fault with it and while we took it to be a defective disorderly and inconvenient mode of Worship it would be our sin to use it of choice while we may prefer a more convenient way what ever we ought to do in case of necessity when we must worship God inconveniently or not at all And as to our people for whose edification and not destruction we have our power or offices we have taken that course as far as we are able to understand which most probably tended to their good and to prevent their hurt and separation from the Church and consequently that course which did most conduce to his Majesties ends and to his real service and the Churches peace none of which would be promoted by our obtruding that upon our people which we know them unable to digest or by our hasty offending them with the use of that which we are forced to blame and are endeavouring to correct and alter And we see not how it can be justly intimated that we use no part of it when we use the Lords Prayer the Creed the Commandments the Psalms the Chapters and some other parts and how much more you expect we should have used that we might have escaped this brand of Ingratitude we know not But we know that Charity suffereth long and thinketh no evil 1 Cor. 13 4 5. and that we have not attempted to obtrude any mode of Worship on our Brethren but desired the liberty to use things of that nature as may conduce to the benefit of our Flocks And as we leave them to judge what is most beneficial to their own Flocks who know them and are upon the place so it is but the like freedome which we desire We are loath to hurt our people knowingly The time is short if you will answer our reasonable Proposals it will not be too late at the expiration of our Commission or the date of the reformed Liturgie to use it greater liberty hath been used about Liturgies in purer times of the Church with less offence and accusation It can be no just cause of offence to mind them of their duty as they do us of ours telling us It is our duty to imitate the Apostles practise in a special manner to be tender of the Churches peace and to advise of such Expedients as may conduce to the healing of breaches and uniting those that differ for preserving of the Churches peace we know no bettter nor more efficatious way then our set Liturgie there being no such way to keep us from Schism as to speak all the same thing according to the Apostle If you look to the time past by our Duties we suppose you mean our Faults for it is not Duty when it 's past If you in these words respect onely the time present and to come we reply 1. The Liturgie we are assured will not be a less but a more probable means of Concord after the desired Reformation then before the defects and inconveniences make it less fit to attain the end 2. VVhether the Apostle by speaking the same thing did mean either all using this Liturgie of ours or all using any one form of Liturgie as to the words may easily be determined This is of much later date unless you will denominate the whole form of the Lords Prayer and some little parts And those that affirm that the Apostles then had any other must undertake the task of proving it and excusing the Churches for loosing and dis-using so precious a Relict which if preserved would have prevented all our strifes about these things And in the mean time they must satisfie our Arguments for the Negative as 1. If a Liturgie had been indited by the Apostles for the Churches being by universal Officers inspired by the Holy Ghost and so of universal use it would have been used and preserved by the Church as the Holy Scriptures were But so it was not Ergo no such Liturgie was indited by them for the Churches 2. If a prescript form of words had been delivered them there would have been no such need of exhorting them to speak the same thing for the Liturgie would have held them close enough to that And if the meaning had been see that you use the same Liturgie some word or other to some of the Churches would have acquainted us with the existence of such a thing and some reproofs we should have found of those that used various Liturgies or formed Liturgies of their own or used extemporary Prayers and some express Exhortations to use the same Liturgie or Forms but the holy Scripture is silent in all those matters It is apparent therefore that the Churches then had no Liturgie but took liberty of extemporate Expressions and spoke in the things of God as men do in other matters with a natural plainness and seriousness suiting their Expressions to the subjects and occasions And though Divisions began to disturb their Peace and holy Orders the Apostle in stead of prescribing them a form of Diâ—ine Services for their unity and concord do exhort them to use their gifts and liberties aright and speak the same thing for matter avoiding Disagreements though they used not the same words 3. Just. Martyr Tertull. and others sufficiently intimate to us that the Churches quickly after the Apostles did use the personal Abilities of their Pastours in Prayer and give us no hint of any such Liturgie of Apostolical fabrication and imposition and therefore doubtless there was nothing for it could not have been so soon lost or neglected 4. It is ordinary with those of the contrary Judgement to tell us that the extraordinary Gifts of the Primitive Christians were the reason why there were no prescribed forms in those times and that such Liturgies came in upon the ceasing of those Gifts and 1 Cor. 14. describeth a way of publick worshipping unlike to prescript forms of Liturgie so that the matter of Fact is proved and confessed And then how fairly the words of the Apostle exhorting them to speak the same thing are used to prove that he would have them use the same Forms or Liturgie we shall not tell you by any provoking Aggravations of such abuse of Scripture And indeed for all the miraculous Gifts of those times if prescript Forms had been judged by the Apostles to be the fittest means for the concord of the Churches it is most probable they would have prescribed such considering 1. That the said miraculous Gifts were extraordinary and belonged not to all nor to any at all times and therefore could not suffice for the ordinary publick Worship 2. And those Gifts began even betimes to be abused and need the Apostles Canons for their regulation which he giveth them in that 1 Cor. 14. without a prescript Liturgie 3. Because even then divisions had made not onely an entrance but an unhappy progress in the Churches to cure which the Apostle exhorts them oft to Unanimity and Concord without exhorting
frigescente devotione cum negligerentur jeiâ—nia inductum Quadrag à Sacerdotibus But when you come to describe your Fast you make amends for the length by making it indeed no Fast To abstain from meats and drinks of delight where neither the thing nor the delight is profitable to further us in our duty to God is that which we take to be the duty of every Christian all the year as being a part of our mortication and self-denial who are commanded to crucifie the flesh and to make no provision to satisfie the lusts of it and to subdue our bodies but when those meats and drinks do more help then hinder us in the service of God we take it to be our duty to use them unless when some other accident forbids it that would make it otherwise more hurtful And for fasting till Noon we suppose it is the ordinary way of dyet to multitudes of Sedentary persons both Students and Trades-men that find one meal a day sufficient for nature If you call this fasting your poor Brethren fast all their life time and never knew that it was fasting But to command hard Labourers to do so is but to make it a fault to have health or to do their necessary work We beseech you bring not the Clergie under the suspition of Gluttony by calling our ordinary wholsome temperance by the name of fasting Sure Princes may feed as fully and delightfully as we yet Solomon saith Wo to thee O Land when thy King is a Child and thy Princes eat in the morning Blessed art thou O Land when thy King is the Son of Nobles and thy Princes eat in due season for strength and not for drunkenness For meer sensual delight it is never lawful And when it is for strength it is not to be forbidden unless when by accident it will iâ—fer a greater good to abstain Eccl. 20. 16 17. so Prov. 31. 4 6. It is not for Kings to drink wine nor Princes strong drink Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish and wine to those that be of heavy hearts Nor does the Act of Parliament 5 of Eliz. forbid it We dare not think a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded Nor does the Act determine any thing about Lent Fast but onely provide for the maintenance of the Navy and of Fishing in order thereunto as is plain by the Act. Besides we conceive that we must not so interpret one Act as to contradict another being still in force and unrepealed Now the Act of 1 Eliz. confirms the whole Liturgie and in that the religious keeping of Lent with a severe penalty upon all those who shall by open words speak any thing in derogation of any part thereof and therefore that other Act of 5 Elizab. must not be interpreted to forbid the religious keeping of Lent If when the express words of a Statute are cited you can so easily put it off by saying it does not forbid it and you dare not think that a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded and you must not interpret it as contradicting that Act which confirms the Liturgie we must think that indeed we are no less regardful of the Laws of the Governours than you But first we understand not what authority this is that you set against the King and Parliament as supposing they will not forbid what it commands You call it Christs Church we suppose you mean not Christ himself by his Apostles infallibly directed and inspired If it be the National Church of England they are the Kings Subjects and why may he not forbid a Ceremony which they command or why should they command it if he forbid it If it be any Forreign Church there 's none hath power over us If it be any pretended head of the Church universal whether Pope or general Council having power to make Laws that bind the whole Church it is a thing so copiously disproved by Protestants against both the Italian and French Papists that we think it needless to confute it nor indeed dare imagine that you intend it We know not therefore what you mean But whatever you mean you seem to contradict the forecited Article of the Church of England that makes all humane Laws about Rites and Ceremonies of the Church to be unchangeable by each particular National Church And that it is not necessary that Ceremonies or Traditions be in all places one or utterly like We most earnestly beseech you be cautious how you obtrude upon us a Forreign Power under the name of Christs Church that may command Ceremonies which King and Parliament may not forbid whether it be one man or a thousand we fear it is against our Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacie for us to own any such Power And not presuming upon any immodest challenge we are ready in the defence of those Oathes and the Protestant Religion to prove against any in an equal conference that there is no such power and for the Statutes let the words themselves decide the Controversie which are these Be it enacted That whosoever shall by Preaching Teaching Writing or open Speech notifie that any eating of Fish or forbearing of Flesh mentioued in this Statute is of aâ—y necessity for the saving of the Soul of man or that it is the Service of God otherwise than as other politick Laws are and be that then such persons shall be punished as the spreaders of false News are and ought to be And whereas you say the Act determines not any thing about Lent Fast it speaks against eating Flesh on any dayes now usually observed as Fish-dayes and Lent is such And the sense of the Act for the Lyturgy may better be tryed by this which is plain than this reduced to that which is more obscure The Observation of Saints dayes is not as of Divine but of Ecclesiastical Institution and therefore it is not necessary that they should have any other ground in Scripture than all other Institutions of the same nature so that they be agreeable to the Scripture in the general end for the promoting â—iâ—ty and the observation of them was ancient as appears by the Rituals and Lyturgies and by the joint consent of Antiquity and by the antient Translations of the Bible as the Syriack and Ethiopick where the Lessons appointed for Holy dayes are noted and set down the former of which was made neer the Apostles times Besides our Saviour himself kept a Feast of the Churches Institution viz. the Feast of the Dedication St. John 10. 22. The chief end of these dayes being not Feasting but exercise of Holy Duties they are fitter called Holy-dayes than Feastivals and though they be all of like nature it doth not follow that they are equal the People may be dispensed with for their work after the Service as Authority pleases The other names are left in the Calender not that they should be so
Grace and the Canon saith It is an honourable badge whereby the Infant is dedicated to him that dyed on the Cross we are signified with it in token that hereafter we shall not be ashamed to confess the Faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight c. now if a thing may be commanded meerly as a decent Circumstance of Worship yet it is unproved that a thing in its nature as instituted and in the primary intention is thus Sacramentally to dedicate and engage us in Covenant to God by signifying the Grace and Duty of the Covenant be lawfully cammanded by man 1. Decent Circumstances are necessary in genere There must be some fit time place gesture vesture as such utensils c. But that there be some such dedicating ingaging Signs in our Covenanting with God signifying the Grace of the Covenant and our state and duty as Soldiers under Christ besides Gods Sacraments this is not necessary in genere and therefore it is not left to man to determine de specie 2. If there be any reason for this use of the Cross it must be such as was in the Apostles dayes and concerneth the universal Church in all ages and places and then the Apostles would have taken care of it Thus much here in brief of Signes and more anon when you again call us to it Sect. 9. To the second That it is not a violation of Christs Royalty to make such Laws for decency but an exercise of his Power and Authority which he hath given to the Church and the disobedience to such Commands of Superiours is plainly a violation of his Royalty As it is no violation of the Kings Authority when his Magistrates command things according to his Laws but disobedience to the Command of those injunctions of his Deputies is violation of his Authority Again it can be no impeachment of Christs Laws as insufficient to make such Laws for decency since our Saviour as is evident by the Precepts themselves did not intend by them to determine every minute and circumstance of time place manner of performance and the like but only to command in general the substance of those Duties and the right ends that should be aimed at in the performance and then left every man in particular whom for that purpose he made reasonable to guide himself by Rules of reason for private Services and appointed Governours of the Church to determine such particularities for the publick Thus our Lord commanded Prayers Fasting c. But for the times and places of performance he did not determine every of them but left them to be guided as we have said So that it is no impeachment of his Laws as insufficient to make Laws for determining those particulars of decency which himself did not as is plain by his Precepts intend to determine but left us Governours for that purpose to whom he said As my Father sent me even so send I you and let all things be done decently and in order of whom he hath said to us Obey those that have the oversight over you and told us that if we will not hear his Church we must not be accounted as Christians but Heathens and Publicans And yet nevertheless they will not hear it and obey it in so small a matter as a Circumstance of time place habit or the like which she thinks decent and fit and yet will be accounted the best Christians and tell us that it is the very awe of Gods Law Deut. 12. 32. that keeps them from obedience to the Church in these Commands not well considering that it cannot be any adding to the Word of God to command things for order and decency which the Word of God-commands to be done so as they be not commanded as Gods immediate Word but as the Laws of men but that is undeniable adding to the Word of God to say that Superiours may not command such things which God hath no where forbidden and taking from the Word of God to deny that Power to men which Gods Word hath given them Repl. To make Laws to determine of undetermined Circumstances necessary in genere to be some way determined and left to Magistrates or Ministers de specie and to do this according to the general Rule of Scripture and in order to the main end and not against it is not against the Royalty or Will or Christ but to make new dedicating Covenanting Symbols to signifie the Doctrine of the Covenant of Grace and solemnly engage us unto God and place these in the publick Worship which are not meer Circumstances but substantial Institutions not necessary in genere that there should be any such at all besides Gods Sacraments we fear this is a violation of the Royalty of Christ and a reflection on his Laws as insufficient For 1. If it belong to the Power proper to Christ then it is a violation of his Royalty for any man to exercise it but it belongeth to the Power proper to Christ Ergo c. The Minor is proved thus If it belong to the universal Head or Ruler of the Church as such then it belongs to the Power proper to Christ for we are ready to prove there is now under him no universal Head or Ruler personally or collectively and civilly one But c. If in the Reason of it it should be the matter of an universal Law if any then it should be the work of the universal Law-giver if any But c. If in the Reason of it it be equally useful to the Church universal as to any particular Church or Age then it should according to the reason of it be the matter of an universal Law if of any But c. It hath the same aptitude to engage us to a duty of universal necessity and hath no reason proper to this Age or Place for it but common to all Moreover it is no where committed to the power or care of man Ergo it is proper to the Care and Power of Christ no Text is shewed that giveth man power in such things To do all things decently and orderly and to edification is no giving of power on that pretence to make new Covenanting dedicating Signs To do Gods work decently c. is not to make more such of our own heads it 's but the right modifying of the work already set us And to do all decently orderly and to edification was a duty in Moses time when yet such things as these in question might not be added by any but God when we say by God we mean by his inspired Instruments and when we say by Christ we mean by his inspired Instruments If we should make Laws that every one is publickly to taste Vineger and Gall as a Sign that we are not ashamed of but resolved through all fresh-displeasing diâ—ficulties to follow Christ that did so and thus to engage and dedicate our selves to him this were to do more than to do all things decently and