FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227  
228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   >>   >|  
es; wherefore I need not stay to prove it. _Sect._ 14. Besides these answers which are common in our adversaries' mouths, some of them have other particular subterfuges, which now I am to search. "We must consider (saith Bishop Lindsey(551)) the ceremony itself (dedicated to, and polluted with idolatry,) whether it be of human or divine institution. If it be of human institution it may be removed, &c.; but if the ceremony be of divine institution, such as kneeling is,--for the same is commended by God unto us in his word,--then we ought to consider whether the abuse of that ceremony hath proceeded from the nature of the action wherein it was used; for if it be so, it ought to be abolished, &c.; but if the abuse proceed not from the nature of the action, but from the opinion of the agent, then, the opinion being removed, the religious ceremony may be used without any profanation of idolatry. For example, the abuse of kneeling in elevation, &c., proceedeth not only from the opinion of the agent, but from the nature of the action, which is idolatrous and superstitious, &c., and, therefore, both the action and gesture ought to be abolished. But the sacrament of the supper, being an action instituted by God, and kneeling being of its own nature an holy and religious ceremony, it can never receive contagion of idolatry from it, but only from the opinion of the agent: then remove the opinion, both the action itself may be rightly used, and kneeling therein," &c. _Ans._ 1. Since he granteth that a ceremony dedicated to and polluted with idolatry, may (he answereth not the argument which there he propounded, except he say must) be abolished, if it be of human institution, he must grant from this ground, if there were no more, that the cross, surplice, kneeling at the communion, &c., having been so notoriously abused to idolatry, must be abolished, because they have no institution except from men only. But, 2, Why saith he that kneeling is a ceremony of divine institution? which he pronounceth not of kneeling, as it is actuated by some individual case, or clothed with certain particular circumstances, (for he maketh this kneeling whereof he speaketh to be found in two most different actions, the one idolatrous, the other holy,) but kneeling in the general, _per se_, and _praecise ab omnibus circumstantiis_. Let him now tell where kneeling thus considered is commended unto us in God's word. He would possibly allege that place, Psal
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227  
228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

kneeling

 

ceremony

 

action

 
institution
 
opinion
 

idolatry

 

nature

 
abolished
 

divine

 

commended


religious

 

idolatrous

 

removed

 
polluted
 

dedicated

 

pronounceth

 

ground

 
propounded
 

surplice

 
notoriously

abused

 
actuated
 

communion

 

speaketh

 
general
 

actions

 

considered

 

praecise

 

circumstantiis

 

omnibus


circumstances

 

maketh

 

whereof

 

clothed

 
possibly
 

argument

 
allege
 
individual
 
Bishop
 

search


subterfuges

 

Lindsey

 

mouths

 
adversaries
 

wherefore

 

Besides

 

common

 
answers
 

proceeded

 
receive