To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.
A Vindication OF LITURGIES, SHEWING The Lawfulneſs, Ʋſefulneſs, and Antiquity, of performing the Publick Worſhip of GOD, by ſet Forms of Prayer.
Wherein ſeveral other things alſo of conſider
In Anſwer to a late Book, Intituled, A Reaſonable Account, why ſome pious Non-Conforming Miniſters in England, judge it ſinful for them to perform their Miniſterial Acts in publick ſolemn Prayer, by the preſcribed Forms of others.
By WILLIAM FALKNER, D. D.
LONDON, Printed for Walter Kettilby at the Biſhops-Head in St
Paul's Church-Yard, 1680.
IT is too well known, that notDoctrine and Worſhip, and the Primitive Orders of the Miniexcel her, if any equal her; it hath been and ſtill is her portion, in Conformity to our Saviour, to his Apoſtles, and to the pureſt Primitive Church, to be aſſaulAdverſaries. Beſides others, our Diſſenting Parties within this laſt year have been very active, both by other methods, and by Books of ſepublick Order and Conſti
And one of them, for the juſtifying their ſeparation, hath adventured ſo far, as to charge the general uſe of preForms of Prayer to be ſinful: which if it were true, would indeed be an high accuſation againſt our publick worſhip, and therewith againſt all the famous Chriſtian Churches. He prelawfulneſs and expediency
Reply. The manner of his writing, is in this reſpect, more commendable than of ſome others, in that he plainly ſtateth his Queſtion, and then produceth his Arguments, that the ſtrength of them may be fairly tried. But I could have wiſhed for his own ſake, that he had not oft intermixed his paſſionate and groundleſs aſperſions, upon our publick Conſticonfident words, upon very weak and ſlender appearances of Reaſon. For ſuch things are teſtiweakneſs of the Writer, who brings theſe things as a ſupply, for want of what is rational and ſubſtantial; or elſe of the badneſs of the cauſe, which needs ſuch ſupports to maintain it.
And though I thought this diſcourſe not at all like to prevail with underſtanding men; there were many
great eſteem amongst our Diſſenters, as any other in theſe parts. There is a fair appearance of a regular way of reaſoning, though there wants ſtrength of Argument; and he more than once declares, that he thinks himſelf to have fully anſwered what I had writForms of Prayer; and therefore I was particularly concerned to ſhew his miſtake. And though the more cautious and wary men among our Diſſenters will not affirm the conſtant uſe of Forms to be ſinful, becauſe they think ſuch a poſi
And I have had ſo much experience of
intelligent, and ſoberly conſiderative, as to ſearch into the ſtrength or weakneſs of Arguments, unleſs they be directed and aſſiſted: which defect when it meets with an unſteady temper, is the occaſion of much infelicity to Civil and Eccleſiaſtical Society. And as I think it in any caſe, a piece of Chriſtian Charity, to guide men in their duty; ſo this is of greater moment, where the Peace of the Church is concerned, as well as the private duty of Chriſtians. But it was not the leaſt thing which prevailed with me to this undertaking, that the Book I anſwer, led me to the conſidering ſeveral miſtaken notions and aſſerti
Upon many accounts, this Diſcourſe addreſſeth it ſelf to your Lordſhip, humpublick Liturgies; which hath been the conſtant uſe of this eſtatruth of what I defend; the clearneſs and evidence whereof is ſuch, as will alſo, I hope, recommend it ſelf to any ſober and indifferent enquirer. I do confeſs I had this great advantage amanifeſt truth on my ſide, and this advantage I have made the beſt uſe of that I could. I am ſo apprehenſive of my own defects, that I cannot expect that this Treatiſe ſhould be in all things free from them. But I am
But the chief reaſon of my preſenting this to your Lordſhip, is, that I might ex
HAving ſeveral years ſince publiſhLibertas Eccleſiaſtica, wherepretended anſwer to two Sections of my Book, conlawfulneſs, expediency, and antiquity of ſet forms of prayer. When I firſt looked into it, I thought it a ſtrange unſinful for Miniſters, who are able to commiſguide the weak and unplauſible by miſtaken fallacies.
Yet becauſe I am very ſenſible, that the Aſſertion maintained by this Author, is both in it ſelf falſe and erroneous, and alſo tendeth to undermine the true exerciſe of Religion, and the Peace and Well-fare of the Church of God; I reſolved to examine all his Arguments, and to return a fair Anſwer to ſo much of his Book, as was needful for the diſcuſſing of the Quedefending my ſelf againſt his Oppoſitions. And this I thought my ſelf the more concerned to undertake, becauſe ſo far as this ſtrange aſſertion ſhould be received as true, it would make void the deſign of my forlawful and a duty, for Miniſters
publick ſervice, worſhip and Miniſtrations of the Church of England. And I knew not how far any appearances of reaſoning might be magnified, by ſuch perſons who are engaged againſt our Church, many of whom in a ſinking cauſe, (ſo far as concerneth the evidence of truth and reaſon) may be willing to catch hold on any twig.
The Author of this Book hath not pubunknown perſon. And I confeſs, I cannot eaſily conlearning and conſideration, as to be guilty of ſuch miſtakes and palpable over-ſights, as may be found in ſome places of this Book. For beſides many other unaccountable poſitimiſunderſtandings, divers of which I ſhall mention in my following Diſcourſe; it is obſervable, that what he writes conancient practices of the Church, after the Apoſtles time; or conadmiration: of
4. When he ſpeaks of the original of Liturgies, he ſaithWe do believe, that Gregory the Great, under the protection of Charles the Great, was the Father of all thoſe that dwell in theſe Tents, and this eight hundred or a thouſand years after Chriſt. But firſt to ſpeak of Gregory the Great, eight hundred or a thouſand years after Chriſt, is far enough from truth, when he died about the year 604. And ſecondly, that Gregory the Great ſhould be under the protection of Charles the Great, is impoſſible, when he was dead about two hundred years, before Charles the Great began his Reign. And thirdly, it is altogether as unaccountable, that the original of Liturgies was in the time eiGregory the Gerat, or Charles the Great, when they were in uſe many hunChurch of the Iſraelites, and ſhould aſſert, that the offering of Sacrifices under the Moſaical Law, had its beginning in
Eli the Prieſt, in the Reign of King Jehoſaphat, ſix hundred or eight hundred years after the Iſraelites came out of Egypt. Surely it is a ſtrange confidence for any perſon to vent ſuch things, and to write poſitively what he no better un
5. But whoever the Author of this Diſclearing of the truth concerning the matter of it, which I ſhall do with as much ſuccinctomit any thing conLiturgies, or againſt what I have ſaid in their deobjections made by others, againſt the force of his Arguments, and gives his Anſwers to them, I ſhall paſs by ſuch things, where the inlong Syllogiſms, which is a tedious way of proceeding; and in rational DiſSyllogiſm. But I ſhall give a faithful account of the ſubſtance of his Arguments, and leave it to the imfirſt Chapter may anſwer his firſt, my ſecond his ſecond, and ſo onward to the end of his Book.
6. But touching my former Diſcourſe which this Writer oppoſeth, he ſeemeth not very well pleaſed, with my having choſen that ſubjectviz. the defence of our Liturgy, nor with the time when my Book was written, which he ſaith was in that nick of time of his Majeſties moſt Gracious Indulgence, if it was poſſible to perſwade the Parliament, that there was no need of any indulgence towards them. Now as to the ſubject matter of my Livertas Eccleſiaſtica, if he diſdiſlike and cenſure; but I think my ſelf to have gitime was
defend and juſtify our Communion, when they who divide themſelves from us, made the greateſt oppoſition againſt it; and inSchiſm. But the truth is, I was engaged in that work before that Declaration came abroad, but may Book was not publiſhed, till after his Majeſty had cancelled that Declaration: the Declaration which was made March 1671/2. was Cancelled about the end of 1672. and my Book came abroad in Octob. 1673.
7. But as to the perſwading our Governours againſt any Indulgence or favour towards them, it is poſſible the poſitions of this Writer may do more to that purjuſtify the lawfulneſs of performing what is required of Miniſters, concerning the Liturgy; which was no more than to vindicate, what the practice and acknowledgment of every conforming Miniſter had before owned. But I think it my duty, to leave the ordering of publick affairs to my ſuperiours, and did not by any expreſſion that I am aware of, inter
8. But I know not how far ſuch Diſvince ſuperiours, that ſuch perſons areſtabliſhment; bedemands, and the weakneſs of their Arguenjoining the ordinary uſe of any Liturgy, or ſet form whatſoever, in publick Minithe only medium he can fancy, for a juſt comprehenſion, that there be no Forms of Prayer enrecommended by ſuperiours and left at liberty. And yet it ſeemeth probable from hisPreface, that all this is not enough; for he there tells us of other ſix things he hath, to put in diſpute beſides this. I do not doubt but all thoſe ſix things, may be as eaſily anſwered as produced: and the Reader may make a probable judgment of the ſtrength and force of thoſe other things, by this one which he hath ſingled out from the reſt, and therefore ſurely he thought it to be as conſiderable as any of the other.
9. And it might be expected, that he who is curiouſly ſevere, in judging of a fit time, for publiſhing other mens Diſſeaſonableneſs of his own. And he who conſiders the buſineſs of our Enemies
encouraged by our diſcords at home, may well think, that they who have any true value for the Reformation, ſhould at this time eneſtabliſhment of the Church, which may tend to uphold and ſecure it. And ſince our diſſenters by ſufficient tryal, found in our late dierect, much leſs maintain any eſtabliſhment in their way, we may thence diſcern that no ſettlement can reaſonably be expectChurch of England, which hath alſo the advantage of truth, and agreement with Primitive Chriſtianity. And therefore it was no fit time now to vent ſuch notions which widen our breaches, are inconſieſtabliſhment of a Church, and which put advantages into the hands of other Enemies, and ſerve their purpoſes. And yet I confeſs this of the time, is the leaſt fault of this Diſconfuſion, and the things contained in it are unſound and untrue, which I ſhall now come to manifeſt.
IN managing his oppoſition againſt the conſtant uſe of preſcribed Forms of Prayer,ſtate of the Queſtion, which he undertakes to diſpute, and therein he expreſſeth what he yieldeth, and granteth as lawful, and what he judgeth and eſteemeth to be ſinful, and undertaketh to prove it ſo: and herein he hath declared himſelf with ſufclearneſs and plainneſs: What he contends for he thus expreſſeth,All that we affirm is this, That our Conſciences do from arguments, which to us at leaſt ſeem highly probable, judge, That it is unlawful for Miniſters, having the gift of prayer, ordinarily to perform their miniſterial acts in ſolemn, ſtated, publick Prayer, by reading or reciting forms of Prayer compoſed by other men, confeſſedly, not divinely and immediately inſpired, although our ſuperiours do requrie this of us.
their labours are profitable, who have drawn the matter of Prayer into Forms:
Form of Prayer contained in the Scripture, may be uſed as part of our Prayer, whether it be under any command or no; but if it be commanded, it undoubtedly ought to be uſed;
Miniſter diſtruſting his own memory or invention, ſhall compoſe Prayers for his own uſe, he may do it:
lawful, yea neceſſary, for them who join with others in Prayer, to make uſe of their words, which yet are but a Form to them:
miniſters in Prayer to others may uſe a preſcribed Form of anothers compoſure, if he have not the gift of Prayer. Andſhort ejaculatory Forms; ſuch as Lord have mercy upon us. This being the ſenſe of this Wri
3. Obſ. 1. From theſe premiſes, the Reamatter of this Queſtion: to which end he may conſider, Firſt, that our Prayer is directed to the moſt high God, and therefore it was called by the ancient Writersſpeaking unto God. Secondly, that the ordinary wants of Chriſtians (except extraordinary
matter of Prayer, for publick Aſſemblies eſpecially, is conſtantly the ſame. He who will deny this, muſt as well condemn the Directory, for&c.
Common Prayer for expreſſing the words; nor can he have ſuch honourable thoughts as he ought to have, and as the Chriſtian Church always hath had, of the Contents of the Lords Prayer. Thirdly, that the granting it lawful, for a Miniſter to uſe a preſcribed Form of Prayer, of anothers compoſure, if he have not the gift of Prayer; is as much as to acknowledge, that ſuch a Prayer, piouſly performed, is a true worſhip of God, and may be acceptable to him; otherwiſe it would not be lawful. Fourthly, That the difference betwixt praying for the ſame things in a Form, and praying for them without a Form is this, that in the former way the ſame words and methods are conſtantly uſed, whereas in the latter the expreſſions are altered and changed,
method alſo, according as the perſon think
4. Wherefore fifthly, The main reſult of this Queſtion, at the laſt comes to this: Whether mens changing of expreſſions, vaaltering their order and method in their Prayers to God, be things ſo valuable and conſiderable in his ſight, that his laws and will do require this, and that he hath ſuch an eye unto it, that the humble, devout, and Religious ſupplications, and addreſſes of pious perſons, are not acceptable to him, unleſs they be attended with ſuch variety of expreſſions, where the perſons have ſo much volubility of ſpeech? Now upon a ſhort view, it may appear, that the affirmative in this Queſtion, is very unlikely and im
5. If we conſult the rules of holy Scripture;
much ſpeaking or many and various words, Mat. 6.7. And as a remedy againſt it, taught his Diſciples that comprehenſive Form of the Lords Prayer. And from this Text S. Aug.
ſuperfluity of words, to be unHilary inferreth, that we ſhouldorare ad Deum, non multiloquio ſed conſcientia, pray to God not with a multitude of words, but with a good Conſcience. And it is accounted a piece of reverence to God, which Solomon directed us to make uſe of in our addreſſes to him, Eccl. 5.2.
Be not raſh with thy mouth, and let not they heart be haſty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.
6.Law, God did not require daily various changes, of the real expreſſions of religious worſhip and ſervice; but apNumb. 28.2, 3, &c. which makes it more than probable, that the variety of verbal expreſſions, is not requiſite to obtain his acceptance under the Goſpel. The daily burnt-offering was continually without any varying the thing, a lamb of the firſt year, with the ſame ſort of meat-offering, and drink-offering; and the Prieſts without any varying of rites about that Sacrifice, were as Joſephus ſaith,performing their office always in the ſame manner. Only upon their ſabbath days, the ordinary ſacrifice was doubled; and upon other days of great ſolemnity, there was an addition of other Sacrifices And I need not direct the intelligent Reaſervice of our Church is in theſe things correſponEvangelical ſervices being now morning and evening offered unto God, as then were the Legal: as hath
Sparrow's Ration. of Com. Pr. p. 3, 8. And from the nature of God.
7. And he who conſidereth that God is a ſpirit, and that true piety, and gooddifferent phraſes in Prayer, can be of any great moment beObedience. Proper words are neceſſary in publick Prayer, that by their expreſſive ſignificancy, the whole Conjoin in their united Petitiorder and decency, and manifeſting a due honour to Gods worſhip, and reverence for his name; and all theſe things may be moſt uſefully provided for, in a well ordered Form. But words are not in repure heart, and the exerciſe of true piety, is that which God accepteth.
8. This truth is ſo manifeſt, that even the Ethnick Writers do frequently exSatyriſt declares of a well fixed integrity, and inward purity of mind and heart,Haec cedo ut admoveam templis & farre litabo; that this is the moſt valuable thing without compare, in
Hierocles had declared,Pythian Oracle ſpake to the ſame purpoſe, he thus exwith piety of mind every expreſſion is acceptable to God, and without it, none. And amongſt the Chriſtian Writers ſuch expreſſions are frequent, as that of S. Cyprian,
Deus non vocis, ſed cordis auditor eſt; God hears not the voice but the heart: and that of Cl. Alexandrinus, that the moſt excellent ſera religious devotion, and that as men obſerve our words, ſo God obſerves our minds and thoughts. But now the affecting variety of words, in the worſhip of God (where fit words may be beſt ſecured by a good Form) is both apt to hinder due devotion, and it alſo ſpeaks ſuch perſons much concerned, about that which is too low and mean to procure Gods acceptance. And it implies a miſconception of the divine nature and Being, in them who look upon ſuch things, as of great concernment to pleaſe him; And the making that a neceſſary part of Religion which is not ſuch, by laying a doctrinal neceſſity, upon it, where men are able to perform it, cannot be excuſed from being a piece of ſuperſtition, or a teaching for doctrines
the precepts or fancies of men.
9. Obſ. 2.certain of the truth of this poſition which he layeth down, in his ſtating the caſe, and in the following part of his Book undertakes to prove. His poſition expreſſeth the ſinfulneſs of uſing Forms of Prayer, in the Caſe he propoſeth: and he ſaith,their judgment of Conſcience is that they are unlawful, and this theyfrom their hearts believe, and ſo muſt practiſe. But when he ſpeaks of his Arguments, he ſaith, they have Arguments whichappear very probable, andſeem highly probable, with other like expreſſions. And how far this evidence doth prevail with himſelf, we may diſ& p. 70.We judge not our ſelves infallible in our ſentiments in this caſe; we condemn not our brethren which judge otherwiſe and accordingly practiſe,
& in p. 22. We dare not judge thoſe who we think have the gift of Prayer, but think not fit to uſe it in their orwe pray God that if we be in the miſtake, God would reveal it to us. Theſe words do plainly ſpeak doubtfulneſs and uncertainty, as do thoſe in the Margent: for no underſtandtheft or lying, he would not ſay, we condemn not them who practiſe otherwiſe, &c. to wit, thieves
lyars, ſince he certainly knows theſe things to be ſin, and therefore that the practiſers of them ought to be condemned. Yet at ſometimes he ſpeaks, as if he pro& p. 123.demonſtrations.
10. Now I hope to make it manifeſt, that his Arguments do not ſo much as prove any probability of truth in his aſſerunſafe it is for themſelves,
dangerous to Religion, for men to oppoſe the ſtate and order of a well ſetled Church, upon probable Arguments. Where we have certain evidence of any thing being our duty, we are bound to embrace it, whomſoever we contradict: but certain evidence no man can have of an errour being truth. And to proceed upon probable Arguments only, yea or on ſuch as men may by their micertain, is in an errour no ſafe foundation for practice.
11. The Donatiſts by their reſtleſs Pleas, and various diſputations, manifeſthighly probable; the ſame may be ſaid of the Arians and Eunomians whoſe Arguments are freAthanaſius,
Gr.
Nazianzene, and other ancient Writers, to a greater number than this Writer hath againſt Forms of Prayer. And almoſt all who were of old guilty of any Hereſy or Schiſm, as alſo at this day the Romaniſts, Anabaptiſts, Quakers, and other ſuch Sects, have their Arguments which they account probable. And for the Browniſts, who declared in theirChurch of England, its Miniſtry, and its worſhip, were all adulterous; Fr. Johnſon publiſhed hisJohn
ſeven Arguments of one ſort, and ſeven of anoSyllogiſms, as our Author produceth his ſeven Arguments in Syllogiſms againſt Forms of Prayer. And Erbury and others with him, had their Arguments which to them ſeemed probaLong in Exam. of Mr
Hales of Schiſm, p. 133.Oxford to produce, and urge againſt all ordination and miniſtry. Yet if I ſhould ask this Author, whether he thinks all theſe pererrors and hereſies, and that the Church of God received no diſadpublick Aſſemblies, and to perform the worſhip of God according to our eſtabliſhed Conſtitutions; they cannot be acquitted from ſin, nor excuſed from doing hurt to the Church of God, who reject theſe duties upon their probable Arguments.
12. But in requital for his ſo favouracondemning our uſing the Liturgy of the Church, this Author expects that we ought not to change him, and others of his perDiſſenters are to be blamed.
We condemn not our brethren. Let not them, ſaith he, judge and condemn us; We are in our diſſents in the caſe, anothers ſervants. Now it becomes no man to paſs that judgment on others, which is peculiar to God, as, concerning the hidden things of the heart of man, or his final ſtate: but we are allowed to acevil, which are manifeſtly ſo. And it is very unreaſonable, that if they who violate any Laws of God or Man, do not blame others for keeping them, that therePeter did not fault S. Paul, who according to his duty kept Communion with the Church at Antioch, S. Paul did not therefore think himſelf
rebuke S. Peter, for his unwithdrawing from it: but he declares in this caſe, Gal. 2.11. I withſtood him to the face, becauſe he was to be blamed; and v. 14. I ſaw that they walked not uprightly, according to the truth of the Goſpel.
13. Wherefore, becauſe I think it my duty to deal faithfully and plainly in theſe things, I do freely profeſs, that beLaws of the Church and of the Realm; I account my ſelf to have as plain evidence from the Laws of God, and the Conſtitution of the Chriſtian Church, that Schiſm and unneceſſary ſepaChriſtian Ʋnity, as that Adultery is a ſin in breaking the bond of Wedlock. And I account my ſelf to be as certain, that if ever there was any unwarrantable ſeparation, from any known Church ſince the Apoſtles time, the ſeparation from the Church of England is really ſuch: ſince our Church is truly as free from any juſt exception, in its Constitution, doctrine and worſhip, as any other ſince that time either was, or is. And it ſeemeth highly probable, if I do not miſtake plain words, that ſome of our diſſenters themſelves, are at ſome times ſatisfied either of ſo much, or of that which comes very near it, concerning
r
Owen ſaith,We look upon the Church of England, or the generality of the nation profeſſing Chriſtian Religion (meaſuring them by the doctrine received ſince the Reformation) to be as ſound and healthful a part of the Catholick Church, as any in the World; and again,We believe that the generality of the inhabitants of this nation, are by their profeſſion conſtituted an eminent part of the Kingdom of Chriſt in this World. But if pitieth me to conſider upon what weak and unwarrantable pretences, ſuch perſons venture upon the practices of real ſeparation: and by what inſufficient ex
14.Obſ. 3. There are conſiderable prejudices againſt the truth of our Authors aſſertion, as it is by him ſtated, even ſuch which, beſide the more direct evidences (of which hereafter) will perſwade a ſoentertaining it, if he duly obſerve them. For this opinion is not only againſt the Church of England, but the moſt famous Churches in the Primitive times, who uſed ſuch ſet Forms in their publick worſhip, as beſides what hath been ſaid already, will ſufficiently appear in the following Diſcourſe. This is alſo againſt the Conſtitution of many
Proteſtant Churches abroad, which I have elſewherethe continuance of Liturgies upon the Reformation, owes it ſelf in a great meaſure to their not having men able to pray without a Form. And yet I cannot but think, that this Author is a perſon of ſo much modeſty, and hath ſuch a reſpect to many of thoſe Reformers, and their Succeſſors, as not to think them inferiour to himſelf; and then they muſt come uncaſt reproach on almoſt all the Churches of Chriſt in all Ages; and muſt alſo conclude all the moſt famous Miniſters therein, to have lived and died, in the conſtant praſame ſin unrepented of. Now I can eaſily apprehend, that ſuch a conauthority or practice is a lamentable Argument: but at another time he declares, concerning the ſenſe and apprehenſions of good men, thatthe ſenſus piorum, neither is, nor ever was judged
by perſons of ſobriety and worth, an inconſiderable Argument; for the truth of a propoſition (eſpecially a practical propoſition) not plainly determined in holy Writ.
15.ſtating his Queſtion, overthrows the main foundatiaffirm and deny the ſame thing, or to reconcile things conanother great prejudice againſt his opinion. Now in ſtating his Caſe, he grants, as I above obſerved, that ſuch Forms of Prayer as God hath commanded in Scripture, (if any ſuch be) muſt be uſed, and other Scripture Forms, though not commanded, may be uſed as part of our Prayer; and yet he detheir own
&c. and Ch. 3.gifts, and 2. From the hindrance of pious diſpoſitions, or attention and fervency, from the uſe of a Form of words in Prayer; and yet if theſe Arguments are of any weight, they muſt conclude againſt the lawful uſe of Scripture Forms, as well as of oForms being in the New Teſtament commanded to be uſed, that ſufficiently manifeſteth, that a ſet Form of words in Prayer can be no hindrance to a religious temper of mind, unleſs we will grant that our Saviours commands are hurtful to his Religion, and that ſuch Poſitions of men, which are contrary to his Precepts, ought to be preferred before them.
16. He acknowledgeth alſo, p. 3. that it is lawful, yea neceſſary, for them who join with others in Prayer, to make uſe of his words who ſpeaketh, which c an be but a Form to them. And p. 19. he ſaith, ſuch perſons have nothing to do but to exerciſe their grace. And this conſideration was made uſe of, to prove the lawfulneſs of Forms, byTayl. Of Prayer Extempore, n. 46, 47. Diſp. of Liturg. Prop. 1. Arg. 6.r
Hammond, Dr
Taylor, and Mr
Baxter. Now from hence it not only follows, that ſuch Prayers are acceptable to God, which are put up by pious men with devout hearts, but without the exgifts; but it muſt alſo be hence concluded, that
Ʋnity in publick Prayer, is more acceptable to God, than the uſe of mens own abilities in conception or expreſſion. For otherwiſe, it would be the duty of all perſons in the publick AſMiniſters words, or
private conceptions there, or elſe to with
17.Nonconformiſts themſelves will not own. Indeed in Qu. Eliz. her time, theWhitgifts Defence Tr. 9. Ch. 2. Div. 2.tied to any Forms of Prayer invented by men, but Mr
Cartwright in hisReply, deagreement for a preſcript Form to be uſed in the Church. And beſides oPresbyterian Commiſſioners at the Savoy, made not our Authors Poſition any part of their objenew Forms, as themſelves exdiſagreements are among themſelves, even in ſo many things; that it cannot be expected that any way of ſettlement ſhould be agreed upon among themſelves, as it was experimentally ma
18. And I ſhould be wanting in due
civility to our Author, if I do not do him ſo much right, as to acknowperſpicuous stating the Question, hath made way for the fairer exalawfulneſs of all Forms in general, and alnot argue for praying ex tempore, but only in the uſe of our own gifts, which excludes not premetruth that right, as to obſerve, that his poſition as he hath ſtated it, is not conſi
THE firſt Argument produced aſet Form, by ſuch Miniſters who have a gift of Prayer, is becauſe (ſaith he) this gift is a mean given by God for the performance of this religious act of Prayer, and thereforemay not be neglected or omitted. And he tells us by the gift of Prayer he meansmans ability fitly to expreſs his mind to God in Prayer. And that ſuch a perſon, who is able fitly to expreſs his mind in his own words, ought to make uſe of them in publick Adminiſtrations, and may not lawfully pray by a Form; he endeavours to prove, by urging ſome Scriptures which require the uſe of ſome gifts, as 1 Tim. 4.14. 1 Pet. 4.10, 11. Rom. 12.3, 6.
2.Gift of Prayer? and
devout Prayer, doth contain a great part of the lively exerciſe, and practice of Religion and Piety; eſpecially if we comprehend under the name of Prayer, both confeſſitrue God, and Faith in him, and acknowledging him to be the Governour and diſpoſer of all things, and the Author of all good: and this is called by Philo
Almighty power, infinite wiſdom, goodneſs, faithfulneſs and Omniſcience of God: and alſo the exerciſe of reverence, ſubmiſſion, humility, hope, affectionate deſire, heavenly mindedneſs, and repentance; together with a lively ſenſe and belief of the GoſLord and Saviour; and a ſincere love to all men, and particularly to the Church, and our Governours, for whom we pray.
3. Wherefore firſt, that is eminently and eſpecially to be eſteemed the gift of Prayer, which diſpoſeth and enableth to the performance of the duty of Prayer.
heart, ſoul and ſpirit unto God, Gods beſtowing the ſupplies and aſſiſtances of his grace, which kindle and excite pious diſpoſitions in ſeeking unto God, with earneſt and affectionate deſires, a lively faith, and the exerciſe of inward devotion; this is moſt properly his vouchſafing, and beſtowing the gift of Prayer: and our regift of Prayer. For as the gift of Charity, doth not conſiſt in ſpeakgrace of Prayer, he may conſider that by Grace, he can here underſtand nothing elſe but an excellent and gracious gift; and as S. Auſtin declaredipſa oratio inter gratiae munera reperitur; Prayer it ſelf is to be reckoned amongſt the works of grace.
4. And whereas this Authorgift of Prayer from the holy Spirit,Zec. 12.10. and Rom. 8.26. it is remarkſpirit or gift of Prayer, have particular reſpect to the indevotion of the heart, and not, according to his notion, to the ability of expreſſion. The former place is Zec. 12.10. I will pour upon the inhabitants of Jeruſalem, the ſpirit of grace and ſupplications; and they ſhall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they ſhall mourn, &c. Where the Hebrew word tranſlated Supplications is by divers Interpreters, as the Chaldee Paraphraſt, the Septuagint, the Syriack and Arabick Verſions, and PagMercies or Compaſſions. And ſince the ſpirit of ſupplications, is the ſpirit of grace, it therefore is to be underſtood acpiety of mind and affections, and an holy temper and diſpoſition of heart, to truſt in God and call upon him. And the following words, and they ſhall look upon me whom they have pierced, and ſhall mourn, &c. will infer the ſame thing, if thoſe words be taken as expreſſions of true repentance, which is the ſenſe of many good Expoſitors; though ſome modern andanguiſh of them who had deſpiſed and diſobeyed our Bleſſed Lord and Saviour.
The ſpirit helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what to pray for as we ought, but the ſpirit it ſelf maketh interceſſion for us, with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now concerning the former part of theſe words, it cannot be conceived, that this great Apoſtle, and other Chriſtians at that time, ſhould be ignorant of the common matters of Chriſtian Prayer, who could not but be acquainted withLords Prayer, but a conſiderable part of the ſenſe of this clauſe is, that whileſt under troubles and ſufferings, of which the Apoſtle was diſa thorn in the fleſh, 2 Cor. 12.7, 8, 10. the influence of Gods ſpirit direſign themſelves unto the will of God, that that may be done on earth, and that his moſt wiſe Government ſhould order all their affairs in this life. And the guidance of the Holy Spirit by keeping pious men humble, preſerves them ordinarily from ſuch irregular inclinations and deſires, as appeared in the requeſt of the two Sons of Zebedee, James and John,
6. And in the latter part of theſe words, the Spirits making interceſſion with groanings which cannot be uttered, may well be applied to vehement affections, and inward gracious motions of the heart; but cannot conſiſtently with comwords and expreſſions. But I ſee no great difference, whether this clauſe be underſtood immeHoly Ghoſt himſelf, as moſt of thegemendi inſpirat affectum, promotes affeAbba Father, Gal. 4.6. becauſe therewe cry Abba Father, Rom. 8.15. Or whether it be underſtood of the gifts of the Holy Ghoſt, and the ſpirits of pious men who are influenced thereby, in deChryſoſtom, and is alſo mentioned byAuſtin.
7. The continued and encreaſed ſupplies of this divine grace and gift of Prayer,
exerciſe of this gift being ſo great a part of Religion, and of ſingular uſe for obtaining various bleſſings from God, it ought by all men to be performed with the greateſt ſeriouſneſs. And as that ability of expreſſion, whereby a man largely profeſſeth the particular doctrines of the Chriſtian Faith, in the ſeveral Articles of our Belief, is not properly the gift of Faith or of believing, ſo neither is the like abigift of Prayer, but rather of ſpeaking, utterance, or Elocution. But it is the inward gracious diſpoſitions, and moeffectual and fervent prayer of a righteous man, which availeth much. Hereby as Cl. Alexandrinus
We ſpeak diſtinctly though with ſilence,
and utter inward loud cries, where no voice is heard.
8. Secondly, There was alſo a gift of Prayer, and praying with the ſpirit, when
extraordinary impulſes and immediate inHoly Spirit upon their minds, ſo to pray either in their own or other Languages, that theſe motions of their hearts, and inward deſires, and alſo their words and expreſſions, were the proper and extraordinary works and dictates of the Holy Ghoſt, 1 Cor. 14.14, 15, 16, 17. And it ſeemeth highly probagift, Rom. 8.26, 27. according to the interpretation ofChryſoſtome, who thinks that for the better clearing thoſe words, there muſt be recourſe had to the times of ſuch extraordinary gifts, which in his days were ceaſed. And he ſaith, God then gave gifts which are called alſo ſpirits; and having mentioned the gift or ſpirit of prophecy, of wiſdom, heal&c. he addeth, after all theſe, there was a gift of Prayer, which is alſo called a ſpirit (or ſpirit of Prayer) and he who had this, ſaith he, prayed for the whole multitude. And in another place the ſame Father obſerves, that this gift which he there alſo calls,gift of
tongues, or an ability by the inſpiration of the ſpirit, to expreſs theſe Prayers in other Languages: which is alſo manifeſt from the Scriptures themſelves, 1 Cor. 14.14, 15, 16.
9.matter of this inſpiration and guifavour from God, and theſe iminfallible guides, for the right performance of the duty of Prayer, and making interceſſion according to the will of God, Rom. 8.27. But theſe eminent and extraordidemonſtration of the ſpirit, both for the eſtabliſhinfallible inſpirations, nor ought he to be credited who ſhall ſo pretend. Yet they who then received theſe aſſiſtances, were not oblimake uſe of them, meerly for the exerciſing of their gifts in the Chriſtian Aſſemblies; but they ought onorder, and decency, and edification; but in other Caſes they were to forbear the uſe thereof, as is manifeſt from 1 Cor. 14. And upon this account, the Apoſtle argues againſt the publick uſe of the gift of Prayer in an unknown tongue, though in the uſe of inſpired gifts, 1 Cor. 14.14. my ſpirit prayeth, but my underſtanding,
is unfruitful; i.e. my gift is exerciſed, and my own mind and ſpirit is affected; but my ſenſe and meaning is not declared, to the profit and benefit of others. For underſtanding, appears to be uſed by S. Paul in this place, for the dev. 19. and ſo it is uſed elſewhere in this Epiſtle, 1 Cor. 2.16. we have the mind of Chriſt, or the plain and true manifeſtation of his mind and doctrine.
10. From this 1 Cor. Ch. 14. I had in my Libertas Eccleſiaſtica given this as an Anſwer to that Argument againſt ſet Forms of Prayer, that they limit the uſe of gifts:That by the will of God, bounds and limits were to be ſet, even to the uſe of the extraordinary gifts of Gods ſpirit, that the Church might be edified, 1 Cor. 14.26, 27, 28, 30, 33. Whereas now no ſuch miraculous
emanations of the Holy Ghoſt can be pretended. Now in reply to this, this Auagainſt two or three ſpeaking or gabling together, and for the avoiding undue length in their Diſcourſes, and that if any ſpeak in an unknown tongue ſome ſhould interpret. And then he declares, that ſuch diſorderly things may be reſtrained; but ſaith, it is one thing to reſtrain the notorious abuſe of gifts, but it is a quite different thing to reſtrain the uſe of them. And to this pur
11.1 Cor. 14. conſidered.particular gifts, is not of ſo great neceſſity in the Church, becauſe they are gifts, but that even ſome of the extraorHoly Spirit might be, and ought to be forborn to be exerciſed, where this forbearance tended to decent order, or edification. And if this be plainly proved from this Chapter, the general urging the neceſſity of the uſe of all gifts given of God, further than
charity, edification, and the good and profit of others, are things to be preferred and valued, above extraordinary ſpiritual gifts, v. 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. that they who had theſe extraordinary gifts of the ſpirit, were not bound to uſe them in the Church, meerly becauſe they were gifts, unleſs the uſe thereof was for the profit and edification of others, v. 2, 6, 18, 19. Yea the uſe of the gift of tongues, though given by the ſpecial inſpiration of the Holy Spirit, was totally forbidden, where there was no interpreter, v. 23, 27, 28. and yet ſo far as concerns the nature of gifts, an ability to ſpeak with other tongues, by peculiar aſſiſtances of the Spirit, was as much, yea more a gift, than an ability of expreſſing our ſelves in our own tongue, without any ſuch extraordinary and peculiar aſſiſtance. And they who had other gifts of revelation, interpretation or doctrine, were to hold their peace, ſo far as was requiſite to the obſerving the rules of order, and dev. 26, 30, 33, 40. But in our Caſe, there are no ſuch gifts in being now, as then were in the Church, and therefore no reſtraint laid upon any ſuch; here is no prohibigift of Prayer as I have above ſhewed, nor is any thing forbidden directly or indirectly, by the injoining Liturgies, which is of greater uſe to the edification of the Church; as I ſhallperformance of the duty of Prayer preſcri
12. Thirdly, I acknowledge there is an ability in many perſons, whereby they can expreſs their minds in ſome defitly to God in Prayer. This our Augift of Prayer. And I do not love to contend about exgift of Prayer, is no where uſed at all in the Scripture, and the ancient Writers do uſefully for the promoting devotion in Prayer, diſcourſe of it as a work of the heart and ſoul, and not of words: Prayer, ſaith S. Baſil
we do not at all define to be a buſineſs of words: and whileſt we are warned againſt confidence in
much ſpeaking, it is a diligent diſpoſition of heart, that is of great uſe. Wheregift of Prayer, but rather of ſpeech or
13.facility of expreſſion is procuaffectionateneſs of devotion doth contribute much thereto: and in others confident ſelf-conceit, and an heated fancy, and (as I have read ſome particular indiabolical contracts have promoted the ſame. And as I cannot adgifts of God, ſo neither is it to be allowed, that the natural product of them in thoſe perſons ſhould be ſo eſteemed; and much leſs are they to be called Gifts of the Holy Spirit. And it is manifeſt, that a readineſs of expreſſing the ſenſe of their minds, with fluency of fit words, and voPrayers and other Diſcourſes, to propagate and upheretical doctrines, and Enthuſiaſm, and even them who are ſunk into the depth of impiety; as well as thoſe who deſign to promote truth and goodneſs. And it muſt be an high diſhopeculiar aſſiſtances, to the advancing of error and falſPaul obſerved a ſleight and cunning craftineſs, in them who lie in wait to deceive, Eph. 4.14. and that by good words and fair ſpeeches, they deceive the hearts of the ſimple,
Rom. 16.18. And Nazianzene deſcribes the diſcourſes of Hequick, nimble, and voluble tongue, and they ſpake, generous ſtile, and choice and approved words. And theſe perſons and ſuch like, might be forward enough to call theſe things gifts, and to uſe our Authors Argument againſt the re
14. The high advantages of the influences, and aids of the Holy Spirit in the Church of God, are with great thankfulpray in the ſpirit, which (beſides what was extraordinary, and peculiar to thoſe times) conſiſts in inward piety of heart, and not in variety of words. And copiouſneſs of expreſſion is ſo far from being an evidence of his conChryſoſtoms judgment, where there is an over-flowing abunwords in Prayer, this cannot conſiſt with that praying in the ſpirit, which is commanded by the ApoEph. 6.18. It is ſaith he,not to pray in the ſpirit, when any one uſeth multitudes of words and repetitions. And indeed to pray in the ſpirit, as the Apoſtle directs, is to perform the duty of Prayer with a pious temper of mind, according to the Chriſtian rules; whereas the deSaviour. The ComAmbroſe his name deHoc eſt in ſpiritu ſemper or are, munda conſcientia, & fide integra precem ad Deum dirigere; This is to pray always in the ſpirit, to direct prayer to God with a pure conſcience, and an upright faith: and Calvin explains praying in the ſpirit, by declaring the inward devoutneſs of affehinc ardor & vehementia, hinc deni
Hence proceed warmth and earneſtneſs of ſpirit and groans, that cannot be uttered.
15. I acknowledge a ſober and due freedom of expreſſion, to be a gift of God, in the ſame manner that the capacities of mens underſtanding, and all other abilities
Gods bleſſing. And I cannot diſcern (and I think no man elſe can) that a Miniſters ability of ſpeech, either for Prayer, or Preaching, or Conference, is of any other nature, than that freedom of expreſſion which a Lawyer hath to plead, or which other perſons of good capacities and liberal education, and who have accuſtomed themſelves to diſcourſe, do make uſe of concerning ſuch things, as they have well conſidered: only it may be advanced by a pious affection towards the things he may diſcourſe of.
16. I ſhall now conſider, whether it be the duty of Chriſtians, or particularly of Miniſters, to make uſe of ſuch abilities, at all times, in the exerciſes of Religion. And beſides what I have ſaid before,ability wherewith he is endued, meerly becauſe it is a gift; in that this would equally make it his duty, to uſe his preſent or extempore ability of conception, and expreſmemory, in declaring what he hath himſelf conceireading what hath been before comſeveral abilities at the ſame time, is impoſſible, becauſe of their being inconſiſtent with one another. But God obligeth no man to impoſſibilities.
17. And beſides this, if it be neceſſary to the obtaining the favour of God, for Miniſters to uſe their own gifts, in uttervariety of expreſſions in their Prayers to God, becauſe they may not neglect the uſe of any of their gifts or abilities; then it muſt be neceſſary alſo, where the perPrayer in the uſe of divers languages, ſome part in one language, and ſome part in another, exerciſing therein all his ſeveral abilities. For our Authors Argument will as much prove the neceſſity of this, as the neceſſity of his uſing his own parts, in difextraordinary ability than the latter, and if no gift or accompliſhment, may be
neglected in the ſervice of God, then not this, which is of ſo conſiderable a degree. But yet if we conſider God,variety of ſounds of words and languages; and the urging ſuch a practice as a neceſſary duty of Religion, would repreſent Reaffectation, fancy and humour; and not of piety and ſeriouſneſs. Now this I mention, to maabilities are, further than they have an influence upon the profit and edification of others.
18.exerciſe of which they may lawfully, and uſefully, wholly omit in their Miniſterial employments. For inexplicate divers difficult Texts of Scripture; or who is one of a piercing judgment, to fathom the depth of the greateſt controverſies, will not only be free from ſin, but may be commended, if he ſilence theſe his abilities in his popular Sermons, and acquaint common Audipractice, and ſucapacities. Thus S. Paul dealt with his Corinthians, feeding them with milk, 1 Cor. 3.2.
19. I ſhall now go further, and ſhew,greateſt degree, both lawfully may, and for the greater good of the Church, ought, to make uſe of what is drawn up to their hands by others, in ſome great and weighty caſes, rather than of their own gifts, in the neglect of what is ſo compoſed, drawn up and eſtabliſhed. And of this I ſhall give two in
20. My firſt inſtance ſhall be, concerntranſlation of the Holy Scripture. Now I preſume this Author will acknowinſtruct their people, in the doctrine and Religion of Chriſtianity, out of the holy Scriptures. But according to his Principles, he who is able to give an account of the Original, ought not to cite the Scripture according to our Engliſh Tranſlation, but muſt uſe his own gift and ability, in making a new Tranſlation of his own: and poſſibly, if he be guided by our Authors way of reacites it a ſecond, third,
fixed and well conſidered Tranſlation muſt be of more value and eſteem, and of greater uſe for the inſtructing people in the doctrine of Chriſtianity, than this changeable method. And in this caſe, we have the acknowledgment of this Writer himſelf, who ſaith,both Chriſt and his Apoſtles made frequent uſe of the Septuagint Verſion.
21. Our Author himſelf propoſeth it, as an objection againſt his opinion, that according to it,Miniſters who are able muſt be bound in reading the Scriptures, to make a Tranſlation of their own. And here at firſt he makes a doubt, whether readMiniſterial act; and ſaith, Chriſt never ſaid to them, Go and read, and he ſuppoſeth the Scriptures may be read by inferiour officers, as is done in other Reformed Churches. But thus far his Anſwer is very inſufficient, if it be conreading the holy Scriptures in the Church, hath been a part of the publick Offices in the Chriſtian Aſſemblies, from the time of theApoſtles times, and by their Precept, Act. 15.31. Col. 4.16. 1 Theſ. 5.27. and that this is included in that charge to Timothy, 1 Tim. 4.13. Give
attendance to reading, is acknowledged by manyr
Hammond, & in Baldw. in loc.publick offices ought to be performed by the uſe of mens own gifts, why not this? 2. Even the publick Prayers were alſo in the ancient Greek Church, uſually performed or read, not by the chief OffiDeacon, asChryſoſtom oft expreſſeth. 3. That yet when perread the Scriptures publickly, they muſt either ſin according to his Poſition, in neglecting the uſe of their gifts, or elſe muſt make New Tranſlations. 4. That what ever ſuch men as our Author will deterpublick reading the Scriptures, which was alſo conſtantlyJewiſh Church, Act. 13.15, 27. ch. 15.21. and where our Savistood up for to read, Luk. 4.15, 16. Yet ſo long as instructing the people out of the Scriptures, is acknowledged a Mininew Tranſlations.
22. But for a further Anſwer, he tells us,That no ſingle Miniſter is fit to be truſted with this, nor to enter a diſſent to the ordinary Verſion, — but with great modeſty and upon weighty grounds. Now I
extream. I do not ſee what reaſon our Author hath, to condemn S. Hieroms tranſlating the Old Teſtament, out of the Original Hebrew (or his Tranſlating the Scriptures, for the uſe of hisDalmatian or Slavonian Tongue, and the like undertakings of divers other perſons) beJunius and Tremellius, or (if they may eſcape the better becauſe they were two) againſt Beza's Verſion of the New TeſtaTranſlations of the Bible, when the old one is ſufficiently perfect, is a very need
23. But why may not what he ſpeaks of a Verſion, be as well and as truly afpublick Prayers of the Church, when there are as great abilanguages, and ancient Cuwiſdom, care, conſideaddreſſes of the Church, and to recomtranſlation of the Scripture? And why private Midiſſents here, than concerning a Tranſlation, I do not underſtand; eſLiturgy is free from any miſtake or erdifficult Texts, concerning any Tranſlation yet extant, every Age affordoriginal Texts, eſpecially of the New Teſtament, as our Author can make againſt them, who think all private Miniſters not ſufficiently able, with due fitneſs, exactneſs and comprehenſivenew ſolemn addreſſes to God, to preſent therein the common ſervice of the Church. And yet if their private abilities could conſtantly enable them, to make Prayers every way as perfect, as a well-ordered Form is, I ſhall in the next Chapter ſhew the advantages,
24. But beſides this, I know not how our Author will be able here to Anſwer his own inſtance. For whatſoever may be ſaid of other Miniſters; were notChriſt, and his Apoſtles who were divinely inſpiinterpreting the Scriptures from the Original, yea and of making an infallible tranſlation alſo? And yet they thought it neither neceſſary nor fit, when ever they cited the Scripture, to exerciſe their gifts, in making a new Verſion, but as he himſelf obſerveth, they frequently and for the moſt part followed the Septuagint. Indeed if our Author ſhould embrace that Notion, from Ariſtaeus, which is menPhilo, and eſpouſed by many of theancient Writers of the Church; and favoured by theImperial Law, and by ſomer Greg. in OpuſSeptuagint was framed by a kind of divine inſpiration, he would hereby in ſome degree avoid this difficulChriſt and his Apoſtles made uſe of this Verſion, though as full of miſtakes as any other. And in that the Pen-men of the New Teſtament, did ſometimes vary very
Zech. 12.10. cited Joh. 19.37. where the Septuagint inHieroms time were obſerved, and affirmed by him to read it, as our moſt ordinary Copies thereof now do; this is evidence enough, that they did not eſteem that Verſion to be of divine inſpiration.
25. A ſecond inſtance I ſhall give,Creed, or profeſſion of the Chriſtian Faith. Now ſuppoſing accordVoſſius, that the Creed called the Apoſtles, was not made by themſelves: In reciting the Articles of the Chriſtian Faith at Baptiſm, or accordCatechumeni before Baptiſm; it cannot be exnew Creed. And if he ſhould do this, it would neither be ſo cloſe and pithy in its matter and ſubſtance, nor of that authority, which the received Creeds are; and this would be the way to loſe the old faith, by a changeable novelty of words. The anciCuſtom of the Church, was to keep to theirfixed Creeds. And then they who would not acquieſce in the receiSymbol or Rule of Faith, were looktrue Faith.
26.publick Confeſſions. And which way ſoever our Author may be enclined in this Caſe, ſome of the chief perſons of the Presbyterian Party, in our late times, diſcerned ſo much hurt by the rejecting theſe publick Forms, as made them earneſt in pleading the uſefulneſs of them. Thus for inſtance, Dr
Tuckney, on 2 Tim. 1.13. Hold faſt the Form of ſound words. Whence he declares,Forms ſo much decryed in our times, were not ſo undervalued in Paul's, who you ſee left with Timothy a Form of words. And he ſaid,theſe have been ever in uſe, ſince God himſelf wrote the Decalogue, — and Chriſt taught us his own Prayer, — And the Apoſtles their Canons, Act. 15. and the Primitive Churches and Fathers their Creeds. And he not only aſſerts,Forms of ſound words are uſeful and in ſome caſes neceſſary: but complains alſo, that ourexperience in theſe wofully diſtracted times, too ſadly cryeth aloud, that the not keeping more cloſe to ſuch Forms of ſound words, (which our Church was ſometimes famous for, in point of Doctrine) — hath miſerably torn us in pieces, and divided us in ſemper diviſibilia, with more to that purpoſe. And conmany ſuch Forms are in theſe times of Deformation rather than Reformation, minted daily. So he in the Year 1650.
27. And amongſt the Independents, when their Elders and Meſſengers, from the ſeveral parts of the Realm, met at the Savoy, to publiſh their joint Declaration of Faith and Order; this their General Aſſembly, it ſeems, thought it not neceſſary or requiſite for them, to make uſe of their gifts to compoſe a new Confeſſion of Faith. For in the main part of what they pubwhole Chapters, and moſt of their Paragraphs, they kept exConfeſſion of the Aſſembly at Weſtminſter, making very few alterations in any other things, ſave where the Independent opinions difPresbyterians. And yet themſelvesConvention, and their
Ʋnity therein.
28. And it may be further conſidered,viz. the Verſion of Scripture, the Declaration of the Articles of Faith, and in publick Prayers, it may well be preſumed, that what is well conſidered and ſetled, or preſcribed as a Form, is more perfect and compleat in the comordinary variation. And to aſmoſt eminent perſon whomſoever, in a conſtant way of varying, in the uſe of their own abilities, than in a well conſidigeſted Form; is as much as to affirm, that the varied expreſſions of men at every particular time, are more probeſt compoſed Prayer that is at any time made, and reviewed with the greateſt coneſtabliſhed Form is.
29. And he who talketh of this our Church, that if all her Miniſters cannot conſtantly in their daily new Prayers, equal or out-do the perfection or exactneſs of a well conſidered Form, (for this muſt be his ſenſe, if he ſpeaks to any purpoſe) thatto the ſhame of the Church of God in England: theſe raw and extravagant ſpeeches will be to the ſhame of thoſe who utter them, ſo far as they will be aſhamed of uncharitable and reproachful calumnies againſt the Church of God, and of ſpeaking againſt all ſenſe and reaſon.
gift of Prayer, which is neceſſary to be exerciſed; nor yet any ſingular or peculiar gift of the ſpirit of God, as a ſpeability of a more common and ordinary nature. And that it is neither a duty, nor yet expedient, that ſuch abilities ſhould be uſed and conſtantly exerciſed, any further than is agreeable to the rules of edification and order. Thus much I thought fit to write for the Readers better ſatiſſubject or matter of his firſt Argument; but I ſhall not need to do the like concerning the reſt: And now it will be no hard thing, to Anſwer the Argument it ſelf.
31. The ſubſtance of his Argument is,gift, of expreſſing his mind fitly to God in Prayer, is a mean given by God, for the performance of the Religious act of Prayer; and therefore may not be omitted, no not at the command of man. To which I Anſwer,
32. Firſt, That a mean given of God,
neceſſary mean to the performance of the duty, may lawfully be omitted. Eſpecially when there are ſeveral means,
most profitable, is not to be faulted, becauſe he doth not uſe the other which is leſs profitable. Thus in the publick Prayers of the Church; whereas a Miniſters preſent fluency of expreſſion, or his remembrance of what himſelf hath before conceived, with reſpect to that particular time; or his uſing a ſet Form, are different ways or means of performing this ſervice; he who chuſeth the laſt, which hath many advantages of the other two, is not to be blamed becauſe he doth not chuſe either of thoſe two. And by this it may appear, that this Writers own Argument, if it were of any ſtrength, might eaſily be inverted, and retorted againſt himſelf, if we put in the phraſe of a Form of Prayer, inſtead of a Miniſters own gift, &c.
33. Secondly, That ability of expreſſion was not peculiarly and particularly given by God to Miniſters, that they might thereby perform the publick Offices of Prayer. This is manifeſt, becauſe this is alſo given to them, whom God never calls to perform the publick Offices of Miabilities of expreſſion in the
compoſing a Form of Prayer, and deliverown Apoſtles, and this too to be made uſe of, not as their private addreſſes, for themſelves alone; but with reſpect to the whole Chriſtian Society, and therefore beginning as was anciently obſervedJohn the Baptiſt had directed his DiſciJewiſh Church, as I have inCh. 3. Sect. 3. n. 27, 28, &c.
34.authority of our Governours is alſo in this Caſe of conſiderable weight. For though the command of man is not to be performed, if it be againſt the will of God; yet ſince it is fit, that a due order of publick worſhip in Chriſtian Aſſemprovided for by them, who have the chief Authority and inſpection therein; the conſtant uſe of the Liturgy, being of it ſelf agreeable to the will of God, becomes more obligatory upon us, becauſe this way of worſhip is wiſely
eſtabliſhed by our ſuperiours. And the Apoſtle S. Paul declared, that the uſe ever of extraordinary ſpiritual gifts, muſt give place to decency and order, 1 Cor. 14.26,—33,—40.
35. But he further ſaith, that a man own gift or ability of expreſſion in Praya divine mean, but a Form op. 7. & 18. Liturgies are no meer humane means for Gods wora meer humane mean. Now this muſt be upon ſuppoſition, that an ability to compoſe a Prayer to ſpeak it, is a divine ability, (which how far it is true, I have ſhewed above) but the ſame ability to compoſe the ſame Prayer, if it be to be written, is a meer humane ability. But no man can ſee any truth in ſuch a ſup
36. But however our Author think fit to talk; ſo far as he hath proved any thing, he hath proved the compoſing of Liturgies, to be by a divine ability, or gift of Prayer. For he thus argues againſt thoſe who deny any ſuch gift, as the gift of Prayer.
either
Jam. 1.17. th
Now the reſult of this Diſgift of Prayer, and a gift of God; and conſequently they muſt be a divine mean for the performance of Prayer, or ſuch an one as is afforded to us by the aſſiſtance of God. Beſides this, God hath ſo far declared his approbation of Forms of Prayer, that he himſelf deenjoined them under the Old Teſtament, as our Saviour did under the New: and if that may be further caldivine, which ſerves the ends of God in the World, and conduceth to holineſs and piety, upon this account alſo good and well-ordered Forms muſt be ſo eſteemed.
37. But it now remains, that I examine his proofs, produced to ſhew that it is a duty, in the publick Prayers of the Church, for a Miniſter to uſe his own gifts of expreſſion, if he have ſuch abilities. His firſtTim. 4.14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by Prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. But Anſ. 1. In this place the Apoſtle requires Timothy, to take care of executing his Epiſcopal Office,
authority (which things were given by the laying on of hands) and alſo to diſcharge the duty of his place and
function, with care and diligence, accordPrayer, or the pergift as our Author pleads for, nor doth the Context which mentioneth reading, exhortation, and doctrine, ſpeak any thing thereof. And I ſuppoſe this Author doth not account the gift of Prayer, to be given by the laying on of hands, when himſelf ſaith, the Churchjudge of her Miniſters gift of Prayer, before ſhe truſt them with the publick Miniſtry.
38. And 3. if this Text had particugift of Prayer, and intended this concerning utTimothy, at that time, when publick Offices of the Church were often performed by miraculous gifts, and who himſelf was in all probability furextraordinary gifts. Yet ſuch Precepts do not enjoin the uſe of any gifts, further than may conſiſt with order and tend to edification; which are general rules for the exerciſe of all gifts. And when the Apoſtle ſaith in this Verſe, and 1 Tim. 1.18. that Timothies Ordination, and the diſcharge of his Funprophecy, even this hath remake choice of perſons to be ordained; and diguidance, whom they ſhould make choice of. To which purpoſeClemens Romanus ſpeaks of the Apoſtles, approving by the Spirit, thoſe whom they orBiſhops and Deacons. AndEuſebius from Clemens Alexandrinus, declares as a certain account of Hiſtory, concernJohn, that he ordained Biſhops, and others of the Clergy, of perſons who were ſignified and marked out by the ſpirit.
39. Now how ſevere this Writer is enPrayer, we may diſcern by this inRom. 15.6. that you may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, was proRidiculous! is there in that Text a word concerning Prayer, &c. Now though there be
glorifying God, of the practice and exi. e. Ut cum Deum laudatis, eiPrayer is one part
40. Another place of Scripture he proPet. 4.10. As every one ha
&c. Now this Verſe is br
Hammond in loc.givi
to which ſenſe its Connexion wiminiſterial abilities, of which the following VerPrayer; ſince miniſtring one to another: WherePrayer, and all proper acts of w
as well as in ſacrifice, he that miniGod, to who
41. He mentioneth alſo Rom. 12.6.
Having gifts, differing according to the grace given to us, whether Prophecy, let us propheſie according to the proportion of faith. But the ſame Anſwer will fit this place alſo: for neither here, nor in 1 Pet. 4.10. is any mention at all of Prayer, but the other gifts, which the Apoſtles had their particular eye upon, are expreſly named in the following Verſes, in both theſe Chapters. And yet if the Apoſtle had then commanded them to have uſed ſuch expreſſions in Prayer, as they were furniſhGrotius ſeemeth to think, that praying in the Holy Ghoſt, Jude v. 20. is to pray, according to the dictates of the Holy Spirit, (which yet is more probamoſt holy faith preceding it, and the love of God following it, to be undergrace of the Spirit) this would not have a like reſpect to us now, ſince the like dictates, and effuſion of ſpiritual gifts are not now afforded. They then not only prayed, but alſo ſung by the peculiar guidance of the Spirit, as is manifeſt, 1 Cor. 14.15, 26. and were therefore infallibly guided in both; but neither aſſiſtances of infallibility are now pretended to, from the divine ſpirit, ſave only in the deceits of Popery and Enthuſiaſm,
new hymns ought to be compoſed by the exerciſe of gifts.
42. And he produceth Rom. 12.3. where the Apoſtle requireth every one to think of himſelf ſoberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the meaſure of faith, and giveth us the laſt part of this Verſe in Greek, as if there were ſome ſtreſs to be laid thereupon. But this apoutdo the perfection of Liturgies; which is directly againſt what the Apono man ſhould think of himſelf more highly, than he ought to think. For I conceive it to be a manifeſt truth, that there is now no man whoſoever he be, who by conſtant alterations, and making new Prayers, according to his own abiliomit ſomething expedient, or be defective in due expreſſion, or be wanting in that pithineſs, cloſeneſs and comprehenſiveneſs, which may be provi
extraordinary gifts, and much leſs of ordinary abilities, in publick Prayer; ſo I cannot ſee, how any Chriſtian can conceive, that they were at all intended againſt the uſe of Forms; unleſs he can firſt perſwade himſelf, that theſe Apoſtles intended to contradict the direction and command of our Saviour, concerning the Lords Prayer.
44. Having now ſufficiently, as I hope, anſwered what he produceth as his Argument, I ſhall not take notice of thoſe other particular Anſwers, which he men
45. His deſcription of the gift of Prayer, for the publick ſervice of the Church, as beingp. 6, 8. This Auability to expreſs ones mind fitly to God in Prayer, is very defective and imperfect, eſpecially in two things, though I uſe the phraſe of the gift of Prayer here, improperly in his own ſenſe. 1. In that he accounts this ability of comexpreſs his mind, whereas it is chiefly to be proviconceptions of his mind be ſober, and well ordered, comprehenſive, and every way ſutable to the nature of the duty. 2. In that he only mentions the expreſſing his mind; Whereas in publick Prayers, it is not a mans own private deſires or wants, ſo far as they are peculiar to himſelf, which he is to preſent to God; but he is to expreſs what is fit, to repreſent the minds of the whole Aſſembly, and the common deſires and wants, and joint Devotions of all the Congregation.
46. Another place I ſhall examine is, where he tells us they
p. 9, 10. His defathink it will be hard to find nine or ten thouſand Scholars in England, furniſhed with the gift either of praying or preaching, in any tolerable manner: and one great reaſon is, becauſe they have been ſo tied to a Liturgy, that they have never applied themſelves to the ſtudy of the Scriptures, and their own hearts, as they ſhould. Thus in this place and in many others, he takes any occaſion to reproach, and caſt dirt upon the MiniEngland; even to ſuch exceſs, as ſometimes to call them (though he excepts very many particular perſons from that charge)an ignorant,
lazy and ſottiſh Miniſtry. And he is the more liberal in theſe exorbitant Cenſures, when he doth withal beſpatter our Liturgy, as in both theſe places, or what he termsthat pitiful thing called Ʋniformity, in words, and ſyllables, and phraſes.
47. Now I conceive my ſelf abunabilities of the preſent Miniſtry of the Church of England are ſuch as were never in this Church outdone (if equalled) in any foreſtudying the Scriptures, or their own hearts, (which is a loud calumny upon our Miniſtry, and many other excellent perFathers, and our firſt Reformers, and their Succeſſors, who cloſely adhered to a Liturgy, men of no underſtanding in the Scriptures, and men of no piety of heart, or holineſs of life? Or is the dayly reading the Scriptures, as
Miniſtry of England at other times alſo) that which muſt hinder mens ſtudy and underſtanding in them? and is the conſtant uſe of morning and evening devotions, which the Liturgy directeth, the great obſtacle to piety, and to mens taking ſerious care of their own hearts, to have them poſſeſſed with fear and reverence of God, and diſpoſed to the exerciſes of Religion, and univerrevile and aſperſe a National Miniſtry at random, and at a venture, concerning ſuch things, wherein every Reader may diſcern, that it is impoſſible for him to know what he ſpeaks to be true, and others, bleſſed be God, know them to be falſe?
48. And I wiſh our Author be not himſtudying the Scriptures, he could not but meet with Precepts againſt evil ſpeaking, falſe accuſing, raſh judging, and uncharitableneſs; and in ſtudying his own heart, he would diſcern, whether he had not ofCalumniator, and it is thence unlikely, that any of the ſpirit of ChriNazianzen accounted to begreateſt evils.
49. In Anſwer to ſuch words, I could alſo without much pains, find out defaming and reflective expreſſions, if I were enclined that way; but I am content herein to be inferiour to him, but truly ſorry to ſee what liberty he ſometimes gives himſelf in ſuch things. I have long ſince learned, from the example of our Lord and Saviour, from the rules of the Chriſtian Religion, and particularly from our Church-Catechiſm, to keep my tongue from evil-ſpeaking, lying, and ſlandering. And if he will not take it ill from me, which I aſſure him, I intend no otherwiſe than with a truly charitable mind; I dare confidently affirm, that if he ſhall pleaſe to be a ſtrict obſerver of ſo much, though it be out of our Liturgy, he will not thereby be the worſe man.
50. And I hope he may be the leſs ofvery civil and courteous, and I thank him for them. And I ſhall not return to him any thing untruth, nor to himſelf, if I ſhould not ſhew the weakneſs and miſtakes of his ArguChurch, of which I am a member, cannot well be diſcharged, without taxing his reproachful words a
51. What he ſpeaketh concerningHymns and Anthems, I ſhall have occa
HIS ſecond Argument againſt the lawfulneſs of the ordinary publick uſe of Forms, by him who hath abilities of expreſſing himſelf without them, is, that they hinder the attention, intention and fervency, both of Miniſter and people, and thereforemay not be uſed. But this charge againſt well-ordered Forms, can never be made out: and his proofs will appear very weak and ſlender.
2. Now I freely acknowledge and aſReligious ſenſe of God, and of Jeſus our Mediator. We ought alſo to
faith, hope, reverence, and ſuch other Chriſtian Graces, as I mentioned in theAuſtin ſaith, Prayer being a ſpiritual thing, it is ſo much the more accepted of God by how much our ſpirits and affectimodel of ſervice, which hinunlawfull And this ſeems to be his ſenſe, when he ſaith,attention is for the ſoul, hoc agere, to do what it pretends to do: and byintention and fervour, he means, an holy zeal and heat — of the inward man, of ſorrow in confeſſion, deſires in petition, joy in thanksgiving. But there may be too great a ſtreſs laid upon zeal, earneſtneſs and fervency: ſince this is ſometimes found, even to ſome degree of ecſtaſie, in men of hot heads, ſtrong imaginations, and deluded minds, in whom it is far
awful reverence of God, a Religious and godly fear, a humble ſubmiſſiveneſs, and ſober exerciſe of other Chriſtian graForm, or without one; but I think the former hath in many caſes the advantage, and ſpeci
3. When he comes to prove, that the uſe of ſet Forms of Prayer hindreth attention and fervency, he uſeth high words, and ſaith,it is to them next to a demonſtration, and it is impoſſible for any without ſelf-condennation to deny it. But if af
4. In his diſcourſing concerning attention, inſtead of Arguments he propoſeth three queſtions, which he would have conſidered. Firſt,Whether it be poſſible for any perſon, to read any diſcourſe, with that degree of attention of thoughts,
as he muſt pronounce the ſame with by heart. To which I Anſwer, that it is certain this may be eaſily done, and I think it ſtrange it
Scriptures, and other Books, wiArguments, I ſhoulattend to their ſenſe
and I know I can do it better, by viewattend to their ſenſe in readin
5. The ancient Chriſtians declared, the reading the Holy Scriptures to have had Origen expreſſeth it, iinſpired: which could not have been, without a diligent attention Oral Tradition, muſt be much more vigorous, lively and powScriptures. I confeſs, he doth make a particular exception conScriptures, when he ſpeaks of oft reading what we are before acquainGod hath ſecured an abiding reverence for them in all pious ſouls. But I ſuppoſe he doth not mean, that this is done in any extraordinary and miraculous manner. And it is plain, that even the Scriptures are read by macareleſneſs, and have been long obſerved to have been perverted, and abuScriptures, in reading them, is chiefly with reGod, becauſe they are his word and his laws, whereby his will is declared to men. But ſince asAug. obſerved, when we pray, we ſpeak to God; and when we read, God ſpeaks to us; a Religifear of God, ſo far as it prevails, will ſecure a reverence to the frequent uſe of the ſame Prayer, becauſe therein alſo we have to do with God, and addreſs our ſelves unto him.
6. A ſecond thing he would have conwhether any thing can more conduce to
when a man can truſt his affection to thruſt out words.
Gods preſence, and oReligiouſly and diligently ſeedependance upon him, and a careful preparing our hearts to approach unto him, do wonderfully more conduce to fix our thoughts and minds upon God and our duty, than uſing our own word with freedom of expreſſion, and a volewhole Chriſtian Aſſembly, as well as the Miniſter, may be prepared for the right performance of this ſervice. Our Authorminiſtreth, to attend the more carefully words, but this only is that, which commands and guides the heart. And that mens hearts may be as much compoſed, anpraying more earneſtly in his agony, was in repeating again and again the ſame words. And the Leyden
my God, my God, why haſt thou forſaken me? he uſed a Form of deprecation from the Pſalmiſt; and yet ſure no Chriſtian can think, that he the leſs attended to what he ſpake.
7. The third thing he would have conſidered, is, whether any ſuch attention be to be expected from people
p. 27. Of the atPeople in Prayer.to Forms of Prayer, which they oft hear, as to a conceived Prayers? Now that part of attention, which conſiſts in conſidering the way and manner of expreſſions, conceptions or method, is like to be the greater in the uſe of a conceived Prayer, by reaſon of its being new: but this is of no benefit to Religion, but a real hindrance to true dejoin in the matter of Prayer, may be the better performed, by perſons Religiouſly diſpoſed, in a ſet Form, when they know before-hand what Prayers they are to preſent, and come prepared to join in them.
8. But to render what he aims at the more plauſible, he ſaith,Ibid. God reingenious obſervation, that God to ſtir up his peoples attentions and affections tells them, he would do a new thing; and that I did in my Preface to my Libertas Eccleſiaſtica ſay, the humour of this Age is more
apt to ſeek for new Books,
than to read
Concerning what he firſt obſerveth 1. The Scriptures ſometimes call that new thing, which is ſo wonderful and op
and ſwallow up Corah and Gods making
Num. 16.30. The like expreſJer. 31.22. which Temiraculous conception
But are varied expreſſions thing of this nature? 2. Doth God never intennew thing? SurelJer. 7.23. — 28. that the command of obeying his voice, was thſecured an abiding reverence,
it waingenious an obſervation as our Aureverence and attentio
would be given by Gods people to hnew things.
9. And which way ſoever in othegenius of men, and the humour of the age may tend; true devotion in Religion always enclines to the ſame things; to wit, to glorifie God for his inpraiſe him for his abundant goodneſs, to confeſs our ſins, and implore his pardon, grace and protection; and the bleſſings both of this life and of eternal life. He who would leave out theſe old and conſtant matters of Prayer, will but badly guide others in that duty: and they who are diligently attentive to what is new in the variety and novelty of expreſſions, but neglect attention to theſe old things, will not be the better Chriſtians. Our Author tells us, none gives that attention to a diſcourſe or ſtory he
hath heard an hundred times over, that he gives to a new one.
inſtruct mens underſtandings, or gratifie and humour their fancies, thoſe things which are new, do moſt affect them; yet in the exerciſe of grace, the fear and reverence of God, and deſires after the ſame kind of divine bleſſings, are more ſerious and earneſt in thoſe perſons, who by a long continued practice, have accuſtomed themſelves to theſe very
unacquainted with the, and to whom they are altogether new things.
10. He next comes to prove,fervency and intention of ſpirit in Prayer, is hindred by the uſe of Forms. To this purpoſe he ſaith,miniſtreth; there is a great deal of difference between words following the affections, and affections following the words. And this he ſaith is an old Argument of Didoclavius. And the very ſame was urged byAmeſius, and therefore ſurely was thought to be the beſt Argument, theſe Writers could meet with. And our Author alſo ſaith,believe the people do find a different flame in theſe Prayers: but it is not eaſy to aſſign the reaſon of the difference.
11. Now here I grant,read or uſed, there can be no particular previous preparation of heart or affections, to join in the ſeveral Petifirſt uſe of ſuch a Form, I admit and acknowledge to be a diſadvantage to devotion. But if thus much be true, it will manifeſt, that the people muſt be hindred in the fervency of their devotions, by joining in a conceived Prayer: becauſe being unacquaintheir affections muſt follow the ſpeakers words. And thus the fordevotion of the people or the whole Congregation, rather than of the Mini
12. But in ſuch an ordinary Form, which he who miniſtreth is well acquainted with, there is no ſuch impediment to his devotion. For he may come with his heart particularly diſpoſed, to apply himthe people do alſo in the like caſe) and ſo the pious diſpoſition and acting of his ſpirit, as to thoſe particular Prayers, is not only the ſudden conſequent of his preſent reading thoſe words, but is previous thereunto.partiality, concerning the preparation of mens hearts to Prayer. He declares in his own waygreatneſs and majeſty of God, and of ones own vileneſs, &c. are of great uſe: but to him who uſethpreſcribed Forms, he allows
ſome general previous preparation of affections, but it is hard to keep them warm ſo long, as until he comes to his work. Thus prejudices hurry men into the moſt unreaſonable abſurdithink it not poſſible, that the words of another ſhould ſo well fit our hearts, and be ſo expreſſive of raiſed affections as our own.
ought to deſire: But I ſuppoſe he did not conſider, that what he thus ſpeaks, tends to declare, that the people cannot with fervent affections join with the Miniſter in any Prayer whatſoever, becauſe they are not their own words: and then all publick Prayer fitted to the people muſt be condemned; and ſo they muſt either take up with the Quakers ſilence, or the Romiſh ſervice, where the Aſſembly are not capable of underſtanding, and conſequently of join
13. But he hath another thing to urge, which particularly concerneth the Miniſters
reading of a Form: and that is, that thenſoul looks through the eye, and is diverted from its contemplation upon God. His ſenſe is, that the looking upon the words in the Book, muſt hinder his heart from being directed unto God, bep. 31. and the ſame ſence p. 52.
it is impoſſible, that any created being ſhould in the ſame action duly intend two objects. Now our Author is ſo unhappy in his Arguments, that they not only recoil with equal viovocal Prayer, whether of Miconſidering of words, phraſes, medirecting the heart and ſpirit unto God; and this muſt take up more of his mind and thoughts, than the looking upon a Book doth. And the peoples hearing and obſerving the words of Prayer ſpoken, is as different a thing from the motions of the mind toward God, as the ſeeing the ſame words is.words is, that they are to expreſs things, the uſe of the ſame act about the word and the thing ſignified by it (as to underſtand each of them) or the uſe of ſuch different acts about the word and the thing ſigniunderſtanding the ſenſe thereof, when theſe words are wholly ſubſervient to the thing, to expreſs the ſenſe and meaning thereof. Nor can I be perſwaded, that I affect any thing of God or goodneſs the leſs, for hearing or read
14. But on the other hand,conceived Prayers as our Author pleads for, the Miniſters mind muſt be imployed in conſidering and conceiving and digeſting his words, and his method, and ſenſe; and is apt to be ſometimes ſolicitous, leſt he do amiſs in any of theſe, and may ſometimes have pleaſing reflexions uppeople, the uſing conpublick ſervice of the Church, may be an impediment thereof, upon theſe ſeveral accounts.
1. They are not certain, join in the matter of a new conceived Prayer, till they have well conſidered it, and therefore are the more apt to heſitate concerning it. expreſſions, and the manner of the compoſure of the Prayer, either to judge of it or imitate it, which tend to diſtract the mind, and divert it from the worſhip of God.one accord put up to God, in the ſeveral Aſſemblies of our Church, may reaſonably be, and to many is, a quickning of their devotion, from the benefit of Chriſtian Ʋnity, and theSparrow's Rationale of Com. Prayer, p. 9.Mat. 18.19, 20. Concerning which Text S. Cyprian obſerved, that though ſome, not conſiderdiviſion: yet it appears from the Connexion of that with the former Verſe; If two of you ſhall agree, &c. that,ſi collecti unanimiter oraverint, duo aut tres licet ſint, impetrare poſſunt de
Dei Majeſtate, quod poſtulant; if they be gathered together with one accord, though they be but two or three, they may obtain what they ſeek for of the divine Majeſty. And therefore there may be a greater hope of obtaining thoſe very things, which we particularly know to be the joint deſire of ſo great a number of Chriſtians.quickneſs of capacity, which is neceſſary for their hearts and affections to go along with new Prayers, who yet can piouſly and devoutly join in thoſe they have been well acquainted with.impertinencies, or unadviſed and unbecoming expreſſions in conceived Prayer, or whatſoever is the reſult of paſſion, imprudence, negligence, weakneſs or bad principles and erroneous opinions, this muſt be expected to be a diſturbance and hindrance to the fervency and devotion of the Auditors.
15. But becauſe I am apprehenſive,publick Forms to other conceived Prayers, may ſeem applicable at firſt view, to the Apoſtolical times alſo, as if the uſe of their miraculous gifts, when
prophecy, were not at all times under the ſpecial impulſes of the divine ſpirit; ſo it is neiextraordinary gifts were conſtantly afforded to all its Miniſters, for the performing all their Miniſtrations thereby. The Apoſtle's diTimothy, to give attendance to reading, meditation, care and diligence, 1 Tim. 4.13, 15, 16. 2 Tim. 2.15. do ſeem plainly to evince the contrary. And ſince the Jewiſh Church, both at, and beForms of prayer, as hath been obſerved by diversTalmud, and Rituals, as well as from their other Rabbins byr
Selden, as was obſerved by Dr
Hammond, in his view of the Directory, Ch. 1. Sect. 15. and alſo byr
Lightfoot; and conformably hereunto, the Baptiſt and our Saviour, taught their Diſciples Forms of Prayer: I ſee no reaſon at all to conForms. But of this the Reader may judge more when he hath read to the end of this Chapter.
16. Secondly, When they had theſe extraordinary aſſiſtances, it is but reaſonaput them upon deſigned conſtant uſing variety of words, and new phraſes, in thoſe things which were their common and uvarious words in Prayer, and gave an example for the due performance of it, in his comprehenſive Form; the Spirit of God in the Primitive Chriſtians, acting according to the will of God, would not guide them to what was contrary to our Saviours preſcripticompoſing Prayers, Pſalms or Hymns, theſe were free from thoſe diſadvantaſpeaker need not be ſolicitous in his thoughts, about words and compoſure. There could be no defects in the matter, or fulneſs of exinward fervency, and devotion of pious men, both ſpeaker and hearers, than to guide their expreſſions, ſince grace and holineſs were his chief gifts, and principal deſign. And the people could not make any doubts or demurs, about their ready conſent to every part of thoſe ſupplications, which were directed by extraordinary inſpiratimotions of the Holy Spirit, would both excite their attention, and raiſe the exerciſe of their faith and hope, in a firm confidence that thoſe interceſſions by the Holy Spirit, being certainly according to the will of God, were accepted of him.
17. Now though what I have ſaid may be ſufficient to anſwer his Argument, and to vindicate Forms of Prayer, from being any obſtructions to ſerious piety; yet with reſpect to this Argument, I ſhall deſire three things to be obſerved.
Obſ. 1. That Attention, and intention and fervency, as our Author expreſſeth them, is not the whole buſineſs, that is needful to be minded and taken care of in the publick ſervice of the Church, as he ſeems to intimate, both in the tendency of this Chapter, and particularly when he ſaith,Attention of thoughts is not all our duty in Prayer, intention of ſpirit, and
fervency of affections is alſo a prime requiſite.
matter of their Prayer may not be in all things ſutable to the will of God, and even when ſeveral things which ought to be part of our Religious Addreſſes, are omitted. Wherefore there muſt be a chief care that the matter of our Prayers be rightly ordered, and that our expreſſions and behaviour be ſuch, as manifeſt a due reverence to the Majeſty of God. And in this Caſe, a well compoſed Form hath a manifeſt advantage above other Prayers.
18. And we muſt alſo take care that our zeal and devotion be regular and ordegree of fervency. Thus if any man think he can be more fervent in his private Prayers, than in joining in any publick ſervice; he is not thereby allowed to neglect the publick Aſſemblies, and to retire himſelf at that time to his Cloſet: ſince this publick worſhip is a ſpecial hoenjoined in the New Teſtament, Heb. 10.25. as it was in the Old Teſtadifferent method from that uſed in the Church, whereof he is a member, would more conduce to raiſe his affectionateneſs, he may not thereupon ſeparate, and make a Schiſm: but as a member of the Church he is to endeavour the preſervation of its
Ʋnity, and to obey them who have the rule over it, and not to intrude into the place of the Chief Governours. Otherwiſe Schiſms would be perpetuated and mulPiety and Religion. Other Caſes might be produced to the ſame purpoſe (as if a Miniſter could be more fervent in the publick Aſſembly, in expreſſing ſuch things as are peculiarly his own private concernment, or if the Jews thought their zeal for God to be the higheſt, and their ſervice to him the greateſt, in their oppoſing the Goſpel) but theſe may manifeſt, that this pretence, of fervency being hindred by Forms, if it were true, as it is not, is ſo ill managed by the Diſſenters, in being made a prinſeparation, that it could not ju
19. Obſ. 2. There may be in many perdevotion, or attention and fervency in the uſe of a Form; and yet this not at all proceed from the Form it ſelf, which therefore is not to be blawell ordered expreſſions of the matters of Prayer, and Religious ſervice, ſhould of themſelves hinder mens affectionate joining in them. Nor can I think that there is any hindrance in any Chriſtian whomſoever, of the moſt Religious exerciſe of Chriſtian graces, or of the moſt raiſed devotion in the uſe of a Form of Prayer; unleſs it be where perſons are under prejudices againſt Forms, or elſe are negligent in the exerciſes of Piety. And both theſe are faults of the perſon, which ought to be amended. It is too manifeſt, that the cenſures our Diſſenters unjuſtly vent, and the out-cries and oppoſitions they make, againſt our uſeful and pious publick Forms, hath made many, in their attendance upon the publick ſervice of God, more irreverent in their geſtures, and more careleſs of their devotion; and hath cauſed others to neglect the publick, and I fear all private exerciſe of Religion too; and have made others to engage in ſeparation with that giddineſs, that at laſt they know not where to ſtand, nor which
good ſervice, either to God, or the ſouls of men, in occaſioning the worſhip of God to be by many neglected, and the minds of men to be perperted from true Piety? Our Author ſpeaking concerning Forms of Prayer ſaith, thatit is a great cooling to a Chriſtians ſpirit, when his mind ſuggeſts doubts to him, whether this be a way, mode or method of worſhip, which God will accept. This is one effect of ſuggeſting needleſs ſcru
20. Obſ. 3. Publick ſervice being that,true Chriſtian ſpirit, but muſt not be cenſured, if it ſuit not with the inclination of all particular perſons (which is not poſſible to be done) eſpecially where their minds are diſorderpaſſion or prejudice. And this due order is beſt effected, where there is moſt care taken of due reverence to God, and of uſing the beſt conſideration, for the dirules of Religion. But Forms have manifeſtly this advantage, of having been moſt conſidered; and of reverence to God, in not being raſh and
haſty to utter any thing before God, Eccl. 5.2.
21. There are ſeveral other expreſſiſuperiours command, or if man command, or whoever require it, with other ſuch like expreſſions, theſe things ſeem to have no favourable aſpect upon our GoGods command, or mans which is contrary to it, muſt be obeyed? But I hope I have ſufficiently ſhewed, that he hath ſaid nothing hitherto, to prove the Sanction of our Common-Prayer to be againſt the command of God. If it were ſo, he need not name, nor we would not plead, the commands of men.
22. When he deſcribes the Souls attenimmediate contemplation of God: his expreſſion here, and that in the margent ſeems to me to be too high for ſuch perſons, as have not out-done S. Paul, who ſaid, now we ſee through a glaſs darkly. And I ſhall onuſe of Forms, than at other times. For ſpeaking concerning Prayer without Forms, as moſt exciting fervency of affections, he ſaith,We believe this will juſtifie it ſelf to the experience of every pious deliberate ſoul. But he yields a little farther when he ſaid,We do not think, but the experience of Chriſtians may be different in the caſe, and ſome may find the uſe of their own gifts the more advant ageous, others may poſſibly find Forms more advantageous. And in another place he ſaith, concerning attention in the uſe of publick Forms, againſt which he had lethe Miniſter may (for ought we yet diſcern) do his work with equal attention of thoughts: for the attention of the hearers, we yet a little doubt it.
FOR trying whether Forms were any prejudice to piety and Religion, I propoſed ituſeful, to conſult the judgment of them, who are leaſt partial, and yet able to make a true eſtimate, and eſpecially to conſider the evidences of Reaſon, which may be produced. This method this Au
2. And in the entrance upon it, he tell us (what I lately noted from him) of the different experiences of Chriſtians. And thence he ſaith,every one is bound in Prayer to uſe that lawful mean, which he finds moſt conducive to keep his thoughts attentive, and his affections fervent; ſo as one may be under an obligation not to uſe Forms, another under an obligation for the preſent to uſe them. And then he declares, that things of this nature are no fit matter for a ſuperiours command; and compares it with ſuperiours making a law, that all Miniſters ſhould pray with their eyes ſhut.
p. 24. More of piety and fervency in the keeping peace and unity, than in breaking them.we muſt love the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our ſoul, doth alſo reReligious obedience: this being the love of God to keep his Commandments. And he who ſeriouſly minds his duty, muſt have a conſcientious regard to
Ʋnity, order and the duties of due ſubmiſbreaking ſome of the divine Precepts, is a way of preparation to fit and diſpoſe us for the keeping others. Whereas in truth, all pra
Ʋniform, that the exhinder a pious man from the beſt perforthwart and croſs one another; to aſſert which, would be a reflexion upon God himſelf. And I have inpromiſes of Gods grace and preſence, are chiefly made to them who embrace Peace and Ʋnity; and that therein is the greateſt encreaſe of Chriſtianity, in per
4. And concerning the acceptable worſhipping of God, I deſire that it may be further conſidered, that when our Savibrings his gift to the Altar, if his Brother hath ought againſt him, to go firſt and be reconciled to his Brother, and then come and offer his gift, Mat. 5.23, 24. this Precept muſt needs be of the greater force, when it hath reſpect to the whole Church, or Soſuperiours. For if the Church of which any one was a member, hath this againſt him, that he hath unwarrantably broken its peace and unity, and forſaken its Commudiſobeyed that authority, which God and our Saviour hath eſtabliſhed, and hath not yielded due ſubmiſſion and reſpect thereto; he muſt according to our Saviours direction, firſt return to his duty, and be reconciled
5. Concerning the fitneſs and reaſonalaws about Forms of Prayer, I ſhall diſcourſe ſomeenjoining a well-ordered Liturgy,
making a law that all Mipray with their eyes ſhut, which can be of no advantage: this looks too like a deſign of humouring the vain fancies of unruly men, in expoſing the pious actions of ſuperiours, to their conPeters doctrine, 2 Pet. 2.9, 10. the ſpeaking evil of dignities, is one part of the deſcription of them, whom God chiefly reſerves to the day of judgment to be puniſhed.
6. And there can be no publick worſhip in any Congregation, unleſs it be firſt deofficiateth in any Chriſtian Aſſembly, ſhould determine this by his authority; but only unſit, that our Governours ſhould determine any thing
care of his Church, and hath fixſupremacy in matters Eccleſiaſtical?
private Chriſtians ought ſo to determine themſelves, as to join in the ſeveral difchange theſe too, as oft as their inclinations vary; and all their Church-Covenants and obligations to conChriſtian Liberty, as penal Laws and an Act of Ʋniformity) this alſo is very unconſtitution of his Church ſo far void, as to account the members born and baptized in an eſtabliſhed Church, to be under no obligation to the guides and Paſtors of the Church, but that they are wholly left to themſelves, to ſeek or found a new one, and it takes away all poſſibility of any furture eſtabliſhment. And the Iſſue of any future eſtabliſhent. And the Iſſue of this muſt alſo be at laſt, that it ſhall be neceſſary, that there be as many ſeveral ways of publick worſhip, exerciſed in every Precinct, as there are different opinions and fancies of men living in it, that none of them may be at a loſs, for ſuch a pubmoſt reverence to God, or tend moſt to the real proſit and advantage of men, but in Religion every man muſt do what is right in his own eyes. But this is ſuch a way of confuſion as gratifies the fanciful inclinations of men, but doth not provide for the honour of God, and the care of true piety.
7. That Forms of Prayer are not diſLeyden Profeſſors, who ſay, they contend,
that they are not only lawful but very advantageous, becauſe every Chriſtian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers, and the attention of Auditors in great Aſſemblies, is not a little helped by uſual Forms. Now o
But it ſigpraying without previous
Forms upon emergent occaſions. But doth their adding this, deny what they before declared with ſome earneſtneſs, concernordinary publick ſervice? We do eſteem ſuch abilities alſo in their proper place, and do ſet a value upon thoſe Books of devotion, which are compoſed by them, with prudence and piety. And how far Prayers without Forms are de
8. The other teſtimony I produced,Walachrian Claſſis, who commend Forms, for helping the attention of the Anditors in great Aſſemblies, and for
keeping Ʋniformity, preventing ſcandals, and encreaſing edification; and they declare how piouſly God may be worſhipped in the uſe of them. Now though our Author ſaith little to the former teſtimoArguments, which they urge for the uſe of Forms. And ſpeaking concerning a preſcribed Form promoting attenting, ſaith,He admire, that our Reverend B
ſome expreſſions, which would make one think, they judged it lawful, for ſome Miniſters, having the gift of Prayer, in publick to uſe the preſcribed Forms of others, commended to them ſometimes. In which words he uſeth a great deal more wariauthority apart from the reaſons they give, ſignifieth little in the caſe.
9. And now I muſt entreat my Reaexceptions he enters againſt this teſtimony, or its being intended to the ſenſe for which I produced it. And though ſome of theſe lie ſcattered in his Diſcourſe, I have ſo collected them, as to digeſt them under particular heads.
10. He firſt objects thatthe
Walachrians profeſs themſelves to agree with Ameſius de Caſ. Conſc. l. 4. cap. 17. qu. 4. and with the Leyden Profeſſors. And then he takes pains to prove, that Ameſius was not for preferring the uſe of publick Forms, as of moſt advantage to Piety, but in the place cited, ſpeaks of them, as the leſs perfect way of praying. Now I acAmeſius. But it ſhould have been obſerved by our Author, that the Walachrians only deWhether Forms were lawful, and not ſuperſtitious, and whether it be lawful to communicate with them who uſe them? And in the reſolution of this Queſtion, they agree with Ameſius: in hac controverſia faciles accedimus iis quae ab Ameſio ſuper hac Quaeſtione ſcribuntur. But it is anomoſt uſeful way of perAmeſius in the ſame place, ſeems by general exLeyden Profeſſors, and their own ſenſe of this they fully expreſs,Forms in publick worſhip help the attention of Auditors and are for edification. And they declare not their own ſenſe alone, butin omnibus pene Eccleſiis Reformatis approbantur Eccleſiaſticae Liturgiae precum
And more concernn. 13, 14, 16.
11. Secondly, he ſaith,Walachrians rejected our Engliſh Common-Prayer
Book, and therefore their teſtimony ought not to have been produced, to countenance it. Now I acknowledge that they did raſhly condemnForms in general, for which purpoſe only I cited them, ſince they were ſo far from being partial on our ſide, that they cloſubverting our Liturgy, and cenſured it as Idolatrous and ſuperſtitious.
12. Thirdly, he ſaith, they,
and the Leyden Profeſſors, ſpeak rather of the lawfulneſs of Forms in general, than of Miniſters uſing them. Whereas they propoſe their Queſtion, concerning Forms,in publico cultu, in publick worſhip: They and the Leyden Profeſſors declare their uſefulneſs, in magnis praecipue Eccleſiarum conventibus, eſpecially
in the great Church Aſſemblies, and in publici cultûs exercitiis, in the performances of publick worſhip: and they diſcourſed of them, asForms of Prayer and of adminiſtration of Sacraments. Now in theſe Caſes they muſt have ſpecial reſpect to Miniſters uſing them: and the ſame appears from what I
n. 10. and al
13. Fourthly, He ſaith,there is not a word in them, to juſtifie the lawful uſe of Forms impoſed upon all Miniſters. Now the Reader may obſerve theſe words; ſay they,Maſcula eſt ſententia J. Calvini in Epiſtola 87. ad Protectorem Angliae. Quod ad formulas, inquit, precum, &c. It is an excellent ſentence of Calvin, in his 87th
Epiſtle to the Protector of England. Concerning Forms of Prayer and Eccleſiaſtical Rites, I much approve, that it may be certain, from which the Pastors may not depart in their function, both to provide for the unskilfulneſs of ſome, and that the conſent and agreement of all Churches may be more manifeſt, and that a ſtop may be put to the changeable levity of ſome, who affect novelties. And they add,ſtated Catechiſm, ſtatam Sacramentorum Adminiſtrationem, publicam item precum formulam, a ſtated Admini
14. Fifthly, He ſaith, they ſayholy affections may accompany a Form, This ſaith he, toucheth not the Queſtion, which is about the magis and minus. And ſo he excepts againſt them, as not ſpeaking an equal intention and fervency to be exercidue attention and reverence, in the uſe of Forms, p. 174. and our Author ſaith, due attention muſt be equal attention, p. 52. And when they declare Forms to be profitable, and that by them attention is helped, p. 173, 174. this not only ſpeaks the devotion to be equal in the uſe of Forms, to what it might otherwiſe be, but that it may be hereby the greater. And they commend them,ad majorem Eccleſiarum aedificationem, for the greater edification of Churches; and this muſt be for the making them the better.
15. Sixthly, He ſaith,they ſpeak not a word of the lawfulneſs or utility of reading Prayers. And what they ſpeak of Forms, he would it ſeems have meant, not of Forms read, but gotten without Book, of which he diſcourſeth, p. 25, 26. But they judge Forms profitable,modo cum debita attentione, reverentia, &c. ex libro pronuncientur, if they be with due attention and reverence pronounced out of a Book. This our Author but half a page before p. 52. thus expreſſed, ſo they be read with attention: ſo the Walachrians. If this be not enough, they further declareſacras Scripturae literas legunt fideles, &c. Christians read the holy Scriptures, with underſtanding, humility, reverence, zeal, &c. and
pronounced in the ſame manner,
out of preſcribed Forms? And here again our Author but two pap. 51. tranſlates theſe words of the Walachrians, quidni & orationes eodem modo ex praeſcriptis formulis pronunciari poſſunt; and therefore why may not Forms of Prayer be ſo read. Theſe frewe believe, we judge, we ſay, it may poſſibly be, that ſome part of it may be written by one hand, and ſome
16. Laſtly, We are told,the Walachrians in ſtating the queſtion, profeſs only to ſpeak to the caſe, where men want an ability, or a liberty to exerciſe it. But the Claſſis of Walachria tell us, they diſut utiles &c. as profitable for them who want ability, or a liberty of exerciſing it, & ut attentio auditorum, &c. and that the attention of the Auditors in great Aſſemblies, may be helped and guided. And again they comprofitable, non tantum in neceſſitatis caſu, &c. not only in a caſe of neceſſity, where fit ability is wanting; but
alſo that the Auditors attention may be helped and directed, &c. And their ſenſe herein may be alſo manifeſt from n. 13.
17. Now though I laid no great weight upon this teſtimony, as is manifeſt from the words immediately following it,But the ſureſt way of tryal, is from conſidering ſeveral Arguments; yet the Reader may eaſily ſee, that they ſpake fully enough to the purpoſe, for which I produced them. And though our Author when he firſt mentioned this teſtimony of the Walachrian Claſſis, promiſedWe will give our Reader a full account of what is ſaid by them; he hath not only been very defecareleſsneſs, which is not to deal faithfully with his Reader, eſpecially after his particular promiſe to the contrary; or elſe which I am not willing to ſuſpect, a deſign of impoſing upon thoſe, who will take things of this nature upon his credit. And if all theſe things were meer miſtakes and over
18. To prove Forms of Prayer to be no diſadvantage to piety, I urged in
Ch. 4. p. 122, 123. Arguments to ſhew Forms of Prayer to be no hin1. From God and our Saviour preſcribing them.Libertas Eccleſiaſtica three ArguThat God himſelf preſcribed a conſtant Form of Prayer, for the Jewiſh offerings, and for the Prieſts bleſſing, and our Saviour directed the Lords Prayer as a Form: but the Holy God and our bleſſed Saviour, would not enjoin what is of its own nature an hindrance to godlineſs, piety and Religion.
19. In anſwer to this Argument, our Author turns every way. He ſometimes miſrepreſents my ſenſe, as if I affirmed, that God and Chriſt had appointed the Forms of Prayer which are now ordinarily uſed, p. 56. or as if the ſcope of my Argument was to prove, that men may lawfully appoint what God may appoint, and ſaith the ſame Argument would prove a liberty for men to make new Scriptures, p. 56, 58. But the Queſtion under debate, was not at all concerning the authority of men, nor concerning the lawfulneſs of appointing Forms merely, but it was whether the uſe of them be an advantage or prejudice to Religion. Nor am I ſo void of all reve
God
may legitimate ſome things by his Precept, which otherprejudice to devotion, ſince God will ſecure his own inſtitutions. And here he tells us God might direct Images of Oxen and Cherubims to be in his Temple, and the people might worſhip before them; but Aaron might not make a golden Calf. And God might command Abraham to offer up Iſaac. And therefore this will only conclude, that Forms of Prayer are not in themſelves unlawful as murther (though by his inſtance, they may be as unlawful as for a Father to kill his Son) or inceſt.
21. Now the ſenſe of this part of his Anſwer, is, That the God of infinite goodneſs and purity, may appoint and enjoin, and conſequently may be pleaſed with, ſuch things as are in their nature hurtful to piety, and oppoſe goodneſs and purity in the World. And I deſire our Author upon his further thoughts, to conſider what high reflexions theſe things caſt updivine majeſty. Indeed God did appoint the Ceremonial worſhip of the Iſraehelp to Religious Piety. But it is contrary to the divine nature to aſſert, that God ſhould give inſtitutions and rules, for ordering that part of his worſhip, which is moral and perpetual as Prayer is, and theſe to be of force both throughout the Jewiſh and Chriſtian Church; which yet are a diſadvantage to Piety. But beſides many other Forms, thoſe in Deut. 21.8. and Deut. 26.3, 5.... 10. and v. 13, 14, 15. were to be of uſe throughout the Jewiſh State; and the Lords Prayer throughout the Ages of the Chriſtian Church. It was called the daily
Prayer, by one of the Councils of Toledo, and to be uſed thrice a day, in the time of the
22. The pretences on which our Auſtanding inſtitutions, which in their own nature tend to hinder piety, and then ſhould undertake by ſome extraorpreſerve them from being abuſed; when it is plain, he doth not further ſecure his moſt excellent inſtiexcellency and the piety of the Chriholy Scriptures have been wreſted, and perverted by evil men, and Prayer it ſelf hath been abuſed to Hypocriſy; and yet both theſe are divine inſtitutions.
23. And concerning the Images of the Oxen and Cherubims, he is miſtaken in ſaying, that the people might lawfully worſhip before them which were in the Temple: for the people might not come within the Sanctuary where they were, and ſo might not ſo much as ſee them. But there is a greater miſtake than this,worſhip. There were indeed Cherubims graven upon the walls, and doors of the temple, 1 Kin. 6.29, 35. but God never allowed or apGolden Calf was made and uſed, but for the adorning the Temple. They were not intended as repreſentations of God himſelf, nor might the people give to them any part of divine honour, or ſay to them, theſe are thy Gods O Iſrael, Ex. 32.4. But molten or carved work, when it was not made to be worſhipped, or to be a Symbolical repreſentation of God, was never forbidden to the Jews, as many of the Jews themſelves have by miſtake imagined; nor were thoſe pieces of art, when ſecured from theſe abuſes, any diſadvantage
to Piety and Religion. There was anciently the ſtamp of a Caſtle, and other reſemblances upon the Shekel of Salomon, and other Jewiſh Medals, as apWaſerus and Biſhop Walton; and neiLyons about Salomons Throne, were to be condemned as unKin. 10.19, 20. Nor did the ſecond Commandment forbid the likeneſs of any Creature to be made; ſo as in general to condemn the Arts of limning, carving, and engraving; but only forworſhip, which is due to God, asJoſephus truly gives an account thereof.
24. Nor will the command given to Abraham, to offer up his ſon, prove that Gods Precepts require any thing to be performed, which is in its own nature prejudicial to Piety. For this was only a Precept of tryal, God did not deſire that the Father ſhould ſlay his Son, but asAmbroſe ſaid, tentabat ſi Dei praecepta praeferret filio, made a tryal, whether he eſteemed the commands of God above his ſon.
Abraham's Offering Iſaac.
diſadvantage to Abrahams Piety, but a great evidence, and high exerciſe of it. But Gods withAbraham from ſlaying his Son, by
grateful and pleaſing to God, that is not every way reconcileable to goodneſs: and the ancient Chriſtian Writers accounted juſtly, the bloody, inhumane, and obſcene rites, of many of the Pagan Deities, to be a ſuffiIſaacs bearing the Wood, and being laid upon the Altar, hath been accountedGood Friday, in our Common Prayer.a figure of the ſuffering of our Saviour, and this act of Abrahams obedience, might be comAbraham receiGen. 22.16, 17, 18. all which tended to promote, and advance his Faith and Piety. Now as it is unſafe, from ſuch inſtances as this, to cenſure the uſefulneſs of any of Gods orhelp or hindrance to piety and Religion, in teaching men to ſlight and diſeſteem, and conſequently to neglect and break, any of the leaſt of Gods Commandments.
25. But he further ſaith,it is not unqueſtionable,
whether God and Chriſt preſcribed Forms of bleſſing and prayer, to be uſed by Miniſters and people.
Prayer I above mentioned out of Deuteronomy, are ſo plainly and exthoſe words, or ſuch others as themſelves ſhould think more fit for that purpoſe; he may as well ſay, that when God appointed his particular Sacrifices, his meaning was, that they ſhould either offer thoſe ſacrifices, which he had appointed, or ſome other, which they ſhould think more expedient. For the injunction of the ſpecial ſacrifices God appointed, is not more expreſs, than of thoſe Prayers which he commanded.
26. And as the particular Form of the Prieſtly benediction is plainly appointed, Num. 6.23, 24, 25, 26. ſo it hath been obſerved byBuxtorfe, Druſius, and other learned men, that upon the day of atonement, the High Prieſt ſolemnly pronounced this Form of bleſſing the people in the Temple,Jehovah. And ſome Chriſtian Writers have thought, that the name Jehovah being thrice expreſſed in that Benediction was ſome intimation of the Trinity. And theChaldee Paraphraſe
Jonathan ben Ʋziel, to expreſs the conſtant and ſtrict obſerſolemn Benediction, in the Hebrew Tongue, rebleſſing is not only uſed as a Form by the Church of England, in the Office for the Viſitation of the ſick, but the ſame is in the Geneva Liturgy compoſed byCalvin, and alſo in that drawn up byLuther, at the beginning of the German Reformation. And the members of that Aſſembly, which ſet up the Directory in the place of our Liturgy, did ſo far aſſert the Form of this Prieſtly Benediction, that in theirOn this wiſe ye ſhall bleſs ſaying, they ſay, Or thus, in a ſet Form of words.
27. All that our Author hath againſt this, is to declare in theſe ſtrange words of Mr
Cotton,
The Prieſts are indeed directed to a Form of bleſſing, Num. 6.22. &c. but that they uſed that, and no other Form, doth not appear; It is certain, the Apoſtles uſed divers other Forms. Now though what I have ſaid be ſufficient, to give an account of the uſe of this Benediction; yet it is very unreaſonable to
authority enough, to make what they preconſtant practice of them. Nor is the Apoſtles uſing other Benedictions, at all to his purpoſe; ſince this Benediction was not preſcribed for them, but only for the Prieſts, Aaron and his Sons in the TemBenediction preſcribed for any ſolemn publick ſervice, doth not hinder the uſe of other Benedictions out of that particular ſerBenediction of Eli the High Prieſt, to Hannah and Elkanah, 1 Sam. 1.17. & Ch. 2.20.
28. He goes on to tell us that theydo not think, that ever our Saviour intended the Lords Prayer to be uſed ſyllabically. AndAmeſius alſo declares, that our Lord did not intend to preſcribe a Form of words, to be conſtantly obſerved, in the Lords Prayer. Now it may well ſeem ſtrange, that any perſons ſhould harbour ſuch an opinion as this, if they had not ſome intereſt, which enclined them to have ſuch apprehenſions conits
great guilt is, that it is the warrant and Original Pattern of all ſet Liturgies in the Chriſtian Church. And I cannot but wonder, thatGrotius ſhould entertain this extravagant and unreaſonable con
29. But that our Saviour delivered this Prayer as a Form, to be of ordinary uſe, I gave manifeſt evidence,precept, from the occaſion of his delivering it, from the manner of its compoſure, and from clear teſtimouſual practice of the Primitive Church, in the firſt, ſecond, and third Centuries, in obſerving it as a Form. And our Author thought not fit to anancient Church, in the following Centuries, and would have been then earneſtly exploApoſtles themſelves, and all other Chriſtians, to have been enjoined by divine Precept, to make uſe of this Prayer as a Form. S. Hierome declared,Docuit Apoſtolos ſuos, ut quotidie in corporis illius ſacrificio credentes audeant loqui Pater noſter, &c. He taught his Apoſtles, that every day believing in
the ſacrifice of his body they ſhould ſay, Our Father which art in Heaven, &c. AndAuſtin ſaith, Omnibus neceſſaria eſt Oratio Dominica, quam ipſis arietibus gregis, i. e. ipſis Apoſtolis ſuis, Dominus dedit, ut unuſquiſ
&c. The Lords Prayer is neceſſary for all, which the Lord gave to the chief of his flock, that is, to the very Apoſtles themſelves, that every one ſhould ſay to God, Forgive us our treſpaſſes, &c.
30. Among the Proteſtants, as their Writers do generally acknowledge it to be a preſcribed Form, ſo Apollonius and the Claſſis ofWalachria obſerved, In omnibus Reformatarum Eccleſiarum Liturgiis, &c. In all the publick Liturgies which are extant of the Reformed Churches, the Lords Prayer is preſcribed to be uſed. But our Authors Aſſertion not only contraCatholick Church, and the generality of Protestants abroad; but he herein claſheth as well with the Directory, and with that Aſſembly at Weſtminſter which rejected our Common Prayer, as with the Church of England. In theDirectory they ſaid, The Prayer which Chriſt taught his Diſciples, is not only a pattern of Prayer, but it ſelf a moſt comprehenſive Prayer, and we
recommend it to be uſed in the Prayers of the Church. And the members of that Aſſembly in their Annotations affirm, thatIt is the moſt exact and ſacred Form of Prayer, indited and taught the Diſciples (who were to teach the whole World the rules and practice of true Religion) by Chriſt himſelf, who is beſt able to teach his ſervants to pray. And again, Chriſt preſcribed this Form of Prayer to be uſed by them.
31. Now it is an unreaſonable confipreſumption, to oppoſe and contradict the general ſenſe of the ChriIf the Apostles had apprehended it left for a Form of words and ſyllables, we ſhould have found ſome after record of the uſe of it. But if he mean, there would be ſome record of this in the Scriptures and writings of the Apostles; this is very vain, ſince it is certain, they do not contain ſuch Prayers as were uſed in the publick Aſſemblies: and it is as unreaſonable to expect this in them, as to expect that all Books of instruction, written by any of our Church, ſhould repeat our Publick
Liturgy: and it is very uſual for ſuch Books, to have other expreſſions of Prayer and Supplication, than thoſe of our Common-Prayer. And if this objection were of any weight, it would as much prove, that our Saviour never intended, that Chriſtian Baptiſm ſhould be adminiFather, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt, as that the Lords Prayer ſhould not be uſed, though he plainly commanded both.
32. But if by record,
authentick ancient Writers, concerning the praPrimitive Church; though the producing ſuch evidence is not neceſn. 29. S. Aug. aſſures us,Ad altare Dei quotidie dicitur Oratio Dominica, The Lords Prayer is daily ſaid at Gods Altar. And in another place, ſpeakfere omnis Eccleſia Dominica Oratione concludit; almoſt every Church doth conclude with the Lords Prayer. And the uſe of it after the reAmbroſe.
33. But our Author ſaith. 2. If Chriſt intended it for a Form,
all that can be concluded is, that Chriſt may appoint a Liturgy for his Church, which ſurely none denies. But it will alſo follow, that Forms of Prayer are not to be rejected and conprofitable uſe.
Jews, in our Saviours time, as I have obſerved, and ſhall more particularly manifeſt in the end of the next Section, our Lord was ſo far from reproving this practice, or John the BapForm alſo, as the Baptiſt had taught his. Wherefore this manifeſtly declares an approbation of Forms of Prayer, taught and directed by others, who have the chief authority in the Church.
34. The laſt thing he urgeth is,ſuppoſing that Chriſt intended this as a Form at that time, whether it was to laſt beyond his Reſurrection, and the deſcent of the Holy Ghoſt, is a farther Queſtion. And though he doth not poſitively aſſert this, yet he would have his Reader to be of this opinion, and offers in proof of it, what he ſaith, was well obſerved, which I
irreverence toexpired and antiquated, when our Lord himſelf gave no intimation of its being temporary, and the
Ʋniverſal Church hath underſtood it otherwiſe? Is not this a new piece of Phariſaiſm, in teaching men how to make void the Commandments of God, by looking upon them as out of date? This Author may by theſe means, do ſome ſervice for them, who contend that the Sacrament of Baptiſm was only intended for the firſt adLords Supper, the Ordination of Miniſters, and many other Chriſtian duties, not to be needful for the ſucceeding Ages after the Apoſtles.
35.Forms might be requiſite for the Apoſtles before Chriſt Reſurrection, and the coming of the Holy Ghoſt, but that no ſuch low things are ſince that time fit to be contidiſſenters are men of far greater abilities than the Apoſtles of our Saviour were, before his Reſurrection, though they were then called to be his Apoſtles, were ſent forth to preach his Goſpel, and were enabled to work miracles, and caſt out Devils: and conſequently that theſe men now, may reaſonably look upon ſuch directions and precepts to be of too low and inferiour a nature for them to obſerve, which yet were enjoined upon, and were fit for the ſtate of the Apoſtles before the Reſurrection.
36. Thirdly his pretence of proof for this opinion is very ſhallow, which isleft out his own name in the Lords Prayer:Joh. 14.13, 14. Joh. 16.23. But to ask in his name, is to ask through his mediation, upinterceſſor, and advocate at Gods right hand in our nature, which is a priviledge peculiar to the time ſince the aſcenſion of our Lord; and alſo to ask ſutably to the rules and doctrine of Chriſtianity. This is the ſenſe which is generally given, of this expreſſion, of asking in the name of Chriſt: and even
through his mediation, and they alſo add from S. Gregory, ſi id quod non expedit petitur, non in nomine Jeſu petitur pater; if that be deſired which ſhould not be, God is not asked in the name of Jeſus. And this ſenſe of this phraſe, In his name, that it ſigniJoh. 1.12. Joh. 20.31. and many other places. But the Apoſtles unJeſus, in all their Prayers, as Rom. 15.13. 2 Theſ. 3.16. and elſewhere.
37. Now in the Lords Prayer, we know that what we ask, is according to the will of our Lord, being directed by him. We call not God Our Father, but upon the account of Chriſt, and upon his account we deſire all our Petitions in the Lords Prayer to be granted. And our deſiring that Gods name may be hallowed, that his Kingdom ſhould come, and that our treſpaſſes may be forgiven, &c. have partruſt that God of his mercy and goodneſs
what we ask, through our Lord Jeſu
And
Haec & alia quae noſti Domine nobis eſſe neceſſaria, à te poſtulamus in nomine Chriſti ea Orationis formula quam ipſe nos docuit. Pater noſter, &c. Theſ. Salm. Par. 3. loc. Com. 47. n. 13.
38. My ſecond Argument to prove Forms of Prayer to be no diſadvantage to devotion, wasit is generally acknowledged, that the ſinging Pſalms of Prayer and praiſe, may be advantageouſly performed in a ſet Form of words: and the Scriptures are not the leſs edifying becauſe they are contained in a ſet form of words. But concerning ſinging Pſalms this Writer ſaith,a miſtake of the Queſtion; andſuch Forms, as God hath Canonized. And he tells us he is againſt ſinging by any Forms not made of God, which he callsApocryphal Anthems, as much as he is againſt Liturgical Forms of Prayer. And yet he allowsMeter, though the words be not dictated of God,
39. But when he ſaith, this Argument miſtakes the Queſtion, the Reader will eawhether Forms
of Prayer are diſadvantageous to Piety. But our Author, that he might avoid the force of this and ſome other Arguments, hath put the Queſtion into another mePſalms of Prayer and praiſe, that God hath Canonized thoſe Forms; he here aſſerteth, what in Anviz. that God ever appointed or preſcribed any Forms of Prayer. And as the matter of many of the Pſalms is Prayer; So S. Hierome obſerves, there arefour Pſalms, which bear the title of Prayers, to wit as he counts them acSeptuagint, Pſal. 16.85.89.101. but in our Engliſh Bibles, Pſal. 17.86.90.102. And from hence we may infer the uſefulneſs of Forms, for the promoting piety, according to the purport and deſign of my foregoing Ar
40.ſet Forms of Prayer, and praiſing God in meter, to be good and Religious, becauſe the matter is directed by God, though the expreſſions are not; he doth hereby, ſo far as concerns reaſon and Argument, yield that which will neceſuſefulneſs of Liturgies, to be in like manner generally uſed. For the like allowance may certainly be made to the uſe of words in proſe, which may be made to them in meter; which is according to his ſenſe, that they may by all Chriſtians be profitably uſed, where the matter of them is none other, than what God himſelf hath directed us to pray for, and the words ſuch as are fit to expreſs that matter, which is according to his will. And there is greater ſecurity of the matter of a fixed well-conſidered Liturgy, being ſuch as God approves of, than there can be in the uſual variations of the conceived Prayers of ſome thou
41. Thirdly, Whilſt our Author dep. 78. Eccleſiaſtiabhorreth any ſinging in pubpray, and to ſing praiſes to God: but it is the matter and pious performance of them, and not the different tone, or flexure of the voice, which God regardeth. And it is certainly as hard a task for him to prove, that we may ſing to God in no other Hymns, but what are expreſſed in Scrippray to God in no other Prayer, than what is contained in Scripture; which would be as much againſt other conceived Prayers, as againſt Forms. Eſancient Churches, as well as modern, their practice was, whatAuguſtine commends in Alexandria, in the time of Athanaſius, that their reciting Pſalms or Hymns, was modico flexu vocis, with a ſmall alteration of the voice, and the manner of uttering them was, pronuncianti vicinior quam canenti, more a deliberate ſpeaking, than a proper ſinging. But there muſt be an extraordinary acuteordinary way of ſpeech, but may not do it in ſomedeliberate way of pronuncia
42. Fourthly, If it had been for our Authors purpoſe, he would have thought it a ſufficient proof from Scripture, for the compoſing new Hymns; that the ProIſay, with reſpect to the Goſpel times, commands to ſing to the Lord a new ſong, Iſ. 42.10. And that the Angelical Hymn, Luk. 2. and thoſe of the Virgin Mary, of Zechary, and of Simeon, were all of them newly compoſed for the ſpeſing with the ſpirit, 1 Cor. 14.15. and that S. John, in his Viſion of the Goſpel worſhip, repreſenteth the Church, as ſinging a new ſong, Rev. 5.9. and ch. 14.3. And however this Writer cenſuhymns compoſed by men, haChriſtianity, as our Church ordereth the Son of S. Ambroſe. Very many ſuch Eccleſiaſtical Hymns are collected byCaſſander. And this practice was as early in the Church, as the end of the firſt Century, when Pliny upon Examination of the practice of the Chriſtians, in their Aſſemblies, found that they were wont upon a ſet day, to meet together before it was light,carménque Chriſto quaſi Deo dicere ſecum invicem, and to ſay an hymn to Chriſt as being God, one towards another. Now in that it was their uſual practice to ſay ſuch an Hymn, and that this was expreſſed by the generality of the Aſſembly, this ſpeaks it a Form which they uſed: and the phraſe of ſecum invicem is a conſiderReſponſals, one towards another. And its being ſaid to Chriſt as God, makes it highly probable, that it was an Hymn, particularly compoſed under Chriſtianity,
Paulus Samoſatenus, byAntioch, that he ſuppreſſed the uſe of thoſe Hymns, which were upLord Jeſus Chriſt, as being new things, the compoſitions of men of late days. And that there were various Pſalms and Odes compoſed before that time by Chriſtians, concerning the Divinity of Chriſt, is alſo declared inEuſebius.
43. But the true cauſe, why our AuHymns, compoſed ſince the Apoſtles time, is not from any Reaſon or Scripture, but becauſe this would not ſerve the intereſt of his opia ſet Form, without notorious confuſion: and therefore the allowing new Hymns to be compoſed, would include an alForms of Prayer and praiſe. And beſides this, he is ſenſivaried conceptions in the making Hymns, ſince as he ſaithnot one of many attain the gift of Hymn-making.
there are Precepts for reading them, and alſo promiſes in the ſame caſe. But this doth the more ſtrengthen my Arguappointed and approved of God, can be no hindrances to Piety. He ſaith alſoconſideration, reverence, faith, ſubmiſſion, and other gracious diſpoſitions, which ſute the ſpecial parts of divine truth, doth require as much ſeriouſneſs, dilireading the Holy Scriptures, as in Prayer. And however, having ſhewed that a Form of words in Prayer, doth not hinder any exerciſes of piety therein, I do not think this exception to deſerve any further an
45. But what he ſaith,there are different workings of the ſoul towards God in ſinging and in Prayer, I ſuppoſe he will upon further conſideration, diſcern to be an overſight: Since the application to God, for the ſame things, require the ſame pious exerciſes of mind, whether it be in proſe, or in meter. And it was another overſight that he declares me to
know and confeſs, what he thus aſſerts; when I never declared any ſuch thing, but know the contrary.
MY third Argument for Forms bethat all the Ages of the Chriſtian Church, from the firſt Centuries, have uſed them as an advantage to Religion.
that it is not at all probable, that ſuch excellently devout and judicious men, as the fourth and fifth Centuries abounded with, ſhould be ſo ſtupid and dull-ſpirited, as not any of them to diſcern between the helps and hindrances of devotion, in matters of moſt ordinary practice; This Author firſt ſaithCertainly it was poſſible, i. e. poſſible all thoſe judicious men ſhould be ſo ſtupid. Now this is a raſh and contumelious expreſſion, and if this be true concerning ſuch men, as S. Athanaſius, Baſil, Ambroſe, Hierome, Euſebius, Chryſoſtome, and S. Auſtin, and others ſuch like, all pretence from experience muſt in this caſe be laid aſide. For though
2. When I ſaidthat Forms of Prayer were of uſe in the Church about thirteen hundred years ſince, is acknowledged by them who plead moſt againſt them, from Conc. Laod. c. 18. 3 Carth. Can. 23. and Con. Milev. c. 12. hewe hold no ſuch thing. But whatever ſingular and unreaſonable conceit, he or ſome other perſons may have,Smectymnuus derive the Pedigree of Liturgies from thoſe three Canons, acknowledging that the Church in the Laodicean Canon ordained,1300. years.none ſhould vary but uſe always the ſame Form; that the Carthaginian Canon furMilevitan Canon would have none other uſed than what was approved in the Synod. Thus they. And the Presbyterian CommiſſioSavoy ſay, theycannot find any Records of know credit, concerning any intire Form of Liturgies, within the first three hundred years. And their fixing this period of time, is ſufficient to juſtify my aſſertion.
3. But our Author ſaith, he believes
they might have denied any ſuch Record of a Liturgy generally impoſed for ſix hundred years, and fixeth the Original of Liturgies uponthe Great, under the protection of Charles the Great, and this eight hundred or a thouſand years after Chriſt;
Gregory the Great, unCharles the Great.n. 4. I ſhall ſay no more here, but that we may not reaſonably expect any accuracy in the right computation of the time, of the birth and firſt production of Liturgies, from him who talks ſo looſely and falſly, about the Age in which Gregory the Great lived, whom he would make the Father of them. And it is ſpeaking enough at random to fix their original now at ſix hundred years after Chriſt, and then at eight hundred, or a a thouſand years after Chriſt: but if in which ſoever of theſe periods they began, it muſt be under Gregory the Great, he muſt then ſuppoſe againſt the credit of all certain Hiſtory, that Gregorius Magnus was Pope for above four hundred years, in imitation of the Jewiſh fancy that Phinehas the High Prieſt livedGregory the Great might become contemCharles the Great, and being by that time unable to govern himſelf, by reaſon of his extream Age, might be put under his protection.
4. Now though ſomething was done by Gregory the Great, in the new modelling Sanction of Charles the Great, for the enjoining the Roman Offices: I ſhall beſet Forms of Prayer in the Chriſtian Church, in the ſeveral Centuries, before the ſix hundredth year of Chriſt. And thereby I hope to give a fair proof, for that aſſertion of Cappellus (and for a more early practice alſo) who ſaidEarum (formularum) uſus in univerſa Eccleſia Chriſtiana, toto terrarum orbe, jam à pluſquam 1300. annis perpetuo obtinuit. A publick Form of Liturgy hath obtained in the univerſal Chriſtian Church throughout the whole World for above thirteen hundred years. And he addeth in the ſame place, that it doth now every where obtain, niſi apud novitios iſtos Independentes, but amongſt them who embrace the new upſtart Innovations of Independency.
5. But our Author will not allow all
three Canons above mentioned, to have any reſpect to Liturgies, and their eſtabliſhment: and herein he hath enSmectymnuus aſſerted, to whom my words had a parCanon of Laodicea, which Council Baronius (though he had ſometimes thoughtfirſt Nicene Council. But I muſt confeſs, the other opinion that this Council ſate about the year 364 is the more probable, from the obſervaDe Marca, That Conc. Laod. c. 7. condemns the Photinians, when Photinus himſelf lived in the Reign of Conſtantius.
6. But he ſaith, The Biſhops
in that Council may not be called the Church in that Age. Indeed, this was a Provincial Council, yet many Biſhops from the ſeveLaodicea conſidered.general ſtate of the Church, if we conſider that this very CaCode of the univerſal Church, being the 122d therein, which Code was extant at the time of the Council
of Chalcedon, An. 451. (which was the greateſt of the four firſt General Councils) and was ſo far approved thereProvincial Councils, which were taauthentick Rules, not taking any notice of the Provinicla Councils, by which they were firſt made; but only citing them acnumber and order they were in that Code. This is manifeſt from the teſtimonies produced out of that Council, which are prefixed to Juſtellus his Edition of the Codex canonum Eccleſiae Ʋniverſae: and thereby it appears, that the Canons of this Code were owned to be of univerſal authority, by this their reception, though they were many of them only provincial, in their firſt Con
7. And this Code or Collection of Canons, was alſo confirmed and eſtabliſhed in thisthis Canon, which was one branch theregenerally approved in the Chriſtian Church, at that time when this Code was compogeneral approbation, when it was firſt compoſed; becauſe there was no apBiſhops or Synods, aſſerted or deterdoctrine, or rules of order, wherein other Biſhops or Churches thought them to err, they would withſtand them. Thus conreceiving penitents, the Novatian errors were condemned byCarthaginian Councils: and the oppoſitions againſt the general rebaptizing Hereticks, and the conteſts about the Roman and Aſian time of celebrating Eaſter, are obvious in the Hiſtories of thoſe ancient times.
8. Our Author further tells us,Laodicea ſaith nothing of ſtated Forms of Prayer, c. 18. only orders Prayers to be poured out, Morning and Evening. Thus he claſheth with Smectymnuus above produced. And to clear this matter, this Canon declares, that there ought always to be the very ſame ſervice of Prayers, both in the Mornings and in the Evenings. That is, there muſt be the ſame Morning ſervice, and the ſame Evening ſervice continually, and asZonaras exthoſe Prayers only ſhould
Balſamon. And for further confirmation, that this Council had a particular reſpect to ſet forms of Prayer then in uſe, in its nextorder of their ſervice, that after the Sermon or Homily, they had firſt the prayer for the Catechumeni, and when they were gone out, the prayer for the Penitents, and when they were gone athree prayers for the Fideles, the firſt in ſilence, the ſecond and third by open pronouncing. And all this was performed before the Communion or Conſecration thereof, the whole Aſſembly, as I conceive, beſilently in the firſt prayer, but in the two other they were to join in vocal expreſſion. Now this cannot be otherwiſe unform, and alſo an obedience to orders and rules eſtabliſhed by the authority of the Church.
9. He next takes ſome notice of 3. Conc. Carth. c. 23. which enjoins, Quascunque ſibi preces aliquis deſcribit, &c. Whatſoever prayer any one ſhall copy out for himſelf, he may not uſe them, unleſs he firſt conferre
with the underſtanding Brethren. Our Authour ſaith,plainly hints that Miniſters were wont to compoſe their own prayers. But if he had conſidered what account I gave concerning this Canon, in myLibertas Eccleſiaſtica, he might have ſeen reaſon to have been of another mind. But he takes no notice at all of what I ſaid concerning it, when I partiLibertas Eccleſiaſtica p. 106. where I onmentioned it, as being owned by our Diſſenters, to have contributed ſomeeſtabliſhing of forms.
10. The nextLiturgies eſtabliſhed by the Council of MileSmectymnuus allow to give a full eſtabliſhment in the African Territories, to Liturgical forms, is ſomething (though not much) differently expreſſed, in ſeveral Copies thereof, both in the title, and in the body of the Canon. But as it is in the African Code, which is the moſt authentick and of higheſt authority, its Title is, Of Prayers to be ſaid at the Altar. And thewhich are approved in the Council (in the ſeveral parts of publick worſhip) ſhould be celebrated of all perſons, and that none
other which be againſt the Faith be at all uſed, but thoſe ſhall be ſaid which are collected by the wiſer men. But that which our Author ſaith to this Canon is,the African Miniſtry being tainted with Pelagianiſm, Prayers agreed by the Council, were thereupon decreed to be uſed in that Province: and yet they do not ſay, no other, but no other againſt the Faith, ſhould be uſed.
11. Now in the ſenſe he taketh it, it doth go as far for the eſtabliſhing Forms of Liturgy, as agrees with the practice of our Church. But when I conſider, what S. Auſtin, who was a Member of this Council of Milevis, declareth,that the Prayers uſed by many perſons were daily amended, when they were declared to the more learned men; and that many things were found in them contrary to the Catholick Faith, — and that many perſons took up with Prayers compoſed not only by unskilful perſons, but alſo by Hereticks; I ſay when I conſider this, I encline to another ſenſe of this Council. And that is, that in the former part it makes conſtant proviſion, for the uſe of Forms ordered by the Council, in the publick ſervice of the Church; and in the latter part it takes care, that no private Books of devotion, which were compoſed by Hereticks, ſhould be enterCatholick Chriſtians; and the ſame thing was very probably taken care of in 3 Conc. Carth. c. 23. above mentioned.
12. But though both Heretical and Schiſmatical Principles had ſpread themAfrica, it is no way probable, that their Miniſtry was at this time tainPelagianiſm, nor could that be the foundation for enjoining Forms. For it appears by this Council ofMilevis, that the Biſhops and chief of the Clergy, were very ſevere againſt it, and yet they obliged themſelves to conſtant Forms. And when Coeleſtius an African Presbyter, had before this time earneſtly eſpouſed Pelagianiſm, there wasAfrica, but he was forced to deſert thoſe parts. I ſhall only add further, that the vaſt Precincts of the African Church, who were directed by this Canon, were much larger than our national Church, and might equal a conſiderable part of Europe.
13. And whereas I gave ſeveral teſtimonies, in myLibertas Eccleſiaſtica, of the uſe of Liturgies, before the time of thoſe Canons above-mentioned, our Auyield it moſt probable, that
the ancient Roman, Jeruſalem, and AlexOffices,
James, &c.were called the Liturgies of S. Peter, S. James and S. Mark, becauſe of their certain early uſe in the Churches where they preſided, though it is not certain that they were compoſed by them, this being mentioned by no ancient. Writer of the firſt Centuries. But our Author intiwhat a lamentable ſhift it is to tell us that they have undergone divers alterations: but thoſe words were not at all uſed by me, concerning any of theſe Liturgies, but concerning thoſe of S. Chryſoſtom, S. Ambroſe, and S. Baſil, Libert. Eccl. p. 107. But I might well have uſed them concerning theſe other Liturgies alſo. He ſpeaking ofthe horrible impoſture of theſe, and other LiturAndrew, S. Matthew, Clemens, Dionyſ. Areop. &c. which I did not ſo much as name, declares, they are ſo generally rejected by all ſober and learned Authors, both Papiſts and Proteſtants, that we ſtand amazed (it ſeems a little thing will affright him) to hear our Reverend Brother ſo much as naming them.
14. Now I grant, that theſe Liturgies according as they are now exhibited, unJames, &c. are manigenuine off-ſpring, both from ſeveral doctrines, and names, which are expreſſed in ſeveral of them. But this is not enough to prove, the other parts thereof to be of no primitive compoſure. For ſo far as concerns the mention of ſome names of perſons, living in after Ages; it ſeems to me no ſufficient Argument to prove, that our Engliſh Liturgy which was in uſe at the beginning of our Wars, was not in ſubſtance eſtabliſhed, under King Edward the Sixth, or Queen Elizabeth; becauſe there were then Prayers for King Charles, Queen Mary and Charles Prince of Wales. And concerning doctrines (for inſtance, that the Liturgy now extant, under the name of S. James oft expreſſeth the BleſArtemon, or againſt Nestorianiſm, by the angreat authority, if this had then been in that Liturgy as receiJames) I think it but reaſonHereſy, ſome ſuch expreſſions might thereupon be added, to the constant Liturgies then in uſe, as may manifeſt their
Catholick doctrine, in deteſtacorrupt doctrines became geneadoration of Saints, &c.) it cannot but be ex
15. But I fear our Author ſpake withtheſe Liturgies are generally rejected, by all ſober and learned Authors, both Papiſts and Proteſtants. To inſtance particularly in the Liturgy of S. James. Amongſt the Romaniſts, it is aſſerted to him byBaronius, andDurantus, and very great numbers of other Authors. The ſame is affirmed in a peculiar Tract, written to that purpoſe, byLeo Allatius, who alSixtus Senenſis, Poſſevinus, Pamelius, Sanctius, and many other Latin and Greek Authors, even as early, as to Proclus, who was BiConſtantinople in the next Age to S. Chryſoſtom, being educated under, and ordained Deacon byAtticus, who was Biſhop of Conſtantinople, the next year after S. Chryſoſtom was thence baniſhed. And Bellarmine alſo owns it to have been
James's, though he admits it to have been greatly altered.
16. Amongſt the Proteſtants alſo, many appear inclined to own Liturgies, to have been eſtabliſhed from and by the Apoſtles. EvenBeza ſaith, Quae ad ordinem ſpectant ut precum formulae, & caetera hujuſmodi, — diſpoſuit Apoſtolus in Eccleſiis; The Apoſtle did ſet in order in the Churches, ſuch things as had relation unto order, as Forms of Prayer, and other things of like nature. And the Walachrian Claſſis acab Apoſtolicis & Primitivae Eccleſiae temporibus, from the Apoſtolical and primitive times unto this day, have performed the publick worſhip of God, out of certain and preſcribed Forms. And if they were from the Apoſtolical times, it may well be that ſome Apoſtles had an hand in making them.
17. And more particularly in our own Church,r
Hammond judged that the Apoſtles and they whom the Holy Ghoſt ſet apart to plant the Churches, had miraculous gifts, and by them they prayed; he addeth, ſome of theſe ſpecial Prayers thus conceived, were received and kept by thoſe whom they thus taught, and are they which the ancients mean by the Liturgy of S. James, &c. AndDurel concerning theſe LiJames, &c. ſaith, mihi dubium non eſt, I make no doubt but ſome things are found in them, which do proceed from the Authors to whom they are attributed. AndSalmaſius as was obſerved by Dr
Hammond in his view of the new DireJacobi, Clementis, Baſilii, Chryſostomi Liturgiae, partim verae ſunt, partim falſae; the Liturgies of James, Clement, Baſil, Chryſoſtome, are partly true, and partly falſe. Which words ſhew that he accounted ſome things to be genuine in them, but with an addition of other things ſpurious. See alſo Mr
Thornedike to the ſame ſenſe.
18. Our Author alſo takes a ſlight notice of that weighty evidence I produConſtantine. And he only tells us, thatConſtantines compoſing Godly Prayers for his Souldiers, is a good Argument that the Church had then no publick Liturgies: for ſurely Conſtantine need not then have made any, and it had been a great derogation from the honour of the Church.
19. But if our Author had duly obſerConſtantines time.Euſebius in the places to which I referred, he would have found 1. That theſe Prayers which Conſtantine made, and Euſebius
Souldiers, as is manifeſt from that particular Prayer related byEuſebius: and therefore his inferring from hence, that the Church had no Forms before that time, is as if he would conclude, that becauſe we have had Prayers lately frauſed at ſea, that therefore we never had before that time any Common-Prayer. And beſides this,Euſebius deSunday, by that part of his Souldiers, who had not embraChristian Religion, whileſt the other part of his Army who were ChriPrayers. 2. He might alſo have further obſerved, that Constantine was ſaid by Euſebius, de Vit. Const. l. 4. c. 17. to order his own palace, according to the manner and uſage of the Church; in that taking into his hands the Books, he either applyed himſelf to the Scriptures, or expreſſed,
thoſe Prayers which had received an authoritative ſanction. But this clear eviOrigen, Cyprian, and others.
eſtabliſhed Liturgy beGregory the Great, nor till ſix hundred years after Chriſt; that the Reader may ſee, how much he would be impoſed upon, by giving creClauſes of Liturgies in St. Auſtin, St. Chryſoſtome, and many other of the ancient Writers) produce as many teſtimonies as are ſufficient to ſatisfie an indifferent Reader, that in all the firſt Apublick forms of Prayer, and Liturgies eſtabliſh
21. Juſtinian the Emperour began his Reign above ſeventy years,An. 541.
Imperial Sanctions were of as large exthe Clergy and Monks, who were not verſed, as his Canons required, in the prayers of the uſual Service, and of Baptiſm. And he declares that he would have things canonically ordered, which if it had been before done, they would every one have acquainted themſelves with the holy Liturgies,
ordained Biſhop
recite the office for the holy Communion, and the prayer for Baptiſm, and the other prayers. And he alſo enjoinspublick offices, and in the adminiſtring Baptiſm, not to be ſaid by the Biſhops or Presbyters ſilently, but ſo as they may be heard. Which things are plain teſtimonies, both that the Church then had Liturgical Forms, and that they were eſtabliſhed and enjoined by an Imperial Law.
22. And beſides this, it was enacted by Juſtinian
made by them, and ſuch as were confirmed by the Council of Nice, Conſtantinople, Epheſus and Chalcedon, ſhould have the force of laws. And thereCanon, which enChalcedon, (for the proof of which, I referre to n. 6, 7, 8. and 23. of this Section) then by virtue of this Conſtitution, that Canon had an elaw of the Empire, throughout all the Dominions thereof. And both theſe Conſtitutions of Juſtinian bear date in the ſame year 541. which
23. In the middle of the foregoing Century, from the year 400. and downGeneral Council of Chaladon, An. 451. in which that Code, wherein was the Canon of Laodicea, which required the conſtant uſe of Liturconfirmed, as may appear above, n. 6, 7, 8. and therefore the uſe of Liturgies was hereby eſtabliſhed in the Chriſtian Church, as far as the authority of a general Council did extend. In this time Proclus, a Biſhop of Conſtantinople of good note, declared forms of divine ſervice, to have beenJames and Clement, and to have been ordered by St. Baſil and St. Chryſoſtome. But how far ſoever his auJames and St. Clement liancient Liturgies under their particular names; yet for the later times, his authority is unqueſtionable, that there were then Liturgical forms, and that theſe had been ſo long in the Church, as not to be then acChryſoſtome eſpecially, ſince Conſtantinople, and was educated there about the enChryſoſtom's time. And at the beginMilevis, whoſe Canon enjoining ſe
24. In the Century beginning An. 300 the atteſtation to the Liturgy of St. Chryſoſtome, in the foregoing Paragraph, Theodoret informs us, his GoThracia, Aſia and Pontus, and he eſtabliſhed excellent laws,
twenty eight Provinces, within thoſe Regions.Baſil's ordering a publick form of Liturgy in this Age, is not only what hath been generally received and acknowledged in the Greek Church but hath a further confirmation from Pr
above mentioned, and alſo from the teſtimony of theGeneral Council, commonly ſo called, where they alſo mention the Liturgy of St. James. And when Julian, for the begetting a greater reſpect to Gentiliſm, ordered many thing therein,after the order of the Chriſtian worſhip, one
Sozomen declares, they were to imitate the Chriſtians in, was conſtituted prayers: whichNazianzen calls form of prayers to be expreſſed by parts: this muſt manifeſtly prove the uſe of ſuch forms then, in the ordinary offiEuſebius, n. 19. and from the Council of Laodicea, n. 5, 6, 7, 8.
25. In the preceding Age from the year 200. what I cited in myLibertas Eccleſiaſtica, from Origen in his HoJeremy, urging a Clauſe out of their uſual Forms of Prayer, and ſpeakCelſus, of the Chriſtians uſing, An. 200.
the appointed prayers, with what I there adCyprian and Tertullian, may be conſiderable evidences, that the Church then uſed forms of prayer. To this may be added, what I above obſerſet Hymns, compoſed by pious men, under the time of Chriſtianity; which the Council of Antioch againſt Paulus Samoſatenus cenſured him for diſuſeing.
two firſt Centuries,
Justin Matyr, and Ignatius, which ſeem to favour the uſe of forms of prayer, as I noted in my Libertas Eccleſiaſtica. But the teſtiPliny, in his Epiſtle to Trajan, at the entrance of the ſecond Century, doth ſufficiently ſhew, that the Chriſtians in their publick Aſſemblies, uſed a ſet form in Hymns of Eccleſiaſtical compoſure. And the words ofLucian, who alſo lived under Trajan, give us a fair intimation, if not certain evidence, of a form of Liturgy then uſed by Chriſtians. Where he brings in Tr
in his Dialogues, expreſſing ſeveral things concerning the doctrine and prabeginning, the prayer from the father (the Lords prayer) and adding at the ending the Ode with many names, or the famous hymn. Indeed, a learned man was of opinion, thatFor thine is the Kingdom, &c. but it is much more probable, if not certain, that there muſt be more than one ſingle Clauſe, in that which he called an Ode;
many names, or many titles. According to this ſenſer
Hammond thought, that Ode or Hymn intended, might be that in the end of our Communion ſerGlory be to God on high, &c. And an Hymn much like to this appears to have been very ancient, being expreſſed in that Collection, under the name ofApoſtolical Conſtitutions. And that this Clauſe in Lucian, hath reſpect to a partiLord and Saviour eſpecially, I am enclined to believe, from the teſtiPliny, lately referred unto, from whence it appears, that ſuch an hymn, (which he expreſſeth ſoliti ſunt carmen Chriſto quaſi Deo dicere ſecum invicem) was at that very time looked on, as a remarkable thing in the Chriſtian ſervice, and was of ordinary uſe in the Chriſtian Aſſembly. Now though I canform of publick ſervice, in that they beTertullian alſo ſhews, to have been anciremarkable hymn.
Lords Prayer; ſo that is the greater warrant for the uſe of forms of prayer, if we conſider, that ſuch publick forms, comJewiſh worſhip. But our Lord complied ſo far with the uſe of theſe forms, that himſelf uſually joined in this SynaLuke 4.16. being of aſome of them at a pinch can hear preſcribed forms. And moreover, our Lord thought fit, as John the Baptiſt had done, to continue this practice, of directing forms of prayer amongſt his Diſciples; and thereby gave a general approbation to this ancient uſage in the Jewiſh Church, and gave his own example for the like practice in the Chriſtian Church, of praying to God in forms piouſly compoſed, and to be devoutly uſed.
28. In their temple ſervice, their ſacrirites of
ſupplication and thankſgiving. But theſe ſacrifices being always the ſame, upon the
conſtant forms of ſupplication, or the ſame expreſſions of the ſame thing, in the worſhip of God. And as the daily ſervice was conſtant and invadifferent offices for ſpecial occaſions. And herein it alſo appears, that God is ſo little pleaſed with variety of expreſſions, that amongſt the ſeveral nuthree ſorts of the former, as Philo obſerviz. Oxen, Sheep and Goats, and two of the latter, Pigeons and Turtles, might be preſented to God in Sacrifice. Nor was there any alteration in the method of their ordinary ſervice. For whereas there was ſacrifice and incenſe daiincenſe, as a rite of thankſgiving; and after that their Sacrifice. And their incenſe was daily offered, before the riſing of the Sun, asJoſephus declares, which is alſo agreeaExod. 30.8. But in the evening ſervice, the incenſe was conſtantly offered after the Sacrifice.
Sacrifices were attended in the Temple with particular prayers and praiſes. The Levites in the Temple ſung praiſes, in a ſet form of words, 2 Chr. 29.27, 30. And the Prieſts joined prayers with their Sacrifices; and that theſe in their conſtant and ordinary ſervice, were ſet forms, (beſides what hath been byPhilo, who deſcribing the Prieſt in this actimaking common lauds for all the people,
in the moſt holy prayers. And we can produce inſtances of ſet forms of prayſolemn occaſions. Such is that, when in caſe of a great impendent danger of ſad calamity, the Prieſts weeping between the Porch and the Altar, were to ſay, Joel 2.17. Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thine Heritage to reproach, &c. And both the Talmud and other Jewiſh Writers, declare how upon the day of atonement, the High Prieſt himſelf uſed ſeveral ſtated prayers, asr
Outram. And the forms of prayJewiſh Paſſover, have been noted by Scaliger, Buxtorf, Syn. Jud. c. 13. Ainſworth in Exod. 12.8. Dr
Lightfoot on Mat. 26.26. and divers others.
30. In their worſhip in the Synagogues and their Schools, beſides other prayers added of latter times, the eighteen prayers, which are much mentioned, and of great account amongſt the Jewiſh WriEzra. But that little or nothing of this whole number of the eighteen prayers, is of any later date than the time of our Saviour, Dr. Lightfoot
forms of prayer of ordinary and common uſe, in the Jewiſh Nation, as early as the times of our Saviour, from the teſtimony of Joſephus, concerning the Eſſens, expreſſuch prayers as were delivered to them from the foreMelancthon, concerning forms of prayer, Eccleſia ſemper eas propoſuit, & publicè & privatim eas exerceri jubet, The Church of God hath always propoſed them, and thought them fit to be uſed, both publickly and privately.
HAving ſufficiently, I hope, anſwerhindrance to piety and devoutneſs in religious worſhip; and vin
2. When our Authour obſerved, that the Walachrian Claſſis commended forms of prayer, as conducing to ſeveral
That uniformity in publick worſhip may be in all Churches obſerved:
Ʋniformity, which they thought valuable, and which is e
Ʋniformity in the ordinary matter of prayer, purſuant to an unity in Doctrine, and this he tells us is neceſſary. And then he thus exthat pitiful thing now called Ʋ
niformity, which lyes in an oneneſs of ſyllables, words and phraſes; a thing which never came into the heart of God to command. And in another place, he enquires how it ſhall be proved, thatthat pitiful thing called uniformity in words and ſyllables and phraſes, was ever deſired of God, or that it ever came into his or his Sons heart. Thus he can come very nigh to a form of words and phraſes, in reviling them in oform of words in the holy exerciſes of Reform of words in ſcofderiding religipractiſing them.
3. But whether God or Chriſt ever commanded a ſet form of words to be u
Ʋniformity, in the uſe of a devout and pious form, ſuch a pitiful thing, as he repreſents it, when by this means almoſt all the adregular way of worſhip, in full and comprehenſive ſenſe, and fit words, is ſecured in all Aſſemblies of the Church of England. Hereby ſober and underſtanding Chriſtians are aſſured, that they can heartily join in the publick ſervice, which is to be preſented to God. Hereby the minds and affections of the people may be particularly prepared bevarious diſtractions, which new variety of words and expreſſions do ſuggeſt. Heredeſiring the ſame things, in ſo many ſeveral Aſſemblies, may quickſcandalous expreſſions, which diſturb the ſobereſt Chriſtians, and adminiſter matter for de
4. And beſides this, how much this Uniformity, which is una & eadem publici Divini cultûs externi forma, in the exCappellus, doth contribute towards the promoting Unity, Peace and Charity, I ſhall repreſent in his words. It is that, ſaith he, qua arctius colligantur, in eadem ſincerae Religionis, Fidei & Charitatis communione, inter ſe fidelium animi, &c. in which the minds of the faithful are more cloſely knit together, in the ſame communion of ſincere Religion, Faith and Charity amongſt themſelves, and thereby in the Church in every Nation, &c. there is leſs of diſturbances, factions, contentions, ſchiſms and diviſions, from that infinite diverſity and multiplied variety of external worſhip, which muſt neceſſarily ariſe, if there be no certain and preſcribed forms of that worſhip, to which all are kept. And now is it a pitiful thing, that our Goverreproach and calumniate the good deeds of others, and eſpecially of our Superiours?
5. But whereas our Author declares for an
Ʋniformity in matter of Prayer, purſuant to an unity in doctrine; and calls that abeauteous Ʋniformity, when we all ſpeak the ſame thing, as to the matter of Prayer; do the ſame thing, in the ſame ſpecifical acts of worſhip; and on the ſame day, the Lords-day, I deſire two things may be here obſerved: Firſt, that our Author doth not pretend that men ordiother things, than what may be contained in a well-diſpoſed Form, ſo that the Queſtion only is, whether, where the matter is the ſame, we are to prefer fixed, known, and well deliberated words, or ſudden, uncerchangeable expreſſions. Now all the great advantages mentioned in the foregoing Paragraphs, and in the firſt Section of this Chapter, are on our ſide: when on the other ſide, men may have the greater opportunity of ſhewing what a volubility of ſpeech they have attained ungood expreſſions they are furniſhed with; which may graadvantage to piety.
6. Secondly, Let it be conſidered,
Ʋniformity in the matter of Prayer, and the worſhip of God, and
Ʋnity in doctrine, ſhould be continued, where publick Forms are rejected. Now no better tryal can be made of ſuch a caſe as this, than by experience, unleſs it can be proved, that the minds of men are now otherwiſe diſpoſed than they were in thoſe days, when this Kingdom had a plain experimental proof hereof. But conmatter of Prayer, it is a thing notorious, that in our late times, when the Liturgy was taPresbyterians, Independents, and other Parties, prayed one againſt the other, and againſt the eſtapaſſions, ſingular opinions and errors, a conſiderable part of their Prayers: others rejected all confeſſion of ſins, as not owning it to be any part of their devotion. In many places of this Kingdom, that great part of ChriLords Supper, was for ten, twelve, fourteen and ſixteen years together totally laid aſide: the adminiInfant Baptiſm, was by ſome MiLiturgy and the rules of our Religion direct us to; particularly concerning our Prayer for the King: it being not amiſs obſerved, by ourour Liturgy then, was on this account.
7. And they were then ſo far from
Ʋnity of doctrine, that one who profeſWe in theſe four laſt years have overpaſt the Deeds of the Prelates, in whoſe time never ſo many nor ſo great errors were heard of, much leſs ſuch blaſphemies and confuſions. We have worſe things among us, more corrupt doctrines and unheard of practices than in eighty years before; denying the Scriptures to be the word of God, denying the Trinity, and the Divinity of Chriſt, the Immortality of the ſoul, the reſurrection of the Body, Hell, and Heaven, &c. And I know no ſober
unity in doctrine.
8. But though our Author thinks fit unreaſonably to vilify uniformity, I ſupva
never entred
9. In another place this Author exan engine of perpetual diſcord, and are made uſe of to deprive the Church of God of hundreds of
and to the like purpoſe he ſpeaksp. 130. Of the cauall ages of the Church of God from the beginning, and that no diſcord was occaſioned by them; and that they are of themſelves of excellent uſe; and that when our Liturgy was laid aſide, almoſt forty years ſince, this was far from procuring concord; he will be apt to think that our Author hath miſtaken the true cauſe of our diſcords
viz. from an ill temper of mind, whereby men neglect the due reverence they owe to their ſupepeace and Ʋnity in the Church; when ſome men ſet themſelves with eaoppoſe regular eſtabliſhments upon ſlight grounds, and others yield themſelves to be led by the paſſions and errors of thoſe whom they eſteem; and when many cauſleſly affect new things, and indulge themſelves to ſet up for new models, of ordering the Communion of the Church, and the way of divine worſhip; Theſe things will indeed perpetually cauſe diviſions, unleſs they be removed. And if any Miniſters ſhall rather forſake their Miniſtry, than admit of any Forms of Liturgy; the true cauſe of this will be from ſome of the things now menmiſtakes, in being perſwaded by ſuch weak Arguments, as his diſcourſe may furniſh them with: or elſe from their going too far to comply with and pleaſe other men.
10. But in truth, the eſtabliſhing Lidiſcords and diviſions. To
Cappellus accounted it very fit, that as far as may be, there ſhould beuna in Eccleſia externi cultûs divini fermula; the ſame Form of publick divine worſhip in the Church, and this he thought of great uſe, ad unitatem ſpiritûs, & charitatis, inter fideles, quantum obtineri id poteſt, conſervandam, for the preſerving, as far as that can be obtained, the unity of the ſpirit, and of charity amongſt believers. And though our Author would be conCappellus in the ſame place declares, that this is by no means adviſeable, and that this would be ſo far from procuring peace, that from hence would ariſe, contemptus, odia, rixae, contentiones, &c. contempt, hatred, claſhings, contentions, ſtrife, and infinite quarrels to the great ſcandal of the Church.
11. But plain experience doth beyond all authority prove, that concord is never like to be the effect of the laying aſide all Forms of publick worſhip. For when this was done in our late ſad times, thereupon all manner of errors, ſects, hereſies and blaſphemies, were broached and vented. After this it was thatbitter, woful, and unutterable fruits of diviſions, which, ſay they, have almoſt deſtroyed, not only the Miniſtry, but even the very heart and life of Religion and Godlineſs.
12. Our Author ſaith alſo, that Forms of Prayerhinder Miniſters care to ſtudy the Scriptures: which he before urChap. 1. n. 47.
13. He ſaith alſo,that hereby many ſuch Miniſters have crept into the Church, of whom every one who hath any concern for Gods glory, or the Churches repute, hath cauſe to bluſh and be aſhamed. Now I ſhall leave him to conſider by himſelf, whoſe work he is doing, whileſt he takes all ocbluſh and be aſhamed of the generality of the Engliſh Miniſtry, that we have abundant reaſon to bleſs God for their great worth. And beſides this, the faults which can be chargeable upon any particular perſons in the Miniſtry, muſt be either from their being 1. not ſound in doctrine, or 2. not of a holy and good life, or 3. from their not being men of
ſufficient abilities, and ſuch as diligently
their Miniſterial work. But ſet Forms of Prayer piouſly compoſed, and inſtantly uſed, can contribute nothing great abilities of our Miniſtry is very evident; ſo I ſhall anſwer this, where he doth more parn. 10.
14. This Writer in the end of this Chapter declareth,thinks he
I had of
but I leave it to the diligent Reaſtrict deſign is not to anſwer me, but to ſhew they
that it would be ſinful for them, ordinarily to uſe the preſcribed Forms of others: and therefore he proceeds to add further Arguments. Nor is it my deſign in this diſcourſe mainly to vindicate my ſelf, much leſs to oppoſe him; but to vindicate the truth, and therefore I ſhall add my Anſwer to his remaining Argufixed Forms of Prayer, or defending other publick Conſtitutions.
HIs third Argument is, that it is Sinful for Miniſters, having the gift of Prayer, to uſe preſcribed Forms, no neceſſity compelling; becauſe God hathp. 71.neither by the light of Nature directed them, nor in his Word preſcribed them. Now it is acknowledged, that all the parts of Divine Worſhip muſt be ſuch,Nature, or the revealed Will of God do direct. By the former, our dependance as Creatures, doth oblige us to acknowledg and honour God; and to call upon him, and pray unto him: And the holy Scriptures give us further Precepts, and encouragements in theſe Duties. And in the parts and duties of Divine Worſhip, the manner of perDivine Precept, or Inſtitution; and is recommended either by the light of
Forms of Prayer in the publick Worſhip of God, are recomLight of Nature, as it directeth us to chuſe the beſt, and moſt expedient and profitable way of perScriptures alſo do encourage us in, and give their approbation of the uſe there
2. But there is yet a further deſign in this Argument, which is, That nouſed in God's Worſhip, which he hath not himſelf preſcribed. To this end, he ſaith, the ſenſe of the Second Commandment is this,
Thou ſhalt worſhip in no other Way, by no other Means or Religious Rites, than what I have preſcribed: And again,We judg all Acts, Rites and Means of Worſhip prohibited by God, which either in expreſs Terms, or by firſt conſequences from Scripture, are not preſcribed. Now if he will be conſiſtent with himſelf, and conclude any thing in the Caſe under debate from theſe things, which are rawords and expreſſions (for of theſe we are now diſcourſing)
uſed in the Worſhip of God, which are not by him preſcribed. But con
3. Obſ. 1. That he here contradictAgain and again, ſaid, That they do not think Forms of Prayer unlawful.
unlawful. And being thus prohibited, no pretence of neceſſity on Mans part, can make them lawful. For according to that ancient rule, Nulla eſt neceſſitas delinquendi, quibus una eſt neceſſitas non delinquendi,
It can be never neceſſary for them to ſin, for whom it is only neceſſary that they do no ſin. And it is more neceſſary, to forbear any preexternal expreſſion of Homage to God, than to make uſe of that which is unlawful and forbidden, as is maniSaul's ſacrificing.
4. Obſ. 2. By this way of arguing, the particular conceptions and expreſſiforbidden,
Form is pretended to be; ſince God hath not preſcribed theſe Expreſſithe light of Nature ſhews our own invention to be a mean, and a ſufficient mean in this act of Worſhip. Thus Men who talk at this looſe rate can tell, when it ſerves their own turn, how to allow what God hath not preſcribed, and to juſtifie it upon this very account; beInvention of Man, though they can declaim againſt Eccleſiaſtical Conſtitutions, under the very name of Inventions of Men. But if we may uſe words and expreſſions, and a method and compoſition of Prayer, not particupreſcribed of God; what an unForm of Prayer, becauſe theſe particular things in this Form, are not appointed of God.
5. But poſſibly he may tell us, as ſome have done, that by keeping to the conſtant uſe of a Form of Prayer, we make that a proper part of Divine Worſhip. Now though this was anſweredPart 3. de Liturg. n. 35.Cappellus, and in part byLib. Eccleſ. B 2. p. 305, 306.Form of Prayer, appointed in any part of the Church, is neceſſary to be uſed in all Chriſtian Churches in the World; who all of them are obliged to perform all
proper parts of Divine Worſhip. Nor is Religion, and the Worſhip of God placed in the bare reciting the words of a Form, but chiefly in the pious devotion of the Heart, of which theſe words are an expreſſion and guide. And thus much muſt be allowed to the uſe of words in thoſe Prayers, which for diſtinction ſake, I call Conceived Prayers. I hope he will not ſay, that it is the conſtant and preſcribed uſe, of the ſame thing not commanded of God, which only is forbidden in the Second Commandment; as if the worſhipping an Image was only forbidden, where there is a conſtant Adoration given to the ſame Image, but that it is allowable where there is ſo great a number of them, that men ſometimes make choice of one, and ſometimes of another, with various changes. We allow the Second Commandment, and the Rules of ScripDivine Adoration be given to any thing elſe beſides God himſelf;Homage and SerNature, and according to his Will, be religiouſly perpretended Worſhip, which is unſutable to his NaForms of Prayer are forbidden by the Second Commandment, as included under Idolatry, is ſo unreaſonView of Direct. Chap. 1. Sect. 22.Hammond might juſtly wonder, at the ſtrangeneſs and prodigiouſneſs thereof; and Cappellus might well declare, concerning them who urge this, as an Argument,Craſſe admodum hîc homines iſti hallucinantur; Theſe Men are herein exceeding groſly deceived.
6. Obſ. 3. This Poſition, That nouſed or appointed in God's Worſhip, but what is particularly enjoyned by God himſelf, (beſidesp. 75, 76, 77. & p. 86, 87.neceſſary circumſtances to humane actions as Humane) is that, concerning the falſeneſs and dangerous conſequence of which I diſcourſed largely in my Libertas Eccleſiaſtica
B 2. c. 1. throughc. 2.deſtructive to pubWords, or the performance of this Duty with or without a Form; it muſt according to this Poſition, be done in neither, ſince each of theſe are by conforbidden, bepreſcribed. The ſame may be ſaid of our Saviour's Precept, concernSupper in Bread and Wine, but he hath not preſcribed or determined the ſort of Bread, or the kind of Wine. And though God hath commanded us to ſing Praiſes to him; whatever this Writer ſaith, he can nePſalms of David, and others recorded in Scripture, to be particularly enjoyned by a Divine Inſtitution, under the Goadvantageouſly uſed them. Wherefore the reſult of this aſcontradict themcontradicted himſelf, in giving ſuch Laws, which ſo claſh with one another, that they cannot be obeyed, and that by the one he hath ſet us free from obſerving the other.
7. But if theſe things may be deterevery Miniſter by his more ſudden and vario thoughts, to determine theſe things for the Congregation where he
deliberate Conſultations of the moſt prudent Men: And if we conſider the Authority of our SuperiSubmiſſion to them, and a not yielding to them that due Superiority in matters Eccleſiaſtical, for the right ordering the exerciſes of Religion, which belongeth to them; of which I have in another Book diſcourſed ſome-what.
8. But whilſt this Author in this Chapter obſerves, that ſome urge the Dutyobeying Superiours in things lawful, and not forbidden of God, as an obligation upon Inferiours in our Caſe, to joyn in our publick Forms of Prayer; beſides what he urgeth againſt this, that Forms of Prayer are things forbidden of God, as I above noted, he hath ſome other expreſſions, concernobedience to them, which I ſhall reflect upon.
9. He grants that the Superiour may in ſome caſes determine of ſuch a thing,both he and the Inferiour confeſs to be in it ſelf indifferent; but not in things,which the Superiour acknowledgeth not neceſſary, and the Inferiour thinks are forbidden.
forbidden, and proceed in his judgment upon good and true grounds; no ſuch thing may be appointed, being in it ſelf evil; wheprofitable uſe for the publick good, though not abſolutely neceſſary in it ſelf: And ſome Inferiours out of miſtakes, or forwardneſs to cenſure, will condemn ſuch things as ſinful and unlawful; it is no way fit that ſuch good Orders be laid aſide; and many others, and the Church it ſelf, be deprived of the good they might receive from them, by yielding a Compliance to theſe miſtakes. And whereas he here urgethCharity, he ought to conſider, that real charity in providing for the good and profit of the Souls of Men, is of far greater value, than that which he calls Charity, in gratifying the Opinions, and complying with the Errors
of Men, in their miſtakes. But of the appointments of ſuch things as are ſcrupled, I have treated more at large in anotherB. 2. Ch. 2. § 3. through
10. Concerning obedience to SupeDoth this make a ſufficient reaſon for practice in Divine Worſhip, that Man commandeth it? And he producethJewel's TeſtiGod is to be obeyed, rather than Men; which we aſſert: AndDavenant, condemning the blind obedience of the Jeſuits, and aſſerting unto all men ſuch a judgment of diſcretion, that they may conſider whether the things be true, or lawful, which are directed by their Superiours. And then he tells us, Thatblind Obedience is the very foundation of Popery; but the judgment of private and practical Diſcretion, is the foundation of the Proteſtant Religion.
11. Now it is true, That to yield ſuch a blind Obedience to Superiours, as to account them Infallible, and thereuptruth, and lawfulneſs thereof, is a foundation of Popery. But to own the due Authority of our superiours and Spiritual guides, and to acknowledg, that they may determine matters of
Order and Decency in the Church, and that it is the duty of Inferiours to ſubfoundation of Peace and Ʋ
nity.
judgments and underſtandings, ſo as to reject whatſoever we certainly know to be falſe and evil, is that which all true Religion and good Conſcience, and the Chriſtiprobable, but are weak and fallacious, and are of no clear evidence and undoubted certainty; and to account themſelves warranted thereby, to purFaction, Schiſm, and Fanaticiſm, and ſuch Principles cannot juſti&c.
12. This is that which the Writers of our Church declare againſt, and ſo do Proteſtants generally, and ſo doth
Davenant, who firſt reſerving to god the Supreme power of judging,
miniſterial judgment, whereby, beſides other things, they have Authode conſtitutionibus ad externam Eccleſiae politiam pertinentibus, of Conſtitutions belonging to the exjudgment of diſcretion in all Chriſtians: which he underſtands, according to the ſenſe I have in the former Paragraph expreſIn Epiſt. ad Coloſ. c. 2. v. 23. And he particularly acknowledgeth it, to be the general ſenſe of Proteſtants;
Judicium hoc diſcretionis vanum, falſum, fanaticum eſſe concedunt, quando ex privato ſenſu & phantaſmate ipſius judicantis dimanat; verum, firmum & legitimum, cum oritur ex lumine infuſo Spiritus Sancti, & dirigitur ad normam verbi: That they acknowledg that judgment of diſcretiuncertain arguments, but only upon manifeſt and clear evidence, in oppoſing what is eſtablind diſobedience, which may well be ranked with blind Obedience. We and all ſober ProteChildren to their Parents, and Servants to their Maſters, eſpecially in working Fancies, and weak Judgments, it would bring nothing but confuſion into Families.
13. This Author alſo tells us, That to juſtifie the Subjects obedience,appear to him, ſome reaſon from a Divine command, requiring the thing. Here if the Precepts of
Ʋnity, Peace, Order and Obedience be ſufficient, theſe are frequent and clear; but if he ſtill mean, that no particular thing may be eſtabliſhed, unleſs, it be ſome way den. 2. &c.
14. He declares alſoGeſtures or Actions, that are idle or inſignificant, are in worſhip ſinful; and therefore may not be ſubmitted to. Now it is well, he hereby diſallows the fond notion of
Ceremonies, becauſe they are ſignificant.
Forms of Prayer, where the words expreſs the ſenſe of the Prayer, and are not only ſignificant, but very uſeful. And though ſuch thngs as are appointed, in the due order of the Church; as the Forms and Order of Prayer, Hymns, and ſuch like, have been uſually and frequently called things indifferent: the word indifferent here, is only to be underſtood in oppoabſolutely neceſſary, but not in oppoſition to, or diprofitable to Edification. so that ſuch things are, if I may ſo call them, in themlegally indifferent, being particuDivine Law, and which may as things of Eccleſiaſtical liberty be appointed by Superiors, not morally indifferent, as if the appointprofitable and good.
15. He ſaith alſo, thatan appropriated habit is in worſhip ſinful (the contrary I have ſufficiently proved in myLibertas Eccleſiaſtica) and that for the Superiour to command any ſuch thing, will be a ſin unto him, as Gideons Ephod was a ſnare to his houſe. Jud. 8.27. But
Gideons Ephod, which he made and put in his own City; that all Iſrael went thither a whoring after it; which thing became a ſnare unto Gideon, and his houſe. So that publick Idolatry in which Gideons family did in all probability joyn, was that whereby ſnare unto them.Ephod of Samuel, 1 Sam. David, 2 Sam. 6.14. nor the Levites garments, 2 Chr. 5.12. at all blamed in the Holy Scriptures, but approved, though none of them were appointed by the Law of God: and therefore it muſt be ſomthing of another nature, than the bare making an habit, that was of ſo ill conſequence to Gideon and his Family. And as this at laſt came to a manifeſt and general Idolatry, ſo there was probably ſomthing blameable in its firſt Conſtitution. St. Auſtin
Ephod, Jud. 8.26. thinketh that other miniſterial things, relating to Gods ſervice, were made therewith: and others think that Gideon making an Ephod, like the high Prieſts, intended to worſhip God, and enquire of God thereby, in his own city, and not in Gods Tabernacle, which was to erect a Schiſm. Now Schiſm and Idolatry,
Snare unto them, as they were to the houſe of Gidcon.
16. Our Author takes notice, thatcommands in Scripture, and examples, are urged for forms of Prayer; and ſaith, it can never be proved, that there were forms of Prayer in the Jewiſh Church, or that the Lords Prayer was intended as an ordinary form: and however what is produced from theſe things, concernState of the Goſpel, he calls pitiful inconcluſive Arguments. And ſaith he, if David made Pſalms (which are Prayhe was a Prophet, but did he make an Act of Ʋniformity too? But that the Jewiſh Church had forms of Prayer; that the Lords Prayer (which ſurely was delivered under the Goſpel) was deliveJews, in uſing forms, was approved by our Saviour, it is not conſiderable, whether any of them were eſtabliſhed by David, or other perſons in Authority. Yet David did in ſome things appoint rules and orders for the ſervice of God, 1 Chr. 25.2, 6.
Hezekiah and his Princes, ordered in what form of words the Levites ſhould ſing praiſe to God, 2 Chr. 29.30.
HIs fourth Argument is, That the adagreeing
Miniſters to uſe ordinarily preſcribed forms of Prayer, is of ſufficient force to reſtrain the total exerciſe of the gift of Prayer, which is ſinful. And that by this principle, Mibefore and after Sermon. And that if the MaLaw,
p. 95. Of the uſe of other Prayers, beſides forms.Latitude of that of Nebuno where to God, neither in Family, or Cloſet, but in the uſe of a form, or the Churches Prayers, they muſt obey this alſo, by the ſame reaſon, which obligeth them, to uſe ſet forms in the publick uſe of the Liturgy. And, ſaith he,who ſhall determine, how far the Magiſtrate may impoſe, or not impoſe?
abilities of expreſſion in Prayer; but ſaith,he takes this to ſhine ſufficiently in its own light.
2. Wherefore, in anſwering this Chapter, I ſhall premiſe three things, Firſt, That I have above ſhewed,gift of Prayer, are not on other accounts neceſſary to be uſed; unleſs, where they be requiſite, for the better performing the worſhip of God.
3. Secondly, that ſince I have maniuſefulneſs of ſetReligious worſhip, and do not found their lawfulneſs, and expediency meerly upon Obedience to our Superiors; thereboundaries of the Authority of our Governors, in ordering things relating to the worſhip of God.
4. Thirdly,reverence to Superiors, for any to deny ſubmiſſion, to the lawful and uſeful Conſtitutions by them eſtabliſhed; and to plead for this, by putting other Queſtions, about their power of commanding things, which ſeem diſadvantageous
extent of their Authority, is not ſufficiently ſtated. What confuſion would it bring into Families, if when Children, or Servants, are commanded there to joyn in any exerciſe of Religiprayer in the Family (which our Author grants, muſt be a form to them, who joyn in the words of others) they may be allowed to anſwer, they will not comply therewith, becauſe, by ſo doing, they may be impoſed on in Religion, from one thing to another: and they muſt firſt know the ſtrict bounds of that Authority they are under, and who ſhall fix them. And the like may be ſaid, of the ſeveral conventions of different SepaFamily, that they may then deny actual obedience and ſubjection, when any thing is required of them, which they know to be evil; we acknow
5. And thus much might be ſufficient,Authority and commands of our Governors; yet beother prayers, beſides ſet forms, in all thoſe particular caſes mentioned in this chapter; before and after Sermon, in the Family, and in the Cloſet. Now comprehenſive and well ordered forms, being with deliberation fitted to the common ſtate of Chriſtians, and the ends of our Religion; are as I have above ſhewed, to be preferred, in the publick worſhip of God. And that before or after Sermon, there ſhould ordinarily be new and varied Prayers, I know no rule of reaſon, or precept of the Chriſtian Religion, which requireth this, and maketh it a Duty.
6.Before Sermons
Thorndike obſerves, That in the flouriſhing times of the Church, Preachers were wont to commend themſelves, and their labours to Gods bleſſing. But this was frequently, at leaſt, done by a ſet form. A ſhort form to this purpoſe, of St. Ambroſe is, as Mr. Thorndike there obſerved, yet extant, may be ſeen in Ferrarius de ritu concion. and from thence inHamon L'eſtrange, and the form of Aquinas, is publiſhed byCaſſander. And ſome of the moſt eager of our Diſſenters, ahve formerly kept themſelves ordinarily to ſet forms before their Sermons. And our Church
Canons, hath given direction for a form of Prayer, to be uſed before Sermons, as is there expreſed, or to that effect: but among the different practices, it is not neceſſary for me here, to con
7. In the cloſe of the Sermon,
ſupplicatory expreſſions, interwoven as a concluſory part thereof, and ſomeBaſil,
Gr. Nazianzen, St. Chryſoſtom, in ſome Hoad Pop. Antioch, and others, and alſo in St. Auguſtine, St. Gregory, Bernard, and divers others: and our Church doth not ſeem to diſlike this Method, which is imitated in ſome of her Homilies. But yet this was uſed but in ſome, either of the ancient Homilies, or of thoſe of our Church; St. Auſtin uſed moſt reconcluſory Prayer, or Collect, which is extant inDiſſenters, who frequently have prayed over the ſeveral heads and parts of their Sermons, that their Auditors might be perſuaded
Taylor obſerved, as their Sermons according to their different parties, were oft directed againſt one another, and in contradiction to one another, ſo by conunſound. But that excelGrant we beſeech thee Almighty God, &c. much uſed in our Chnrch after Sermons, (beſides, the exbleſſing of God, for obtaining the beſt effect of the Sermon, that no pretence can remain, to charge any blame upon thoſe, who uſe no diffe
8. Indeed there are ſometimes extraordinary caſes and occaſions, which are proper matter for our publick Prayers and Thankſgivings, and ought not to be omitted. It is obſerved byBanonius, that the Church preſented their eſpecial Suffrages to God, for the good ſucceſs of Gratian againſt the Alemans: andAthanaſius did publickly do the like, for Conſtantius againſt Magnentius. Such caſes as are moſt weighty, or uſual,
particular Collects in our Liturgy; and if they be caſes of particular perſons, they may be comextraordnary caſe, which is not ſufficiently conHammond declared,The Church ſometimes permits, and upon incidental occaſions preſcribes, other forms in the Congregation. Such are upon great ſpecial reaſons, the Prayers for particupublic days of Humiliation and Thanksgiving. And if ſaith Mr.Mede, There be any ſudden unexpected occaſions, for which the Church cannot provide, the ſpirit of her Miniſters is free. Who will forbid her Miniſters to ſupply in ſuch a caſe, that by a voluntary and arbitrary form, that the Church could not provide for in a ſet form? But ſuch caſes where this is neceſſary, will be very rare, and muſt keep their place.
9. And for Family, and Cloſet Prayers, what ever freedom of expreſſion any man hath, whenſoever he devoutly and
form of words, in the daily and conſtant matters of worſhip,adoring the Divine excellencies and perfections, bleſſing God for daily beneſeeking to him for ſuch mercies, as we always ſtand in need of; I do not ſee, how the leaſt blame can be charged upon ſuch a Perſon, but his mind may be enlarged, his memory helped, and his affections quickned thereby.
10. And ſo far as I can diſcern, the ordinary uſe of a well compoſed form, may uſually in a Family, moſt conduce to the promoting inward and ſerious Piety, upon many of the ſame grounds that prove it expedient in the publick ſervice. and the diſparaging the uſe of forms of Prayer in Families, is both untotal neglect of ſuch Religious ſerviFamilies; many perſons on this account, omitting the uſe of all Prayer in their Families, rather than to expoſe themſelves to be cenſured as weak, in uſing a Form. And other perconfidence, perform this much worſe, both as to matter and words of Prayer, and the profit of others, than they might do in the uſe of a good form.
carefully conſidered, it being of concernment to the real profit and good of men, however it may be ſlightCappellus declared his diſlike of them, whocertas orandi formulas, etiam in privatis familijs damnant, condemn fixed forms of Prayer, even in private Families. And what Melancthon ſpeaks, in approbation of forms in private, as well as in publick, I have
11. But becauſe, many private caſes, which may be of great concernment to particular perſons and Families, may be more properly taken into the ſubject of Family Devotions, than of publick Aſvariety of words. And in the Cloſet, many things concerning the perſons own particular caſe and wnats, which cannot be comretired Devotion: which may either be by vocal expreſſions, or only by the inward lively motions of a
Hammond declared,ſuppoſed by the Church, that in the Family and Cloſet, every man may ask his own wants, in what form of words he ſhall think fit. and what he ſaid, and the liberty therein expreſſed, was obſerved as an inſtance of the moderation of our Church, by my worthy friendPuller. And I acknowledg, That if any Superior ſhould forbid all ſuch private ConfeſſiCreature, and a Chriſtian, ought not to be ſubmitted to. But bleſſed be God our Governors are far enough from any ſuch thing, nor ought our Au
12. Wherefore the reſult of this matpublick offices of the Church by a ſet-form, is that which is really profitable to ChriPower and Dominion, in our Superiors, which is deſigned no farther than to try the Subjects obedience; but in this caſe, it is a pious act of their Chriſtian care and prudence. If all Miniſters ſhould perform theſe Offices, without preſcribed Forms, how
inconveniencies,
with a Form, and by others without one, would be an engine of Diſcord and Faction; and men of high conceit and raſh confidence, who are moſt apt to miſreſtraint, from which others are free. And if any one perſon under a wel-conpeace of the Church, and ſo not to be deſired of any good man. And this man alſo, whoever he be, unpremeditated things, will not perform theſe with that exactneſs, that is in a Form, and may be ſometimes liable to defects of memory or expreſſion. And Forms of Prayer are alſo of excellent and ſingular uſe in Families and in Cloſets.
13. Yet we account other Prayers, beſides Forms, in their placeAuſtins Confeſſions, or the pious Meditations and Soliloquies,ſtrict account of themſelves, and penitently to confeſs their particular neglects and treſpaſſes, and to implore the needful mercies and bleſſings of God, that none need to fear, that any Chriſtian Governor will ever prohibit ſuch things. And whereas by a conſtant ſtrict courſe of Piety, ſome perſons have arrived in a tranquillity of mind, to an higher deMortification,
ſublime affections to, and ſenſe of God, and his Goodneſs, than the generality even of other pious Chriſtians; it is fit that in their private Devotions, they expreſs, as they think moſt expedient, the noble, grave and ſober ſentiments of their Souls, in acts of Adoration. But ſuch things are unfit for publick conventions, being too high for the common ſtate of men, who can more eaſily admire them, than joyn in them. And all En. huſiaſtical pretences, and the methods of ſpeaking myſtical non-ſenſe, deſerve no
14. And I humbly beſeech Almighty God, in the name of his only Son, who founded his Church in
Ʋnity, that all men who have any love of God or goodneſs, may at length learn to ſtudy, and to do and ſpeak thoſe things, which tend to peace in the Church, and not to make breaches therein, and to divide it. And that we may all more thankfully acknowledg the ſignal mercy of God to us, That we have the priviledg of having been educated, in ſo excellent a part of the Chriſtian Church, as our Church is. And God grant that this Diſcourſe, may have ſome influence to
15. But it would be diligently conPeace, but that whoſe members keep their own ſtation, and the governing and ordering part, is left to the Governors and Superiors, to be determined by them, others yielding due ſubmiſſion in things lawful. But if every man, or every ſeveral club, or diſtinction and party of men, may claim to themſelves a power, of new-modelling the ſtate of the Church; this not only tends to confuſions, but ſpeaks them to intrude themoverlook and overturn, all the foundation and fawell ordered Church.
HIS fifth Argument is,p. 98, 100.Miniſters may obey Men, in performing their Miniſterial Acts of ſolemn Prayer, by the preſcribed Forms of oMiniſterial Gifts in preaching be ſuppremiſed to the foregoing Argument, may be aconſtant uſefulneſs, of ſet Forms of Prayer in Publick Worſhip, for the adDiſcourſes of others in Preaching, (as I conceive he never can) he hath then, and not till then, made the Caſes parallel.
2. The different practice of the Chriſtian Church,
Forms of Prayer, when their Sermons were comPreachers themſelves, and the like uſage in our own Church, may incline modeſt men to think, that theſe Caſes are not alike. The Apoſtolical Doctrine required of the Clergy, that they ſhould be apt to teach, and ſo doth our own Book of Ordination, and thec. 19.Ancient Canons required their diliInſtructions or Exhortations, in the Chriſtian Aſſemblies, is of as early OriJuſtin Martyr, andc. 39.Tertullian; and the conHomilies, Tractates and Orations of following Ages, which are yet ex
3. Firſt, Preaching is directed to Men, but publick Prayer to God in the
Mat. 6.9.Mede, andn. 57.Taylor, obſerve, It is convenient the People ſhould know beforehand, what the Minivariety of Words and Expreſl. 3. c. 20. n. 29.Calvin obhumano more perſuadendus, to be wrought upon by words as Men are. For while he ſearcharts of Speech, or himnew compoſure of words.reverence not only in our Hearts, but in well-deliberated words, and in geſtures alſo, is conſiderable in the ſight of God; and this is more due to God to whom we pray, than to Men to whom we preach.
4. Secondly, As the matter for Sermons, or popular Diſcourſes, is of ſo large extent, as to include all the great and neceſſary Doctrines and Rules of Religion, ſo that are too oft corrupt Notions and Opinions which ſubvert Piety, and ill practices which may be apt to prevail, at ſome ſpecial times and places.
Pleas, Pretences and Objections.
5. Thirdly, By this means he can acMatter of them, moſt promanner, as is moſt agreeing to their Capacities; which thing was noted byWhitgift, to be of great advantage in order to profiting. And to this purpoſe alſo it is reaſonable, that the Method and manner of Compoſure, of popular Diſcourſes, be ſuch as ſuit the Place, Time and Age, wherein we live.
6. Fourthly, It is not only requiſite that our Publick Service of God be at all times ſo comprehenſive, as to take in all the uſual parts of Religious WorAdoration, Thanksgiving, and Supplication, for all ordinary Bleſſings; but this alſo ſeemeth enjoyned by Apoſtolical Precept, 1 Tim. 2.1, 2. and thereall the neceſſary
points of Doctrine and Practice, but ſuch a particular Branch thereof, as the Speaker thinks moſt proper. But was he to declare or expreſs all the Articles, or Doctrines of the Chriſtian Faith; certainly a known Creed is more fit for this purpoſe, than a new Compoſure. And beſides this, as the temper of the Age accounteth it a Diſparagement to preach a Sermon compoſed by another Man; this temper having nothing of hurt in it (as the condemning Forms of Prayer hath) is fit to be complied with, for the benefit of the Hearers. And theſe things will ſhew, that able Miniown preparing. See alſo Chap. 7. n. 4.
6. But notwithſtanding this,Sin, for Miniſters in their inſtructing others, to make uſe of what is Compoſed by others, in ſuch caſes, where this may tend to the greater proCatechiſing them, it is certainly beſt, that this be done in the uſe of a known ſet Form of Catechiſm. The ſhort exhortaholy Communion, (and the like may be ſaid of other OfGraces to be exerciDuties to be performed, are conſtantly the ſame, may be better performed in a well compoſed pithy Form, than by a continued varying.
7. And for Sermons, as it may be veauthority of the Perſon, or the Diſcourſe it ſelf, might have a greal. 4. c. 29.Auſtin's judgment, that ſuch of the Clergy who could not compoſe Diſcourſes, ſo well as they could ſpeak them, might do good ſervice to the Church, by publickly pronouncing what was made by others. And I doubt not, it had been much better for many Teachers, and for the Church of God too, if they had ſown good Seed, received from other faithful Hands, rather than to have diſperſed their own Tares, Errors, and unſound Doctrines. In the Primitive Times, it was ordinary, to
Whitak. Controv. r. 1. Qu. 3. c. 4. Daven. in Loc.Church of Laodicea, to be read in the Church at Coloſs, Col. 4.16.
8. But though I have a due value and eſteem for Preaching, yet I can by no means come up to our Author's height, who not only calls Preaching thep. 99.greateſt Ordinance of the Goſpel; but he alſo declaresSavoy, that Preaching is ſuch a Speaking in God's Name to the Peowe make God a Lyar, if we ſpeak a falſhood in his Name. SureDivine Oracle, and that if he be guilty of any Miſtake, he becomes thereby ſo horrid a Blaſphemer, as to make God a Lyar; had need confine himſelf to the manifeſt Articles of the Chriſtian Faith, and the clear and plain rules of Practice,
form of ſound words; and for other things had need ſhut and ſeal up his lips, until he have ſurely atInfallibility: and our Author, if he preach at that looſe rate which he writeth, hath reaſon then to tremble and ſtand amazed.
9. In preaching, the Miniſter by conrules of Goodneſs and Truth, and the particular Doctrines of the Scripture, and divine Revelation, is conſcientiouſly towards God and man, to declare what he diſcerneth to be uſeful and wholſom Truth. And in the main and neceſſary things of the Chriſtiinfallible: and other Expoſitions, Directions and Notions, he is to expreſs with pious care and ſincerity, but not with any pretence to Infallibility. I do acknowledg, that it is matter of LaReverence, they ought to have for their ſpiritual Guides, whom God hath ſet over them; and their Counſels, Inſtructions, Exhorhumble temper of mind, as is ſuitable to be expreſſed, to Gods officers
preaching and hearing, and too little upon practiſing; or upon the fearing God, and keeping his Compeculiar Inſtitutions of our Saviour, in revepeaceable, humble, meek and charitable towards men, and obedient to Superiours.
10. I ſhall take no further notice of any thing in this Chapter, ſave of one clauſe wherein he reflects on the MiniHow many Diſcourſes of late years, have we had in Pulpits, pretending to prove, men have a natural power to things ſpiritually good; That we are not juſtified by the imputed righteouſneſs of Chriſt, but by our own works? How many perfect Satyrs, Railleries, and evomitions of the luſts and choler in the Preachers hearts? Theſe are the kind words and meek expreſſions, of one who judgeth and cenſures the ſharpneſs of other men;
Reproaching. Now whoſoever they be,England, beſides what I have preached my ſelf; and in all theſe Diſcourſes, I do not remember, that I ever heard ſo many Contumelious expreſſions, towards our Diſſenters, as may be found againſt the Miniſtry of our Church, in this one little Book of our complaining Author.
11. And concerning Diſcourſes, to prove that men have a natural power to do things ſpiritually good,
Jeſus Chriſt to be the Saviour of the World; and that the new Covenant of grace is confirmed through him, and that we are now unday of grace and Salvation; wherein God gives his aids and aſſiſtances, beſides the inſtructions of his word, the mighty motives of his Goſpel, and the benefits of the Miniſtry of reconciliation,
theſe helps, if they be not wanting to themſelves, may work out their own Salvation, believe and ſubmit themſelves to the Doctrines of the Gopower of Nature, as our Author miſtakes it, but it is to own the advantages of the Goſpel-Grace, and of the mediation and undertaking of our Saviour. But if under theſe gracious circumſtances, men are in no capacity of doing any ſpiritual good, or of being perſuaded to it; I cannot underſtand to what end Preaching can tend, when it muſt be in vain to exhort them to their Duty, and unreareprove their neglect of it; Nor can they act without natural powers and faculties.
12. And concerning Juſtification there is as little reaſon for his complaint, as in the former head. We diſclaim every where merit in our own works and actions, and do here acknowledg, That our Saviour hath, as our mediator, inGoſpel-condition of Juſtification, that muſt be performed by us our ſelves, and we do account, that as Repentance, which excludes forſaking evil and doing good, is a neceſſary conpardon of ſin (which I preſume no ſober Chriſtian will deny) ſo conſequently, it muſt be neceſſary to our being juſtified; unleſs we can be juſtified, and yet unpar
13. Or to ſpeak plainly, all ſin whatHoly rules and precepts of the Goſpel, as much as by any other Diſpenſation: but the terms of the Goſpel-Covenant, are ſo gracious and extenſive, that they admit Repentance, tender pardon, and accept the ſincere obedience of the Chriſtian faith and life; yet all that is neceſſary, as the condition of the Goſpel, in order to our being accepted into Gods favour, is neceſſary to our juſtification. And that a renewed and Holy life is neceſſary hereto, is mathreatning, denounced againſt workers of Iniquity, and from the impoſſibility for them to find favour, in the ſight of God, who
do the Will of our Father which is in Heaven.
14. Yet the Goſpel-juſtification, upredemption of our Saviour, and faith in him: and from the benefit of his Sacrifice, we receive the pardon of our ſins, in the Holy Sacraments of the Goſpel eſpecially; in the adminiſtration of which SacraMiniſtry of Reconciliation. But it cannot be, that the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt, ſhould be ſo imputed to us, that we ſhould be looked on, as having done or ſuffered, what he did or ſuffered: for then muſt every Chriſtian be reputed and looked on, as having performed the office of Mediator, and having paid to God the price of Redemption, for the ſins of the World, and as having made Reconciliation, and obtained thereby Reinvocated on this account, for the diſpenſing the ſame. And they who are reputed to have performed compleat actual ſinleſs Obedience, need no ſuch Grace, whereby they muſt receive pardon and Remiſſion. But the Holy Jeſus by his Sacrifice, hath made a way of Reconciliation,
Conditions of his Goſpel. And I ſee no other blame can be charged on this Doctrine, unleſs it be, that it is conſiſtent with it ſelf, and with what was delivered by the Apoſtles of our Lord.
IN his ſeventh Chapter, he produceth his ſixth Argument, which is, That forMiniſters who have the Gift of Prayer, to perform publick Vocal Prayer, by the preſcribed Forms of others, is to pretend to do an act of Worſhip, and at the ſame time not to do it, and ismock God and deceive their own Souls.
2. Now this is a very heavy Charge, if it be true, and can be proved; but if all this ſhall appear to be a falſe AcSlander and Calumny, upon the Religious Worſhip of God;recal and deny, what he hath ſo often grantForms of Prayer are in themſelves lawful, and that they may be lawfully uſed by Miniſters in ſome caſes. For if they be a mocking of God, and the duty of Prayer is not really performed, in the uſe of them, but is only pretended ſo to be, to the deceiving mens own Souls, then they are certainly unlawful.
3. Now his chief and yet trifling Arcommand to go and Preach, requiInventing and Compoſing, and therefore ſo muſt the Command to make publick Prayers. Now in anſwer to this, it may be ſufficient to ſay,
4. And with reſpect to Preaching, though our Author will find it a difInvention and Compoſition; yet his greateſt miſtake is, in ſupInſtruction, ExhorPreaching, and of Praying, to be parallel. For where in inſtructing others in the knowledg of Religion,new Words, that they may learn Knowledg; it can never be imagined, that he ought alſo to acExhortations to Men, to make them better, and to change their Tempers, it may be of good uſe, to ſuggeſt to them, and urge upon them, ſuch Arguments and Conſiderations, as before they eiconſider the weight and force of them; there is not the like reaſon of uſing frequently new words and expreſconſidered. Surely no
5. But beſides this, he tells us, that thoſe words in Scripture, which are uſed in commanding publick Prayer, are not uſed concerning the reciting or reading the words of others. Thus he ſaith when Prayer is commanded, Hoſ. 14.2. and Joel 2.17. the word is ſay, and he ſaith,not awar of any Text in the Old Teſtament, where that word ſignifies the Recitation, or repetition of Words formed by others.
Speaking, or Saying. But yet in truth, notwithſtanding his pretence to Critical Obſervations, in which he is alſo very unhappy, this veSpeak, or Say, is very frequently in the Old Teſtament, uſed for reciting the words preſcribed by others; as in Gen. 32.4. Deut. 26.5.
Deut. 27.14. and in many other places.
6. And he tells us,Pray, and Say, to wit, in Praying. But what meaneth he? Are theſe words never made uſe of for the reciting a Form of Prayer, when they are the very words, by which the Lords Prayer is preſcribed? The formerMat. 6.9. and both of themLuke 11.2. And the former of them, togeMat. 26.44. to exPraying the third time, ſaying the ſame words. I might althanks to God, is in Scripture expreſſed to be done, in reciting the words of others, 1 Chron. 16.7. But though I was not willing to paſs by any thing which he urged, though but under the appea
7. Indeed he tells us,greater ſtreſs upon his former Arguments, than upon this: but what little reaſon he hath, to lay any ſuch ſtreſs upon them, may, I hope, by this time appear.
think this altogether vain and impertinent; but of that, let others judge. But withal, this Argreat queſtion, whether if we think to fulfil the command of God, for vocal Miniſterial prayer, by reading Forms, we ſhould not come ſhort of what God requires, and both mock God, and deceive our own Souls. Thus ſome men with extravagancy enough, can ſpeak great and ſwelling words, ſupported, or rather unſupported, by weak, feeble and impotent Arguments. And his laſt words of this Chapter are, That there is neither Precept nor Preſident, for prayavowed again and again, though it be plainly againſt both the Scriptures, and the ſenſe of the
Ʋniverſal Church, and the contrary thereunto I have above
HIs ſeventh Argument is,Miniſters performing their Miniſterial acts in Prayer, by preſcribed Forms, tends to level the ſacred Office of the Miniſtry, to the capacity of the meaneſt of the People: but ſaith he,God would never have erected an Office, to do what the meaneſt perſon in the Church, hath a natural ability to do. And he there adds, there is nothing plainer in the whole Book of God, than that God hath eſtabliſhed a peculiar order of perſons to be his Miniſters, to declare his will unto his People, and on their behalf to intercede with God in Prayer. And he ſaith, if thisno great reaſon for any peculiar maintenance for the Miniſtry, nor for Honour and Reverence to them. Now in anſwer to this, I ſhall obſerve four things:
2. Obſ. 1. That he gives a very dewords and expreſſions.power of Office, which muſt be the chief Miniſterial performanſpecial Authority and Commiſſion, to receive perſons into the Church, in the name of Chriſt; and to govern them in it, to exerciſe the power of the Keys, to conſecrate the holy Sacraments, and therein to exhibit in Chriſts name, the tender and ſeal of remiſſion of Sins, and by his Authority Miniſterially to diſAbſolution and Remiſſion, to them who are qualified to receive it, by perAuthority, are the great and chief parts of the Miinſtructions and prayers, perOffice. But what God worketh by their Miniſtry, is eſpecially to be regarded; and if this was nothing, asChryſoſtome argues, Thou thy ſelf neither haſt any Baptiſm, nor doſt thou receive the Sacraments, nor doſt thou enjoy Benedictions, nor indeed art thou a Chriſtian.
3. Obſ. 2. The uſe of Forms of Prayer is far from rendring learning, knowledg, and ſuch like abilities uſeleſs, or needleſs for the Miniſtry: nor can any man that knows the work and dupreaching, ſo as to approve himſelf a workman that need not be aſhamed; he is by his Office, to be a ſpiritual Guide to the conſciences of others,practice. He is to direct and oblige Offenders, who are under his care, to obſerve the due rules and exerRepentance; and this with reconvince, or at leaſt to confound their Adverſaries, and detect their errors, and the danger of them. They are alſo to watch over their charge, and as much
ſlight and cunning craftineſs of them, who would deceive them. And theſe are things, which reabilities, ſtudy, care and diligence, than is needful to enable any man, to uſe fluent expreſſions in Prayer.
4.Obſ. 3. The time when Liturgies were laid aſide in England, was that time when many of the meaneſt of the Peoabilities, who yet could ſpeak confidently, and alſo men of bad and erroneous Principles, were thought fit to be taken into the Miniſtry, in the place of many ſound and able men, who were caſt out. And the performing Prayer, and popular Sermons, after that method our Author conforward tongue, and but indifferent parts, withDoctrines of Religion and Chriſtianity. There are ſo many evidences of this, among the ſeveral parties of our diviDiſſenters, do very well know the Truth thereof.
5. Obſ. 4. Our Author's aſſertion, That God would never erect an Office or Order of Perſons, to do what the meaneſt of the People, have a natural capacity to do, is alſo certainly falſe.
Prieſts, was parCorah and his CompaIſraelites, had Natural Capacities of knowing how to order the Incenſe and Sacrifices, as well as the Prieſts. And the High Prieſt was to offer the Sacrifices for Attonement, and to enter into the Holy of Holies, with the Blood thereof; and performExpiation, to bleſs the People; and upon occaſion to ask coun
Ʋrim and Thummim. The Levites alſo, were to wait on the ſervice of the Tabernacle. And theſe and ſuch like Rites, were accompanied with Prayers and Praiſes; but I haveForms were uſed in that Service. But none of theſe Perſons were by their relation to the Tabernacle, or Temple, or by verScribes or Rabbins, or Doctors
teach the People in their Synagogues. Indeed after the time of David, when the Ark had reſt in the Tabernacle he pitched, many of the Levites were made Officers and Judges of the People, and were therefore to direct them in the Law of God, and the knowledg of his Will, and ſome of their Scribes might alſo be of this Tribe, as well as of any other. But this was not their Original Office, further than as good Men, and the ſpecial Servants of god to attend upon his Worſhip, they would by their Example, and no doubt by their Counexcite others to perform care
6. And with reſpect to what our AuLevites
Maintenance of the Miniſtry, it is worthy to be obſerHonour of his Worſhip and Migreater Income, for the ſupport and plentiful ſubPrieſts and Levites, than our Clergy now enjoy, and the Revenue of their Prieſts, was greater than that of our Biſhops. For the manifeſting of which, it may be conſidered, that after the Iſraelites came out of Egypt, the oLevites, had males from twenty years old and upward, ſix hundred thouſand, three thouſand, five hundred and fifty, Numb. 1.45, 46, 47. But the Levites being numbred from a month old and upwards, were only twenty and two thouſand, Numb. 3.39. And in reaſonable conjecture, thoſe of them who were under twenty years old, might be near as many, as thoſe who were above it. But if there were thirteen thouſand Levites, who were twenLevi all the Tenth, or Tith of the Land of Iſrael, Numb. 18.21, 24. and the other nine parts being reſerved to the other Iſraelites, theſe thirteen thouſand Levites, who were grown Men, had a larger proviſion, from theſe Tithes alone, than ſixty ſeven thouſand grown Men of the other Iſraelites had, though every one of theſe Iſraelites, was to have their inheritance of Freehold, and none was to be poor among them. So that every man of the Levites, had from this ReFlocks, and the Suburbs of their Cities, Numb. 35.2, 3. and their ſhare, in the extraordinary Tithe of the third Year, Deut. 14.28, 29. and in ſome other ObDeut. 12.12. Chap. 16.11. Theſe things with other Acceſſions and Priviledges, which they had, make their proportion much more conſiderable.
7.five Perſons conſecrated Prieſts; Aaron the High Prieſt, and his Sons, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Exod. 28.1. Nadab and Abihu being dead without any Iſſue, Lev. 10.2. Num. 3.2, 3, 4. there remained then onthree Perſons, who miniſtred as Prieſts, in the Service of God. I confeſs their number after increaſed, and ſo did the number of the other Tribes. But theſe Prieſts had the tenth of the Tithe allotted to them, Numb. 18.26, 28. and upon this account alone, there was appointed by the Divine Law, for theſe three Prieſts, a much greater Revenue, than for ſix thouſand Men fit for War, of the other Tribes. But beſides this, the Prieſts had the Firſt-fruits of the Land, which God gave to them, Numb. 18.12. which, asp. 830, 831.Philo, agreeably to the Scripture obſerves, included even the
Firſt-fruits of their Bread, and the beſt of their Corn, Wine, Oyl, and other inFortieth part of their increaſe, others the Fiftieth, and others the Sixtieth part for their Firſt-fruits. The Redemption alſo of the Firſt-born of Men, and of them who were under a Vow, the Firſtlings of the clean Beaſts, and the redemption of other Firſtlings; their proportion in the ſewave Breaſt, and heave Shoulder, and the Skins of ſep. 833.Philo noLev. 7.8. Theſe things, beſides their intereſt in Free-will Offerings, and vo
8. And we may further note from Joſephus, who was himſelf one of the Prieſts, that notwithſtanding this ample Proviſion, God then made for theſe his Prieſts, yet they were not at the expence of the daily Sacrifice, or the Lamb that was offered every Morning and Evel. 3. c. 10.by a publick or common Charge: Only the daily Meat-offering
Atonement, was at the charge of the High Prieſt himſelf, as
9. Thus whatſoever our Author may think to the contrary, the Wiſdom of the moſt High God did annex a great, and honourable Revenue, (ſuch ſaithPhilo, as might reſemble the glory and majeſty of Princes) for them who were his Officers, though their Work was none other, than what other Perſons had a natural capacity to do. But other Perſons had not a Divine Authority to act as God's Officers, and to intermeddle in his ſacred Inſtitutions. And it is a much more high and honourable thing, in the ſight of all who have any lively ſenſe of God upon their hearts, to be his Officers, inveſted with a ſpecial and excellent authority from him, than to be ſo far popular Orators, as to be able to ſpeak to the ſatisfaction of the People, or even to their admiration.
10. Having now ended his Syllogiſtical Arguments, he tells us,only inſtance in one thing more, and that is thoſe unbleſt effects, which, ſaith he, are matters of Demonſtration to us: Theſe
Effects obvious to every Eye; and entring upon them ſaith,Let us inſtance in ſome too evident effects of Forms of Prayer, &c. And the firſt of theſe is, The filling the Church of God, with an ignorant, lazy, and ſottiſh Miniſtry. He indeed here excepts very many Perſons, but yet theſe are his refill the Church. Now ſuch an open notorious and ſhameleſs Calumny, ought not to paſs without juſt rebuke. The great accuſer of the Brethren, to his grief and indignation knows, that there is now in England as Learned, Able,main Body of our Clergy, be called Ignorant and Sottiſh, but by ſuch Perſons as make no conA Reaſonable Account, &c. is very far from being above the pitch, of the generality of that part of our Miniſtry, which I have had the opportunity to know. And if you were indeed the
Knowledg and Learning, and had the advantage of Truth alſo on your ſide, as you pretend, how eaſily might you bafle and confute us, by clear and plain Evidence, which your ſelves are ſenſible enough you canmelancholy temper of ſome, and upangry diſpoſition of others, and upon the earneſt and weak affections, and the prejudices of many well-diſpoſed People: But you can hope to prevail little, on men of even, calm, and compoſed Tempers, and Perſons of the beſt judgment and underſtanding.
11. A ſecond effect he inſtanceth in, is,The loſs of Miniſterial Gifts and Abilities. But bleſſed be God, there is no loſs in our Church, of any Abilities, requiſite for the due diſcharge of the Miniſtry. But he here again falls upon the gift of Prayer; of which, as alſo of the lawfulneſs, and profitableneſs of u
12. His third and laſt,If not effect, yet experimented conſequence of preſcribed Forms, is a flood of Iniquity, for more than an hundred Years, cauſed thereby,
in our parts of the World. Hence ſaith he, Bitter words in Pulpits, and printed Books, which have vexed righteous Souls, who have had nothing to reply, but, The Lord rebuke you. (They it ſeems wholly imitating the pattern of the Archangel, contending with the Devil, Jude 9.Zech 3.2.) Hence ſaith he, Are ungodly repreſentations to Superiours, of Men of whom the World was not worthy; hence ſuſpenſions of ſo many thouſands, and Ruines of ſo many eminent Servants of God and their Families, and hence the ſeparations of Chriſtians from one another. Thus our Author charenjoyned Liturgies, and Uniformity be utterly rooted out of the Church, and unleſs they will lay aſide that care they ought to have, of the due order and decency of the pubConfuſions, Hereſies, yea, and Blaſphemies, as in theſe Kingdoms were brought into the Church, when Liturgies were ſhut out, and the publick Worſhip was performvanity of their own minds. But that our Author hath miſtaken the true cauſe, of that evil he complains of, I have ſhewedoppoſitions, againſt lawiniquity, will I think appear manifeſt enough, from what I wrote in mythroughout
Libertas Eccleſiaſtica. And I do both heartily pity, and am really grieved and ſorry, for the temper of ſuch perſons, who by their miſtakes, and too much of eagerneſs and paſſion in them, not only expoſe themſelves to outward inconveniencies, but which is of far greaſinful undertakings, and are the occaſion of much hurt and evil to the Church of God; and make uſe of the latter, as a remedy againſt the former.
13. If any perſons among us, have ſpoken or written, with overmuch paſGovernours, and the Conſtitution of our Church, are not concerned herein. But have our Diſſenters replyed nothing but calmneſs and meekneſs, as this Auſtranger in England, and unacfierceneſs, as this Author pretends,Church and State, would have enjoyed more quiet, and many things had never been heard of which have been a ſcandal to Chriſtianity. But if their writings be reviewed from Martin Mar-prelate to this preſent year, mabitter words, and reproaches and reviChriſtian meekneſs, patience and gentleneſs, when they made ſuch violent invectives againſt our Govercivil Wars, when they ejected, ſequeſtred, impriſoned, and put to Death, great numbers of the Clergy, Gentry and Nobility, for their loyalty to the King, and their honourable reſpect to the Church, when they ſtrained their hands, and more deeply their Conſciences in eager and forward ſhedding the blood of many thouſands of Chriſtians, and dared to ſtretch out their hands againſt
Lords Anointed, and to take away the life of one of the beſt Princes, that ever the Chriſtian world enjoyed. All this ſeems not to ſpeak only the meekneſs of the Lamb, and the innocence of the Dove.
14. Beſides the writings of particuSmectymnuus, in charging the Clergy of our Church, with bringing in a new Creed, other Scriptures, another Baptiſm and Euchariſt, and another Chriſt too; and another Heaven, from what Chriſtianity propoan Heaven receptive of Drunkards, Swearers, Adulterers, &c. Can it be otherwiſe, than that paſſion and uncharitableneſs made them write, what they could not but know to be far from Truth? They who have much converſed with very many men of this way, cannot be unacquainted with their temper of raſh cenſuring, and unChriſtian meekneſs. Theſe things I ſhould not have mentioned, but that as a charge againſt the eſtabliſhment of our Liturgy, and the care of our Governours therein, our Author preunbleſt effects to proceed
IN his ninth Chapter, he mentioneth divers Arguments, produced for Forms of Prayer, to which he returns his anſwers. Now ſince I have above, not only anſwered his Arguments, but in ſeveral parts of my Diſcourſe, have proved the profitable uſe of Forms of Prayer, and have in my thirdvindicated ſeveral Arguments, which I urged in my Libertas Eccleſiaſtica, it is not neceſſary for me to undertake the defence of others, which are inſiſted on by other men. But the five laſt Argu
2. And indeed my foregoing Diſſufficient reply to many of his anſwers,p. 134. Forms of Prayer are not forbidwhat God hath not forbidden is lawful, he anſwers, that Forms in the caſe by him ſtated, are forbidden by the ſecond commandment; which I ſpake to, Chap. 4. that they are forbidden by the precepts to ſtir up gifts; which I conſidered, Chap. 2. and are forbidden by thoſe comworſhip God with all our hearts, and with the greateſt attention and fervency; and of this I diſcourſed Chap. 3.
3. To the ſecond Argument, from the Lords Prayer being a Form, and from the uſe of the Pſalms of David, and the Prieſtly bleſſing under the Law,
4. The third Argument (which hath reſpect to 1 Cor. 14, 40.) is, that Forms of Prayer
p. 136. Of matters of order, decency & circummeer decency, order and circumſtance, and therefore may be lawfully commanded and praexternal order, but to be more
internally of profitable uſe, and conducive to the edification and good of the Church and its members; yet I ſhall obſerve what weak anſwers he gives to this Argument. As to order he ſaithorder only reſpects prius and poſterius firſt and laſt. This was I conceive raſhregular conſtitution and appointment, and not to order of number and mere ſucceſſion of one thing after another. Concerning Decency, he ſaithnothing can be decent, but the contrary muſt be indecent. Now though a Form, and no Form, are not properly contrary, but rather contraindecencies have been committed, where Forms of Prayer have been rejected; and the conhurtful errour; yet his aſſertion is alſo falſe; a white Garment may be decent, and ſo may a black one, and yet white and black are contrary. ConCircumſtances, he ſaithForms are no Circumſtances relating to the action as humane, becauſe it may be performed without them. By this reaſon ſtanding, or any other particular geſture in readgeſture is at all times, and in all actions neceſſary. And as for the words of publick Prayer, there can be no ſuch Prayer without any words, nor unleſs theſe words be fixed on, and determined by ſome perſon: but the ſenſe and matter, taken care of in Forms of Prayer, is of an higher nature than a Circumſtance. And he addshe conceives no Circumſtances appropriated to an action as Religious, are left to mens liberty to decommand his Child, or for any man to determine himſelf, to kneel in Prayer, out of any reverence to God, becauſe, this is a cirReligious. If all this be not trifling, I know not what is.
5. The fourth Argument is, thateſſentials to Prayer may be found (I would add, may in publick Prayer be beſt ſecured) in a preſcribed Form. This Prayer may be in the matter agreeable to the will of God, it may be put up in the name of Chriſt, and it may be atGraces, and ſanctified Affections. But he here anp. 138. All things neceſſary and eſſenuſe of his own gifts is alſo neceſſary: but this pretence I have
Chap. 2. and I preſume, no pious man can eaſily think, that the will and pleaſure of God, ſhould require a mans own abilities to be exerciſed, merely to ſhew his parts, when the whole buſineſs of Religion, may be every way as well, or better performed without them; as may appear in every Miniſter undertranſlations of Scripture, whenſoever he cites them, that his gift may be exerciſed. But he ſaith alſo, thatattention, and intention and ferven
6. In his ſixth Argument, he produPrayers, &c. be made for all men, and hereLibert as Eccleſiaſtica, p. 109. that many have thought the Apoſtle had a ſpecial eye to the compoſure of Forms of Prayer, agreeably to what the Baptiſt, and our Saviour preſcribed to their Diſciples, in this his command to Timothy, the Governour of the Church. And he obthough the phraſe
may either ſignifie, that Prayers be put up to God, or that they be
compoſed, in this place it may well intend both. And I now add, That the eviForms, in the earlieſt Ages of Chriſtianity, and alſo in the Jewiſh Church, makes it the more probable, that the Apoſtle might have ſome eye unto them.
7. But he tells me, but upon what reaſon I know not,a little critical with the Verb
a Poet comes from it; but he is but a miſerable Poet, who ſhould only read or recite, Copies of Verſes compoſed by others. Now though I ſpeak of compoſing Prayers which might be reciJuſtinian, eſtabliſhed the uſe of Forms of Prayer, as Ic. 6.little Critical, in imagining ſo unreaſonable a thing, as that the ſignification of Poet.
Fancy, as well as in his ArguDeſign. I am perſuaded that upon further
Criticiſm, or for making Prayers, afFancies, and gratifying the Humours of otruth, or minding what is ſerious. And I wiſh, that no ſuch miſcarriages may prevail with any, according to our Author's way and method, which he contends for. And with reſpect to the Speaker, if this Criticiſm was of any weight; as they are not the beſt Poets, who truſt themſelves to their preſent ſudden abilities of expreſſion; but raconſider both matter and words, and write them down, and have left their Wrilaſting Monuments; thoſe alſo muſt be the beſt Prayers, which are compoſed in like manner. But for the People, they are utterly cut out, from having any part in making publick confeſſions, or ſupplications to Almighty God, according to this conceit, though the Scriptures, and the Language of the Church, admit them to have a ſhare therein.
8. His ſeventh Argument, being onlawfulneſs of Forms enjoyned, is this,may lawfully determine himſelf to the uſe of Forms, and theredetermined to them by his Superiours. Here he firſt tells us, this doth not reach his Queſtion, conMiniſters who have the gift of Prayer. But he ſaith further, A Chriliberty to determine himſelf, where he may not lawfully be determined by his Superiour; as in caſe of Marriage to a particular Woman, in the choice of his Trade and courſe of Life, and a Miwrite his Sermon conſtantly at length. Now theſe words, as many others in this Diſauthority of Superiours, I ſhall conſider the weight of them, with re
9. Wherefore it may be obſerved, that there are two Caſes, concerning the matter of a Law, which may render it unlawful,civil Rights, and freedoms of the Subneedleſs burdens; the other when it is againſt the rules of Conſcience. In the former caſe it is true, that a man's own civil rights, are ſo far at his own diſpoſal,
determine himſelf, to what his Superiour may not determine him. Thus a free Subject of a conſiderable eſtate, may if he pleaſe ſettle his Eſtate upon another Perſon, or remove his Habitation into another Country, or reſolve upon a ſingle Life, or put himſelf into the conditiServant. Another Perſon of like competent Eſtate, may determine himſelf to a retired Life, a ſparing Diet, and a mean Garb; and if he be free from dependent Relations, may reſolve to give the ſurpluſage of his Eſtate to pious, publick, and charitable Ʋſes. But it is not fit nor lawful for his Superiour, ſo to deprive him of his civil Rights, as to put upon him ſo much burden and trouble. But in things which are lawful or unlawful, according to the rules of Conſcience, where he may lawfully as to Conſcience determine himſelf to any thing, he may lawfully be determined by his Superiour; and if from the unlawfulneſs in Conſcience, he may not be determined, to any particuSin, a man may not lawfully deterno Sin,
preſcribed Forms of Prayer (taking this in genepreſent Queſtion, we ſupW
and Piety of men can make.civil rights of Subjects, or impoſing things burdenſome to their outward condition conſidered apart from Conſcience; and therefore if there be any diſpute about the lawfulneſs hereof, it muſt proceed from the rules of Conſcience. And therefore if a man may lawfully determine himſelf in this caſe, or any other of like nature, he may alſo be lawfully determined by his Superiour.
10. He alſo tells us,P. 147. It is no Popery for People to think their Spiritual Guides, and GoAuthor of this Argument, would perſuade us to be Papiſts, in that he would have men think, that the judgment of Superiours is better than our own. But he might conSpiritual Guides, it is both the moſt prupractice which themconſult them, receive their counſel, and be directed by them. And his eſtabliſhGovernours, manifeſteth that they are appointed to conſider, what within the ſphere of their Power, is
Popery, but due Chriſtian ſobriety. Only this limitation muſt be admitted, that as I havecertain evidence appears to be unlawful, thoſe who are under them, ought then to reject their Direction and Authority, as being contradicted by a greater and higher.
11. The tenth Argument mentioned by him is, ThatForms are neceſſary for Ʋniformity. And here he again dethat pitiful thing, called Ʋniformity in words, and ſyllables and phraſes, as he upbraidingly ſtiles it. But having anſwered this in a
12. But that he may vent himſelf the more, againſt Liturgy and Ʋniformity, he tells us, that in the caſe of Daniel the Princes reſolved
it neceſſary to eſtabliſh an Ʋniformity in Prayers; and all muſt be commanded to pray only to Darius. Yet here was nothing of
Ʋniformity in words
and phraſes, of which he was diſcourſing; but that matters not,Darius.
Ʋniformity. He might as well, if he had pleaſed, have called that precept of our Saviour, Mat. 4.10. Thou ſhalt worſhip the Lord thy God, and him only ſhalt thou ſerve; an act of Uniformity, only that would not ſerve his purpoſe, to inſinuate that Liturgy and Uniformity, are like that act in the time of Darius, deſigned wholly for miſchief, and to hinder the worſhip of God, and to eſtabliſh Idolatry againſt the ſecond commandment, though not ſo groſly as in worſhiping the Perſian Kings, who were wont to receive Divine worſhip, as is evident in the many teDruſius. But theſe things are ſo manifeſtly uncharitaHoly God appointed certain Forms of Prayer, to be uſed under the old TeſtaBleſſed Saviour preſcribed the Lords Prayer under the new; and ſince the ancient Jewiſh Church, and the Chriſtian Church in the pureſt times, uſed Forms of Prayer; no conſidering perGod or Religion, can think that all theſe muſt be conmiſchievous
things, and the ruining the true way of Religion; how far ſoever ſome mens angry temper may be unjuſtly diſForms and Ʋniformity.
13. This Writer in ſome following pages, diſcourſing about the ability or gift of Prayer, at length ſaith,as we judg, the Apoſtle, Heb. 5.1. hath given us the perfect notion of a Miniſter, in the deſcription of the high Prieſt, he is but a perſon taken from men, and ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he might offer Prayers and praiſes, Preach and adminiſter the holy Sacraments. So he. But I hope he was not knowingly ſo bold with the Holy Scripture, as to alter and change both the words and ſenſe of it, as he pleaſeth: when the Apoſtle ſpeaks nothing in that place of Prayer, Praiſe, Preaching or Sacraments, but of offering gifts and ſacrifices for Sins. And therefore I ſhall paſs by this, as a groſs overſight in him; or poſſibly ſomething may be left out by the Prin
14. I now come to juſtifie five ReaCh. 4. p. 97.98, 99. ExpedienLibertas Eccleſiaſtica (beſides others which I vinrequiſiteneſs of ſet Forms of Prayer, which I there produlawfulneſs, but the uſefulneſs and expediency of Forms.
15. My firſt Reaſon was, becauſe hereby a fit, true, right and well ordered way of worſhip, in addreſſes to God, may be beſt ſecured to the Church, in the publick ſervice of God. To this he ſaith, 1. That alone is
p. 156. 1. as beſt ſecuring a fit and right way of worſhip.a right way of worſhip, which God hath inſtituted. And I reply, that Prayer performed with a devout heart, where the matter is holy, pious and revariety of words, is according to his will, and appointed by him. But he hath not inſtituted the very words we are to uſe, upon all occaſions, whether we pray by a Form, or by any conceived Prayer, of which I ſaid more, Chap. 4.
16. He ſaithThat God ſhould be ſo worſhipped is reaſonable, but that this ſhould aforehand be ſecured, is not poſſible, in men who may err: nor will Forms ſecure it, which may be read falſly and diſorderly enough. To which I anſwer, That when he requires, that none ſhould be admitted to the Miniſtrywho have not the gift of Prayer, is not the intent of this, to ſecure as much as may be, the right performance of that duty? but this may be beſt provided for by a Form, as I ſhewed in the ſecond and third
reading falſly, as a diſparagement to Forms is inconſiderable, and is one of the weak Arguments, of the meaneſt diſputants for Oral Tradition, againſt the Scriptures. For there may be as many miſtakes,Of reading falſly, ſee alſo n. 24.Scriptures, as the Prayers of the Church: and beſides that, they who would decry their Authority, can talk of their being poſſibly printed falſe, or it may be in ſome things tranſlated amiſs, or that the copies whence they were tranſlated might not be every where pure and right. But ſuch little objecti
17. He ſaith 3.That for twenty years together, the worſhip of God was performed in a well-ordered manner, in hundreds of Congregations in England without Forms. Now though I have ſhewChap. 2. & 3.) that it cannot be reaſonably expected, that it ſhould be conſtantly performed ſo well in any one Congregation, by any Perſon whomſoeconſtant varying, as in the uſe of a good Form; yet there ought to be reſpect had to all our Conwell ordered Worſhip, where one or both the Sacraments were in many placonfeſſion of Sin) purpoſely and generally omitſeveral Sects, ordered the Worown Errors. And I can as eaſily be perſuaded, that the Papiſts, Arians, and Donatiſts, did rightly order the Worſhip of God, as that all our ſeveral Sects and Parties did ſo.
18. My ſecond Reaſon was, That needful and comprehenſive Petitions, for all ſpiritual and outward wants, with fit thanksgivings, may not in the publick ſupplications of the Church be omitted, which can be no other way ſo well, or at all ſecured. To this he ſaith,ſhame of our Church,
2 As proPerſons enough ſufficient for this, and howare ſome. Now in this AnThat it is not poſſible to ſecure this right Worſhip beforehand. And I have above ſhewed, that no Perſons, in uſing conſtant altera
Forms be compoſed, extant and left at liberty This he again mentions, in the laſt Paragraph of his Book. And this meDidoclavius,
p. 613.Scotland: Who alſo tells us, that himnever uſed them, nor did he think them wiſe that did. And the leaving Forms of Prayer at liberty,
dividing Party, or are ſolicitous to avoid the fierce cenſures of raſh Men, or who are highly conceited of themſingularity, or who are Erroneous, and not willing to walk in the ſound path of Religion, will be moſt ſure to avoid Forms, for the pro
20. He adds thatThis Argument would hold ſtronger, for Forms of Sermons. It holds indeed to prove, a comſummary of the Articles of the Chriſtian Faith, to be better expreſreceived Creeds, then in the compoſing of new Creeds, of every mans own maPreaching, I have ſhewed the contrary, Chap. 6.
21. My third Reaſon was, That the hearts of pious men may be more devout, and better united in the Service of God, by conſidering beforehand, what Prayers and Thanksgivings they are to offer up, and come the more ready and prepared to joyn in them. To this he ſaith,particular foreknowledg is not needful, andit rather hinders devotion and affection, as he hath proved. But this pretended proof I have anſwered,3. As conMiniſters premeditation, what he ſhould ask, in the way and method our Author propoſeth, which he alloweth, (and ſo muſt every one, who thinks care and conſideration to be uſeful, in the moſt weighty things, or who would not be raſh to utter any thing before God, which he would not do before a Prince) muſt be an hindrance to his devotion, if the Peoples knowledg beforehand what they ſhall pray for, muſt hinder theirs.
22. He further ſaiththan a general compoſure of ſpirit to ſeek God, to ask whatſoever they or
others ſtand in need of, and to confeſs all Sin. Now I acknowledg this to be veprepared to do, as to confeſſion of Sin may be omitted, and alſo the asking of many other things, which are reliefs for our conſtant wants, and other things may be prayed for, which they cannot ſo readily joyn in. And this general compoſure or preparation, where theſe parts of ſervice are omitted, can be of no more uſe, than ſuch a general preprovided for.
23. He ſaith alſo,If the Miniſter tranſgreſs his Rule,
and ask what is not according to the Will of God, the People may withhold their Amen. But ſuch a worſhip in others, our Author would be apt to call, offering the Blind and the Lame; and when they have a Male in their flock, to offer to God a corrupt thing; when the Speaker in his part doth amiſs, and the People at beſt, muſt forbear their act of publick worover-rule their Teachers, and it is a great diſtractidoubtful diſquiſitions: and it is too plain, that many thouſands are miſled, by the errors of them whom they receive as their guides, into Antinomianiſm, Popery, Quakeriſm, and the worſt of Sects.
24. But that he may catch at every thing, he ſaith again here,Forms may be read falſly. But beſide what I above anſwered, this is very unlike, in what is ſo well known, and conſtantly uſed: but if there ſhould be ſome words pronounced amiſs, the People may more eaſily help themſelves here, they having oft heard and joyned in this Form, which is no new thing to them, and many of them having the advantage of their Books alſo.
25.4. As beſt fitted for the diffiThat ſuch difficult parts of Church-offices, as Baptiſm and the Lords Supper, the matter of which requires great conſideration, may in compoſing a Form be ſo framed, that men of greateſt underſtandings may with readieſt aſſent entertain them, and that they may be ſufficiently vindicated, againſt the boldeſt oppoſers. Now this Argument is of the greater weight, becauſe of the great
Sacramental Adminiſtrations. If an error be committed in any thing eſſential to Baptiſm, the Baptiſm it ſelf, and the perſons memberſhip in the Church, muſt thereupon be queLords Supper (which without Forms, may ſometimes be occaſioned by defect of memory, and ſome preſent confuſion) there may not only be a loſs in the high benefits and bleſſings of that ordinance, but (as in Baptiſm alſo) a profanation of the ordinance it ſelf.
26. Here he ſaith,Lords Supper, the Conſecration is by reading the words of Inſtitution and Prayer; the diſtribution hath nothing of difficulty, and the application is by Exhortation and Prayer, and ſurely he that can pray and preach can do that. And for Baptiſm: the Baptizing in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoſt, with a foregoing Prayer, and Prayer or Thanksgiving concluding, is, he judgeth, ſufficient withwords of Chriſts Inſtitution in the Lords Supper, and the Form of Baptiſm, are thought needful to be retained and obliberty of varying here, with as
Lords Prayer. And thereſecurity in this particular; when ſome may, asIrenaeus tells us, ſome who forſook the Catholick Church did, vainly by obſcure Paraphraſes, alter the Form of Baptiſm in the name of the Father, &c. and the matter alſo, or the uſe of Water.
27. And touching Prayer in this caſe, (and Exhortation alſo) there is no ſmall difficulty. For there are various miſtakes concerning the Sacraments, which ſome would have only ſignificative ſigns, others will have them to be an abſolute ſealing in Chriſts name, remiſſion and other bleſſings, to every perſon who communicateth in them, and that therecertain evidence of actual grace in the Communicants, is neceſſary to the Adminiſtration thereof. And other miſtakes there are, concerning the effects and gracious benefits of the Sacraments, concerning their efficacy and operation, and the manner of Chriſts preſence therewell ordered Form, are in the moſt ſure and ſafe way. But they who affect to vary conaſtray here, than in other caſes. And here particular Perdifferent opinions, whereby they may err and miſcarry, and great inconvenience and hurt may en
28. My fifth Reaſon for the expediThat this may be an evidence to other Churches, and future times, after what way and manner we worſhip God, and that ſuch a Church is in its meaſure a pure and incorrupt Church. To this he ſaithWhere hath God required the leaving any ſuch Teſtimony? Now we need not a ſpecial command,
5. As leaForms of publick Confeſſion, which all Proteſtant Churches have owned, amongſt other ends, for a Teſtimony of their owning the true prinChriſtian profeſſion, and the caſe of
Ʋnity with all true parts of the Chriſtian Church, doth at leaſt greatly recommend ſuch a Teſtimony as this. And ſince in all caſes of Religion we are to give an anſwer to them who accuſe us, where that is needful; to this end, Forms may be of conſiderable uſe. Beſides the
Romaniſts, ſome earneſt Lutherans accuſed the Churches of the Palatinate, for not having the Sacraments truly Adminiſtred, for the refelling of which,
Ʋrſin appeals to their pub
29. He ſaith 2.Forms of Sermons are alſo needful to this end; but though we have many volumes of our Printed Sermons, they are no direct part of our common Worſhip.
30. He ſaith, 3. While we declare our ſelves Chriſtians, and that we worſhip God according to his word,
we leave a ſufficient Teſtimony, that we are a true Church of God. If this be true, our Author hath now found a precept for giving ſuch a Teſtimony, if he allow any precept for declaring our ſelves Chriſtians: But indeed if perſons ſo declaring themſelves Chriſtians, &c. do enough in this caſe, then all manner of Sects and Hereticks, who own the Chriſtian name, give ſuffitrue Church, and of their right worſhiping God. But we are further to profeſs the true Catholick Doctrine, and to worrules of Chriſtianity.
31. He ſaith, 4.a confeſſion of Faith, is a ſufficient Teſtimony. It is ſo,
Doctrine, not as to our Worſhip: ſince ſeveral chief parts of worSacraments) may ſtill be neglected: and there may be many other defects in worſhip, performed without the uſe of Forms, by forgetfulneſs, or being at a loſs. And withall, no ſuch Confeſſions of Faith, were kept to in England, by all thoſe who undertook to guide others in the worſhip of God, in our late times when the Liturgy was taken away: nor do all our ſeveral dividers, who reject our Church and Liagree in any ſuch Confeſſion at this time.
HIs tenth and laſt Chapter, which contains little more than one Page, is has Concluſion; wherein in ſome things, he more particularly repeats his own ſenſe, but addeth nothing of any further Argument, which requires my anſwer. Among theſe things he ſaith,We do not think it unlawful, to joyn with another praying by the uſe of Forms, provided the matter be good and pious.
We have in ſuch praying nothing to do but to ſay Amen, whether he who ordinarily doth ſo, doth his miniſterial duty, we confeſs that we queſtion. But that we may do our duty, though he fails in his, we do not queſtion. From theſe words it is apwithout queſtion do their duForms of Prayer. And then they cannot be juſtified and excuſeparation out of diſlike of them.
2. But as the concluſion of my Diſdiſſent and divide from our Church, both Teachers and People,
perſunſion. And that I would intreat of them is, that they would calmly conſider, what good account they can give to God, and what ſecurity they have from the dangers of Sin, in making that ſad ſeparation, wherein they engage, and too much pleaſe themDiviſions do hinPiety, and diſorder the Spirits and Minds of men, is ſo maPopery, and that here is the greateſt danger of undermining our Proteſtant Reformation, both many Romiſh Authors, and ſome of your own Writers do acknow
3. Friends, can you think rending the Church, to be a ſlight thing? Hath God given you any ſpecial leave or auConſtituted Church? Or may any
highly probable Arguments (as our Author calls them) and yet without any certainty of truth, ſecure you? Very few men of any note among your ſelves, dare charge any ſin upon our Communion, and they who do it, are not able to give any tolerable proof of their Accuſation; and withevidence of ſin in communicating, ſelawfulneſs of Communion, or joyning in the Reli
4. If ſome things be ſaid in behalf of your Separation, or as proofs that your withdrawing is no Separation, and your dividing no Schiſm; which till they be throughly examined and underſtood, may ſeem plauſible to you, even this is not enough,certain evidence that Commuſinful. Thoſe who are men of any parts and learning among your ſelves, know how eaſie it is, to make
any Error; yea, and to bring ſome ſubany truth in the World: But no Chriſtian may hence conclude, that hereupon he may ſafely neglect his duty, of imbracing that Truth, or rejecting that Error, And I preſume that thoſe who are of the meaneſt rank among you may know, that there are few cauſes ſo bad, but that a Lawyer, who hath uſed himſelf to pleading, though he be not a perſon of profound skill in the Law, may ſay ſomething plaucivil Rights: Much leſs will the like ſecure you, if you act againſt that which is really your duty to God, his Church, and other Chriſtians, in matters of Religion.
5. In reading the holy Scriptures, noPeace and Ʋnity of the Church,Diviſions vehemently condemned and cenſured, in the Chriaffectionate deſire and prayer for
Ʋnity in his Church: And he declared this to be a great
propagated, and take the greater place in the World, John 17.11, 21, 23. In Chriſtianity, while many are eager, in proſecuting their Conteſts too highly in other things, the Apoſtle aſſures us, that Peace is one of the great parts in which the Kingdom of God conſiſts, Rom. 14.17, 19 And he perſuades to Unity in the Church, with very great and affectionate earneſtneſs, Phil. 2.1, 2. and urgeth the ſame in almoſt every Epiſtle: Declaring alſo, that they who make Drviſions contrary to this Chriſtiſerve not our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, Rom. 16.17, 18. But can any perſons be the better Chriſtians, by dediſobeying him, even in ſuch Precepts, which (beHonour, and the progreſs of his Re
6.ancient Catholick temper of Chriſti
Ʋniverſal Church, they who would
withdraw from the eſtabliſhed Church,
diſeſteeming that, would priwithout the conſent of the Biſhop, ſet up another Church, were unAnathema. And that the AnciPeace and Ʋnity, to forbid and condemn DiSeparations from the Church, and that they themſelves were zealous in rejecting ſuch practices, may ſufficip. 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24.changed, and become quite difaltering the nature of theſe Duties, or cancelling their Obligati
7. I know that ſome plead on your behalf, that you are not chargeable with any blameable ſeparation. You meet inone Church may do diſtinctly from anocenſure the Church of England, to be no true Church, but profeſs to own her to be a true Church, and her Communion to be lawful, and
Schiſm,
profeſſion is not always made, with ſufficient clearneſs and freedom; the acknowledgment thereof, is ſo far from being a plea on your behalf, that it is rather an unanſwerable charge againſt you. For you reject in your practice, the Rules and Conſtitutions eſtabliſhed by Authority, concerning the order of the Church and its worſhip; you generaldiſlike of our way of worſhip, or at leaſt your diſeſteem and undervaluing thereof, many of you uſe your utmoſt endeavours, to draw off perſons from our Communion, and to bring them to your Congregations; and ſome of your chief Teachers have written their Letters to that purpoſe, to ſuch perſons in whom they think they have any great intereſt, ſome of which I have ſeen, ſome years ſince; your party frequently uſeth ſharp cenſures, againſt ſuch pious perſons, who will not forſake our Church, to joyn with you. Your people ordinarily uſe reproachful expreſſions of our ſervice, yea concerning our Church and Miniſtry (and ſo do your Teachers too frequently) and if any perdiſpleaſure. And becauſe this betrue Church, and her Communion not ſinful, this is ſo far from juſtifying your praunexcuſable.
8. Can it be ſuppoſed,
Ʋnity and Peace our Saviour recommended, for the gaining upon the world, was only this: that his Diſciples and folſeveral parties as they pleaſed, all of them openly before the world, proteſting their diſlike of the ſeveral models, the other parties embraced, and alſo of that worſhip, which was moſt publickly uſed and eſtabliſhed by the chief Guides and Governours of the Church? Now if all this might be done, and care muſt only be taken, that the dividing parties, do not charge the main body of the Church, to be no true Church, or to have no true worſhip; could this be the way to promote the honour of Religion, or would it not rather make it appear contemptible? And in our own preſent caſe, do the enemies of the Proteſtant Refordividing behaviour, honour our Reformati
Ʋnity? or do not you know, that upon this account they upbraid our diſcord and diviſions, and make ill uſe of them. And beſides this in theCommunicating, when this might only be feared to have ſuch effects, as to cauſe offences, and raiſe ſuſpicions in the people, was eſteemed ſo blameable, though it might continue but a ſhort time, that unleſs a ſufficient account was given thereof, it was ſepuniſhed.
9. We know that St. Peters withdrawing from the Gentiles at Antioch,Paul, Gal. 2.11, 12, 13, 14. becauſe of the diſturbance and trouble it might create, to the minds and conſciences of the Gentiles. But none can think, that St. Peter, who immediately before communicated with them, did now charge them to be no true Church, or that their worſhip and communion was ſinful: Wherefore it is hence manifeſt, that there may be a ſcanſinful ſeparation from a Church, where there are no ſuch uncha
10. And I appeal unto any party of our Diſſenters themſelves, whether if any members of their own number,
leſſer diviſions,
3. By apdeſert and declare their diſSociety or Communion, with which they before joyned: ſtill calling them a true Church, and not charging their worſhip with ſin; I ſay, whether the Teachers, and remaining members of this firſt party, will juſtifie theſe diviPatrons of Confuſion, and that any part of a Chriſtian Society may ſeparate it ſelf, when there is no apparent danger of ſin in the Communion, and conſeconſcience, will oblige them to forſake that Comnew parties of di
11.rend the Church of Chriſt; whence it will appear neceſſary, that they who forſake a well-eſtabliſhed
diſobedience to any DiPeace and Ʋnity; if it be from careleſminding the will of God; or from a temper reſolobedient; or from the rule and dominipride or paſſion; is ſo oppoſite to the ſpirit of Chriſtianity, that he who is guilty hereof, cannot find acceptance with God, v. n. 16.
12.dividing and rending the Church, though they hold faſt the fundamental doctrines of Religion, and a care of many other duties of a holy life, yet for this miſcarriage, and their perſiſting therein, they diminiſh their future happineſs, and the degrees of glory, which they might oCorinthians.
13. When the Apoſtle reflected upon
Strife, and diviſions of the Church of Corinth, he thence pronounceth them to be carnal, and Babes in Chriſt, 1 Cor. 3.1, 3, 4. or that they were of the loweſt ſort,
1 Cor. Ch. 3. Conſidered. Dividers are not of the higheſt rank of Chriſtians.value and eſteem themſelves. And whereas they were one of Paul, and another of Apollos, he ſhews them, that Paul and Apollos, and all other Miniſters of Chriſt were labourers under God, and neither could, nor did, lay any other foundation than Jeſus Chriſt, v. 5.11. which is an Argument againſt dividing, Ch. 1.11, 12.
14. And the Apoſtle,Diviſions; tells them, concerning what is built upon this Foundation, that every mans work ſhall be made manifeſt: for the day ſhall declare it, v. 14. and that the Apoſtle ſpeaks this of the day of judgment, or the day of the Lord (as being oppoſed to mans day, Ch. 4.3.) is manifeſt, from Ch. 3.8. and eſpecially from Ch. 4.4, 5. He acquaints them, that he who ſhall build upon this foundation, Gold and Silver, and precious Stones, and whoſe work
ſhall abide; that is, who ſhall keep cloſe to the integrity of the Chriſtian Faith and Doctrine, and to the purity of the Chriſtian Life, and therein to Chriſtian Unity, which is one great duty thereof, and a means of growth therein: (v. 1.3, 4.) he ſhall receive a reward v. 12.14. or obtain great and perfect happineſs.
15. And he lets them know, that they who build Hay and Stubble, upon this foundation, and whoſe work ſhall be burnt, they ſhall ſuffer loſs, ver. 15. Which ſhews, that they who ſhall joyn hurtful Opinions and Errors, though not in things Fundamental, with the Chriſtian Religion; and irregular Practices, tho they be not wholly oppoſite to a Chrithis Foundation build Strife, Factions, or Diviſions, ſhall ſuffer loſs. Or theſe, though they act from miſtaken Zeal, or from ſome other Principle, which is not inabatements of reward: Though they ſhall be ſaved as by Fire, or with appearance of difficulty and danger. And beſides the evidence that this Truth
Corinth were, which are ſo much decried and condemned, in the Doctrine of Chriſtianity, muſt be reckoned amongſt thoſe works, which ſhall not abide, but be burnt, to the loſs of them who are engaged in them. And they who are Babes and carnal, (ver. 1, 3.) may well be thought inferiour in reSpiritual and grown men, when every man ſhall receive his own reward according to his own labour, ver. 8.
16. And this Apoſtle ſtill eying their Diviſions in the Church,v. n. 11.
Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God? And Ver. 17. If any man deſile the Temple of God, him will God deſtroy. That is, that they who deprave the genuine PuDiviſions, as thereby to turn aſide from the Chriſtian Life, their end will be miſery. And to this purpoſe, Diviſions, or Seditions, are reckoned among thoſe fruits
of the Fleſh, which exclude from the Kingdom of God, Gal. 5.20, 21. And yet further, with reſpect to the ſame thing, the Apoſtle, Ver. 18, 19, 20. ſhews, That what men may ſometimes account to be their Wiſdom, if it lead them amiſs (as particularly by bringing them into the paths of ſtrife and diſcord) is no true wiſdom, but folly. And the ſame thing is aſſerted by St. James, Jam. 3.13, 14, 15, 16, 17.
17. And to make it manifeſt, that in this diſcourſe of the Apoſtle thus far, and alſo in his proceeding yet further, what he wrote was particularly directed to the caſe and miſcarriage of their Diviſions: From what he had hitherto ſaid,Ver. 21. Therefore let no man glory in Men, i.e. to make Factions and Diviſions, out of pretence of the eſteem they have, even of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, or any other. And he directs, Chap. 4.1. Let a man ſo account of us, as of the Miniſters of Chriſt, and Stewards of the Myſteries of God. And Chap. 4. v. 6. he tells them, Theſe things I have in a Figure, transferred to my Self and to Apollos, for your ſakes, that you might learn in us, not to think of men, above that which is written, that
no one of your be puffed up for one againſt another.
18. And that no man may ſlight and deſpiſe this conſideration, and ſtill conpleaſe himſelf in ſuch undertakings, ſo God ſurely cantemper, that generally attends them. Beſides,Church of God, to Religion, and to omany diſorders of Mind and Practice. Here are Prejudices towards them, from whom they divide, with diſordered heats and cenſoriouſneſs; a neglect of due reverence to Superiours; and a proneneſs to emparticular Opinions, concerndiſtance from them. And withal, the offending Perſons are here ordinarily ſo far pleaſed with, and ready to juſtifie, and approve their miſexamine their own Errors and Miſtakes; are far from being pleaſed with him, who ſhall reprove their faults, and ſomeperſuade them, to conſider of their Duty, and return unto it. And this temper of mind, beſides the various woful fruits, and manifeſt conſequents of Diviſions themſelves, may well provoke the Di
19. Wherefore as every Perſon vapleaſing God, and minding the duties of the Chriſtian Religion, which are things of mighty concernment and abſolute neceſſity; they muſt not think,duty of Ʋnity, or any other great command of the Goſpel, and practiſe only ſuch Rules and Precepts, as themſelves pleaſe. When St. Paul did beſeech his Epheſians, Eph. 4.1. to walk worthy of the Vocation wherewith they were called; he to this end, among other duties, inſiſts moſt particularly, and moſt largely, upon keeping the Ʋnity of the ſpirit in the bond of peace; and inforceth this by very many Arguments, and Obligations to Chriſtian Ʋnity, v. 3.4, 5, 6. And I hope I need add no more, but the Apoſtles concluſive words, in his latter Epiſtle to the Corinthians, beApoſtolical Bleſſing, to
Finally, Brethren farewell, be perfect, (orHammonds Annot. in Loc.be compact and knit together) be of good comfort (or as others render it not amiſs, receive exhortation) be of one mind, live in peace, and the God of love and peace ſhall be with you.