The VINDICATION of Liturgies Lately Published by Dr. FALKNER PROVED NO VINDICATION OF THE Lawfulness Usefulness and Antiquity of SET-FORMS of Publick Ministerial Prayer to be Generally used by or Imposed on all Ministers And consequently 〈◊〉 Answer to a Book Intituled A Reasonable Account why some Pious Nonconformists judge it sinful for them to perform their Ministerial Acts in by the Prescribed Forms of others Wherein with an Answer to what Dr. Falkner hath said in the Book aforesaid the Original Principles are discovered from whence the different apprehensions of men in this Point arise By the Author of the Reasonable Account and Supplement to it Prov. 18.7 He that is first in his own cause seemeth just but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him LONDON Printed for Benjamin Alsop at the Angel and Bible in the Poultrey 1681. To those Honourable Knights Citizens Burgesses Who Are or Shall be Chosen To Represent the Commons of England In the Next Assembly of PARLIAMENT 1. BEfore you most Renowned Patriots we most humbly spread our Cause to whom should the Commons of England make their Applications but to those whom they have chosen to represent them in their Circumstances of Distress and Grief Especially when their most Gracious Soveraign hath so often declared the Benignity of his Royal Nature to them and readiness to joyn in any Act or Acts declarative or confirmative of it and when the most Noble Lords in the years 1672 and 1673 together with the Commons then assembled had gone so far as to our Relief in the Cause as â—â—ey did notwithstanding which the mutability of your Honourable House seems to require a new Application to your Honours How far we have applied our selves to the Reverend Bishops will appear to your Honours by the Account of the Proceedings of the Commissioners of both Perswasions appointed by his Sacred Majesty c. Printed 1661 and several other overtures That the case was the same then that is by us now pleaded for will appear to your Honours by that Printed Account p. 5. in their 7 Proposal expressed in these words That the Gift of Prayer being one special Qualification for the work of the Ministry bestowed by Christ in order to the Edification of his Church to be exercised for the profit and and benefit thereof according to its various and Emergent necessities It is desired that there may be no such Imposition of the Liturgy as that the exercise of that Gift be thereby totally excluded in any part of Publick Worship And that the Commissioners on the other side so apprehended appears by their Answer then to this Proposal p. 35. where they replyed This makes the Liturgy void which is very true as to Universal use and Imposition but not otherwise 2. Nor is this Opinion a Novel Opinion or the liberty desired a Novel Request It appears by the Book called The Troubles of Frankford that it is older than our Reformation by Q. Elizabeth and coaevous in England with the first hours of Reformation much older in the Churches of Suitzerland the oldest Reformed Protestant Churches The Opinion and Practice of the Waldenses and Bohemians whose Churches I do not call Reformed but look upon them as continuing in their Integrity and succeeding in the Primitive Doctrine and Practice of the Church in a great measure whilst other parts of the World were in their Apostacy for more than a thousand years together None ever shewed us any Liturgy of Prayers they had nor do they mention any in their accounts which by their Deputies they in gave both of their Faith and Practice to Luther an Oecolampadius which are extant in Scâ—ltâ—tus's Annales Evang. That the practice we desire is the same with that in Scotland New England Holland is not to be denyed 3. The persons most Renowned Patriots on whose behalf we desire it are neither few nâ—r inconsiderable Two thousand Ministers were turned out 1662. Some are dead but possibly not a much lesser number are sprang up either in the Ministry or Candidates for it Of those let men say what they please there will not be found a tenth part that can think it lawful to perform their Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer by the Prescribed Forms of other Men. And Dr. Falkner in his Epistle tells the World That the Genius of that party is much set against them and in their Practice they reject them almost generally with some eagerness which is very true and so appeareth in that the far greater part of them can neither upon eighteen years Trial be perswaded that it is lawful for them to hear them nor yet by any sort of Cudgells be Cudgelled into such a Belief or Practice tho I must profess my self of another mind and in that am my self a Dissenter from I believe 9 parts of ten of our Dissenters whom yet I love and honour I take in both Ministers and People unto my Account Nor are they Inconsiderable considered as to their Intellectuals or Morals or Quality in the World or usefulness to our English world which must be owned and will readily be I am sure by your Honours who are the Eyes of the Nation seeing in every corner of it and â—â—â—ng able better to judge of Numbers and Qualities of Persons than we that sit in our Studies or any that take an Account from Registers c. 4. Nor are they invaluable or the worst sort of men for Morality and which is much higher True Piety and Godliness Of late years your Honours have had many of them brought before you in your publick Sessions and Assizes Might not you say to those that brought them as the Town Clerk of Ephesus once said Acts 19.37 You have brought hither these men that are no Robbers of Churches nor Blasphemers of God I may add further no Murtherers no Adulterers no Drunkards no Profane or false Swearers no Perjured Persons no Robbers by the High way onely accused of Questions about a Law not profitable to men nor necessary for the glory of God A Law which is but the Will of King and Parliament whose Will hath been since sufficiently declared tho not yet in that formality that it should not be so rigorously pursued nor ever was that it should be exdecuted in that manner and with those circumstances that it hath been For their Religion let it be judged from what your Honours have observed in their behaviour both in Religious Duties and as to tâ—â—â—r Civil converse with men For their Religious Conversation let it be observed Whether the generality of them when they are in Gods Publick Worship are they who when they should be joyning with the Minister in putting up Prayers whether he be praying by Forms or no have their Eyes up and down here and there are whispering and talking to those that are next them it may be sleeping or rather be not those who natural infirmities allowing it do stand up or kneel keep their Eyes shut or fixed upon God
And that he Prayed in his Family The Non-conformists say They allow those may use Forms to guide their Mental Prayers who cannot Pray Vocally therefore Constantine did well to make a Form for such and tho Eusebius saith Constantine in his Family Prayed yet it cannot be proved it was by Forms not of Dâ—vine Institution Prayers were appointed but not Forms of Prayer He quotes a speech of Sozomen relating to this Century and a Phrase of Nazianzen which he maketh expository of Sozomen or Julian but the Non-conformists say Nazianzen was dead many years before that Sozomen wrote and so could not expound his words From the year 400 to the year 500. He quotes the general Council of Chalcedon 451 confirming the Canon of Laodicea 364 but the Nonconf say that the Canon of the Council of Laodicea as appears by the words ordered not Forms of Prayer only a Publick Ministry of Prayers Morning and Night He quotes Proclus also asserting Liturgies delivered by James and Clement Basil and Chrysostome The Nonconformists say the Vindicator himself rejects the Authority of Proclus for St. James and Clement and they may as well do it as to the other and that the pretended Writings of Proclus are of no Authority On the contrary the Nonconformists say That in this Century Sozomen saith there were no two Churches to be found which spake the same words in Prayer From the year 500 to 600 he quotes Justinians Novellae confirming the Canons of Chalcedon But the Nonconformists say They have proved that Council established no Forms He quoted indeed before this the Council of Milevis but the Nonconformists say It was a particular case of a particular Province infected notoriously with Pelagianism nor was that Canon by the Council of Chalcedon 451 taken into the Code After the year 600 the Noncon wil agree that Gregory by his Canon Law established Forms of Prayer as far as his Authority went but with so bad success that if Adrian the Pope 200 years after had not obtained of Charles the Great to protect his Canon by a Civil Sanction and by an horrible Persecution to inforce it it had never obtained amongst Christians But they say at this time the true Christians were fled into France the Vallies of Piedmont Alsatia and Bohemia where we read not that their Ministers generally prayed by Forms Now upon this Evidence let all the Consciencious and Intelligent World judge and bring in their Verdict as they please whether this Question can be determined against us by any valuable Practice of the Church in the purer primitive times and whether Our Reasons be not much more valuable to prove the Vnlawfulness Viz. 1. Because we that are Ministers cannot do it without omitting a mean God hath given us for the Action and using one under no special divine Prescription 2. Because in doing it we cannot pray with the like Attention and Intention of heart and Fervent affections 3. Because we judge words an Essential part of Vocal prayer and these or these words an Essential part of this or that Vocal Prayer 4. Because in an Act or Part of Worship where God hath left a liberty to Ministers or Christians other Men cannot determine them 5. Because in doing it we must grant a principle improveable to the total Suppression of Ministerial Gifts 6. Because the Holy Spirit hath or may have an influence on our words as well in Prayer as in Preaching or Confession and it ought not to be shut out unnecessarily 7. Because we cannot understand why the precepts for Prayer should be interpreted differently from the Precept for Preaching which was never by the Church expounded Go read another Mans Forms 8. Because it transforms Ministers from Ministers of Christ to meer Ministers of Men. 9. Because it makes the highest performances of Ministers to be such as ordinary people may do so as there were no need of such an order of persons 10. Because by Experience we see That many idolize Forms of Prayer and think there is no other right Praying to God which is an horrid Error not fit for us to give the least countenance to This is the Summ of all Let the Reader read and judge and we trust he will be so candid as to think we have something to say for our Dissent in this Cause The Conclusion IT is now Reader high time to have done drawing this Saw which will goe no further I remember in the Ancient Practice of the Canon Law after the Pars Rea or as we call him the Defendant had put in his Answer to the Promoters Libel so as there was Lis contestata as we call it Issue joined the Promoter or his Proctor took an Oath which they called Juramentum Calumniae and expressed in these terms Illud juretur quod lis tibi justa videtur Et si quaeretur verum non inficietur Nil promittetur nec falsa probatio detur Vt lis tradetur dilatio nulla petetur That is the Promoter was to swear That he believed he had just cause of action That being asked he would not deny the truth That he would promise no Bribe nor bring in any false Testimony nor without just cause delay any proceedings I have observed likewise some Writers of late interposing some Solemn Professions and Protestations amongst others our Vindicator saith thus p. 21. I do freely profess that besides what concerns the Laws of the Church and of the Realm that I account my self to have as plain Evidence from the Laws of God and the Constitution of the Christian Church that Schism and Vnnecessary Separation is a sin in the breach of Christian Unity as that Adultery is a sin in the breach of Wedlock And I account my self to be as certain that if ever there were an unwarrantable Separation from any known Church since the Apostles time the separation from the Church of England is such since our Church is truly as free from any just exception in its Constitution Doctrine and Worship as any other since that time either was or is A very large Assertion I shall only in like manner enter my Protestation 1. That I do believe all unnecessary Separation from any Church of which we are or have been Members is Sinful 2. I am equally certain That Seperation is necessary where Ministers or People cannot keep communion without sin or so far forth as they cannot do this 3. I have the same certainty That the practical judgment of Ministers or Peoples Consciences must as to their practice determine what is lawful and unlawful tho it be a fallible judgment and they are therefore bound to use the best means they can for information before they form it 4. I do in like sincerity profess That I have wilfully omitted no means of a true Information as to the Will of God in this Cause and I do truly believe it is not lawful for me as a Minister of Christ ordinarily to perform my Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer
doth not Prayer as I told him p. 61. is in Scripture called a crying to God a wrestling with him a powring out of our Souls it must be with strong cries and groans Is there any such thing said of Reading the Scriptures Or of Singing Psalms Attention of our thoughts indeed is required in all so are such degrees of Fervor as are proper to those duties but what if God will require some degrees of Homage to be performed to him one way some another some in a way not capable of the like degrees of Attention and Fervour as others are such I take reading the Scriptures to be is it not enough for us to do that duty with such degrees of Attention and Fervour as he requires in that duty tho we do not do it with such degrees of Attention and Fervour as in that duty he hath not required Or shall it be concluded by any man of reason that the mean which God hath appointed by which we may serve him in one duty as in Reading the Scripture it is nothing but the use of our ability to read which is not by reason of the infirmity of our nature capable of such an attention of our thoughts which will wander if they have the least liberty may be used in another duty of another Species where God requires other degrees of Attention and Fervour or that the mean which he hath given us for that duty is not necessary but that duty also may lawfully be performed in the use of a mean which doth hinder such degrees of Attention and Fervour 19. This was the substance of one of my Answers tho a little further opened now what saith our Vindicator to this Truly little what he saith is p. 135. in these words and no more But what he saith That there are different workings of the Soul towards God in Singing and in Prayer I suppose he will upon further consideration discern to be an oversight since the Application to God for the same things require the same Pious Exercises of Mind whether it be in Prose or Meeter and it was another oversight that he declares me to know and confess what he thus asserts when I never declared any such thing but know the contrary As to the last Clause Reader judge see Libertas Eccles p. 123. Both in reading the Scriptures and in Prayer our hearts ought to be religiously moved towards God tho in somwhat a different manner Wherein have I wronged him here Neither see I reason to acknowledg the oversight let him prove if he can that we are obliged to Sing Psalms with an equal degree of Fervor of Spirit at all times as we are to Pray Though we may sing the Words of a Prayer yet it is more then I know that we are to make those words our Petitions or to address our Souls unto God for the same things which are the matter of the Psalm we Sing If I thought so I should hardly sing many of Davids Psalms having no occasion for the things he asked of God Nor do I think Singing is the Application of our Souls to God for obtaining Mercies but the Praedication of the Holy Name and Will of God and only to differ from Reading the Scripture as the first is done with the Modulation of the Voice the other not so which Modulation is required as having some force in it to excite several Affections either of Joy or Grief according to the matter sung Further in the same page he saith Tho there be different Acts of the Mind exercised in these duties yet that Consideration Reverence Faith Submission and other Gracious Dispositions which suit the special parts of Divine truth doth require as much seriousness diligence and care in reading the holy Scriptures But doth it require as much Fervour of Spirit and Affections That is the Question and the contrary was shewed by the Phrases wherein Prayer is in Scripture expressed but as to this not a word onely he had shewed before that a Form of Words in Prayer doth not hinder any Exercises of Piety therein What he hath formerly said I have formerly answered I leave the Judgment to any Intelligent Reader 20. I had further told him That the Scriptures are Divine Forms and reading them is a Divine Precept and the Forms we Sing Divine Songs and the Singing of a Congregation by a Form naturally necessary and the duty impossible to be performed but by a Form The Question was only stated about Humane Forms and in a Case where no such thing is necessary all the World will see the inconclusivenes of such Arguings I shall not trouble my self to answer such things further which nothing relate to the Question in issue which himself owned to be plainly and cleerly stated I wish I could say that on his side it had been as plainly and clearly Argued against CHAP. V. An Answer to what the Vindicator hath said in his Third Section of Chap. 3. concenring the General use or Impositions of Forms in the Primitive Church Some further things noted of the Canons of the Provincial Councels of Laodicea Carthage and Milevis Further Discourse upon the head of this Argument waved because the Argument it self if true concludeth nothing as to Lawfulness or Unlawfulness 1. I am now come to the Argumentum Palmarium of our Adversaries in this Question the pretended Practice of the Church for 1300 years Indeed I always looked upon the Practice of Men a very poor Argument where the Question was about the Lawfulness or Vnlawfulness of an Action And it is doubtless no Argument tho Ex Abundanti I did speak somthing as to that point and since at the request of some Friends have spoken much more in a Supplement to that Book I shall now say little but refer my Reader to my former Book and the Supplement to it 2. Our Author hath told us That it is not probable that such excellently Devout and Judicious Men as the 4th and 5th Century abounded with should not discern helps and hindrances of Devotion I told him it was possible Like one in Cathedra he tells me This is a rash and contumelious Expression What is That some particular Men may be mistaken in a particular point This is all can be made of my words and such a point too as is of a mutable Nature for I have shewed before That that may be an hindrance to Devotion to one which is not to another which is most certainly true Is this a contumely when David saith All Men are Liars and tho he spake it in haste yet it hath thus much truth in it that there are in all Men grains of Falshood and Error and Fability Did ever any modest and judicious man talk at this rate When our Articles tell us That the Churches of Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch and all Rome erred both in matters of Worship Ceremonies and Doctrine Artic. 1562. n. 19. may not we say it was possible that some Churches in the
the Plotters The often repeated Declarations of it by the King and Parliament the several Declarations of the Council the proceedings against the Plotters by the Reverend Judges are not enough to make these Men believe a matter of Fact so often proved before them Let this be in answer to the Provision for particular Emergencies by Collects p. 199. This is enough to have spoken to this Chapter of our Vindicators where the Principles we seem to differ in are 1. That all Ministers may be lawfully tyed up to Forms of Prayers made by others in the Church and all People in their Families and they are useful for those who have Abilities to Pray in their Closets 2. That Forms of Prayer for any States and Churches may be made comprehending all wants of Churches and States upon particular Emergences of Providence I utterly deny the former and the latter too if there be not a renewing of them every Month or Week CHAP. VII A Reply to what the Vindicator hath said Chap. 6. p. 206 c. The Vindicator's great esteem for reading other Mens Sermons instead of Preaching The tendency of Principles to be considered before we grant them by our Practice He hath said nothing cogent to prove that Superiors may not as well impose Forms of Sermons as of Prayers His Notions about Mans power to Spiritual good examined as also his Notion as to Justification and the imputed Righteousness of Christ How consonant to the Articles of our Church and those of Ireland The mischief of the Scheme of Doctrine which he in this matter defends 1. I laid my fifth Argument thus To agree a Principle which agreed would also allow a power in man Reasonable Acco p. 98. when pleased to suppress all Ministerial Gifts in Preaching is sinful But to agree it is lawful for Ministers to obey Man in performing their Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed Forms of other Men is to agree a Principle which agreed would allow man a power when he pleased to suppress all Minsterial Gifts in Preaching Ergo The Major is evident upon the Principle before laid down That it is not in the power of Man to suppress extinguish or render useless any Ministerial Gift for this were to frustrate Christs design in giving them which was not to be laid up in Napkins but to be used for the good of Men. Nor will our Answerer say that it is lawful for Superiors to suppress all Ministerial Gifts in Preaching and tye Ministers only to read other Mens Sermons He saith p. 211. It is lawful to cite other Mens Sentences Or to use a larger Portion of other mens Discourses owning the Authors All this is true but what is it to the purpose which is not about sentences and quotations but about the whole contexâ—ure of Sermons 2. Nay further then this It is lawful to read to People whole Sermons and Hâ—milies but this is no Ministerial Act tho it be a good Action and the People had better have this means of Instruction then none at all But every good Action is not a Ministerial Act. By a Ministerial Act I mean an Act which Christ or any of his Apostles required of or directed the Ministers of the Gospel not that which Christ meant when he commanded his Disciples to go and Preach nor as it appears by their Practice did they so understand it 3. Our Answerer seems to deny the other Proposition but for Answer to it he first referreth to what he premised to his Answer to the former Argument as to which I shall also refer to my former Answer only adding this That whereas out of Reverence to Superiors he seemed to hint that we should first stay till any such thing be commanded The plain English of that is this Stay till you have condemned your selves and shall have nothing to say if such a thing be commanded having first granted the Principle on which it is founded and then complain that is When the Steed is stollen shut the Stable door let us first hook you past escaping us without rending your jaws and then if we catch you and pull you up complain Every wise man ought to consider whither his Principles or Practice will carry him before he alloweth the one or ingageth in the other 3. Next he tells us That he hath manifested the ordinary and constant usefulness of Set Forms in Prayer in Publick Worship for the advantage of Religion if I be able to prove the same concerning the ordinary using the discourses of others in preaching he hath then and not till then made the Cases parallel but this he thinks I never can Let me try a little I remember p. 87 88 he hath given us a summary of these pretended advantages 1. To ascertain the people that nothing shall be prayed for by the Ministers but what they can say Amen to And is it not as great an advantage from Forms of Sermons that then the People shall hear nothing but what they may afore-hand consider and be assured they may by Faith agree to 2. That the people might be under no Temptations to give their minds a liberty for ill ends to observe Expressions and the manner of composure of the Prayer And is it not of as great advantage there should be Forms of Sermons that Ministers may not have a Temptation to make their Preaching a business of Rhetorick or of Raillery or meer Philosophy which too many have done and do do Witness Mr. Hickringill's Curse ye Meroz 3. That there may be an Vnity in Prayer And is not an Vnity of Faith and Doctrine of as much advantage to Religion as an Vnion in the words and syllables of our Devotion and something more too Might not Forms of Sermons both contribute to and also testifie that 4. Dull Capacities would be so helped And are not people ordinarily more dull in comprehending the Mysteries of the Gospel and the Doctrines thereof then in understanding the words of a Prayer 5 To prevent Impertinencies in advised Expressions results of Passion Imprudence Negligence Weakness bad Principles Erroneous Opinions Would not Forms of Sermons as much advantage Religion by preventing all these ten times more ordinary in Sermons then in Prayer Thus I 〈◊〉 made â—he Cases parallel I think But 〈◊〉 Divine Institutions we argue without â—â—â—rd to the Will of God as the only Diâ—ectâ—â— in the case from such things as we â—aâ—â—y would be advantages of Religion we d â— but set the Sun by the Dial God knew better than we what would be advantages to Religion There 's no arguing in these cases but concerning the Will of God in the case They are not our fancied advantages that will prove the Will of God in these cases 4. In the next place he tells us The Ancient Church appointed Forms of Prayer but not Forms of Sermons Admit this were true that the Ancients for 500 years after Christ did either generally use or impose Forms of Prayer which I am
or an opportunity to discharge their lusts and passions have call'd a flanting piece of Oratory a Lecture out of Aristotles Ethicks or Plato or such a discourse as lately was made before my Lord Mayor to the admiration of all men Preaching which is just such Preaching as before the Reformation the people had from the Popish Priests whose Preaching was but a Lecturing out of Scotus and Aquinas or a story out of the Legend and as the story of that age tells us they had not onely the brutish impudence to do this but also to Petition Magistrates for a liberty to do it when the common people discerned the folly and madness of it and would no longer endure to be so abused and deluded 10. In his 214 p. he groweth very angry that I should say How many discourses of late years have we had in Pulpits pretending to prove Men have a natural power to things Spiritually good That we are not justified by the imputed Righteousness of Christ but by our own works How many perfect Satâ—res Raillerys and Evomitions of the Lusts and Choler in the Preachers hearts To this he subjoyneth These are the kind words and meek Expressions of one who judgeth and censures the sharpness of other Men. Then he comes to defend those who have spoken for Mens Natural power to Spiritual Acts and against the imputed Righteousness of Christ These things must not pass unexamined 11. Will our Answerer say there have been no such discourses of late years I appeal to thousands and ten thousands of Witnesses Will he say Ah but they should not have been spoken of because they reflect on the Ministry of our Church That is false they reflâ—ct not on the Ministry tho upon many Ministers of our Church or who call themselves so The Ministry of our Church are those who Preach according to the Doctrine of our 39 Articles which these Doctrines are not others are but Intruders whom our Church owneth not they are but our Churches Natural Sons Our Church hath declared against them in her Articles and Homilies 12. Besides did not our Answerer inforce me to what I spake he had before often told us of the Impertinencies Errors Nonsense Blasphemy to which conceived Prayer gave a scope and That a Prayer may be put up and the People could not joyn in one Petition I told him Reasonable Account p. 106. That was a rare and an hard case 2. That their not joyning might be from the Lusts and Error of their own Hearts 3. That it was the same case as to Preaching and therefore the Argument was as strong for Forms of Sermons to be Vniversally imposed and used He told me there had been many such Prayers I told him there had been also many such Sermons But must our Vindicator who knows this plead for it too as he doth now to the end of this Chapter p. 215 216. Let us hear what he saith 13. He tells us that all our Ministers own Christ to be the Saviour of the World so did Pelagius and that the New Covenant of Grace is confirmed through him so did he for ought I ever heard or read and that in this day of Grace God gives his Aids and Assistances besides the Instructions of his Word the mighty motives of his Gosâ—el and the benefits of the Ministry of Reconceliation and his Holy Sacraments Hold here a lirtle for here lieth the pinch What doth our Vindicator mean by Aids Helps and Assistances besides the Instructions of the Word and Motives of the Gospel c. doth he mean any more then the Remonstrants have in their confession 1622 thus expressed Chap. 17. n. 8. That the Holy Spirit gives to all and every Man to whom the word of Faith is ordinarily preached so much Grace or is ready to give so much as is sufficient for the begetting of Faith If he meaneth no more by those terms then this he meaneth no more then a common Grace granted unto all men that are in the Church and tho this indeed be more then a Natural Priviledge yet I do not understand how it is more then a Natural Power under the advantage of those Priviledges For Natural here is opposed to Adventitious and such adventitious assistance as is more then the improvement of meer natural Abilities by ordinary and common Means Which improvements we commonly call The common Gifts or Grace of the Holy Spirit All these are comprehended under the term of a Natural Power and are opposed to Spiritual which here signifies the mighty workings of the Spirit of God in a way of special and distinguishing Grace inabling the Soul to do some truly Spiritual Acts which it cannot do without the Assistances either from the powers of meer Nature or improved Nature but must be done from a Soul changed born again of the Spirit renewed transformed c. 14. I am sorry to read our Answerer declaring That he cannot understand the End of Preaching unless a man under no special Circumstances differencing him from none who lives within the Church hath a power to believe and work out his own Salvation and to live Godlily Righteously and Soberly I am sure no man can truly believe what he hath no sufficient Evidence of the truth of and our Saviour told Peter Flesh and Blood had not given him a sufficient Evidence That Christ was the Son of the Living God Matth. 16.17 But what our Author saith is the Arminians Argument and hath been sufficiently answered in multitudes of Books and what our Vindicator saith is confuted by the experience of many good Christians who will own the quite contrary and I am sure the Church of England saith in her 10th Art We have no power to do good works pleasing and acceptable to God without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will And Art 13. Works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasing to God because they spring not of Faith in Jesus Christ neither do they make men meet to deserve Grace 15. As to the point of Justification our Author saith thus We disclaim every where merit in our own works so do the Socinians and acknowledge Vindication p. 217. that our Saviour hath as our Mediator interposed by his Obedience Righteousness and Sacrifice to expiate our sins give the Sanction to the New Covenant of Grace and Righteousness and to assure the Mercy of God and Pardon and Forgiveness upon the Terms of it But if we speak of the Gospel condition of Justification that must be performed by our selves and we do account that as Repentance which includes that I dare say he meant not Excludes as it is Printed though he hath not been so charitable to me as to think I meant the Opinion and Practice not the Person of Gregory the great was protected by Charles the great is a necessary condition to
the obtaining of Pardon of Sin so consequently it is necessary to our being justified Nor shall I examine tho I cannot find it out the sense of the next words but take him up again where I do understand what he meaneth And that a renewed Holy Life is necessary to Justification is manifested from that wrath and threatning denounced against workers of Inâ—quity yet he tells us p. 218. That the Gospel Justification is through the Redemption of our Saviour and Faith in him and from the benefit of his Sacrifice But it cannot be that the Righteousness of Christ should be so imputed to us as that we should be looked upon as having done or suffered what he did or suffered for then we should be looked upon as Mediators and might be invocated And he can see no other blame in this Doctrine then that it is consistent with it self and with what was delivered by the Apostle 16. I will begin my Answer with the 11th Article of our Church We are accounted Righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith and not for our own works or deservings wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome Doctrine and very full of comfort and that they may not say that by Faith is understood Works or a Practical Assent Faith in the two next Articles is made the Spring and Fountain of all good Works The Articles of the Church of Ireland are yet more plain Artic. 34 35 36 37. I shall only mention one clause Art 34. This Righteousness which we receive of Gods Mercy and Christs Merits imbraced by Faith which Faith Artic. 37 they declare to be a particular Application of the Promises of the Gospel to the comfort of our Souls whereby we lay hold an Christ c. is taken accepted and allowed of by God for our perfect and full Justification 17. Our Answerer knew well enough that by imputed Righteousness we did never understand that the Acts or Sufferings of Christ as Mediator were imputed so as to make them as if we had done them This Reader is just such another Argument as if a Prince should employ his Embassadour to pay a Redemption Price for an 100 Slaves at Algiers and he should do according to his Commission and when he had done some learned Musselman should come to prove that the Embassadors Action in Payment of the Ransome could not be reckoned his or as if he had done it because he was a Mediator for an 100 neither did he actually pay the money Certainly the Slave would tell him that his Action so far as concerned him might notwithstanding be imputed to him that is reckoned as if it had been his Action 18. But it may be this is but a word-bait a contest De Lana Caprina it may be what they grant is enough to express the end of Christs coming into the World the Mercy of God in Christ and to secure the Salvation of Souls Doth he think so I would gladly then have him answer these Questions Whether the Righteous Lord can clear the Guilty without a satisfaction given to his Justice contrary to Exod. 34.7 If a satisfaction must be given for every Mans sin to make him in a capacity to be declared Righteous that is justified before God who could ever satisfie but Christ 3. Whether this satisfaction which we call Christs Righteousness could ever be ours without a gracious Act of God so reckoning it as if we our selves had made it Whether therefore it be possible that the Righteousness whereby any Soul can be in any capacity to be declared Righteous bâ— God should be any other then the Righteousness of Christ and any Righteousnes of our own can possibly be antecedaneous to our Justification 19. In the mean time we grant that God pardoneth no Souls Sins but theirs in whom he hath wrought so much Repentance as lies in a Resolution through his Grace to leave sin and to do good but this may be separated from all Actual good works and is no more then an habit of Sanctification which God gives at the same time that he justifieth the Soul but he doth not for that justifie the Soul That is very far from the Righteousness for which God in this life declareth any Soul Righteous and pardoneth its Sin It is true no Soul in the day of Judgment shall be justified but that Soul that hath wrought Righteousness and every Soul which hath in sincerity done that tho not in a legal perfection shall be acquitted from guilt by vertue of the Covenant of Grace founded upon the satisfaction of Christ who in this sense is called The Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World 20. Nor is the contrary Opinion so finely blended by our Vindicator so harmless as he would make it much less so consonant with the Apostles Doctrine 1. It makes Justification a meer Act of Grace which the Scripture makes also an act of Justice and Righteousness in God Rom. 3.25 26. To declare his Righteousness for the Remission of sins to declare I say his Righteousness that he might be just and the Justifier of him who believeth in Jesus 2. It gives Christ no place in Mans Redemption but that of establishing a Covenant upon which God might exercise his Grace It indeed talks of his Redemption and Merit but takes away the work of a Redeemer and maketh his Merits needless 3. It maketh Faith as it is an Application of the Soul to his Righteousness and Merit needless tho the Scripture makes an inseparable connexion betwixt it and Salvation Hence it is very rarely that we hear the necessity of such Faith urged 4. It gives man the principal parts in his Justification for they are his works for which God justifieth tho indeed it be upon the account of a Covenant established by the Blood of Christ Much more might be said In short it alloweth Christ to be a great Prophet a great Benefactor to Man-kind but denies him to be a True Priest such a one as atones by Blood he onely doth it by Mediation Intercession and a Covenant According to this Doctrine his Blood only sealed a Covenant in what sense they call his Death a Sacrifice they know best 21. In the mean time no sober persons deny good works their due place without them no Soul shall be justified in the great day They are necessary to Salvation and that final Justification Ambsdorsius is the only Protestant I have met with who indeed in one place denies them to be necessary to Salvation no valuable person hath since that I know of approved his wild saying But they have no place in the justification of a Soul in this Life unless in the Justification of its Faith to be true and not counterfeit And a Soul may be declared Righteous before God and have its sins pardoned before it hath actually done any good works tho not before it be prepared by God for them by
He drew the Imperial Law into three Books called after Justinians Code to which were added the Digesta and last of all the Novellae constitut the former contained the Laws of all former Emperors the last such as he himself and some few Emperors next before him made Justinian confirmed these Books so they became the Imperial Law from the year 542. By the way tho this Justinian did many good things yet he was an Heretick and had many great Vices It was he who put out the eyes of Belisarius that great Commander by whom he indeed did whatsoever he did worthily in his Wars c. so as he was inforced to begg his bread before he died 13. Out of the Preface to these Novellae our Vindicator hath taken something he thinks for his purpose If he had given us the words of the Prefacer for I cannot find them in Gothofred I could have spoken distinctly to it but I suppose he hath given all that were for his turn Speaking of his Monks and Clergy he saith they would have done otherwise if they had acquainted themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to learn the way of the Holy Ministrations as to what he saith cap. 2 and cap. 6 having not the Book I can say nothing unless he had given us the Greek words I suspect them to be but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which prove nothing But it is not worth the while for admit these proofs prove the thing it proveth no Sanction of Forms of Prayer before 542 So I lose but 59 years Nor do I understand what need Pope Adrian had 259 years after this to get a Civil Sanction from Charles the Great if one were 259 year old made by Justinian and made a part of the Imperial Law 14. But I cannot but observe by the way how our Author fetching his Ecclesiastical Sanction but from the Council of Chalcedon 451 and Justinians Novellae 541 hath quite destroyed his instance out of Eusebius de Vita Constantini c. 17 19 20 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for if the English of that be Prayers by Authority appointed we must find an higher Authority constituting their use then that of Justinian who did what he did 542 and Constantine had been dead 200 years before Nor was the Council of Chalcedon of 130 years after Constantines death so that it should seem only the Prayers were constituted of which he speaks cap. 17 not the Forms also but I shall meet with that anon besides this Civil Sanction of Justinian being in his Novellae which contained only his own Laws and some Emperors that went immediately before him it is a certain proof there was no Ancienter Civil Sanction by Constantine and Theodosius c. we should then have found it in Justinians Code not in his Novellae for any Ecclesiastical Sanction there is no pretence to any until the Councel of Chalcedon and I have shewed there is no proof to be fetched from thence besides the Canon of the Councel of Milevis being not brought into the Code of the Vniversal Church is a sufficient Argument there was no such thing confirmed by the Councel of Chalcedon for that Canon is the only plain Canon in the case 15. But Dato non concesso as we say admit That from the year 541 they had been so imposed by Justinian and made a part of the Imperial Law what then I had been mistaken 59 years which I am far from believing or seeing the least ground for Will any one say that the practice of a Romane Emperor in that age or indeed the Church under his Government was a Copy for any Protestant Church in all things to write after I refer my Reader to the sad account given by the Centuriators who were all Learned Protestants of the most corrupt state of the Church in this Age see Magdeburg Centur Centur. 6. ap 137 impr Basil I think any one who is a Protestant will be of another mind The Pope indeed at that time was not well set in his Saddle it was 6 or 7 years after that age before he got the Title of Vniversal Bishop but his foot at this time was in the Stirrop and the Bridle in his hand 16. But our Vindicator will go higher with us he will prove them from the year 400 to the year 500. I hope he means generally used in publick Devotion or imposed for such use or he proveth just nothing To prove this he again brings in the Canon of the Council of Chalcedon I have already said enough to that Next he brings in Proclus Bishop of Constantinople and he finds his Writings in Bibliotheca Patrum he tells us he declares Forms of Divine Service what is the Greek word To have been delivered from St. James and St. Clement and to have been ordered by St. Basil and St. Chrysostome That there was one Proclus Bishop of Constantinople soon after Chrysostome Eusebius tells us But that he left us any Writings must be proved from better Auhority then that of Bibliotheca Patrum However he saith as much for St. James and Clements Forms of Prayer as he doth for Basils or Chrysostomes and as to them our Author declares his not giving credit to him nor is it reasonable he should for it is not probable that had there been any Apostolical Liturgies Chrysostome and Basil would have made any Nor was Proclus a likely man to impose any for Eusebius l. 7. c. 4. gives us this Character of him He vexed no Sect but preserved and restored to the Church the great Jewel of Meekness which is best for the Church wherein he imitated the Emperor Theodosius for as he would not exert his Imperial Power against any accused for Religion so neither did Proclus concern himself as to those who held a diverse Doctrine 17 Our Vindicator riseth higher and will prove something from the year 300 to the year 400 but I observe he never tells us what will he prove the Lords Prayer was used Or that some Forms were made by others Or that some men used some Forms None denieth all this But that which he is to prove is That such Forms were generally used by or imposed upon all Ministers in any considerable part of the Church All his proof is from the Liturgies of Chrysostome and Basil Julians speaking of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Order amongst Christians in Worship which Sozomen calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Nazianzene Orat. 3. p. 101 102 calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 considering what himself had quoted out of Eusebius and from the Council of Laodicea n. 5 6 7 8. 18. What he hath said out of the Council of Laodicea hath had its full answer what he hath said from Eusebius hath had an Answer in part and anon shall have a fuller reply to it at present I will onely concern my self in the other For the Liturgies of Basil and Chrysostome admit they did make any I would fain
by the prescribed Forms of other Men not Divinely Inspired nor yet being Solemnly set apart to the Ministry wholly to forbear Preaching 5. There are many other things which I cannot but judge sinful without the doing of which I can have no station in the National Ministry Reordination Assent and Consent Ceremonies Promiscuous Administration of the Lords Supper c. 6. I do believe the Vindicator hath not given a just Answer to one Argument I brought in this cause and I profess my Arguments remain still such as I cannot Answer 7. I do finally profess That I have not wilfully brought any thing in any of my dicourses on this Argument laying any stress upon it which I have not believed to be true Nor have I been bribed with any hopes of Reward or Preferment Nor have I quoted any Author to my knowledge falsly or partially hardly three which I have not seen with my own Eyes unless I have told the Reader otherwise Nor have I done any thing to keep my Reader from a true understanding of the thing in Question nor gone about to blind him with Digressions Prejudices or Impertinent Observations nor further then the Nature of the matter doth it have I loaded my Adversary with Odium Envy or Prejudice Whence all may observe what need we have for to exercise a further Charity then is yet to be found amongst us and a greater liberty in Religious Worship then we are yet so happy to injoy and that without it we are never like to come to our desired Peace and Vnity If there were only this single point in difference East and West seem to me as likely to unite as Dissenters and those of our Vindicators perswasion The good Lord shew us a more likely way for Vnion then all Ministers using the same Words and Syllables in the Acts of their Publick Worship which is a kind of Union no where required no where promised no where found nor ever to be expected and of which there is no necessity at all FINIS Postscript BEcause our Vindicator is so mightily confident that if ever there was a Sinful Separation in the World the Dissenters altho they agree in the Doctrine of the Church of England and possibly more heartily then some others who profess only to subscribe the 39 Articles in their own sense and as Instruments of Peace and in the same Acts of Worship and do not condemn the Church or Churches of England as no Churches are guilty notwithstanding of such a Sinful Separation I shall crave leave to mind him of an Argument to the contrary brought this last Commencement at Cambridge I suppose the Vindicator might hear it which the Auditors did not judge they heard sufficiently answered by the Dr. Respondent It was this To Separate or withdraw rather from a Church which doth not acknowledge the true Ministers of Christ as such is no Sinful Separation But to separate from the Church of England is to separate from a Church that disowns the true Ministers of Christ to be such Ergo. The Minor was proved because it will not own Ministers ordained by meer Presbyters to be true Ministers and so consequently disowneth the Ministry of all Forraign Churches which by several Acts of Parliament 3 at least one 13 Eliz. another made in the Parl. 1660 and the late Act for Uniformity are acknowledged true Ministers The trite answer That it is in a case of necessity those Churches having no Bishops to ordain Ministers is pitiful for no case of necessity can make one to be that which by the Law of Christ he is not nor was there any necessity that our Parliaments should so own them in three Acts. We had Bishops in England which could have re-ordained Ministers in 13 Eliz. and in the year 1660 and 1662. The Basis of this Argument is also much larger It is this It is lawful to withdraw from any Church where any Ordinance of Christ proper and necessary for any Church is disowned or not to be enjoyed according to the Practice of that Church Now whether the choice of their own Ministers and the exclusion of the ignorant and scandalous from the Lords Supper And a power in a Church to purge it self from Ministers who by their lives or Doctrine make it appear that God never called them to the Ministry and from Members that by the Laws of Christ are to be shut out of the Communion of a Church be not Institutions of Christ necessary to the very being of a Church most certainly to it s well being let any judge and that those charged with Separation can enjoy them in the Parochial Churches of England lies upon our Vindicator to prove and should have been well thought on before he had been so very positive in his charge there being especially so many men of unquestionable Learning and Piety that are of another mind in the Case and as well assured of the contrary FINIS An A 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ement to the Reader WHat thou hast here in answer to Dr. Faulkner hath been more than nine Months in the Booksellers or Printers hand and is at last come out with more Errata's then are consistent with the Authors reputation some of the principal of them I shall give thee an account of and for mistakes of a letter or a stop leave my self to thy Charity Only that I may not again be so smartly reflected on for my want of skill in the Chronology of Gregory the great I must give thee notice that whereas in the Title to the Introduction the Vindicator is said to have asserted that Gregory died 15 years before according to Platina he entred his Popedome and in the Book p. 14 there is only mention of ten it is none of the Authors mistake For in the Edition of Platina in Fol. thou wilt find he entred his Popedome Anno 1610 which was but 6 years after the Vindicator saith he died but in the late Edition of Platina in 24 he is said to have entred it 1619 which was 15 years after The Author hath left thee a latitude to believe which thou wilt only with thy Pen correct these following Errata's some whereof might be mine in writing but the most the Printers P. 2. l. 13. and so in many other places for Liturgy r. Leiturgy l. 19. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 3. l. 17. r. deliver p. 7. l. 7. r. Arguments l. 8. r. with him l. 23. r. self have p. 10. l. 5. r. dicendum ne l. 13. r. frustra l. 19. r. we judge l. 28 29. r. saepe etiam olitor est opportuna locutus p. 12. l. 22. r. 604 p. 13. l. 29. r. 1000 p. 15. l. 21. r. self say p. 18. l. 5. r. Darapti Ferison p. 24. l. 7. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 28. l. 8. r. gust l. 20. r. an Author p 35. l. 25. so p. 159. l. 17. r. word-bate p. 40. l. 30. r. no other p. 41. l. 32. r. may be p. 67. l. 16. r. For Ministry he p. 76. l. 3. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 116. l. 13. r. whether it or yt p. 118. l. 15. r. by which p. 21. l. 22. r. who joyn p. 140. l. 15. r. sometimes very little then blot out these words and where they concern it very little or nothing at all p. 143. l. 15. r. when he pleaseth l. 30. r. gifts p. 145. l. 17. r. he be able p. 146. l. 22. r. in inadvised p. 185. l. 4. r. prefer p. 195. l. 17. r. I may p. 219. l. 16. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 224. l. 28. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 226. l. 24. before proper r. as p. 238. l. 5. r. prayer p. 239. l. 29. for others r. them