Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	church_n	read_v	tongue_n	2,635	5	7.5388	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33981	The vindication of liturgies, lately published by Dr. Falkner, proved no vindication of the lawfulness, usefulness, and antiquity of set-forms of publick ministerial prayer to be generally used by, or imposed on all ministers, and consequently an answer to a book, intituled, A reasonable account why some pious nonconformists judge it sinful, for them to perform their ministerial acts in by the prescribed forms of others : wherein with an answer to what Dr. Falkner hath said in the book aforesaid, the original principles are discovered, from whence the different apprehensions of men in this point arise / by the author of the Reasonable account, and Supplement to it.	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.	1681 (1681)	Wing C5345; ESTC R37651	143,061	307

only further mentions Hymns and proveth the use of Hymns of Ecclesiastical composition from Pliny and Lucian no very competent Witnesses of the Christian Churches affairs The early use of the Lords Prayer is easily yielded him but it is a strange proof of a Form of Prayers composed by other Men and generally used or imposed to prove as p. 158 That they began in some Churches with the Lords Prayer and ended with the Hymns of many names which Mr. Gregory thought was the clause at the end of the Lords Prayer and he doth but guess it some other The Lords Prayer cometh not within our question be it a Form or not a Form 25. Whatsoever he saith à p. 160. ad p. 164. is rather ad pompam then ad pugnam it all referreth to the use of Forms of Prayers in the Jewish Church To it all I shall only add 2 things 1. It is very improbable and will appear so to every considerate Christian that we should have in Scripture a full account of the Jewish Church from its Cradle to its Tomb and so particular an Account of the way of Worship which God established amongst them from which they might not vary and they should have Forms of Prayers established for ordinary use and the Scripture not mention any thing of them we read in Scripture of other Books they had some of which are perished some preserved for our Instruction and Guidance We read of the Book of the Law many times but never of their Common Prayer Book nor of any person that used the 18 Prayers We read Nehemiah 8. That in a solemn day of Worship the whole Congregation met and called to Ezra for the Book of the Law he brings it they read in it from the Morning to Mid-day v. 1 2. After this we read of many Priests and Levites who read in the Book of the Law distinctly and gave the People the sense of it and made them to understand the reading thereof but we read not a word of their Book of Prayers either there or in any other part of Scripture We read in Luke that when our Saviour came into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day they brought him the Book of the Prophet Isaiah he read in it and preached out of it but neither there do we read of the Book of 18 Prayers brought forth I must confess that in ordinary cases it is not a good Argument That this or that thing was not in being or in use because there is no Sacred Record of the being or use of it But certainly concerning Gods Worship amongst the Jews it is a good Argument to prove there was no such thing established in their Worship because in the Holy Scriptures where we have the full story of that Church a full account of their Worship either by Moses or David so many charges to them not to add thereto nor to diminish there-from there is not any mention of a Book of publick Prayers which God directed for that Church we read only of a blessing which looketh like a Form tho some have been of another mind of Gods own directing tho we often read of the Book of the Law called for brought read in and often read of the Servants of God Praying publickly yet not the least mention is made of a Book or Forms by which they prayed Admit they had had Forms if God had prescribed them it had been out of our question who will freely allow God to prescribe his own Homage and Worship but to think that any of the Jews or the whole Sanhedrim had Authori●y to make any for universal use when God gave such punctual directions both to Moses for the Service of the Taberncale and all things therein and to David for the Service of the Temple that it is expresly said Exod. 39.42 3. That the very structure of the Tabernacle was according to all that the Lord commanded Moses and Deut. 4.2 there is so express a command You shall not add to the word which I command you nor shall you diminish from it which is repeated Deut. 12.32 and David saith 1 Chron. 28.11 12 13 19. All this the Lord made me to understand in Writing by his hand upon me v. 12. the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit When we read of Nadab and Abihu being struck dead Levit. 10. for but using ordinary fire in a Sacrifice and of Vzzah being struck dead for but touching the Ark when it shook in the New Cart it being Gods prescript that that Family of the Levites should carry the Ark on their shoulders Num. 4.15 7 9. I say after all this for any to go about to prove that the Jews in their Worship had Forms of Prayer not prescribed of God which their Ministers were bound to use and of which is no mention in Scripture is an undertaking fit for none but those who think they can prove Quidlibet e quolibet nor to be believed by any but such as are very credulous Our Vindicator saith their very Sacrifices were Rites of Supplications and as to them they were limited and used no such Variety Rites of Supplication and Supplications are two things and these Rites were limited by God not by the Sanhedrim I hope nor were they without some variety in them For his instance 2 Chron. 29.30 It is said They praised God with the Words of David and Asaph the Seer Asaph was a Prophet David told us he ordered nothing but by the Spirit of God what he understood by the hand of the Lord in writing upon him For Joel 2.17 which he quoteth surely Joel was divinely inspired nor is that Prayer surely of length enough for a whole Office nor was it more then a general direction for matter to be inlarged in words as the Jewish Minister thought fit For what Dr. Lightfoot Dr. Outram Scaliger Buxtorf Ainsworth tell us they have had their Intilligence from the Rabbies the eldest of which of whom we have any Record was saith Alstedius after the world was 3380 years old The Hierusalem Talmud was finished by R. Jochanan 250 years after Christ the Babilonian Talmud not till 500. The most of the Writings of their Rabbins saith Alsted appeared not to the World till 1000 years after Christ Now how competent Witnesses these are whose Books also are as full of Fables as leaves of the practice of the Jewish Church before Christ or in its incorrupt state let any judge who are men of sense 2. But admit it were a thing capable of proof that the Jews in their incorrupt times and that by Gods command ordinarily used Forms of Prayer in their Worship and that such as were neither prescribed by God nor any Prophet or Penman of Holy Writ or that in and about and since Christs time they have used such Forms of Prayer ought this to guide the Practice of the Christian Church Or will it prove that the same thing is lawful in the Christian Church I

is no evidence that at this time which was betwixt 306 and 335 there were any Forms of Prayer constituted either by any Imperial Law or by any General Councel or by any Provincial Council The first Provincial Council that did any such thing was that of Milevis more then 60 years after this that supposed one of Carthage was above 30 years after That of Laodicea pretended 30 years after the General Council of Chalcedon more then 200 years after Justinians Imperial Law 200 years after So that if any in Constantines time ordered any it was himself for his Family which is nothing to our purpose admitting it were true for we will allow any master of a Family or any Minister apprehending that he or others are not able fitly to express their own or o●●ers wants and desires to God in Prayer to compose a Form or Forms for themselves or others to be used by him or them until they shall have attained to such an Ability God forbid persons should not pray as well as they can because they at present cannot pray so perfectly as they ought to do and to strive after Nor can I possibly understand by what Authority our Vindicator interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers which had received Authoritative Sanction as he doth p. 152 and unless it be necessarily to be so translated the Weight of this Weighty Evidence he speaks of n. 18 is not above the Weight of a feather Every body knows that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but a compound of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and can signifie no more then lawful or within a Law and so all the Lexicographers which indeed are but 3 or 4 which I have translate it They make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all to be Synonymous Only they seem a little to differ in the Etymology of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some making 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be equipollent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laws given others to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Laws Any Child that looks into Scapula will find that he expounds the word of any Laws whether they were vvrote in Mens Hearts or in Tables or confirmed by Custom that Plutarch in Romulus hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacred Laws and Xenophon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Laws and Hesychius again and again expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Laws and all know Hesychius is no invaluable Author for giving the true sense of Greek words Constantine ordered his Court like a Church he had in it constant Reading of the Scripture and Prayers Himself was present at the Worship of his Family and being there he spent his time either in Reading the Scripture or Praying as God had appointed What is all this to prove that Forms of Prayer were used or appointed This is the utmost of this Weighty Evidence which surely would not have been called so had not the Vindicator suspected all his Evidence to be very light 39. The Case is now tryed I will but summ up the Evidence and leave the judgment to the whole Intelligent World as the Jury The Question is Whether the Nonconformists have not probablet Arguments on their side to induce them to judge that the Church of God for six hundred years after Christ never by their general Practice of its Ministers nor any general Impositions upon its Ministers judged it lawful for all Ministers ordinarily to perform their Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer by the Prescribed Forms of other Men not directed in Holy Writ They think they have the Vindicator thinks the contrary The Evidence on the Nonconformists side is this Within the first 200 years after Christ 1. They find no Forms left them by Christ or the Apostles the Lords Prayer only excepted if that were so intended to be used after Christs Resurrection But on the contrary they find that Justin Martyr saith that in the Christian Assemblies the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they translate as he was able The Vindicator wi h all his might They are sure it is truly translated so The Vindicator is not Infallible assertin● it must be translated with all his might The Non-conf also have Tertullian telling them that in those days they prayed without a Monitor because from their hearts The Vindicator saith without a Monitor cannot be without a Form because a Monitor is a person They conceive those that make Forms are Persons and that mute things are very ordinarily called Monitors doing the things which persons that are Monitors do The Vindicator thinks he hath some advantage from Ignatius and Justine Martyr telling us the Christians made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Non conformists say The Supplications and Petitions are common in a Congregation when the People make use of the words of one that ministreth whether he speaketh from a Form or no. In the next 200 Years The Vindicator tells us That he finds in Cyprian Lift up your Hearts We lift them up to the Lord. That Origen speaks of Prayers Ordained and quotes an usual expression in their Prayers Almighty God give us a part with thy Prophets and that they sang by Set Hymns the Non-con answer That this will no more prove the Ministers Prayed by Forms then it will prove that we do so who ordinarily begin our Prayers with Let us Pray Let us lift up our Hearts to the Lord and usually in our Prayer say Lord forgive us our Sins and use several such general Petitions constantly They say it is impossible without Forms of Psalmes or Hymns for any Congregation to Sing but they ought to keep only to Scriptural Forms left us on Sacred Record for that purpose From the Year 300 to 400. the Vindicators proof is from Liturgies pretended to be made by Basil and Chrysostome from the Councils of Laodicea and Carthage The Non-con say That Basil and Chrysostomes making Forms prove nothing unless it can be proved they were by them imposed or used by all Ministers 2. That very learned Men have denied the Liturgies going under their names to be theirs and the Vindicator himself will grant That the Liturgies we have could not be theirs only he thinks they made some tho much hath been foisted into them since which is impossible to be proved the corruptions come to us on the same credit the whole comes The Non-conformists prove that the Council of Laodicea onely ordered Prayers not Forms of Prayer to be Morning and Evening Either there was no such Council of Carthage in this age or they made no such Canon saith Justellus nor is it brought into the Code of the V●iversal Church so could concern one Province only nor doth the Canon establish Forms of Prayer The Vindicator saith Constantine in this age made a Prayer for his Pagan Souldiers who were not able to Pray for themselves nor might joyn with Christian Congregations

and so far as man can judge mind what they are about with all Indication of Reverence and Godly fear Whether they be the Persons that talk or sleep out Sermons or that hear the word of God so far as men can judge with trembling Not that none but they do so my concern is not to discourse of others but for them Whether they generally be not a People against all Idols and Idolatry that dread to use the name of God idly or to swear by it or by any Creatures Prophanely Whether they be those that prophane the Sabbath by unnecessary Journyings or Labours or Recreation and do not ordinarily spend it in the publick and private Duties of Gods Worship For their behaviour towards men Are they generally the Sons and Daughters of this age that dare curse their Fathers and Mothers and reproach the Womb that bare them Are they Murtherers Thieves Adulterers Fornicators Perjured Persons Do they not generally make Conscience to Owe nothing to any but to love one another to deal justly with men I will not speak for every Individual Christ had a Judas in his Flock Nor do I reflect on any others I know there are many that are no Dissenters who are Pious towards God Righteous towards Men. I would only have these on both sides made one What have their worst Enemies to Object but disobedience to an Humane Law in matter of Divine Worship wherein they do in all sincerity profess they cannot do or omit the thing commanded or forbidden without sinning against God In the mean time your Honours see their bitterest Enemies can disobey Laws against Pluralities and Non-residents Others of them can disobey Laws against Drunkenness Swearing Cursing Adulteries c. and not see the beams in their own eyes tho they cannot but say these Laws are against things plainly and syllabically forbidden in the Word of God And indeed none lives on either side but violates some Humane Laws Nemo sine crimine vivit Optimus ille qui minimis urgetur said an Heathen Poet and truly without doubt 5. Nor most Honoured Patriots are the Arguments of those who are charged as disobedient as to this very point of Prayer invaluable nor can any mans confidences make them appear so to your Reasonable and Generous Souls It is not so evident as some Infallibles of our age would make it That the Holy Spirit of God hath not or may not have a special and immediate influence upon Pious Ministers Souls as to their words in Prayer as well as upon Gods Peoples words in Confession or Ministers words in Preaching both which the Scripture asserts which ought not to be excluded in that Prayer where words are to be used Nor is it certain that words are not an Essential Part of all Ministerial Prayer and these or these words an Essential part of this or that Prayer Nor that any Superior can direct an Essential Part of Gods Worship nor that in an Act of Worship where God hath left any thing to Ministers or Peoples Liberty that they may do this or that any Superiors can determine them to one part against the other Nor many things more in the following sheets which are inlarged upon Some parts of some of these Questions may appear clear to some the other part to others But this will conclude the things in themselves not to be plainly and clearly lawful Your Honours abhor an Infallible Judge boasted of by the Papists let it not be pretended to in the Tents of Protestants Nor one Infallible person suffered to triumph over others in the near concerns of Divine Worship In things necessary for all by a Divine Law we humbly allow it the Kings and your Honours duty to command us But if they appear not such upon plain evidence to our Superiors we beseech their Pardon if we say They cannot with any security to themselves from the Divine Law enjoyn them to or inforce them from those who judge them sinful in Divine Worship 6. And as it is not possible that any Divine Rule should be produced to make such a thing as this necessary to be brought into or continued in Publick Worship So these two last years have given abundant Evidence that it is not Expedient to tye all men to the use of them We are sure your Honours will grant from the Instances of the Songs of Thanksgiving Recorded in Scripture both those of Moses and Miriam and Deborah and David and from the Prayers in Scripture of Solomon David Jehosaphat Hezekiah Ezra c. That when Persons are under Signal Providences whether of Deliverances or Distress or in respect of some general Sin the Servants of God have not thought it sufficient in Publick Prayer To give thanks in general words for all Mercies and Preservations but to tell him of his particular wondrous works to recognize him the Author of this or that Salvation To confess and bewail those particular Sins if they be the Sins of the generality of the People To put up Petitions suited to those particular distresses the Church or State is in This is plain in all Scripture And where it is not done God is eminently restrained in his Glory our duty is eminently neglected We are sure God within these two years hath made England as remarkable a Stage of Provividence as ever any Nation in the World was made We have been in most eminent distresses and have had most eminent deliverances Both of them concerning the whole Nation and all that in the Nation can be dear to every good man The life of our Soveraign the life of our Religion The life of our Ancient Government The lives of several of our Noblemen multitudes of our Gentry and many thousands of our Commonalty Plots upon Plots have been discovered Uno Succiso Pullulat alter We have had to deal with an Hydra Now we humbly refer it to your Honours to judge what particular Homage either of Prayer or Praise God hath had relating to these distresses in all our particular Congregations And whether the limiting all Ministers to Old Forms of Prayer hath not been the cause of this High Omission The Practice of our Ministers satisfied as to Confirmity is two-fold Some take themselves obliged not only as all are in the Desk to add nothing to the Forms But in their Pulpits to keep to the Bidding of Prayer in the Canon or at least to Preface their Sermons with half a dozen lines taken out of some Collect and conclude them with either Gloria patri c. or that excellent Collect our Vindicator tells us of Grant we beseech Almighty God c. those and these are not a few could never put up one Prayer except upon 11 April 1679 for which were indeed good and particular Forms made for any deliverance nor yet offer up one Publick Thanksgiving Others there are who conceive that though the Statute gives them in the letter of it no further liberty yet the continual Practice of our Church

Closet do it If not there is another kind of Prayer besides this and our Author knew well enough that it is that we are speaking of The Question is What is the Gift of Prayer relating to Vocal Prayer Our Answerer grants It is that which inableth and disposeth to the performance of the duty Now I appeal again to any one that understandeth sense Whether those things which the Answerer mentions inable any person to Vocal Prayer as it stands contradistinguished to meer heart Prayer which is that we are not at all speaking of It is manifest it is not for then no Vnbeliever no Wicked Man hath any Ability to pray and St. Paul had given very impertinent Counsel to the Sorcerer to Pray that the thoughts of his heart might be forgiven him which it seems he had no Gift no Ability to do for it is certain he had no Faith nor Pious Affections It might have been expected that he who Faults others for Impropriety of Speech should himself have spoken Ad idem at least i. e. to the thing in Question which whether he hath done or no I leave to any one who understands sense to judge The Author of the Book he answereth had often enough told him that he spake not concerning Heart Prayer but Vocal Prayer that Praying wherein in obedience to the command of God the voice is used to express the desires of the heart It is an easie thing to answer at this rate 12. For what he saith p. 31 32 33. in Answer to what the Author had spoken from Zech. 12.10 Rom. 8.26 to prove a Gift of Prayer to be a Divine Gift issueth in this Whether by the Spirit of Grace and Supplication and the Spirits helping our Infirmity in Pra er be to be understood as well the Spirits giving us an Ability fitly to express our minds to God in Prayer as furnishing us with Gracious Habits disposing us so to Pray as we may find favour with God It is our Answerers concern to affirm the latter onely But the Author is of another mind because he finds in Scripture Gifts that are not saving called Spiritual Gifts 1 Cor. 12.1 and 1 Cor. 14.1 and the Manifestations of the Spirit 1 Cor. 12.7 where are reckoned the Word of Wisdom the Word of Knowledg the Gifts of Healing Working of Miracles Prophecy Tongues some of which are by the same Apostle determined no saving gifts 1 Cor. 13.2 3. The Author is of the mind that all these are comprehended under the Promises of powring out of the Spirit mentioned in the Old Testament And tho an Ability to Pray be not mentioned in that 1 Cor. 12.7 yet he never thought to have met with any who regarded what he said who would have denied That it is a gift and a Spiritual gift nor doth yet believe it shut out of those Promises Zech. 12.10 Rom 8.26 tho not solely perhaps not Principally intended in them both which the Author grants to the Answerer if he can make any Market with them 13. Our Answerer is again at it p 34. As that Ability of Expression whereby a Man largely professeth the particular Doctrines of the Christian Faith is not properly the Gift of Faith of Believing so neither is the like Ability of expressing the matter of our Prayer to be accounted in any proper sense the Gift of Prayer Still we are upon the old fallacy and whatsoever I Answer our Answerer will avoid us by telling us he spake of meer Heart Pra●er where no words are needful that is nothing to the point in Question Is Beleeving a Vocal Action think we Or is it a meer Action of the Heart and to say an Ability fitly to speak is that Gift were to own my self simple enough But I hope an Ability fitly to speak is the Gift of Confession of Faith with our Lipps Let our Author speak out and tell us If a Praying with our hearts be all the Prayers God requireth of Ministers in their publick Ministrations If it be not he saith nothing to the purpose for still the Gift of Prayer in that sense and I spake of another is an ability fitly to express our Minds to God in Prayer 14. But he tells us This is but the Gift of Speaking Vtterance or Elocution p. 34. I have scarce patience for such Assertions Then every one who hath an Ability to speak utter or to speak out or Oratoriously hath the Gift of Prayer which is demonstrably false and contrary to the experience of every day 15. But at length our Answerer can find a Gift of Prayer and with the Spirit this he saith was that whereby Christians in the beginning of Christianity were inabled by the extraordinary Impulses and immediate Inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon their Minds so to Pray either in their own or other Languages that those Motions of their Hearts and inward Desires and also their Words and Expressions were the proper and extraordinary Works and Dictates of the Holy Ghost Admit this true what followeth Then an Ability to Pray is the Gift of Prayer only given to some in a more extraordinary to others in a more ordinary way I freely grant him all he saith if he doth not say or by this cunningly go about to perswade people that now no people have an Ability to express their Minds fitly to God in Prayer which he must not because he is so liberal as to grant the contrary p. 40. 16. But he saith these extraordinary Gifts were peculiar to the primitive times Who denys it But is there not a more ordinary Gift of Prayer still continuing and the only question is Whether this be omitted in the performance of the Act 17. He tells us p. 36. that those who had these extraordinary Gifts were to use them only so far as was consistent with the rules of Order Decency and Edification Who denieth this too But these Rules of Order and Decency were such as either Nature it self shewed or the Infallible Spirit by the Apostles directed let him prove any thing further if he can and if he understands no more it is freely granted 18. As to what he saith in Reply to what I answered to that which he objected from 1 Cor. 14. I know not what his Intentions were but his words are these Libertas Eccles p. 120. The Argument against the lawfulness of set Forms because they limit the use of Gifts needeth not much consideration since it is manifest that by the Will of God bounds and limits were set even to the use of extraordinary Gifts of Gods Spirit that the Church might be edified 1 Cor. 14.26 27 28 30 33. Could any one make this less than an Argument a majori ad minus affirmando if the greater Gifts might be Limited then the lesser may In my Answer I observed the fallacy might lurk under the term Limited and distinguished betwixt the Regular use and the Irregular abuse of Gifts and denied that consequence That because the

liberty it ought not to be determined by Superiors because it was the VVill of God that his People should have liberty in the case and that liberty is a part of the Institution 15. In the Old Law where a strict Prescription of all Acts Parts and Means of VVorship can be modestly denyed by none yet in the burnt offering of Fowls Levit. 1.14 the people were left to liberty to bring either Turtle Doves or any other Young Pidgeons and in the Womans Purification Lev. 12.6 she had the like liberty I would gladly know now if our Vindicator or any sober man thinks that the Superiors in the Church or State of the Jews might have determined the Jews and by their commands enjoyned all the Jews to bring none but Turtle Doves Or none but Young Pigeons of another kind Or what president there is in Scripture of any Ecclesiastical or Civil power that ever arrogated and assumed such a liberty or declared that they judged such a thing lawful This I think sufficient to have spoken to what our Answerer saith as to the first Question 16. The Second Question was about the Superiors power of commanding in Religious Acts. A grave and weighty Question an Agreement in which will bring us to a present issue as to all our Religious differences Let us see what our Vindicator will grant in the case He tells us p. 185. That if any Inferior or any person whatsoever accounteth any thing to be forbidden proceeding upon any good and true grounds no such thing may be appointed being in it self evil whether the Superior think it not necessary or by a mistake thinks it necessary We thank him for this it is enough for us nor shall we need repeat any thing more he hath in this Chapter said I have onely this Question to ask Who as to the Inferiors Practice must judg whether the Inferiors judgment proceedeth upon just and true grounds Let us but have this point freely and clearly spoken to If he saith the Superior must judge all this is just nothing for those Superiors must be prodigiously wicked that shall command their Inferiours to do that which they judge the Inferiors upon good and true grounds judge unlawful This were for him to command things which he knew to be sinful 17. If he saith as he must do if he will maintain the Religion of Protestants That tho the Superior be the judge of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of his commands so far as concerneth his own Act in commanding yet every Inferiour must judge of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of his Act in obeying and the truth and falshood of the grounds upon which he proceeds It is what we hold and agree in 18. But still the true Question remains upon supposition That the Superior and Inferiour differ in their Aprehensions of a thing the Superiour thinking upon such as he thinks good and true grounds that the thing is lawful The Inferior judging upon what he thinks true and good grounds that it is unlawful Whether the Superior can command his Inferiors such things in the VVorship of God Qu. which he judgeth not necessary from the Light of Nature or Revealed Will of God and the Inferior judgeth sinful and what he may not do So then there are two things we yield in the case 19. That as to things which are meerly Political and secular the Magistrate may command what he judgeth necessary or expedient for the ends of his Government of which things he hath no Judge save God alone Superior to him and the Inferiour must obey him where Gods Will doth not plainly controul and if it doth controul him he must patiently suffer the penalty for not doing them for his private Conscience is no Judge of these things further then as to his own practice whether they be contrary to the Rule of Gods Word or no. 20. That as to things of a more Spiritual Nature which concern the Worship of God the Magistrate is bound to command what he after diligent inquiry into the law of God judgeth necessary that is commanded by God in his Word and to forbid what he judgeth there forbidden and in these things the Inferiour is bound to obey If in these things he judgeth diversly from his Superiour he cannot do the things but must patiently suffer and the matter in difference must be by God determined at the last day where the Magistrate tho it then appears he was in a mistake may hope for Mercy because he did what he did in the integrity of his heart provided he neglected not due means for finding out of the Will of God nor in his Punishment for disobedience exceeded the Rules of Scripture and right Reason and Justice 21. But we do not think that in the Worship of God especially as to the Acts Parts or Means of it those being things of the truth or falshood of which the Will of God alone can determine and which he hath sufficiently determined in his Word The Superior without sin can command what himself doth not from the will of God judge necessary but he knoweth the Inferiour judgeth to be sinful 1. Because he hath no power in commanding things of this nature more then the Kings of Israel and Judah had who had no power to bind up all the Israelites to bring Turtle Doves when Gods prescription had left them at liberty either to bring them or young Pidgeons nor was ever any such power assumed by Magistrates under the ordinary Circumstances of Magistrates that is being no Prophets and divinely inspired as were David and Solomon who both were Pen-men of Scripture 2. Because such commands must necessarily be for Destruction not for Aedification and the Apostle declared he had no such power 2 Cor. 13.10 such commands must necessarily be against Charity tending to destroy Peoples Souls 22. But as to this our Vindicator tells us That real Charity providing for the good and profit of the Souls of Men is of far greater value then that which I call Charity gratifying and complying with men in their mistakes How properly this is spoken and how prettily the Question here begged let any ordinary Reader judge was not I arguing for the good and profit of Peoples Souls and Bodies too That which I call Charity is what the Apostle calls so Rom. 14.15 If thy Brother be grieved with thy Meat which thou mayest eat or let alone now walkest thou not charitably that is in eating and so giving him occasion to sin destroy not him with ●y meat for whom Christ dyed Can any Divine think that God in that Text hath not said to all Magistrates in the matters relating to my Worship make not him to sin by thy commands which thou mayest or mayest not as thou thinkest at thy pleasure give out for whom Christ dyed 23. I appeal now to all rational and intelligent persons whether the Vindicator or I have spoken here most sense and pertinencies as to the matter in

that common place it appears plainly that Melancthon did think All Ministers might not perform ordinarily their Ministerial and Family Acts of Prayer by the prescribed Forms of other Men for his whole business is to instruct Students for the Ministry in the true nature of Prayer the parts and methods of it the understanding of the Lords Prayers c. He first determines Supplications and Thanksgivings the two great parts or species of Prayer then p. 532 533 he goes on shewing the difference betwixt the Prayers of Christians and those of Pagans Jews and Mahumetans directing the first to distinguish themselves by praying in the Name and Mediation of Jesus Christ After this he casts his discourse under 5 heads of all which he discourseth severally 1. In order to a due Compellation of God he adviseth a Premeditation what God is who Christ was what he hath done c. 2. He adviseth a Meditation concerning the Precepts enjoyning Prayer several of which he mentioneth 3. He adviseth the consideration of the Promises for this life and that which is to come and instanceth in many p. 536 537. 4. He sheweth the necessity of the exercise of Faith in Prayer and directeth the different exercise of it in Petitions for Temporal and Spiritual and Eternal good things 538 539 540 541. Then he comes and directs men what to pray for others and how 5. He directs that the matter of Prayer Cogitetur ac Ricitetur should not only be Endited in and by the Heart but Recited by the Lipps He again repeateth the Matter and Order and Method and justifieth the lawfulness of begging Temporal good things and giveth reasons for it answering the Arguments of some against Praying for Temporal good things to p. 555 and 556. He tells us there may be Prayer Gemitu by a sigh but it is profitable both for the Younger and Elder to keep a well ordered Form in Compellation of the true God that they may distinguish true Christian Prayers from those of Jews Turks and Pagans minding us of the Divine Promises and comprehending the certain matter of Prayer Such he saith were Jacobs Prayers and many others Recorded in the Prophets p. 557 he saith let us therefore accustom our selves to Recital and we may use well composed Forms without Superstition or Magick that is provided those Forms have no Superstition in them nor are thought to have a Magical Vertue or Operation from the meer sound of such and such words rather than other for which no reason can be given Let us not saith he recite the Hymns of Homer Orpheus or Callimachus but let our Souls move towards God with a confidence in Christ revealed He adds in the same page many Lazy Drunken Careless persons contemn Recital in Prayer but saith he let good Men be perswaded to accustome themselves to others for which he giveth Reasons after which come in the words at first cited I can understand nothing by this but that many Lazy Drunken Careless Papists both Priests and others despised Vocal Praying some of them pretending they prayed in heart others perswading the people that if the Priests muttered over the Church Prayers tho the People heard not a Petition nor understood none of them yet it was well enough the Church Prayers were said and they were of avail enough for them Melancthon doth indeed say but it is three sides before in my book That a well ordered Form may be useful both for young and old provided men did not use it Supe●stitiously which they must do who judge it Universally necessary nor have any Magical Conceit of it as if the very words in it were acceptable to God tho no reason could be given why those words more then others expressing the same mat●er should be so But his immediate oposing that to that Prayer which he saith may be by a meer sigh and opposing Cogitetur and Recitetur makes it apparent that he meaneth no more then a Vocal Prayer opposed to what is meerly Mental and as may be seen by what there followeth he chiefly referreth in that place to a Form of Compellation of God whether Scriptural or according to the sense of Scripture This was to bring off such as were newly converted from Popery from Prayers to the Virgin Mary and other Saints Yet Melancthon afterward doth indeed direct the use of the Lords Prayer which he largely openeth but saith nothing of any Forms but those upon a Scriptural Record and commendation not a word of St. Peter's St. James's St. Marks St. Andrews St. Cl●ments St. Ambrose St. Basils or St. Chrysostomes or Gregory's Liturgies Yet indeed in that State of the Church the Proposal of some Forms of Prayer composed by men was necessary in Publick Service tho not for all Ministers they were newly come and still coming off from Popery where in their Publick Worship they had no other Prayers nor any liberty for others and the generality of their Priests were very unfit for any thing but Reading a Prayer In this case what is necessary is lawful tho not the full duty of Ministers in Prayer nor to be rested in and transmitted as the only way of Worship from age to age 32. Which Melancthon was manifestly far from for it is his whole business in that common place to fit Ministers and Christians for Prayer by instructing th●m in the Nature Parts Matter Method of it giving them Copies of Forms to imitate largely giving them the sense of every Petition in the Lords Prayer This as I said at first confirms to me that tho Luther made a Missal at first for the Reformed Churches in Saxony yet it was left at liberty nor did other Reformed Divines so well like it when it was first made as all to write after his Copy Yet I will not be too confident of it But Melancthon speaketh of no Forms which the Church proposed and willed to be used both publickly and privately but the Lords Prayer 33. Now I should have done with the Vindicator but that I remember p. 152 153 he heavily complained that I took but a slighty notice of his weighty Evidence for proof of Forms of Prayer in the times of Constantine for which he quoteth Eusebius de Vita Constantini Cap. 17 19 20. He shall complain no more I will be at the pains to transcribe all the 3 Chapters and to leave it to the Reader to judge what he can make out of them for the Vindicators purpose But you may see much more noble things then these If you consider how he ordered his Court like unto a Church Eusebius de Vita Constantini Cap. 17. Himself when the rest were assembled beginning He took the Books into his hands and either applyed his mind to Meditate on the Scriptures or prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the whole Church He diligently also taught his whole Army to reverence the day which we call the Suns day Ibid cap. 19. or the Day of Light For those in