the Old Testament from the apostles at their first conversion but suddenly they could not be translated into every language and till they were translated they could not be read in the congregation unto edifying The books of the New Testament could not be delivered untill they were written but they were not written all at once and when they were all written being sent to severall churches it must be some time before they could be gathered together and translated And if nothing be allowable in the church but what was found in the primitive churches planted by the apostles by record of scripture I fear the reading of the scriptures in a known tongue must be cast out of the congregations I go not about to equalize stinted Liturgies with set translations of the holy scriptures but I would intreat such as oppose a stinted Liturgie by these reasons to consider whether they do not put weapons into the adversaries hands to fight against the scriptures Again set forms of catechismes publick or private composed by the minister or devised by others used with liberty to adde or alter as occasion requireth are no more commanded of God then set forms of prayer nor no more in use in the apostolick churches Christ our Saviour the Prophets or Apostles have no more appointed the one then the other if all parts of holy and spirituall worship may be performed without a stinted Liturgie they may be performed also without a stinted or set catechisme and if a set form of prayer must be disallowed a set form of catechisme publick or private composed by the minister or devised by others must be condemned also But the antiquity excellency and necessity of catechizing is known to them who are exercised in the building and governing of the house of God the use and profit of a set form therein is both manifest by reason and confirmed by experience at home and abroad in publick and private to them who have laboured to lay the foundation of Christian religion and train up the people committed to their charge in sound wisdome and understanding And in these things we swerve not from our pattern because we teach and professe the same doctrine and worship God with the same worship and substantiall means of worship that the primitive churches and Christians did There is the same reason of reading the Apocrypha books of Maccabees and those that follow them in the congregation and of reading a stinted form of Liturgie and the same reasons that silence the Apocrypha will silence stinted prayers as well and as much When we prove the lawfulnesse of a stinted form of prayer by the stinted forms of psalmes and blessing mentioned in scripture it is thought answer sufficient to say There is great difference betwixt blessings or psalmes and prayer and yet here it is enough to match things unlike together and to say of them without all proof There is the same reason of both But if it have any sinews it will silence the singing of psalmes sermons professions of faith and conceived prayer no lesse then stinted especially the use of notes to help memory and forms of catechisme by whomsoever and howsoever used For there is the same reason of reading and uttering by heart in the congregation And if nothing but the canonicall scriptures must be read in the congregation nothing must be uttered by heart or strength of memory but the scriptures alone But sermons professions of faith conceived prayer are not canonicall scripture The reason is one and whatsoever can be answered truly in the one will put the other to flight If it be said That it is the prerogative of the scripture to be the rule of faith and manners and therefore nothing is to be read in the congregation as the ground undoubted and immediate of faith and manners but the scripture alone this openeth way for stinted prayer as well as for sermons or conceived prayer The substantiall means of worship both publick and private are determined of God It is unlawfull to set up an image for worship either publick or private The scripture must be acknowledged the sole rule of faith and manners both in publick and private It is unlawfull to devise sacramentall signes in private as well as in the congregation And if it be unlawfull to reade any other book in the congregation because the reading of the scripture is the onely approved medium cultûs by the same reason all forms of catechismes and singing of psalmes and reading or use of stinted praiers in the family are unlawfull And if the one be an image in the congregation the others are so in the family When the Lord had devised and appointed a perfume saith the authour of the Letter all men are forbidden to make a composition like that perfume Exod. 30. 35 37. So if it could be proved that Christ had made a form for the churches and believers alwayes when they pray then the offering up of any other prayers made by others or of our own devising would seem to be as unlawfull as the offering of strange incense Exod. 30. 9. Where it is implyed that seeing God hath determined no certain form therefore forms devised by men are not necessary but lawfull In the same manner they may be answered from their own grounds That seeing God hath sanctified and set apart the canonicall scriptures given by immediate Divine inspiration to be the sole and perfect rule of faith and manners therefore the scripture alone must be read and acknowledged as the sole ground of heavenly instruction But seeing he hath determined no certain form of prayer or sermons professions of faith or thanksgiving therefore either none at all must be made or forms devised by men are lawfull to be heard in the congregation yet not as immediate and undoubted grounds of faith for that is proper to the scripture but as instructions and exhortations builded upon or petitions framed according to the scripture as present occasion doth require In sermons who doth not put a difference betwixt the text whereupon the discourse instructions exhortations rebukes comforts be grounded deduced the exhortations rebukes comforts which are propounded in method phrase of speech devised by men The first is ought to be canonicall scripture the other not so But it would argue great ignorance if not perversenesse if a man should cavill in this manner against the preaching of the word That the scriptures alone are to be read in the congregation therefore the minister of the Gospel must simply reade the scripture but never give the meaning nor make application In the Primitive church sundry councels have forbidden the reading of any books as parts of Divine worship but canonicall scripture onely of the Old and New Testament but no councel ever condemned the use of a stinted Liturgie Those churches which forbad the reading of any books which be without the canon did
and consented unto if it were possible by all the sound true orthodox churches in the world is in many respects expedient such a form as being free from all exception apprved of all might testifie their sweet harmonie and concent And the like may be said of forms of catechismes confessions c. A stinted form then of publick prayer is not one in common nature with images devised for worship nor opposite to the worship which must in speciall be instituted of God it is no vain or superfluous devise much lesse an humane invention condemned in the second commandment It is not strange at all that one and the same thing should be a sin in one and not in another If by the same thing you mean the same materially onely And if that which was lawfull to all people priests and Levites in the old Testament cannot be unlawfull now then neither circumcision nor any other Jewish rite is now unlawfull to us True it is that one and the same thing may be sin in one and not in another when the reasons and considerations be not the same as that which a man is bound to do by speciall calling or office may be sin in another which is not called and appointed pointed to that service And many things were lawfull in the old Testament being according to Gods word that are not so now viz. things that were proper and peculiar to them and those times in respect of the manner of dispensation Divine But things which have grounds and reasons common to those and our times in respect of persons and things and do not in peculiar respects belong unto them onely these if lawfull to them are lawfull to us and if forbidden to us they are forbidden to them And of this sort is a stinted form of prayer or blessing not peculiar to them but common to us with them not a priviledge of the persons but of the cause It is given for a rule concerning examples That a reason drawn from them doth necessarily conclude sc cùm unum particulare ab alio particulari probatur vi similitudinis communis toti generi sub quo ea particularia continentur But the publick use of a stinted free arbitrarie form of prayer praise or blessing is grounded upon reasons and considerations common to the priests or Levites and the ministers of the Gospel the things are like and this likenesse is common to the whole kind not materiall circumstance can be named which should appropriate it unto them onely Therefore if the publick stinted use of prayer or blessing was not a breach of the second commandment in them it is not a sin against that commandment in us It is objected that their forms were not as ours strictly imposed ordinarily to be used without so much as the variation of a word But this unlooseth not the knot but rather tyeth it the faster For if it be a sin against the second commandment to use such a form it must not be done once If it be no sin it is not made sinfull by this that it is used this week or the next as occasion is offered If it be lawfull to use the Lords prayer as a stinted form it is not made unlawfull that I use it in these precise words without addition or alteration And if the priests were not tyed to one precise form of blessing without addition or alteration yet might they lawfully use one form without addition or variation and that which was allowable in them is not unlawfull in us upon the same grounds and considerations So that we may summe up this reason thus If publick stinted forms of blessing prayer or praise might be used ordinarily by the priests Levites and ministers of the Gospel without addition or alteration then all stinted forms to be used ordinarily without addition or alteration be not a breach of the second commandment in common nature one with an image devised for worship But the priests and Levites in the time of the Law and the ministers of the Gospel in the New Testament might ordinarily use a stinted form without addition or alteration Or thus it may be framed If a publick stinted form of prayer be unlawfull then either simply and absolutely all stinted forms to be used in publick or such onely as are to be used ordinarily without alteration or addition or such onely as be corrupt and faulty But a publick stinted form is not simply and absolutely unlawfull for then this exception That it is to be used ordinarily and without alteration is vain and superfluous not onely because it is ordinarily to be used without alteration or addition for then that consideration taken away a stinted form should be just and lawfull as also then it should be lawfull at one time to use this or that phrase of speech unlawfull at another when yet the same occasion requireth it If onely because corrupt and faulty then a stinted form is not an humane invention a breach of the second commandment an idole-prayer a superfluous devise to be condemned then the fault and corruption removed the form it self is lawfull to be used without addition or variation A stinted form of prayer is not unlawfull to him that needeth it as not able largely to expresse his own desires or lay open his wants particularly but to him that is able and needeth it not it is unlawfull because in such case a set form of prayer is an arbitrary help or furtherance forbidden by the second commandment But then a set form of prayer in words devised by others or by a mans self is not unlawfull because stinted or devised not of it self nor to all but by accident onely Then it is not a devised worship strange incense an idole-prayer an image of prayer forbidden in the second commandment for whatsoever is verified of a generall as generall is verified of all underneath it Then they must not say Humane inventions in Gods worship are forbidden but Humane inventions in the worship of God are lawfull to them that need them unlawfull to them that need them not because arbitrarie Then the exception of using a stinted form ordinarily without alteration or addition is altogether fruitlesse for the form is unlawfull because arbitrarie And for the thing it self it is an unwritten tradition because it hath no ground in scripture For it is a received rule That all distinctions in Divinity not grounded upon the word of God are unwritten traditions indeed humane unwarrantable inventions and additions But this distinction That a stinted form of prayer is warrantable to him that needeth it because of his inability unwarrantable to him that needeth it not is grounded upon no text of scripture or solid consequence drawn from thence All arbitrarie helps and furtherances in Gods service are not forbidden in the second commandment nor any help or furtherance because arbitrarie in this sense that is no help or furtherance devised in Gods worship that
ordinary reading of the Law in the assemblies upon the Sabbath is not commanded by Moses either to the priests or Levites no mention is found of any such practice for a long time together We find not for a long time that the Jews had any synagogues for the ordinary assembling of the people and the Law could not be read in their synagogues untill they were built Will our brethren hence conclude either that the scriptures were not read in the assemblies or that it was a devise of man to reade them in their synagogues It is not good to lay grounds for such conclusions If M r Ainsworths testimony be of any value then mark what he testifieth from the famous Jew Maimonie in Misneh treatise of prayer That the church of the Jews had no stinted Liturgie Annot. on Deut. 6. 13. Our wise men have said saith Maim What service is this with the heart It is prayer And there is no number of prayers by the Law neither is there any set form of this by the Law c. If M r Ainsworth be not crosse to himself he cannot deny the use of a stinted form amongst the Jews in the celebration of the passeover of a stinted form free and voluntary not necessary as prescribed of God And that which is here cited out of Maimonie is no way repugnant thereunto For he speaketh not of the passeover or any observations in the celebration thereof but of prayer and that private by one alone and not publick in the assembly or congregation Now the Jews might well use a stinted form in the celebration of the passeover when yet by the law there was no number set nor form prescribed for private prayer These two may well agree After long search no copy can be found of any stinted Liturgie in use among the Jews till they ceased to be the church of God which is a poore and weak proof of the lawfulnesse of a stinted Liturgie amongst Christians It followeth not that they never had or used a set form because it is not to be found at this day For many monuments of antiquity are perished Again though forms which now are extant were not entire as now they be untill they ceased to be a church yet many things conteined in them might be in use before So it is in the counterfeit Liturgies which goe under the name of James Mark Basil and Chrysostom they contein many things which shew the whole composure to be late in comparison whereas divers things in them mentioned were of more ancient use in the church of God And if this do not please though there never was any stinted Liturgie or form of prayer to be used in all their synagogues and assemblies yet that is no reason to question the truth of that which the learned have observed touching the stinted form used in the celebration of the passeover and the probabilities at least they bring to shew that our Saviour Christ approved the same which is all that is affirmed in the argument and maketh more for the lawfulnesse of a stinted form of Liturgie then any thing that hath been objected against it As for the reformed churches we are not to consider what they do but what they ought to do It is most true but we must consider wisely and not censure unadvisedly The churches of God are companies of men called out of this world in part onely inlightned subject to errour they have erred they may erre their sole testimony cannot be the ground of divine faith and assurance Neverthelesse the constant judgement of the churches of God for many ages in a matter of this nature in the times of reformation when clouds and darknesse are expelled when the sunne is risen and great light given to the scriptures by the benefit of languages translations and commentaries I say the judgement of the churches at these times and in a matter of this nature is not lightly to be regarded A man should try and examine his grounds and reasons and mistrust himself rather then so many wise learned and godly sweetly consenting in a matter of this nature unlesse his evidence be very good He had need be well advised before he charge them to maintein a worship not allowed an idole-prayer for the spirituall worship of God a strange form of prayer which was never approved whereat a Christian may not safely be present against which he is bound to witnesse Be it that the churches do erre herein yet I hope they be not obstinate and such as will not give consent to the truth when it is shewed and manifested How cometh it then to passe that none of them hitherto have subscribed to their opinion and practice Either their arguments are not sufficient to convince and then their Separation is unjust or they generally want eyes to see the light for they will not say they want conscience to acknowledge what they cannot but see and then in meeknesse they are to be born withall if upon well tried grounds a man be assured that they all and not he himself is in the errour The testimony of the church then is not infallible because it may erre and hath erred and some members of it at this day do erre in the particular differences that be amongst them but yet the constant testimony of the whole church in the times of light and reformation is of great weight otherwise the Apostles would never alledge the practice and consent of churches to confirm the faithfull and stop the mouthes of the contentious We must look to the primitive churches planted by the apostles who are patterns to them and us But the apostolick churches for many yeares had no such Liturgie devised or imposed And therefore it is no ordinance of Christ because the churches may perfectly and entirely worship God without it with all the parts of holy and spirituall worship We freely confesse it to be no ordinance of Christ by speciall institution nor part of his worship It sufficeth that it is allowable in the worship and consonant to the generall rules given in scripture but not of absolute necessitie Whether any stinted forms of prayer were in use in the apostolick churches is more then can be affirmed certainly or denyed That the apostles prescribed none as necessary that is easily beleeved because no mention of it That none was in use our Divines will neither peremptorily affirm nor deny But if that be granted it is no prejudice to a stinted Liturgy nor to the churches apostolick who are to be our patterns For it is more then probable that many assemblies had not the scriptures read in a known tongue at their first planting it is more then can be shewed by precedent or example that they were read in any Christian congregation Some churches converted by the preaching of the Gospel had neither books nor letters It may be others received the book of