abler Brethren If there had been a stated Form before imposed on the Churches what room could there be for this course And even this much seems but a caution made newly upon some late abuse of Prayer The same we say de Concil Malevit Can. 12. if they were but a prudentioribus tractatae vel comprobatae in Synodo new Prayers might by any man at any time be brought in which sheweth they had no such stated publick Lyturgy as is now pleaded for and even this seemeth occasioned by Pelagianism which by this caution they would keep out We hope your omission of our eighth Desire for the use of the new Translation intimateth your Grant that it shall be so But we marvel then that we find among your Concessions the alteration of no part but the Epistles and Gospels As they would have no Saints dayes observed by the Church so no Apocriphal Chapter read in the Church but upon such a reason as would exclude all Sermons as well as Apocripha viz. because the holy Scriptures contain in them all things necessary either in Doctrine to be believed or in duty to be practised If so why so many unnecessary Sermons why any more but reading of Scriptures if notwithstanding their sufficiency Sermons be necessary there is no reason why these Apocriphal Chapters should not be as useful most of them containing excellent Discourses and Rules of morality it is heartily to be wished that Sermons were as good if their fear be that by this means those Books may come to be of equal esteem with the Canon they may be secured against that by the title which the Church hath put upon them calling them Apocriphal and it is the Churches Testimony which teacheth us this difference and to leave them out were to cross the Practise of the Church in former Ages Repl. We hoped when our desires were delivered in writing they would have been better observed and understood we asked not that no Apocriphal Chapter may be read in the Church but that none may be read as Lessons For so the Chapters of holy Scripture there read are called in the Booâ— and to read them in the same place under the same Title without any sufficient note of distinction or notice given to the People that they are not Canonical Scripture they being also bound with our Bibles is such a temptation to the vulgar to take them for Gods Word as doth much prevail and is like to do so still And when Papists second it with their confident affirmations that the Apocriphal Books are Canonical well refelled by one of you the R. Reverend Bishop of Durham we should not needlesly help on their success If you cite the Apocripha as you do other human Writings or read them as Homilies when and where there is reason to read such we spake not against it To say that the People are secured by the Churches calling them Apocripha is of no force till experience be proved to be disregardable and till you have proved that the Minister is to tell the People at the reading of ever such Chapter that it is but Apocriphal and that the People all understand Greek so well as to know what Apocriphal signifieth The more sacred and honourable are these Dictates of the holy Ghost recorded in Scripture the greater is the sin by reading the Apocripha without sufficient distinction to make the People believe that the Writings of man are the Revelation and Laws of God And also we speak against the reading of the Apocripha as it excludeth much of the Canonical Scriptures and taketh in such Books in their steads as are commonly reputed fabulous By thus much you may see how you lost your Answer by mistaking us and how much you will sin against God by denying our desires That the Minister should not read the Communion Service at the Communion Table is not reasonable to demand since all the Primitive Church used it and if we do not observe that Golden Rule of the venerable Council of Nice let antient Customs prevail till reason plainly requires the contrary we shall give offence to sober Christians by a causless departure from Catholick usage and a greater advantage to enemies of our Church then our Brethren I hope would willingly grant The Priest standing at the Communion Table seemeth to give us an invitation to the holy Sacrament and minds us of our duty viz. to receive the holy Communion some at least every Sunday and though we neglect our duty it is fit the Church should keep her standing Repl. We doubt not but one place in it self is as lawful as another but when you make such differences as have misleading intimations we desire it may be forborn That all the Primitive Church used when there was no Communion in the Sacrament to say Service at the Communion Table is a crude Assertion that must have better proof before we take it for convincing And it is not probable because they had a Communion every Lords day And if this be not your meaning you say nothing to the purpose To prove they used it when there was a Communion is no proof that they used it when there was none And you your selves disuse many things more Universally practised then this can at all be fairly pretended to have bin The Council of Nice gives no such golden Rule as you mention A Rule is a general applyable to particular Cases The Council onely speakes of one particular Let the ancient Custom continue in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria have the Power of them all The Council here confirmeth this particular Custom but doth not determine in general of the Authority of Custom That this should be called a Catholick usage shewes us how partially the word Catholick is sometime taken And that this much cannot be granted us lest we advantage the Enemies of the Church doth make us wonder whom you take for its Enemies and what is that advantage which this will give them But we thank you that here we find our selves called Brethren when before we are not so much as spoken to but your speech is directed to some other we know not whom concerning us Your reason is that which is our reason to the contrary you say the Priest standing at the Communion Table seems to give us an invitation to the Holy Communion c. What! when there is no Sacrament by himself or us intended no warning of any given no Bread and Wine prepared Be not deceived God is not mocked Therefore we desire that there may be no such Service at the Table when no Communion is intended because we would not have such grosse dissimulation used in so Holy things as thereby to seem as you say to invite Guests when the Feast is not prepared and if they came we would turn them empty away Indeed if it were to be a private Masse and the Priest were to receive alone for want of Company
to make Profession of known or suspected falshood as to put in practise unlawful or suspected actions 2. Further we humbly desire that it may be seriously considered that as our first Reformers out of their great wisdome did at that time so compose the Liturgy as to win upon the Papists and to draw them into their Church-Communion by varying as little as they well could from the Romish forms before in use so whether in the present constitution state of things amongst us wee should not according to the same Rule of Prudence and Charity have our Liturgy so composed as to gain upon the judgements and affection of all those who in the substantials of the Protestant Religion are of the same perswasions with our selves Inasmuch as a more firm union and consent of all such as well in Worship as in Doctrine would greatly strengthen the Protestant interest against all those dangers and temptations which our intestine Divisions and Animosities do expose us unto from the common Adversary 3. That the Repetitions and Responsals of the Clerk and People and the alternate reading of the Psalms and Hymns which cause a confused murmure in the Congregation whereby what is read is less intelligible and therefore unedifying may be omitted The Minister being appointed for the people in all publick services appertaining unto God and the Holy Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament intimating the peoples part in publick prayer to be only with silence and reverence to attend thereunto and to declare their consent in the cloze by saying Amen 4. That in regard the Letany though otherwise containing in it many holy petitions is so framed that the petitions for a great part are uttered only by the people which wee think not to be so consonant to Scripture which makes the Minister the mouth of the people to God in prayer the particulars thereof may be composed into one solemn prayer to be offered by the Minister unto God for the people 5. That there be nothing in the Liturgy which may seem to countenance the Observation of Lent as a Religious Fast the example of Christs fasting forty daies and nights being no more imitable nor intended for the imitation of a Christian than any other of his miraculous works were or than Moses his forty daies fast was for the Jews And the Act of Parliament 5. Eliz. forbidding abstinence from flesh to bee observed upon any other than a politick consideration and punishing all those who by preaching teaching writing or open speeches shall notifie that the forbearing of flesh is of any necessity for the saving of the soul or that it is the service of God otherwise than as other politick Laws are 6. That the Religious Observation of Saints-daies appointed to be kept as Holy-daies and the Vigils thereof without any foundation as wee conceive in Scripture may be omitted That if any be retained they may be called Festivals and not Holy-Daies nor made equal with the Lords-day nor have any peculiar service appointed for them nor the people bee upon such daies forced wholly to abstain from work And that the names of all others now inserted in the Calender which are not in the first and second books of Edward the sixth may be left out 7. That the gift of Prayer being one special Qualification for the work of the Ministry bestowed by Christ in order to the Edification of his Church and to bee exercised for the profit and benefit thereof according to its various and emergent necessity It is desired that there may bee no such imposition of the Liturgy as that the exercise of that gift bee thereby totally excluded in any part of publick worship And further considering the great age of some Ministers and infirmities of others and the variety of several services oft-times concurring upon the same day whereby it may bee inexpedient to require every Minister at all times to read the whole It may bee left to the discretion of the Minister to omit part of it as occasion shall require which liberty wee finde to bee allowed even in the first Common Prayer-Book of Edward 6. 8. That in regard of the many defects which have been observed in that version of the Scriptures which is used throughout the Liturgy manifold instances whereof may bee produâ—ed as in the Epistle for the first Sunday after Epiphany taken out of Romans 12. 1. Bee yee changed in your shape And the Epistle for the Sunday next before Easter taken out of Philippians 2. 5. Found in his Apparel as a man as also the Epistle for the fourth Sunday in Lent taken out of the fourth of the Galathians Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia and bordereth upon the City which is now called Jerusalem The Epistle for St. Matthews day taken out of the second Epistle of Corinth and the 4th Wee go not out of kind The Gospel for the second Sunday after Epiphany taken out of the second of John When men bee drunk The Gospel for the third Sunday in Lent taken out of the 11th of Luke One house doth fall upon another The Gospel for the Annunciation taken out of the first of Luke This is the sixth month which was called barren and many other places wee therefore desire instead thereof the New Translation allowed by Authority may alone bee used 9. That inasmuch as the holy Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation to furnish us thorougly unto all good works and contain in them all things necessary either in Doctrine to be beleeved or in Duty to bee practised whereas divers chapters of the Apocryphal Books appointed to bee read are charged to bee in both respects of dubious and uncertain credit It is therefore desired that nothing bee read in the Church for Lessons but the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament 10. That the Minister bee not required to rehearse any part of the Liturgy at the Communion-Table save only those parts which properly belong to the Lords Supper and that at such times only when the said holy Supper is administred 11. That as the word Minister and not Priest or Curate is used in the absolution and in divers other places it may throughout the whole Book bee so used instead of those two words and that instead of the word Sunday the word Lords-Day may bee every where used 12. Because singing of Psalms is a considerable part of publick worship wee desire that the Version set forth and allowed to bee sung in Churches may bee amended or that wee may have leave to make use of a purer Version 13. That all obsolete words in the Common-Prayer and such whose use is changed from their first significancy as Aread used in the Gospel for the Monday and Wednesday before Easter Then opened hee their wits used in the Gospel for Easter Tuesday c. may bee altered unto other words generally received and better understood 14. That no portions of the Old Testament or of the Acts of the
being one of them the mouth of all the rest in the Confession at the Lords Supper 4. By being the onely Petitioners in the far greatest part of all the Letanie by their Good Lord deliver us and We beseech thee to hear us good Lord while the Minister onely reciteth the matter of the matter of the prayer and maketh none of the Request at all we fear lest by parity of reason the people will claim the work of preaching and other parts of the Ministerial Office 3. And we mentioned that which all our ears are witnesses of that while half the Psalms and Hymns c. are said by such of the people as can say them the murmur of their voices in most Congregations is so unintelligible and confused as must hinder the edification of all the rest for who is edified by that which he cannot understand We know not what you mean by citing 2 Chron. 7. 1 4. Ezra 3. 11. where there is not a word of publick prayer but in one place of an Acclamation upon an extraordinary sight of the glory of the Lord which made them praise the Lord and say He is good for his mercy is for ever when the prayer that went before was such as you call A long tedious prayer uttered by Solomon alone without such breaks and discants And in the other places is no mention of prayer at all but of singing praise and that not by the people but by the Priests and Levites saying the same words For he is good for his mercy endures for ever towards Israel The people are said to do no more then shout with a great shout because the foundation of the House was laid and if shouting be it that you would prove it 's not the thing in Question Let the ordinary mode of praying in Scripture be observed in the prayers of David Solomon Ezra Daniel or any other and if they were by breaks and frequent beginnings and endings and alternate Interlocutions of the people as yours are then we will conform to your mode which now offends us but if they were not we beseech you reduce yours to the examples in Scripture we desire no other rule to decide the Controversie by As to your Citation 1 Socrat. there tells us of the alternate singing of the Arrians in the reproach of the Orthodox and that Chrysostome not a Synod compiled Hymns to be sung in opposition to them in the streets which came in the end to a Tumult and Bloudshed And hereupon he tells us of the original of alternate singing viz. a pretended Viâ—ion of Ignatius that heard Angels sing in that order And what is all this to alternate Reading and praying or to a Divine Institution when here is no mention of reading or praying but of singing Hymns and that not upon pretence of Apostolical Tradition but a Vision of uncertain credit Theodore also speaketh onely of singing Psalms alternately and not a word of reading or praying so and he fetcheth that way of singing also as Socrat. doth but from the Church at Antioch and not from any pretended Doctrine or Practise of the Apostles and neither of them speaks a word of the necessity of it or of forcing any to it so that all these your Citations speaking not a word so much as of the very Subject in question are marvellously impertinent The words Their Worship seem to intimate that singing of Psalms is part of our Worship and not of yours we hope you disown it not for our parts we are ashamed of it Your distinction between Hopkins and Davids Psalms as if the metre allowed by Authority to be sung in Churches made them to be no more Davids Psalms seemeth to us a very hard saying If it be because it is a Translation then the prose should be none of Davids Psalms neither nor any Translation be the Sâ—ripture If it be because it is in metre then the exactest Translation in metre should be none of the Scripture If because it 's done imperfectly then the old Translation of the Bible used by Common-Prayer-Book should not be Scripture As to your reason for the supposed priority 1. Scripture-examples telling us that the people had more part in the Psalms then in the Prayers or Reading satisfie us that God and his Church then saw a disparity of Reason 2. Common Observation tells us That there is more order and less hinderance of Edification in the peoples singing then in their reading and praying together vocally It is desired that nothing should be in the Liturgie which so much as seems to countenance the observation of Lent as a Religious Fast and this as an expedient to peace which is in effect to desire that this our Church may be contentious for peace sake and to divide from the Church-Catholick that we may live at unity among our selves For St. Paul reckons them amongst the lovers of contention who shall oppose themselves against the custome of the Churches of God That the religious observation of Lent was a custome of the Churches of God appears by the testimonies following Chrys. Ser. 11. in Heb. 10. Cyrill Catec myst 5. St. Aug. Ep. 119 ut 40 dies ante Pascha observetur Ecclesiae consuetudo roboravit and St. Hierom ad Marcell says it was secundum traditionem Apostolorum This Demand then tends not to peace but Dissention The fasting forty days may be in imitation of our Saviour for all that is here said to the contrary for though we cannot arrive to his perfection abstaining wholly from meat so long yet we may fast forty days together either Cornelius his fast till three of the Clock after noon or Saint Peters fast till noon or at least Daniels fast abstaining from meats and drinks of delight and thus far imitate our Lord. If we had said that the Church is contentious if it adore God in kneeling on the Lords Days or use not the White Garment Milk and Honey after Baptism which had more pretence of Apostolical tradition and were generally used more anciently then Lent would you not have thought we wronged the Church If the purer times of the Church have one custome and latter times a contrary which must we follow or must we necessarily be contentious for not following both or rather may we not by the example of the Church that changeth them be allowed to take such things to be matters of Liberty and not Necessity If we must needs conform to the custom of other Churches in such things or be contentious it is either because God hath so commanded or because he hath given those Churches authority to command it If the former then what Churches or what Ages must we conform to If all must concur to be our pattern it will be hard for us to be acquainted with them so far as to know of such concurrences And in our Case we know that many do it not If it must be the most we would know where God commandeth us to imitate
such as we are any way bound by When you say the Church may vary in such indifferent things 1. If kneeling or standing at Prayer be an indifferent thing then so are they at this Sacrament 2. Then you follow the Changers and we the old Pattern 3. Then the Canons of general Councils and Customs pretended to be from Apostolical Tradition may be changed 4. What is it that you call the Church that changeth or may change these A Council or a popular Custom Bring us not under a forraign Power 5. The thing then being so indifferent and changeable you may change it if you please for ends that are not indifferent 6. And if now the Ministers may Pray standing why may not the People receive standing 7. When you say that to sit was never the use of the best times you deny the Apostles and primitive times to be the best as to the extent of the Church they were not the best but as to the purity of administrations they were Sect. 16. That there were ancient Lyturgies in the Church is evident St. Chrysostom's St. Basil's and others And the Greeks tell us of St. James much elder than they and though we find not in all Ages whole Lyturgies yet it is certain that there were such in the eldest times by those parts which are extant as Sursum Corda c. Gloria Patri Benedicite Hymnus Cherubinus c. Vere dignum justum c. Dominus vobiscum cum Spiritu tuo with divers others Though â—hose that are extant may be interpolated yet such things as are found in them all consentient to Catholick primitive Doctrine may well be presumed to have been from the first especially since we find no Original of these Lyturgies from General Councils Repl. We know there wanteth not a Lyndanus a Coccius to tell the world of St. Peters Lyturgy which yet prayeth that by the Intercession of Peter and Paul we may be defended c. and mentioneth Lynus Cletus Clemens Cornelius Cyprian Lucia Barbara and abundance such shall we therefore conclude that there were Lyturgies from the first and that what is here consentient to Antiquity waâ— in it There wants not a Marg. de la Bigne a Greg. de Valent. a Coccius to commend to us the Lyturgy of Mark that prayeâ—h protege Civitatem istam propter Martyrem tuum Evangelistam Marcum c. and tells us that the King where the Author lived was an Orthodox Christian and prayeth for the Pope Subdeacons Lectors Cantors Monks c. must we therefore believe that all that 's Orthodox in it is ancient So there wants not a Bigne Bellarm. c. to tell us of St. James his Lyturgy that mentions the Confessors the Deiparam the Ancherets c. which made Bellarm. himself say de Lyturgia Jacobi sic sentio eam non esse ejus aut multa a posterioribus eidem addita sunt and must we prove the Antiquity of Lyturgies by this or try ours by it There wants not a Sainctsius a Berllarm a Valentia a Paresius to predicate the Lyturgy of St. Basil as bearing witness to Transubstantiation for the Sacrifice of the Mass for Praying to Saints c. when yet the exceeding disagreement of Copies the difference of some Formes from Basil's ordinary Forms the Prayers for the most Pious and faithful Emperours shew it unlikely to have been Basils Many predicate Chrysostom's Mass or Lyturgy as making for praying to the dead and for them the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass c. when in one Edition Crysost is prayed to in it saith Cook in another Nicolaus and Alexius that lived about 1080. is mentioned in another Doctrines are contained as de Contaminata Maria c. clean contrary to Chrysostom's Doctrine must we now conclude that all is Ancient that is Orthodox when one Copy is scarce like another or can we try our Lyturgy by such as this The shreds cited by you prove a Lyturgy indeed such as we have used while the Common Prayer Book was not used where the Psalms the words of Baptism of Consecration Commemoration and delivery of the Lord's Supper and many other were used in a constant Form when other parts were used as the Minister found most meet so Sursum Corda was but a warning before or in the midst of Devotion such as our Let us Pray and will no more prove that the substance of Prayer was not left to the Ministers present or prepared Conception than Ite Missa est will prove it The Gloria Patri Bellarm. himself saith according to the common opinion was formed in the Conncil of Nice which was in the 4th Century And even then such a particular testimony against the Arrians might well stand with a body of unimposed Prayers and rather shews that in other things they were left at liberty If the Benedicite the Hymns or other passages here mentioned will prove such a Lyturgy as pleaseth you we pray you bear with our way of Worship which hath more of Hymns and other Forms than theâ—e come to That these Lyturgies had no Original from General Councils adds nothing with us to their Authority but sheweth that they had an arbitary Original and all set together shews that then they had many Lyturgies in one Princes Dominion and those alterable and not forced and that they took not one Liturgy to be any necessary means to the Churches Uniâ—â— or Peace but bore with those that used various at discretion We well remember that Tertul. tels the Heathens that Christians shewed by their conceived Hymns that they were sober at their Religious Feasts it being their Custom ut quisque de Scripturis sanctis vel de proprio ingenio potest provocetur in medium Deo canere Apol. cap. 39. Note here 1. That though there be more need of Forms for Singing than for Praying yet even in this the Christians in publick had then a liberty of doing it de proprio ingenio by their own wit or parts 2. That those that did not de proprio ingenio did it de Scripturis sanctis and that there is no mention of any other Lyturgy from which they fetcht so much as their Hymnes And the same Tertul. Apol. c. 30. describing the Christians publick Prayers saith sine monitore quia de pectore oramus we pray without a Monitor or promptor because we do it from the heart or from our own breast And before him Just. Mar. Ap. 2. p. 77. saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if all these words seem not plain enough to some it is no wonder when they rest not in the greater plainness of the holy Scriptures where Prayer is so frequently mentioned as much of the imployment of believers and so many directions encouragments and exhortations given about it and yet no Liturgy or stinted form except he Lords Prayer is prescribed to them or once made mention of no man directed here to use such no man exhorted to get him a Prayer
and it were really desired that the People should come it were another matter Moreover there is no Rubrick requiring this Service at the Table when there 's no Communion It is not reasonable that the Word Minister should be onely used in the Liturgy for since some parts of the Liturgy may be performed by a Deacon others by none under the order of a Priest viz. Absolution Consecration it is fit that some such word as Priest should be used for those Offices and not Minister which signifies at large every one that ministers in that holy Office of what order soever he be The word Curate signifying properly all those who are trusted by the Bishops with Cure of Souls as anciently it signified is a very fit word to be used and can offend no sober Person The word Sunday is ancient Just. Martyr Ap. 2. and therefore not to be left off Repl. The word Minister may well be used instead of Priest and Curate though the word Deacon for necessary distinction stand yet we doubt not but Priest as it is but the English of Presbyter is lawful but it is from the common danger of mistake and abuse that we argue That all Pastors else are but the Bishops Curates is a Doctrine that declares the heavy charge and account of the Bishops and tends much to the ease of the Presbyters minds if it could be proved If by Curates you mean such as have not directly by Divine obligation the Cure of Souls but onely by the Bishops Deligation But if the Office of a Presbyter be not of Divine Right and so if they be not the Curates of Christ and Pastors of the Church none are And for the ancient use of it we find not that it was so from the beginning And as there 's difference between the ancient Bishops of one single Church and a Diocesan that hath many hundreds so is there between their Curates But why will ye not yeeld so much as to change the word Sunday into the Lords Day when you know that the later is the name used by the holy Ghost in Scripture and commonly by the Ancient Writers of the Church and more becoming Christians Just. Martyr speaking to Infidels tells how they called the day and not how Christians called it All he saith is that on Sunday that is so called by the Heathens the Christians hold their Meetings see the usage of the Church in this point in August Cont. Faustum Manich. lib. 18. cap. 5. Singing of Psalms in Meeter is no part of the Lyturgy and so no part of our Commission Repl. If the word Lyturgy signifie the publick worship God forbid you should exclude the singing of Psalms And sure you have no fitter way of singing then in Meeter When these and all Prayers conceived by private men as you call the Pastors whether prepared or extemporary and by purity of reason Preaching are cast out what will your Lyturgy be We hope you make no question whether singing Psalms and Hymnes were part of the Primitive Lyturgy And seeing they are set forth and allowed to be sung in all Churches of all the People together why should they be denyed to be part of the Lyturgy we understand not the reason of this N. 13. 14. we suppose you grant by passing them by The Phrase is such c. The Church in her Prayers uses no more offensive Phrase then Saint Paul uses when he writes to the Corinthians Galatians and others calling them in general the Churches of God sanctified in Christ Jesus by vocation Saints amongst whom notwithstanding there were many who by their known sins which the Apostle endeavoured to amend in them were not properly such yet he gives the denomiation to the whole from the greater part to whom in Charity it was due and puts the rest in minde what they have by their Baptisme undertaken to be and what they professe themselves to be and our Prayers and the Phrase of them surely supposes no more then that they are Saints by calling sanctified in Christ Jesus by their Baptisme admitted into Christs Congregation and so to be reckoned Members of that Society till either they shall separate themselves by wilful Schisme or be separated by Legal Excommunication which they seem earnestly to desire and so do we Repl. But is there not a very great difference between the Titles given to the whole Church as you say from the greater part as the truth is from the better part though it were the lesse and the Titles given to individual members where there is no such reason We will call the Field a Corn-field though their be much Tares in it because of the better part which denominateth But we will not call every one of these Tares by the name of Corn. When we speak of the Church we will call it holy as Paul doth but when we speak to Simon Magus we will not call him holy but say Thou art in the Gall of bitterness and the bond of Iniquity and hast no part or lot in this matter c. we will not perswade the People that every notorious Drunkard Fornicator Worldling c. that is buryed is a Brother of whose Resurrection to Life Eternal we have sure and certain hope and all because you will not Excommunicate them We are glad to hear of your desire of such Discipline But when shall we see more then desire and the Edge of it be turned from those that fear sinning to those that fear it not Sect. 1. The Connexion of the parts of our Lyturgy is conformable to the example of the Churches of God before us and have as much dependance as is usually to be seen in many Petitions of the same Psalm And we conceive the Order and Method to be excellent and must do so till they tell us what that Order is which Prayers ought to have which is not done here Repl. There are two Rules of Prayer one is the Nature of the things compared in matter and order with nature and necessity The other is the revealed Will of God in his Word in General the holy Scripture more Especially the Lords Prayer The Lyturgy for the greatest part of the Prayers for dayly use is confused by which soever of these you measure it You seem much to honour the Lords Prayer by your frequent use of it or part of it we beseech you dishonour it not Practically by denying it for matter and order to be the onely ordinary and perfect Rule we know about particular Administrations where it is but certain Select Requests that we are to put up suited to the particular subject and occasion we cannot follow the whole Method of the Lords Prayer which containeth the heads of all the parts where we are not to take in all the parts we cannot take them in that order But that none of all your Prayers should be formed to that perfect Rule that your Letany which is the comprehensive
Brethren or hinder that peace healing of the Church For Order is for the thing ordered and not contrarily For example there is much disorder lies in the Common-Prayer-Book yet we would obey it as far as the ends of our calling do require It wouldbe undecent to come without a Band or other handsome Raiment into the Assembly yet would we obey if it were commanded us rather than not worship God at all We are as confident that Surplices and Copes are undecent and kneeling at the Lords Table is disorderly as you are of the contrary And yet if the Magistrate would be advised by us supposing himself addicted against you we would advise him to be more charitable to you than you here advise him to be to us We would have him if your Conscience require it to forbear you in this undecent and disorderly way But to speak more distinctly 1. There are some things decent and orderly when the opposite species is not undecent or disorderly 2. There are some things undecent and disorderly in a small and tollerable degree And some things in a degree intollerable 1. VVhen things decent are commanded whose opposites would not be at all undecent their Charity and Peace and Edification may command a Relaxation or rather should at first restrain from too severe Impositions As it is decent to wear either a Cloak or a Gown a Cassock buttoned or unbuttoned with a Girdle or without to sit stand or kneel in singing of a Psalm to sit or stand in hearing the Word read or preached c. 2. VVhen a Circumstance is undecent or disorderly but in a tolerable degree to an Inconvenience Obedience or Charity or Edification may commaud us to do it and make it not only lawful but a duty pro hic nunc while the preponderating Accident prevaileth Christs instances goe at least as far as this about the Priests in the Temple breaking the Sabbath blamelesly and David's eating the Shew-bread which was lawful for none to eat ordinarily but the Priests And the Disciples rubbing the ears of Corne I will have mercy and not Sacrifice is a lesson that he sets us to learn when two duties comes together to preserve the greater if we would escape sin And sure to keep an able Preacher in the Church or a private Christian in Communion is a greater duty caeteris paribus than to use a Ceremony which we conceive to be decent It is more orderly to use the better translation of the Scripture than the worse as the Common-prayer-book doth and yet we would have no man cast out for using the worse It is more orderly decent and edifying for the Minister to read all the Psalms than for the people to read each second verse And yet we would not cast out men from the Church or Ministry meerly for that disorder It is more orderly and decent to be uncovered in divine worship than covered And yet rather than a man should take cold we could allow him to hear a Chapter or Sermon covered why not much more rather than he should be cast out But let us come to the Application It is no undecent disorderly worshiping of God to worship him without our Crosse Surplice and kneeling in the reception of the Sacrament 1. If it were then Christ and his Apostles had worshipped undecently and disorderly And the Primitive Church that used not the Surplice nor the transient Image of the Crosse in Baptism but in an unguent yea the Church for many hundred years that received the Sacrament without kneeling 2. Then if the King Parliament and Convocation should change their Ceremonies it seems you would take your selves bound to retain them for you say you must not worship God undecently But that they may be changed by Authority our Articles determine and therefore Charity may well require the Magistrate to change them without any wrong to the worship of God 3. VVe appeal to the common judgement of the Impartial whether in the nature of the thing there by any thing that tels them that it is undecent to pray without Surplice in the reading place and not undecent to pray without in the Pulpit And that it is undecent to Baptize without Crossing and not to receive the Lords Supper without And that it is undecent for the Receiver to take the Lords Supper without kneeling and not for the Minister to give it him standing that prayeth in the delivery Sect. 8. These promised we Answer to your first Reason that those things which we call Indifferent because neither expresly commanded or forbiden by God have in them a real goodness a fitness and decency and for thâ— cause are imposed and may be so by the Rule of St. Paul by which Rule and many others in Scripture a power is given to men to impose Signs which are never the worse surely because they signifie something that is decent and comely and so it is not doubtful whether such power be given It would rather be doubtful whether the Church could impose such ildle Signs if any such there be as signifie nothing Repl. To your first Answer we reply 1. We suppose you speak of a moral Goodness and if they are such indeed as are within their power and really good that is of their own nature fitter than their opposites they may be imposed by just Authority by equal means though not by usurpers nor by penalties that will do more harm than the things will do good 2. Signs that signifie nothing we understand not It is one thing to be decent and another to signifie something that is decent what you mean by that we know not The Cross signifieth our not being ashamed to profess the Faith of Christ crucified c. do you call that something that is decent It is something necessary to Salvation 3. Signes are exceeding various At present we use but two distinctions 1. Some are Signs ex primaria intentione iustitnentis purposed and primarily instituted to signifie as an Escucheon or a Sign at an Inne door in common matters and as the Sacrament and Cross in sacred matters and some are Signs but consequently secondarily and not essentially as intended by the Institutors so Hills and Trees may shew us what a Clock it is and so every Creature signifieth some good of Mercy or Duty and may be an Object of holy Meditation so the colour and shape of our Cloaths may mind us of some good which yet was none of the primary or proper end of the Maker or Wearer 2. Signes are either arbitrary expressions of a mans own mind in a matter where he is left free or they are Covenanting Signes between us and God in the Covenant of Grace to work Grace on us as moral Causes and to engage us Sacramentally to him Such we conceive the Cross in Baptism to be The Preface to the Common Prayer Book saith They are apt to teach and excite c. which is a moral operation of
Consecrat no man is to be accounted a good Catholick Christian that does not receive three times in the year The distempers which indispose men to it must be corrected and not the receiving of the Sacrament therefore omitted It is a pittiful pretence to say they are not fit and make their sin their excuse formerly our Church was quarrelled at for not compelling men to the Communion now for urging men How shall she please Hooker l. 5. s. 8. Repl. We conâ—ess it is desirable that all our distempers and unfitnesse should be healed and we desire with you that Sacraments may be oftner but that every person in the Parish that is â—â—fit be forced to receive is that which we cannot concur with you to be guilty of Two sorts we think unfit to be so forced at least First abundance of people grosly ignorant and scandalous that will eat and drink Judgment to themselves not discerning the Lord's Body Secondly many melaâ—â— holy and otherwise troubled doubting souls that if they should receive the Sacrament before they find themselves more fit would be in danger to go out of their wits with fear left it would seal them to destruction and as the Lyturgy saith left the Devil enter into them as into Judas or at least it would grievously deject them As formerly so now there is great reason 〈…〉 that the unprepared be not forced to the Sacrament and ye◠〈◊〉 to great a part of the Body of the Church may not be let alonâ— in your Communion without due admonition and discipline that ordinarily neglect or refuse the Churches Communion in this Sacrament Those that are so prophane should be kept away but withall they should be proceeded with by discipline till they repent or are cast out of the Church Sect. 12. Answ. This Rubrick is not in the Lyturgy of Queen Elizabeth nor confirmed by Law nor is there any great need of restoring it the world being now in more danger of Prophanation than of Idolatry besides the sense of it is sufficiently declared in the 28 Article of the Church of England The time appointed we conceive sufficient Repl. Can there be any hurt or danger in the peoples being taught to understand the Church aright Hath not Bishop Hall told you in his Life of a Romanist beyond Sea that would have forced him down that the Church of England is for Transubstantiation because of our Kneeling pag. 20. And the same Bishop greatly differing from you saith in the same Book pag. 294. But to put all scruples out of the mind of any Reader concerning this Point let that serve for the upshot of all which is expresly set down in the fifth Rubr. in the end of the Communion set forth as the Judgment of the Church of England both in King Edward and Queen Elizabeth's time note that though lately upon negligence note upon negligence omitted in the Impression and so recites the words Where you say There is no great need c. We reply 1. Prophaness may be opposed nevertheless for our instructing the People against Idolatry 2. The abounding of Papists who in this point seem to us Idolatrous sheweth that there is danger of it 3. The commonness of Idolatry throughout the world and the case of the Israelites of old shew that mans nature is prone to it 4. Prophaness and Idolatry befriend each other As God is jealous against Idolatry so should all faithful Pastors of the Church be and not refuse to give such a Caution to the People and say There is no great need of it Publick Baptism Sect. 1. Ex. Ans. Until they have made due profession of Repentance c. We think this desire to be very hard and uncharitable punishing the poor Infants for the Parents sakes and giving also too great and arbitrary a Power to the Minister to judge which of his Parishioners he pleaseth Atheists Infidels Hereticks c. and then in that name to reject their Children from being baptized Our Church concludes more Charitably that Christ will favourably accept every Infant to Baptism that is presented by the Church according to our present order and this she concludes out of holy Scripture as you may see in the Office of Baptism according to the Practice and Doctrin of the Catholick Church Cyp. Ep. 59. August cap. 28. de verb. Apost Ser. 14. Repl. We perceive you will stick with us in more then Ceremonies To your Reasons we reply 1. By that Reason all the Children of all Heathens or Infidels in the world should be admitted to Baptism because they should not be punished for the Parents sakes 2. But we deny that it is among Christians that believe Original Sin any absurdity to say that Children are punished for their Parents sakes 3. But yet we deny this to be any such punishment at all unless you will call their non-deliverance a punishment They are the Children of Wrath by nature and have Original sin The Covenant of Grace that giveth the saving Benefits of Christ is made to none but the faithful and their Seed Will you call this a punishing them for their Fathers sakes that God hath extended his Covenant to no more Their Parents infidelity doth but leave them in their Original sin and misery and is not further it self imputed to them If you know of any Covenant or Promise of Salvation made to all without Condition or to Infants on any other Condition or qualification but that they be the Seed of the faithful dedicated to God you should do well to shew it us and not so slightly pass over things of so great moment in which you might much help the world out of darkness if you can make good what you intimate If indeed you mean as you seem to speak that its uncharitableness to punish any Infants for the Parents faults and that a non-liberation is such a punishmeâ—t then you must suppose that all the Infants of Heathens Jews and Turks are saved that dye in Infancy or else Christ is uncharitable And if they are all saved without Baptism then baptizing is of no use or necessity as you seem to think What then is the priviledge of the Seed of the Faithful that they are Holy and that the Covenant is made with them and God will be their God We fear you will again revive the opinion of the Anabaptists among the People when they observe that you have no more to say for the baptizing of the Children of the Faithful than of Infidels Heathens and Athiests To your second Objection we Answer You will drive many a faithful Labourer from the work of Christ if he may not be in the Ministry unless he will baptize the Children of Infidels Heathens and Excommunicate ones before their Parents do repent And the first question is not who shall be judge but whether we must be all thus forced Is not the question as great who shall be judge of the unfitness of persons for the Lord's Supper and yet there
Book or to read or learn it or to beware that he add or diminish not whereas the holy Scriptures that were then given to the Church men are exhorted to read and study and mediate in and discourse of and make it their continual delight and it s a wonder that David that mentions it so oft in Psal. 119. doth never mention the Lyturgy or Common Prayer Book if they had any And that Solomon when he dedicated the house of Prayer without a Prayer Book would onely beg of God to hear what Prayers or what Supplication soever shall be made of any man or of all the People of Israel when every one shall know his own sore and his own grief and shall spread forth his hands in that house 2 Chro. 6. 29. and that he giveth no hint of any Lyturgy or Form so much as in those common Calamities and talks of no other Book then the knowledge of their own sores and their own griefs And in the Case of Psalms or singing unto God where it is certain that they had a Lyturgy or Form as we have they are carefully collected preserved and delivered to us as a choice part of the holy Scripture And would it not have been so with the Prayers or would they have been altogether numentioned if they also had been there prescribed to and used by the Church as the Psalms were would Christ and his Apostles even where they were purposely giving Rules for Prayer and correcting its abuse as Mat. 6. 1 Cor. 14 c. have never-mentioned any Forms but the Lords Prayer if they had appointed such or desired such to be imposed and observed These things are incredible to us when we most impartially consider them for our own parts as we think it uncharitable to forbid the use of Spectacles to them that have weak eyes or of Crutches to them that have weak Limbs and as uncharitable to undo all that will not use them whether they need them or not so we can think no better of them that will suffer none to use such Forms that need them or that will suffer none to pray but in the words of other mens prescribing though they are at least as able as the prescribers And to conclude we humbly crave that ancient customs may not be used against themselves and us and that you will not innovate under the shelter of the name of Antiquity Let those things be freely used among us that were so used in the purest Primitive times Let Unity and Peace be laid on nothing on which they laid them not let diversity of Lyturgy and Ceremonies be allowed where they allowed it May we but have Love and Peace on the Terms as the Ancient Church enjoyed them we shall then hope we may yet escape the hands of uncharitable destroying zeal we therefore humbly recommend to your observation the Concurrent testimony of the best Histories of the Church concerning the diversity of Lyturgy Ceremonies and modal observances in the several Churches under one and the same civil Government and how they then took it to be their duty to forbear each other in these matters and how they made them not the test of their Communion or Center of their peace concerning the Observation of Easter it self when other Holy-days and Ceremonies were urged were less stood upon you have the judgement of Irenaeus and the French Bishops in whose name he wrote in Eusob. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. 6. 23. Where they reprehend Victor for breaking peace with the Churches that differed about the day and the antecedent time of Fasting and tell him that the variety began before their times when yet they nevertheless retained Peace and yet retain it and the discord in their Fasting declared or commended the concord of their Faith that no man was rejected from Communion by Victors Predecessors on that account but they gave them the Sacrament and maintained Peace with them and particularly Policarp and Anicetus held Communion in the Eucharist notwithstanding this difference Basil Epist. 63. doth plead his cause with the Presbyters and whole Clergy of Neocesarea that were offended at his new Psalmodiâ— and his new order of Monasticks but he onely defendeth himself and urgeth none of them to imitate him but telleth him also of the novelty of their own Lyturgy that it was not known in the time of their own late renowned Bishop Greg. Thaumaturgus telling them that they had kept nothing unchanged to that day of all that he was used to so great alteâ—ations in 40. years were made in the same Congregation and he professeth to pardon all such things so be it the principal things be kept safe Socr. Hist. Ec. l. 51. c. 21. about the Easter difference saith that neither the Apostles nor the Gospel do impose a yoke of bondage on those that betake themselves to the Doctrine of Christ but left the Feast of Easter and other Festivals to the observation of the free and equal Judgement of them that had received the benefits And therefore because men use to keep some Festivals for the relaxing themselves from labours several Persons in several places do celebrate of custom the memorial of Christs Passion Arbitrarily or at their own choice For neither our Saviour nor the Apostles commanded the keeping of them by any Law nor threaten any mulct or penalty c. It was the purpose of the Apostles not to make Laws for the keeping of Festivals but to be Authors to us of the reason of right living and of Piety And having shewed that it came up by private custom and not by Law and having cited Irenaeus as before he addeth that those that agree in the same Faith do differ in point of Rites and Ceremonies and instancing in divers he concludeth that because no man can shew in the monuments of writings any command concerning this it is plain that the Apostles herein permitted free Power to every ones mind and will that every man might do that which was good without being induced by fear or by necessity And having spoken of the diversity of customs about the Assemblies Marriage Baptism c. He tells us that even among the Novatians themselves there is a diversity in their manner of their praying and that among all the Forms of Religions and parties you can no where find two that consent among themselves in the manner of their praying And repeating the decree of the Holy Ghost Act. 15. To impose no other burden but things necessary he reprehendeth them that neglecting this will take fornication as a thing indifferent but strive about Festivals as it were a matter of life overturning Gods Laws and making Laws to themselves And Sozomen Hist. Eccl. l. c. 18. and 19. speaketh to the same purpose and tells us that the Novatians themselves determined in a Synod at Sangar in Bythinia that the differenoe about Easter being not a sufficient cause for breach of Communion all should abide in the same concord and in the same