and ignorant as to the generality of their Ministers they made it their business to put out and put in to the Writings of the ancients what they pleased to forge Writings to be theirs which were not so and suppress others that were so which is evident from the Writings of Papists as well as Protestants Sixtus Senensis Possevine Bellarmine were all Papists so was Erasmus Rivet and Cocus were Protestants they have all books extant to teach us to distinguish betwixt the true Writings of the Ancients and those pretended to be theirs but not so And there is no doubt but it was through meer carelesness if they left a word or line in the ancients against any point of Doctrine any way of Worship any Rite or Ceremony in credit at Rome or used in their Church 5. From them came Justin Martyr Ignatius Clement Tertullian Ambrose Augustine in short all the Writings of the Fathers we have except possibly some two or three of the Greek Fathers yet the most famous and common Editions of them are all Popish and come out to us with their puttings out and puttings in what they pleased 6. From hence will appear what little credit is to be given to any thing in any of the books published under their names any further than it is agreeable with the Scripture and bottomed there 7. Allow me the Editions of the Fathers and Councils which the Papists have let us have I hardly know one Doctrine of Popery or one Idolatrous or Superstitious Practice Rite or Ceremony at Rome but I will bring as good proof for as either Mr. Faulconer or Mr. Pelling have brought for the Antiquity of forms of prayer generally used 8. From hence it follows that those who lay such stress on this point of Antiquity in the case are but doing the Papists work laying a foundation for the Papists to build all their abominable Doctrines Idolatries and Practices upon and he is half a Papist that is resolved to believe all those things true which may be found in the ancient Writings as we have them We have so much charity for those great and holy men as to believe they never wrote any such things though some Popish Monks and Fryers have fathered them upon them 9. If any will yet believe what they find in their Works as we now have them he stands obliged not to do it rashly but to read 1. what both Papists and Protestants have wrote as to that book of theirs out of which the Quotation is 2. Then to consider what was the signification of the words Liturgy Merit Offices and an 100 more in that age and whether we have not put a new sense upon them not known in their times 3. To consider how far in the judgment of Protestants the Church was corrupted in the times when those Fathers wrote 10. This I take to be a tedious work the Prophet Isa 8. 20. hath taught me a nearer and safer course To the law and to the testimony if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Does any say but how will you know the sense of the Scriptures I answer from my own conscience and reason comparing things spiritual with things spiritual and hearing the judgments of others before I determine Will they say but you may be deceived it is true so might the Fathers but in things necessary if I use prayer I have a promise The Spirit shall lead you into all truth I am sure I can from Scripture be as certain of the Will of God in any case as I can be that any one leaf of the Fathers were ever written by them and if it were I am sure they were fallible men as well as I and in many things did err The pressing and laying so much stress as men do some men on authority and antiquity is in truth nothing but a mighty facturing for Popery and it is impossible but learned men must understand so much Besides not one often who talks so much of the Fathers and antiquity regards what Edition he quotes or makes use of and all know that where there is one of the Ancients to be got so much as of Erasmus his Edition who was a Papist but seemeth just and honest there are ten of filthy and most corrupt Popish Editions where the Reader can safely trust nothing And thus much shall serve for Mr. Pelling for I am not concerned as to what he saith for the English Liturgy let it be as fine a thing as it will if it be unlawful for me to use any in my Ministration in prayer it is most certainly unlawful for me to use that and at that boundary I stick till better reason than I have yet met with removes me from it FINIS For the Reverend his very Worthy Friend c. SIR YOU must think me either very regardless of the Obligations you have laid on me or which I had rather chuse very inconcerned in the New Argument for Forms of Prayer from Matth. 26. 44. that I should put you to the trouble of a second Letter to mind me not to overlook it and particularly to give you my thoughts upon it Indeed Sir the Argumentation from it savours fo little of a Scholar or a rational man that I did not think you in earnest But calling to mind that the Gentlemen we have to do with think they have a conclusive argument in the case from the â—… Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 command that prayers should be made for all men 1 Tim. 2 which surely may be made by each Minister for his Congregation and shall not need be prescribed in a book and what your self told me that you heard a late Bishop of Bath and Wells say That it was very probable that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Parchments left at Troas which St. Paul took such care Timothy should bring were the Church-prayers or Liturgy forgetting as you well note that there St. Paul prayed some time without them I began to assume some more deliberate thoughts of that Text Mat. 26. especially reading what you write that you had once met with it in Print and had often heard it in Sermons and Conferences For Sermons men now-a-days use more Rhetorick than Logick but methinks in Prints and Conferences they should be more Logical Let me therefore consider the Text Mat. 26. 44. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we translate it saying the same words so saith Mark 14. 39. Luke mentioneth but one prayer Now Sir how 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can be translated the same words judg you it must be the same word if any thing â—nd we know though our Saviours prayer were very short yet there was more than one or two words in it But Sir this Topick speaks either a very great ignorance or a wilful design to lead others to mistake in those that use it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not signifie always a syllabical word but the thing
complaining to Pope Adrian at the imposing of Gregory's Common-Prayer Book it should seem he liked some other possibly that which went about for St. Ambroses better but it seems the complaint ran so high that some Fathers just come from a Council met again to decide the matter spent a night in prayer having first laid both the Common-prayer Books that of Ambrose and that of Gregory on St. Peter's Altar to desire of God by some sign to shew which of those Liturgies he would have universally used In the morning they went in and found that of St. Ambrose lying in his place that of Gregory torn in pieces and scattered up and down From whence they concluded that it was the will of God that St. Ambrose his Office should lye still and be used only in his own Church Gregories should be scattered over the world And thus the Roman Mass-book which is one point in which we differ from the Papists was confirmed by a miracle too He that asked the question By what Common-prayer book the Fathers prayed that night when both their books were lockt up Might have remembred that we have heard of a Liturgy of St. Peter's only one would think that if he had been Bishop of Rome he might have been angry to have seen his Liturgy thrown out and one brought in patcht up by so many hundred years his Juniors especially having so much superstitious stuff in it which he never owned It may be it was for this he caused it to be torn so that night not enduring such trash should lye upon his Altar but then the Fathers were miserably out in their judgments upon the cause This is the truth as to the pretended antiquity of Liturgies and as to the imposition of them by Canon-law from 600 to 800 by Canon and Civil Laws 800 years after Christ § 15. In further proof of this I shall but offer what the Reader may see in Print and what I know to be true It pleased his most Excellent Majesty to grant his Commission out under the Broad Seal dated 25 March in the 13th year of his Reign to 12 Bishops and to divers others requiring them amongst other things to advise upon and review the Book of Common Prayer comparing the same with the most ancient Liturgies which have been used in the Church in the primitive and purest times c. The aforesaid Commissioners did so and being divided into two Parties the party which in some things dissented made this reply to that passage It is to be found p. 11. of the Printed account of their Proceedings Prop. 19. As to that passage in his Majesties Commission wherein we are authorized and required to compare the present Liturgy with the most ancient Liturgies which have been used in the Church in the purest and most Primitive times We have in obedience to his Majesties Commission made enquiry but cannot find any Records of known credit concerning any entire forms of Liturgies within the first 300 years which are confessed to be as the most Primitive so the purest ages of the Church nor any Imposition of Liturgies for some hundreds of years after We find indeed some Liturgical forms fathered upon St. Basil St. Chrysostome St. Ambrose but we have not seen any Copies of them but such as give sufficient evidence to us to conclude them either wholly spurious or so interpotlated that we cannot make a judgment wha in them hath any Primitive authority This Proposition was given in with the rest by these Divines to the rest of the Reverend Bishops and Doctors of Divinity who made the opposite party and it was not only signed by Dr. Manton Dr. Jacomb Mr. Calamy and many others but by the most Reverend and Learned Dr. Reynolds at that time Bishop of Norwich Here if ever the proof should have been produced of Liturgies generally used and enjoyned in the Church in the purest and most Primitive times Let us now see what Reply was made the Reader shall find it in p. 75. of the Printed account It is the 16 Section of the opposite Commissioners Reply in these words Sect. 16. That there were ancient Liturgies in the Church is evident St. Chrysostoms St. Basils and others and the Greeks tell us of St. James much elder than they and we find not in all ages whole Liturgies yet it is certain that there were such in eldest times by those parts which are extant Sursum Corda c. Gloria Patri c. Benedicte Hymnus Cherubinus vere dignum est justum c. Dominus vobiscum cum spiritu tuo with divers others Though those that are extant may be interpolated yet such things as are found in them all censistent to Catholick and Primitive Doctrine may well be presumed to have been from the first especially since we find no Originals of those Liturgies from ancient Councils This is all they say What was replyed to this is too large to transcribe the Reader may read it in the aforementioned Printed Account of the Proceedings p. 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83. But because every Reader may not have that book at hand I shall add a few words We know none will deny but that particular men might even from Christ's time have by them forms of Prayer either of their own composure or other mens but that from the beginning all Ministers in any Church were tyed to them that we deny nor can it be proved It cannot be proved that in the first 400 years there were any entire forms of Liturgy that the Ministers might before they began to pray say Sursum Corda Lift up your hearts or Dominus Vobiscum The Lord be with you and the people of course say And with thy Spirit are far from proving that there were any books directing them so to do It is known that the Doxology Glory be to the Father Son and Holy Ghost was not in any general use for more than 300 years after Christ In the whole Answer there is nothing to prove that for 500 years after Christ there were any such forms as all Ministers in any one Church or Province were commanded to use and to perform their Ministry in prayer by without varying from it But the Reader may at his leasure read much more in the Judicious Reply made by the Commissioners on the other side And if more could have been said upon this argument for the Antiquity of Liturgies it is not probable it would have been omitted by 12 Bishops and so many learned men besides several of which have since that time been made Bishops and some of them are so at this day § 16. Our Reverend Brother talks therefore at a great deal too high a rate when he tells us p. 110. of Forms of prayer embraced by the ancient Church whiles it retained its soundness and before the corruptions and distempers of the Church of Rome took place if by embraced he means used generally by all Ministers or commanded so to
Author saith next wherein he undertakes a thing beyond all men viz. to prove That in the Apostles times and in the interval betwixt the burial of the Jewish Synagogue and the setting up of the Christian Church set-forms of Divine Service he should have said of Prayers for all Ministers were allowed also Aude aliquid brevibus gyni carcere dignum Si vis esse aliquis I know none hath undertaken this neither Dr. Hammond nor Mr. Faulconer this Notion is but a Probationer to the world Let us examine what Arguments he hath 1. His first proof is from the Apostles going to the Temple to worship and pray Acts 2. 46. Acts 3. 2. and 2. the Apostles justifying themselves Acts 25. 8. 24. 12. 28. 17. that they had nothing against the temple or the law and 3. the Jews tenaciousness of their Rituals all which are proved well enough p. 63 64. But how will our Author prove that the Jewish Ministers in their Temple-service used any prescribed forms of prayer which others had made for them and enjoyned them who were no inspired Prophets or Penmen of holy Writ He hath not yet proved this Or how will he prove that the Apostles themselves in the Temples or Synagogues ministred at any time by such forms we will prove they sometimes preached there but it lyes upon our Author to prove they read prayers for that we find not and we grant they may hear prayers that are forms if the matter be good It is a sign of an ill cause or a weak Disputant to pack on proof where none needed but bring none where all the pinch and stress lay Our Author here takes it for granted what is most notoriously false That the Apostles constantly attended the Jewish Service both in the Temple and Synagognes only met together in other places for the Sacrament and such service as they could not joyn with the Jews in but that is not to our purpose nor yet to examine how well by his Dial he hath rectified the Sun translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 2. 46. in the house not from house to house nor at home as Beza But he is not satisfied that in the Christian Assemblies in the Apostles times there were no manner of forms Who says there were not There was a form of sound Doctrine which the Apostle tells us of there were Psalms Hymns and spiritual Songs in forms they are the three titles of Davids Psalms we have nothing to do with any thing but forms of prayer made by some particular Ministers or Church Officers to be used by all other Ministers He comes a little to the point p. 67. His first pretended proof is what divers have touched upon before him 1 Tim. 2. 12. we grant him from that Text 1. That the several sorts of prayers are there mentioned 2. That these several duties were to be done prayers of these several sorts to be made for offices observed that term seems to suggest something else not in the Text But whereas he goes on and tells us in the third place p 68. That it is as clear that the whole Church of Christ hath conceived and taken it for granted in all ages that the Apostle in this place did intend to fix a rule of Devotion and did order a Platform and Model to be observed in all publick Services and especially at the celebration of the holy Communion if he means a platform of words and phrases not to be varied from It is so far from being clear that no proof can be brought of it nor do as himself confesseth the Apostles words inforce any such belief nor his following quotations out of Chrysostome Ambrose or Augustine prove the least of it All rests upon the practice of the Church since for which indeed much may be said after 600 years after Christ but nothing of any weight or moment before that time And for the Churches judgment in Pope Gregory's time as to Rituals it is a very ill proof of what was done in the Apostles time in all Protestants judgments Our Author goes on still and will not say it is demonstrable but he tells us it seems very probable that the Apostles themselves did in their ordinary Ministrations observe forms of prayer notwithstanding those extraordinary assistances of the spirit which they were blest with Strange the Apostles what men that received not their Ministry of men nor by men but immediately from Christ then he must give them their forms men that hath those extraordinary effusions of the spirit Surely there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some Divine thing in prescribed forms or those that speak thus must use the same Art with us to perswade us to their Lure that Romulus used with his silly Romans who to perswade them to accept his Laws made them believe that he had them from the Goddess Ageria Well but our Author doth not believe they used a book we thank him for that the Parchments that St. Paul left at Troas then shall not rise up in judgment against us though his Cloak may nor doth he think they tyed themselves to words but this they must if they used forms of words all that he will assert that they used a certain method and the matter and substance of their ordinary services was for the most part the same We thank him for nothing then Nonconformists use forms of prayer as well as Conformists we shall never need examine his reasons when we grant the thing for if they be strong it is but to confirm what none doubteth if weak it would be but to expose an Author whose book seems to be calculated for his reputation Thus far I have examined all the pretended proof from Antiquity rather ex abundanti and to satisfie some peoples curiosity than for any other reason And in the close let me give my Reader a caution against this kind of arguing which I doubt not but will appear very reasonable 1. The Reader must know that Printing hath not been known in the world yet 200 years before that time all was in Manuscripts 2. The most of the Manuscripts were in Papists hands and from them it is that the Copies came which were printed indeed the Bible was in the Jews hands as to the Old Testament we were infinitely acurate in preserving the purity of it keeping account both of the numbers of lines in pages and how often the same letter was used in each line the New Testament was in the hands of the Greek Churches as well as the Papists so that they could not well deprave that 3. That as the Church was debauching in some rituals before 300 years after Christ was expired so ever since 600 it hath been debauched much in Doctrine more in matters of Worship Rites Ceremonies and Government 4. That from the year 600 to 1516 the generality of all ancient Manuscripts being in their hands and that Church all along growing worse and worse more sottishly idolatrous superstitious
A Supplement TO A LITTLE BOOK ENTITULED A Reasonable account why some pious Non-conforming Ministers cannot judg it lawful for them to perform their Ministerial Acts in publick solemn prayer ordinarily by the prescribed Forms of others Wherein is examined whatsoever Mr. Falconer in his Book called Libertas Ecclesiastica and Mr. Pelling in a Book called The Good old way have said to prove the ancient use of Forms of Prayers by Ministers And it is proved That neither of the two aforementioned Authors have said any thing that proveth the general use or imposition of such Forms of Prayer in any considerable part of the Church till Pope Gregories time which was six hundred years after Christ nor in any Church since the Reformation except that of England and which is uncertain some in Saxony Multa videntur dicuntur quae non sunt LONDON Printed in the Year 1680. COURTEOUS READER ALthough where the question is about the lawfulness or unlawness of any action the pleading of Antiquity be a great impertinency and if the Plea be true it can rise no higher than a presumptive argument and be so far from a demonstration that it is not a good Topick for there is no prescribing to error So that nothing can incline the scale of Conscience in which every one is obliged to weigh every Proposition relating to his practice but his apprehension of the revealed will of God either from the letter or reason of Holy Writ yet because every one is not thus spiritually instructed and it makes a great noise to hear men talking That the Church in all ages all the Fathers judged otherwise than these men and if it were true in any case it ought highly to oblige all Dissenters again and again to examine those arguments upon which they have founded their particular practical judgment I who know the world too well to believe all that I read in mens Books have thought it reasonable to examine what Mr. Falconer and one Mr. Pelling have said to prove the pretended antiquity of forms of prayer as generally used or required to be used by Ministers in their publick Ministrations as to Prayer I the rather did it because truly Mr. Falconer hath said as much as hath been said on that argument or as that Cause will bear The Reader will find Mr. Pelling hath added little but words I must profess to my Reader there appears to me no shadow or pretence of proof of the matter in question till Pope Gregory and Boniface's time more than 600 years after Christ nor do I believe any can be made to satisfie any inquisitive man I leave it to thee to judg whether I have not given a reasonable answer to any thing brought by these two and shewed that they have made no proof that can satisfie the conscience of any man of any reasonable understanding and thinks the thing is unlawful if indeed it were a thing granted indifferent these little flourishes might do something but the conscience of a good man judging a thing unlawful from grounds of Scripture and Reason cannot be dispossessed of that judgment by any thing but by Scripture and Reason and though the general judgment of the Church might stumble him if his opinion were contrary yet that general judgment must be proved not meerly talkt of and plainly proved too before it can have any operation at all Now whether either of these Authors have done this I leave thee to judg The one of them is very confident and can speak nothing of this nature in a lower stile than with questionless doubtless without all doubt The other though much more modest yet possibly hath some freer and smarter expressions in his Pages on this Argument than in any other part of his Book But my humour is always to suspect a soft place in that part of any Book where I meet with most confidence or passion Reason is so beautiful and noble a thing that it needeth not the service of passion or paint of confidence It commends it self to the next rational soul it meets with without any such black patch or foot-boy at its heels I will freely tell thee my opinion about forms of Prayer in publick Ministrations not imposing upon thee with any such thing as questionless and without doubt I do believe that forms of Prayer are very ancient that is that there were by some good and pious men forms of Prayer made both for their own publick use and for the private instruction of others and teaching them to pray without forms I do think that our Saviour Christ made the Lords-Prayer for the temporary use of his Disciples not so as to oblige them to use no other or to use that Sillabically but to pray for those things either in those words or other words and that they might for a time use that very form particularly until his Resurrection and Ascension after which I believe they were obliged to a more particular mention of his sacred name I believe that forms of Prayer were much more in use before the pouring out of Gods Spirit in the days of Pentecost than after for although the effects of that effusion of the Spirit were some of them peculiar to the Apostles such as speaking with Tongues Miracles Healing c. yet from that day to this I believe from Zach. 12. 10. there hath been a more full effusion of the spirit of grace and supplication upon all both Ministers and people than ever was before generally Notwithstanding which in regard that until men come to believe and be Christians indeed they have not the Spirit of God and even then the Spirit of God works in them by the use of means I do believe there were many forms of Prayer made by good men teaching beginners in Christianity how to pray and what to pray for I am not difficult to believe that many both Ministers and people in those days might make use of such forms till their exercise in Scripture and in the ways of God rendred them as to them needless and turned what were before helpers into hinderances of Devotion But I believe it cannot be proved that for more than 400 years after Christ any one Church commanded her Ministers generally to use such and no other in any part of their publick ministration though possibly some particular men that had not the gift of Prayer or at least feared themselves or suspected they had it not might use some forms made before by themselves or some others Pope Gregory the Great who is commonly call'd the worst of all that went before him though the best of all the Popes that followed him I believe was the first that commanded the general use of forms of Prayer by Ministers in their publick Ministrations Platina saith thus of him What should I speak more of this most holy man for all the ordering of the Ecclesiastical Office especially the old one was by him invented and approved Haec in Canonem redegit
prove that there were forms universally imposed on all Ministers There might be forms for instruction some men might at their pleasure compose forms for their own devotion and use them but that the governing part of the Church did in those years make forms and require all men to use them and Ministers and Christians then generally thought it lawful this is to be proved for we will yet allow a lawful use of forms of prayer for instruction and in some cases for devotion and if they did no more we agree with them Our Reverend Brother hath pag. 113 114 115 116 117 118. taken notice of some proofs brought by Divines of our mind to make it very probable that in those years there were no such forms made for general use no such forms generally used much less enjoined to all to be by them used The first is that of Justine Martyr who flourished about the year 160 who says the Minister sent forth prayers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Brethren translate it as they were able this Reverend Author will have the sense to be with all his might I do not think that any thing can be infallibly concluded on either side from it the words may signifie either or both and so one thing in one part another thing in another part of the same Apology so as that debate is never like to be ended The next is that of Tertullian who lived about 200 years after Christ who saith the Christians did pray Sine monitore quia de pectore without a monitor because from their heart Our Reverend Brother thinks sine monitore can in no propriety of speech be understood of a form and why because a form must be a person And was not that other person who composed the form a person think we and his monitor who prayeth by his form nay are there not mute as well as vocal monitors May not the bell which calls us to a publick assembly be called our monitor because it is no person Is it so unusual a figure to give the name of the office of a person to the thing that doth that work as effectually for his peculiar sense of that Text I see no need of it but leave it to criticks Besides the words are not cum pectore but de pectore the words of the Christians prayers flowed from the heart conceived there He takes notice of no more brought on our side within the first 300 years But I shall mind him of another and that a shrewd one the Reader shall find it in Socrates Scholasticus Histor l. 5 cap. 21. in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every where and in all worships of Prayers there are not two to be found that speak the same thing This cannot be understood as to matter but as to words which could not be if they prayed in all Churches by the same forms of words As to matter it is unquestionable false It is true Socrates lived in the fifth Century but he relates the History of the Centuries before him as well as his own what need we any further witness for near 500 years after Christ Let us now hear what our Reverend Brother hath to say in proof of his assertion He produceth in the second Century Ignatius and Justine Martyr but what say they one of them speaks of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Common-prayer But must the Minister himself needs use a prescribed form because his Prayer is common to the people I wonder how a Minister can in a Congregation make any other prayers than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common prayers Surely the term of Common-prayer is too much an Anglicism to be expressed especially in Greek in that manner In the third Century our Reverend Brother produceth Origen and Cyprian What say they Origen saith they often said in their prayers O Almighty God give us a part with thy Prophets and doth not many a Minister who useth no form ordinarily say in his Prayers O Lord forgive us our sins and O Lord bring us to thy everlasting Kingdom Shall these common Petitions prove a hundred years hence that these men prayed by set-forms For his other passage out of Origen I have not the Book to weigh it but am sure those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not so much as a good Topâ—ck much less of a Demonstration of Liturgies What saith Cyprian he testifieth That they used to say Sursum corda lift up your hearts and the people said Habemus ad Dominum we lift them up to the Lord. So many a Minister that prayeth by no forms begins his Prayer with Let us pray Let us lift up our hearts to the Lord c. This is all the proof this Reverend Author brings for 300 years after Christ let any fair Reader judg the force of it and whether the proofs of the Negative be not more probable and strong especially when we are assured by Socrates 150 years after this That there were not two to be sound that used the same words in prayer And truly what proof he can bring after 300 years is not much valuable for I shall shew that in those ages worser things than Liturgies were crept into the Rituals of the Church § 7. His next instance is that of Constantine which must be betwixt the year 306 and 324 Eusebius saith That he made godly prayers for the use of his Soldiers and Eusebius accounteth this a very admirable thing in him Certainly if true so it was But doth not this argue that there was then no publick Liturgy for certainly if there had his Chaplains would have used it as now our Chaplains do to Regiments and Ships Eusebius calleth these constituted prayers But by whom by Constantine For whom for his Soldiers not for his Ministers Doth any one think Constantine's Soldiers had generally the gift of prayer and were able to express themselves properly to the present case of his army This argues that Constantine did not think fit his Legions should be without all Worship of God nor did he think forms unlawful for those who could not pray without them he therefore wrote down some prayers in a Book ordered them to be read to them and himself sometimes read them or pronounced them What is all this to our purpose we advise the like to all Housholders who have not ability of themselves to pray in their families For Eusebius his saying this was after the manner of the Church If it be understood for the Minister of the Congregation to make prayers for his own Church it is what we plead for if it be meant that he kept a course of prayer in his army as is in the Church it proves nothing for forms unless it could be done no otherwise § 8. For what our Reverend Author saith next for I take his Quotations as they respect order of time not as they lye in his Book p. 106. he seems to me as if
Peter James and Mark themselves use them No saith our Author that is incertain it is false and our Author yields it in saying they ministred by their extraordinary gifts Now we read of no Liturgy came down in the days of Pentecost was it by others that came after them who or how long after because he saith they were of certain early use in those Churches how doth that appear doth he account 450 years after when Socrates tells us there were not two to be found speaking the same things in their prayers early 4. He acknowledgeth he speaks without proof and by guess for he hath no writer in the first Centuries that mentions them But seeing this Reverend Author can say no more for them let us see if nothing can be said against them That of St. Mark and St. Peter the Papists and they know best I believe make to be both the same if they be the learned Morney hath supplied us with enough to say against them 1. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are found often enough in that Liturgy which argues it to be made more than 300 years after St. Peter and St. Mark were in Heaven or else there had been no reason for so long a conrest as was in the Church about those things St. Peter's and St. Mark 's Liturgy had in a minute determined the business 2. In that Liturgy are several prayers for Monks and Monasteries persons and things never thought of till some hundreds of years after Christ 3. There is also mention of Temples Altars Incensings for remission of sins did St. Peter or St. Mark think we know many such things 4. There are prayers for the Pope who commenced 800 years after Peter and Mark were dead 5. There is also in St. Mark 's prayers for Subdeacons Readers Singers nay Mark is made to pray that God would save the City of Alexandria for the sake of his Martyr S Mark. Can our Reverend Brother think these things were of any early use at Alexandria how are our judgments oft-times bribed by our passions For St. James his Liturgy 1. How often is the Virgin in it called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of God when in the Synod of Ephesus and Chalcedon against Nestorius and Eutyches the Fathers had much ado to find one or two places where she was so called in Origen and Eusebius yet the latter lived 400 years after Christ All know what a stir was 300 years after Christ to get Christ agreed equal with his Father in essence This Liturgy had it been known then had prevented all that for He and his Father are every where called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Hymn called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was not composed till 400 years after Here are also prayers for Monasteries unknown for more than 300 years after In it there is a prayer that we might find grace with confession a name and a prayer not known long after There is in it mention made of Temples and Altars which Christians had none of for 300 years of offering incense for remission of sins c. not like St. James his Doctrine There are in it prayers for the dead to the Virgin Mary which James never made and the Doxology Glory be to the Father c. and the Hymn Glory to God in the highest c. are in it too brought into use in the Church-Liturgies many hundreds of years after St. James his time Yet we must believe that these Liturgies were of early use and these were but additions since though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be woven into the best part Quod volumus facile credimus The Reader may read much more in the incomparably learned Lord of Morney's book de Missa l 1. cap. 2. from whence what we have here said is taken Nor do I see how it can be avoided but if Peter Mark and James were the Authors of these pretended Liturgies they must be of equal authority with the Scriptures as that Noble Lord saith And being things of no better reputation than they are though our Reverend Brother hath said little for them yet he hath said a great deal too much for a person of so valuable a judgment and learning and sobriety to speak § 13. We shall come now to hear what he saith to the pretended Liturgies of St. Ambrose St. Chrysostome and St. Basil They all flourishrished above 350 years after Christ Basil in the year 370 Ambrose about the year 374 Chrysostome about the year 398 Basil died 379 Chrysostome 407 Ambrose 397 all these are said to have had Liturgies or Forms of prayers and the Papists can shew us the copies of them they say But this is nothing to us unless it can be proved that they were used by any but themselves yea and that not voluntarily that might be out of some Ministers sense that they had not gifts fit to pray with but at the command of some Council or of these Bishops But let us hear what our Author saith in Libertas Ecclesiastica pag. 106 107. There are so many Testimonies that St. Chrysostome St. Ambrose and St. Basil were framers of Liturgses that I do not see how any can rationally doubt thereof but that these Liturgies have undergone divers alterations is both apparent and is very reasonable to be imagined And he who shall compare the Greek copy of St. Basil's Liturgy with the Syriack or its Version both which are represented together by Cassander will find them so vastly different from each other that he must either conclude great alterations to have past upon them or that they never were originally the same This is all that he saith of them That Ambrose Basil Chrysostome and others might set themselves in order for reading the Scriptures and compose prayers for their personal use may be true for ought any body can tell Divers Divines that we have known have done the like That divers Ministers might out of a reverence to these persons and distrusting their own gifts use the forms which they had made may be true too We have seen Mr. Shutes Dr. Holdsworths and many others forms of prayer which they ordinarily used before their Sermons And possibly some out of respect to them may have made use of them whether they did what they ought is the question That the Liturgies now extant and that go under their name as they now are to be seen were none of theirs is out of question Liturgias has ownes falsi postulo saith the most learned Lord of Morney de l. Missa cap. 6. Nor was he a person used to speak rashly He chargeth them all for counterfeits and sufficiently proves it He shews that in those Liturgies there were prayers for the dead prayers to the Virgin Mary There is the Hymn called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not known in the Church till more than an hundred years after their time In Chrysostome's the Priest is brought in worshipping
the Crucifix and the Virgin Mary all know the worshipping Images came in long after Chrysostome and many other Saints are invoked in his Liturgy who lived many years after Chrysostome was dead There is in it a prayer for the Emperor Alexius and the Oecumenical Bishop Pope Nicholas who both lived 700 years after Chrysostome was dead It is true the Papists adoring these Liturgies we make use of them against them to prove that the Sacrament was used to be given in both kinds and that there were no private Masses but these pretended Liturgies were most certainly made many hundreds of years after their times who are made the Authors If they were not the Papists have more to say for their Holy-water their Paganish Incensings and Wax-candles burning at noon-day their Crossings and Crucifixes their Invocation of the Virgin Mary and Saints than Protestants ever thought they had But our Author will allow them to have undergone divers alterations We thank him for that but how shall it appear to us that they were not intire new compositions made a thousand years after Christ that by them the Papists might justifie their Mass-book their Doctrine and Ceremonies Or how shall it appear that any Ministers in Chrysostome's Ambrose's or Basil's Diocesses were required by them to perform their Ministerial acts in prayer We challenge any one to make that good And the making of forms of the particular use of them by those that made them or the voluntary use of them by other Ministers who distrusted their own abilities or the requiring of the use of them in a time of general corruption of the Ministers will not prove the lawfulness of the use of them by all Ministers under no such circumstances Besides the Canon of the Council of Mela limiting their Ministers to such prayers as should first be approved in some Synod is a strong presumption that they knew of no Liturgies of St. Mathew St. Mark St. James St. John St. Peter St. Ambrose St. Basil St. Chrysostome for they would then have named some of them and restrained their Ministers to the use of them or some of them and not still have ordered the making of more or rather given their Ministers liberty to make their prayers themselves but not to use them till they had been debated and agreed in some Synod which I take to be the truest sense of that Canon nor needed the Council of Carthage to have ordered their Ministers to confer about their prayers with their more experienced brethren if seven or eight Liturgies had been then known and so authentick § 14. But yet we must find it more than 300 years after this before any Church or Magistrate took upon them under penalties to command Ministers to minister not by the use of their own gifts but by the prescribed forms of others Let us but in the case hear Durandus a Papist high enough speak and that in a book which he called A Rationale of Divine Offices l. 5. cap. 2. his words are these Theodosius who by the way lived 380 intreated Pope Damasus that some Ecclesiastical office might be made by some Ecclesiastical Catholick person upon which Damasus commanded Saint Hierome who was then in Bethlehem with Paula Eustochium and some other Virgins to abide there and to make a Liturgy for the Churches because he was well skilled in Hebrew Greek Chaldee and Latin which he obediently did appointing how much of the Psalms should be read each day of the week and ordering the reading of the Gospels and the Epistles out of the Old and New Testament Where note this is all that most superstitious Ritualist could find that Saint Hierome did It was approved by Pope Damasus and made a rule Gelasius who was Pope and lived 400 and Gregory the Great who lived 600 years after Christ added Prayers and Hymns the Lessons and the Gospels Ambrose Gelasius and Gregory saith he added the Gradualia Tractus Hallelujah other Doctors of the Church added other parts Thus far Durandus This seemeth to be much of the truth Platina in the life of Damasus tells us that he first ordered Hierome's Translation to be read in the Churches That the Psalms should be read alternalim part by the Minister part by the people That Glory be to the Father to the Son and to the Holy Ghost should be repeated at the end of every Psalm and the Confession at the beginning of the celebration of the Mass was also ordered by him Now when was this It was above 380 years after Christ Nor have we yet any record of a Liturgy but an order by Hierome prescribed for reading the Scripture and a Confession before the Sacrament made by Pope Damasus and Gloria Pater by him added to every Psalm The next Pope to him was Siricius that learned man who in great passion urged That Priests might not marry because the Apostle Paul tells us Those that are in the flesh cannot please God The next to him was Anastasius he saith Platina ordained the Priests standing up at the Gospel Innocent the first succeeded him who spent his time about preserving the Faith against Pelagius I do not find that Sosemus the next Pope added much but he sent Faustenus and two Presbyters to the Council of Carthage to let them know they ought to do nothing without the consent of the Bishop of Rome saith Platina Boniface after him did little the next which was Coelestinus ordered Davids Psalms to be sung by turns before the Sacrifice so was the Lords Supper now called The next Successor Sixtus 1. his superstition evaporated in buildings and adorning them I find not that the four next Successors Leo Simplicius Hilary or Faelix did any thing as to the Liturgy nor indeed is much said of any till we come to Gregory Anno 600 Pamelius saith he made a Lectionary directing the order for the Scripture to be read an Antiphonary directing some Responds and an order for administring the Sacraments but he could command no further than his own Church for it was five or six years after this before the Pope of Rome was set up as Vniversal Bishop a title which Gregory refused by Phocas who killing his Master had usurped the Empire Yet little was done for almost 200 years after this the continual stirs caused by the Lombards giving the Emperour no rest About the year 800 Charles the Great being Emperour Pope Adrian moveth him to establish a Liturgy by a Civil Edict and obtained it and Durandus telleth us that Pope Gregories Liturgy was it To which Charles the Great compelled all Ministers by threatnings and punishments and this is the first authority we have for any thing of this nature From whence we observe That the first imposing of a Common-Prayer Book was in favour to Pope Adrian and began with a persecution Nor after this was it glibly swallowed for Mr. Fox amongst the Protestants and Durandus amongst the Papists tell us a pleasant story of one Eugenius
was from it both all her Reign and after that all King James his Reign is too sad a story to repeat Whereas had it pleased God so to have moderated the spirits of our Bishops in the beginning of her Reign that they had only composed a Liturgy and left Ministers to a liberty as in all other Reformed Churches it is all had been quiet It is very like that the most of the Ministers at that time being very little practiced in Praying or in Preaching would have used and been studying to pray without it and long ere this we might have had flourishing Church shining in every corner with a Ministry that needed no book to have told them the words and syllables they must put up their prayers to God in When on the other side these contests about this thing have carried some few into great extremes on both sides Some on one side thinking that there is no true Prayer but by the Liturgy at which they are very devout but studying to shew all manner of slight and irreverence at other prayers believing them no true worship of God no whole-faced Son of the Church must use any prayer in his family no Lady or Gentlewoman any other prayer in her Closet but this Common-prayer It was a great objection against a person of great Honour and Piety appearing for Knight of the Shire in his County though he constantly attended publick prayers and received the Sacrament as constantly that he used fanatick Prayers in his family that is his Chaplain there prayed not by the publick forms at all times This madness not to say profaneness by the way is to us a sufficient argument against our use of any set publick forms in our Devotion we ought not to nurse up people in these most erroneous conceptions to speak no worse of them If people will adore humane constitutions at this rate they must be to us Nehushtan On the other side this madness hath run some to that excess that they will allow no forms to be lawful of any use in any time for any persons their children must not learn the Lords Prayer nor a form of Catechism none must hear a form c. But the number of these is very small and their judgment is as invaluable Forms of prayer are lawful useful many a good man learns to pray by a form as Scholars learn to write by their Masters first guidance of them and holding their hand They are useful and lawful for Devotion for persons that have not an ability yea for Ministers in that case The people always pray by the form of him that ministreth The Minister doth well if he can do no better he conducts the people that they may in faith say Amen he guides himself But if he have an ability otherwise to do we cannot think he doth his duty and we are sure every Minister should have an ability from himself both to pray and preach How hard it is to keep out of extremes I challenge any to shew me how our judgment thus stated and opened dissents from the Revelation of the Will of God in Scripture or of any valuable persons in the Church of God in any age § 18. It is an easie thing for men to talk of all the Fathers and the Church in all ages but it is an hard thing for those that talk at this rate to prove what they say in any tolerable measure A man is right in his own cause until his neighbour cometh and searcheth him out When men have worn out their tongues and pens in writing and speaking vain words they will be found to have spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the words of men puft up with a desire to prove some unproveable thing or with an opinion We will not say our opinion is infallible but we will in sincerity say it is what we cannot dispossess our selves of by any ratiocination within our selves or with others Some will say we have a liberty to use our gifts before Sermons in our Families in our Closets the Vanity of that is shewed But is not the Administration of the Sacraments a great piece of our Ministry what liberty is left us as to that or by what rule are we restrained in any part of our Ministry or how long shall we have it in any allowing this principle We owe no such Idolatrous Reverence to any Father or Person or Church as to take their judgment against the plainer letter or Reason of Scripture this were to set up one higher than the highest no nor to practice any thing upon the recommendation of men or in obedience to them contrary to what our consciences tell us is the Will of God in Scripture This were not to set up man above God possibly but above Gods Deputy in our souls All the Reverence we can owe to man in that cause is to examine our opinion to the utmost again and again to compare things spiritual with things spiritual But if after all our Consciences say It is not lawful to the utmost we can discern it is not lawful Though as to the reality of the truth of the notion it is not all one yet as to our practice it must be all one as if God said from Heaven It is not lawful for you But in the present case there is no other prejudice appears against us from the judgment of the Church in former ages than what was against the whole Protestant Religion objected by Harding It is not probable that God would leave his Church in Errors a thousand years We confess the judgment of what the Papist calls the Church for a thousand years is in a great measure against us But so it was against many points of the Protestant Religion Bishop Jewell durst not make his challenge for more than the first 500 years to them to shew any one point of their new Creed maintained in We make the like challenge as to this point of the lawfulness of forms of prayer to be universally used by Ministers or imposed upon them It certainly robbeth God of the most natural proper Calves of our lips and makes our lips but Ministers to offer up others sacrifices when we have a male in our own flock § 20. I shall conclude with the Reformed Church in Holland I have not seen their Agenda but I am assured by a Reverend Divine Pastor of one of those Churches in England that they are not so tyed up but that they have a liberty in all parts of their publick worship to use their own prayers and do accordingly use it And this I take to be enough to have spoken on this Argument until I hear what will be said against any thing here spoken WHen I had finished this discourse I had an intimation given me of something spoken upon this Argument by one Mr. Pelling Chaplain to his Grace the Duke of Somerset in a book called The good old way Though I was pretty well satisfied that I could
the most orthodox people and it would be enquired in England at this day whether there be more Socinians Pelagians and Papists amongst those that adore the Liturgy or amongst those who have no kindness for that or any other Let but the understanding Reader judg of all the rest he saith by the truth of this In the next place he saith it cannot be denied but Liturgies were in use in St. Basils and St. Chrysostomes time generally who were about 380 years after Christ and why cannot this be denied because he saith Liturgies are extant under their names This learned argument will prove that there were also Liturgies in St. Marks St. Peters St. James and St. Andrews time for there are Liturgies out also under their names yet this is all this Author hath to say why no body should deny what he saith as if there were not 100 books extant under the names of the Ancients which not only Rivet and Cocus amongst the Protestants but Possevine Sixtus Senensis Erasmus and Bellarmine amongst the Papists have denied to be theirs men all as learned as our Author I have before shewed that the Liturgies going under their names could not be theirs The noble and learned Lord of Mornay whom our Author sometimes speaks highly of l. 1. de missa cap. 6. saith Liturgies has omnes falsi postulo I charge all these Liturgies as false In both of them as was said before is the hymn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which came 200 years after into the Church in both Confessors are mentioned whose names were not known of many years after in both the Virgin Mary is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a term not admitted in common use till after the Council at Ephesus 436. In both of them there is Incensing Many other reasons the Reader may find in Morney in the Chapter before quoted c. But faith our Author Though we do not think that these are the very same which they used because later ages have defaced them and foisted many heterogeneous things into them yet 't is Ridiculous to imagine that St. Basil and St. Chrysostome did not compile any or that nothing of these was of their composing And what if they did compile some doth it therefore follow that they required all Ministers in their Diocesses to use them But the truth is this is a ridiculous argument to prove they compiled any because some go under their names and a ridiculous answer to men proving the forgery of those pretended Liturgies from the use of terms not known in their Ages of rites mentioned in them which confessedly came not in of hundreds of years after they were dead and of Prayers found in them for a Pope and an Emperor that lived 500 years after they were dead I say it will appear to answer all this a most silly and ridiculous trifling to tell us It is true some things are foisted in since but 't is manifest they made Liturgies and some parts of those Liturgies How is it manifest Good Reader observe what possibility of proof there is that these men made no such Liturgies if this will not it lyes upon them to prove they did make some They produce Copies divers Copies we peruse them and find 1. That no two of them agree each with other 2. That the Doctrine in the Copies is contrary to the Doctrine of those times 3. That there is in them Prayers for men that lived 500 years after they were dead 4. That there are in them many rites and modes of worship not known of hundreds of years after they were both dead But yet saith our Author ' t is Ridiculous to think these Fathers did not make Liturgies or that nothing of these was of their composing yea 't is ridiculous to assert any thing in them was of their composing for what is there to prove it Those parts which the Papists and some Protestants say are foisted in come to us upon the same Tradition that the other parts do What one thing is there in any of these Liturgies which none but Basil or Chrysostome could be the Author of If others might be the Authors and that 500 years after how doth it appear that Basil or Chrysostome must we are sure they were no Authors of a great part what but a foolish fancy can make us believe they were the Authors of any part of them But the truth is this is the Papists answer My Lord of Morney quotes Espenceus de missa privata p. 220. It was saith the Jesuit Leo Thuscus that wrote the Scholion of the Priests communicating alone he lived in the year 1170 and was Secretary to Emanuel the Great Emperour and Interpreter to Trithemius Did not he make the whole Liturgy and had respect rather to his own times than Chrysostomes Which saith he I mind you of not that I think that Missal unworthy of Chrysostome or the Greek Church or do otherwise suspect it but think it began and composed by a most holy man and enlarged by putting in many things according to the variety of times As much might be said for the Antiquity of the Alcoran in which are many things of Primitive truth though Mahomet hath put in a world of fooleries and wickedness and doubtless the whole is of no Primitive authority though there be much Primitive truth in it From hence our Author rises higher to tell us of St. James and St. Marks Liturgies and Clements Constitutions for the two first I have said enough before For Clement chuse Reader whether thou wilt believe the D. of Somersets Chaplain or Eusebius and Hierome who lived above 400 years after Christ and knew of no such book as Clements Constitutions see Eusebius l. 3. cap. 32. See also what Morney saith of this l. 1. de missa p. 46. cap. 2. He that will believe all in Bibliotheca patrum hath more faith than I have or any Protestant can have But he will at last come to authentick Testimonies that will satisfie any indifferent man p. 56. if compared with the Liturgies that is with the forgeries aforementioned that such and such forms were used by Christians in the first ages and so that in all probability they were directed by the Apostles or Apostolical men Vsed is not enough if he could prove it they must be universally used or required to be universally used But let us hear what proof he hath Cyprian speaks of solemn Offices solemnibus adimpletis that must be understood of customary forms of Prayer and why because he elsewhere hath sursum corda Lift up your hearts We lift them to the Lord. In another place he saith they prayed for several things continually and earnestly and these he saith no doubt were charitable forms used in Morning and Evening-Service Origen saith they used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appointed Prayers Origen quotes a form of three lines Questionless this was in the Alexandirian Liturgy Tertullian mentions Dominica solemnia and tells us of four parts of it
Reading the Scripture Singing of Psalms Prayers and Adlocutions These he will have to be Biddings of Prayer the Deacons saying Let us pray then telling them what they should pray for So then Preaching was no part of the Sabbath-days Service which I should rather understand by Allocutiones considering that there is a book called Dies Dominica so abundantly proves it and we have such plentiful proof of it from Chrysostome Justin Martyr c. But a thing never thought on by Christ or his Apostles Bidding of Prayer that forsooth must be made one of the parts of the Sabbath-service Most ridiculous But in all this good Reader consider what little of proof there is besides the Authors Questionless and without doubt Cyprian speaks of solemn things Offices he puts in and are there no solemn things but Prayers made by forms He hath sursum corda And do not those who pray by no forms ordinarily begin with Let us lift up our hearts to God Cyprian saith they pray continually and earnestly and might they not do so without a book Origen saith they used Prayers appointed but doth he say the words they should use in those prayers were also set and appointed them Origen reciteth a form of three lines and he might for ought we know or say to the contrary both make it and use it but is it proved that the Church generally used that form His interpretation of the Petitions mention'd by Tertullian as part of the solemn Service of the Sabbath to be Collects is a new whimsi of our Authors and I think his Exposition of Tertullians sine Monitore is as new and precacious for Tertullian's preces delegatae they signified all the prayers which the Congregation put up to God by their Ministers delegated and instructed to speak to God in the name of all the people who upon this account by Greg. Naz. is said to have had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a kind of Mediatorship between God and man he being the peoples mouth unto God There was then in the Church-Meetings but one voice heard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Chrysostome Homil. 36. in 1 Cor. That is There ought never to be but one voice in the Church He that readeth readeth alone and the Bishop saith he is in the mean time silent He that sings sings alone and when all sing together 't is all as one voice c. Our Author in the last place spends much Paper upon a quotation from Justin Martyr It is too long to transcribe p. 62. he comes to his Collections from it 1. He saith the Catechumeni were taught to pray the congregation of believers praying with them he would have them taught to pray by the Deacons admonishing them to pray Admonishing whom did they think we admonish those not admitted yet into Church to pray in the solemn Assembly of the Believers Surely the latter and they told them the general matter of Prayer This certainly concludes they had no stated forms of words which they used and might use no other So fair a proof is this 2. In the next place he collecteth that the Catechumeni did in a form make confession of their faith What is this to the purpose 3. In the third place he gathers from Justin Martyr that the Catechumeni were brought from the water to the congregatiou and Sermon ended they went jointly to prayer So then they had a Sermon and prayers after it but how doth it appear this was by a form of words from which they might not vary Questionless saith our Author it is pretty that he should think his Questionless should make a good argument But he hath found the form in Clements Constitutions a book not heard of 300 years after Clements death out of what hole soever it is now come All he saith else is no more to the purpose than that Prayers being ended they saluted one another with an holy kiss they received the Sacrament and prayed again and praised God in a copious and large manner by their Minister And these prayers being concluded the people jointly cryed out Amen What proof there is for forms of prayer comes out of the forged Constitutions of Clement and this Authors strong fancy not out of Justin Martyr and our Author p. 62. confesseth Justin Martyr tells us no such things but yet he saith They did it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Cyril he talks of as so ancient was an Author lived near 500 years after Christ and was not like to know so exactly what was done in Justin Martyrs time Any writer now would be lookt on to give a very incertain account of what was done in England Anno 1200. nor would any give much credit to what he should write It is a great vanity men have when they are eager of a thing to fancy all they meet with to look that way if they do but see a word or a letter or two of that nature I knew a Dignitary of our Church who was strongly conceited against the Morality of the Sabbath and therefore was engaged to put another sense upon the fourth Commandment or to leave us but Nine Moral Precepts in the Decalogue He at last finds in Origen and Epiphanius a place or two where Christ was call'd The great Sabbath and presently writes a book about a new 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mightily triumphing That he had found out Gospel in the midst of the law The sense of that Commandment was nothing else but remember to sanctifie the Name of Jesus Christ When alas the old Fathers meant no more than that Christ in whom alone is rest for our souls was typified by the holy day of rest appointed by the law and though Christ be our rest our great rest yet he is not a day of rest which is that which the Commandment only speaketh of Just so I observe it is in this Controversie Some men are so mightily zealous for stated and universally imposed forms of prayer that where-ever in any of the Ancients they meet with the words Liturgy Offices Common-prayers Prayers solemn Services they presently think they have a full proof for forms of prayer composed by others to be used by all Ministers When as alas there 's nothing more weak and ridiculous and these arguments speak nothing of reason but only a fancy disturb'd by unreasonable passion A Liturgy signifies nothing but an order of Ministration in holy things which may be without one form of prayer only directing the time or times when the Ministers shall pray Offices in the ancients signifies no more than Duties The approbation of the term Offices to forms of prayer to be used at Burials Christnings c. is but a very modern Popish Device to suggest to silly souls that Ministers did not do their duties if they did not use their Missals and Rituals c. and surely Prayers and solemn Services may be without forms and so may Common prayers too I am the more confirmed in this by what our
find in it nothing new but words and confidence yet for the satisfaction both of my self and my friend I procured the book in all haste and read it with as much greediness though with no great expectations as thinking it a barren subject out of which little Reason would grow but what we before had reapt and proved nothing but fallacy and falshood and for which little varnish of authority could be procured but what we had washed off with a cloth wetted in a very small degree of learning I read it from the first to the last line upon this Theme I at first observed that all which he pretended to was That forms have been allowed and used which may be granted without the least damage to our cause who do not argue all forms unlawful no nor all forms of prayer unlawful no nor the use of forms of prayer unlawful nor the use of all forms of prayer in praying unlawful but the use of forms of prayer for all men ordinarily and that in publick solemn prayer To prove which he hath not said a word but yet seeing he will not speak to what he should if he intended to speak any thing to the purpose let us consider what he hath spoken to his own purpose He will prove he saith p. 49. That set-forms of Divine Service were of use amongst the Jews 2. That set forms of Divine Service were of use also amongst the Primitive Christians 3. That after our blessed Lords ascention in that Interval betwixt the burial of the Synagogue and the setling of the Christian Church set-forms of Divine Service were allowed also even by the holy Apostles Three great undertakings Et quae non viribus istis conveniunt But if they were all proved would no more prove That it is lawful for all men ordinarily to perform their Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed forms of others than it would prove that it were lawful or not lawful for all particular men and women to marry or not to marry because marriage was lawful amongst the Jews and amongst the Primitive Christians and in the interval he talks of or that it was not lawful for some persons to marry in all those periods both which Propositions are true But let us see how he proves what he propounds to prove be it what it will And here we might have expected a Scriptural proof for the first and second of his periods and the third too at least the greater part of it falleth within the time of which the holy Scripture giveth us an account But alas of this we have very little and what we have of another nature is Apocryphal and proves nothing but to such credulous souls as will believe any thing which they read in any trifling Author 1. As to his first Period from the beginning of the world till Christs time I admire at the confidence of the Author to urge the Jewish worship as a pattern to Christians when he knows that Worship and Discipline were the two things which Christ came to alter and although he retained Prayer and Praise parts of natural worship and Exhortations which were all used amongst the Jews yet we find no forms of words in Prayer used by the Jews the retaining of which he directed Nor did he use or retain instruments of Musick in the worship of God nor did the Primitive Christians for Justin Martyr Qu. Resp 107. tells us That they looked upon the use of musick as a childish service of God and therefore used it not only plain singing 2. It lies upon him to prove that no Priest or Levite in the Jewish Church might use any forms of prayer or blessing but those he mentioneth in their ordinary publick Service and when he hath done that we will take the same argument and prove That neither the Disciples did nor any Christians ought to use any Prayer but the Lords Prayer because Christ hath said When you pray say or pray after this manner 3. Admit they did not this will only prove either that we must use no other or that we may use forms of prayer directed by God himself or by his holy Prophets or other Penmen of Scripture But it will not prove that all men either must use or may use forms of prayer never prescribed by God nor by any men to whom God had given authority to make forms of prayer or praise for his Church Surely it is no argument If we must or may use a form of prayer or praise directed by God or Christ by David Asaph Moses c. then we must or may use forms of prayer made by Pope Gregory Pope Boniface or by St. Basil or Chrysostome and it is impossible but men of learning must see the inconclusiveness of this Argument only they must say something and ad populum phateras any thing will serve those that understand not None that I have met with will say that we must in praying or blessing use the forms of prayer and blessing used in Scripture and no other So then they only say we may use them It is granted and what wonder is it if we may use such forms of words in prayer as are directed by Christ and those servants of his whom he appointed to write the Holy Scriptures for us which is the rule of all our Actions and contain all that we are to believe to pray for and to do though we judg it yet sinful for all Ministers to tye themselves to forms of prayers made by men that could never pretend to such an authority to guide the Church as to what is to be believed prayed for or done but only to rule it by seeing the Laws and Ordinances which Christ and his Apostles have given put in execution especially considering that neither Christ nor his Apostles whose proper offices it was to direct all things of lawful and necessary use in the Church ever did any such thing But after this Pope Gregory comes up and he forsooth thinks it fit to enjoyn such a thing Or admit it were Basil or Chrysostome 200 years before him which we do not believe the case is the same though not so scandalous I shall have done with what our Author saith as to his first period only minding him this is shooting at rovers and will never hit any mark but that which is in very ignorant and childish persons heads It is an arrogating the same power for the Governours of Churches since Christs and the Apostles times to ordain in matters of Worship which they had which is the same argument the Papists bring for their unwritten Traditions If I had a mind to discover mens infirmities I could take notice of many mistakes of our Author in this Paragraph but this is not my business 2. I proceed to his second Period where he saith That prescript forms of worship have been established for above these 1200 years last past no learned man can deny he delivereth himself in this bold