the greater number though the worse or hath secured us that they shall not be the worst or why we are not tyed rather to imitate the purer Ages then 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 sound and heard that may command England and all the Churches of his Majesties Dominions If it be said to be a General Council 1. No General Council can pretend to more Authority then that of Nice whose 20th Canon back'd with tradition and common practise now binds 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 over the universal Church there being no visible Head of it or Governours to make universal Laws but Christ as Rogers on the 20th Article fore-cited shews our 21th Article saith That General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes And doubtless all the Heathens and Mahometans and all the contending Christian Princes will never agree together nor never did to let all their Christian Subjects concur to hold a General Council It saith also And when they be gathered together for as much 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 unless 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 been divers and changed according to the diversitie of Countries times and mens manners so that nothing be ordained against Gods Word And after Every particular or National Church hath Authority to ordain change or abolish Ceremonies or Rites of the Church ordained onely by Mans Authority so that all things be done to edifying They that believe not this should not subscribe it nor require it of others As for the Testimonies cited by you they are to little purpose We deny not not that the custome of observing Lent either fewer days or more was as Ancient as those Authors But first That Lent was not known or kept in the second or third Ages you may see as followeth Tertul. de jejun l. 2. cap. 14. pleading for the Montanists Si omnem in totum devotionem temporum dierum mensium annorum erasit Apostolus cur Pascha celebramus anno circulo in mense primo cur quadraginta inde diebus in omni exulcatione deturrimus Cur stationibus quartam sextam sabbati dicamus jejuniis Parasceven quanquam vos etiam sabbatum si quando continutatis nunquam nisi in Pascha jejunandum c. And cap. 15. excusing that rigour of their Fasts quantula est apud nos interdictio ciborum duus in anno Hebdomadas xerophagiarum nec totas exceptis scilicet sabbatis dominicius offerimus Deo The old general Fast at that time was onely the voluntary unconstrained fasting on Good Friday and after that on one or two days more and then on six Irenaeus in a Fragment of an Epistle in Euseb. Hist. Lib. 5. Cap. 26. Gr. Lat. 23. saith the Controversie is not onely of the day of Easter but of the kind of Fast it self for some think they should fast one day some two others more some measure their day by forty hours of day and night and this variety of those that observe these Fasts began not now in our Age but long before us with our Ancestors who as is most like propagated to posterity the custome which they retain as brought in by a certain simplicity and private will and yet all these lived peaceably among themselves and we keep peace among our selves and the difference of Fasting is so far from violating the consonancy of Faith as that it even commendeth it Thus Irenaeus read the rest of the Chapter thus is the true reading confessed by Bellarmine Rigaltius c. and Dionys. Alexand. Ep. Can. ad Basil. pag. 881. Balsam saith Nor do all equally and alike sustain those six days of fasting but some pass them all fasting some two some three some four some more And the Catholicks in Tert de jejun cap. 2. says Itaque de caetero differentur jejunandum ex arbitrio non ex imperio novae disciplinae pro temporibus causis uniuscujusque sic Apostolos observasse nulâ—um aliud imponentes jugum certorum in commune omnibus obeundorum jejuniorum And Socrat. admireth at many Countries that all differed about the number of days and yet all called iâ— Quadragesâ—ma lib. 5 c. 22. Lat. Gr. 21. So Sozomen lib. 7. c. 19. Gr. Niceph. lib. 12. cap. 34. which may help you to expound Hierom and the rest cited by you as Rigaltius doth ad Tertul. de jujun 118. as shewing that they did it with respect to Christs forty days fast but not as intending any such thing themselves as any fast of forty days It is against the Montanists that the Quadrag was but once a year that Hierom useth the title of Apostolical tradition And how to expound him see Epist. ad Lucin unaqueque provincia abundet in suo sensu praecepta Majorum leges Apostolicus arbitretur But saith August ad Casulan Ep. 86. In Evangelicis Apostolicis literis totoque Instrumento quod appellatur Testamentum Novum animo id revolvens video preceptum esse jejunium quibus autem dieâ—us non oportet jejunare quibus oportâ—at precepto Domini vel Apostolorum non invenio definitum And that Christians abstinence in Lent was voluntary quanto magis quisque vel minus voluerit vel potuerit August affirmeth cont Faustum Manich. lib. 30. cap. 5. And Socrat. ubi supr saith ac quoniam nemo de care praeceptum literarum monumentis proditum potest ostendere perspicuum est Apostolos liberam potestatem in eadem cujusque menâ—i ac arbitrio permisisse ut quisque nec metu nec necessitate inductus quod bonum sit ageret And Prosper de vit Contempl. li. 2. C. 24. veruntamen sic jejunare vel abstinere debemus ut nos non jejunandi vel destinendi necessitate subdamus ne jam devoti sed inviti rem voluntariam faciamus And Cassianus lib. 2. col 21. cap. 30. saith In primitiva Ecclesia equale fuisse jejunium per totum annum Ac
practice of them or subscription to them But may bee permitted to enjoy their Ministerial Function and Communion with the Church without them The rather because these Ceremonies have for above an hundred years been the fountain of manifold evils in this Church and Nation occasioning fad divisions between Ministers and Ministers as also between Ministers and People exposing many Orthodox Pious and Peaceable Ministers to the displeasure of their Rulers casting them on the edge of the penal Statutes to the loss not only of their Livings and Liberties but also of their opportunities for the service of Christ and his Church and forcing people either to worship God in such a manner as their own consciences condemn or doubt of or else to forsake our Assemblies as thousands have done And no better fruits than these can bee looked for from the retaining and imposing of these Ceremonies unless wee could presume that all His Majesties Subjects should have the same subtilty of judgement to discern even to a Ceremony how far the power of man extends in the things of God which is not to bee expected or should yeeld Obedience to all the Impositions of men concerning them without inquiring into the will of God which is not to bee desired Wee do therefore most earnestly entreat the Right Reverend Fathers and Brethren to whom these Papers are delivered as they tender the glory of God the honour of Religion the Peace of the Church the service of His Majesty in the accomplishment of that happy Union which His Majesty hath so abundantly testified his desires of to joyn with us in importuning his most excellent Majesty that his most gracious indulgence as to these Ceremonies granted in his Royal Declaration may bee confirmed and continued to us and our posterities and extended to such as do not yet enjoy the benefit thereof 19. As to that Passage in His Majesties Commission where wee are authorized and required to compare the present Liturgy with the most antient Liturgies which have been used in the Church in the purest and most primitive times Wee have in obedience to His Majesties Commission made enquiry but cannot finde any Records of known credit concerning any intire forms of Liturgy within the first three hundred years which are confessed to bee as the most Primitive so the purest ages of the Church Nor any Imposition of Liturgies upon any National Church for some hundreds of years after Wee finde indeed some Liturgical forms Fathered upon St. Basil St. Chrysostome and St. Ambrose but wee have not seen any Copies of them but such as give us sufficient evidence to conclude them either wholly spurious or so interpolated that wee cannot make a judgement which in them hath any Primitive Authority Having thus in general expressed our desires wee come now to particulars which wee finde numerous and of a various nature some wee grant are of inferiour Consideration verbal rather that material which were they not in the Publick Liturgy of so famous a Church wee should not have mentioned others dubious and disputable as not having a clear foundation in Scripture for their warrant but some there bee that seem to bee corrupt and to carry in them a repugnancy to the Rule of the Gospel and therefore have administred just matter of Exception and offence to many truly religious and peaceable not of a private station only but learned and judicious Divines as well of other Reformed Churches as of the Church of England ever since the Reformation Wee know much hath been spoken and written by way of Apology in answer to many things that have been objected but yet the doubts and scruples of tender consciences still continue or rather are increased Wee do humbly conceive it therefore a work worthy of those wonders of Salvation which God hath wrought for His Majesty now on the Throne and for the whole Kingdome and exceedingly becoming the Ministers of the Gospel of Peace with all holy moderation and tenderness to indeavour the removal of every thing out of the Worship of God which may justly offend or grieve the spirits of sober and godly people The things themselves that are desired to bee removed not being of the foundation of Religion nor the essentials of Publick Worship nor the removal of them any way tending to the prejudice of the Church or State Therefore their continuance and rigorous Imposition can no waies be able to countervail the laying aside of so many pious and able Ministers and the unconceivable grief that will arise to multitudes of His Majesties most loyal and peaceable Subjects who upon all occasions are ready to serve him with their prayers estates and lives For the preventing of which evils wee humbly desire that these particulars following may bee taken into serious and tender Consideration Concerning Morning and Evening Prayer Rubrick THat morning and evening Prayer shall bee used in the accustomed place of Church Chancel or Chappel except it bee otherwise determined by the Ordinary of the place and the Chaucel shall remain as in times past Exception WE desire that the words of the first Rubrick may be expressed as in the Book established by Authority of Parliament 5to 6to Edw. 6ti Thus the Morning and Evening Prayer shall bee used in such place of the Church Chappel or Chancel and the Minister shall so turn him as the people may best hear and if there bee any controversie therein the matter shall be referred to the Ordinary Rubrick And here is to bee noted that the Minister at the time of the Communion and at other times in his ministeration shall use such Ornaments in the Church as were in use by Authority of Parliament in the second year of the Reigne of Edward the sixth according to the Act of Parliament Exception Forasmuch as this Rubrick seemeth to bring back the Cope Albe c. and other Vestments forbidden by the Common-Prayer-Book 5. and 6. Edw. 6. and so our reasons alledged against Ceremonies under our eighteenth general Exception wee desire it may bee wholly left out Rubrick The Lords-Prayer after the Absolution ends thus Deliver us from evil Exception Wee desire that these words For thine is the Kingdome the power and the glory for ever and ever Amen May be alwaies added unto the Lords-Prayer and that this Prayer may not bee enjoyned to bee so often used in morning and evening Service Rubrick And at the end of every Psalme throughout the year and likewise in the end of Benedictus Benedicite Magnificat Nunc Dimittis shall bee repeated Glory to the Father c. Exception By this Rubrick and other places in the Common-Prayer-Books the Gloria Patri is appointed to bee said six times ordinarily in every Morning and Evening Service frequently eight times in a Morning sometimes ten which wee think carries with it at least an appearance of that vain repetition which Christ forbids for the avoiding of which appearance of evil wee desire it may bee used but once in
that a convenient conjunction of both might be a well-tempered means to the common constitutions of most But still we see the world will run into extreams whatever be said or done to hinder it It is but lately that we were put to it against one extream to defend the lawfulness of a Form of Liturgie now the other extream it troubleth us that we are forced against you even such as you to defend the use of such Prayers of the Pastors of the Churches as are necessarily varied according to subjects and occasions while you would have no Prayer at all in the Church but such prescribed Forms And why may we not adde That whoever maketh the Forms imposed on us if he use them is guilty as well as we of praying accordiâ—g to his private Conceptions And that we never said it proved from Scripture that Christ appointed any to such an Office as to make Prayers for other Pastors and Churches to offer up to God and that this being none of the work of the Apostolical or common Ministerial Office in the Primitive Church is no work of any Office of Divine Institution To that part of the Proposal That the Prayers may consâ—st of nothing doubtful or questioned by pious learned and Orthodox persons they not determining who be those Orthodox persons we must either take all them for Orthodox persons who shall confidently affirm themselves to be such and then we say First the Demand is unreasonable for some such as call themselves Orthodox have quâ—stioned the prime Article of our Creed even the Divinity of the Sâ—n of God and yet there is no reason we should part with our Creed for that Besides the Proposal requires impossibility for there never was nor is â—or can be such Prayers made as have not been nor will be questioned by sâ—me whâ— call themselves pious learned and Orthodox if by Orthodox be meant those who adhere to Scripture and the Catholick Consent of Antiquity we do not yet know that any part of our Liturgie hath been questioned by such And may we not thus mention Orthodox persons to men that profess they agree with us in Doctrinals unless we digress to tell you who they be What if we were pleading for civil coâ—cord among all that aâ—e loyal to the King must we needs digress to tell you who are loyal We are agreed in one Rule of Faith in one holy Scripture and one Creed and differ not you say about the Doctrinal part of the 39 Art And will not all this seem to tell you who are Orthodox If you are resolved to make all that a matter of Contention which we desire to make a means of Peace there is no remedy while you have the Ball before you and have the Wind and Sun and the power of contending without controul But we perceive That the Catholick consent of Antiquity must go into your definition of the Orthodox but how hard it is to get a reconciling determination what Ages shall go with you and us for the true Antiquity and what is necessary to that consent that must be called Catholick is unknown to none but the unexperienced And indeed we think a man that searcheth the holy Scripture and sincerely and unreservedly gives up his Soul to understand love and obey it may be Orthodox without the knowledge of Church-History we know no universal Law-Giver nor Law to the Church but one and that Law is the sufficient Rule of Faith and consequently the test of the truely Orthodox though we refuse not Church-History or other means that may help us to understand it And to acquaint you with what you do not know we our selves after many Pastors of the Reformed Churches do question your Liturgie as far as is expressed in our Papers And we profess to adhere to Scripture and the Catholick consent of Antiquity as described by Vincentius Liniensis If you will say that our pretence and claim is unjust we call for your Authority to judge our hearts or dispose us from the number of the Orthodox or else for your proofs to make good your accusation But however you judge we rejoyce in the expectation of the righteous Judgment that shall finally decide the Controversie to which from this Aspersion we appeal To thâ—se Generals loading publick Form with Ch. pomp garm Imagery and many Superfluities that creep into the Church under the name of Order and Decâ—ncy iâ—cumbring Churches with Superfluities over-rigid reviving of obsolete Customes c. We say that if these Generals be intended as appliable to our Liturgie in particular they are gross and foul Slanders contrary to their profession page ult and so either that or this contrary to their Conscience if not they signifie nothing to the present business and so might with more prudence and â—andor have been omitted You needed not go a fishing for our Charge what we had to say against the Liturgie which we now desired you to observe was here plainly laid before you Answer to this and suppose us not to say what we do not to make your selves matter of reproaching us with gross and foul slanders Onely we pray you answer Mr. Hales as Mr. Hales whom we took to be a person of much esteem with you especially that passage of his which you take no notice of as not being so easie to be answered for the weight and strength which it carries with it viz. that the limiting of the Church-Communion to things of doubtful disputation hath been in all Ages the ground of Schism and Separation and that he that separates from suspected Opinions is not the Separatist And may we not cite such words of one that we thought you honoured and would hear without contradicting our Profession of not intending depravation or reproach against the Book without going against our Consciences If we cite the words of an Author for a particular use as to perswade you of the evil of laying the hurches unity upon unnecessary things must we be responsible therefore for all that you can say against his words in other respects We suppose you would be loath your words should have such interpretation and that you should be under such a Law for all your Citations Do as you would be done by It was the wisdom of our Reformers to draw up such a Liturgie as neither Romanist nor Protestant could justly except against and therefore as the first never charged it with any positive Errours but onely the want of something they conceived necessary so it was never found fault with by thâ—se to whom the name of Protestants most properly belongs those that profess the Augustine Confession and for those who unlawfully and sinfully brought it into dislike with some people to urge the present State of Affaires as an Argument why the Book should be altered to give them satisfaction and so that they should take advantage by their own unwarrantable Acts is not reasonable If it be blameless no man can
justly except against it but that de facto the Romanists never charged it with any positive Errours is an Assertion that maketh them reformed and reconcileable to us beyond all belief Is not the very using it in our own Tongue a positive Errour in their account Is it no positive Errour in the Papists account that we profess To receive these Creatures of Bread and Wine Do they think we have no positive Errour in our Catechism about the Sacrament that affirmeth it to be Bread and Wine a ter the Consecration and makes but two Sacraments necessary c. 2. And unless we were nearlier agreed then we are it seemeth to us no Commendation of a Liturgie that the Papists charge it with no positive Errour 3. That no Divines or private men at home or of forraign Churches that ever found fault with the Liturgie are such to whom the name of Protestant properly belongeth is an Assertion that proveth not what authority of Judging your Brethren you have but what you assume and commendeth your Charity no more then it commendeth the Papists that they deny us to be Catholicks Calvin and Bucer subscribed the Augustine Consession and so have others that have found fault with our Liturgie 4. If any of us have blamed it to the people it is but with such a sort of blame as we have here exprest against it to your selves and whether it be unlawful and sinful the impartial comparing of your words with ours will help the willing Reader to discern But if we prove indeed that it is defective and faulty that you bring for an Offering to God when you or your Neighbours have a better which you will not bring nor suffer them that would Mal. 1. 13. and that you call evil good in justifying its blemishes which in humble modesty we besought you to amend or excuse us from offering then God will better judge of the unlawful act then you have done But you have not proved that all or most of us have caused the people at all to dislike it if any of us have yet weigh our Argument though from the present state of Affairs or if you will not hear us we beseech you hear the many Ministers in England that never medled against the Liturgy and the many moderate Episcopal Divines that have used it and can do still and yet would earnestly intreat 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 sparingly and would â—eform them he may not presently forfeit the reputation of being a Protestant And astly we beseech you deny not again the name of Protestants to the Priâ—ate of Ireland the Archbishop of York and the many others that had divers meetings for the Reformation of the Liturgie and who drew up that Catalogue of faults or points that needed mending which is yet to beseen 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 Respensals and alternate Readings in Hymnes and Psams and Lâ—tâ—â—y 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 shâ—uld continue because they do edifie if not by informing of our reasons and understandinâ—s the Prayers and Hymns were never made for a Catechism yet by quicâ—ning continuing and uniting our devotion which is apt to fâ—eeze or sleep â—r â—â—at in a lâ—ng continued Prayer or Fâ—rm it is necessary therefore for the edifying of us therein to be often called upon and awaâ—â—ned by frecuent Amens to be excited and stirred up by mutuâ—l exultations prâ—vocations petitions holy câ—ntentions and strivinâ—s which shall mâ—st shâ—w his â—wn 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 Prâ—yer Nor is this â—â—r opiniâ—â— onely but the Judgement of former ages as appears by the practise of antient Christian Churches and of the Jews 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 sâ—lence and to declare their assent in the close by saying Amen if they mean that the people in publick Services must onely say this word Amen as they can no where prove it in the 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 may be done in Hopkins why not in Davids Psalms If in Metre why not in Prose if in a Psalm why not in a Letany 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 profess 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 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 us as hard as they and we gave you some of the Reasons of our Judgement 1. Though we have not said that the people may not in Psalms to God concur in voice we speak of Prayer which you should have observed and though we onely concluded it agreeable to the Scripture-practise 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 then 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 Psalms and Praise then their Amen or meer consent we desired to imitate the surest pattern 2. As we finde 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 Psalms and Hymnes 2. By saying half the Prayers as the Minister doth the other half 2. By
being one of them the mouth of all the rest in the Confession at the Lords Supper 4. By being the onely Petitioners in the far greatest part of all the Letanie by their Good Lord deliver us and We beseech thee to hear us good Lord while the Minister onely reciteth the matter of the matter of the prayer and maketh none of the Request at all we fear lest by parity of reason the people will claim the work of preaching and other parts of the Ministerial Office 3. And we mentioned that which all our ears are witnesses of that while half the Psalms and Hymns c. are said by such of the people as can say them the murmur of their voices in most Congregations is so unintelligible and confused as must hinder the edification of all the rest for who is edified by that which he cannot understand We know not what you mean by citing 2 Chron. 7. 1 4. Ezra 3. 11. where there is not a word of publick prayer but in one place of an Acclamation upon an extraordinary sight of the glory of the Lord which made them praise the Lord and say He is good for his mercy is for ever when the prayer that went before was such as you call A long tedious prayer uttered by Solomon alone without such breaks and discants And in the other places is no mention of prayer at all but of singing praise and that not by the people but by the Priests and Levites saying the same words For he is good for his mercy endures for ever towards Israel The people are said to do no more then shout with a great shout because the foundation of the House was laid and if shouting be it that you would prove it 's not the thing in Question Let the ordinary mode of praying in Scripture be observed in the prayers of David Solomon Ezra Daniel or any other and if they were by breaks and frequent beginnings and endings and alternate Interlocutions of the people as yours are then we will conform to your mode which now offends us but if they were not we beseech you reduce yours to the examples in Scripture we desire no other rule to decide the Controversie by As to your Citation 1 Socrat. there tells us of the alternate singing of the Arrians in the reproach of the Orthodox and that Chrysostome not a Synod compiled Hymns to be sung in opposition to them in the streets which came in the end to a Tumult and Bloudshed And hereupon he tells us of the original of alternate singing viz. a pretended Viâ—ion of Ignatius that heard Angels sing in that order And what is all this to alternate Reading and praying or to a Divine Institution when here is no mention of reading or praying but of singing Hymns and that not upon pretence of Apostolical Tradition but a Vision of uncertain credit Theodore also speaketh onely of singing Psalms alternately and not a word of reading or praying so and he fetcheth that way of singing also as Socrat. doth but from the Church at Antioch and not from any pretended Doctrine or Practise of the Apostles and neither of them speaks a word of the necessity of it or of forcing any to it so that all these your Citations speaking not a word so much as of the very Subject in question are marvellously impertinent The words Their Worship seem to intimate that singing of Psalms is part of our Worship and not of yours we hope you disown it not for our parts we are ashamed of it Your distinction between Hopkins and Davids Psalms as if the metre allowed by Authority to be sung in Churches made them to be no more Davids Psalms seemeth to us a very hard saying If it be because it is a Translation then the prose should be none of Davids Psalms neither nor any Translation be the Sâ—ripture If it be because it is in metre then the exactest Translation in metre should be none of the Scripture If because it 's done imperfectly then the old Translation of the Bible used by Common-Prayer-Book should not be Scripture As to your reason for the supposed priority 1. Scripture-examples telling us that the people had more part in the Psalms then in the Prayers or Reading satisfie us that God and his Church then saw a disparity of Reason 2. Common Observation tells us That there is more order and less hinderance of Edification in the peoples singing then in their reading and praying together vocally It is desired that nothing should be in the Liturgie which so much as seems to countenance the observation of Lent as a Religious Fast and this as an expedient to peace which is in effect to desire that this our Church may be contentious for peace sake and to divide from the Church-Catholick that we may live at unity among our selves For St. Paul reckons them amongst the lovers of contention who shall oppose themselves against the custome of the Churches of God That the religious observation of Lent was a custome of the Churches of God appears by the testimonies following Chrys. Ser. 11. in Heb. 10. Cyrill Catec myst 5. St. Aug. Ep. 119 ut 40 dies ante Pascha observetur Ecclesiae consuetudo roboravit and St. Hierom ad Marcell says it was secundum traditionem Apostolorum This Demand then tends not to peace but Dissention The fasting forty days may be in imitation of our Saviour for all that is here said to the contrary for though we cannot arrive to his perfection abstaining wholly from meat so long yet we may fast forty days together either Cornelius his fast till three of the Clock after noon or Saint Peters fast till noon or at least Daniels fast abstaining from meats and drinks of delight and thus far imitate our Lord. If we had said that the Church is contentious if it adore God in kneeling on the Lords Days or use not the White Garment Milk and Honey after Baptism which had more pretence of Apostolical tradition and were generally used more anciently then Lent would you not have thought we wronged the Church If the purer times of the Church have one custome and latter times a contrary which must we follow or must we necessarily be contentious for not following both or rather may we not by the example of the Church that changeth them be allowed to take such things to be matters of Liberty and not Necessity If we must needs conform to the custom of other Churches in such things or be contentious it is either because God hath so commanded or because he hath given those Churches authority to command it If the former then what Churches or what Ages must we conform to If all must concur to be our pattern it will be hard for us to be acquainted with them so far as to know of such concurrences And in our Case we know that many do it not If it must be the most we would know where God commandeth us to imitate
frigescente devotione cum negligerentur jeiâ—nia inductum Quadrag à Sacerdotibus But when you come to describe your Fast you make amends for the length by making it indeed no Fast To abstain from meats and drinks of delight where neither the thing nor the delight is profitable to further us in our duty to God is that which we take to be the duty of every Christian all the year as being a part of our mortication and self-denial who are commanded to crucifie the flesh and to make no provision to satisfie the lusts of it and to subdue our bodies but when those meats and drinks do more help then hinder us in the service of God we take it to be our duty to use them unless when some other accident forbids it that would make it otherwise more hurtful And for fasting till Noon we suppose it is the ordinary way of dyet to multitudes of Sedentary persons both Students and Trades-men that find one meal a day sufficient for nature If you call this fasting your poor Brethren fast all their life time and never knew that it was fasting But to command hard Labourers to do so is but to make it a fault to have health or to do their necessary work We beseech you bring not the Clergie under the suspition of Gluttony by calling our ordinary wholsome temperance by the name of fasting Sure Princes may feed as fully and delightfully as we yet Solomon saith Wo to thee O Land when thy King is a Child and thy Princes eat in the morning Blessed art thou O Land when thy King is the Son of Nobles and thy Princes eat in due season for strength and not for drunkenness For meer sensual delight it is never lawful And when it is for strength it is not to be forbidden unless when by accident it will iâ—fer a greater good to abstain Eccl. 20. 16 17. so Prov. 31. 4 6. It is not for Kings to drink wine nor Princes strong drink Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish and wine to those that be of heavy hearts Nor does the Act of Parliament 5 of Eliz. forbid it We dare not think a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded Nor does the Act determine any thing about Lent Fast but onely provide for the maintenance of the Navy and of Fishing in order thereunto as is plain by the Act. Besides we conceive that we must not so interpret one Act as to contradict another being still in force and unrepealed Now the Act of 1 Eliz. confirms the whole Liturgie and in that the religious keeping of Lent with a severe penalty upon all those who shall by open words speak any thing in derogation of any part thereof and therefore that other Act of 5 Elizab. must not be interpreted to forbid the religious keeping of Lent If when the express words of a Statute are cited you can so easily put it off by saying it does not forbid it and you dare not think that a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded and you must not interpret it as contradicting that Act which confirms the Liturgie we must think that indeed we are no less regardful of the Laws of the Governours than you But first we understand not what authority this is that you set against the King and Parliament as supposing they will not forbid what it commands You call it Christs Church we suppose you mean not Christ himself by his Apostles infallibly directed and inspired If it be the National Church of England they are the Kings Subjects and why may he not forbid a Ceremony which they command or why should they command it if he forbid it If it be any Forreign Church there 's none hath power over us If it be any pretended head of the Church universal whether Pope or general Council having power to make Laws that bind the whole Church it is a thing so copiously disproved by Protestants against both the Italian and French Papists that we think it needless to confute it nor indeed dare imagine that you intend it We know not therefore what you mean But whatever you mean you seem to contradict the forecited Article of the Church of England that makes all humane Laws about Rites and Ceremonies of the Church to be unchangeable by each particular National Church And that it is not necessary that Ceremonies or Traditions be in all places one or utterly like We most earnestly beseech you be cautious how you obtrude upon us a Forreign Power under the name of Christs Church that may command Ceremonies which King and Parliament may not forbid whether it be one man or a thousand we fear it is against our Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacie for us to own any such Power And not presuming upon any immodest challenge we are ready in the defence of those Oathes and the Protestant Religion to prove against any in an equal conference that there is no such power and for the Statutes let the words themselves decide the Controversie which are these Be it enacted That whosoever shall by Preaching Teaching Writing or open Speech notifie that any eating of Fish or forbearing of Flesh mentioued in this Statute is of aâ—y necessity for the saving of the Soul of man or that it is the Service of God otherwise than as other politick Laws are and be that then such persons shall be punished as the spreaders of false News are and ought to be And whereas you say the Act determines not any thing about Lent Fast it speaks against eating Flesh on any dayes now usually observed as Fish-dayes and Lent is such And the sense of the Act for the Lyturgy may better be tryed by this which is plain than this reduced to that which is more obscure The Observation of Saints dayes is not as of Divine but of Ecclesiastical Institution and therefore it is not necessary that they should have any other ground in Scripture than all other Institutions of the same nature so that they be agreeable to the Scripture in the general end for the promoting â—iâ—ty and the observation of them was ancient as appears by the Rituals and Lyturgies and by the joint consent of Antiquity and by the antient Translations of the Bible as the Syriack and Ethiopick where the Lessons appointed for Holy dayes are noted and set down the former of which was made neer the Apostles times Besides our Saviour himself kept a Feast of the Churches Institution viz. the Feast of the Dedication St. John 10. 22. The chief end of these dayes being not Feasting but exercise of Holy Duties they are fitter called Holy-dayes than Feastivals and though they be all of like nature it doth not follow that they are equal the People may be dispensed with for their work after the Service as Authority pleases The other names are left in the Calender not that they should be so
kept as Holy-dayes but they are useful for the preservation of their memories and for other reasons as for Leases Law-dayes c. Repl. The antiquity of the Translations mentioned is far from being of determinate certainty we rather wish than hope that the Syriack could be proved to be made neer the Apostles times But however the things being confessed of humane Institution and no forreign Power having any authority to command his Majesties Subjects and so the imposition being only by our own Governours we humbly crave that they may be left indifferent and the Unity or Peace of the Church or Liberty of the Ministers not laid upon them Sect. 1. This makes all the Lyturgy void if every Minister may put in and leave out at his discretion Repl. You mistake us we speak not of putting in and leaving out of the Liturgy but of having leave to intermix some Exhortations or Prayers besides to take off the deadness which will follow if there be nothing but the stinted Forms we would avoid both the extream that would have no Forms and the contrary extream that would have nothing but Forms but if we can have nothing but extreams there 's no remedy it 's not our fault And this moderation and mixture which we move for is so far from making all the Lyturgy void that it would do very much to make it attain its end and would heal much of the distemper which it occasioneth and consequently would do much to preserve the reputation of it As for instance if besides the Forms in the Lyturgy the Minister might at Baptism the Lords Supper Marriage c. interpose some suitable Exhortation or Prayer upon special occasion when he finds it needful should you deny this at the visitation of the sick it would seem strange and why may it not be granted at other times It is a matter of far greater trouble to us that you would deny us and all Ministers the Liberty of using any other Prayers besides the Lyturgy than that you impose these Sect. 2. The Gift or rather Spirit of Prayer consists in the inward Graces of the Spirit not in extempore expressions which any man of natural parts having a voluble tongue and audacity may attain to without any special Gift Repl. All inward Graces of the Spirit are not properly called the Spirit of Prayâ—r nor is the Spirit of Prayer that Gift of Prayer which we speak of nor did we call it by the name of a special Gift nor did we deny that ordinary men of natural parts and voluble tongues may attain it But yet we humbly conceive that as there is a Gift of Preaching so also of Prayer which God bestoweth in the use of means diversified much according to mens natural parts and their diligence as other acquired abilities are but also much depending on that Grace that is indeed special which maketh men love and rellish the holy Subjects of such Spiritual studies and the holy exercise of those Graces that are the soul of Prayer and consequently making men follow on such exercises with delight and diligence and therefore with success and also God is free in giving or denying his Blessing to mans endeavours If you think there be no Gift of Preaching you will too dishonourably level the Ministry If reading be all the Gift of Prayer or Preaching there needs no great understanding or learning to it nor should Coblers and Tinkers be so unfit men for the Ministry as they are thought nor would the reason be very apparent why a Woman mightnot speak by Preaching or Praying in the Church Sect. 3. But if there be any such Gift as is pretended it is to be subject to the Prophets and to the Order of the Church Repl. The Text speaks as Dr. Hammond well shews of a subjection to that Prophet himself who was the Speaker Inspiration excluded not the prudent exercise of Reason but it is a strange ordering that totally excludeth the thing ordered The Gift of Preaching as distinct from Reading is to be orderly and with due subjection exercised but not to be on that pretence extinguished and cast out of the Church And indeed if you should command it you are not to be obeyed whatever we suffer And why then should the Gift of Prayer distinct from Reading be cast out Sect. 4. The mischiefs that come by idle impertinent ridiculous sometimes seditious impious and blasphemous expressions under pretence of the Gift to the dishonour of God and scorn of Religion being far greater than the pretended good of exercising the Gift it is fit that they who desire such liberty in publick devotions should first give the Church security that no private opinions should be put into their Prayers as is desired in the first proposal and that nothing contrary to the Faith should be uttered before God or offered up to him in the Church Repl. The mischiefs which you pretend are inconveniences attending humane imperfeotion which you would cure with a mischief Your Argument from the Abuse against the Use is a palpable fallacy which cast out Physitians in some Countries and rooted up Vines in others and condemneth the reading of the Scriptures in a known tongue among the Papists If the Apostles that complained then so much of divisions and Preaching false doctrine and in envy and strife had thought the way of cure had been in sending Ministers about the world with a Prayer-book or Sermon book and to have tyed them only to read either one or both of these no doubt but they would have been so regardful of the Church as to have composed such a Prayer-book or Sermon book themselves and not left us to the uncertainties of an Authority not infallible nor to the divisions that follow the impositions of a questionable Power or that which unquestionably is not universal and therefore can procure no universal Concord If one man among you draw up a Form of Prayer it is his single conception and why a man as learned and able may not be trusted to conceive a Prayer for the use of a single Congregation without the dangers mentioned by you as one man to conceive a Prayer for all the Churches in a Diocess or a Nation we know not These words that the mischief is greater than the pretended good seem to express an unjust accusation of ordinary conceived Prayer and a great undervaluing of the benefits If you would intimate that the Crimes expressed by you are ordinarily found in Ministers Prayers we that hear such much more frequently than you must profess we have not found it so allowing men their different measures of exactness as you have even in writing Nay to the praise of God we must say that multitudes of private men can ordinarily pray without any such imperfection as should nauseate a sober person and with such seriousness and aptness of expression as is greatly to the benefit and comfort of our selves when we joyn
Brethren or hinder that peace healing of the Church For Order is for the thing ordered and not contrarily For example there is much disorder lies in the Common-Prayer-Book yet we would obey it as far as the ends of our calling do require It wouldbe undecent to come without a Band or other handsome Raiment into the Assembly yet would we obey if it were commanded us rather than not worship God at all We are as confident that Surplices and Copes are undecent and kneeling at the Lords Table is disorderly as you are of the contrary And yet if the Magistrate would be advised by us supposing himself addicted against you we would advise him to be more charitable to you than you here advise him to be to us We would have him if your Conscience require it to forbear you in this undecent and disorderly way But to speak more distinctly 1. There are some things decent and orderly when the opposite species is not undecent or disorderly 2. There are some things undecent and disorderly in a small and tollerable degree And some things in a degree intollerable 1. VVhen things decent are commanded whose opposites would not be at all undecent their Charity and Peace and Edification may command a Relaxation or rather should at first restrain from too severe Impositions As it is decent to wear either a Cloak or a Gown a Cassock buttoned or unbuttoned with a Girdle or without to sit stand or kneel in singing of a Psalm to sit or stand in hearing the Word read or preached c. 2. VVhen a Circumstance is undecent or disorderly but in a tolerable degree to an Inconvenience Obedience or Charity or Edification may commaud us to do it and make it not only lawful but a duty pro hic nunc while the preponderating Accident prevaileth Christs instances goe at least as far as this about the Priests in the Temple breaking the Sabbath blamelesly and David's eating the Shew-bread which was lawful for none to eat ordinarily but the Priests And the Disciples rubbing the ears of Corne I will have mercy and not Sacrifice is a lesson that he sets us to learn when two duties comes together to preserve the greater if we would escape sin And sure to keep an able Preacher in the Church or a private Christian in Communion is a greater duty caeteris paribus than to use a Ceremony which we conceive to be decent It is more orderly to use the better translation of the Scripture than the worse as the Common-prayer-book doth and yet we would have no man cast out for using the worse It is more orderly decent and edifying for the Minister to read all the Psalms than for the people to read each second verse And yet we would not cast out men from the Church or Ministry meerly for that disorder It is more orderly and decent to be uncovered in divine worship than covered And yet rather than a man should take cold we could allow him to hear a Chapter or Sermon covered why not much more rather than he should be cast out But let us come to the Application It is no undecent disorderly worshiping of God to worship him without our Crosse Surplice and kneeling in the reception of the Sacrament 1. If it were then Christ and his Apostles had worshipped undecently and disorderly And the Primitive Church that used not the Surplice nor the transient Image of the Crosse in Baptism but in an unguent yea the Church for many hundred years that received the Sacrament without kneeling 2. Then if the King Parliament and Convocation should change their Ceremonies it seems you would take your selves bound to retain them for you say you must not worship God undecently But that they may be changed by Authority our Articles determine and therefore Charity may well require the Magistrate to change them without any wrong to the worship of God 3. VVe appeal to the common judgement of the Impartial whether in the nature of the thing there by any thing that tels them that it is undecent to pray without Surplice in the reading place and not undecent to pray without in the Pulpit And that it is undecent to Baptize without Crossing and not to receive the Lords Supper without And that it is undecent for the Receiver to take the Lords Supper without kneeling and not for the Minister to give it him standing that prayeth in the delivery Sect. 8. These promised we Answer to your first Reason that those things which we call Indifferent because neither expresly commanded or forbiden by God have in them a real goodness a fitness and decency and for thâ— cause are imposed and may be so by the Rule of St. Paul by which Rule and many others in Scripture a power is given to men to impose Signs which are never the worse surely because they signifie something that is decent and comely and so it is not doubtful whether such power be given It would rather be doubtful whether the Church could impose such ildle Signs if any such there be as signifie nothing Repl. To your first Answer we reply 1. We suppose you speak of a moral Goodness and if they are such indeed as are within their power and really good that is of their own nature fitter than their opposites they may be imposed by just Authority by equal means though not by usurpers nor by penalties that will do more harm than the things will do good 2. Signs that signifie nothing we understand not It is one thing to be decent and another to signifie something that is decent what you mean by that we know not The Cross signifieth our not being ashamed to profess the Faith of Christ crucified c. do you call that something that is decent It is something necessary to Salvation 3. Signes are exceeding various At present we use but two distinctions 1. Some are Signs ex primaria intentione iustitnentis purposed and primarily instituted to signifie as an Escucheon or a Sign at an Inne door in common matters and as the Sacrament and Cross in sacred matters and some are Signs but consequently secondarily and not essentially as intended by the Institutors so Hills and Trees may shew us what a Clock it is and so every Creature signifieth some good of Mercy or Duty and may be an Object of holy Meditation so the colour and shape of our Cloaths may mind us of some good which yet was none of the primary or proper end of the Maker or Wearer 2. Signes are either arbitrary expressions of a mans own mind in a matter where he is left free or they are Covenanting Signes between us and God in the Covenant of Grace to work Grace on us as moral Causes and to engage us Sacramentally to him Such we conceive the Cross in Baptism to be The Preface to the Common Prayer Book saith They are apt to teach and excite c. which is a moral operation of
Grace and the Canon saith It is an honourable badge whereby the Infant is dedicated to him that dyed on the Cross we are signified with it in token that hereafter we shall not be ashamed to confess the Faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight c. now if a thing may be commanded meerly as a decent Circumstance of Worship yet it is unproved that a thing in its nature as instituted and in the primary intention is thus Sacramentally to dedicate and engage us in Covenant to God by signifying the Grace and Duty of the Covenant be lawfully cammanded by man 1. Decent Circumstances are necessary in genere There must be some fit time place gesture vesture as such utensils c. But that there be some such dedicating ingaging Signs in our Covenanting with God signifying the Grace of the Covenant and our state and duty as Soldiers under Christ besides Gods Sacraments this is not necessary in genere and therefore it is not left to man to determine de specie 2. If there be any reason for this use of the Cross it must be such as was in the Apostles dayes and concerneth the universal Church in all ages and places and then the Apostles would have taken care of it Thus much here in brief of Signes and more anon when you again call us to it Sect. 9. To the second That it is not a violation of Christs Royalty to make such Laws for decency but an exercise of his Power and Authority which he hath given to the Church and the disobedience to such Commands of Superiours is plainly a violation of his Royalty As it is no violation of the Kings Authority when his Magistrates command things according to his Laws but disobedience to the Command of those injunctions of his Deputies is violation of his Authority Again it can be no impeachment of Christs Laws as insufficient to make such Laws for decency since our Saviour as is evident by the Precepts themselves did not intend by them to determine every minute and circumstance of time place manner of performance and the like but only to command in general the substance of those Duties and the right ends that should be aimed at in the performance and then left every man in particular whom for that purpose he made reasonable to guide himself by Rules of reason for private Services and appointed Governours of the Church to determine such particularities for the publick Thus our Lord commanded Prayers Fasting c. But for the times and places of performance he did not determine every of them but left them to be guided as we have said So that it is no impeachment of his Laws as insufficient to make Laws for determining those particulars of decency which himself did not as is plain by his Precepts intend to determine but left us Governours for that purpose to whom he said As my Father sent me even so send I you and let all things be done decently and in order of whom he hath said to us Obey those that have the oversight over you and told us that if we will not hear his Church we must not be accounted as Christians but Heathens and Publicans And yet nevertheless they will not hear it and obey it in so small a matter as a Circumstance of time place habit or the like which she thinks decent and fit and yet will be accounted the best Christians and tell us that it is the very awe of Gods Law Deut. 12. 32. that keeps them from obedience to the Church in these Commands not well considering that it cannot be any adding to the Word of God to command things for order and decency which the Word of God-commands to be done so as they be not commanded as Gods immediate Word but as the Laws of men but that is undeniable adding to the Word of God to say that Superiours may not command such things which God hath no where forbidden and taking from the Word of God to deny that Power to men which Gods Word hath given them Repl. To make Laws to determine of undetermined Circumstances necessary in genere to be some way determined and left to Magistrates or Ministers de specie and to do this according to the general Rule of Scripture and in order to the main end and not against it is not against the Royalty or Will or Christ but to make new dedicating Covenanting Symbols to signifie the Doctrine of the Covenant of Grace and solemnly engage us unto God and place these in the publick Worship which are not meer Circumstances but substantial Institutions not necessary in genere that there should be any such at all besides Gods Sacraments we fear this is a violation of the Royalty of Christ and a reflection on his Laws as insufficient For 1. If it belong to the Power proper to Christ then it is a violation of his Royalty for any man to exercise it but it belongeth to the Power proper to Christ Ergo c. The Minor is proved thus If it belong to the universal Head or Ruler of the Church as such then it belongs to the Power proper to Christ for we are ready to prove there is now under him no universal Head or Ruler personally or collectively and civilly one But c. If in the Reason of it it should be the matter of an universal Law if any then it should be the work of the universal Law-giver if any But c. If in the Reason of it it be equally useful to the Church universal as to any particular Church or Age then it should according to the reason of it be the matter of an universal Law if of any But c. It hath the same aptitude to engage us to a duty of universal necessity and hath no reason proper to this Age or Place for it but common to all Moreover it is no where committed to the power or care of man Ergo it is proper to the Care and Power of Christ no Text is shewed that giveth man power in such things To do all things decently and orderly and to edification is no giving of power on that pretence to make new Covenanting dedicating Signs To do Gods work decently c. is not to make more such of our own heads it 's but the right modifying of the work already set us And to do all decently orderly and to edification was a duty in Moses time when yet such things as these in question might not be added by any but God when we say by God we mean by his inspired Instruments and when we say by Christ we mean by his inspired Instruments If we should make Laws that every one is publickly to taste Vineger and Gall as a Sign that we are not ashamed of but resolved through all fresh-displeasing diâ—ficulties to follow Christ that did so and thus to engage and dedicate our selves to him this were to do more than to do all things decently and
Labours or their Sufferings God will serve and honour himself by those many faithful Servants of his whom he hath called into his Work and whose Cause we plead and that however they are used they shall not be unuseful to the ends of their Vocation As Theodoret observeth Hist. lib. 4. cap. 30. that in a calamitous time the Moderator of the Universe raised up such Guides as were sufficient in so great affluctuation and opposed the valour of the Leaders to the greatness of the Enemies Incursion and gave the best Remedies in the hardest times of Pestilence So that the punished Pastors did from the utmost parts of the Earth corroberate their own and refuâ—â— thâ— Adversaries by their Writings And for our selves as we were truly desirous to do our part for to preserve your reputation with the Flocks in order to the success of your Government for their good and never envyed you that worldly Honour or Revenue which yet some have thought unsuitable to the simplicity and employment of Christ's Ministers So if you will neither suffer us quietly to serve God or conscionably to serve you we shall be the lesse sollicitous for that part of our Task from which you have power to discharge us And as Basil said to Valens the Emperour that would have him pray for the Life of his Son If thou wilt receive the true Faith and restore the Churches to Concord thy Son shall live which when he refused he said The will of God then be done with thy Son So we say to you If you will put on Charity and promote your Brethrens and the Churches peace God will honour you and good men will honour you and your Calling will have advantage by it But if you will do contrarily the will of the Lord be done with your Honours but know that them that honour Him He will honour and they that despise Him shall be lightly esteemed and that by the course of uncharitable violence which we deprecate you will most deeply wound the Cause of your preheminence even more than its adversaries could have done And if it be the will of the Lord that suffering at home where we have served Him must be our Lot we doubt not but that he will furnish us with strength and patience and we shall remember such Ensamples as Ruffin recordeth Hist. Lib. 2. Cap. 3. when a Millitary Bishop sent his Souldiers to assault 3000 scattered Christians where appeared a strange kind of Warfare when the assaulted offered their necks saying onely Amici ad quid venisti Friend why camest thou hither Or if we must be removed from the Land of our Nativity as Maris told Julian That he thanked God that had deprived him of his sight that he might not see the face of such a man Socrat. Hist. Lib. 3. Cap. 10. So we shall take it as a little abatement of our Affliction that we see not the Sins and Calamities of the People whose Peace and Welfare we so much desire Having taken this opportunity here to conclude this part with these Requests and Warnings we now proceed to the second Part containing the particulars of our Exceptions and your Answers Concerning Morning and Evening Prayer 1. Rubr. Sect. 1. VVE think it fit that the Rubrick stand as it is and all to be left to the discretion of the Ordinary Repl. We thought the End and Use more considerable than Custom and that the Ordinary himself should be under the Rule of doing all to Edification 2. Rubr. Sect. 2. Answ. For the Reasons given in our Answer to the 18. General whither you refer us we think it fit that the Rubrick continue as it is Repl. We have given you Reason enough against the Imposition of the usual Ceremonies and would you draw forth those absolute ones to encrease the burden Sect. 3. Lords Prayer Answ. Deliver us from evil These words for thine is the Kingdom c. are not in St. Luke nor in the ancient Copies of St. Matthew never mentioned in the ancient Comments nor used in the Latine Church and therefore questioned whether they be part of the Gospel there is no reason that they should be alwayes used Repl. We shall not be so over-credulous as to believe you that these words are not in the ancient Copies It is enough that we believe that some few ancient Copies have them not but that the most even the Generality except those few have them The judgment of our English Translators and almost all other Translators of Matthew and of the R. R. B. â— of Chester among your selves putting the Copy that hath it in his Bible as that which is most received and approved by the Church do shew on which side is the chief Authority If the few Copies that want it had been thought more authentick and credible the Church of England and most other Churches would not have preferred the Copies that have this Doxologie And why will you in this contradict the later Judgement of the Church expressed in the Translation allowed and imposed The Syriack Ethiopick and Persian Translations also have it and if the Syriack be as ancient as you your selves even now asserted then the Antiquity of the Doxologie is there evident And it is not altogether to be neglected which by Chemnitius and others is conjectured That Paul's words 2 Tim. 4. 18. were spoken as in reference to this Doxologie and as Pareus and other Protestants conclude it is more probable the Latines neglected than that the Greek inserted of their own heads this sentence The Socinians and Arrians have as fair a pretence for their Exception against 1 Joh. 5. 6 7. Musculus saith non cogitant vero similius esse ut Graecorum Ecclesiae majis quam Latina quod ab Evangelistis Graece Scriptum est integrum servavit nihilque de suo adjecerit quid de Graeca Ecclesia dico vidi ipse vetustissimum Evangelium secundum Matthaeum Codicem Chalaaeis Elementis verbis conscriptum in quo Coronis ista perinde atque in Graecis legebatur Nec Chaldei solum sed Arabes Christiani pariformiter cum Grecis orant Et exemplar Hebraeum a docto celebri D. Sebast. Munstero vulgatum hanc ipsum Coronidem habet Cum ergo consentiant hac in re Hebraeorum Chaldaeorum Arabum Graecorum Ecclesiae valde inconsideratum videtur quod uni Latinorum Ecclesiae contra omnes reliquas tautum tribuitur authoritatis ut quod sola diversum legit ab Evangelistis traditem esse credatur quod vero reliquae omnes concorditer habem orant pro aâ—dititio peregrino habeatur And that Luke hath it not will no more prove that it was not a part of the Lords Prayer than all other omissions of one Evangelist will prove that such words are Corruptions in the other that have them All set together give us the Gospel fully and from all we must gather it Sect. 4. Lords Prayer often used Answ. It is used but twice in
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 and arbitrary to have a judicium 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 and not as men if we must not use our reason and we are more miserable than 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 who 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 God-fathers that are the Church whoever called them so And if by the Church you mean the Minister and by presenting you meant baptizing them then any Heathens 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 than charity in this and Christ never invited any to him but the Children of the Promise to be thus presented and baptized Sect. 2. The time appointed we conceive sufficient Repl. We conjecture the words that conclude your former Subject being misplaced 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 is no great matter what time we have notice of it Sect. 3. P. 23. Ans. And then the God-fathers c. It is an erronious doctrine and the ground of many others and of many of your Excâ—ptions that Children have no other right to Baptism than in â—heir Parents right the Churches primitive practice forbids it to be left to the pleasure of the Parents whether there shall be other Sureties or no St. Aug. Ep. 23. It is fit we should observe carefully the practice of venerable Antiquity as they desire Prop. 18. Repl. 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 to them by God and then we promise to consent It 's strange to us to hear so much of the Churches primitive practice where so little evidence of it is produced Aug. Ep. 23. talketh not of primitive practice ab initio non fuit sic was it so in the Apostles dayes And afterwards you prove not that it was the judgement of the Catholick Church that bare Sponsers instead of Parents Pro-parents or Owners of the Children might procure to the Children of all Infidels a title to Baptism and its benefits Such Suscepters as became the Owners or Adopters of the Children are to be distinguished from those that proforma stand by for an hour during the baptizing of Children and ever after leave them to their Parents who as they have the natural interest in them and power of their disposal and the Education of them so are fittest to covenant in their names Sect. 4. Ans. The Font usually stands as it did in primitive times at or near the Church door to signifie that Baptism was the entrance into the Church mystical We are all bapâ—ized into one Body 1 Cor. 12. 13. and the People may hear well enough If Jordan and all other waters be not so far sanctified by Christ as to be the matter of Baptism what Authority have we to baptize and sure his Baptism was dedicatio Baptismi Repl. Our lesser difference about the Font and the flood Jordan is almost drowned in the greater before going But to the first we say that we conceive the usual scituation for the Peoples hearing is to be preferred before your Ceremonious position of it And to the second we say that dedicatio Baptismi is an unfiting phrase and yet if it were not what 's that to the sanctification of Jordan and all other waters Did Christ sanctifie all Corn or Bread or Grapes or Wine to an holy use when he administred the Lords Supper Sanctifying is separating to an holy use but the flood Jordan and all other water is not separted to this holy use in any proper sense no more than all mankind is sanctified to the Priestly Office because men were made Priests Sect. 5. Sureties c. P. 24. Ans. It hath been accounted reasonable and allowed by the best Laws that Guardians should Covenant and contract for their Minors to their benefit by the same right the Church hath appointed Sureties to undertake for Children when they enter into Covenant with God by Baptism St. Aug. Ep. 23. And this general practice of the Church is enough to satisfie those that doubt Rep. 1. Who made those Sureties Guardians of the Infants that are neither Parents nor Pro-parents not Owners of them we are not now speaking against Sponsors But you know that the very Original of those Sponsors is a great Controversie And whether they were not at first most properly Sponsors for the Parents that they should perform that part they undertook because many Parents were Deserrors and many proved negligent Sponsors then excluded not Parents from their proper undertaking but joyned with them Godfathers are not the Infants Guardians with us and therefore have not power thus to Covenant and Vow in their names We intreat you to take heed of leaving any Children indeed out of the mutual Covenant that are baptised How are those in the Covenant that cannot consent themselves and do it not by any that truly represent them nor have any Authority to act as in their names The Authority of Parents being most unquestionable who by nature and the Word of God have the power of disposing of their Children and consequently of choosing and covenanting for them Why should it not be preferred at least you may give leave to those Parents that desire it to be the Dedicators of and Covenanters for their own Children and not force others on them whether they will or no. 2. But the question is not of Covenanting but professing present Actual believing forsaking c. In which