to be believed for necessity of Salvation But the Statute doth require belief of every one of these Articles when it enjoyns not only subscription but an assent unto them punishing all with Deprivation that shall affirm and maintain any Doctrine repugnant to them which every man must do if they be found contrariant to the Word or he must be false to God 4. If subscription to these or any other Articles be still continued How can any just liberty be granted to tender Consciences But that they must swallow all that is enjoyned although beside yea contrary to the Word or be persecuted and ruined Thus much of the Doubtfulness of the Articles and of the inconvenience and mischief of subscribing them Which inconvenience and mischief will be greater if we should be tyed to those Articles alone though never so sound as shall now appear in the Defectiveness of them 2. The Articles are Defective Because 1. The sixth Article speaking of the Holy Scripture saith In the name of the holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church Nevertheless albeit it enumerate the Canonical Books of the Old Testament yea and all the Apocrypha too yet it nameth not any of the New Testament but only concludeth thus All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received we do receive and account Canonical Now it being not unknown that there hath been doubts in the Church of some of them insomuch as the Epistle of St. James the second Epistle of St. Peter and several other books and passages in the New Testament have been not only doubted but refused the Article is defective in the not enumerating all the Books of the New Testament 2. There are no Articles for discovering and condemning sundry points of Popery in Doctrine which being first the Tenets of Arminius the first Protestant Writer that was not a professed Lutheran that ever openly maintained them are too commonly suckt in and cryed up by some as the Doctrine of the Church of England which since the Reformation never own'd them but are all maintained by Bellarmine and generally by all Franciscans and Jesuites but confuted by all approved Writers of the Protestant Reformed party that have written against Bellarmine and others of that crew as likewise by the learned Whitgift Whitaker Junius Zanchius Pareus Chamier Dr. Prideaux and many others The learned King James also took so much notice of and distaste at those Arminian-Popish Opinions touching Predestination abused universal Redemption universal Grace the manner of conversion and falling from grace that his Majesty was the chief procurer and promoter of the late Synode of Dort to which he sent Bishop Carlton Dr. Davenant Dr. Hall afterwards Bishops Dr. Goad and Dr. Balcanqual to assist in that Synode whose judgements touching all those points were given in to the said Council subscribed with their hands and afterwards printed and published Agreeable whereunto in the main hath the late Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster declared their judgements in the Confession of Faith afterwards ratified by both Houses of the late Long Parliment for which reason is that Assembly so much slighted reviled and opposed 3. Those Articles contain nothing of the Creation of Providence Fall of man of Sin of the Punishment of sin of Gods Covenants Effectual Calling Adoption Sanctification Faith Repentance Perseverance of the Law of God Christian liberty and Liberty of conscience Religious Worship of the Sabbath or Lords day of Marriage and Divorce the Communion of Saints Church-government and Discipline of the Resurrection or of the last Judgement all which the Scripture teacheth and that as necessary as appears by the comprizing most of them in the Apostles Creed and therefore necessary to be explained and held forth unto all as the Doctrine of this Church especially considering the differences and Controversies about many of them Upon this reason it was that the late Assembly of Divines have taken so much pains to compose several Articles which they call Chapters wherein both those of the 39 Articles which are held to be indeed fit to be retained are more fully cleared and explained and the rest added with pertinent proofs of Scripture to make it manifest that they are all evidently grounded upon the Word of God But all proofs are wanting in the 39 Articles no text of Scripture being produced to make cut any one of them II. Of WORSHIP THe Form of Publick Worship in England except Preaching is set down in the Liturgy or Book of Common-Prayer established by Law in 1 Eliz. 2. intituled An Act for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer and Service in the Church and the Administration of the Sacraments This Act repealeth another made in 1 Mar. 2. which had repealed a former Statute made in 5.6 Edw. 6. for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer c. and re-established that Common-Prayer-Book which the said last mentioned Act of Edw. 6. had ratified and confirmed But yet the Act of 1 Eliz. which authorizeth and enjoyneth the use of that Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. doth it with allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year and the form of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences onely added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the Communicants but none other or otherwise Now it is here to be observed that in the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. for confirming that Book it is said that The Kings most Excellent Majesty with th' assent of the Lords and Commons in that Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same had caused the aforesaid Order of common service intituled The Book of Common-Prayer to be faithfully and godly perused explained and made fully perfect and by the foresaid Authority annexed and enjoyned it so explained and perfected to that present Statute So that the same was enrolled together with the Act it self Which being repealed by Queen Mary the Original Book was taken off from the Parliament-Roll and so lost But in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. there is no mention at all of joyning the Book then revived and re-confirmed to the said Act nor doth it appear that ever it was again enrolled whereby by having recourse to any Record or Parliament-Roll it may be proved that that Book of common-Common-Prayer printed in the year 1559. the first of Qâ—een Eliz. is confirmed by Law or that any man is bound to use it as the onely form now established by Parliament or to be punished for not using it at all And albeit the Act of 1 Eliz. Quere therefore whether he that either useth them not or useth other be punishaable taketh notice of some alterations above mentioned to be made in the Book then ratified yet it doth not name nor express what those alterations were So that all men are lest in a blind touching the same if put to prove that those
to be sinners Accordingly he took three Verses out of Psal 14. one out of Psal 140. another out of Psal 10. another out of Isa 59. All which the Old Translators unadvisedly thrust into the 14. Psalm as parts of that one Scripture I forbear to mention other Psalms wherein sometimes words sometimes whole verses are left out and much of the rest is very improperly and impertinently translated which in the Leiturgy provided for Scotland was redressed yet the Book for sundry other defects impertinencies and redundances was refused This makes sport for Papists and Atheists to find how much our Translations publickly used do enterfere and jar and how corrupt some of them be Thus of the differences between the old Common-prayer-books confirmed by Law and the present Common-prayer-books so much magnified and adored not only by the common sort but by too many of those who pretend to learning and skill in the Publike Offices of the Church of England but abuse the people yea Magistracy and God himself therein For still the Preface of the Book runs thus That nothing is enjoyned to be read but that which is the pure word of God or that which is evidently grounded thereupon which as our bold Masters have ordered the matter is false and a meer cheat put upon the people of God Having thus given a taste of the Differences between the Old and New Books I hold it needful to shew how unsafe it might be hereupon to conclude no more but this Then let the present Book of Common-prayer be compared with the old that was established and be reformed by it For even in the Book that was established by Parliament there are sundry incongruous and uncomely expressions unwarrantable passages and some gross mistakes of the Scripture it self especially in the Translations of the Epistles and Gospels Which Translation used in the Book of common-Common-prayer is as antient as the 35. of Hen. 8. and used first in private Primmars being translated out of the Mass books and other Offices of the Romish Church for want of a better Translation in the Reign of Edward the sixth For Example Gâ—sp The old Translation on 2 Sund. after Epiph. When men be drunk But in the new When men have well drunk Epist Indeed Dr. Prideaux saith all these are amended in the Kings New Transtation of the Bible But what is this to the Service-book in which these corrupt passages are still printed and pressed to be read in Divine Service on 4 Sund. in Lent Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia and hordereth upon the City which is now called Jerusalem a gross mistake both of Scripture and Topography The new Translation therefore renders it thus This Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to Hierusalem which now is He saith not Mount Sinai is Agar for that is not so But Hagar is mount Sinai that is a representation or figure of it Nor doth the Apostle say that mount Sinai in Arabia bordered upon Hierusalem For that is false Arabia being many hundred miles distant from Hierusalem And the Mount whereof St. Paul speaks was a type of it not bordering on it Epist on Palm-Sunday He was found in his apparel as a man In the new He was found in fashion as a man The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports not apparel but the form or figure which includeth the real substance and true nature of the thing whereof it is a form Epist on 16 Sun after Trin. Which is Father of all that is called father in heaven and in earth Then the Father must needs be Father to himself The new Translation therefore renders it Of whom the whole family of heaven and earth is named So the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Much more might be added not only against the present unestablished Leiturgy but against that which was confirmed But this shall suffice For my intention neither is nor ever was to destroy or cast off all Forms but only to shew some grounds of exception against this And seeing this is so much cried up that the most place all their Devotion and Religion in it and come little short of the Israelites in abusing of the brazen Serpent which by Gods own command was erected in the Wilderness Authority may consider whether it be not honourable safe and necessary to deal with both Books as Hezekiah did with that Idolized Serpent and carefully to provide a better in the room as that good King did in reforming the whole Publick Service of God there being now far better means and fairer opportunities of so doing than in the times of compiling the Antient Leiturgy by those Reverend and Renowned Bishops and Matyrs that did compose it ROM 10.22 Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Having reprinted the foregoing Sheet we must now go on in the same Order and Method as was before promised to observe some more incongruous and unworthy passages all which call for a New Form of Liturgy in the rest of the Kalendar Rubricks and Body of the Book it self I. In the KALENDAR THe Kalendar is either that which appoints Proper Lessons for Sundays and Holy-days to speak in the Common-prayer-book Language or that which in each Month sheweth what Chapters are to be daily read on week-days according to the days of the month and is prefixed in all Editions to the Book it self In the Proper Lessons appointed for Holy-days The Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. omitteth proper Lessons for the Conversion of Paul because that was then no Holy-day but abrogated by the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. ca. 3. Therefore in the Common Kalendar then established the first Lessons for that day being Jan. 25. as being a Common-day of the Week were Gen. 46. and Gen. 47. But in the Book of 1 Eliz. these two Chapters are laid by and Wisd 5 and 6. put in the room This however toucht upon in the printed Sheet is here again taken notice of to shew by this among other arguments that the Book then printed was not confirmed by 1. Eliz. 2. because that Act admits of no alterations of Lessons on Holy-days or other days save only on Sundays Yet is this also thrust into the New Scotish Leiturgy and that day made an Holy-day again And whereas in all the proper Lessons for Holy-days in 5.6 Edw. 6. only All Saints day had for those Lessons Wisd 3 and 5. and all other Holy-day Lessons were Lessons out of the Canonical Books the Kalendar of 1 Eliz. hath appointed 20. more Apocryphal Chapters for Holy-days and thrust out so many Canonical Chapters that by the Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. were appointed for those very days as for instance  Kalendar 5.6 Edw. Kal. of 1 Eliz. On the Purification None yet on Feb. 1 which is the Day Exod. 12. Exod. 13. Wisd 9. Wisd 12. On St. Mathias None yet on Feb. 25. which is the Day Numb 33. Numb 34. Wisd 19. Ecclus. 3. On the
four other learned and grave Persons Masters of Art at the least and allowed for publique Preachers What Law for confining Ordination to four times a year If there be a Law do Bishops now observe it Is it not usual to ordain in other mens Diocesses which they can no more legally do then a Sheriff execute his Office when he is out of his County How often do Deans and Prebendaries assist at Ordinations And why must all other Assistants be Masters of Arts at least What Law or Rule for any of these things unless for being Assistants to and Co-ordainers with the Bishop which this Canon doth tacitely deny when it saith such and such shall be present but not a word of their Laying on of Hands according to the Book of Ordination And whereas by the 36th Canon Subscription is enjoyned to the Books of Common-prayer and of Ordination not only upon all Ordinations and Institutions to Benefices c. which by Can. 37. is required also of all Lecturers Catechists Readers yea by Can. 77. of all School-masters too unless to the last clause of Art 2. touching using the book of Common-prayer whereas the Statute of 13. Eliz. 12. requires no subscription but to the 39. Articles nor that save only of such as are to be instituted to a Benefice not at Ordination or at taking Licenses to Preach only The 38th Canon touching Revolters after Subscription hath been spoken to before The 40th Canon enjoyning an Oath against Simony is necessary yet against Law and particularly against the Petition of Right This therefore we say no more of but humbly pray such an Oath may be imposed by Law But whereas the 49th Canon prohibiteth Ministers not to expound Scripture c. if not Licensed by the Bishop this is expresly contrary to Law 8. Eliz. 1. which confirmeth the Book of Ordination in and by which every one ordained a Presbyter hath the Bible delivered into his hand by the Bishop with these Words Take thou Authority to preach the Word of God c. Yet must every such ordained Minister be compelled to be at the charge of taking out a further License from the same Bishop at the same time to preach in the same place or else not to perform that duty which he promised solemnly to the Bishop and by him was authorized to perform at his Ordination Nor may any Ministers be suffered by the 51. Canon to preach in any other Church without shewing such License although otherwise well known to be sufficiently authorized thereunto And whereas the 62. Canon alloweth Ministers to celebrate Matrimony between other persons without asking the Bannes in Churches if he have a License for doing of it from the Bishop Archdeacon or their Officicals this is expresly contradictory to the Book of common-Common-prayer Rubrick 1. before the form of Matrimony and so contrary to Law of 1. Eliz. 2. if that Book be confirmed thereby There be sundry other Exceptions justly to be taken to the Book of Canons as namely to such Ecclesiastical Offices besides Bishops and Presbyters as be admitted to bear a share in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction albeit they be Lay-men while yet they abominate Lay-Elders in the Presbyterian Government beside many other all which we at present forbear not as approving of them but as hoping for a Reformation of that as well as of other things We therefore shall now only with all humility propound a few Queries very necessary as we conceive to be seriously considered 1 Quere Whether if there be any thing of substance altered in or added to the Articles of Religion or Books of Common-Prayer or Ordination and those Alterations or Additions not expresly mentioned and confirmed by Parliament this doth not make those Books to be void in Law if pleaded at Law The Grounds of this Quere are the Acts of 13. Eliz. 12. as touching the Articles that of 1. Eliz. 2. as to the Book of Common-prayer and the Statute of Eliz. 8.1 and of 5.6 Edw. 6.1 as to Ordination Which last named Act saith that the Books therein mentioned were annexed to the said Statute yet are they not to be found inrolled therewith no more is the other Book of Articles in 13. Eliz. inrolled with that Act. 2 Quere Whether the Statutes which are said to confirm any of the things named in the former Quere mentioning only the Titles but not reciting the matter of the Books themselves do make those Books or the things contained in them which have been several times altered although never so much as said to be inrolled nor found so to be do make those things to be established and good in Law because now commonly reputed received and generally used as ratified by Law The Ground of this Quere is that clause in 1. Eliz. 2. which after mentioning some Alterations but not particularly naming them in the Common-prayer-book prohibiteth all other Alterations saying And none other or otherwise 3 Quere If any man be indited or sued at Law upon the Statute of 1. Eliz. 2. for not reading of or coming to hear the Book of Common-prayer or upon the Stat. of 13. Eliz. 12. for not reading the Articles of 1562 and the Defendant plead Not guilty and deny these Books to be those confirmed by those Laws till the Plaintiff prove them to be of Record whether is not the Plaintiff bound to prove that and in the mean time the Defendant not punishable by those Statutes The Grounds of this Quere are first that there are no Records of these to be found secondly the Books have been several times altered since those Acts and thirdly many punished upon the said Acts because those Books have been generally received and used as established by Law 4 Quere Whether notwithstanding the Royal Licence before and Assent after any Canons made in Convocation be valid in Law before they be ratified by Act of Parliament as the Service-book and Articles of Religion were said to be and whether by consequent the Canons of 1603. be now binding The grounds hereof are first that all other Constitutions are or are reputed to be ratified in Parliament Secondly the Statute of 1. Eliz. 2. which gives power to the Queen her Heirs and Successours to grant Licence to Commissioners Bishops and others to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction when it speaks of withdrawing or altering any Rites and Ceremonies or adding new the power is there given to the Queen alone without mention of Heirs and Successours And when any thing is ordered or authorized by the King although under the Great Seal yet the enforcing thereof before ratification by Parliament is held to be contrary to the Petition of Right We shall now close up all with this humble Advertisement that whereas it is pleaded by some that Liturgies and among them the substance of ours are ancienter then the Popish Mass-Books by many hundreds of years whence they infer the weakness and folly of their Objections who say that all or most or any of the things contained in our Service-Book are taken out of the Mass-Book and so are Popish and upon that account would have them abolished and for that purpose produce some passages out of Ignatius Clem Alexandrinus Justin Martyr Tertullian Cyprian Chrysostome c. wherein sundry things in use among us are found mentioned in them and by some the Liturgy of St. James Peter c. are also urged although by many Learned men censured as supposititious Yet none of these Authors do mention any Publick Form the same for substance with ours although they speak of Publick Prayers made in the Congregation which none ever denyed Publick Prayer is one thing a Publick Form another Nor are we against all Liturgies but onely against that which is liable to such material Exceptions as necessitate us to desire a new Form And albeit some of the Rites and Ceremonies now in use may be mentioned in sundry of the Fathers within the first 600 years after Christ yet the mentioning of them is no evidence of the lawfulness of them or that they are not Popish although of latter times espoused by that Synagogue of Rome for as much as Popery was in the Egge and the mystery of iniquity began to work although under disguises and other names even in the time of St. Paul himself 2 Thes 2.7 Yea some of those very Fathers have sundry passages in them which condemn those very things which are now cryed up upon the very authority of their venerable names We shall for brevity give but one instance which every Reader may find in the Preface touching Ceremonies before the Book of Common-Prayer which albeit it hath been before alledged we here briefly touch upon again for better satisfaction of such as cannot consult the Author himself The particular mentioned in that Preface is a passage out of St. Augustine who was so far from approving such a number of Ceremonies yet not to be compared with the multitude in after-times that he complained that hereby Christians were in worse case then were the Jews and therefore counselled to take off that yoke and burden so soon as it might quietly be done And this was one of the Grounds and Reasons there alledged of the cutting off of so many superstitious Ceremonies in the first Reformation under that blessed King Edward the sixth which of late our Arminians and Grotian Divines and Prelates have sought to recal under the colour and guise of Antiquity for which they produce onely some bits and scraps of Fathers to prove their Antiquity but no solid Arguments to make out their lawfulness and conveniency and yet seek to impose them on those who hold themselves bound to hate the garments spotted with the flesh as well as the flesh that is the corruption it self We therefore conclude That it is not bare Antiquity but Divine Verity that must be the onely Rule and Standard of all Doctrine Worship Rites and Ceremonies Ordination Jurisdiction and Discipline among all that intend Conformity to the Mind of Christ FINIS Page 2. line 7. read 4 Car. p. 7. l. 4. r. them in print p. 34. l. 18. r. that and another p. 43. l. 26. r. Presbyteris l. 30. r. qui.
alterations now found in the printed Common-Prayer Books are the very same which the last mentioned Act intended to allow and confirm Howbeit that we may go so far as we can herein take notice that by-comparing the Book printed in 5 6 Edw. 6. with that which was printed in 1 Eliz. the alterations therein found which are onely hinted in the Stat. of 1 Eliz. 2. are these 1. As touching Proper Lessons The Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. appointed no Proper Lessons for Sundays except for Easter-day Whitsunday and Trinity Sunday but onely for Holy-Days The Lessons for all other Sundays were onely set down in the Kalendar in ordinary course of reading the rest of the Bible upon that and other days of the week in a continued way of reading all But the Book in 1 Eliz. in the Kalendar of Proper Lessons hath it thus Proper Lessons to be read for the first Lessons both at morning Prayer and evening Prayer on the Sundays throughout the year and for some also the second Lessons Then it after adds Lessons proper for Holy Days All which proper Lessons were appointed in 1 Eliz. to take place of all Chapters which in ordinary course of reading according to the day of each moneth had been before ordered in the Kalendar to be read without respect to either Sunday or Holy-Day but onely to the day of the moneth in course What alterations have been made either in that Book printed An. 1559. 1 Eliz. of other proper Lessons not warranted by the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. namely of such as were before appointed for Holy-days c. or that have been made since shall be afterwards shewed 2. As touching the Letany there is no material alteration in that save onely this that whereas both the Books of 2 Edw. 6. ran thus From all sedition and privy conspiracy from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities from all false Doctrine and Heresie c. those words touching the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities are lest out in 1 Eliz. 2. and ever sithence 3. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the words used at the delivery of the bread and wine ran thus Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee and feed on him in thine heart by faith with thanksgiving but in the Book of 1 Eliz. and in all since the words are these The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life take and eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee and feed on him in thine heart by faith with thanksgiving The words at giving the Cup in 5.6 Edw. 6. were these Drink this in remembrance Christs blood was shed for thee and be thankful But in 1 Eliz. and since the words are The Blood of our Jesus Christ which was shed for thee preserve thy Body and Soul into everlasting life drink this in remembrance Christs Blood was shed for thee and be thankful Now it is to be noted that whereas onely the two former Clauses which run in the forms of Prayers were in the Book of 2. Edw. 6. and the two latter Clauses onely are in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. as here above shewed that Book of 1. Eliz. takes in and joyns them both together If these be not the alterations to which the Act of 1 Eliz. referreth it will be very difficult if not impossible to find what they were Now having thus prepared the way to speak to the necessity of Reformation in Worship it is desired that all Readers of this Piece will take notice that there was lately printed in one sheet of Paper some of the Differences and alterations in the present Common-Prayer-Book from that which was established by Law in 5.6 Edw. 6. and in 1 Eliz. or at least supposed so to be which is but a Specimen or short hint of what is here intended to be set forth more largely and fully and that in the same Order and Method which is there propounded none of those printed Papers being now left it is thought fit to reprint and insert that sheet with some few Revisals in this larger Tract which shall now follow in the next place And then after that we shall add what shall be necessary for making out more fully the necessity of reforming the whole Liturgy not by way of reducing so much as of new moulding the whole Some of the DIFFERENCES and ALTERATIONS In the present Common-Prayer-Book FROM The Book established by Law in quinto sexto Edw. 6. and 1 Eliz. The KALENDAR THere are sundry Saints days although in black Letters not found in the Books of 5.6 Edw. 6. or 1. Eliz. to the number of 50. and moe Which however it may seem a small matter yet Time may turn them into Red Letters and so claim observance of them For Dr. Cousens in his Kalendar which he calls the Kalendar of the Church in his Book of Devotion hath put one of them already viz. St. Barnabies Day into Red. But however the Epistle and Gospel for that day and for the Conversion of St. Paul be extant in the Service-Book and in the Liturgy printed for Scotland An. 1637. both these are put into Red and enjoyned to be observed yet in 2. Edw. 6. and in 5.6 Edw. 6. those days were expunged out of the Catalogue of Holy Days On Aug. 7. The Name of Jesus is put in for an old Holy-day which however used in times of Popery but under a more gentle Title a a Fest Jesu yet even in 2. as well as in 5.6 Edw. 6. and 1 Eliz. it was expelled Howbeit Dr. Cousens in his forementioned Devotions hath already set down proper Lessons for that day viz. Mat. 1. and Philip. 2. which shews how desirous some are to keep an Holy-day to a Name The Order for Proper Lessons On Whitsunday 1. Eliz. the first Lesson at Even Prayer was Deut. 18. now that is thrust out and Wisd 1. crept into the room And if we look into the Lessons for Holy-days we shall find many Chapters of the Canonical Scripture laid aside and Apochyphal Chapters ordered to be read See some instances in the Margent at the Letter c c Old Kalendar The New Jan. 25. Gen. 46. Wisd 5. Jan. 25. Gen. 47. Wisd 6. Feb. 2. Exod. 12. Wisd 9. Feb. 2. Exod 13. Wisd 12. Feb. 2â— Numb 33. Wisd 19. Jun. 29. Job 31. Ecclus. 15. Jun. 29. Job 32. Ecclus 19. Jul. 25. Eccles 10. Ecclus. 21. Jul. 25. Eccles 11. Ecclus. 23. Aug. 24. Ezek 3. Ecclus. 25. Aug. 24. Ezek 6. Ecclus. 29. Sep. 21. Mic. 7. Ecclus 35. Sep. 21. Naum. 1. Ecclus 38. Sept. 29. Zach 7. Ecclus. 39. Sept. 29. Zach 8. Ecclus. 44. Octob. 18. Judg. 14. Ecclus. â—1 Dec. 28. Isa 60. Wisd 1. There are sundry other Lessons altered which I here omit It is true the Stat. of 1. Eliz. alloweth one alteration or addition
of certain Lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year but after mention of some by name it addeth And none other or otherwise Also in the present Kalendars there are four Chapters of Joshua left out that were in the Kalendars of 5. and 6. Edw. 6. And on Octob. 13. Judith 15.16 are appointed now to be read which was not so in 5.6 Edw. 6. This deserves consideration seeing so many Canonical Chapters of use are not at all appointed to be read in publick The RUBRICKS The first Page of the present Books appoint Ministers to use such Ornaments as were of use in 2. Edw. 6. not declaring what they be The Book of 2. Edw. 6. enjoyned onely a surâ—lis in Parish Churches and Chappels See last page of that Book where are notes for explanation So also in Rubr. before Morn Prayer 5 6. Edw. 6. The Book established in 5.6 Edw. 6. names a Surplice onely The Book of Canons Can. 58. enjoyneth other Ornaments Hereby some Ministers must break that Canon or the present Rubrick which the 14th Canon requireth all to observe So that the 14th Canon and the 58th contradict each other And neither those Canons nor that Rubrick nor this Book are established by Law After the Communion there are in all Service-Books of 5.6 Edw. 6. seven Rubricks Which number remaineth but the Third is divided into two and the fourth wholly lost In which fourth the Compilers had solidly and excellently declared in what sense they intended Kneeling at the Communion The loss whereof hath occasioned much stumbling and offence yea much trouble and persecution That Rubrick was this Although no Order can be so perfectly devised but it may be of some either for their Ignorance and Infirmity or else of Malice and Obstinacy misconstrued depraved or interpreted in a wrong part yet because brotherly Charity willeth that so much as conveniently may be Offences should be taken away therefore we willing to do the same Whereas it is Ordained in the Book of Common-Prayer in the Administration of the Lords Supper that the Communicants kneeling should receive the Holy Communion which thing being well meant for a signification of the humble and grateful acknowledging of the benefits of Christ given unto the Worthy Receiver and to avoid the profanation and disorder which about the holy Communion might else ensue Lest yet the same kneeling might be thought or taken otherwise we do declare that it is not meant thereby that any Adoration is done or ought to be done either unto the Sacramental Bread Wine there bodily received nor unto any real and essential Presence there being of Christs natural flesh and blood For as concerning the Sacramental Bread and Wine they remain still in their very natural Substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians And as concerning the natural Body and Bloud of our Saviour Christ they are in Heaven and not here for it is contrary to the truth of Christs true natural Body to be in moe places than one at one time The Body of the Book it self There is a whole Prayer now left out at the end of the Letany which was extant in the Books of 5.6 Edw. 6. to be used in times of Dearth or Famine which was this O God merciful Father which in the time of Heliseus the Prophet didst suddenly turn in Samaria great scarcity and dearth into plenty and cheapness and extream famine into abundance of victual have pity upon us that now be punished for our sins with like adversity Encrease the fruits of the Earth by thy heavenly benedi ction and grant that we receiving thy bountifvl liberality may use the same to thy glory our comfort and relief of our needy Neighbours through Jesu Christ our Lord Amen Moreover there are sundry Prayers some before some in King James his time put into the present Leiturgy as also some things into the Catechism which are not confirmed by Parliament Which Additions although useful being not legally ratified hath imboldened some to make alterations at their pleasure For instance The Prayer for the Queen and Royal Family before the year 1627. began thus Almighty God which hast promised to be a Father of thine elect and of their seed but now thus Almighty God the fountain of all goodness Which change was a great Presumption and may seem to imply an exclusion of the Royal Stem out of the number of Gods Elect. This alteration was first made in the Books appointed to be used about that time at publick Fasts and thence was stollen into the Book of common-Common-Prayer Of which no reason can be discovered unless this that the word Elect distasted the favourers of Popish Arminianism Likewise the reading Psalms now thrust into the Common Prayer Books pretended to be established by Law were no part thereof in 5.6 Edw. or in 1. Eliz. For neither of the Books then printed in Folio for publick use in Churches had the Psalms in them but only a direction what Psalms should every day be read which were accordingly read out of the Bibles then used in Churches It is therefore very hard and unreasonable to continue that Translation and to enjoyn and tye men to read out those abused Psalms as now they stand in that Book And it is a great wrong to the people that Version being very defective and corrupt Take some instances wherein that differs from the Kings last authorized Translation now only allowed to be read in Churches as also from the Original it self Psal 28.9 The Lord is my strength In the new thus Old Transt The Lord is their strength ver 8. 37.38 Keep innocency and take heed to the thing that is right In the new Mark the perfect man and behold the just ver 37. 58.8 So let indignation vex them as a thing that is raw In the new He taketh them away as with a whirlewind both living and in his wrath ver 9. 68.6 Maketh men to be of one mind in an house In the new Setteth the solitary in families 105.28 They were not obedient In the new They rebelled not against his word * * Let which of those by Fuller or Dr. Prideaux be thought the better yet while they both stand they cause scandal 107.40 Though he suffer them to be evil intreated In the new He poureth contempt upon Princes 125.3 The rod of the wicked cometh not In the new the rod of the wicked resteth not upon the lot of the righteous In Psal 14. there are three whole Verses which are not in the Original nor in the revised Translation nor in the Greek 72. but only in the Popish vulgar Bibles To excuse it by saying All those Verses are found together in Rom. 3. is a fig-leaf For the Apostle never meant to produce all those words as taken out of one place but only to collect out of several Texts of the Old Testament sundry testimonies to prove all men
Day lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin Most men are convinced of the necessity of repenting but such is the deceitfulness of their hearts that too many defer it and that upon that very ground expressed in these words which have no ground or warrant from the Word of God At what time soever a sinner repenteth c. as if he could repent when he list which carries many to Hell It is true this is seemingly put off by a great Doctor thus D. P. de Disciâ— Eccl. 2. â— Sect. 3. Dixit Dominus quoad sensum licet non verbatim The Book speaks the sense although not the very words of the Text. But this is too frigid an answer to satisfie the Objection For 1. It is said to be a sentence of Scripture not an Exhortation according to the sense onely It is one thing to give the sense another to repeat the words 2. This agrees not with the sense but is contrary thereunto as was but now demonstrated Therefore it is untrue and injurious to charge the Apostles with the like in alledging the Old Testament in the New 2. That expression in the general Confession of sins viz. There is no health in us although well meant is incongruous and improper because most of the common sort understand not the true meaning of it yet patter it over out of custom without being through their ignorance duly sensible of what is indeed intended by it Howbeit the Minister may not alter the Phrase 3. After the first Lesson at Morn Prayer Te Deum or Benedicite both of them being Apochrypals are to be read before the second Lesson and so they interrupt the continued reading of the holy Scripture which the Preface to that Book would bear us in hand is provided against As for Te Deum or We praise thee O God c. it is a piece taken out of the Mass-Book and in Popish Churches usually sung at times of great Victories Deliverances and other Triumphs From thence some Bishops little to their credit have introduced it upon like occasions into Protestant Churches that being no where enjoyned nor warranted by any Law in force This shews what able men such Bishops are to govern that know not how to express their thanksgiving to God for any extraordinary mercy so well as in a superstitious formal dress usually sung in Popish Churches And as for Benedicite viz. O all ye works of the Lord c. it is a piece of the Mass-Book also and taken out of the Apocryphal song of the three Children And it is bungled too not set forth as it is in the Song it self as by comparing them may appear And whereas that Song is said in the Title of it in the Apocrypha to be the song of the three holy Children which followeth in the third of Daniel after this place And they walked in the midst of the fire praising God and blessing the Lord this is an abusing and belying of the Canonical Text in Daniel 3. in which there is no hint of any such thing Yet must this come in and be kept in in our Liturgy though cast out of the Scotch Book to give another lye to the Preface of our Book of common-Common-Prayer of which more by and by 4. The many Antiphonies Responds except the peoples saying Amen have no pattern or warrant in the Word Yet above an hundred of these Antiphonies and Responsals or Answerings between Minister Clerk and people are enjoyned to be used beside the accompanying of him in the Confession of sins Creed reading every other verse of the Psalms c. How can such things having no warrant in the Word be done in Faith in the Publique Worship of God and not rather be accounted Will-Worship This is the rather to be excepted against not onely because it is so frequent in the Mass-Books but no where else but because also the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer saith That the reading of the holy Scripture is therein so set forth that all things shall be done in order without breaking one piece thereof from another and for this cause be cut off Antiphonies Responds Invitatories and such like things as did break the continual course of the reading of the Scripture How then do so many Responds and Answers of Clerk and People while the Minister is reading as likewise those Anthems before-mentioned which interpose between the first and second Lesson all which are still continued in the Book agree with that Preface still printed with the Book 5. If the Letany must be read which contains petitions for more particulars then all the Book besides and being put into one continued prayer without so many interpositions and interruptions might be of far better use then now it is why must the praying part be so much performed by the People and not by the Minister whose proper Office it is in publique to pray for the people as their mouth and not they to be his mouth There is no ground for this in Scripture yet we must be made to believe that there is nothing in the Leiturgy but what is evidently grounded upon the Word And wherefore must that clause in the Let any from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities be still left out was there no fear of his return to tyrannize over this Land again Had he ever more Instruments at Work in this Kingdom since the Reformation then now If it be said The Act for Vniformity gives notice of an alteration in the Letany yet that Act doth not tell us what that is in particular Therefore till that alteration be named that clause needeth not yea ought not to be omitted so long as the Letany is used 6. In the Book printed in 1 Eliz. there be added after the Letany two Prayers one for the then Queen another for Bishops both which were prayed for before in the Letany and also in the Prayer at the Communion for the whole estate of Christs Church which are not in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. And in 1 Jac. these were continued with one other Prayer for Queen Anne the Prince c. Now albeit the Prayers for the King Queen and Royal Family be useful and necessary yet when the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. admits of no alterations from or additions to that Book in 5.6 Ed. 6. save only in proper Lessons for Sundays one in the Letany and two more in the Communion and none other or otherwise how can those Prayers be used without making them that use them liable to the Law if rigorously urged till they be confirmed by Act of Parliament Or rather till that Act of 1. Eliz. 2. be repealed and taken away 7. Albeit the Preface to the Book saith that therein many things be left out whereof some be untrue some uncertain some vain and superstitious and nothing is ordained to be read but the very pure Word of God the holy Scriptures or
exigitur quam consulitur there is a service set up which however it was appointed by God to be once used by the children of Israel so soon as they were gone over Jordan into Canaan Deut. 27. yet is now no way warrantable in the Publique Worship of God that is for the Minister openly to denounce Curses upon all sinners divers times in the year and that not in the ordinary Reading-place but out of the Pulpit To which all the people are required to say Amen Whereby many of them are necessitated to curse themselves But as for that place in Deuteronomy that is no warrant for this now Because that was no part of the Publique Service then incumbent on the Priests or Levites nor to be done by any in the place of Publique Worship but upon Mount Ebal and that by six of the Tribes to wit Reuben Gad Asher Zebulun Dan and Naphtali ver 13. and that but once And let it be observed that Levi was none of them that were appointed to Curse nor were they of that Tribe so much as among them But he was to be upon Mount Gerizzim with Simcon Judah Issâ—char Joseph and Benjamin to bless ver 12. And this was the charge before given of God by Moses unto Aaron and his sons as their constant duty at all publique Assemblies of the Congregation for Worship Numb 6.23 c. to bless the Congregation thus The Lord bless thee and keep thee the Lord make his face to shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace This indeed was an Ordinance to which God there promiseth a good success saying They shall put my Name upon the children of Israel and I will bless them For Ministers of the Gospel then whose Office it is to be Messengers of Peace and to bring glad tidings of good things to his people to be imployed and that often in cursing the people as a part of his Office and of publique Worship not this or that particular offender being according to Christs Ordinance convicted and censured and still remaining refractory and impenitent is such a piece of humane and unchristian-like invention as hath no warrant from the Word of God nor from the practise of the Primitive Church which this very Commination it self in the first lines of it plainly confesseth where it saith that then the Discipline was to put notorious sinners to open penance in Lent and that in stead thereof until the said Discipline may be restored it is thought good to use this Which shews plainly that this is no other then a later spawn of Antichrist in his Popish Services More might be said of sundry other particulars in the Service-Book but we suppose that he that shall duly weigh that which hath been already noted will think these enow III. Of RITES and CEREMONIES HAving spoken of the necessity of Reformation in Worship it is necessary in the next place to shew the like necessity of Reformation in Rites and Ceremonies which are appurtenances of and appendents to Worship in relation to the Injunctions of the Apostle Let all things be done decently and in order a 1 Cor. 14.40 and to the use of edifying b 1 Cor. 14.26 And here we speak not of Rites and Ceremonies which be Divine by Gods own Institution for these are all in some respects parts of external Divine Worship in their use prescribed by himself such are the outward elements in the Sacraments c. and in other respects Ceremonies appendent to that Worship which is internal and principally intended in and by that which is external by Divine Institution But we speak of Rites and Ceremonies appointed by the Lights and Guides of the Church for decency order and edification being of Humane institution and alterable although used in the exercise of Religious Worship according to the 34th Article of Religion which teacheth that it is not necessary that Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of Countries Times and Mens manners c. The reasons why such Ceremonies not only may but sometimes must be changed according to the diversities of Countries Times and Mens manners which may make it evident that what is now desired no way tendeth to disorder confusion or Schism but to godly order without the least infringement of holy unity in the Church are plainly set forth before the Book of common-Common-prayer it self under that Preface or Title Of Ceremonies why some be abolished and some retained Where it is said Of such Ceremonies as be used in the Church and have had their beginning by the institution of man some at the first were of godly intent and purpose devised and yet at length turned to vanity and superstition some entred into the Church by indiscret Devotion and such a zeal as was without knowledge and for because they were winked at in the beginning they grew daily to more and more abuses which not only for their unprofitableness but because they have much blinded the people and obscured the glory of God are worthy to be cut away and clean rejected The same Preface saith further Some are put away because the great excess and multitude of them hath so increased in these later days that the burden of them was intolerable whereof St. Augustine in his time complained that they were grown to such a number that the estate of Christian people was in worse case concerning that matter then were the Jews And he counselled that such yoke and burthen should be taken away as time would serve quietly to do it But what would St. Augustine have said if he had seen the Ceremonies of late days used among us whereunto the multitude used in his time was not to be compared This our excessive multitude of Ceremonies was so great and many of them so dark that they did more confound and darken then declare and set forth Christs benefits unto us Upon these and other reasons it was that many Ceremonies introduced into the Mass-Books and other Popish Breviaries such as ducking and bowing to the East to the Altar the standing up at Gloria Patri or Glory be to the Father c. at the reading of the Gospels of the Day the wearing of Robes Copes Lawn sleeves or other Vestments save onely a Rochet to be worn by an Archbishop or Bishop and Surplice only by Priests and Deacons the wearing of Sandals or Slippers when men go into Churches or Chappels the turning Communion Tables and setting them Altar-wise at the East end of the Chanâ—â—l or setting up Altars of stone in that place whether the Congregation can hear or not womens wearing of Vails and offering of Chrisomes at Churchings and that at the high Altar the reading of the Lessons in one place and the second Service at the Altar which second Service was never appointed by the common-prayer-Common-prayer-book to
be used but onely at the celebration of the Lords Supper the setting up of Tapers of wax Candlesticks Basons and Ewres upon the high Altar and ducking to them every time a man comes into the Church or goes out or stirs while he is in it Whereas Cups Pots and Basons for Alms were never since 5. Edw. 6. to be set there but at the Communion nor then to be bowed unto though the Bread and Wine were on the Table The wearing of Hoods of degrees and many other such like devices all which were laid aside in 5.6 Edw. 6. as appears by the Rubricks and the Act for Uniformity in 1. Eliz. 2. compared together which allows nothing but what was in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. save onely the alterations mentioned in the said Act as hath been before shewed And however the Rubrick before the Book printed in 1. Eliz. directeth to use such Ornaments as were in use in 2. Edw. 6. yet that is no part of the Book established because the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. hath no such Rubrick and the Act enjoyns all to be done according to that Book and none other or otherwise However afterwards another Statute of Q. Eliz. did so appoint Now the same Preface before the Common-prayer touching Ceremonies giveth all men to understand that the most weighty cause of the abolishing of certain Ceremonies was that they were so far abused partly by the Superstitious blindness of the rude and unlearned and partly by the unsatiable avarice of such as sought more their own luere then the glory of God that the abuses could not well be taken away the thing remaining still Upon which grounds there was a removal of them in 5.6 Edw. 6. For then was that Preface of Ceremonies first prefixed to the Book of Common-prayer But so great is the itch of mans corrupt nature after Humane inventions in Divine Worship and so natural are Popish Gue-gaws and outward pompous toyes that please the senses that many of these who had been laid aside as abovesaid in 5.6 Edw. 6. and that at the Conference at Hampton-court it was desired that those Ceremonies and Rites of the Cross in Baptism kneeling at the Communion the Surplice c. might be put away yet such was the violence of the prevailing party at that time that having obtained License under the Great Seal they in Convocation An. 1603. recalled sundry of those rejected Ceremonies again and enjoyned all Students in Colleges to wear Surplices in time of Divine service Can. 17. Copes by him that Ministreth the Sacrament Epistolers and Gospelers according to 7. Eliz. there being no such Statute nor Parliament in 7. Eliz. and sundry other things under colour whereof by degrees most of those things before cast out viz. bowing to the East and to the Altar with the rest before named were retroduced and now devoutly or rather superstitiously observed without any shew or colour of warrant but ancient custom which being duly examined will appear to all to be first used in the Popish Churches as too palpably appeareth by the Preface touching Ceremonies before alledged Yea those very men who are so much for these and not onely urge the 18th Canon of 1603. but the Queens Injunctions * 52 Injunct for bowing at the Name of Jesus which no Common-prayer-book or Statute hath enjoyned yet in other things regard not those Injunctions nor the Book of Homilies no nor the Act for Vniformity it self touching such Ceremonies as they have a mind to recal and advance witness their setting up Candles in Candlesticks on the High Altar as they call it and such like superstitions which the third Injunction of Eliz. reckons among those things which tend to Idolatry and Superstition which of all other offences God doth most detest and abhor They must have their Antiphonies Responds c. which the Preface to the common-prayer-Common-prayer-book tells us are laid aside c. Not content with this they must have all except Candles lighted that are upon the Popish Altars where Mass is used upon their high Altars yea piping on divers Instruments singing so as none can understand the matter but onely be tickled with the musick playing upon Organs c. all which were laid aside in Edw. 6. and even by the 2 Hom. of the Place and time of Prayer which is by vertue of Art 35. subscribed unto by every Minister in England that ever was admitted to any Ecclesiastical Promotion according to the Act of 13. Eliz. 12. are censured and declared openly to all to be displeasing unto God and sore and filthily to defile his holy House and Place of Prayer All which are here mentioned to shew how far they deviate and whither they are tending and posting amain who under colour of upholding and practising of the laudable Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England do recal and retroduce many Popish Rites cast out of this Church and despise all Laws and Constitutions made against them and are thereby lyable to Inditements every time they use them upon the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. We shall forbear to insist longer upon this but leave it to others to judge what sad and dangerous effects these things if they be suffered and countenanced are likely to produce That which we chiefly aim at is to shew a necessity of reforming those Rites and Ceremonies contained in the Book of common-Common-Prayer or enjoyned by the Canons of 1603. Such are the Surplice Copes c. enjoyned to be used by Ministers the Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Communion Marriage with the Ring Bowing at the Name of Jesus and such like imposed upon all as established by Law But such Establishment we do and must deny until we see a Record produced by which that Book now in use or printed in 1 Eliz. is by Act of Parliament ratified and confirmed For if either there be no Record of that to which an Act referreth or that there be more alterations in the Book said to be established than the Act mentioneth can that Book be properly said to be established by Law and not rather made void thereby In all other things nothing is admitted for Law or as being of force by Law but what is expresly contained in verbis in the Act it self especially if the Act refer to any thing to be confirmed by it of which no Record can be produced and which differs from ought else that is said to be ratified by it And this is the case of the present Liturgy which neither is Recorded nor agreeth with but hath sundry alterations from and additions to that of 5.6 Edw. 6. besides those hinted in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. And if any Deed or Bond be rased or altered after sealing or if rased or altered before sealing and that not witnessed will such a Deed or Bond be admitted as good evidence at Law or in Equity if produced and pleaded We therefore cannot understand how the present Service-Book can be established by
License from the Bishop under his hand and seal appoint or keep fasts or be present at them either publiquely or in any private Houses other then such as by Law are or by publique Authority shall be appointed he shall for the first offence be suspended for the second excommunicated and for the third deposed from the Ministry Lastly the 73. Canon excommunicateth ipso facto all Ministers and others meeting in any private house or elsewhere * What if in Parliament or in Convocation to consult upon any matter or course to be taken by them or upon their motion or direction by any other which may any way tend to the impeaching or depraving of the Doctrine of the Church of England or of the Book of Common-prayer or of any part of the discipline now established What is that Now this sentence of Excommunication being to be pronounced by a Minister onely and after to be publiquely denounced by other Ministers and the persons excommunicated upon the 2 3 4 5 9 and 11th Canons not to be restored but by the Archbishop and every such person not restored is liable to the Writ De excommunicato capiendo or else the excommunication signifies nothing we appeal to all whether these Canons if executed be not against the Stat. of 5. Eliz. 23. which Enacteth that if in the Significavit of the Ordinary for obtaining a Writ de excom capiend it be not contained that the excommunication doth proceed upon some cause or contempt of some original matter of Heresie or refusing to have his or their child baptized or to receive the holy Communion as it is now commonly used to be received in the Church of England or to come to Divine-service now commonly used in the said Church of England or Errour in matters of Religion or Doctrine now received or allowed in the Church of England Incontinency Vsury Simony Perjury in the Ecclesiastical Court or Idolatry Then all such Writs and Significavits to be void in Law And whether such Ministers as in Court or in Churches pronounce or publish such excommunications or for non-appearance non-payment of Fees c. too too commonly practiced in those late Courts be not liable to be punished by an Action at Law for doing such illegal Acts as are not justifiable by the Laws of the Land Or if such a Writ will lye against any man for Heresie not declared such by Parliament according to 1. Eliz. 1. for not receiving the Communion kneeling or for not coming to the Common-prayer as now used it being already made out that it is not established by Law or for dissenting from any of the Articles of Religion of An. 1562. when it hath been shewed that some of them are doubtful some defective and disagreeing from one another c. is it not high time to Reform these things especially when by the Canons not kneeling not coming to Common-prayer are declared to be Schism and any dissent from those Articles being adjudged errour in doctrine the party shall be punished with excommunication yea with imprisonment by Writ out of Chancery and not be absolved but by the Archbishop Can. 5. nor by him till he shall have repented and openly revoked that his dissent as a wicked errour how just and necessary soever such dissent was Again the 14th Canon appoints Divine service to be said not only on the Holy-days appointed by the Book of Common-prayer but on their Eves Which observation of Eves is taken away by the Books of Common-prayer and so this Canon is herein contrary to the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. Moreover the same Canon enjoyneth Ministers to observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer which by referring to these in 2. Edw. 6. admits of a Surplice only so doth that of 5.6 Edw. 6. yet this enterferes with the 58. Canon of which before And whereas that 14th Canon forbids diminishing any part of common-Common-prayer in regard of preaching or in any other respect or adding any thing in the matter or form thereof the Book of Common-prayer it self doth warrant us to diminish that is to omit all that men now call the second Service when there is no Communion as hath been also shewed The 17th Canon enjoyneth all Fellows Scholars and Students though Boys as well as Masters of Colleges and Halls upon Sundays Holy-days and their Eves to wear Surplices at Divine service pretending for it the Order of the Church of England and Graduates to wear the Hoods of their degrees Whereas the Order in the Liturgy enjoyns Surplices only to Ministers in the times of their Ministration not to others And this of Boys wearing Surplices doth countenance that fond conceit so much cryed up in Popery that all once entred into Colleges ought to receive primam tonsuram and therefore to wear Surplices * Ham. le Strange in Affin of Div. Serv. The 24 Canon enjoyneth Copes which are forbidden in the Rubrick before Common-prayer in 5.6 Edw. 6. of which before The 27th Canon requireth Ministers not to administer the Communion to any but such as kneel under pain of Suspension whereas we have before demonstrated out of 2. Edw. 6. that kneeling is left arbitrary And if any person not kneeling be refused the Communion with what justice can he be punished with Excommunication which may end in imprisonment upon a Writ De excom cap. by vertue of the forementioned Statute of 5. Eliz. 23. even when he desireth to communicate with that Liberty in gesture which the Law alloweth him Yet both Minister Church-Wardens and Quest-men the Office and duty of which last in Ecclesiasticals we know not must take notice whether every Parishioner come so often to the Communion as the Law requireth Can. 28. which if he do not he is to be presented c. which makes way to Excommunication and imprisonment as aforesaid albeit it be not his fault that he received not unless it be an offence to claim and make use of the liberty which the Law affordeth him The Explanation of the lawful use of the Cross in Baptism undertaken in Can. 30. is very defective for whereas it undertakes to remove all scruples of Conscience therein it produceth not one Scripture nor Father to that end but only indefinitely talks of both which without better arguments and more distinct proofs can never in common reason quiet much less satisfie any mans Conscience that maketh scruple thereof Nor can we submit thereto till we see it proved as well as affirmed The 31. Canon forbiddeth the making of any Deacons or Ministers save only on the four Sundays after the Ember-Weeks appointed for prayer and fasting and so continued in England by what Law when the Stat. of 5.6 Edw. 6.3 declares the contrary and this to be done in the Cathedral or Parish-church where the Bishop resideth in presence not onely of the Archdeacon but of the Dean and two Prebendaries at least if not by any lawful cause let or hindred or of
speech and deceit to be their wound and stripe c. Was not this a brave resolution a pious petition to tell a lye for God We forbear more instances because we delight not to scrape in such Dung-hills We have done with the Kalendar II. Of the RUBRICKS RVbricks are Directions given in the Common-Prayer-Book how to officiate and read the said Book in the several parts thereof And they are called Rubricks because anciently printed in Red Letters and are as much established by Law as any other part of the Book of Common-Prayer it self I shall instance onely in some of them not medling with those before noted in the inserted Paper of Differences 1. There are many Rubricks wherein the Minister is called Priest which is the old Stile and Title in the Mass-Book from whence it was taken We never finde it in the New Testament but onely in the Old which Title was then given to such of the Levites as were made Priests to sacrifice at the Altar And thence the Papists borrowed that name for their Popish Sacrificers at their Altars It is now then a meer Superstitious and Antichristian Name no way warranted by the Word of God in the Pontifician Sense yet is it used above fifty times in our Liturgy It is true one seeks to excuse it by saying Use hath made this so Popular as it is not safe to remove it yet confesseth it may be altered without prejudice to Religion But why may not the Word Priest be taken away and the word Minister put in the room The Name of Minister is not unknown yea it is as often used in the Rubricks of the same Book as the name Priest Therefore it may without the least danger or offence be wholly obliterated Hence it is that in the Scots Liturgy it is wholly omitted and Presbyter put into the room thereof Whereas this is a more strange and unknown name being borrowed from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was never used to signifie a Priest but an Elder and thence borrowed to denote a Minister as all the Learned know and none but Papists use the word Priest unless Scoffers at Ministers whom in scorn and derision they call and nick-name Priests 2. In the fifth Rubrick of the Order for reading of the holy Scripture it is said That the Collect Epistle and Gospel appointed for the Sunday shall serve all the week after except there fall some Feast that hath his proper By vertue of this these in Cathedrals were read every day albeit they had no Communions But another Rubrick prefixed to the Epistles and Gospels runs thus The Collects Epistles and Gospels to be used at the celebration of the Lords Supper and holy Communion throughout the year These therefore were never intended to be read but when there is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper administred This was anciently administred every day in the Church of England and so to be used still at least in Cathedrals as appears by the Rubrick after the first Exhortation at the Communion If then upon any reasonable cause there be no Communion there ought at that time to be no Epistle and Gospel read If there be any read it is without warrant So that these two Rubricks fight and which to follow is uncertain And indeed they are both but blind guides that lead into the ditch and make a man obnoxious to the Law 3. The Rubrick before the general Confession at the Communion runs thus Then shall this general Confession be made in the name of all those that are to receive the holy Communion either by one of them or else by one of the Ministers This gives liberty to Lay or private men to officiate in part at least as to this Confession which is a branch of the Office peculiar to the Minister to be the mouth of the people unto God in Prayer especially in the Administration of the Sacraments in the Congregation What is this but to admit a private person to assist and bear a share in administring the Lords Supper Is not this to hit against the 17 Article of Religion which declares it to be unlawful to any but such as be lawfully called and sent to wit Ministers duly ordained In all other parts of the Liturgy all Confessions and Prayers are expresly put upon the Minister alone at least to begin and lead the Congregation therein 4. In the Rubricks before the proper Prefaces at the Communion it is said that upon Christmas day and seven days after upon Easter-day and seven days after upon the Ascention-day and seven days after upon Whitson-day and six days after the same several Prefaces appointed for each of these solemn days shall be read as if every of the seven days following were one and the same with the first and what was done on the first day was done over again every one of the following days which yet was never done but once and but upon one day at all and perhaps upon neither of those days on which it is said there to be done But of this more when we come to speak of the Body of the Book 5. The last Rubrick after the Communion saith Note that every Parishioner shall communicate at the least three times in the year of which Easter to be one and shall also receive the Sacraments and other rites c. But the first Exhortation before the Communion to be used when the people are negligent to come unto it requireth the Minister to say unto the whole Congregation I bid you all that be here present and beseech you for the Lord Jesus Christs sake that ye will not refuse to come thereto being so lovingly called and bidden of God himself Yet the aforesaid Rubrick seems to dispense with Gods own Invitation How rightly let all sober men consider And if thrice communicating will suffice contrary to the Primitive Practise which was for all to Communicate at every solemn meeting why must Easter be one of the three times more then any other Lords Day seeing every Lords Day is celebrated upon the same account that that called Easter-day is viz. in memory of the Resurrection of our Lord But where it is added in that Rubrick He shall also receive the Sacraments and other rites c. this is no other but non-sense or worse For what Sacraments else are there for a Communicant of the Lords Supper to receive Is Baptism to be reiterated are the Popish Sacraments to be recalled And if they were must every Parishioner receive them and that thrice a year And what are the Rites he must receive Be they Ceremonies Humane Inventions Superstitious antique Crossings duckings bowing to the Altar towards the East to Images c If so where are these or any of these enjoyned And if not enjoyned why must they be all received thrice a year or at all But of this more hereafter 6. The last Rubrick before the Catechism in order to Confirmation concludeth thus And that no man shall
elected there can be legally and regularly no succession of Bishops There is no necessity of such a Consequence nor of making more Archbishops or Deans and Chapters or continuing of any such if it shall please the King and Parliament by any Act or Statute to appoint any other way and course of Election and Consecration of Bishops Which is as easie to be done as any thing else Enacted in Parliament there being no Divine Right so much as pretended unto for such Election or Consecration as of late was used in England 2. Whereas it is of late much insisted upon that Episcopacy is not only an Office of Precedency and Presidency above other Presbyters and Ministers given to them by the free Election of the rest to regulate order and act things agreed upon by the Presbytery joyned with them as the Commander in chief in an Army as the Capital Justice in a Court or as the Speaker in either House of Parliament but that it is a distinct and specifical Order by Divine Right Superiour to all other Presbyters which Order onely is Authorized to exercise such things as none else may medle with We say that this in England was never at all arrogated by any Bishops till of very late times 2. The things they make peculiar to Bishops ratione Ordinis are sole Ordination and sole Jurisdiction as if none had power in either of these but themselves neither of which even they who pretend to derive their Episcopacy from the Apostles ever undertook to make good by any solid Antiquity Yea 3. those very Antiquities which they allege are either spurious or else speak nothing either of sole Ordination or of sole Jurisdiction but rather the contrary as might easily be made out But we tye our selves to speak to these particulars only as said to be made out by Law 3. This was never yielded by any Law of England nor by the Book of Ordination For however that Book established in 5.6 Edw. 6. and after repeal by Queen Mary confirmed in 8. Eliz. cap. 1. Yet when it speaks of the making of Bishops it calls that a Consecration and not an Ordination as it doth when it speaks of making Deacons and Presbyters which it calleth Priests calling one The form and manner of Ordering Deacons the other The form of Ordering Priests But when it speaks of the other it changeth this Word Ordering and calls it The form of Consecrating an Archbishop or Bishop Which shews plainly that the Book of Ordination never meant to make Bishops or as Dr. Gauden calls it Legal Episcopacy to be not only in Degree and Office of Prolocutor but in a distinct Order of Christ's and his Apostles institution Superiour to a Presbyter It is indeed an easie matter for a bold man to contradict this and to say that the antient Writers call the Solemn form of consecrating a Bishop by no other name then that of Ordinatio Episcopi but it seems it is not so easie to prove what he saith For he produceth no such proof at all so that this confident saying touching such Ordination of Bishops affirmed by his Adversary to be a Novel Popish Position that this is Not Novel he is sure is but a meer shift and a put off no confutation at all And where he is pleased afterwards to urge the Preface to the Book of Ordination Dr Heylin Certam Epistol p. 143. which mentioneth three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons and one passage in one of the Prayers at the Consecration of an Archbishop or Bishop to prove that Episcopacy is a distinct Order from and Superiour to that of Presbyters he must be intreated to take notice 1. That the Preface alleged saith not as he speaks these THREE Orders but onely these Orders of Ministers c. But even there by way of explanation the Preface calls them Offices which Offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation c. now we deny them not to be distinct Offices only we cannot admit in his sense the Office of a Bishop to be a distinct Order above Presbytery For even in that very Preface it speaks of Consecrating not of Ordaining a Bishop as the Book all along doth of Ordering that is Ordaining of Deacons and Priests but never of other then of Consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops that is of setting them over the rest in degree to be the mouth and hand of the rest in executing what by the rest is agreed upon And 2. touching that Prayer he mentions wherein Episcopacy is called in that Part of the Book it self which concerneth Bishops an Order This is but a wyre-drawing of the Words and a meer wresting of them The Words of the Prayer are these Almighty God giver of all good things which by thy holy Spirit hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy Servant now called to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop c. Now how do these words prove a Bishop to be a distinct Order when speaking of the person then to be made Bishop it is not said he is called to the Order but to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop And seeing he onely talks of antient Writers but produceth none we shall make bold to mind him what is the sense of the Canon-Law which he pleads to be still in force in England if Lindwood that great English Canonist be of any value with him who saith expresly Episcopatus non est Ordo Yea the very Book of Ordination in ordering of Priests appointing 1 Tim. 3. to be then read If any desire the Office of a Bishop he desireth an honest work A Bishop must be blameless c. doth more then tacitly admit a Bishop and a Presbyter not to differ in Order To which we shall add the judgement of an antient Archbishop of Canterbury even Anselmus himself an high man for the Pope and a great Contestor with the King for Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction even beyond the bounds of the Laws of this Land who in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians where Paul cap. 1. saluteth but two Orders Bishops and Deacons on the word Episcopis saith thus Episcopis id est Presbyteris Episcopos namque pro Presbyteris more suo posuit Non enim plures Episcopi in una civitate erant neque Presbyteros intermitteret ut ad Diaconos descenderet Sed dignitatem excellentiam Presbyterorum declarat dum eosdem qui Presbyteri sunt Episcopos esse manifestat Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur in Schismatis remedio facium est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Evangelium rumperet Nam est Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos qui sederunt in Centuria 3. Presbyterum unum de se elecium in Excelsiori loco Gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si Exercitus Imperatorem faciat aut Diaconi elegant
the said Letters Patents to him or them made and delivered as is aforesaid shall have full power and authority by vertue of this Act and of the said Letters Patents under your Highness your Heirs or Successours to exercise use and execute all the premises according to the tenour and effect of the said Letters Patents any matter or cause to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This is one entire Clause of that Act nor is there any Branch or Clause in that whole Act that gives more or other Jurisdiction to Bishops or any other Ecclesiastical persons whatsoever 2. Now the Act of 17. Car. 1.11 having repeted this Clause at large addeth Be it Enacted by the Kings most excellent Majesty and the Lords and Commons in this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same That the aforesaid Branch Clause Article or Sentence contained in the said Act and every word matter and thing contained in that Branch Clause Article or Sentence shall from henceforth be repealed annulled revoked annihilated and utterly made void for ever any thing in the said Act to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding This as we humbly conceive puts a period to all Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of Bishops Deans and Chapters and Archdeacons whatsoever And even before that Act of 17. Car. 1. that Government which they exercised was without yea contrary to Law For whereas by the Statute of 1. Edw. 6.2 it was Enacted that all Summons and Citations or other process Ecclesiastical in all Suits and Causes c. should from the first day of July thence next following be made in the name and with the stile of the King as it is in Writs Original or Judicial at the Common Law And that the Teste thereof be in the name of the Archbishop or Bishop or other having Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction who hath the Commission and grant of the Ecclesiastical Authority immediately from the Kings Highness And that his Commissary Official or Substitute exercising jurisdiction under him shall put his name in the Citation or Process after the Teste And that they in all Seals of their Office shall have the Kings Highness Arms decently set with certain Characters under the Arms for the knowledge of the Diocess and shall use no other Seal of Jurisdiction c. upon pain of his Majesties displeasure and imprisonment during his Majesties pleasure * So also it is Enacted 1. Edw. 6.12 that they should make their Process and Writings in the Ks. name and not under their own names and that their Seals should be the Kings Arms. In which Act nevertheless they were allowed to use their own Seals in admission and ordering all their own Officers in all Certificates in all Collations Presentations Institutions and Inductions of Benefices Letters of Orders or Dimissories as formerly was accustomed But under colour of this last Toleration they have used their own Names and Seals onely in all Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions for many years last past without taking the least notice of King or Queen or taking any special Commission from them for ought hath appeared in any of their pretendedly juridical proceedings which are therefore apprehended to be all void in Law albeit they had obtained in secret Letters Patents so to act as they have done For that Statute being repealed in 1. Mar. 2. was again in general terms revived and re-established in 1. Eliz. 1. and never since made void And whereas our Bishops and Archbishops in England and Wales are in all but twenty six in number which being far too few to be able to execute the Office of Bishops as by the Word of God they are bound to do there was in the 26th year of Hen. 8. cap. 14. an Act of Parliament made for adding six and twenty Suffragan Bishops more unto them which that Statute saith hath been accustomed to be had in this Realm It was Enacted that Thâ—tford Ipswich Colchester Dover Gilford Southhampton Taunton Shaftsbury Molton Marleborough Bedford Leicester Glocester Shrewsbury Bristol Penreth Bridgwater Notingham Grantham Hull Huntington Cambridge and the Town of Pereth and Barwick St. Germans in Cornwal and the Isle of Wight shall be taken and accepted for Sees of Bishops Suffragans to be made in this Realm These to be chosen thus Every Archbishop and Bishop that would have Suffragans must for each place nominate two persons to the King whereof the King to chuse one and to give him the name title and dignity of Bishop of such of the Sees aforesaid as he should be nominated unto and he to be called Bishop Suffragan of that See And the King by his Letters Patents is to present him to the Archbishop of the Province where this Suffragan is to be requiring the Archbishop with two Bishops or Suffragans more to be procured by the Bishop that names him to Consecrate the said person to the same name title stile and dignity of Bishop as to the Office of a Bâ—shop Suffragan appertaineth and then to execute such power and authority as by the Archbishop or Bishop within whose Diocess he is to be he shall be Commissionated to do but no other under pain of a Premunire but not to partake any of the Profits of the Bishoprick of the Diocess But our Bishops like none of this although heretofore used which Act being repealed by Queen Mary was revived in 1. Eliz. 1. by name and is still in force Therefore in stead of twenty six Bishops to desire fifty two is no Puritanical request but a legal and just demand For there are so many allowed by Law already Yea if two hundred Bishops should be setled in England they would be too few to execute all the duties which by the Word are incumbent on a Bishop And verily we are perswaded in Conscience that this must be done if there be any due care of Souls by such as have power to do it if Episcopacy be again set up in England And we speak thus because we apprehend that by Act of Parliament all their power and jurisdiction is absolutely taken away and therefore by consequent the Office it self although the Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament of October 9. 1646. had never been For when their power of Jurisdiction is gone for ever what of the Office of a Bishop as such remaineth This was the sense of both Houses of Parliament as appears by that Ordinance which makes all their Grants since 17. Car. 1. to be null and void because their Office then expired If it shall be thought fit to set up Episcopacy again We most humbly pray that it may be no other but that Primitive Episcopacy agreeable to the Apostles rules in that form method and power mentioned in the Book of Reduction of Episcopacy composed and published in the year 1641. by Dr. James Vsher late Archbishop of Armagh always provided that there be such a competent number of Bishops set up as may be able faithfully and profitably to discharge the Office of