only for private use What hinders but if those variations are proper to answer the ends for which they were devised viz. the helping of people to perform the duty of Prayer with more understanding and better affections other variations in publick may be equally useful If P. 16. as the Doctor doth grant every good man may by the ordinary assistance of the spirit be moved to pray with Devotion and Fervency That is as I conceive may have his soul enlightned and possessed with a true apprehension and knowledge of his spiritual concernments and vigorously affected with them and carried out towards God in fervent desires inclinations and affections suitably to his present occasions What reason can be rendered why he may not by the ordinary assistance of the spirit be inabled to express his inward resentments in proper expressions The gift of utterance being the gift of the spirit as well as other gifts Mens discourses are usually answerable to their apprehensions and affections What we darkly apprehend we express obscurely and what we understand distinctly and clearly we discourse of plainly The principal thing indeed in Prayer is the frame and actings of our Souls the inward exercise of Faith Repentance Love and other Graces But saith the Doctor any good man may act these in the use of a Form And therefore may pray in or by the Spirit in the use of a Form But I say it must still be noted that if a man be to pray with others and that which we are now discoursing is concerning one that by way of Office is to perform this duty in the hearing of others so as to have them joyn with him in this performance he must use words and if he restrain himself to the words devised and put together by others and these words do not so well express and represent the sense he hath and which others should have of what is the matter of Prayer as others which do occur unto him and which he could very pertinently make use of for that purpose he cannot be truly said to pray in or by the Spirit according to the full import of that phrase But saith the Doctor then no man in the Publick Assemblies doth pray in the Spirit but the Minister for the Minister alone conceives the Prayer and it is a Form to the whole Congregation who must pray in his words To which I answer That the matter in dispute at present is only concerning him that officiates Besides it is not a Form to the Congregation taking a Form in the sense we are now discoursing of But the Congregation may joyn in the Spiritual Performance of this Duty acting graces suitably to the occasions which are administred and improving for this purpose the Abilities God hath bestowed upon others in order to the furthering and promoting of their devotion This is the work which pertains unto the Congregation at that time they not being called to express vocally their inward resentments during the Ministers officiating in this performance in the fittest expressions they are able The Doctor seems to be of the opinion that in the Apostles days there was an extraordinary gift of Prayer which some did partake of and that their Prayers were Divine Revelations They being immediately furnished by the Spirit both with the Matter and Words of their Prayers and that these Prayers were written down and after that gift failed they were preserved and used by the Church and were transmitted down to us by their Successors So that by this sort of discoursing our Liturgies are Divine Revelations But the Doctor hath none of the Ancients but St. Chrysostom to vouch for an Extraordinary Gift of Prayer in the Primitive Times This is certain before the Liturgies now extant or any part of them which is not expresly contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament will be owned by good Christians and sound Protestants for Divine Revelations very substantial particular proof must be made of their being such To father Liturgies in such an arrogant presumptuous manner on the Holy Spirit is not the way to bring them into credit with judicious and serious people It may effectually provoke God to pour forth in a little time so much contempt upon them they shall never get into repute any more This is further certain that our latest Liturgies have some prayers in them which by the very make of them any ordinary person may perceive they were not composed by Divine Inspiration And if the other could be proved to be of such an original surely these will not deserve to be thought the more venerable meerly because they have been added unto them Having said thus much concerning some passages in the Doctors Introduction before he enters upon the First Century I will now briefly consider the Testimonies he doth alledge for Liturgies In the First Century And he labours first of all to prove what he hath undertaken P. 28 c. by asserting that the Essenes who have been believed by divers learned men to be Christians had Forms of Prayer for Josephus saith they used Prayers which they received from their Forefathers which must be Forms and Philo saith they did sing alternately and Eusebius calls these the Hymns sung amongst us Christians And that excellent Historian labours to prove these Essenes were Christians by this Argument amongst some others Because they prayed and sung Hymns in set Forms as the Christians use to do Euscb Hist lib. 2. c. 17. Thus far the Doctor And I do readily acknowledge that Fusebius doth indeavour from what he sinds in Philo to prove the Essenes to be Christians And particularly from their way of singing Psalms and Hymns But he doth not say one word of their having set Forms of Prayers That they prayed in set Forms as the Christians use to do is the Doctor 's own saying for Fusebius doth neither say the Essenes had Forms of Prayers nor that the Christians did use any And yet Eusebius doth say That Philo's Book doth comprehend in it the Rules of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Valefius thinks this doth import that that Book did contain in it all the Rules or Canons which were observed by the Christian Church in Eusebius's time Further Eusebius doth gather out of that Book what he thought was proper to shew how exactly these Essenes and the Christians did agree in their Ecclesiastical Affairs as he himself assures us in the Chapter before referred unto And yet saith not one word of praying by set Forms which rather intimates there were no set Forms of Prayer used by the Christians in his time seeing he omits the mention of the Forms the Essenes used if as Josephus reports the Essenes had Forms of Prayer In the next place the Doctor thinks he hath a proof of Liturgies in Clemens Romanus But whoever considers Clemens will soon perceive that the passages the Doctor hath been pleased to quote are nothing at all to the present purpose
pray but hath also given Rules for the manner of performing this Duty when we perform this Service according to the Rules he hath appointed we may properly be said to use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if we consider the passage intirely as Origen hath it for the Doctor hath left something out it will clear it self We do affirm for a certain truth saith Origen that they who do worship God Orig. in Celf. lib 6. the Lord of all things through Jesus in the Christian manner or way and hee according to the Gospel using frequently as they ought night and day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such Prayers as are appointed or commanded are not vanquishable or cannot beovercome either by Magicians or Devils These last words the Doctor thought fit to leave out Now let any one judge whether by using appointed Prayers Origen meant offering up to God Prayers in such way as he had appointed or using such prayers as were composed by Men and saying them over in such order as they had prescribed which of these do you imagine Origen thought to be the Christian 's effectual security from Magicians and Devils Can it enter into any Mans head who knows any thing of Origen that he was for Christians to use Prayers as others did Spells How came the use of prescribed Forms to be better security from Magicians and Devils than any other way of praying There is further a Dispute betwixt the Doctor and Mr. Clarkson whether Origen P. 61. quoting some passages which are in the Psalms did by saying we find them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mean the publick Liturgy or the Psalter To which I shall only say That I do not perceive that there is any Antecedent proof that they had a publick Liturgy but it is certain they had the Book of Psalms amongst them I leave you to determine whether it is most probable that Origen being to quote Passages which were in the Book of Psalms would rather refer his Reader to another Book than unto that which was acknowledged to be divinely inspired St. Cyprian is next brought by the Doctor as a Witness for Liturgies And I might suppose P. 65. That he did allow the Lord's Prayer to be used as a Form of Prayer and that he would have us repeat the very words of it And yet this will not amount to any resemblance of a proof for Liturgies as they are here to be understood But the Passages in St. Cyprian the Doctor alledgeth do not I think import what he pretends they do St. Cyprian in his Sermon concerning the Lord's Prayer seems to have the very same Notions about it his Master Tertullian had expressed in his Tract concerning the same matter of which I have spoken before There are indeed some Passages in St. Cyprian's Sermon from which the Doctor doth draw his own inferences The enquiry must be whether St. Cyprian's meaning in those passages was what the Doctor pretends St. Cyprian hath this Passage Cypr. Serm. de Orat. Dom. Orandi ipse formam dedit ipse quid precaremur monuit instruxit I conceive he means no more than this That the Lord Jesus hath taught People in what manner they should pray and what things they should pray for I think if we consider St. Cyprian's Discourse we cannot warrantably understand any thing else by his Orandi forma than those Instructions our Saviour gave for our Direction in performing of this duty of Prayer St. Cyprian doth also certifie that the surest way to obtain acceptance and audience with the Father is to govern our selves in the performance of this Duty by the directions the Son hath given for this purpose Vt dum prece oratione quam filius docuit Id. apud patrem faciliùs audiamur If we strictly consider this Father's sense and meaning there doth not appear any ground to conclude that he laid any stress on our using the very words of which the Lord's Prayer doth consist And besides several passages which might be instanced in which do strongly intimate that what I have already mentioned is the substance of this Father's meaning here there is one short Passage at a little distance from these already mentioned which to me seems to put the matter out of all doubt Vt aliter orare quà m docuit Id. non ignorantia sola sit sed culpa Now let any man who knows any thing at all of St. Cyprian judge whether he thought that it was a sin to use any other words in Prayer than just those which were expressed in the Lord's Prayer and whether his meaning was not that it is a sin or fault to govern our selves in the performing of this duty by other Instructions than those the Son had given for our guidance in this Duty This I take to be the meaning of that other Passage Agnoscat pater filii sui verba cum precem facimus By cerba filii sui I conceive is not meant the words of the Lord's Prayer but the Instructions and Directions the Son gave for the right performing of this duty Here I may mind you that the Doctor in his Discourse on one of his Quotations out of Origen hath this Passage Note also Origen doth not say P. 60. the Christian made these injoyned Prayers but used them which supposes they were made into a prescribed Form before Now what doth the Doctor think might be noted here according to his way of making notes upon precem facimus But for my part I think the Ancients by making Prayers and by using Prayers meant much what the same thing viz performing the duty of Prayer Moreover St. Cyprian hath this Expression Si petamus ipsius oratione And this he immediately interprets I think by our governing our selves in this Duty by the Directions he had laid down about it And his account of these Directions is very like that Tertullian had given of them before him Id. Sit autem orantibus sermo precatio cum disciplina quietem continens pudorem There are two Passages more relating to this matter which the Doctor quotes out of this Author in which he considers the words the Author useth but neglects the sense and meaning the Author had in his using of those words The first is this Publica est nobis communis oratio Now St. Cyprian's meaning is neither more nor less than this That Christians must not be so confined and narrow-spirited in their Prayers as to pray only for themselves but they must extend their Prayers to others and pray for all People He does not call the Christians Prayer publick and common because he speaks of the Lord's Prayer as the Doctor pretends nor as intimating that there was one fixed prescribed form which all were to use but because their prayers were not to be confined to themselves but to be general or universal extending to all Men. That this is the plain and
say 1. Justin Martyr doth not refer us to the passage the Doctor hath recourse to for the explaining of this phrase by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but doth expresly refer us to what he had related a little before where he saith the President offereth up Prayers and Praises to God c. and gives thanks for the benefits and gifts he vouchsafeth in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which for any thing I do yet understand to the contrary may signifie largely distinctly and with variety of expressions So that if we must interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by what goeth before in Justin Martyr we must explain it by this For this is what Justin Martyr doth expresly refer us unto in this place 2. Tho this phrase doth signifie fervently and so refers to the affections I do not understand any reason that can pertinently be alledged why this should exclude him who officiates from using his utmost ability to express his inward devotion in the best manner and fittest words he can to help the devotion of those persons who join with him in the Service Put the Case a Minister doth in Publick use a Prescribed Form of Prayer and desires the several things prayed for in that Form with all the earnestness and vigour he can but yet perceives the words of that Form do not represent and express his inward resentments and devout affections in so vivid and proper a manner for the helping and assisting of his hearers devotion as he is able to represent them by his own expressions I dare refer it to the Doctor whether he may properly be said to pray in the use of that Form as well as he is able and to the utmost of his power I will allow he doth pray fervently and devoutly but I think it will be hard to perswade any man of sense that he doth pray as well as he is able unless we must be forced to grant that a man may properly be said to pray as well as he is able tho at the same time he is able to pray better than he doth 3. As for all the quotations the Doctor alledgeth to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth note fervency and vigorous affections I leave the Doctor to look them over again and consider whether his Authors do mean no more than vigorous affections and had any design to exclude peoples using their best abilities for the most advantagious outward performance of their Work and Duty The Doctor further observes P. 35. with reference to this passage That this phrase doth only relate to the Hymns used in the Eucharist and these Hymns were known Forms To which I answer 1. I think it equally relates to the Prayers and Thanksgivings which were celebrated on that occasion and I leave any indifferent person who understands the passage to conclude when he looks upon it as it lies in the Author as lie shall see reason whether it doth relate more to the one than to the other 2. Tho Hymns may be and often are used for celebrating the praises of God yet that is not the only way whereby we may offer up our Praises and Thanksgivings to God 3. Justin Martyr speaks here expresly of the Presidents offering up particular thanks for the benefits exhibited and vouchsafed in the Eucharist and speaks of his performing the Offices of Prayer and Praise himself without any audible concurrence of the people during the whole Service Yea he further acquaints us that when the President hath finished these Offices then it is the people do speak testifying their joyful approbation by saying Amen This is the account he gives us himself of this matter but a very little before the passage now insisted on and whither he refers us in this very place for the more distinct apprehending of his meaning here But saith the Doctor P. 36. all Christians are said to worship God and his Son according to their ability with Prayer and Praise and private Christians we may be sure were not allowed to make their own Prayers and Praises in Publick Worship extempore To this I answer That the matter in dispute at present is concerning him that Officiates And all the stir which is made about this phrase in the present case amounts I think to no more than this whether a Minister may properly be said to pray to the utmost of his ability when he doth not pray to the utmost of his ability Which in my apprehension is a very plain case if people were free from prejudice Well but it may be enquired how the people can be said in the Publick Worship to pray according to the utmost of their abilities I answer their circumstances are not the same with his who is to officiate And therefore this phrase hath not the same importance when applied to the one and when extended to the other The people are said to pray to God and to praise him according to the utmost of their ability in the Publick Worship when they do make the best improvement they can of the use he who doth officiate doth make of the abilities he is indued with for the celebrating of these Offices to the furthering of their own devotion There is one thing more the Doctor doth take notice of with reference to the phrase we have been discoursing of P. 38. And that is this He saith We are only to consider this phrase here as it is applied to praying and praising God And there it never signifies doing these things extempore he should have said according to the best of those abilities with which God hath endued them who are to celebrate these Offices but doing them very devoutly Now whether inward devotion in these Services be all this phrase doth import with reference to them who are to Officiate I refer to what I have already said about that matter I will further only mind you that tho the Doctor hath taken notice of some of the quotations Mr. Clarkson hath produced for the signification of this phrase in other cases yet he hath not said one word here by way of reply to those instances Mr. Clarkson hath given expresly relating to the cases wherein he doth acknowledge the phrase is at present to be considered The instances Mr. Clarkson hath produced relating to Prayer and Praise you may find in the 118 119 120 pages of his Discourse concerning Liturgies The Doctor having done with Justin Martyr proceeds to Ireneus out of whom he alledgeth only one passage which is P. 39. that Ireneus relates that the Hereticks to prove their phancies did alledge that we that is the Orthodox in our Thanksgivings do say world without end From hence the Doctor concludes that these words being the very conclusion of the Gloria Patri the Christians praised God in publick by this very Form which we now use Glory be to the Father c. Now allowing the Christians did usually in his time use this
Strom. lib. 6. p. 665. Now Clemens tells us that the true Christian or as he terms him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth pray every hour And that he doth first ask remission of sin then that he may not sin again then that he may do well and understand both Creation and Providence and that his Heart being made clean by the Knowledge which he hath by the Son of God he may attain to see God face to face Such a passage as this relating to Publick Prayers out of one of the Ancients would be look'd on by some men as a swinging proof of a prescribed Liturgy I leave you to divert your self with the Doctor 's dextrous device to furnish people with an Expedient to enable them to Pray by Book with their Eyes and Hands lift up to Heaven The Doctor hath one Author more whom he quotes in this Century P. 43. and that is Tertullian In whose works he saith we have sufficient evidence that they used Forms of Prayer and Praise The passages he is concerned with out of this Author are of two sorts 1. Such as he alledgeth to prove the use of a Liturgy at that time 2. Such as Mr. Clarkson produceth to prove the contrary which the Doctor endeavoureth to make appear do not answer the end for which that Author brings them I will first consider the passages the Doctor alledgeth as sufficient evidence that the Christians used Publick Forms of Prayer and Praise in his time His first proof is this That Tertullian declares That Christ hath fixed a new Form of Prayer for us who are his Disciples viz. The Lords Prayer which he expounds in a peculiar Tract and in divers places calls it The Lawful and the Ordinary Prayer I do acknowledge Tertullian near the beginning of his Book De Oratione Tertul. de Orat. p. 788. hath this passage Jesus Christus Deminus Noster nobis Discipulis Novi Testamenti Novam Orationis Formam determinavit The Great Question is What Tertullian did mean by Novam Orationis Formam The Doctor saith it was the Lords Prayer which he expounds in a peculiar Tract I think his meaning was otherwise And that he did intend no more by that Phrase than a new Instruction or Direction how to perform the Duty of Prayer which he saith was necessary to the Gospel State or Administration Oportebat enim in hac quoque specie Novum Vinum novis utribus recondi And though Tertullian doth expound the Lords Prayer in that Tract yet he doth consider it in his explaining of it not as the whole he understands by his Nova Forma but as an instance and example of one of the General Instructions our Saviour had laid down for the guiding of us in the performance of this Duty He doth in a little time even before he begins his explanation of the Lords Prayer alter his phrase and calls it Orandi Disciplina And then tells us this New Way or Instruction for Prayer did consist of several parts The third he mentions is Brevity Which he explains by our not laying any stress on the use of a confused heap of words but our using such words as are proper and very comprehensive And then he certifies us that our Lord hath given us an admirable example of this Brevity which is the third part of his Nova Orationis Forma or the Third Precept Christ injoined to be observed in the performance of this Duty Et tamen Brevitas ista quod ad tertium Sophiae Gradum faciat magnae ac beatae interpretationis substantia sulta est And his principal business in his expounding the Lord's Prayer which he immediately subjoins is to shew how comprehensive our Saviour was in this Prayer tho it was so short or consisted of so few words But notwithstanding Tertullian doth expound every part of the Lords Prayer yet he doth not strictly tie himself to the method observed in the Lord's Prayer As for Tertullians Legitima Ordinaria Oratio Id. p. 791. it seems to be just the same with his Ordinata Religio Orationis Which I conceive is another phrase of the same import with his Nova Orationis Forma and his Orandi Disciplina Which I think do only signifie the General Instructions Christ gave for the directing of his Disciples or the directing of Christians in their performing of this Duty of Prayer The Doctors next quotation out of Tertullian is of no use to the present purpose till it be proved that people cannot join in prayer with him who officiates unless they do use their voices during that performance as audibly as he doth his or at least till the pretended implication of their joining voices be better cleared than by bare aslertion But saith the Doctor Tertullian describes some of the things P 44. which they desired of God to bestow on the Emperors viz. that they might have a long Life a quiet Empire c. To which I answer that this may pass for a proof of a fixed Litany when it shall be made evident that the particulars mentioned by Tertullian cannot be prayed for but in prescribed words or that an account cannot be given of the things which are constantly prayed for unless those matters be constantly prayed for in the same precise words But you may take notice that Tertullian when he relates what the Christians prayed for doth not always use the same words nor make the same enumeration of particulars For a proof of this I refer you to Tertullian himself in the places of his Apology The Doctor refers to p. 44. But if you consult Tertullian according to the worser Edition which is that I am necessitated to use you must look p. 876 and 867. As for the Doctors quotation out of Tertullian De Anima P. 142. I need not say any thing concerning it because Mr. Clarkson hath expresly answered the Plea made from that place and the Doctor hath not thought fit to say one word to his vindication of that place The Doctor 's next quotation is out of Tertullian De Baptismo Concerning which I shall only tell you that Tertullian is replying to those who pretended that Baptism is not necessary because Faith is sufficient Now amongst other things Tertullian doth urge the necessity of Baptism from Christs instituting of it Lex enim tingendi imposita est forma praescripta saith he And this he proves by producing what is said touching this matter in the last Chapters of St. Matthew and St. Mark What he saith amounts to this Baptism is necessary now under the Gospel because the Lord Jesus hath commanded it and told us in what manner it is to be administred You may try your own faculty and see whether from these premises Christ hath instituted Baptism and hath shewn in what manner it must be celebrated you can draw such a conclusion as this Therefore Prayer and Praises are to be performed in the Church by prescribed Forms or that
a Rule for it He saith there was also some kind of uniformity in their Sacramental Prayers P. 5. that is a general agreement to pray for the same things Idem tho not in the same words He expresly relates what it is which is the point in dispute P. 2. And declares That by prescribing Forms are meant such as are imposed upon the Administrator so as those must be used and no other nor otherwise without adding detracting or transposing This saith Mr. Clarkson is it which is denied P. 6. That in the Ancient Church for many ages after Christ such Liturgies and Forms of Prayer were commonly imposed on those who administred the Sacraments as are before described Thus you see what was denied as well as what was granted by Mr Clarkson and therefore what the Doctor was to prove If the Doctor 's quotations be not home to this point they do not reach that for which he doth pretend to produce them And whether for the first three Centuries his Authorities do amount to a proof of what is in dispute yea or so much as of Forms of Prayer you may conclude as you shall see fit when you have considered the following account of them Before I enquire into the passages the Doctor doth quote for the proof of Liturgies in the particular Centuries as they come in their order I will take notice of a few passages which occur in his Discourse concerning the Grounds for Liturgies in Holy Scripture which takes up some Pages before he makes his entrance on the First Century The Doctor saith the Holy Bible makes it appear P. 2. that the People of God from the beginning did generally use Forms of Prayer and Praises in their Publick worship Now supposing this to be true to make it reach the present purpose he should prove they did not nor might not use any Prayers or Praises but those very Forms Idem Yea saith the Doctor God prescribes a Form of Prayer for the penitent Jews and charges them to take words with them and turn to the Lord and say Take away all Iniquity c. Hos 14.2 3 4. 'T is true God doth command them to use words in their Prayers and directs them what sort of words to use but let the Doctor answer when he thinks fit whether God doth bind them to use no words but what are there mentioned But further Forms of Prayer and Praise were indited by the Spirit of God for the publick service of the Temple and commanded by the Lord to be used there Is the inference from hence plain and just Therefore men may devise Prayers of their own and oblige the Church to use these and none but these The Doctor refers to Doctor Hammond and Doctor Lightfoot for proof that the Jews had a fixed Liturgy whether their proof be solid touching that matter would be too great a diversion to inquire But if occasion required I should not be afraid to undertake to produce the Authorities those two Learned Doctors build their proof upon for some things the Learned will not allow we must acquiesce in upon their testimony I will not insist on the difference betwixt the Jewish and Christian Church-State For we may suppose Forms might be of general use among the Jews and yet there be no necessity of an express abrogation of that way to warrant peoples addressing themselves publickly to God in another way than by stinted Forms For Prayer being commanded and there being two ways wherein this duty might be performed viz. by stinted Forms and by expressing themselves truly according to general Occasions and particular Emergencies There appears not any necessity that the use of Forms as to the Lawfulness thereof must of necessity be abrogated in order to it 's being Lawful to use the other way P. 5 6. But if we would prosecute the Doctors way of Arguing on this occasion aright somthing else will follow than what the Doctor doth conclude even what the Doctor I am perswaded would not be very willing to stand to For seeing the Jews did worship God acceptably c. by set Forms and Christ and his Apostles did joyn in these Forms and never reprove the Jews for using them The most obvious inference will be That Christians must now use those very Forms and none but them unless those Forms be abrogated and a positive institution of other Forms be left upon Record either in the Gospels or Epistles For by the Doctors discourse the Disciples had Forms of Prayers which must certainly be Jewish Forms and Christ only taught them another Form which they were to add to those they had before yea according to what the Doctor relates the Lord Jesus when he provided his Disciples a New Form to be added to the rest was not only so far from discharging people and setting his Disciples free from the stinted way of Liturgies but from their obligation to the Jewish Forms That he would consine himself in the very Prayer he made them whereby they were to be known from all others to be his Disciples to the Jewish Liturgy so that there should not be one sentence in his Prayer but what he took out of the Jewish Prayers then in use Now those who devote themselves to such notions as these may do well to consider whether if it be so as the Doctor reportes that Christ took every sentence of his Prayer out of the Jewish Prayers and taught it his Disciples that they might add it to their other Forms which were Jewish the obligation to use this as a Form of Prayer and to use those other Forms to which they were to add it be not of equal duration But alas whether will some mens pretences to reading hurry them What work will be made of Christianity if the forced conceptions of some men who would be thought to have read much must be entertained Some do represent matters in such a manner as if they had a mind to perswade people that the Lord Jesus was anointed with the Spirit only to supply the meanness of his education not to inable him to form and compose a Prayer himself but only to collect and cull sentences out of other peoples Prayers and then put them together into one form Not many years ago other matters were represented at such a rate by another hand as if the Spirit had been given to the Apostles to furnish them immediately because they had not been bred to such matters with Philosophical notions and some critical niceties and particularly was given to St. John to inable him to write his Epistle in a Platonick strain How far this sort of dealing may serve a particular interest for a while I will not inquire But it hath no probable tendency to promote the main design of Christianity The Doctor saith that Christ in giving his Disciples a new Form when they desired him to teach them to pray and Coppying the several Petitions out the Jewish
of his extraordinary dislike of Forms of Prayer meerly as Forms Nor do I mind any proof that hath been produced that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did about the Year 220. signifie publick prescribed Forms Our next Author saith the Doctor is the Famous Origen P. 55. in whose eleventh Homily on Jer. we have so express a Form of Prayer which was wont to be used in his days the learned Centuriators were convinced by it that set Forms of Prayer were used in his time The matter in debate is not whether those learned men were convinced from that passage that set Forms of Prayer were used in his time But whether that passage is a substantial proof that the Christian Church did in Origens time worship God only by a prescribed Liturgy Now the Argument from this Homily to prove a stated Liturgy depends as Mr Clarkson saith on the Mode or Form of expression here used P. 141. and what Origens way of expressing himself in this place was we have not any certainty because we have not his own words here but his Translator's who have certified us they did not tie themselves to an exact and strict translation This argument therefore cannot be convincing in the present case because we have no assurance of the truth and certainty of that on which the Argument depends and from which it must derive its whole strength The Doctor doth not take notice of this but suggests it is pretended that Russinus might add this Prayer himself But the doubt is not so much whether he added the Prayer as whether he did not alter the Mode of expression and in his Translation put that into the Form of a Prayer which Origen propounded in another Form For tho Origen might only relate as St. Paul doth Ephes 1.16 17. what was the ordinary subject of their Petitions on such occasions Ruffinus might in his Translation deliver it in the Form of a Prayer And till we have some assurance that Origen is here faithfully translated and did express himself exactly in the same Mode the Translator reports this matter the Argument cannot be convincing to the purpose for which it is brought Mr. Clarkson further adds That allow all that can be pretended fairly from this place no more can be concluded from it than what is common with those who do pray extempore viz that they often in Prayer preferred one or two Petitions in the same words To which the Doctor hath not thought fit to make any reply If those who do officiate do frequently use the same words in Prayer concerning the same matter is the inference thence just that therefore they may not use any words or that they are bound up to a prescribed Liturgy in their whole worship But having said thus much concerning the Dispute betwixt the Doctor and Mr. Clarkson touching this passage I will relate the matter it self more distinctly Origen having taken notice in the forementioned Homily that the Prophets having suffered many hardships from the People on the account of the messages they did bring them and the threatnings they denounced against them from the Lord it was expedient that those who hear the word should be briefly admonished what manner of lives the Prophets did lead and what benefits did appertain unto them and what their own duty is viz that if they would partake of the happiness the Prophets have arrived at they must diligently endeavour to do the works they did And in short he adds his meaning is thus Orig. Hom XI in Jer. Frequenter in Oratione dicimus Da Omnipotens Da nobis partem cum Prophetis c. O Almighty grant grant unto us a part with the Prophets grant us a part with the Apostles of thy Christ grant that we may be found at the footsteps of thy only begotten But saith he when we speak these things we do not understand or we have not a due sense of what these Petitions do import For in reality when we speak thus we do ask that God would make us to be hated as they were hated c. Now the matter seems very plain viz. That Origen expounding the Scripture popularly took occasion to mind the people how careful they should be if they desired to be happy as the Prophets are to live such lives as they did and not content themselves with saying as was very usual for them when they heard affectionate discourses concerning the Prophets and Apostles c. Lord give us a part with them c. For saith he these Petitions or Prayers we are so prone to use when our affections are moved at the reports which are made to us concerning the Prophets do properly signifie what we do not at all think of or really intend when we use those expressions For these Prayers do really signifie our desiring of God that we may be hated as the Prophets were and fall into the same calamities they did endure Re enim hoc dicimus fac nos sic odio haberi ut edio habiti sunt Prophetae Da in istas incidere calamitates quas Apostoli sustinuerunt Is it any proof that he who administers Divine Ordinances is tied up to a fixed Liturgy because in his popular discourses on particular occasions in his pressing people to a good life he tells them we do ordinarily pray O Almighty grant us this or that or the other thing and that these Petitions are of such importance as to ingage our endeavours to lead such lives as we are persuaded unto Yea it may be if the matter be well inquired into it will be found that Origen's explication of this Prayer is a more just reproof of the Prayer it self than his relating it is a proof of the Administrators being tied up to the use of Forms in his time For it may be very well questioned whether Christians may pray for what he saith those Petitions do properly import The next passage the Doctor doth quote out of Origen P. 58. is in his sixth Book against Celsus And he places the force of this quotation on the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he finds in it and of which he gives this account that it signifies not only a thing injoined or commanded in general but so injoined that the very order and manner of doing it is set down and particularly appointed And I may truly say that all this may be with reference unto Prayers and yet the very words to be used not be set down and particularly appointed without which there is no Liturgy in our present acceptation of that word But saith the Doctor Origen is speaking of the Prayers themselves and gives them this Character that they were ordered or prescribed and therefore must be in Forms To which I answer that all he saith except his inference doth amount to no more than an order for the method of the performance but doth not reach to the prescribing of the words And if God have not only commanded us to