abroad against the Persons and Prayers of the Ministery of England that we have been so negligent in asserting the frequent use of Our Lords Prayer of which the most are guilty or contrary to their former practice which it is hoped they performed in Faith have wholly abandoned the use of it as too many and what is worst of all that any Disciple after Confession of its excellency and crying Hosanna to it should almost in the same breath denounce a crucifigite that with its blessed Maker it might be betrayed with a kiss When an Enemy when the Sea invadeth our Land and threatneth destruction we all joyn as one man to make up the breaches but when our Religion our Zion is assaulted by more Enemies then ever when her Turrets and Battlements are broken down no man layeth it to heart This is Zion whom no man seeketh after was her Motto of old Ier. 30. 17. How secure and negligent have we been for the most part disserviceable and injurious to the Cause of Christ and his Church against the unchristian reasonings and unreasonable practices of such men who would drive us from our last and best refuge Quid enim nisi vota for what can Christians better confide in then in their Prayers and what Prayer is like to be more safe and effectual then this I shall expose my self not animated with the expectation of success and victory being on the defensive part but to discharge my duty to shew my readiness in the cause of Christ and to strengthen the feeble knees and lift up the hands that hang down lest that which is lame be turned out of the way And yet seeing that Magna est veritas praevalebit truth is great and will prevail though the Advocate that pleadeth for it be never so weak and seeing that no truth hath more express foundation in Scripture or for that cause hath had more universal practice in the Church I despair not but the eyes of those that are not wilfully blind may be opened at least the mouths of such as are not desperately wicked may be stopped from reproching the footsteps of Gods anointing in decrying rhe pious use of this most excellent Prayer by that which through the blessing of God shall be said on its behalfe in this ensuing Exercitation Which that it may not swell with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or digression I shal insert a few things by way of Introduction against the opinion of such as oppose this Prayer under the notion of being a form as 1. that though som forms may justly be dislik'd yet the ground of disliking them because they are forms is very unjust forasmuch as God himself prescribed divers forms which were accordingly practised by the Jewish Church under the Law and our Saviour and the Christian Church after his Example have in all ages done the like under the Gospel Most unhappy therefore are they who heap such disrespect on that most Heavenly Prayer delivered and inculcated by our Saviour once and again to his Disciples meerely on the account of its being a form in as much as they seem to fight against God and proclaim that to be common and unclean which God and our Saviour have Sanctified by their reiterated injunction and practice And with what greater pompe the Friends of the English Liturgy could have solemnized its funerals then the enemies of it have done in causing this sacred form to accompany it to its grave no Master of Ceremonies could well have contrived In condemning this they have as much as in them lay justified that and given its friends some hope there being so much Divinity in the Grave with it that one day it may have a refined resurrection But at such a Funerall as this the Church cannot but mourn in the words of old Jacob Ioseph is not and Simeon is not and will ye take Benjamin away all these things are against me But that in the Old Testament divers forms were prescribed by God and used by the Jewes sundry instances will evince That of Alsteed shall lead the Chorus Etsi in S S. nihil tradatur de formula precum Although nothing be recorded in Scripture concerning a form of Prayer used by the Fathers before the floud for that which the Jewes say of certain Psalmes then used is uncertain yet sure it is that they had a set form of Prayer because they had a set form of worshipping God i. e. certain Rites Ceremonies and Sacrifices for the worship of God without Prayer is imperfect and God was then invocated To this that they had a certain sort of Books wherein 't is likly such forms were recorded But after the floud before the promulgation of the Law there were extant the devout Prayers of Abraham Jacob and Moses Moreover when God delivered the Law of the Nazarites he injoyned Aaron and his Sons a form of Prayer which others afterward did imitate Thus far Alsteed And I find his first conjecture to be approved by many learned men viz. that Sacrifice was alway attended with solemn invocation which appeareth from Gen. 12. 8. Abraham built an Altar and called upon the Name of the Lord and from Psalm 116. verse 13 17. I will take the cup of salvation and will call upon the Name of the Lord. I will offer to thee the sacrifice of Thankesgiving and will call upon the name of the Lord. Sigonius saith that from the time of their settlement in Canaan the Jewes had In omnibus urbibus loca quaedam destinata precibus solennibus certain places set apart in every City for solemne Prayers so that Prayers it seemeth were more usual then Sacrifice and thus Bertram Conveniebat populus ad Synagogas extra Jerusalem ad preces solennes the people met in certain Synagogues without Jerusalem for solemne Prayer but now as Dr. Lightfoot noteth they are content as appeareth in their common-prayer-Common-Prayer-book and they pray God to be so too with Prayers without Sacrifices The Jewes have a form of Prayer recorded which they say was used by Noah how truly I will not contend but these following instances of prescribed forms so used are undoubtedly true as the blessing injoyned Aaron and his sonnes was constantly pronounced and continued untill the dayes of Simeon the Just who imbraced Christ in his armes The Song of Moses Exod. 15. 1. was used on all occasions of Thanksgiving by that Church The form injoyned at the end of tithing on the third year Paulus Fagius giveth us the form of Prayer used by Aaron over the Scape-goat Quae forma haec fuit which form was this O Lord thy people the children of Israel have sinned they have done wickedly they have grievously transgressed against thee I beseech thee now O Lord forgive their sinnes iniquities and transgressions wherein thy people the children of Israel have sinned and done wickedly and transgressed against thee And another form when the bullock
was offered v. 27. And he giveth a third form on ch 8. and addeth 〈◊〉 simile est Christum quibusdam quae in his precibus continentur usum fuisse It is likely that Christ made use of some things in these prayers but of this hereafter Hoernebeck repeating the seven precepts of Noah viz. 1. For avoyding Idolatry 2. Not cursing of God 3. Not shedding of blood 4. Not discovering of nakedness or fornication 5. Of theft and rapine 6. Of Judgement 7. Of not eating any part of a living creature all which the Jewes say were given by Noah and so continued till Abraham who received a precept for circumcision and appointed Morning-prayer Isaac consecrated Tithes and added another prayer to be said before day Jacob added another precept De non comedendo nervo oblivioso of not eating the nerve of forgetfulness and prayers for the Evening and at length by Moses was the Law consummate Mr. Herbert Thornedike proves the use of forms from 1 Chron. 23. 30. where the Levites were to bless and praise the God of Israel using some Psalmes of David particularly those Psalmes of Degrees from Psalm 121. to Psalm 135. which being ended they pronounced the blessing appointed in the Law And indeed the Titles of those Psalmes directed for the Masters of Musick do intimate that they were to be used in the service of the Temple and learned men also assure us they were constantly so used many of Davids Psalmes were used as the Jewish Liturgy on all occasions Psalm 104 105 106 107. were of frequent use Psalm 92. was appointed for the Sabbath Psalm 118. for Festivals Psalm 102. for the afflicted Saint Hierome observes that four of them are expresly called Prayers Mr. Perkins saith that most of them are so Psalm 90. is called A Prayer of Moses the man of God which because Scripture saith it we ought to believe it was so Hezekiah we read commanded the Levites to praise God in the words of David and Asaph and that he had a form of thanksgiving which he used all the dayes of his life is very probable from Isa. 38. 20. for it was appointed for the House of the Lord. Calvin saith Consilium Spiritus Sancti meo judicio fuit ordinariam precandi formam Ecclesiae tradere cujus usum ex verbis fuisse colligimus quoties discrimen aliquod instabat It was the counsel of the Spirit of God to give his Church an ordinary form of Prayer which was used in words as oft as any danger approched In a Samaritan Chronicle which the renowned Archbishop of Armagh procured from the Library of the admirably learned Joseph Scaliger is another testimony of the Antiquity of forms Postea mortuus est Adrianus c. After this died Adrian in whose time the high Priest took away that most excellent booke that was in their hands ever since the calm and peaceable times which contained those Songs and Prayers which were ever used before the Sacrifices for before every several sacrifice they had their several songs still used in those times of peace All which accurately written were transmitted to the subsequent generations from the time of the Legate Moses unto this day by the Ministery of the high Priest this book he the high Priest took away then which no History besides the Pentateuch of Moses was found more ancient These memorials of forms of publick and prescribed Prayer before the time of Ezra may suffice here the studious Reader may observe many more in the Rabbines works and from them in Scaliger Selden Fagius Buxtorfe c. From the time of Ezra until Christs it is yet more evident that publick forms were used Mr. Selden saith that certain forms of Prayer were to be used dayly by every one by Law or received custome which were composed by Ezra and his house or consistory Capel us relateth the same and that Ezra and his house the great Synagogue appointed eighteen forms of Benedictions Rabbi Tanchum saith The wise men made these eighteen Prayers for so many bones in the back of a man which are to be bowed at the rehearsal of them because David saith All my bones shall praise thee which Benedictions were to be pronounced in words already conceived And that the number of their Prayers was according to the number of their Sacrifices their morning Prayer their mincha minor and major i. the lesser and greater oblation their Evening Prayer their additionary Prayer and the concluding Prayer and he addeth The Prayer for which Peter and John Acts 3. 1. went into the Temple was the mincha minor which answered to the Evening-sacrifice of the Law and the hour according to our account was three of the clock in the afternoon Selden addeth that the Prayers prescribed by Ezra were to be learned by every man that so the prayers of the unskilfull might be as perfect as of the eloquent man that every act of praying was begun with O Lord open thou our lips c. and concluded with Into thy hands I commit my spirit The learned Scaliger saith Rara illis benedictio erat sine his verbis solennibus Benedictus es Domine Deus noster c. There was seldome a blessing without these words Blessed art thou O Lord God King of Ages who hast sanctified us and hast given commandment about these and these things Joseph Albo Ikkar saith The men of the great Synagogue attributed the work of the Resurrection only to the power of God in this form Tu potens in seculum Domine c. Thou O Lord art Almighty for ever thou restorest the dead to life and art of great power to save A little before the dispersion of the Jewes R. Gamaliel added a nineteenth Prayer to those of Ezra and after him others until the dayly service grew to an hundred Prayers The Jewes Talmud especially that part called the Mischna is full of such forms which carrie the names of the ancient Rabbines that composed them the first Chapter of the Talmud is intitled as Buxtorf observeth Berachos i. of Blessings and Prayers for the fruits of the Earth and the practice of the Iewes ever since the penning of the Talmud in recording their set forms of Prayers upon divers occasions is an Argument that it was their use to compose such and use them in more ancient times Now this is evident by the many volumes of publick Devotions published by them of which it shall suffice to name these following In the History of Pascha are the Blessings and Prayers belonging to that Festival The second part of Sepher Haa haua is concerning Prayers Also a great Rituall and commentary upon the Prayers of the Iewes Another Precationes quibus utuntur ante post cibum Of Prayers used before and after meat which were divers some at publick Feasts and others at private meals Another named Selichos being Prayers appointed for obtaining mercy
being a form or our using it as such be a fault both these may be charged on our Saviours account who yet knew no sin though he used divers forms and why we should be such professed enemies to what our Saviour declared himself so much a friend especially if we consider how much the formes used by him were beneath that which he commanded us I fear a satisfactory reason can be scarcely given Nay when we doe the same thing in other parts of Gods Worship why should we disallow our selves in this The Scriptures which we read are formes There are formes of Doctrine and formes of wholesome words formes of praysing God and praying unto him in the words of Abraham Jacob Moses Deborah David Solomon Hezekiah c. and when we may and ought to bless and praise God in some of these forms why ought we not also to pray unto God in this It seems forms are lawful in our praises in the administration of both Sacraments in our benedictions yea and our excommunications too onely in our prayers they are not so And is not this greatly to be wondred at that in our Generation men should so much dote upon and contend for petty forms of Discipline which till of late dayes were never fancied to be either in the Scriptures of God or the practice of his Church for which notwithstanding the veil of the Temple yea the very bowels of the Church are rent and Christ himself seems to be crucified afresh when this form so positively prescribed in Scripture so universally practised by the Church in all ages is most undeservedly and unworthily exploded Our Saviours own practice was a sufficient warrant for the Primitive Church to compose and make use of forms of Prayer in the publick worship of God and that promise of his which also implies a precept was a firm ground of raising their faith and hope of obtaining a blessing on them I say unto you that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall aske it shall be done for them c. And indeed it will require the serious study experience wisedome and premeditation of more then one Disciple to express the necessities of all the people of God and suit them to the capacities and affections of them all And now having already given you a series of the use of forms in the service of God under the Old Testament and seeing the use of this prayer is disliked chiefly because it is a form I am even necessitated to say somewhat of the use of forms also under the New And that they that seek a stumbling-block may find none I shall choose to doe it in the words of pious and approved men who are above all exception And such an one in the first place I take Mr. Calvin to be who in his Epistle to the then Protector of England sayes thus As for formes of Prayer and Ecclesiastical rites I greatly approve that there be set formes from which the Pastors may not depart in their offices and whereby provision will be made to assist the simplicity and indiscretion of some and the consent of all Churches may more visibly appear and it will prove a remedy against the desultory levity of some men that still affect innovations as I have shewed saith he that the Catechisme it self serves for this purpose so therefore there ought to be a set form of Catechisme a set form of the administration of the Sacraments and of publick prayer The worst that Mr. Calvine said of the English Liturgy when it was newly purged from the dross of Popery being importuned by some dissenting English at Franckfort to pass his censure upon it was this that the things most obvious to exception were tolerabiles ineptiae trifles that might be tolerated rather then contended about and his toleration of the worst implies his approbation of the rest Upon one of these grounds the heathen themselves made use of formes which indeed were grown more universal then the Church her self ne fortè aliquid praeposterè dicatur lest any unfit thing should be spoken they read their Prayers before their sacrifices out of a book And in truth as at the building of the Temple there was no noise of axes and hammers heard but all the materials were hewed and formed before hand so in the publick service of God we should use all lawful means to secure our selves from those weaknesses indecencies and miscarriages to which we are all subject Marosius tells us that adstata pietas officia c. It is both lawful and expedient in the constant duties of Piety as well private as publick to use preconceived forms whereby both the mind and tongue may be guided in the performance for this saith he was the constant practice of the Church in all ages and grounded upon most firm testimonies of Scripture Next Alsted sayes That certain formes of prayer have been alwayes used in the Church and although to pray in a right manner be a gift of the holy Ghost tamen formulae precum divinitus praescriptae c. yet formes of prayer which are by divine prescription are not to be neglected as the precepts of living well are not therefore to be despised because the holy Spirit doth work Holiness in us Bishop Andrewes reproves an imagination against Orabo Spiritu praying in the Spirit 1 Cor. 14. 15. by finding fault with a fit Liturgy which they call stinted Prayers and giving themselves to imagine Prayers at the same instant whereby it is plain they so occupy their minds with devising what to say next that their spirit is unfruitful no less then the others understanding and both the understanding of the mind and the affection of the spirit are there necessarily required And again St. Cyprian saith It was ever in Christs Church counted an absurd thing ventilari precs inconditis vocibus the absurdity whereof would better appear if seeing under prayers here Psalmes and spiritual Songs are contained both being parts of Invocation they would have no stinted Psalmes but conceive their songs too and so sing them for in truth there is no more reason for the one then for the other but Gods Church hath ever had as a form of Doctrine both of Faith in the Creed and of life in the Decalogue so of Prayer too which from Acts 13. 2. the Fathers in all ages have called a Liturgy or the Service of God So the Reverend Bishop And Alsted sayes Eruditio eruditionum est Symbolum Virtus virtutum est Decalogus Litania litaniarum est Oratio Dominica I shall close this with that which D. Wilkins hath said of this subject who after a debate pro and con for Prayer by form and without form concludes That generally it is both lawful and necessary to prepare our selves as for the gift in general so for every particular Act of it by premeditating if we have leisure
quickness plainness significancie and fulness of it Suppose our Saviour instead of this form had set down only the heads of Prayer as thus when ye pray observe these Rules First invocate God as your Heavenly Father and pray that he would dispose of you and all things to the glory of his Name and Holy Attributes then for the inlargement and consummation of his Kingdome grace and glory c. And having so done a Christian Disciple should have done by our Saviours Directorie as some have done by the Assemblie's turn the heads and matter of Prayer with little alteration into a form which form would have been like this of our Lords Prayer doubtless that prayer would have been very pious and acceptable and seeing it was our Saviours good pleasure to save us that labour and to compose those heads more summarily and significantly then we can do I wonder why the same words ought not to be used by us If it be required that in all our prayers we should have this pattern for matter in our minds why should we not sometimes have the same form of words in our mouths It is hard measure to make a man an offender for such words as these Our prayers which are then onely acceptable when presented in our Saviours Name do not ipso facto become void when presented in his words That rule which gives rectitude to another is it self most right and perfect to all uses and purposes If on sudden emergencies we may use some briefer forms of prayer without a precept why on more solemn occasions may we not use this most exquisite form which is so positively injoyned Every prayer by whomsoever indited is acceptable to God when presented in faith though read out of a book or repeated by memory other essential properties of prayer being joyned why not this then which is put into our mouths by him who gave us a right to ask as well as instructions how to ask aright That holy Spirit which helpeth our infirmities and assists our weak devotions even in sighs and grones did and will doubtless abound in every Petition of this prayer when offered from a penitent heart That Dove loves such Olive-branches I have heard and read that wicked spirits have been conjured and dispossessed by an impious perverting and abuse of this prayer but that the good Spirit of God who indited it for use should abandon it when used by humble and faithful Christians is a degree of blasphemy to think And upon what account we Protestants shall be able to justifie our quarrel against the Papists for leaving out the Doxology when at once we casheer the whole Prayer will be hard to find Beza saith it is Vera omnium Christianarum precum summa ac formula Annot. in Matth. Let us therefore dear Brethren whom God hath made his more publick servants as gladly and readily continue and reassume the practice of this long-neglected duty as the people did the feast of Tabernacles which they celebrated with very great gladness after it had been omitted for some hundreds of years I can only pray and hope that every publick Minister will bring the spices and flames of his Devotion that he may help to raise this Phoenix out of her ashes or at least that everie one whose judgement and conscience is convinced that 't is his dutie to use it will not be withheld from the exercise of it by any shame or fear whatever it is no shame to rectifie an error but to persevere in it and fear and shame where there is no sin but contrarily a manifest dutie incumbent on us are but bugbears to affright children and cowards and should not at all move any good souldier of Jesus Christ from his station or if any such thing might befall us yet the great dishonour that hath redounded to our Nation and the Church of Christ among us through the neglect of this dutie should to a publick person and will if he have a publick spirit too render all personal reflections inconsiderable We have not been afraid or ashamed to plead for and practice some forms of which there is not so clear a warrant in Scripture as for this although they are lawful and necessary in their kind onely this like the wounded person is past by without any commiseration from Priest or Levite although we cannot practice any of them in so much faith as this for God having commended his Son to us saying this is my beloved Son hear him how confidently may we recommend our prayers back unto him and say Lord thus thy beloved Son hath taught us to pray Hear thou us in his Name and Words Besides it may be considered whether this prayer may not as well be left out in our Catechismes for the instruction of youth and if this then the Creed and the Commandements too and so we should reduce our selves to that which some would have i. no Catechisme at all for fear of forms as well as from our prayers in the Congregation for even among the elder people are some children in knowledge who need to be taught again the first Principles of Christian Religion and who indeed are uncapable of higher attainments unless such a soundation be laid and if these things should be disused experience may assure us that some would slight them and others forget them and a great part of our people be willingly ignorant of the true sense and meaning as well as of the letter of them and which is also a sad truth cast off the very form of godliness as well as the form of prayer all which mischiefs seeing the frequent use and occasional interpretation of these fundamentals of our Religion may in all probability through the blessing of God prevent for the future we are in duty obliged to the use of them And if those masters of Families which wholly neglect the duty of prayer and so have not the appearance of Christianity among them the Heathen and the families that call not on Gods Name being both alike would begin that duty with this form and some other joyned to it and having learned themselves the true meaning of each Petition the prime and literal sense whereof would be easily found would teach it to their families I doubt not but as hereby they would give an evidence of their being Christians so they might certainly obtain the blessing of God for themselves and families and who knows whether the wisedom of God did not abbreviate the Doctrine and form of prayer and make it so plain and easie for this end among others to render them inexcusable who should omit this duty when it would cost them so little labour study or time the words being so few and plain so nigh them even in their mouths Oratirnem saith Lyra brevibus verbis composuit ut sit nobis siducia citò annuendi quod breviter vult rogari Our Saviour composed this prayer in few words that
practice used in the service of God in other forms then this form was used by them much more there being not any of those supposed or reall Liturgies which did not use our Lords Prayer as a chief office of devotion 2. It is an uncharitable and high presumption for any to think that those Apostolical men that penned those holy books should be such prophane daring persons as to harbour any thought much less actually to attempt the mending of our Lords Prayer when not onely their care and diligence to prevent the like practice from others but their fidelity to the Gospel and truths of Christ which they maintained with the expence of their blood and lives is so apparent to all certainly if they had Liturgies so anciently which I think my present adversaries will not grant or if they do we shall be adversaries no longer they would rather have reformed their Liturgies by the Gospel out of which indeed the materials of them were taken and not the Gospel by their Liturgies And though they used many forms in their devotions as frequently as this Doxology which they did also immediately annex and insert to portions of Scripture used in their Liturgy yet we never find them guilty of annexing or inserting them to the holy Writ as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Glory be to the Father after the Psalmes and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Angelical Salutation Surely whatever succeeding ages were they were not so unfaithful to the great depositum of the Gospel as to consent unto much less to be contrivers of and actors in the corruption of it by any additions or otherwise It may with much more charity and probability be thought that this clause was in progress of time omitted by the Latine Translators as a thing of form and dayly use which none could be ignorant of or forget as when we transcribe any thing of accustomed forms we write a part and supply the rest of it with c. and this Doxology was not onely used to the Lords Prayer but from thence added to other parts of devotion also and so became most familiar this I say may be more charitably thought then that those most ancient unquestionable Writers should purposely without any reason or design with high presumption and a heavie curse which was but even then pronounced being almost the last words of the Scriptures adde it unto the holy Gospel besides these did onely transcribe it from Greeke to Greeke and every one knowes there is less danger of error in transcribing then in translating there will likely be somewhat lost in tossing liquors from vessel to vessel by the most steddy hand And that all that guilt which I wipe off from the Greeke transcribers may not stick on the Latine translators whoever they were I shall offer with submission to better judgements this conjecture as the ground why they did omit the Doxology which at best was but pia fraus a pious fraud I read in St. Ambrose after he had expounded the rest of our Lords Prayer thus Quid sequitur saith he Audi quid dicit Sacerdes Per Dominum nostrā Jesum Christū in quo tibi est cum quo tibi est honor laus gloria magnificentia potestas cum Spiritu Sancto à seculis nunc semper in omnia secula seculorum Amen i. What followes hear what the Priest saith Through Jesus Christ our Lord in whom and with whom be unto thee together with the holy Spirit honour praise glory magnificence and power from all ages both now and alwayes for ever and ever Amen Now plain it is that the Latine Church did use this clause with the Lords Prayer and that it was pronounced by the Priest as also that it was fitted by that Church to maintain the Doctrine of the Trinitie which was by many contradicted So that my opinion is that having first left out the genuine and proper clause of our Lords Prayer in their Liturgies and established this in the place of it as most conducing to the ends they aimed at and being so setled in progress of time they did omit the true Doxology to gain the more credit to this new one and when as all learned Protestants know there were many corruptions and additions and omissions too in the Vulgate Latine even in those dayes which St. Hierome himself did note but not amend Ne nimis multa immutasse videretur Lest he should seem to change too many things no wonder if this were past over among others And we know also that the Latine Church hath not for a long time upward been so tender of the Scriptures as they should Cardinal Hosius was not afraid to write meliùs actum fuisse cum Ecclesia si nulla unquam Sciptura extitisset It might have been better with the Church if none of the Scriptures tures had ever been extant And seeing as Grotius observes they did add to the Gospels out of their rituals it is likely they did omit also from the Gospels Then for the word Amen which is not in Beza's copy and is disliked by Grotius who saith it was not added by Christ but came in from a custome of the Church which did approve their prayers by that word this that learned man onely saith for what he alledgeth afterward will prove the contray that the word is used in the Old and new Testament Now this word is also retained in the Latine and Brugensis who in the business of the Doxology opposed us saith of this word Syriacum manuscriptum Graecique omnes libri quos vidi c. The Syriack manuscript and all the Greek books that I have seen doe conspire with these Latine ones that have it Hierome with Euthemius elegantly expound it calling it Signaculum Dominicae Orationis the Seal of the Lords Prayer as it is a note of confirmation so he teacheth in two Epistles to Marcellinus and the Apostle useth the word 1 Cor. 14. 6. See this great Scholar urgeth the same Argument for it which Grotius urged against it Now if Beza's copy and those few others which onely in some things consent with his be true then the many ancient generally receiv'd and approved Greek Hebrew Syriack Arabick copies which differ from his but agree among themselves are false or if these be true as I hope appears to every impartial person then his is false in this particular of the Doxology and if it be faulty in St. Mattehw much more in that of Saint Luke as himself grants in his Epistle and especially in omitting those severall parts of our Lords Prayer which those more ancient copies retain And here I may also conclude with reverend M. Crook That the Doxology is causelesly and without warrant omitted by the Church of Rome And now we come in the last place to inquire after the rise and authority of the vulgate Latine upon whose credit both Beza and Grotius do dissent
uniformity in the chief part of Gods worship as was consistent with the common good and desires of all mankind in general and agreeable to the Iewes own forms of devotion they having been for a long time Gods peculiar people in special Nor 2. is it any disparagement to our Saviour the eternal Wisdom of the Father that he did create a prayer as beautiful as the heavens out of such a Chaos and gather up those Jewels out of that dunghil wherein they had obscured them and set them in such a heavenly frame as nothing out of heaven or the Scriptures whereof this is the summe as many Divines affirm is half so perfect For certainly they had these petitions out of the Scripture from the Prophets and holy men of God And Mr. Lightfoot applies that to the Talmud wherein many of these are which was said of the works of Origen Ubi bene nemo meliùs That which is good is very good and that which is bad is very bad And now remembring you that our Saviour did in other parts of Gods worship comply with the accustomed forms of the Jewish Church it will appear very probable that he did the same in respect of Prayer both as to the method and form of it The likeness of Method hath been observed from Mr. Selden who sayes that of the eighteen Prayers or Benedictions called in the Gemara composed or appointed Prayers and which were for a long time the chief body of their devotion the three first and the three last respected the glory of God the other twelve those things that were necessary either for the whole people of God or for every particular man And whether our Saviour did not design his Prayer though not according to the number of their Petitions yet to the general method and matter of them vi the three first branches of it and the conclusion which may serve for three more referring to the glory of God the other intermediate to the publick and private necessities of Gods people is of easie observation Then for the particular Heads and Petitions they are more obvious we shall give an instance of each First for the Preface it is commonly known that the Jewes did prefix to their Prayers these two letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which as Buxtorf in his Abbreviations sayes do signifie the Preface of our Lords Prayer viz. Our Father which art in Heaven Dr. Lightfoot notes that in Folio 5. of their Common-prayer-book is this passage Humble your hearts before your Father which is in Heaven and he proves the appellation of Our Father to be common among the Jewes in those dayes and both he and Heinsius do adde Ubique Christus hoc egisse videtur ut ad receptas paroemias axiomata vel formulas respiceret The Doctor seems to translate him thus Christ hath an eye and reference to their Customes Language Doctrines Traditions and Opinions almost in every line Drusius gives the reason why to the appellation of Our Father they added as a note of distinction Which art in Heaven because they did frequently call the Patriarchs by that Title Pater noster Abraham Isaac Pater noster Jacob Pater noster our father Abraham c. Therefore when they call God Our Father they usually adde which art in Heaven and so Capellus giveth the Preface intire out of Seder Tephilloth of the Jewes of Portugal i. their order of Prayers for the whole year used as Buxtorf sayes by the Iewes of France Germany Poland Italy and Spain thus Our Father which art in Heaven be gracious unto us And in Machazor i. Cyclus a circle of Prayers for their greatest Festivals Let our Prayers be accepted before our Father which is in Heaven Then for the first Petition Hallowed be thy Name in Seder Tephilloth Hallowed be thy Name O Lord our God and let thy memorial be glorified O our King in heaven above and on the earth beneath Master Gregory from the comment on Perk Avoth transcribes the second Petition Let thy Kingdom reign over us for ever and ever Doctor Lightfoot sayes they pray almost in every other prayer thy Kingdome come and that bimherah beiamenu quickly in these our dayes And Drusius mentioneth all these Deus noster qui in coelo unicus es c. Our God which art one in Heaven let thy Name be established for ever let thy Kingdome rule over us for ever and ever and let thy Name be sanctified by our works The fourth Petition hath such an evident agreement with that Prayer of Agur Feed me with food convenient for me which phrase our Bibles do parallel with this Petition by quoting it in the margine and is such an approved Exposition of it in the Rabbins sense that I will not trouble my self or Reader to transcribe other instances The fifth Petition they express thus Our pious forefathers were wont to say remit and pardon all them that trouble me This Drusius Doctor Lightfoot and Master Gregory observe from the Comment on Avoth fol. 24. The last Petition is in Seder Tephilloth p. 115. Lead us not into sin nor into transgression nor into temptation and remove from me every evil imagination The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth the Devil or Original sinne and concupiscence This Petition Master Gregory repeats thus out of Sepher Hammassar p. 49. Lead us not into the power of temptation but deliver us from evil And to this they immediately subjoyn a like Doxology Quia tuum est regnum regnabis gloriosè in seculae seculorum Of this we shall have occasion to speak hereafter Solomon Glassius asserts also very confidently that our Saviour in this Doxology had respect to that of Solomon Thine O Lord is the greatness and the power and the glory and again thine is the Kingdome Ex qua desumpsisse Christus clausulam istam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnino videtur from which form it fully appears our Saviour took the Doxologie in the close of his Prayer And very usual it was with the Iewes to shut up their devotions with such short forms of praise And thus having found both the method and the matter of our Lords Prayer in the Devotion of the Iewes it onely remaineth that we answer one Objection or two against our assertion viz. That our Saviour in the framing of this most heavenly form had respect unto the forms of Prayer then in use among the Iewes the grounds of which we have laid already The first Objection is that these books from which it is supposed that our Saviour borrowed the heads of his Prayer are of a far later date then our Saviours time and therefore they may more probably be thought to have transcribed something out of the Gospels then that our Saviour the very wisedome of God should borrow any thing from their devotions To this Objection a satisfactory answer hath been given already by Scaliger and Master
Thorndike to which ex abundanti it may be added That it is true the Books themselves are not some of them above a thousand or eleven hundred years old but yet they do record matter of a far greater Antiquity as books printed in this very age may record such rites and forms as were in use among primitive Christians for more then a thousand years since so for instance in the late Liturgy were the best parts and offices of devotion preserved that had been used by any Church since the Apostle dayes And as for the Mischna wherein most of these petitions are extant it is known to be one part of that Talmud which was compiled by R. Hakkadosh who lived in the year of Christ 150. that is 1508. years since and the Title and Contents of it is this Liber traditionum qui Patrum traditiones continet quae inde à Mose observatae successivè per oralem traditionem propagatae fuerunt The book of traditions which containeth the traditions of the Fathers which had been observed from that time unto Moses and were successively propagated by Oral tradition Maimonides gives us this series of the tradition R. Hakkadosh had it from Simeon his father he from Gamaliel his father he from another Simeon his father he from another Gamaliel his father he from a third Simeon he from Hillel he from Shemaiah and Abtalion his masters they from Judas the son of Tabbaeus c. unto Simeon the Just who had it from Ezra he from the Prophets successively they from the Judges and Elders of Israel they from Joshua he from Moses who as they pretend had many of them from God Arias Montanus speaking of the form in which Christ gave thanks saith thus Porro illa gratiarum actionis formula antiqua est ut constat ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Israelitarum ex Mischnaioth Now if these books prove the antiquity of that form used by our Saviour they must relate it as a matter of fact beyond the time of our Saviour in the judgement of that learned man And certainly the forms and heads of Devotion used and recorded by these later Jewes of Portugal were the product of more ancienttimes and were then collected and composed by them that they might not be lost and forgotten in the dispersion as they had lost many Customes and Manners and their very Language in the Babylonish captivity In one of the Petitions above named they say so much expresly dicebant pii priores Our pious forefathers were wont to say c. And considering how superstitiously tenacious they have ever been of the customes and traditions of their forefathers retaining and practising in their Synagogues to this very day many things which their Ancestors practised long before our Saviours time it cannot reasonably be thought that they did coin any new devotions or at least that they did insert any such there but least of all would they have stampt upon them the likeness of our Lords Prayer in every Character as we shall now shew in answer to the second Objection which is 2. Object That possibly the Rabbines since the dayes of our Saviour may have borrowed some parts and expressions of their Devotion from our Lords Prayer and from other Evangelical passages but that our Saviour the very wisedome of his Father should be beholden to the Jewish Liturgies and Forms for his Devotion is not with any reason to be imagined 1. Answer This Objection is made somewhat unadvisedly for if it were true that the Jewes did insert these Petitions into their Devotion from our Saviours Prayer it would be a sad consideration that the Jewes should shew more respect and observance to the prescriptions of our Saviour then such as would be accounted the most excellent Christians Secondly It hath been already proved beyond all contradiction that our Saviour was pleased to practise and retain divers Jewish forms and adapted them to the Ministerie of the Gospel and commended them to his Disciples in the principal service of God and therefore there is sufficient ground to assert that he did the same in this business of devotion But on the contrary there will be but rare instances given that the Jewes did make use of any new Rite Institution Doctrine or History which is proper to the Gospel in those ancient Records of theirs so as to use or approve the same and therefore it is unlike that they had any respect to this Prayer in their Devotions Thirdly It is yet more incredible that the Jewes who abhor the very name of Christ and make many solemn publick imprecations against him and all his followers should transcribe any thing of his into their Devotion much less that every Petition of our Saviours Prayer should find place in theirs for in the very Talmud one Chapter is intitled De Idololatriâ ac vitanda omni conversatione societate cum Christianis Of Idolatrie and of avoyding all manner of societie and conversation with the Christians And Buxtorf saith of them In secretissimis corum libris scribunt docent quòd anima Esaui corpus Christi subingressa est They call Christians Edomites and Esauites and in exemplaribus vetustis saith he they have sundry forms of imprecation against Christians of which take this one Let them be destroyed and have no more hope and let all the Infidels they mean Christians especially perish in the twinkling of an eye and all thy enemies which have hated thee O Lord our God be suddenly rooted out and that proud and presumptuous Kingdome be quickly overthrown and at last come to a totall ruine and make them without delay subservient to us in these our dayes That the Turks should record some of our Saviours sentences is not strange seeing they account him to have been a Prophet and I have read that among their devotions they have a Prayer which they call the Prayer of Jesus the Son of Mary which differs little from ours onely it ends thus And let not him have rule over me that will have no mercy upon me O thou most High But that the Jewes who hate and nauseate every thing that hath the least savour of Christianitie eo nomine as it is Christian should insert this most Christian Prayer in its full latitude into their prayers is certainly a vain imagination Yet as you see both Iewes and Turkes doe retain though not as Christian both the form and matter of this Prayer where then are the enemies of it if they be friends Alas in Christs own house among them for whose sake chiefly it was written and unto whom it was not onely commended as a priviledge but commanded as a duty among Christs own stewards and servants Of our own selves as the Apostle saith have men arose speaking perverse things they that had made it their familiar and would not eat at Gods Table or sleep in their own beds without it have I will not say
Christ and his Apostles and their sense of them also being fresh in memory for this Language Christ did use and for this cause wise men would even equal it with the Greek fountain See also what Tremelius saith of it in his Preface to the New Testament And Chamier tells us the Syrians did use the Doxologie in their Liturgy as well as in the Gospel 2. Maldonate confesses that it is in the Hebrew copy also and he attempts to prove that St. Matthews Gospel was originally written in Hebrew and urgeth St. Hieroms testimony who had seen and made use of the Hebrew copy and therefore he concludes it to be not a temeritatis a note of rashness to deny it and answers Objections to the contrary if this be true it must needs be authentique however the antiquity of this Hebrew copy is beyond St. Hieroms time 3. It is also in some Arabick translations in that printed by Erpenius and a manuscript in Queens Colledge Library Certain it is that many of the books of the New Testament were translated into this Language in the Apostles dayes yea 't is said that they have certain Epistles of St. Paul and other Apostles which are not yet extant in any other Languages that St. Paul himself was among them appears from Gal. 1. 17. and this will help to justifie it against the Vulgate also 4. The learned Mr. Gregory gives two reasons more for its authority the first is that it was used by the Christians in Lucians dayes long before any of those books that omit it were extant 5. Because in all probability as our Saviour had respect unto the prayers of the Jewes in all other parts of his prayer so had he also in this and it appears that as they used the last Petition so they annexed the Doxology unto it as Libera nos à malo quia tuum est regnum regnà bis gloriose in secula seculorum i. Deliver us from evil for thine is the Kingdome and thou shalt reign in glory for ever and ever 6. It s conformitie with the analogy of Faith throughout the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament is an argument in the judgement of Sol. Glassius that it is authentique who thinks that our Saviour had respect to a like clause 1 Chron 29. see also 2 Tim. 4. 18. and sure I am it could not serve the design of any Heretick to insert it 7. The Prayer it self would be less perfect without it and therefore it was not originally wanting the Councel of Trent saith Orationis Dominicae duae sunt partes there are two parts of the Lords Praye Petition and Thanksgiving and as Morton saith Lest we should deprive God of one part of his worship which consists of thanksgiving this clause must be annexed for though the two first Petitions Thy Kingdome come c. seem to imply thanksgiving yet is it not actually performed except in the Doxologie Having thus confirmed the Protestant Tenet we shall also confute the Papists Objections against it 1. Bellarmine objects that the Latine Fathers do not expound it when they open all other parts of the Prayer To this it is briefly answered that this will conclude nothing against its authoritie seeing the Greek Fathers who in the Primitive times were more and had more advantages to know the truth did retain it in their Expositions for as Chamier saith Non à Latinis ad Graecos sed à Graecis ad Latinos scripturae pervenere The Scriptures were not delivered from the Latine to the Greeke but from the Greeke to the Latine Fathers 2. He saith Graeci in sua liturgiâ recitant quidem haec verba c. The Greek Liturgies do recite these words after the Lords Prayer but doe not continue them with the Prayer To this Chamier Answers That they did continue it with the Prayer as in St. Basil and St. Chrysostome appears and it was the order of the Church then that the Priest onely should pronounce it which also is an argument of its authoritie the most solemn offices being alway performed by them So Montanus Sacerdoti duntaxat licere verba ista proferre It was lawfull for the Priest onely to pronounce these words and so Master Gregory the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is alway the Priests and it would be a strange inference to conclude that therefore it was less authentique or that it was not originally in the Greek books Yet again Huntly saith Istis Verbis respondebat Populus Sacerdotiâ—i post orationem Dominicam That in the Greek Liturgies the people did answer the Priest in these words But whether both of these be true or false they will conclude nothing against the authoritie of this clause as will appear in answer to the next Objection Some Protestants do joyn with the Papists objecting that this clause was inserted into the Greek copies from their Liturgies So Brugens Verisimile fit c. It is probable that this clause was added by the Grecians out of their Liturgy or some other solemn form into the Gospel of Matthew as also out of some such form these words are added to the Angelical Salutation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because thou hast born the Saviour of our souls But by the way be it known that we Protestants disown any such surreptitious addition to that place of St. Luke in the copies which we follow and therefore the Objection concludes not against them or us upon this account But to goe on with the Objection in which Grotius agrees with Brugensis thus Seeing this clause is not extant in some ancient Greek exemplars but is in the Syriack and Latine and Arabick it is an argument that not onely the Arabick and Latine but the Syriack translation also were made after that the Liturgies of the Church had received a certain form for this Doxologie rather then a part of Prayer was annexed according to a custome of Greece altogether unknown to the Latines And what Beza saith you have heard already that it did creep into the context c. And he and Grotius will not grant the Amen to be Canonical but that both it and the Doxology came in as a thing in use among those Primitive Christians Thus I have made the most of the Objection and shall now do my best endeavour to answer it And first whereas the Objectors suppose that the Doxology crept in from the Greek Liturgies into those many and ancient copies it will undeniably follow from this supposition that the use of the Liturgies and publick form of Prayer was of Apostolical authority and antiquity for so are many of the Greek Syriaeck Hebrew and Arabick copies that do retain this Doxology to say nothing of the Latine which Grotius also mentioneth And whoever he be that agrees with the Objectors in this supposition cannot possibly be at any great distance with me in my main proposition for if publick Prayers were by Apostolical
to the Jewes so doubtless it hath and will appear in the preservation of the Mysteries of our salvation in the New Testament to the end of the world for I know not any promise or priviledge that the Jewes had in this respect above Christians and seeing God doth require on our parts that we should captivate our reason and understandings to the Doctrines and Truths therein revealed it is but reasonable to think that God will certainly preserve them in their integritie and puritie And if the Jewes who have been professed enemies to Christ and Christian Religion ever since they had a being have been so wonderfully withheld from corrupting the Scriptures of the Old Testament in those things that concern our Saviour his Nature Person and Offices which they have alway had more then a good will but never power to do how can it be supposed that the Greek books of the New Testament which have alway bin in the custodie and under the care of most of the Churches of God who in all ages have had men of great abilitie sidelitie and vigilancie to preserve them should be corrupted And thus we pass on in the second place to enquire that seeing there are many Greek copies some of which do hugely differ from others yet all of them pretend to Antiquity and Purity which of these are the most authentique and in this also we shall be directed by those that are the greatest enemies to them Sextus Senensis thus Dicimus eum Gracum codicem qui nunc in Ecclesia legitur c. We affirm this Greek book which is now used in the Church to be the very same which the Greek Church had in the times of Hierome and long before even to the dayes of the Apostles which is true sincere and faithful not polluted by any falsitie as the continual reading of all the Greek Fathers doth plainly shew for Dionysius Justine Irenaeus Melito Origen Affricanus Apollinarius Athanasius Eusebius Basil Chrysostome Theophylact and other Fathers before and after the time of Hierome doe use one and the same Text of Scripture Now that all these should be so deluded as not to know the corrupt copies from the true and by their inanimadvertency purchase a curse to themselves and intail it on their posteritie no rational man can think if he consider how near they were to the Apostles dayes what abilities they had and what courage for the cause of Christ besides the tradition of the Church which is an Argument against the Papists and the actings of divine Providence to the contrary And Saint Hierome tells us it was the practice of the Church in his time In N. T. si quando apud Latinos quaestio oritur c. If any controversie doe arise among the Latines concerning the New Testament and there be variety in the Latine copies we presently flie to the Greek fountains and although some Greek copies did anciently differ as possibly they might within a few Centuries of years yet the difference being but in words and letters rather then sense and the Church still retaining those which did agree with one consent and common practice there cannot be a more probable Argument of their authority and perfection Besides seeing those ancient Greek copies which by the Primitive Church have been delivered to us do keep the same Analogy of faith and truth among themselves it is an argument they were not corrupted by those Hereticks whose malice aimed at the most precious truths But when any particular Greek copy goes against the generally approved ones and is faulty in any of the more important truths that copy may be suspected as spurious or corrupted thus the corruption of the Arian copies discovered it self in corrupting those places that did in Christo hominem à Deo separare separate the Divinity from the Humanity of Christ as Jo. 1. 30. 1 Jo. 5. 7. Our third inquiry is concerning the authoritie of those Greek copies especially that of Beza which differ from the rest Brugensis saith of his second copy which hath some difference from others Latinae editioni contra alia omnia consonat c. that it agrees with the Latine Edition against all others and sometime with its Grand errors and was almost wholly conformed to the Latine So Erasmus of the Greek copy in the Vatican Exemplum illud ante paucos annos confectum esse tempore Concilii Florentini cùm facta est concordia Latinae Ecclesiae cum Graecâ This copy was made not many years since in the time of the Florentine Councel when there was a peace made between the Latine and Greek Churches Then for Beza's copy Mr. Gregory tells us that it was the Opinion of those two learned Bishops Armagh and Worcester that it had been corrupted by the Hereticks and that which he intimates concerning its faultiness in the Genealogie is an argument of it But it may suffice to give you his own judgement concerning that copy as he delivers it in his Epistle to the Universitie of Cambridge to whom he presented it Quatuor Evangeliorum Actorum Apostolorum Graeco-Latinum exemplar ex Sancti Irenaei caenobio Lugdunensi ante aliquot annos nactus inutile quidem illud neque satis emendatè ab initio ubique descriptum neque ita ut oportuit habitum sicut ex paginis quibusdam diverso charactere insertis indocti cujuspiam Coligeri barbaris alibi adscriptis notis apparet vestrae potissimùm Academiae ut inter verè Christianas vetustissimae plurimisque nominibus celeberrimae dicandum existimavi Reverendi Domini Patres in cujus Sacrario tantum hoc venerandae nisi forte fallor vetustatis monumentum collocetur etsi nulli verò melius quam vos ipsi quae sit huic exemplari fides aestimarint hac de re tamen vos admonendos duxi tantam à me in Lucae praesentìm Evangelio repertam esse inter hunc codicem caeteros quantum vis veteres discrepantiam ut vitandae quorundam offensioni asservandum potiùs quà m publicandum existimem In hac tamen non sententiarum sed vocum diversitate nihil profecto comperi unde suspicari potuerim à veteribus illis haereticis fuisse depravatum imo multa mihi videor deprehendisse observatione digna quaedam etiam sic à recepta Scriptura discrepantia ut ramen cum veterum quorundam Graecorum Latinorum Patrum scriptis consentiant non pauca denique quibus vetusta Latina editio corroboratur quae omnia pro ingenii mei modulo inter se comparata cum syrâ Arabicâ editione collata in majores meas Annotationes à me nuper emendatas brevi Deo favente prodituras congessi c. This copy was found at Lions in France during the civil wars there in the year 1562. of whole Antiquity the chief mark that Beza gives is that it hath barbarous notes affixed to it whereas the Grecians have been more barbarous in