action which is otherwise lawful but giveth offence I do the action and yet I break not the Apostles precept because it is not such an offence as he means though it go under the same general name as the Act of the Sheriff and of the private man doe For Saint Paul means as the Authors Confesse an offence taken from an action which in other respects and antecedently to the offence I might do or not do But in this case my action is no such it is not an action which I might either do or leave undone antecedently to the offence but I was bound in conscience to do it if no offence had been taken and that by the Command of God requiring obedience to the Magistrate and therefore the duty being necessary antecedently to the offence in order of nature yea and in order of time too the falling out of the offence cannot warrant the omission of it much lesse oblige to the said omission SECT IV. Conformity is not in its own Nature so scandalous as Difformity both in provoking Distast and in laying stumbling-blocks in the way of the weak The Ministers Reasons make as much against the Oath of Allegiance as the Common-prayer It is absurd to offend the Magistrate that they may avoid the offence of private men Their Reply to this is but a meer begging of the Question and betraying their cause IN the next place they describe the scandal which they say would be taken at their reading of the Common-Prayer and make it consist in two particulars 1. That people would scorn and vilifie them and withdraw themselves from communion with them And 2. That they would be encouraged by the examples of these Ministers to do the like although not convinced of the lawfulnesse of so doing and so sin against their own consciences But I reply to them thus As for the first part of the scandal supposing that you are satisfied of the lawfulnesse of using the Common-prayer and have nothing to say against it but the scandal as the supposition is made by your selves upon this Argument I say supposing your selves thus satisfied then the people have more cause to vilifie you and withdraw themselves from your communion on the other hand for disobeying those to whom God hath commanded you to submit your selves This hath evidently more appearance of evil in it then the other I mean disobedience hath much more appearance of evil in it then obedience and consequently is much more scandalous in its natural tendency and more apt to give offence of this first kind that is to procure a disrepute and contempt among men who stand not on their heads and have not their Opticks inverted May be men will take a pretence from your conformity to call you Time-servers Men pleasers and the like But they may much more reasonably take an occasion from your Non-conformity supposing your selves are satisfied of the lawfulnesse of conformity were it not for the scorn which attends it to accuse you of a far greater sin which the Scripture parallels with that of Witchcraft If therefore you stick on your credit you should rather fear a greater reproach to which you give not only a greater pretext but also a real cause then a lesse reproach to which you yield a lesse pretence and no real cause at all For though people at least those whose votes you most regard are more apt to vilifie where there is lesse cause then where there is more yet you ought more to fear the giving cause of reproach then to be reproached And besides who knows how soon their minds may be turned For we see how men alter in their opinions about Religion and then may be they will reproach you for omitting of that which now they would reproach you for doing And as for the second part of the scandal you may by your example as much encourage some to sin against their consciences by not using of the Common Prayer as by using it For why may they not be as well-emboldned to Non conformity with a doubting conscience by your example as you think others will be encouraged to Conformity by the same example In case they be you lead them into a far greater sin For to conform purely in imitation of you is their sin only because they do it with a doubting conscience But the contrary is a sin without any respect to the said doubts If it be said that there are none or but a few of such Persons whom these Ministers ought to regard that scruple the Lawfulnesse of Non-conformity and therefore that there is no danger they should be led into sin that way I answer that the Peoples Non-conformity is a sin whether they do it doubtingly or no and the Ministers practice doth confirm them in this sin and hinder them from doubting of it that so they might leave it Yea though the People think it lawful to disobey the Act for the Common Prayer yet they are very wild indeed if they think without any scruple that they may violate other Acts But now seeing their Ministers to break one act as well as themselves they will the more easily be carried on in their Error till they come to think they may break others also And how the contempt of Laws hath proceeded by degrees from one to another till the most fundamental Laws were overturned we have seen by late and lamentable experience And it is no wonder For the very same Arguments which are brought against the use of Common Prayer do serve as much against the taking of the Oath of Allegiance For a Form of words in Prayer is there imposed since an oath is an invocation of God and so are significative ceremonies which the first Argument of this book which I oppose pronounceth unlawful Again such words actions and gestures are there used in divine worship for such is an oath which were used by Idolaters and this is pronounced unlawful by their second Argument And lastly to take the Oath of Allegiance is scandalous and offensive to many of the weak Brethren which are offended at the Common Prayer and therefore it ought not to be taken if the third Reason was of any force which is under my present examen And I cannot let this passe without putting this question Should a man refuse to take the Oath of Allegiance when required thereto because others are offended at it I hope the Authors will allow such an offence how many or how good soever the Persons are that are offended to be inconsiderable And yet it cannot be denied that the thing is indifferent in it self and only made necessary by humane Laws For till the Law was made no man was bound to take that Oath Therefore since humane Laws have force in this case to make that action lawful which many are offended with they must needs have the like force in the case of the common Prayer supposing it to be indifferent save only for the scandal which the Authors
add to them though they avoid the Popish Rock of conferring Grace which we say no true Sacrament doth ex opere operato But the answer is ready viz. That this Argument makes as much against the Ceremonies annexed to a solemn Oath as against any other significant Ceremonies quatenus significant But indeed it makes against neither the one nor the other For to make a Sacrament as the word is properly and strictly taken it is not enough that there be a sign representing spiritual mysteries I doubt the Authors scorn to learn out of the derided Catechism in the Common Prayer-Book else they might see there that it must be ordained by Christ himself to be a means and a pledge How ever that may convince them that the imposers of those Ceremonies against which they are so querulous never intended them to be Sacraments for they never say that they were ordained by Christ himself to be pledges and means But I hope they have a better value for Mr. Perkins and I am sure when I was a School-boy I learned of him that a Sacrament is not only a sign to represent but also a seal to confirm and consequently implies a Divine institution Humane Authority may appoint our seals by which we have our engagements to God confirmed as the Cross after Baptism but they cannot make Gods seals by which his promises may be confirmed to us for that is proper to him and therefore they can make no new Sacraments But though they can make no new seals yet they may make new signs without making a Sacrament Yea and new seals on our part though not on Gods It is wont to be objected What place can be then left for Superstition if men may add new Ordinances which God hath not declared to be necessary To which I answer that Superstition consists not in using these things as helps to Worship which are only not commanded by God but withall not forbidden But in using them as necessary pieces of Religion sanctified by divine institution when they are not And so there may be as much Superstition in sitting at the Sacrament as in kneeling in wearing other Garments as a Surplis SECT II. The Text Deut. 12.32 doth not forbid all humane inventions in Gods Worship any more then in Civil Government It condemns as much the approved practice of David and Salomon and our present disuse of the Ceremonial Law The seal of the Canon Rev. 22. considered as to this matter I Have heard many more such exceptions made against these humane inventions as they call them But I remember I am not now writing a Treatise but answering a Book and shall only answer the objection which the Authors make from that Scripture which hath the greatest appearance of patronage to their cause of any I know of in the Bible It is Deut. 12.32 What thing soever I command you observe to do it thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it This they cite to their purpose in the Question under consideration with this Gloss pag. 100. By this Text certainly all humane inventions in the worship of God are forbidden But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an Argument themselves much cry down Therefore let us take the Liberty they give us to examine their interpretation by the Rule of Right Reason by which it will easily appear that their certain truth is a certain falshood For 1. If this Scripture forbids all humane inventions in Gods Worship then all humane inventions in the Civil Government are forbidden also The Consequent is false by their own confession unless they will deny that the Act of Indempnity is either an Humane Invention or a Lawful Act Ergo the Antecedent is false also I prove the Consequence thus Those words which are applyed both to the commands of God about his Worship and to the commands of God about the Civil Policy do as much forbid humane inventions in Civil Policy as in the worship of God But these words Thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it though in the twelfth of Deuteronomy they are indeed applyed to the commands of God concerning his own Worship yet in other places they are applyed to all his commandments in general Ergo They do no more forbid humane inventions in the Worship of God then in Civil Policy The Minor is clear from Deut. 4.1 2. Now therefore Hearken O Israel unto the Statutes and unto the Judgements which I teach you for to do them You shall not add to the word that I command you neither shall you diminish ought from it Now the Laws made to regulate Civil commerce and Judicial proceedings were some of those Statutes and Judgements to which all additions are forbid And therefore if such a Prohibition forbids all humane inventions in the Worship of God it must needs forbid humane inventions in the Civil Government which I hope those I oppose are not so wild as to assert 2. We find good and holy men notwithstanding this Prohibition setting their own Prudence a work to invent new things in the Worship of God which may well serve as an Argument ad homines to convince those which place so much in Examples as usually the Nonconformists do But that it may be the more easily and universally succesful I shall further demonstrate that these examples were approved by God also We have an instance 2 Sam. 7. David purposed to build God an house The Reason which grounded this Purpose was no command of God but meerly Prudential ver 2. The King said to Nathan the Prophet See now I dwell in an house of Cedar but the Ark of the Lord dwelleth within Curtains The Prophet Nathan approveth the Motion in the next words Go do all that is in thy Heart for the Lord is with thee And though afterward God by Nathan stopped the execution yet it is evident from the divine Oracle that he liked the Intention as he took pleasure in the readiness of Abrahams mind to offer Isaac though he would not have him be actua ly slain This divine approbation of Davids purpose appears from Gods promise made thereupon to build David an house c. And so doth his Son Salomon comment upon the foresaid Oracle in his prayer at the dedication of the Temple 1 Kings 8.18 The Lord said to David my Father Whereas it was in thy Heart to build an house to my Name thou didst well that it was in thy Heart Nevertheless thou shalt not build the House but thy Son If it be said that David had a particular command for it by divine and extraordinary Revelation beyond the Dictates of his sanctified Reason This is said clearly without Book yea and against Book For thus God answereth David 1 Chron. 17.6 Spake I a word to any of the Judges of Israel saying Why have ye not built me an house of Cedars And besides if God commanded David before why did he forbid him afterward For though God did forbid that to Abraham
But Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate there is no necessity to assign a Metaphysical cause for such an accident as we see obviously effected by the powers of Nature For Schollars experience the same thing in themselves where the Spirit cannot be pretended beginning to read or meditate on a new subject with great intention and fervency but soon calmed and ready to lay it aside till the diversion of a new one hath made the old one new again 3. Nature it self is apt to be more intent and fervent in the exercise of a Gift then in the exercise of a Grace and therefore where there is place for the exercise of both there may probably be more intention and fervour then where there is place only to exercise grace And in this case the less intention is as acceptable to God as the greater For the over-plus may arise from the gift and not from the grace whereas the Lord delighteth not in the legs of a man nor in his wit and tongue neither but his delight is in them that fear him To apply this answer He that reads the Common-Prayer exerciseth no gift in comparison of that which is exercised in extempore Prayes all that is left him to do is to exercise Grace as faith love humility desire But the other exerciseth his memory fancy invention an harder piece of judgement besides method Now since we are most stupid to the best and most spiritual duties and had rather read a book where our parts and gifts are exercised then a plain one though more practical where the exercise of Grace is more purely and singly required it is manifest that caeteriâ— paribus there will be more intention and heat in the use of extempore Prayer which sets so many gifts a work then if the same man should use the Common-prayer which employs little else then his graces And yet this overplus of intention and heat is hardly a better sign to the person in whom it is that he or his Prayer is any whit more acceptable to God then the intention and heat which a school-boy finds in using his invention and making his verses above that which he finds in reading an Author For invention takes up the soul be it in what subject it will And this brings me to a fourth Reason wherefore some men may be more intent and fervent in extempore Prayers then in the Common-prayer 4. Men are naturally more affected with their own inventions then with those of others and therefore extempore Prayers may more affect them then prescribed forms upon no better an account then that of self-love May be some have experienced that they can better joyn with others in an extempore Prayer then in a Form but that may proceed from the first Reason and moreover from this I shall now name That it is natural to be intent and fervent in hearing others to exercise their parts notably and it is no more then we find in reading or hearing any piece of Wit But the Authors have professed that they come not under this Reason being not so much affected with premeditated forms of their own therefore because it reacheth not them though it doth others I will not account it a fourth Reason but substitute another which for ought I know may agree to them It is natural to the mind of man to be impatient of restraint and love to be at its own liberty whence it comes to passe that a plausible fancy doth more prevail then a severe and sullen Argument as Doctor Reynolds now Bishop of Norwich hath excellently noted in his Treatise of the Passions and Faculties of the Soul cap. 4. Now men using their own liberty in extempore Prayers but being limited and tyed up by Forms they may be more intent and fervent in the former then in the latter upon no better principle then that which is most predominant in the most corrupt men which are the most independent and say Let us break their bonds asunder and cast their cords from us 5. In unpremeditated Prayers there is far greater room and scope and opportunity for ostentation and vain glory in the discovery of mens parts and gifts yea as some hearers will interpret of their graces and divine experiences And what can flesh and blood be more intent and earnest about then such an employment And that the intention and fervour of many in their Prayers proceeds from this Reason is evident from hence in that when they pray before others they will weep and make other such signs of intention and fervour but it is not so when others pray before them I have now mentioned the five Reasons I promised which may probably cause the overplus of intention and fervour in these men while they use extempore Prayers above what they find in using of Forms I say not only possibly but probably For seeing the self-same things are prayed for in the Letany which can be the matter of the longest extempore Prayer though not in that novelty variety and elegancy of phrase if the heat and intention they speak of did purely proceed from the strength of their desire to the things themselves it would be equal in both cases But since it is not equal it must needs proceed from some other cause and probably from one or all those I have assigned since it is known that they are apt in their own nature to produce such an inequality It might be further considered that some persons having entertained some private opinions of their own are engaged by them to pray for such things which the Prayers of the Church do not beg of God but rather the contrary as it was in the late wars when the late King thought one Reason of disliking the Common-prayer was that there were so many Petitions put up for him I shall only add a Reason which relates more properly and especially to the fervency spoken of then to the intention of mind And it is this when a man doth strongly bend his wit in study most of all in invention he feels a sensible heat in his body insomuch that I have known some to put a napkin dipped in cold water on their heads Any man I think may experience that in such an employment he doth not breath so freely and frequently as ordinarily he doth which will be most apparent to such as take Tobacco even as a man holds his breath when he is about with all his might to strike a blow And this obstruction of the breath alone is sufficient to effect an extraordinary fervency in the blood and spirits Besides when a man is not only to invent but to invent as fast as the Auditors expect he should utter in case matter comes not fast enough he will be apt to draw out his last words to the great straining of his body and to make up the defect of matter with more then ordinary earnestnesse in the delivery Like him whose notions being out before the glasse lifted up
Remembrancers The same may be said of the usual names of the moneths and dayes of the week which do include the names of heathenish Gods and Goddesses which some have taken much pains to shew and presse for the credit of Mr. Jesse's Almanack But his Almanack would be needlesse except these things were first pressed by such tinkerly Reformers who make work that so they may mend it For who thinks of Venus when he mentions Friday though Frea signifie the same And who thinks of keeping a Feast to Saturn when he celebrates the Nativity of our Saviour or of honouring Flora in a May pole None I dare say or but very few excepting such as have been endroctrinated by the said Reformers No more then a man means to swear by Hercules when he saith or writeth Mehercule which I am sure I have met with in Theological discourses made by Authors never suspected of any good inclination to Popery or other Idolatry In like manner who thinks of the Lady of Loretto or other Popish Idols in reading of the Liturgy Only the discourse I oppose is the direct way to effect that which they pretend to prevent I have argued all this while upon the Authors supposition That the worship of the Church of Rome in the whole complex is idolatrous But they might more properly say that a bushel filled half with wheat and half with rye is a bushel of wheat or that a Sermon is nonsentical in the whole complex if some few phrases of it be non-sense or that a Translation is erroneous in the whole complex if there be some few Errata's in it Whosoever faith a Blackamore is white ih the whole complex according to my Criticks tels a lye though he be white in his teeth I might also add that the Papists in the grossest part of their idolatry in adoration of the bread are justified by a Principle which the Non-conformists or most of them do maintain and their idolatry is but the lawful emprovement of this Principle viz. That Reason is not to judge what points are to be received as articles of faith and what not For this principle being supposed there is no warrant to interpret those words figuratively This is my body since all the warrant which is pretended is that the literal sense is repugnant to Reason which pronounceth it absolutely impossible that one body should be in two places at once But according to this Hypothesis of the exclusion of reason from the judgement seat the Papist might reply Indeed my reason tels me that it is impossible but the Scripture saith This is my body and therefore I ought not to mince the words at the command of reason which hath nothing to do in matters of faith Indeed the Scripture saith the Body of Christ is in heaven but I believe it is on earth too at the Eucharist Nothing but Reason gain-sayes and she hath nothing to do to judge in the case What can a man that goes on this Principle reply to the so much condemned Idolater Out of his own mouth he is confuted He laid down the doctrine and the other makes the natural and genuine use Those therefore which hold this principle cannot judge the action of the Papists in adoring the Bread to be idolatrous without self-contradiction and if they will act according to their light this second Reason signifies nothing to them though it may to others I cannot conclude my notes on their second Reason without reflecting upon another extracted from the same Topick and by what they have said upon this Reason rendered more creditable to the unwary and half observing Reader For they have sprinkled in several pages of their book many shrewd hints as if the Liturgy ushered in the Masse and conformity were a step toward Popery As page 67. We know that those Ministers and people who are most zealous against Popery are most averse to this Liturgy But a zeal for any cause except it be bridled by discretion and attended with an equal pace of strength is not the way to protect it but to betray it We saw lately that the States-men which were most zealous for the good old Cause lost it and the King had not better friends then his most implacable enemies Fury is as bad in a Champion as torpour it is an even temperature of wisdom and valour which doth the execution A sober Protestant though he rageth lesse shall prevail more on a Papist then a mad Fanatick The greatest part of the zeal against Popery which is found among the Non-conformists is like that of one frantick who wounds himself while he would strike his foe They are mad against Popery but they cannot tell why they cannot confute it without condemning themselves as I could prove in many Instances This unguided zeal will be sure to run far enough from Popery and so runs into it as he that sails round the Globe the further he goes after he is half way the nearer he approacheth to the place from whence he set out Thus the Quakers a considerable part of the Non-conformists rayled at Popery till they began to be taken for Jesuites or their disciples I have heard of several Papists that have turned Protestants by the reasonings of men zealous for the Liturgy But I professe unfainedly I never heard of one that of late years was won by any Non-conformist excepting by Mr. Baxter And I believe he would have been as unsuccessful as others but that he goes upon more moderate principles Me thinks the example of Doctor Cosens now Bishop of Durham once most suspected of Popery for his zeal for the Liturgy and yet exercising a no lesse couragious then considerate zeal against Popery in the time of his exile methinks I say this example alone were sufficient not only to stop the mouth of calumny in this particular but to non-plus jealousie it self I confesse in some things the Conformists come nearer to the Papists then others but it is as Souldiers make their approaches to the enemy to fight with him and are therefore many times thought to fall away but when they return with their spoils captives and Trophees none is so hard-faced as to maintain the suspition Mr. Baxter himself it is known hath not only been suspected but verily believed to be a Papist and that by some Rabbi's meerly for his conceding some Positions to the Papists which no reasonable and just man can deny them whereby he hath done more to the shaking of the very foundations of the Papal Sea then all the Non-conformists that ever mannaged the Controversie which I ever heard of But I have so much to say upon this subject that it would require a Book by it self Doctor Sanderson in both his Prefaces to his Sermons hath shewed how much service is done to the Pope by the Non-conformists in many particulars where the Reader may be satisfied concerning the falsenesse of that which they affirm page 109. That there is nothing of more
place their Religion in them and think that a man cannot pray in the spirit if he pray by a Form Why do not the Authors fear to harden such Persons in their sin by their example Certainly those which think the Common-prayer may lawfully be used saving for fear of scandal ought sometimes to use it were it only for this Reason that their Example might not tempt weak Christians to think Religion consists in Non-conformity as many do restraining the name of Christians the Godly the Brethren to the Non-conformists For such an opinion wrought or confirmed by such an Example would prove by much a more grievous scandal then that which the Authors pretend to be so tender of since there is more Reason for a man to rest in conformity then in Non-conformity For the former is a piece of obedience performed to the Moral Law Honour thy Father but the latter is disobedience thereto SECT VI. The impertinency of pleading that the Liturgy is pressed on them out of Malice Such a supposition makes rather for Conformity Their scruple at the obsolete words dubious phrases and antique Responds answered Their Conclusion and mine THey produce another Reason wherefore they cannot use the Common Prayer in the next Section in these words Because we are assured in our consciences that very many of those who are earnest for it presse the use of it upon no other account then from a principle of Malice against Gods Ministers and People But I think there was never seen a more feeble objection brought in a case of so much moment For may not good and necessary duties be pressed out of Malice Was not the solemn League and Covenant accounted a good and necessary duty and yet upon many a man was it pressed out of Malice by those who thought he would not take it and so they should have advantage against him Is not the taking of the Oath of Allegiance a good and necessary duty and yet possibly it may be pressed upon some out of Malice The truth is this Argument taken from Malice is so far from making against conformity that it makes strongly for it For by how much the more the Enemies of these Ministers watch for their fall and desire a just occasion against them so much the more careful they should be to give them none but conform to the Laws and stop the mouths of their ill-willers by an orderly and peaceable conversation In their next Section they say they cannot use the Common Prayer because it is full of obsolete words dubious phrases antick Responds But 1. As for the Obsolete words I have heard that there is an intention of reforming them However there are the like in Sternholds and Hopkins translation and yet probably these Authors do sing them with their People Besides these obsolete words are not so hard to be understood as many which the Assembly hath put down in their childrens Catechism and may be all interpreted to the meanest capacity in one Sermon and the hour better spent then often it is And so may 2. The Dubious phrases though I believe there is hardly made an extempore prayer which for the length of it hath not as many dubious phrases especially if captiously examined as long as our Liturgy hath been 3. If by Antick Responds they mean Ancient what hurt is there in that Can these Authors use nothing that is ancient why then do they quarrel at Innovations If by Antick they mean foolish and ridiculous they should remember that it is with modes forms fashions and ceremonies as it is with other things secundum modum Recipientis salves all That which is foolish and ridiculous to one is grave and wise to another Broad-brim'd Hats are ridiculous generally when out of fashion and so are narrow ones when the others have been used awhile If the Authors and the rest of their minds would but unanimously use these Responds the seeming antickness and ridiculousnesse in the Eyes of some at present would quickly be worn out But therefore men think the fashion ridiculous because it is not worn by such Persons as they most esteem The Authors add in the same Section that the Method of the Common Prayer through the whole is like to none in any reformed Church in the World But I wonder that the Church of England should be so inconsiderable a part of the Christian world that she must go to other Churches and not they rather come to her I am sorry that Divines of several forraign Churches have spoken much more reverently of our Liturgy then the Authors They conclude This is the sum of our Apology alway reserving to our selves further liberty of adding any further Arguments or Exceptions Indeed they had need to reserve that liberty otherwise they have left their cause in a very poor condition But we may easily see that they are so far from seeking satisfaction in these disputes to their present doubts and scruples that they are purposed to study and devise new Cavils when these are answer'd And therefore I sadly prognosticate that neither this of mine nor any other more able attempt will prevail with many such persons that are rather active then passive in their doubts and that study more how to fortifie their own Objections then how to confute them But if this undertaking may be but so successful as to preserve other more indifferent Readers fiâ—â—â— being misled by the Reasons whose sophistry I have detected I am infinitely recompenced for my pains and can contentedly wait on the divine Suada to give a satisfactory answer to the Rest FINIS