Argument and shewing that their disobedience to the Commands of their Superiors in Lawful things more likely renders them partakers of the sin of others 2ly That our Submission to Superiors in these matters cannot render us partakers of their supposed sin § 1. This farther proved from the consideration of all the ways which render us partakers of the sins of others directly or indirectly Directly 1. By actually consenting to willing or approving the sin of others 2ly By commanding the doing of it 3ly By perswading encouraging warranting or alluring others to the performance of sin by applauding the action or rejoycing in the doing of it 4ly By teaching false Doctrins which do encourage others to sin § 2. Indirectly 1. When we do that which is a culpable occasion of their sin As 1. By neglecting of that Duty or by committing of that Evil action which doth directly give occasion to the sin of others 2ly When by our ill example we minister occasion to their sin 3ly When we do use our Liberty in things indifferent to the offence or sin of our weak Brother § 3. That our submission to things Lawful in themselves commanded by Superiors can neither directly nor indirectly involve us in guilt § 4. Jnst 2. By partaking with you in the Holy Sacrament who do not separate the Precious from the Vile we should approve of your neglect of discipline and by partaking with them become partakers in their sins Answered § 5. CHAP. VII § 1 IN the last place it is objected that their Submission to the imposed Rites will render them purtakers of the sin of others and therfore ought not to be done This they endeavour to make good upon a double ground And 1. We dare not joyn with you say they in Publick Worship or the participation of the Holy Sacraments Because some things are by Superiors required of all those who are permitted to joyn with you in those Ordinances which tho they are not evil in themselves yet ought they not to be required as the conditions of Communion they being things unnecessary now should we say they yield obedience to them in these things we should countenance them in their imposing these unnecessary burthens upon others and harden them in that which we suppose to be their sin and should encourage their persistance in it and so should be partakers in that Guilt Moreover the Rigid imposition of these things say they tends to divide the Church to make men Schismaticks and so it ministers to the destruction of poor Souls we dare not therefore submit unto the practise of them lest by so doing we approve of those Unchristian practices To this pretence I Answer 1. By Retorting of the Argument for the refusal of obedience to Superiors in Lawful matters hath the like and more pernitious consequences and therefore they at least have equal cause to yield obedience to such constitutions of Superiors on this account lest by refusing that obedience they approve the more Unchristian practises of those who rend the Church desert Communion with her Schismatically separate themselves disturb the Unity the Peace the Charity and the Edification of her Members and cast a vile reproach upon Christianity by representing it as that which doth forbid obedience to Superiors in Lawful matters and harden others in these sins all which is manifestly done by their refusal to obey the Constitutions of Superiors in Lawful matters 2. Did our Submission to any thing which our Superiors should not command make us partakers of their sin then every Burthensome and Grievous Act of Parliament which after it is made tends more unto the prejudice then to the good of the Community not only Lawfully might but must be disobeyed for Conscience sake lest by submitting to it we should encourage our Superiors to impose Grievous burthens on the Subject so that this scruple will lead to Faction in the State as well as to Sedition in the Church And 2ly If this were so that by submitting to any thing Commanded by Superiors which we do not approve of or they should not impose we become Guilty of the Sin of the Imposers then must our Lord and his Apostles be Guilty of like sin for they did ordinarily joyn with the People of the Jews in their Publick Service on the Sabbath day and at their other Festivals as I have shewed already altho they who then sat in Moses chair imposed more Rites and Ceremonies to be observed in those parts of Publick Worship then are imposed in our Church 3ly Then also must St. Paul be Guilty of approving those who did impose the Jewish Ceremonies as necessary to be observed by the Jew converted to Christianity because for peace sake he himself submittedto them and to the Jew became as a Jew that he might gain the Jew He also must himself approve and advise others to approve the judgment and the practice of those Jews who thought the Meats forbidden by the Law of Moses unlawful to be eaten the days appointed by that Law still necessary to be observed because he did himself and he advised others to comply with them in their weakness or to abstain from eating of those meats when that would minister occasion of Offence to their weak Brethren and so according to the Grounds of this objection he himself encouraged and hard'ned other persons in their sin and he advised others so to do But § 2 3ly To give more ample satisfaction to this scruple I shall consider all the ways whereby we become guilty of the sin of others and then apply them to the case in hand We therefore may become partakers of the sin of others either directly when we do actually consent unto will or approve the evil action which is done by others or indirectly when tho we do not actually consent unto the sin of others yet do we that which is a culpable occasion of it 1. Directly when we do actually consent unto will or approve the sin of others Now this is done two ways 1. Antecedently to the Evil action as when 't is done by our command direction or perswasion or consequently when tho we had no hand in doing of it yet we do afterwards censent unto approve or do rejoyce in any Evil done by others 2ly Directly we partake with others in their sin and Antecedently are guilty of it when having power over them we do command the doing of it for this Command is a plain evidence that we do will the Evil action and desire that it may be done Thus Absalom slew Amnon because he commanded his servants saying when I say unto you smite Amnon then kill him fear not have not I Commanded you 2 Sam. 13.30.28 thus David numbred the People 2 Sam. 24.10 by commanding Joab so to do v. 4. He kill'd Uriah the Hittite with the Sword 2 Sam. 12.9 because at the command of David he was put into the front of the Battel that he died 3ly We are directly partakers
Phrase That I commanded them not is only used in Scripture concerning things which he forbad or did command his people not to do and upon that account by good Interpreters is styled a Litotes that is a Figure which in Words diminisheth the thing intended as when a prohibition is intended by saying such a thing is not commanded This will appear from a perusal of the places cited For 1. The strange Fire which Nadab and Abihu offered was forbidden Fire 't was Fire not taken from the Altar to put into their Censers and burn Incense with Vid. Ainsw in locum whereas God had commanded that Fire should be always burning on the Altar to that very End And if God had no where commanded whence they should take their Fire to burn Incense and offer Sacrifice withal and yet would not allow them to use that Fire which he had not commanded it was not possible that they should offer to him any Incense or Burnt-Offering which was not an abomination to him As for their Offering their Sons and Daughters unto Baal or Moloch God most expresly did forbid it saying Lev. 18.21 Thou shalt not let any of thy Seed pass through the Fire to Moloch that this was the abomination which he hated Deut. 12.31 18 10 12. and that the Person guilty of it should be stoned with stones because he had defiled his Sanctuary and profaned his Holy Name Levit. 20.2 3. The Worship of other Gods or of the Sun and Moon and Stars which God is said not to have commanded is most expresly said to be transgressing of his Covenant Deut. 17.2 3. And therefore it was doing that which he forbid so that the import of these Texts seems only to be this that we must not perform in publick Worship or elsewhere that which God hath forbidden or hath enjoyned us not to do Question But why then is a thing so highly criminal expressed in these mild Words Which I commanded them not Answ The certain reason of this Phrase I cannot promise only I conjecture thus that whereas God had imparted to all the Heathen Nations the Sun Moon Stars and all the Host of Heaven that is had left them to the Worship of them Deut. 4 19. winking at them in the times of ignorance he had taken the Jews to be a people of inheritance to himself v. 20. and therefore saith unto them I am the Lord your God you shall have no other Gods but me wherefore for them to worship any of those Gods which he had not commanded or imparted to them was virtually to renounce the true God and to transgress his Covenant Deut. 29.25 26. and hence is that expression in the Book of Deuteronomy they have forsaken the Covenant of the Lord God of their Fathers which he made with them when he brought them forth out of the Lord of Aegypt for they went and served other Gods and worshipped them Gods which he had not given or imparted to them § 6 Add to this that Ingenious Answer which Mr. Eccles pol. l. 2. Hooker hath returned to this Objection viz. That because the Works of God are perfect and lack nothing for the performance of the thing to which they tend it followeth that the End being known to which God directeth his Speech the Negative Argument is always strong and forcible concerning those things that are apparently requisite to the same End As v.g. The purpose of God was to teach his people both to whom they should offer Sacrifice and what Sacrifice was to be offered to burn their Sons in Fire to Baal or Moloch he did not command them he spake no such thing neither came it into his Mind therefore this they ought not to have done For when the Lord had once set down a precise Form of executing that in which we are to serve him the Fault appeareth greater to do that which we are not than not to do that which we are commanded in this we seem to charge the Law of God with Hardness only in that with foolishness in this we shew our selves weak and unapt to be Doers of his Will in that we take upon us to be Controulers of his Wisdom in this we fail to perform the thing which God sees Meet Convenient and Good in that we presume to see what is Meet and Convenient better than God himself in those actions therefore the whole Frame whereof God hath on purpose set down to be observed we may not otherwise do than exactly as he hath prescribed Thus I suppose the Force of this Objection is sufficiently assoiled Obj. 3 Moreover it is objected by Dr. Ames and others § 3 p. 298.299 that the second Commandment forbiddeth to make unto our selves the Likeness of any thing whatsoever for religious use and therefore forbids us to use significant Ceremonies of mans devising Answ 1 The Major of this Argument is false for the second Commandment doth only forbid us to make any Likeness there mentioned to be the Object of our Religious Worship by bowing down unto or worshipping it the import of it being plainly this Thou shalt not make any Resemblance c. by Picture Sculpture or Fusion in Order to religious adoration and yielding to them any such signification of respect which the Custom or Consent of men hath appropriated to Religion as bowing falling down lying prostrate before them or the like That this is the true intent of this Precept is plain by the ground of this prohibition delivered by Moses in these Words Take ye therefore good heed to your selves for you saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake to you in Horeb Lest you corrupt and make you a graven Image Deut. 4.15 16. the similitude of any Figure the Likeness of Male or Female c. 2ly This is apparent from the reason of the prohibition I am a Jealous God that is a God very tender of my Honour and of my Right who will by no means suffer any Mate or Competitor in respect to that outward Worship which properly belongs to me I am the Lord that is my Name Esa 42.8 my Glory will I not give to another neither my Praise to graven Images For who can without blushing say that God is robbed of the outward Worship due unto him by our kneeling at the Sacrament our using the surplice or making the sign of the Cross upon a Childs Forehead whereas he himself tells us that he is robbed of his Praise and Glory by giving of Religious Worship unto graven Images it being only due unto that God to whom every Knee shall bow But saith Dr. Ames p. 302. The very Phantasies or Images of the mind not prescribed by God are by most Interpreters held as well forbidden as outward Real Images Answ if so the most are not always the best Interpreters there being nothing more absurd and foolish than this Interpretation never thought of by any of the Ancients or approved
that he gives us but he consigns no good and represents none but what he also gives and effects in that Ministration and under that Sign but a Symbolical Rite of humane Invention to signify what it doeth not effect and then introduced into the solemn Worship of God is so like those vain Imaginations and Representments forbidden in the second Commandment that the very Suspition is more against Edification than their use can pretend to and it is also unbefitting the Gravity and Spirituality of our Religion Moreover it is certain that Christ did therefore break the Yoke of Moses and cancel all the Ceremonial Rites contained in that Law because they were in themselves Burthensome Acts 15.10 Unprofitable and weak Hebr. 7.18.13.9 because they were but weak and beggarly Elements Gal. 4.9 The Rudiments of the World Col. 2.8 20. Rudiments to which we were in bondage Gal. 4.3 9. And were appointed only till the time of Reformation whence it doth seem to follow that to introduce like Rites as burthensome unprofitable weak and beggarly is to reduce us in some measure to a state of Judaism And that we are not to be subject to such Rudiments is proved from Colos 2.20 Where the Apostle speaking partly of the Jewish Ordinances which were abolished and partly of the Insittutions of the Essens or Philosophers which others labored to bring into the Christian Faith said thus If ye be dead with Christ from the Rudiments of the World Serm. of Superst p. 15. wherefore as living in the World are ye subject to Ordinances i.e. saith Dr. Still If ye are freed from the Yoke of the Law what reason is there ye should submit to another which depends only on the Authority and Invention of men and Dr. In locum Hammond thus If ye have received the Christian Faith as you ought to do and have made that use of the Death of Christ as to have forsaken all other Doctrines and Practices to receive him and so to look upon the Rights of the Jews and the Philosophy of the Gentiles to be abolished and out-dated why do you now subject your selves to such Abstinencies as either out of Heathen or Jewish Practices are brought in among you And whereas it is answered 1. Still 16. p. 16. That the Apostle speaks not here of those who had Lawful Authority to impose such things but of Seducers It may be thus replyed That this is not material seeing the Apostle doth not reject these things as being introduced without just Authority but as being Ordinances to which the Christian ought not to be subject they being Rudiments of the World and things which did insinuate that they who practised them were not yet dead unto the World with Christ 2ly Ibid. Whereas 't is answered that the Apostle speaks not of things appointed meerly for Decency and Order but of such things as are supposed by the Imposers to have more of true Perfection and Sanctity in them more Humility and Mortification and consequently to be more pleasing to God than bare obedience to the Precepts of Christ and his Apostles and that such only are here censured it is replyed That they who think these Rites fit to be imposed on the account of their Edification Decency and Order must think them more pleasing to God than bare obedience to Christs Precepts in Celebration of his Worship and much more they who being importuned out of pity to the Souls of their weak Brethren to abstain from the imposing of these things upon them answer with our Commissioners that the things they desire to be excused from § 8 have a Real Goodness in them a fitness and decency § 7 and that tho Charity will move to pity relieve those that are truly perplexed and scrupulous yet we must not break Gods Command in Charity to them and therefore we must not perform Gods Publick Services undecently or disorderly for the Ease of tender Consciences For must not these men think that our Publick Service is better and more pleasing to God when performed with than when performed without our Ceremonies even abstractly from their Institution and that the using of these Ceremonies doth add some Real Goodness in the Service which would be wanting in it otherwise Ductor Duâ—it l. 3. c. 4. R. 20. In a word We are to remember § 8 saith the Reverend Bishop Taylor That Figures and Shadows were for the Old Testament but Light and Manifestation is in the New and the Aegyptians indeed did teach Religion by Symbolical Figures and in the Schools of Plato and Pythagoras they taught their Scholars by Numbers and Figures but we that walk in the Light of the Gospel and rejoyce in that Light have received from Christ and his Apostles an easier way of teaching the People and are not therefore to return to the Elements and Rituals of Jews and Pagan Schools Christ left no sign but two that did also effect as well as signify and if they had only signified and done no other good we have no reason to believe that they would have been appointed To this very weighty Argument I think it very difficult to give a full and Satisfactory Answer tho unto others it seems very slight What I can honestly reply unto it is to this effect Answ 1 1. § 2 That as St. Paul submitted to some Jewish Rites unlawfully required by the Jewish Christians as necessary to be observed by Jews that he might gain the Jews and minister to their Salvation so may the Christian submit to Ceremonies imposed unduly by Superiors when this is necessary for Preservation of the Churches Peace Unity and Wellfare and to enable us to serve the Church of Christ in ministring to the Salvation of the Souls committed to our Charge or to whose Service we are devoted by our Ordination so that this Argument tho it seem strong against the Imposition of our Ceremonies provided that they be imposed as significant and teaching Ceremonies yet doth it not conclude against Submission to them on the foresaid accounts Answ 2 2ly I answer that we must distinguish betwixt Signs natural and customary and Signs which are arbitrary and tropological A natural Sign is that which naturally and before any Institution doth signify to others who perceive them that which is intended by them or which they do import as sighing smiting of the Breast importeth Heaviness and Sorrow A customary Sign is that which custom antecedently to any Institution hath determined to this or that signification in the place where such a custom doth obtain Thus pulling off the Hat with us is now and pulling off the Shoe among the Eastern Nations was anciently with them a sign of Reverence Now of such signs it truly may be said they rather are Expressions than Documents of what they do import Such v. g. were the ancient Love Feasts and the Kiss of Charity approved or required by the Apostles viz. Expressions of that sincere affection which they
Where there is no law forbidding sure we are there is no transgression but there is no law forbidding the observation of Christmas and other Festivals of our Church and therefore there is no transgression in observing them and if our assurance that there is no transgression in not observing of these days depends on this that no law doth command their observation why are we not as sure that we transgress not in observing them being as sure that no law doth forbid their observation wherefore we being sure of this that there is a law commanding us to yield obedience to the guidance and appointment of our Superiors in all lawful things and sure from what hath been discoursed that the Religious observation of these days for the forementioned ends is not only lawful but expedient let any Reasonable person judge which is the surer side the observation of these days as by Authority we are required or the Refusal so to do Object 6 Others object against the observation of these days § 15 that St. Paul condemneth his Galatians for observing Months and Times and Years Gal. 4.9 10. And saith to his Colossians let no man judge you on the account of a Feast or a New Moon or a Sabbath-day Coloss 2.16 Answer It is exceeding manifest that both these places only do concern the observation of those Jewish Festivals which were commanded by the Law of Moses by Gentile Converts to Christianity For 1. the Apostle in the beginning of the fourth Chapter to the Galatians saith Gal. 4.3 5. that Christ came to redeem those from the Law who were in bondage to its beggarly Elements that they might receive the adoption of sons and then puts the Question to his Galatians thus how therefore turn you again unto those weak and beggarly Elements to which you desire again to be in bondage v. 9. v. 10. And as an instance of their relapsing to that bondage he adds You observe Days and Months and Times and Years viz. Those Months and Days and Yearly Festivals which were prescribed by the Law of Moses and therefore saith I am afraid of you lest I may have laboured among you in vain v. 11. And farther saith tell me you that desire to be under the Law v. 12. do you not hear the law Plainly demonstrating that he reprehends them for their desire to joyn the observation of the Law of Moses to Christianity In the 2d Chapter to the Colossians he speaks expresly of New Moons and Sabbaths which were proper to the Jewish Pedagogy v. 16 17. and of such Festivals as were Shadows of things to come and such were properly the Jewish Festivals and they only 2ly That he speaks only of the observation of them by the Gentile Convert to Christianity is evident from the severity of his reprehension of them as being a reducing them to bondage and that which made his labour vain among them whereas he being an Hebrew of the Hebrews did himself observe the feast of Pentecost and did permit the observation of them for a season to the weaker Jew Rom. 14.5 6. Hence also 3ly Act. 18.21.20.16 It is evident that he speaks only against the observation of these days from the opinion of their necessity to the justification of the Gentile Christian or from an opinion of their obligation to observe the Law of Moses as his whole disputation in his Epistle to the Galatians doth plainly shew wherefore our Festivals being not Jewish nor such as were commanded by the Ceremonial Law nor Shadows of things future nor observed by us out of opinion of any such necessity as hath been mentioned they cannot be concerned in those words of the Apostle nor can they with any colour be esteemed Yokes of bondage or weak and beggarly Elements as were these Jewish Feasts any more then weekly Lectures or stated fasts for publick judgments or stated Festivals for the remembrance of publick mercies can be so accounted But tho this Exposition of these places be so evident that he who runs may read it yet do dissenters thus object against it Object If the Apostle speak only of Judaical days either he condemneth the observation of the same feasts materialiter that is the observing of the same days the Jews observed or formaliter that is he condemns the observing of them with such a meaning after such a manner and to such an end as the Jews did if the former then say they their own feasts of Easter and Whitsunday will be condemned because they were observed by the Jews if they assert the latter this cannot be true for the Apostle condemns that observation of these days which was done by those Galatians who believed that Christ was already come and therefore could not keep them as figures of his coming as the Jews did but rather as memorials saith Cartwright Disp p. 48. 49. that he was already come so Gillespy Answer The Apostle plainly condemns the observation of these days by Gentile Converts whether Colossians or Galatians upon account of any obligation lying on them from the Law of Moses so to do now I hope Mr. Gillespy will grant that the Galatian Christians might think themselves obliged to observe the Law of Moses by being circumcised and keeping of the Festivals prescribed by it 2ly He also condemns the observation of them by Gentiles to the same end the Passover in memory of their deliverance from Aegypt the feast of Pentecost in memory of Gods kindness in giving his Law to them at that time the feast of Tabernacles in memory of their Divine protection in the wilderness their weekly Sabbaths in memory of their deliverance from Aegyptian Thraldom and to these ends the Judaizing Gentile Converts might observe them 3ly The Judaizing Christians believed that the Messiah was already come and yet conceived themselves obliged to observe these Festivals not as Shadows of things to come but as Festivals commanded by the Law of Moses and so might also those Gentile Converts whom they had perverted CHAP. X. The Contents The Proposition that a prescribed Form of Liturgy may lawfully be used in publick Worship 1. Because such a Form is not forbidden either directly or indirectly in the word of God Not 1. by the command to pray always in the Spirit Eph. 5.18 and in the Holy Ghost Jude 20.2 Not by our Lords command to his Disciples when they were brought before Kings and Rulers for his sake not to meditate what they should say Matt. 10.19 Nor 3. by the promise of the Spirit to help our infirmities Rom. 8.26 27. Nor 4. by the commands not to neglect our Gifts 1 Tim. 4.14 but as we have received the Gift so to minister 1 Pet. 4.10 Rom. 12.6 Nor 5. from Gods Promise to pour out upon his People the Spirit of Supplication § 1. To pray in the Spirit 1 Cor. 14.15 is 1. to pray by the immediate Assistance and Operations of the Holy Spirit 2 To use the gift
together in our Petitions and with one mouth to glorifie God to secure the publick Service from dark extravagant erroneous Petitions too oft put up by the contenders for and practisers of this Extemporary Devotion If therefore care ought to be taken that our publick Sacrifice should be as near as can be without blemish and that we do not offer unto God the lame and the blind Mal. 1.13 14. I think this cannot be done better than by prescribing of a well composed form of prayer to be dayly offered up unto God as our Morning and our Evening Sacrifice Lastly Whereas it is objected That in set Forms of prayer we restrain and confine the Spirit and in conceived prayers the Spirit is free unlimited and unconstrained I Answer That by restraining of the Spirit the Objectors mean the restraining of their own Spirits or of the blessed Spirit If by restraining of the Spirit they mean restraining the spirit of the Minister I ask 1. Why his Spirit may not be restrained by the wisdom of his Superiors as well as the spirit of the people by his conceived prayer And tell me Is not their spirit restrained when the whole Congregation is confined to the form of this one mans composing or unto words which on a sudden he doth utter 2. Did not Christ restrain the Spirit of his own Disciples when he taught them to pray the Lords Prayer if he had only said pray thus after this manner and given only a Directory for the matter of prayer this was a restraint but if he said pray this or pray these words as I shall prove he did he then prescribed both the matter and words too and therefore did restrain the Spirit of his Disciples as truly as any other form could do 3. The Spirit of the Minister must in some cases be restrained and that by precept Apostolical for otherwise what means St Paul by saying 1 Cor. 14.32 the Spirit of the Prophets must be subject to the Prophets what greater restraint than subjection for if subjected then they must be ruled if ruled then limited or prescribed unto and as much under restraint as the Spirit of the superior Prophets shall judge convenient In fine when the Assembly of Divines appointed the matter of prayers to all particular Ministers was that appointment by the Spirit or no if no then for ought appears the Directory not being made by Gods Spirit may be an enemy to it But if this appointment were by the Spirit then the determination and limitation of the Spirit in either sense is by the Spirit himself and such indeed is every pious and prudent constitution of the Church in matters spiritual such was that of St Paul to the Corinthians when he prescribed orders for publick Prophesying and Interpretation and speaking with Tongues All these are Answers to this Objection transcribed from the excellent Bishop Taylors Discourse concerning Prayer ex tempore And it seems reasonable to suppose with him that after all these Answers this Objection should trouble us no more If by the Spirit they mean the Holy Spirit I enquire 1. By what Argument shall any man make it so much as probable that the Holy Ghost is injured if every private Ministers Spirit shall be guided and so by necessary consequence limited by the Authority of the Church What prohibition what Law what Reason or Revelation is against it what inconvenience in the nature of the thing for can any man be so weak as to imagine a despite is done to the Spirit of Grace when men pray by such well composed Forms as the whole Church approves of and doth not in opposition to them use his private Gift 2. Is not the Holy Spirit as much restrained by premeditated prayers since the design of that premeditation is only to consider after what form or manner they should pray for what and in what words so that the Holy Spirits assistance is restrained to their conceptions and meditations men therefore must be bound to pray they know not what or else according to this Objection must lay restraints upon the Holy Spirit 3. Doth not the Directory that thing which is here called restraining of the Spirit Doth it not appoint every thing but the words and after this is it not a goodly Palladium which is contended for and a princely liberty they leave unto the Spirit to be free only in supplying the place of a Vocabulary or a Copia Verborum for as for the matter it is all there described and appointed and to these determinate senses the Spirit must assist or not at all only for the words he shall take his choice Now I enquire which is the most considerable of the two Sense or Language matter or words if the former is it not a greater injury to the Spirit to restrain his matter than to appoint his words so that in the greater of the two the Spirit is restrained when his matter is appointed and to make him amends for not trusting him with the matter without our directions and limitations we trust him to say what he pleaseth so it be to our sense 4. Is it not as much a restraint of the Spirit to sing a Psalm in Metre by appointment as to use a Form of Prayer and Thanksgiving by appointment yet this is done daily by Dissenters without any scruple made which seems to argue great partiality or want of judgment There being then no Scripture precept no evidence of reason against Forms of prayer we may hence rationally conclude that they are lawful For had it been the will of God that publick prayers should be performed by Christians in an extemporary manner and not by forms we may rationally conceive the Holy Spirit who is the Spirit of supplication would somewhere have admonished us to pray ex tempore and to beware of Book-prayers and the use of Forms as well as of neglecting this duty altogether or performing it in a careless and undue manner and this the rather because Forms of Prayer and Thanksgiving were used in the Jewish Church and because the modesty of many good Christians and the inabilities of many more would naturally prompt them to the use of so ready a help to Devotion as pious and useful Forms of prayer are but so far are we from finding any command in Scripture to pray upon suddain invention that we find no preference given to this way in Scripture above the use of Forms but rather the contrary for when our Saviour taught his Disciples to pray he enjoined them the use of a form As for all other vices by which this duty is corrupted or rendred less acceptable to God the Holy Ghost hath fully cautioned us against them Matt. 6.7 v. 5. Matt. 15.8 Luke 18.10 1 Cor. 14. James 1.6 1 Tim. 2.8 John 9.31 putting in caveats against Battology or much speaking against performing of this duty for ostentation against honouring God with our lips when our hearts are far from