opportunity to vent a private opinion then in Prayer It is known de eventu That it is much more ordinary And if you say that in Preaching The minister speaks not the words of the Church but his own nor unto God but man and therefore it is a less matter We answer It is as considerable if not much more from whom he speaketh then to whom In preaching he speaks as a minister of Christ in his stead and name 2 Cor. 5. 19 20. And it is as an higher so a more Reverend thing to speak in Gods name to people Then in the peoples name to God and to speak that which we call Gods word Truth or Message Then that which we call our own desire We make God a liar or corrupt his word if we speak in his Name a falshood we make but our selves lyars if we speak a falshood to him in our own names The former therefore is the more heinous and dreadful abuse and more to be avoided We might further add That if there were any reason in this Reason it would be of equal force against all conceived Prayers before others as well in the Pulpit as in the Desk as well in the family as in the more publick Congregation Let us now see if Ireneus Freemans Second Reason hath any thing more in it He gives it us in these words § 6 Because the minister in his preaching is to expound confirm and apply all the Articles of faith as occasion shall be which is a work would require many days if not years It would be endless to comprice the substance of all Sermons in forms But we pray for the same things continually and therefore the Directory saw reason to put down the matter of prayer though not of sermons Here the Author forgot he but even now had told us the Directory had put many lamentable restraints upon preaching Here now we confess is something that hath a great shew of Reason Against the flail of Necessity there is no defence It must be obeyed and hath no law If it be true as he saith That forms of sermons cannot be made comprehensive of all we are to preach he saith something To prove this he assumes 1 That the minister in preaching is to open confirm and apply all the Articles of faith 2 That the substance of these cannot be comprehended in forms The First is granted but the stress lieth upon the Second and our advantage is That no medium will serve him to make it good But That they are infinite for if they be finite they may doubtless with all their appurtenances of Explication Confirmation and Application be limited by forms The question is not whether 12 or 24 forms will comprehend them But whether No Number of forms are comprehensive of them Are not all the Articles of faith with plentiful Explication Confirmation and Application of them conteined in many books Suppose now supperiours should command all Ministers in stead of studying the Scriptures and composing discourses of their own to read some of these books by portions The question is Whether they might lawfully do this instead of composing sermons themselves and then preaching them or of he should command them That for three parts of four of their time used to be spent in sermons of their own They should do this and leave them at liberty for a fourth part to preach from their own parts and abilities Were this lawful If he saith yes we are sure that D r. Ames M r. Perkins and all valuable authors we have met with have determined the contrary and do believe the whole company of Christian hearers would be found of another mind And could we think this lawful We should see no further need of Vniversities then to accomplish a few Gentelmen with some Philology for which four colledges might serve in stead of 34. If he saith Such a command were not lawful nor could lawfully be complied with We would understand the Reason why All ministers might not in this case lawfully obey Certainly it must be because in doing this They should contrary to the Apostolical command Neglect the gift that is in them or not stir it up nor rightly divide the word of God instead of shewing themselves workmen that need not be ashamed they should shew themselves no workmen at all If such a thing might not be lawfully commanded what can be the reason but Because man who hath no power but what he deriveth from God can have no power to suppress and smother those ministerial gifts with which the most wise God hath immediately furnished his ministers with as means in order to their ministerial acts and by their having or not having of which the Church must judge whether God hath called or not called them to the ministry We do here allow our superiours both in church and state a great power 1 In regard that he who desires that office 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desires a noble work and that a Bishop as the Apostle saith should be blameless c. apt to teach 1 Tim. 3. 1 2 3. Holding the mystery of faith in a pure conscience v. 9. and therefore v. 10. He must be first proved We say the church is to prove them whether they be indeed sent of God or meerly thrust on by their desire of gain or love of preheminence And in this judgment we say The church acteth in the place of God and we do think the Christian Magistrate may appoint some of the church to do this work 2 In regard all men are fallible and those entrusted with this Judgment may be mistaken in their judgment and find that the persons they have sent our are not what they took them for but blameable persons lazy covetous unfit to teach winebibers strikers men of ill report unsound in the faith we do allow a judgment to the church in case any be found such to say to Archippus Take heed to thy ministry to admonish them to remove them and we say the Magistrate may command this from the church but still allowing them men fit for their stations We say None can hinder them in the use of their gifts though they may be restrained in and reproved for the abuse or disorderly use of them For what the superiour doth he doth vice Dei in the place of God and God having given his ministers gifts as means in order to this work cannot be presumed to will the omission of them whence it must follow That the commands of the church in such a case are contrary to the will of God and to be superseded by It is better to obey God then man The same reason holds against forms of prayer to be imposed upon all ministers yet certainly forms of Preaching are as necessary 1 For Vniformity 2 To prevent Heresy 3 For people to know and deliberate beforehand what they should give their assent unto which are the great arguments for forms of Prayer to which we shall hereafter
A Reasonable Account Why some Pious Nonconforming Ministers in England judge it Sinful for them to perform their Ministerial Acts in publick solemn prayer by the Prescribed Forms of others Wherein several of their Arguments are modestly propounded opened and Justified against pretended answers given to them either by Ireneus Freeman or M r. Falconer in his book entituled Libertas Ecclesiastica or others The strength also of the several arguments brought by them for the lawfulness of forms to be used universally by ministers in their publick ministrations is fairly tried 1 Pet. 4. 10. As every man hath received the Gift even so minister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold Grace of God If any man speak let him speak as the oracles of God c. As wee believe so wee speak Rom. 14. 23. He that doubteth is damned if he eate because he eateth not of faith For whatsoever is not of faith is sin Habemus quidem nos etiam in Ecclesiâ nostrâ Agendas ordinem in sacris celebrandis servandum sed nemo alligatur precibus aut exhortationibus Liturgiae nostrae proponuntur tantum ut paradigmata quibus precum aut exhortationum materia forma quoad substantialia judicantur non ut iisdem verbis astringantur ministri Didoclavii Altare Damasc p. 613. Anno 1679. To the Reader WE suppose thee not so much a stranger in our Israel but that thou knowest that from the 24 of Aug. 1662. very many hundreds of ministers and many of them their greatest adversaries being judges of no invaluable parts and worth have not onely been removed from the Ecclesiastical livings of which they were possessed but also incapacitated to take any other And very many of them with their wives children left to live meerly upon the charity of their friends who formerly valued their ministry Had it been for any immoral debauchery for any ignorance or negligence of or in their work they had but been deservedly dealt with had deserved no great pity but it was because for fear of sinning against God they durst not do diverse things which were made the terms of their abiding in their station Possibly had the like number of any sort of persons in England for so many years been debarred of making any advantage of their education for a livelihood their complaints would have been louder then theirs have been We are not ignorant how much some of our Brethren at ease in Zion have magnified these poor mens portions of alms during their begging time To which wee shall onely say That though wee shall ever adore Gods goodness in enlarging the hearts of some that these good men have been kept alive and from a scandalous beggery yet we are pretty well assured from the diligence wee observe in those that love thus to talk to heap up parsonages upon parsonages sine cure's dignities to make one livelihood that wee do not think what ever liberty they give their tongues that any valuable person amongst them would have been content to have changed lots with the best of the N. C. or to have been tied up to feed at the Rackstaves they have fed at Wee desire for ever to bee thankful both to God and our most gracious sovereign for the liberty wee for a little time enjoyed to preach the Everlasting gospel though as to maintenance it extended as all know no farther then to begg cum privilegio Under these circumstances wee might reasonably have expected that our Brethren should have had pity upon us because the hand of God had touched us But alas in stead of it we have seen continual reason to cry out with Job How long will you vex our souls and break us in pieces with words These ten times have you reproached us and are not ashamed that you have made your selves strange unto us why do you persecute us and are not satisfied with our flesh yet had they been our enemies that had done thus then wee could have born it but they were not they that magnified themselves against us They are men that were our Equals our Acquaintance Wee took sweet counsel together and went to the house of God in Company Had they been some of our Brethren who felt the smart of former times for adherence to his late Majesty or using the Liturgy then prohibited wee could have born it though they had mistaken the due objects of their wrath there being none of us that wee know of who hurt them many of us who heartily pitied them to our utmost served them to our power relieved them But the truth is these are not the men from many of these wee have found the measure we meted to them But they are those whom wee thought of our mind could heretofore dispense with their consciences to serve God without Liturgy or Ceremony in all things do as we did if not serve the time to some degree beyond what wee durst dispense with These mostly are the men who have turned themselves into every imaginable form in which it could be thought they could abuse their brethren the servants of the same Lord Master Some not it seemes so good at an Argument think it worth the while to peruse the pamphlets sermons printed during the late troublesome times to pick out Such sentences as any present Nonconformist then used to put them together to represent the N. C. as men seditous rebellious ungovernable c. forgetting in the meantime that some Doctours of their own and in great request are far more deeply chargeable then any N. C. wee could ever yet hear of And forgetting also the Act of oblivion which was necessary for every man of them that in those times was worth any thing that to save his life that a Great person then whom the church had not in his period a greater friend was at last found so far to need it as his friends thought fit to plead it in bar to some Articles against him Another comes forth and picks out some passages the product of a Luxuriant wit and fancy in some N. C. sermons and writings these he stretcheth upon the tenter thinks he hath made N. C. ridiculous enough to the world Forgetting all this while that there was a great Prelate not many years since out of whose sermons fourty times as much might have been returned them and improved to a far other advantage to the dishonour of their way if this would have done it or could have been judged a fair way of dealing Others gather up all sentences they can find out of the N. C. of former times and their business is to represent the N. C. inconsistent to themselves men that can never tell what they would have c. In the mean time torgetting how the circumstances are altered how many things are required now not required then and as to those things which are the same how strangely our circumstances are varied
could speak with diverse tongues never regarded to have what they said interpreted from whence nothing could proceed for Edification while many understood nothing of what was said and manifest Confusion several persons gabling diverse things at the same time To the avoiding of which the Apostle directeth 1 That they should not speak together but successively by course 2 To avoid undue lengths That not above Two or Three at most should speak at the same time 3 That if any should speak an unknown language some one should interpret That what was spoken might be understood by all This is all the Apostle saith Is there any Noncon that will not most freely grant all this 1 That Two or Three ministers should not pray and preach together to the same auditory and if any will be so disorderly the superior ought to restrain them that there be no Confusion 2 That if ministers will protract their discourses to unreasonable lengths they may be restrained 3 That if any be so vain as because he can speak Latine French Dutch or any other language not generally known to his poeple he will pray preach in such language The superiors shall forbid it that by authority of this scripture But surely our Reverend Brother is so much of a scholar a Divine as to conclude That because superiors may thus far restrain the notorious evident abuse of gifts therefore they may as they please limit the use of them yea forbid the use of them ordinarily in the performance of those Acts to which they relate If indeed he could have proved That the Apostle had sent them a Manuscript of his own and we know he had parchments of Prophesies Doctrines Psalms Revelations and commanded them that when they Prophesied taught sang they should ordinarily use them none but them This had come nearer the business yet not home to it till the same Infallibility could be asserted for present superiors as for the blessed Apostle as well as the same constitution of God for them to direct in all matters of worship and Ecclesiastical order which none can deny the Apostles to have been possessed of Yet the Apostle knew the mind of his master too well to send them books to pray preach by but onely directeth them to such an use of those Gifts with which God had blessed them as might be without what all men would cry out off as confused clamorous disorderly and unreasonable because the generality of hearers not understanding them could not possibly get any good or advantage from them Our Reverend Brothers Argument must lie thus If the Apostle Paul might in the Church of Corinth direct that none might speak in anVnknown tongue nor Two or Three gabble together nor any though he were able minister in a language which the people understood not and the Corinthians were bound to obey Then the Church or Churches of the present age may command all their ministers when they pray for three parts of four of their time so spent to spend it in praying omitting any use of their own gifts by reading or reciting the prescribed forms of prayers which they shall send them And those ministers are bound to do accordingly We leave our Reverend Brother upon second thoughts to judge of the validity of this consequence and do believe that it will not justify it self to his own private thoughts we cannot we profess reconcile it to any degree of Reason Here is a manifest arguing from things of one kind to things of another and that quite different It being one thing to restrain the abuse of gifts another thing to restrain the use and that not as to order of time and so as to make the use of them still established even in every individual act intelligible and of use to the church but so as it shall be onely denied or Suppressed as to the far greater Number of those individual acts wherein they should be used The upshot therefore of this argument is Those of our Brethren who will answer this argument must bring us some Medium which will conclude That it is lawful for ministers of the gospel having a spiritual gift given them of God as a proper mean to help them in the performance of their Ministerial acts in solemn publick prayer yet at the command of superiors ordinarily to perform those acts omitting the use of such means and using the prescribed forms of others Which we can by no means agree to 1 Because of the force of the scriptures before mentioned 2 Because we think we should allow men wiser then God if we should in practice prefer a mean of mere human invention before one that is Divine and therefore more proper and we are sure more natural § 8 We meet with no more pretended direct answers to our argument We are aware of the indeavours of some to reduce it to absurdity with what success we shall very shortly examine They tell us that admitting this Principle 1 All those Eminent Divines would be condemned who have used or do before their Sermons use a form of their own composure The vanity of this will appear from our stating the Question 2 He who preacheth must preach ex tempore This is as idle as the other we argue not for praying ex tempore but onely in the use of our own gifts which certainly excludes not previous meditation men may use what of that they please 3 We must not use the Lords prayer Let any one read our question see if it concludes against any such thing 4 The ministers also must make hymns and people must not sing by forms As if we had not scriptural forms to which we are tied in singing composed by men divinely inspired We think Apochryphal Anthems to be sang in publick worship no more lawful then Liturgical forms of Prayer Nor can it be proved that Hymn-making or singing is an ordinary ministerial act Nor that God hath to any promised the gift of Psalm or Hymn-making but it is certain he hath promised the Spirit of prayer Zech. 12. 10. Rom. 8. 26. 5 Nor do they speak any thing more to the purpose who tell us that according to our Principle None must join with others in prayer for the speakers prayer is a form to him The Question is not about him who barely prayeth who hath nothing to do but to exercise his grace but about him who is in prayer to minister unto others 6 We have met with some who have indeavored to encumber this argument with another absurdity telling us that according to this Principle Every minister who is able to interpret the Hebrew of the old Testament the Greek in the new is bound to read the scripture according to his own interpretation and not the translation received in the Church where he ministreth And indeed of any thing we ever heard objected this cometh nearest an argument to bring our Principle to an absurdity But yet we think it
is not sufficient For not to dispute whether Publick Reading of the scriptures be though a good work and fit to be used in the Congregation as Moses was read in the Synagogue strictly a ministerial act we never read Christ saying to his Ministers Go read so as for ought we know The scriptures may in the publick Congregation be read by inferiour officers as is very ordinary in other Reformed Churches we say not to insist upon this which yet were a foundation not to be shaken we take that Principle which if we remember right we have some where read in M r. Capel to be a true Principle That God never yet had a church in any place of the world but he at the first planting of it and so after as there was occasion stirred up the Rulers to employ some in making a true version of the scripture which persons so employed God hath upon experience been found constantly so to asist That they have not erred or mistaken in any point of Doctrine necessarily to be known believed and that it is his will that particular ministers members in such churches in their ordinary use reading of the scriptures should use such version or the version of some other church which they may find more exact perfect This is so fully proved by experience the frequent use which both Christ his Apostles made of the Septuagint version though as full of mistakes as any other if compared with the Hebrew that nothing is to be said against it nor need any more be said in answer to this objection The sum of what is said is this That to interpret the body of scripture to be read to people is no private ministerial act or gift nor is any single minister fit to be trusted with it nor to enter a dissent to the ordinary version used either in the church of which he is a member or some other orthodox church as to a particular text but with great modesty and upon weighty grounds § 9 We think enough said to justify our argument against all answers we have met with and those who are so ready upon all occasions to send us for satisfaction to Mr. Hooker D r. Sanderson should do well to tell us in what Page of either of their works this argument is answered for we can in neither of them find an answer to it Our adversaries may also see that we do not neglect to inquire into all their writings for satisfaction Though it be our misfortune to find them rarely speaking to the true question but first making to themselves a man of straw then pelting him with arguments and immoral language § 10 Hence also appears to our weaker Brethren an obvious reason why some of us can at a pinch hear other ministers pray in the use of such pescribed forms though our selves cannot use them When we join in prayers with others we have nothing to do provided the petitions we hear be according to the will of God but to say Amen exercising our faith c. But if we be our selves to Minister in prayer either we are mistaken which we must first be convinced of or besides the exercise of Grace God requireth also we should use Our Gifts being the mean he hath given us for those acts Whether he who ministreth acquitteth himself to God or no Viderit ipse it is nothing to us let him look to that Nor can there be any thing of scruple in the hearing of ministers praying by the forms of others provided the matter of them be good and according to the will of God Unless some should scruple it as encouraging a minister in that which they judge sinful But why may not we think That he who doth use them doth it in an humble distrust of his own abilities thinks at least that he doth agere optimum do his best Why must we think our selves infallible We dare not judge those who we think have the gift of prayer but think not fit to use it in their ordinary service because their superiors command the omission of it but as we do not judge them so we dare not practice after their copy Whether it be sin in them we freely leave to Gods determination we are sure it would be sin to us As we believe so we speak sowe must act but shall freely listen to what any of our Brethren can say to the taking away of the appearing Probability both of this argument or any other we shall bring In the mean time we would not be crowed over as such dunces who have nothing to say but are hardned with Prejudice blinded with passion biassed by false Principles c. See Dr. Asheton's Ded. Ep. Nor as meerly peevish Grubstreet Divines c. which with abundance more of such brutish stuf another useth Till these confident men have let the world know That they have given a sufficient answer like scholars to what we say and that they are good at something else besides reviling we are not careful to answer them CHAP. III. The second argument The terms opened What is meant by Attention Intention Fervency Both propositions proved M r. Freemans answer considered What M r. Falconer hath said in answer to this argument proved in sufficient The Judgment of the Leyden Professors and the Walachrian classis not duely opposed to this Argument M r. Falconers three reasons why forms should not hinder devotion answered § 1 WE proceed to a second Argument which we thus state To use such a mode in the ordinary performance of our duty in solemn publick prayer as either from the necessary workings of human nature or otherwise upon experience we find either hindring the Attention of our own or others thoughts to the duty or the Intention and Fervency of our own or others Spirits in the performance of the duty when we can so perform it as neither of them will be to that degree hindred is Vnlawful But for him who hath the Gift of prayer ordinarily to perform his ministerial Acts in publick solemn prayer is for him to use such a mode in those Acts of worship as either from the Natural workings of human nature or from some other cause scarce avoidable is upon experience found to hinder his own Attention and also the Attention of others thoughts to the duty and the Intention Fervency of his own others spirits in the duty when in the mean time he hath a natural ability so to perform it as neither of them will at least to that degree be hindred Ergo This we conceive to be what by Mr. Falconer is represented as a second Objection under the terms That it is disadvantageous to devotion We shall with what candor becomes us towards a person of Mr. Falconers worth candor consider both what he saith in answer And also ex abundanti what we find to have been said to less purpose by any others And examine whether what
becometh an unlawful mean and lawful for us to omit it though we pray less fervently therefore he tells us p. 23. He that is by the Magistrate forbidden to go to the next church and therefore is necessitated to go to one more remote must needs be more indisposed to prayer by his long journy except some men of a temper by themselves so that he shall not perform the duty with so high an intention of mind or fervency of Spirit as might probably be experienced in case he came to the church less wearied and weather beaten but yet such a man may lawfully go to the farthest church and pray there though these hinderances of intention and fervency be consequent thereupon because they are necessary not voluntary he wisheth the case were otherwise with him but as the case standeth if he should go to the next church contrary to the Magistrates Prohibition he should sin and Evil is not to be done that Good may come of it especially when a greater evil might come of it then the good aimed at as in this Case § 20 To all which we answer God send his church in England better Divines then this Author The case is this The unlawfulness of ministers ordinary use of forms prescribed by others was indevoured to be proved because it hindred intention of mind and fervency of Spirit Two things from reason and by Gods special command and determination necessary to every good prayer He grants they are both necessary whence it followeth That he who omitteth any means given or allowed him by God being natural rational which may help him in this must needs sin against God whose law commanding an End always commandeth the use of all proper Means relating to it He granteth this a Mean in it self lawful he must acknowledge it proper and natural yet he saith It is no sin to omit it and so consequently no sin for one to serve God with a lesser intention and fervency when we have a natural power to serve him with a greater intention and fervency And why none Because he saith It is necessary not voluntary Is it not voluntary That is strange he did not put the case of the Magistrates forcing him to be draged to another place at such a distance where his Spirits must be exhausted before he could come How was it necessary then Not naturally not by coaction It remaineth therefore that it must be necessary by some divine determination In what leafe of Scripture shall we find it He offers no texts but what commands our obedience to Magistrates But is there any Scripture requireth an obedience to man in all things Or must those texts be limited to such things where we may obey them without disobeying God Thus this Author hath finely answered by begging the question which is Whether it be lawful to omit the use of a proper Mean given by God for the performance of an Act in his worship according to his will The Apostles surely determined better Whether it be better to obey God or man judge you To his instance therefore the Answer is easy If when we may with equal advantage to our souls go to a nearer church and to one farther but yet not at such a distance as before we come there we shall be spent our Spirits exhausted and we fitter to sleep then to serve God we think we ought to obey But if they will command us to go to a place at such a distance as we cannot reach in any time or without such a wasting tyring of our Spirits as when we come there we shall be unfit for the service of God we cannot obey He trifleth to say The thing is Inexpedient It is unlawful and he is a fallacious Sophister in Divinity who talkes of chusing lesser evils of sin before greater There can be no necessity of sinning § 21 In his p. 26. he seemeth to hint a time when a less intention is more acceptable to God then a greater That time we would gladly know for the Scripture saith nothing of it He tells us when the Over-plus ariseth from the gift not from the Grace This is a strange nick of time we always thought The grace exercised in prayer lay very much in Gods assistance of us to keep our minds attent to our duty and intent upon fervent with God in our duty so that to us it seems a strange piece of sense That the overplus of Attention Intention and Fervency should proceed not from the Grace but from the gift he goes on tells us p. 28. Seeing the same things are prayed for in the Litany which can be the matter of the longest conceived prayer though not in that variety novelty and elegancy of Phrase if the heat and the intention they speak of proceeded from the strength of their desire to the things themselves it would be equal in both cases but seeing it is not equal it must needs proceed from some other cause and probably from some of those assigned § 22 He saith true It must either proceed from some different matter or some other cause But 1 we doubt whether what he sayes of the Litany be true We think it far short of conteining the whole matter of ordinary Confession or Petitions or thanksgivings See what the Commissioners at the Savy in their papers since printed have said to this But suppose 2 The matter were ful Can there be nothing else frigidam suffundere to cool a Christians Spirit What if there be a mixture of something else which a Christian cannot in his judgment allow In the Popish Missal is much excellent matter but we should think him but a luke-warm Protestant that could be fervent in Spirit serving the Lord by it It is a great cooling to a Christians Spirit when his mind suggests doubts to him Whether this be a way mode or method of worship which God will accept because never directed by him Here we instead of stirring up exercising our own gifts and ministring them borrow the gifts of others and serve God with what costs us nothing but a little lip labour § 23 To conclude for this Author we need no more then Mr. Ireneus against Mr. Freeman Every man is bound to pray with the highest intention of mind and fervency of Spirit which he can by just means attain But he who having an ability to express his own wants wants of others to God in prayer in words first formed in his own heart doth in the exercise of prayer use the forms of other men doth not pray with the greatest intention of mind fervor of Spirit which can be obtained by just means Ergo. This is M r. Ireneus argument in his book called The Reasonableness of Divine service Let M r. Freeman answer it we profess we cannot The Major is made up of M r. Ireneus his own words in the aforesaid book p. 22. The Minor is not onely said by Mr. Ireneus but proved too
Palmanum Argumentum Let but the Indifferent Reader See and Judge of what was answered though it may reasonably be presumed considering the Learning and interest of their opponents that they omitted nothing which could with any truth or modesty be spoken in the case All they say is this That there were ancient Liturgies in the church is evident St. Chrysostoms St. Basils and others And the Greeks tell us of St. James's much older then they And though we find not in all ages whole Liturgies yet it is certain there were such in the oldest times by those parts which are extant Sursum Corda Gloria Patri Benedicite Hymnus veré Cherubinus Veré dignum est justum c. Dominus Vobiscum cum Spiritu tuo With diverse others Though those which are extant may be interpolated yet such things as are found in them all consistent to primitive and Catholick Doctrine may well be presumed to have been from the first especially since we find no original of those Liturgies from general councils For answer to this We shall refer our reader to the Answer of the Noncon commissioners p. 76. Of the account of their proceedings printed 1661. § 48 To bring this point to an issue There was a book published 1662. called Asober and temperate discourse concerning the Interest of words in Prayer where chap. 3. 4. The Reader may at Large see what we judge of the Original of Liturgies when our Reverend Brother or any for him hath given a strict reply to those two chapters then we shall think they have more to say for their Antiquity then we have yet seen In the mean time we do believe That Gregory the great usually said to be the worst of all the Popes that went before him under the Protection of Charles the great was the father of all those that dwell in these tents and this eight hundred or a thousand years after Christ An imposed Liturgy unless in a particular Province for a time in a particular case such as was that of the spreading of Pelagianism we cannot find And for a Liturgy to be proposed onely and left at liberty we know most reformed churches have such a one and we have before declared our judgment for the reasonableness of it he who thinks such an Eminent man as Gregorius Magnus would do nothing which should disadvantage true Devotion hath not we think attentively either read his story or considered the Acts of the Governing-part of the church in his time § 49 We are not so uncharitably disposed as not to think there were many eminently good and judicious men in the fourth and fifth Century who were able to judge what was of true advantage or disadvantage to devotion But this is that which we say That the same things are not at all times nor yet to all persons advantages either to publick or private Devotion We have already granted forms of prayer advantages to the devotion of particular persons who being to minister before others have not attained the gift of prayer i. e. an ability in that duty fitly to express themselves 2 To the general devotion of a church when her ministers are very many of them tainted with errors in Doctrine which was the cause of the Milivitan Canon We do know that in the fourth Century there was An Arnobius A Lactantius An Athanasius Ambrose Chrysostom Augustin Hierom and very many others but we also know there was an Arius and Pelagius and that their herecies were of desperate consequence and had over spread a great part of the church yea had tainted a very great part of the ministry of it now it will not follow That because set forms were advantages to devotion in such a time and in such parts of the church for a time therefore they will be Universally so Nor do we think that either in the fourth or fifth Century There was generally such knowledge as in the later ages of the church nor is it proved That in those ages set forms were generally imposed The Question is Whether set forms be advantages or hinderances of devotion to such whom God hath blessed with the gift of prayer and to such churches who have such ministers and are not so tainted with erroneous opinions in the fundamentals of Religion And thus we think we have fully answered whatsoever Mr. Falconer hath offered in answer to this Argument But because our strict design is not to answer M r. Falconer but to shew we have probable Arguments inducing us to believe That what ever it be to others It would be sinful for us ordinarily to perform our ministerial Acts in Prayer by reading or reciting the prescribed forms of others We will yet proceed to add some further Arguments inductive of such a persuasion in us still professing That we do not judge our selves infallible nor condemn any of our Brethren who are of another mind in the case onely as we our selves apprehend and believe so we speak so we act and not out of any factious humour as we are rashy judged CHAP. IV. The Third Argument propounded Both propositions in it proved The second commandment forbiddeth all means of worship not directed in Scripture M r. Freemans answer considered What the Noncon grant His instances answered Bishop Jewels opinion and Bishop Davenants against blind obedience The Difference between circumstances and Ceremonies what circumstances are in the power of man Why Forms of Prayer may not be commanded as well as Time and place Acts rites and means in worship must appear reasonable in themselves to him who conscientiously obeyeth § I WE thus state our Third Argument To use a mean in an Act of worship which God hath neither by the light of nature directed nor in his word prescribed no natural necessity compelling us so to do is sinful But for us or any of us to whom God hath given the gift of prayer ordinarily in prayer to perform our ministerial acts by the prescribed forms of others read or recited were for us no natural necessity compelling in Acts of worship to use means neither of God directed by the light of nature nor by him in his word prescribed Ergo. The proof of the major proposition depends upon these hypotheses 1 That divine worship is nothing else but an homage done unto God in consideration of his excellency In this we think all are agreed 2 That it belongs to God alone to prescribe both the Acts and Means of this homage which certainly is the most reasonable thing in the world That God should tell us what homage he will have at our hands and how performed God hath as much right to appoint the way of his worship as to be worshipped saith Dr. Ashton himself in his Case of persecution p. 45. 3 God having determined our Acts of worship hath likewise in his word and by the light of Nature given us sufficient direction as to the means Which if it be true it certainly must be impious
to the best Reason He must command what the Subjects apprehend so or nothing at all therefore it remains That that Reason which must judge what is indecent must be the Magistrates and if he commandeth such things as be indecent so they be not otherwise unlawful The people must submit To all which we answer § 17 As to the matter of our present debate There were no great loss in granting all he saith for the matters pleaded against are not onely pleaded as indecent though none hath power to command any indecent thing in Gods worship but as unlawful But we know he would then say we must not then use this as a medium to prove them so Because they are not commanded We will therefore reply more strictly § 18 He saith we have granted a power to superiors to command particular circumstances of Divine worship which circumstances are generally commanded For Example Reverence and Order are commanded generally as Moral duties and especial regard is to be had to them in the worship of God If any will come to the publick Congregation in the ridiculous habits of moris-dancers or naked The Magistrate may for ought we know command them into a gaol But what is this to our Authors purpose A form of prayer he saith is but a circumstance and that is generally commanded in the Divine precepts for obedience to Magistrates We answer that we do indeed make a great difference between a circumstance and a Ceremony The first we say is appendant to an action as an human action The latter to a Religious action as a Religious action But we do not know that in reference to Divine worship men may appoint whatsoever may come under the notion of a Circumstance in the Latitude of the term nor do we think our Brethren judge all circumstances in worship determinable by creatures § 19 There is a Rhetorical notion of a circumstance and so Circumstances are usually comprehended in that verse Quis quid ubi quibus auxiliis cur quomodo quando If this Author thinks That all Circumstances of Divine worship in this large notion are determinable by man he must affirm That Magistrates may appoint whom they please to Baptize administer the Sacraments That is the Quis. And that if the Magistrate thinks fit to command men to worship God before an image that also becomes lawful quibus auxiliis is a circumstance he knows There is a Logical notion of a circumstance and so a circumstance is Quicquid rei praeter essentiam adjungitur Whatsoever is added to the essence of a thing and in this sense no ceremony can be a circumstance for the Appropriation of it to the Religious action makes it a piece of Homage done to God so as it partakes of the general nature of the whole action in which it is used We never thought that men might institute or appoint such circumstances as wanted nothing but a Divine institution to make them True Divine worship Will any say There was nothing of divine Homage in the High Priests garments which he might never put on but in his approaches to God we by Circumstances understand Appendants to actions as meer humane actions such are Time Place and possibly so much of the quomodo as is natural to restrain an indecency and disorder which the light of nature or the particular custom of the place sheweth to be such These things we believe in their kind required in the General precepts of Gods word for order and decency hence it appeareth § 20 The fault was not in us but in his own Reson That as he tells us he cannot see why the Magistrate may not as well command forms of Prayer as determine Time Places Are therefore forms of prayer in the general necessary to the act as human or as Religious Or could any one think That Gods word should set down a certain rule for times and particular places of worship for all churches in the world This is so miserable trifling as we are ashamed to make any reply to But we must follow the Author yet further § 21 He would know whose Reason must judge in the case Whether the Reason of the Magistrate or of the people To which we freely answer If the question be about Lawful or Vnlawful Every private Christians Reason must judge as to his own practice unless we will turn Papist and vow Blind obedience If the thing be confessed both by the superior and the inferiour A thing in it self indifferent we believe most Noncon will allow the judgment to their superiors If the Author will but consult Bp. Jewells Apology pag. 435. He will find him laughing at the Papists for their obedience in carying baskets from Palestina to Damascus Sitting 7 years together Silent and watering for 12 months together a dead tree Let the author determin whose Reason was to judge in those cases § 22 To make the business short In all Religious commands there must appear to the person that obeyeth some Reason from a divine command either particularly or generally requiring the thing The meer will and authority of an another in these things is not reason enough to justify our obedience In matters of that nature we must be very wary of idle and superfluous actions To be of no use and insignificant is enough in worship to make a gesture or action sinful yea and an appropriated habit too There lyeth no necessity upon the superior to command any such things nay to do it will be a sin unto him as Gideons Ephod was a snare to his house Judg. 8. 27. Precepts in such things must be for farther use and evidently so then to try inferiours obedience The lawfulness or policy of precepts of no farther significancy in things of a meer civil nature may be disputed The Magistrate is the minister of God for good Rom. 13. 4. But in these matters it is out of question In matters of civil nature the Magistrate hath unquestionably a far greater power then in them yet even in those things he that will not grant that all commands must refer to some general or particular good will be brought to strange absurdities But he is a judge of good especially in particular relating to political concerns he is judge of the best means of order and policy and every particular person is not to be a privy counsellor which warranteth in such things much of a blind obedience Besides there are various dispositions of people several complexions of Political bodies for all which it is not imaginable that God in his word should have set down particular laws for their preservation and civil order Nor hath God in his word laid out any general platforms of civil Government But in Matters of worship There is both a general and sufficient rule all the Earth is tied to worship God and to worship God by the same acts Every particular person may and ought to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of God so as
there being a sufficient rule for worship in Scripture both for the Acts and Rites and Means of it supposing time and place by the church determined or by the Magistrate either people following no other rules then the light of nature and of Scripture sheweth them may so worship God as neither he will be offended nor any good man need be scandalized It is every individual Christians duty to enquire into the Mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven and to be acquainted with the laws of Divine worship and he cannot do that there in meer obedience to his superior which he can neither see the Light of Nature Reason or Scripture requireth of him or which his conscience or Reason telleth him is idle superfluous or ludicrous and so under such circumstances repugnant to the Divine will without an high profanation of the holy name of God If such things be commanded he must patiently suffer if he doth them he unquestionably sinneth against the Lord who in matters of his external worship hath particularly told him That he is a Jealous God § 23 But our Author goes on telling us There are particular commands and examples of forms of prayer in Scripture Davids Psalms are prayers so Hos 14. 2. Joel 2. 10. Acts 4. 24. Luke 11. 2. Though this be sufficiently before answered yet in short we again desire our reader to consider That if this Author by commands doth not mean That there is some command that the church of God and all the ministers in it at least in some National church should use ordinarily in their stated Solemn prayer certain forms made by others he saith nothing to the purpose we have said again and again That we do not think Forms of Prayer unlawful That we are not against forms to be used by some persons at some times much less against them as made by any minister for his own use and the proposing of a form which those who will may use David made some Psalms which were forms of Prayer but did he make an Act of Uniformity too Again a great Prophet and Penman of holy writ made forms of Prayer Suppose he had enjoyned the constant use of them too in all places of publick worship may therefore men that are no Prophets no Penmen of Scripture no pretenders to such an inspiration do the like Farther suppose That it could be proved which it never can that there were forms of Prayer composed for and used in the Jewish church or that the Lords prayer was intended for a form of words and commanded to be ordinarily used for a time yet we never met with any that said The Apostles might ordinarily use no other how doth this prove That it was the will of Christ concerning the church under the gospel That because Christ who was the head of the church enjoined the use of such a form Therefore any Superior deriving from him may do the like and add fourty times as much and enjoyn it to all ministers after Christs ascension on high pouring out the gifts of his Spirit upon all flesh who seeth not what pitiful inconclusive arguments these are But our Author pretendeth to give some reasons for the Necessity of Imposing forms of prayer They are but the Ordinary topicks which all make use of in the case we will therefore reserve them for a proper place and go on yet with our other arguments CHAP. V. The Fourth Argument stated Because actively to obey in this case is to grant a principle improveable to suppress the total exercise of the gift of prayer in Publick meetings Families Closets all places to which the superiors dominion extends To say This is not yet commanded is in part false as to prayers before and after sermons if true no answer The Vanity of those that say though the superior may impose in part yet not in whole The Quota pars not determined nor determinable from Scripture Reason No power in man to suppress the total exercise of any ministerial gift § 1. OUr Fourth Argument we state thus To agree a principle which being agreed is of sufficient force to restrain the total exercise of the gift of prayer is sinful But to agree it lawful for ministers ordinarily in their Solema prayers to perform their acts of prayer by the prescribed forms of others were to agree such a principle Ergo. We hope there is none will deny the Major until he hath proved to us That it is lawful for man wholly to suppress any ministerial gift and make it useless as to its end yea and sinful to use it at any time which to us appears a strange task we shall therefore at present not labour in the establishing of that taking it to shine sufficiently in its own light § 2 For the Minor we say All Prayer is either Publick in the Congregation or Domestick in the family or Private or Secret in the Closet For that which is made in the Congregation We are indeed often told That the minister hath a power left him to pray before and after Sermon But 1 Suppose he had yet he may be restraind we hope by the superiors precept and if he be we hope he is bound to Obey it For why should it be less lawful for him to ty himself to the use of forms in the Pulpit then in the Desk 2 But it were worth the examining whether he hath such a liberty Did the late Bishop of Durham Dr. Cousins think so Let any minister in his diocess enquire about that Did Bishop wren think so Doth Mr. Kemp think so Let the Reader read his sermon on this subject Doth the Act of Parliament say so But once for all Let the Reader judge of this by what he shall find in the Printed account of the proceedings of the Commissioners of both persuasions p. 19. He shall find The Commissioners on the Bishops side and they were no less then eleven Bishops and nine Doctors of Divinity of which five have since been made Bishops thus speaking We heartily desire that according to this Proposal great care may be taken to suppress those private conceptions both before and after sermon least private opinions be made the matter of prayer in publick as hath and will be if private persons take liberty to make publick prayers Here is Heartily desire and Great care to be taken to suppress private conceptions both before and after Sermon It seemes they apprehended The law gave no such liberty and therefore are very heartily desirous the Executors of it would take care yea and great care too that none might take it Let us therefore hear no more of a liberty not so much as indulged and if it were no more then indulged for ministers at all to use their ministerial gift in prayer There is no such liberty but as assumed § 3 So that the publick ministerial exercise of this gift is wholly supprest but yet we are told Ministers may in their families use their gifts
very Argument the Popish Abby-lubbers Monks and Priests used to persuade the Pope to appropriate to Covents Abbies the tythes belonging to many Parishes and the Racovian Catechism de Eccles c. 11. hath it plain enough Postquam igitur Doctrina Christi secundum consilium Dei patefacta confirmata fuit abundè iis personis quae eam patifecerent confirmarent nihil amplius loci in Ecclesiâ relictum And the Arminians agree much with them Episcopius Disput 28. determineth preaching profitable but not necessary But blessed be God the number of these men in England is not great all men almost acknowledging Preaching a great Ordinance of Christ an ordinance not onely to make men Christians in name and outwardly but Christians inwardly and indeed changing their hearts and turning them from all sin and lust to serve the living God It was the unhappiness of England to have three or four Prelates of great power who thus depretiated the greatest ordinance of the gospel But as they are gone and ere this know whether they in this thing did well or ill so there are not many that approve their sayings or will rise up to call them blessed We therefore take it for granted that Preaching may not be suppressed and are little affected with a Critial Authors witin distinguishing betwixt Preaching and Teaching and essays to prove it is not the ministers duty to Preach but to Teach In short we think that Critick had need himself be taught before he either preacheth or teacheth § 2 Our onely question is Whether it be in the power of man to suppress the gift of preaching in a minister of the gospel We think it is not because of the frequent commands in Scripture to ministers To stir up and not to neglect that gift and to minister it 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 1. 6. 1 Pet. 4. 10 11 c. And to us nothing can be more absurd then to fancy That God should have given abilities and gifts to men for so great a work as the work of the ministry and given them an heart to desire the imployment and the church should have approved of them as furnished by God for his work and sent into it and after this it should be in the power of men to suppress the use of these gifts and appoint them in stead of it to readsome discourses of others to the people § 3 The onely doubt then can be about the Minor Proposition which stands upon this foundation That God hath given unto man no farther liberty to stifle and suppress one ministerial gift then another Nor can any sufficient reason be given of their farther authority in the one case then the other and therefore our wise Reformers seing a necessity to make a provision for that most sad state which our and other Reforming-churches were in in the beginning of Reformation at the same time provided ministers both a book of Homilies and a book of Publick prayers and Homilies at first just proportioned to the Number of sermons they willed to be preached every year That was 12 on each month Well knowing That if they had Authority to do the one they had Authority to do the other And those who had need of the one had an Equal need if not greater of the other The Doctor Respondent therefore within these few years at a Commencement having given the lawfulness of Imposing and using forms of prayer for his Question and being pressed by one of our Learned Prelates with this Argument That then it was lawful to impose and use forms of sermons too Like a wise man granted the Consequence and denied the Assumption And his hearers thought he answered well to avoid a publick baffle though he affirmed a falshood by denying the Minor we are sure some of us did judging the Consequence by no means to be destroyed by the Art of man § 3 Every considerate person will easily understand That if it be lawful for man to compose all forms of prayer and forms of sermons to be used by ministers and they may discharge their ministerial office by reading them both We shall neither need Grammar-schools nor Vniversities to breed up men for the Ministry Let us but make sure of good School-dames in every Parish to learn children to read and every parish will commence a Nursery of very able and sufficient Clerks that is Such as can read Primers Psalters and Bibles or any other books of reasonable good Prints If any will tell us that a Minister hath some other work We answer we know of no other But the administration of the Sacraments where God himself hath made the Form certain the Minister in those ordinances hath nothing farther that we know to do but to add the application of Prayer and Exhortation the two general acts of his office to that particular performance Let none tell us That he is to Convince gainsayers for that so far as it is the work of every ordinary minister it is by way of plain Scripture and ministerial reproof and for that too there are books enough in English So that we are confident That if St Paul had thought such kind of Discharge of the ministerial work would have acquitted Timothy's soul before God he would never have so called upon him as he doth 1 Tim. 4. 13. To give attendance to Reading to Exhortation to Doctrine Neglect not the gift that is in thee c. Nor have told him that such labourers in the word and Doctrine were worthy of double honour 1 Tim. 5. 11. Nor charged him To prove ministers was it whether they could read or no think we Not to lay hands suddenly on any Nor charged him as 2 Tim. 1. 6. To stir up the gift of God Nor called upon him rightly to divide the word of truth it had been divided to his hand he would never have called upon Timothy as 1 Tim. 4. 15. To Meditate on the Scripture To give himself wholly to that study that his profiting might appear to all § 4 But we find our old friend Ireneus Freeman here again opposing us not urging the lawfulness of Magistrates imposing and Ministers using forms of sermons but pretending a different Reason betwixt Forms of Prayers and of sermons which indeed may enfeeble our Minor Proposition we have onely to Examin what he saith whether it will amount to what he would have it For otherwise the strength of our Argument is evident enough to every deliberate Christian He begins with telling us That one would in charity think That these men were none of the Contrivers or Approvers of the Directory for these lamentable restraints both of sermons and Prayers are to be found there To which we answer That one would in charity also think That this Author a Scholar and Divine should speak truth And not abuse his Reader with a known falshood Surely he never read the Directory or hoped his Readers never would Who ever saw one form of
speak particularly § 7 Mr. Freeman assumeth in the third place what is false viz. That we are continually to pray for the same things Certainly we have neither the same sins at all times to confess nor the same wants at all times to begg a supply of nor the same receipts of mercy at all times to give thanks for and therefore forms of prayer will no more fit us then forms of preaching where neither have we any new gospel or doctrine to preach Witness that known Ipswich story Where an eminent son of the church not being able out of the Liturgy to fit the case of the man that was goared by an Ox with a thanks giving was put to it to read in his case The office for churching women We must profess we tremble at the force of the consequence of this Argument so horrid a thing do we look upon it to establish a power in man at his pleasure to smother and totally to suppress ministerial gifts The great means which God hath thought fit immediately to give and by his word to appoint for converting and perfecting souls and make them wholly useless That we stand amazed that any understanding Christian should agree to it § 8 But we hear some saying That they do not agree to any such power though they think they shall not sin in obeying such a command yet they think the superior sinneth in commanding To which we answer We must grant that there are many things which the superiour cannot command but he must sin yet the people may without sin obey if they be commanded And in requital to us for this concession we are sure the most wise and sober of our brethren will grant to us That there are thousands of other things which can neither lawfully be commanded nor obeyed if commanded The question is in which order of things The ordinary discharge of our Ministerial acts in prayer by the prescribed forms of others is Or whether in neither of them but such as may both be universally commanded also used Our Brethren we believe judge the last but for advantage against us Suppose them in the first order we think them in the Second order Because Prayer is a divine institution Praying and Preaching are both so and great means in order to the conversion edification and eternal salvation of souls and that in order to both of them God hath furnished his ministers with gifts Man saith you shall not use that means but another mean in the performance of those acts which I judge more accommodate to this end then your own gift To say no more Those who think That obedience in this case is not a disobedience to God seem not to have that Reverence for God which we desire that our souls may be possessed of to judge his wisdom paramount to the wisdom of men § 9 When we could relieve our selves by thinking But there is yet no such thing required of us or ordinarily to perform our ministerial acts in preaching by reading sermons made to our hands We find we cannot because our consciences tell us we grant the Principle That it may be done and if commanded we are obliged no more to dispute such command In granting man a power to suppress or smother one ministerial gift we yeild him a power for him to impose upon us as to the other and oblige our selves to obey We must profess let others think what they please we cannot but judge That those who can swallow this and stumble at a Ceremony do but strain at a gnat while unwarily they swallow a camel This is more to us then a thousand surplices or rings in marriages But we have said enough to establish this argument which we cannot find any where answered in the All-satisfying Mr. Hooker CHAP. VII The Sixth Argument Stated and Justifyed Whether the precept for ministerial Vocal prayer includes not the use of our own gifts The precept for preaching ordinarily so interpreted There is in all languages a difference betwixt the words that signify to Read and those by which the Action of Prayer is exprest § 1 WE proceed to a Sixth Argument which we thus form To pretend to perform an act of Divine worship and at the same time not to do it is sinful But for ministers furnished by God with the gift of prayer to perform their ministerial Acts in prayer by the prescribed forms of others is to pretend to the performance of an act of Divine worship and at the same time not to do it Ergo. The proposition will be granted by all who will be so just as to acknowledge It is sinful both to mock God and to deceive our own souls so as all we have to prove is the Assumption and that depends upon the resolution of this single question Whether the Precepts for Vocal ministerial prayer doth not imply the first forming of the petitions in our hearts which we utter with our lips Where we desire our Reader to observe That the question is not about the precept for Prayer in the general but about Vocal prayer when we are to express the desires of our hearts by the words of our lips such is all Ministerial prayer The case is quite otherwise when we onely pray but do not minister in prayer We know Hannah may pray and her voice not be heard but we also know That a minister in his publick ministry must not so pray as we hope all will grant Now we profess we do very much incline to the affirmative part of the question That is we think wheresoever God hath commanded his ministers in their Publick ministry to pray The meaning is That they should first in their own hearts form such petitions as they judge according to the will of God both on their own behalf and their peoples and then to express such conceptions and desires by their own words and we are induced thus to judge from these reasons § 2 The whole world almost the Christian world we mean thus interpreteth for Preaching No sober Divine that ever we met with ever said that a minister of the gospel could discharge his ministerial office in preaching no not in one Individual Act by reading or reciting another mans sermon Mr. Perkins Dr. Amer two of our Protestant Casuists determin the quite contrary and tell us That To Read or recite another mans sermon is not to preach and therefore a late hypercritical son of the church took himself concerned in a book printed some few years since to distinguish between Preaching and Teaching and took upon him to learn us a new lesson That a Minister is not bound to Preach but to Teach And that if we may believe him he may do By reading anothers Sermon or good book By writing a good book By setting another to teach By living a good life c. But none we know off ever affirmed That to read or recite another mans Sermon was a lawful discharge of the
do onely that which the meanest person in the church had a natural ability or power to do There is nothing plainer in the whole book of God then that God hath established a peculiar order of persons to be his ministers in his name to declare his will unto his people and on their behalf to intercede with God in prayer Now if they may do the one by forms of sermons made for them and the other by forms of prayer also made for them This is no more then the meanest of their people could do as well as they it requireth no extraordinary knowledge in the Scriptures no study and meditation c. The minister of the gospel would onely stand distinguished from the people by imposition of hands upon him He would have nothing to do but what any one might do supposing him under the same circumstances of ordination The Apostle Paul needed onely have given Timothy a charge to have found out faithful men for such as should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 able they were easy enough to find if this were all the ability requisite Now we cannot entertain any such thoughts of God especially considering how much care he hath taken in his word For a double honour for such as labour in the word and Doctrine which Divines do interpret of Reverence and Honour and Maintenance And if that be not the sense of that phrase yet we are sure that both of them are by many other Scriptures required for the ministers of the gospel Supposing this were lawful there were no great reason for either 1 Not for any peculiar maintenance it were but ordaining so many of the people and that charge might be saved Besides the reasonableness of maintenance depends very much upon their separation from worldly businesses that they might study and attend to their office and be fit for their work but none of this were needful if the great acts of their ministerial office might be so discharged 2 For Honour and Reverence God that knoweth our frame knew it would be hard to gain of the world a reverence for those whom people should onely see their superiors in a notion or by an inoperative character We therefore observe that God himself when hee called any to a place of publick employment constantly capacitated them to some farther noble and powerful actions then others could do or set upon them some special sensible marks of his favour by which rationally an honour and reverence was gained for them Moses is called up to the mount his face shineth so as they were not able to look upon him Moses and Aaron are empowred to do miracles So also the Prophets and the latter to soretel future contingencies The Apostles work miracles speak with tongues c. and though these extraordinary miraculous operations be ceased which were at first to give the gospel credit in the world yet he still gives gifts unto men and that which gains a reverence for ministers is when people see them in gifts and graces higher by the shoulders then themselves There is nothing of such efficacy to destroy the ministry and to make the officers and offerings to be a contempt as to let the people see or to induce them to believe that they are no other then what the meanest of them could offer And of this every day giveth such an ample experience That it were idle for us to spend many words in the proof of it But this would follow viz. That God hath erected a sort of officers to do that which the meanest people might do as will as they if it be lawful ordinarily to perform ministerial acts in Prayer and preaching by the prescribed forms of others for setting aside the application of those general acts there is nothing in the administration of the Sacraments but any one may do who hath hands and a tongue This makes it very probable to us That this principle is false and that it is not lawful c. § 2 It were an easy thing to multiply arguments but we shall onely instance in one thing more and that is those unblest effects which are matters of demonstration to us We hope the Argument will not be judged improper both because our Saviour hath learned us the Topick and most of the Arguments brought for such forms are beholding to this Topick Besides that we say in Logick Talis causa qualis effectus which it true where the effects are natural and any way necessary Yea or ordinary But our Saviour hath taught us to conclude what the tree is from the fruits Math. 7 Let us therefore instance in some too evident effects of forms of prayer universally imposed and to be ordinarily used by ministers 1 The First is The filling of the church of God with an ignorant lazy and sottish ministry This we confess is no necessary consequent A minister may be a diligent painful holy man that yet in his ministerial prayer may think fit to use the prescribed forms of others Blessed be God we have had and have very many that are so Far be it from us either to say or think otherwise But we say That the establishing this for universal use opens a door for such persons to enter in and as a deluge overflow the Church And while such a door is open it is not to be expected but they will enter in and it is evident many such have ordinarily entred in Experience tells us That conscience is not enough in all to oblige them to their duty nay That the very best of men had need of all the obligations that can be laid upon them over and above the bare obligation of conscience arising from the force of the Divine precept We have before said That forms of sermons may every whit as lawfully be imposed as forms of prayer Supposing both we would fain know why a minister may not neglect the use or stirring up of his own gifts improving his mind by study and meditation nay if his own lusts so incline him why he may not spend the whole week at an alehouse and be ready too for his work on the Lords day He will have no ty upon him to take more pains in his study and meditations from the work he hath to do nor from any honour in doing of it well his work if it be meerly to read first Prayers then an Homily needs no preliminary pains and may be done as laudably ex tempore as upon the longest premeditation Whereas if every one were obliged to pray and preach constantly in person and in the excercise of their own gifts men would have an obligation upon them to study to meditate and to give up themselves to their proper work and would not find so much leisure for markets and taverns and coffee-houses Or were forms of prayer onely recommended and left to liberty men would have some obligation upon them from honour and repute to Take heed to their ministry Besides the Test of
it What God hath not forbidden is lawful True what God hath not forbidden either Generally or particularly either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally or by direct consequence of Scripture is lawful But if our Brethren by Forbidden mean Particularly and Expresly forbidden or Literally forbidden and lay the Proposition thus Whatsoever is not in the letter of Scripture particularly and by name forbidden that is lawful Our Brethren will we trust give us leave to deny the Proposition because they agree with us in determining a hundred things to be sinful and some of them in a most heinous degree sinful that are not particularly and by name forbidden onely as they fall as Specials under some other Generals or by a first and just consequence If they so understand the Major we do think That ministers are in Gods word forbidden plainly enough forbidden having abilities to express their own and their peoples minds to God in publick prayers ordinarily to perform their ministerial acts in prayer by onely reading or reciting forms of prayer composed by others being no Gods nor by any plain designation of God appointed to compose such forms for the use of the church Forbidden 1 By the second commandment as a mean of worship not instituted by God 2 Forbidden by all those texts mentioned in justification of our first argument commanding us To stir up not to neglect our ministerial gifts but as every man hath received the gift so to minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it c. 3 Forbidden by all those texts that command us to worship God in the best manner we can with all our hearts all our souls all our strength not having a male in our flocks to offer a female 4 Forbidden by all those texts that require of us in prayer the highest attention of thoughts intention of mind and fervor of affections All which we have before justified under our five first arguments so as in short we deny the Minor in that first Argument and if all do not think it forbidden in this manner yet we do and our consciences must be the proximate rule of our actions so as it is at least to us forbidden from Rom. 14. 23. § 4 They object in the second place the form of Blessing Num. 6. The forms of Psalms composed by David The Lords prayer The Argument is thus If it were lawful for Christs disciples to use the Lords prayer and for the church to use the form of blessing directed by God himself Num. 6. And for the church in Davids time to use his forms of Psalms Then it is lawful now for ministers having the gift of Prayer ordinarily to perform their ministerial acts in Prayer by the forms prescribed not immediately by God but by men and those no prophets nor persons divinely inspired c. But the former was lawful therefore the latter is also lawful We deny the consequence not onely because we do not think That God ever intended the form of blessing should syllabically be used so often as the Priest blessed the people but onely That the name of the Lord to that sense should be lifted up upon them Nor that Christ ever intended to enjoin his disciples the syllabical-use of the Lords prayer Nor do we read That either the former blessing nor the latter Prayer was so ordinarily used But we find diverse forms both of prayer and blessing used But also Because we think no man hath such authority now to prescribe in matters of worship as God and Christ unquestionably had or as David and other holy Penmen of Scripture had Which this argument must suppose or the consequence must be false But we have spoke to this fully before § 5 A third Argument is this What is matter of meer decency order and circumstance in the worship of God may be lawfully commanded by Superiours and lawfully obeyed by Inferiours But this is matter of meer decency order and circumstance Ergo. We deny the Minor order is not concerned in it that onely respecteth prius posterius first and last Nothing can be decent but the contrary must be indecent there is no medium participationis in the case No sober person will say it is indecent for ministers having the gift of prayer to pray without the prescribed forms of others Circumstances relate to actions as humane actions but the prescribed forms of others in prayer have no such relation to prayer it may be performed without them They must be therefore if at all circumstances appropriated to the action quatenus a religious action and no such circumstances we conceive are left to mens liberty to determin being properly Ceremonies or religious rites which in them have something of homage to God § 6 A Fourth Objection or Argument is this If all the essentials to prayer may be found or observed in the prescribed forms of others Then the minister may in his publick ministry use them But all the essentials to prayer may be found and observed in the use of the prescribed forms of others To justify this some tell us That matter and form are the onely essentials to prayer Others tell us Due affections and grace may be equally exercised in praying by a form To which we answer That Prayer may be considered either in Facto esse as a composition of words and phrases so indeed The essentials are the same as of all other compounded things Matter and Form The due matter of prayer is Things agreable to the will of God The form in the name of Jesus Christ We most freely grant That both these may be found in a form composed and prescribed by men What follows Therefore this form is a good form and it may be used It is granted it may lawfully be read for instruction by the best it may be used as an help for children or men that have not yet attained the gift of prayer All this is true But we are considering Prayer not in this notion but as an human Action and say That a religous action a piece of homage and worship which his minister in the Congregation puts up to him To this action It is essentially necessary not onely that he confesseth sins putteth up petitions c. according to the will of God and that with a sutable exercise of Grace and Sanctified affections but that 1 He useth an audible voice and this all will grant 2 Say we that if he hath them he useth his own gifts not other mens He thus understands his Lord saying to him Go and preach why should he otherwise interpret him saying to him Go and pray When he hath bidden him minister his gifts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and according to the Grace given so to minister Rom. 12. Besides we have declared both our judgments as that and our reasons why we so judge That he who prayeth by reading or reciting the prescribed forms of others cannot pray with the same Attention Intention and fervour essentiall things to acceptable prayer § 7
that should run up and down a market naked or one that should refuse to pull off his hat when he speaketh to his Prince And so for any thing of this nature where is onely a general application of the rules and customs of places for reverence order and decency in all human actions to religious actions If two or three will confusedly be babling together in a meeting for religion we believe superiours may restrain them as well as he may restrain such a confusion in a Town-hall or civil Assembly met for any civil ends For these circumstances it is true again that Dr. Ashton saith p. 50. They must not be left indetermined But all this reacheth not Ceremonies that is Religious rites be they habits or gestures or actions appropriated to Religious actions these are quite other things and must have something of the generical nature of worship in them Because of their appropriation to acts of that nature We say onely That no creature hath power to command those things in Gods worship 1 Which are in Gods word either explicitly forbidden or implicitly as having something of worship in them Or 2 Which the superiour acknowledgeth not in themselves necessary and the inferiour thinks are forbidden Those of the first sort being eminently against Piety Those of the latter sort as eminently against Charity Having thus freely and plainly opened our minds Let us now consider our Authors instances from which he would make the world believe That we little value a Divine precept in acts rites or means of Divine worship § 8 His first instance is our Singing Scriptural Psalms in the meeters of Sternhold and Hopkins which in derision he calls Hopkins and Sternholds Psalms And there is he thinketh the same reason for ex tempore Hymns as for ex tempore Petitions We have already said enough and the learned and judicious Cotton hath said more to answer this pitiful Cavil but that we may be troubled with it no more This objection must be either against the matter of what we sing or the form of the meeter 1 The Matter is Scripture directed by the Spirit of God composed by the Penmen of holy writ we abhor any Singing of other compositions in publick worship 2 It is plain that singing and by such forms hath been ever used as an ordinance of God both in the Churches of Jews and Christians 3 It is manifest not one of many attains the gift of Hymn making It is a known saying Poeta nascitur 4 We do not know that God ever promised his Spirit to teach his people to compose Hymns but he hath promised to teach us what to pray for 5 Singing being the joint action of a congregation cannot possibly be done but by a set form without notorious and eminent confusion It is more then we know That in the publick congregation the people are all to pray aloud together 6 We cannot understand how the metrical forms used by us in Singing make the Psalms we sing more Hopkins and Sternholds then our Bibles are the Translators Bibles 2 For the meeter it makes no alteration in sense onely limits the number of Syllables in a pause for order in Singing We do see many things in the ordinary meeter of our English Psalms which do no better fit the English idiom of our age Then with my body I thee worship fits it to express the honour which a man ows to his wife But we see Davids sense kept in that meeter as the Hebrew sense was much kept especially in material things by the 70 interpreters and therefore we do keep to it And this we think enough to have said to shew the Vanity of his first instance We proceed to his second § 9 Again saith Mr. Freeman when they visit the sick they anoint them not with oyl yet they shall be so far from producing an instance for such a visiting from the Scripture that they shall find the contrary in St. James If they say there is not the same Reason for that anointing now which was then I reply Neither is there the same reason now for unpremeditated prayers forms of prayers composed by others he should have said as was then for now forms are commanded by our Rulers then according to their opinion they were not § 10 In answer to which we first ask will our conformable Brethren then when they visit the sick anoint them with oyl or have they any Rubrick for that How dare they omit it If it were a standing institution of the gospel They are yet a peg higher then we thought off if they also will maintain a power for superiors to abrogate any gospel institutions Was it a temporary practice What an impertinency is it then to urge it § 11 We confess we do not anoint the sick with oyl not onely because we do not know what oyl to use and much depends upon the kind whether it wrought by a natural virtue or by virtue of an institution But because we learn from Mark 6. 13. That anointing with oyl was annexed to the extraordinary and miraculous gift of healing which gift both reason and experience tells us is now ceased So that notwithstanding these two instances Mr. Freeman may see we are consistent enough to our principles And this we take to be something a better answer and more particular then what he supposeth we would say viz. There is not the same reason now That is true but it is further true That God in his providence making the miraculous gifts of healing to cease hath taken away any pretended Reason for that practice Whereas he saith neither is there the same reason for unpremeditate forms now because Rulers command the contrary We answer That Mr. Freemans friends think they were then also commanded But suppose they had been then commanded doth this make a sufficient Reason for a practice in Divine worship that man commandeth it § 12 But because this is so oft repeated as if all the world were drunk with Hobbism Parkerism believing That the Superior commanding not the inferiour obeying must answer for the sin if any be committed by any such obedience Let us discourse this point a little In the first place this must be an exception to the general rule of Gods word which hath told us The soul that sinneth shall dy and the child shall not be punished for the parent or else it must be a new gloss or a thing forgotten by St John when he described sin to us to be A transgression of the law And Thirdly They should do well to tell us which way the obliquity of one creatures action should pass to another creature that he should bear his Brothers sin Again if the command of superiors will justify the Inferiours from guilt in their acts of obedience to their commands The Command of the Pope will do it for all under his jurisdiction and would have done it for us here in England while he was here without controle
allowed to be the Head of the church But our forefathers the Martyrs were not of this impudent Religion If they had they might have saved their lives But let us hear what hath been the opinion of more valuable and ancient Protestants in this case we will instance in two both eminent Bishops of Salisbury The one at the beginning of the Reformation The other dying within a few years last past Bp Jewel and Bp Davenant § 13 What Bishop Jewel thought may be read in his Apology against Harding chap. 2. Divis 7. The subject saith he is bound to obey his Prince how be it not in all things but where Gods glory is not touched These Nobles he speakes of those in Scotland had learned of St. Peter It is better to obey God then man And of the Prophet David It is better to trust in God then in Princes for they are mortal and shall dy Neither may a Godly Prince take it as any dishonour to his estate to see God obeyed before him for he is not God but the minister of God Leo saith Christ determined That we should give to God the things that are Gods and to Cesar the things that are Cesars Verily this is not to rebel against Cesar but to help him c. § 14 In the next place let us hear Bp Davenant in his excellent commentary on the Collossians chap. 2. v. 23. Ignatius Loyola saith he the father of the Jesuites in that Epistle of his which is read in the Jesuites Colledge every month warneth and commandeth them seriously by a blind obedience absolutely to do whatsoever their superiors command not considering whether it be good or profitable yea or no for that saith he takes away the value and merit of obedience It is also the common opinion of the Papists That there ought to be in Christians such an humility of mind that they must not in the least doubt of those things which are commanded by the Church of Rome either to be believed or done in Religion or in the worship of God but we sayth he notwithstanding this truly say That this Blind obedience is not onely foolish but Impious and Irreligious 1 Because we are not bound to obey superiors but in cases wherein they are our superiors now as to Doctrines of Faith and Divine worship God alone is our superior If therefore men indeavour to forge new Doctrines of faith or to bring in a New worship they go beyond the bounds of that power which is committed to them and are not in this thing acknowledged to be our superiors 2 Because the command of an inferiour power doth not oblige to obedience when it contradicteth the command of a superiour power Asts 4. 19. We must rather obey God then man 3 Because no intelligent person will expose himself to the danger of mortal Sinning as the school men speak but whosoever voweth and performeth absolute subjection and blind obedience to man exposeth himself to a manifest hazard for every man may err by commanding those things that are evil According to the Doctrine of our new edition of Divines we would gladly understand how any man can run a danger either of mortal sin or venial either by doing any thing in obedience to the command of superiors 4 Because what is proper to God cannot without great impiety be given to men But an absolute dominion over mens souls bodies is proper to God alone To him the will of man oweth an absolute obedience to him his understanding oweth in all things a prompt assent But those who require this obedience of us use to object That it is not the subjects part to judge of the faith actions of their superiors they seem therefore to recede from their duty when they doubt whether the things be true and lawful which are published and confirmed by the Authority of those who are set over them This he answereth Subjects neither may nor ought with a judgment of Authority to judge of their superiors actions but they may and ought to judge of them so far as concerneth themselves with a judgment of Discretion Aquinas excellently gives the reason of it Every one saith he is bound to examin his own acts according to the knowledge which he hath from God Whether it be natural acquired or infused for he is bound to act according to Reason It is saith he confirmed by the Examples of all pious men who although they did not arrogate to themselves a judgment of Authority upon Magistrates or Prelates yet they used their judgment of Discretion concerning things commanded by them Thus far that Reverend and very Learned man § 15 This is the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches and was wont to be the Doctrine of the Fathers in the Church of England and we humbly offer it to the consideration of our Rulers whether there can be greater factors for Popery in England then those who so boldly assert the duty of Blind Jesuitical Obedience and declaim against the Judgment of private and practical Discretion The first is the very foundation of Popery The latter the foundation of the Protestant Religion § 16 But to proceed with Mr. Freeman he telleth us The Nonconformists have in word granted more then he asketh Let us first know what he asketh then see what they have granted that which he asketh is our concession That it is lawful in the worship of God to do somethings not commanded by God What have the Nonconformists granted He instanceth in three things 1 To command in the circumstances of divine worship what is generally commanded in the word of God 2 To appoint time and place 3 To appoint such circumstances without which the worship of God in the judgment of common Reason Must be indecently and disorderly performed of which he makes the following improvement p. 35. Of the Reasonableness of Divine service 1 A form of prayer is but a circumstance of Prayer and I have proved That if the Magistrate think them convenient they are in the general commanded 2 If he can appoint the time and place which he thinketh most convenient though otherwise it would be less he would fain know a reason why he may not appoint a form which he thinketh most expedient though otherwise it would be less expedient To appoint to begin at such a time is as really a limitation of the Spirit as to appoint a form For the ordinary reason which they speak of it must either be the Reason of the Magistrate or of the People or both If they mean the reason of the people Then the sense is That the Magistrate hath power to appoint such things as the People judge reasonable We thank them for nothing If both we thank them for as much If they mean that Reason which is best without restraining it to any subject I reply That Reason in the Idea doth nothing but as it is somebodie 's Reason Except the Magistrate hath power to command what he apprehendeth agreable
ministers duty in Preaching What is the reason Because he who doth not exercise his own gift in inventing and composing Christ hath bid us Go Preach What then is the meaning of that Have not all Divines agreed to interpret it thus Go stir up the gift that is in you Give your selves to the study of the holy Scriptures and to Meditation Compose discourses of Christ and Gospel-doctrines then communicate them by your voice to people opening to them the sense of the Scriptures applying the will of God reveiled in them to the consciences of all dividing the word of God aright that you may shew your selves workmen that need not be ashamed Christ hath also bid us Pray his great Apostle hath commanded That supplications prayers intercessions and givingthanks be made for all men How come we to interpret this thus Go read a form or forms of words which other men have made for you We do not so interpret Go preach It is true as we hinted before there is a praying in the Spirit which some who have no mind to consider the force of an argument may object to us but we are speaking of Vocal ministerial prayer and what is the will of God in commands which relate to that species of prayer Such prayer alone he can use who in that duty ministreth unto others and every one will grant That there is such a duty A whole Congregation must not pray in the Spirit onely without any voice heard The Question is Whether he who in prayer ministreth to others more fulfilleth the precept of God concerning ministerial prayer then he who readeth or reciteth onely other mens Sermons fulfilleth the precept concerning Preaching We think not § 3 It is yet a farther question If he onely readeth such prayers Because the words used in Scripture in all languages to express reading are quite other from those used to express our duty in praying and the action of Reading and praying are quite differently expressed to us Those who know any thing know That the Hebrews had a great scarcity of words the Radical words in their language hardly bearing the proportion of a fifth part to those in Greek or Latine So as they are forced to make use of the same words to signify sometimes quite contrary actions Ordinarily to signify diverse actions if they have but the least cognation each to other So that it is not so easy to argue from the old Testament upon this Topick Yet we cannot but observe that the words used Hos 14. 2. Joel 2. 17. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We will not be too confident of it but we are not aware of any text in the old Testament where it signifieth that kind of speech which is but the recitation or repetition of words formed by others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed which is generally used to express Reading when it is joined with upon the Lord or upon the name of the Lord doth sometimes signify the action of prayer As it never signifys to read without the addition of The book of the law or the law or some such substantive following it Both Pagnine and Buxtorf say it properly signifyes Clamare voce significativâ verbis expressis conceptis But as we before said the execeding penury of words in that language makes it hard to establish an argument from proper and significant words in it In the Greek the case is much plainer The precepts for prayer are every where expressed there by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. never by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the proper word used to signify reading In short Speaking may be conceived by us as a Generical term and is either Mental or Vocal The first we call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a speaking to the capacity and understanding or sense at least of others so as they may know what we say And this again is twofold 1 The one is The re-forming of words which others have first conceived in their minds and committed to writing for us or which they dictate to us If they be written down or printed for us and we recite them looking upon the characters in the books This we call Reading Criticks tell us That Legere est oculis scripta percurere quoniam literae oculis legi id est collegi videntur This cannot be done without the help of our eyes which gathering up the letters makes a representation of them to our understandings This action the Greeks express by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or else we Reform words conceived by others and dictated to us our ears there gathering up the sounds of them This in English we call Reciting or Repeating The Latines Recitare Repetere from re and cito or re Peto 2 There is a speaking which is the forming of words which we have first formed and our selves conceived in our own hearts Neither Legere nor repetere nor recitare in Latine Nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek are expressive of this action Every one would deride him that being to express the action of him who made an argument or pronounced an Oration should either in Greek say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in Latine Legit orationem The words express Actions specifically distinct so as though we lay a greater stress upon our arguments before mentioned then upon t is yet we cannot think this altogether vain and impertinent we cannot but make a great question Whether if we should think to fulfil the command of God for our duty in Vocal and ministerial prayer by a reading forms ready composed for us we should not come short of what God requires of us in the action and so both mock God and deceive our own souls we can find neither precept nor president for such praying CHAP. VIII The Seventh Argument from the tendency of the principle to level the sacred office of the ministry to the capacity of the meanest of the people stated proved The last from the Vnblest effects of forms universally imposed Three bitter effects or consequents instanced in proved from experience and Reason The conclusion of the Arguments against the lawfulness of prescribed forms to be universally imposed or used § 1 WE proceed to a Seventh Argument That principle which levelleth the performances of the great and sacred office of the ministry to the capacity of the meanest of the people cannot be a true principle But this Principle That it is lawful for a minister of the gospel ordinarily to perform his ministerial acts in prayer by the prescribed forms of others levelleth the performances of the great and sacred office of the ministry to the capacity of the meanest of the people Ergo. That Principle is not true The proposition doth but presume the truth of this That God would never have erected an office or order of persons in his church to