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