(n) P. 141. that I am a little critical with the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Poet comes from it but he is but a miserable Poet who should only read or recite Copies of Verses composed by others Now though I speak of composing Prayers which might be recited or publickly used yet to gratify our Author I shall acquaint him that though the Imperial Law of Justinian established the use of Forms of Prayer as I (o) Ch. 3. Sect. 3. above shewed yet the praying by these Forms is (p) Justin Novel 137. c. 6. there expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But besides this he is but a little Critical in imagining so unreasonable a thing as that the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be every where accommodated to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Poet. Our Authors fancy about Poetry And he is so unhappy in this his Fancy as well as in his Arguments that as weak as it is it is not so much as fitted to serve his own Design I am persuaded that upon further thoughts he will not open his mouth Ch. VIII for practising according to his own little Criticism or for making Prayers after the manner that Poets make Verses who are for exercising their own Fancies and gratifying the Humours of other men more than for keeping close to truth or minding what is serious And I wish that no such miscarriages may prevail with any according to our Author's way and method which he contends for And with respect to the Speaker if this Criticism was of any weight as they are not the best Poets who trust themselves to their present sudden abilities of expression but rather they who with great care consider both matter and words and write them down and have left their Writings for lasting Monuments those also must be the best Prayers which are composed in like manner But for the People they are utterly cut out from having any part in making publick confessions or supplications to Almighty God according to this conceit though the Scriptures and the Language of the Church admit them to have a share therein 8. His seventh Argument being only intended as a general proof for the lawfulness of Forms enjoyned is this (q) Reas Acc. p. 146. that a man may lawfully determine himself to the use of Forms and therefore may be lawfully determined to them by his Superiours Here he first tells us this doth not reach his Question concerning Ministers who have the gift of Prayer But he saith further A Christian hath a liberty to determine himself where he may not lawfully be determined by his Superiour as in case of Marriage to a particular Woman in the choice of his Trade and course of Life and a Minister may determine himself to write his Sermon constantly at length Now these words as many others in this Discourse being written with reflection upon the authority of Superiours I shall consider the weight of them with respect to the Case in hand 9. Wherefore it may be observed that there are two Cases concerning the matter of a Law which may render it unlawful Of the lawfulness of being determined by our Superiours where we may determine our selves to be enacted by Superiours The one when it takes away the just civil Rights and freedoms of the Subject and imposeth unreasonable needless burdens the other when it is against the rules of Conscience In the former case it is true that a man 's own civil rights are so far at his own disposal and in his own power that he may here determine himself to what his Superiour may not determine him Thus a free Subject of a considerable estate may if he please settle his Estate upon another Person or remove his Habitation into another Country or resolve upon a single Life or put himself into the condition of a Servant Another Person of like competent Estate may determine himself to a retired Life a sparing Diet and a mean Garb and if he be free from dependent Relations may resolve to give the surplusage of his Estate to pious publick and charitable Vses But it is not fit nor lawful for his Superiour so to deprive him of his civil Rights as to put upon him so much burden and trouble But in things which are lawful or unlawful according to the rules of Conscience where he may lawfully as to Conscience determine himself to any thing he may lawfully be determined by his Superiour and if from the unlawfulness in Conscience he may not be determined to any particular thing by his Superiour neither may he determine himself to it And the reason of this is because if this thing be a Sin a man may not lawfully determine himself to it but if it be no Sin no principle of Conscience will oblige him not to be determined by his Superiour Now the appointing prescribed Forms of Prayer taking this in general as our (q) P. 163 164. In the present Question we suppose Forms as good â—nd perfect as the Wâ—t and Piety of men can make Author discourseth of it can be no invading the civil rights of Subjects or imposing things burdensome to their outward condition considered apart from Conscience and therefore if there be any dispute about the lawfulness hereof it must proceed from the rules of Conscience And therefore if a man may lawfully determine himself in this case or any other of like nature he may also be lawfully determined by his Superiour 10. He also tells us (r) P. 147. It is no Popery for People to think their Spiritual Guides and Governours wiser than themselves That the Author of this Argument would persuade us to be Papists in that he would have men think that the judgment of Superiours is better than our own But he might consider that since God hath appointed Spiritual Guides it is both the most prudent course and the duty of private Persons in cases of practice which themselves do not throughly understand to consult them receive their counsel and be directed by them And his establishing other Governours manifesteth that they are appointed to consider what within the sphere of their Power is useful for the publick good and others are to be directed by them and to rest satisfied in their determination Nor is this any thing of Popery but due Christian sobriety Only this limitation must be admitted that as I have (s) Ch. 4. n. 11.12 above shewed if any thing be proposed by them which upon plain and certain evidence appears to be unlawful those who are under them ought then to reject their Direction and Authority as being contradicted by a greater and higher 11. The tenth Argument mentioned by him is That (t) Reas Acc. p. 149. Forms are necessary for Vniformity And here he again declares against that pitiful thing called Vniformity in words and syllables and phrases as he upbraidingly stiles it But having answered
the Benediction of Eli the High Priest to Hannah and Elkanah 1 Sam. 1.17 Ch. 2.20 28. He goes on to tell us that they g p. 57. do not think that ever our Saviour intended the Lords Prayer to be used syllabically And h De Casib Consc l. 4. c. 17. qu. 5. Amesius also declares that our Lord did not intend to prescribe a Form of words to be constantly observed in the Lords Prayer Now it may well seem strange that any persons should harbour such an opinion as this if they had not some interest which enclined them to have such apprehensions concerning the Lords Prayer But as our late Gracious Soveraign observed i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 16. its great guilt is that it is the warrant and Original Pattern of all set Liturgies in the Christian Church And I cannot but wonder that k Grot. in Mat. 6.9 in Luc. 11.1 Grotius should entertain this extravagant and unreasonable conceit 29. But that our Saviour delivered this Prayer as a Form to be of ordinary use I gave manifest evidence l Libert Eccles p. 100 101 102. from the expressions of his precept from the occasion of his delivering it from the manner of its composure and from clear testimonies concerning the usual practice of the Primitive Church in the first second and third Centuries in observing it as a Form And our Author thought not fit to answer any thing to these proofs The Lords Prayer was directed to be a Form nor indeed to take any notice of them unto which I shall refer the Reader But this novel and groundless notion is also greatly opposite to the sense of the ancient Church in the following Centuries and would have been then earnestly exploded since they looked upon the Apostles themselves and all other Christians to have been enjoined by divine Precept to make use of this Prayer as a Form S. Hierome declared m Hieron adv Pelag. l. 3. c. 5. Docuit Apostolos suos ut quotidie in corporis illius sacrificio credentes audeant loqui Pater noster c. He taught his Apostles that every day believing in the sacrifice of his body they should say Our Father which art in Heaven c. And n Aug. Epist 89. S. Austin saith Omnibus necessaria est Oratio Dominica quam ipsis arietibus gregis i. e. ipsis Apostolis suis Dominus dedit ut unusquisque Deo dicat Dimitte nobis debita nostra c. The Lords Prayer is necessary for all which the Lord gave to the chief of his flock that is to the very Apostles themselves that every one should say to God Forgive us our trespasses c. 30. Among the Protestants as their Writers do generally acknowledge it to be a prescribed Form so Apollonius and the Classis of o Consid contr Ang. p. 177 178. Walachria observed In omnibus Reformatarum Ecclesiarum Liturgiis c. In all the publick Liturgies which are extant of the Reformed Churches the Lords Prayer is prescribed to be used But our Authors Assertion not only contradicts the sense of the ancient Catholick Church and the generality of Protestants abroad but he herein clasheth as well with the Directory and with that Assembly at Westminster which rejected our Common Prayer as with the Church of England In the p Direct Of Prayer after Serm. Directory they said The Prayer which Christ taught his Disciples is not only a pattern of Prayer but it self a most comprehensive Prayer and we recommend it to be used in the Prayers of the Church And the members of that Assembly in their Annotations affirm that q Assembl Annot. on Luk. 11.2 It is the most exact and sacred Form of Prayer indited and taught the Disciples who were to teach the whole World the rules and practice of true Religion by Christ himself who is best able to teach his servants to pray And again Christ prescribed this Form of Prayer to be used by them 31. Now it is an unreasonable confidence and presumption to oppose and contradict the general sense of the Christian Church in all Ages and even the truly Primitive and Reformed Churches if it be not upon great evidence Wherefore I shall now examine what this Writer hath to say for his opinion He saith r Reas Acc. p. 57. If the Apostles had apprehended it left for a Form of words and syllables we should have found some after record of the use of it But if he mean there would be some record of this in the Scriptures and writings of the Apostles this is very vain since it is certain they do not contain such Prayers as were used in the publick Assemblies and it is as unreasonable to expect this in them as to expect that all Books of instruction written by any of our Church should repeat our Publick Liturgy and it is very usual for such Books to have other expressions of Prayer and Supplication than those of our Common-Prayer And if this objection were of any weight it would as much prove that our Saviour never intended that Christian Baptism should be administred in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost as that the Lords Prayer should not be used though he plainly commanded both 32. But if by record The Lords Prayer used as a Form in the Primitive Church he means evidence beyond all exception from authentick ancient Writers concerning the practice of the Primitive Church though the producing such evidence is not necessary to make the Precepts of our Saviour valid I have sufficiently manifested so much in the place lately referred unto but if he took no notice thereof I cannot help that And besides what I mentioned above n. 29. S. Aug. assures us ſ Hom. 42. inter 50. Ad altare Dei quotidie dicitur Oratio Dominica The Lords Prayer is daily said at Gods Altar And in another place speaking of the Communion Service he saith that the Prayers thereof t Ep. 59. ad Paul Qu. 5. fere omnis Ecclesia Dominica Oratione concludit almost every Church doth conclude with the Lords Prayer And the use of it after the receiving the Sacrament was also observed by u De Sacr. l. 5. c. 4. S. Ambrose 33. But our Author saith 2. If Christ intended it for a Form x Ibid. p. 57. all that can be concluded is that Christ may appoint a Liturgy for his Church which surely none denies But it will also follow that Forms of Prayer are not to be rejected and condemned but ought to be esteemed of profitable use It gives an approbation to other publick Forms For since such Forms were of use among the Jews in our Saviours time as I have observed and shall more particularly manifest in the end of the next Section our Lord was so far from reproving this practice or John the Baptist his conforming to the like that himself taught his own
evidence from the Laws of God and the Constitution of the Christian Church that Schism and unnecessary separation is a sin in the breach of Christian Vnity as that Adultery is a sin in breaking the bond of Wedlock And I account my self to be as certain that if ever there was any unwarrantable separation from any known Church since the Apostles time the separation from the Church of England is really such since our Church is truly as free from any just exception in its Constitution doctrine and worship as any other since that time either was or is And it seemeth highly probable if I do not mistake plain words that some of our dissenters themselves are at some times satisfied either of so much or of that which comes very near it concerning the excellent Constitution of our Church Dr Owen saith i Of Evang. Love p. 54 55. We look upon the Church of England or the generality of the nation professing Christian Religion measuring them by the doctrine received since the Reformation to be as sound and healthful a part of the Catholick Church as any in the World and again k ibid. p. 87. We believe that the generality of the inhabitants of this nation are by their profession constituted an eminent part of the Kingdom of Christ in this World But if pitieth me to consider upon what weak and unwarrantable pretences such persons venture upon the practices of real separation and by what insufficient excuses they plead for themselves in the defence thereof 14. This Authors opinion is a heavy charge against the most eminent Churches and men Obs 3. There are considerable prejudices against the truth of our Authors assertion as it is by him stated even such which beside the more direct evidences of which hereafter will perswade a sober man to be wary of entertaining it if he duly observe them For this opinion is not only against the Church of England but the most famous Churches in the Primitive times who used such set Forms in their publick worship as besides what hath been said already will sufficiently appear in the following Discourse This is also against the Constitution of many eminent Protestant Churches abroad which I have elsewhere l Libert Eccl. B. 1. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. n. 11 12. observed briefly and shall not need here to add further proof since this Author doth not deny the same but tells us m Reason Acc. Ch. 2. p. 9. the continuance of Liturgies upon the Reformation owes it self in a great measure to their not having men able to pray without a Form And yet I cannot but think that this Author is a person of so much modesty and hath such a respect to many of those Reformers and their Successors as not to think them inferiour to himself and then they must come under the censure of his assertion And to me it seemeth a very hard thing to embrace such a position as must cast reproach on almost all the Churches of Christ in all Ages and must also conclude all the most famous Ministers therein to have lived and died in the constant practice of the same sin unrepented of Now I can easily apprehend that such a consideration as this will have a different influence upon such men as this Author according to the different temper in which it may meet with them For at one time he tells us n Ch. 9. p. 163. authority or practice is a lamentable Argument but at another time he declares concerning the sense and apprehensions of good men that o Ch. 2. p. 44. the sensus piorum neither is nor ever was judged by persons of sobriety and worth an inconsiderable Argument for the truth of a proposition especially a practical proposition not plainly determined in holy Writ 15. Nor is it consistent with it self his very stating his Question overthrows the main foundations and chief Arguments of his Discourse and then he who will embrace our Authors assertion according as he hath stated it upon such Arguments as he chiefly urgeth must learn to affirm and deny the same thing or to reconcile things contradictory which to me and to all rational men must be when observed another great prejudice against his opinion Now in stating his Case he grants as I above observed that such Forms of Prayer as God hath commanded in Scripture if any such be must be used and other Scripture Forms though not commanded may be used as part of our Prayer and yet he declares it sinful for such Ministers who can pray otherwise to use Forms 1. From the duty of using their own p Ch. 2. p. 6 7 c. and Ch. 3. gifts and 2. From the hindrance of pious dispositions or attention and fervency from the use of a Form of words in Prayer and yet if these Arguments are of any weight they must conclude against the lawful use of Scripture Forms as well as of others which yet he asserteth to be lawful And indeed some Scripture Forms being in the New Testament commanded to be used that sufficiently manifesteth that a set Form of words in Prayer can be no hindrance to a religious temper of mind unless we will grant that our Saviours commands are hurtful to his Religion and that such Positions of men which are contrary to his Precepts ought to be preferred before them 16. He acknowledgeth also p. 3. that it is lawful yea necessary for them who join with others in Prayer to make use of his words who speaketh which c an be but a Form to them And p. 19. he saith such persons have nothing to do but to exercise their grace And this consideration was made use of to prove the lawfulness of Forms by q Pract. Catechism B. 3. Sect. 2. Bishop Tayl. Of Prayer Extempore n. 46 47. Disp of Liturg. Prop. 1. Arg. 6. Dr Hammond Dr Taylor and Mr Baxter Now from hence it not only follows that such Prayers are acceptable to God which are put up by pious men with devout hearts but without the exercise of their own gifts but it must also be hence concluded that Vnity in publick Prayer is more acceptable to God than the use of mens own abilities in conception or expression For otherwise it would be the duty of all persons in the publick Assemblies who have any such abilities not to take notice of the Ministers words or to join in them but distinctly to exercise their own gifts or make use of their private conceptions there or else to withdraw themselves from the publick Assemblies that they may have the more free opportunity for the exercise of them 17. Nor generally owned by the Non-Conformists I shall only add in the last place that this assertion of our Author is such that a great part and I think the greater part of the Nonconformists themselves will not own Indeed in Qu. Eliz. her time the r In Bishop Whitgifts Defence Tr. 9. Ch. 2. Div. 2.
first Admonition disliked the being tied to any Forms of Prayer invented by men but Mr Cartwright in his ſ ibid. Div. 3. Reply declares his agreement for a prescript Form to be used in the Church And besides other particular persons the Presbyterian Commissioners at the Savoy made not our Authors Position any part of their objections yea they were willing to have composed t Grand debate in exceptions of Presbyt p. 29. new Forms as themselves express And it would be well if our dissenting Brethren would really consider how great their disagreements are among themselves even in so many things that it cannot be expected that any way of settlement should be agreed upon among themselves as it was experimentally manifested by the proceedings of 1643 1644 1645. and the years ensuing 18. And I should be wanting in due returns of civility to our Author if I do not do him so much right as to acknowledge that his perspicuous stating the Question hath made way for the fairer examination thereof And he also disowns those wilder extreams in denying the lawfulness of all Forms in general and also declares that he u p. 18. doth not argue for praying ex tempore but only in the use of our own gifts which excludes not premeditation But I must likewise do the truth that right as to observe that his position as he hath stated it is not consistent therewith and therefore ought not to be asserted or defended CHAP. II. Ch. II. Of the gift of Prayer THE first Argument produced against the lawfulness of ordinarily using a set Form by such Ministers who have a gift of Prayer is because saith he this gift is a mean given by God for the performance of this religious act of Prayer and therefore a Reasona Account p. 5 6. may not be neglected or omitted And he tells us by the gift of Prayer he means b p. 6. a mans ability fitly to express his mind to God in Prayer And that such a person who is able fitly to express his mind in his own words ought to make use of them in publick Administrations and may not lawfully pray by a Form he endeavours to prove by urging some Scriptures which require the use of some gifts as 1 Tim. 4.14 1 Pet. 4.10 11. Rom. 12.3 6. 2. What the gift of Prayer is Now that I may give the clearest satisfaction to the Reader in this particular I shall not content my self barely to answer this Argument and to shew the weakness thereof but I shall first give an account What that is which is and may be called the Gift of Prayer and how far this is afforded and how far mens own abilities must be exercised Of the nature of Prayer And for the better understanding of this it must be observed that a pious and devout Prayer doth contain a great part of the lively exercise and practice of Religion and Piety especially if we comprehend under the name of Prayer both confession and thanksgiving It includeth a professed owning the true God and Faith in him and acknowledging him to be the Governour and disposer of all things and the Author of all good and this is called by Philo c Philo lib. Quod Deus sit immutabilis p. 306. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great Prayer It taketh in also a professed owning the Almighty power infinite wisdom goodness faithfulness and Omniscience of God and also the exercise of reverence submission humility hope affectionate desire heavenly mindedness and repentance together with a lively sense and belief of the Gospel grace and promises and of the merits Mediation and Intercession of our only Lord and Saviour and a sincere love to all men and particularly to the Church and our Governours for whom we pray 3. Wherefore first that is eminently and especially to be esteemed the gift of Prayer which disposeth and enableth to the performance of the duty of Prayer And therefore since Prayer is not so much a verbal thing The gift of Prayer is a devout temper of mind as a pious address of the heart soul and spirit unto God Gods bestowing the supplies and assistances of his grace which kindle and excite pious dispositions in seeking unto God with earnest and affectionate desires a lively faith and the exercise of inward devotion this is most properly his vouchsafing and bestowing the gift of Prayer and our receiving and exercising them is our having and using the gift of Prayer For as the gift of Charity doth not consist in speaking of the matters or rules of Charity but in being inwardly disposed to the lively practice of that divine grace so is it also in Prayer Now if any persons shall here say as some are used to speak that what I have expressed is not the gift but the grace of Prayer he may consider that by Grace he can here understand nothing else but an excellent and gracious gift and as S. Austin declared d Aug. Ep. 105. Sixto ipsa oratio inter gratiae munera reperitur Prayer it self is to be reckoned amongst the works of grace 4. And whereas this Author e Reas Acc. p. 19. produceth two places of Scripture to prove the gift of Prayer from the holy Spirit This shewed from the Holy Scripture Zec. 12.10 and Rom. 8.26 it is remarkably observable that both these places so far as they speak of the spirit or gift of Prayer have particular respect to the inward affection and devotion of the heart and not according to his notion to the ability of expression The former place is Zec. 12.10 I will pour upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and supplications and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced and they shall mourn c. Where the Hebrew word translated Supplications is by divers Interpreters as the Chaldee Paraphrast the Septuagint the Syriack and Arabick Versions and Pagnine agreeably to the derivation of it rendred Mercies or Compassions And since the spirit of supplications is the spirit of grace it therefore is to be understood according to the common sense of Interpreters of piety of mind and affections and an holy temper and disposition of heart to trust in God and call upon him And the following words and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced and shall mourn c. will infer the same thing if those words be taken as expressions of true repentance which is the sense of many good Expositors though some modern and f Eus Dem. Evang. l. 8. Test 4. ancient Writers look upon them as expressing the anguish of them who had despised and disobeyed our Blessed Lord and Saviour 5. The other place is Rom. 8.26 The spirit helpeth our infirmities for we know not what to pray for as we ought but the spirit it self maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered Now concerning the former part of these words it cannot be conceived
in a persons being able to express his mind whereas it is chiefly to be provided that the conceptions of his mind be sober and well ordered comprehensive and every way sutable to the nature of the duty 2. In that he only mentions the expressing his mind Whereas in publick Prayers it is not a mans own private desires or wants so far as they are peculiar to himself which he is to present to God but he is to express what is fit to represent the minds of the whole Assembly and the common desires and wants and joint Devotions of all the Congregation 46. Another place I shall examine is where he tells us they x p. 9 10. His defavâ—ing the ministry of our Church is unjust and unreasonable think it will be hard to find nine or ten thousand Scholars in England furnished with the gift either of praying or preaching in any tolerable manner and one great reason is because they have been so tied to a Liturgy that they have never applied themselves to the study of the Scriptures and their own hearts as they should Thus in this place and in many others he takes any occasion to reproach and cast dirt upon the Ministry of the Church of England even to such excess as sometimes to call them though he excepts very many particular persons from that charge y p. 124. an ignorant lazy and sottish Ministry And he is the more liberal in these exorbitant Censures when he doth withal bespatter our Liturgy as in both these places or what he terms z p. 149. that pitiful thing called Vniformity in words and syllables and phrases 47. Now I conceive my self abundantly warranted to say that the abilities of the present Ministry of the Church of England are such as were never in this Church outdone if equalled in any foregoing Age nor as I verily believe in any other part of the Christian World since the Apostolical times in any Church of so large extent And it is an easy thing but mightily unworthy of a Professor of Christianity to speak bad and evil words of the mosT worthy men and things But doth the use of a Liturgy hinder men from studying the Scriptures or their own hearts which is a loud calumny upon our Ministry and many other excellent persons of eminent piety and goodness who have a very high value for our Liturgy and were the ancient Fathers and our first Reformers and their Successors who closely adhered to a Liturgy men of no understanding in the Scriptures and men of no piety of heart or holiness of life Or is the dayly reading the Scriptures as is done in the Liturgy and by the Ministry of England at other times also that which must hinder mens study and understanding in them and is the constant use of morning and evening devotions which the Liturgy directeth the great obstacle to piety and to mens taking serious care of their own hearts to have them possessed with fear and reverence of God and disposed to the exercises of Religion and universal obedience And what a wild accusation is this to revile and asperse a National Ministry at random and at a venture concerning such things wherein every Reader may discern that it is impossible for him to know what he speaks to be true and others blessed be God know them to be false 48. And I wish our Author be not himself defective in some part at least of what he chargeth upon others For in studying the Scriptures he could not but meet with Precepts against evil speaking false accusing rash judging and uncharitableness and in studying his own heart he would discern whether he had not offended in any of these And I presume him though I am not very certain who he is to be so much a Scholar as to know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the usual Greek word for the Evil one doth properly and primarily signify a Calumniator and it is thence unlikely that any of the spirit of Christianity should be contained in reproaching others which Nazianzen accounted to be a Naz. Orat 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the greatest evils 49. In Answer to such words I could also without much pains find out defaming and reflective expressions if I were enclined that way but I am content herein to be inferiour to him but truly sorry to see what liberty he sometimes gives himself in such things I have long since learned from the example of our Lord and Saviour from the rules of the Christian Religion and particularly from our Church-Catechism to keep my tongue from evil-speaking lying and slandering And if he will not take it ill from me which I assure him I intend no otherwise than with a truly charitable mind I dare confidently affirm that if he shall please to be a strict observer of so much though it be out of our Liturgy he will not thereby be the worse man 50. And I hope he may be the less offended with me for this Counsel because I do not write it out of any private provocation or any apprehension of disrespectful expressions towards my self I acknowledge his expressions towards me in particular to have been very civil and courteous and I thank him for them And I shall not return to him any thing unmeet But I should not be faithful to the truth nor to himself if I should not shew the weakness and mistakes of his Arguments so far as I discern them And the duty I owe to the Church of which I am a member cannot well be discharged without taxing his reproachful words against it where I meet with them 51. What he speaketh concerning b p. 18 19. Hymns and Anthems I shall have occasion to take notice of in the next c Ch. 3. Sect. 2. n. 38 c. Chapter CHAP. III. Of Devotion and attentive fervency of mind in publick Prayer and whether the use of Liturgies be hindrances or helps therein SECT I. His pretences for Forms of publick Prayer being an impediment to attention and fervency examined and the contrary manifested HIS second Argument against the lawfulness of the ordinary publick use of Forms by him who hath abilities of expressing himself without them is that they hinder the attention intention and fervency both of Minister and people and therefore a Reas Acc. p. 23. may not be used But this charge against well-ordered Forms can never be made out and his proofs will appear very weak and slender 2. Now I freely acknowledge and assert Pious devotion greatly needful in Prayer that in our Prayer we ought to have a holy and Religious sense of God and of Jesus our Mediator We ought also to be serious in minding and attending to the duty in hand Ch. III. and as free as may be from distractions and to have a lively exercise of faith hope reverence and such other Christian Graces as I mentioned in the b n. 2. former Chapter And the
Disciples a Form also as the Baptist had taught his Wherefore this manifestly declares an approbation of Forms of Prayer taught and directed by others who have the chief authority in the Church 34. The last thing he urgeth is y p. 57 58. that supposing that Christ intended this as a Form at that time whether it was to last beyond his Resurrection and the descent of the Holy Ghost is a farther Question And though he doth not positively assert this yet he would have his Reader to be of this opinion and offers in proof of it what he saith was well observed which I shall by and by consider The Precepts of Christ which all ancient Churches reverenced may not now be laid aside But first Is it not a strange boldness and irreverence towards any Precept or Institution of our Saviour for him to suggest to men that it is expired and antiquated when our Lord himself gave no intimation of its being temporary and the Vniversal Church hath understood it otherwise Is not this a new piece of Pharisaism in teaching men how to make void the Commandments of God by looking upon them as out of date This Author may by these means do some service for them who contend that the Sacrament of Baptism was only intended for the first admission of Nations into the Christian Church so far as the reputation of his bare authority will go Yea and for those also who look upon the Lords Supper the Ordination of Ministers and many other Christian duties not to be needful for the succeeding Ages after the Apostles 35. The Apostles had extraordinary assistances and abilities before the Resurrection of Christ Secondly His supposing Forms might be requisite for the Apostles before Christ Resurrection and the coming of the Holy Ghost but that no such low things are since that time fit to be continued doth too plainly manifest that some persons are strangely big with swelling conceits of themselves Dare our Author speak out the plain sense of this suggestion which is this That himself and other dissenters are men of far greater abilities than the Apostles of our Saviour were before his Resurrection though they were then called to be his Apostles were sent forth to preach his Gospel and were enabled to work miracles and cast out Devils and consequently that these men now may reasonably look upon such directions and precepts to be of too low and inferiour a nature for them to observe which yet were enjoined upon and were fit for the state of the Apostles before the Resurrection 36. Thirdly his pretence of proof for this opinion is very shallow which is z p. 58. that Christ left out his own name in the Lords Prayer Of praying in the name of Christ but in that name his Disciples were afterwards enjoined to ask Joh. 14.13 14. Joh. 16.23 But to ask in his name is to ask through his mediation upon the encouragement of his merits and his being our intercessor and advocate at Gods right hand in our nature which is a priviledge peculiar to the time since the ascension of our Lord and also to ask sutably to the rules and doctrine of Christianity This is the sense which is generally given of this expression of asking in the name of Christ and even the Assemblies Annotations declare asking in the name of Christ to be a Assembl Annot. on Joh. 14.14 Ch. 16.24 26. through his mediation and they also add from S. Gregory si id quod non expedit petitur non in nomine Jesu petitur pater if that be desired which should not be God is not asked in the name of Jesus And this sense of this phrase In his name that it signifies upon his account and though him is evident from Joh. 1.12 Joh. 20.31 and many other places But the Apostles under the guidance of Gods Spirit did not always verbally express the name Jesus in all their Prayers as Rom. 15.13 2 Thes 3.16 and elsewhere 37. Now in the Lords Prayer we know that what we ask is according to the will of our Lord being directed by him We call not God Our Father but upon the account of Christ and upon his account we desire all our Petitions in the Lords Prayer to be granted And our desiring that Gods name may be hallowed that his Kingdom should come and that our trespasses may be forgiven c. have particular respect to our Mediator And in this whole Prayer we according to the direction of our Church-Catechism trust that God of his mercy and goodness 〈◊〉 do what we ask through our Lord Jesu◠Christ and therefore we say Amen And this is also the general sense of all b Formula à Resormatis usurpata ante illius Orationis recitationem Haec alia quae nosti Domine nobis esse necessaria à te postulamus in nomine Christi ea Orationis formula quam ipse nos docuit Pater noster c. Thes Salm. Par. 3. loc Com. 47. n. 13. sober Protestants 38. My second Argument to prove Forms of Prayer to be no disadvantage to devotion was c Libert Eccles p. 122 123. because it is generally acknowledged that the singing Psalms of Prayer and praise may be advantageously performed in a set Form of words and the Scriptures are not the less edifying because they are contained in a set form of words But concerning singing Psalms this Writer saith d p. 59. this is a mistake of the Question and e p. 60. that these are such Forms as God hath Canonized And he tells us he is against singing by any Forms not made of God which he calls f p. 18 19. p. 60.78 Apocryphal Anthems as much as he is against Liturgical Forms of Prayer And yet he allows g p. 78. p. 60. singing the Psalms in Meter though the words be not dictated of God My second Argument was that the Psalms in a set Form of words are useful to devotion and so are the Scriptures because the sense and matter in the Psalms in Meter is so directed 39. But when he saith this Argument mistakes the Question the Reader will easily see it was proper enough for the Question or Case of which I was discoursing which was in general whether Forms of Prayer are disadvantageous to Piety But our Author that he might avoid the force of this and some other Arguments hath put the Question into another method but hath not done it solidly nor hath he avoided the force of this Argument thereby For first when he grants concerning the Psalms of Prayer and praise that God hath Canonized those Forms he here asserteth what in Answer to the former Argument he would not own viz. that God ever appointed or prescribed any Forms of Prayer And as the matter of many of the Psalms is Prayer So S. Hierome observes there are h Hieron Epist 139. Comment in Ps 189. four Psalms which bear
a renewed and Holy life is necessary hereto is manifest from that wrath and threatning denounced against workers of Iniquity and from the impossibility for them to find favour in the sight of God who do not do the Will of our Father which is in Heaven 14. Yet the Gospel justification upon these terms of Grace in the new Covenant is still through the redemption of our Saviour and faith in him and from the benefit of his Sacrifice we receive the pardon of our sins in the Holy Sacraments of the Gospel especially in the administration of which Sacraments is a principal part of the benefit of the Ministry of Reconciliation But it cannot be that the Righteousness of Christ should be so imputed to us that we should be looked on as having done or suffered what he did or suffered for then must every Christian be reputed and looked on as having performed the office of Mediator and having paid to God the price of Redemption for the sins of the World and as having made Reconciliation and obtained thereby Remission and then besides many other gross absurdities they might be invocated on this account for the dispensing the same And they who are reputed to have performed compleat actual sinless Obedience need no such Grace whereby they must receive pardon and Remission But the Holy Jesus by his Sacrifice hath made a way of Reconciliation and as our Mediator hath by his Blood established that new Covenant of Grace whereby through his Redemption we may be justified upon performing the Conditions of his Gospel And I see no other blame can be charged on this Doctrine unless it be that it is consistent with it self and with what was delivered by the Apostles of our Lord. CHAP. VII Praying by a Form is very rashly and injuriously charged with mocking of God IN his seventh Chapter he produceth his sixth Argument which is That for (a) Reas Acc. p. 115. Ministers who have the Gift of Prayer to perform publick Vocal Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others is to pretend to do an act of Worship and at the same time not to do it and is (b) P. 115 to mock God and deceive their own Souls 2. Now this is a very heavy Charge if it be true and can be proved but if all this shall appear to be a false Accusation and to be untrue Ch. VII it is then no little Slander and Calumny upon the Religious Worship of God Praying by a Form no mocking God and upon all those Churches of God and Pious Christians who make use of Forms in their Prayers And to make good his Charge our Author must here recal and deny what he hath so often granted That the use of Forms of Prayer are in themselves lawful and that they may be lawfully used by Ministers in some cases For if they be a mocking of God and the duty of Prayer is not really performed in the use of them but is only pretended so to be to the deceiving mens own Souls then they are certainly unlawful 3. Now his chief and yet trifling Argument to make good this very weighty and heavy Charge is this (c) P. 116 117. That the command to go and Preach requireth the Ministers exercise of his own Inventing and Composing and therefore so must the Command to make publick Prayers Now in answer to this it may be sufficient to say The nature and exercise of Prayer is sutably performed by a Form That every Duty is to be performed sutably to the nature of the Duty it self or in such a manner as may best tend to the pleasing of God and the exercising true Piety therein But in publick Prayer Religious Devotion and gracious dispositions and desires towards God are the great things to be practised and to that end the use of a Form of words in publick Service is well accommodated as I have shewed and therefore may be not only fitly but profitably used 4. And with respect to Preaching though our Author will find it a difficult task to prove that in every Instruction a Minister is bound to have new matter of Invention and Composition yet his greatest mistake is in supposing the cases of Instruction Exhortation or Preaching and of Praying to be parallel For where in instructing others in the knowledg of Religion Of the comparing Preaching and Praying it is the Ministers duty to teach them what they before understood not and to that end to use new Words that they may learn Knowledg it can never be imagined that he ought also to acquaint God in Prayer with what he before understood not And when in Exhortations to Men to make them better and to change their Tempers it may be of good use to suggest to them and urge upon them such Arguments and Considerations as before they either never thought of or at least did not duly consider the weight and force of them there is not the like reason of using frequently new words and expressions to God as if men were to put him in mind of the force of such things as he had not considered Surely nothing can be more weak than to insist on such unlike Comparisons instead of Arguments 5. But besides this he tells us that those words in Scripture which are used in commanding publick Prayer are not used concerning the reciting or reading the words of others Thus he saith when Prayer is commanded Hos 14.2 and Joel 2.17 the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say and he saith (d) P. 118. He is not awar of any Text in the Old Testament where that word signifies the Recitation or repetition of Words formed by others Of the words of Scripture which enjoyn Prayer Now if this was true it would be very little or not at all to purpose unless he could prove that the using of the words of a Form is not Speaking or Saying But yet in truth notwithstanding his pretence to Critical Observations in which he is also very unhappy this very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Speak or Say is very frequently in the Old Testament used for reciting the words prescribed by others as in Gen. 32.4 Deut. 26.5 Deut. 27.14 and in many other places 6. And he tells us (e) P. 119. That in the New Testament the Precepts for Prayer are expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Pray and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Say to wit in Praying But what meaneth he Are these words never made use of for the reciting a Form of Prayer when they are the very words by which the Lords Prayer is prescribed The former (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 6.9 and both of them (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 11.2 And the former of them together with the Noun derived from the latter is used (h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 26.44 to express our Saviour his Praying the third time saying the same words I might also mind our
Author that giving thanks to God is in Scripture expressed to be done in reciting the words of others 1 Chron. 16.7 But though I was not willing to pass by any thing which he urged though but under the appearance of an Argument I must intreat the Readers pardon in giving him the trouble of perusing a thing so very inconsiderable as this Argument is 7. Indeed he tells us (i) p. 120. he layes a greater stress upon his former Arguments than upon this but what little reason he hath to lay any such stress upon them may I hope by this time appear But he saith he cannot think this altogether vain and impertinent but of that let others judge But withal this Argument had need to be of great force when upon the account of this he tells us again in the (k) Ibid. close of this Chapter he makes it a great question whether if we think to fulfil the command of God for vocal Ministerial prayer by reading Forms we should not come short of what God requires and both mock God and deceive our own Souls Thus some men with extravagancy enough can speak great and swelling words supported or rather unsupported by weak feeble and impotent Arguments And his last words of this Chapter are That there is neither Precept nor President for praying by Forms which assertion he hath peremptorily avowed again and again though it be plainly against both the Scriptures and the sense of the Vniversal Church and the contrary thereunto I have above (l) Chap. 3. Sect. 2 3. plainly proved CHAP. VIII C. VIII Forms of Prayer are falsly accused of debasing the Ministry and of several unblest Effects HIs seventh Argument is (a) Reas Acc. p. 120 121. That Ministers performing their Ministerial acts in Prayer by prescribed Forms tends to level the sacred Office of the Ministry to the capacity of the meanest of the People but saith he (b) p. 121. God would never have erected an Office to do what the meanest person in the Church hath a natural ability to do And he there adds there is nothing plainer in the whole Book of God than that God hath established a peculiar order of persons to be his Ministers to declare his will unto his People and on their behalf to intercede with God in Prayer And he saith if this (c) p. 122. might be performed by Forms there would be no great reason for any peculiar maintenance for the Ministry nor for Honour and Reverence to them Now in answer to this I shall observe four things 2. Obs 1. That he gives a very defective description of the work and business of the Ministry as if it only consisted in being Orators and in the well using words and expressions Of the work and Office of the Ministry And this is no more than a master of a Family may do to instruct and pray for those of his Family but it must be the exercise of a special power of Office which must be the chief Ministerial performances of those who are in the Sacred function of the Ministry Wherefore by special Authority and Commission to receive persons into the Church in the name of Christ and to govern them in it to exercise the power of the Keys to consecrate the holy Sacraments and therein to exhibit in Christs name the tender and seal of remission of Sins and by his Authority Ministerially to dispense Absolution and Remission to them who are qualified to receive it by performing the conditions of the Gospel these and other such acts of Authority are the great and chief parts of the Ministerial office which he wholly omits And even instructions and prayers performed by those who are in this Sacred function are of greater moment because of their Office But what God worketh by their Ministry is especially to be regarded and if this was nothing as (*) Chrys in 2 Tim. c. 1. Hom. 2. St. Chrysostome argues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Thou thy self neither hast any Baptism nor dost thou receive the Sacraments nor dost thou enjoy Benedictions nor indeed art thou a Christian 3. Obs 2. The use of Forms of Prayer is far from rendring learning knowledg and such like abilities useless or needless for the Ministry nor can any man that knows the work and duty of a Minister judge so Besides his preaching so as to approve himself a workman that need not be ashamed he is by his Office to be a spiritual Guide to the consciences of others Learning and knowledg greatly requisite to the Ministry when they apply themselves to him for Counsel and Advice not only for their comfort but chiefly for their practice He is to direct and oblige Offenders who are under his care to observe the due rules and exercises of Repentance and this with respect to conscience men ought to take more notice of than most persons do And in a time when the Church and Truth hath many enemies and this Author might have been better employed than to have appeared as one the Ministers of the Church are to be able to convince or at least to confound their Adversaries and detect their errors and the danger of them They are also to watch over their charge and as much as may be to preserve them from being led aside by the slight and cunning craftiness of them who would deceive them And these are things which require far greater abilities study care and diligence than is needful to enable any man to use fluent expressions in Prayer 4. The weanest persons Aâ—â—ristred in the Church when forms of Prayer were disâ—â—ed most Obs 3. The time when Liturgies were laid aside in England was that time when many of the meanest of the People both men of weak abilities who yet could speak confidently and also men of bad and erroneous Principles were thought fit to be taken into the Ministry in the place of many sound and able men who were cast out And the performing Prayer and popular Sermons after that method our Author contends for in expression of their own may be effected to the satisfaction of great numbers of ordinary hearers whatever may be pretended to the contrary by a man who hath a forward tongue and but indifferent parts without any considerable learning or study and without much knowledg of the Doctrines of Religion and Christianity There are so many evidences of this among the several parties of our divided Separations that the chief persons among our Dissenters do very well know the Truth thereof 5. Obs 4. Our Author's assertion That God would never erect an Office or Order of Persons to do what the meanest of the People have a natural capacity to do is also certainly false The Priests Office under the Law For under the Law the office of the Priests was particularly appointed to minister before the Lord by offering Incense and Sacrifices though Corah and his Company and any other of the
matters of Demonstration to us These (l) P. 131. he calls Effects obvious to every Eye and entring upon them saith (m) P. 124. Let us instance in some too evident effects of Forms of Prayer c. And the first of these is The filling the Church of God with an ignorant lazy and sottish Ministry He indeed here excepts very many Persons but yet these are his reproachful words reflecting upon the generality of our Ministry or in his own expression those that fill the Church Now such an open notorious and shameless Calumny ought not to pass without just rebuke The great accuser of the Brethren to his grief and indignation knows that there is now in England as Learned Able The English Clergy falsly aspersed as Ignorant Lazie and Sottish and Industrious a Clergy as this Church ever had or any other of so numerous a Ministry Nor can the main Body of our Clergy be called Ignorant and Sottish but by such Persons as make no conscience of Slandering and speaking falsly And truly Sir to say no more the reason and understanding part of this your Discourse which you intitle A Reasonable Account c. is very far from being above the pitch of the generality of that part of our Ministry which I have had the opportunity to know And if you were indeed the main Men acquainted with Knowledg and Learning and had the advantage of Truth also on your side as you pretend how easily might you bafle and confute us by clear and plain Evidence which your selves are sensible enough you cannot do And therefore your most usual Methods are to work upon the fearful and melancholy temper of some and upon the fierce and angry disposition of others and upon the earnest and weak affections and the prejudices of many well-disposed People But you can hope to prevail little on men of even calm and composed Tempers and Persons of the best judgment and understanding 11. A second effect he instanceth in is (n) P. 125. The loss of Ministerial Gifts and Abilities But blessed be God there is no loss in our Church of any Abilities requisite for the due discharge of the Ministry But he here again falls upon the gift of Prayer of which as also of the lawfulness and profitableness of using of Forms of Prayer I have sufficiently discoursed in the former part of this Book 12. His third and last (o) P. 130. If not effect yet experimented consequence of prescribed Forms is a flood of Iniquity for more than an hundred Years caused thereby in our parts of the World Hence saith he Bitter words in Pulpits and printed Books which have vexed righteous Souls who have had nothing to reply but The Lord rebuke you They it seems wholly imitating the pattern of the Archangel contending with the Devil Jude 9. Ill effects charged upon Liturgies proceed from another cause Or of the Lord checking of Satan Zech 3.2 Hence saith he Are ungodly representations to Superiours of Men of whom the World was not worthy hence suspensions of so many thousands and Ruines of so many eminent Servants of God and their Families and hence the separations of Christians from one another Thus our Author chargeth a great deal of evil upon our Laws and Governours which according to his rash Position they must stand guilty of unless all enjoyned Liturgies and Uniformity be utterly rooted out of the Church and unless they will lay aside that care they ought to have of the due order and decency of the publick Worship of God and unless an Inlt may be opened to such Confusions Heresies yea and Blasphemies as in these Kingdoms were brought into the Church when Liturgies were shut out and the publick Worship was performed even by men of Erroneous principles according to the vanity of their own minds But that our Author hath mistaken the true cause of that evil he complains of I have shewed (p) Ch. 3. Sect. 4. above to which I refer But that the violent and ungrounded oppositions against lawful constitutions are too great an inlet into much iniquity will I think appear manifest enough from what I wrote in my (q) B. 1. Ch. 1. throughout Libertas Ecclesiastica And I do both heartily pity and am really grieved and sorry for the temper of such persons who by their mistakes and too much of eagerness and passion in them not only expose themselves to outward inconveniencies but which is of far greater concernment both run themselves into many sinful undertakings and are the occasion of much hurt and evil to the Church of God and make use of the latter as a remedy against the former 13. If any persons among us have spoken or written with overmuch passion or sharpness we will defend no man wheresoever he deserves blame but our Governours and the Constitution of our Church are not concerned herein But have our Dissenters replyed nothing but calmness and meekness as this Author suggests One might be apt to think upon considering such words that he is a stranger in England and unacquainted with affairs here and may have lately come from some unknown Island separated from converse with other parts of the world I heartily wish their party had been as free from all fierceness as this Author pretends Many sad and evil effects from the opposers of our Liturgâ— and then both Church and State would have enjoyed more quiet and many things had never been heard of which have been a scandal to Christianity But if their writings be reviewed from Martin Mar-prelate to this present year many of them will manifest that keen and bitter words and reproaches and revilings are no strangers to their Tents It seems not wholly to have savoured of the spirit of Christian meekness patience and gentleness when they made such violent invectives against our Governours and Establishment as kindled our late dreadful civil Wars when they ejected sequestred imprisoned and put to Death great numbers of the Clergy Gentry and Nobility for their loyalty to the King and their honourable respect to the Church when they strained their hands and more deeply their Consciences in eager and forward shedding the blood of many thousands of Christians and dared to stretch out their hands against the Lords Anointed and to take away the life of one of the best Princes that ever the Christian world enjoyed All this seems not to speak only the meekness of the Lamb and the innocence of the Dove 14. Besides the writings of particular persons could it be any other than a strange fierceness in (r) Answ to Remon p. 83.84 Smectymnuus in charging the Clergy of our Church with bringing in a new Creed other Scriptures another Baptism and Eucharist and another Christ too and another Heaven from what Christianity proposeth which they call an Heaven receptive of Drunkards Swearers Adulterers c. Can it be otherwise than that passion and uncharitableness made them write what they could