The old Puritan detected and defeated, or, A brief treatise shewing how by the artifice of pulpit-prayers our dissenters, at all times, have endeavour'd to undermine the liturgy of the reformed Church of England together with the fault and danger of such prayers, whether vented extempore, or forethought by the speaker / by a most learned and reverend divine now with God.

The old Puritan detected and defeated, or, A brief treatise shewing how by the artifice of pulpit-prayers our dissenters, at all times, have endeavour'd to undermine the liturgy of the reformed Church of England together with the fault and danger of such prayers, whether vented extempore, or forethought by the speaker / by a most learned and reverend divine now with God.

Table of contents

Title page

The Publisher to the Reader.

THE GENERAL PROPOSITION, Maintaining, That it is not Lawful for any Person that has received Holy Orders in the Church of England, to use any Extemporary or Praemeditated Prayers of his own private Composure either before or after Sermon in the Church, in the publick Worship and service, but only the Liturgy set forth and allowed.

THE GENERAL PROPOSITION, Maintaining, That it is not Lawful for any Person that has received Holy Orders in the Church of England, to use any Extemporary or Praemeditated Prayers of his own private Composure either before or after Sermon in the Church, in the publick Worship and service, but only the Liturgy set forth and allowed.

[Page]

FIrst, Because it is directly against his own Solemn Promise made to the Church when he came to be Ordained: v. The Form of Ordination, &c. And that promise is set under his hand when he subscribed the Three Articles contained in Canon 36▪ the Second whereof runs thus Quod ipse in publicis precibus & Sacramentis administrandis, illam prorsus formam quae in dicto libro praescribitur & non aliam sit observaturus. Sparrow's Collections, p. 287. That he will use the Service-Book praescribed in Publick Prayer, and no other.

Secondly, Because the use of such prayers is directly against an Act of Parliament (viz.) That v. The Acts of Uniformity and especially That in primo Eliz. which is still in force as will appear by that in xiv Car. ii, and is meant by the Author▪ See also lib. quorundam Canon. ib. p. 238. parag. 2. For the Vniformity of Common-Prayers, which enjoyns peremptorily under sharp punishments, that no man shall use any other open Prayer than is mentioned and set forth in the said Book.

[Page]Thirdly, No man is to presume to exercise any Sacerdotal Office except he be But in Ordination, the Person to be Ordain'd is rather call'd to the contrary, as is shewn above in the first Argument. v. Sparrows Coll. p. 47. and p. 60▪ called to it as was Aaron.

Seeing therefore both the Church and State have expresly enjoyned us to use no Publick Prayers but the Liturgy [Except his Majesty give special leave, upon some extraordinary occasion, for the drawing up of Forms, which leave has ground de jure Communi both Ecclesiastical and Civil] it follows, that neither Church nor State have given power to any to vent Themselves in such Open Prayers in the Church; because they Expresly forbid it.

To presume then to use such prayers contains in it a Complication of several Sins.

First, A sin of Falshood or the breach of a Solemn Promise, confirmed by Subscription, to the Church.

Secondly, It is an Act of Disobedience to the Higher Powers; and so 'tis an express sin against the Fifth Commandment.

Thirdly, It is an Act of Injury and Vsurpation Offer'd to the Church in presuming to thrust themselves into a Sacred Office, which such men are not intrusted with, nor thought fit at all to Execute.

For, Many may be able to discourse unto Men (since if they chance there to fail in point of Truth or Congruity, the matter is of less Consequence.) But the Church will trust but Few that shall Lead men when they speak to God, because there a Falshood may oft prove an Abomination in speech, and an Incongruity may soon amount to Blasphemy.

I would gladly Demand of any prudent Person, whether he conceives that when the Church of England was [Page] in her greatest Glory she had ever in it 9500 persons, answerable to the 9500 Parishes, that were able to Lead the People in Prayer? Sad Experience tells us the Contrary, and informs us loudly enough of their Solaecisms and Blasphemies. And the same Experience tells us that the Directory helps them not at this Dead Lift: Nay it may often prove the greatest Impediment, since were some weak men allow'd to choose as well their matter as their words, they might perhaps come off with some tolerable approbation: But being forc't to Confine themselves to matter, which either they well understand not, or are not so much used to speak on, their Prayers are oft times vain and ridiculous, or (which is worse) Erroneous or Blasphemous.

The Licentiousness of Devotion (that Each Private Priest durst adventure to Lead others in Publick Prayer) breeding great disturbance in the Primitive Church; brought the Fathers to Decree thus, in the 2d. Council of Canon. 12. Milevis (where St. Augustine sate, as appears by the Subscription) that no Publick Prayer should be offer'd up to God, that had not been approv'd of in a Council, or at least Agreed upon by the more discreet sort of men, This is also repeated in the 70th Canon of the Council of Africk. And hereunto agrees the 3d. Conc. Carthag. Can. 23. see also Microl. de Eccles. Observ. c. 4. Orationes quae ab Ecclesia probatae non sunt▪ rejiciantur: as 'twas decreed under Carolus magnus. [Ne fortè aliquid contra Fidem, vel per Ignorantiam vel per minus studium sit Compositum:] least either through Ignorance or for want of due pains In the Composers. the Publick Faith might receive hurt through such Prayers.

Now besides other Hurts which the Church of England hath received by this unlawful Course, all may know she hath received one remarkable mischief in the Neglect and Scorn of Her Liturgy.

For, when Cartwright that Puritan Incendiary, saw he wanted Power either to Extirpate or Alter our [Page] Establisht Book of Common-Prayer, He was the First durst boldly use this Forbidden Knell of Devotion, which he, and those who follow'd him, improv'd to so great an height by Posting over our Liturgy with so much Carelesness and Scorn, and by giving all the Advantages to those Forms of their own, [advantages] both of the Voice and of the Eyes and of the Hands; that the People began ere long to think, that the Reading of the Liturgy was but a Vseless Task impos'd by the Church on the Priests: But that they compleatly serv'd God if they came in [to the Church] when the Psalms were singing; because, besides that they praised God, and had the Benefit of a Sermon, they heard a long Prayer too [And that] set out with all the Devotion and all the Advantages it could possibly receive from the Art, or from the Natural good Parts of that Person who compos'd it. So that he who will needs continue the use of these Forbidden Prayers in the Pulpit takes the readiest Course (as much as in him lies) for the rooting out of the Publick Liturgy.

Object. It may be said perhaps▪ that many This is too true, but makes it not a whit more Lawful. Church-men both of great Knowledge, and great Place, have themselves used these Forms of Praying. And upon that ground, why may not they?

Ans. Truly if to Argue at this rate were Concluding, it might soon free us not only from the tyes of many English Laws, but from the Obligation also of the Decalogue it self, which without all doubt is broken often enough, not only by those of the Common Sort, but by men of great Place and Knowledge. But we must Distinguish between Consuetudo and Corruptela, and so Learn that Vsages taken up against express written Laws, are Corruptions, but not Iustifiable Customs.

[Page]I suppose that these men do not at all like the Course that the Independents now use in Prayer, who permit this Extemporary or Voluntary way not only to the Priests, but to their Souldiers and to their Mechanicks. And I Imagine a main cause of their mistakes to be, because such an office is intruded on by those men who have no just Authority to perform it. But then if they would consider things well, they would easily find that this use of Forbidden Prayer has Metamorphos'd them into Independents since they have no more Authority to compose such Forms from the Apostolick Church that Ordain'd them, than either that person has, who is now employ'd to make shoes, or that other Ecclesiastick whose Formalities are a Belt and a Buff Ierkin.

One thing I shall add more, and it is a short Discourse how the Pulpit Forms of Prayer were brought into the Church of England.

We must know then, that in the times of Popery the manner Commonly was to use the Lords Prayer, or else an Ave Maria before Sermon: So that when King Edward the Sixth came to Compose his Injunctions, He made Choice (as he had very good Reason of the Lords Prayer for that purpose. But because it was thought fit that the Kings just Supremacy in Ecclesiastical things should be at least Weekly publisht to the People, it was thought Expedient to premise to the Pater-noster, a Form (as his 'Tis call'd there the Form of Bidding the Common-prayers. Sparrow's Collect. p. 10. Injunction styles it) of Bidding Prayer, wherein the Priest was not to speak to God, but only to the People, Exhorting them to pray Instantly for such and such Persons (and things) but He pray'd not to God at all, until he clos'd (his Exhortation) with the Lords Prayer.

This was likewise confirmed in the The Title is, The Form of Bidding the Prayers to be us'd Generally in this uniform so [...]t. Spar. Collections, p. 85. Injunctions of Queen Elizabeth, and Expresly called the Form of Bidding Prayer.

[Page]And when King Iames of Blessed Memory turned those Injunctions into Canons his Law runs [Canon. 55.] That Ministers Populum Hortabuntur ut secum in precibus, Concurrat, &c. Sparrows Coll. p. 294. should move the People to joyn with them in Prayers (viz.) in this Form of Bidding Prayer Ye shall Pray for Christ's Catholick Church &c. concluding always with the Lords Prayer.

Now, Let any Indifferent man Judge: Are Exhortations proper Forms of Prayer? Nay let a Discerning person Consider it well, and it will appear that things there prudently spoken by way of Exhortation and Narration, would prove very Absurd in Prayer. How fond would it appear to tell the great God of Heaven (and Earth) of the King's most Excellent Majesty our Soveraign Lord Charles by the Grace of God King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith &c. or, as some oft do, to tell God of such a Lord, Earl of such a place and Baron of another, One of his Majesties most Honourable Privy Council, and his very good Lord and Patron, &c.? And yet when we do but exhort them Or desire them. to joyn their Prayers, such Clauses may not be unfit.

I can scarce think of any other apparent way to defend them From impertinence in that practice..

And yet 'tis true this Form is there (viz. Canon 55.) call'd Precationis formula—in Concionum—ingressu—ibid. a Prayer before Sermon: And so it is; because we then say, together with the Preacher, the Lords Prayer, to those very purposes he Exhorts. And they well know, who know Divinity, that all kinds of prayer are reducible to that Holy Form: But it follows not that the Preachers Exhortation is a Prayer: Or that he then at all speaks to God himself, but (only) to the People. Indeed upon an occasion Extraordinary Such as this appears to have been in th [...]design and use of it. it is a Prayer of no Ordinary Composition, and therefore call'd the Form of Bidding Prayer, both by a Reform'd King Edw. 6. and Q. Eliz. ut supra. and a very glorious Queen; and yet de facto disus'd by an Itching [Page] Puritanical Humour at first (no doubt) by Cunning and Design, and afterwards (as I verily think) for the most part by mistake of the bad end to which it drove, or by Inadvertency of the Law. And perhaps Both. But it is most apparent that such Forbidden Prayers are an Especial means to Eat out the whole English Liturgy.

FINIS.

§

[Page]

[Page]

THE OLD PURITAN Detected and Defeated: OR, A BRIEF TREATISE SHEWING How by the Artifice of Pulpit-Prayers our Dissenters, at all times, have endeavour'd to undermine the Liturgy, of the Reformed CHURCH of ENGLAND.

Together with The Fault and Danger of such Prayers, whether vented Extempore, or fore-thought by the Speaker.

By a most Learned and Reverend Divine now with God.

Now I beseech you Brethren—that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no Divisions among you. 1 Cor. 1.10.

LONDON: Printed for W. Davis in Amen-Corner. 1682.

The Publisher to the Reader.

[Page]

[Page]

AT this time of day when the Reverend and Learned Clergy of the Church of England, are so great Ornaments of the Pulpit, and so justly admir'd for their performances in Preaching; he that would take upon him to instruct them how to behave themselves in it, had need be a very wonderful and extraordinary Person for Learning and Authority; or else he will be thought to charge himself with a most invidious and vain glorious Task.

But the Author of the following Tract was well known to be such a Person, a man of great Reverence and Learning, and worthily Design'd for a Principal Governor in this Church, if it had pleas'd God to spare us so great a Blessing a little longer. And therefore it should not be thought any great presumption, to set down His sence of the Clergies Duty: Especially in a matter that does not touch on the preaching part, but concerns only Discipline, and is neglected by most (as himself thought it was) through mistake of its bad consequences, or by Inadvertency of the Law that has enjoyn'd it.

For some years both before and since this Copy came to my hands, I have observ'd in many places, and especially about London, a great disuse of the practice here contended for: And having discours'd with several concerning it, I must needs say I have not been yet so fortunate, as to meet with any Reasons sufficient (in my Iudgment) to justify the Common practice, or to outweigh my Author's arguments against it.

I know that the Title of the Canon cited by him, (viz, 55. primo Jacobi) runs thus Precationis Forma à Concionatoribus in concionum suarum Ingressu imitanda, but I am not convinc'd that the intention of the Canon is fullfil'd when the matter of it is turn'd into the proper Form of a Prayer: Because we are hereby oblig'd to follow this very Form, which is plainly the Form of Bidding Prayer, the word being all along precamini, and not precemur. And in the Beginning 'tis, populum hortabuntur they shall move or exhort the People to pray, but not pray with them till the Conclusion: So that the next words I [...] hunc aut similem modum may not be understood of changing the Form of Bidding Prayer into a formal direct Prayer, but barely to allow a Liberty of altering only the words, so as may be suitable to any Emergent occasion, or particular Circumstance, keeping still to this Form [Page] in the nature of an Exhortation. Wherefore seeing 'tis so praescrib'd by K. Edw. 6th. by Q. Eliz. and here by K. James; and ratify'd since by the succeeding Powers a [...] not repeal'd by any later Constitutions; I see no reason why it may safely be dispenc't with, unless we infer from the general usage, that there is in this case a Tacit Consent of the Church. But I don't find why the Church should be thought to Agree and Consent privily, to that which she has Decreed otherwise in a publick manner. And however she may Connive, or tolerate, or forbear to punish Offenders; yet this will in no case acquit them of the guilt. Besides there is the less ground to Argue upon the Churches Consent, because many Eminent Church-men that should share in it, have declar'd themselves of this Authors opinion and do practice accordingly.

The Dissenters tho' they hate nothing (but Monarchy perhaps) more than our Establisht Uniformity yet are so fond of any pretence against us; that of late they have had the hardiness to Tax the Conforming Clergy with the Alsop against Dr. St. Hickringil, &c. Breach of it, in matters (as of less moment, and not so ill consequence as this here treated of, so) much more Difficult, if not impossible, to be remedied. And I am told, the Popish Faction hath taken hold of the very same occasion to bespatter and revile our Discipline. And farther, I know many Regular and sound Divines that both use this Form of Bidding Prayer, and no other, and are also dissatisfy'd with▪such as do not use it: so that such would do well either to shew good reasons why they disuse it, and to make those Reasons as publick as this Paper, Or else to Testify their Conviction by the use of it. For if my Authors proofs stand firm and unshaken, their contrary Custom or their great numbers, will not justify them in the other practice. How long soever they have been in the wrong, 'tis no shame at last to yield Obedience to the Truth and to the Law.

But if they make it appear against this Author, that they are in the Right, or that 'tis but a matter of meer Indifferency whether we use this or another Form, tis hop'd that the Rest of the Clergy may follow their way for Uniformity's sake: Or, that whether they do or no; yet neither they, nor the People may be Scandaliz'd if both ways be prov'd Lawful.

There is no other Design in the Publication of this paper than to procure a strict Conformity in the practice of the matter in hand, or a General satisfaction to such as are Scrupulous about it.

I shall say no more but only give notice that the Authors words are kept entire in the Body of the Text: The marginal notes being added by the publisher, to make his meaning clear, and to ease the Reader in perusal of his Citations by referring directly to their places.

Information about this book

Title statement

The old Puritan detected and defeated, or, A brief treatise shewing how by the artifice of pulpit-prayers our dissenters, at all times, have endeavour'd to undermine the liturgy of the reformed Church of England together with the fault and danger of such prayers, whether vented extempore, or forethought by the speaker / by a most learned and reverend divine now with God.

Steward, Richard, 1593?-1651.

Edition statement

1682

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2004-03 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A61498

ID [STC]

Wing S5524

ID [STC]

ESTC R16271

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

11929067

ID [OCLC]

ocm 11929067

ID [VID]

51072

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A61498)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 51072)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 515:27)

Source

— The old Puritan detected and defeated, or, A brief treatise shewing how by the artifice of pulpit-prayers our dissenters, at all times, have endeavour'd to undermine the liturgy of the reformed Church of England together with the fault and danger of such prayers, whether vented extempore, or forethought by the speaker / by a most learned and reverend divine now with God., Steward, Richard, 1593?-1651..

Extent

[4], 7 p.

Printed for W. Davis ...,. London :: 1682.. (Attributed to Richard Steward by Wing.) (Reproduction of original in University of Pennsylvania Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

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.