hereafter To conclude this If foundness of Doctrine purity of Worship and a conversation in some measure becoming the Gospel be any true notes of a Church of Christ then there have been and I know are such Churches where no Forms of Prayer are composed much less imposed upon the Ministry that it was but a bold assertion of him to say All Churches had them I find no more in Mr. Carre nor the Fr. Debat I see Mr. Falkner hath summed up five Reasons which have been used by others most of them His first The security of the Worship of God This we had before His second That needful comprehensive petitions for all common and ordinary spiritual and outward wants c. with fit Thanksgivings may not be omitted c. Ans Surely Sir he is but a mean Minister that cannot do this without a Book though I know there is a vast difference in gifts yet there is no true Minister but is able in some good measure to do this the different Congregations are to be considered some mens gifts may serve for some places well that will not for others His third That the affections and hearts of pions men may be more devont c. when they may consider before-hand what particular prayers they are to offer up Ans Who are further off from these and care less for them than your most truly pious men who walk most with God such as can pour out their souls before God in prayer I speak of private men in another manner than most of your Ministers can do how have I heard them complain of these as deading their spirits That truly Sir your argument from pious and religious hearts was quite beside the business they are your formal Christians who sooth up themselves in their outward performances that are the most devout at these But 2ly since I see you have twice quoted the Liber Ritualis in the Bohemian Churches on your side and against us let me give the Reader an account of it out of Comenius the same Author and Book which you quote When a Minister is ordained the Ritual-book is given to him so far you say true but then he goeth on which you conceal this Ritual-book the common people were not to see when the Minister died the Book was returned to the Elders again Not that the Ministers were bound up to those words and syllables in the Book saith Comenius but they were left free This is quite against you He goeth on By this means the hearers were made more attentive and greater admirers of the grace of God For to rehearse only Forms or things prescribed what will there be to excite attention Quite cross to you The reason why they suffer not the people to have these Books is that the people might not slight or despise them Had the people the Books as ours the common-Common-Prayer Book they would more observe whether the Minister read right c. saith Comenius Thus we see when we go from the Scriptures to Humane Reasons how Reasons clash against one another Comen in Annotat. ad Rat. Ord. Discipl Frat. Bohem. p. 100 101. who adds more that makes against you Something I may say as to the Walacrian Classis whose judgment * Thus in the Dutch Churches Minister preces vel dictante spiritu vel certa sibi proposita formula concipiet Har. Syno Belg. Cap. 11. Canon 21. Apollon p. 172. Comment on Exod. 28. Def. of B. Land pag. 102. you produce against us 't is true what you quore but withal if you please to read the latter end of the first Paragraph you will find them rejecting the ceremonies and forms of publick worship in England introduced in these latter times And in the second Paragraph condemning Forms of Prayer and publick worship though materially well disposed if imposed as absolutely necessary and essential parts of Divine Worship with a certain tyranny and violent command upon the consciences of men I could also quote Rivet whom you quote on your side for Ceremonies he mentions your Surplices in England which you retain ex reliquiis Papismi and saith if you do it in imitation of the Jews or for some mystical signification which you do then 't is not to be born saith he In his pious and learned Homily de Orig. errores grounded on the 2 Cor. 11.3 he saith Mens departing from the simplicity of Christ is the original of all error Christs wisdom is too low for men There you will find something more Dr. Stillingfleet according with him in this tells the Jesuit piously and truly If your Church had kept to the Primitive simplicity and moderation the occasion of most contreversies in the Christian world had been taken away I may say the same for England I will not deny but you may quote many against us But 1. I am of that Faith concerning Churches which the Church of England is concerning General Councils Act. 21. when General Councils are gathered together for so much as they be an assembly of men whereof all be not governed by the Spirit and Word of God they may err and sometimes have erred in things pertaining to God c. even good men may err We know but in part 2ly We have Churches if there be any true in the world that are against these things so that here is the Testimony of Churches against Churches 3ly The Holy Scriptures are the Rule of all Churches to which they ought all to conform Wherefore Constantine said right and as became a Christian in the Council of Nice Let us take our resolution of questions out of the Books that are Divinely inspired To be sure they do not err Mr. Falkner's fourth Reason From the difficult parts of Church-offices of Baptism and the Lords-Supper there a Form is needful c. Ans He that doth not understand the nature of those Ordinances and is not able to unfold them to his people is not fit to be a Minister Christ doth not send fools of his Errand he hath provided for those whom he sends Now if they do understand them and be found in the Doctrine of them which is best known by Confession of their Faith they may be able to compose prayers suitable to the Ordinances 2ly Or if such be composed for your Tyrenes when they first come into the work must they needs be continued when they are grown more able the ablest and oldest men in England must be tyed up to words and syllables as if they were still Novices 3ly Truly Sir you must not much boast of your Form in this Administration for the Parental-Covenant which is the only foundation of the administration of that Ordinance to Infants the God of Abraham and his seed this is not at all taken notice of in your Form Besides many other things which I shall not meddle with now for I do not aim at your Liturgy more than any other in my discourse 5. His last reason To be an evidence
any of the 39 Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe unto let him be Excommunicated ipso facto Lay these both together and how can we receive his Interpretation Besides doth the Church not care though her Sons be such gross Hypocrites Doth not Reason and Religion teach me first to try examine and to believe the thing to be lawful before I practise Whatever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14 23. I know two Conformists one is known to be a right Son the other is suspected neither of these do wear the Surplice the reason is the same for both neither Parish had provided one when they came to the Court the right Son hath nothing said to him though he did not practise the other was suspended Was it not the internal assent that the Court regarded it was that saved the true Son Are we not commanded unfeignedly to assent and consent to all things in the common-Common-Prayer Book in which are several Creeds and you tell us the Doctrine of your Thirty-nine Articles contained To conclude this Head of old he was esteemed a true Son of the Church of England who was tite to the 39 Articles subscribing to them in their Literal and Grammatical sense as the King required Now he is reputed the true Son of the Church who doth but submit to these three articles that respect the Ceremonies Rites Episcopacy c. let him for Doctrine be an Arminian Socinian Papist no matter how corrupt I would have lest Dr. Goodman or whoever it was that was the Author of the serious and compassionate Inquiry c. till I had come to his stating of the Questions but that I find him p. 67 69. giving one cause which he imputes to us worthy the taking notice of and the speaking to it here will save me a labour afterwards A great part of this Nation saith he having been leasened with Jewish superstition or Jewish Traditions hath thereby been indisposed to an uniform reception of the reformation of Religion held forth by this Church and thus doth charge us with Judaism quoting Cartwright Ainsworth and H. Broughton who were great Students in the Rabinical writings and they leavened us p. 68. This is very strange when as if he will please to read over Mr. Falkner he shall see how much he useth these Rabinical writings and Jewish customs to confirm the Liturgy and Forms of Prayer and the Rites and Ceremonies of this Church Yea Christ himself is not spared but he is made a Conformist to the Jewish customs different from the Law to prove our conformity Thus Scaliger and out of him Mr. Carre and Mr. Falkner That I was studying how to give answer to this head of argument in these men and this it seems is charged upon us To clear our selves then from this and to give answer to the other men I grant 1. That the Jews had many Rites Traditions and Customs of their own some of which the Holy Page od record But for their Oral Law Traditions c. they were not committed to writing till the reign of the Emperour Antoninus and not perfected till the year 219 after Christ saith Buxtorf Synag Jud. p. 52. some say more Now how shall we be infallibly certain that what Traditions they then wrote were exactly the same which they were in Christ his time above 200 years before in such a space of time how easily may things vary 2. We are infallibly certain that our Lord was an enemy to the Elders Traditions how then these should be brought in to prove the lawfulness of the things in question I know not How will you infallibly prove the Church of the Jews in the purest time did tye up it self to Forms of Prayer in publick administration which though it could be proved will not serve the turn as we shall see when the question comes to be stated 3. Suppose Christ used some actions at his Supper like to the Jews must he needs borrow them from the Jews to be conformable to them I hope he did not learn to bless and give thanks from them Homer and Hesiod some say lived before Isaiah or about his time Hesiod hath expressions very like that of Isaiah in the description of Tophet Analet Sacr. p. 425. Isa 30.33 as if the Heathen drew with the same pencil saith Doughtie But did Isaiah borrow from Hesiod the same Author instanceth in many things more and did the Penmen borrow or rather the spirit that inspired them from the Heathen Because Plato hath an expression something like to Paul's distinction of the outward and inward man must Paul needs borrow it out of Plato as Nerimbergius would have him Thus some have affirmed that John took up his Baptism from the Jews baptizing of Proselytes when others have shown that the Jews took it from John when Christ put the question Mat. 21.23 25. The Baptism of John whence was it from heaven or men Why did they not answer from the Elders Tradition it seems it was the counsel of God Luk. 7.30 whatever these men say and Joh. 1.33 He that sent me to Baptize Whence I shall desire that leave to lay by all these Quotations out of Scaliger Selden and other Rabinical men as signifying nothing to the Questions in hand We must have Scripture and Scripture reason in matters of God Here Dr. Goodman proves us to be guilty of Judaism telling his Reader p. 69 this is their grand Hypothesis That nothing is lawful in the service of God but what is expresly prescribed in Scripture Such an Hypothesis I never saw yet in any of our Nonconformists Books I will yield him more As 1. Not only express Scripture but necessary consequence from Scripture but then it must be necessary consequence 2. Where the Lord hath lest us only a General Rule and hath not tyed us op to Particulars let but the Particulars carry in them the nature of the General Rule as the species includes the essence of the Genus and we will yield them too Yet this Doctor can tell his Reader that this of express Scripture is the Characteristical Doctrine of that party and that we graft our Christianity upon the scock of Judaism Were the Jews tyed up to express Scripture in all they did about the Worship of God I think the Jews had as much liberty then as we have under the Gospel I shall give but one instance though I could more The Passover was a solemn Ordinance of God now in Exod. 12.8 there is a command given to eat it with bitter herbs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we supply the word herbs but the word is only bitterness or Res amarae The Chaldae Arabick and Samaritan keep the Hebrew word without any addition of herbs Here is only a General Rule given but what those bitter things should be whether herbs roots c. there is no determination Hence then I might go into
seeking to make good his bargain he found it so soon as Christ had eaten the Passover instituted his own Supper and was gone forth then that could not be the time he made his bargain so the sop could not be at the Passover for then you will make the time of his bargain and delivery to be almost the same contrary to both the Texts 4. When Christ bad Judas Joh. 13.27 That thou doest do quickly the Disciples thought the meaning was that Judas having the Bag he bad him buy those things we have need of against the Feast vers 28 29. What Feast was that the Passover no question so saith a Lapide Ad emendum necessaria pro instante Pascate But if this were the Paschal Supper at which Judas received the sop then what need to buy against the Feast when the Feast was past and Christ knew he was now to die I see but two things that trouble me but the same doubts are moved by Gerhard Maldonate and a Lapide who interpret this Supper of the Passover as others commonly do To which doubts they have given answers and their answers will serve me better than if I should interpret it as they do of the Paschal Supper As yet then Christ is no Conformist Having done with these men now to our good friend the Author of the Friendly Debate in whom I find something more p. 102. he tells us We use Ceremonies in Divine Worship as in an Oath laying the hand upon the Book kissing the Testament which are outward signs accompanying swearing though they belong not to the essence of it A. 1. I have heard of some and may be there are more than we are aware of who will lay their hand on the Book kiss it and do it readily because they think they do not swear and so regard not what you say to them but if you put them to lift up their hand as we read in Scripture they did who sware they would not do that because then they thought they should swear indeed though I do not justifie these persons in this yet if an Oath be of consequence it deserves to be looked into A Lawyer tells me he hath seen it and a Gentleman tells me hath sworn in the Court by lifting up the hand whether the Law binds only to this form of laying c. I know not but I could never yet learn the meaning of this form of swearing If the Christians did it in Chrysostom's time upon the Book of the Gospel and the Jews upon the Book of the Law as Mr. Falkner saith to be sure we find the Scripture mentioning more than one Form of swearing Sometime Abraham lifts up his hand Gen. 14.22 another time we find him bidding his servant put his hand under his thigh Gen. 24.2 that is my Master made me swear Thus Israel makes Joseph Gen. 47.29 31. put his hand under his thigh So the giving the hand under Solomon 1 Chron. 29.24 is by some interpreted that the Princes sware unto Solomon as we take the Oath of Allegiance to our King the custom of several Countries is various in this point in which we are indifferent though I know some refuse to swear at all unless it be by lifting up the hand but the Scripture hath not so tyed us up we see 2ly But that he saith these signs belong not to the essence of an Oath certainly he is mistaken these signs have a causal influence into the effect the Oath For he that gives the Oath doth not swear the person to whom the Oath is given swears not by words then take away these signs and where is the Oath Again p. 220 221. He tells us of Ceremonies the Parliament appointed and Ministers used in giving the solemn Oath and Covenant As first Tho whole Congregation uncovered Ans Then it seems they were not against decent gestures It was in a solemn piece of Worship of God at the administring of Baptism the whole Congregation sit uncovered and who opposes it 2ly Standing and very meet not to sit when they are thus dealing with God in such a solemn manner we like reverent gestures well in these cases the Parents stand at the Infants baptizing there is a Covenant made 3ly It is the right hand this and not the left is attributed to God Psal 17.7 Psal 98.1 where it is not determined which hand in Scripture we will take which hand our superiours please but if manuum fortior est dextra why not that 4ly The hand must be bare If the hand must be lifted up let us see the hand not the glove If Vaninus were to swear it may be he hath under his glove some writing that he owns no God at all as he and his Disciples taught so others might have something quite cross to the Covenant that did swear the contrary be the Covenant never so holy and past dispute as some did question this These are but trifles But p. 106. he tells us and this is that which Mr. Falkner and all make use of as an argument against us The things commanded are indifferent and remain so after they are commanded in their own nature no necessity put upon them Upon which to illustrate the strength of his argument and show the Knavery of the non-conforming Ministers for they must be the persons in the Reddition whom he intends he gives his Reader an elegant similitude Part 1. pag. 107. If you saith he who are a master in your family will have your servants come in to worship God at such a time in the Parlor not in their Frocks in which they rub'd your horses heels but in their Liveries this is but reasonable it is indifferent in it self all one to God whether the hours be ten or eleven but you appoint Ten whether in the Hall or Parlour If your servant would not come in at Ten or into Parlor being thus indifferent were not this servant guilty of contempt and faulty If your servants were such fools and cannot understand common sense they are the more to be pitied but yet those Knaves that abused their simplicity and instilled these principles deserve to be punished and put out of his service c. I leave you to apply this case c. Ans This apt similitude of the Frock whereby the Fr. Deb. would illustrate the Knavery of the Nonconformists puts me in mind of a story which a Conformist and neighbour-Minister told me being about four years standing in the Colledg of Dublin when the thing was done A Laundress bringing home a Scholars Linnen instead of his Surplice leaves him a Smock I suppose unwittingly Dr. Chappel was then Provost if that be the title they give the Head of the Colledg if it were that Chappel who was fellow of Christs Colledg in my time he was a severe man indeed and fit for Bishop Laud's purpose The Bell ringing to Chappel early in Winter-time the Lad puts on the Smock and why not for I suppose the
THE QUESTIONS Between the CONFORMIST AND Nonconformist Truly stated and briefly discussed Dr. FALKNER the Friendly Debate c. Examined and Answered Together with a Discourse about Separation and some Animadversions upon Dr. STILLINGFLEET's Book ENTITULED The Vnreasonableness of Separation Observations upon Dr. Templers Sermon Preached at a Visitation in Cambridge A brief Vindication of Mr. Stephen Marshal Sed hoc nimis doleo quia multa quae in Divinis libris saluberrima praecepta sunt minus curantur tam multis presumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia ut gravius corripiatur qui per octavas suas terram nudo pede tetigerit quam qui mentem Vinolentia sepelierit August Epist 119. Cum Apostolus testetur mysterium hoc iniquitatis suo etiam tempore agi caepisse hinc intelligimus opiniones omnes Traditiones a Sacris Scripturis dissidentes quas Pontificis urgent tanquam a Patribus acceptas ad Apostasiam hanc quam praedixit Apostolus esse referendas Downham de Antichrist p. 151. LONDON Printed for Tho. Cockerill at the Three Legs in the Poultry over against the Stocks-Market 1681. THE Reader may please to take notice that this Discourse was drawn up long before now Doctor Falkner took his Degree else I had given him his Title And so something of Schism was spoke to before the Epistle to Dr. Stillingfleet could be written To the Reverend and my much Honoured Brother Dr. Edward Stillingfleet Dean of St. Pauls SIR I Hope it is no offence unto you though you be a Dean Unreas Separat p. 62. that I call you Brother since you have taught the Press how to speak soberly and amicably calling us Dissenting Brethren this is better language than Sots Rogues Fools Knaves Rebels Schismaticks which we read and hear from others As for Rebels if they be all Rebels that break the Kings Laws I believe the King will have but a few loyal subjects He hath Laws against Drunkenness Swearing Whoring Sabbath breaking and these are agreeable to the Law of God besides Laws about Hares Partridges Pheasants and against Papists c. we see men can live in opposition to these Laws yet these are not called Rebels But if the Laws of men concern the House and Worship of God concerning which God himself hath given us his own Laws to which all Princes and men are bound and unto which all their Laws ought to be conformable as we shall hear your self speak presently but that conformity we cannot see and therefore dare not assent and consent c. now we are called Rebels Schismaticks and what not Aug. Epis 119. Thus it was in pious Augustines time and this he complains of Sir speaking of your Church you tell us p. 302. Our Church is founded upon a Divine Rule viz. the Holy Scriptures which we own as the basis and foundation of our faith and according to which all other Rules of Order and Worship are to be agreeable 2ly Our Church requires a conformity to those Rules which are appointed by it agreeable to the Word of God Twice you tell us agreeable to the Word of God to which we agree also this being the affirmative part of the second Commandment that all things in our worshipping of him be agreeable to his will and word Now Sir had you proved that all the things imposed upon us had been agreeable to the word of God you had put an end to this Controversie But though I honour and love you for the great service you have done to the Church of Christ against the Papists yet in proving the things Imposed upon us to be conformable to the word of God I humbly conceive you fall very short therefore are we still Nonconformists Several things are imposed upon us but in your whole Book I find not one Scripture you produce to shew the agreement of them with it Till then our Separation is reasonable That Schism is a great sin I agree with you and wish Christians were more convinced of it than I see they are But the Questions are 1. What is schism 2. Who is the cause of schism For the first Sir I presume you will grant that the separation against which you preached and now printed do suppose there was a union with that body from which you tell us we are now separated For how can there be a separation from that to which we were not united Now Sir I think by what you have said to remove the mighty stumbling-block as you call it pag. 359. of the Cross there will be found many thousands in England who were never admitted into your Church and if not admitted into it then not united to it as such a Church no members of your body how then can you charge them with this sin of separation from it Thus then Sir you speak of the Cross in Baptism p. 351. when the Minister uses these words We receive this child into the congregation of Christs flock and sign him with the sign of the Cross c. the Minister now speaks in the name of the Church We receive c. then follows as the solemn rite of admission and do sign him with the sign of the Cross All publick and solemn admissions into societies having some peculiar ceremony belonging to them And so as Baptism besides its Sacramental efficacy is a rite of admission into Christs Catholick Church so the sign of the Cross is into our Church of England in which this Ceremony is used without any prescription to other Churches Thus you have interpreted the Cross Whether this will satisfie Mr. B. I leave it to him it doth not me the Imposers of that Ceremony in their Canons do not tell us that it is the Rite of admission into your Church but by this ceremony the Infant is dedicated to the service of him that died upon the Cross And that Book being of publick authority must carry it I had thought that in our Baptism we had been Dedicated to the Father Son and Spirit But it seems this is not enough you annex to his words Another sign to dedicate us to the service of Christ that died upon the Cross This Sir I hope you will prove to be agreeable to the word of God as you told us your Impositions are I am very ignorant of the Text that proves it and you have named none But this is not the thing I aim at it is your interpretation I mind and from it I gather that you and all others who charge us with separation from your Church must prove That we were received and that by this rite of admission the Cross into your Church which you call the Church of England This is clear from your own Interpretation and also from the page before 350 where you illustrate it from the Independent Churches Thus Suppose say you an adult person to be baptized and immediately after Baptism to be admitted a member of an Independent Church and the ceremony of this admission to
several houses at that time where they had prepared in one house such bitter herbs as Sichory Wild Lettice which they say they used in another house Wormwood and Horehound in another Centory Germander in another bitter Almonds and Gentian c. so mention twenty more differences yet if Bitternesses were observed the rule was kept Again shall these bitternesses be boiled or raw beaten into a sawce like our Mustard as Scaliger saith the Churoseth was here is nothing determined be sure there be bitternesses and the general Rule is kept Again here is no mention made of drink but to have a Lamb and unleavened bread eaten and bitter things and not drink it had been a dry Feast fit to choak them Again the Lamb must be roast but how must it be without a Spit as we use sometimes or with a Spit and if so whether with a Spit made of Iron c. or Wood and that of a Pomegranate tree as a Learned man supposeth who can tell there is nothing determined or expressed and I prefume that Learned Author was not there to turn the Spit Again it must be roast but must the fire be made of wood or coal or turff or other combustible matter not a word of any such thing Thus I might reckon up many more circumstances that I wonder at this Author and another of his party answering for their Ceremonies telling us This is the difference between the Law and the Gospel that under the Law all ceremonies and circumstances are exactly prescribed not so under the Gospel How true this is the Reader may judg Leaving then this Author a while let us come to the stating of the Questions and for the first about Forms of Prayer Mr. Carre begins his Book and states the Question thus 1. Forms of Prayer are lawful thus it was stated in the Commencement-house when Dr. Fern was Vicechancellor and moderated I yield it being my own practice to compose Forms for my Children and for others who could not express themselves in fit words in their families before their servants and what then what is this to our business 2. For the Ceremonies The Church hath power in circumstances and who denies it 3. For Government some Episcopacy is lawful The Proposition must not be universal for then we shall setch in a Universal Bishop which as yet our opponents do not like Make it particular for my part I yield it I shall therefore now give the true state of the Questions and then leave it to the judicious Reader to see whether any one argument the Conformists use conclude the Questions For the First about imposed Forms of Prayer the question is this Quest The Question about Forms Prayer stated Whether the Lord Jesus hath given such power to any ordinary persons Civil or Ecclesiastical to compise and impose their Forms of Prayer upon his Ministers in the Gospel-church whom he hath sufficiently qualified for his work unto which he hath called them so that in their ministration and worshipping of God by prayer his Ministers must be tyed up to those very Forms and Syllables and not vary from them Let me open the Question 1st That Christ is Lord of his House King of his Church having the only power over it to institute what he please no Christian will deny 2ly True Ministers of the Gospel are his Ministers they have their talents and abilities from him their call and authority from him Their Laws and Doctrine what they must preach and how they must order all things in the Church from him They have a promise of his Presence and unto him must they give an account of their work 3ly These Ministers being his are sufficiently qualified in one sense it is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2. 16. who is sufficient but yet again Timothy is charged that those whom he takes into the Ministry be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficient men Praying and Preaching are the two great works of a Minister Act. 6.4 to declare the will of God to the people and to open and present the wants of the people unto God is their business and whom Christ sends of his errand he fits them for both or never sends them Ephes 4.8 11. He prepareth gifts for his If your Forms of Prayer will make a man sufficient I know not who shall be insufficient if he can but read well 4ly These are Christs Ministers in the Gospel church I hope 't is no strange thing to put a difference between the Ministers of the Old and New Testament Gal 4.1 2 Cor. 3 c. that the Spirit is given by Christs Ascension in a greater measure both as to gifts and grace to the body of the Gospel-Church than to the old Church hath been unquestioned Divinity by the Conformists 5ly For ordinary persons to impose such as cannot dare not lay claim to an extraodinary Mission as the Prophets and Apostles had Yet the Apostles never imposed their Prayers on the Churches 6ly For these to tye up Christs Ministers to words and syllables in Prayer from which they must not vary This is the practise indeed but this is the question by what right this is done What I have heard in answer to it is that the Church allows our own Prayers before and after Sermon 1. Whether the Church allow it I cannot tell the genuine Sons of the Church say no and will use only the Canon-prayer The Arch-Deacon in his Visitation did dehort the Ministers from the use of their own prayers with these words Though I do not command nor enjoin you yet I advise you to it it is more out of fear it would cause such an Odium among the people should they take them off from their own prayers wholly in places where there is any knowledg in ignorant places they use none at all but the Common-Prayer as I have certain intelligence of divers places The Fathers of the Church in their Conterence with the other Ministers at the Kings first coming in thus express themselves Account of the Proceedings c. p. 19. VVe heartily desire that according to this Proposal great care may be taken to suppress those private conceptions of pray ers before and after Sermons As the Judges are the Interpreters of Statute-Laws so surely the Bishops of the Canons Now it is clear they would take away all but Book-prayer The judgment of Bishop VVren and Bishop Cozens is well known 2ly But if superiors being but ordinary persons have power to impose their Forms at Baptism the Lords supper c. all but before and after Sermon is it because their power of imposing is limited by God where I pray certainly by what power they take away the use of our own prayers before and after Sacraments they may before and after Sermons and that we see they desire it might be done but that they fear the consequence Let us come to their reasons for this One they draw from the Scriptures and that is
authority it seems are equal His is part of the Canon into which our Faith is resolved so it seems is yours This Christ did when his Disciples were but weak in gifts and grace for Christ had not yet ascended But still two things must be proved 1. That Christ gave them this for a Form a perfect Form as I hear it often expressed 2ly That Christ tyed them up to these words and syllables as you do to yours For the first That it was perfect for the end Christ gave it I doubt not that is to give us a summary of Prayer what we should pray for I shall quote but two or three that you will say were no Nonconformists Maldonate the Jesuit on Mat. 6. Non his necessario verbis sed hac aut simili sententiâ quoting Austin and Beda for his judgment but proves it best from Christ and his Apostles that did not use those very words in their Prayers Grotius on Mat. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. in hunc sensum non enim praecipit Christus verba recitari sed materiam precum hinc promere And on Luk. 11. very fully Doce nos compendium rerum orandarum neque enim eo tempore syllabis adstringebantur These men then judg the matter the Oranda things to be prayed for to be the intent of Christ but not to tye us up to those syllables as you do to your Forms If that will not serve then I will urge the very literal sense When you pray say 'T is not When you pray or say your Prayers then say this but when you pray say So that I should use no other prayer when I do pray but this If that will not do yet it binds that always when you pray this you must say but when at the beginning end or middle of my own prayer Here is nothing And your Conformists do not say it at the end of their prayers before and after Sermon too in that I think you are to blame That this Form of Prayer our Lord left us is perfect as to the end he intended by it I easily yield But if by a perfect form they understand such a form of Prayer as contains in it all the parts that are requisite to Prayer and therefore called a perfect form as the opinion and practise of many would make us believe I cannot easily yield to that Prayer is commonly thus described and I think very fully and truly It is an offering of our desires to God for things agreeable to his will in the name of Christ with confession of our sins and thankeful acknowledgment of his mercies Here are four things expressed as requisite to make up a perfect Form of Prayer They are partes Integrantes or Constituentes of this Totum 1. Confession 2. Petition 3. Thanksgiving 4. The offering up of all in the Name of Christ As for Petition which to speak strictly is prayer in that part we present our desires this is very fully expressed in our Lords Prayer and in this respect it may well be called a perfect Form For there is nothing we can rightly desire but it is reducible to one of these six Petitions and contained in them as Conclusions are in their Principles But let us come to some other Parts To offer up our Prayers to God in the Name of Christ is an essential part of a Christians prayer Joh. 14.13 14. and Joh. 16.23 24. God brought his people to pray towards the Temple so did Dan. 6.10 and Jon. 2.4 c. But this part is neither expressed nor contained in this Form of Prayer If any Heretick will deny that we are to pray in the Name of Christ convince him out of this Form of Prayer if you can For confession of sin I grant it is tacitely implied in that petition for pardon of sin we do confess by consequence we are sinners and have sinned in begging pardon But confession of sin and petition for pardon of sin are two different things yea differ exceedingly a man may pray as most men do for pardon of sin from a principle of meer natural self-love but confession of sin is a thing man cares not for even good David was not very forward to it at one time Psal 32.3 5. much of a gracious spirit may appear in confession of sin Now one would think that this being one part to make up prayer it should be as plainly expressed as other parts are being a principle to which all Confessions different for Aggravations Circumstances c. should belong and be reduced as it is in Petition And as it is in the Commandments we reduce many sins and duties to these Commandments but the Command to which they are reduced is plainly expressed and not tacitely only implied in another So that I conclude with Grotius as before It is a thing often observed men that in their conversation live in open rebellion against God while they are about Divine Worship they carry themselves so prosanely that one would think these persons do not believe there is a God to worship when they should attend to the Word preached they are talking or jeering or sleeping at the Ministers prayer sit on their tails as if no such ordinance in hand but if the Minister come to the Lords-Prayer then clap their Hats before their eyes and mumble over the words and now I hope they have worshipped God well But I leave it let men use it or not use it at the end of their prayers they shall not offend me I have done with all the Scripture-arguments I meet with in all their Books Par. 1. pa. 64. the Fr. Debate I see in that place where he produceth the Form of the Lords-Prayer tells his Reader That the Nonconformists will not give the title of Saint to one of the Apostles for no other reason that he can conceive but their good Dames and Masters do not like it they will not offend their tender ears Sir since you profess your self to be such a master of reason I pray give a reason why we may not as well say Saint Abraham St. Samuel St. Daniel c. as well as St. Paul St. John St. George or St. Patrick forsooth do the holy Prophets deserve so little in comparison of these two last Saints 2ly And I pray give a reason why we may not as well say Mathew Mark Luke Paul c. as well as Clemens Romanus Polycarpus Ignatius Clemens Alexandrinus Athanasius c which Authors I see seldom put the Epithete Saint to them Ignatius in one Epistle six times calls him Paul without Saint Sometimes I have met with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so commonly though I do not deny but they may use that Epithere too and I not see it But did these Fathers forbear this word Saint so as not at least always as you do to use it because they would not displease their good Dames and
part The Spirit in prayer helpeth our Infirmities not only in the manner of our prayer but even in the matter of our prayer the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so are the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Quid oremus this infirmity the Spirit helps but now you will spare the Spirit that trouble for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things and words are all set down to a syllable Obj. The Fr. Deb. falsly so called for neither Author nor Book answer the title part 1. p. 88. tells us The Spirit of God doth not now suggest to any of us when we pray the very matter and words which we utter Ans 1. That the Spirit suggesteth All the words and matter I easily deny but that the Spirit doth help his people in the very matter of their prayers the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I must own it or give the lye to the Text. 2. Let me appeal to the experience of praying Christians Ministers and others when we have been called forth in our Ministerial work or at other times to pray that was the work lay before us when our hearts have been oppressed with some temptation our spirits quite down dead and flat the thoughts of our duty a terrour to us because we found no ability to it we could not tell what-to say unto the Lord we wanted words we wanted hearts we wanted every thing but to our work we must go we could not avoid it Well when we have been entred into our work have we not found a supply afforded our tongues untyed our hearts enlarged words and matter have come flowing in such sentences words and matter as were never in our minds before yet very apt and pertinent melting and warming that the best prayers ever we made have been at such times when we have gone most pressed with the sense of our own inability though it be not always so the Spirit is a free agent yet at these times whence could it come but from this good Spirit Shall he lose his glory 3. I thought that praying men use before-hand to pray for that good Spirit for a presence of Grace as to the spiritual manner of our work and a presence of assistance as to the matter of our work being conscious to our selves of the truth of the sayings of that great Apostle 2 Cor. 3.5 and 2.16 how the Spirit inspired the Prophets we enquire not but that he helpeth our Infirmities in our Duties shew me the sace of that Minister that feareth the Lord who will deny it and doth not feel the want of him Having these Scripture-grounds I go on to Arguments deduced also from Scripture 4. That practise which nourisheth Ministers in their laziness and sluggishness is certainly an unlawful practise But this practise of Composing and Imposing these Forms c. according to the question do so Ergo Ministers duty is to stir up the gifts of God which are in them 2 Tim. 1.6 but that duty now as to the gift of prayer is layed by The Fr. Debat tells us Part 1. pag. 124. That some of the Nonconformists are for Liturgy but they think it not convenient for men of their parts and gifts Truly Sir when our hearts are in any trim becoming the duty of prayer we find it a very great hindrance to be tyed up to the Forms of other men we cannot open our hearts nor spread before the Lord our desires in other mens conceptions we cannot work with their tools But when laziness despondency and unbelief prevail it is as convenient as may be for men of our sinful tempers I could tell you something of the experience of my own carnal heart as to this point but I find you are a person that jeer at the experiences of Christians and therefore let it alone 5. We are to pray for spiritual gifts 1 Cor. 14.1 I hope not only for extraordinary gifts Every good and perfect gift Jam. 1.17 tells us whence it comes Then for a gift of Preaching and a gift of Prayer But why should we pray for it if when the Lord hath given it we must not use it but be tyed up to other mens Forms 6. If you may impose Forms of Prayer then you may impose Forms of Preaching so leave us nothing but Forms of Prayer and Homilies to read as indeed they came in both together We have Forms of Preaching in the Scripture as you have of Prayer by what authority you take away one you may take away the other Your Humane reasons that I have met with as yet will as strongly argue for Forms of Preaching as of Prayer When this argument was urged in the Commencement-house the Respondent yielded it But Dr. Fern being then Moderator thought this was too gross and so denied the consequence Because in Prayer we spake to God but in preaching to men But the Doctors answer was invalid for in prayer we represent and are the mouth of a people of Infirmities we are but persons of Infirmities Here Infirmities are but like us the Lord expects no other from us Rom. 8.26 The Spirit helps our infirmities in prayer But in Preaching we speak from God we come in his Authority and require Faith and Obedience to what we preach therefore here we had need have a care what we speak for now we come with Thus saith the Lord. 7. Diversities of Gifts and Operations are the Spirits work and glory 1 Cor. 12.4.6 Diversities of Kinds and of Degrees in those kinds this diversity is seen in the gift of Prayer as well as in other gifts As to have in one Lords-day many thousands of Ministers confessing of sins petitioning for mercies pardon purging healing praying also for Kings c. they all aim at the same thing in their Prayers but the words sentences whereby they express the conceptions of their minds and desires of their hearts how various are they the same Spirit that gave this diversity of gifts assists them in the exercise of them And it is his glory which is taken away while these thousands of Ministers are tyed up to the same syllables in their Book This multi-form unity if I may so call it for here are various expressions different sentences yet all tend to one and the same thing hath better ground for it in Scripture than Vniformity in syllables 8. What want of wisdom care or grace yea want of all this with your Ceremonies charges upon the Apostles all men may see you pretend much wisdom and care of Gods worship in these things were the Apostles so defective in wisdom and care that they could not foresee the usefulness of these things in the Church and appoint them as well as you And that when there were the same reasons that you urge for them now in their time We are built upon the foundations of the Prophets and Apostles and take them to be as wise as any of their followers To conclude how honourable is this for the Ministry I will
take a boy of eight years old and teach him to read with a grave tone a thing easily done and this boy shall be able to perform all your Ministerial Offices excepting Preaching which he may easily procure once a month and he at other times read but Homilies As did that Priest who was my Predecessor only one Minister for a short time between us that for fifty years could do no other but read his Book except one Sermon and that a strange one Yet he a Minister of the Church of England takes the maintenance and lets the people provide a Preacher at their charge he contributing something as that I suppose the Law would force him Mr. Falkner I see labours much in giving us an account of the practise of the Jewish Church and the Christian Church For the Jewish-Church whatever was their practise it will not reach the question But however how will Mr. Falkner give us infallible proof that the Jews in the purest time of their Church-state did compose Prayers and imposed them upon the Priests and Levites who were able to officiate without them If he prove not this which he is never able to do all that he hath writ about them signifies nothing to the proof of the question and all that labour is but lost For the Christian Church 1. Can Mr. Falkner give us an account infallibly of the practises of all the Churches after Christ for the first four Centuries are the Infallible records of them all come to our hands I thought we fell short abundantly of the records of all the Churches there might be many for ought he knows that used no Forms 2ly It is possible that he may find several Pastors or Bishops that did compose their own Forms But First Can he prove they used only those Forms and did vary at no time as was the practise of several of our old Divines that had their Forms of Prayer before Sermon but of their own composing and varied after Sermon according to the subject matter they had been Preaching upon So did improve that gift they had received from Christ before and after Sermon Secondly He must prove they Imposed these Forms of theirs upon other Ministers able to officiate without them and tyed them up to these syllables else he misses the question and his labour is but lost there too Neither of these hath Mr. Falkner proved The 23 Canon of the third Council of Carthage which some write was Anno 395 others 397 others 399 at which were 44 Bishops and good Austin amongst them thus ordered No man shall use those Forms of Prayer which he hath composed for himself till he hath communicated them to more able Brethren A Canon of a Council carries very much conviction with it what was the practise there abouts more than any thing Mr. Falkner hath produced By this it appears that the more able Brethren did not first Compose the Prayers of those who were less able 2ly Much less did they Impose them on those who were able and it may be more able than themselves Mr. Carre wrote more warily than Mr. Falkner who dares not venture beyond twelve hundred years This Canon interprets Tertullian's meaning to be against Forms better then Mr. Falkner How long after this the question arose about Ambrose and Gregories Liturgies and into what a corrupt state the Church was fallen when Imposition began Mr Falkner knows well For that instance which Mr. Falkner brings p. 107. to prove Forms to be in use from Constantine's composing of Forms of Prayer for his Soldiers Whence he thus argues It is not probable that Constantine the Emperour would have composed Godly Prayers for the use of his Soldiers if such Forms had not then been used in the Christian Church Let us see the Logick of this and how it proves the Question 1. Constantine composed Godly prayers for his Soldiers Ergo Some one Bishop or Bishops or Ministers composed prayers for Gospel-Ministers How does this follow Constantine did well and it may argue some did use Forms and who denies it But doth it follow that Ministers did tye up themselves to Forms I hope Ministers and Soldiers in a proper sense differ 2. Constantine did thus Ergo we may impose our Forms upon able Ministers How does this follow nor would Constantine impose his Forms upon his Soldiers able to pray without them Can Mr. Falkner prove it Once more Had there then been Common-prayers composed to which the Church did tye up her self would they not have composed one or two prayers for times of War they did not deserve the name of Common-prayers if that was omitted and if they had done it Constantine we all know bore such respect and honour to the Church that he would have used those prayers before his own not lay by them and compole others As our King now commandeth the Liturgy of this Church to be used in his Armies at Land and Sea there being prayers for War c. So that to me this instance of Mr. Falkner is rather against him To put an end to this first question How lawful a Directory for Worship and some Forms of Prayer composed for the help of young Ministers at their first coming into the Ministry * Thus they who composed the Liturgy for the French-Church in Francfort say Hae formulae serviunt tantum rudioribus nullius libertati praescribitur who it may be at first are not so able in all offices to express themselves in prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before a multitude of people how lawful yea how useful this may be I do not deny but for these Ministers to content themselves with these Forms and not labour to improve and increase their Talent I think it is sin against him who hath given gifts who requires gifts of all those whom he sends and to whom they must give an account how they improved and stirred up the gift he bestowed upon them never did Christ send that man into his work upon whom he did not bestow a gift of Prayer How far the Congregational Divines have allowed of Forms of Prayer for some Ministers may be seen in that acute and learned Divine Mr. Norton of New-England to which Book Mr. John Cotton Dr. Tho. Goodwin Mr. Nye and Mr. Simpson have prefixed their Epistles in a high commendation of the Book For other particular Offices I shall not follow Mr. Falkner Respon ad Apollon p. 137 c. for I had no aim at the Common-Prayer-Book more than other Forms but if the Imposing of Forms according to the question can be proved from Divine Writ I should yield to several things he labours to justifie only in Baptism there are four things I should desire satisfaction in and more must be said then Mr. Falkner hath yet spoken CHAP. II. WE come now to the second Question concerning Ceremonies Quest 2. That the Church hath power in circumstances of Divine Worship I have before easily yielded The
Independents have declared it witness the aforesaid Mr. Norton in the same Book p. 133 who helps us a little to understand circumstances I shall only transcribe his own words Adjuncta cultus licet non praescribuntur in particulari determinantur tamen in generali multiplici ratione How near we and the Friendly Debate shall come we shall see anon 1. Respectu materiae non sunt cultus ipse ne dum circumstantiae a cultu separabiles sed inseparabiles ut tempus locus 2. Respectu finis omnia ad aedificationem fiant 1 Cor. 14.26 3. Respectu modi omnia decenter ordine siant 1 Cor. 14.40 4. Ex natura ipsarum rerum circumstantiis occasionalibus anne natura quidem ipsa nos docet 1 Cor. 11.14 Vbi agit Apostolus de virorum faeminarum decenti habitu in conventibus publicis Ecclesiasticis Porro determinantur aliquo modo in particulari nempe ut fiant tali modo qui circumstantiis omnibus consideratis est maxime conveniens adificationi Si nullus sit error hominis in hac circumstantiarum determinatione constituenda constitutio illa habenda est quasi simpliciter divina Thus Mr. Norton By this we may see the modesty of Dr. Goodman that can tell his Reader so confidently that this is our grand Hypothesis and the Characteristical Doctrine of the Nonconformist party That nothing is lawful in the service of God but what is expresly prescribed in Scripture The contrary to which he might have read in this Author and in others I question not But whether Ceremonies be but such circumstances or only circumstances is the question Let me state the question The Question concerning Ceremonies stated Q. Whether Man may institute Doctrinal-ceremonies or means for a spiritual end impose them upon the Church annex them to Gods own worship yea so that without the use of these God must have no publick worship performed to him That this is the true state of the Question observe the Preface to the Ceremonies in the common-Common-Prayer Book and the practises of men They tell us in the Preface The Ceremonies they have retained are not dark and dumb ceremonies but are so set forth that every man may understand what they mean and to what they serve and such as be apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and special signification whereby he might be edified Hence we may observe 1. Man owes Duty to God this is expressed 2ly Because the wise God hath not ordained means enough to put us in mind of this our duty to him by his Command Threats Promises and his Ceremonies in both the Sacraments men will institute Ceremonies to signifie and represent to us this our duty to him this is plain for 't is expressed to be the end of these Ceremonies 3ly These Ceremonies are so clear point out and speak so plainly not dark nor dumb our duty that any man may understand what duty or grace they signifie 4ly Whereas our minds are dull to our duty these Ceremonies help to stir up our dull minds to our Duty and so stirring up they help to edifie us These things are clear in the words of the Preface no denying them and in this they speak more and commend more their Ceremonies than ever the great God did speak of his When I have urged the Conformists with these words they would fly off from them what care they for the Preface But in so doing do they shew themselves rational men does any wise man read a Law or Statute of men and not look into the scope of the Law the Preface to the Statute so understand the mind and aim of the Legislators Do they show themselves such Christians as they ought to be by shutting the window for fear light should shine in to hinder them from what they are resolved to do Let the Conformists consider it To proceed 2. That these Ceremonies are imposed upon the Church and annexed to Gods own worship is so visible that there needs no more words about it 3. That they are so annexed as without these God must have no publick worship Witness first Bartholomew-day upon which day so many hundred Ministers were turned out from their publick worshipping of God because they would not subscribe to them 2ly Witness the Parish where I was Minister and divers others where for several weeks yea months the Church-doors were shut up God had no publick worship because I would not conform to these Inventions 3ly Witness a Parish in Suffolk before the unhappy Wars began while Bishop Wren there Domineered because there was no Surplice in the Church the Church-doors were shut up two Lords-days no publick worship performed to God until they got a Surplice to annex to his Worship So that the stating of the Question cannot be denied Now let the Reader observe that worthy Mr. Falkner and tell me which argument of his from Scripture concludes the question If it were no more but the first part I thought it had been only in his power to institute means to a spiritual end and impose them on his Church who is able to make a connexion between the means and the end But it seems mens Ceremonies are so clear bright and speak so plain being not dark nor dumb as they say that they can teach men and help them on to their duty and spiritual ends without the Spirit of God or else the Spirit of God must truckle and come down and make use of their means because they have appointed them which I am sure he hates Do Kings stand upon their Prerogatives shall any man dare to set his own Image upon Copper to have it pass for a farthing in a Commonwealth and yet shall men be so bold to set their stamp or institution upon a ceremony as a means to a spiritual end impose this upon the Church What is this but to incroach upon Gods Prerogative will he not require it But so to annex them to Divine worship that God shall have no worship without them I wonder how such thoughts could enter into the hearts of such men as did own the true God and believed him to be a jealous God and the Holy Scriptures the Law of that God Let me proceed to the further clearing of the Question First These Ceremonies are humane Institutions depending only upon the will and pleasure of man So that all natural Ceremonies such as are found among those that have nothing but the light of Nature to instruct them as lifting up the eyes or hands Bowing of the knees in prayer c. found among Heathen These are excluded this question For these Ceremonies in the question have nothing but some particular mens wills for their ground 2ly These Ceremonies have an Ordained signification though the things in themselves may have some aptness to signifie something yet they do not actually signifie without the Ordination and Institution of man As in