. So are many of the Fathers. Divers collections for the Affirmamative. Bishop Lake puts it out of question. 3. The first Section of the seventh General: Wherein is declared what Posture Christ used when he consecrated the Eucharist. All Gestures in Religious worship reduced to two heads. Some belong to Hope. As the lifting up of the Eyes and Hands. Humiliation. As the uncovering of the Head, beating of the Breast, bowing of the Knee. Some Gesture, or other, is necessary at the receiving of the holy Sacrament. What Gesture Christ used, cannot be demonstrated. Certainly the devoutest. In old time they used to pray sometimes Kneeling, sometimes falling down on their Faces, sometimes Standing, and sometimes Bowing down their Heads. 4. According to the degrees of Hope, or Fear, there are degrees of Worship. The Publicans Gesture, Luke 18. descanted on. God gave to Man a lofty countenance. Whence called in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Fourfooted beasts have seven Muscles in their eyes: Man but six. Why the Eyes are called by the Hebrews Oogon. Naturally what one Eye doth, both do. Eyelids, and the differences of them in Men, Beasts, and Birds. One Eye in the singular number often used in Scripture for both. 5. Falling on the Face, and Kneeling in Divine worship. Examples thereof. And diversity of Opinions concerning the same. Men have Kneeled unto Men. Examples thereof. In Thangesgiving, and Blessings they ordinarily stood up, with Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven. Variety of Gestures according to the variety of affairs, commendable and necessary. A fixed Gesture is not essential to a Supper. Feasting, not Gesture, makes a Supper. 6. Adoration, and the Degrees thereof. 1. Degree, Uncovering of the Head. 2. Degree, Bowing of the Head and Face. 3. Degree, Kneeling. 4. Degree, Falling on the Face. 5. Prayer. Kneeling, Prostration, Rising again, Standing in Adoration, what they signify. Jacobus de Valentia his Degrees of Adoration rejected. Others preferred. 1. Reverence, and us Act. 2. Veneration, and us Act. 3. Worship. 4. Adoration. Adoration produceth 1. An Act of the Intellect. 2. An Act of Will. 3. Bodily Acts. Bending, Kneeling, Prostration, etc. Probable, when Christ instituted the blessed Eucharist, he Prayed and Kneeled. Prayer, and Thanksgiving, almost one. Two motives to Prayer, Feat and Hope. The Fruits and the Gestures thereof. Both joined together in Prayer. 7. By the ancient Heroes, and Semidei, are meant famous Men and Princes of renown. Secundei (saith Trithemius) successively rule the World. Pagan Gods were very Men. Arnobius, and Minutius Foelix do mention the places of their Births, Countries, etc. Alexander wrote unto his mother De Diis Hominibus. Tertullian wrote of Saturn that he was a Man, the Father and Son of a Man. The Heathen Gods were borne and died. The Heathen to preserve the memory of their Heroës, made Statues and Images of them. Minutius Foelix reproveth their manner of Deifying Men. The ancient Romans made an absurd Decree, that the Emperor might not consecrate a God without the consent of the Senate. The very people did one day Deify a God, and the next day Vndeified him. Tiberius' the Emperor approved Christ to be a God. The Senate reject him. 8. The Pagans had several kinds of worshipping their Consecrated Gods. First, they did lift up their eyes unto them. Secondly, they blessed them. Thirdly, they did Sacrifice unto them. Fourthly, they did set their Idols upon their Beasts, and Cattle. The lepid story of the Image of Isis set upon an Ass' back. They made Caroches, and Carts to carry their Images upon. They made Beds in their Temples in honour of their Idols. They daubed them over with silver and gold. They clothed them with costly garments. The story of Dionysius his sacrilege. The story of the Knave that stole away Jupiter's golden Eyes out of his head. 9 Another kind of Adoration of Idols, at distance. To kiss the hand in passing by the Idol. So did Cecilius worship the Image of Serapis. A Creditor by the Law of the 12. Tables might cut in pieces his condemned Debtor, who was not able to pay him. The rigour of that Law commuted into shame. The manner of shaming such Debtors. There is a Civil death of a man's Honour, and Good name; as well as a Corporal death of the Body. 10. Their fashion of Adoring their Idols, was either at Distance, or Close by. Adoration at distance was divers, either of Idols in Heaven, or on Earth. If they adored the Celestial bodies, 1. They looked up towards the Heavens. 2. They did in heart give the honour to the Creature, which is due only to the Creator. 3. Their mouths did Kiss their hands. 4. They prayed unto them, either audibly, or tacitly. If they Adored their Images on Earth, 1. They stood before their Images, somewhat off. 2. They solemnly moved their right hand to their ●ips. 3. They kissed the forefinger joined with the thumb. 4. They turned about their body on the same hand. 5. They did draw nearer, and kiss the Images. They kissed not only their Lips, and Mouths: but other parts of their bodies also. 11. The manner of saluting one another among the Persians. The story of Polyperchon. Adoration whence so called. The reason why in Adoration they did both Bend and Kiss. The reason why they put their Hands to their Mouths in Adoration. The ancient Romans had a house dedicated to the Sun. A greater Obeliske dedicated to the Sun. meaner to the Moon. Kings Adored before either Sun or Moon. The Persians worshipped the Sun. The manner how. The Buckler of the Sun, what it is. Servius Tullus built a Temple in Honour of the Moon. The Manichees Adored the Sun and the Moon. 12. The original of Adoration. Kings and Princes, had not their original of worship from the Adoring of Idols, or Images: as M. Selden opineth. But Statues, and Images had the beginning of their Adoration from the exemplary worshipping of Kings, and famous Heroes: as Geverard Elmenhorst proveth from S. Cyprian, Athenagoras, and Alexander's letter unto his mother. About Serug his time, they began to draw the pictures of Magistrates, Tyrants, etc. About Terah's days, they made Statues and Images. Statues were made 1. Of Clay, by the Potter. 2. Of Stone, by the Mason. 3. Of Silver, Gold, &c by the Goldsmith. 4. Of Iron, by the Blacksmith; and other Artificers. The divers Apellations of Images made for Gods. Heroës'. Kings. Wisemen. Well-deserving men. The cause of Adoration sometimes Greatness. Goodness. Adoration, a Reward for the dead. Illective for the living. Both Men and Women for some evident privilege of Virtue, were deified. The first Inventors of every thing profitable for men, Deified. Jupiter so called à juvando. Jovis, Jovi, Jovem, Jove, corrupt derivations from Jehova. 13. The Cities, Countries, and Places of the Heathenish Gods are known, where they were Borne. Lived. were Buried. The great variety of Gods and Goddesses, among the Heathen. Saturn the Ancientest among the Heathen Gods. Jupiter borne and buried in Crete. 300. Jupiter's. The famous Heroës, and Princes were in the World before their Images. Statues were at first Comforts. are now sacred Relics. Common people pray unto, and publicly consecrated Images. The mouths of the Image of Hercules many Images at Rome worn bare by Kissing. 14. In ancient times, living Kings were Worshipped, and Adored. Sons of God, Gen. 6.2. were Sons of Princes. Elohim, the name of God; appliable to Princes. Great men in ancient times Adored for their wickedness. Men Reverenced, and Adored for their Name. In ancient time great store of Kings. Nine in one Battle. Gen. 14. Usual in India for Subjects to Kiss their Kings by way of Worship. Some Kissed their Hands, yet did not Adore. Adored, yet Kissed not their Hands. Adorare, to worship, used for Orare, to pray, both in Scripture, profane Authors, and Fathers. Praying to an Idol, maketh it a false God. The True God only must be prayed to. Prayer used for Adoration. Adoration for Prayer. The story of the Father (Wisdom the 14.) for the untimely death of his Son. 15. The story in the Mr. of the Ecclesiastical History, concerning the Original of Idols. Idolatry had divers Inventors. The Egyptian Idolatry the worst. That place of Scripture; Then began men to call on the Name of the Lord, Gen. 4.26. vindicated from the misinterpretations of Bellarmine and Waldensis; who apply it to a Monastical life. Others, who gather from hence the Original of Idolatry. Examined at large, and truly Interpreted. No Idolatry before the Flood. Enos was Called a God. Held a God for his admirable Virtue and Justice. His Sons called the Sons of God, Gen. 6.2. So Adam: so are Kings, and their Officers; so are Christians. Enos the first who called upon God, by the name Jehovah. How God was not known by the name of Jehovah to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Two Conjectures of the Author. Many words in the Hebrew Bible signify contrary things; to excite our minds to a diligent search of the right meaning. Authorities that Idolatry was not before the Flood: Salianus, Cyrill, Irenaeus, etc. The first Idols had their primitive Adoration from the Adoration of Kings. The latter Kings, etc. have had Adoration from some kind of Adoration derived from Idols. When Christ celebrated the holy Communion, 'tis probable he fell down on his Face. Falling on the Face is the most forcible Gesture exciting to Devotion. The prostration of the Body, is the Elevation of the Soul. Christ in the celebration of his Last Supper varied his Gestures as occasion required. The Church ought to imitate Christ in those things which she commands. PARAGRAPH 1. 1. WHether Christ himself received the blessed Sacrament? I answer. Here cannot choose but be diversities of opinions, Bellarmine de Sacramento Baptismi. 1.23. thus; Dices, potuit Christus accipere sunm Baptisma, non ad effectum Regenerationis & Adoptionis consequendum, sed aliquâ aliâ de causâ, etc. You will say, Christ might be Baptised with his own Baptism, not to work Regeneration, or obtain Adoption, but for some other cause. As Christ was Circumcised, which he needed not: and was Baptised by John, to the Baptism of Repentance, though Christ had no cause to Repent: and lastly, as he took the Eucharist, which likewise he did not need nor want. To this last point, he either answereth nothing (which he seldom doth) or else it was suppressed by higher authority: or his answer is involved in these words; Quicquid de hoc sit, and in this sense, whether Christ received the blessed Sacrament, or received it not, I will not now speak, I will pass it over, or the like. Aquinas Parte 3. Quaest. 81. Articulo 1. handleth this point scholastically; Whether Christ took his own Body, and Blood? And with his authorities and reasons is for the Affirmative; though he saith, Others think the contrary. Soto likewise 4. Sententiarum, Distinctione 12. Quaest 2. Articulo 1. propoundeth the same quick question. Whether Christ did Receive his own Body and Blood? And he answereth (stealing almost all from Aquinas) There have not been wanting, who have said, Christ gave his Body to his Disciples, but himself took it not. Luther de Abrogandâ Missâ privatâ resolveth, Christ took not that blessed Sacrament; and thence collecteth (if Soto belie him not) that other Priests ought not to take it, but to give Both kinds to the Laity. If Luther so said, Soto well reproveth him, and confuteth him; because by Luther's argument, the Priests are of worse condition and in a worse state than the people. Which none, but a popular Claw-back, or Calf of the people will say. Aquinas his Inference is much sounder. Because the Ministers with us, receive it first; therefore we conclude Christ first took it. For (say I) Christ commanded us, to do as He did. And the Church evermore since Christ's time doing so, that is, the Priests not giving the blessed Sacrament, till themselves had first received, it followeth unforcedly, that Christ took it first. There be many Canons of the Church, which command the Priests, first of all to receive: So is it in the Council of Toledo. If they that Sacrifice, eat not, they are guilty of the Lords Sacrament: 1 Corinth. 10.18. Are not they which eat of the Sacrifices, partakers of the Altar: For if to participate, be to eat, and the Sacrificers be the chief partakers; it resulteth, They must first eat. The like was practised in the old Law. The Priest was served even of the people's offerings, before the people themselves, 1 Sam. 2.13. etc. If you say, that was but an usurpation, and profanation of Ely his sons, then see the Law itself. Leviticus 6.25. Where the offering is killed, shall the sin-offering be killed before the Lord: it is most holy: and verse 26. The Priest that offereth it for Sin, shall eat it. Leviticus 7.29. etc. You may see the Priest's portion of the Peace-offrings, by a statute for ever. Numbers 15.20. Ye shall offer up a cake of the first of your dough: Of the first of your dough, ye shall give unto the Lord, Vers. 21. But especially see Deut. 18.3. & 4. verses: and Numb. 18.9. etc. What God reserved for Aaron, his sons, daughters, and household that were clean. All the best of the oil, All the best of the wine, and of the wheat; the First fruits of them that offer: and whatsoever is First ripe in the Land. The people of the old Law shall rise up in Judgement against Our people, who think the least and worst things, are too good for the Clergy, though God hath committed to us the word of Reconciliation: and given us a power, above Angels and Archangels, in those most powerful, un-metaphoricall, proper words, John 20.23. Whosesoever sins ye Remit, they are remitted unto them: and whosesoever sins ye Retain, they are retained. The people of the Law enjoyed not Their part, till the Priests had first Their parts; not aught Our people to participate of our sacred offerings, Till the Priests have taken Their parts. Soto his proof for the Affirmative, is a ridiculous one. David fuit figura hujus: David was a figure hereof, who, 1 Samuel 21.13. etc. before Achish, Suis se manibus referebat: sic Christus suum corpus suis tenebat manibus, & suo sumebat ore: So Christ held his own body in his hands: and received it with his mouth. I answer, there are no such words, nor words tending to that purpose, in the Vulgar, either of Hentenius, or Saintandreanus; or in Vatablus, or the Interlineary, nor in the Greek, or Hebrew. Nor can I judge from what words in that Chapter, Soto did gather his wild protasis, or first part of the typical comparison. A weak proof doth harm to a good cause; and so hath Soto done in this point. The authority of Hierom in his Epistle to Hedibia, de Decem quaestionibus; quaestione 2. Tomo. 3. fol. 49. reacheth home, Dominus jesus, Ipse conviva, et convivium; ipse comedens, & qui comeditur; The Lord Jesus was himself both guest, and feast: He was both eater, and thing eaten. Act. 1.1. jesus began to do, and teach: his actions led the way: his voice followed. He first Received, then Administered. He first celebrated the Eucharist, than made his Sermon in coenaculo: or Sermon in the Supping Chamber. Before be Instituted his Baptism, he was Baptised. When he said to his Apostles, Do this in remembrance of me; if followeth, he did take it First Himself. The Gloss on Ruth 3. saith, Christ did eat and drink That Supper, when he delivered the Sacrament of his Body and Blood to his Disciples. Soto bringeth this objection, When Christ said; Take and Eat; the question is; Whether He did eat or no? If you say, He had eaten, this is against that opinion, because he had not Then consecrated the bread. For by the subsequent words, he did consecrate and say, This is my body. If He had not eaten then, it is apparent, He did not before his Disciples: For reaching it to them, he said, This is my Body. I answer (saith Soto) He first broke the bread into Thirteen pieces; which when he had in a dish together in his hands; He said, Take, eat, this is my body, receiving his own part First. For he kept Feast with them: and the nature of a Feast requireth, that the Inviter feed with the Invited; He fed with them in the First Supper: He drank with them in the Second Supper. In the Best Supper, and the Supper which was most properly his Own, did he nor Eat nor Drink? Barradius, thus; Accepit ex mensâ panem azymum: benedixit: in parts Duodecem fregit, eas consecravit: unam sumpsit, reliquas distribuit: He took from the Table unleavened bread: He blessed it: He broke it into twelve parts: He consecrated it: One He took; the Other he distributed. Therefore even our adversary being our judge, He was at a Table. judas was not present: for then there should have been Thirteen pieces or morsels: Christ himself received himself. So they cannot tax me for these opinions; or these opinions for novelty, but they must needs condemn Barradius, and divers others of their own side. chrysostom homilia 83. on Matthew 26. Christ drank himself, when he said, Drink ye all of this; lest the hearers should say, Why drink I blood and eat flesh? To keep them from being troubled at it, as they were troubled when many fell off from him, he drank his own blood first himself. So Titus hath it, the Abbreviator of him. Isychius on Leviticus 8. (as I guess) verse 23. Moses took of the blood of the Ram and put it upon the tip of Aaron's right ear; and on the thumb of his right hand: and upon the toe of his right foot. And verse 24. He did the like afterwards to Aaron's Sons, Not only on their thumbs, but verse 27, He put oil upon Aaron's hands, and upon his Son's hands: Not only on his hands; But verse 30. Moses took of the anointing Oil, and of the blood which was on the Altar, and sprinkled it upon Aaron (first) and his garments: and upon his Sons, and his Son's Garments: and sanctified both Aaron and his Sons, and their Garments. Isychlus addeth; Christ in that Supper first drank his blood, Then gave it to his Disciples. Yea, but it is not read, that he eaten his Body, and drank his blood. Soto answereth; It is read, that He took the bread, He took the Cup: and though it must be expounded, He took them into his hand, or hands: yet it is not said, He took them into his hands only; but He took them himself, as he commanded his Disciples to take them. Therefore when he said to them, Take, eat, drink; so when He took them, it is deducible, He did after the same manner eat and drink. The old Rhymer before cited, is authentic enough in this last point. Se tenet in manibus; se cibat, Ipse cibus. Christ in his hands Himself did bring: The Food and Feeder being one thing. Soto bringeth another objection: Between the Receiver, and the thing Received, there is a Division. But Christ is not divided from himself: Therefore he could not take himself. It is answered (saith he) Christ is not compared to the place by his proper Dimensions; but by the Dimensions of the several Species; so that wheresoever They are, there is his body and blood: Therefore because he had the bread and wine in his mouth and stomach, when he eaten Them, he did eat himself. And to this there needs no division, between the receiver, and the received. PAR. 2. A Third Objection by him urged, is this: There is a double eating of the Sacrament Spiritual. Sacramental. Christ needed not the spiritual receiving, for he received no Grace from the Sacrament. The Sacramental reception is improper: proper to sinners only, and so unfit for Christ. He answereth with Aquinas; Christ received himself both Spiritually and Sacramentally: And so before Aquinas, Alexander Hales settled at last in that opinion. For though Christ received no increase of Grace or Charity by the Sacrament, because he needed none, yet he received a spiritual Taste, and sweet enjoying of Delight, which are effects of this Sacrament. So he took it also Sacramentally. To take it Sacramentally without increase of Grace, happeneth from hence; that the Receiver (Then) is not capable of Grace. And this may come to pass two ways: Either because he puts an impediment or block against it, as he is a sinner; or because a man is so full of Grace, that he cannot receive an Increase of Grace, as Christ was. Much of this discourse proceeded from the learned Dominicus Soto, Confessor to Charles the Fist, which, because he most enlargeth Aquinas, I have translated, and cleared: and enlarged him. To conclude; let me add, that Christ might well take the blessed Eucharist himself for example sake, to Teach us what we should do; who may receive much good by taking it; and should imitate him, by taking it first ourselves, before we administer it unto Others. For thus did he do divers Actions in his life, to Teach us to do the like. Gregorius de Valentia, Tom. 4. in Tertiam partem Thomae: Disputat. 6. Quastione 9 Puncto 1. pag. 1095. agreeth with Soto, and useth most of his arguments, producing nothing of his own. Cajetan in his Commentaries in Tertiam partem Thomae, Quaest. 82. seemeth to approve Durand for saying. That the Apostles, though they did concaenare cum Christo; yet they did not concelebrare. Christ did it by himself; the Apostles did not assist him in Consecration: but he leaveth Aquinas without exposition in the main point, Whether Christ are his own Body, and drank his own Blood? Franciscus Lucas Brugensis on Matth. 26. saith in these words; Christus ipse comêdit, priusquam discipuli ejus: qui tamen non comêdit, priusquam pronuntiasset haec verba; Hoc est corpus meum: Christ did Eat before his Apostles did; yet did he not Eat before he had said, This is my Body. last; all the Fathers, who say, Christ communicated with judas, are clearly for the Affirmative. If by these words; My Father's Kingdom, Matth. 26.29. and these; The Kingdom of God, Mark. 14.25. the blessed Eucharist be pointed at, and meant, (as is likely:) then apparent it is, Himself drank of his own blood in the sacred Eucharist; for he professed, He would drink no more of the fruit of the Vine, but only in the holy Eucharist. Bishop Lake in his Sermon upon Matth. 26.26. etc. saith; It may well be presumed, that Christ did receive it Himself. For in his own person he did sanctify and honour, both Circumcision and the Passcover. Also he was baptised and sanctified the water of Jordan: Why should we question his Taking of the Eucharist? That he did so, needed not to be expressed, because of the correspondency of This Sacrament to That of the Passeover. Indeed Christ needed not partake. But by his own participation, he gave virtue to all the Sacraments: So he needed not to die for Himself; but he died for us; To this effect, that holy and learned Prelate, now a great Saint in heaven. PAR. 3. I Now come to the next points, unexpressed. 1. What Posture Christ used when he consecrated the Eucharist. 2. What Gesture They used when they took it. Of which in the seventh Chapter. Some there are who say, That all the Gestures which we use in religious worship, may be brought to Two heads. Some belong to Hope; as first the Lifting up of the eyes; which do crave or expect some good thing. Secondly, the Lifting up of the hands to reach at mercy offered, or set forth. The other Gestures belong to Humiliation; as the Uncovering of the head, is as the laying down of the crown glory, and majesty that Man hath; and a bearing of Man's merit, or emptying himself of worth, to give it to the party worshipped. Secondly, the beating of the Breast: showing that in it is sin, which ought to be expectorated. Thirdly, Bowing of the Knee; which is a great token of the heart's contrition. But somewhat is defective in this Dichotomy; of which more fully hereafter. I return to the Queres. Concerning the first; Remember what I writ in the last point save one, concerning our Saviour's extraordinary devout Gestures at his Prayers, which are not like to be unbended or slackened, in matters of as high, if not an higher strain: and yet, as I opine, accompanied with divine prayers also, which in Christ were very frequent. Some Gesture or other, is absolutely necessary, at the Receiving of the holy Sacrament. By a moral necessity, Comeliness and Decency is commanded: though the natural necessity descendeth not to the individuality of the particulars; but is content in general, that there be some Gesture, as it is also with other Circumstances, viz. that there be some Persons, some Place, some Time, some Preparation, some Comeliness. What the particular Gesture or Gestures, or How, or When they varied, or how Long each continued, cannot be demonstrated. Yet it is most certain, he used the devoutest, and most fitting Gesture or Gestures; none could go before him, or beyond him in choosing the best way to serve God. Men are not at their Common refections, and especially at Feasts, tied, and bound to keep one posture; and do they not now and then stand Up, then Sat, than Bow, and use several decent behaviour? Let not that be denied to Christ and his Priests in the administration of the holiest Supper, but with all convenient variation of posture, Prore natâ, as occasion served; and most answerable, and conducible to devotion. They were wont in old time to bow down the body, then kneel, and pray; And from bending they descended to kneeling: From kneeling, they fell down on their faces and prayed; then risen up again on their knees, and prayed again: then did stand up, and prayed also. Daniel 6.10. He kneeled upon his knees, and prayed, and gave thanks also. 1 Chronicles 6.13. Solomon kneeled down on his knees, before all the Congregation of Israel: and spread forth his hands towards heaven. And, 1 Kings 8.54. Solomon arose from kneeling on his knees, with his hands spread up to heaven. No man doubteth, but in prayer time they most commonly kneeled: In worshipping God, they sometimes bowed their heads down, 1 Chron. 29.20. Sometimes fell down: Sometimes kneeled. O come let us worship and fall down, or bow down, and kneel before the Lord our maker. Psal. 95.6. PAR. 4. ACcording to the Degrees of Hope or Fear, there are Degrees also of Worship: The lifting up of the Eyes to Heaven in Prayer, is the most usual, common, though the least kind of Adoration. To lift up the Hands to Heaven, is a more solemn service. The Publican 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Luke 18.13. would not lift up, Not so much as his eyes to Heaven. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Not so Much; as if that were a mean, if not the meanest Degree. The Publican lift up his Heart. That is most true: for the devout Prayer, which he emphatically couched in those few words, proveth it; God be merciful to me a sinner. But for his bodily Gesture, he lifted not up his Head, or his Face to Heaven, which is an expression of greatest hope: nor did he lift up his Hands to Heaven, or spread them abroad, which is also a solemn sign of spiritual rejoicing. Nay he did not so much as lift up his hands in a mean degree. Which Tertullian adviseth us to do. He lift them not up at all, but let them fall, or hang down, as almost out of hope, or perhaps beat his breast with them. I think I may also truly infer hence, he did not lift up his very voice to heaven: but with Anna, 1 Sam. 1.13. spoke in his heart: his lips only moved, but his voice was not heard, his sorrowful spirit pouted out his soul before the Lord, in the language of the heart, as in a silent murmur. He did not so much as lift up his eyes, much less his voice: so that any man could hear it, or know it. If Christ, God and Man, had not related it, we had not known it. Not so much as his eyes. Nothing is sooner performed than the lifting up of the eyes: Nothing easier dispatched; Nature inclining us to it; and God framing our countenance to that end. Os homini sublime dedit; coelumque tueri Jussit, & erectos ad sidera tollere vultus. He gave to Man a lofty look, the Heavens to behold; And to outface the Starry Sky, he bade him to be bold. Man in the Greek tongue is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quasi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, sursum aspiciens, looking upward: or as Athanasius hath it in his Tractat of Definitions, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. From lifting his face upwards. The Publican offered violence to Nature by his resolute dejectednes. God would have man look up; the Publican would not so much as lift up his eyes. Fourfooted beasts have seven muscles in their eyes; Man hath but six. Man is not hindered from looking upward. But that seventh muscle is found only in such beasts, quae prona terram spectant, which look downright to the earth, (saith Laurentius in his Historia Anatomica, 11.5.) The first muscle of the eye lifteth up the eye; and from his office, is called Attollens, & Superbus, (saith the same Laurentius) who also addeth, that the eyes are called by the Hebrews Oogen, which signifieth High, and Lofty; to put us always in mind to contemplate High and Lofty things. It is not said in the singular, He would not lift up an eye to Heaven; but His eyes. God hath so created and framed the eyes of men, that naturally what below, or on the right hand, or on the left hand, or directly forward, so doth the other; though the muscles serve to move the eyes on every side. But if one eye did look upward, and the other downward, the object would appear double, and the sight be uncertain. Therefore to perfect the sense of seeing, both move together and alike; and most harmoniously consort to the equal beholding of the same object. Yet if the eye in the singular be used (as it is full often) it doth not denote a several operation of one eye, different from the work of the other: but two are accounted as one, because the effects of both are only one, and the same. The eyelids (though in men the upper only moveth) are two, and are so called; Birds have only one eyelid moving in the lower part. Fourfooted beasts have only the upper eyelid. The higher eyelid is greater in Men; the lower eyelid is greater in Birds. In Men the higher eyelid moveth both upward and downward, the lower moveth not, nor needeth move. And yet the higher only moving, they are called palpebrae, eyelids. Contrary, the conjoined and indivisible rolling, or moving of both eyes, is ascribed as the operation of one eye in particular, 1 Cor. 15.52. in the twinkling of an eye; though they twinkle both together. Job 24.15. The eye of the Adulterer. And Jeremy 13.17. Mine eye shall weep: Yet both the Adulterers eyes are equally sinful. And Jeremy wept not with one eye only: Oh that my head were waters, and my eyes a fountain of tears, Jer. 9.1. His head in the singular, were waters in the plural; and his eyes in the plural, were a fountain in the singular. Perhaps, this fountain of tears descended so fast upon the poor mortified Publican, that he would not, because so conveniently he could not lift up his eyes to Heaven, drenched in his own tears. PAR. 5. DANIEl, 10.9. Daniel was on his face: and his face on the ground: and an hand touched him, and set him upon his knees and the Palms of his hands. The Samaritan, who was healed of his Leprosy, Fell down on his face at Christ's feet, giving him thanks, Luke 17.16. A Leper kneeled unto him and besought him, Mark 1.40. as S. Luke hath it, fell on his face, and besought Jesus, Luk. 5.12. 1 King. 18.42. Eliah cast himself down upon the earth, and put his face between his knees. Prayers, Supplications and Thanksgiving are to be united in every matter. Philip. 4.6. The giving of glory, honour and thanks, are conjoined, Revel 4.9. The 24 Elders fell upon their faces, and worshipped God, saying, we give thee thanks, Rev. 11.16. An unbeliever will fall down on his face, and worship God, 1 Cor. 14.25. John 11.41. Jesus lift up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee. Many fell down at Jesus his feet, John 11.32. The diversity of opinions is very great. Some think that from the adoring of men, and the bodily prostration to them, true Adoration of God is transferred to the mind. Others more probably, and sensibly, thus. When the great Heroës, and good benefactors to mankind did live, they were in great esteem, honoured of all, and worshipped above others, Kneeled unto, Kissed, Worshipped, and Adored; yea when they were dead, the surviving did continue to their Images and Statues that reverence, which their persons enjoyed in their lives. Many knees kneeled to Baal, and many mouths Kissed him; 1 Kings 19.18. Even men have kneeled to men. Cornelius fell down at Peter's feet, and worshipped him, Acts 10.25. The Captain fell on his knees before Eliah, and besought him, 2 King. 1.13. The Shunamite fell at Elisha's feet, and bowed herself to the ground; 2 King. 4.37. Esther 8.3. She fell down at the King's feet, and besought him with tears. A servant fell down at his fellow servants feet, and besought him. Matth. 18.29. The crafty widow of Tekoah fell on her face to the ground, and did obeisance to David, 2 Sam. 13.4. And Absalon bowed himself on his face to the ground before the King, 2 Sam. 14.33. The complemental Abigail fell before David on her face, and bowed herself to the ground, and fell at his feet, 1 Sam. 25.23, 24. In Thankesgiving, and Blessings, they ordinarily stood up, with lifted hands and eyes to Heaven. And Solomon stood, and blessed all the Congregation of Israel, with a loud voice. 1 King. 8.55. The Levites were to stand every morning, and evening to thank and praise the Lord. 1 Chro. 23.30. The Pharisee stood, and prayed (Luke 18.11.) thus within himself, Lord, I thank thee. Jesus lift up his eyes to heaven and said, Father, Glorify thy Son, John 17.1. Jesus lift up his eyes, and thanked God John 11.41. Variety of Gestures according to the variety of Affairs, is not only commendable, but necessary. He who made all things in number, weight, and measure, will proportion his Behaviour, and Gesture to devout harmonious holiness; who ordereth all things sweetly; and hath commanded that we do all things orderly: his deportment was correspondent to such heavenly mysteries. Any fixed Gesture is not essential to a Supper: nor essentially contrariant to it. It is the Feasting makes the Supper, not the Gesture; and in some regard, it may be said, The Supper makes the Feasting; and just Occasion Leadeth all, and Guideth all. PAR. 6. IN Adoration, the bowing of the head and face after the uncovering of the head, was the meanest and first degree of Bodily Humiliation; and then nothing bowed but the head, and face. The bowing of the body was, when not only the head, and face, but the entire bulk of the body did holily stoop down; and chin and knees did almost meet, and kiss; and this was the Second Degree. The Third Degree of Adorative deportement was Kneeling; and that upon both Knees, like Christ, who prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pitched on both knees, fixis interram poplitibus, as the Fathers have it. The Fourth Degree of Adoration was, when they cast themselves down to the Earth, with their faces grovelling on the ground. And therefore what S. Matthew termeth Worshipping, Matth. 8.2. S. Luke describeth by Falling on the face, Luke 5.12. Some do add, with Hands spread abroad, and Feet dispersed fare asunder. But I want proof for their striding feet; though there is proof enough for expanded hands in Adoration. The Fift and highest and most devouted part was Prayer, both as they lay Prostrate; and when they Risen again on their Knees; and when they prayed again Standing Upright. Kneeling betokened fearful Humility: Prostration on the Ground, the Hyperbole of Devotion, if I may so call it. Rising again, signified an undaunted Hope, or hoping Charity; Standing prepared a man for Praising, and Thanking of God by an unfeigned Faith. Jacobus de Valentia super Psal. 104, Hac habent se per ordinem; These things are thus in their right order. First to Reverence or Revere, is to think of somewhat better in another, than we find in ourselves. To Honour it, is to have an high conceit of the party for that Good. Then followeth Praise to commend the thing honoured. After it, we do as it were Glorify it by public Encomiums, and Laudatories. To Confess, is to Affirm before men, that God is Lord of all things. To Adore, is to Worship the Honoured, Reverenced, and Glorified God, for his excellent Omnipotency, and Holiness; and setting all other hopes aside, wholly to submit himself unto Him; and this belongeth only to God. So Valentia maketh Adoration contain within itself All the other Steps, and Degrees. In that his opinion, there is much Coincidency of matter. Rather therefore thus: Reverence doth eye directly the Excellency of a person: and as one is more, or less excellent; so is the Reverence more or less. In which regard, it being certain, that Christ knowing the Excellency of his Father, more than other men did, or do, Revered, or Reverenced him more than other men do. Veneration resideth not in the soul alone, but showeth outward good respects to the things Venerable; implying, and including a Civil, and excluding a Religious and Superstitious deportment. Worship is one Degree higher, more Obedient, more Pious, more Devout, both Inwardly, and Outwardly. Adoration is the Highest step, including all the rest within its verge: producing, first an Act of the Intellect, by which we apprehend and know the Supereminency of the thing Adorated; firmly believing that he is all Good, and no Good cometh, but from him, and without him we can have no Good. Secondly an Act of the Will, by which we inwardly bow and subject ourselves, and are ready to do any thing inward or outward in testimonial of its Excellency, and our submissive subjection. Thirdly, Adoration riseth not only in a proneness, and obsequious intentions, but produceth the bodily Acts of Bending, Kneeling, Prostration, or any other honorary and holy gesture. I stand not on strictness of terms, but use them promiscuously. I conclude thus, as most agreeable with conveniency, reason, and devotion. When our blessed Saviour prayed at any time, whilst this holy work was in hand (as I doubt not but he prayed) he may be thought to kneel, yea on both his knees, as he was wont. Sure I am, S. Paul, 1 Timoth. 4.4. & 5. verses, saith, Every creature is good, if it be received with Thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. If at ordinary meals, Prayer and Thanksgiving were usually conjoined, to sanctify their meat; we may not imagine, that in so sacred a banquer, Christ did give Thanks without Prayer. Though Christ's prayer or praying be not expressed. And yet, Quod subanditur, & subintelligitur, non omittitur: That which is understood, is not omitted. The great connexion and conjunction, of Prayer with Thanksgiving; and Thanksgiving with Prayer, showeth that they are almost all one. What the Apostle called Thanksgiving, 1 Timoth. 4.3 & 4. verses: he calleth Prayer, verse 5. Qui unum norit, ambo norit, Know one, know both. When we pray, there are Two Motives, though in some degree contrary, yet always conjoined, Fear and Hope. The fruits of Fear, are, the humiliation both of soul and body; with casting down of our Eyes; with Smiting of the Breast, like the Publican, Luk. 18.13. With tears confessing out sins, and humble petition, Lord be merciful to me a sinner. When our prayers are ended, and we reconciled, the gestures of Hope are these, or the like: Arising from the ground; Lifting up both of hearts, eyes, and hands to heaven. Christ himself, Joh. 11.41. Lift up his Eyes to his Father. Without some kind of Fear, we need not pray: and without some Hope to obtain, none would pray. PAR. 7. BEfore I examine what particular Posture, Gesture, or Behaviour Christ used, when he Received and Administered the holy Eucharist; I must needs say somewhat more of Adoration in General. The farthest way about, is sometimes the nighest way home. The Heroes, and Semidei, the Heröicall Ones, and Half-gods, were sometimes Men with great and vast bodies (saith Arnobius adversus Gentes, lib. 2. toward the end, pag. 119.) Trithemius mentioneth Secundeos, which successively rule the world. May not famous Men and Princes be meant thereby? Certainly, the Pagan Gods were very Men; both the same Arnobius and Minutius Foelix in Octavio do declare it; mentioning their places of Birth, Countries, Parents, Dwellings, Deaths, and Burials. Alexander wrote to his Mother, that the Priests of Hammon, for fear of his power, had revealed this secret, De Diis hominibus; That their Gods were but men. More particularly, Tertullian in Apologetico, and the said Minutius Foelix, writ of Saturn (from Nero's and Cassias his History; from Thallus and Diodorus) that Saturn was a man that fled from Crete for fear of his Son, and came to Italy, and was hosted by Janus, and being Graeculus & politus, a neat Greek, did teach them many fine new devices. Homo igitur utique qui fugit: Homo utique qui latuit, & pater Hominis, & natus ex Homine; Therefore he who fled was a man; he who lay hid, was a man, and both Father of a man, and Son of a man. So of the rest; Manifestum est Homines illos fuisse, quos & natos legimus, & mortuos scimus: It is manifest, they were men, whom we have read to be borne, and know to be dead. But of this more hereafter. That they did preserve the memory of these dead men, by making Statues, Images, and Resemblances of them, is most evident, and beyond denial. The same Minutius Foelix divinely reproveth their manner of deifying men; And it seems he took it from Esay 44.10. etc. His discourse is thus: When is a God borne? Behold he is cast and poured out in metal; he is framed and fashioned, he is scraped and polished; but is not yet a God. Behold he is soldered with lead, he is wholly and fully wrought, and is set upright, nor is he as yet a God. Behold he is adorned, dressed, and trimmed up, consecrated, and prayed unto: Now at last he is a God: When Man would, and when he did Dedicate him: Man had a power to make, or unmake a God. The Romans went farther; Vetus decretum erat (saith Tertullian in Apologetico) ne qui deus ab Imperatore consecraretur, nisi à Senatu probatus: It was an ancient decree, that the Emperor might not Consecrate a God, without the consent of the Senate. Absurd, Absurd. Unless God please Man, he shall not be God; Man must be propitious, and favourable to God. The very people did one day deify a God, and the next day undeify him. — hodie tu Jupiter esto; Cras mihi truncus eris, ficulnus inutile lignum. Thou shalt a God be unto me to day: To morrow a stock, a worthless Castaway. I was about to say, Tiberius hearing from Pontius Pilate, his Procurator and Rationalis for Judea, and from divers others, such records and monuments as proved Christ to be a God, referred it to the Senate, with the prerogative of his Own voice first. But because the Senate had not beforehand approved Christ to be God, they now reject him. Yet Caesar continued constant to his own sentence and decree; menacing the accusers of Christians. PAR. 8. WHen their Gods were now borne, and acknowledged as consecrated, they fell unto several kinds of worshipping them. That they did Lift up their Eyes to their Idols, is proved, Ezechiel 18.10. etc. And they blessed their Idols, Esay 66.3. Though indeed, both the Idols and themselves were the more Accursed by that Blessing: They did Sacrifice to their Idols, Psal. 106.38. And served their Idols, verse 36. They did offer sweet savour to all their Idols, Ezech. 6.13. & 2 Kings 23. They did set their Idols upon their Beasts and Cattle, Esay 46.1. The Image of Isis was on an Ass' back; the people kneeled and fell down to it; the Ass grew proud, as if the Honour had been done to him; The people (which was a greater Ass) spoke to his brother Ass, Non tibi, sed Religioni; We worship not thee, but Isis; And yet it stood with more reason, to worship the Ass, which had sense, rather than the Image which had no sense. They made Caroches, Carts, and divers other such movable Instruments, to carry their Images upon; especially upon Holidays, they made beds in the Temple in honour of their Gods, Tacitus Annal. 14.3. They carried tidings to their Idols, 1 Chron. 10.9. though the Gods could neither lie down, nor rise up. They were mad upon their Idols, Jerem. 50.38. and under the word Madness, all their frantic Idolatry, with their several senses, forms and fashions, may be included. He falleth down to the graven Image, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, Esay 44.15. & 17. The mean man Boweth down, and the great Man Humbleth himself, Esay 2.9. He humbleth himself even unto the Ground; such was the worship of their Idols. They daubed them over with silver and gold. Opinio, & mens Imperitorum artis concinnitate decipitur, auri fulgore perstringitur, argenti nitore, & candore eboris hebetatur: The opinion and judgement of unlearned men is deceived by the exquisiteness of Art, by the shine of Gold, and is dulled by the brightness of Silver, and whiteness of Ivory. They clothed them with costly Garments; Dionysius his sacrilegious violence, taking away Jupiter's golden coat, upon pretence, it was cold in the Winter, and too heavy in the Summer, and putting on a woollen coat, as warmer in the Winter, and lighter in the Summer, is known to children. The knave that stole away two eyes of pure gold, massy gold, out of Jupiter's Image, knew Jupiter could see as well without eyes, as with eyes; or rather that he did not see, either with them, nor without them. But of the Adorning of their Images I have spoken before; and yet the very Robbing of them, proveth the precedent Adorning of them. These things they did, when they came near to Worship them, and Adore them. PAR. 9 BUt there was another kind of Adoration of them, when they passed by the Images, and stood at distance from them. Minutius Foelix in Octavio, toward the beginning, setteth it down by the actions of Cecilius, who seeing the Image of Serapis, vulgus superstitiosum solet, manum ori admovens, osculum labiis impressit: As the superstitious people is wont, putting his hand to his mouth, he Kissed it. This was a kind of Honorary salutation of Devotion: a Running Adoration, a Worship at Distance: But that his hand did kiss his Lips, or fasten a kiss on them (as the phrase may seem to import) and not rather, his Lips did kiss his Hand, is observable, as an Heterogeneal kind of expression: For it is proper for the Mouth and Lips to kiss, when the other parts of the body do touch or rub, but not kiss. Yet if the words be read in the Ablative case, he printed a kiss on his Hand, by, or with his lips, we may give it the privilege of an African phrase: And yet in the Hebrew, the phrase is reciprocal; My Mouth hath kissed my Hand, or my Hand hath kissed my Mouth. See our last Translation, job 31.27. and the marginal note. In Adorando, dextram ad osculum referimus; When we worship, we kiss our Right hand. Apuletus lib. 4. Millesiarum, as Elmenhorst quoteth him. Let me also defend the African Optatus against Rigaltius, who in his Observations on Tertullian, towards the end of them, pag. 119. among the Inserenda, citeth a place of Tertullian in Apologetico, cap. 4. The purport is this: The laws were of old, that the Creditors should cut in piecest he condemned Debtors, who were not able to pay; and every Creditor might have a portion of his flesh. See Aulus Gellius 20.1. who hath that Law of the Twelve Tables at large. In which place Caecilius saith, Nothing is more cruel, and vastly extreme, unless (as it seemeth) this Law was made so cruel, to this end, that no man should ever venture to endure it. For (saith he) many debtors are adjudged to their Creditors, and bound, or imprisoned: But that ever any was cut into pieces, and each Creditor had several gobbets, or portions, I never heard or read; though the rigour of the Law ran so. If there were more Creditors, to whom the indebted man was adjudged, the Law permitted them to cut in pieces and divide the body of the Debtor among them. junius Rabirius in his Tractat called Hastarum & Auctionum Origo, ratio, & sollemnia, hath the words of that Law, pag. 7. in Terminis; and more succinctly than Gellius. Which cruelty by a general consent was taken away: Death was turned into Shame: the Proscription of their goods, did rather make them blush than bleed. For must they not needs blush, who when they parted from all their goods by Proscription, were to sit on a Stone bare-breeched, with naked and seen, and shown buttocks; also with their uncovered podds, to strike or run at a Marble Lion set before the gate of the Capitol (for that purpose?) See Cerda on the place of Tertullian. Pamelius cleared the way to Cerda, though he complain of Zephyrus his obscurity in this point. And yet I wonder, why nor Gellius, nor the accurate Rabirius, do mention the manner of the Commutation in their punishment, unless modesty deterred them. Rigaltius saith nothing to the main matter, but picks a quarrel, and findeth fault with Optatus for the like phrase. Suffundere maluit hominis sanguinem, quàm effundere, said Tertullian. Optatus lib. 2. Fundentes sanguinem, non corporis, sed pudoris. At quis alius pudoris sanguis, quàm corporis? saith Rigaltius. As if there were some other blood of shame, which was not of the body. Wittily enough, if it be wit to find Nodum in scirpo, a knot in a bulrush. For Optatus in the cited book hath it otherwise. Episcopos gladio linguae jugulastis, fundentes sanguinem, non corporis, sed honoris. You have slain the Bishops with your tongues, as with swords, shedding the blood of their honour and credit, though sparing the blood of their Bodies. And this reading, and exposition, is confirmed by the words, one leaf before. Linguas vestras acuistis in gladios, quas movistis in mortes, non corporum, sed honorum: Jugulastis, non Membra, sed Nomina. Quid prodest, quia vivunt homines, & occisi sunt honores à vobis? Valent quidem membris, sed ereptae portant funera dignitatis. You have sharpened your tongues as swords, which you have moved, and thrust into the death and destruction, not of Bodies, but of Goods; you have killed, not their bodily Members, but their Names, and Credit; what boots it that they live, when their honours are destroyed by you? They are healthy, but they carry about the carcase of funeral exequys of their Dignities and Honours. He speaks of a Civil death Metaphorically, when a man's good Fame is blemished, wounded, or destroyed. Honours occisi sunt: Their Honours were slain, as it is in the Margin. He doth not oppose Sanguinem corporis, sanguini pudoris; the blood of the body, to the blood of shame, sed sanguini Bonorum, or Honoris; to the blood of Goods or Honor. In the opposition of the bodily blood, to the blood of shame, is no good sense; the resultance of it being, that the blood of Blushing, is not of the Bodily blood; but it stands with fair reason to say, ye shed the blood, not of their Bodies, but of their Goods or Honours. Howsoever, Rigaltius was supine. For if his copy had the words as he citys them (which is the best excuse) yet the unlikely hood that so great a Scholar as Optatus, would speak so improperly, might have made him to distrust his own Copy; and to make search after other Copies: and he might have found the truth in the Copy of Albaspinaeus, as I have cited the words. Neither needed Rigaltius to have inquired far off. For Optatus with the Notes, and Observations of Albaspinaeus, were Printed at Paris three years before Rigaltius Observations on Tertullian came forth in the same City under his nose. PAR. 10. THeir fashion to Adore their Images, or false Gods, either Eminus or Cominus, either Aloof off, or Close by; but especially Aloof off, as they followed other businesses; their casual saluting Adoration was manifold, and of divers forms: See our accomplished Mr. Selden (who is impensè Doctus) in his Titles of Honour, and in his Syntagmata de Diis Syris, toward the beginning. They did Kiss their Images; (that must be when they are close by them.) Their Kissing he proveth from Cicero, Act. 5. in Verrem: from Lucretius libro 1. And ere they Kissed, they looked up to Heaven with Hands spread abroad (say I,) and after they bended down, and sometimes Kneeled. Many Knees bow to Baal, Many mouths kissed him, 1 King. 19.18. So Hosea 13.2. They kissed the Calves, or molten Images. The good man did wiser, when he kissed his Cow. Concerning the Heathens Adoration at Distance, it was divers: if they Adored the Celestial bodies. First, they looked up toward the Heavens, For they beheld the Sun, when it shined: and the Moon walking in brightness, Job 31.26. Secondly, their Heart was secretly enticed to give the honour due to the Creator, to those his Creatures. Thirdly, their mouths did Kiss their hands, vers. 27. which was not without some Bend of their bodies. Fourthly, they Prayed unto them, either audibly, or by a more secret murmur. Remember the place of Tertullian (concerning which by and by) Ad Solis inititium Labra vibratis. Ye wag your Lips at the rising of the Sun. — Bona pars procerum tacitâ libabit acerrâ. Haud cuivis promptum est, murmurque, humilesquesusurros Tollere de templis: Et aperto vivere voto. Mens bona, Fama, Fides, haec clarè, & ut audiat hospes; Illa sibi introrsum, & sub linguâ immurmurat; o si Ebullet patrui praclarum Funus: & o si, etc. Persius' Satyrâ secundâ. The greater part of noblemans their Tacit censers bring Unto the Gods, when they from them some shameful boon would wring. 'Tis not, o 'tis not for each one to banish far away Their Secret muttring from the Church; and make them loud to pray. If they, for a sound mind do pray, for Fame, or Credit: then they'll pray aloud; and make their vows ring in the ears of men. If for rich Nuncles death they wish, that once 'twould bubble out, They'll pray so soft, that none shall hear, that stands them round about. The like they did, when they prayed to the Sun. Secondly, concerning their Worship or Adoration of Images on Earth at Distance, it is thus, for the most part, branched by the glory of our Nation for all humane literature. 1. They stood somewhat off before their Images. 2. They solemnly moved their Right Hands to their Lips. 3. They Kissed the Forefinger joined with the Thumb. 4. They turned about their Bodies on the same hand, as Mr. Selden allegeth from divers Authors. 5. Let me add. They then lifted up both their Eyes, and Hands spread abroad to Heaven. When they swore by Jove Capitoline, they looked not so much to Jove in the Capitol, as to the Heavens. Yea their backs were sometimes towards the Capitol. 6. They did draw nearer, and did Kiss oftimes the Images themselves, as I said before. That this was a Kiss not like the Humane Ambulatory Salutation, only done for Compliment; but of deep, and real Adoration of false Gods, as is evidenced; Because I should have denied the God that is above, saith Job vers. 28. For Worshipping of Idols on Earth by Kissing them, is a denial of God in Heaven. Which mutual Kissing of one another is not, nor can be. Nor did they Kiss the Lips only of their Idols, and their Mouths; but both the Foreparts, and the Hinder parts, and their Shoulders, the Cheeks, the back of the Hand, even the very Feet. See Ritterbusius ad Salvianum, pag. 379. Perhaps they might kiss some other Hinder parts in humiliation. And I do verily think they left not the Knees unkissed. PAR. 11. AMong men, if Persians of equal Degree, did meet, they Kissed one another's Lips. If a Superior met an Inferior, he gave the Inferior his Cheeks to kiss. But a mean Persian, falling down did worship the Better, or more Ronowed; (saith Brissonius, pag. 241. as he is cited by Drusius.) The story of Polyperchon falleth in here very fitly: A Persian worshipping Alexander, fell on his face before him, and with his chin touched the ground: Polyperchon in a flout, exhorted the Persian to shake his chin lustily against the ground: Alexander thereupon drew Polyperchon from the banqueting bed, and tumbled him down, and arietated him to the earth, and made his head knock the ground: and bitterly taunted him saying: Now Polyperchon, thou seest thyself do that, which even now thou didst laugh at in another. See Curtius, 8. pag. 245. Mr. Selden very probably addeth, It was called Adoration, or they were said to Adore; Quòd ad Ora, sive ad Os manum admovebant; because they moved their Hands to their Mouths; or rather the Forefinger joined to the Thumb, as he before explained it. His proof from S. Hierom, is most punctual; who do Adore, do Kiss their Hands, and Bow down their Heads, (saith Hierom;) And in the propriety of the Hebrew tongue, Kissing is used for Worship or Adoration. Psal. 2.12. The vulgar of Cajetan, Hentenius, and Santandrianus, have it, Apprehendite disciplinam, Apprehend discipline, agreeing with the Chaldee. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lay holdfast on Discipline. Osculamini Filium, saith the Hebrew; which Vatabus doth well enlarge, saying, Osculo manuum testamini vos Dei Filium habere pro Rege: By Kissing the Hands, that is, by Adoration, witness that ye esteem the Son of God as King. Geverard Elmenhorst in his notes on Minutius Foelix, citeth to the same purpose both Pliny and Apuleius: whom Mr. Selden insisteth in. One reason, why they did both Bend and Kiss, may be, because both Head, and Mouth with it, did stoop down toward the Hand; and the Hand did mount up to meet the Mouth. The joint correspondence, the concurring to the same action, maketh the Sense appliable, either to Hand, or Lips. Perhaps, the reason why they put their Hands to their Mouths in Adoration, might grow from hence. When they worshipped the Sun and Moon, and the Host of Heaven, or Coelestem Africae Deum; The heavenly God of Africa, as Tertul. Apologet. 33. or rather Coelestem Illum, That heavenly One, as Salvianus, lib. 8. They had not always their Images below to Kiss them, and Worship them, and therefore looking up and kissing their hands they so adored them. Tertullian contra Nationes, 1.13. thus expresseth it, Plerique affectione Adorandi, aliquando etiam Coelestia, ad Solis initium labra vibratis. Most of you, when you mean to Adore things heavenly, move your Lips toward the rising of the Sun, or rather you shake, quaver, and often move your Lips Forward, and Backward. Indeed the Romans had an house dedicated to the Sun: Tacitus toward the end of the 15. Book of his Annals saith, Proprius honor Soli, cui est vetus aedes apud Circum: Especial honours were decreed to the Sun, in the house dedicated to him of old. Solis Effigies de Fastidio Aedis emicat, saith Tertullian de Spectaculis, cap. 8. yea they placed it above the Top of the house. And indeed an Huge great Obcliske was sacred in his honour: Obelisci enormitas Soli prostituta, was consecrated to the Sun, saith Tertullian ibid. And this was a very High one. Cassiodorus lib. 3. Epist. 51. speaks of more Obelisks. A greater was dedicated to the Sun; a meaner to the Moon. Ammianus lib. 17. addeth, That which was devoted Deo Soli, to God the Sun, had in it the Rays gracilescentes, growing less and less, and did resemble the Sun. That the Heathen worshipped or kissed, or fell down before the Images of the Sun, Moon, or Stars, Before Kings were Adored, I remember not to have read. The Persians worshipped the Sun, as he was pictured, or painted on Nappery, and Linen, or their Banners, whom we behold in his Buckler (saith Tertullian Apologetic. cap. 16.) Many mistake what the Buckler is. I take it to be his round Circle, Orb, or Globe; He remaining, or residing bodily within the compass of his Orb, or Round-Buckler, as the Poet calls it. Ovid Metamorph. 15. vers. 193, etc. Ipse Dei Clypeus terrâ cum tollitur imâ, Mane rubet, terrâque rubet cum conditur imâ. The Buckler of the Sun looks red, When he doth rise, and go to bed. Dei Clypeus, the Buckler of the Sun; that is, Solis orbis, the round Circle of the Sun, as Greg. Bersman, hath expounded it in his Marginal Annotation, on that place. But in the Houses of the Sun, no doubt he was Adored with Divine Worship. Servius Tullus also built a Temple in honour of the Moon (saith Tacitus, Annalium, 15.9.) And in it, no doubt but She also was honoured, as the Sun was in the House to Him dedicated. Augustine Tom. 6. pag. 75. Contra Faustum Manichaeum, 20.2. The Manichees Adored the Sun; Ad cujus gyrum oratio eorum circumvolvitur; They turned their Prayers to Him, and to the Moon (as they moved any where in their Orbs) upon two false suppositions, or rather misinterpretations, that the virtue of God did dwell in the Sun; and wisdom in the Moon; and the holy Ghost in the Air; and that God dwelleth in the Light, as all confess, Faustus little remembered that God said He would dwell in the thick Darkness, 2 Chro. 6. ●. And 1 King. 8.12. And not only said so, but Darkness was under his Feet. Psal. 18.9. And he made Darkness his secret place: his pavilion round about were Dark waters and thick clouds, verse. 11. Soli huic Genu flectitis, saith Augustin, de Moribus Manichaeorum, 2.8. Tom. 1. pag. 164. PAR. 12. MAster Selden in his Titles of honours, pag. 38. saith; It grew by custom, that Princes being next to Deities, and by some accounted as Deities, had the like honour done to them, (that is to be Kissed or Adored) in acknowledgement of Greatness: But I should rather think, That Statues, and Images had the beginning of their Adoration from the obsequious Exemplary Worshipping of Kings, Princes, and famous Heroës, either living or dead; more probably than that Kings and Potentates had their Adoration from Images, or Idols. Geverard Elmenhorst in his notes on Minutius Foelix, saith; Because the memory of the Ancients, and of Kings was observed: thence grew into custom the rites of Worshipping and Sacrificing: He proveth it by Cyprian de Idolis, and Athenagoras his Apology, and Alexander's letter to his mother. Tertullian de Idololatria, cap. 3. Idolum aliquando retrò non crat. Idols were not always or at all times. The Alexandrian Chronicle to this effect. Grecisme, and Gentilism began about Serug his time (who was the third Father, or great Grandfather of Abraham, Gen. 11.22, etc.) Then did they take out to life the Pictures of Magistrates, Tyrants, and others. After these Effigiations by Paintings, about Terah's days (who was Father of Abraham) they spread and increased their Idolatry by Statues and Images; which were first made of Clay, by the help of the Potter in memory of those who were dead. And then, Dibutades (saith Pliny 35.12.) invented Red-ochre, Rade, or Red-chalke; and they did paint these Images with Vermilion, and Red-lead. Tarqvinius Priscus his Jupiter was of Earth; and therefore was wont to be daubed over with Red-lead: So far Plinius. And Pausanias in Achaicis, saith; Bacchus his Image was died and coloured with Red-lead. The Chronicle of Alexandria thus proceedeth. After, the Masons prepared the Stone: Then the Silversmiths, and Goldsmiths framed their Images: and the Copper-smiths, Carvers, and Gravers at their pleasure varied their work. Last of all the Blacksmith and other Artificers. This is cited by Cerda, or Tertullian, who excellently observeth in his Notes on that chapter of Tertullian, that the Images made for Gods, were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: For Heroës, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: For Kings, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: For Wisemen, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: for Well-deserving men, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That, not only, nor perhaps principally, Greatness was the cause of their Adoration; but divers others as effectual motives, and inductives, is plain from Minutius Foelix in Octavio. Vnaquaeque Natio Conditorem suum aut Ducem inolytum, aut Reginam pudicam, sexu suo fortiorem, aut alicujus Mun●ris, vel Artis R●portor●m venerabatur, ut civem Bonae m●●oriae. Sic defunctis 〈◊〉, & futuris dabatur exemplum. Every Nation did worship his Founder, either some famous Captain, or chaste Queen, eminent above other women, or the Inventor of beneficial things and Arts, as unto Citizens of happy memory. So was there both Reward for the Dead, and an Illective for others after, to do the like. From Historians he addeth. Ob merita Virtutis aut Man●ris. For their Virtues, or Gifts, and Goodworks, they were accounted Gods. H●lco● on Wisdom, 14.15. saith, Both Men and Women for some evident privilege of Virtue, as Strength, Chastity and Knowledge, began to be Deified. Exhorts believed divers were assumpti in Deos, esteemed Gods, for finding out new kinds of Grain, or Corn profitable for mankind: And both the Inventos, and things Invented, were called by the same names. For— Sine Libero, & Cerere, friget Venus. Without meat and drink, Lust waxeth cold. As Perseus did Philosophise in the records of Minutius Foelix. Some hold that Jupiter was so called à juvando: But Mr. Selden more excellently to this effect, Jovis, Jovi, Jovem, Jove, are but derived corruptions of the most sacred name of Jehova. Generally it is confessed, men were Deified, not so much in acknowledgement of Greatness, as of Goodness, and doing of Good. And yet perhas Mr. Seldon doth measure Greatness only by Goodness. It was wont to be his old position; None Great but Good: Deus Optimus, the Best God, running in title, before Deus Maximus, the Greatest God; and so we may say they were Deified for Greatness, next after Goodness. PAR. 13. SEcondly, it is apparent that the Heathen Gods were but Men, as I proved before. Let your Conscience condemn us, if it can deny, that all your Gods were Men. (quoth Tertullian in Apologet. cap. 10.) He proceedeth; We know the Cities wherein they were borne, and the Countries wherein they left footsteps of their works: In which also they were Buried. Nor will I instance in every one of your Gods, being so many and so great. New Gods, Old Gods: Barbarous Gods, and Greek Gods: Roman Gods, and Strange Gods. Gods whom you have taken Captive, and Gods whom you have Adopted; your own Country Gods, and Common Gods: He-Gods, and She-Gods: Clownish Gods, and Civil Gods: Sailing Gods, and Fight Gods. Tertullian ad Nationes 2.12. varieth the couples thus; Greater Gods, and Lesser Gods: Old Gods, and New Gods: Unmarried Gods, or Married Gods: Gods Artificers, or Lazy Gods: Citty-Gods, or Peregrine Gods: Rustic Gods, or Urbane Gods. He addeth, you had no Gods before S●turne, and no Historian hath divulged him other than a Man. Latinus Pacatus thus, Terra Cretemsis parvi J●vis gloriata est cunabulis. Crect gloried that Jupiter was there Borne; or that they had the Cradle of the child jupiter. Know with all, that divers Fathers both Greek and Latin, and most Historians say, that jove was Buried also in Crect, and a Temple there built to him, with this Epigram (saith the Alexandrian Chronicle) (it might rather have said, Epitaph) Here lieth Picus dead, whom also they call jupiter, or jove. Yet there being 300 jupiters', we had need to have a truer man, than a Cretan, to show us which of the 300 jupiters' it was, who was there Entombed. Prudentius wittily reproveth them; Miror quod ipsum non sacratis Mentorem, Nec templum & arras ipse Phidias habet, Fabri Deorum, vel parentes Numinum. Qui si caminis institissent segniùs, Non esset ullus Jupiter conflatilis. I marvel that you do not consecrate Mentor, and Phidias, The God-makers, and Fathers of your deities; For if they had not heated throughly their furnace, No Molten jupiter had nourished impieties. Thirdly, the Famóus Heroës and Princes were in Rerum Naturâ, in the world, before their Images. The Statues being Statues of such and such eminent Men. For the Represented must be before the Representor; and the Similitude beginneth in time after that to whom it is like: Exemplar est prius exemplato, the Example is before the thing Exemplified: As Vnio est rerum praeexistentium unio: as things must preexist and have a being, before they can be united, and joined together. Graven Images were not the Chimaeras and wild Antics, or mere Fancies of men's brains, having reference to Non entia, not beings (if such a reference be to be had) but were Remonstraces of things that had been extant, and were now out of sight and passed. Minutius Foelix in Octavio, Dum Reges suos colunt religiosè, Dum Defunctos eos desiderant in Imaginibus videre, Dum gestiunt corum memorias in Statuis detinere, sacra facta sunt, quae fuerant assumpta solatia. While they religiously do worship their Kings; Whilst when their Kings were dead, they desired to see them in their Images; Whilst they rejoice to keep their memories in their Statues; What were at first Comforts, are now Sacred Relics. And afterwards. Quis dubitat horum Imagines consecratas vulgus orare, & publicè colere: Who doubteth that the Common people doth pray unto these consecrated Images, and publicly worship them? I must add out of Cicero against Verres; That the Mouth & Chin of the brazen Image of Hercules, were more worn than other parts thereof; because in their prayers and gratulations they were wont, not only to worship, but to kiss them also. And thus it is seen in many Images at Rome, where massy stones are worn bare by the kisses of Adorers. Woe worth the time when Rome Christian affected to be like Rome Ethnic or Pagan. Cyprianus thus, Si aliquando Dii nati sunt, cur hodie quoque non nascuntur? nisi forte jupiter senuit, & partus in Innone defecit. If Gods were sometimes borne, why is it not so now? unless Jupiter be grown Old, and Juno past Childbearing. PAR. 14. FOurthly, Even in the more ancient times, Living Kings were Worshipped, and Adored. In the Infancy of the world, Cain built a City, and called it after his Son's name, Gen. 4.17. Before the general undage were Giants, and their children became Mighty men, Men of Renown, Gen. 6.4. Whereas we read it Sons of God, ibid. verse. 2. Others read it Sons of Princes: So the Chaldee. And indeed that one name of God, viz. Elohim, is ascribed and appliable to men, Psal. 82.1. Exod. 21.6. So before the Flood there were Giants, Mighty men, Men of Renown. Princes, and the Sons of Princes: and these doubtless were much Honoured by the people, if not Adored, according to the great wickedness of those days, When there was not a good thought in the heart of man, Gen. 6.5. Within a while after the Flood, Nimrod began to be a Mighty One in the e art: He was a mighty Hunter: and the beginning of his Kingdom was Babel, or Babylon, Gen. 10.8. etc. So he was a King, and the people testified their subjection unto him, and homage was tendered by Kissing, Kneeling, or Falling down to him. For he was a mighty Hunter, which words point at his Tyranny and Oppression, Before the Lord, as it is in our translation; Against the Lord, as Agustine hath it, De civitate, 16.4. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, being like a Sandal fitted to either foot, signifying both Before and Against. The bvilders of Babel aimed eagerly at Renown; Let us make us a Name, Gen. 11.4. Reverence, Honour, Worship, Adoration, did attend on such as made themselves a Name, or Famous, even whilst they lived. Unto those days Josephus doth refer the beginning of Idolatry. In Abraham's days is mention made of nine Kings at one battle: one of them was Tidal King of Nations, Gen. 14.9. How many more Kings were there then afar off? And how long before, had the Old World their Kings. 1 Sam. 10.1. Samuel poured a Vial of Oil on saul's head, and Kissed him. Drusius on the same place saith, The Kiss of Dignity or Greatness is meant in this place of Samuel. Master Selden observeth well: It was usual in India also for subjects to kiss their Kings; and not only so, but to fall down and worship them. I Adore thee, O King, after the fashions of the Barbarians, by falling down before thee. So fare in effect Master Selden himself: So that I may repeat and resume my former Opinion; That Statues and Images had the beginning of the Adoration, from the obsequious exemplary Adoration of Kings or Great Men, either Living or Dead, rather than that Kings and Potentates had their Adoration from Images or Statues. last; Though it is a very probable Etymology, which Master Selden hath, that Adorare, to Adore, is derived from putting the Hand or Forefinger to the Mouth, which was a solemn custom in many of their Adorations: yet neither did All kiss their Hands always who Adored; nor did All that kissed their Hands, always Adore. Let us hear what others hold. 1 Sam. 1.3. Elkanah went to Worship, and to Sacrifice. Drusius in his Commentary on the place expoundeth, Adoraret, ut Deum Oraret, eumque precaretur; To Worship, that is to Pray unto God: for so the word signifieth, saith he. He doth not only say it, but proveth it, thus. Adorare pro Orare, legitur apud Virgilium, Propertiuns, & Ovidium; Virgil, Propertius, and Ovid, use the word Adorare for Orare; Worship for Prayer. In the Margin of Drusius 'tis well added; that sometimes they Prayed Standing; and that Adorare is not simpliciter Orare, sed Orare Prostratum in terram, ut adorantes solent: To Adore, is not simply to Pray, but to pray Prostrate on the Earth, as Adorers use. Tertullian often useth the word Adorare for Orare, in his book the Oratione. John taught his Disciples to pray; He turneth it Adorare. And again, Non extat, in quae verba docuit Johannes Adorare; Where fair probability, if not necessity, enforceth Adorare to be taken for Orare. No man will deny but Praying is the chiefest kind of Worship or Adoration. Esay 44.17. The residue of the wood he maketh a God, even his graven Image; He falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me, for thou art my God. The Praying unto the Idoli, maketh it a false God. It is the true God Only, who must be Prayed unto. Call upon Me in the day of trouble, saith God Almighty, Psal. 50.15. See the forecited testimonies of Minutius Foelix, and of him who prayed to julius Caesar, and you will confess, that Prayer is used for Adoration; Adoration for Prayer. Martial his testimony is as obvious as punctual. Qui fingit Sacros auro, vel marmore, vultus, Non facit ille deos: qui Rogat, ille facit. Not He that for a Portraiture doth Gold or Marble Take: But He that doth Adore the same, He doth the Idol make. And in 1 Sam. 2.36. He shall crouch to him for a piece of silver, and a morsel of bread; Where Hentenius and Santandreanus have it, Oretur pro eo, that he may be prayed for; the Seventy have it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Worship him. The Thargam of jonathan, Humiliet se coram eo, That he may Humble himself before him. Vatablus, Incurvet se ei; And he expoundeth it, That he Cast down himself before him, when he Prayeth. Veniet ad Incurvandum se; as it is in the Interlineary, He shall come to Bow down himself. And unto his Action is joined his express. Prayer; Put me I pray thee, into one of the Priests offices. Adorare & Orare have near conjunction. And Adoratio may be derived from the other; Curtius, lib. 6. pag. 153. saith of Alexander, jacebant humi venerabundi ipsum: They did Prostrate themselves on the ground when they worshipped Alexander. The learned Ludovicus de la Cerda, on Tertullian de Orat. cap. 7. heapeth up proofs, that Adoro was used for Oro. Arnobius lib. 1. Deum quotidianis supplicationibus Adoratis: Ye Pray to God with daily Prayers: Apuleius lib. 3. Senior exurgit, & populus Adorat: The Elder stands up, and the people Pray. Cyprian de Oratione; Christ went alone, Adorans, Praying. Ovid 4. Fast. Hetruscus Turnus Adorat opes; id est, Precatur: Turnus the Hetrurian Prayed for riches. Tacitus used Vulgum Adorare, Adoring of the people, Pro salutare, aut Precari: for Salutation, or Praying unto them. So he concludeth, Adorare, to Adore, is nothing else but Orare Ad, to Pray unto. And de Idololatriâ cap. 7. His manibus Adorare; Cerda expounds Propriè, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, properly, to Pray To. And is resolute, Adorare, est Orare Ad; To Adore, is to Pray To; As Adprecari, est precari Ad: And yet he modestly confesseth, that other expressions or notions pari veritate constant, are alike true. Among which I do reckon that good Etymon of Master Seldens. The Rites to be observed in Adoration, See in Apuleius, libro 4. de Asino; and Pliny lib. 11. So fare Cerda. I am now almost at an end. Wisdom 14.15. There is a story of a Father afflicted with untimely mourning. When he had made an Image of his Child, soon taken away, now honoured him as a God, which was then a dead man, and delivered to those that were under him, Rites and Ceremonies. See farther in the 16, 17, and 20 & 21 verses. The Father here pointed at, was one Syrophanes (saith Holcot on the place) and he had this from the Master of the Scholastical History: From Fulgentius Mythologiar. lib. 1. cap. 1. From Alexander Nequam, in scintillario poetarum, cap. 1. And the said Fulgentius had the History from Diophantes, a most ancient Author. Holcot addeth, Syrophanes was a very rich man in Egypt: and that he set up his Son's Image in his house: And the Family of Syrophanes, to flatter their Master, offered up Flowers to the Idol, plaited Crowns, burnt sweet smells; and the delinquents, or guilty servants, fled to the Image, and then were pardoned. PAR. 15. HOLCOT yet proceedeth; The Master of the Scholastical History, telleth another Story of the Original of Idols. Ninus King of Assyria (when Belus his Father was dead) made the Image of his Father, which was an Asylum, a Sanctuary to faulty persons. Whereupon Men gave divine Honours to that Statue. Others likewise dedicated Images to their dead friends. Gregory hath this Story on Luke 11.15. Nor is there repugnancy in these Stories, saith Holcot; because Idolatry had divers Inventors; and the Book of Wisdom insisteth in the Egyptian Idolatry, as being the most, and worst. Likewise in other parts of the world, as he there evinceth at large, Idolatry sprung from divers other motives: and Adoration with it, say I. It is most certain, The worship exhibited to false gods, was called Adoration: and it is very likely, because they did Orare, & Orare ad Deos, it was termed with a little and easy inversion, Adorare. I conclude; Since men of Great Renown were before Kings: and Kings were Adored whilst they breathed; and preceded their Counterfeit, Pictures or Images, the Statues had Adoration derived unto Them from the Adoration of those eminent Men: who being but Men, were by Men made such Gods as they were, for doing of good: and for those men's sakes, and in memory of them, were their Semblances, or portraitures, and Statues made, Adorned, Prayed unto or Adored. Gen. 4.26. Then began men to call On the Name of the Lord; or, to call themselves By the name of the Lord; as it is in the Margin of our last translation. It is true indeed, that some learned men, and Master Selden among them, De Diis Syris in his Prolegomena, cap. 3. pag. 28. read it, Tunc coeptum est profanari in invocando nomine Jehovae; because (say they) Chalal is interpreted both to Begin, and to Profane. But the reason is shallow, and may be thus retorted; Because Chalal is interpreted, both to Begin and to Profane; it cannot signify, Coeptum est Profanari; but either, Coeptum est, or Profanatum est. That Chalal signifies sometimes to Profane, is confessed on all sides. But it oftener signifieth to Begin. See the great Pagnine, pag. 699. etc. on the Arabicks Chalal. The Interlineary rendereth Hochal, by Coeptum est. Some of the Jewish Doctors are for Profanare, and some for Incipere. Aben Ezra upon a most true and sound foundation, against all other Jews of the other side, saith; If it did here signify to Profane; Nomen, non verbum cum particulâ cohaereret. Such is the relation and judgement of junius and Tremelius on the place; in which I rest. Bellarmine Tomo 2. de Monachis, lib. 2. cap. 5. is in one extreme; A Religious life (saith he) is so ancient, (he must mean a Monastical life, if he will confute Melancthon and Calvin, (as he there pretendeth to do) that there was an adumbration of it in the law of Nature before the Flood; for Enos began to call on the Name of the Lord. From whence Authors do gather (saith he) that Enos did institute some particular Worship, and Higher and Better than the Religion of the people. If he mean of the people that were of the cursed seed of Cain, I will confess it. If he mean Enos, as a Patriarch or chief head of a Family, instructed the people, and prescribed them their Duties, both to Believe and to Practise; and that the people did not right to regulate or frame a Religion to Themselves, or their Superiors; I will say, as he saith. Let ignorant, presumptuous, and frantic Rebels, who will Guide both King and Kirke, think of this. I say, God defend me from a Religion compiled and made by the Ignorants, or by the Vulgar: though two or three factious Superintendents, as Thomas Muncer, Buchanan, Knox, or the like, do either lead them, or be led by them. Bellarmine citeth Waldensis, as one of the Authors: yet he is a party, not a legal witness, and more suspected than Bellarmine himself, as living in more ignorant times. Yea Bellarmine himself might as well have said, that Adam's and Eve's manner of life, before they had any Child, did adumbrate, effigiate, or afford a pattern or patrociny, for the solitary life of the married Hermit's: for some such they have had, and one of late. If Enos did prefigure then a Monastical life, it was of married Monks also; For he begat sons and daughters eight hundred and fifteen years, Gen. 5.10. last; If it must be read, Profanatum est nomen Domini, as is possibly verifiable; Then from this place no Monkery can be adumbrated. Others are in Another extreme, and gather from hence, That now was the public Breaking-in of Idolatry; and Gods Name now began to be profaned. So fare was that time from establishing any extraordinary way of religious service of God in their judgements. And therefore they read it, as I said before; Tunc coeptum est profanari in invocando nomine jehovae. But, I say, First for the Reading, they translate the Hebrew amiss; for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hochal cannot be expounded, both Coeptum est, and Profanari also in the same place; though in several places it may signify, sometimes the one, and sometimes the other; and perhaps both together, if Hochal were doubled, or repeated. Master Selden in the place above cited, saith; Divers Rabbins have read it, Tunc profanatum est in invocando nomine Jehovae; where he might have observed, that coeptum est, was, and must be left out. Vatablus averreth, that another learned Jew expoundeth it, Tunc Inquinatum, sive profanatum est nomen Domini; but Vatablus himself rendereth it best of all; Tunc coeptum est Invocari nomen Jehovae. Profanatum est nomen Domini, may possibly be a good reading. Coeptum est, Invocari, is fare more probable, in my judgement. But single Hochal cannot be rendered Coeptum est profanari; if it were true, that it might be so at large justifiably expounded from the sense. The Interlineary hath it literally, and truly; Tunc coeptum est ad invocandum in nomine Domini. Indeed in the Margin, it is Invocari nomen, vel pollui; where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Likra, is made appliable either to Invocation, or Profanation. But the word is tortured; and though the Interlineary citys the reading so, it doth not therefore approve it. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hochal is rendered most properly, Coeptum est; and in some other place, Inquinatum est: yet it doth not, nor cannot in this place, comprehend within its signification any of These two readings; either Coeptum est Invocari, or Coeptum est Profanari, as I said before. I say, Hochal by itself cannot signify so. Lastly, I, for my part, will adhere to the translation of our Church, who have it in the Bishop's Bible's: Then began they to make Invocation in the Name of the Lord; or in the last Translation, as is before recited. God grant me to avoid unnecessary crotchets or strains of singularity with any earnestness; by following the major part, and by using the commonest notions of the words. Though the first Edition of Tremelius had it, as Drusius saith; Tunc coeptum est Profanari: the later hath it, as a palinody, say I, Tunc coeptum est Invocari; And truly I was glad, that after I had uttered and penned my settled single judgement, I found Drusius on the place concurring with me. Si Hochal hoc loco significat coeptum est, non significat Profanatum est; & contra, si significat profanatum est, non significat Coeptum est. If Hochal in this place do signify, They Began: it doth not signify, They Profaned: and contrarily, If it signify here, They Profaned; it cannot signify, They Began; So Drusius hath it in his Commentary, Ad difficiliora loca Geneseos Cap. 15. pag. 30. where he handles the words more at large. Secondly, concerning the matter itself, which nearer concerneth the point in question; Whether Worshipping of Idols, preceded Worshipping of Kings, or Men of Renown; and so Kings came to be Worshipped, because Idols had been so; or rather contrarily, that Idols had their Worship from the preceding Adoration of Kings, and Eminent people? Let me follow Aquinas, saying, 2 â 2 ae quaestione 94. Art. 4. & 2. Idolatry was not before the Flood, for so his words, (inprima aetate) are to be understood, as appeareth by the second objection, In secunda aetate. Idololatria legitur esse adinventa, vel à Nembeoth, qui (ut dicitur) cogebat homines Ignem Adorare: vel à Nino, qui imaginem patris sui Beli Adorari fecit; And both those were After the Flood: There was no Idolatry in regard of the fresh memory of the World's Creation; so that the knowledge of the true God, did flourish in their minds (saith Aquinas) though they abounded in other sins, say I. The affections of Cain, and his descendants, were most perverse: but their understandings were not so darkened, but they remembered the Creator of all things; with whom Cain had personal conference, (if I may so say) as well as Adam had. If you sharpen an objection, that within a while after the Flood the people forgot both the gracious Creation, and their as just as terrible inundation, and fell to Idolatry, and so they might in the law of nature. As quickly I answer; Though they had some few good men after the Flood, to live among them, as Noah, Sem, and Abraham, and to keep them from Idolatry: yet neither did the righteous men live so long, nor were so many, or near the Creation as the first Patriarches were, or as our Enos, who lived nine hundred and five years, nor as Seth, who lived nine hundred and twelve years; much less as Adam, who lived nine hundred and thirty years. About six hundred years after Enos was borne, as some say; Enos lived with Adam six hundred ninety five years (saith Salianus;) yea some account, that Adam lived within a hundred and thirty years of the birth of Noah, and Eve ten years longer than her husband. These propagated the true Religion, and somewhat restrained the stigmatised Cain, and his irreligious posterity, from extremity of sinning, by their holy lives, sanctified precepts, and divine both reprehensions and exhortations. Indeed Cyril in the beginning of his third Book de Genesi, relateth, that Enos was called a God, and held a God for his admirable virtue and incredible justice. Theodoret proceedeth quaestione 47 in Genesin; By his kinsmen was Enos called a God, from whence even those that were borne of him, and other holy men, were called the Sons of God. It seemeth to be confirmed by Gen. 6.2. The Sons of God saw the daughters of Men: So Adam was called the Son of God, Luk. 3.38. So Kings and their Officers are termed the Sons of the most High, Psal. 82.6. and Christians are called the Sons of God, 1 joh. 3.1. and are the Sons of God, verse 2. But none of this was Idolatry, nor did they make these men false Gods, nor worship their Statues, for they were called Gods not otherwise than in the Scripture Magistrates and Great Men are called Gods, Psal. 82.6. joh. 10.34. I said ye are Gods. The Skilful in the Hebrew (saith Augustine de Civit. 15.17.) avouch, though the names of Adam and Enos, do both of them signify a man, yet under Adam, is comprehended both Man and Woman: But Enos designs out man alone. Yet those, whom he esteemed expert Hebreitians, deceived S. Augustin; for Psalm 103.15. it is said, As for man, his days are as grass (and are not Woman's so too?) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hominis sicut herba dies. Enos, and homo, being common names, both to Man, and Woman. So Psalm 8.4. What is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 man, or mankind, that thou art mindful of him? Which is a false exposition, if we exclude all womankind from God's merciful remembrance of them. Enos began to call on the name of the Lord; perhaps because he first began to call upon God by the name Jehova. For though God was not known by the name jehova unto Abraham, Isaac and jacob, Exod. 6.3. Yet he might be known by that name unto Enos. I am sure, Gen. 4.3. Cain brought an offering unto jehova; and vers. 4. jehova respected Abel, vers. 6. jehova said to Cain. So again vers. 9 & 15. And Cain said to jehova, vers. 13. And jehova set a mark on Cain, and Cain went out of the presence of jehova, vers. 16. Can you now say, God was not known unto Cain by the name jehova? therefore much more should I think, He was known to the righteous Abel, to Adam the Protoplast, and to the repentant Eve, by that Name of Names. Eve confessed ingenuously, Gen. 4.1. I have gotten a man from jehova; And indeed jehova is often mentioned in Gen. 2. Though till man was created, and the Creation perfected, the Name of jehova is forborn; And (which is admirable to be considered) In the story of Abraham, Gen. 12.1. jehova said to Abram, jehova spoke to him, vers. 4. and jehova appeared to him, vers. 7. And most remarkably, Abram builded an Altar to jehova, and called upon the Name of jehova, vers. 8. And he called a place jehova-jirith, Gen. 22.14. God said I am jehova; who brought thee out of Vr of the Chaldees, Gen. 15.7. And Abraham said, ●ehova, God, what wilt thou give me? vers. 2. Yea Abraham's servants said, Gen. 24.27. Blessed be jehova, god of my Master Abraham. Likewise the name of jehova is often used in the Hebrew tongue, in the particular stories of Isaac, and jacob; How then, and why doth Moses bring in God saying, as before is recited, God was not known by the name of jehova, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? I answer; It is a very difficult place, where all answers are easier to be confuted, than established, or demonstratively proved. Consider favourably of my two Conjectures. Though each crosseth other; yet if either give content, or satisfaction, I shall be glad. May I not then in the first place say, that the holy Spirit of God, which dictated unto Moses what he should write, might, and perhaps did resolute, that Moses should show his joy and delight, which he had for first knowing God by the name of jehovah, by using and frequent repeating that Name, and applying it to the Actions, Relations, Passages, or Say, which were long before, though not exactly by the name of jehova, but by some other convenient Attribute of God? As for example; Abraham called upon the name of jehova. The meaning may be; Abraham called on the name of him, whom I knew to be jehova, though Abraham knew him not by that name, but by some other. Again, where it is, I am jehova (in the conference with Abraham) Moses wrote in the language of the later and better relation, though long before God might speak to Abraham in other words to that effect. For Moses doth not, would not contradict Moses; And the truth being but one, Abraham did not know the name jehova before, which was first revealed to Moses; and therefore first spoken by Moses, and applied by Moses to the first times so soon as Man was created, and so continually dispersed into the History of the other Patriarcks; Moses delighting in his prerogative of first knowing the the name of jehova; as Lawyers may more eloquently utter the Laws of the 12 Tables which were in rude Latin long before, in the more refined, and fuller expressions of latter times: Or like Historians, and Poets who ascribe the name of jove, and Ioves words and deeds, to the first beginning of times; though jove had no being till after the Flood of Noah; and therefore no name. So Moses might write according to the most clear Revelations of his time, what was done, and said, in other terms not so energetical, long before to the Patriarcks. If this please you not; what say you to a second way? May not the words be read by way of Interrogation, which is as good as a strong and vehement affirmation? By the name of jehova, was not I known to them? As if he had said; yes, certainly I was; as may be seen in their particular stories and passages of their time. And I have elso established my Covenant with them, Exod. 6.4. Even by that name Jehova, Gen. 15.1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, verses. For I pray you consider, God here speaketh not to diminish the reputation of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: but to the great glory of their names and persons, with whom first he established the Covenant made with them for the Jews. And therefore Ignorance of God, or nesciency of his great Name, cannot be handsomely ascribed to those Patriarcks in this place, where the knowledge and ratification of God's Covenant, and God's familiarity with them, are reckoned as their glorious privileges above all other men of those times. Did not Abraham see Christ's day a far off? Did he not rejoice at the sight of it? Was God the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, above other men? and they esteemed as the Living, and not as Dead; & shall we rest in Abraham's bosom, and eat and drink with Abraham, in the Kingdom of Heaven; than which prerogatives, none ever had greater, and more, except our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who also came of Abraham, and was promised particularly to Abraham, that in his seed, that is, as the Apostle saith, not in his seeds, but in Christ, all the Nations of the World should be blessed: and shall Abraham be ignorant of the name Jehova, which both Cain knew at first, and every Jew, and Christian now knows? I cannot so undervalue those Patriarcks' majorum Gentium. Besides, though not a Sentence, not a Word, not a Letter, not a jot of Scripture, can now be lost or perish: yet the note of an Interrogation, or a Comma, a Colon, a Mark, or a Pause might be omitted long since. For was not all Scripture written without both points, and vowels at first? If you say, the mark of an Interrogation being wanting, leadeth us to perplexities, to diversity, yea contrariety of senses. I answer. Do not full many words in the Hebrew Bible signify contrary things, exciting our studious minds to a search of the most probable matters, and meaning, whilst the truth is known to God alone? Even thus might it be with this passage. Where the note of an Interrogation might either be wholly omitted at first, or casually unobsetved, and left out by the first Transcribers, or Translators; and this might lead men into Ignorance ever since; and yet no imperfection is to be imputed unto God's Word; nor is it for any deficiency. And therefore I conclude, according to the Rules of Aristotle, Top. 6. cap, ult. Let this exposition stand, and be believed, till better be invented, and come in place. And then let the clearest light of truth have his due; that is persuasion. And let the less yield, and obey the greater. If you expect authorities averring, that Idolatry was not before the Flood; I refer you to the learned Salianus, in divers places, especially in anno Mundi 250, and to the learned Scholia ibid. who citeth for me, and for the negative, Cyril Alexandrinus contra Julianum libro primo. Irenaeus 5.29. and divers others. Besides such, whom my weariness commandeth me to omit, that I may return from extravagances to the right way, and method propounded by me. And so because there was no Idolatry before the Flood: and Kings, at least eminent men of high renown, and worth, were long before the times of the Flood, or Idolatry: I conclude, Kings, Princes, Dukes, and other men of venerable account for their goodness, in making Cities, governing of Nations, and founding Commonweals, had not the beginnings of their Adoration from the worship exhibited to Idols, Statues, Images, or Pictures: but rather, those Simulacra were Adored, because they were the representations of Kings, Princes, or other people, beloved, and revered; who both in their lives, and after their deaths, were Adored. And yet to make the best interpretation that I may, of Mr. Seldens words; whom for his depth, and variety of learning I admire: Let my consent run along thus far by his side; That the later Kings, and Heroës might perhaps have had their Adorations from some kind of Adoration derived from Idols; and yet the first Idols had their primitive Adoration from the Adoration of Kings, and other people of esteem, which were before Idolatry. When Christ Worshipped and Adored God, as doubtless he did full often, I think, He fell down on his Face. No Gesture could be more convenient at the celebration of the holy Sacrament. For we cannot think otherwise, but that Christ used almost all possible means to make the Apostles attentive to him: and stirred them up, to the consideration of so stupendious mysteries, that they might be better prepared to the holy receiving of them. Among Gestures exciting, and raising up of Devotion, the falling down upon ones Face, is most forcible, either in seeing it so done by others, or in practising it ourselves. The dejection and prostration of the body, is the elevation of the soul, and a means to sanctify and quicken the spirit. When he took the bread, and gave thanks (for thanks he gave) Luke 22.19. I cannot think otherwise but he lifted up his Eyes, and Hands to Heaven. So did he in lesser matters; for when he multiplied the five loaves, he looked up to Heaven, and blessed, and broke, and gave the loaves to his Disciples. And can we now think, He looked on the Earth, and not up to Heaven, when he gave Thanks and blessed the Food of life for us? When he broke the bread, and gave it, It is likeliest he stood on his Feet, and might move from one to another; or reach it to every one severally. So did the Pater familias, or chief of the Feast among the Jews stand, and distribute the bread at their solemn meetings as the Rabbins affirm. When he consecrated the Bread, saying; Take, eat, this is my Body, which is given for you; Do this in remembrance of me, Luke 22.19. and hallowed the Cup with its proper consecration: His countenance was divided between the Sacred Eucharist, and his Disciples: Sometimes he beheld one, sometimes another: as the matter required. He viewed the bread, when he began to say, This is my Body, which is broken, or given; When he proceeded, It is given, or broken for you, he earnestly beheld his Apostles, and the whole Church in Them, Idealiter, Likewise when he said, concerning the Cup, Drink ye all of it, etc. His Eyes passed along with his Words, his Words with his Heart: viewing the varied objects, as was meet, flitting, and moving from the Apostles, when he commanded, All of you drink; or Drink you All: But when he added, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new Testament; it cannot be, but he earnestly beheld the consecrated Wine, or his own Blood. All this I likewise suppose to be done by our Heavenly Saviour, as he stood on his Feet; And this doth the Church, or aught to do, imitating him, and fulfilling his commandment. Do this in remembrance of me: which he spoke not only of the Bread, and the form of its consecration, Luke 22.19. and perhaps of Identity of Gesture: but also of the Cup, and the Consecrating of the Wine in its proper form, as himself had done, 1 Cor. 11.25. And either in Heaven, or from Heaven taught his Apostle S. Paul. Whilst each of them did eat, he beheld the Eater severally: and when they drank All of it, (as they All drank of it, Mark 4.23.) So he beheld them especially, and singly one after another. The Prayer. I Must needs acknowledge (O all-knowing God) that the humblest way that I can, I do Worship thee both in soul and body; and yet I apparently discern, I do not sufficiently Adore thee. Accept (holy Father) my devout wrestling rather, than performances: Pardon my imperfections; confirm, and increase in me all goodness; and give, O give me such a taste of thee in this life, that I may be filled, and satisfied with thee, and by thee in thy glorious Kingdom. Amen. CHAP. VI And the second Section of the seventh General: Wherein is showed, what Actions and Words Christ used in the Consecrating of the blessed Eucharist. 1. The first Action, He took Bread. Christ never took any thing into his hand in a religious manner, but it was bettered. Ignatius was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the child whom Christ took in his arms. Christ's S●●urge had more virtue, than an ordinary whip. Christ's Touch impar●●●●th virtue. 2. The second Action, He Blessed the Bread. What it is to Bless. Many kinds of Blessings. God's Blessing what it is. The effects of God's Blessing. Joseph a Prophet. Christ's Blessing of the five loave caused their multiplication, not in Number, but in Magnitude. Christ's Blessing is like God's Blessing; it consisteth not in mere words. It is effectual in operation. Christ's Blessing of the bread, was not the Consecration of his Body. Parent's Blessing. Priest's Blessing; and the effects thereof. Illyricus would have altered the doctrine of the Keys. Christ's Benediction consisted partly of Prayer. Tankesgiving. Giving of Thanks, and Blessing, sometimes used promiscuously. Piscator's observation How God Christ blesseth. How Man blesseth God. Why the blessed Sacrament is called the Eucharist. In the Celebration of the blessed Sacrament Blessing Giving of Thanks all one. The power of Blessing greater than the power of Nature. Man's blessing of God, a superlative kind of Thanksgiving. Christ's blessing of God, what it is. The virtue of Christ's blessing. Man's blessing of Man, what it is. Christ's Thanksgiving, and blessing in the Sacrament, what it was. The Jews had distinct Graces for their Suppers. Christ's Benediction of the Bread in ihe Sacrament, not the Consecration of it. Lyranus, Hugo, Innocentius, and S. Ambrose taxed in this point. The properest use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst Men. How Christ in the blessed Sacrament did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Bless. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Give thanks. Probable that Christ's blessing was not without Imposition, or lifting up of his hands. Heave offerings in the old Law, types of this. Wave offerings in the old Law, types of this. Possibly Christ might use Elevation and waving of the Bread at the Benediction. 3. The third Action, He Broke it. The end, why he Broke it. Maldonat (saying Breaking of the bread, and Giving of it, is all one) is exploded. Christ in Breaking the bread, followed the Hebrew custom. Breaking of the bread did properly signify the breaking of his body on the Cross. How Christ's body was broken. Breaking of the bread showeth the ancient custom of Imparting the Sacrament to the Standers-by. Lorinus, in saying the bread was cut with a Knife, is against three Evangelists, and S. Paul. The ancient Fathers do not use the term of Cutting, but Breaking of bread. The Not-Breaking of the bread in the Sacrament, is a transgression of the first Institution. The Church of Rome herein censured. The practice of the Primitive Church: both in receiving of the Bread and Wine. The Papists taxed for Barring the Laity the Cup. Broken, and Divided, not all one, as Gaspar Sanctius ridiculously thinks. The Rabbin, that taught Baronius, Direct against Lorinus. The form of bread at the Jews ordinary Feasts, described by Baron. cut Lozinge-wise. The form of the Panis decussatus, religiously used among the ancient good Christians. A Cross, or Christ crucified on the Cross, was in ancient times impressed on the mystical bread. The picture of a Dove, of the Holy Lamb, and of a Shepherd with a sheep at his back; and the mystical signification of them. 4. The fourth Action. He gave it to his Disciples. He Himself gave it to every of his Disciples particularly. The consecrated bread given by Christ, was unleavened bread. We may consecrate either Leavened, or unleavened bread. It is probable, Christ gave the Cup Himself to every of his Disciples. Musculus censured therein. Aquinas saying. The Sacrament is many things materially, but one thing formally. He gave it to his Disciples. The Communicants at this Eucharist, were none of the Common Disciples, but only the Eleven Apostles. They in some sort represented the rest of the Priesthood only. Christ never gave power to any Layman to administer his sacred Body. Common persons are not to meddle with holy things. God's judgements upon such profane persons. Christ at this Eucharist gave his Apostles power to Consecrate the sacred Eucharist. After his Resurrection, and before his Ascension, he seconded this power. The Apostles in another regard represented the whole company of all his Disciples Christians in general. Christ when he Consecrated the blessed Eucharist, represented the body of the Clergy Idealiter. But when he received it, he represented the whole body of the universal Church, both Clergy and Laity. The Apostles, quâ Apostoli Discipuli represented the body of the Clergy. Laity. 5. Secondly, His words. First word: Take. He said, or Saying, were not spoken by Christ: neither are they part of his Consecration. The words of Consecration were only these; This is my body, etc. Innocentius the third, his opinion concerning Christ's Consecration of the blessed Sacrament, censured. A second and third opinion related by Aquinas, censured. Lucas Brugensis thinks Christ used more words in the Consecration. When, or at what Time Christ said those words, Take, etc. Christ gave the hallowed bread, not in Promise, but in Exhibition. John the Baptist called a fool. Epictetus' saying. Christ put not the blessed Sacrament into the Disciples Mouths, but into their Hands. In the Primitive Church the Christians received it into their Hands. So did they in Tertullia's time. So did they in Cyprians days. Taking is by the Hand. Cases may fall out, wherein the hallowed food may be put into the Recipients' mouths. We are not bound to do All, whatsoever Christ did at the first Celebration. We must do All, whatsoever he commanded us to do. Authorities for Taking the blessed Sacrament into our Hands. The Tripartite History. chrysostom. Cyprian. Tertullian. The Schismatics in old time divided not themselves from the Catholic Church in this respect; as S. Augustine witnesseth. Nor Novatus; as Ruffinus recordeth. The Christians in ancient time Reserved the Sacrament. Some Reject things really Tendered unto them. 6. The second word: Eat. It is probable that Judas did receive the Sop into his Hand. Mouth. Many of the Fathers did think so. Sinnes revealed grow more sinful. Carolostadius his fancy by most Divines disliked, disploded. The Future tense is never used for the Present tense, but the Present tense is often used for the Future in Scripture. 7. The third word: This is my Body, which is given for you, etc. Transubstantiation roved at. The farther Disquisition thereof wittingly and willingly forborn. The Author's Apology for the same. His Valediction to the Remainder of his Miscellanies. Resolves to spend the remainder of his days in holy Devotion, and continual Praying. The Moors of Morocco Pray six times every twenty four hours. The Lord's Prayer highly commended, and preferred before all other Prayers. It ought to be used by every Christian at least seven times a day. The Church of England commended: Unto which the Author submits himself, and all his Writings. Bishop Jewel, Bishop Andrew's, Bishop Morton, Bishop White, and incomparable Master Hooker, have written Polemically the Controversies of the Lords Supper: unto whose unanswerable Writings the Author referreth all scrupulous Christians for their better satisfaction. PARAGRAPH 1. THe accursed Gnostics have feigned abominable blasphemies, and ascribed them to our holy Saviour in his first Institution. Sixtus Senensis in my opinion, deserves a very sharp censure, for the bare reciting and recording such damned horrid lies, though his soul detested them. May they never more be thought upon. Let us consider the Actions in order in the same manner as Christ performed them. First, He took bread; and so the Cup: he might have bid them take it themselves, as in the Second Supper he bade them Divide the wine among themselves, Luke 22.17. But he himself now took the bread, and by Taking it, sheweth he would do somewhat more by It, than by other bread, which he took not into his hands. So John 6.5. Jesus lift up his eyes: and he took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the Disciples, ver. 11. So he took the seven loaves, and fishes, and gave thanks, and broke them, and gave them to the Disciples, Mat. 15.36. Neither did he ever take Any thing in a religious form into his hands, but it was bettered, and changed from its old nature some way or other. Simeon took Christ up in his arms and blessed God, Luke 2.28. for Christ needed no blessing. Christ took a child into his arms, Mark 9.36. And some think this child was Ignatius, who saith of himself, that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, borne or carried of God. But whosoever he was, certainly he was blessed of Christ more than others, whom he took not into his arms. When little Children were brought to him that he might touch them, Christ was much displeased with his Disciples, because they rebuked them who brought them; he took the children up in his arms; but what followed? He put his hands upon them, and blessed them, Mark 10.16. If I should say, that when Christ made a scourge of small cords, John 2.15. and drove all the faulty ones out of the Temple, no doubt that scourge had more virtue than an ordinary whip. If virtue went out of him, when a woman touched but the hem of his garment, Mat. 9.20. questionless, when in a religious way he touched other things, he imparted virtue to them. So when he took the bread, you cannot but think, He put his hands upon it, and blessed it: blessed it above other bread which he touched not. Saint Matthew saith expressly, He took bread, and blessed it, Mat. 26.26. So it is also Mark 14.22. confirmed with a back of steel. It is varied Luke 22.19. Christ took the bread, and gave thanks, and broke it. And this is also doubled or redoubled, 1 Cor. 11.23. etc. Christ took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it. Hence ariseth the next point, the Second point worthy the disquisition. PAR. 2. AFter he took bread, he blessed it, Mat. 26.26. What it is to bless? All words, names, voices, and things whatsoever which are applied to God, are more significant than if they be referred to ordinary matters. When God blesseth, he giveth, bequeatheth, exhibiteth blessings. He doth good, and prospereth the parties blessed. God's Benedicere, is his Benefacere; imparting to the creature some real benefit, efficacious blessing, Gen. 12.2. I will bless thee, and make thy name great .. That was one effect of God's blessing; but many more concurred with that, both Temporal. The Lord hath blessed my Master greatly, and he is become great: he hath given him flocks, and herds, silver, and gold, etc. Gen. 24.35. What need have we to cite more particulars? when God blessed Abrahaem in all things, ver. 1. And God blessed Abraham not in Temporal things alone (for they many times are the portion of the wicked) but even in Eternal and Spiritual blessings, Gal. 3.14. It followeth, Thou shalt be a blessing; or, as the Interlineary hath it rightly from the Hebrew, Be thou a blessing, Gen. 12.2. He spoke the word, and it was done. By the word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. Psal. 3.6. Abraham became a blessing to us. The faithful alive are the children of Abraham. The blessed who are dead, are in Abraham's bosom. It yet followeth, I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee: that is, who do good for thee, I will do good for them; who do ill to thee, I will do ill to them. God said to Kings, Touch not mine Anointed, and do my Prophets no harm, Psal. 105.14, 15. One of the Kings was Pharaoh, whom the Lord plagued, and his house with great plagues, because of Sarai Abraham's wife, Gen. 12. 1●. though Pharaoh had committed no evil with her. The other King was Abimelech, to whom God came by dream in a night, and said, Thou art a dead man, for Sarah whom thou hast taken, Gen. 20.3. Yet Abimelech had not come near her, ver. 4. Abraham is a Prophet, and he shall pray for thee, ver. 7. And Abraham prayed unto God, and God healed Abimelech and his wife, and maidservants: and they bare children. For the Lord had fast-closed up all the wombs of the house of Abimelech, ver. 17, 18. The like may be said of Isaac, whom Abimelech so revered, that he charged all his people, sayin, He that toucheth this man, or his wife, shall surely be put to death, Gen. 26.11. And both he and his people confessed that Isaac was now the blessed of the Lord, ver. 29. God hath the like care of joseph: and he was a prosperous man. And Potiphar saw that the Lord was with him; and, That the Lord made all that he did to prosper in his hand, Gen. 39 3, 5. And the Keeper of the prison looked not to any thing that was under his hand, because the Lord was with joseph: and that which he did, the Lord made to prosper, ver. 23. Pharaoh made much of joseph, and God prospered both Pharaoh and his kingdom through josephs' means. And joseph may well be accounted a Prophet; for joseph had a Cup, by which indeed he divineth (saith the Steward of josephs' house, Gen. 44.5.) And if indeed he did Divine, he was a Prophet; yea one of those Prophets pointed at by the Psalmograph, as followeth in Psal. 10. ●. in the next verses where joseph is particularly named. He was blessed in himself, and a real blessing to others. When Christ blessed the five loaves and two fishes, Luke 9.16. Benedictione augebat eos, & multiplicabat; by the blessing he increased, and they began to multiply, immediately upon Christ's benediction of them: increased more at his fraction: multiplied yet more as he gave them to the Disciples: ascended to a greater augmentation, as the Disciples gave them to the people: growing still in quantity, as the people held, or beheld them. Lastly, it is like also they did increase even in their mouths, and as they did eat them. Nor were the five loave made more loaves, or the two fishes increased in number; for than it had been improperly said, that they all did eat, and were filled with five loaves and two fishes, if the loaves and fishes were more in number: as if from every stalk seven ears came up full and good; so from every loaf more loaves did arise, and from every fish more fishes. But each piece or mouthful of every one of these did grow greater. And as some wells do fill the rather, and swell the more, by ha●ing water often drawn from them; or as fountain water continually floweth, and what you take up from it, filleth again with a kind of usurious increase: so every parcel of bread or fish did grow (as Butchers say of young fat meat) did plim, or grow till it came to their eating. As God Blesseth: so Christ Blesseth. For his Blessing never consisted in mere words, but was effectual in operation, conveying real good unto the blessed. For though the Blessing of the bread was not properly the Consecration of his body; yet it was an antecedent Preparative; a dispositive Adaptation: not void, or vain, or inefficacious: perhaps accompanied with prayers, perhaps with thanksgiving, perhaps with both. The Benediction of Parents, though it be but a prayer most times, yet it returneth not empty; but many times imparteth blessedness: yea, Always if the Recipient be well prepared. The Sacerdotal Benediction is not Only a plain good prayer; but wholly, and altogether hath a certain power and efficacy of the Key, Losing and Absolving, (saith Illirycus.) Who would have invocated the doctrine of the Keys, if he could have found but a little hole Open, or a little crack or flaw? But Christ's Benediction, as it was mighty in operation, so it consisted in part as well of Thanksgiving, as of Prayers. For though S. Matthew and S. Mark, have the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and apply it to the Bread only, Matth. 26.26. Mark. 14.22. And though S. Paul, 1 Corinth. 10.16. calleth the Sacred Cup, the Cup of Blessing, which we Bless: yet S. Paul, 1 Corinth. 11.24. useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and so doth the Evangelist, Luk. 22.19. He took bread, and gave thanks, and broke it. Giving of Thanks, and Blessing, are sometimes of one and the same signification; as is evidenced, 1 Corinth. 14.16. When thou shalt Bless with the Spirit, how shall he who occupieth the room of the unlearned, say Amen, at thy Giving of thanks, where Blessing, and Giving of Thanks, are confounded. Piscator's observation on the 1 Corinth. cap. 10. vers. 16. is good. Poculum illud Benedictionis: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: That cup of Blessing. The words in the Syriac are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Cosó haú dothaudithó: id est: Poculum illud Gratiarum actionis: That Cup of Giving of Thanks. And so it is read in Tremelius Syriac translation of the New Testament. Vbi observa; Syrum, nomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exponere per nomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Et sanè in Institutione sacrae Coenae, duo ista verba 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, uno eodemque sensu accipiuntur: Where observe (saith Piscator on that place) that the Syriac expoundeth the word which signifieth Blessing, by a word which signifieth Giving of Thanks. And verily, in the Institution of the holy Supper, those two words of Blessing, and Giving of Thanks, are to be taken in One and the selfsame signification. God doth not bless with Giving of Thanks or Prayers to man. Christ blessed creatures reasonable and unreasonable, sometimes with Giving of Thanks; sometimes with Prayer: Thanks to God: Prayers for the things to be blessed. Man may be said, in a nice way, to bless God; yet not Give him Thanks Then: but God may be blessed by prayer alone: At another time he may be blessed by Thanksgiving alone without Prayer. Commonly it is done by the coadunation of both duties. For no otherwise can we bless God, or confer good on him: But we can Thank him, and Pray to him, and keep his Commandments. The Jews did use the word Benedicere, to govern both a Dative and an Accusative case; As Benedicere Deo; and Benedicere Deum. The Romans do restrain the use more to the Dative. The Grecians construe it with the Accusative. As the blessed Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord, is called the Eucharist, from Christ's giving of Thanks, when he did institute it: and Justin Martyr in his second Apology, termeth the Sacrament Eucharistizatum panem, the bread which is sanctified by Giving of Thanks, or rather cibum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the bread of nourishment. And Irenaeus, 4.34. Ille panis, in quo gratiae actae sunt, est corpus Domini, that bread In which, or On which, or Over which Christ gave Thanks, is the Body of the Lord. So was both Bread and Wine blessed, even the very materials: and the Fathers insist more upon the Benediction, than on the Thanksgiving. In Celebration of the blessed Sacrament, the duties of Blessing and Thanksgiving, seem to be all One, though they may, and are at other times divided. In giving of Thanks, Christ blessed: in blessing the bread, he gave Thanks. Eusebius Emissenus, Homilia 5 de Paschate, Quanta vis divinae Benedictionis, ut in Christi substantiam divina elementa mutentur? Oh, how great is the power of Christ's divine Benediction, that changeth the divine Elements into Christ's substance? Ambrose de iis qui initiantur, cap. 9 answereth in a sort. Greater is the power of Blessing, than of nature; because by the Blessing, Nature herself is changed. Bless me (sweet Lord) and change my Nature into Grace. He blessed some bread to multiply it, and it did multiply; as if it had had vegetation, sense, or reason. Neither was the Crescite and multiplicamini, Increase and multiply, so fruitful. For of five loaves and two fishes, which he Blessed, Matth. 14.19. All did eat, and were filled, above five thousand in all, and there was more left, than was in store before they fed. But here Christ blessed the bread, separating it from common use, elevating it above its nature, and imparting to it spiritual virtue. When Men bless God, it is but an higher degree of Thanksgiving, if I may so call it. For our Goodness reacheth not to him, we can convey no good to him; we may by blessing God, and thanking him, do good to our own souls, bodies, and estates; to our children, kindred, friends, and benefactors. The Greater properly Blesseth the Lesser: Not the Lesser the Greater. Whensoever either Christ blessed God; or Man did, doth, or shall bless him, Benediction is nothing else but Thanksgiving, and praising, and speaking good of him. And, of the two, rather Giving of Thanks is comprised in Benediction; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; than Benediction is all one with Thanksgiving; or Benedicere, be interpreted, Gratias agere. Christ never blessed any Creature, but it received good by him, in one kind and degree, or other; But Benedicere nostrum non est causale, (as Christ's blessing was) sed recognoscitivum seu expressivum; We Thank God, and utter our desires. Man never blessed man or Creatures so, that the very Benediction was not a Thanksgiving to them; but rather a Prayer for them, and a Thanksgiving to God. Christ's Giving of Thanks when he administered the Sacrament, was Thanks to God alone, not to Men, not to the Sacrament: And the Benediction did not only bless God: but blessed the subject matter, the Bread, and the Wine contained in the Cup: the Cup itself being said to be blessed, by the Metaphor of continens pro contento. The elemental Sacramentals had an induing, some way or other, with heavenly virtue. The Jews had distinct Graces for their Suppers. And no doubt, Christ was more devout in Thanksgiving to God, than the Jews were. He is a Jew, who denieth this truth. Therefore Christ's Thanksgiving in the Celebration of the Eucharist, was not an Ordinary Giving of Thanks, as is before all other meals: but more Divine, and Operatively energetical, suiting with so heavenly mysteries. Christ's Benediction of the bread, was not principally the Consecration of it, but a kind of preparative prayer before the Consecration. Lyranus, Hugo, Innocentius, say, the Benediction was the Consecration. Benedixit ipsum panem, saith Maldonate. Ambrose, Hic est panis, quem Benedictio consecravit: This is the bread consecrated by the Blessing (saith he, in Libro de iis qui initiantur, cap. 9) Barradius (saith Ambrose) taketh Benedictionem Latè: and inferreth, If after Blessing Christ instituted the Sacrament, than the blessing was not the Consecration. Truly may I say, the Blessing and Thanksgiving was not the full entire Consecration, but only the former part of it. Amongst men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Blessing before eating, sanctifying the meat, ere it be taken, by prayer to God: and daily do we bless the Table (as our phrase is) that is, the meat on the Table, or the whole Meal, though all the dishes be not brought in: and this is the properest and best use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After meat, is a Thanksgiving rather for the Creatures received, than a Sanctification of them. And it may be, Christ did both Bless Before he did eat and drink: and gave God Thanks After: one time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: another time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Though the manner of Christ's Benediction be not recorded in Scripture, yet we cannot well think it was in words only: Excluding all solemnity of Ceremony, denying his Ocular Elevation, rejecting the Imposition of his Hands, which he was wont to do in Benediction. He laid his Hands on little children and blessed them, Mark. 10.13. So did he in healing the sick, Mark. 6.5. He laid his Hand on a few sick folk, and healed them. So Luke 4.40. Sure I am, that he lift up his Hands, when he Blessed his Apostles, Luk. 24.50. And his Apostles were wont to consecrate people to divine services by Imposition of Hands. 1 Timoth. 5.22. Lay Hands suddenly on no man. He doth not speak in Sensu forensi, of Laying on of hands; as he Laid his hands on me; that is, he strooke me: But in sensu Ecclesiastico, as the Holy Spirit teacheth us, for Consecration, as Timothy himself was used, who received a gift by prophecy, With the Laying on of Hands, 1 Timoth. 4.14. In the old Law they had divers Heave offerings, or Wave-offrings: As they did wave other things: So they did wave a loaf of bread, and a cake of oiled bread, and a wafer out of the basket of unleavened bread, Exodus 29.23. Vatablus readeth it, Exaltabisque Illa Exaltationem: Thou shalt wave them for a Wave-offring. This was first Lifted up, or Heaved up; Then was it waved, or shaken to and fro, as it is in the Margin of our last Edition. Vatablus in his Comment, saith it is Ad verbum, Agitabis illa agitatione: yet the Interlineary hath it, Agitabis Ea agitationem. I conclude; Lifted up the bread was, and shaken to and fro it was after it was Lifted. So fare have we Scripture to guide us. Vatablus doth more particularise the manner of the waving. The Heaved-up. Sacrifice they did shake, or wave; moving it first from the East to the West; then from the North into the South; signifying thereby that God was Lord of the whole earth (saith he.) The signification is good and proper, if it were grounded on Scripture, which it is not. That the heaving up of the offering did manifest It appertaineth to God, is a fair resultance; but though Rabbi Solomon, and Vatablus after him, may safely conclude, it was moved or shaken round about, yet which quarter of heaven they began at, and which they ended at, wanteth proof: and the Rabbins differ in judgement one from another. I will not say, but it is possible, Christ at the Benediction, might use Elevation; in signification that he should be Lifted up to the Cross: yea, waving of the bread in the sight of his Apostles: and toward them, or toward heaven: and if he did, he did it with a divine signification, that God commanded this, and that this ordinance was from heaven, perhaps with more than one only. But it seemeth not probable to me, that when and where he abrogated part of the levitical Law; Then and There he used the Ceremony of the said levitical Law: or that his Offering was not every way perfecter than the Oblations of the Old Law, which savoured more of the Terrestrial than Celestial Canaan. Sed quisque abundet sensu suo: Let every one opine as he pleases: yet thus conclusively I shall never believe, but the Benediction was with some sacred extraordinary Solemnity, Ceremony, or Action, more, than if it had been used, or was used at an ordinary refection. For by the breaking of ordinary bread, Christ was not known, nor was discerned, nor could be discerned from any other man: But when he (so solemnly) took bread, and Blessed it, and Broke, and Gave it them (just as he did before in the Eucharist) by his Actions, and the devout manner of them in their Circumstances, were their eyes opened to know him, Luk. 24.30. etc. PAR. 3. WHen Christ had Taken the bread, he Blessed it, He Gave thanks, He Broke it. His Breaking of it is now to be considered. If the Priest alone had been to take it, there needed little breaking: or rather none, unless the Priest are all the broken pieces. The Breaking implieth it is so done for more than one: and for this end was Fractio panis; The Breaking of bread. It is ridiculous, what is in Maldonate, Matth. 26.26. on the word Fregit; It is called the Breaking of Bread; not because it is truly Broken; but because it is Given: As if Bread could not be Broken, and yet not Given. As if they could not also Give whole loaves. Did whole loaves, and not rather Broken bread signify Christ's body, which was Broken for us? And did not Christ Give his Disciples the Sacred Bread after it was Broken? How then is Breaking all one with Giving? He saith, our reasoning proceedeth from great Ignorance. Judge (Reader) if this supervice exposition do not arise from pride, and presumptive confidence, that he can cast dust, and blind the eyes of the world. Even in this particular also, it seemeth Christ followed the Hebrew custom: For the Talmudists report, that at their Home-feasts among the Jews, the Head or Father of the Family, took Bread, Gave Thanks, and Broke it. And in truth, Breaking had a proper signification to demonstrate That his Body should be Broken on the Cross. For though a Bone of him was not Broken, John 19.36. yet were they Out of joint, Psal. 22.14. yet his Flesh was Broken in many pieces. His holy Temples and Head pierced with many thorns: thorns beat in with a Reed or Cane, Matth. 27.30. His tender back so cruelly whipped, that the Psalmist, Psal. 129.3. compareth the executioners to ploughmen: the dints, ruptures, and slices, made by the Roman rods, to no less than furrows, than long furrows. The ploughers ploughed upon my back, and made long furrows. I know no interpretation of this Scripture so proper as this, that I have delivered. His innocent hands and feet, they bored thorough with great vast nails, so great, that a bridle was made of them, as Eusebius records. The Psalmist saith, Psal. 22. vers. 16. They Digged my hands and my feet: as the Hebrew well beareth it, intimating the wide orifices of the wounds: Lastly, so great an hole was made in his side, that Thomas thrust his hand into it, Joh. 20.27. in sign of theseBreakings, well might he Break the Bread. The word of Breaking, showeth the ancient custom of Imparting the Sacrament to the Bystanders; And it was Broken by the Hand of the Breaker: or rather with a Knife (saith Lorinus on Act. 2.) because unleavened bread is glutinous, or clammy; and so is easier divided. That a Knife shall be said so propely to Break bread, as an Hand, I cannot believe. And I discern no such clamminess, or cleaving of the Unleavened Bread, above the Leavened, as should cause a Knife to be used, rather than an Hand: and the Hand may easily enough divide it. And if the Knife did prepare it, yet the often repeated word of Fraction, induceth me to think, the Fingers did Break the divided Bread into less and fit pieces. But Lorinus brings in that invention of the Knife, and preferreth it before the Breaking with the Hand, contrary to three Evangelists, and S. Paul, who name not Cutting, but Breaking of bread: Nor do the ancient Father's name the Cutting, but urge the Breaking. And when Christ said, Do this; It is as clear as the light of the Sun, he meaned, Take the bread, Give thanks, Break it, etc. And so the not Breaking of the Bread is a trangression of the first Institution. How ill then doth the Church of Rome, to leave off Breaking of the Bread (as it hath done for a long time) and to consecrate Singulos panes, seu minores hostias, ad vitandum periculum decidentium micarum; the loaves by themselves, or lesser hosts, or sacrifices, to avoid the danger of the crumbs falling down; and that the Laics and other sacred Administrants must be contented with a lesser host than the sacrificer hath, (saith Lorinus;) Yet Christ Broke the Bread, without fear of crumbs falling, say I: and the Primitive Church appointed men to receive the sacred bread into their Right hands, with their fingers close and not open, and the women to receive it in clean Linen, so to prevent the falling of the crumbs. Likewise concerning the sacred Wine: The Laics were wont of old, Cannâ haurire Dominicum sanguinem è chalice, with a Cane to drink out of a Chalice the Blood of our Lord: (and so was no danger of spilling one drop.) Pelican calleth it, argenteum calicem, & Fisiulam quâ Laici Dominicum exorbeant sanguinem. A silver Mazor, or Cup, or Chalice, and a Pipe, Reed or Cane, by which the Laics sucked, and supped the Blood of our Lord. See Beatus Rhenanus in his preface before Tertullian de Corona Militis; and Tertullia's testimony in his book de Corona Militis, is express, that they had a great care of the sacred Mysteries. Calicis, aut Panis etiam nostri aliquid decutian terram, Anxiè patimur; We are soretroubled, and passionately suffer if one drop of the sacred Wine or one crumb of sacred Bread fall to the ground. Which in despite of some novelists, I will apply to the Sacramental morsel. Bucan in his 48 Common place, pag. 658. seemeth to slubber the matter over, thus, Si in terram forte cadat per imprudentiam, vel mica panis, vel vini gutta, non amplius Sacramenti rationem habet: If by chance there fall to the ground a crumb of bread, or drop of wine, it leaveth off to be part of the Sacrament. Further observe, that the Papists have kept away the sacred wine from the Laity, and now they pair them and mince them, and say they must be content with a lesser consecrated Host, than the Priest hath: So that the Laity may fear the Romanist will, ere long, take wholly from them the lesser Host also. They shall give me leave to think, if they had kept the old Institution; if they had continued in the plain way: if they had not mingled Policy with Divinity, and preferred gainful Imaginations, and Worldly Ratiocinations before the evidence of Scriptures, there had never been a Session from that Church. Some think, that to be Broken, is all one with to be Divided. So Gaspar Sanctius on Acts 2. But he is much deceived. For after it was Broken, it was Divided: and it might have rested Broken, and yet Undivided: Undivided to Christ himself, or to his Apostles: though when it was Broken, it was Divided, one piece from another, and not till it was Broken. Yet he well resolveth; Panis hoc loco Frangi dicitur, non Scindi: it is said to be Broken, not to be Cut or Sliced with a knife. He might have added out of Baronius (whom he cited in Anno Christi, 8. which should have been 58. Numero 64.) that the Rabbin skilful in Judaical Antiquities, taught Baronius, when the bread was Cut at their Common Feasts, into such shape as hereafter is expressed, they did cook them so, that they needed not to Cut them when they eaten them, but only to Break them; This is direct against Lorinus before cited. The form of civil morsels, at ordinary Feasts, is thus described by Baronius, not much differing from our Marchpanes or Sweetmeates cut lozenge-wise. The form of the Panis decussatus or bread made in likeness to a Cross, or an X, was in this wise, as the same Baronius there hath it, from the old monuments yet to be seen. That the good Christians made a religious use of this form, because it did in some sort resemble a Cross, Gregory proveth, Dialogorum 1.11. Yea even the unleavened bread, of which they made the Eucharist, was by the Ancients framed to such a quadrangular form in a Circle, whose parts being divided by Breaking, were called morsels. And the Cross not only stood upon the Altar, (which chrysostom avoucheth:) but also was drawn upon the Eucharist; and afterward on the same mystical bread, Christ crucified was form. So fare Baronius. Let me add from Johannes Stephanus Durantus de Ritibus Ecclesiae. cap. 34. that the holy Eucharist was kept, and reserved in a vessel made in the form of a Dove, which is a token or badge of Charity, or of the holy Spirit in that wise descending and lighting upon Christ. And I have otherwhere read (if my memory deceive me not) that the sign of the Holy Lamb was sometimes printed on the Sacred Eucharist, as I have seen it graven on some Chalices remaining to this day. Or rather, to speak according to Baronius his relation, ad annum 216. Numero 15. The Image of a Shepherd carrying a Sheep at his back, was wont to be effigiated in the Chalice, and on the Episcopal Cloak, or Pall. I have the rather transcribed these things, because they are not quotidiani commatis, obvious and ordinary; but carry with them a new delight. PAR. 4. THe next words are, He gave it to His Disciples. In which words, at the first sight of them, is plainly evidenced, That Christ gave not the blessed bread to One alone; and that One Apostle gave it so to Another; and he to a Third, etc. But that Himself gave it to His Apostles: Himself, and no other: it was His Immediate gift; to Each, to All of them. That the Consecrated Bread given by Christ to his Apostles, was unleavened bread, is most certain: To say peremptorily, that we may not use leavened bread: Or that we must use leavened bread only, savoreth of two extremes: What Alphonsus de Castro saith of the Greek Church, that they are Schismatics, not because they used leavened bread in the Sacrament of the Eucharist: but because they think, that only leavened must be used; I say on the other side, If any maintain that the bread of the Sacrament must be only unleavened bread, and that it is sin to consecrate any Other bread; I shall think him to be in this point little less than a Schismatic. A liberty is left to the Churches of God: which no way gives room to the unbridled licence of the giddy people against their Pastors. Though at the delivery of the Wine he said, Drink ye All of this: and at the delivery of the Bread, did not say Eat ye all of this: it is likely he did it for this cause, because he gave the Broken bread to every one Himself, by Himself; but they gave the Cup One to the Other (saith Musculus.) Yet I hold it far more likely, that as immediately he gave to every one of His Apostles the consecrated bread; so he did also deliver the Cup to Every one; and was more distinct, and punctual in administering the Holy Sacrament, than at common refection. The word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, proveth it; As he gave One Species, so he gave the Other; yet was not this Another Sacrament, though it was a distinct Action, and a distinct Material. Both Eating and Drinking make up but One Sacrament. Aquinas part 3. Quaest. 73. Artic. 20. This Sacrament is many things materially; but One thing only formally, as it makes one integral refection Only. In the First or Second Supper, I confess, he said, Accipite, & Dividite, Luke 22.17. He took the Cup, He gave thanks, and said, Take this (Wine) and divide it among yourselves; for they did not divide the Cup; So, He did not divide. the Wine; but They: And yet at the holy Institution of the Eucharist, the same Evangelist saith, He gave the bread to Them: Likewise The Cup: versibus 19.20. In the First or Second Supper he used no Benediction extraordinary: They did eat, and drink promiscuously, and as is usual in such Feasting, one Disciple might help another. But in this Sacred Banquet, the Consecrant and Administrant, was Christ only, lest any man should challenge superiority or equality of concurrence in the Institution. A second rivelet from this fountain, He gave it to His Disciples, may thus flow. Four times S. Matthew nameth Christ's selected company Disciples; S. Mark, Thrice; S. John, Thrice; S. Luke, Once only, called them Apostles: Luke 22.14. and Once Disciples. Now as the once-named word (Apostles) showeth, That the Communicants, were then no part of the Disciples in General; but those very especial Twelve or rather Eleven, (Judas being gone forth) which were an exempt out from the rest: employed above the rest, more inwardly and familiarly conversing with Christ, than the rest of the Disciples: So since they are so often called Disciples, we may think it teacheth us probably, That the Apostles represented at this Eucharist, in this regard (viz. as Christ was the Administrant) the rest of the Priesthood only; not the Body of Christ's Church; not the whole and entire company of all the Faithful Disciples that then were, or were to be unto the World's end: Lay, and others: but the Clergy, Presbyters, and Ministers, who are here called Disciples: though the word (Disciples) be also often of a larger extent. And this may be a reason hereof. No man can imagine that Christ gave power to the Laity, and Common Disciples, Men and Women to consecrate his Sacred Body and Blood. If they should offer to do such an Act, they should be more guilty than rash Vzzah, who for but touching the Ark, was strooken dead by God, 2 Sam. 6.7. Than foolish Saul, who for offering a burned Offering, lost his Kingdom, 1 Sam. 13.13. Than presumptuous Nadab, and Abihu, who offered strange fire before the Lord, Leu. 10.1. and were consumed with fire from Heaven. Than wicked Jeroboam, who by raising up two Calves, made Israel, the greatest Calf, to sin: and made of the lowest of the People Priest of the High places; now the Calf was grown to to an Ox. Any one that would, or whosoever would, Jeroboam consecrated him, 1 King. 13.33. which thing became sin to the house of Jeroboam, even to cut it off, and to destroy it, from off the face of the Earth, vers. 34. It were an horrid intrusion on Sacred offices; and a Nullity in the fact itself. Not Angels or Archangels, nor any of that Heavenly spiritual Host: Not Kings, nor Princes (unless in Orders) not any under Heaven, except the Clergy, have power to Consecrate the most holy Eucharist. To whom he said, Hoc facite; which he said not to others. Indeed it is true (as is in my Miscellanies) that Saint Peter represented sometimes all the Apostles: sometimes the Apostles represented all the Clergy: But in this place toward his death, Christ gave his Apostles (representing the whole body of the Priesthood) a power to consecrate the Sacred Eucharist; and gave it to them only: So after his Resurrection, when he had overcome actually Death and Sin, Hell and Satan; when he had fully satisfied to the utmost farthing, for all our offences, and had an over-merit left; even before his Ascension, he gave again, when he had most and properest power for to give, to the Apostles (representing the Church for ever, that are in holy Orders) another power and authority, distinct from the former, yet conducing some way to it, in these words, John 20.21, etc. As my Father sent me, so send I you. Then he breathed on them, and said; Receive ye the holy Ghost: Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them: Whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained. Let the ill-bred ignorant Clown jeer at the power of the Keys, he shall never find Heaven gates open, but by these Keys; And to the Clergy only were thy given, maugre all the enemies of the Clergy. In one respect it hath been maintained, that the Apostles did at the Eucharist represent the body of the Priesthood; viz. as the Sacrament wholly, and only was to be Instituted and Consecrated by them, by whom the Bread must be Taken, Blessed, Broken, Distributed and Hallowed, with the right form of consecration. But in another regard, the Apostles, even Then, may be said to represent the whole company of the Disciples, in the largest signification; namely, as All, and Every Christian was to Receive it: for so were Themselves, Then, Recipients; and as Recipients (as well as in other regards Administrants) were these words said to them, Do this in remembrance of me; and All of you drink of this: which last words cannot be restrained to the Ministers only, but involve within their circumference, the whole round World of devout Christians: Else none might Communicate but Priests only; which to say, is accursed. Perhaps I may say inoffensively, Christ represented the Apostles, and stood for them, and the body of the Clergy Idealiter, when he consecrated the blessed Eucharist, and gave it to them. But, as Christ himself Received it, and in both kinds, he may be called their Symposiarchon; and I am sure, I may say truly, and therefore boldly, Our most blessed Saviour represented the whole body of his universal Church, both Clergy and Lay-people, if so he did Receive it, as is most probable. In imitation of him, I say likewise, that the Apostles (quà Apostoli & Sacerdotes) did celebrate the Divine Mysteries, and Administer them; So, representing the Clergy: but as they received the Divine Food, they were Participants, (quà Discipuli,) and so stood in the room of the whole Christian Laity. PAR. 5. THe words of Saint Matthew, and Mark, and S. Paul, do follow after, He gave it to them: And said. S. Luke varieth it thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Saying. It is all one in sense. Here let me tell you, These words, He said, or Saying; were not spoken by Christ, nor part of his Consecration: But they are the words of the Evangelists, and Apostles recording and coupling Deeds and Words at Christ's Institution. Christ's Consecration consisted of Actions and Words: His Actions were, He took Bread, Blessed it, Broke it, and Gave it to his Disciples. His words were not these, Saying, or He said; They are the Historical copulative narrative of the Heavenly Penmen: but his words were only these, This is my Body, and so forth. Aquinas tertiâ parte, Quaestione 78. Aritic. 1. ad primum, relateth, That Innocencius the third opined, Christ first perfected the Eucharist by Divine power; and Afterwards expressed the form which others should follow. But this is express against the Evangelists, who say; Christ did bless it; which was not without some form of words: yet, in favour of Innocentius, he saith, The words were spoken Opinatiuè magis, quàm determinatiuè. Rather by way of Opinion, than of determination. Others (quoth he) say, the Benediction was made with certain other words, to us unknown; but he replieth wisely; This cannot hold, because our Benediction of Consecration is now perfected by reciting what was then done: (Let me add, and Said also.) And if it were not done by those words, Then; it would not be done by these words, Now. A third sort say, Christ spoke the words of Consecration twice: Once secretly: the second time openly to instruct others how to do so. But this cannot stand; because the Priest doth consecrate, uttering these words, as publicly spoken by Christ, not in a secret Benediction. Whereupon since the words have no force, but as Recited by Christ, it seemeth Christ consecrated the Eucharist, by manifest uttering of them. More he may read at large in him, who so pleaseth. To conclude, he saith not, nor can say, that Christ himself pronounced this Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Dicens: or this Proposition, Et Dixit, And Said. It is true, such a Consecration compounded of his Reception of it into his hands, of Benediction, of Fraction, of Distribution, and lastly of the Consecratory and Operatory words themselves, cannot handsomely be registered in particular, without the Addition, Saying; or And he said: yet this evinceth not, That Christ pronounced those words, or in the consecration needed to pronounce them, but they are only the convenient, if not necessary expressions of the Relators. Divers think, that Christ used more words in the Consecration; and among these the learned Franciscus Lucas Burgensis, on Matth. 26.26. Non est verisimile, tam paucis verbis Dominum usum esse, quàm scribunt Evangelistae. It is not likely, that Christ used so few words, as the Evangelists write. Thus far I agree with him; that whether the Benediction were of God, Christ blessing God: or a benediction upon the Elementary materials; or of both (as I judge likeliest:) some other words were used by Christ, not made known to us: fit for Christ on such an occasion to speak, not necessary for us to know or speak: Brugensis scarce probably insisteth upon One. Of which hereafter. Between Christ's Offering, and giving the blessed bread to his Disciples, on the one side: and the consummate Consecration, on the other side, Christ held out his hand, and reached the bread, and said (not the words And Said) Take ye, or Take. Take. Some would Give, but others will not Receive; Thus God would Give much unto Millions of people, if they were willing or prepared to Receive it. And gifts there are, which come off kindly from the hands of the Donor, yet fall short of the hands of such to whom they were Destined, because they clutch their Fists, & ponunt Obicem, lay a Block in the way. Christ gave the hallowed bread, not in Promise, but in Exhibition: He commanded them to Receive it. When he wished Thomas to thrust his hand into Christ's side, John 20.27. it is irreligious to think, that Thomas disobeyed, or refused to do so, though it be not expressed. That late Writer was a Fool, who said, the Holy Baptist was a fool, for not doing at first, as Christ willed him. God grant me to be as humble, and as well accepted by Christ, as Saint John was, even when Christ the second time spoke to the Baptist, and overruled him to baptise our Saviour. And let the haughty Germane keep his wisdom to himself. The Baptist was wise to Godward; though esteemed a fool by him. Epictetus' said of old: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Every matter hath two Handles. Whereas it is said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Take; because an Handle, and every thing else by which we Receive, and Handle, and Hold a thing, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And because Taking into one's hand, is more proper than to take it into one's mouth; I resolve, Christ put not the blessed Sacrament into their mouths, but into their hands: and they did as they were commanded, that is, Take it: For in the Primitive Church the good Christians received it into their hands. Tertullian de Coronâ Militis; Eucharistiae sacramentum non de aliorum Manu, quàm praesidentium, sumimus: We give it not one to another, but each of us taketh it from the hand of him who is set over us. And into their hands did they take it at first (as Maldonate confesseth.) And the story in Cyprians book de Lapsis, pag. 284. proveth. For one who took the blessed Sacrament unworthily, Cinerem ferre se apertis manibus inuênit, found embers in stead of it, in his hands, and was not able to handle it, or eat it. When Christ said, Take, Eat, the taking was with the hand; as the eating was by the mouth; and if the Apostles had Taken it from Christ's hands immediately into their mouths, this one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Eat, would have served for all: and Christ had had no need to say, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Take. For, from bidding them Eat, floweth this sequel necessarily, that they were to receive it into their mouths: since otherwise they could not eat. Therefore the two words, Accipite, Manducate, are two divers commandments to be performed by two distinct instruments, of Hand and Mouth. Nor otherwise to be lawfully administered (as I judge) unless to such as are too weak and sick to receive it with their hands; or have lost the use of their hands; or have no hands at all: Which cases sometimes have, and sometimes again may fall out; and then the hallowed food may be put into the mouths of the Recipients; Otherwise, not. For Christ did both practice it, and command his Church to do the like. Do This, This, as well as the other things. And therefore the delivery of the heavenly Manna into the hands of the Communicants, is necessary, except in the before excepted cases. Indeed we are not bound to do whatsoever Christ did at the First celebration; For he did it at night, and but to a few, and with unleavened bread, which are left at liberty to us. But we are bound to follow whatsoever he both did and commanded: as he did in this point. For he both took the bread into his hands, and bidding them Take it, he put the consecrated bread into their hands: and charged them to do after the same manner. And if we go to Reason, The washed hands and lips are as clean, as the inside of the mouth: and therefore it may be put into their hands, as well as into their mouths. Let humane discourse give way to Authority. tertullian de Idololatria, cap. 7. saith, they did Manus admovere corpori Domini; put forth their hands to receive the body of our Lord. The Tripartite History, 9.30. How wilt thou hold out thy hands, from which unjust blood yet droppeth? How wilt thou take with such hands the holy body of our Lord? chrysostom in his third Homily to the Ephesians; How wilt thou appear before the Tribunal seat of Christ, who with unclean hands and lips darest touch Christ's body? Cyprian de Lapsis, pag. 281. speaketh of some, who offered violence to the body and blood of Christ: and then sinned more with hands and mouths against the Lord, than when they denied the Lord. And pag. 283. he instanceth in a sacrilegious wretch, who was angry with the Priest, because the Priest would not suffer him presently with defiled hands to Take the body of Christ; or with polluted mouth to drink his blood. Tertullian in lib. de Idololatria, Faulting such as promoted the makers of Idols, to the Orders of Priests, or Deacons, cryeth out; Proh scelus! O abomination! The Jews Once laid hands on Christ; these Daily offer violence to his body, by unworthy Giving and Taking of it. O manus praecidendae! O hands worthy to be cut off! Yea, the very Schismatics in old time divided not themselves from the usance of the Church in this speciality. For Augustine, Tom. 7. contra literas Petiliani, 2.23. pag. 22. saith to Petilian, and his adherents, I do instance, and make rehearfall unto you of a man who lived with you— into whose hands ye placed, or put the Eucharist. Ruffinus Ecclesiastica Historiae 6.33. saith of Novatus, or Novatianus; That when he divided the Sacrament to the people, he held the Hands of the Receivers, till he made them swear by what they held in their Hands, and then they did Sumere. They did accipere manu; Sumemere ore: took it with their Hand; and received it with their Mouth: And I doubt not, but these holy ancient Fathers followed Christ's celebration, in such things as he commanded. When they did Reserve the Sacrament, and carry it to their houses, I hope they took it not into their Mouths, they carried it not in their Mouths, but took it in their Hands. Accepto corpore Domini, & reservato, saith Tertullian in the end of his book the Oratione. It was first received (and this was not within their Mouths) but with their Hands. If it had been in their Mouths, it was not so fit to be Reserved. And how vain had it been, to take it out of their Mouths, and to reserve it to that end, that they might put it another time into their own Mouths? or into other folk's Mouths either? If you plead, it was reserved for the sick; Gregorius Nazianzenus Oratione 11. in laudem Gorgoniae, saith; If Gorgonia's Hand treasured up any part of the Antitypes of Christ's honoured body and blood, she bedewed it, or mingled it with her tears. The word (If) not betokening any doubt, but implying a certainty, that sometimes she did weep over the consecrated mysteries, which her Hand had Reserved. The word If, being taken for When. So it is used, 1 King. 8.46. If they sinne against thee, for there is no man that sinneth not. I conclude with the binding Rubric of out Lyturgy, that the Priests, or Priest, must deliver the Communion to the people in their Hands, Kneeling. Maldonate on Matth. 26. confesseth it: further proof needed not. Yet was Maldonate to blame to say, The same Church with better Counsel gins to give the Sacrament not into their hands, but into their mouths: because there was both more reverence, and less danger. To call that better Counsel which varied from Christ's Institution, I like not. Nor doth Maldonats' similitude hold. For, if the Churches are the Eucharist fasting, varying from Christ; yet they had Apostolical Authority to guide them, which the Handless and Mouthless Receivers wanted. Some Reject things really Given, and Tendered. Matth. 7.9 Ye Reject the Commandments of God. Jeremy 8.9. Some rejected the Word of the Lord. Luke 7.30. The Pharisees and Lawyers rejected the Counsel of God against themselves. 1 Samuel 10.19. The Israelites rejected their God. Is not in those words included a plain offer, and withal a Not-accepting of the Tendry? Remarkably is it said, Joh. 12.48. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth-not my words, the same Word shall judge him at the last day. Rejecting, is expounded by Not-receiving, if it signify not worse also. So some Refused to hear God's Word, Jeremy 13.10. Ammon refused to eat, 2 Sam. 13.9. though the cakes were poured out before him. Elishah though he was urged to take a gift, yet refused, 2 Kings 5.16. Yet for all this, I cannot think, but when Christ said to his Disciples, Take; they did Take it: and when he said, Eat; they did Eat. For it argueth Obedience to their Master: and their conformity, to partake of the mysteries of Christ. PAR. 6. THe next part of our Saviour's words, is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Eat. That Christ gave Judas a Sop, is clear, a dipped Sop, Joh. 14.26. that judas received it, I hold as clear, john 14.30. He then having received the Sop, went immediately out. That judas did eat it, is not expressed, nor so clear. He might possibly Take it, and not Eat it, but let it lie on his trencher. Besides, the Sop being given for a Manifesto, that judas was the only Traitor, perhaps he was not willing to swallow the Disgust, as he accounted it, and the Sop also. But it may be well answered; judas was so surprised with the unexpected Offer; his reason, wit, and senses so clouded: his soul amazed with such arisings, and fumes of his treasonable plot: in one word, so given over to Satan, that what another man, yea what he himself would have done at another Time, either not Receive, or not Eat, he certainly received, and in likelihood swallowed. If the words of Scripture be closer followed, and more forcibly urged, That judas having received the Sop, went out immediately: and therefore he did receive it only, but not Eat it. I answer: The end of his Receiving, was only to Eat it: and there was no great distance of time between the Receiving and Eating of the Sop: but he might put his hand to his mouth even almost in an instant, or in tempore penè imperceptibili, in the twinkling of an eye, and swallow, without chewing, a moistened, soft, little glibery Sop, that his going out immediately excludeth not his Eating. Besides, the word Receive, may extend, not only to his Taking of it with his hand, but to the Eating of it also. For there is a receiving into Ones mouth: and it is not possible to be proved, that judas did not So receive it, nor Eat it. And it may be well believed, because so many holy Fathers have declared themselves to think, He did Eat the Sop. I know but few that deny it; but many affirm it. Some indeed say, He carried away the Sop, and shown it to the High Priests, and thence framed a forged accusation against Christ: or an excuse for his own treachery; as if without cause he would not have betrayed him. A man having his hidden sins revealed, groweth worse, and more mad in sinning: Per scelera semper sceleribus tutum est iter, said One. The safest way to commit sin; Is by new sins still to begin. Lucas Brugensis on Matth. 26. saith; That after the word Eat, the reason was given. And the word (Enim) is to be understood: Indeed it may well be understood, because at the delivery of the Cup, it is expressed, Matth. 26.28. For this is my blood of the new Testament: And yet the sense seemeth to me as full, Take, Eat, This is my Body: as if it had been written, Take, Eat; For this is my Body. I would not willingly add any new sense to Scripture, no more than I would diminish a letter from it: especially, if, as it is, the sense may be well accepted. Carolostadius (and never any before him, that I have read of) fancieth; That when Christ said these words, This is my Body; he put his finger to his breast, shown himself, and meaned thus: Here sitteth my Body which shall be given for you. This Sleidan reporteth in the Fift book of his Commentaries. And this may seem to favour him; Jesus said to the jews, Destroy This Temple, and in three days I will raise it up, Joh. 2.19. And the holy Apostle expoundeth it; Christ spoke of the temple of his body, verse 21. Tolet in his Commentary on the place, saith; It is certain, that when Christ said, This temple, he did by his Gesture, and the motion of his hands, demonstrate Himself, and pointed not at the material Temple built of stone; so might he here do. Tolet his Collection is but probable. For Christ might point at either, at neither, but leave them in suspense. Many times did Christ use verbal equivocations, as I have proved in my Miscellanies; that is, he so spoke, that his words might have a double Construction; though he adhorred mental Reservation. Concerning Carolostadius, I must needs say, he was one of them, who in those precipitious and whirling times, did strive to raise his own name, by inventing most new devices: And this was one of them, which is not seconded by any other Christian Divines, which I have seen; but disliked by many: For when Christ said, This is my Body, which shall be given for you; (as Carolostadius hath it) is as if he pointed at, and did mean his natural passiive body. What did they eat? They did eat none of That body, nor was it Broken, till, after the Celebration of the holy Eucharist, he did suffer. But the holy Scripture hath it in the Present tense, Luk. 22.19. This is my Body which Is given for you: And vers. 20. This Cup Is the new Testament in my Blood, which Is shed for you. Can you think (O Carolostadius) that when he gave them the Cup, he touched his breast, and pointed at, and meaned the blood in the veins, lanes, and hidden alleys of his mortal body? So, 1 Corinth. 11.24. This is my body, which Is broken for you. And, this Cup Is the new Testament in my blood, vers. 25. Likewise Matth. 26.28. This is my Blood which Is shed: and so Mark. 14.24. For though it be a truth most certain, that Christ his natural body and natural blood was broken, given, and shed afterwards in his Passion: yet Carolostadius was too blame, to change the Tense, to invent an imagined gesture of Christ, which is impossible to be proved. Lastly, to broach a new opinion contrary to all Divines; from which refulteth, That they did eat only bare Bread, but no way the Body of the Lord: and drank only the fruit of the Grape; but no way drank the Blood of the Lord. Indeed the Vulgate hath it, Frangêtur, in the Future tense; is Shall be broken for you: But it starteth aside from the Original. Nor standeth it with sense, reason, or example, that the Future is taken for the Present tense: since it is a retrograde course against nature. But the Present tense is often used for the Future, foreshowing the infallible certainty of what will, or shall come: both in Prophetical, and Evangelicall Writings. Esay 60.1. The glory of the Lord Is risen upon thee: And yet he speaketh of Christ, and his coming. And Revel. 22.12. Behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me: And Yet he cometh not, though it were said above fifteen hundred years passed. But most undoubtedly He Shall come quickly: Celeritate motus, though not celeritate temporis, when he beginneth to come, he shall come speedily; though he shall not quickly begin to come. PAR. 7. IT succeedeth, This is my Body, Matth. 26.26. which is Given for you, Luk. 22.19. Which is Broken for you: 1 Corinth. 11.24. This do in remembrance, or for a remembrance of Me: as both S. Luke and S. Paul have it. And he took the Cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drinkeyee All of it; for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins: Matth. 26.27. etc. It is thus changed; Mark. 14.23. He gave it to them; and They all drank of it. And S. Mark leaves out these words, For the remission of sins. S. Luke maketh the alteration, thus; Likewise also (he gave them) the Cup after Supper, saying; This Cup is the New Testament In my blood, which is shed for You, Luk. 22.20. Another diversity is yet, 1 Corinth. 11.25. Likewise after Supper (he took) the Cup, when he had supped, saying; This Cup is the new testament In my blood: This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. Matth. 26.29. Christ saith, I will not drink henceforth of the fruit of the Vine: And this was After the sacred Supper. But (saith Adam Contzen) A Matthaeo non suo ordine ad finem coenae recitantur ea verba de Genimine vitis. S. Matthew reciteth not in Order the words concerning the fruit of the Vine; nor were they spoken After Supper. Perhaps (say I) they were spoken Twice. Here (if ever) is an ample field to expatiate in; these words have tortured the wits of the learnedst men since the days of the Apostles; Et adhuc sub judice lis est; And yet they are not determined. And as the Areopagites in an inexplicable perplexity, deferred the final determination till the last day; so the Roman Church might have deferred their definitive sentence, and overhard censure, even till then; especially since they confess, that the manner of Transubstantiation is inenarrable. Whereupon I am resolved, to forbear farther disquisition, and to lose myself in holy devotion and admiration, that I may find my Christ. The sail is to large for my boat: This Sea is too tempestuous for my Shallop: The new Cut of Erasmus Sarcerius in his Scholia, on the place of S. Matthew, thus shuffleth it. The Material causes are Bread and Wine, and the things under them understood, and present, the Body and Blood. The Formal causes, are to Eat, and to Drink. The Efficient causes; Christ, who did institute it: and his Word. The Effectual causes, to have Remission of sins. I say, this may rather go among the final causes. And to make Effects to be Effectual causes, introduceth new Logic, new Terms into Logic: Besides, he omitteth the Final cause, which is the first mover to the rest. Divinity and the mysteries of it are not to bow down to any one's Logic. Oh! but will you now say leus in the last Act? in the last Scene? Will you be silent, where he and she Apprentices, where Women and illiterate Tradesmen raise themselves upon their startups, prick up their ears, and tire their tongues? 1. I answer, If I should enter into the lists of controversy, and take upon me to decide and determine all the doubts, which concern the holy Sacrament of the Eucharist; and to untie all the knots, which may be made from those words, I am persuaded, you might, sooner see an end of me, than I of this Work. For I am wearied, and tired already. This toil, which I have performed, and the labour which I have bestowed, hath cost me full dear: My sedentary life hath made my reins as quarries of stones; my parents knew no such disease, though they lived long: my right hand heretofore carelessly unfenced and undefended from the cold (alas for the time!) hath swelled with the gout, as if it would break; I have been often sick, always weak, yet have I prevented antelucanam opificum industriam; & nox ad diem accessit: Early, and late have I performed my hard task. Yea Midnight hath conceived full many of the day's expressions, and oft have I arose from my bed, and meals with a Conclusum est, to prevent forgetfulness. But the manifold avocations by my own private affairs, and especially by public employements, both in Ecclesiastical, and Civil Justice, have, after their dispatch, set an edge, and sharpened the appetite of my endeavours. The unbent bow hath prepared itself for the stronger shooting, or delivery: Yet now my senses decay; my memory faileth me; I have no courage or encouragement; I am out of heart: I am worn to the stumps, and spent: I must imitate old Ennius his race-horse, to whom age afforded quiet, and exempted from more active exercise: craving pardon, if my book in some passages have partaken of my weakness, and infirmities, or languishing. And now, thou great Work of mine, concerning the Estate of humane souls from their creation to the day of the general Judgement exclusively: on which I have bestowed thousands of hours; Lie still and sleep. S. Hierom did seem always to hear, Surgite Mortui, & venite ad Judicium. Arise you dead, and come to Judgement. And me thinks, I hear the repeated precept, as spoken to myself, and such only as are in my case. 1 Thess. 5.17. pray without ceasing: pray always, Luke 21. 3●. Yea though I be enfeebled and faint, wronged and distressed, as the widow was; yet the rather ought I always pray, and not faint, Luke, 18.1. The very Mcores of Morocco pray six times in 24. hours; And think he is not held worthy to bear witness to a truth, who hath not said his prayers six times in a natural day. Seven times a day did David praise God, Psal. 119. vers. 164. Some have held; and sure that Christian doth best, who saith the Lord's Prayer at least seven times in a day. There never was composed a perfecter and sweeter prayer. To what prayer shall God give ear, if not to the prayer composed by his own son? which the extravagant babble of Pharisees and battologies of those, who Longum precantur, love long prayers (as Tertullian phraseth it:) and the sudden extemporary ebullitions of Lip-holy seeme-Saints are as far inferior, as Hell is to Heaven: which no men, no raptures of Angels or Archangels can mend. O Lord, prepare my heart to continue in Prayers; and guide my prayers to please thee, through him, in whom thou art well pleased, Jesus Christ our blessed Saviour and Redeemer. 2. I will go briefly to work. Concerning the divisions of these times, and the scruples from these words, I wholly put them off to the Masters of Controversies, and the Anti-Bellarminian Canvasers: and I refer myself and my belief to the Doctrine of the Church of England: assenting to her wholly, so far as my knowledge reacheth: and in other things, beyond my capacity, implicitly believing in her. For I see no reason but in such things, as the Layman and Ignorant must trust in his Priest, by an implicit Faith: so the Clergy man ought to trust in his Church. It is no false ground (whatsoever the ignorant Zelotes do say, or write) but fit to be embraced; To confess and follow Scripture express, in things apparent, and to believe such senses thereof as may be, though to us unrevealed. Not can it be amiss to subscribe to our Church in points beyond our Sphere, Needle or Compass, but to Fellow the Faith of our Governors, Overseers and Pastors. That which I know, is good; what I know not, I believe to be better, said Heraclitus of old. To her I subject, in humblest manner, all my Writings, with myself: professing in the sight of God (who searcheth souls, and tryeth consciences) that I believe the Church of England to be the purest part of Christ's Militant Church:— pro quâ non metuam mori, as one said, in another case. In the defence whereof I could be well content, if occasion served, to sactifice my dearest blood. In a more particular expressing, I unbosom my thoughts thus. We have had four right Reverend and most learned Lords Bishops. Bishop Jewel, Bishop Andrew's, Bishop Morton, and Bishop White, who have written polemically and unanswerably of this subject; and may give content to any indifferent Reader. Many other Heroës of our Church of England, have also done excellently well; but the incomparable Mr. Hooker exceeds them all. Let them, who have him not, buy him: who have him, study him: and who is scrupulous concerning these words, This is my Body, etc. let him read, and diligently consider, and he may safely believe what Mr. Hooker writeth in his Ecclesiastical Polity, lib. 5. Par. 67. I cannot but transcribe part. Thus then divinely he proceedeth, p. 179. Variety of Judgements and opinions argueth obscurity in those things, whereabout they differ. But that which all parts receive for truth, that which every one having sifted, is by no one denied or doubted of, must needs be matter of infallible certainty. Whereas therefore there are but three expositions made of This is my Body. The first, This is in itself before participation really, and truly the natural substance of my body by reason of the coëxistence, which my omnipotent body hath with the sanctified element of bread; which is the Lutherans interpretation. The second; This is in itself and before participation, the very true and natural substance of my body, by force of that Deity which with the words of Consecration abolisheth the substance of bread, and substituteth in the place thereof my body; which is the Popish construction: The last, This hallowed Food, through concurrence of divine power, is in verity and truth, unto Faithful receivers, instrumentally a cause of that mystical participation, whereby as I make myself wholly theirs, so I give them in hand an actual possession of all such saving grace, as my sacrificed body can yield, and as their souls do presently need, this is to them, and in them, my body. Of these three rehearsed Interpretations the Last hath in it nothing, but what the rest do all approve, and acknowledge to be most true; nothing, but that which the words of Christ are on all sides confessed to enforce; nothing, but that which the Church of God hath always thought necessary; nothing, but that which alone is sufficient for weary Christian man to believe concerning the use, and force of this Sacrament; finally, nothing, but that wherewith the writings of all Antiquity are consonant, and all Christian Confessions agreeable. And as truth in what kind soever, is by no kind of truth gain-faid; so the mind which resteth itself on this, is never troubled with those perplexities, which the other do both find by means of so great contradiction between their opinions, and true principles of reason grounded upon experience, nature, and sense. Which albeit with boisterous courage and breath they seem oftentimes to blow away, yet who so observeth how again they labour, and sweat by subtlety of wit, to make some show of agreement between their peculiar conceits and the general Edicts of Nature, must needs perceive they struggle with that which they cannot fully master. Besides, sigh of that which is proper to themselves, their discourses are hungry, and unpleasant, full of tedious and irksome labour, heartless, and hitherto without fruit; on the other side, read we them, or hear we others, be they of our own, or of ancienter times, to what part soever they be thought to incline, touching that whereof there is controversy: yet in this, where they all speak but one thing, their discourses are heavenly, their words sweet as the Hony-comb, their tongues melodiously tuned instruments, their sentences mere consolation and joy; are we not hereby almost even with voice from Heaven admonished which we may safeliest cleave unto? He which hath said of the one Sacrament, Wash and be clean; hath said concerning the other likewise, Eat and live. If therefore without any such particular and solemn warrant as this is, that poor distressed woman coming unto Christ for health, could so constantly resolve herself, May I but touch the skirt of his garment, I shall be whole; what moveth us to argue of the manner, how life should come by bread; our duty being here but to take what is offered, and most assuredly to rest persuaded of this, that can we but Eat, we are safe? When I behold with mine eyes some small and scarce discernible grain or seed whereof Nature maketh promise that a tree shall come; and when afterwards of that tree any skilful artificer undertaketh to frame some exquisite and curious work, I look for the event, I move no question about performance either of the one, or of the other. Shall I simply credit Nature in things Natural? Shall I in things artificial rely myself on Art, never offering to make doubt? and in that which is alone both Art and Nature, refuse to believe the Author of both, except he acquaint me with his ways, and lay the secret of his skill before me? where God himself doth speak those things, which either for height and sublimity of matter, or else for secrecy of performance we are not able to reach unto: as we may be ignorant without danger, so it can be no disgrace to confess we are ignorant. Such as love piety, will as much as in them lieth, know all things that God commandeth, but especially the duties of service which they own to God. As for his dark, and hidden works, they prefer, as becometh them in such cases, simplicity of Faith before that knowledge, which curiously sifting what it should adore, and disputing too boldly of that which the wit of man cannot search, chilleth for the most part all warmth of zeal, and bringeth soundness of belief many times into great hazard. Let it therefore be sufficient for me presenting myself at the Lord's Table, to know what there I receive from him, without searching, or enquiring of the manner how Christ performeth his promise; Let disputes and questions, enemies to piety, abatements of true devotion, and hitherto in this cause but over patiently heard, let them take their rest; Let curious and sharp-witted men beat their heads about what questions themselves will; the very letter of the Word of Christ giveth plain security that these mysteries do, as nails, fasten us to his very Cross, that by them we draw out, as touching officacy, force and virtue, even the blood of his gored side, in the wounds of our Redeemer; we there dip our tongues, we are died red both within, and without; our hunger is satisfied, and our thirst for ever quenched; they are things wonderful which he feeleth, great which he seethe, and unheard-of which he uttereth, whose soul is possessed of this Pascall Lamb, and made joyful in the strength of this new Wine: This Bread hath in it more than the substance which our eyes behold; this Cup hallowed with solemn benediction, availeth to the endless life, and welfare both of soul and body, in that it serveth as well for a medicine to heal our infirmities, and purge our sins, as for a sacrifice of thanksgiving; with touching it sanctifieth, it enlighteneth with belief, it truly conformeth us unto the Image of Jesus Christ. What these Elements are in themselves, it skilleth not; it is enough that to me, which take them, they are the Body and Blood of Christ; his promise in witness hereof sufficeth; his word, he knoweth which way to accomplish. Why should any cogitation possess the mind of a Faithful Communicant but this, O my God, thou art true; O my soul thou art happy? So far M. Hooker. The Prayer. THou art merciful, oh Heavenly Saviour, thou art merciful to Mankind, against the fiery and furious temptations, and assaults of spiritual powers, sometimes alluring, sometimes haling, sometimes leading men captive unto sin, and under it. Thou most graciously hast ordained an Host of Holy Angels, to help us, to suggest good thoughts unto us, to free us, to strengthen us: that we shall not so much as hurt our foot; and there are more on our side, than against us. But in opposition of the allurements from the wicked world, and the insurrections, and ebullitions of the skittish civil war between the flesh and our soul, thou hast provided both preservatives that we fall not, and redemptives if we fall: even thy powerful Sacraments replenished with Divine virtue. For thine own sake, most holy Mediator, and Advocate, let thy blessed Sacraments work effectually in us, be conduit-pipes of grace, and conveyors of goodness into our souls. Let them nourish us up unto true Faith, Hope, and Charity; and let thy sacred Eucharist be our spiritual Food, both in Life, and Death. Amen Lord Jesus, Amen. CHAP. VII. And the eight General. Wherein is questioned, what Gesture the Apostles used in Receiving the blessed Eucharist. 1. The Word of God hath omitted to set it down in particular. 'Tis probable, they did Kiss their Right hand, and so receive it. An evil custom of False complementing by Kissing the hand in Jobs days. In Adoration our hands must be lifted up. Our voice lowly, and submiss. In great Agonies it is lawful to Cry aloud, and Roar. Probable it is, the Apostles received the heavenly Sacrament humbly Kneeling on both their Knees. Tertullian is punctual against Sitting, even after prayer. The Heathen after their prayers, and some even at their prayers, did use to sit upon their Altars. Their Servants had three Sanctuaries to fly unto from their angry Masters. Numa's Law, to sit at the time of Adoring their false Gods. A reason, why no passage either in the Evangelists, nor Apostles, commandeth Adoration at the Sacrament. How the Ancient Fathers are to be understood when they say, The holy Eucbarist is to be adored. 2. Reason's proving that the Apostles received the blessed Eucharist Kneeling. 1. Reason. Most sacred Reverence is to be exhibited to most sacred things. 2. Reason. The Fathers of the Primitive Church received it Kneeling. 3. Kneeling doth edify the simple. 4. It is an Ecclesiastical custom. The manner of Reverence used both by Priests, and Lay people in S. Chrysostom's days. God will be worshipped aswell in our body, as in our Spirit. The Penitents in Tertullia's time did Kneel down at the receiving of Absolution. And it was the common practice of all other Christians in his days to worship God Kneeling: Except from Easter to Whitsuntide, and on the Lord's day. Divers of holier times, had Knees as hard as horn by their continual Kneeling at God's worship. An adminition to stiffe-kneed Pure-trants. 3. Reasons why the devouter sort did forbear Kneeling betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide. 1. The Church did so appoint it. 2. Hereby the people did show themselves thankful. Whitsunday, whence it hath its denomination. Kneeling imports Repentance, and Sorrow for Sins. Standing implies Thanksgiving for the pardon of our sins. The divers usances of divers Churches in the Primitive times concerning Fasting, and Feasting on the Lord's day: Kneeling, and Standing at the time of Prayer: and the Reasons thereof. In the Primitive Church, they baptised not any except the Sick, but at Easter and Whitsuntide. The newly baptised stood, to express their Thankfulness to God for their baptism. The people in some Churches Stood praying at the Altar (on every Sunday between Easter, and Whitsuntide) in remembrance of Christ's Resurrection. The Christians in the Primitive Church prayed Recto vultu ad Dominum; to confront the Heathen, who fell down flat on their Faces, when they adored their false Gods. 4. The great variations of the Primitive Churches concerning the Eating, or not Eating of flesh offered to Idols. A just discourse to that purpose. A good Rule for the peace of the Church. Why our Church hath commanded Kneeling at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament: when the Primitive Church hath commanded Standing. Churches have great power committed unto them. The Church upon just motives may change her Orders. The meaner sort of all people, Ecclesiastical and Civil, are bound to obedience; are not to Order. Peter Moulin found fault with the precise Ministers of our Church of England. The day of Christ's Resurrection the first day of his Joy after his Dolorous passions. Why the Fathers made Sunday their Holiday. Why they forbade Kneeling and Fasting upon that day. What Indifferency is, according to S. Hierome. A thing Indifferent in itself, being commanded by the Supreme Magistrate or Church, is no longer Indifferent to thee. Variety of Ceremonies, not hurtful, but beneficial to the Church of Christ. The Bishop of Rome taxed; by Cardinal Palaeotus excused. Rome Christian in too many things imitateth Rome Heathen: In public prayer, cometh short of it. Heathen Rome began all their business in the world with this Prayer, Quod foelix faustumque sit, etc. The greater power the Pope and his Cardinals have; the more need they have to pray to God before their public meetings in their Consistory. Kneeling at receiving the holy Eucharist, never disliked as a thing of its own nature evil or unlawful. In the Primitive Church After Whitsuntide they used to kneel. Kneeling at the blessed Sacrament, not prescribed by Scripture; but authorized by Tradition; confirmed by Custom; observed by Faith. In the Primitive Church when they received the Sacrament Standing Kneeling they Prayed Standing. Kneeling. Our Factionists would follow the Primitive Church in one thing; but leave her in another. 5. A third Reason. At the first Institution of things Sacred, Profane, the solemnity is greater than in the sequel. Every New thing hath a golden tail. Proverb. Popular Lecturers have sunk even below scorn. All sins of former times have descended down upon our days. An Epiphonêma, or Exclamation against the profane pretenders of Devotion now adays. The lowest humiliation is too little for the house of God. They cried Abrech, or, Bow the knee, before Joseph. He that boweth himself most before men, is most right in the sight of God. Divers examples of Prostration and Geniculation, both out of the Old, and New Testament. A Viceroy of Ireland devoutly fell on his knees, and asked an archiepiscopal Benediction. The Heathen kneeled down to worship their very Idols. S. Hieromes saying. By Kneeling we sooner obtain what we ask at the hands of God. Not lawful for Any to sit in the porch of the Temple, but only the Kings of David's loins. The humble Gesture of the jews, when they came In went out of the Temple. The Primitive Church Kneeled to the Altars. Altars the seats of the body and blood of Christ. The Cross in Chrysostom's days did always use to remain upon the Altar. An Angel an assistant, when Christ is offered up. Ambrose. To this day we Worship the Flesh of Christ in the Sacrament. Idem. No man eateth the blessed Sacrament, before he have Worshipped Christ in the Sacrament. Augustine. Constantine the Emperor in his Soliloquies with God, pitched on his knees, with eyes cast down to the ground. K. Charles partaketh of the body and blood of Christ, with as much Humility as the meanest penitent amongst his Subjects. His holy and devout Gestures at the participation of the Lords Supper, turned the heart of a Romanist to embrace the truth on our side. In origen's, Arnobius, and Tertullia's days, the Saints never met in holy places about holy things, without decent reverence. The Papists in Kneeling, adore the very materials of the Sacrament. Yet the Abuse of a thing, taketh not away the right use. Proved by divers curious instances. Christian's may lawfully use many artificial things, though invented by Heathenish Gods. Goddesses. To argue from the Abuse of things to the whole removing of the use, is ridiculous. Illustrated by some particulars. Veneration of the Sacrament, is accorded on all sides. In the very Act of Receiving it, it is lawful to Kneel down and worship Christ In it. Calvin himself holdeth That Adoration to be lawful. The Lutherans are divided in this point. Illyricus denieth Christ to be Worshipped in the Eucharist, Brentius and Bucer hold, That then we must worship Christ's body. Luther himself styleth the Eucharist, Sacramentum venerabile, & Adorabile. Chemnitius saith, None, but Sacramentaries, deny Christ to be Adored in the Sacrament. Chemnitius acknowledgeth these Theses. 1. Christ God and Man, is to be Adored. Only Arrians deny this. 2. Christ's humane nature for the hypostatical union with the Divinity, is to be Adored. None but Nestorians will deny this. The Apostles worshipped the Humane Nature of Christ. Adoration proceedeth Cemmunication; by the judgement of S. chrysostom, and S. Augustine. Christ's Flesh, as made of Earth, may be said to be God's footstool. So is the Ark. All the Angels of God do Worship Christ. Christ is to be Adored always, and everywhere. Augustine, Ambrose, Nazianzene, and Eusebius Emissenus are Chemnitius Co-opinionists. Not the material Elements, but Christ only In them, is to be Adored. If We must adore Christ when we celebrate the divine Sacrament; much more did the Apostles. Habitual not (always) Actual Adoration of Christ was required of the Apostles. The Apostles worshipped Christ: 1. When he had newly performed any Super-humane work. 2. When they begged great matters of him. 3. When he did heal some who were vehemently afflicted. 4. When he conferred any extraordinary blessing on their souls: As he did when he instituted the New Sacrament. Master Hooker termeth Kneeling an Adorative gesture. No kind of Worship accepted, that is not sometimes conjoined with Kneeling. Gregory Nazianzens Story of his Sister Gorgonia. Eusebius Emissenus, and Origen say, Christ is worshipped in the Sacrament. Kneeling at the Communion, commanded by the book of Advertisements, set forth by Queen Elizabeth; by the Laws of the Realm, and the Queen's Majesty's Injunctions. They defraud the Knees of their chiefest office, and honour, who refuse to bend them at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament. PARAGRAPH 1. THe next point of my propounded Method leadeth me to inquire, With what kind of Gesture the Apostles Received from our blessed Saviour, his sacred body and blood in the holy Eucharist. 1. I answer; the Word hath omitted to set it down in particular, and there is no absolute unquestionable certainty hereof; Therefore look not for Mathematical Demonstrations, which are (saith Orantius Finaeus) purae, fideles, & in primo certitudinis gradu constitutae, most certain, and Infallible. It is well, if our Collections may in secundis, tertijsve consistere, find place in a Second, or Third Degree of Truth. If out of that which is written, we can extract that which is not written: if we avoid all absurdities on the one side, and be guided by the best and most probabilities on the other side. It is a custom among many of us, when we receive a courtesy of an high nature from our Superiors whom we reverence, we kiss our Right hand first, and Then receive it. That such was the old guise of the Romans in their Adorations, Pliny in his Natural History, 28.2. averreth. In Adorando dexteram ad osculum referimus; When we Worship, we kiss our Right hands. Perhaps the Apostles might do so, and devoutly kissing their Right hands convery Reverend Love from their Lips to it, and bring back with their Right hands, the Consecrated and Adored Body and Blood of our Saviour unto their Lips and Mouths. In Jobs time, there was such an evil custom of false Complementing, which he found fault withal. job. 31.27. If my mouth hath kissed my hand: or it may be read, If my hand hath kissed my mouth. But if the Apostles did so, they did it devoutly, truly, and most piously: And so let this rest upon Conjecture only. Tertullian de Oratione, cap. 13. thus describeth the Gesture of such as Worship God: Cum modestiâ & humilitate adorantes, magis commendamus Deo preces nostras: nec ipsis quidem manibus sublimiùs elatis, sed temperatè ac probè elatis: When we Adore God with modest humiliation, our prayers are the rather accepted: nor must we Lift up our hands Too high, but indifferently, decently, moderately, measurably. Yet David Lifted up his Hands, Psal. 28.2. & 63.4. And Solomon 1 King. 8.22. spread forth his hands toward heaven: and Christ lifted them up, Luk. 24.50. Ne vultu quidem in audaciam erecto (as he proceedeth) not with a bold face, but shamefast countenance. Sonos etiam vocis subjectos esse oportet; The voice also must be Lowly and Submiss. The Devil that uttered the Pythian Oracles, could say; Et mutum intelligo; & non loquentem exandio: I both understand the dumb; and hear him, who saith nothing. And shall God's ears expect a noise, a voice, or a sound? How then was jonas his prayer heard from the belly of the Whale, thorough the bowels of so great a beast, from the depth of deeps, thorough so vast a compass of the sea, and yet ascended up to heaven? It was not by virtue of his loud voice. If a clamorous voice were best accepted, happy were Stentor, that thunder of humane Voice, that monster of Roaring. And yet in great Agonies, it is lawful, it is fit to Cry, to Cry aloud. I cried with my whole heart, (saith David, Psal. 119.145.) The Levites cried with a loud voice, Nehemiah 9.4. Mordecay cried with a loud and bitter cry, Esther 4.1. Christ himself cried with a loud voice, Joh. 11.43. Matth. 27.46. I have roared by reason of the disquietness of my heart, Psal. 38.8. He roared all the day long. Psal. 32.3. He deserveth not much pity, who by a small, low, heartless voice, as if things concerned him not, coldly expresseth his soul's sorrow. My opinion therefore is, that the Apostles received the heavenly Sacrament, not supinely, not slovenly, not lying, leaning, or sitting; but humbly, and devoutly, most thankfully, and joyfully; piously kneeling on both their knees, if not with greater Adoration. Tertullian de Oratione cap. 12. is punctual against sitting, even after prayer; which though we use, and lawfully use, yet they in Tertullia's time did so in imitation of the Heathen, who closed their prayers, and sealed them up with sitting; as if without sitting they had not been made perfect; And this made Tertullian find fault with them for it. But if he reprove them for sitting after prayer, would he not much more have censured them, if during their prayers they had sat? But the Heathen after their prayers, did sit upon their Altars. Plautus in Mustell. Ego hanc aram occupabo; I will sit on this Altar: for so it is to be understood: which though it be somewhat obscure, yet it is cleared by Tibullus lib 4. toward the end. Sed Veneris sanctae considam vinctus ad arras. But I being bound will on the Altar sit Of holy Venus. joseph Scaliger on the place observeth, that servants with whom their masters were offended, had three Refuges or Sanctuaries; though he accounts them but as two: The Altars of the Gods, the Statutes of the Mediation of Friends. Nec hic tibi Aram aliquam, nec Deprecatorem paraveris: Thou hast neither Altar, nor friendly Mediator to fly unto. Terence in Phormione calleth him Precatorem, a Spokesman. I return. Pindarus O de 6. Istm. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. When he said these things, or ended praying, he presently sat down. Pausanias' in Laconicis recordeth Orestes sitting about holy businesses, even when he was out of his mad humour. Let Numa Pompilius prescribe what law he will for worshipping his false gods; Deos adoraturi sedeant; let them who adored their gods, Sit. It was casually wise. For indeed they were not worth the rising up unto: much less deserved they to be adored with bended knees, or face prostrate. Our God cannot have reverence enough. If we could in humility cast ourselves down to the bottom of Hell, we do but our duty: and God would the more love us, and sooner, and higher lift us up. Whosoever desireth proofs from the ancient Fathers, that the holy Eucharist is to be adored, let him read Bellarm de Sacramento Eucharistiae, 4.29. toward the end; but expound them so, as if Christ were to be worshipped in the Sacrament, and not the mere Elementary part. When they lifted up their hands in adoration, they were wont also to spread them abroad. PAR. 2. COngruentiall reasons hereof do follow. First, To most sacred things most sacred reverence is to be exhibited. But the blessed Eucharist was, and is a most divine gift; and kneeling is a sacred reverence. Therefore was it received with kneeling. The greatest care is to be had of heavenly matters. This is confirmed by Tertullian in lib. 1. ad uxorem. Saecularibus satis agentes sumus, & utrique nostrum consultum volumus; si talibus tabulas (as Rigaltius well readeth it) ordinamus: cur non magis de divinis atque coelestibus posteritati nostrae prospicere debeamus? We are wise enough in worldly businesses, and will look well enough to ourselves; and make our Wills and Testaments concerning these lower and meaner affairs: why then ought we not rather to provide for posterity in things divine and heavenly? Secondly, The Fathers of the Primitive Church received the holy mysteries with kneeling; And though the true Geniculation be of the mind, so that one were better to have an humbled mind, and stand upright; than to kneel often, and be proud withal: yet if we worship God in our hearts, our hearts will command the humble Bowing of the knees. Besides, Geniculatio corporis aedificat simplices; the bodily kneeling doth edify the simple. Therefore Moris Ecclesiastici est Christo genuflectere, saith Hierom on Esay 45. It is an Ecclesiastical custom, to bend the Knees (when Christ is named.) When the Corinthians did meet at the receiving of the Eucharist, we may safely pronounce, they lay not on Beds: but, as they might Sat at their feasts of Charity; so we may presume, they kneeled when they partaked of the Sacrament. Rhenanus in his Annotations before Tertullian de Coronâ Militis, pag. 413. Propter crebram Sacramentorum tractationem, inolita fuit illis religio quaedam, etiam vulgarem panem & vulgar poculum reverenter tractandi: They were so religious when they took the Sacrament, that they did transfer some reverence also even unto their common meats. The fifty-two Injunction of Queen Elizabeth, commandeth her people to make a lowly courtesy, answerable to antiquity, which used a modest and humble Bowing of the body. But more of this by and by. Yea, the Priests were wont 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Three times to bow down, as it is in Chrysostom's Liturgy: And the like was appointed to the Lay people in his Homilies. The more devout (as I take it) did Bend and Bow their Bodies very low Thrice, even almost to the Earth, which was the Greater Reverence: and the Lesser Reverence (which was a Bending of the head and shoulders only) they performed Twelve times; as a late learned Writer affirmeth. If he pick out such kind of Reverences, in which, by his description, there was no Kneeling, nor Bending of the Knee: He might countenance Geniculation, and bring proofs for it. In the worship of God, Body and Soul being united together, there ought to be a sympathy betwixt them. And since the Body expecteth to be Lifted up to Heaven hereafter, it must Kneel here on Earth. God loveth not half-worship: and God will be glorified as well in our Body; as in our Spirit, 1 Corinth. 6.20. Textullian witnesseth, That the Penitents did Adgeniculare, Kneel down at the receiving of Absolution: And indeed, both the Baring of men's heads, and the Kneeling on Bare and bended Knees, are both of them gestures of humbled and mortified minds, worshipping God. Not-Kneeling and coveted heads argue men's pride. The Ancients were wont with bended Knees, piously to worship God, except from Easter to Whitsuntide, saith Tertullian. And on the Lord's day we account it unlawful to fast, or geniculis adorare, to Kneel. Other where, Tertullian esteemeth and reckoneth, the Not-kneeling between Easter and Whitsuntide, an Immunity or Privilege: But at other times, Kneeling was their Ordinary pious practice. For Histories make it plain, that divers of those holier times, had knees as hard as horn, by their often and continued praying in that gesture. Therefore let such deluded Pure-trants, who come into the Church, as if they had no joints, as if they had swallowed two bars of iron, or as if two stakes were fall'n into their legs, so that they will not, or as if they could not stoop, learn more piety and devotion: and not deny That Reverence to God, which they give to temporal Princes. PAR. 3. IF any ask the reasons, why those Primitive devout Ones, did forbear Kneeling betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide? I answer. First, the Church did so appoint it: and they were the obedient children of the Church, and would not teach their Teachers, or spiritual Fathers. When our Church commandeth thee so to do, do so. Yea but why did the Church appoint it so? I say, they might have, and I believe they had many powerful Reasons inducing them Then so to do, which we know not now. I answer secondly; This might be one Inductive; Because it was fit the people should show themselves Thankful for the great and blessed gift of Baptism, which at Easter and Pentecost they received most commonly: For it seemeth, as the newly-baptized washed not for a whole week after sacred Baptism, and did wear only White clothes; whence the Sunday called Dominica in Albis, or Whitsonday, had its denomination: Which Ceremonies had their fair significations: So the Church of the Newly-Baptized, gave God Thanks for the Remission of their fins, and the grace conferred on them by Baptism, Standing rather than Kneeling; as may be collected from Rhenanus: His words are these in his Annotations before Tertullian de Coronâ Militis: Geniculari in adorando, velut poenitentis est: Quistans adorat, tanquam jam veniam consecutus, Gratias agit: In the worship of God, Kneeling is the sign of a Supplicant or suppliant, or as it were of a Penitent: Who worshipped God standing, giveth Thanks, as having then received pardon of his sins. When any of our un-kneeling Schismatics are new-baptized (as none are:) Or if they have not sinned again since the forgiveness of their sins; or if they need no pardon: Or if they were so holy every way, as the Primitive Church was, we will indulge somewhat unto them. And let them consider whether Tertullian, or other Fathers did not speak in the persons of the Newly-baptized only, and represented them, when they pleaded the privilege of Standing, and not Kneeling, at some certain times. Tertullian de Coronâ Militis, cap. 3. From the day of Baptism we abstain a whole week, Lavacro quotidiano, From our daily washing. For, as I dare say, that divers Churches did Fast on the Lord's day, and others Feasted on it: whence Ambrose gave the Counsel, and Augustine, both himself, and his Mother practised it, and counselled it to others, that people should fast or not fast, according to the custom of those Churches, to which they then came: and with whom they conversed. See Augustine Epist. 118. ad januar. So the Standing between Easter and Whitsuntide was not in use with All the Primitive Churches, nor with All the people. The Council of Nice (the first General Council) confessed, That some did Kneel on the Lord's day between Easter and Pentecost, and forbade them; and if any other people did, as the New-baptised did, they did it to countenance the neophyte. Christians, rather than as if it were necessary: but in some times, places, and with some people only. See Cerda on Tertullian, and he assureth us, that of old in the Church, they baptised not any except the sick, but at those Two solemn times, or Feasts of Easter and Pentecost: and therefore all That time they did rejoice. The Church having changed that Constitution, and the Cause being removed, why are people now so desirous to continue the Effect? Certainly, Tertullian himself was not to be baptised, nor tasted milk and honey, nor abstained from washing a whole week, when he writ thus: We are thrice drowned over head and ears, than we taste of mingled milk and honey, and from the day of Baptism we abstain a whole week from washing: but he speaks in the persons of the Newly-baptized: De Coronâ Militis, cap. 3. So ibidem, when he saith; They take the Eucharist antelucanis coetibus, at their morning-prayers before day; Nec de aliorum manu quàm praesidentium; and that not at the hands of any, but of their chief Ministers; he speaketh in the person of the Receivers only, not of the Administrants. And examine whether he speak not of such only, as did then first of all receive the holy Communion; as well as before he spoke of the then-Newly-baptized. Examine also whether the not-Kneeling on the Lord's day was forbade on all Sundays of the year: or on Easter-Sunday, and Whitsunday, and the Sundays between them. If it be objected, that on these Sundays also, yea on All the Sundays of the year they forbore Kneeling, which excludeth the reference to the newly-baptized. I answer, Sub judice lis est, that is more than they can prove; They did not Stand All the time of divine Service in all Churches; or All the time that they were in the Churches; but sometimes they somewhere Sat, sometimes they Kneeled, sometimes they did Prostrate themselves, as is generally confessed. But at the Altar indeed, the people in some Churches stood; Stantes oramus, quod est signum Resurrectionis; We pray Standing, because Standing is a resemblance of the Resurrection. Vnde etiam omnibus diebus Dominicis id ad Altare observatur: Hence every Sunday, at the least between Easter and Pentecost, and on those Sundays themselves, we Stand praying at the Altar, (saith Augustine ad januarium, Epistola 119. cap. 15.) Also they might stand at some Set prayers, as we Stand at the Te Deum, the Magnificat, at the Three Creeds, and at the Gospel: and yet in other parts of prayer they did Kneel: when they asked forgiveness they did Kneel: and who needed not ask forgiveness? I would feign see such a Pharisee. At prayers of Thanksgiving they did Stand, as before I proved out of Rhenanus. Again, the Council of Nice appointed, Stantes ad orationem vota Domino reddamus, that when we pay our vows unto the Lord, we should Stand in prayer, as Gratian hath it, Folio 441. Columella 1 a. So in bringing of Tithes and Offerings, they might do it standing. Moreover, the Heathen were wont to fall down flat on their faces, and adore their false Gods; and therefore to confront them, some Churches might ordain their public Service to be performed Recto vultu, ad Dominum orationis, Standing and Praying to God on all Sundays, and on every day between Easter and Whitsuntide: because in these days we celebrate the joyful time of our Lord's Resurtection. PAR. 4. COnsider, I entreat you, the great variations, yea the seeming contrarieties, that the Churches of Christ made and practised, concerning the eating, and not-eating of flesh, and meat offered to Idols, at several times, and all to good ends. Holy men feasted the people holily: So did David, 1 Chron. 16.3. But Balaam taught the people to eat of things sacrificed to Idols, Revel. 2.14. Whereupon in the Law of Grace, Act. 15.20. it was ordained by the Hierosolymitan Council, that the converted Gentiles should abstain from pollutions of Idols, or things offered to Idols. For otherwise the weak Jews (who abhorred such a sin) would have been offended. Among the Jews, none but the Priests, or his attendants and family, might eat of some sacrifices, or things offered, viz. of the Shewbread. But among the Gentiles, on extraordinary Festivals and times of joy, they did promiscuously partake of things offered to Idols; except This case only; Whosoever had slain a man, he might not partake of the Pagan sacrificed meat, as being reputed holy: and in this case it might be said, Procul, o procul este prophani. Whereupon that Council forbade the Ethnic Converts to eat of things offered to Idols promiscuously with other meats, lest that might breed an exulceration of mind, between the Jews and Gentiles, if they used contrary ceremonies. For the Jews before abstained from such things, though offered to the true God. After this, S. Paul's opinion was asked by the Corinthians, or cause given him to explain his opinion; And because the Corinthians vainly imagined, That an Idol was something in the world; otherwise the meat offered to Idols would be indifferent, and as nothing, like the Idol itself: The Apostle to remove this scandal for a time, in a sort cancelleth the decree of Council, though made by the holy Ghost, and the Apostles, and seems to deny that the Idol is any thing; or that which is offered to Idols is any thing, 1 Cor. 10.19. etc. and in plain terms, 1 Corinth. 8.4. As concerning the eating of things offered unto Idols, we know that an Idol is nothing in the world: though made of matter, wood, stone, brass, silver, or gold, yet it is nothing, In genere signi relati ad rem significatam, because the thing signified by the Idol, is nothing; nothing real in the world. And so the Apostle permitteth the eating of things sacrificed to the Idols; Provided, that first it be done without scandal to others, 1 Cor. 8.9. etc. Secondly, We must not eat it, if we know that it hath been offered unto Idols, or eat it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, As a thing offered to an Idol, vers. 7. as he most acutely and divinely distinguisheth; Neither must it be done in the Temple of the Idol, 1 Corinth. 8.10. Otherwise, neither if we eat, are we the better; neither if we eat not, are we the worse, vers. 9 But whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, ask no question for conscience sake, 1 Cor. 10.25. Yet if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto Idols, eat not for his sake that shown it, vers. 28. & 29. About this time, because as it was an abomination to the Egyptians to eat bread with the Israelites, Gen. 43.32. So the Jews abhorred not simply to eat, but to eat such forbidden things with the Gentiles: Whereupon, as it is most likely, S. Peter did forbear to eat with the Gentiles, and S. Paul blamed him for it, Galat. 2.12. and he was justly to be blamed, or else S. Paul would never afterward have recorded it. Yet upon further disorder, and abuse of the holy Apostle S. Paul his heavenly-inspired doctrine, the wisdom of God to set a final determination to this seeming difference, to accord both Jews and Gentiles, and to build the Church upon one corner stone, elect, and precious, again reneweth the Apostolical sanctions and holy decrees of the Jerusalem Council; and notwithstanding S. Paul's indulgence and determination, which in the right use was most holy; I say, the blessed Spirit of God most justly findeth fault both with the Angel of Thyatyra, Revel. 2.20. Because he permitted Jezabel to teach, and to seduce God's servants— to eat things sacrificed unto Idols: and also reproveth the Angel of Pergamus, Revel. 2.14. because there were among his Church They who held the Doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto Idols. According to which Dictate of the Spirit, being the last book of Scripture, and was written by S. John, did the Church of God guide itself a longtime after, nor did eat of things sacrificed to Idols. And it was so strictly observed; that the cursed Apostata julianus, who for his abominable Idolatry was termed Idolianus, took it to heart, and resolved to break them off from that point of Religion, whether they would or no; and therefore to vex the Christians, caused all the meat in the Pagan Markets to be mingled with things offered unto Idols; so that the Christians must either eat no flesh, and be ready to starve; or else eat of such things as were offered unto Idols. But an holy Martyr admonished the Christians to live by boiled wheat and furmenty, and so deluded his politic irreligion. Julianus being thus rancountred and undermined, he fell to a countermine, and the rage of that Renegado Emperor so increased, as Theodore Historiae 3.14. saith, At Antioch (the than most flourishing seat of Christians) and in other places, he mingled both the fountains (their then drinking places) with some part of the Heathen sacrifices, and their markets with meats offered unto Idols. In this commiserable estate, some were starved, rather than they would eat or drink: and questionless died most holy Martyrs. Other dovout men did eat and drink of the creatures, which were before them, grounding their practices on the Apostles words, 1 Cor. 10.25. Whatsoever is sold in the Shambles, that eat, making no question for conscience sake. And Rom. 14.3. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not: and let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth. Again, v. 6. He that eateth, eateth unto the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, eateth not the Lord, and giveth God thanks. Some may think the Eaters and Drinkers of those mingled waters and meat, did sin against S. Paul's directions, because they knew that some things were purposely offered unto Idols, and mingled with other meat and drink. But I judge charitably, that they might lawfully eat, because they did not eat the meats 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, As things offered unto Idols: Neither did know which was offered to Idols, which not: and if they had known, they would have refused the things sacrificed. Yet for all this, S. Augustin in his 154, Epistle is enough severe in this point, saying, If a traveller being extremely hungry, findeth no meat, but such as hath been offered to an Idol, though no other man be present to see him eat, yet let him not eat (saith he.) Lastly after this, the Church mitigated the severity in this point. So still, for the good of peace, for the bettering of the Church's estate: for avoiding to give offence to the weak brethren: the same thing may done, or not done: concealed or revealed; There is nothing that may be omitted without sin, but must be omitted, rather than the Sin against the weak brethren should be incurred. And this I hold to be a safe Rule. And now in further answer to my learned and laborious Friend, who was a little stumbled, because our Church hath commanded Kneeling, when the Primitive Church appointed Standing; I say, Churches have great power committed to them, of which I spoke at large in my first book; Yet now will add, that though the Church hath established such and such good Orders: Yet upon abuses, or other just motives, she may mutare velificationem, and change the Orders. And why should any of the people, or any inferior Minister take upon them to guide or govern the Churches, or to pry into the Reasons, and Consultations Ecclesiastical, why the Governors have appointed such observances, or have Abrogated them? The meanner sort are bound to Obedience. The Foot must not usurp the offices of the Head, or Eyes. Peter Moulin, whom Balzack compareth to a brave Seaman, in a single small Brigandine, daring to affront a great Fleet, found fault with such Ministers of ours, who for a Cap, and a Surplise would leave their Ministry, and disobey our Church; professing, that if his King would permit him to preach in Paris, though he were enjoined to do it in a blue Cap, he would be content to do so. In honour of Christ's Resurrection, and to testify the joy of Christians for that great blessing; the holy Church than forbade Kneeling at some times: Now, since that irreverence, and contempt hath grown among the people, our Church hath justly commanded kneeling in prayer-time. The Fathers esteemed the day of the Lords Resurrection to be the first day of Christ his Joy, after his Passions being dolorous; His descent into Hell; His victory over Satan; His ascent, and His Resurrection being active, or laborious. Heaviness might endure for awhile, but joy cometh in the morning. So the Father's joying not so much in their own joy, as in Christ's joy, which on Sunday morning was least clouded, and least annoyed, they made that Day their Holiday: and Kneeling being held by them to be a symbol of Sorrow, they forbade that sign of Sorrow; and Fasting being a token of Humiliation, they forbade That also; though some Churches did Fast on That day, as I proved before; and the people of some Church's might, and did Kneel. Excellently writeth S. Hierom, That is indifferent which is neither good, nor evil: which if you do, you are not the more righteous; or if you leave it undone, you are not the less righteous. But if the Supreme Magistrate, or the Church command a thing indifferent, it is no longer indifferent to thee; it is now a binding precept upon the injunction: and that must make thee yield Obedience upon the Ecclesiastical Magistrates authority, which bindeth not others, in other places. Variety of ceremonies, is not hurtful to the Church of Christ, but rather beneficial; for out of them we may choose those for practice, which are best, and most agreeable to our Times and Congregations. If thou findest any thing, any where, that more pleaseth God, select that to the use of the Church, saith Gregory the Great, to our Augustine of Canterbury, as it is in Beda, cap. 27. What Gregory appointed, I wish the now Bishop of Rome practised. In all our solemn Ecclesiastical meetings we begin with public humble prayer unto God to bless and guide us. Yet in the Pope's Consistory at Rome, there is not heard the voice of public prayer. And the learned Cardinal Palaeotus De Sacri Consistorii Consultationibus, p. 373. goeth about to excuse it, saying; The Pope and the Cardinals were at their Devotions, before they came to the Consistory; and there commended themselves hearty to God. I answer, Every one, I presume in our Convocation-house do pray to God hearty before our going to that meeting: yet public prayers are also thought necessary: because of meeting in an holy place; and because holy matters are there to be handled; and we seek to obtain a blessing from God: and we must not be weary in well-doing, Gal. 6.9. but must pray always, that is upon all fair occasions. In too too many things, the Church of Rome hath followed and imitated the fashions of Heathen Rome: In this point, Pagan Rome is holier than our late Christian Rome. No man doubteth but the Senators did after their sort, pray in their Houses, or Capitol, or Temples, before they came into the Sentate house: yet before they began any business of the World, this kind of prayer was publicly recited. Quod foelix faustumque sit, etc. God bless and prosper us in our undertake. His Second subterfuge, that they pray not, because the Pope is present, who hath so great power, is most ridiculous: for supposing him so holy, and to have all the pretended power; He and they should the rather pray together to God, and would the sooner be heard. I return to the old matter. Concerning Kneeling at the Receiving of the holy Eucharist, it was never disliked as a thing of its own nature evil and unlawful, but as inconvenient for such times, and not simply inconvenient, but because the Church so judged. From Easterday not only unto Whitsunday excluding it, sed eâdem immunitate in Pentecosten usque gaudemus, saith Tertullian de Coronâ Militis, cap. 3. They kneeled neither at the feast of Easter, nor at the feast of Pentecost, nor between those times; but after both feasts were ended. If you look for Scripture to command this: No Scripture prescribeth it as a Law. Tradition is the author: Custom the confirmator: Faith is the observer, saith Tertullian cap. 4. And there was some reason for it, to which thou owest obedience, saith he, ibid. Whensoever they received the blessed Sacrament standing, they prayed standing likewise: when they Kneeled at one duty, they Kneeled at the other: yet divers of the factious ones will kneel at Prayer; who will not kneel when they are partakers of the Communion; and are faulty therein, which themselves find fault withal; contemning the ancient Churches practise in the one half, whilst they are eagerly bend for the other part. Thirdly, at the first institution of things, both sacred and profane, the solemnity is more, than in the sequel of them. Abraham made a great Feast, the same day that Isaac was weaned, Genesis 21.8. When Christ weaned the Apostles from the World, and made them an Heavenly banquet, we must think, their Joy and Thanks was great, and their devotion did strive to correspond unto the gift. At the receiving of the Law, the Israelites sanctified themselves two days, and washed their , and did not come to their wives, Exodus 19.14, and 15. yet was the Law but a Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ; and brought not with it that benefit to them, which the sacred Eucharist doth to us. Therefore the greatest and devoutest solemnity of Gesture can be but too little. When Christ was in his swadling-bands, The wisemen fell down, and worshipped him. Matth. 2.11. and gave gifts unto Him. And can we think the Apostles lay all along or sat unreverently, when Christ gave Them better gifts than Gold, frankincense, and Myrrh: when he gave Himself to them? Absit; God forbidden. If we have but new , we will not suffer a spot upon them: but we wipe them, brush them, and put them on, more carefully, than when they are threadbare and worn out. It is an old Proverb, Every new thing hath a Golden tail, is much loved, admired and desired: and yet within awhile, it falls into neglect; and sometimes into contempt, & malam caudam trahit, that I may use calvin's phrase in his Epistles, Colum. 478 it smelleth ill, like the candle going out. I have lived to see popular Lectures sink below scorn, who were formerly admired: and both undeservedly, as the humours and passions of the people move, which is by Levaltoes. The diseases of the body, and the humours thereof, commonly fall into the legs; all sins of former times have descended and rolled down upon and into our days: and now the feet swell, and we proud, that they are full of corruption; and a curing hand, they will not hear of. O my God into what dregs of time are we fallen, that they, who pretend most Devotion, and think themselves to be the purest Christians on the earth, do account it Indevotion to be humble and reverend, and will not come into the house of prayer, till prayer be ended, that they may hear a Sermon? Who will not Kneel, when they enter into the Church, nor show any reverence at their going out of it: nor bow at the sacred mention of our Saviour Jesus Christ; but come boldly, impudently and most irreverently into God's house, and stay there: and return, as if it were an ordinary room or Townhouse to meet in. Is this to reverence God's Sanctuary? Is the fear of Superstition become the mother of Atheism? Hath liberty been turned into licentiousness? Because some Kneel to Idols, shall we not Kneel to the true God? Because some creep to the Cross, shall not we worship, and fall down, and kneel before the Lord our Maker? This is such a mark of the dear children of God, of the Elect, and the Generation of the Just, of the Plants for Heaven, of the Holy Ones that are sure to be saved, as former times never heard of. How hath my soul abhorred to see some men labour to gain reputation upon God, and by being irreverent in the Church to magnify themselves, as they think, above the people; who keep off their hats whilst the Atheists are covered, and kneel, whilst they most profanely do sit. The lowest humiliation is too little in that sacred place. They cried before Joseph; Abrech or bow the Knee, Gen. 41.45. Esay 46.23 I have sworn by myself: the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me every knee shall bow: which is explained, That they shall Kneel before prayer. Every knee shall bow to me, and Every tongue shall swear; or as S. Paul Roman. 14.11. expoundeth it, Every tongue shall confess to God. The Apostle S. Paul, Phil. 2.9. enlargeth it thus; God hath highly exalted Christ, and given him a name, which is above every name: that at the Name of Jesus every Knee shall bow, of things in Heaven, of things in Earth, and things under the Earth. Humiliari, est ad humum inclinare. It is a sign of humbleness, to bow toward the Earth. Neither he who stoopeth to take up one fall'n, nor he who prostrateth himself and falleth down for dovotion sake, amittit statum rectitudinis, groweth ever a whit more crooked: Yea, when he is most down, he than standeth up Rectus, and rectissimè, in curia Coelesti. Who humbleth himself, shall be lifted up of God. Psal. 119.25. My soul cleaveth to the dust. How? if not by bodily prostration? Abraham bowed himself to the ground, Gen. 18.2. The great observer of the Commandments, Kneeled to Christ, Mark. 10.17. Act. 21.5. S. Paul and the company, rather than they would not Kneel, did kneel on the shore. And I have heard of a late Viceroy of Ireland, who going to take ship, and return to England, devoutly fell on his knees, and asked, and had an holy archiepiscopal Benediction, and it prospered divinely. They worshipped their very Idols; Shall not we worship God? The mean man bowed down, and the great man humbled himself: which Worship being due to God only, because they gave it to Idols, it is said, Esay. 2.9. Therefore forgive them not: Which was an usual and terrible imprecation. The father of the Lunatic, Kneeled down to Christ, Mat. 17.14. The Leper kneeled down to Christ, Mark. 1.40. 2 Chro. 7.3. The people bowed themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and worshipped: when they saw the fire come down, and when the Glory of the Lord was upon the house. And shall not we do the like, when we feel the grace of God sanctifying our souls, descending upon our spirits; and Christ the Glory of his Father inhabiting in our hearts, and feeding us? When Solomon and the people began their public devotions, He kneeled on his knees, and spread his hands to Heaven, 2 Chro. 6.13 And all the Congregation worshipped until the offering was finished, 2 Chro. 29.28. And when they had made an end of offering, Hezekiah, and all they that were with him, bowed themselves and worshipped, vers. 29. At all times: In the beginning, middle and end of Divine service, God is to be humbly worshipped. S. Hierom, on Ephes. 3. Fixo in terram poplite magis, quod ab eo poscimus, impetramus; We do the rather obtain what we desire, when we kneel. Constantine l' Empereur, saith, It was not lawful for any to sit in the porch of the Temple, except the Kings of David's loins. They fell on their faces, when they came into the Temple. And they went backward out of the Temple (others say sideward) with their faces still looking toward it: So great reverence did the very Jews show toward their Temple; Neither is it shame for us to imitate them in our Ingress and Regress. The Primitive Church did Kneel to the Altars. Aris Dei Adgeniculari, est Adorare sacrosanctum Altar. Adoremus primum, saith an holy Father. If at their first approach near the Altar, they Adored It: do you think they did not adore Christ, when he was to be taken at the Altar; whose blessed Sacrament was left upon the Altar? Optatus Milevitavus in his sixth Book against Parmenian. In Altaribus votae populi, & membra Christi portata sunt; In the Altars the prayers of the people and the members of Christ are carried: God is called upon: and the Spirit being requested, descendeth on it to the Consecration, as Bellarmine holdeth. What is the Altar, but the feat of the body and blood of Christ? Whose body and blood dwelled there for certain times or seasons. chrysostom in his Oration, that Christ is God, witnesseth, That the Cross did always use to remain on the Altar. Ambrose lib. 1. in Lucam, Doubt not but an Angel is assistant, and Christ assistant when Christ is offered up. And more fully, De Spiritu Sancto 3.12. Carnem Christi hodie in mysteriis adoramus; quaem Apostoli in Domino jesu Adorarunt: To this day we worship that Flesh of Christ in the Sacrament which the Apostles adored in Christ jesus. Augustine on Psal. 98. Nemo illam carnem manducat nisi prius adoraverit: No man eateth the blessed Sacrament before he hath worshipped; not the Sacrament itself, but God, or Christ in the Sacrament. Ensebius in vitâ Constantini, 4.12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. He had Soliloquies with God; and being pitched on his knees, with eyes cast down to the ground, he was earnest with God by humble prayers, to obtain those things which he needed. When he received our blessed Lord himself, did Constantine sit on his royal Throne, and keep state, or rather descended to the gestures of a thankful suppliant, and humble receiver? To the eternal glory of King CHARLES, be it known unto the remote people, who cannot come to see him; when he partaketh of the body and blood of our Saviour, He doth it, not sitting, not lying all along, not standing, but with as much humility, as the meanest penitent amongst his Subjects; He kneeleth, he worshippeth Christ; he prayeth, he giveth thanks; and his gestures are so holy and devout in that sacred participation, that (as I have been informed) God by him, hath turned the heart of a Romanist, to embrace the truth on our side. And if his enemies did truly take measure of him, they would fear his prayers as well as his Arms, and his devotion with his power. Genua flectimus orantes, In prayer-time we kneel, saith Origen on the fourth Chapter of Numbers, Homil. 5. Arnobius in his first Book, useth this phrase, Genu nixo procumbere, to pitch on the bended knee. The Saints never meet in holy places about holy things, without decent reverences expressed by their bodily gestures. Detur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— in contrarium. The poenitents cast themselves down, ad fratrum genua, to their brethren's knets, saith Tertullian; which they could not do, without Kneeling themselves. And did they not kneel when they received Christ? But you will say, the Papists in Kneeling, do adore the very Eucharist itself, viz. the materials. I answer: Abuses take not away the right use of things. If Mercury first invented Letters (saith Tertullian de Coronâ Militis;) yet I will use them as necessary both for commerce and divinity. If he used Music, so did David. Aesculapius' first cured Diseases; yet this did not hinder Esaias to apply a medicinal plaster to Ezechias: And S. Paul knew a little Wine was good for the weak stomach of Timothy. Though Minerva made the first ship, yet the Apostles (yea Christ himself) refused not to sail in ships. If you name some Heathen god, as Author, Founder, and Inventor of all and every utensils and vessels: I will also say, Christ did recumbere in lectulo, lay on a small discubitory bed, and was girded with a Towel, Propriâ Osyridis veste, with a vestment appropriated to the service of Osiris, both when he took the Basin, and washed the Apostles feet; and when he put water into it, ex urceo, out of the waterpot or pitcher. Remove the Abuse; keep still the right Use. To argue from the abuse, to the wholly removing of things in their right use, is as childish and ridiculous, as if another should say, The Vines and the Corn are to be spoilt and cut down, because some are drunk, and do surfeit: and all creatures, and all the world to be destroyed, because Man abuseth them; yea mens souls and bodies to be annihilated, because there are none, but sometimes and some ways, do abuse both their souls and bodies. Concerning the veneration of the Sacrament, it is accorded on all sides, That in the Act of Receiving, or whilst we are participating of it, it is lawful to Kneel, yea to fall down and worship Christ in it. Calvin who is most vehement against Adoration, when the Host is carried up and down in state (as oft it is under a great goodly costly Canopy) is express, Institutionum 4.17. Parag. 37. If Christ be adored in, or at the receiving of the Supper, I will say, that that Adoration than is lawful, if it resideth not in the sign, but mounteth up, and is directed unto Christ sitting in Heaven. The Lutherans run with divided streams: Illyricus denieth Christ to be worshipped in the Eucharist, (saith Bellarmine de Sac. Eucharistiae, 4.29.) Others hold, That when we are busied in the real present partaking of Christ's body, we must then worship it. See Brentius in his Apology for the confession at Wittenberg: and Bucer in the Acts of the Conference at Ratisbon. Their leader Luther (cited by Chemnitius in his Examen of the Decrees of the Tridentine Council, the second part, pag. 151. of Sarerius his Edition) styleth the Eucharist Sacramentum venerabile, & Adorabile, A Sacrament to be worshipped and adored. And none, saith Chemnitius, denieth Christ to be adored in the Supper, but Sacramentaries, or such as deny Christ to be truly and really present in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Chemnitius himself acknowledgeth these Theses. 1. Christ God and Man is to be adored. Only Arrians deny this. 2. Christ's humane nature; for the hypostatical union with the divinity is to be adored. None but Nestorians will deny this. The Apostles worshipped the Humane nature; Matth. 28.17. When they saw him, they worshipped him. Let me add, Adoration praecedeth Communication; for, Adora & Communica, saith chrysostom, Homil. 21. ad populum Antiochenum. And, Nemo illam carnem manducat nisi prius adoraverit: No man communicateth of those heavenly morsels, who hath not first adored. 3. The adoration of God, is not confined to time or place. S. Augustine on those words, Worship at his footstool, Psal. 99.5. readeth it, Adorate scabellum pedum ejus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Suppedaneum, Worship his footstool. S. Augustine his opinion is express, That Christ's Flesh as made of Earth, may be said to be God's Footstool: That That Footstool is to be Worshipped: and therefore Christ's Flesh is to be Worshipped: And when we eat his Flesh, we do not only not sin in Worshipping it; but we sin, if we do not Worship it: yet if the Prophet and Psalmist aimeth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, principally at the Adoration of Christ's Flesh in that place, but commandeth their prostration before the Temple, and before the Sanctuary (which was holy) and before the Ark, in it: as in my judgement he doth: For the Temple was the place both of God's throne (in some regard) and the place of the soles of his feet (in another regard) Ezechiel 43.7. And God saith, He will beautify the place of his Sanctuary, and make the place of his feet glorious, Esay 60.13. And in the verse following, he expresseth how it shall be glorious; They shall come bending unto thee, and— they shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet: a very low prostration. The Ark also is called the Footstool of God, and there God was to be worshipped, not the Ark itself but God: 1 Sam. 1.19. They worship before the Lord. We will go into his Tabernacles: We will worship at his Footstool. Arise, O Lord, into thy rest, Thou and the Ark of thy strength, Psal. 132.7. & 8. verses; I resume and say, if the Israelites were commanded to worship God before the Temple, before the Sanctuary, before the Ark: O come, let us worship and fall down and Kneel before the Lord (which I have forealleaged;) We cannot think that God would have Christians less devout toward his only Son God and Man; than the Israelites were to the Temple, Sanctuary▪ or Ark: and therefore, I hold it a probable inference, The Apostles Adored Christ whilst he was facially present, and presenting his most sacred Body and Blood to them: which was a most gracious gift and blessing, more of value than the Temple, and all the holy things contained in it. Did God, when he brought in the First-begotten into the world, say, Heb. 1.6. Let all the Angels of God worship him? And when the same Saviour of Ours, was going out of the world, and was present with his holy Apostles, and gave them his own Body and Blood with all needful graces, and among them even this grace, to know Whom to adore, and When (which are parts of his Worship) can we think he was not worshipped by them? Always then, and everywhere is Christ to be adored: Fieri nec potest, nec debet, quin fides Christum in actione coenae praesentem veneretur: It cannot be, nor aught to be, but that our Faith must worship and adore Christ present in the Sacramental distribution and reception. And the same Chemnitius bringeth in Augustine, Ambrose, Nazianzen, and Eusebius Emissenus for his Co-opinionists; yet thus he expounds himself; That not the material Elements are to be adored, but Christ only. But my inference and collection from these passages, is only this; If we must adore Christ, when we celebrate and take the divine Sacrament; than it behoved the Apostles much more to do so, when They beheld Christ, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, visibly, personally, and bodily present, conferring those hallowed Blessings unto them. I do not say, I do not think, that the Apostles did always, at all times, and in all places adore Christ, by bodily prostration, after they knew he was humanatus-Deus, the Son of God, yea God in our Flesh. He expected it not. The occasions did not so permit it. He sent them, He sat with them, He did eat and drink ordinary food with them, He washed their feet: At which times, bodily adoration was not, could not be well performed. Christ held it worship enough, at some times, that they did confess him to be God and Lord: My Lord, and my God, (saith Thomas) Joh. 20.28. Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, saith Peter, Matth. 16.16. We believe, and are sure, Thou art That Christ, Joh. 6.69. It was well accepted from them, That they did worship him in Spirit and Truth, Joh. 4.24. If their minds and souls had gotten an habitual adoration of him, the expression of it by continual prostration was not necessary. 1. But first when Christ had newly performed some superhumane works, they did as they were bound, Worship him, Matth. 17.6. At the Transfiguration when they heard a voice from Heaven, They fell on their faces. At the great draught of fishes, overlading their ship, Peter fell down at jesus knees, Luk. 5.8. And others might do so, at other times, though it be left unmentioned. 2. When they begged great matters, They worshipped him. The woman of Canaan, seeking for help, Worshipped him, Matth. 15.25. The mother of Zebedees' children craving a boon, Worshipped him, Matth. 20.20. 3. When Christ did actually heal some, who were vehemently afflicted, They did adore him. The healed Samaritan, fell down on his face at Christ's feet, Luk. 17.16. 4. Lastly, it was fit to adore him, when he extraordinarily conferred on their souls greater blessings, to the saving and enriching them with all necessary graces; At such times and seasons, did they, ought they too, Adore him. And thus did he do to them, when he gave them the consecrated food of his Body and Blood, when he instituted a new Sacrament for the good of their souls. And therefore I doubt not, but they did Then Adore him, according as the excellency of the gift required. Therefore, Kneeling being a Gesture of Piety, as M. Hooker fitly termeth it, an Adorative Gesture, and above all Gestures most frequent in use to worship God; I conclude, with some degree of certainty, and with the clearest probability: That when Christ administered the consecrated Eucharist unto his Apostles, they Kneeled at least, if they did not fall down on their Faces, and worship him. And yet if they did fall down to the Ground, they first fell on their Knees: and Kneeling was the way and means of their prostration, and they arose not up, without Kneeling. Let any one, give me one instance where ever any Church at any time did like or prescribe, that any one might receive the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist Sitting, or Lying all along, except such as were unable to kneel, till these later times of Singularity, and Innovation, and I shall give them thanks. Tertullian de Oratione, cap. 12. Irreverens est, assidere sub conspectu, contraque conspectum ejus, quem cum maximè reverearis ac venereris; quanto magis sub conspectu Dei vivi, Angelo adhuc Orationis astante, factum istud irreligiosissimum est, nisi exprobramus Deo quod oratio nos fatigaverit. It is irreverent among men, to sit in his sight, and against him, face to face, whom you do most revere and worship. But this is more, a most irreverent fact, to Sat in the sight of the living God; the Angel (that heareth and offereth up our prayers) Standing still there: unless we object it against God, that prayer hath tired us. And is it likely, that the Apostles, at the Receiving of the stupendious mysteries from the hands of their Saviour then present, blessing the Elements, giving Thanks to God, working miraculously, foresignifying his Death and Crucifixion with the breaking of his Body and pouring out of his Blood, and giving himself unto them, after a new way; last lifting them up then from consideration of things earthly, to the enjoying of things heavenly: I say, is there so much as a shadow of likelihood, that they did not worship him? Even Balaam advised Balack to stand at his Burunt-offering, whilst Balaam met the Lord further off, Num. 23.15 and Balak obeyed him: for, Behold he stood by his Burnt-offering, vers. 17. And yet it is likely that Balak did sometimes Sat; for vers. 18. It is in the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Surge; not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it is in the Septuagint; Balaam as it were dislikeing Sitting in sacred offices. Even the unweildly Eglon arose out of his seat, when Ehud said to him, I have a message from God unto thee, Judges 3.20. And he was another King of Moab. Gregory Nazianzen in his Oration of the death of Gorgonia his sister, saith, When she was afflicted with an incurable disease, by night she hastened to the Church, and lying Prostrate before the Altar, so earnestly prayed before the venerable Sacrament, that she was presently cured, calling upon him who is Worshipped on the Altar: And can we think she did not fall down on her knees at least when herself received the sacred Food of her soul? Eusebius Emissenus, Homilia 5. de Paschate, saith, The Sacrament was instituted, ut coleretur Christus jugiter per mysterium, That Christ might be continually worshipped by the mystery. Origen Homilia 13. in Exodum, Nostis qui divinis mysteries interest consuevistis; you who use to be present at the Divine Mysteries, do know, that when ye receive the Body of the Lord, ye heed unto it with all fearful cautiousness, and worship, lest any thing of it fall. Again, Contra Celsum, 8. about the middle of the book; With prayers and thanksgiving for the benefits received, do we eat the sacred Bread. And did they not needle either when they prayed, or when they received? In the next place followeth the binding argument from the book of Advertisements set forth by Queen Elizabeth's command 1584., and printed by Thomas Dawson, in the Articles for administration of Prayers and Sacraments (We appoint) Now follow the words, That all Communicants do receive Kneeling, and as it is appointed by the Laws of the Realm, and the Queen's Majesty's Injunctions. Lastly, let men consider themselves, and their own natures, and they shall find, that the body of Man was not ordained of God to serve only, nor principally for natural necessities: It is indeed, as a stranger to percolate our Bread, Meats, and Drinks; but it hath many fair offices, and more spiritual. The Face framed with erected eyes to look up to Heaven. The Heart to meditate on it. The Hands being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the instruments of instruments, to work righteousness; and are not the Knees Omni cardine versatiliora, more pliable, flexible and turning, than any hooks or hinges, whereby we may easily fall down and worship God: and easily arise to praise him and do him service? Let me speak in Tertullia's phrases De corona cap. 5. Deus auditum in auribus fodit visum in oculis accendit, gustum in ore conclusit, odoratum in naribus ventilavit: contactum in manibus astimavit: per haec exterioris hominis ministeria, interiori homini ministrantia, fructus munerum divinorum ad animam deducuntur à sensibus. God hath bored hearing in the ears (because into them it descendeth as into an hole) He hath kindled sight in the eyes (for the eyes do sometimes sparkle with fire, and are of a fiery nature.) He hath shut up tasting within the mouth (for he hath bounded it within that compass.) He hath winnowed, or vanned smelling in the nostrils (by the playing of the wind.) He hath made the hands the judicatories of touching: (which touching being diffused over all the body, yet is more used by the hands.) He concludeth divinely: By these ministerial bodily Organs, serving the inner Man, the blessings and fruits of heavenly gifts are from the Senses conveyed to the soul. Much more might be added of other parts, I will end all in this addition. They defraud their Knees of the chiefest office, and greatest honour, who refuse to bend them, in holy times and places: especially at the receiving of the blessed Sacrament: which I would take, after I had fallen on my Face, and used grovelling Adoration, if the Church so appointed me: or if scandal would not arise, from such extraordinary Gesture. THE PRAYER. O Lord, thou knowest my heart, and that with Soul and Body I Reverence and Adore thee in thy divine Eucharist: I humble myself, as much as I can: and I would humble myself lower, even unto the gates of Hell, if I could: confessing my worthiness in nothing, but that I am worthy to be condemned. In such contemplations, quakeing and terror take hold of my heart; and I am horribly afraid of thy judgement. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob shall be in a sweat at the day of judgement, as good children shall be in a dread to see their father angry with his rebellious children. The earth shall melt away like wax; the heavens shall tremble, and the pillars of Heaven shall shake: to whom shall I fly? to whom shall I say, Cover me? but unto thee most compassionate Saviour: for thou art my rock, thou art the buckler of my defence, under the shadow of thy wings do I desire to rest: as thou wert superexalted, because thou didst humble thyself; so grant good Lord, I may so fall down before thee, that I may be taken up by thee, and that the greatness of my humility may bring unto me, by thy favour, the riches of thy glory, the exaltation both of my soul and body. Lord, hear my prayer, and let my cry come unto thee, for jesus his sake. Amen. CHAP. VIII. Which contains the ninth, tenth, and eleventh Generals. Wherein is declared, 1. What Gesture we are to use at the Receiving of the blessed Eucharist. 2. What Names have been given to it. 3. What Words were spoken by our Saviour, after the Third Supper, before he departed out of the Coenaculum. 1. What Gesture we are to use at the Administration of it to others. Receiving of it ourselves. Both handled promiscuously. The English Liturgy our best guide. At the Repeating of the Law, the people must Kneel. Receiving of the same, the Israelites did no less. Never Patriarch, Prophet, Evangelist, Apostle, nor holy Man, nor Christ himself prayed Sitting, when there was opportunity of Kneeling. The Monks of Egypt did pray Sitting. The Rule of Saint Benedict mentioneth Sitting at the Reading of three Lessons. Rising up at Gloria Patri, etc. Several Gestures are to be used both by Priest and People, upon several occasions. The Priest never Kneels, while the people stand; but he may stand, when they kneel. Great reason why the people should kneel at the Receiving of the Body and Blood of Christ. No superstition, nor Idolatry, then to Kneel: But obstinate Irreverence, if not blasphemy, not to Kneel. Prayer most an end used with b●nding of the Knees. The Pharisee Stood Christ Kneeled when he prayed. The Rubric of the Communion Book is to be followed by all obediently. 2. The Minister is to deliver the Communion to the people Kneeling in both kinds. into their Hands. Maximus would have Men to wash their hands Women to bring clean linen that will Communicate. The Nicety of former times questioned. The sixth Synod, Canon 3. against it. The consecrated bread must be carefully delivered, and received. To let any crumb, or particle thereof fall to the ground, accounted a great sin by Tertullian and Origen. Pope Pius the first, punished those who let any of the Lords blood fall upon the ground or Altar. S. Cyril of Jerusalem gives a Cave at to this purpose. Little Tables set before the Communicants in former times: as now we hold Linen clothes, saith Baronius. The usual fashion of receiving the Consecrated bread between the Thumb and a Finger or two, disliked. Receiving the holy bread in the Palm of the hand, a safer way. In Tertullia's days, the Christians did stretch abroad their hands like Christ upon the Cross, in their private prayers. Damascene would have us receive the Body of Christ crucified with our hands framed like to a Cross. The right Hand being upward open, and hollow to receive the bread. This accounted the safer way. S. Cyril commandeth the same kind of usance. Other manners of Taking it, not sinful. In things indifferent we must not love singular irregularity. All unseemly Motions and Gestures are so many profanations of the Lords Supper. Seven General Rules to be observed against the profanation of the Lords Supper. The word (Amen) explained: and Kneeling at Receiving the blessed Sacrament, pressed. 3. Tenth General. What Names are given to the blessed Sacrament by the Scriptures and Fathers, the Latin and Greek Church. The hallowed Bread is called in the Scriptures 1. The Lord's Body, Broken for us. 2. The Communion of the Body of Christ. And the Reasons thereof. 3. Breaking of Bread from house to house. 4. Holy Bread, Blessed Bread, Eucharistical Bread, Heavenly Bread: Joh. 6. In the Fathers. 1. Taking of the Lords Body, Tertullian. 2. Earthly Bread, sanctified by prayer, consisting of Earthly and Heavenly things. Irenaeus. A Medicine of immortality, an Antidote against death, procuring life, purging sin, driving away all evils: idem. 3. Christ's Dole to his Church, Tertullian. The Plenty, Abundance, and Fatness of the Lords Body. The Wine is called in the Scriptures 1. The New Testament in his Blood. 2. The Blood of the New Testament. 3. The Cup of the Lord. 4. The Communion of the Blood of Christ. The blessed Eucharist consisting of both kinds, is styled In Scripture 1. The Lord's Supper. And in what regards it is so called. The Papists dislike the frequent use of this Phrase. Casaubone confutes Justinian and Maldonate the Jesuits, and calls it The Great Supper. The most Divine Supper. The Arch-Symbolicall Supper. 2. The Table of the Lord, 1 Cor. 10.21. With Us, it is commonly called Christ his Last Supper. And the Reasons why it is called the Last Supper. In the Fathers it hath these titles. 1 The Communion of Saints, in the Apostles Creed. 2 Peace of Christ, Ignatius and Cyprian. 3 A New Oblation, Irenaeus. 4 Mystery, is a common appellation. Augustine. 5 Life. So called by the Africans. Augustine. 6 The Oath, and strictest band of Religion. Augustine. 7 The Mystical Bread. Augustine. 8 The holy Offering, in regard of the offerings for the poor. Augustine. 9 The Supper of God, and the Lords Banquet, Tertullian. 10 The Lords Testament or Legacy. 11 A Communion, prohibiting Schism, and Division; and inclining to Peace and Union. 12 A Blessing. 13 A giving of Thanks. 14 The Authentic performance of the Type, Theodoret. 15 The Latins name it Missah, the Mass; which word some derive from the Hebrew or Chaldee, and say, it signifies A Tribute of a offering of the hand. Cevallerius dislikes that derivation. The Heathen Greek Priests dismissed their people with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Pagan Romans with these words, I licet, Missa est. Whence the Christian Roman Church borrows their Mass. 16 The Greek Church calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Ministration. 17 Sacramentum Sacramentorum, etc. Nicolaus de Cusâ. 18 God. Tertullian. 4. Eleventh General. Wherein is inquired, what Speeches were used by our Saviour in the Coenaculum After the Third Supper was administered. The gracious Sermon of Christ. His Prayer to God. An Hymn. PARAGRAPH 1. NOw followeth, What Gesture we are to use at the administration of the holy Eucharist to others. At the Receiving of it, ourselves. Take then thus together in a Mass or lump, from the best authority under Scripture. The English Liturgy or Common Prayer, is our best guide. We begin it first with the Lords Prayer, and the succeeding Prayer; Almighty God unto whom all hearts be open, etc. And this is performed at the Lords Table, the Minister standing, and the whole Congregation Kneeling: And at the Collect the Minister standeth: At the rehearsing of the Commandments the Minister standeth as speaking in the person of God, and commanding by authority. The people hearken, pray, and kneel, at the Recital of every Commandment. Nor did the Israelites do less, if they did not do more, at the first receiving of the Law. When the Second Commandment said expressly, Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them; may well be inferred, they did Then bow down to him. Never did Patriach, or Prophet, never did Christ, Evangelist, or Apostle, never did holy Man pray sitting, when there was opportunity of Kneeling. Yet I confess that Cassian 2.12. reporteth that the Monks of Egypt did sit praying: yet he addeth, insidentes sedilibus humillimis. The rule of S. Benedict. cap. 9 mentioneth their sitting at the Reading of three lessons, and their rising up at Gloria Patri. For at the reading the Collect for the day, and the Collect for the King, the Priest standeth up and the people kneel still. The Epistle, the Gospel, the Nicaene Creed, the Sermon or Homily, and the one or more Sentences following, may be officiated, the Minister and people standing. The prayer for the whole state of Christ's Militant Church, must be done, every one Kneeling. The one, two, or three Exhortations following, and the short Invitatory advice to the Communicants, may be read to them, either the Minister, and they standing, or he standing, and they sitting, or approaching. The general Confession is to be read, both Priest and People humbly Kneeling on their knees. The hearty prayer following, conjoined with the Operatory Absolution, is to be done by the Priest or Bishop (if he be present) standing: and the people kneeling. And in that posture may continue, till the Laudatory, with Angels and Archagels be performed. Then shall the Priest kneel down praying in the name of all the Communicants; The people also kneeling, and saying Amen to the prayer. For I do not remember that ever the Priests did kneel, when the people stood: but the Priests many times stand, when the people kneel: As in the words of Prayer and Consecration following the Priest standeth up, and People kneel. When the Minister or Ministers do participate, they kneel. When they Distribute, and Administer to the People, the Priests stand, the People receive it kneeling, as the Rubric appointeth. And great reason is there people should then kneel, at the Divine prayers, The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life: and a like prayer is devoutly poured forth at the delivery of the Cup. And will they not kneel when the heart saith Amen to these holy prayers? It is so far from being Idolatrous to kneel before God at these prayers, that it is obstinate Irreverence, Contempt of the Sacrament, yea of Christ himself, Not to kneel, for such as are well before instructed. Furthermore, are we not at that instant advised to be Thankful? which seldom is well performed without Prayer; and Prayer is to be said, as with lifting up of holy hands, 1 Tim. 2.8. so most wise with bending of humbled knees. It was also the wicked Pharisee who stood, and prayed, Luk. 18.11. But Christ himself kneeled down and prayed, Luk. 22.41. Oh that such wretches, as do beat their servants if they be not reverend, humble, but disrespect their Masters, and little esteem of their kindnesses bestowed, would but make the comparison between their heavenly Master, and themselves. After the participation ended, every one solemnly kneeleth down on his knees, and saith the Lord's Prayer. And in that Gesture continue, whilst they say the next prayer, or the next save one. The Gloria in excelsis Deo, by reason of the Praise, Blessing, Adoration, and Thanksgiving included in it, and by reason of the Divine prayers made to the Father, and the Son: with the coequally-glorious holy-Spirit, may well be said, or sung, All Kneeling. The Blessing at their parting, is to be performed by the Bishop, or Priest standing, and by the People Kneeling. The Collects after the offertory, are to be read, all parties Kneeling: for every one of them is a powerful prayer. What the Rubric directly appoints, aught to be answered with full and obedient performance: And since I have spoke my mind in some points unspecialized, in or by the Rubric; I submit my judgement, (as I do in all other things) to the judgement of the Church of England. And thus I proceed. That the people are most an end to Kneel, but especially at the Receiving of the holy Communion, is so clear, that all see it, except such, whose eyes Satan hath blinded. And if they do not repent, he will lead them blindfolded into the Lake of fire and brimstone, which never shall be quenched. PAR. 2. THat when the people Kneel, the Minister is to deliver the Communion in both kinds into the hands of them, is as clear. Maximus a great enemy of the Monothelites, saith, All men that will Communicate, must first wash their hands, that with a pure mind, and neat conscience they may receive the Sacrament. Likewise let the Women bring clean Linen, that they may receive Christ's body. Baronius, Tom. 1. Anno. 5. Numero 148. observeth, men might take it into their bare hands. Women might not take it but in Linen, which was called Dominicale. Hence first the nicety of former times, may be questioned, Why the Women were to receive it in pure linen, and white: but the Men into their bare hands? Have not the Women as clean and white hands as Men? If the women's hands were unworthy to receive it, how are the men's hands more worthy? If linen be to cover, or adorn the women's hands: Why will not such an ornament befit men's hands also? In the sixth Synod, Canone 3. celebrated Anno Domini 681. there seems to be a Plea against that custom. We do not admit those who make receptacles of gold, or of other matter, to receive, in stead of their hands, the Divine mysteries; for they prefer the liveless subject matter before the Image of God. If any do so, let both the Administrant, and the Communicant be separated. Again, it is the fashion both for Men and Women, to receive the sacred Bread from the hands of the Minister, some with the thumb and one finger; some with the thumb and two fingers: and this is not sinful, nor to be condemned in itself, as it may be carefully delivered and received. But if any crumb or particle fall to the ground, it is a greater sin, than people imagine. Tertullian took it very grievously, when any such thing was. Origen accounteth it a sin, and a great sin, & told the people they did well to think so of such as let any part fall to the ground. The words are; Tom. 1. p. 102. in Eusebius, Episcopius his edition. Nostis qui divinis mysteriis interesse consuevistis, quomodo cùm suscipitis Corpus Christi, cum omni cautelâ, & veneratione servatis, ne ex eo parum quid decidat, ne consecrati muneris aliquid dilabatur. Reos enim vos creditis, & rectè creditis si quid inde per negligentiam decidat. Circa Corpus Christi conservandum (magnâ) utimini cautelâ, & recte utimini. You who are usually present at Divine services, do know, with what wariness, and reverence you preserve the Body of Christ when you receive the same; lest by chance some small parcel or crumb of the Consecrated gift, should slip out from between your fingers, and fall to the ground. For you do believe, and rightly believe, that you are guilty of the Body of Christ, if any part or parcel thereof should through your negligence fall to the ground. And therefore you do use, and rightly use, a great deal of cautelousness in the preservation of the Body of Christ. Pope Pius the first, who lived in the days of Justin Martyr, between 100, and 200 years after Christ, punished those by whose negligence any of the Lords Blood did fall upon the ground or Altar: The like we imagine of the sacred Body. Sanctificatis ergo oculis tam sancti corporis contactu, communica: Cave, ne quid excidat tibi. The very eyes being sanctified by the touching of so holy a Body: receive the blessed Eucharist; but take heed, that no part of it fall from thee, saith Cyril of Jerusalem. Baronius, Tom. 1. anno 75. Numero 146, saith, that when they took the Eucharist in former times, certain little Tables were set before the Communicants; as now (saith he) we hold Linen before the Receivers. And all this was done, and is done out of doubt, lest any particle should fall to the Ground. Indeed, there is more danger in the nice receiving with the thumb, and a finger or two; for the Bread is made of many corns, and every corn yields such mealy stuff, as may easily by breaking, or in the acts of delivery, and receiving, moulder into crumbs, and fall down: There is much more care to be had of the keeping whole of such mouldering soft food, than if silver, gold, or precious stones (from which nothing can drop away) were to be consigned over, or delivered to others. Nor is there danger in the fall of them; But danger there is in the fall of the Consecrated Bread. Wherefore I doubt not, but as the words of the Liturgy command not, to put the holy bread into the people's fingers, or between their thumb and fingers, but into their hands; so the meaning is, it ought to be delivered into the palms of their hands, as a safer receit, and as a safer conveyer unto their mouths, than the use of thumb and fingers. Tertullian de Oratione, cap. 11. Nos non Attollimus tantùm (manus) sed etiam expandimus, & Dominicâ passions modulantes & ●rantes confitemur Christo. When we pray, we do not only lift up our hands, but we spread them abroad like to the Cross, conforming ourselves to the Passion of our Lord. For (say I) his hands were stretched out. But this was done in private prayers. In public prayers, they lifted them up but a little way; as before I noted out of Tertullian. Johan. Damasc. Orthodoxae Fidei 4.14. Accedamus ei desiderio ardenti: Manus in crucis modum formantes, crucisixi corpus suscipiamus: & apponentes oculos, & labra, & frontem, divinum carbonem concipiamus. Let us come to the Sacrament with an earnest desire; And framing our hands like to a cross, let us receive the body of Christ crucified; and laying our foreheads, eyes, and lips nigh to it, conceive it as a divine coal to burn our sins. To conclude, in my opinion, the left hand bearing up the right, and especially in some paralytics, one hand had need to establish another, and both crossing about the wrists, and the palm of the right hand being upward, and open, at the receiving of the bread, the blessed Sacrament of Christ's body may be received; But at the taking of the Cup, there is no need, or cause that the palm should be upright; yea it cannot be so with conveniency; and this doth no way enterfeere with Damasc●n, or our Lyturgy; and let the Christian heart judge, if this be not the safer way. And thus, for aught that I can object to the contrary, the Apostles themselves might receive the Sacrament, and perhaps did. I was overjoyed when I found this proof following, agreeing both to my practice, and opinion. Cyrillus Hierosolymit. in Mystag. 5. Come not to the Communion with the palms of thy hands spread all abroad, nor thy fingers severed, and open: but putting the left hand under thy right, to settle and establish it, in the hollow of thy hand receive the Body of Christ. I will not say that any other course of taking is sinful: but I have spoken my opinion for the Conveniency. The liberty granted by Christ, is not to be kerbed, or Ephorized by us. But let us take heed lest our liberty grow to licentiousness, or that we love singular irregularity. For, if one should receive the blessed Sacrament sitting, or leaning on his elbow, or halfe-sitting, halfe-kneeling, or looking on the one side, or smiling, or using unseemly motion, though those Gestures be not in singled particularities forbid: yet they are a profanation of the Lords Supper; as being forbidden in the General Rules. First, That comeliest, and devoutest Gesture be used in holiest matters. Sancta sanctè. Secondly, Let all things be done to edifying, 1 Cor. 14.26. Thirdly, Let all things be done in order, vers. 4. The rest will I set in order, when I come, saith S. Paul, 1 Cor. 11.34. Fourthly, Rom. 14.17. The Kingdom of God is not in meats, nor drinks: but righteousness and peace, and joy in the holy Ghost: For he that in these things serveth Christ, is acceptable to God, and approved by men; let us therefore follow after the things, which make for peace, as there followeth. Fiftly, Let all things be done decently, 1 Cor. 14.40. A comeliness is commended, Ecclesiastes 5.18. 1 Cor. 11.13. It is comely that a women pray unto God uncovered: Comeliness is taught by nature, as it there followeth. Sixtly, The meetings in sacred convocations are for good, nor for evil. We are come together for the better, not for the worse. And the contrary is reproved by Saint Paul, 1 Cor. 11.17. Lastly, God ruleth things Inferior, by Superior; things farther off, by things nearer to him. The people must not prescribe to the Magistrates, nor to themselves Laws, in things indifferent; but the Governors, and Pastors to the People. Whosoever therefore at the receiving of the blessed Eucharist, doth any thing misbeseemingly, sinneth against these, or some of these Rules, and so sinneth against Christ. I proved before, that at the holy Receiving, a prayer is preparatory, and made for every one of us. And as the Minister devoutly prayeth, doth not thy heart say Amen? and is not Amen truly explained and enlarged thus; O Lord, I confess, this is thy Body, this is thy Blood, yea it is thine own Self which thou vouchsafest unto me, and I do now Receive: Oh preserve my body and soul unto everlasting life; I eat in remembrance that thy Body was broken, and that thou died'st for me: I drink in remembrance that thy Blood was shed and poured out for me. Lord, I am thankful, and I feed on thee in my heart by Faith. Lord, I believe, pardon my wand'ring thoughts: unite me unto thee: make me from henceforth holy, and conformable to thyself, and let this spiritual food strengthen me in the way to Heaven. To conclude in the Divine M. hooker's words; Oh my God, thou art True. Oh my Soul, thou art blessed. He who useth not these, or some of these, or the like faithful thankful precatory ejaculations, both at the instant act of receiving of the sacred Communion, and presently after, yea and whilst the Minister is praying for him, he hath an obdurate heart, he discerneth not the Lords Body, but eateth and drinketh his own damnation. Now, Reader, judge again, if a man will not kneel when the Minister prayeth for him, and that openly? If he will not kneel, when he poureth out his hearty prayers unto God, whether he sinneth not heinous? Certainly, God condemneth his foolish obstinacy; and so I pass to another point. PAR. 3. THe next is; What names are given unto the holy Sacrament. And here I will first speak of the Bread, and of the Wine severally, and show you what names have been given them both in the Scriptures, and by the Fathers: and then will I speak of them jointly together. The hallowed Bread, in the sacred Word of God, is called the Lords Body broken for us, 1 Cor. 11.24. discernible to be the Lords body, vers. 20. styled also the Communion of the Body of Christ, 1 Cor. 10.16. which Communion is not in the use of Scripture a proper name of the Eucharist; but a declaration of its power, and efficacy, by making us one with Christ, and by partaking the Sacrament with our brethren, being a special means to the Communion of Saints; though the Fathers make it a proper appellation (saith Casaubone.) Act. 2.46. it is said; They continued Breaking of Bread Domatim, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at home, or from house to house. In which place it is varied, Communicabant in fractione Eucharistiae. They did Communicate in breaking of bread; where the Translator makes use of a Greek word, which he doth not often. It is farther called Panis Sanctus; Panis Benedictus: Panis Eucharisticus: Panis Coelestis. Holy Bread; Blessed Bread; Eucharistical Bread; Heavenly Bread, John 6.32. The Father's appellations for it. Oratio solvenda est Corpore Domini accepto. Tertullian de Oratione, cap. ultimo: Upon taking the Lords Body, we end our Prayers. The same in lib. de Idololatria; cap. 7. saith, some did Manus admovere Corpori Domini, move their hands to take the Lords Body. Irenaeus, lib. 4. cap. 34. E terrâ panis, percipiens invocationem Dei, non jam communis panis est, fed Eucharistia, ex rebus duabus constans, terrenâ & coelesti. Earthly bread Sanctified by prayer, is not now common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of earthly and heavenly things. It is a Medicine of immortality; an Antidote against death: procuring life; purging sin; driving away all evils. Tertullian, Adversus Judaeos, in fine, calleth the Eucharist Dominicae gratiae quasi viscerationem. Christ's Dole to his Church. And lest you may think it to be a poor Dole, a Lean, Thin, Hungry gift; the same Tertullian in lib. de Pudicitiâ, expresseth it better thus, Opimitate corporis Domini vescitur. He eateth of the Plenty, Abundance, and Fatness of the Lords Body: and our Soul is fully satisfied, fatted, crammed with God: of which testimony hereafter. The Cup is the new Testament in his blood, 1 Cor. 10.25. This is my blood of the new Testament, Matth. 26.28. and it is termed The Cup of the Lord, vers. 7 So it is also called, 1 Cor. 10.21. Ye cannot drink the Cup of the Lord. The Cup of blessing which we bless, is the Communion of the Blood of Christ, vers. 16. The blessed Eucharist consisting of both kinds, hath these glorious Tittles. In the Scripture it is termed the Supper of the Lord, 1 Cor. 11.20. And the Lords Supper, in all these regards. First, because the Lord did Institute it. Secondly, did Take it. Thirdly, did Administer it to his Apostles. Fourthly, did appoint the Church to do the like in remembrance of the Lords death. The Papi●●s, as before I observed, dislike the frequent use of this phrase. See Casaubone confuting Justinian the Jesuit in that point: and against Maldonate; whilst Casaubone from the Ancients calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Great Supper, the Most Divine and Arch-symbolical supper. By a Metonymy of the subject, a Table, that is, the food set on that Table. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: the Table of the Lord, 1 Cor. 10.21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lords Testament or Legacy: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Communion, as prohibiting Schism and Division, and inclining to Peace, and Union: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Blessing: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a giving of Thanks. With us it is commonly called, Christ his Last Supper; which word Last, not only signifieth that he eaten no supper any day, or night for ever After, with a mortal, passable body; but, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Last, includeth, and involveth the two precedent Suppers of that night, as if it had been said, This Supper is the Last of the Three; and Last of All. It is also termed Communio Sanctorum, in the Apostolical Creed. The Communion of Saints. In the Fathers are found these Titles. Pax Christi: The Peace of Christ, by Ignatius, Epistola 14. And Dare Pacem Lapsis: to give Peace to them that have fallen; is all one, with admitting people to the holy Communion, in Cyprian, Epistola 10. Iren●us saith; It is Nova oblatio, a New oblation, 4.32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Mystery, is a common appellation. Augustine de peccatorum Meritis contra Pelag. 1, 24. saith, The Africans do most significantly call Baptism nothing else but Salutem, Health, or Salvation: and the Sacrament of the Body of our Lord nothing else but Life. And himself contra Faustum, 20.13. saith, It is Sacramentum Religionis; the oath, and strictest bond of Religion; and the Mystical bread, in the same place. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an Offering, in regard of the Offerings made for the poor. And Sacrosancta oblatio, by Augustine, contra Faustum, 20.18. The Consecrated oblation. Dei Coena, & Dominicum Convivium. God's Supper, and the Lords Banquet; by Tertullian ad uxorem, 2.4. Theodoret termeth it Verum typi archetypum: the authentic performance of the Type. The Latins call it Missah, which some derive from the Hebrew, or Chaldee. For what is in the Vulgat, Spontanea Oblatio, a sufficiency or tribute of a offering of thy hand: Deut 16.10. The Chaldee hath it, Missath. In the Interlineary it is translated, Sufficientia Spontis manus tuae: or Spontanea manus tuae: Which for substance divinely agreeth with our Eucharist. Juxta sufficientiam donarii spontanei manus tuae, erit quod dabis, as Vatablus well interpreteth it. Thou shalt offer according to the worth of the voluntary gift of thy hand, as much as thou well art able. Some say that Missath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an offering made to God, and due for a perfonall duty or service; But (saith Cevallerius) in Pagnine his great Lexicon, I do not think so, because none of the Hebrew Doctors, which I have read, use it so. And well might he dislike it. For the Hebrew phrases, or words, did not per saltum skip over to the Romans, but were derived to them by the Greek Church. Therefore since none of the Greek Fathers did ever use the word Missa, I cannot think the Latins borrowed it from the Hebrews. The Heathen Greek Priests dismissed the people, saying, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Pagan Romanist gave the parting blow to the people by these words: I, licet: Missa est. And the Christian Roman Church, which hath imitated too many of the old Rome's customs, hath not done amiss in this, to use the like things and words. The Greek Church calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which had its ground from Acts 13.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Prophets and Teachers in the Church of Antioch did minister to the Lord. The holy Eucharist is called by Nicolaus de Cusa Sacramentum Sacramentorum, Exercitationum 6. pag. 532. & in ipso est consummatio Fidei, saith he; and a little before, Hoc est Sacramentum consummatae Vnionis ad vitam aeternaliter vivificantem: It is the Sacrament of Sacraments, in it is the consummation of Faith: It is the Sacrament of the most perfect Union to the life which quickeneth us eternally. Lastly, Tertullian de Resurrectione carnis, cap. 8. saith: Our flesh is fed with the Body and Blood of Christ: ut Anima Deo saginetur, that our Soul may be filled, Sated, Fatted with God. The Eucharist being called God: which is an high Expression. He who will see more attributes of Hallowed Supper, let him have recourse to Cyprian de Coena Domini, pag. 500 Casaubone Exercitatione 16. c. 30, etc. PAR. 4. IT followeth in my Method, to inquire what speeches were spoken by our Saviour after the Third Supper was administered. S. Paul mentioneth none. The gracious Sermo Domini in Coenaculo, was after Supper, after the Third and Last Supper; beginning John 13.3. continuing to John 16.33. Then, as he had made a long Sermon to his Apostles, so he continueth with a Prayer to God, in part of the seventeenth chapter of S. John. Then did they sing an Hymn, Matth. 26.30 what it was is unknown. In likelihood, after the Hymn, they departed the house; and then fully ended the Third Supper. Then they went over the brook Cedron, over the Mount of Olives. David when he fled from his unnatural and rebellious son Absalon, went up by the ascent of Mount Olivet, and wept as he went up, 2 Sam. 15.30. No doubt also but our Saviour's heart was full of sorrow. For in the way, as he went to the Mount, He foretold that all the Apostles would be offended, Matth. 26.31, etc. and that Peter would deny him, howsoever he promised the contrary. Hence in some likelihood proceeded the strife, (when S. Peter was kerbed by our Saviour) which of them should be accounted the greatest, Luke 22.24. Which was determined by Christ from the 25 verse, unto the end of the 30. Though some think the strife was at the Second Supper. Whereupon Christ to teach them humility, washed their feet, and became as their servant. When he came to the Mount, he prayed: When he came down from the Mount, he still had more conference with his Disciples, and comforted S. Peter in special, and all the Apostles in general. We cannot think, but he passed all the time in holy devotions, and heavenly discourses. About half an hour before midnight, he came to the village Gethsemane situated at the foot of the Mount of Olives: and there the Apostles did sit, and stay by his command, except Peter, and thetwo sons of Zebedee, and they went with Christ: and Christ prayed thrice, Matth. 26.36. Then might he conclude, and seal up all with a prayer for his Church, John 17.9. For when he had spoken these things, John 18.1. Then did he pass the brook Cedron, where was a Garden into which he entered, and his Disciples, as he was wont: & Judas knew the place, Joh. 18.1. etc. and Judas came thither, v. 3. and there was Christ betrayed, and bound. From thence was he carried and recarried unto manifold examinations, and more revile: He was hurried to judgement, to sentence all along the dolorous way to the shameful death of the rose. THE PRAYER. BY the virtue and merits of which crucified Jesus, good Lord, free me from all sin passed, prevent me from sinning hereafter; guide me by thy Grace, confirm me by thy Goodness, and leave me not, O leave me not, most gracious Lord, till thou hast brought my soul to my desired haven, thy bliss in heaven, through Jesus Christ my only Saviour and Redeemer: To whom with thee, and the blessed Spirit, three persons, and one God, be all possible praise and thanksgiving ascribed for prolonging my life, for strengthening my feeble body, for giving me power to end this Work, and for all other favours vouchsafed to me a poor sinner for Christ his sake. Amen, Amen, Amen. Gloria in excelsis Deo, cum Gratiarum actionibus. Trinuni, & Vni-trino Deo, Sacrum. Malim Deo placere, quàm aliis omnibus. Malim mihi ipsi placere, & nonnullis aliis: quàm solummodò nonnullis aliis, & non mihi. Explicit in Vernali Aequinoctio 1637 hic liber tertius. Siquid hic verum, ac non incommodè dictum inveniatur, illud non humano cujusvis ingenio, sed Deo omnis veritatis auctori, (ut scripsit S. Augustinus) omninò, ut par est, ascribendum est. Simendum aliquod, vel erratum inciderit, id meae imbecillitati tribuendum est: Cujus (coeles●i misericordiâ) veniam humiliter precor. Gabriel Palaeotus in fine libri, de Sacri Consistorii consultationibus. principio Finis cohaereat, Omnia haec in his tribus libris de Tricoenio Christi in nocte proditoriâ, Ecclesiae Anglicanae Judicio submissa sunto. An Advertisement to the Reader. REader, I may not conceal, that after I had fully ended, though (I confess) not throughly transcribed my Tricoenium, there were brought unto my hands by the means of M. John Tournay the Works of two Jesuits, who have written of this self same subject, that I have He who wrote lately, is one Theophilus Raynandus, an eminent man, full both of quick wit, much reading, and great scholarship. The title page of his book weareth this superscription: Optimae vitae finis pessimus. The sum is almost comprised in his 8. and 9 chap. The other did write the Triplici Coenâ Christi: Agni, Vulgari, Eucharisticâ, 22 years since. His book printed at Antwerp, by the heirs of Martin Nutius, and John Meursius. I never saw, nor heard of any of them, till my Work was accomplished. Nor since took so much as one line, or any one testimony from either of them. In most things and in the main they agree with me, and I with them: in something we descent. The Jesuit Johannes Walterius Viringus, who writ so long since, amasseth strange testimonies, not commonly heard mentioned in our Schools, pulpits, or Masters of controversies. The Jesuits have run their way: I mine. They might have done me much service, and pleasure, if I had seen them soon enough. I commend them in very many things: and they shall wipe of the aspersion of Novelty from me, in most matters, if any Romanist shall charge me with it. Compare the Work, who will: And so God bless their labours, and mine, to the benefit of thy soul (Good Reader.) So hoping for thy prayers, I bid thee farewell in Christ Jesus, our gracious Redeemer. Thine in the Lord, EDWARD KELLET FINIS.