Selected quad for the lemma: order_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
order_n	church_n	time_n	word_n	3,052	5	3.9362	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33979	A supplement to a little book entituled, A reasonable account why some pious nonconforming ministers cannot judg it lawful for them to perform their ministerial acts in publick solemn prayer, ordinarily, by the prescribed forms of others : wherein is examined whatsoever Mr. Falconer in his book called, Libertas ecclesiastica, and Mr. Pelling in a book called, The good old way, have said to prove the ancient use of forms of prayers by ministers : and it is proved, that neither of the two aforementioned authors have said anything that proveth the general use, or imposition of such forms of prayer in any considerable part of the church, till Pope Gregories time, which was six hundred years after Christ, nor in any church since the reformation, except that of England, and (which is uncertain) some in Saxony.	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.; Falkner, William, d. 1682. Libertas ecclesiastica.; Pelling, Edward, d. 1718. Good old way.	1680 (1680)	Wing C5343; ESTC R18940	53,644	120

or matter which some words signifie and other words may signifie too The Leper is said Mar. 1. 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we translate it to blaze abroad the matter and that very truly Christ is said to preach the word to the people Mar. 2. 2. that is the matter of the Gospel for no doubt he did not always use the same syllabical words so Mark 4. 14 15 16 17 18 19. Matth. 13. 19 20 21 22 23. where word signifies the matter of the Gospel though in diversified words it were easie to produce an 100 Texts The truth is it is an Hebraeism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answering to their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies matter or things as often as syllabical words and those who know not this are very ignorant of the Dialect of the Hebrew or the Greek Tongue Christ went and prayed saying the same thing that is to the same sense the same matter and this must be the sense for we shall find that Christ did not use the same syllabical words the first time Mat. 26. 39. The words are O my father if it be possible let this cup pass from me nevertheless not as I will but as thou wilt V. 42. He went away the second time an●… prayed saying O my father if this cup may not pass from me except I drink it thy will be done V. 44. He prayed the third time saying the same words Mark 14. 36. He said Abba Father all things are possible unto thee take away this cup from me nevertheless not what I will but what thou wilt V. 39. He prayed and spake the same words Luke 22. 42. Father if thou be willing remove this cup fr●m me nevertheless not my will but thine be done It is agreed on all hands by the Evangelists that our Saviour at this time prayed but three times Luke mentions but one Mark mentions two Matthew mentions three Here are four forms how is it possible that he should then use the same syllabical words twice and yet use all the forms as they lye before us In earnest the Argument from this Text is such a trifle as I am ashamed to examine it lest some should think me as simple as they that use it for it is as much idleness to pelt a Puppet as to make it Those who argue from this Topick must be acquainted little with the Hebrew or the Greek or with the Scripture and those that think it militates against my Position must have as little acquaintance either with it or with common sense chuse they whether My Hypothesis is That it is unlawful for Ministers whom God hath furnished with the gift of Prayer ordinarily to perform their ministerial Acts in publick solemn prayer by the prescribed forms of others No must they say Christ did it Say they so who made these forms for him I wonder who denies but that a person furnished with the gift of prayer may pray by a form composed in his own heart who says forms of prayer are sinful in that degree as blasphemy so that God himself cannot legitimate them who saith that when we are to pray for one and the same thing we may not use the same words which we have before conceived in our own hearts Now what doth this Text prove more If it could be proved that our Saviour did use the same words syllabically two or three times which it is plain he did not if he did not pray six times instead of three which are all the Evangelists mention yet I hope he made use of words conceived by himself and I do not read that he left any order that his Disciples or the Church should afterwards use these very words and no other in a state of affliction if he had surely we ought to have had no other Collect for sick and afflicted persons and by his varying four times or three times he taught us that we may lawfully vary our words and yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pray to the same sense and make the same to be the matter of our Petitions So that those who triumph in this Argument do not only triumph before the Victory which the Proverb makes absurd but they triumph in the thing by which they are conquered which yet if it be rightly done is but ingenuous for we ought to rejoyce when Truth to which all rational souls are debtors prevaileth By which Reverend Sir you may see I am very well pleased at the news that my little book shall be answered I do not think it worthy of a man to be afraid of an Answer and profess to you rom my heart that I should be glad to see an ingenuous answer to which I should not be able to make a reply satisfactory to my self or any reasonable persons I will assure you it would go a great way to deliver me from the name of a Dissenter But for a Minister of Christ to be made a meer Minister of men to read or say in his Ministerial Acts only what men would have them is what I am so far from thinking lawful that I cannot entertain a thought of it with that patience I ordinarily use in causes which appear to me of a lighter nature This is my present apprehension of this matter I seek for Truth and not for Masteries and shall therefore rejoyce if any can inform me better but you see it must be with better arguments than these though this be as good an argument I must needs say as that from Hosea 14. Take unto you words and say c. and many others But I have enlarged too much upon so inconcludent an argument unless as I hope it will conclude that I am Your most affectionate Brother and Servant

Church of God whose practice should be any thing of a law or president to us Thus far we have delivered our selves from the vulgar and indeed no other than a poor popular prejudice of a dissent from the concurrent judgment of the Church in all ages We consent with the five first ages and for the ten latter we also agree with the pure Church of God in Bohemia and the Valleys of Piedmont for ought we could ever hear proved relating to their practice For other Churches no reformed Churches this day in the world but thinks twenty things unlawful which both the Greek and Latin Churches in those ages practised § 17. We have but one prejudice more to deliver our selves from and that is the Judgment of the Reformed Churches since the Reformation To try which let us but again repeat what we say We say Forms of Prayer are in themselves good and lawful Good as means of Instruction and lawful to be so used yea and also for Devotion until men have obtained an ability without them fitly to express their minds to God in Prayer or when though they have that gift yet through the hand of God in some natural inability they are hindred from the use of it We say also that where in a Nation or Church there is a multitude of Ministers needful so that it cannot be expected that a sufficient number should be found so competently qualified as they should be it is reasonable there should be forms made which Ministers may use or not use according as they find their abilities But we say it appeareth to us unlawful for those to use them to whom God hath given such an ability for the reasons before mentioned Now let us see how much in this we in judgment differ from any Reformed Churches The first Reformed Churches were in Germany and Switzerland whether those to whom Zuinglius was the head or the Lutherans were the first is hard to say They by degrees abolished the Mass they would have done it at first if they could But alas their people were newly come out of Popery and they must drive the pace they would go Let our Author if he can shew us that any of the Churches adhering to Zuinglius whose Reformation was the purest had any such form of Prayers as no Ministers might vary from or was enjoyned to use under a penalty The Liber Ritualis he speaks of in Bohemia and the Agenda in the Palatinate he will find to be no more than a general Directory and Order no prescription of words and phrases Let any one read Scultetus his Annales Rerun Evangelicarum he will find the Agenda of the Churches of Nordlingen Walshat Strasburgh Zurich let him see if he can find any thing of a form of Prayer excepting the Lords Prayer nor that imposed but ordinarily used It is true Luther and his party were a little laxer and Luther made a Mass-book correcting much in the Popish Missal but leaving in too much to the great offence of his Brethren as may be learned from another place of Scultetus I know not but they might impose for Luther though a great man yet was too much of a Dictator and for every one to conform to his humors but yet I no-where have read that he did command his Missal to be read by all Ministers that adhered to him And for what he did as to his composition of a Missal it was rather judged to cross Carolostadius and others and uphold his notion of the Corporal presence of Christ than for any other reason Next to this was the Reformation of Geneva and England For Geneva what Mr. Calvin's judgment was I cannot tell I have not his Epistles by me to examine Mr. F's Quotation but however he was but one man though a great one it should seem by the settlement there if it were his judgment when he wrote to the Protector it is like it was altered or his Colleagues were of another mind or he only approved it for a time in regard of the State of the Church being newly crept out of Popery for in the French Liturgy there is no tying up Ministers to the use of their forms though indeed they propose and commend some forms it saith The Minister shall make such prayers as seem good to him fitting for the time and matter he is in his Sermon to treat of In another place The form is according to the discretion of the Minister In a third place They use this or some like it In a fourth place He prayeth after this manner What their practice is I cannot tell The work of our Reformation was slow so as Scotland got the start of us though we set out first Dioclavius tells us Alt. Damasc p. 613. We have indeed in our Church Agenda and an Order to be observed in our publick Devotion but none is tyed either to the Prayers or Exhortations in our Liturgy they are proposed for Examples c. In all the 13 years saith he that I exercised the Ministry in that Church I never neither at Sacrament nor in other parts of my Religious Serivce used either the Prayers or Exhortations in our book nor did many more every one was at liberty and it seems child-like to me to do otherwise In England we used onother method more conformable to the Saxon Reformation than to that of Switzerland Strasburgh France or Scotland or what was afterwards in Holland Our Countrey was wholly Popish our Priests zealous for them our common people so ignorant that their Priests might have perswaded them that it was their duty to eat Hay with an Horse not an English Bible to be found in the Nation until the middle of King Henry 8. Reign The Reformation went on under the Conduct of a Popish King till Edward the 6th came to the Crown Our Reformers did not think fit at once to abolish all the Popish trash Though therefore they first turned much of the Popish Mass-book into English leaving out much Idolatrous and Superstitious stuff yet they left in it too much which caused a second Common-Prayer-book to be made in the time of Edward the 6. though his whole Reign was but seven years then came Queen Mary and destroyed all and the zealous Protestants went out of the Nation fixing some at Frankfort some at Basil c. At Frankfort the Ministers that first fixed there used no prescribed forms in their publick worship till at length Dr. Cox came amongst them with the Common-Prayer book made in Edw. 6. time which made that woful stir of which we have an account in the book called the Troubles of Frankfort In short Dr. Cox got the Magistrate on his side and forced the rest away to Geneva and other places When Queen Elizabeth came to the Throne all know how great a man Dr. Cox proved By his means and some of his stamp the Common-Prayer-book was again revised and published all Ministers enjoyned to use it but what a dissent

to those Numerical words or syllables Luther and Calvin's use proveth it not I hope but yet we think we may lawfully use any form of Gods prescription the question is Whether we may use no other nor that with the least variation Our Brother's second argument is yet weaker The Disciples said Lord teach us to pray as John taught his Disciples What then was it not an apposite answer for him to tell them That now they must call God Father and pray that his Name might be sanctified his Kingdom come his will be done c. unless he set them a form of words to which they might not add nor diminish The Disciples did not say Lord tell us what words and no other we must use in prayer But thirdly saith our Brother our Saviour gives in the phrase of prayer but doth this conclude so do we sometimes give our Children forms which we desire not they should use as forms but directions to speak to the like purpose For Cyprian Tertullian and Gregory who lived 300 400 800 years after Christ they were not like to know Christs intention in this more than we and for their use of it as a form We do not think it unlawful to use those intire words and phrases as a part of our prayers nor indeed any other Scriptural forms of words that are proper But on the other side are they not two great presumptions that our Saviour never intended it as a form 1. That we never read in Scripture that it was so used afterward 2. That the name of Christ in whose name Joh. 16. we are commanded to pray is not in it unless by implication as it hath been in all prayers of the Church since the Ascension of Christ the prayers concluding for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ To compremise this business I believe it was as a form given to the Disciples being then but children and not perfectly instructed to the Kingdom of God and they might or might not use it as a form until they should be more fully instructed and inabled but not with any obligation upon them or the Church after them necessarily to use those numerical words in that order nay that after Christs Resurrection it was their duty to add something more to their prayers asking plainly and expresly in the name of Jesus Christ For he tells them Joh. 16. 24. Hitherto you have asked nothing in my name how could that be true if they had used the Lords-prayer till then and the petitions there had been so put up in the name of Christ as appears to have been his will now vers 23. Our Brothers next instance is pag. 103 104 105. from the example of the Jewish Church here he tells us That the Jews did use prayers with their sacrifices and had their hours of prayer These things he proveth well from Lev. 1. 10. Act. 3. 1. and that Aaron was to confess the sins of the people over the live-goat Lev. 16. 21. What is all this to the purpose none doubts but that Priests and people prayed under the Old Testament as well as the New But the question is Whether by stated forms or no 2. He tells us there are evidences in Scripture of such forms 2 Chron. 29. 30. The King commanded the people to praise God with the words of David and Asaph That is with such and such portions of holy writ do not all men grant that some parts of holy Writ may be sung in publick Worship The Nonconformists will allow no other he instanceth in Joel 2. 17. Hos 14. 2. Deut. 21. 8. Deut. 26. 3 4 5 13 14. It is true in all these Texts there are some short very short forms of prayer as they lye before us they are so But 1. can our Reverend Brother think so short phrases or sentences as some of them are were ever used as the only solemn prayer used at that time 2. Is there any Record that they were ever syllabically used 3. Is it said you shall use these words and no other 4. Is it not ordinary for us in our Sermons directing people only to what sense to pray in our Sermons to say Go to God and say c. and then give them a short prayer which we never intend they should use as a form 5. Is it not reasonable to think this was all intended in these passages when we consider the length and solemnity of the Prayers recorded in Scripture of Solomon Ezra Daniel Hezekiah Jehoshaphat For the practice of the Jews in later days I shall only say this 1. That he knows how little credit is to be given to any testimony of the Rabbins and what time the earliest writings of theirs appear'd 2. How ill their practice can be pleaded who our Saviour saith worshipped God vainly teaching for Doctrines the Traditions of men 3. That I observe Luk. 4. 16. that when our Saviour at Nazareth went into the Synagogue the Clerk did not bring him any Common-prayer-book but the book of the Prophet Isaias which he made use of § 6. Let us now leave these pretences of more ancient proof and come to consider what hath indeed been the practice of the Church since the Apostles times for our Reverend Brother thinks it probable that while the miraculous gifts of the Spirit continued Prayer was performed by them For the time succeeding the Apostles it must be divided into three periods 1. The first is the purer period of it before the Bishop of Rome got fully into Saddle this as to Doctrine held to a great degree for 500 years but as to Rites and Ceremonies scarce half so long as we shall possibly shortly shew 2. The second is the depraved period of it which was for a 1000 years as to Doctrine 1200 and more as to some matters of Rites and Government 3. The Reformed period of it which was from the year 1516 and is yet going on For the first of these Periods we have not so full and clear an evidence of what was the practice of the Church as we could desire For though it was after the year 600 that the Bishop of Rome got the Title of Vniversal Bishop and some years after that before the Church of Rome was furnished with all her present accoutrements and 1200 before Transubstantiation was setled Yet betwixt that and 1500 they had time enough to burn all the Writings of the Ancients from which the practice of the Primitive Church might appear to us or so to correct them and interpolate that we might see little or nothing that could be made use of to shew the Novelties of their Doctrine and practice yet Bernardus non vidit omnia some things scaped their eye or correction of which our Divines make good use Let us see what our Reverend Brother produceth for the first 300 years which all Divines say was the most pure times of the Church It is not our part to prove the Negative it lyeth upon our Brethren to

prove that there were forms universally imposed on all Ministers There might be forms for instruction some men might at their pleasure compose forms for their own devotion and use them but that the governing part of the Church did in those years make forms and require all men to use them and Ministers and Christians then generally thought it lawful this is to be proved for we will yet allow a lawful use of forms of prayer for instruction and in some cases for devotion and if they did no more we agree with them Our Reverend Brother hath pag. 113 114 115 116 117 118. taken notice of some proofs brought by Divines of our mind to make it very probable that in those years there were no such forms made for general use no such forms generally used much less enjoined to all to be by them used The first is that of Justine Martyr who flourished about the year 160 who says the Minister sent forth prayers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Brethren translate it as they were able this Reverend Author will have the sense to be with all his might I do not think that any thing can be infallibly concluded on either side from it the words may signifie either or both and so one thing in one part another thing in another part of the same Apology so as that debate is never like to be ended The next is that of Tertullian who lived about 200 years after Christ who saith the Christians did pray Sine monitore quia de pectore without a monitor because from their heart Our Reverend Brother thinks sine monitore can in no propriety of speech be understood of a form and why because a form must be a person And was not that other person who composed the form a person think we and his monitor who prayeth by his form nay are there not mute as well as vocal monitors May not the bell which calls us to a publick assembly be called our monitor because it is no person Is it so unusual a figure to give the name of the office of a person to the thing that doth that work as effectually for his peculiar sense of that Text I see no need of it but leave it to criticks Besides the words are not cum pectore but de pectore the words of the Christians prayers flowed from the heart conceived there He takes notice of no more brought on our side within the first 300 years But I shall mind him of another and that a shrewd one the Reader shall find it in Socrates Scholasticus Histor l. 5 cap. 21. in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every where and in all worships of Prayers there are not two to be found that speak the same thing This cannot be understood as to matter but as to words which could not be if they prayed in all Churches by the same forms of words As to matter it is unquestionable false It is true Socrates lived in the fifth Century but he relates the History of the Centuries before him as well as his own what need we any further witness for near 500 years after Christ Let us now hear what our Reverend Brother hath to say in proof of his assertion He produceth in the second Century Ignatius and Justine Martyr but what say they one of them speaks of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Common-prayer But must the Minister himself needs use a prescribed form because his Prayer is common to the people I wonder how a Minister can in a Congregation make any other prayers than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common prayers Surely the term of Common-prayer is too much an Anglicism to be expressed especially in Greek in that manner In the third Century our Reverend Brother produceth Origen and Cyprian What say they Origen saith they often said in their prayers O Almighty God give us a part with thy Prophets and doth not many a Minister who useth no form ordinarily say in his Prayers O Lord forgive us our sins and O Lord bring us to thy everlasting Kingdom Shall these common Petitions prove a hundred years hence that these men prayed by set-forms For his other passage out of Origen I have not the Book to weigh it but am sure those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not so much as a good Top●ck much less of a Demonstration of Liturgies What saith Cyprian he testifieth That they used to say Sursum corda lift up your hearts and the people said Habemus ad Dominum we lift them up to the Lord. So many a Minister that prayeth by no forms begins his Prayer with Let us pray Let us lift up our hearts to the Lord c. This is all the proof this Reverend Author brings for 300 years after Christ let any fair Reader judg the force of it and whether the proofs of the Negative be not more probable and strong especially when we are assured by Socrates 150 years after this That there were not two to be sound that used the same words in prayer And truly what proof he can bring after 300 years is not much valuable for I shall shew that in those ages worser things than Liturgies were crept into the Rituals of the Church § 7. His next instance is that of Constantine which must be betwixt the year 306 and 324 Eusebius saith That he made godly prayers for the use of his Soldiers and Eusebius accounteth this a very admirable thing in him Certainly if true so it was But doth not this argue that there was then no publick Liturgy for certainly if there had his Chaplains would have used it as now our Chaplains do to Regiments and Ships Eusebius calleth these constituted prayers But by whom by Constantine For whom for his Soldiers not for his Ministers Doth any one think Constantine's Soldiers had generally the gift of prayer and were able to express themselves properly to the present case of his army This argues that Constantine did not think fit his Legions should be without all Worship of God nor did he think forms unlawful for those who could not pray without them he therefore wrote down some prayers in a Book ordered them to be read to them and himself sometimes read them or pronounced them What is all this to our purpose we advise the like to all Housholders who have not ability of themselves to pray in their families For Eusebius his saying this was after the manner of the Church If it be understood for the Minister of the Congregation to make prayers for his own Church it is what we plead for if it be meant that he kept a course of prayer in his army as is in the Church it proves nothing for forms unless it could be done no otherwise § 8. For what our Reverend Author saith next for I take his Quotations as they respect order of time not as they lye in his Book p. 106. he seems to me as if

he would a little impose upon us for he tells us That forms of prayer were of use in the Church about 1300 years since is acknowledged by them who plead most against them from Concil Laod. cap. 18. 3 Carthag c. 23. Concil Milevit cap. 12. and that they have continued from that time downward cannot be denied That there were forms of prayer before this we will not deny that some particular persons might use some we will not deny But that they were universally imposed upon any considerable part of the Church for more than 400 years after this we will deny Nor do the Canons mentioned prove any such thing Let us try if we cannot prove it The Council of Laodicea was in the year 364 some say 315. All that this Synod decreed was that the same order of Prayers should be used morning and evening for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not necessarily signifie form besides in Liturgies Mattens and Evensong use to differ And Caranza makes the title of the Canon only concerning daily prayers and the substance of it That prayers should be made in the Church morning and evening besides this was a very small part of the Church Caranza saith there were but 22 Bishops there The Council of Carthage rather determines the contrary for it decreeth That if any Minister composed any prayers for his own use he should not use them till he communicated them with his abler Brethren So then he might compose prayers by his own gifts This was 395. Indeed the Canon of the Council of Mela is plainly restrictive of Ministers liberty but it was made upon a special occasion upon the woful prevailing of the Pelagian Doctrine in that Province and reached no further And they in their Canon plainly set down the reason of it Lest Pelagianism being so rampant there some phrases through carelesness or ignorance should be put in contrary to the faith § 9. And now we are come to 400 years and more after Christ But I must not pass over here what our Reverend Brother saith p. 118 119 120 where he telleth us that these Councils did not give the original to set forms of Prayer but only established some sanctions about them We are not enquiring about the original of forms of prayer nor do believe that these Councils gave the original to them but we are enquiring into the original of Bishops or Church-officers commanding the same forms of prayer to be used by all Ministers subject to their jurisdiction and commanding Ministers to perform their Ministerial acts of Prayer either wholly or in the greatest part not by their own gifts but by forms which others had made for them and we say the Council of Mela in St. Augustines time was the first record we have of that and that but in that Province and upon a particular occasion The third Council of Carthage is mentioned by Caranza and by Chytraeus but it is not to be found in the ancient account of Councils wrote before the year 900 in Greek and Translated by Dr. Pappas and printed at Strasburgh 1621. Justellus in his African Code hath no such Canon as this is Justellus in his Notes Praef p. 35. will not deny but that there was such a third Council of Carthage as Caranza gives us an account of because Zonaras and Balsamon and his own Collection which was he saith a most ancient Manuscript of Nic. Faber mentions such a Synod but he saith it made but 21 Canons not 50 and the other Canons ascribed to that Council the rest belong to a Council held at Carthage 419 in the time of Pope Boniface which he saith is evident from the Acts of the Synod For Boniface was not Bishop when Caesarius and Atticus were Consuls We are therefore come to the year 419 when it is said but with no great certainty that there was a Council at Carthage where were 44 Bishops who made this Canon That none in their prayers should name the Father for the Son nor the Son for the Father How could they do that if the Church had set them their form And when they ministred at the altar their prayers should be directed to the Father what needed this if their form were set them and whatsoever prayers any made for himself he should not use them before he had communicated them to his more skilful brethren I cannot understand sense if this Canon doth not prove that Ministers were at this time at liberty publickly to pray by the use of their own gifts for if they were tyed to a certain form made by others there was no fear of their using the name of the Father for the Son or the name of the Son for the Father or that they should not direct their prayers to the Father that being the sense of the Church whose forms they were tyed to to say nothing of the latter part of the Canon which apparently giveth Ministers liberty to make prayers for their use only obligeth them to take the advice of their more experienced brethren in that erroneous and most dangerous time before they publickly used them So that I conclude this Canon is a full proof there were no stated forms at this time which was 419 years after Christ used or injoined in the African Church Whereas our Brother saith very critically That transcribing properly here intended supposeth a form I answer the words are describit sibi in Caranza Our Author knows that describo in a hundred instances might be given him signifies no more than to write down Hoc quam vehementer ad me pertineat in iis quas tibi illi reddent literis descripsi saith Tully who did not use to transcribe his Letters out of other mens copies Besides admitting our Brothers criticism yet the form might be his own and he only write a fair out of a foul copy What he saith further about the words in the former part of the Canon from which we conclude no form was then in use at least not enjoined he yields the case in saying That there were various forms then used in that Church some made by hereticks Then there was no one form enjoined and used nor doth the Canon say they should use none but the stated forms appointed by that Church it only saith That in their prayers they should not name the Father for the Son nor the Son for the Father and that all prayers which was the will of Christ should be directed to the first person in the Trinity to the Father § 10. Our Author triumpheth in the Council of Mela or Milevis as he calls it that he saith declared against the use of any other forms than those established by the Council It doth so indeed but not then those established by the Church That Council considering the state of their Province at that time thought fit to order some forms and seems to tye up the Ministers of that Province at that time to the use of them and no other so much

be used and of our opposing our judgment against the concurrent judgment and practice of the Church of Christ in so many several Ages and Nations and against the determination of God himself under the Old Testament and our blessed Saviour under the New These words are not the words of Truth and Soberness nor do they savour of that spirit of Truth and Love which we always had thought did dwell in our Brother For if he means that the Ministers and Christians of all ages have thought it lawful and expedient to draw up forms of Prayer that by them the weaker might be taught to pray nay that those Ministers or People who have not attained that gift may use them still coveting and labouring for that gift until they have attained it none will deny it But all this is nothing to the purpose I know no Nonconformist will deny it but say Let them be in the Church and for that use still The Nonconformists in their Debates upon his Majesties Commission would never have tendred some Emendations of our Liturgy to the Bishops much less a new Liturgy or form if they had been of this mind But if our Reverend Brother means that they have been in the Church required to be used by all the Ministers in their publick Ministration in all ages or in those ages before the Corruptions Idolatry and Superstition of the Papists crept in there is not the least proof made either by our Reverend Brother or any else that we could ever see of a word of truth in the assertion § 17. Let us now take a view of the State of the Church from the year 500 to the year 1500 and see whether the Church was then in such a State that we may conclude all lawful that was during that time admitted in practice All Protestants will deny it especially from the year 700. But let us examine a little In the 5th Century they had got Images into Churches at Constantīnople The Image of the Manger which Chrysostome complains of and of the Virgin Mary saith Nicephorus they had got Altars also Augustine Chrysostome and Salvian often mention them they had also got in Candles using holy Water in Baptism they had also got in Vnction and the custom of giving the Lords Supper to children after Baptism together with the wearing of a white garment after that Sacrament They in many places mingled water with the wine in the Supper Exorcisms were also crept in as Augustin tells us lib. 20. de Civ Dei Lent also crept in in this age as we learn from Augustine Cyril Chrysostome and Maximus Nicephorus tells us also of abundance of Reliques now in fashion Monks and Monasteries began in this age to be very thick The Doctrine of the Church was miserably invaded by Pelagius They began in this age to put only single persons into Ministry in the Latin Church as we may learn from the Council of Toledo from Augustine and Leo. They had now also brought in many new orders of Ministers Acolecthi Exorcists Subdeacons c. From the year 500 to the year 600 we shall yet find a stranger face of the Church the Doctrines of Freewill Justification by works Prayers to the dead Satisfactions for sin Purgatory c. were in this age preached In this age came in the Dedications and Consecrations of Churches the Consecration of Wells for Baptism the Oyl and Chrysm the Consecrations of Altars Cups Corporals the Mass offerings for the dead the seven Letanies Rogations the seven Canonical hours In short almost the whole fardel of the Popish Superstitions It is no great charge to any conscientious man to say he differs in some things from the Ruling part of the Church 5 or 600 years after Christ and that he judgeth it both inexpedient and unlawful for him to do what they did in 40 particulars We must now take our leave of the Romish Synagouge from whose practices at this time all Protestants in the world differ in a multitude of things both as to Doctrine Worship and Discipline we must go seek for the true Church the next 1000 years in the Valleys of Piedmont in France in the Provinces of Languedec Provence and Dauphiny amongst the Albigenses the poor people of Lions and the Waldenses indeed mostly in the Valleys of Piedmont where we shall find them coopt up in the time of Innocent the Third after St. Dominick had fired him to engage Simon Montford with the French Kings leave to destroy some hundred thousands of them those that escaped went to their Brethren in the Valleys of Piedmont some of them possibly got into Bohemia amongst the Taborites Piccards c. Nor could I ever meet with any that could give me account of any Liturgies they used or which were imposed on them or by them nor do I remember that the Piccards when they came to Luther about 1520 or the Deputies of those of Piedmont when they came to advise with Oecolampadius 1530 though they gave him an account of their Faith Rites and Order yet ever mentioned any thing of Liturgy yet these two bodies of people are the only visible Church we can give any account of retaining any Degrees of Purity in Doctrine Worship or Discipline for a thousand years which is double the time that the Church kept any degrees of Purity after Christ We will freely grant that after the year 600 the Mass-book was Canonically imposed by Pope Gregory and within 200 years more by Charles the Great and except in the Valleys of Piedmont and in Bohemia the Priests generally both used that and after 1200 made their Maker worshipped Images prayed for the Dead and prayed to Saints said their Service in Latin But I hope it is no prejudice to any Protestant that he owns no relation to the Church that did so for a thousand years together and doth so still And now our Reverend Brother sees what his concurrent testimony of the Church in all ages comes to till the year 1520 or thereabouts for ten of those fifteen ages we hope our Reverend Brother agreeth with them no better than we and if he will leave Rome and follow the Woman into the Wilderness where God hid her for 1260 days he will find no Liturgy she carried with her or commanded all her Ministers there to use If our Brother will resolve to abide with the Red Dragon that hath seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns after he hath with his tail drawn down the third part of the Stars of Heaven we mean no more than keep his eye only upon the stately company at Rome that after the year 600 call'd themselves falsly the true Church the only Catholick Church we cannnot help it We believe that all along God had his number of hidden ones within the challenged Jurisdiction of that Church but for the visible governing part of them we leave them soon after Gregory's time believing them far more like a Synagogue of Satan than a