4 and 5 Centuries might mistake 3. I am not concerned to make good what Smectymnuus said tho I knew the Men that made that Book and know that none of them wanted learning but for the Commissioners of the Savoy their saying they could find no intire Liturgies within the first 300 years doth not argue that they found any then for I am sure they did not but those being the times of the purer Primitive Church they by their Commission were concerned to speak to no more I do say it again that they might have said That they find no Record of any Liturgy universally used or imposed and commanded to be used by all for 600 years till the time of Gregory the great nor then by any imposed but by Gregory the worst of all the Bishops of Rome before his time whose Judgment and Practice in this case signified little but under the Protection of Charles the Great 200 years after that I repeat not here an Answer to the Answerers silly Reflection p. 138 I believe I knew what time Gregory the Great and Charles the Great lived before our Vindicator could construe his Cato and that his Book did not enlighten me with this glorious peice of Learning the Supplement will inform him and all those who have a mind to laugh at such lamentable Exceptions We must attend hereafter to what our Author can say to prove Liturgies of Prayer generally used or commanded to be used before the time of Gregory the great 4. In the mean time he takes notice that I will not allow that the three Canons which he quoted that of the Councel of Laodicea cap. 18. of the third Councel of Carthage can 23. of Milevis can 12. had any res ect to Liturgies and their establishment Where have I denied they had no respect to Liturgies Or what doth he mean by Estab ishment For still it is not our Interest I perceive to speak plainly and distinctly I have denyed and do deny that those Canons have the least tittle of proof That Liturgies in the time when those Canons were made and yet the last of these was more then 400 years after Christ were generally used or commanded to be generally used one of which they must prove before they have proved that my Opinion Tâ—at the Vniversal use of Liturgies is not lawful in all probability is false because contrary to the judgment of the Church for 1300 years past 5. I had reason to say so when the last of these Councels was not till 402 and then made for a particular Church and in a particular case which I have else where largely shewed and given a full account of it and for the Two first Supplement p. 30 31 32 33 34 35 36. it is doubted whether ever there were any such Councils and tho this Author produceth something out of Justellus to prove there was such a Council of Laodicea yet there is no Canon of it enjoyning a Form of Prayers should be used morning and evening Other Collectors of Councils very ancient too have no such Council there was but 22 or 42 at it and for the other 3 Carthag Justellus tells our Vindicator the 23 Cannon could not be theirs for that Council made but 21 nor is the 23th to be found in Justellus his Code of the African Church where it should have been if it had been of any authority And our Vindicator tells us too this Code was extant 451 so as at that time they knew of no such Canon And though the first mentioned Canon of Laodicea was taken into the Code which Code was approved by the Council of Calcedon Anno 451. yet there is no proof that Forms of Prayer were then generally used or imposed For the Canon it self mentions no more then a publick Ministry of Prayers as to which Forms are not necessary In the late times in Colledge Chappels there was morning and evening 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where no Forms were used but a certain Order observed all the Week and Year long And indeed this is an usual Cheat in these debates when Men hear or read of a Liturgy of Prayers they presently think there 's a proof for Forms of Praâ—er when it is but of late years that the term Liturgy hath been appropriated to signifie a Common Prayer Book And admit there were such a Council of Carthage and they made what is called the 23 Canon which Justellus denieth yet that as I have shewed in my Supplement determined no such thing that of Milevis or Mela indeed did but in a very small Corner of the Church and for a very particular reason and the Vindicator cannot say these 2 Canons were ever brought into Justellus his Code or confirmed by any general Council But of this matter I have elsewhere said enough 6. For what our Author objects p. 143. to prove the Laodicean Canon injoyned more then the same Ministry or Order of Prayer even Forms From the next Canon it speaketh not a word of Forms more then the other only three Prayers were made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the words used neither of them signifying the reading of a Prayer out of a Book by a Form See at the end of the Book in the Review a full Answer to all said by Dr. Faulkner on this head Whereas our Answerer p. 144 complains I have not read over or considered what he hath said to prove that the Canon of Carthage contrary to the plain sense of the words commanded a Form he will find it taken notice of in my Supplement largely enough p. 28. For the Councel of Milevis it proves no universal use nor any Vniversal Imposition Now that Forms may be used by some Ministers and at some times and that in some particular Exigent they may be Vniversally Imposed for a time which was the cause then I do not doubt but enough is said of that Council Supplement p. 30.31 c. I leave to any Reader to judge whether it is not like a very great part of their Ministry were tainted with Pelagianism whatever our Vindicator saith 7. I shall not trouble my self further about this Section the Argument if it were good concluding nothing as to the Lawfulness and Vnlawfulness I have said in my Supplement as much as I think can be said at least as I can say and so I think hath our Answerer let the Reader judge who hath spoken with most probability and from most Credible Authority So far as we understand the truth of Church Affairs for the first 300 years which we can have no great certainty of for the generality of our Editions are from the Papists who would let us know as little of the truth as they could where it was contrary to their Practice what was held practiced and retained in the Church not being matter of Faith within two hundred years after Christ is no great guide to our Practice tho I said and do believe that Forms of Prayer were
know what line of proof we have that made they were not left at liberty we have before proved there could at this time be no imposition of them doth any think there were not many in their Diocesses that needed Forms of Prayer both for their Instruction and to help them in their Devotion How doth it appear that Chrysostome or Basil did themselves use any 2. This cuts the Throat of all the fictitious Apostolical Liturgies Had there been any such things found out in their times there is no doubt but they would have rather recommended them then any of their own unto their people 3. Both these great Men flourishing in the time of the Milevitane Council it is not likely had there been known Liturgies by so famous Men as Basil and Chrysostome that they would not without any more ado have ordered the reading of them they especially living at that time or a little before But 4thly As I have before said what imaginable proof can there be more then we have that those Liturgies were none of theirs The Copies do not agree there are Doctrines in them quite contrary to their Doctrines hymns not used in their times words not then in use Prayers for Persons living 500 700 years after their time But there is enough said by my Lord of Morney in the case by Learned Rivet in his Critici Sacri Specimen in the Reasonable Account p. 67. Supplement p. 43 44. 19 As to our Vindicators Quotation out of Sozomen concerning Julians design â—o bring the Pagan Religion in credit the Reader must be wary for 1st Sozomen tells us the summ of what Julian did in his own words then for the proof of it he referreth to Julians own letter to the Pontesee of Galatia which he giveth us at large The words our Vindicator quotes as they are in Sozomen for he doth not love to give us his quotations full are these Soz. l. 5. c. 15. He saith he that is Julian determined to adorn the Gentiles Temples both with utensils and furniture Apparatu saith the Latin Translator and the order 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Christian Religion and besides with Seats and Pews for the Teachers and Lecturers of the Pagan Doctrine and Exhortations and with Prayers prescribed for certain days and hours and Monasteries Then he referreth for the proof to Julians own Letter where is not a word of Prayers What is there in this to prove the Christians had at that time Forms of Prayer in the Church Because they had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Order in Worship and because the had some set days for Prayer they ordered Prayers on certain days and hours must they needs be Forms Nor do I believe was the Common Prayer Book of Julian made for the Heathen ever yet seen by any learned man at least I never heard of it But what our Vindicator means by his next words which Nazianzene calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which with all submission to his skill in Critical Learning I think is better tranlated partly a Form of Prayers then as he doth Forms of Prayers in parts I cannot Divine Doth he mean that Naz. expounded Sozomens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That could not be without a Resurrection for Nazianzen died 389 which was above 50 years before Sozomen wrote was not this as great a miracle as Gregorius Magnus his living 200 years What then Did Nazianzen expound Lucians words There is no Evidence he ever spake any such only Sozomen so phraseth what he did but Lucian in his Epistle saith no such things or at least hath no such words Indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is more properly expressive of the thing in Question Forms of Prayer then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Nazianz. is not by our Author quoted to have said any such thing was established only to expound the words of another Author who wrote 50 years after he was dead or Julians who never appears to have used such words So heâ—â— is a fine flourish of words to no purpose but to delude the Reader 20. Our Vindicator is now come to his proof from the year 200 to the year 300 where he refers to his proof in Libertas Eccles from what he had of Origen and Cyprian and I refer to my answer in my Supplement p. 21. 22 only minding our Vindicator that there is a great deal of difference betwixt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers appointed and Forms of Prayers appointed The latter is not in Origen but the former which proves no appointment of Forms but that there should be Prayers at such times 21. For what he addeth out of Tertullian of their having a Form of Renuntiation in Baptism and H mns and the Council of Antioch censuring Paulus Samosetanus for disusing the Hymns It had been proper to have told us the Nicene Council also established a Form of Confession of Faith Are we arguing about Hymns Forms of Confession of Faith and Abrenuntiation of Idolatry or about Forms of Prayer to be used in Devotion Were the other Acts of Worship as Prayer is I mean the two first for singing indeed was from the instance of the Ennuch and Philip Acts 8. it seems to be an appendant to the Ordinance of Baptism that grown persons offering themselves to Baptism should profess their Faith in Christ which could not be without a Renunciation of Idolatry But surely those were no Acts of Adoration or Devotion So as these instances are meer Transitions from things of one kind to things of another from whence no proper conclusions can be 22. The Argument from Singing by Forms is as improper for a Form is necessary there how else can a whole Congregation sing the same thing But it is not necessary in publick Prayer by any necessity of Nature or Divine Precept Now it is wide Arguing to conclude from the use of Forms in an Act of Worship which cannot be performed without Forms to the lawfulness of them in another Act of Worship which may be performed without them 23. I must confess I never was for Singing any Hymns or Psalms or Spiritual Songs in Publick Worship but what were Scriptural My reasons are 1. Because I take singing to have a cognation with Reading only with a Tuneable Voice now I know nothing but the Holy Scriptures which can be read as an Act of Homage to God 2. Because it is needless we have Scriptural Hymns Psalms and Spiritual songs enough 3. Because I know none specially commissionated to compose them and Psalmistry is no ordinary gift 4. Because it hath proved and may prove of very dangerous consequence and I am much mistaken if I have not read some Ancient Canon prohibiting it tho I know it hath been since admitted in some Churches by Canons 24. For the first 200 years after Christ he speaketh faintly saying only that Justine Martyr and Ignatius have two expressions which seem to favour it He
only further mentions Hymns and proveth the use of Hymns of Ecclesiastical composition from Pliny and Lucian no very competent Witnesses of the Christian Churches affairs The early use of the Lords Prayer is easily yielded him but it is a strange proof of a Form of Prayers composed by other Men and generally used or imposed to prove as p. 158 That they began in some Churches with the Lords Prayer and ended with the Hymns of many names which Mr. Gregory thought was the clause at the end of the Lords Prayer and he doth but guess it some other The Lords Prayer cometh not within our question be it a Form or not a Form 25. Whatsoever he saith à p. 160. ad p. 164. is rather ad pompam then ad pugnam it all referreth to the use of Forms of Prayers in the Jewish Church To it all I shall only add 2 things 1. It is very improbable and will appear so to every considerate Christian that we should have in Scripture a full account of the Jewish Church from its Cradle to its Tomb and so particular an Account of the way of Worship which God established amongst them from which they might not vary and they should have Forms of Prayers established for ordinary use and the Scripture not mention any thing of them we read in Scripture of other Books they had some of which are perished some preserved for our Instruction and Guidance We read of the Book of the Law many times but never of their Common Prayer Book nor of any person that used the 18 Prayers We read Nehemiah 8. That in a solemn day of Worship the whole Congregation met and called to Ezra for the Book of the Law he brings it they read in it from the Morning to Mid-day v. 1 2. After this we read of many Priests and Levites who read in the Book of the Law distinctly and gave the People the sense of it and made them to understand the reading thereof but we read not a word of their Book of Prayers either there or in any other part of Scripture We read in Luke that when our Saviour came into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day they brought him the Book of the Prophet Isaiah he read in it and preached out of it but neither there do we read of the Book of 18 Prayers brought forth I must confess that in ordinary cases it is not a good Argument That this or that thing was not in being or in use because there is no Sacred Record of the being or use of it But certainly concerning Gods Worship amongst the Jews it is a good Argument to prove there was no such thing established in their Worship because in the Holy Scriptures where we have the full story of that Church a full account of their Worship either by Moses or David so many charges to them not to add thereto nor to diminish there-from there is not any mention of a Book of publick Prayers which God directed for that Church we read only of a blessing which looketh like a Form tho some have been of another mind of Gods own directing tho we often read of the Book of the Law called for brought read in and often read of the Servants of God Praying publickly yet not the least mention is made of a Book or Forms by which they prayed Admit they had had Forms if God had prescribed them it had been out of our question who will freely allow God to prescribe his own Homage and Worship but to think that any of the Jews or the whole Sanhedrim had Authoriâ—y to make any for universal use when God gave such punctual directions both to Moses for the Service of the Taberncale and all things therein and to David for the Service of the Temple that it is expresly said Exod. 39.42 3. That the very structure of the Tabernacle was according to all that the Lord commanded Moses and Deut. 4.2 there is so express a command You shall not add to the word which I command you nor shall you diminish from it which is repeated Deut. 12.32 and David saith 1 Chron. 28.11 12 13 19. All this the Lord made me to understand in Writing by his hand upon me v. 12. the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit When we read of Nadab and Abihu being struck dead Levit. 10. for but using ordinary fire in a Sacrifice and of Vzzah being struck dead for but touching the Ark when it shook in the New Cart it being Gods prescript that that Family of the Levites should carry the Ark on their shoulders Num. 4.15 7 9. I say after all this for any to go about to prove that the Jews in their Worship had Forms of Prayer not prescribed of God which their Ministers were bound to use and of which is no mention in Scripture is an undertaking fit for none but those who think they can prove Quidlibet e quolibet nor to be believed by any but such as are very credulous Our Vindicator saith their very Sacrifices were Rites of Supplications and as to them they were limited and used no such Variety Rites of Supplication and Supplications are two things and these Rites were limited by God not by the Sanhedrim I hope nor were they without some variety in them For his instance 2 Chron. 29.30 It is said They praised God with the Words of David and Asaph the Seer Asaph was a Prophet David told us he ordered nothing but by the Spirit of God what he understood by the hand of the Lord in writing upon him For Joel 2.17 which he quoteth surely Joel was divinely inspired nor is that Prayer surely of length enough for a whole Office nor was it more then a general direction for matter to be inlarged in words as the Jewish Minister thought fit For what Dr. Lightfoot Dr. Outram Scaliger Buxtorf Ainsworth tell us they have had their Intilligence from the Rabbies the eldest of which of whom we have any Record was saith Alstedius after the world was 3380 years old The Hierusalem Talmud was finished by R. Jochanan 250 years after Christ the Babilonian Talmud not till 500. The most of the Writings of their Rabbins saith Alsted appeared not to the World till 1000 years after Christ Now how competent Witnesses these are whose Books also are as full of Fables as leaves of the practice of the Jewish Church before Christ or in its incorrupt state let any judge who are men of sense 2. But admit it were a thing capable of proof that the Jews in their incorrupt times and that by Gods command ordinarily used Forms of Prayer in their Worship and that such as were neither prescribed by God nor any Prophet or Penman of Holy Writ or that in and about and since Christs time they have used such Forms of Prayer ought this to guide the Practice of the Christian Church Or will it prove that the same thing is lawful in the Christian Church I
shunned my Company and I never yet wanted enough so far as to tempt me to be an Intruder upon any How little I was concerned in any Publick Affairs will appear from this That if I remember right from 1646 when I entred the Ministry till 1653 I never but once saw London nor I think twice more betwixt that and 1659. I much kept home and could hardly be a month from my People but my Conscience was ready to ask me in the words of Eliab With whom hast thou left those few sheep in thy trust II. Upon the coming out of the Act of Uniformity I was concerned with Two thousand Ministers more to examine whether no more were by it required of me than I might without sinning against God do I saw so many things made necessary to the keeping of my station that I suspected what I found and more too viz. That it was by some contrived to throw out of the Publick Ministry a sort of men and all of them who were possessed of my Principles in Doctrine and though it would not do as to all yet it did as to a very great part even all those who though they believed the same things with many that did conform in points of Doctrine yet had some stricter Notions as to Worship I was afterwards the more confirmed in this from a Reverend Minister now I doubt not but with God who lived and dyed a Conformist who told me that in discourse with a Brother of his a Member in that Parliament and lamenting to him the Turning out of so many Ministers and putting so many terms upon Ministers as they could not but know would Turn out the greater part of Ministers so and so principled as to Doctrine c. He told him It was their design to do it It is very like he did not speak the Sense of the House of Commons of which he was a Member but of many he doubtless did That for those of Puritan Principles as they call'd them Jehu might slay such as escaped the Sword of Hazael and Elisha those that did escape the Sword of Jehu But when I came more narrowly to look into the Things required I discoursed with Divines and those who were most Learned of the Episcopal Persuasion I offered my Arguments heard their Answers I read the generality of Books wrote on all sides but upon the whole judged that oâ— eight or nine things required I could not judge three or not above three in any degree lawful I resolved to lay down my Publick Ministry but being set apart to the Ministry having solemmly promised not to take away my hand from that Plough I could not then think my self discharged from itâ— further than in Publick Temples places in Superiors disposal Amongst other things I was then fully possest of the Unlawfulness of performing Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others Three or four of those Arguments truly I think I may say all but one of them were my Arguments 1662. and then freely discoursed with divers of my own Brethren and several Learned men some of whom are dead some yet alive at this time and the Heads of them by me were drawn up in writing and the most considerable Inlargements as to the proof of them From that time till 1673 they lay by me some little before that all knew at what a rude rare all Nonconformists were treated in several Books as the veriest Dunces in the world men that opposed themselves to Authority meerly out of Stubbornness judging the things lawful being able to give no Reasons for their Nonconformity Men fit for Gallies Prisons c. This made me review what I had Eleven Years before drawn up for my own private use with some Additions and particularly Answers to some Arguments which in that time I had met with and Dr. Falkner's Book coming at that time out I could not baulk what he had said Whosoever readeth what I wrote will be my Compurgator that I did not give any a Presumption that I thought my Cause weak by any uncivil treating of the Doctor I saw he was a man of some Learning that he had read many Authors nor had I ever heard an ill word of him as to Sobriety of Life or Warping in Doctrine I treated him with that Civility which I thought became me meerly answering his pretended Reason and Arguments I did indeed see that the making good the Notion I was fully possess'd of would make any further answer to his Libertas Ecclesiastica needless and am very much for the Rule of Frustra fit per plura c. III. But though I quickly concluded this sinful to me to perform my Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others yet I never intended to trouble others with my Notion till I was challenged to it by the worlds being told We had nothing to say for our selves I never that I remember preached it in one Sermon I never affirmed it sinful for People to join with others that use Forms though by the way I do not think that People in the worship of God may lawfully do whatsoever they judge just lawful if they be commanded to do it I was a little tender my self as to Total Separation This hath made me from the Year 1662 not decline hearing Ministers that used it nor as occasion offer'd receiving the Sacrament with sober Ministers and a sober People though the Minister used the Liturgy in doing of it although withal neither have I refused to hear others and receive it with them too as I had occasion nor I think shall I be deter'd from it by the Scare-crow-word Separation I fear not separating from any with whom I am but morally persuaded by Arguments which I cannot answer that I cannot join without separating from the Will of God and further I will separate from no Christians in the world This Reader is known to as many as know me by any ocular observation of my Converse IV. Further than this my Nature disposeth me to such a Benignity as I am Enemy to none but such as are open Enemies to the Glory of God or led by their Lusts and Passions to Acts disturbing Humane Societies Upon the first account I always thought Atheists open Blasphemers professed publick Idolaters were to be punished by the Judge with the severest punishments Profane Swearers and Cursers and Violation of the Sabbath with proportionable punishments and those who detected such did a good action Yet as to these I never thought an Inquisition might be set up nor an Oath Ex Officio administred to make them to accuse themselves Nor as to Idolatry did I ever think that the Magistrate ought to punish any thing but Open Profession of it or Seduction to it Upon which account until this late Plot convinced me that nothing would serve the Papists less than the whole Government and that to get it they thought Assassinations Poysoning Lying For swearing any thing lawful
upon that single Term tho many of them indure hardship enough But this is a trick used to perswade our Rulers that that is a point of difference betwixt very few Dissenters and them whereas they know the contrary and as to our Brethren of the Congregational Perswasion and the Anabaptists they cannot but know that there is not a man of them judgeth Forms of Prayer generally used or imposed lawful and I dare assure him that of the Presbyterians there is not one of forty so judgeth them 7. But I am more concerned to inquire whether there be nothing in my Book of any great wâ—ight c. I have observed in Shoâ—s that the judgment of the Weight of Wares hath much depended upon the Scales and Weights used and the hand of him that pretends to set the Ballance even an Vnrighâ—â—â—â—â—â—s Thumb and Finger often makes a Commodity appear light which hath weight enough I must therefore crave leave to examine the Scales and Weights by which our Vindicator hath taken his Measures and see whether some unlucky Thumb and Finger of Prejudice or Passion hath not caused my Ware to be prenounced so l ght and intreat my Reader to weigh it over again in the Ballance of the Sanctuary with the Sealed Weights of Scripture and Right Reason and then to pass a deliberate Judgment and shall onely tell our Vindicator that it was no good Logick to put the ergo before the Premises he should first have shewed the Weakness and Lightness of them and have left these expressions for his Conclusion others and those learned Men are not all of his mind and because he is so confident upon me let it rest to justify their Weight and further to prove that he hath been so far from proving any Antiquity for any general use or Impositions of Forms of Prayers to be used by all Ministers in their publick Ministrations for 600 years after Christ that it is a thing not proveable and which no wise and learned man can undertakeÌ„ the proof of only Aliquid dicendum in nihil dicant and what is wanting in just matter must be made up with many and big words 8. He saith right That the design of his former Book is made void by my undertaking if what I say be true which I very well knew Es frustra fit perplura c. be the particular Forms used in our Church as good as they will it is nothing to us who would never have entred the Ministry if we had not thought we had and been judged by those who set us apart to the work to have had some ability to Pray as well as Preach and having so judg it Sinful not to perform our Ministerial Acts in the use of that gift 9. The Author of the Reasonable Account c. did not set his name not desiring that his Arguments should derive any Repute or Disrepute from him What matters it whether the Author be a wise Man or a Fool the question is What his Arguments in the Case are Saepe etiam tolitor est opportuno locutor But he chargeth me deeply when he says p. 3. That it is observable that when I write concerning the Ancient Practice of the Church after the Apostles times or any thing written in those days it is generally done so loosely and somtimes with such wonderful extravagancy as may surprize an intelligent Reader with some kind of Admiration Says he so Wherein He will give but one instance which he saith is in my 68 69 pages speaking of the Original of Liturgies I say We do believe that Gregory the Great under the Protection of Charles the Great was the Father of all those that dwell in these Tents and that 800 or a 1000 years after Christ My words in that place are these To bring this point to an Issue there was a Book published 1662 called A sober and temperate Discourse concerning the Interest of words in Prayer The Reader may there at large see what we judg concerning the Original of Liturgies when our Reverend Brother or any for him shall have given a strict Reply to the 3. and 4. Chapters in that Book we shall think they have more to say for their Antiquity then we have yet seen In the mean time we do believe that Gregory the Great usually said to be the worst of all Popes that went before him under the Protection of Charles the Great was the Father of all those who dwell in these Tents and that 800 or 1000 years after Christ He leaves out the first part and the reference to the other Book The truth is it was too Elliptically expressed towards a Person that sought an occasion to Carp and Reflect which that our Vindicator did too much appears from his taking notice of what was p. 68 69. of a book which had not above 180. pages in it or thereabouts In the 4 p. of his Answer and then again in p. 138. of his Answer in both which places he makes sport with it at such a rate as were unpardonable but that it was just about Prevarication time at Cambridge and indeed it was a thing fitter to make sport for boys then men who understand any thing of Sense and have any judgment 10. He comes upon it with a Firstly Secondly Thirdly then makes Application suitably which he pursueth p. 138. and amplifies with a Rabbinical Story and shuts up his Reflection with a very pretty Jest His words are these To speak of Gregory the great 800 or 1000 years after Christ is far enough from truth when he dyed about the year 1604 and Secondly that Gregory the great should be under the Protection of Charles the great is impossible when he was dead about 200 years before Charles the great began his Reign And 3ly It is altogether as inaccountable that Liturgies had their Original either in the time of Gregory or Charles the great when they were in use many 100 years before them both Quod est demonstrandum Then he comes to Application This mistake concerning these Persons whose Names are so famous in History that a Man of ordinary reading could not be unacquainted with them is as if any person should presume to give account of the Church of the Israelites and should assert that the offering of Sacrifices under the Mosaicai Law had its beginning in the days of Eli the Priest in the Reign of K. Jehosophat 600 or 800 years after the Israelites came out of Egypt This is a great piece of ignorance and error That 's the first use Surely it is a strange confidence for any person to vent such things and to write positively what he no better understandeth The Author therefore of the Reasonable Account is an ignorant confident person That is the 2d use p. 138. Therefore we must not reasonably expect any accuracy in the right computation of the time of the birth and first production of Liturgies from him who talks so loosly and falsly about the Age in
way of varying in the use of their own Abilities then in well considered and digested Forms is as much as to affirm that the varied Expressions of Men at every particular time are more propper pithy and expressive and full then the best composed Prayer that is at any time made and reviewed with the greatest consider and care for so it may he expected that a publikly established Form is This is now a fine flourish and harangue of words but that is all for if he meaneth it concerning our own Liturgy what might have been expected I will not say but if our Author inquireth whether any one part of it were so much as once read over by the House of Commons and being now part of an Act many think it should have been by the Law of England all read over thrice and when it was read over in the House of Lords what a mistake was found in it by their Lordships will see no reason to presume that it was by our Ecclesiastical Superiours who yet without a Parliament are not our Superiours in the point of Legal Establishments reviewed with the greatest Care and Consideration 2. If it were so surely the Nonconfor nists-Adversaries would not all this time have only contended that there were no Phrases in it but might Lawfully be used but they would have pleaded That there could no better Forms be composed or used which I do not know that any of them hath gone about to demonstrate What in a Legal Establishment is not once reviewed by one part of the Legislative power in any place cannot certainly be said to be reviewed with the greatest Consideration and Care tho possibly it might be by some said to be reviewed with a sufficient Consideration as to which I say nothing but cannot allow Superlatives in the case 3. This very Argument will conclude for Forms of Preaching every whit as much as for Forms of Prayer But I shall give a strict Answer to it 27. In the Sacred Worship of God that is best which God hath prescribed and directed In the cleansing of the Leper Levit. 14. the poor mans Two Turtle Doves or two young Pidgeons such as he was able to get v. 22. was though of far less intrinsick value yet every whit as good as the Rich Mans Lamb mentioned v. 12 13 c. and therefore when the Question is What is the Will of God in the case all these discourses which is best or worst in Humane Eyes or according to Humane valuations are woful Impertinencies That is best which it is the Will of God we should use or do Nor is Superiours Establishment any evidence in which my Soul ought to rest without further enquiry to guide my Practice who am to search the Scriptures after St. Paul hath preached Acts 17. That what is Established is the Will of God in the Case if it were true instead of proving all things that I might hold fast that which is good I should prove nothing but presume it best because Superiors have established it This is the very thing that Eccius the Popish Lawyer replied to Luther at the Diet of Worms Ann. 1621. Ne que tuum est ea quae Conciliorum authoritate sunt olim definita rursus in quaestionem aut dubium vocare Sleidan de Statu Religionis c. l. 5. What is the English of that but this That is best which your Superiours have determined and how far such a Notion is improveable to the ruin of all true Religion appears by the Councel to which Eccius related which consisted of as vile a pack of Men as ever met in Council For it was the Council of Constance which determined the Pope above all Councils contrary to the Council at Basil just before and in conformity to the Factious Council of Pisa Assembled by Julius 2. to confront another Council sitting it was that Council of Constance I mean that burnt John Huss and Hierome of Prague who had both the Popes and Emperours security for safe coming and returning and established another Cursed Doctrine of Popery That Faith is not to be kept with Hereticks In this case before us the difference betwixt us and our Adversaries for I see I must call Brethren no more lies here We say That is best in the Worship of God which appeareth to be the Will of God and what as to our own practice so appeareth unto us is best unto us Our Adversaries say That is best which hath a Legal Establishment and as to your Practice ought to be presumed best tho you do judge the quite contrary from Arguments which appear to you very probable and you cannot answer So in short our contest is for no less then the Foundation of the Reformed Religion But it may be this Harangue of our Answerer did not come in because he thought it pertinent but to give him an opportunity to lash him whom he had to deal with which is the next thing he attempts but never toucheth him He goes on And he who talketh of this our Church That if all her Ministers cannot constantly in their daily Prayers equal or outdo the perfection or exactness of a well considered Form for this must be his Sense if he speaketh to any purpose that this may be spoken to the shame of the Church of God in England These raw and extravagant speeches will be to the shame of those that utter them so far as they will be ashamed of uncharitable and reproachful calumnies against the Church of God and of speaking against all Sense and Reason When I read this I wondered who he meant till I saw in the Margent the Book quoted which he pretends to answer p. 157. there I find in answer to the Vindicators arguing the Necessity of Liturgyes That needful and comprehensive Petitions for all Common and Ordinary Spiritual and outward wants of our selves and others with fit Thanksgivings may not in the publick Supplications of the Church be omitted which considering men as they are can no other way be so well or at all assured That the Author of that Book had said Let it be spoken to the shame of the Church of God in England and it shall be for a Lamentation in it if in a Church whose Territories are so large there cannot be found persons enough sufficient without others prescriptions to them to put up needful comprehensive Petitions not only for common and ordinary but for the Emergent and Extraordinary Spiritual and outward wants of any persons with fit thanksgivings What makes the man in such a passion for this Here is not a wotd of all Ministers being able to equal and out do the Perfection and Exactness of a well considered Form but this he saith must be his sense or he speaks to no purpose E Cathedra dictum 1. But in cool blood when men are least subject to let their tongue outrun their reason was the Author bound to say more in his Answer then his Objector
this to be the sense of Amesius But it should have been observed by our Author That the Walachrians onely declared their Agreement with them in that Question which was by them propounded then he repeateth the Question which I have translated Verbatim Doth our Vindicator call this an Answer or a Vindication He told us the Walachrian Classis in Zealand do in like manner declare publick Forms to be lawful and profitable for the direction of the attention of the Auditors and preserving Uniformity Libertas Eccles p. 121. to prove this he quotes Consid Cap. 7. Qu. 2. I look that Chap. that Qu. I tell him That the Walachrian begin their Answer to that Q. with saying They easily agreed to what Dr. Ames had said upon this Question which is the Question before stared the Question quoted in Libertas Ecclesiastica Now faith he I should have considered that they declared their Agreement with D. Ames in that Question by them proposed Very good and that Question proposed is the very Question Libertas Ecclesiastica referred me to Is not this enough But he tells us it is another Question Whether Praying by Publick Forms be the most useful way of performing that Service What have I to do with another Question I was only to speak to the Question quoted and this is that Question I am sure Neither is there any other Question in all those Considerations stated about Forms of Prayer Besides our Question is about Lawfulness for all Ministers to use them Dr. Ames with whom the Walachrians profess to agree in this Question saith expresly Cas Consc 14. c. 17. qu. 4. None ought to acquiesce in Praying by Forms Liberâ—as Eccles p. 121. but to labour for an ability that he may Pray without this help And gives four reasons for it The first is That while a prescribed form doth not follow our affections Reasonable Account p. 46 47. but plainly lead them he who so prayeth doth that which is of the Nature of Prayer less perfectly Now with this man as to the Question before translated the Walachrians who spoke to no other Question about Prayer in all their Books Vindication p. 106. profess they readily agree Judge good Reader who hath dealt less faithfully with thee I or the Vindicator look but the Books set in the Margent 6. But he tells us They could not agree with those of Leyden and Dr. Ames too Synopsis pur Theol. Disput 36. Sect. 33. They plainly say they do agree with them both Let us see that The words of the Leyden Professors in the place cited are these There is a Question usually made so it is no novel Question whether it be lawful to use Forms of Prayer publickly or privately We say If they be pronounced with due attention of Mind mark pronounced and with due attention they are not only lawful but very profitable 1. Because every Christian hath not an Ability and the attention of the People in great Meetings is not a little helped by usual Forms Upon which account God himself directed the Priests a Form of Blessing under the Old Testament Num. 6.24 c. And Christ upon the Cross is observed to use that Form of Deprecation which David who was a type of him used Matth. 27.46 and the Disciples of Christ Luk. 11.2 asked Christ to teach them to Pray as John taught his Disciples To whom Christ answered When you Pray say Our Father c. from which Circumstances of the Words it is manifest that this Prayer of Christ was not only a Rule to Pray by but also a Form of Prayer as all the Ancient Church thought unquestionable Sect. 34. But in the mean time we do confess That it is profitable yea almost necessary that all grown Believers and especially the Pastors of Churches should stir up in themselves the Gift of Praying publickly without praevious Forms that as occasion seâ—veth and necessities renew they may pray and give thanks as we read that Holy Men Prophets and Apostles did often do both in the Old and New Testament which will not be difficult for them if they observe the Method of Prayer and be frequently exercised in it 7. This is all which those learned Professors say Now I must profess I see no reason for what our Vindicator saith That the Walachrians could not agree with Dr. Ames and the Leyden Professors too one thing is Dr. Ames is put first Whether they also agreed with the Leyden Professors is not much material let those wordâ— be blotted out I have enough to make me understand their Sense upon the Question in their telling me They readily agree with Dr. Ames in this Controversie If it be not possible they should agree with the Leyden Professors too then their Testimony against us signifies nothing for they contradicted themselves and Dr. Ames did not agree with those of Leyden but I do not think so It may be our Answerers mistake only 8. Nothing can be certainly concluded in the cause but I think I shall offer what any unbiast Reader shall judge very probable in the Cause All Divines that will speak clearly and distinctly in this Cause must distinguish betwixt such as are more imperfect and low in Knowledge and Gifts and such as are more grown and perfect So that Acute Casuist Dr. Ames distinguisheth and certainly so do the Leyden Professors and it is apparent from their words 2. They like Divines accordingly deliver their minds in two Theses The one which is the 33 relating only to Christians and Ministers in a more Imperfect State while they have not the Gift of Prayer As to these they determine Forms of Prayer both lawful and necessary especially where such Ministers in a low state of the Church have great Congregations for there their hearers are more advantaged doubtless by a Form then they would be by the use of such Persons own Abilities for they are not two Sentences but one because every Christian that is to Minister hath not an Ability and in such cases the hearers are more advantaged by Forms and the Person ministring doth well for tho he offereth a Female he hath no Male in his flock for of all the instances they give there is not one other Such was the state of all the Ministers of the Jews of all the Disciples of John and of Christ his own Disciples before the days of Pentecost prophecyed of under the Old Testament by the Prophet Joel when God would pour out his Spirit on all Flesh Acts 2.17 Joel 2.28 that is imperfect comparatively with what it was after the Effusion of the Spirit Upon this Account Christ saith Tho to that day there had not appeared Born of Women one greater then John Baptist yet the least in the Kingdom of God should be greater then he greater as to Spiritual Gifts Knowledge Vtterance able to speak greater things then he could And the Promises are to Christs Disciples for doing greater things not then Christ could
judge not For the Jews had by Gods prescription a Worldly Sanctuary and as some Typical so many Carnal Ordinances as the Apostle speaks which are to continue but till the time of Reformation Musick which was one of the things directed by David by the Spirit of God upon him to be used by the Jewish Church was no Typical Ordinance but it was a Carnal Ordinance upon which the primitive Church disused it retaining singing only as Justin Martyr tells us Quaest Resp 107. where he calleth it a Service 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Children with allusion to the Apostle who compareth the state of that Church to the state of Children under age therefore the Gospel Church threw it out but he tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plain singing was not so and it was therefore retained besides it was justified by our Saviour commanded by the Apostle c. In that very Chap. Joel 2. where at the 17. v. Our Vindicator thinks he hath found a Collect to be used in the Jewish Worship he might have also found a Promise at v. 28. relating to the days of Pentecost as appears by Acts. 2.17 I will power out my Spirit on all flesh and this Spirit Zech. 12.10 is a Spirit of Supplication a Spirit of Adoption teaching us to cry Abba Father and because we know not what to pray for helping our Infirmities with strong cries and groans which cannot be uttered Rom. 8. It is therefore very ill arguing to argue Divine Institutions under the Gospel and the modes or means of them from the Institutions under the Law But far worse to argue not from the Institutions of God but the Traditions and Practices of Men in the Jewish Church Are we then ignorant how severely Christ taxed the Traditions of that Church in his time Telling them they had by them made the Law of God of no effect For which tho our Saviour did not wholly desert their Church but was often with them heartily joyning with them in his Fathers Institutions yet he doubtless never approved nor joyned with them in such Traditions as he had so declared against 26. Our Vindicator in the close of this Section hath a passage out of Melancthon from whence he would make us believe that Melancthon judged that Forms of Prayer were always used and commanded in the Church I shall the more diligently examine this to learn my Reader not over much to trust the Vindicator without looking himself into the Authors he citeth and because it hath had so contrary an influence on me That whereas before I was something doubtful whether the Saxon Churches since the Reformation had not an universally imposed Liturgy knowing that Luther did at the beginning reform a Missal for them upon reading the common place of Melancthon from whence our Vindicator takes his quotation I begin to be of another mind and to think that even those Churches tho of all other most imperfectly Reformed had no other then a Book of Prayers composed and left at liberty The place he quoteth is in Melancthons common place De Precatione The words of our Vindicator are these And upon a view of what I have now produced in this Section the Reader may see reason to believe the truth of what was asserted by Melancthon concerning Forms of Prayer In loc Theol. de Precat Ecclesia semper eas proposuit publice private in eas exerceri jubet The Church of God hath always proposed them and thought them fit to be used both publickly and privately 27. Melancthon was a great Light and one of the first threes in the Reformation of Germany from Popery of the perswasion of Luther and the Saxon Divines who differed much both from the Suitzerland Churches and the five Imperial Cities and many others both as to the indifferency of Rites and Ceremonies which had been used in Popery and in the great point of the True Corporeal presence of Christ in the Lords Supper This is manifest in the whole History of those times wrote by Scultetus Hospinian and Sleidan He published two Editions of short Com. Places the one 1535 which he dedicated to Hen. VIII King of England the other largely printed 1543. In both which is a common place about Prayer but in the first no such passage as our Vindicator quoteth In the latter I find something like it p. 558. In these words Sed quia difficilis est Attentio in recitatione ideo ignavi fugiunt recitationes At Ecclesia semper eas proposuit et publice et privatim eas exercere jubet Ideo Psalmitraditi sunt summo concilio compositi Christus ipse formam precandi proponit ac nominatim inquit Luc. 11. Cum Oratis Dicite verba et Recitationem certam prescribit ut antea praescripserat Johannes Teneamus Ergo et recitemus formam Divino consilio traditam In English But because in recitation attention is difficult therefore lazy persons decline Recitations but the Church always proposed them and commanded them to be used both in publick and private The Psalms were therefore composed with the greatest wisdome and Christ himself proposeth a Form of Prayer and particularly saith Lu. 11. When you pray say He both prescribeth words and a certain Recital as before John had done Let us hold and recite that Form which our Lord hath given us Then he largely expounds the Lords Prayer 28. It is manifest that Melancthon here speaketh not one word of such Forms of Prayer as are within our question which are Forms composed and prescribed by other Men not divinely inspired or commissionated by God to order things in his Worship He neither here nor that I can find in any part of this common place mentions any but the Lords Prayer the Psalms of David or some other parts of Holy Writ the use of which we most freely allow even to the best of Ministers tho it may be we have no such opinion of the necessity of the use of the same words and syllables as some others have had or have 29. Neither doth he by Recitations which he saith the Church always commanded mean Forms of Prayer as our Author suggesteth it is a most unaccountable thing why lazy persons should as he saith decline Forms But the thing he is speaking of is Vocal Prayer in opposition to the Popish Practices of Priests in Publick Worship Muttering Prayers in secreto making the people believe that whether they heard what was said or no joyned in one Petition or no yet they were the Prayers of the Church and upon that account heard for them This is it he opposeth and saith the contrary was always ordered and commanded by the Church That Christ ordered it otherwise he bids them in Praying say not mutter to themselves only and that the Psalms were made to be sang out not mumbled over in secreto and this is all can be made of that Paragraph 30. From the whole method and structure and matter of