[132] Matt. 26. 26. Mark 14. 22. Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. &c.
Object.But if they say, That it is used among them, in that the Pope, and some other Persons among them, used to do it once a Year to some poor People;
Answ.I would willingly know what Reason they have why this should not be extended to all, as well as that of the Eucharist (as they term it) or whence it appears from the Text, that [Do this in Remembrance of me] should be interpreted that the Bread and Wine were every Day to be taken by all Priests, or the Bread every Day, or every Week, by the People; and that that other Command of Christ, Ye ought to do as I have done to you, &c. is only to be understood of the Pope, or some other Persons, to be done only to a few, and that once a Year? Surely there can be no other Reason for this Difference assigned from the Text. The Protestants use not the washing of Feet.And as to Protestants, who use not this Ceremony at all, if they will but open their Eyes, they may see how that by Custom and Tradition they are abused in this Matter, as were their Fathers in divers Popish Traditions. For if we look into the plain Scripture, what can be thence inferred to urge the one, which may not be likewise pleaded for the other; or for laying aside the one, which may not be likewise said against the Continuance of the other? If they say, That the former, of washing the Feet, was only a Ceremony; what have they, whence they can shew, that this breaking of Bread is more? If they say, That the former was only a Sign of Humility and Purifying; what have they to prove that this was more? If they say, That one was only for a Time, and was no Evangelical Ordinance; what hath this to make it such, that the other wanted? Surely there is no Way of Reason to evade this; neither can any Thing be alleged, that the one should cease, and not the other; or the one continue, and not the other; but the mere Opinion of the Affirmers, which by Custom, Education and Tradition, hath begotten in the Hearts of People a greater Reverence for, and Esteem of the one than the other; which if it had fallen out to be as much recommended to us by Tradition, would no Doubt have been as tenaciously pleaded for, as having no less Foundation in Scripture. But since the former, to wit, The washing of one another’s Feet, is justly laid aside, as not binding upon Christians; so ought also the other for the same Reason.
§. VII.
Object.If it be said, These are but Circumstances, and not the Matter; and if the Matter be kept to, the Alteration of Circumstances is but of small Moment;
Answ.What if it should be said the Whole is but a Circumstance, which fell out at that Time when Christ eat the Passover? For if we have Regard to that which alone can be pleaded for an Institution, viz. these Words, Do this in Remembrance of me; it doth as properly relate to the Manner as Matter. For what may or can they evince in Reason, that these Words, Do this, only signify eat Bread, and drink Wine, but it is no Matter when ye eat, or how ye eat it; and not as ye have seen me eat it at Supper with you, who take Bread, and break it, and give it you; and take the Cup, and bless it, and give it you; so do ye likewise? And seeing Christ makes no Distinction in those Words, Do this, it cannot be judged in Reason but to relate to the Whole; which if it do, all those that at present use this Ceremony among Christians, have not yet obeyed this Precept, nor fulfilled this Institution, for all their Clamours concerning it.
Object.If it be said, That the Time and Manner of doing it by Christ was but accidentally, as being after the Jewish Passover, which was at Supper;
Answ.Besides that it may be answered, and easily proved, That the Whole was accidental, as being the Practice of a Jewish Ceremony, as is above observed; The breaking of Bread was a Jewish Ceremony.may it not the same Way be urged, That the drinking of Wine is accidental, as being the natural Product of that Country; and so be pleaded, That in those Countries where Wine doth not grow, as in our Nation of Scotland, we may make use of Beer or Ale in the Use of this Ceremony; or Bread made of other Grain than that which Christ used? And yet would not our Adversaries judge this an Abuse, and not right Performing of this Sacrament? Yea, have not Scruples of this Kind occasioned no little Contention among the Professors of Christianity? Contests between the Greek and Latin Churches, concerning the leavened and unleavened Bread in the Supper.What great Contest and Strife hath been betwixt the Greek and Latin Churches concerning the Bread? While the one will have it unleavened, reckoning, because the Jews made use of unleavened Bread in the Passover, that it was such Kind of Bread that Christ did break to his Disciples; the other leavened: Therefore the Lutherans make use of unleavened Bread, the Calvinists of leavened. Farellus.And this Contest was so hot, when the Reformation was beginning at Geneva, that Calvin and Farellus were forced to fly for it. But do not Protestants, by these Uncertainties, open a Door to Papists for their excluding the People from the Cup? Will not [Do this] infer positively, That they should do it in the same Manner, and at the same Time, as Christ did it; as well as that they should use the Cup, and not the Bread only? Or what Reason have they to dispense with the one, more than the Papists have to do with the other? Oh! What strange Absurdities and Inconveniencies have Christians brought upon themselves, by superstitiously adhering to this Ceremony! Out of which Difficulties it is impossible for them to extricate themselves, but by laying it aside, as they have done others of the like Nature. The Clergy taking Bread do bless, and give it: The Laity must take and eat, not bless it.For besides what is above-mentioned, I would gladly know how from the Words they can be certainly resolved that these Words [Do this] must be understood to the Clergy, Take, bless, and break this Bread, and give it to others; but to the Laity only, Take and eat, but do not bless, &c.
Object.If it be said, That the Clergy only were present;
Answ.Then will not that open a Door for the Popish Argument against the Administration of the Cup to the People? Or may not another from thence as easily infer, That the Clergy only ought to partake of this Ceremony; because they were the Apostles only then present, to whom it was said, Do this? But if this [Do this] be extended to all, how comes it all have not Liberty to obey it, in both blessing, breaking, and distributing, as well as taking and eating? Hot Contests about the Manner of taking it, and to whom to give it.Besides all these, even the Calvinist Protestants of Great Britain could never yet accord among themselves about the Manner of taking it, whether sitting, standing, or kneeling; whether it should be given to the Sick, and those that are ready to die, or not? Which Controversies, though they may be esteemed of small Moment, yet have greatly contributed, with other Things, to be the Occasion, not only of much Contention, but also of Bloodshed and Devastation; so that in this last Respect the Prelatick Calvinists have termed the Presbyterians schismatical and pertinacious; and they them again superstitious, idolatrous, and papistical. Who then, that will open their Eyes, but may see that the Devil hath flirted up this Contention and Zeal, to busy Men about Things of small Moment, that greater Matters may be neglected, while he keeps them in such ado about this Ceremony; though they lay aside others of the like Nature, as positively commanded, and as punctually practised; and from the Observation of which half so many Difficulties will not follow?