A View of the Face Ʋnmasked.

OR, AN ANSVVER TO A Scandalous Pamphlet, published by divers Ministers, and Entituled, The Common Prayer-Book Ʋnmasked.

Wherein the lawfulness of using that Book is maintained, by Answering their Five (as they boast) undeniable Arguments brought against it.

Whereunto are added also some Argu­ments for the retaining of that Book in our Church, from the same heads, whereby they plead against it; namely,

  • The Name of it.
  • The Original of it.
  • The Matter contained in it.
  • The Manner of using it.
  • The Effects of it upon the whole Land.

By Sam. Wotton, D. D. sometime Fellow of Kings Colledge in Cambridge.

LONDON: Printed by Tho. Newcomb▪ 166 [...]

TO THE Impartial Reader.

Christian Reader,

THough I have all my life time hitherto declin­ed to shew my self any ways in this kind; yet now in my last dayes, I can no longer keep my self out of the over-burdened Press; For having seen this Book, not only publickly sold in Westminster-Hall, but also reprinted without controll, and no answer that I can hear of yet made to it; I thought it better to make this brief An­swer thereto, then to let it seduce and abuse so many peo­ple as might be hurt by it, if it should pass for such an un­answerable peice, as it is pretended to be. I have therefore set down all their arguments, and given plain and direct answers to them; their vain extravagancy, and most un­civil railings, I have either wholly passed over, or very lightly sometime touched upon them, that I might neither too much enlarge my Book, nor write in a stile so contrary to my natural disposition, and so unfitting my quality and profession. First then in answer to their Epistle to the Reader, they tell us there, that Out of a respect to the glory of God, which is a God that will be worshipped [Page] in spirit and truth; as also with a desire of the Readers eternal good, they present this Treatise.

To which I say also, that out of a respect to the glory of God, which is not a God of confusion, but of peace, and so 1 Cor. 14. 33. of order, without which there is nothing but confusion, and no true peace; as also out of a tender care of the honour and glory of the Church of England; and lastly out of a desire of thy good, that thou mayest not be misled by faction, ig­norance and blind zeal, I present unto thee this Answer to their book, set forth in [...]ew against the Common-Prayer-Book, but in deed and truth against the Church of Eng­land, as by this answer will appear.

Secondly, they tell us, That this Treatise was formerly penned by some eminent Orthodox Divines, late Non-conformists, wherein are solid arguments. Concerning which vain glorious boast, for eminency how much soever I fall short of them, they being many and I but one, yet for Orthodoxness, let any man judge of their writing and my an­swer, to whom that title doth best belong; and for their last title of late Non-conformists, I am more troubled to under­stand what they aim at by it, then to answer it; for if they be still Non-conformists, why do they prefix that word late, as implying that now they are not so; and if they be no longer such, why or how then do they own such a book now? To that therefore I say no more, but hope that my title of present conformity shall be as well accepted by the indifferent Reader, as theirs of late or present difformity.

Thirdly they say, That three sorts of Readers shall be helped by this Book, the doubtful shall be fully resolved, the users of the Common Prayer Book shall be brought off, and the refusers of it encouraged; not onely be­cause Gods people, but God himself mislikes it.

To this I rejoyn that those three sorts of people shall by my answer be more profited then by their accusation; for the first sort, the doubtful, may be hereby resolved to use it; the second sort which use it shall be confirmed in their confor­mity and obedience; the third may be either changed or ashamed, not onely because humane authority does directly, but Divine authority also consequently command it, by en­joyning us to obey the powers set over us.

Fourthly, they press the Covenant as an unaswerable ar­gument against the book, To which I answer, that the Co­venant is nothing at all against our Common Prayer Book; for we shall plainly shew when we come to the motive, that neither they which for fear of present ruine, did in some sort seem to joyn in that Covenant by Tyranuy imposed on them, nor they which through ignorance or weakness of judgement did easily and willingly yeild to it, are in any sort now bound thereby to reject the Common Prayer Book.

Lastly, they tell us, That their book will inform us of the truth, and if the truth (as the Scripture saith) make us free, we shall be free indeed.

To this I say, that my answer truely performing that, which they onely promise, shall bring us out of the darke­ness of error in this point, into the light of truth, that be­ing in the light, we m [...]y (as the Scripture speaks) walk as children of the light, that is, in obedience to God, by obeying our Governors, which are the Ministers of God for our wealth. And this freedom of ours does in no sort come be­hind Rom. 13. 4. that of theirs; for hereby we are the servants of God▪ whose service (as with our book in our daily Collect we con­fess) is perfect freedom. This freedom we shall ever pray for, but freedom from government, discipline, order, decency, or whatsoever other freedom in that kind they mean, we neither desire our selves, nor (as we hope) shall they ever attain to that, most of all desire it. So desiring [Page] thee (equal Reader) to weigh their bare arguments, with my plain answers, and to let their railings, revilings, trou­ble thy head no more then they have done my pen, I com­mit thee to Gods blessing, in this, and all thy Christian en­deavors, and rest

Thine in the Lord S. Wotton.

A View of the Face Unmasked.

CHAP. I. To the Preface.

HEre they begin with a mentioning of Loy­alty, telling us, That

As Loyalty is the very Fortress of Poli­cy; so pure Religion is the Fountain and Root of Loyalty; yea, Equity, Charity, Sobriety, and Loyalty, are the Virgin-Daughters of unspotted Piety.

Had they as much Loyalty in their hearts, as in their mouths, never would they have presumed now, especially in these days, to reprint this Pamphlet, so bitterly and sordidly inveighing against a Book by Law and Authority set forth so long ago, and now allowed by His Royal Majesty, and constantly read before Him in His Sa­cred Chappel. But as the Lord said of the Jews, so may the King of these: They have Loyalty and Obedience in their Isai. 29. 23. mouths, but in their actions they are far from it. And if as they tell us, Pure and undefiled Religion be the Fountain of Loy­alty; and Equity, Charity, Sobriety, and Loyalty be the Virgin-Daughters of unspotted Piety: Let them take heed, that the want of these four, which they abundantly discover in their Book, do not out of their own mouth condemn the pretend­ed Purity of their Religion; for more then ordinary defects [Page 8] in these, shall this answer abundantly shew in their Book. But they will not be large, as they say, here in this theme, no more will I: But I hasten with them to the p [...]rticular [...]tter, viz. The Common Prayer Book, the Principal Subject of their dis­course, but in which they aim and strike at the Bishops, [...]s they pre­sently confess; upon this supposal, that one of these two cannot stand without the other; for so they tell us, saying,

As it is true, That no Ceremony, no Bishop; so it is as true, That no Service-Book, no Ceremony. This they do very well bring in with this, As and So; for one of these is just as true as the other, there being no truth at all in the one, or the other: For the Bishops might still have their Authority, Dignity, and Estates which they now have, though all the Ceremonies we have were abolished; and we might also have more Ceremo­nies then now we have, though we had another Common Prayer Book, or none at all; which is too clear, to have any place left for proof.

The next Page of this Chapter, is an inveighing against Su­perstition in general: Concerning which, I will meddle no more with them, then they do therein with our Common Prayer Book; for I am as much against Superstition as they▪ But nothing said against Superstition can be against the Book, till the Book be proved Superstitious. Which that it is, they attempt to prove in these words very couragiously.

If our Liturgy be not a mass of Superstition [...] superstitious Ceremonies, we know not what Superstition is.

To which Proposition, if they will let me assume rightly, thus; But our Liturgy is not a mass of Superstitions, &c. I grant all; and for their Information, will tell them a little, That it is Super­stition to make that a matter of Conscience which they need not, or to make that a part of Gods worship and service which is not simply so but a thing of it self indifferent, Whether then it be Superstition to use our Book and Ceremonies, because commanded, or to reject them upon a pretence of their being not indifferent, but simply unlawful, when God hath not for­bidden them, and the Church hath commanded them, let Rea­son judge.

But to proceed with them, they endeavor to prove the Common Prayer to be superstitious, because it appoints kneeling at the Communion, thus;

The grand ceremony of adoration or kneeling at the Com­munion, hath it not been the staffe and strength of that abomi­nable Idole the breaden God? In which words with the rest there following, they charge us in kneeling to agree with the Lutherans and Papists in this point, concerning the matter, but leaving the manner.

We answer, That we neither suppose Lutherane Consubstan­tiation, nor Popish Transubstantiation hereby, but we deny both; and so does our book, as by the words and form of Ad­ministration in the book is clear enough. Neither is our kneel­ing any adoration of the creature, as they would have it sup­posed, but the most fit and convenient gesture that can be used in the time of Prayer, which we are all in at the very receiving of that blessed Sacrament, as is plain enough by the very words used at the delivering it. Now if any particular man seem to these men to incline too much towards Popery in this point, that is nothing to our Common Prayer Book, the defence whereof is my onely task; whatsoever therefore may be said in any parti­cular mans defence I pass by; Therefore also I omit the menti­oning of the Liturgy which they talk of sent to Scotland, with all the Chimerical conceits of their English brain concerning that which they call the Scottish Hydra.

Lastly, Whereas they tell us,

The superstitions of this book are such, and so many, that if Paul were here and saw them, as he saw that of Athens, he would cry out undoubtedly, ye are too superstitious, Act. 17. 22.

We say no more to this, but if that we may presume to know St. Pauls minde as well as they, we may better say, That which he appointed to the Corinthians, 14. 40 that have we observed in our Liturgy. But that we may not stand too long upon these general extravagancies in their preface, let us come to the parti­cular charges against that Book to which they are such adversa­ries; the first whereof is the Name in the next Chapter.

CHAP. II. To the Name.

THe scope of this Chapter is to prove our Common Prayer Book unlawful, because it hath the same name with the Popish Mass book; which that it hath, they prove thus in the be­ginning of the Chapter.

The Service-book men, and the Papists do mutually inter­change the name of Liturgy and Mass; the later calling their Mass by the name of Liturgy, and our men owning the name of Mass to our Service Book, witness Pocklington, Cozens, and Montague; in the name then is an unaminous agreement; If these men can be ashamed of any thing, they may be ashamed of this ridiculous caviling with our Common Prayer Book in this kind. If some men should call them schismaticks, make-bates, sowers of sedition, rebels, &c. would they count this to be a suf­ficient argument, to cause them to be banished out of our Land, or cast out of our Church? If they would think this hard measure against themselves, where is their equity in dealing thus with others? Here me thinks Dame equity the first of the Virgin daughters mentioned in their preface, is fouly vitiated, and so there is a sore blemish laid upon their unspotted piety the mother hereof. Secondly, if this were granted, that the names were the same absolutely in both, is the name enough to destroy the thing? If they be offended (as many we know are) in the places of Gods worship among us, as well as with the manner of our worshipping there, they have the same argument for demolish­ing of them; for Papists call their Churches as we do ours. If they be angry with St. Jude for speaking against railers upon them that are in authority, they may as well cry down all he saith by this argument of the name, because he hath the same with Iscariot the traitor. But being conscious to themselves (I pre­sume) of the vanity of this argument (though perhaps some simple one may be seduced by it) they quickly flye from the name to the thing, and tell us that for matter they are one.

What difference (say they) is there between our Liturgy and theirs, but a pair of sheers, and putting ours in a coat of ano­ther [Page 11] tongue, ours having nothing to a word but out of theirs?

All which is very unseasonably stuffed into this present Chap­ter; for this belongs to the next Chapter, concerning the matter and the original, and not to this of the name; and therefore they promise to shew this more abundantly hereafter, to which when we come we shall answer accordingly; in the mean time to follow their immethodical manner of proceeding: I answer for the present, that first this accusation is false; for where can they shew in the Mass book our thanksgivings for deliverance from the plague, for victory over our enemies, for rain, for fair weather, &c? Secondly, If every word in ours were in the Mass book, yet as long as all that is evil in the Mass book is left out in ours, what is that which is good in ours the worse for be­ing in the Mass book? If that good thing in that book, is so pol­luted by being there among the evil, that it can be good nowhere else? what will they say to all the texts of Scripture read in that book? must they be expunged out of our Bibles because they are taken into the Mass book? Let any man judge of this arguing. But to return with them back again to the name, they say,

Names are the very images of things; and there being an una­nimous agreement, as in the names, so in the things; what reason is there that we should groan still under the burden of a Liturgy born in upon us, under the name and nature of a Mass?

The assertion here is to no purpose, except the names do truely set forth the nature of the things. To the question we answer, that we do not at all groan under such a burden; for neither is the book any such burden, as in my answer shall ap­pear; neither does our book own any such name. Next then after a railing discourse, they ask a company of questions, which being truely answered, the answer would be very unpleasant to them; for they ask,

Who hath cast the State into this consumption of mony? who hath made the heart to ake, and the souls to groan of honest householders, &c? Who have caused the Kings leige people for obeying the Laws of God and man, to be carried to stifling prisons? who caused some to be tortured, &c? who have been the Incendiaries and firebrands to melt away the Kings love to his Subjects, and their true loyalty to the King?

To all these questions of theirs, they might have added one [Page 12] more, Who have so horribly murdered their King and many thousands of his subjects? To all these questions, Whither the defenders of the Common Prayer book, or the opposers of it, must be answered, let the whole world judge, and let them like the answer as they please, and deny it as they can; I will appeal to others, and be silent my self in this point. The rest of this Chapter, till they come to their Syllogism, is nothing but railing, which I pass by; onely concerning one passage therein, where they speaking of the Scots rising up in arms, they conclude with this exhortation, Ʋp in the name of the Lord and do the like.

Here I must needs ask them Whither this speech savour of loy­alty or rebellion? If this were not a direct incitement to rebel­lion, let the world judge. Here then we see Lady Loyalty the fourth of the Virgin daughters so notorious, that we cannot but condemn the mother of impious treason instead of commending her for unspotted piety; but that fire of rebellion through the infinite mercy of God being now quenched, I will not rake into the ashes of it, but come to their Syllogism.

We must not name an Idol but with detestation, much less are we to offer it as a worship of God: But the Service book is an idol There­fore we are not to name it, &c.

The Proposition in this syllogism, which no man will deny, they labor to prove by several texts of Scripture, which I pass as brought to no purpose. The assumption which should be throughtly proved, they promise to prove in the next point, where I promise also (God willing) to answer their proofs; and to that which they brag to be already granted, that our Service book is a Mass book, I have already disproved.

CHAP. III. To the Original.

IN this Chapter they begin with a Syllogism, and fall to their idle extravagancies afterward, quite contrary to their course in the former Chapter.

That whose original and rise is naught, must needs be naught in it self: But such is our Service book: Therefore it is naught.

The Proposition they seem to prove, by saying thus, Can there come clean water out of a corrupt fountain? The assumption they would prove, by proving our book to be taken wholly from the Mass book and other Popish peices. This they endeavor to prove in this Chapter three several wayes. 1. By comparing the books. 2. By the mutual liking that our Liturgy Masters, as they call them, and the Mass book men have one of anothers piece. 3. From the evidence given from the Kings Counsel of England; most of his Chapter is spent in those three last proofs of the Assumption. The Proposition they strive not to prove any further. And yet if that be false, the whole argument is nothing worth. To that therefore I answer first, and deny the truth of it simply, and in it self; for it is then onely to be granted as true when the original is wholly and absolutely evil without any good in it; but if there be a mixture of good therein as well as evil, that which ariseth from that part which is good may be good, as well as that which ariseth from that evil is evil. If then there be any good in the Mass book, and that onely our book takes from thence, wholly rejecting all the evil, it cannot follow that our book must be evil though taken thence, any more then a Pearl or precious stone must be naught, if raked out of a dunghill. For the objection against this; that the Case is different, because that Pearl or stone was not bred in the dung­hill; We answer that is nothing against us.

For first, Those good things which we have in our book, and are also in the Mass book, were not bred there, but taken out of the Scriptures, Fathers, or Ancient Liturgy of the Church, and put in theirs.

Secondly, A thing bred in that which is evil in that sense we speak, that is not totally evil, may be good, coming from evil, as the precious stone in the head of a Toade is not venemous though the Toad be. But for their instance of the fountain, it is very unsufficient and unfit in this case; because though the foun­tain were not totally evil, yet the evil and good in the water is so mixed, that one cannot be severed from the other in the flow­ing out; but in collecting good things out of a book where are also evil, and more evil then good, the case is very different, and the work easie.

This their Proposition then being thus unsound, what proof soever they make of that which follows, their conclusion cannot [Page 14] hold; yet I am content to take a view of the triple proof of their Assumption also: The first whereof is from the comparing of the Mass book, and our Common Prayer Book together: Be­tween which they pretend there is such a consent, that every piece and parcell of our Book is taken from thence; but the fal­sity of this we shewed in the former Chapter, in which they spake of this matter, and named there what we have in our book, which the Mass book hath not. And we add now, That if we had never a word but what is there, yet we having none of the evil that is there, it cannot follow that ours must be evil, for having in it somewhat that is there. Secondly, For the mutual complacency they talk of, I answer that to accuse all that like our Liturgy, to be likers also of the Mass, is so shameless and foul a slander, as none can be more. And of the other side for the Papists approving of our Liturgy, it is more a commendation of it then otherwise, it arguing our Service to be so good, that our very adversaries, which in all things else are so bitter against us, yet can say nothing against that: Whereas therefore they say, That if the Papists like it, it cannot be good, because they are against all good.

I answer, This is intolerable; for thus they may as well condemn much of our Doctrine, as well as our Liturgy; as namely, all Divine and necessary Truths which we hold and teach concerning the Unity of Essence, and Trinity of persons in the Divine Na­ture; all the Artributes of God; and in a word all the first part of Divinity in Thomas, wherein we and the Papists have hardly any difference. So then this second argument makes more for our book then against it. All those sound parts and doctrines in Divinity, which we with them held joyntly, not having their Original from them or their writings, but from the Scriptures, whence we and they also took them.

The rest of the words which they use in this Chapter concern­ing this second argument, as having nothing in them, but foul and shameful expressions of their rancorous and m [...]licious hearts against all those that are not of their strain, I pass over as nothing to purpose for the business we have in hand; And so I come to the last evidence they bring against us which they call, The unde­niable testimony of the King, namely of King Edward the sixth, and of his councel; Where they bring in a piece of a letter, tell­ing us, they have the rest by them, which may be as true as all [Page 15] they say else; but granting all they say; if the King and State, to draw the Papists back to us, and win them to our Church, did write to that purpose; what is that to the prejudice of our Litur­gy, as long as all the evil in the Mass book is left out in ours? If ours be no new Service but the old, and what is in ours be theirs, to assure the Papists hereof must needs be an especial argument to move the Papists not to abhor our Churches, but too frequent them and joyn with us in our Liturgy, though perhaps they can­not rest satisfied with it, but will privately have their own Mass besides it also.

Thus I have done with their third proof also. Now their Syl­logism made hereupon is this.

That which is word for word out of the Popish Mass book, is not to be offered to God as a worship, but to be abolished as abomination to him. But the Liturgy in controversie is so, as hath been abundantly proved: Therefore is not to be offered, &c.

To this we answer briefly; That which they here brag to be proved to the full, we have by our answer shewed to be utterly false. For if there be any thing in the Mass not in ours, as abun­dantly there is; or any thing in ours not in theirs, then is not ours word for word out of theirs. But both these we have al­ready shewed, and so their argument is fully answered. Vainely therefore do they spend so many words following by several places of Scripture to prove that which no man denies. And as needless is their following Invective against the Mass which we de­fend not; and to no purpose concerning this business, is their answering two texts of Scripture used in defence of the Mass by the Papists; all which words helping onely to fill up their book, and nothing touching our Common Prayer Book, I pass by.

One onely thing more have I to add concerning this Chapter, that for the original of our Common Prayer book, whereas in this whole discourse thereof, they seem to suppose that we went to the Mass and no further, to frame a Liturgy from thence; this is a meer fancy of theirs; we follow the old Liturgy before the Popish Mass; but the truth is, when we having been a long time with the Mass amongst us, and other Idolatrous ceremonies very notoriously faulty in the worship of God, did according to our duties begin to reform our selves, we did onely cast off such things as were inevitably offensive, and did retain the rest; con­cerning which, whereas they tell us It was great incogitancy [Page 16] (to speak the least) in our Reformers in King Edwards days, to take a Monke from among the Canaanites, &c.

We answer for those our holy Ancestors, that they took the most advised, pious and Christian course that could be taken in that kind. For first, hereby they took the most likely course that could be thought on to draw many of the Papists to our Re­ligion, wherein we departed no farther from them then they had first departed from the word of God; all other things we still re­tained, that they that would but reform notorious abuses, might still retain fellowship with us. Secondly, they hereby declared sufficiently to all the world, that this alteration made, was neither out of hatred to them, or love of novelty, or singularity, or any high conceit of any excellency in fancies, or devices of our own brains above our forefathers, but would be content with what we had from them, as far as it was consonant to the word of God, or not contrary to it. Thirdly, by this means they avoided com­bustion in Church and State, making as little stir or noise as could be in the reformation which is always especially to be regarded by all quiet spirits and lovers of peace in any change whatsoever. Fourthly, by this dealing they followed the Apostles rule by shewing their meekness, softness and gentleness to all men, as is re­quired. So that retaining thus much of the Mass book when we Phil. 4. 5. cast off Popery, was so far from incogitancy, or any other scan­dal to be layed upon our forefathers, that we may rather admire, or at least must much commend their wisdom, meekness, love of peace, and charitable desire of converting others thereby. For the conclusion then of this Chapter, wherein they brag so much of success, telling us, That

It will fall out, as it did with the Scribes and Pharises, envying that the people should follow Christ. Perceive ye not (say they) how ye prevail nothing? the world is gone after him, Joh 12. 19. It is so in this case of the worship of Christ, &c. We shall prevail no­thing, &c.

To this we need not answer any thing to them; the times (we humbly praise God for it) have answered for us; this book which was so long cast off, being now generally taken up again, and used with reverence, devotion, and thankfulness to the Lord for it in the most principal places and most Cuurches of this Kingdom, so that the saying they cite there of the Pharisees and Scribes, may better be applyed to these people that cite in it then to those to [...]

CHAP. IV. Of the Matter.

HEre they inveigh against the Common Prayer Book in re­spect of the matter of it, telling us that

The matter is partly false, partly ridiculously frivolous, yea and some part of it is not without a tincture of blasphemy.

The first of these charges they go about to prove three ways, saying,

For the general we lay down these three instances, In false or cor­rupt translations of the word, additi [...]ns to the word, and substracti­ons; all which the Service Book not onely allows, but injoyns sub­scription to them.

To these things we answer, first in general, that it is no suffici­ent plea against the book to cry it down wholly, for some parti­cular defects in it, but to desire rather to have those things amen­ded, then the whole book, so excellent in several respects, totally to be abolished, for some imperfections in it. Secondly, to come to them more particularly, to the first of false translations, we answer. 1. That if that be sufficient for a particular place to re­ject a whole book or volum, what sh [...]ll become of our English Bible in the last and best translation that we have? for in that we shall find such a translation as no English man can make sense of, namely Phil. 1. 21. which words there agree with the Latine, which these men are so much against; for it is there Vivere est mihi Christus; to me to dye is Christ; but neither that Latine nor the English can express either the Apostles meaning, or can in­deed be understood what they mean themselves. They put the Greek verbatim into English, which the idiome of our tongue cannot bear; and herein they reject Calvin, and Beza's, and Junius, and Tremilius translations, and agree with the Vulgar Latine; yet no man wholly rejects this our new translation, as containing false matter, but it is not unworthily esteemed as one of the best translations extant in any language. Again that word [...], 1 Cor. 11. 29 is in both our translations rendred Dam­nation, which is neither according to the signification of the word in it self, nor according to the Apostles meaning in that [Page 18] place, for he proves that which he saith there in the words fol­lowing, directly mentioning temporal judgement, as vers. 30. But I will not strive to defame our translations, as they do our Common Prayer Book by searching how many places are not so translated as they should be; but were there more defects then there are, who could hereupon reject totally our English Bibles, as these do our Service Book, upon that score of falsity in matter, through some imperfections in the translation?

Secondly, then I pass to the next particular which they call ad­ditions.

To add to the word of God in general, as to propound any thing for Gods word, which is not so indeed, I grant to be abo­minable; but to add to any particular part of Scripture some words taken out of some other part of Scripture, is no addition to the word of God; for it does not affirm any thing to be Gods word which is not indeed. Now of this kind are the additions they speak. In Psalm. 14. the words in the end added, are not onely taken out of Gods word in several places, but also all collect­ed together by Saint Paul, and added to the precedent words in this Psalm, as we see Rom. 3. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. neither are thrust into the Psalm by the composers of the Common Prayer book, but are in the old Latine Bibles whence those Psalms were translated; and how reasonably and fitly they are there, our Bibles do note after the end of Psal. 14. where they shew why they are not put into our Bibles. For the next addition mentioned in Psal. 13. what is that but a concluding of that Psalm, with the very words of Scripture also? for the same expression we find in two other Psalms near adjoyning, viz. Psal. 7. 17. & Psal. 9. 3.

For the third addition it is an addition of their own making, not found in the book in that 24. Psalm.

Whereas therefore they say lastly, That they will not reckon di­verse additions more, they do well in that point; but they had done better if they had not reckoned this neither, unless there had been more truth in it. I also will add no more of this mat­ter, but come to their next accusation, which is concerning sub­stractions or omissions. And therein first they accuse us for omit­ting the titles of diverse Psalms. Secondly, for omitting the words (Praise ye the Lord) Thirdly, for omitting the conclusion in the Lords Prayer. For which last; First, if we took the Lords Prayer out of Luke 11. we omit none of it; and why may we [Page 19] not use it sometime as it is in one place, sometime as it is in ano­ther? so that the cavil is onely for want of a better; for the two former omissions, the book makes no omission, but renders the Psalms as it found them in the translations whence they were taken. Their last omission is, Leaving out many Chapters and some whole books unread for the Lesson, in the Kalender appointed. But this is not taking away any thing from the word of God, ex­cept the book did profess, that it hath appointed the whole word of God to be read for the Lessons; but this the book does not, only it appoints such parts of the word of God to be read at such times, and leaves the rest to be read of the people privately. The next thing is, the reading of the Apochrypha, very immetho­dically brought in here; for that should rather have come in a­mong the additions, then the omissions, yet it is not any addition to the word of God; for we read it not as a part of Scripture to build our faith upon, or to establish any doctrine of divinity thereby, but for moral instruction; then if they ask What need of that, the Scripture being sufficient for that also? We answer, that we do it not as supposing defect therein, but because they are books written by holy men, and have been continually read pub­likely by the Church of God, in reverence thereto we thought not fit wholly to reject them, or cast them out of our Church; but whereas they tell us here, That some things are appointed to be out of them which are utterly false: We tell them that is more then they can prove to be true; but if any of them be to read any such Chapter at any time, which he counteth not to be profitable to be read to the people, he may read one out of the New Te­stament instead of it: as Dr. Sparke shews concerning this mat­ter in his brotherly perswasion to unity and uniformity, Chap. 10. whether for brevity sake in this treatise, I refer any reasonable man, adding onely thus much, that if those and such other ob­jections seem to any man not to be sufficiently answered, yet they cannot make the book wholly to be rejected, but needfull in some particulars to be corrected and amended.

The next thing they come, is the grand accusation against E­pistles and Gospels; which I presume belongs to their second head of frivolous things; for though they began orderly with the first particular of false matters, yet they proceed not so; but I must be forced to follow them as they go up and down from one thing to another. Concerning Epistles and Gos­pels [Page 20] then they have three weighty charges, with which they begin thus.

We may subjoyn that profaning gross abuse of Epistles and Gospels in which there are three strange and remarkable occurrences, for which there is no ground or reason but from the Mass-book. First,

These three remarkable things are. 1. That the Acts of the Apostles, and some books of the old Testament, are read for, and called Epistles. 2. That we read not whole Chapters, but scraps and shreds, as they disgracefully call them. 3. That at the Epi­stles there is silence, sitting, &c. at the Gospels, standing, scraping, bow­ing, and responds before and after.

To the first of these concerning the name of Epistles given to books, not so called in Scripture. What great matter is this to be set out under those words of profane and gross abuse? For first we know, the old Testament is in the new sometime called the Law and the Prophets, sometimes the Law, Prophets, and Psalms. These several expressions shew, that the word Prophets is some­times largely taken for all the old Testament, except the five books of Moses, sometime more strictly for the other books onely; but excluding the Psalms, why then also may not the word Epistles be sometime taken generally for all the Scripture, except the four Gospels, and sometimes more strictly, except the Acts, Gospel and Revelation; and sometime most strictly for those books which we commonly call the Canonical Epistles? ta­king the word in the two former acceptions, what hurt in calling all that we read for Epistles by the name of Epistles, especially considering, secondly, that the whole Scripture is a letter or Epi­stle indited by the Holy Ghost, and so sent from God by the ho­ly writers thereof into the world, or more especially to his Church; and the fitness of this appellation they themselves con­fess, and tell us, The holy fathers spake so; onely they tell us, They spake so in a different sense from us, which difference if they had shewed we had either answered them, or yelded to them.

To their second accusation, That our Epistle and Gospels are but scraps of Scripture, and never a full passage in them. If by full passage they mean a whole Chapter, we desire to know why a whole Chapter must always be at once, and neither more nor less? but if by never a full passage they mean that we break off abruptly in respect of the matter read, then any one may see [Page 21] they do us notorious wrong, and the Book answers for it self without my help. To avoid therefore the guilt of so foul a slan­der, I am willing to take them in the former sense, but must with­al tell them, that so they may as well accuse all our Preaching of this gross abuse, and say we preach not upon the Word of God, but upon scraps and shreds of it, and that less shreds too then the other; few Texts being half the length of the very shortest Epi­stles we have. But why either our Texts, or Epistles, and Gospels, should be thus taxed, I see not, the division of Chapters not be­ing Canonical, but made according to humane wisdom and dis­cretion: Of this therefore no more.

I come to the third charge, which is concerning Silence, Sit­ting, Bowing, &c. To which I must first tell them, That this comes in very unseasonably in this place; this belongs rather to the ridi­culous manner of our Service, then to the matter of it; but their want of method I must needs pass over many times, lest my Book should grow too big.

Secondly, I must tell them again, that the Book appoints none of these things they here inveigh against; therefore if those things were as bad indeed as they would make them, all this were nothing to purpose against the Book, which they pretend onely to write against. Nevertheless, being in many passages they labor to disgrace our Church what they can, as well as the Book they write against; I would, if they would come to parti­culars, assay to answer all, and as far as I can by these general words guess at their meaning, I will briefly answer them. It hath been the custom long ago in many Churches, to stand up at the Gospel; and it was also usual at the naming of the Gospel to say, Glory be to thee O Lord; and after the end of the Gospel, to say Thanks be unto God. These I presume are the things they aim at (for the bowing at the name of Jesus, was, and is as much used in all parts of Service and Sermon, as of the Gospel.) To the other three therefore, as proper to the Gospel, I will onely speak: And first to the standing up: We know many men at the naming of the Text, and many times in the Sermon will stand up, not onely for their ease, but to hearken the more attentively: Why then is it not as lawful so to do at the Gospel? We know standing up, when we hear one beginning to speak to us, does both shew respect to what is spoken, and a readiness to receive what is spoken wil­lingly and chearfully: By standing up then at the reading of the [Page 22] Gospel, we shew our gladness and readiness to receive it; and what prophaneness or grand abuse can be in this? Then for say­ing, Glory be to thee, O Lord. We know when the Angel first brought word of our Saviours birth, the Author of the Gospel, there were presently with him a multitude of Heavenly Angels, saying, Glory be to God on high. If the Church then in memory Luke 2. 13, 14. hereof, do at the naming of the Gospel use part of that Angeli­cal Hymn, what grand abuse is this? when our Saviour first came into the world, this was the Angels praising God; and when we hear mention made of the Gospel, which declares and preacheth these glad tidings to us, with the benefits coming to us thereby, we do with like words give glory to God the Son, and we are counted prophane for it. Lastly, when we have heard some of the Gospel read, which publisheth these things to us, we presently give thanks to God for this. Now what superstition or prophane abuse there is in this standing and respond, as they call it, before, at and after the Gospel, let any indifferent man judge.

Now upon these their grievous complaints, they flee to the Parliament as supream Judges to vindicate this dishonor done to God: Which how it can stand with the loyalty mentioned in their Preface; or with the subscription which they have, or should all have subscribed, if they be rightly Ministers, and Orthodox, as they pretend to be, let them say, who acknowledge the King supream Judge in all Causes, and over all Persons. Lastly, Where­as they say in the end of this Section, That the discovery of some evil in the Apocrypha condemns our Common Prayer-Book for ap­pointing it to be read. I answer, It follows not, except it did ap­point those Books to be read as parts of Canonical Scripture, which we know it does not. This for the grand abuses in general in Epistles and Gospels.

Now we must with them to particular untruths by them charged upon us, bidding us to

Look upon that egregiously abused place, or Christ abused by our dealing with that place, namely Revel. 12. 1. Michael and his An­gels fought, &c. Which words the Book appoints for the Collect, they mean the Epistle for Michaels day; where they make Christ by mis­applying the place, a created Angel.

Here they make much ado to prove Michael to be Christ, which being granted them with such ado, their accusation is ne­ver [Page 23] the truer, nor our Cause or Book the worse. The reading the Epistle on Michaelmas day, in no sort makes Christ a created Angel; but the keeping of Michaelmas day as we keep it, is one­ly in memory of Michael (or Christ if they please) who is called an Angel, Mal. 3. 1. Who with all his created holy Angels, fought against the Devil and his Angels. We call Christ an Angel, so does the Scripture, but it calls not a created Angel, no more does our Book, nor we; but in memory of that victory of that Mi­chael and his Angel, we keep that day, praising God for it; and so read that part of Scripture which relates it.

Secondly, They tax the words in the latter end of the Bene­dicite, but to no purpose; if that were the Song of the Three Children we do not know; we do not now exhort them three to praise the Lord, but sing their song in memory of them, and their miraculous deliverance. When we read Davids Psalms, we do not in many of them pray for the things that he in those Psalms prayed for.

The third particular here, is a clause or sentence in our Burial of the dead; for which very particular, I refer the Reader to Dr. Sparge, in Chap. 12. pag. 62. where that matt [...]r is expresly hand­led; and where I know another man hath answered any thing, to avoid prolixity, I say nothing. Next then comes their Syllo­gism.

That which is mans device, and hath been an Idol in Gods wor­ship, must of necessity be so still: But the Ceremonies mentioned in the Service-Book, have been Idols in Gods worship, as Cross, Surplice, &c. Ergo, They must be Idols still in the worship of God.

To this I answer. First, The Proposition is false; their proof is from some few particulars to a general, which whosoever hath the least smatch of Logick in him, knows to be nothing worth. We may by this rule as well demolish our Churches and Ch [...]p­pels; nay somewhat more may be said against them, then our Surplices; for the very particular individual Churches which we now have, have been abused to Idolatry, which our particular Surplices have not: And so the Minor also is faulty, namely, our Crosses, Surplices, and particular Ceremonies, which we now use, have never been Idols at all: And so we deny, and have proved their later Proposition also false, which they tell us none can deny. For the other supposed abuses in the Sacraments, in [Page 24] the Churching, the Confirmation, &c. I refer the Reader again to Dr. Sparge to satisfie all. Next they tell us▪

We would not have the Lent Fast forgotten, which the Patrons of our Liturgy make a Religious Fast, abusing places of Scripture by mis-application of Scriptures, as Joel 2. 12. Matth. 6. 16. & 4. 10. 2 Cor. 6. 2.

This Lent Fast which they would not have forgotten, no more would I. For the abusing the places of Scripture mentioned by them, if they did particularly shew wherein the supposed abuses consist, I would answer them more particularly; but howsoever supposing they count the Scriptures which speak of Fasting, to be abused by being read in Lent, which is not a Religious but a Po­litick Fast, as they seem to say. I answer, that the Lent is in­deed by our Laws, and the Kings late Proclamation a Politick Fast; nevertheless, if any man observing our Lent according to Law, by abstinence from flesh totally, do also by temperance, and an abstemious and spare diet all that time, and by absolute Fasting sometime in the Lent, keep a Religious Fast, by subduing the flesh, by Mortification and Repentance, more then ordina­ry humbling himself before God: This man as he shews himself in that respect a Loyal Subject by the former, so he does the duty of a good Christian by the later, pleasing God by both; for his better help and assistance then in the later, the places of Scripture which he shall hear read in the time of Lent, are useful and bene­ficial to him. Neither do we incline to Popery in this Religious Fasting, nor approve of their superstitious Fast, nor Fast in imi­tation of them; for they that do celebrate such a Religious Fast in the time of Lent, take not the example of the Papists to fol­low therein, but of the antient Christian Church, which did so fast many years before Popery was hatched. This Religious Fast therefore, though we press not as by Law required, yet may we safely and profitably perswade to, and preach and read concern­ing it, from the example of the Church in former times.

Lastly, In this Chapter they come to that which they call Fop­peries and fooleries in our Book: Touching also again upon false Translations, that they may be still like themselves, observing no method or order in any thing: But to the point having an­swered already, I come with them to their fooleries.

What can be said for those Tautologies and Battologies used in the Service-Book, as Lord have mercy upon us, Christ have mercy, &c. [Page 25] condemned Matth. 6. 7. And by and by, One foppery more, that mu­tual salutation between Priest and People, in these words, The Lord be with you; And with thy spirit. Last of all they conclude thus; Tritenhemius wrote a Book upon Dominus Vobiscum, in which are many fruitless questions, and so we are sure the thing it self is fruit­less.

If it be a vain Tautology to repeat those words a few times in praying to God, what will they say to the Prophet David, for re­peating the same words so often in praising God? namely Psal. 118. the same words five times; and Psal. 136. the very same words twenty six times more.

Next for the Salutation, as they call it. I answer it is no fool­ish salutation, as they would have it, but a mutual praying of the Minister and people each for other severally, before they begin joyntly to pray the prayers following altogether: And in no sort can this be unlawful, or foolish, or unfitting, but rather very fit and convenient for each other hereby to express their mutual charity; without which, none of their ensuing prayers can be either pleasing unto God, or profitable to themselves. First therefore the Minister to shew his charity, prays to God to be with the people in their prayers, that they may with heart and voice, faith and fervency pray to God the prayers following; then they pray the like for him, onely emphatically they mention his Spirit, as most desiring Gods assistance of it. Thus praying charitably each for other, they do all joyntly and more unani­mously pray altogether, resting upon that promise of our Saviour, Matth. 18. 19.

Lastly, To conclude this Chapter; whereas they do in the last place, by a quirk conclude this to be a fruitless salutation, be­cause such a man hath made many fruitless questions about it. This is as ridiculous an Argument, as to say also, That our Liturgy must needs be evil, because these men have made such an evil dis­course about it.

CHAP. V. Of the Letany.

HErein passing over all their railing flourishes in the former part of the Chapter, I have these six several accusations of our Letany to answer to; and then a Syllogism against all the Book. To these now in their otder.

The first is of several Repetitions of the same words. Good Lord deliver us: And we beseech thee to hear us good Lord. Con­cerning which words, we say they are no vain Repetitions, but so many several Prayers for so many several things. And that these men should be so bitter against Repetitions, is very unreasonable, considering what Prayers divers of them make before their Ser­mons, wherein they have such strange Repetitions, and runnings backward and forward, That he that shall come into the Church in the time of their Prayer, cannot tell whither they are near the beginning, middle or end; and they that hear them all the while, from first to last, cannot tell when they are toward an end, till they have in a manner quite done. And I have heard of one (whom I do not commend for so spending the time) that reckoning how often one of them repeated the word Lord in his Prayer found it to be betwixt Four and five hundred times: And if that word were drawn out at length, as some of them draul it out sometime (that they may think of what to say next before they have done with that) the repeating of that word alone would take up more time, then our twenty eight Repetitions as they count them in the Letany.

The second accusation is, That we pray

To be delivered from such things, from which there is not the least appearance, no more then of the French-Pox, the danger of being drunk at a Whitsun-Ale, or a Purse cut at a Stage-play, and not so much.

If these be sober expressions, well and good, otherwise their unspotted Piety may again be questioned for bringing such a Strumpet instead of Virgin-sobriety. But to the matter of the Argument, I answer; If they had named those things prayed [Page 27] against in our Letany, which they suppose there is no danger, I could easily have answered more particularly to this charge: But now onely I say in general, I know no evil prayed against in the Letany which may not possibly fall upon us; and the more secure we might count our selves from it, so that we should scorn to pray against it, the more danger there would be, that through the just judgment of God it might come upon us.

Secondly, If there be any evils which others have suffered, or do suffer, which we in this Land are in great danger of; yet con­sidering the Communion of Saints, we may justly pray, as we do against such things, by the word us, not understanding our selves here in England, but us Christians in general; for all whom we do, or ought to pray as for our selves.

Thirdly, By that expression of Fornication, and all other dead­ly sins, they say we make some sins venial: But I answer, no such matter; we use not that expression there by way of distinction of several kindes of sins, but by way of explication of the nature of sin; and most fitly in that place do we so use it, because we know some Papists make simple fornication to be scarce any sin, at most but a small venial one: Which doctrine we detesting, do fitly say, Fornication and all other deadly sin, by the word other, including Fornication for one.

Fourthly, They accuse those expressions, By thine agony and bloody sweat, by thy cross, &c. to be a kinde of conjuring or ad­juring: But if these expressions be such, what is that of St. Paul, Rom. 12. 1. By the mercies of God, I beseech you, &c. and divers others in that kinde in several places?

Fifthly, they adde, That we may not come short of the Papists idolizing the Letany, we have not onely our ordinary and weekly Le­tanies, but our annual or yearly Letanies acted in Procession.

To this first, The Annual Procession not being by our Common Prayer-Book appointed, is nothing to purpose against the Book; therefore the bringing of it in thus here, shews their malice against our Church in general, as much as against our Common Prayer Book. Therefore, secondly, had they said any thing against that Procession in particular, I would have particularly answered it; but now seeing no fault in it, nor knowing what fault they can forge against it, I can say no more of it.

Sixthly and lastly, They accuse our Letany for a Prayer against the Tyranny of the Pope, which they say hath been expunged since King [Page 28] Edward's days. To which I say, If out Letany want any thing that should be in, it may be said to be defective, and need an ad­dition, but not to be cast off as superstitious; the want of some good, which should be in any thing, makes not the rest of the good which is in it to be stark naught.

Now though this be all that is in this Chapter objected against the Letany, yet here are two or three things more in it to be spoken of: For though the title of it be onely of the Letany, yet that they may be still like themselves, they shuffle other things in also; as namely, The cavil against the Collect on the twelfth Sunday after Trinity, asking us how we can justifie those words in the Collect? giving unto us that which our Prayers dare not presume to ask, because what we dare not pray for, we shall never obtain.

To this we must answer, that we can justifie that Petition by the right expounding the meaning of it; which is this, as in the former part of the Prayer we acknowledge Gods readiness to hear us, and abundant mercy in giving beyond our deservings or desirings; so now we desire him to give us more then we dare particularly crave at his hands, that whatsoever he sees fitting for us, he would grant, though we dare not particularly mention it to him. And whereas they say, What we dare not ask, we shall never obtain, that hath no truth in it; for Solomon asking onely wisdom, and daring to go no farther, yet we know he obtained honor and riches also.

Thus much for their particular exceptions, now we come to the general Syllogism.

That Service, the matter or bulk whereof, is partly false, partly foolish and frivolous, should not be presented unto God. But the parts of the Service are such, as hath been fully proved. Therefore they should not be presented to God.

To this, first it fails in form, and so concludes not the question, that the Service-Book is not to be presented to God, but onely that some parts of it are not to be presented; and so they seem to express in the conclusion, not saying as they should: Therefore it is not to be presented, that is, the Common Prayer-Book is not to be presented: But therefore they are not, &c. i. e. the vicious parts of it; and so they conclude not, that the whole Book is to be re­jected, but some things in it to be expunged or amended. Which had they onely desired, and that in any civil way, and sober man­ner, it might happily have been done long ago without strife, [Page 29] hatred and uproars; but for some pretended abuses, nothing but a total abolition could serve their turns. But to come to the mat­ter of their Syllogism; the Minnor is utterly false, neither all the parts of the book, or any part of it having been fully proved to be frivolous and foolish; neither can the Major be granted, ex­cept the denomination of false, frivolous, and foolish, be gi­ven to the whole book or matter from the greater part of it; which granting all they have said for true (how false soever we know it is) yet cannot that denomination be justly given to the book, and so it does not follow that it may not be used in Gods service.

So now having answered all they have said in this Chapter also, I must now come upon a little to question their piety again; for some words in this Chapter, they say thus;

It is true we have left out the Saints in our Liturgy; that was too gross; but had the Laudenses got their colours fixed, ere this the Le­tany had been flanked with this stuff.

Concerning which to pass by that title which they give in scorn to all that are not of their stampe, passing that by, I must take notice of their charitable censure here, accusing all those they mislike of an intention of bringing praying to Saints into our Liturgies and Letany. Is this any Christian charity? If this cen­sure argue no charity, as I presume no man will say it does; cha­rity by their own words in their Preface, Being one of the four virgin daughters of unspotted piety; their piety must be either very much spotted in bringing forth such a Charity, or else very barren in bringing forth virgin d [...]ughters, having brought forth neither loyalty nor sobriety, as we have shewed already; nor charity as appeared before, and now again is evident; so that if Dame Equity come not forth at last to save her mothers credit, little unspotted piety will be found in these Unmaskers, if we examine them by their own principles. Of their equity there­fore I shall speak also in due place; In the mean while having done with the matter of our Liturgy, I am next to come to the manner of it.

CHAP. VI. Of the Manner.

AFter their usual fashion of an idle preamble, they procceed to name these particulars in blaming the manner of our Church Service.

First to the Minister, whose change of voice, place and posture, is strange and ridiculous; for first he must say some things with a loud voice, not all; what can be the reason of this, but that of the Mass-Priests, that there are some mysteries which the profane Laicks must not hear?

Instead of a ridiculous manner of serving God according to our Com. Pr. book, I shall shew the contrary God willing in due time: in the interim to this whole charge in this Chapter, it is utter­ly false in all the particulars. First for that here first mentioned, of the Ministers change of voice; the book appoints no such change, nor bids him say any thing at all softly, but onely puts him in mind, sometime of speaking out that he may be heard of all, but not one word or syllable is there in the Book to move him to speak any thing otherwise then with an audible voice; the thing then he layed to our charge being wholly false, we need say nothing to the forged reason hereof; onely let me ask what Charity or Equity there can be in this dealing? Instead of Equity and Charity herein, what can it be but extream unjustice and ma­lice both to forge such an accusation against us, that they may fain such a reason of it as is far worse then the thing it self? If here be Equity or Charity, let the producers hereof be judged men of unspotted piety.

Their second exception against the Minister, we have in these words.

Secondly, For his posture, besides the windings, turnings and cringings, his face must be sometime toward the people, and sometime his back.

Concerning these postures, we have nothing in the book, or any word tending that way, except they catch at these places. 1. Where the Minister is appointed at reading the Lessons, to stand, and so turn himself that he may be best heard of the people. [Page 31] 2. When at the Communion, when he is appointed to turn to the people in reading the blessing, this is all of the turning so con­demned. And for the first of these, for him to stand at the reading of the Lessons, it is according to Christs own example, Luk. 4. And for standing, so as he may be best heard, reason might perswade it, if it were not commanded; and so likewise for turning towards the people at the blessing of them. Other standing besides this, is but three times appointed in all the Ser­vice; namely first at the Creed, which is for the people as much as the Minister, and the fitness thereof shall be shewed in due place. 2. At the Versicles, O Lord shew thy mercy upon us, &c. where the people are to answer the Minister; And 3. At the communion, that the people may the better see his demeanor in the consecration. If any particular exceptions were made against any of these Postures, they should be answered particularly; but without that, to possess the people with a conceit of I know not what ridiculous turnings, windings, and cringings in general terms, from these fit, few, decent and convenient at least, if not needful actions and gestures of kneeling at prayer, standing at the con­fession of faith, and some other times, that his voice may be the better heard, and his actions the better seen of the people; if this savour of any ingenuity or conscience in these Unmaskers, let any indifferent man say.

Thirdly, they complain that The Priest saies somewhat in the Church, somewhat in the Chancel, getting himself from the people as far as he can, &c.

To this ag [...]in I say, there is no such thing by the book appoin­ted, nor is the Minister bound to perform any p [...]rt of the Ser­vice in the Chancel, but at the communion, nor then neither ex­cept the table stand there; nevertheless, if any Minister reading that part of the Service which belongs to the Communion, do use to go to that table to read it, if they can make any particular exceptions against it, they that use it will be able to answer them; but howsoever, most unexcusable are they that blame our book for that, which, be it better or worse, the book enjoyns not at all. This for the first head of their exceptions against the Ministers manner of Service.

In the second place comes the unmannerly handling of the mat­ter. First they have many short Collects, &c.

This unmannerly dealing, they branch out into three particu­lars. [Page 32] [...]. That there be many short Collects, but a long and tedious Service. 2. That it is several times said, Let us pray. 3. That the people answer and say any thing in the Service with the Minister. And to make this charge good, they bring two similitudes of little Girles cutting cloth to pieces, and of an Ambassador.

We answer, first to all in general, concerning unmannerliness in Gods service, let them shew what of manners in particular there is, or what part of good manners we offend against, either toward God or man, in any thing we follow the book in, and they shall be particularly satisfied; In the mean time let the world judge, whether it be not more rudeness, unmannerliness, and incivility to wear their hats in time of Divine Service, to sit or loll or lean unreverently this way or that way, neither standing nor kneeling in the very time of prayer, then to go reverently and civilly out of the Desk to the Communion table. Secondly, to the particulars. 1. What is the hurt in short prayers? much good and conveniency we see therein, when divers persons com­ming into the Church in time of prayer, when one short prayer is ended, they can presently at the beginning of the next joyn with the Congregation, and so go on with all the rest to the end. 2. For the better stirring up and inciting the peoples too too dull hearts and minds, by putting them often in mind of what they are or should be all about, it is not onely not amiss, but needful to call upon them, with Let us pray, when any wandring or stragg­ling thoughts have averted their minds. 3. For the answering of the people, it is such an especial means to keep from drowsi­ness, du [...]ness, and to rouse up their spirits and affections to be wholly occupied in those sacred duties they are about, [...]s nothing can be more. And whereas they talk of the peoples interrup­ting the Minister by their saying with him, or answering him, it is so far from interrupting or hindring his devotion, that it does comfort him, encourage him, and elevate his heart and spirit to hear his Congregation with one heart and voice, as it were joyn­ing with him, and answering to him in his heavenly devotions. So that as David said, so every faithful Minister that desires the peoples good as his own must necessarily, heartily rejoyce in hear­ing Psal. 122. 1. that concent of the people with him in prasing God, or pray­ing unto him; and happiest are those Ministers which have such Congregations; I grieve for the want of it.

In the next place come their similitudes, but all men know [Page 33] that similitudes prove nothing; they may illustrate a thing when fitly and rightly applied, but prove they cannot. And these are such as do not that; the first as being an idle thing in it self, so is nothing to our purpose, or resembling the business in hand: The other which seems to hit the nail on the head, does not hurt us. For though it be not fit or ordinary when an Ambassador is de­livering his message, for his attendants by, to meddle to speak any thing, they not knowing what his embassage is, nor being con­cerned in it; yet to make some resemblance between the case of an Ambassador, and this of ours, if the Ambassador were to treat of such a business, wherein the consents of all present were necessary to be expressed to the King to whom he speaks, and he should desire to hear it; then what unfitness were it for the people at such and such set periods, to speak such words as should be appointed to express their hearts that way? This is the case in the Ministers and Peoples praising God, and praying to him: But these being no p [...]oofs, I pass hence, and come to the last thing in this Chapter, which is this Syllogism.

That worship of God, which for Name, Original, Matter, and Manner, is naught all over, is not to be suffered, head nor tail, but wholly to be cast out of Gods house: But the Liturgy is such a wor­ship, &c. Therefore it is to be cast out.

To this the answer is plain; the falsity of the Minor in all the particulars hath appeared by this my answer, I hope sufficiently; And so I might finish this Chapter, but for one wonder which herein they make, and I am willing to satisfie them therein; they propound their minde thus.

To shut up the point, one thing we cannot but wonder at, why the Popish, Prelatical Priests, do admit the common people a share in say­ing of Service, who will not have the people in any case to try, much­less to judge of the Doctrines of their Teachers.

The case is plain enough, because many men may be fit for one thing, which are not fit for another. It is an easier thing to joyn with others in the Worship and Service of God for matter and manner once rightly instituted and appointed, then to know how thus to order such a Service, for the glory of God and good of his Church: All therefore are bound to do the one, few able, and so few suffered to do the other. Yet by the way you may take notice concerning your last clause, we hinder not the people to do like the Bereans, to try and examine what they are taught by Acts 17. [Page 34] the Scriptures; but we allow not the Learners to teach their Teachers how, or what to teach. But of this enough.

CHAP. VII. Of the Effects.

HEre they come to the pretended evil effects of our Common Prayer-Book, which they tell us, are first, upon the Mini­sters; secondly, upon the Ordinances; thirdly, upon the people; fourthly, against God most of all.

For the first, They tell us that Ministers which are good work­men, and bad workmen, and no workmen, are all hurt by the Common Prayer Book.

And first they instance in the last of these, thus: Where Mini­sters should be apt to teach, &c. this Book settles such blind fellows over people, who can neither feed nor lead.

To this the answer is plain, the Book appoints not at all what Ministers we shall have setled in Churches, but what they shall do that are setled in them. And if we have any such as they here speak of, and call them dumb dogs, saying, Sir Johns, &c. These are not hurt, nor the Churches that have them, hurt; but benefited by the Common Prayer-Book; for hereby they that can do no other good, yet are forced to do some, by reading that Book duly to and among the people; for by that reading, the ignorant people are instructed by the Word of God read to them, according to the Book: They have also a Confession of Faith, the Ten Commandments, the Lords Prayer, by frequent read­ing, taught them, with many other excellent and godly Prayers; whereby they call upon God agreeably to his Word, wherewith they praise God with Songs and Hymns in this Book which with­out it, they could not tell how to do. So then all the bad Mini­sters, whether no Preachers or bad Preachers, are all helped by this Book; those that cannot preach at all, if any such be now, do good by reading; these which are evil Preachers, and could do nothing but hurt (if any such there be) by idle and senseless Prayers, and erroneous Doctrine which they preach and make themselves, which they would do onely, shall by reading the Book [Page 35] do some good, both to themselves and others. Then for the good Ministers, which they divide into two sorts, some Conformists to whom the Book they say is a burthen; some Non-Conformists, which for this Book are sufferers. I answer, the first are not hurt by the Book, but by their own erroneous Conscience, which makes that a burthen to them, which of it self is no such thing: For the other which are sufferers for their disobedience, it is either their weakness, or their obstinacy which causes them to suffer, and not the Common Prayer-Book; which is at the most but a remote Causa sine qua non; of their sufferings, if they suffer onely for refusing that, else it is not so much: And I believe there are few sufferers, if any at all, which have had no fault but non-confor­mity to the Book laid to their charge; this for the Ministers then is nothing. Secondly, they tell us the Ordinances suffer by this Book, namely, Preaching is hindred by it; but this experience shews to be otherwise, no Toleration being given to neglect preaching for reading the Book; but where it is most punctually observed, Sermons are as good, though perhaps not so long, as in those places where it is neglected; and we know it is not the length of the Sermon that makes the people edifie; but many times the untolerable tediousness thereof, makes many even shun them, rather then frequent them. Neither do any of us esteem more of the Service-Book (as they accuse us) then of preaching in general; but to esteem more of the set Prayers made by the most Judicious Fathers, and by Law established, and of the Word of God truly and plainly read, then of such ex tempore Prayers and Sermons, as many of the enemies of the Common Prayer-Book make sometimes, no man that understands himself, and the Word of God, can possibly forbid, without manifest impiety: And that such Prayers and Sermons are not more properly Far­dels of mens devices, then the Liturgy which hath so much of the sincere Word of God in it, no reasonable man can say. Then for those words in the Canon, which they alledge of Divine Ser­vice and Sermon, they do not in the least sort make preaching no part of, or a lesser part of Gods service then reading and praying; but speaking in that Canon for the ordering of the people, they speak in the peoples language, wherein it is usual to say Service and Sermon: So that had they said onely Divine Service, and not added Sermon, some would have excluded the Sermon from be­ing understood in the Canon; but the Canon to shew that we [Page 36] esteem of Sermons as well as of Service, appoints the same reve­rence to be used in the one, that is in the other. This cavil there­fore is most idle.

Thirdly, They speak of evil effects of our Liturgy upon the people.

And herein first they tell us of an evil effect the Book hath upon the Law, because some have been punished for not reading the Book contrary to Law.

Which I answer to thus: If this were true, it is meerly acci­dental to the Book, and partly the f [...]ult of disobedient men, and partly of unjust Judges. But if the Act for the observing that Book be well looked into, they shall quickly see, that the offences in this kinde have not been punished beyond the rigor of the Law, but have rather had more favor then the Law allows: For the Statute is plain, That whosoever shall preach or speak any thing in the derogation or depraving of the said Book, or any thing therein contained, or any part thereof, and shall be convict thereof, &c. shall forfeit all his Spiritual Promotions coming or arising in one whole year. How would these fellows storm if this Act were put in exe­cution against them!

But to proceed; they tell us next, That this Book affronts Re­ligion; and herein they spend many words in nothing but un­christian and unhumane railing, telling us, That many good peo­ple have suffered, &c. Which discourse, how horribly f [...]lse soever it be, yet is to no purpose, if supposed true; for whatsoever men have suffered for seditious and rebellious words and actions, they would here make the ignorant people believe, hath been wholly for not conforming to the Book; just like the Papists, who when a Jesuite or Priest is put to death for Treason, say, He is martyred here for his Religion.

They tell us next, That many people have been destroyed by being brought in ignorance hereby: Which is so false and impossible, as nothing more; the Common Prayer-Book, if well observed and used, hath enough in it to shew any man the way to everlasting life, by the Scriptures read, and such Confessions of Faith as are necessary to salvation; and such Prayers, a [...] if faithfully prayed, and mercifully granted, we shall be happy enough in this world for a time, and perfectly happy in the world to come, for ever and ever. Whereas on the other side, many of their magnified Sermons fill poor souls with Errors, Heresies, and Doctrines of [Page 37] Devils, inciting and moving men to Rebellions, Murders, Trea­sons, and the most damnable villainies that ever hath been com­mitted in our Land, as the murdering our late King, and many other horrid acts in the late times committed.

Lastly, For those three things which they propound to be con­sidered from Queen Maries days, Pag. 41. For the present we can as truly deny them, as they falsly affirm them; and if they would instance of them more p [...]rticularly, they should receive answer accordingly.

The fourth kinde of evil effects follows, namely, against God himself; which they tell us of, are these two. Feastival days to Saints, and kneeling at the Communion. These I confess are right­ly laid to the charge of the Common Prayer-Book, which nothing else in all this Chapter is; but both these things we defend as good and lawful: For that the Church of God hath not power to appoint and set apart some days to be kept holy to God upon particular occasions, is a fancy against the generality of their own parties opinion and practice, as well as against the truth it self: For did not they continually in all these late years, in which they had all the sway in their own hands, and all others but meer slaves to them; did not they, I say, set apart more days to keep holy in their raign, for Thanksgiving, Humiliation, &c. then ever were appointed before (except in some time of Plague) in five times so many years? And as their practise was then, so their judgment was before, none of them ever questioning the lawfulness of keeping the Fifth of November for a day of Thanksgiving, or the days of Fasting for Prayer and Humiliation in the times of Pesti­lence, or any other grievous calamity. Neither do the two pla­ces quoted by them, Gal. 4. 10. Col. 2. 16. any thing touch our holy days; for they forbid not the Christian Churches to appoint any particular holy days, as they should see cause; but forbid Christians to be in bondage to the Jewish Feastivals, being but shadows of things to come at first, and so ending with the Sacri­fice of Christ the Substance.

For the second thing, Kneeling at the Communion; they would prove it to be Idolatry thus:

To adore in, by, or before a Creature respectively, with relation to the Creature, is Idolatry.

But to kneel at the Sacrament, is so to adore: Therefore it is Idolatry.

In this Syllogism we deny the Minor, as having no truth in it; we do no otherwise adore, then we do always at Prayer; and in the act of delivering and receiving the Sacrament we are in pray­er, joyning in our hearts with the words of the Minister pray­ing to God, That the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ may preserve our bodies and souls unto Everlasting Life. And being thus in Prayer unto God, no action is so fitting as kneel­ing.

The last Argument in this Chapter against us, is this, God will not hear the prayer of the Service-Book: Therefore they are not to be offered.

Then that God will not hear the Prayers in our Liturgy, they would prove by this, That they are not according to Gods will. Which they suppose, they have proved by all that they h [...]ve said in this Book. This if they have not proved, but all their Argu­ments to that purpose, have been by me sufficiently answered and confuted; then is this last Argument nothing worth. Whether therefore of the two is true, let the Reader judge, and I will say no more of this matter.

Now for the Cross in Baptism, which they onely do but men­tion, and refer us to Zions plea. I may as well, I make no doubt, refer you to the answer thereto, though I must confess I have never seen the one or the other. So having done with the matter and arguments in this Chapter; for their most unchristian railings in it, and all the rest of that stuff, which their Book is stuffed withal, if St. Peters words, and St. Judes, can neither stop their mouths, nor make others stop their ears against such speeches, by those two places, 2 Pet. 2. 10, 11, 12. and Jude v. 9, 10. they may proceed without control; onely being their Virgin-Daughter Sobriety, does behave her self so loosely and uncivilly in this Chapter, that neither she, nor any of her sisters, can be found in this Book untainted, according to their own confession in the be­ginning of their Preface, we have little reason to suppose un­spotted Piety to have been the Author of their Treatise. So I pro­ceed.

CHAP. VIII. Intituled three Motives.

IN this Chapter they beg for the taking away of the Common-Prayer in this sort.

Let us humbly crave you would be pleased for the love that you bear and owe to the Lord Jesus; to the purity of his worship; to the thrivings of our bodies, souls, and estates; to the turning away of Gods judgements, &c, by all these and many more, we again and again intreat you to pluck up the plant of the Service-Book, which God never set.

What is all this, but according to their censure of our Letany, upon those words, By thine agony, &c. but a meer conjuring? for here they pray, as we there, by several motives, By the love you bear to the Lord Jesus; by the love you bear to the purity of his worship, &c. Yet these things here they count no conjuring, no more do I; but let me ask them, what equity there can be in condemning that in us, which they allow in themselves? here's a poor Virgin shrewdly vitiated by them. Alas poor mother Piety, that hast all thy daughters so often abused by thy pretend­ed friends!

The next of note in this Chapter, is an idle extravagant dis­course which they make of Mr Womacke, which how easily soe­ver it might perhaps be answered, yet I will wholly pass by for brevities s [...]ke, and keep me to the work in hand; namely to the defence of the Common Prayer Book; for they confess them­selves at the end of this excursion, That all this is nothing to the purpose, which might be as truely said of a great deal more in their book though they do not confess it.

Against their next stroke, against the Bishops, desiring to have them and the book destroyed together, as being the upholders of one ano­ther; we shewed the vanity of that argument when they first mentioned it; of that therefore no more; for though I am forced by their want of method, to follow them sometimes forward and b [...]ckward, yet do [...] live to say the same thing over and again in several words as they do.

Lastly, then for their vain and needless discourse of Christs go­verning [Page 40] his Church, which no man ever made question of it, to their argument gathered thence against us, because Christ hath appointed what we must have in Liturgy and Government.

I answer to all in a word; Christ hath appointed in general that which all must, and we do follow; but he hath left the particu­lars of order and decency to his Church; else what ground could they have for any other Prayer then the Lords Prayer? or for any prayer at all before their Sermons, finding no precept or example of Christ or his Apostles in that kind in all the Scrip­ture?

This may suffice for the matter of all this Chapter, the title whereof is, of three motives, but we have hitherto met with never an one of them; they are now at last onely named in the end of the Chapter, and follow in the Chapters now to come. The first whereof they take from the example of others; the se­cond from the danger of not doint what they desire; the third is from the covenant. The two first we have in the next Chapter, the last in Chapter ten. To which I come in their order.

CHAP. IX. Of the Pattern.

TO follow their disorderly proceedings still like themselves, as in the former Chapter they intituled it, of three Mo­tives, and yet medled with never a one; so this Chapter they give the title of one motive onely, namely of the Patterne, and yet handle two; the Pattern for doing, and the danger of not doing what they would have done. First then of the Pattern. Wherein 1. They tell us, that all the reformed Churches have done it. 2. They press us with the example of the Scots. To the first we answer, That their Allegation is not true, but they name some Churches that have done it, yet many more might be named which have not done it. 2. For the Scots, we are neither bound to follow their examples, nor any other further then they have done well, nor so far, if we shall not do well also in following; for it will not always hold that what is or hath been done well by some in some places, can be done well by all others in other places. I have no mind to cen­sure other men and their actions, but will rather proceed to their [Page 41] next motive. Onely I must touch one thing in a word which here they say, namely, They seem to hope for the bringing back of the King; which through the infinite mercy of God (blessed be his n [...]me for it for ever) we see now effected; if they desired the Kings return before, or be glad of it now, it is done, let them express so much in suffering him to be a King now he is returned, and not force or appoint him, how to govern that Church, which God as to a nursing father hath committed to his charge. And so I come to the second motive, the danger of not doing what they demand to be done. Which danger they propound to be looked upon in a twofold respect, a Priori, and a Posteriori, from what is past, and what is like to ensue. The former they say is to be looked upon in way of prophecy, or in a way of performance. Con­cerning the former they tell us How the servants of God have pro­phesied of the increase of Popery, and the suffering of true Religion, by many revolting in times of tryal. Now the ground of all this, if you will believe them, is the Common prayer, and the Bishops, one up­holding the other; which later clause I have already refuted where they first mention it in their Preface, whether I refer the Reader; and for the former part faining the Bishops and book to be ground of the increase of Popery, who sees not the quite con­trary, that rather rebels and schismaticks have done it, Popery having got more strength, and our Church more shame and slan­der in these late times they have born the sway, then all the time since the reformation before? So that as it was a godly Prayer set forth to be used upon the fifth of November by Act of Parlia­ment to be used, that upon that horrible treason of the Papists, through the goodness of God so happily discovered, God would strengthen the hands of our gracious King, the Nobles and Ma­gistrates of the Land, with judgement and justice to cut off those workers of iniquity; so we have as much cause to pray a­gainst these detestable Sects and murderers of King and all Subjects which most strangely opposed their damnable and devilish pro­ceedings; the cause of all which doings whether it were the Bi­shop and book, as these men would have it, or the rebellious minds of the enemies thereto, it is needless now to say; and whe­ther the chief want of a through reformation be not suffering such spirits, rather then suffering the Bishops and the book to remain, these late times have shewed, wherein the two later books and Bishops have been all the while in a total Ecclipse, and the former [Page 42] rebels and Schismaticks shining in full and unlimited power and lustre.

Next for future dangers they alledge Zions plea again, against which we must also again oppose the answer thereto.

In the rest of this Chapter after much vain and idle railing ac­cording to their custome, they come to particular dangers to those to whom they write their book, if they obey them in an extirpation of the true pretended enemies; wherein they bring no new arguments, but use a flourishing exhortation to per­form the work they would have done, all which exhortation be­ing grounded onely upon the supposed unlawfulness of the book, proved as they think, by their undeniable arguments, as they call them, all those arguments having been sufficiently answered, and so no proof of any unlawfulness in the use of the book re­maining good, this brave exhortation falls of it self, so that the third Motive onely is left.

CHAP. X. Of the Covenant.

COncerning the Covenant in general we need say but this. 1. As they moved men to break the Oath of Allegiance, and Canonical obedience, by saying (though most wickedly and falsely) That they were unlawful Oaths, and so better brok [...]n then kept, that may we truely say to them concerning the Covenant, and so their mouthes ought to be stopped; and for the unlaw­fulness of that so unjustly and tyrannically imposed Covenant, that it was utterly unlawful, may easily and clearly appear in these two respects.

  • 1. In that it was absolutely forbid by our Dread Soveraign Lord the King then being.
  • 2. By the matter of it in it self.

For the first, it is a truth without any question or dispute, that it is simply unlawful for any subjects though never so many and powerful to make any solemn League or Covenant concerning any innovation or alteration in government to be made by them without the Kings consent; much more then when his Majesty hath not onely given no consent, but also declared absolutely [Page 43] against it, and peremptorily forbidden it, as we all know the King did, while the Covenant was in hand.

Secondly, for the matter of it, if any one particular in it were simply unlawful, the Covenant is thereby unlawful.

Now the extirpation of the Church-government by Archbi­shops and Bishops in our Kingdom, where the Gospel hath so long and so abundantly flourished under it, the Kingdom with it, and by it; which Government also hath been even in the Church of Christ since the Primitive times, and is most agreeable to the word of God; the extirpation I say of this Government, and the ruine of all the officers therein, without any just cause or ground, but upon distast taken against some of them, which way it can be lawful, is not in imagination possible. Secondly, the Covenant be­ing one intire thing consisting of many branches, the principal point being wholly broken by the murther of the King, and the alteration and change of the fundamental Laws of the Realm, the whole Covenant is broken, void, and annihilated in respect of any tye upon those which either took it voluntarily, or were by force or fear compelled to it.

Lastly, If this Covenant were never so punctually observed, yet might the Common prayer book still continue in use amongst us, there being never a word in the Covenant concerning the aboli­shing of it. So for the Covenant in general this may suffice.

Now to the particulars which therein they insist upon for the abolishing the book, wherein they divide the Covenant into three parts. 1. For the defence of Religion, the King and State. 2. For opposing Popery and Popish innovations. 3. To maintain the peace of the three Kingdoms, of England, Scotland, and Ireland.

Hence they draw these two arguments. 1. If all Popery, &c. be to be opposed, then it follows that our Liturgy and ceremonies must be opposed; but the former is to be done; therefore the later.

We deny the consequence, because no superstition or Popery hath been proved to be in our book and ceremonies, as by this answer conferred with the charge by them drawn is evident enough.

Then for their new additional proof here, to make these things superstitious, Because by Christ they are not commanded; We answer if they mean expresly, & totidem verbis appointed by Christ; they may as well except against our Churches, Gowns, Pulpits, reading-Deskes, &c. none of which Christ particularly [Page 44] commanded to be used; but we must tell them also, that although none of these are particularly appointed by Christ to us, nor ge­nerally by Christ appointed to the whole Church throughout the world; yet none of these being forbidden to any Church, and being by the authority of our Superiors commanded in our Church, they and all other ceremonies so commanded, and by Law established amongst us, are by Christ consequently and me­diately commanded by those places which command us to be subject to authority, and to do all things without murmurings or disputings; as Rom. 13. 1. Phil. 2. 14. with other places for­merly quoted.

The second argument is, From our mutual Oath between us and the Scots to maintain the peace of the three Kingdomes, which the Scotch Commissioners are perswaded cannot be maintained without unity in the worship of God, and so consequently (as these men would bear us in hand) without our conformity to the Scots. But who sees not, that it may as well be by their conformity to us? And they that are bound to endeavor a unity and conformity among three, must needs see it more likely and more reason [...]ble to bring one to two, then two to one; but all this may now be very well spared; for the Scots have sufficiently declared that they press not this Covenant as these men do, but will be in perfect love and peace with us, enjoying our Liturgy and Government with us established, and themselves enjoying their own; and so to press the Cove­nant by any of them as to reach to us, they make no better reason in them that shall do it. If therefore these men would be as rea­sonable as desirous of peace and quiet as the Scots, we should hear no more of this matter. Thus having done with the two argu­ments drawn from the Covenant, they bring two more; One from Erasmus, another for Smectymnuus: The first whereof, they say, tells us, That we are not onely to abolish things evil in themselves, but th [...]se also that have any appearance of evil, for which they needed not have made any use of humane authority, St. Paul saith enough in that kind; and so that matter no man can deny; but this is nothing 1 Tim. 1. 22. to their purpose, to move against our Book of Common Prayer or Episcopacy, no appearance of evil being in either of them to men of judgement and understanding that way; but if every particular weak ignorant man shall be admitted as a judge of what is good or evil either truely or in appearance, there will be no worship of God at all allowed of, witness so many under-Sects [Page 45] misliking the Covenant, the Directory, and many other things which the great Architectaries allow and highly approve of; onely all in general mislike Government, order, decency, and whatso­ever is not their own invention, and so concerning particulars are ready to fall together by the ears among themselves, though all presently ready to joyn against what they call the common enemy, that is, truth it self, Law, Monarchy and Episcopacy, the Defen­ders and m [...]intainers of it.

Next for that of Smectymnus, we answer in a word, that removing of such factious spirits, and Incendiaries, would quickly settle a more happy peace and uniformity in the Church, then ever the removing of the Common Prayer book can do.

Lastly, they come in this Chapter to the Surplice, In which to omit idle words, the argument they use against the Surplice, is this,

If the Surplice be mans device, and hath been an Idol in Gods worship, it must be so still; but our Surplices are of such; therefore they are ido's still.

To this first, we deny the consequence, for there is no necessi­ty that any thing that hath been abused once must be so abused al­ways, or else destroyed; the abuse may be taken away, and the thing continued in its being still, and a lawful use made of it. A very Crucifix, or any Saints picture worshipped by Papists, taken into our houses, and kept onely as an ornament or picture to deck a room, is no longer an Idol. Our Churches we [...]e all in time of Popery abused to gross Idolatry, but are, blessed be God, neither demolished, nor so abused now. The Surplice also was so abused among the Papists once in this very Land, but is not so now, be­ing not used as any invention of man necessarily to be added to make Gods worship and service to be compleat and perfecter then it could be without it, but is onely used as an ornament indifferent in it self, and onely necessary, where and when it is commanded in respect of the command onely, and not of any thing in it self; and were it by authority forbidden, as it is commanded, it were the same sin then to use it, that now it is not to use it. Then for the Minor, I answer again that is false; also our particular and in­dividual Surplices which we now wear, never were Idols, nor ever can be, if used no otherwise then we are commanded to use them; and for the rise and original of the Surplices, we answer, that we retain them not as reliques of Popery or superstition, [Page 46] neither take we them up from the Papists, but from the ancient use of them in the true Church of Christ, which used them be­fore ever they were idolized by Papists, or railed upon by Schis­maticks.

CHAP. XI. Entituled, The Objections.

HEre they tell us, They will remove some Objections, wherein they will shew them to be of no great weight, and there say, they will use but few words. And I believe indeed, that such Ob­jections or Arguments as they will bring forth for themselves to answer, shall have no great weight in them, lest they should take upon them such a burden, as they are neither able to bear, nor to cast down ag [...]in handsomely, after they have once taken it up. Briefly therefore running over the Arguments here brought, and their answers to them, I shall at last use some Arguments my self, for the continuance of our Liturgy among us, as well as they have done for the abolishing of it; but first to their Ob­jections.

The first, they bring from the antiquity of it; to which they tell us Smectymnuus hath answered, whom I never saw, and so know not what his answer is, and so can say nothing to him. But whereas they answer here, That antiquity without truth is nothing: I grant that, but tell them withal, this is nothing to their purpose; because, what is most ancient, must be supposed most true till the contrary be proved: Therefore their answer to the antiquity of this Book, is nothing against it, till they have proved the unlawfulness of it a little better then yet they have done.

Secondly, They s [...]y, Many good men have liked it: To which they answer, That their approbation is not sufficient. To this I rejoyn, nor is their misliking and railing at it, enough to con­demn it: For though they brag of more light then our forefathers (this new light is the common argument in these days for all things done against the old light of Gods Word) yet all their l [...]ght hath not shewed them how to frame such a Liturgy as we [Page 47] have received from our forefathers; and till they have made a better, they might be content with this.

Thirdly, They say Our Book hath many good things in it; but answer, So hath the Alcoran and the Talmud. But we reply, that those Books, if they have some good things in them, which they are pleased to call many, yet they are not many in respect of the evil with which they abound; but our Book abunds with good, if not free from some defaults: The denomination then being to be taken from the greater part, our Book, and so the Apochry­pha, which here they also gird at, are to be called good, and the other two evil.

Fourthly, It is better to amend then to cashiere. To this first, They suppose an impossibility of amending. Secondly, They say, It is contrary to Gods course, who commands the Altars to be thrown down, &c To this we say, It is a vain and groundless supposition that every thing amiss in our Liturgy, might not easily be amend­ed. Neither is it to be doubted, but that they whom it concerns would sooner amend what is distastful to any quiet and moderate men, if the violent opposition of troublesome and factious spirits not hinder it, by the unreasonableness of their demands; whom when nothing in that kinde done can satisfie, it is to no purpose in respect of them, to do any thing.

To the second we answer, concerning Gods command to cut down the Altars, burn the Groves, &c. the case is very far dif­ferent from ours here: Those Groves and Altars were directly against the express command of God, for worshipping onely in the place by himself chosen, namely the Temple at Jerusalem. And again, there is great difference between that Idolatrous wor­ship, and some defects and imperfections in the right worship of the true God. Lastly, It is not Gods course always in cor­recting abuses, rather to abolish the thing, then to take away the abuse; for we know our Saviour speaking against the abuses in Fasting, Prayer, and Alms, does not take them away, or forbid any of them, but shews how to amend the abuses: And to make their answer good here, they must plead against our Churches, as well as our Liturgy.

To the fifth, This Book, they say, hath Acts of Parliament to confirm it. To which they answer, first, That this Book is not esta­blished by Act of Parliament. Secondly, That the thing it self be­ing simply evil, no Act can make it good.

To these we say again, The Act before the Book, is plain; but they tell us, The Books we now use, have been altered since the Act, and so the Act is not for them. To this we answer, If there be any such alterations in the Books, that by the strictness of Law, or tricks of Lawyers, the Act cannot take such hold of Non-con­formists, as to make them liable to the penalties there appointed; yet in conscience, whatsoever is not altered in the Book, is by vertue of that Act obediently to be observed, and yielded to the intention of the Law-giver, being as much or more to be regard­ed, then the Letter of the Law. And again, those alterations being made according to Law, that is, by a Commission given forth by His Majesty then being, King James of Blessed memory, under the Broad Seal of England, to the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and others, according to the form which the Laws of this Realm prescribe to be used (as we see in His Majesties Proclamation before the Book of Common Prayer) all are as much bound to observe the Book so altered, as if no alteration at all had been made in it.

To the second answer we say, That the supposition there made of the evilness of the Book, hath been by my answer so taken away, that the ground of this answer fails.

And so I have at last done with their Five undeniable Argu­ments, as they call them, and their three Motives for the taking off our Common Book, and the Answers to the Objections which they were pleased to bring against themselves. There remains now onely to take a view of their opinion concerning any Litur­gy at all, or any set form of Prayer; for if these two be unlaw­ful, it is a sufficient Argument against the Common Prayer Book.

In delivering their opinion herein, they say, They will answer these two questions. First, Whether they do allow of any set Prayers in a more private way? Secondly, Whether of any set Liturgy? To which two questions, they might very well have spared their pains in answering, we not much caring for their opinions herein; yet seeing they would thus express themselves, we will see what they say, and deliver our mindes thereto.

First, They say, They allow the ignorant onely set forms of Prayer in private. To which, if by these set forms they mean set pray­ers made by others, we are willing with them to allow them one­ly to such as cannot make better themselves; but in general to [Page 49] use set forms for the very best of men, is not onely lawful, but very good, and most carefully to be done, that we may observe that of the wisest of men, Eccles. 5. 1.

For the second. A set Liturgy they say they allow in general; but come to the particular use of any particular Liturgy, they flee off again, and will have their set Liturgy, onely a pattern for a Liturgy, made it seems ex tempore every time; because the words they tell us, must follow the affections, and not the affections the words.

In this they do but dally with us, making our Liturgy no Litur­gy, and turn publick Prayers into private; every one by this means, as their affections are different, so praying differently; whereas in publick Prayers all must pray at the same time the same prayer, or else there is not one common and joynt prayer of all, but several prayers as several persons. And for their Ar­gument, that the words should follow the affections; that may as well be in a set prayer, as in an ex tempore one: For the heart does first conceive the prayer, and then frames words to express it by. Now such prayers being made, and read, and known to all, so that all have them by heart, they do thereunto first con­form their affections, and praying with the Minister, their words inwardly conceived, if they speak not, or also outwardly uttered, if they speak, do follow the affections of their hearts. If they say this is not enough, but every mans private affections should be the rule or guide of his words and prayer; I answer then, that if there be never so many praying at the same time, in the same place, they differing in their affections, and so in their inward or outward words, viz. their several forms of prayer, there are but so many several private prayers made, and not one joynt publick prayer by all. And there is no more efficacy in the prayers of them in the Church, then in so many particular prayers elswhere: For these prayers want the condition by our Saviour expounded, Matth 18. 19. and so cannot truly claim the promise there made. Thus I have done with their Book, in respect of the sum or sub­stance, which I have fully answered, their extravagancies and railings lightly passed by; I will adde no more to all they say but this, If any man desire to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the Churches of Christ, 1 Cor. 11. 16.

CHAP. XII. Arguments for our Common Prayer Book.

HAving hitherto answered what hath been said against our Liturgy, and now desirous to say somewhat more for it; I have thought it best briefly to draw some Arguments for it from the same heads, whence the Unmaskers have fetched all the matter they have brought against it; namely, from the name of it; the original of it; the matter contained in it; the manner of using it, and the effects of it upon our whole Land. By all which I hope, they whom it may concern, will correcting what they see cause, not totally destroy, but continue our Liturgy, and Church Government.

First then I will begin with the name; not the ignominious name of Mass which they would cast upon it, but the name which it owns, and we all call it by; And that's the name of The Common Prayer Book, a name challenging all liking and acceptation, con­sidering the excellency and efficacy of the common and publick prayers of all, above the particular and private prayers of any one, how holy or pious soever he be. If Christ promise, as we know he does, Matth. 18. 19, 20. That where two or three be ga­thered together, &c. how much more will he be present with a whole congregation, or a whole Land publickly with the same desires, words, and affections, calling upon him, and praising his name? If then the nick-name of a Mass, odiously by our enemies cast upon our Liturgy, make it seem to some distasteful; yet let its own proper name rightly belonging to it, cause us in that respect, that it is a Book of Common Prayer for us all, cause us in that respect to love and esteem it, and to desire the continued use of it among us.

Secondly for the original. This Book had its first rise and origi­nal from the ancient fathers of the Church in the Primitive times, long before Popery was known or thought of, and its immediate original here, as it is now with us, from the very beginning of that blessed Reformation, which we still by the mercy of God enjoy, and except the interruption of some few years in the days of [Page 51] Queen Mary, and in the late rebellions and distractions amongst us, we have still, blessed be God, retained and flourished under it. Out of the respect then to our blessed Ancestors of former times, and our Predecessors here, that first established this Book, and for the happy continuance of it, from the very beginning and first setling of the true Protestant Religion in England, let us love this Book, and with thankfulness for it, diligently use and constant­ly retain it.

Thirdly for the matter of it, that ought to be a more preva­lent argument for it then both the former; for had it never so good a name, if that name were dissonant from its nature, I could not urge it; or had it never so good a beginning in the respects forementioned, yet were the matter of it nought, the good ef­ficient cause would not sufficiently make amends for the evil ma­terial cause; but if that be as or more excellent then the other, sure then may it well move us to regard it. What then is the matter of this Book? wholly prayers made onely to God himself, through the mediation of no Saints, or Angels, but onely through Jesus Christ, whom Gotappointed the sole and absolute Media­tor between him and us.

Secondly, We have the Word of God read in it to instruct and teach us in the knowledge and service of God, which he is plea­sed to impart to us, and require of us.

Thirdly, Songs and Hymnes of praise and thanks to God, ei­ther Divine and Canonical parts of the Scripture it self, or made by holy men, altogether consonant to the Word of God in he Scripture.

Fourthly, Confessions of Faith, briefly comprising the main, chief, and principal points which a Christian is bound to believe, and to profess to salvation.

This is generally the matter of our Common Prayer Book; which matter is so, and in such order and manner set down, and so disposed of; and every thing in the Book appointed to be used in such admirable manner and order, that from thence, we have another strong argument for the maintenance and retaining of the Book.

Fourthly, Therefore I come to the excellent manner and order of using this book, and used in this book; concerning which I must take a brief view of the order appointed, and so deliver it unto you.

First, when we are come into the house of God for his publike worship and service, how can we better begin this sacred work, then with some words out of the Word of God himself? This is without controversie; but with what words we should begin, or what piece of Gods word is fittest to be the first word that should be spoken in his house, is perhaps more difficult to be ab­solutely determined; that therefore is not absolutely appointed, and to all enjoyned, but in this kind some liberty left to the Mini­sters discretion at every particular time and occasion. If any man think it most fit to begin with some short prayer he may; to this end we have these sentences, Turn thy face away from our sins, O Lord, and correct us, O Lord; and yet in thy judgement, &c. If it be thought more fit to move the people a little to humility in re­spect of their sins, that they more earnestly mind this sacred duty they are met about, we have to that purpose, Rent your hearts and not your garments, &c. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive our selves, &c. I will go to my father and say, &c. If thirdly some think it more needful first to propound comfort and consolation, that the people, may with the more faith call upon God, and serve him with the more heart and spirit, we have to that end, At what time soever a sinner doth repent, &c. So that beginning the service of God with the word of God in the house of God, we have several sen­tences for several times and several occasions to be used, as is most convenient at any time. Then follows most fitly a brief, but grave and serious exhortation to put the people in mind of, and stir them to that duty which they are come together about. After which immediately they make a most excellent, short and pithy confessi­on of their sins, humbly kneeling upon their knees. After confes­sion we know follows absolution, according to that of Solomon, Prov. 28. 13. and of David. So then proceeds our Liturgy to a Declaration of Gods pardoning the penitent, by which we are Psal. 32. 3. all the more heartned and encouraged with faith to pray to God for all things necessary to soul or body; we do this therefore pre­sently in that form of Prayer which our Saviour himself taught us. Having thus faithfully prayed, and not doubting but what we have faithfully asked, shall effectually be obtained; we are bound in the next place, as reason as well as Religion will teach us, to praise God for this his mercy toward us, which we being not able to do without Gods assistance, we do first desire him to open our lips, that our mouth may shew forth his praise; and through our earnest desire [Page 53] presently to perform this holy duty, we desire God to make speed and haste to help us in this kind; and then with a short doxology expressing our faith in and of the Trinity, we proceed to Psalms of praise.

First, we have one set Psalm every day, being a Psalm of speci­all note to stir up to this holy duty; and then every day several Psalms in such order, that the whole Psalter is read through once every moneth. Having thus far proceeded in this excellent man­ner and order, we must not yet leave thus, but because he that goes not forward in Religion daily, will quickly go backward, we must endeavor daily to increase in the knowledge of God, which will be by reading and hearing the word of God, and that chiefly in the house of God; therefore in the next place we have two Lessons read to us, one out of the old Testament, another out of the new; and between those Lessons, and after them, excel­lent Hymns of praise and thanksgiving to God, in sending our Saviour especially, and also for all his mercies and favours, spiri­tual or temporal to our souls or bodyes; let any man of reason and judgement now say if our book do not orderly lead us all this way; yet here I confess is not enough; as we do diligently and daily learn somewhat out of the Word of God, in the house of God; so it is most fit we should there also shew what we have learned, and make some profession and confession; next there­fore most fitly follows a solemn and publike confession of our Christian faith, comprised in the Creed, which we are all to say with the Minister, and that standing, which gesture is most con­venient in these two respects.

First, to declare our readiness and willingness to make that con­fession, and that we do all joyn in it, which if we sat still could not so easily be perceived, it being an easie thing to observe who stand and who sit, but hard to see who speaks, and who do not.

Secondly to testifie by this gesture of standing up, that this faith we are not afraid or ashamed publikely to stand to, but that this we are ready to maintain and defend against all opposition whatsoever, as that f [...]ith we will live and dye in.

Lastly after all this thus devoutly, decently, and reverently per­formed; how can we better conclude this holy work then with prayer altogether unto God, to confirm, settle, strengthen, and establish us in that holy Faith which we do profess, and have now [Page] made confession of; and to [...]ase our knowledge, and to grant us all mercies and favours [...]ful for souls and bodies, and to keep us from evils, to the one or to the other? In which prayers first we begin with a mutual short prayer of the Minister and peo­ple each for other, to testifie each to other their perfect love and charity one to another, that so they may the more cheerfully and unanimously joyn as one in the ensuing prayers; in which after a brief praying for Gods mercy in general, we begin again. First with the Lords prayer, the most absolute and perfect pattern for all our prayers. Then after some few short ejaculations of the Mini­ster and the people answering, which is an especial means to rouse and stir up the dull affections of the people, subject to be weary and faint in holy duties, we proceed to the set and solemn prayers en­suing. The first of which is varied every day almost, and upon the most solemn and great days fitted to the day, as the present occasion requires; and so on every particular holy day. The other prayers for peace, grace, encrease of knowledge, and protection against perills and dangers, and so the prayers for the King, &c. being most necessary at all times, are every day to be used; and af­ter all, the blessing pronounced to all.

Thus I have briefly touched upon you see, our excellent way and manner of serving God according to our Common Prayer book appointed daily. It would be no difficult matter to run through all the other matters in that book, as the administration of the Sacraments, solemnization of Matrimony with all the other Rites and Ceremonies; I desiring brevity, this may suffice for this my fourth argument for the Liturgy, the excellent order and manner of using it.

I come now to the fifth and last argument for it, the blessed and happy effects of this our worshipping and serving God in this sort from the beginning of the Reign of that never enough praised and admired Queen Elizabeth of blessed and eternal memory. How wonderfully did the Lord bless and preserve her with a long, happy, and prosperous Raign that did establish and settle this Li­turgy in her Kingdoms? How did the whole Nation flourish in piety, peace, and prosperity under her Government? ever since her Raign began, during the time of it, and since the end of it, no Nation in the Christian world hath received more, and more miraculous mercies and favors from Gods hand then our Nation. We have abounded in honor, glory, and estimation abroad, en­creased [Page 55] abundan [...]ly in wealth, learning and knowledge at home; We have h [...]d as excellent and powerful preaching, and as frequent; as learned and pious books written as any place in the world. We have had such uniformity and decency in the worship and service of God, as no Church in Christendom more, till of late d [...]yes, wherein this book, and our Bishops and Church Government by them have been cryed down, and thrust by force and violence a­gainst all reason, conscience, and Laws of God and man out of their places; and our Church; during which time of their exi [...]e, what treasons, rebellions, murder, and all horrible acts of pro­phanness, and abominable impiety have abounded in the Land no tongue can express. What strange Sects have risen? how hath Popery increased? how insolency and ignorance, under pretence of new light hath overspread a great part of the Land, woful experience hath shewed more then I am able to express. These effects may justly be imputed to the want of Bishops, and a Set form of divine worship amongst us; for immediately upon the abolition of them they began to grow, and encreased all the time of their much lamented absence, and now through the great mer­cy of God, since the restoring of them, they are much abated and decayed daily; and by the continuance of them now again a­mongst us, in some reasonable time, if without interruption or di­sturbance, it please the Lord of his infinit goodness to continue this blessing to us, we doubt not by the gr [...]ce of God the falling down, or vanishing away of all these Sects again; The book being an especial help to the simple and ignorant in the worship and service of God, and the authority of the Bishops, an approved and ef­fectual means to keep under the insolency and perversness of will­ful disturbers of the Churches peace; which happiness that we may enjoyn again, as we have formerly had it, as we are daily to beg and crave at the hands of Almighty God, with earnest and uncessant prayers; so do we humbly for the conclusion of this Treatise, desire of his sacred Majesty, and the most reverend Fa­thers in God, the Lords Arch-Bishops, the right reverend Fa­thers in God the Lords Bishops of our Church, by his Majesty chiefly intrusted in this business, and by the Law of God; and of this chiefly, with the instructing and teaching of his people, and governing his Church, that amending whatsoever in their wisdom they see fit for the glory of God, the good of this Church of England in general, and the satisfactions of the minds, [Page 56] desires and consciences of the peaceable and weak, but faithful members thereof, they would still continue our Liturgy, which we have had so long among us, and so happily flourished under, and with which God of his mercy grant that this Church and State may still flourish and prosper to the end of the world. Amen.

A Collection of some choice Expres­sions of the Equity, Charity, Sobriety and Loyalty, the four Virgin Daughters of the unspotted Piety of these unknown Unmaskers of our Common Prayer Book.

1. THe Service Book is evinced to be a rank Impostor in Gods worship, and a violent intruder into the house of God. To the Reader,Pag. 1.
2. The said Book is called, The overwhelming storm of the purity of worship.Chap. 1. p. 1.
3. It is called, A Superstitious and Popish Liturgy.ibid.
4. If our Liturgy be not a Mass of Superstition, and Superstitious Ceremonies, we know not what Superstition is.p. 3.
5. Kneeling at the Communion is said to be the staff and strength of that abominable Idol, the Breaden God.ibid.
6. Our Service-Book is called The Mother of that Hydra of the Scotish Liturgy, and the yong Dragon in that Nation, and the Mass-Book, the Mother of our and theirs too.ibid.
7. Except our Liturgy had been full of Serpents, it could not have hatched the Dragon that was sent into Scotland.ibid.
8. The Superstitions of this Book are such, and so many, that we may apply that saying, That it is not onely hurtful and dangerous, but cursed and execrable.P. 4.
9. Their Liturgy (that is, the Papists) is the very Lethargy of wor­ship; and what difference between ours and theirs? Truly nothing but a pair sheers betwixt them, and putting ours in a coat of an­other tongue.Chap. 2. p. 5.
10. What reason is there, that we should groan under the burden of a Liturgy borne in upon us, under the name and nature of a Mass, which is nothing but a mass of Idolatry, and an Idol of abomina­tion.ibid.
11. The Service-Book is the main engine; it is the saddle, and we the asses, &c.Page 6. from the middle to the end.
12. Though Ave Maria be not actually in it, (namely, in our Litur­gy) yet if purpose had holden, it was more then in a fair possibility to have been the head-corner stone of the Liturgy.Chap. 3. p. 8.
13. This Symbolization of Papists and Prelate-men, in the name and nature of Mass and Liturgy, discovers how they conspire against the truth, and those who desire to worship God in spirit and truth.P. 10.
14. If this (our Liturgy) were the true worship of God, the Papists and the Prelatical crue would never endure it, but would stone, tear in pieces, imprison, burn, banish, and kill, with all manner of cruelty, as they do and have done, those that worship God according to his will.ibid.
15. They must bear false witness in proclaiming under their hands by subscription, that this stinking puddle is the River of God; when indeed it is the Euphrates of Babylon. Ibidem to the end, and almost to the middle ofP. 11.
16. If the Altars now er [...]cted were of God, they would be an abe­mination to the Prelates and their faction.ibid.
17. It was great incogitancy (to speak the least) in our Reformers in King Edward's days, to take a Monk from among the Canaanites, and putting a coat of English cloth upon it, to represent it, being an unclean beast, as a service to the Lord. It is no better truly, then the excommunicate thing.P. 16.
18. To cause Ministers to subscribe to it, is no less then treason against the high and mighty GodCh [...]p. 4. p. 22, 23.
19. That Jewish, Popish Institution of Churching-women, called Purification, and that bast [...]rdly piece of ConfirmationP. 25.
20. The Letany is not a stump or limb of Dagon, but the head of the Mass-Book.Chap 5. p 26.
21. Of this it may be truly said, as one said of the Pharisees sin, tha [...] it was either the sin against the Holy Ghost, or else very nigh to it; so the Letany is either blasphemy, or very nigh blasphemy.P. 27.
22. They call us Popish, Prelatical Priests; they say we fill their brains with the froth of that stuff, and their mouths with that con­fused noise of words, to shut them out from the soul-saving words, and the Word from them, and then the Priests bear rule and ty­rannize over them at pleasure.Chap. 6. p. 31.
23. This Letany is the very fascinating Fardel of Tautologies and Battologies, besides its other faults:P. 27.
24. We have left out the Saints in our Liturgy, that was too gross; but had the Laudenses got their colours fixed, ere this the Letany had been flanked with this stuff.Chap. 5. p. 28.
25. This Book settles blinde fellows over the people, &c.Pag 32. [Page 59] Also pag. 33. & 34. are wholly railings and revilings.
26. As our Liturgian Mass-mongers esteem more of the Service then Preaching; so they justle out, and keep out Preaching with it.Chap. 7. p. 35.
27. It is ordinary with the Journey-men Levites, and Letany Priests, to spin out all the time in making up that course thred of the Ser­vice that is allotted for Sermons; and this they do of malice, like the dog in the manger.P. 36.
28, The Arsenical gobbets of that poisonful Book which is worse then the Iron furnace.P. 38. See also the rest of that page, and p. 39, 40.
29. We have had woful experience, how the Hierarchical crue endea­vor with tooth and nail, and therein worse then the Manichees, to supplant Gods Law, of whom we might justly say with the Pro­phet, They have almost undone thy Law.Chap. 8. p. 45.
30 Our Liturgy is the garment spotted with the flesh, condemned by the Apostle Jude v. 23.P. 49. see p. 51.
31. The Babylonians and Ed [...]mites, Prelates and Jesuites under the favor of their Canons, got at length such footing, and made such head for Popery, Arminianism, &c. that Religion and Polity, the two twins of Gods favor, were like Archimedes Tomb, so over­grown with thorns that it could not be found.Chap. 9. pag. 55. where see more.
32. The Hierarchy and Service are resembled already to Mother and childe; so may they be twins begotten and born of Pride and Superstition, nursed and brought up in the lap of Covetousness; these twins are born together, live together, and must die together.p. 56.
33. Above all put away the Ashtaroth, the Service-Book, for that we may well call the very Caterpiller of Gods husbandry.p. 57.
34. If all Popery and Popish inn [...]vations are to be opposed, then it will follow, that the Service-Book and Ceremonies are to be opposed.Chap. 10. p. 58.
35. By the malignity of the Masters of those Ceremonies, the bulk was increased, and would have been like Crocodiles, who grow as long as they have a being, if you had not come in place, &c.p. 59.
36. That Service, Government, and Officers, being none of Christs, but the main evil, and cause of all evil in the three Nations, &c.P. 60. where see more. And in the next page, they call it a Mock-Ordinance, or Will-worship of the Service-book.
37. The Surplice is called not the least of all the idolatrous Rites and Ceremonies▪ yea worse then a plague-sore clou [...]p. 61.
38. They pray to cast it out, and all the rest, as carcasses of abomina­ble things; and withal to set the Masters of Wardrobe on pack­ing with them.P. 63. see more there.
39. For our Liturgy, what can be said for form, or hath been said, that cannot be said for the Popish Liturgy, but the clothing of it in another tongue?Chap. 11. p. 68.
40. Our Liturgy is said to be the head-piece of all our evils.ibid.

Much more stuff of this kinde might have been collected, but I am to weary of this, and have even forced my self to gather these things together, and so to present them to thy view, that thou maist see what temper and spirit these men are of, and so be no more deceived by their pretended holiness, then by their un­christian, uncharitable, uncivil, unsober and disloyal Writings.


This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.