The true NON-CONFORMIST In Answere To the Modest and free Conference Betwixt a CONFORMIST And a NON-CONFORMIST About the present Distempers Of SCOTLAND By a Lover of Truth And Published by its order HEBR. XII Ver. XIV XV. Follow peace with all men and holiness without which no man shall see the Lord looking diligently lest any man faile of the grace of God lest any root of bitternes springing up trouble you and thereby many be defiled Printed in the Year 1671. To the AUTHOR OF THE CONFERENCE ALthough I judge it no less of my concernment then of yours to be concealed and unseen in this undertaking Yet seeing that I do not captate the empty praise of an affected modesty I am resolved in liew of your Stationer to the Reader and Friend to the Stationer to give the following Sheets this direct and immediate adress And to begin with my self as your Friend doth with you really I think I should have had nothing to say of such a nothing were it not in opposition to that Character wherewith he pretends to honour you He sayes You are a person of extraordinary Moderation and Peaceableness And no doubt these qualities understood in their due mediocrity and subordination are of notable value But that you can allow any difference of opinion but such as is incompatible with the peace quiet of the Chuch is an ampliation so little favourable to truths preference so inconsistent with these Scripture intimations of Heresies and divisions through mans corruption inseparably attending it that I cannot otherwise esteeme it to be extraordinary then as it is excessive If truth do allow nay require a synathletick zeal which error doth no wise warrant to accommodate their contradictions by an easie indifferencie is more agreeable to the love of this World then the love of God And verily your Friends excusing the tartness of some of your expressions from a zeal that he allowes against that uncharitable Spirit which can suffer nothing that is not exactly of its own vvay is not more calumnious in its insinuation against us who desire utterly to disclaime selfe conceit in all thir matters then unjustly restrictive of the true zeal of God no less enemy to an irreligious lukewarmness the apparent measure of your latitude and the extreme now so dreadfully prevalent then an humorous severity so little at present to be apprehended But let all who desire to be found of a true Christian temper seek first the Kingdome of God and his righteousnesse and as his peace and the love of the Brethren cannot be wanting so the quiet of the Church is best submitted to his good pleasure For the occasion of my writing the account which your Friend gives of the occasion of yours doth equally justifie it The English Dialogues please you and I assure you both they and their answer are displeasing to me I reflect not upon the method of Dialogues Nay I am so far from censuring it though I relish it not in thir matters that I am confident that had you and your English pattern managed it sincerily it had proven the ruine and not the support of your design But finding the English man so insolently scornful as not to rest satisfied with an answere which by taking sanctuary in the Act of Indemnity other such fearful fainting shifts did rather bewray then vindicat the commoun cause and perceiving by your little essay the humors of the unquiet Spirit in both Nations as you are pleased to speak evill of the uprightnesse of such who run not with you to the same excess of ungodlinesse not to be more the same then it is the same strange Spirit of Hypocrisie and irreligion that at present abounds so much in these Lands to the perverting of both truth and righteousnesse I was moved by these considerations to make you this free and round reply Your Friend sayes you designed not vanity by your few sheets written almost as hastily as they could be transcribed And the truth is I am so much convinced of it that I am more enclined to apologize for the seriousnesse that I have used in confuting such a trifling bable then to purge my endeavours of any such suspicion Only because he saith You wish that every one may see the weakness of these grounds upon which such specious structures are built which when they come to be examined prove but painted sepulchers I thought it worth my paines by clear descriptions firme demonstrations both of the solidity of the foundations and beauty of the superstructure of the work of God to check the tumor of this insinuat boasting But in the next place we have your great designe in your small Book and it is To let some well-meaning People who have a love to godlinesse see that Religion is not at all concerned in things wherein they do concern themselves very much and that in contending for the shell we are like to lose the Kernel of Religion Why herein is a marvellous thing if I may use the blind mans words since I think you would almost have me to lose that sight which he had then lately received while the things wherein we did concerne our selves were sincerily owned and improven Religion flourished holinesse was in request profanity was ashamed iniquity stopt its mouth and since by you and your partakers they were subverted and decried wickednesse only hath exalted it selfe and its blasphemous Impieties and violences have abounded to the very horrour of every ingenuous man And yet we must believe that Religion is not at all concerned in the change And your Friend doth attribute to you the confidence not only to write but to direct your writing to well-meaning People Lovers of godlinesse For this effect I shall not anticipate my performance in the ensuing answer only as I have singly aimed at the establishment of the Lord 's faithful remnant in this hour of great manifold temptations so I am hopefull that eternal life and the meanes thereof the Gospel and its Ordinances shall never be so divided in this Land as to separate the things that they and I do contend for from Religions real and true interest Your Friend sayes They are but the shell and not the Kernel of Religion And if I may presse his lame similitudes I would enquire whither he call's them so because of their use for conservation or their superfluity when broken off And though it be manifest that this later sense can only warrand his undervalue and is indeed a proper allusion for such who have not stood to devoure that which is holy and after vowes to make enquirie Yet I am assured that unto his second thoughts its absurdity will appear so palpable as by forcing him to the first meaning it will constrain him rather to contradict his asserting of Religious inconcernment in these matters being the special means of its preservation then prophanely to despise them as rejectaneous trifles The language and manner
will admit cannot but be received for a Directory both of words and things But you add That it was but a cheat to cozen the World who might have startled to have seen us without any rule for Worship in as much as our Leaders quickly wearied of it It is answered first So long as any Church doth own the revealed will and word of God for the rule of Worship none but such phantastick Formalists as you will prove startlers at this sure and acceptable simplicity 2. Whence you alledge our Ministers their wearying of the Directory as such except from the suggestion of your own malice I cannot conceive that our Leaders neither turned it nor astricted themselves to it as to an imposed Liturgie is very certain but that they did not at all regard it is a groundless calumnie In the next place you add that Hence it clearly followed that the Preaching was the great matter of the Worship but the constant acts wherein the Church should adore God were thought too homely How you will make out this connexion seing both the ground is false and the consequence doth not hold I recommend to your second thoughts though our Prayers and Psalms related to our Preaching yet it will not conclude that therefore the Preaching was the great matter of the Worship Your service-Service-book makes many both Prayers Gospells Epistles and Collects relative to certain festivall dayes is therefore the observation of these dayes the great point of Worship The great matter of Worship is the rendering of our acknowledgement unto God which if performed by prayer hearing of His word and praises and that in such a harmony as all the exercises may conspire and be mutually helpful is thereby greatly advanced and not in the least marred As for these Constant acts which you desiderat in our Service if thereby you mean your Constant Set-forms you are already answered but if only the dayly solemn performances of Prayer and Praise which in liew of the morning and evening Sacrifice ought as the stated and fixed recognizance of the great God be observed and kept up in every Christian Society when other things shall be restored I frankly promise you my assent In the last place you say It is the least evill of extemporarie Forms that a Minister is ready to pour out his Soul to God in such devotions as are then most in his own Spirit Which may possibly happen to be very unfit for Publick Worship Sir this is so groundless a fear and so plain a diffidence of the assistance and presence of the Lord that I shall not trouble you with any further answere then to add that as a thoughtfull serious Spirit is ever found to be most prepared for dutie and divine influences so all experiences do conclude that a Ministers particular exercises have been so farre from marring that on the contraire they have alwayes rendered his publick performances more spiritual and lively And thus at length your dull N. C. comes to see that you are for Set-forms and demanding your reason tels you that the Apostles used them not to which you answere that you cannot doubt but they used our Saviour's Prayer and really though I do as little doubt but they might have done it yet I think both you and I must acknowledge that we finde no vestige of their doing of it For as for your distinguishing betwixt Mathew's after this manner therefore pray ye and Luke's when ye pray say the pattern to be proposed in the first and the practice intended in the second seing the form is formally the same in both places and the patterm so proposed by Mathew that the practice might be its most exact imitation and the practice so enjoined by Luke that yet the latitude of a Pattern is not discharged your notion is but airie and of no moment But if it were needful to give you my thoughts in this matter I would say that considering 1. That this pattern was given to the Disciples in the infancie of their knowledge before the out-pouring of the Spirit as a short and easie rudiment 2. That thereafter the Spirit is promised and that in such an abundant measure as it should flow like rivers of living water 3. That our Lord in his last discourse commands them frequently to pray to and ask the Father in his Name and 4 that the Spirit being given de facto they were enriched unto all utterance and both in their own Prayers and in their Directions to others how to pray do constantly make mention of the name of Iesus these things I say considered I am verily in the opinion they did not precisely use either this form of Prayer or any other but leaving this digression and esteeming this Form to be the most excellent modell and the very Substance of all prayer and granting the Apostles might have used it yea supposing with you they did use it yet what makes all this for your imposing and enjoining of Forms the only point of our present difference But you go on and say the Iews at that time had a Liturgie and hours of Prayer which our Saviour never reproves ergo quid I have told you already that to inferre an approbation from our Lords tolerance for a time of either the whole or any of the parts of that service which he was in a short space to abolish totally is bad Logick 2. Admit this tolerance were an approbation how will you make it out that the Iews their Lyturgie was more then a Directorie and that they were thereby astricted to an imposed Set-form Specially seing we finde that where in their best times certain Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving dictated by the Spirit are committed by David and other men of God to the Ministers for publick use yet the thing was both done and observed without the mention of any precise astriction or limitation In the next place you tell us that the Lords Prayer is word for word taken out of the Iewish Lyturgie and thence you think that exception against the English Service that some of its Prayers are out of the Roman Missal and not or Breviarie to be foolish and groundless But pray Sir why talk you so confidently of the Iewish Liturgie of these times for other posterior Liturgies availl not since to this day though much search hath been made and many forgeries have been obtruded no such thing could assuredly be found Next if such a thing sound and pure was in our Lord's dayes think you it was then no better Pattern nor the Roman Missal Ritual and Breviarie were in the very profoundest darkeness of that Superstition immediatly before the Reformation broke up and when the first glimmerings of that light managed as much by Police as Piety did translate from it the English Liturgie The disparity of these things is too palpable 3. Admitting the Iewish Liturgies used in the dayes of our Lord were yet truely extant it will not be sufficient for you to
the Land Truth and Purity and then shall we certainly enjoy Peace and Unity As for the liberty you taxe in our discourses and writings I hope no right discerner will finde it to be an invective but the native genuine and well-becoming freedom of Truth and Uprightness whether the license that you usurp in your pretended justifications of the King the Laws and your Consciences be indeed uncharitable bitter and malicious I neither say nor judge he whose glory is concerned he also judgeth But for the allowance of your defence by Tongue and Pen which you would appear to plead from our asserting of defensive armes you cannot be so serious in the demand as I am free to accord it seing I am perswaded that if the defensive armes which we maintain were no better warranted and as little to be feared as the self-defence which you pretend neither you nor any other would have accounted them to be worthy of the opposing The fifth DIALOGUE Answered SIR Neither envying you that poor applause which you vainly captate from your Mock-Non C. confessing himself to be by you much shaken in the matter of Bishops nor regarding the pitiful scorne you would cast on us by making him or your self rather ridiculous in avowing a blind aversation notwithstanding of his professed conviction I come to consider his quarrel against the Bishops on the account of your common-prayer-Common-prayer-book and what you answere Your N. C. alledges That this common-prayer-Common-prayer-book is a dead and formal Lyturgie set up instead of the pure and Spiritual worship of God In answere whereunto pretending as vainly that these are but big words as I have already clearly proved that the Government which we contend for is the interest and doth appertain to the Kingdom of Christ and thereby manifestly shewed this your confidence to be meer calumny you undertake to discover the fallacy by telling us what it is to pray by the Spirit And you say To Pray by the Spirit is when out of a deep sense of our misery and need and firm confidence in God we draw near to him to offer up our prayers and praises to him through Iesus Christ And you add That our hearts being moulded in this frame we pray by the Spirit use we words or not the same or different Nay it will appear we are carnal when we need to have our devotion tickled and provoked with new words Which description and the deduction from it being laid for a ground exciting your self by the faigned interjections of your N. C. surprises at the wit and novelty of your invention in representing the Liturgie-worship as Spiritual and the conceived one as carnal You go one to discourse of the differences betwixt spiritual devotion and prayer by words the termes wherein you are pleased very groundlessly and impertinently to state the distinction And the former you say lying in the will and not in the fancy and being affected with the thing and not with words can with the newness of affection make the same prayer in words though an hundred times repeated at every return New And is a still humbling and melting thing and so equable that it is above the frisking fits of the fancy neither doth it require a variety of words but in its sublimest exercises can persist long with great sweetness in the simplest Acts whereas multiplicity doth perhaps lead out the minde from pure and still devotion interior prayer and spiritual converse with God On the other hand you tell us that prayer by words lying in the fancy and its gratifications by the varying of things into several shapes the devotion raised by such Chimes is only sensible needing new phrases to renew its fervour and words and all the heat begot by words are but a false fire in the natural powers of the Soul which may heat the brain draw forth teares seem to wring the heart bâ—t amounts to nothing save a sensible fervour and present tickling wherein he that abounds most in Memâ—râ— Fancy Elâ—quence and Confidence is likely most to excell from all which you conclude that it expresseth a more spiritual temper to be able to worship God in simple and constant Forms and that extemporary prayer cannot be called praying by the Spirit except by Spirit be understood the Animal or Natural spirits This I suppose is a true account of your first floorish upon this subject to what purpose remaines yet to be inquired And first I might take notice of the inaccuracy of your expression of praying by the Spirit whereas the Scripture-phrase is to worship in Spirit Iohn 4. 23. Praying in the Spirit Eph. 6. 18. to worship in the Spirit Phil 3. 3. to pray with the Spirit 1. Cor. 14. 15. And though the difference be more in words then matter yet as the Scripture-diction is certainly the founder so I am apt to apprehend that your not adverting to it may have in part occasioned your vain and impertinent digression upon praying by the Spirit and praying by Words as if these were by us wholly distinguished and the latter preferred 2. I might observe that the description which you give us of Praying by the Spirit is more suteable to the calme and serene progress of a Christians course then to these doubtings feares wrestlings depressions and overwhelmings so frequently found in the experience of all to be thereto incident which being no less removed from and destitute of a firm confidence then the staying and assisting of the Spirit with groanes that cannot be uttered is therein observable your description appeares to be narrow and inadequat But the plain answer which I returne is that as the stating of the Question is by you wholly neglected so the reasoning whereby you go about to maintain your lifeless and superstitious Liturgie is altogether inconcludent The controversie betwixt you and us anent your Service-book is twofold 1. Whether the Publick worship of God ought to be astricted to set and imposed Forms And 2. Whether that form of Worship which your Book contains be not in it self in many particulars unsound and impertinent and consequently not to be received by way of directory farre less acquiesced unto as a precise injunction That these are the two hinges of this debate will easiely be acknowledged but what your above mentioned discourse doth contribute to its determination I must again solicite your second thoughts to render us an account We have your definition of praying by the Spirit and we let it pass Next you subjoin and that with many empty reiterations that praying in words specially extemporary and various is sensible fancical affecting and heating the brain in lower minds and producing only a natural fervour and that thus it may be with such who pray in words without the Spirit was never by us denied but darre you or any man els not abandoned to utter irreligion propose this as your opinion of all prayer in conceived and not precontrived and prescribed words Do not the very truth of
Religion requiring both heart and mouth the reasonableness of our service consisting in their Harmony the practice of the Lords people in all Ages the frequent examples every where in Scripture the experience of every serious Soul yea the common reason of all men redargue the gross absurdity of such a perswasion Were David's Thanksgiving 1 Chron. 29. 10. Solomon's Prayer 1 King 8. 23. and Iâ—hosaphat's Supplication 2 Chron. 20. 5. all without Book or Set-form only extemporary heats Are the praying Psalmes with all the exercises of the Lord Servants in the Nynths of Ezrah Nehemiah and Daniel and in other places clearly flowing as the Spirit gave utterance without any taught frame of words frisking fits of the Fancy Was our Lords Prayer Ioh. 17. only a sensible servour 〈◊〉 Sir I would rather suppose that although your airy discourse hath wildly seduced your observation yet your heart abhorres such impiety I will not therefore insist on the advantage which this your laxe inadvertencie so fairely offereth nor shall I content my self with this obvious retortion that where one instance can be given of conceived Prayer only managed by Fancie and subsisting in its vain exercise thousands may be found of persons through the practice and custome of Set-forms habituate to a most lifeless and superstitious mummery more suteable to the worshiping of stockes and stones then to the service of the true and living God Nor lastly will I vex you by shewing that the distinction which you make of praying by the Spirit and by words is so impertinently by you applied to our present purpose that though you endeavour thereby to impugne extemporariness multiplicity and variety of words in Prayer yet it plainly concludes all words to be superfluous for seing that in opposition to the spiritual worship of God which we contend for you tell us that we may pray by the Spirit use we words or not and that spiritual devotion is a still inward thing Is it not evident that all outward Forms whether set or extemporarie are thereby rejected But freely waving these your lapses that I may come more closely to the present purpose it is to be considered that the right and true worship of God is certainly inward in the minde will and affections God who demandeth the heart doth thence expect that tribute of reverence love fear acknowledgement and praise which in his sight is acceptable and all other outward performances as they ought to be the sincere expressions and significations of this internal devotion so they are wholly and only regulable by the prescriptions of Divine appointment If this truth were as seriously heeded as I am perswaded it is fixed and constant both by you and me our controversie would soon be ended The Question then is not concerning the life and truth of internal Prayer wherein without doubt the spirituality of that exercise doth principally consist but seing that you and we are agreed that God whom we serve is to be worshiped in Spirit and in Truth the debate is anent the manner how this worship specially when Publick is to be performed Whether in set and imposed Forms or as the Spirit giveth utterance Or if for preventing mistakes you please to take it at greater length whether it be lawful for men to compose and impose Set forms for Prayer and Worship and thereto to astrict the People of God in their performances Or whether it be more agreeable to the will and service of God that prayer and worship which are to be performed inwardly in the liberty and truth of the Spirit and understanding in their outward expression be left to be managed by the free and sanctified use of the rational faculty for that end given and in many observably gifted By which state as you may easily perceive that I do allow not only the antecedent improvement of the expressive power by all warrantable aides and advantages but also the free using upon occasion of such words as others have formerly either dictated or made use of Nay even in so ne cases of several of you Set forms both which I conceive are very consistent with praying by the Spirit either as by you or by us defined So the precise point controverted and to which I would have you all along to advert is anent the imposing and astricting which I plainly judge to be both destitute of Divine warrant and contrary to the liberty of spiritual devotion and so repugnant in both qualities to that Worship in Spirit and Truth which only is acceptable But before I proceed to a confirmation there occurre some mistakes to be removed one is of some of your way who defining praying by the Spirit the uttering of such petitions as are immediatly suggested both matter and words by the Holy Ghost hold it for a Gift proper to the Apostles and their times and now ceased thus the English Debater and your own headless allegeance that extemporarie Prayer cannot be called praying by the Spirit unless we also call it infallible doth also coincide But seing by your description above mentioned you do allow of praying by the Spirit as not yet ceased and do thereby very justly understand rather the Grace then the Gift of Prayer although even the Gift where it is as it may be without the Grace may also have the name of praying by the Spirit and seing that both the Debater and you I suppose would be offended if any should affirme that no man using the Service-book-forms could pray by the Spirit I only add that as the Spirit is the great promise of the Gospel its Grace the life and its Gifts the strength of all Christian duties so praying by or in the Spirit can no more be impugned for want of infallibility then any other good work of the same Spirit in us denied for want of perfection But who would not pitie two Doctors of the Church either so disingenuous or unable as not to distinguish betwixt the Spirits ordinary measures and extraordinary assistances The next mistake is that reflecting upon the greater exactness of phrase attainable in a Set-form above what can be expected in an extemporarie work and commending the propriety conciâ—neness and gravity that may be in the former in respect of that rudeness incohesion and levity supposed to be incident to the latter you exaggerate the comparison as if the whole stress of the debate did ly in this point whereas he that duely considereth will not only finde your Forms at best to be but humane and imperfect and that the Gift of Prayer promised if duely improved in and with the exercise of the Grace is farre more likely to furnish sound savory and acceptable words then these jejune and lifeless composures for framing and enjoining whereof men have no promise of the Lords assistance And lastly that the whole word of God and the excellent patterns therein recorded with many other helps are at hand and allowed by us by way of Directory but he must
History Victories and the like with all the composures made thereupon yea even these imprecatorie Psalmes which though in the direct act they appear to be hard and to need a special warrant may nevertheless furnish unto all sweet reflections of praise are most proper for the matter of song whereunto they were both at first framed and have since been used are all the works of God wonderful and such as may excite to praise and do you think it strange that the various exercises of his Servants and People should be accounted proper matter for this exercise Sir though I be no pretender to Poesie farre less presumptuous PINDARUM AEMULARI yet I conceive the smallest intelligence of the Nature and manner of Encomiasticks and Elogies finding matter in every subject might have guarded you from this escape but here I must digress unto a very pertinent discovery I have already told you that though by command we use the Psalmes in our praises yet seing these Forms are prescribed by the Spirit it can import no restraint and therefore can furnish no argument for your humane impositions but now there appears a more significant disparity viz. That the Psalmes being commanded by the Lord only for the matter of our praises though many of them may suggest both inward elicite conceptions and outward proper expressions of praise yet it is evident that by the injunction the reflex acts wherein the nature and exercise of praise doth formally consist are not in the least narrowed or confined let be stinted or restrained whereas by your imposed Forms framed on purpose not simply to furnish matter but to direct nay to suggest lead and express our Petitions the very formal desires of the heart and spirit in their substance at least though not in their degree are so led and bound up that it is hard to determine whether this restraint be more visible or injurious Having thus farre diverted I return to our purpose You say there are many things in the Psalmes that we understand not To sing without understanding is certainly sinful but unless you affirme the Psalmes to be in themselves unintelligible you may not because of our ignorance or weakness reject the institution of God Lastly you tell us that there were not above twentie of the Psalmes used by the Jews in Worship 'T is answered 1. You observe not that all this clatter is no more against us then against you at least your Episcopal Church for as for your self I am almost in the opinion that you are yet so little fixed that the clearest redargution will prove no conviction 2. The very inscriptions of more then thrice the number of Psalmes by you named do demonstrat the groundless confidence of this your alledgeance beside that we finde 1 Chron. 16. 7. the very first Psalm delivered by David to the publick Singers insert in the Book of Psalmes without any direction by way of title what may we then conceive of the rest 3. Reforming Hezekiah commanded the Levites to sing praises unto the Lord with the words of David and of Asaph the Seer and this the opinion and custome of the Church in all ages have understood of all the Psalmes whence then is it that you do assert so boldly The 2 difficulty which I am to remove is that you say we are not bound or rather have no warrant to use the Psalmes in meeter or with Tunes To this I answere That we are bound to sing is evident both from Scripture-precept and example and that we are thereby warranted to have the Psalmes in meeter with Tunes is as clear as both are necessary at least convenient in the propriety of our language for the use of singing I deny not but prose may be sung but seing it is certain that our language hath no such exact Prosodie as either to render it easiely measurable or the measures distinguishable by points and accents nay that the import of the musici or tonici accentus in the Hebrew qui olim moderabantur harmoniam musicam is so farre now lost and unknown that if we were now to sing the Hebrew Psalmes we could not make use of them Pray Sir leave us but the way of meeter in place of points and accents untill you teach us better Grammar whereas you hint that we may have all David's Instruments as well as Tunes if you could learn us to sing without Tunes as we may well do without Organs I shal not contend but seing that David did no doubt invent and introduce these his Instruments as well by the special direction of the Spirit as he did all other things anent the service of the Temple and that the Primitive Christians worshipping more in the simplicity of the Spirit then in outward showes canebant assâ voce non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think you may now put up your pipes and spare the cost Next you say Why may not the Christian Church compose new Hymnes as they of Corinth did And this you judge to be the more necessarie because that David's Psalmes have not such full and clear Hymnes upon the great Mysteries of the Christian beliefe And you think the liberty which we plead for in Prayer should much perswade it 'T is answered if you consider that Scripture 1 Cor. 14. and particularly the 26. v. you may understand that as the Apostle's business in the place is to set an order to the use of extraordinary Gifts wherein that Church abounded so the Psalms Doctrine Tongue Revelation and Interpretation there spoken of appear to be inspired and afflatitious motions which will not found you any argument And you your self do so plainly observe that these Psalmes of the Corinthians were framed by private persons that I marvell that your remembring of the thing to be extraordinary did not stop your translation of it by way of Privilege to the Churches in our dayes 2. Seing the Lord hath provided us with a plentiful variety of Psalmes and Hymnes and beside hath allowed us as full a liberty of praising in prose as of prayer I think it doth fully remove all that is here by you objected and abundantly warrant us both to abide content with Gods institutions and refuse a superfluous mixture of humane Odes with these Divine Psalmes which he hath appointed for the matter of our more solemne Praises But your scope is Why do not ye use the Glorie to the Father and your N. C. answering Because it is not in the Scripture and is but the device of men you reply who would not be sick with such pitiful folly Thus your nice ceremonious stomach nauseats sure and solid truths You add shew me a reason why you make prayers and not praises I answere 1. Whatever we make we impose none 2. We do not say that we make either prayers or praises our plain profession is that as the Lord whose it is hath commanded so we worship him using that allowed liberty of Spirit and utterance both in
Kingdome But can you or any man thence conclude that therefore he acted from an ordinary power and facultie a priviledge proper to his office Why then should men be so absurdly unequal as from the like extraordinary interpositions of Princes in Church perturbations to attribute to them a proper inherent right and perpetual prerogative Next you say That the Emperours also judged in matters of Schisme But seing that any judgement given by them was consequent to the Churches determination though perhapes with a little attemperation for conveniency whereof determinations in these matters do very naturally allow the instance is no more favourable then the rest you have adduced But the Code Basilicks Capitulers of Charles the great shew that they never thought it without their sphere to make laws in Ecclesiastick matters 'T is answ This objection shewes that either you are little acquainted with what is in these Books or little advertent to the conclusion you have in hand The laws you mention are either imperial confirmations of the truth owned by the Church or for condemning and punishing of declared hereticks or for authorizing and ordering a slender umbrage of jurisdiction called episcopalis audientia granted to Church-men in charitable and favourable cases or for restraining and correcting their dissolute manners or lastly anent the regulating of Hospitals Alms-houses other things pertaining to the outward policy of the Church Pray Sir what make these for your Supremacie Or was ever this part of his Majesties power by us questioned But where wil you finde in all approven antiquity that ever a Prince by vertue of a pretended inherent right in his Crown or any acclaimed prerogative and Supremacie in causes Ecclesiastick took upon him with one blow summarily to overturne the established Ministery of a Church by himselfe formerly by solemn Oath confirmed introduce new Office-bearers set up a new frame of Church-government declaring himselfe to be the sole head and fountain thereof to whom all others as subordinat must be accountable for their admistrations In what antient record did you ever read of a Commission granted by a King for Ecclesiastick affaires impowering Secular persons to appoint Ministers to be censured by suspension and deposition and Church-men to punish by fining confining incarcerating and other corporal paints What Emperour or Prince did ever assume to himselfe in the right of his royal power at once to impose upon a whole Church a new liturgie and form of service never before heard of among them Or did it ever enter in the heart of a Christian Potentat to declare for a Law that what ever he should please to enact anent Church-meetings and matters should upon the publication be by all obeyed and observed and in suite of it to statute that if either Minister or other person not allowed by his or his Bishops authority do preach expone Scripture or pray except in his own house and to these only of his own family it shall be judged a Coventicle and liable to pains of Law These are a part of the native fruits of your Supremacie If you look back to confirme it by antient precedents pray give us but one parallel I grant that Iustinian in some of his Constitutions after having declared and confirmed the truth received by the Church and dâ—termined by her Councils not only condemnes but anathematizes the contrary heresies But seing his using of that phrase peculiar to the Church and properly importing a power acknowledged not to be competent to secular Athority doth only express his more enixe detestation of these errours and approbation of the Church her censures against them it cannot with any colour of reason be made use of for your purpose But you proceed to tell us that the Bishops not excepting the Bishope of Rome were named at least their elections approven by the Emperours And what then For my part if the Emperour and all Christian Princes should agree at once to reduce them aswell as they advanced them it should not be accounted an invasion of the Churches power or priviledge But because it is like that these Emperours you speak of did indeed regard them as true Church-officers nevertheless medled as is mentioned in their elections I answer further that the true cause of Princes their first medling in the elections of Bishops was either the diffidence of the Bishops as to that office and title wherein not being satisfied from Scripture-warrant they were inclined to apply to the Emperour for the supplement of his confirmation or els their solicitous ambition which in thesearly contests that they had for precedency did prompt them among other artifices to fortify their pretensions by the Emperour's favour and suffrage However this is very certain that whether the Emperour 's medling was first procured by the Bishops address or did flow from their own proper motive had these Church-men contained themselves within the rules and limits set to them by our Lord they had never judged the Emperours confirmation requisite to the validity of their office and title and therefore seing the true account of this matter is that the aspiring of Ecclesiasticks did give the first rise unto this secular medling whether we take it to be no usurpation as being conversant about that which to say the truth is not Christian let be Ecclesiastick or to be a partaking in the Church-men their usurpation either of the two doâ—h equally make void your argument After the reasons which we have heard you conclude That Kings their medling in Ecclesiastick affaires was never controverted till the Romane Church swelled to the hight of tyranny and since the reformation it hath been still stated as one of the differences betwixt us and them It is answered If Princes had at first exceeded and intruded too far in Church-matters and then the Pope acted by a worse spirit and no less aspiring had risen up against his Masters and thrust himselfe into their rooms what would this make for your advantage Or doth it to either of them conclude a right Suppose a Papist debating this question should argue thus that the Pope his headship in Ecclesiastick affaires in England was never controverted till Henry the Eight impatient through lust did arrogate to himself the Supremacy and since that time it hath still been stated as one of the controverted differences would you think this reasoning pungent Why then is not your discerning equall to your judgement But the clear truth in this matter is that although the Emperours of old did at no time lay claime to this Supremacy questioned yet they and the succeeding Princes having too much connived at and countenanced the Antichristian ambition working in Prelacy toward the Papacy it was from the righteous judgement of God that upon its exaltation they were blinded and involved in these contentions and justly plagued by the transcendent insolence of an evill which they had too much fomented And therefore your dating the period of these contests