a more publick and general concern though the Composers of our Liturgy could not foresee the Horrid Powder-Plot and the strange discovery of it the impious Murder of the late King and the happy Restoration of this yet upon the happening of those great Events our Church hath always taken care to provide such Forms of publick Prayer as are every way suitable to the Case and as for those extraordinary Cases which might be foreseen because they happen more frequently in the course of things such as want of Rain or fair Weather Dearth and War Plague and Sickness there may be Forms composed for them afore-hand as there are in our Church's Liturgy so that it is no Argument at all against publick Forms that they cannot make a due provision for extraordinary Cases and Events for before they happen extempore Prayers can no more make due provision for them than Forms and after they happen as due a provision may be made for them by Forms as by extempore Prayers 3. That supposing such provision for extraordinary Cases be not or cannot be made in the publick Form yet that is no Argument why it should not be used so far forth as it comprehends the main of the common Cases and Necessities of the People for as I shew'd before the main matter of publick Prayer may be much more fully comprehended in a studied Form than it can reasonably be supposed to be in an extempore Prayer in which in all probability there will be more omissions as to what respects the ordinary cases of Christians than there are in the publick Form as to what respects their extraordinary cases so that if the Form ought not to be used because it extends not always to all their extraordinary Cases for the same reason extempore Prayer ought not to be used because it extends not always to all their ordinary Cases But since as hath been proved at large the use of Forms is upon sundry accounts of great advantage to the publick Devotion it 's very reasonable that they should be used so far forth as they can and do express the common Cases and Necessities and that the people should not be deprived of the benefit of joyning with them in the main matters of publick Prayer because such extraordinary matters may occur as either are not or can be express'd in them especially when 4. The defect of such new provision for extraordinary Cases may be supplied by the Minister in a publick Prayer of his own for as I observed before our Church allows or at leasts permits the Minister to use a Prayer of his own composure in the Pulpit in which if any extraordinary Mercy or Judgment for which there is no provision in our Liturgie happen to the place he lives in there is no doubt but he may and ought to supply the Devotion of his People with such Confessions Petitions and Thanksgivings as are proper and suitable to the occasion and where this is allow'd of or permitted the non-provision for such extraordinary Cases in the establisht Liturgy can be no bar at all against the use of it provided its Prayers be good and comprehend all ordinary matters of Prayer it is sufficiently provided for ordinary publick Devotion and so far doubtless may be lawfully used sufficient provision being otherwise made for all those extraordinary matters which it doth not or could not comprehend The sum of all therefore is this That as for the ordinary and main matters of publick Prayer they may be more fully and distinctly comprehended in a Form than in an extempore Prayer and as for those new matters which extraordinary publick Emergencies do administer they may for the generality be as well comprehended in a new Form as in a new extempore Prayer and though it should not or could not be express'd in the publick Form yet that is no bar against our joyning with it in all other matters of Prayer especially when these new matters of Prayer may be comprehended and express'd in a publick Prayer of the Minister's own composure CASE V. Whether there be any Warrant for Forms of Prayer in Scripture or pure Antiquity IN which Case there are two Enquiries to be made 1. Whether there be any Warrant for Forms of Prayer in the holy Scripture 2. Whether there be any evidence of the publick use of them in the primitive and purer Ages of the Church 1. Whether there be any Warrant for the use of Forms of Prayer in holy Scripture Where by Warrant must be meant either first positive Command or secondly allow'd Example for upon both these our Brethren insist First they require us to produce some positive Command upon this pretence that nothing ought to be used in the Worship of God but what is commanded by him which how true it is is not my present business to enquire that being done already to excellent purpose in the Case about Indifferent Things But because upon this pretence our Brethren reject the use of Forms as unlawful I shall endeavour to prove these two things 1. That supposing this pretence were true yet it doth not conclude against the use of Forms 2. That supposing it did conclude against the use of Forms it equally concludes against conceiv'd or extempore Prayer 1. That supposing this pretence were true viz. That what is not commanded by God ought not to be used in his Worship yet it doth not conclude against the use of Forms for though we do not pretend that God hath any-where commanded us to pray to him by Forms and no otherwise or that all the Prayers which we at any time offer to him should be first composed into a Form yet we do assert that he hath injoyn'd some Forms to be used and offer'd up in Prayer though together with those particular Forms we grant there might be and doubtless sometimes were other Prayers to be offer'd up to him Thus in the Old Testament we read of sundry Forms of Prayer injoyn'd to be used by God himself and which is the same thing by persons immediately inspired so Numb 6. 23 24 25 26. On this wise or thus shall Aaron and his sons bless the children of Israel saying unto them The Lord bless thee and keep thee the Lord make his face shine upon thee the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace In which words the Priest did solemnly invocate and pray for a Blessing on the people and he is commanded to do it saying unto them this very Form of words The Lord bless thee c. which is as plain an injunction of this Form as words can well express So also in the expiation of uncertain Murder Deut. 21. 7 8. the people are injoyn'd by God to say Be merciful O Lord unto thy people Israel whom thou hast redeem'd and lay not innocent bloud unto thy people of Israel 's charge So also at their paying their third years Tythes they were expresly injoyn'd to use this Form of words I
great Significations in them had not the express Institution of God for their warranty and yet were well enough receiv'd in the purest times of the Jewish Church and comply'd with by our Saviour himself Secondly take we a view of the Christian Church and that both as to the first ages of it and all the later Reformations that have been made 1. We may observe even from the days of the Apostles themselves the Church hath taken the Liberty of making use of one Rite or other that hath signifi'd things of greatest weight and moment to instance in a twofold Custom primitively us'd amongst Christians that lookt much more Sacramentally than our use of the Cross in Baptism that is the institution of them seem'd Apostolical being frequently mentioned in their Holy writings and they were immediatly annext to the Holy Eucharist and in their Signification bore some analogy with what that Sacrament it self was in part the token and seal of these were the Holy Kiss and the Agapae or Feasts of Charity The Holy Kiss was perform'd as the best Writers generally conceive after all other preparations immediatly before they entred upon the Celebration of the Dr. Caves prim Christ part 1 Chap. 11. p. 346. 352. Lord's Supper and at the close and upshot of the whole Solemnity from whence Tertullian gives it the term of signaculum orationis the Seal of Prayer This the Apostle is suppos'd to direct to when he enjoyns the Corinthians 1 Cor. 16. 20. to greet one another with an holy kiss And this was kept Quae oratio cum divortio sancti osculi integra Tert. de orat up with that Reverence in Tertullian's time that he speaks as if the Service of the Publick Prayers were maim'd and imperfect if it concluded not with this kiss This was us'd in token of the mutual Communion and Fellowship that Christians had with one another and the unfeigned reconciliation of their Minds that they came with no inward heart-burnings against one another being that great Christian Grace and Vertue so much insisted upon in our Saviour's Gospel and after that by his Apostles made one great Evidence of the Professors having pass'd from Death to Life And yet that this custom had not its Foundation in any Divine Appointment but the voluntary use the Church made of it seems agreed to on all hands because afterward it is not only prohibited by some Councils but by an universal consent in all Churches wholly laid aside and grown out of all use Again we may observe as to that custom of the Agapae or Feasts of Charity which in the Apostles days 1 Cor. 11. 20 21. probably were celebrated immediately before the Lords Supper and in some Ages afterward not till the Holy Communion was finished But whether they had them before or after it is certain they had great Significations in them not only of Christians mutual Love and Communion but also of the equal regards that God and our Blessed Lord had toward all sorts and conditions of Men the poor as well as the rich those of meaner degree and quality as well as the high and noble when they were all to eat freely together at one common meal This the Apostle seems to point at in the remarks he makes upon the disorders in the Church at Corinth that in their Love-Feasts every one taketh before other his own Supper and so did despise the Church of God And those that had Houses to Eat and Drink in sham'd those that had not Now though this custom was hallowed by the practice of the Apostles and had so great Significations in it and was from the first so annext to the Holy Eucharist that it always either begun or concluded it and consequently lookt much more Sacramentally than our Sign of the Cross in Baptism can be suppos'd to do yet is it plain by the universal disuse of it in these later ages of the Church that it self never was esteem'd any Sacrament I might further instance in the Ceremony of insufflation or breathing upon the Person that was to be Baptis'd Aug. de nupt concup lib. 2. 29. call'd by one of the Fathers an ancient Tradition which they us'd as a sign of expelling the Evil Spirit and breathing into them the good Spirit this seem'd to signifie more the Grace of God than Duty of the Christian and yet not suspected as any Sacrament Thus the Baptized Persons stripping of his Garment in token that he put off the Old Man which was corrupt according to his deceitful Lusts doth it not look full as Sacramentally as our Cross in Baptism Yet we find it anciently practis'd without any jealousie of invading the prerogative of Christ in instituting Holy Sacraments To say no more what think we of the trine immersion once accounted a pious usage in the Church whereby the Person being thrice dipt or put under water at the mention of each Person of the Trinity was suppos'd to be Baptiz'd in the beleif of that great Article So Tertullian expresseth it Nam nec semel Advers Praxeam Again in lib de Coron milit sed ter ad singula nomina in Personas singulas tingimur We are dipped not once but three times at each name and so are Baptiz'd into the three Persons And besides this Signification of the three Persons by this threefold immersion which Tertullian and not only he but St. Ambrose have mention'd there are others of the Fathers that have suppos'd the Death the Burial and the Resurrection of our Saviour together with his being in the Grave three days was signifi'd by this custom And yet was this so far from being accounted any Sacrament of it self or a Sacrament within that of Baptism that the Church hath thought fit to lay Immersion aside for the generality and the threefold Immersion much sooner particularly in Spain and that upon a reason that made the single dipping as significant as the Trine had been when it was in use viz to distinguish themselves from the Arrians who had taken occasion from this threefold dipping in Baptism to assert the three distinct substances pretending a Testimony from the Catholick Church by this usage Much such a reason by the way the Reform'd Churches in Poland govern'd themselves by when in a general Synod they decreed against the Posture of sitting at the Lords Supper because that Custom had been brought in first by the Arrians who as they irreverently treat Christ so also his sacred appointments Which leads to a view of the Church in all Synod Petricov An. 1578. its later Reformations 2. Is it not very evident that in none of our later Reformations nay even in those of our Dissenting Brethren themselves but they do in their most Religious Solemnities some things that are very Symbolical Actions that have great significations in them 1. There giving to every Baptiz'd Infant a new Name which both they and we do call the Christian Name this seems to
the Sacrament can never be demonstrated so as that the conscience may surely build upon it This I shall endeavour to make good these two ways First we have no sure ground for it in Scripture Secondly the Customs observed by the Jews render it very incertain and disputable 1. All that can be gathered from Scripture amounts Mat. 26. 26. Mar. 14. 22. to no more than this that as they were eating or as they did eat as the Phrase is rendred in St. Mark Jesus took Bread and blessed it and brake it and gave it to his Disciples and he took the Cup when he had Supped saith St. Paul after Supper as St. Luke hath 1 Cor. 11. 25. Luke 22. 20. it and gave Thanks and gave it to them saying Drink ye all of it Now it 's very clear from this account which the Scripture gives that our Lord did Institute and Administer the Sacrament to his Disciples and that they did Receive it But whether Sitting Kneeling or Standing is no where mentioned nor plainly determined It 's clear that he Instituted this Holy Feast at the close of the Paschal Feast for he took the Bread as they were Eating and the Cup when he had Supped that he did Celebrate the Passover according to the usual manner of the Jews in those times which was in a Discumbing Luke 22. 14. Mat. 26. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Marg. posture on Beds placed about the Table much after the manner of our lying or leaning upon Couches Yet whether after all the Apostles Received or our Lord Administred the Sacrament still Sitting after the same manner as they did at the Passover is not exprest nor can it be certainly concluded from the Word of God The utmost strength of their Argument who urge Sitting in imitation of our Saviours example can arise to no more than this That it's probable our Lord did not alter the Gesture he used at the Passover when he Instituted the Sacrament But who sees not that a probability is far from a certainty A thing may be really false though it seem likely to be true And that opinion which is speculatively probable may when reduced to practice become a great Sin and a great Error Thus to refuse to Receive the Holy Sacrament Kneeling and thereby neglect a known necessary Duty and not onely so but to disturb the Peace and break the Unity of the Church upon a bare probability that our Lord sate which we are not cannot be sure of is a great fault in all who are guilty of it For they appeal to an incertain example against a plain certain Command viz. to receive the Tokens and Pledges of our Saviours dying love and to do this in Remembrance of him They therefore who urge the example of Christ for Sitting at the Sacrament and as a Plea against Kneeling would do well first to make the example appear and prove that he did Sit before they press a Conformity 2. If we consult the Records of Jewish Antiquities and the Writings of Learned Men both Jews and Christians concerning the Passover and the manner of the Jews Celebrating it we shall find that they did not keep to one and the same Gesture throughout the Solemnity For the Babylon and Jerusalem Talmud Maimonides and Buxtorf do certifie us that they did alter their posture at the Passover though the Lying or Leaning posture was generally and most Religiously used and observed at this Feast above any other And the Scripture gives some hints and intimations of the Truth of what they deliver 1. It was the antient custom of the Jews and of those Gen. 18. 4. 19. c. 2. 24. 32. Mat. 15. 2. Mar. 7. 3. Luke 7. 44. Eastern Countries at their ordinary Feasts and Entertainments to Wash their Hands and their Feet and especially at their Religious Feasts to Wash their Hands often At the Passover they Washed their Hands thrice at least according to the Talmudists and the Authors forecited Which Ceremony could not well nor was Tract Berachoth â—esachin Maimon in Chametz Umaâ—sah Buxtorf Synag c. 13. not in all likelyhood performed during their Lying or Leaning posture on their left sides as their manner was For the reason of their Washing at all and so frequently was that no legal Impuritie or Uncleanness might cleave to them and to signify the great care they took to keep this Solemn Feast Holy to the Lord. And as they were Nice and Curious in Purifying and Washing themselves so in keeping the Beds Table Dishes and Vid. Buxt Synagoga c. 12. p 286. all other Utensils necessary for this Feast clean and free from all pollution too To Wash so often more than the Law required and the general custom of those Eastern and hot Countries warranted was a Pharisaical Invention and superstitiously abused by them and as such it 's certain our Lord did not use it but that he did Wash sometime before he Eat the Paschal Supper and after he had Sat down as the manner was there is little reason to doubt and all that I infer from hence is that when he Washed be it once or twice he altered his posture and in all probabilitie either arose from his Bed and went Vid. John 2. 6. to the place where Water and Vessels were prepared and set for such uses or had Water brought to him in a Basin wherein he Washed either Sitting upright or Standing which are both different from that Gesture which was peculiar and proper to the Passover St. John in Chap. 13. 2 4 5. Verses will explain and Confirm this Custom we are speaking of There he tells us how that Supper being ended that is in a manner or almost ended for by comparing the 12 and 26 and 27 Verses together we shall find plainly that they had not quite finished their Supper Jesus riseth from Supper and laid aside his Garments and took a Towel and girded himself and after that poureth Water into a Basin and began to Wash the Disciples Feet There are Learned Men on both sides who think all this was Vid. Grot. in loe Dr. Hamond on v. 26. Mark 14. 12. done at the Feast of the Passover and that towards the close of it when he Instituted the Lords Supper but I shall wave this and not infist upon it because as I hinted before I believe as the Learned Dr. Lightfoot doth it was no more then an ordinary or common meal and therefore I onely shall conclude thus much from it which I think is very probable That it was usual with the Jews to Wash at their Feasts and that in Supper-time And that our Saviour complyed with thâ—s custom To Wash the Feet of the Guests was the Office of Servants and it was altogether unusual for the Master of the Feast to do but our Lord to set his Disciples an example of Humility and Charitable condescention one to another performs this servile Office himself Joh. 13. 14 15.
as being agreeable to the Nature of a Feast or a Banquet and at the same time think there lyes no necessity at all upon them to observe other Formalities equally agreeable to the Nature of Civil Feasts and warranted by custom as much as Sitting is the great knot of the Question and that which puzzles me I confess to unty 2. They observe several Modes and Circumstances at the Sacrament which are not agreeable to the Nature of a Feast or Supper nor to the customary way of Feasting among us For example The Sacrament say they is a Feast a Supper and requires a Feast a Supper-Gesture and then too say I it requires a Supper-time It is called in Scripture the Lord's Supper and it was Instituted the same night in which he was betrayed and it 's clear that our Lord Administred it at Even and that late at the close of the Paschal Feast Now the Nature of a Supper according to Common use and acception requires the Evening or Night as the proper and peculiar season for it and yet our Dissenting Brethren make no scruple of Communicating at Noon It 's not agreeable to the Nature of a Feast that one of the Guests and the Principal one too should fill out the Wine and break the Bread and distribute it to the rest of the Society but this the Dissenters generally allow of and practice at the Holy Communion It 's not agreeable to the Nature of a Feast to Sit from the Table dispersed up and down the Room In all publick Feasts there are several Tables provided when one is not big enough to receive the Guests and yet the Dissenters generally receive in their Pews scattered up and down the Church and think one Table is sufficient though not capable of receiving the twentieth part of the Communicants in some large Parishes and numerous Assemblies And where they are few in number that they may come up to and Sit at the Table they generally are against it especially the Presbyterians and think they are not obliged to observe that formality though constantly practised at Common and Civil Entertainments It 's by no means agreeable to the nature of a Feast to be Sorrowful To Mourn and Grieve at a Feast is as Indecent and Unsutable as to Laugh at a Funeral But sure our Dissenting Brethren will not say that to come to the Sacrament with a Penitent and a broken Spirit to come with a hearty Sorrow for all our Sins which caused much Pain and Torment to our Dearest and Greatest Friend our ever-Blessed Redeemer To reflect upon the Agonies of his Soul in the Garden the Bitterness of his deadly Cup the Torture he endured on the Cross with a deep Sympathy and Trouble for the occasion they will not surely I say affirm that such a disposition of Heart and Mind is improper and unsutable to the Nature of this Holy Feast which we Solemnize in Commemoration of his Death for our sakes I make no doubt but all Pious Dissenters bring along with them to the Sacrament such a temper but this they ought not to do if their Rule hold good viz. That at this Feast we ought to be guided by the Rules of Common Table-Fellowship 2. The Nature of the Lord's Supper doth not necessarily require a Common Table-Gesture because it 's not of the same Nature with Common and Ordinary Feasts It is very ill Logick as well as ill Divinity to argue from Natural and Civil things to Spiritual to conclude that because they agree in their names they are of the same Nature For example When any Man who hath led a loose sensual wicked Life is awakened and excited by the Grace of God to consider and take up to mind Heavenly things and to breath after God and Christ and Eternity to alter his mind and his manners and lead quite another Life from what he did before this Person is in Scripture-Phrase said to be Regenerate and Born again But if we would go about to judge of the true Nature of Regeneration and the new Birth purely by the Correspondency it holds with the Natural Birth and argue from the Natural to the Spiritual we should Entertain very gross and silly Conceptions of Regeneration and greatly mistake the Nature of it How ridiculous would it be to prescribe the same Rules to be observed by a New Convert or a New-Born Babe in a Spiritual Sense in Order to his Spiritual nourishment and growth in Grace as are prescribed and practised towards Infants and New-Born Babes in a Natural Sense for the maintenance and preservation of their Natural Life and Strength as that they should be Swathed and enter into a Milk-Dyet And yet this is every way as reasonable as to prescribe Sitting as necessary to the worthy Receiving of the Sacrament which is a Spiritual Feast because it 's agreeable to the Nature of Civil Feasts Or which amounts to the same thing because it 's called a Feast therefore it 's of the same Nature with Ordinary and Common Feasts and Consequently such a Gesture and Behaviour as is necessary and requisit to these is also requisit and necessary to the Lord's Supper 3. The Nature of the Lord's Supper considered as a Feast doth not necessarily require and oblige us to use a Common Tale-Gesture in order to right and worthy Receiving because in the Judgement and Practice of numerous Dissenters it may be worthily Received Standing Thus the Presbyterians and all their Writers who have engaged against Kneeling do not condemn Standing as Sinful and Unlawful nor esteem such as use it unworthy Receivers on that account and yet Standing is no Common Table-Gesture If any should yet urge the necessity of Sitting as the Object onely agreeable Gesture to the Nature of the Sacrament considered as a Feast and that to use any other Gesture would Prophane the Ordinance I offer this to be considered as a good Answer That Answer the Passover was called a Feast by God himself who Exod. 12. 14. Instituted it and yet he Commanded the Children of Israel to Celebrate it in Egypt after this manner with Ver. 11. their Loyns Girt their Shoes on their Feet and their Staff in their Hands All Signs of hast indeed but no Feast or Table-Gestures either among the Jews or the Egyptians To say that God enjoyned Gestures unsutable to the Nature of that Ordinance is to call in Question the Wisdom and the Knowledge and the Truth of God as not Acting upon a right understanding of and in Conformity to the true Nature of things it 's all one as to suppose that God after he had Created a reasonable Creature would enjoyn him to do something that was disagreeable to his Nature and Reason On the other hand to say that the Feast of the Passover did in its Nature admit of several Gestures is to yield all that I desire for then the Sacrament considered as a Feast will admit of several too and Consequently doth not oblige