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
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
us before Chap. 3. § 37 c. What he farther saith of the use of them in the Christian church we have answered in that Chap. 3. § 43 44 45 46 47 48 49. In short We think we may say of this as we say of the Papists plea for themselves From Peters being at Rome If they could prove That forms of prayer were universally imposed upon the whole church and used by all ministers in it within 400 years after Christ and so in the ages downward it would not prove either the lawfulness of such general Imposition or use but they shall never be able to prove it while they live Let us therefore leave inquiring What those who lived before us did or thought might lawfully be done and enquire what Christ and his Apostles did or determined lawful to be done While we are disputing about what is lawful and unlawful Authority or practice is a lamentable argument and will never be insisted on by wise and understanding men but for want of such as are better and more cogent It will be a very hard thing to justify all those things to be lawful which were established by councils of as great antiquity as any they can pretend to for the establishment of forms of prayer to be universally used And thus much may serve for an answer to all we have heard or met with pleaded for the lawfulness of a general imposition or use of forms of Prayer in the church We shall onely say That our Brethren dealing with those who in their consciences judge them unlawful We think were concerned to have proved them necessary For certainly if Superiours will think themselves in the least obliged by the Roial law of love they ought not with their meat which they may eat or let alone command to be eaten or not eaten to destroy the souls of their inferiours for whom Christ died Either by tempting them to do what in their consciences they think is sinful or without necessity laying their souls under a guilt for disobeying them if that be true That whosoever obeyeth not the command of his Superiour in a lawful thing sinneth against God CHAP. X. The Conclusion of the discourse nothing said against any particular forms No judging or condemning of those who judge otherwise in the case No unlawfulness concluded to join with those who use pious forms It is reasonable to propose and recommend some forms leaving them at liberty This the onely mean of Comprehension § 1 THat we may not be misunderstood in this discourse we hope every ingenuous Reader will easily understand That we have not levelled any thing in this discourse against any particular forms or books of Prayers In the present question we suppose Forms as good and perfect as the wit and piety of men can make and dispute their state in worship i. e. Whether they may be indiscriminatively imposed or lawfully used by such ministers as God hath blessed with the Gift of prayer We have an equal Reverence for the First compilers of the English Liturgy as the later compilers of the Directory believing they both did famously in their generations We onely think The forms mistaken in their opinion of the lawfulness of an universall imposing or use of them in publick worship § 2 Nor do we judge our selves infallible in our sententiments in this case but as we believe so we speak so we must practice We condemn not our brethren that judge otherwise and accordingly practice We trust God will either to us or them reveil his mind that we shall at length know who are mistaken Let not them judge and condemn us we are in our dissents in the cases anothers servants And that other we take to be our common Lord and Master Jesus Christ Let us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Apostles precept strive for truth walk in what we apprehend to be truth yet walk in love § 3 We do not think it unlawful to join with another praying by the use of forms provided the matter be good and pious We have in such praying nothing to do but to say Amen Whether he who ordinarily doth so doth his ministerial duty We confess That we question But that we may do our duty though he faileth in his we do not question If any Nonconformists amongst the ministers or people judge otherwise it must be upon some principle forreign to this discourse such as that of scandal c. Which is not our business here to argue § 4 We do think it not onely lawful but Reasonable That some Forms of Prayer or Directions at least should be proposed and commended by the approbation of our Superiours and left at liberty That those may use them for some time at least who have not attained to the gift of prayer or may distrust themselves or not have their usual natural liberty to express themselves in prayer And indeed this is the onely medium we can fancy for a just Comprehension and restoring to an use in the church of all Valuable Dissenters We humbly leave our thoughts in this case and the Candor of our Spirits to the Judgment of all Whether our superiors or Brethren in this famous church FINIS
from Scripture partly from Reason § 2 We judge so from Scripture 1 Pet. 4. 10 11. As every man hath received the gift so minister it one to another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God If any man speak as the oracles of God if any one minister c. The Apostle is evidently there speaking of gospel ministrations and giving a Rule about them his Rule is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As every man hath received the Gift ministring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the substantive to that must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This is the same which the Apostle expresseth in a little different phrase Rom. 12. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As God hath divided to every one a measure of faith v. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to the Grace given to us The Apostle makes the gift 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which we are to minister and we are commanded to minister according as we have received it Now in administrations by other mens forms and prayer is the one half of our ministry we neither minister The gift nor as every one hath received the gift but as we find in the Book or in the forms prescribed A gift indeed we use Reading is a gift but not the gift of prayer § 3 But if we had no such express Scripture The very light of Nature and Reason would make this very probably appear to be the will of God to us 1 Because we use in an act of worship a less proper less natural and perfectly human mean and in the mean time we omit a more proper more natural Divine mean 2 Because wee cannot use other mens forms omitting our own gift but we must omit a mean given us by God for the act to use a mean under no Special divine prescription And we think it but reasonable that nothing but a special divine prescription should controle a general rule whether written in Scripture or approving it self to our Reason Especially if it be in matter of Divine worship and to be done ordinarily This is our first Argument delivered and opened with as much freedom and plainness as we are able to express it in We have indeed met with Six or Seven answers but such as we cannot acquiesce in we will fairly relate them all and shew why they apear to us by no means satisfactory § 4 Some have gone roundly to work denying any such gift as the gift of prayer But this is either to deny what is evident to sense viz. That there are some persons able fitly to express their minds to God in prayer or to deny the Scriptures which say Ja. 1. 17. That Every good gift and every perfect gift cometh from above from the father of Lights Besides That it stubbeth up all Liturgies of Prayer by the roots none it seems having any ability to make them But those who have thus answered have been very few and very invaluable § 5 Others therefore tell us That all ministers have not this gift and it were unreasonable to presume it in such a clergy as that of England consisting of 9 or 10000 persons To this we answer If they who answer thus intend by all Ministers all who are ordained by men or all those whom the church in some stress of necessity is forced to make use off in stead of ministers have not the gift of prayer we do agree it But if they mean that All those who are sent of God into the ministry have not the gift of Prayer we think we should too much trespass upon the reverence we owe to God if we should grant That hee sendeth any into his work whom hee hath not first fitted for all the parts of it 2 We do grant That there may be such a state of the church when for the present it cannot be furnished with perfect ministers by perfect we mean such as are tolerably fit for all the parts of their work Our forefathers experienced this both in the beginnings of our Reformation in K. Edw. in Qu. Eliz. time as also did our Forefathers Brethren in other churches They were so far from finding persons enough fitted to pray preach that were well affected to a Reformation that they had much a do to find such persons enough that could read And it is said the Priviledge in our courts of Judicature which persons guilty of theft separated from Burglary other crimes have comes from this defect of former ages And we do believe that the Orginal or continuance of Liturgies upon the Reformation owes it self in a great measure to this But we say These were but Tanquam ministers better these then none their Reading may give the people some instruction But 3ly suppose some that must be made use off for the present necessity of the church have not the gift must they therefore who have it be restrained in the use of it We do indeed think that it will be hard to find nine or ten thousand scholars in England furnished with the gift either of praying or preaching in any tolerable manner and one great reason is Because they have been so tied to a Liturgy that they have never applied themselves to the study of the Scriptures and their own hearts as they should but to tie up all to the use of such forms is the ready way never to have such a number Therefore this answer is far from a satisfaction § 6 Another hath told us That the same gift may serve for several uses and he that useth it to one use is in some cases excused from using it in another especially if he be hindred by authority This gift he saith may be used another way both in the worship of God out of it In the worship of God because the same faculty which enableth a man to utter a good prayer to God enableth him to make a good exhortation to people Out of the worship else those Laymen who have it and are no ministers sin This is Ireneus Freemans answer in his book called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But certainly this author had forgot whereof he spake By the gift of prayer must be understood An ability in man fitly to express his mind to God in prayer in asking things agreeable to his will Can this gift or faculty be used in making good orations exhortations to the people or can any thing be spoken more absurdly then to say That the gift of prayer may be put to some other use out of Gods worship Surely the author doth not think it lawful to pray to Saints Angels But by the Gift of prayer he certainly understands nothing but the gift of speaking or at most of speaking sense But surely the gift or ability of working in Brass iron wood are differing abilities or gifts though at several times they be exercised by the same person proceed from the same reasonable soul But distrusting this answer he hath a Fourth § 7 That
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
forms of prayer for all because some ministers or that go for ministers can do nothing in prayer without might with less guilt and reproach to our church cure that disease destroy that necessity which is but a Chimera made by their own fancies § 19 The Reverend Author of Libertas Ecclesiastica p. 98. c. hath given us Four or Five farther Reasons as he calls them for forms of prayer which in the last place we will consider He saith Hereby a fit true right and well ordered way of worship in addresses to God may be best secured to the church in the publick service of God that neither God nor his worship may be dishonoured There being many easily discernable ways of considerable miscarriage in the pubiick offices of the church even by those who err not in the Doctrines of Religion To which we answer 1 That alone is a fit true right and well ordred worship which God hath instituted Worship is his Homage and there 's all the reason in the world he should prescribe to his own Homage 2 That God in the Church should be truly fitly rightly and in due order worshipped is reasonable but that it should aforehand be secured That he should be so worshipped by ministers who are but men and may err is not possible Nor will forms secure it which ministers may if they will be careless and many have done it read falsely and disorderly enough There is therefore no security to be had in the case caution may be used The Rulers may say to Archippus Take heed to thy ministry 3 We do think That for twenty years together The worship of God was truly fitly rightly and in a well ordered manner performed in hundreds of congregations in England where no forms of prayer were used in the eye of all sober reasonable men better then where they were used we therefore see nothing here but a flourish of words § 20 His Second reason is That needful comprehensive petitions for all common and ordinary Spiritual and Outward wants of our selves and others with fit thanksgivings may not in the publick supplications of the church be omitted which considering men as they are can no other way be so well or at all assured To which we answer Pudet haec opprobria nobis dici potuisse c. Let it be spoken to the shame of the church of God in England and it shall be for a lamentation in it if in a church whose territories are so large there cannot be found persons enough sufficient without others prescriptions to them to put up full and comprehensive petitions not onely for common and ordinary but for emergent and extraordinary Spiritual and Outward wants of any persons with fit thanksgivings But Secondly If there be not men enough to do this yet certainly there are some and very many ministers of all persuasions that can do it what need therefore is there farther Then that such Forms be composed extant and left at liberty Must those be restrained that are able to perform their duty because there are others that either cannot or will not set themselves to the due performance of it Besides That this Argument holds stronger for forms of Sermons too to be imposed For those who know how in preaching to reveil to people the whole counsel of God most certainly know how to put up full and comprehensive petitions for all common and ordinary Spiritual Outward wants of themselves and others § 21 Mr. Falconers Third Reason is That the Affections and hearts of pious and Religious men may be more devout and better united in their presenting their Services to God where they may consider beforehand what particular prayers and thanksgivings they are to offer up and come the more ready and prepared to join in them This is an advantage of which many are deprived by a bad temper of mind sucked in by prejudice or swallowed down by carelesness To which we answer that in this pretended reason we can see nothing but words Are not we to ask of God for our selves or others all good things under such limitations as his word directeth submitting our petitions for temporary things to the will and wisdom of God Needs there any more when we come to prayer then a general composure of our Spirits to seek God for all good things we or others stand in need of If not what needs such a particular foreknowledge of the words and phrases to be used in asking If the minister transgresseth his Rule and asks what is not according to the will of God and that he may do by reading forms falsely may not people withold their Amen The Affections and hearts of all good people though the publick prayers be not by prescribed forms are united 1 As to the duty They all say to God Thy face will wee seek 2. As to the matter of the duty To Confess all sin Original Actual To beg of God whatsoever they or other stand in need of which God hath promised to give For the particular phrases There is no such need of a foreknowledge nor will it at all as we we have proved before promove but rather hinder devotion and affection § 22 His Fourth Reason is That such difficult parts of church-offices as Baptism and the Supper of the Lord the matter of which requireth great consideration That they may be aright and clearly expressed as both Conformists and many Nonconformists acknowledge is evident by the many disputes about them by men neither of mean parts nor dangerous designs may by a considerate care in the composing of a form be so framed That men of greatest understandings may with readiest assent entertain them and that they may be sufficiently vindicated against the the boldest opposers We do confess that we have met with some of our Brethren who lay some stress on this But we are no more taken with meer words from Noncon then from other men And we cannot understand What there is in the Administration of the Sacraments that makes Forms of Prayer c. necessary For the Sacrament of the Lords Supper where if any where it seemes most necessary What is there in that Administration more then 1 The Sanctification or Consecration of the elements 2 The Distribution of them and words used in the distribution 3 The Application of the General acts of the ministerial office Prayer and Exhortation to that particular action For the first the Apostle hath taught us that Sanctification or Consecration is by the word Prayer The word is nothing but the words of Institution which are in Scripture The Reading of which declares Christs separation of those elements for that use and our separation of them in his name for and during that time for that ordinance For other words and forms of consecration we know no need of them no warrant for them and believe them of ill original and consequence Now any one that can read a form can read the
Scripture For the distribution of them It is no further work then every hand can do what words to use Our Saviour hath set down from which we know no need to vary In using of them can be no errour in deviating from them indeed there may For the Application of Exhortation Prayer to that act surely he that can Pray and Preach can do that The like is to be said of the other Sacrament so that a Righteous law that all should keep to the Scriptural-institution is enough we think in that case And wonder at their fancies That think of such a special need of a form in those cases believing no pretence of necessity but what depends upon a fancy of a reasonableness to add to the Divine institution in the case of which we cannot be convinced For God-fathers and God-mothers and Forms of questions to be propounded to them we understand neither necessity nor use of them much less any particular Forms of words besides those the Scripture gives us for Consecration or to be used in the Distribution of the elements in the Supper The points in dispute can this way come into no dispute that we know nor any error infused into poeple It is mens varying from the Institution in this case which alone hath given advantage to the Envious one to sow tares If any minister having the elements of bread and wine before him shall read I The words of Institution as delivered by the Evangelists or the Apostle Paul Then solemnly praying to God First That as he had instituted that ordinance for the remembrance of Christ The shewing forth of his death The communion of his body and bloud c. So he would at that time bless it to those ends c. Pardoning his peoples want of preparation and accepting them in their desires to honour him in his own institutions c. Or to that purpose Then giving the bread repeating onely our Saviours words with but a small and that necessary change Take eat This is the body of Christ in stead of my body which was broken for you And after the cup repeating onely Christs words This cup is the new Testament in the bloud of Christ c. We would fain know if this man concluding all with a prayer hymn of thanksgiving had not duly administred the Sacrament of the Lords Supper If he had what need is there of forms of words in this case other then what the holy Scriptures have given us For as to the Prayer before and after as we conceive him a pitiful minister and very unfit to be trusted with that office which often calleth him to pray upon particular emergent occasions for which a form cannot be made ready if he cannot without it apply his petitions to the particular business in hand viz. The administration of the Sacrament So if he distrusteth himself he may compose himself a form of prayer fitted for that purpose For the administration of that ordinance is seldom or never so sudden as to surprice a minister So for the other Sacrament Will any one dare to say That a lawful minister having water before him who shall first beg of God To own and bless his own institution To wash away the sin of the person to be baptized with his own bloud And to grant that it may be born again of water and the Spirit c. Or to the like purpose And then having had a previous knowledge That the parent is a believer i. e. one who either hath a true faith or maketh profession of such true faith shall take water and pour or sprinkle it upon the childs face or dip the person in it saying J. Baptize thee in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is not truly Baptized A prayer and thanksgiving usually concludes the Action But what need here of a form more then the Scripture hath furnished us with or directed us to May one minister say J. Baptize thee c. Another Let this person be Baptized c. A third Be thou Baptized c For our parts we think the difference not so much as to require a prescribed form to reconcile and should not doubt but the person were truly Baptized under any of those variations of words Water being poured or sprinkled on it and the action declared to be in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost We conclude as we said before That we can see nothing in either Sacrament but the inventions of men superadding to the institutions of the gospel diverse rites and actions of which Christ never spake which makes any pretence for a need of Forms in the administration of them There being nothing to be done in them that requireth any special ability comparable to that which Preaching Praying according to the various states of the church and the particular cases of souls in it doth require § 23 Mr. Falconers Fift Reason is thus by himself expressed To be an evidence to other churches and future times after what way and manner we worship God and that both the matter and expression of our service to him is sound and pious in our general and common worship And this may be a full Testimony That such a church receiving the true faith and expressing a right way of worship is both a true and in its measure a pure and incorrupt church We answer 1 Where hath God required the leaving any such Testimony 2 If he had forms of prayer had not been sufficient without forms of Sermons too 3 While we declare our selves Christians and that we worship God according to his word we leave a sufficient Testimony that we are a true church of God 4 A confession of faith publickly owned subscribed unto by all ministers which we never opposed doth far better effect this which may be done without making a new act or mode of worship § 24 Mr. Falconer at last comes to this argument from example which yet he doth not lay so much stress upon as to aver They evince a necessity of Forms but he thinks the countenance the lawfulness and expediency of them For what he saith about the Lords prayer it is answered by us before In short It reacheth not the case There can be no conclusion from Christs power to the power of ordinary Governors now in the church Or from the lawfulness of Christs disciples using a Form of prayer dictated by Christ himself in that time before his ascension and the effusion of the Holy Ghost to the lawfulness of ministers in after ages using a bundle of forms neither composed by Christ nor by his Apostles Besides the probabilities we have before offered that even then when it was first given it was not intended for a form of words nor do we ever read of it after so used but as a more general direction for the ordinary matter of our prayers § 25 As to what Mr. Falconer saith further of Scripturalforms it hath had its answer from
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
That the use of forms not particularly directed by God or parts of holy writ by reading them doth not prejudice devotion by hindring Attention Intention Fervor § 39 Our Reverend Brothers Second argument is thus by him stated p. 22 Because it is generally acknowledged that the singing of Psalms of Prayer and Praise may be advantageously performed by a set form of words and the holy Scriptures are not the less edifying nor the less applicable to our selves because they are conteined in set forms of words and both in reading the Scriptures and in prayer our hearts ought to be moved towards God though in something a different manner The Argument is this What in singing of Psalms and Reading and Applying the Scriptures doth not prejudice Devotion That in Prayer doth not prejudice devotion But set forms of words doth not as we confess prejudice Devotion in singing Psalms of Prayer and Praise nor in the reading and applying the Scriptures Ergo. The whole argument may be granted For it concludeth nothing against us Proceeding ex ignoratione Elenchi upon a mistake of the Question which is not about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the use of set forms But of forms of words set us by men confessedly not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not authorized and directed by God to make such forms for general use by any special command The Minor therefore should have been laid thus But set forms of words in singing Psalms of Prayer and Praise being no parts of holy writ nor made by God or penmen of holy writ do not hinder devotion And if it be so formed we shall deny it for it is most certainly false § 40 For reading the Scriptures our Reverend Brother knoweth We can both shew him Precepts in Scripture for it and also Promises made to it if he can shew us but one precept for reading forms of Prayer or one promise made to it he will then have said something These precepts and promises are of that moment in the case That they make Reading the Scriptures on Gods part A sacred institution on our part A necessary duty And by reason of the promise to be done in faith Let our Reverend Brother if he can say as much for forms of Prayer made by men in these days § 41 The same may be said of the Psalms of prayer and praise which we sing They are such forms as God hath canonized and to which in our singing we conceive our selves limited Our Brother knows or may know we are as much against singing by others set forms as against Praying ordinarily by the set forms of others Besides it poseth us to fancy how it is possible that a whole Congregation should sing the same thing together otherwise then by a set form The peoples voices that we know are no where required in Prayer And for the meeter which some make an objection if it be not consonant to the Psalms in prose we abhor it if it be The words are but the words of Scriptures limited by measures for the apparent order and decency of the action singing being Gods institution it is not to be doubted but it may by a careful soul be performed by such Attention Intention and Holy workings of the soul upon God as he hath directed and will accept in the action § 42 But neither is the Major of our Reverend Brothers argument unquestionable for he knows and confesseth That the workings of the soul upon God and the motions of the soul towards God in Prayer are different from its workings and motions in Reading and Singing In Reading and Singing their should be 1 Some contemplation and intuition of God 2 Attention to what we are about 3 An exercise of faith believing what we read and sing to be truth But in prayer is required A more immediate intuition and contemplation of God 2 A striving and wrestling with God for the obteining what we ask therefore it is expressed By calling upon God crying to him pouring out our souls before him a wrestling with him a listing up of our souls it must be with strong crys groans Heb. 5. 9. Rom. 8. 26. Now that this cannot be done in reading of forms prescribed by fallible men or at least not so well done as when the soul hath nothing to do but meerly to look up to heaven and thrust out its own words by which it expresseth its own conceptions is to us next to a demonstration Besides there is as we conceive another Act of faith to be excercised in Prayer then in Reading the word c. viz. A particular motion of the soul devolving itself upon God and trusting in him for the granting of what we ask of him But enough is said to shew That neither is the Major of our Reverend Brothers Argument unquestionable § 43 His third Argument to induce us to believe that such forms do not hinder devotion is in p. 123. laid thus Because all the ages of the church from the First centuries have used them as an advantage to Religion and it is not at all probable that such excellent devout and religious men as the Fourth and Fifth Centuries abounded with should be so stupid and dull spirited as not any of them to discern between the helps and hindrances of devotion in matters of most ordinary practice wherefore though many mens minds may be most pleased and delighted with a variey of expression yet There is no prejudice to piety from a set form farther then this is caused by a prejudice against a set form and by want of a Religious temper to join in it The Argument is this What all ages of the Christian church especially such devout and judicious men as lived in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries judged no hindrance to devotion is no hindrance But all ages of the Christian church more especially those devout and Religious men who lived in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries judged prescribed forms of prayer to be read no hindrance to devotien Ergo. The Major is onely proved by It is not probable for certainly it was possible The Minor is taken for granted § 44 In the first place we cannot but observe The phrases our Reverend Brother useth they used them as an advantage to Religion So they might and yet they might be a disadvantage to the particular devotion of a great Number We do believe that the English Liturgies established in Ed. 6. Qu. Eliz. time was a great advantage to Religion in the nation in general so great an ignorance having prevailed upon the nation in general in the times of Popery as few were able to read much less to compose prayers But the tying of those to the use of it whom God had furnished with abilities that they needed it not was notwithstanding this A great disadvantage both to their particular devotion who had such gifts and so our Brethren at Francfort judged in Qu. Maries time and the general devotion of the whole church as to future
times both hindring ministers care to study the Scriptures and to improve in spiritual ministerial gifts and making an engine of perpetual discord from that time to this and which hath been made use of for to deprive the church of God of the gifts and abilities of hundreds of able godly and painful ministers while in the mean time many have crept into the employment of it being by Liturgies and Homilies now made so easy for them of whom every one who hath any concern for Gods glory or the churches repute hath cause to blush and be ashamed § 45 But Secondly we would see it proved That all the devout and judicious men in the five first Centuries That is for five hundred yeares after Christ either judged Prescribed forms of prayer to be ordinarily used by all ministers in their publick ministrations advantageous to devotion or that they so used them We often hear of this But when we call for proof we can meet with nothing but Gloria patri c. Sursum corda Where we desire it may be observed That a proof that in that time there were some forms extant or used by some in some particular churches will not reach the case We are not against a form to be composed proposed and left at liberty that those may use it who either have not or durst not trust to their own gift We farther know That there then might be and still may be some particular reasons in some particular churches which was the cause of the Canon of the Milevitan Council in regard of the errors of Pelagius being in matters of Doctrine ordinarily falling into ministers Confessions and Petitions And if in such a stress as that There could be proved a temporary imposition of the use of forms of sound words in prayer upon ministers who are suspected tainted in matters of doctrine we should not oppose it § 46 But whom doth our Brother call The church in the fourth and fifth Centuries or the three preceding or how doth it appear to him or can it appear to us That they generally so judged of forms of prayer or so generally used them as helps to devotion Certainly our Brother doth not call the 22 or 32 or if there were 42 Bishops in the Council of Laodicea more none speaks of the church in that age Besides that if there were 42 it is possible that 20 of them might be of another mind for we know that in councils the Major part must carry it let the excess be never so small Yet That Council of Laodicea saith nothing of stated forms of prayer cap. 18. onely orders prayers to be poured out morning and evening but that they should be read or recited out of a book given that Council saith not Nor doth the Third Council of Carthage Can. 23. quoted by our Reverend Brother p. 106. speak any thing at all nay it plainly hinteth us the quite contrary viz. That ministers were wont to compose their own prayers onely in regard it was a time of errour they required the weaker sort of ministers not to use the prayers they had made for their use without first shewing them to their more able Brethren The whole canon as Caranza gives it is this That none in their prayers should name the Father for the Son or the Son for the Father and when they stood at the Altar They should direct their Prayers to the Father And whatsoever prayers any minister should write for himself he should not use them till he had conferred them with his more able Brethren Doth not this Canon plainly imply They had no publick set forms at that time for if they had there could be no such mistakes as it is made against This was about the year 398. For the Milivitan councill Anno 402. It doth indeed decree in that overspreading floud of Pelagianism That the prayers agreed upon by the Council should be used in that Province it doth not say no other onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No others against the faith should be used It doth not follow That because set prescribed forms were advantageous to devotion in that African Province so tainted in its ministry with Pelagianism that therefore they are Universally so our Reverend Brother is mistaken therefore in saying That we hold they were in use for 1300 years upon the account of these Canons for we hold no such thing nor see any pretence for it from these Canons § 47 And for the Centuries preceding we do not think it worth the while for us to write over again what hath been said almost by all who have wrote Critically upon the writings of the Ancients to shew the horrible imposture of the Liturgies said to be made by St. James St. Mark St. Andrew St. Peter St. Mathew Clemens Dionis Areop c. We onely shall say this That they are so generally rejected by all sober and learned Authors both Papists and Protestants that we stand amazed to hear our Reverend Brother so much as naming them Let those that are at leisure read Morneium de Missâ cap. 2. What a lamentable shift it is to tell us That they have undergone diverse alterations Who altered them In what things How doth it appear Those who know any thing know it was the interest of the Church of Rome to have a sottish ignorant inferiour clergy and that these could not do their work without Liturgies and therefore it was their concern First to have them made Then to avouch their original as high as they could It pleased God in their hast in this business to let them slip into most notorious errors ascribing Liturgies to Chrysostom Basil c. Where were prayers for persons not in being for some hundreds of years after and Doctrines averred That all know the Church never knew for many years after Now when the forgery is thus detected for any Protestants to tell us it is true There are some manifest interpolations which are of a later date but the Liturgies are ancient is both gratis dictum a thing can never be proved and a fair offer at the destruction of our most convincing argument of the Popish abominable forgery § 47 For what Mr. Falconer saith about Constantines composing godly prayers for his souldiers It is a good argument that the church had then no publick Liturgies for surely Constantine needed not then have made any and it had been a great derogation from the honour of the church In short our Reverend Brother might have remembred That his Majesties Commissioners at the Savoy replied to that part of his Majesties Commission which required them to compare the English Liturgy with the Ancient Liturgies of the pure and primitive church That they could not find any authentick record of any Liturgy generally imposed upon any national church for more then 300 years after Christ we believe they might have said 600 and did upon the point challenge the opposite Commissioners to justify that which they make their