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 Bookes are Canonical well refelled by one of you the R. Reverend Bishop of Durham we should not needlesly help on their successe If you cite the Apocripha as you do other humane writings or read them as Homilies when and where there is reason to read such we speak 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 dis-regardable and till you have proved that the Ministers is to tell the people at the reading of every such Chapter that it is but Apocriphal and that the people all understand Greek so well as to know what Apocripha 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 stead as are commonly reputed fabulous By this much you may see how you lost your Answer by mistaking us and how much you will sin against God and the Church by denying our desire 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 customes prevail till reason plainly requires the contrary We shall give offence to sober Christians by a causelesse departure from Catholick usage and a great advantage to enemies of our Church than 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 that they used it when there was none And you your selves devise many things more universally practised than this can at all be fairly pretended to have been The Council of Nice gives no such golden Rule as you mention A Rule is a general applyable to particular Cases the Council only speaks of one particular Let the antient 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 Catholic usage shews us how partially the word Catholick is sometimes taken And that this much cannot be granted as least 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 Mass and the Priest were to receive alone for want of Company 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 It is not reasonable that the word Minister should be only 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 antiently it signified is a very fit word to be used and can offend no sober person The word Sunday is antient Just Mart. Ap. 2. And therefore not to be left off Repl. The word Minister may well be used in stead of Priest and Curates 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 only by the Bishops Delegation 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 antient use of it we find not that it was so from the beginning And as there 's difference between the antient Bishops of one single Church and a Diocesan that hath many hundred so is there between their Curates But why will you not yield so much as to change the word Sunday into the Lords Day when you know that the latter is the name used by the Holy Ghost in Scripture and commonly by the antient Writers of the Church and more becoming Christians Just Mart. speaking to Infidels tells how they called the Day and not how Christians called it All he saith is
or might doe by vertue of these our Letters patents or any thing therein contained in case he or they were personally present In witness whereof we have caused these our Letters to be made patents witness our self at VVestminster the 25 day of March in the thirteenth year of our Reign Per ipsum Regem Barker THE EXCEPTIONS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN Brethren Against some passages in the present LITURGY ACknowledging with all humility and thankfulness His Majesties most Princely condescention and indulgence to very many of his Loyall subjects as well in his Majesties most gracious Declaration as particularly in this present Commission issued forth in pursuance thereof we doubt not but the Right Reverend Bishops and all the rest of His Majesties Commissioners intrusted in this work will in imitation of His Majesties most prudent and Christian Moderation and Clemency judge it their duty that we find to be the Apostles own practice in a speciall manner to be tender to the Churches peace to bear with the infirmities of the weak and not to please themselves nor to measure the Consciences of other men by the light and latitude of their own but seriously and readily to consider and advise of such Expedients as may most conduce to the healing of our breaches and uniting those that differ And albeit we have an high and honourable esteem of those Godly and Learned Bishops and others who were the first Compilers of the publick Liturgy and doe look upon it as an excellent and worthy Work for that time when the Church of England made her first step out of such a mist of Popish Ignorance and Superstition wherein it formerly was involved yet considering that all humane Works do gradually arrive at their maturity and perfection and this in particular being a Work of that nature hath already admitted several emendations since the first compiling thereof It cannot be thought any disparagement or derogation either to the Work it self or to the Compilers of it or to those who have hitherto used it if after more than one hundred years since its first composure such further emendations be now made therein as may be judged necessary for satisfying the scruples of a multitude of sober persons who cannot at all or very hardly comply with the use of it as now it is and may best suit with the present times after so long an enjoyment of the glorious light of the Gospel and so happy a Reformations especially considering that many godly and learned men have from the beginning all along desired the alteration of many things therein and very many of his Majesty's pious peaceable and loyal Subjects after so long a discontinuance of it are more averse from it than heretofore the satisfying of whom as far as may be will very much conduce to that Peace and Unity which is so much desired by all good men and so much endeavoured by His most Excellent Majesty And therefore in pursuance of this His Majesty's most gracious Commission for the satisfying of tender Consciences and the procuring of Peace and Unity amongst our selves we judge meet to propose I. That all the Prayers and other Materials of the Liturgy may consist of nothing doubtful or questioned amongst Pious Learned and Orthodox Persons inasmuch as the professed end of composing them is for the declaring of Unity and consent of all who joyn in the Publick Worship it being too evident that the limiting Church-Communion to things of doubtful disputation hath been in all Ages the ground of Schism and separation according to the saying of a Learned Man To load our Publick Forms with the private Fancies upon which we differ is the most Sovereign way to perpetuate Schism to the Worlds end Prayer Confession Thanksgiving reading of the Scriptures and administration of the Sacraments in the plainest and simplest manner were matter enough to furnish out a sufficient Liturgy though nothing either of private Opinion or of Church pomp of Garments or prescribed Gestures of Imagery of Musick of matter concerning the dead of many superfluities which creep into the Church under the name of Order and Decency did interpose it self To charge Churches or Litnrgies with things unnecessary was the first beginning of all Superstition and when scruple of Conscience began to be made or pretended then Schisme began to break in If the speciall Guides and Fathers of the Church would be a little sparing of incumbring Churches with Superfluities or not over-rigid either in reviving obsolete Customs or imposing new there would be far less cause of Schism or Superstition and all the Inconvenience likely to ensue would be but this they should in so doing yield a little to the imbecility of their Inferiours a thing which S. Paul would never have rrefused to doe mean while wheresoever false or suspected Opinions are made a piece of Church-Liturgy he that separates is not the Schismatick for it is alike unlawful to make profession of known or suspected falshood as to put in practice unlawful or suspected actions II. 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 well they could from the Romish forms before in use so whether in the present constitution and state of things amongst us we should not according to the same rule of Prudence and Charity have our Liturgy so composed as to gain upon the judgement and affections of all those who in the substantials of the Protestant Religion are of the same perswasions with our selves In as much as a more firm union and consent of all such as well in Woship 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 III. That the Repetitions and Responsals of the Clerk and People and the alternate Reading of the Psalms and Hymns with 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 close by saying Amon. IV. 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 onely by the People which we 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 V. That there may be nothing in the Liturgy which may seem to countenance
is ancient So there wants not a Bign Bellarm. c. to tell us of S. James his Liturgy that mentions the Confessours the Deiparam the Anchorets c. which made Bellarm. himself say de Liturgia Jacobi sic sentio Eam aut non esse ejus aut multa à posterioribus eidem addita sunt And must we prove the Antiquity of Liturgies by this or try ours by it There wants not a Sainctetius a Bellarm. a Valentia a Peresius to predicate the Liturgy of S. Basil as bearing witnesse to transubstantiation for the sacrifice of the Masse for praying to Saints c. When yet the exceeding disagreement of Copies the difference of some forms from Basils ordinary forms the prayers for the most pious and faithful Emperours shew it unlikely to have been Basils many predicate Chrysostomes Masse or Liturgie as making for praying to the dead and for them the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Masse c. when in one edition Chrysostom is prayed to in it saith Cook in another Nicolaus and Alexius that lived 1080 is mentioned in another doctrines are contained as de Contaminata Maria c. clean contrary to Chrysostoms doctrine must we now conclude that all is ancient that is Orthodox when one Copy is scarce like another or can we try our Liturgies by such as this The shreds cited by you prove a Liturgie indeed such as we have used while the Common Prayer-book was not used where the Psalms the words of Baptism and the words of Consecration commemoration and delivery of the Lords 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 Minister's present or prepared Conceptions than Ite missa est will prove it The Gloria patri Bellarm. himself saith according to the common opinion was formed in the council 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 shewes that in other things they were left at liberty If the Benedicite the Hymnes or other passages here mentioned will prove such a Liturgy as pleaseth you we pray you bear with our way of worship which hath more of Hymnes and other forms then these come to That these Liturgies had no original from generall Councils addes nothing with us to their Authority but sheweth that they had an arbitrary original and all set together shews that then they had many Liturgies in one Prince's Dominion and those alterable and not forced and that they took not one Liturgy to be any necessary means to the Churches unity or peace but bore with those that used various at discretion We well remember that Tertull tells the Heathens that Christians shewed by their conceived Hymnes that they were sober at their religious feasts it being their custome 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 then for praying yet even in this the Christians in publick had then a liberty of doing it de proprio ingenio and 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 Liturgy from which they fetch so much as their Hymnes And the same Tertul. Apol. cap. 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 Mart. 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 encouragements and exhortations given about it and yet no Liturgy or stinted forms except the 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-book or to read or learn it or to beware that he adde or diminish not whereas the holy Scriptures that were then given to the Church men are exhorted to read and study and meditate in and discourse of and make it their continual delight and it 's a wonder that David that mentions it so oft in the 119. Psalm doth never mention the Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book if they had any And that Solomon when he dedicated the house of Prayer without a Prayer-book would onely begge 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 Chron. 6. 29. and that he giveth no hint of any Liturgie or form so much as in those common Calamities and talkes of no other book then the knowledge of their own sores and their own griefs And in the Case of Psalmes or singing unto God where it is certain that they had a Liturgy or form as we have they are carefully collected preserved and delivered to us as a choise part of the holy Scripture And would it not have been so with the prayers or would they have been altogether unmentioned if they also had been there prescribed to and used by the Church as the Psalmes were Would Christ and his Apostles even where they were purposely giving rules for prayer and correcting its abuse as Matth. 6. 1 Cor. 14. c. have never mentioned any forms but the Lord's 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 customes 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
of affairs or if you will not hear us we beseech you hear the many Ministers in England that never medled against the Liturgie and the many moderate Episcopal Divines that have used it and can do still and yet would earnestly entreat you to alter it partly because of what in it needs alteration and partly in respect to the Commodity of others Or at least we beseech you recant and obliterate such passages as would hinder all your selves from any act of Reformation hereabout that if any man among you would find fault with some of the grosser things which we laid open to you tenderly and spiringly and would reform them he may not presently forfeit the reputation of being a Protestant And lastly we beseech you denie not again the name of Protestants to the Primate of Ireland the Archbishop of York and the many others that had divers meetings for the Reformation of the Liturgy and who drew up that Catalogue of faults or points that needed mending which is yet to be seeu in print they took not advantage of their own unwarrantable Acts for the attempting of that alteration The third and fourth Proposals may go together the demand in both being against Responsals and alternate Readings in Hymns and Psalmes and Letany c. And that upon such Reason as doth in truth enforce the necessity of continuing them as they are namely for edification They would take these away because they do not edifie and upon that very reason they should continue because they do edifie If not by informing of our reasons and understandings the Prayers and Hymns were never made for a Catechism yet by quickening continuing and uniting our devotion which is apt to freeze or sleep or flat in a long continued Prayer or form it is necessary therefore for the edifying of us therein to be often called upon and awakened by frequent Amens to be excited and stirred up by mutual exultations provocations petitions holy contentions and strivings which shall most shew his own and stir up others zeal to the glory of God For this purpose alternate Reading Repetitions and Responsals are far better than a long tedious Prayer Nor is this our opinion only but the Judgement of former Ages as appears by the practice of ancient Christian Churches and of the Jewes also But it seems they say to be against the Scripture wherein the Minister is appointed for the People in publick Prayers the peoples part being to attend with silence and to declare their assent in the cloze by saying Amen if they mean that the people in publick Services must only say this word Amen as they can no more prove it in Scriptures so it doth certainly seem to them that it cannot be proved for they directly practise the contrary in one of their principal parts of Worship singing of Psalms where the people bear as great a part as the Minister If this way be done in Hopkin's why not in David's Pslams if in Meetre why not in Prose if in a Psalm why not in a Letany Reply What is most for edification is best known by experience and by the reason of the thing For the former you are not the Masters of all mens experience but of your own and others that have acquainted you with the same as theirs We also may warrantably professe in the name of our selves and many thousands of sober pious persons that we experience that these things are against our edification and we beseech you do not by us what you would not do by the poor labouring servants of your family to measure them all their dyet for quality or quantity according to your own appetites which they think are diseased and would be better if you work'd as hard as they And we gave you some of the reasons of our judgment 1. Though we have not said that the people may not in psalmes to God concur in voice we speak of prayer which you should have observed and though we only concluded it agreeable to the Scripture practice for the people in prayer to say but their Amen yet knowing not from whom to understand the will of God and what is pleasing to him better than from himself we considered what the Scripture saith of the ordinary way of publick worship and finding ordinarily that the people spoke no more in prayer as distinct from Psalmes and praise than their Amen or meer consent we desired to imitate the surest pattern 2. As we find that the Minister is the mouth of the people to God in publick which Scripture and the necessity of order do require so we were loath to countenance the peoples invading of that Sacred Office so far as they seem to us to do 1. By reading half the Psalmes and Hymnes 2. By saying half the Prayers as the Minister doth the other half 3. By being one of them the mouth of all the rest in the Confession at the Lords Supper 4. By being the only 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 only reciteth 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 Psalmes and Hymnes c. are said by such of the people as can say them the murmure of their voices in most Congregations is so intelligible 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 than 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 the 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 Aruians in the reproach of the Orthodox and that Chrysostome not a Synod compiled Hymnes to be sung in opposition to them in the streets which came in the end to a Tumult and Bloodshed And hereupon he tells us of the original of alternate singing viz. a pretended vision 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 Hymnes And that not upon pretence of Apostolical Tradition but a vision of uncertain credit Theodor. also speaketh only of singing Psalmes 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 necessitie of it or of forcing any to it so that all these your Citations speaking not a word so much as of the very Subjects in question are marvellously impertinent The words their Worship seem to intimate that singing Psalms is part of our Worship and not of yours we hope you disown it not for our parts we are not ashamed of it your distinction between Hopkin's and David's Psalms as if the Meetre allowed by Authority to be sung in Churches made them to be no more David's Psalms seemeth to us a very hard saying If it be because it is a Translation then the Prose should be none of David's Psalms neither nor any Translation be the Scripture If it be because it is in Meetre then the exactest Translation in Meetre should be none of the Scripture If because it 's done imperfectly then the old Translation of the Bible used by the 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 than in the Prayers or Readings 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 hindrance of Edification in the Peoples singing than in their Reading and Praying together vocally It is desired that nothing should be in the Liturgy which so much us 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 Saint 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 appeares by the Testimonies following Chrysost Ser. 11. in Heb. 10. Cyrill Catec myst 5. St. August Ep. 119. ut 40. dies ante Pascha observetur Ecclesiae consuetudo roboravit and St. Hierom ad Marcell saies it was secundum traditionem Apostolorum This Demand then tends not to Peace but Dissention The fasting Forty daies 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 daies together either Cornelius his Fast till three of the Clock afternoon or Saint Peter 's fast till noon or at least Daniel 's fast abstaining from Meats and Drinks of delight and thus far imitate our Lord. Reply If we had said that the Church is contentious if it adore God in kneeling on the Lords daies or use not the White Garment Milk and Honey after baptism which had more pretence of Apostolical tradition and were generally used more anciently than Lent would you not have thought we wronged the Church if the purer times of the Church have one Custome and later 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 Custome 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 conforme to If all must concurr to be our patterne 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 the greater number though the worse or hath secured us that they shall not be the worst or why we are not tied rather to imitate the purer Ages than the more corrupt If it be said that the Church hath Authority to command us we desire to know what Church that is and where to be found and heard that may command England and all the Churches of his Majesty's Dominions If it be said to be a General Council 1. No General Council can pretend to more Authority than that of Nice whose 20th Canon back'd with Tradition and common pratice now bindes not us and was laid by without any Repeal by following Councils 2. We know of no such things as General Councils at least that have bound us to the religious observation of Lent The Bishops of one Empire could not make a General Council 3. Nor do we know of any such power that they have ever the universal Church there being no visible head of it or Governours to make universal Laws but Christ as Rogers on the 20. Article fore-cited shews our 21. Article saith that General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes and doubtless all the Heathen and Mahomitans and all the contending Christian Princes will never agree together nor never did to let all their Christian Subjects concurre to hold a General Council It saith also and when they be gathered together forasmuch as they be an Assembly of men whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God they may erre and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining unto God therefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither strength nor authority unlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scriptures And if they may erre in things pertaining unto God and ordained by them as necessary to Salvation much more in lesser things And are we contentious if we erre not with them Our 39. Article determineth this Controversie saying It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have
Subject that can exempt him from the duty of obeying But it may ensnare him in a certainty of sinning whether he obey or disobey For as God commandeth him to obey and also not to do that which man commandeth when God forbiddeth it So he obligeth the erronious first to lay down his errours and so to obey But if a thing he forbidden of God and commanded of man and one man erroniously thinke it lawful and that he should obey and another is in doubt between both it is neither a duty nor lawful for either of them here to obey For mans errour changeth nor Gods Laws nor disobligeth himself from obedience But this mans duty is both to lay by that errour and to refuse obedience but if the question be only of the order of such a persons duty we answer If the thing be really lawful and obedience a duty then he that doubteth or erreth should if possible suddenly lay by his errours or doubt and so obey But if that cannot be he should first go about the fittest means for his better information till he be resolved and so obey And so on the contrary if really the thing commanded be unlawful if he be sure of it he must resolve against it if he hesitate he is not therefore allowed to do a thing forbidden because he is ignorant For his ignorance is suposed culpable it self but he is first to consult and use the best means for his Instruction till he know the truth and in the mean time to suspend his Act. But yet because of humane frailty between several faults we must consider when we cannot avoid all as we would in what order most safely to watch and to avoid them And so when I have done my best and cannot discern whether a Command be just and the thing lawful or not If it have the face of Idolatry Blasphemy or some hainous Sin that is commanded and our dis-obedience have the appearance but of an effect of involuntary ignorance it is more excusable in us to fear the greater Sin and so to suspend till we are better satisfied than to do that which we suspect to be so hainous a Sin though in leed it prove no sin So on the contrary if our disobedience be like to bring Infamy or Calamity on the Church and our Obedience appear to be but about a very small sin if we doubt of it it is more excusable to obey than to disobey though both be faulty supposing the thing to be indeed unlawful and we discern it not So that your Rule of obeying where you are not as sure c Is an unsure Rule unless as we have fullyer cautioned it Pretence of Conscience is no exemption from obedience for the Law as long as it is a Law certainly binds to obedience Rom. 13. Ye must needs be subject and this pretence of a tender gainsaying Conscience cannot abrogate the Law since it can neither take away the Authority of the Law-maker nor make the matter of the Law in it self unlawful Besides if pretence of Conscience did exempt from obedience Laws were uselesse whosoever had not list to obey might pretend tenderness of Conscience and be thereby set at liberty which if once granted Anarchy and Confusion must needs follow Repl Neither pretence of Conscience nor real Errour of Conscience exempteth from the Obligation to obey though sometime it may so ensnare as that obeying shall become of the two the greater sin so also real Errours or pretence of Conscience will justifie no man for obeying when it is by God forbidden Though Charity will move to pity and relieve those that are truly perplexed or Scrupulous yet we must not break Gods Command in Charity to them and therefore we must not perform publick Services undecently or disorderly for the ease of tender Consciences Repl. O that you would but do all that God alloweth you yea that he hath commanded you for these ends how happy would you make your selves and these poor afflicted Churches But as to the instance of your Rule we answer 1. When the indecency and disorder is so small as that it will not crosse the ends so much as our disobedience would we are here so far more conformable and peaceable than you as that we would even in Gods worship do some things indecent and disorderly rather than disobey And so should you do rather than destroy your Brethren or hinder that peace and 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 in it as far as the ends of our calling do require It would be undecent to come without a Band or other handsome raiment into the Assembly yet rather than nor worship God at all we would obey if that were commanded us 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 tolerable degree And some things in a degree intolerable 1. When things decent are commanded whose opposites would not be at all undecent there 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 unbutton'd 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. When a Circumstance is undecent or disorderly but in a tollerable degree to an Inconvenience Obedience or Charity or Edification may command us to do it and make it not only lawful but a duty pro hic nunc while the preponderating Accident prevaileth Christs instances go at least as far as this about the Priests in the Temple breaking the Sabbath blamelesly and Davids eating the Shew bread which was lawful for none to eate ordinarily but the Priests And the Disciples rubbing the ears of Corn I will have mercy not sacrifice is a Leston that he sets us to learn when two duties come together to prefer 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
c. We reply 1. Profaneness 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 through the World and the case of the Israelites of old shew that mans nature is prone to it 4. Prophaneness and Idolatry befriend each other As God is jealous against Idolatry so should all faithfull Pastors of the Church be and not refuse such a caution to the people and say There is no great need of it Publike Baptism UNtill 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 judge which of his Parishioners he pleaseth Atheists 〈…〉 Hereticks c. and then in that name to reject their children from b 〈…〉 Baptized Our Church concludes more charitably that Christ will 〈…〉 vourably accept every Infant to Baptism that is presented by the Church according to our present Order And this she concludes out of Holy Scriptures as you may see in the Office of Baptism according to the Practise and Doctrine of the Catholick Church Cypr. Ep. 59. August Ep. 28. de verb. Apost Ser. 14. Reply 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 faithfull 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 or any other condition or qualification but that they be the seed of the faithfull dedicated to God you should do well to shew it us and not so slightly pass 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 that a non-liberation is such a punishment then you must suppose that all the Infants of Heathens Jews Turks are saved that die in Infancy or else Christ is uncharitable And if they are all saved without Baptism then Baptism is of no such use or necessity as you seem to think What then is their priviledge of the seed of the faithfull that they are holy and that the Covenant is made with them 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 faithfull then of Infidles Heathens Atheists To your second Objection we Answer You will drive many a faithfull labourer from the work of Christ if he may not be in the Ministry unless he will baptise the Children of Heathens Infidels and Excommunicate ones before their Parents do repent And the first Question is not Who shall be the judge But whether we must be all thus forced Is not the Question as great Who shall be the judge of the unfitness of Persons for the Lords Supper And yet there you think it not a taking too much upon us to keep away the scandalous if they have their Appeals to you And is it indeed a power too great arbitrary to have a judiciam discretionis about our own Acts and not to be forced to baptize the children of Heathens against our Consciences Who judged for the Baptizers in the Primitive Church what persons they should baptize We act but as Engines under you not as Men if we must not use our Reason and we are more miserable then brutes or men if we must be forced to go against our Consciences unless you will save us harmless before God O that in a fair debate you would prove to us that such children as are described are to be baptized and that the Ministers that baptize them must not have power to discern whom to baptize But who mean you by the Churches that must present every Infant that Christ may accept them Is every Infant first in the promise of pardon If so shew us that promise and then sure God will make good that promise though Heathen Parents present not their children to him as your grounds suppose if not then will the sign save those that are not in the promise But is it the Godfathers that are the Church Who ever called them so And if by the Church you mean the Minister and by presenting you mean baptizing them then any Heathen's child that a Minister can catch up and baptize shall be saved which if it could be proved would perswade us to go hunt for children in Turkie Tartary or America and secretly baptize them in a habit that should not make us known But there is more of fancy then charity in this and Christ never invited any to him but the children of the promise to be thus presented and baptized Sect. 3. P. 23. And then the Godfathers c. It is an erronious doctrine and the ground of many others and of many of your Exceptions that children have no other right to Baptism then in their Parents right The Churches Primitive practise forbids it to be left to the pleasure of Parents whether there shall be other Sareties or no It is fit we should observe carefully the practice of venerable Antiquity as they desire Prop. 18. Reply We conjecture the words that conclude your former Subject being mis-placed are intended as your Answer to this and if all the children of any sort in the world that are brought to us must by us be baptized without distinction indeed it 's no great matter what time we have notice of it It seems we differ in Doctrine though we subscribe the same Articles we earnestly desire you distinctly to tell us What is the Infants title to Baptism if it be not to be found in the Parent Assign it and prove it when you have done as well as we prove their right as they are the seed of Believers dedicated by them to God and then we promise to consent It s strange to
that on Sunday that is so called by Heathens the Christians hold their meetings See the usage of the Church in this point in August Cont. Faustum Manithaeum Lib. 18. Cap. 5. Singing of Psalms in Meeter is no part of the Liturgy and so no part of our Commission Repl. If the word Liturgy signifie the publick Worship God forbid we should exclude the singing of Psalms And sure you have no fitter way of singing than in Meeter when these and all Prayers conceived by private men as you call the Pastors whether prepared or excemporate and by purity of reason-preaching are cast out what will your Liturgy be We hope you make no question whether singing Psalms and Hymns were part of the Primitive Liturgy 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 Liturgy we understand not the reason of this N. 13. 14. The 13. and 14. we suppose you grant by passing them by The phrase is such c. The Church in her Prayers useth no more offensive phrase than St. Paul uses when he writes to the Corinthians Galathians 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 denomination to the whole from the greater part to whom in charity it was due And puts the rest in mind what they have by their Baptisme undertaken to be and what they profess themselves to be and our prayers and the phrase of them surely supposes no more than 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 Soeiety till either they shall separate themselves by willful 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 call the Field a Corn field though there 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 bitternesse 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 burried as a Brother of whose Resurtection 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 than desire and the edge of it be turned from those that fear sinning to those that fear it not The Connexion of the parts of our Liturgy is conformable to the Example of the Churches of God before us and have as much dependence 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 Liturgy for the greatest part of the Prayers for daily use is confused by which soever of those 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 only ordinary perfect Rule we know about particular Administrations when 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 the perfect Rule that your Let any which is the comprehensive Prayer and that the body of your daily Prayers broken into several Collects should not as set together have any considerable respect unto that order nor yet to the order which reason and the nature of the thing requireth which is observed in all things else and yet that you should admire this and be so tenacious of that which in conceived Prayer you would call by worse names than confusions this shews us the wonderful power of prejudice We were thus brief in this exception lest we should offend by instances But seeing you conceive the order and method to be excellent and to be willing to hear more as to this and the following exception we shall annex a Catalogue of defects and disorders which we before forbore to give you The Psalmes have ordinarily an observabe method If you find any whose parts you cannot so well set together as to see the beauty of method will you turn your eye from the rest and from the Lords Prayer and choose that one to be your President or excuse disorder on that pretence The Collects are made short as being best for devotion as we observed before and cannot be accounted faulty for being like those short but prevalent Prayers in Scripture Lord be merciful to me a Sinner Son of David have mercy on us Lord encrease our Faith Repl. We do in common speech call that a Prayer which containeth all the substance of what in that businesse and addresse we have to say unto God and that a Petition which containeth one single request usually a Prayer hath many Petitions Now if you intend in your addresse to God to do no more than speak a transient request or ejaculation which we may do in the midst of other businesse then indeed your instances are pertinent But why then do you not give over when you seem to have done but come again and again and offer as many Prayers almost as Petitions This is to make the Prayer short as a Sermon is that is cut into single Sentences every Sentence having an exordium and Epilogue as a Sermon but it is to make the Prayers much longer than is needful or suitable to the matter Do you find this the way of the Saints in Scripture Indeed Abraham did so when Gods interlocution answering the first Prayer called him to