Why should we be more obliged to imitate the Posture of our Saviour and his Apostles, in receiving the holy Sacrament, than to imitate the Time, the Place, the Habit in which they did it? Ought there not to be as much Regard had to these Circumstances in any Action as to the former ? Are they not all of equal Moment and Confideration? If I must be bound to partake of the holy Supper only in that Posture in which it was inftituted, and taken at first by our Lord and his Apostles, then I must likewife, by Parity of Reason, be bound to receive it in such a Place as they did, that is to say, not in a Church, but in a Chamber. I must be bound to receive it at the Time that they did, that is to say, not in the Morning and fafting, but after Supper. The Minifter that gives it me ought to have on such a Habit as our Saviour had, that is to say, a long woven Robe without Seam, and not a Gown or Surplice. But now fince none do think themselves obliged to observe these Things, why should they think themselves so tied up as to the other? unless they can shew that there is something peculiar and particularly obligatory in this Circumftance of Gesture, which there is not in the other three. But this no Man has ever yet shew'd, nor, I believe, ever will. But I would farther ask these our Brethren, Do they themselves observe that Law Law which they would impose upon others? Do they use that Gesture in taking the holy Supper that our Saviour and his Apostles did? If what they say be true, namely, that the Apostles received the Sacrament at our Saviour's Hands in a Table Posture, then I am sure they do not. For the Posture which our Saviour and his Apostles used in taking their Meals, was not fitting, as we practise, but lying or leaning on a Couch. As may be proved from several Texts of Scripture; and particularly from the Account that is given by St. John, of this very last Supper of our Saviour's. But now I never heard that any of our Brethren used to receive the Sacrament in this Posture, but they do it either fitting or standing, which is a quite different Gesture. But in Answer to this, they say, that we are not obliged to observe precisely that particular Posture that our Saviour used, but only in general, that Posture which is used at Meals, because he did so. Now the Custom of our Country is to take our Meals fitting, and therefore in ufsing that Posture at the Sacrament, we do fufficiently follow our Saviour's Example. To this I reply first, that this is gratis diftum; those that say this, can give no Reason why they say so. If the Principle they build their Notion upon will hold Water, it will every Jot as much prove the Neceffity Necessity of imitating Christ in the particular Posture he used, as of imitating him in the general, that is to say, observing the common Table Posture used in our Country. But further; If the general received Posture at Meals be the only allowable Posture of receiving the Sacrament (as must be concluded from this Doctrine, if any Thing can be concluded from it) then what will become of them that receive the Sacrament standing (as many do) that is no more the common Posture at Meals than kneeling is. It is fitting that hath univerfally prevailed in our Country; and therefore to receive the Sacrament standing, or in any other Posture but fitting, must, according to this Doctrine, be irregular; which yet, I hope, none of them will affirm. But, lastly, to conclude; Pray let this be confider'd: Why should the Custom of any Country be sufficient to make standing or fitting to come in the Place of lying or leaning at the Sacrament, and yet the publick Law of a Nation shall not be able to do as much for kneeling? Shall not a Law made by publick Authority, and confirmed by long Usage of the Church, have the same Force to establish kneeling in the Place of fitting, (there being no more Unlawfulness in the one Posture than in the other) as a Custom brought in by little and little, little, and without any publick Authority, had to bring in fitting in the Place of leaning? But I am sensible I tire you with being so long upon this Head. All the Apology I have to make, is, that I thought it would serve some Purpose to make this Matter as plain as was possible. I have now done with my Cafes of Conscience concerning the Extent of our Obligation to follow Christ's Example, which, you fee, I have resolved in fix Propositions. The next Thing I am to do, is to propose some of those Virtues which our Saviour was most eminent for, and which are of the greatest Use in human Life, and serioufly to recommend them to your Imitation. I pray God give a Blessing to what has been faid. Now to God, &c. SER SERMON III. Christ's Piety, and Diligence, and I PET. ii. 21. Leaving us an Example, that we should fol low his Steps. HAVE made two Sermons upon this Text. In the first of them, I laid before you in general the great Obligation that lies upon us to follow our Lord's Example. In the second, I endeavoured to shew the Extent of this Obligation; how far, and in what Instances Christ's Life was an Example to us; in what Cafes we are obliged to the Imitation of it, and in what Cafes not. I now come to the third Thing I proposed upon this Text, and which indeed is the principal Thing I intended when I first pitched upon it; and 333 A |