requisite that no man should come to the Holy Communion but with a full trust in Gods mercy and with a quiet Conscience though it be every mans duty to be perfect pro statu viatoris yet it is not requisite that no man come till he be perfect He that hath but a weak Faith though not a full trust must come to have it strenthned And he that hath an unquiet Conscience must come to receive that mercy which may quiet it It is a private Opinion and not generally received in the Catholick Church that one of the People may make the Publick Confession at the Sacrament in the name of all those that are minded to receive the Holy Communion It is a private and not generally received distinction that the body of Christ makes clean our bodies and his blood washeth our souls It is a doubtful opinion to speak easily that when the Lords Supper is delivered with a Prayer not made in the Receivers name but thus directed to him by the Minister the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ c. preserve thy Body and Soul it is so intollerable a thing for the Receiver not to kneel in hearing the Prayer that he must else be thrust from the Communion of the Church and yet that no Minister shall kneel that indeed doth pray But he may pray standing and the Hearers be cast out for standing at the same words It is not a generally received but a private opinion that every Parishioner though impenitent and conscious of his utter unfitness and though he be in despair and think he shall take his own damnation must be forced to receive thrice a year when yet even those that have not a full trust in Gods mercy or have not a quiet Conscience were before pronounced so uncapable as that none such should come to the Communion Abundance more such Instances may be given to shew how far from truth the Assertion is that the Church hath been careful to put nothing into the Liturgie but that which is either evidently the Word of God or which hath been generally received in the Catholick Church unless you speak of some unhappie unsuccesful Carefulness But we thankfully accept of your following words and if the contrary can be proved we wish it out of the Liturgie which we entreat you to perform and impartially receive our proofs But then we must also entreat you 1. That the Primitive Churches Judgment and practice may be preferred before the present declined much corrupted State And 2. If Gods Law rather than the sinful practises of men breaking that Law may be the Churches Rule for Worship For you call us to subscribe to Art 19. that as the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch hath erred so also the Church of Rome hath erred not only in their living and manner of Ceremonies but also in matters of Faith and saith Rogers in Art 20. they are out of the way which think that either one man as the Pope or any certain Calling of men as the Clergie hath power to decree and appoint Rites or Ceremonies though of themselves good unto the whole Church of God dispersed over the universal world and indeed if you would have all that Corruption brought into our Liturgie and Discipline and Doctrine which the Papists Greeks and others that undoubtedly make up the far greater number of the now universal Church do use you would deserve no more thanks of God or man than he that would have all Kings and Nobles and Gentry levelled with the poor Commons because the latter are the greater number or than he that would have the healthful conformed to the sick when an epidemical disease hath made them the Majority or than he that would teach us to follow a multitude to do evil and to break more than the least Commands because the greater number break them we pray you therefore to take it for no justication of any uncertain or faulty passage in our Liturgie though the greater number now are guilty of it 3. And we must beseech you if the Churches Judgment or Practice must be urged that you would do us the justice as to imitate the ancient Churches in your sense of the quality and the mode and measure of using and imposing things as well as in the materials used and imposed Consider not only whether you finde such things received by the ancient Churches but also consider how they were received esteemed and used whether as necessary or indifferent as points of Faith or doubtful Opinions whether forced on others or left to their free choice If you finde that the generality of the ancient Churches received the White Garment after Baptism and the tasting of Milk and Honie as Ceremonies freely though generally used you should not therefore force men to use them If you finde that the Doctrine of the Millennium or of Angels corporeity was generally received as an Opinion it will not warrant you to receive either of them as a certain necessary truth If you finde that the General Councels forbad Kneeling in any Adoration on the Lords daies but without force against Dissenters you may not go denie the Sacrament to all that kneel nor yet forbid them to kneel in praying So if you find some little parcels of our Liturgie or some of our Ceremonies used as things indifferent left to choice forced upon none but one Church differing from another in such usages or observances this will not warrant you to use the same things as necessarie to order unitie or peace and to be forced upon all use them no otherwise than the Churches used them We heartily desire that according to this Proposal great care may be taken to suppress these private Conceptions of Prayers before and after Sermon lest private opinions be made the matter of Prayer in publick as hath and will be if private persons take liberty to make publick Prayers Reply The desire of your hearts is the grief of our hearts the Conceptions of Prayer by a publick person according to a publick Rule for a publick use are not to be rejected as private Conceptions We had hoped you had designed no such innovation as this in the Church When we have heard any say that it would come to this and that you designed the suppression of the free Prayers of Ministers in the Pulpit suited to the varietie of subjects and occasions we have rebuked them as uncharitable in passing so heavie a censure on you And what would have been said of us a year ago if we should have said that this was in your hearts nothing will more alienate the hearts of many holy prudent persons from the Common-Prayer than to perceive that it is framed and used as an Instrument to shut out all other Prayers as the Ministers private Conceptions Such an end and design will make it under the notion of a means another thing than else it would be and afford men such an Argument against it as we desire
we dare not think a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded Nor does the Act determine any thing about Lent Fast but only provide for the maintenance of the Navy and of Fishing in order thereunto as is plain by the Act. Besides we conceive that we must not so interpret one Act as to contradict another being still in force and unrepealed Now the Act of 1 Eliz. confirmes the whole Liturgy and in that the religious keeping of Lent with a severe penalty upon all those who shall by open words speak any thing in derogation of any part thereof and therefore that other Act of 5 Elizab. must not be interpreted to forbid the religious keeping of Lent Reply If when the expresse words of a Statute are cited you can so easily put it off by saying it does not forbid it and you dare not think that a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded and you must not interpret it as contradicting that Act which confirms the Liturgy we must think that indeed we are no lesse regardful of the Laws of the Governours than you But first we understand not what Authority this is that you set against the King and Parliament as supposing they will not forbid what it commands You call it Christs Church we suppose you mean not Christ himself by his Apostles infallibly directed and inspired If it be the National Church of England they are the Kings Subjects and why may he not forbid a Ceremony which they command or why should they command it if he forbid it If it be any Foreign Church ther 's none hath power over us If it be any pretended head of the Church universal whether Pope or general Council having power to make Laws that bind the whole Church it is a thing so copiously disproved by Protestants against both the Italian and French Papists that we think it needlesse to confute it nor indeed dare imagine that you intend it We know not the refore what you mean But whatever you mean you seem to contradict the forecited Article of the Church of England that makes all humane Laws about Rites and Ceremonies of the Church to be unchangeable by each particular National Church And that it is not necessary that Ceremonies or Traditions be in all places one or utterly like we most earnestly beseech you be cautious how you obtrude upon us a Foreign Power under the name of Christs Church that may command Ceremonies which King and Parliament may not forbid whether it be one man or a thousand we fear it is against our Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy for us do own any such Power And not presuming upon any immodest challenge we are ready in the defence of those Oathes and the Protestant Religion to prove against any in an equal conference that there is no such Power and for the Statute let the words themselves decide the Controversy which are these Be it Enacted that who soever shall by Preaching Teaching Writing or open speech notifie that any eating of Fish or forbearing of Flesh mentioned in this Statuie is of any necessity for the saving of the Soul of man or that it is the Service of God otherwise than as other Politick Laws are and be that than such persons are and shall be punished as the spreaders of false news are and ought to be And whereas you say the Act determines not any thing about Lent Fast it speaks against eating Flesh on any days now usually observed as Fish days and Lent is such and the senfe of the Act for the Lituigy may better be tryed by this which is plain than thus reduced to that which is more obscure The observation of Saints dayes is not as of Divine but Ecclesiastical Institution and therefore it is not necessary that they should have any other ground in Scripture than all other Institutions of the same nature so that they be agreeable to the Scriptare in the general end for the promoting piety and the observation of them was antient as appears by the Rituals and Liturgies and by the joynt consent of Antiquity and by the antient translation of the Bible as the Syriack and Ethiopick where the Lessons appointed for Holydayes are noted and set down the former of which was made near the Apostles times Besides our Saviour himself kept a Feast of the Churches Institution viz. the Feast of the Dedication S. Jo. 12. 22. The choice end of these dayes being not feasting but the exercise of Holy Duties they are fitter called Holydayes than Festivals and though they be all of like nature it doth not follow that they are equal The people may be dispensed with for their work after the Service as Authority pleaseth The other names are left in the Calender not that they should be so kept as Holydayes but they are useful for the preservation of their memories and for other reasons as for Leases Law-dayes c. Reply The antiquity of the Translations mentioned is far from being of determinate certainty we rather wish than hope that the Syriack could be proved to be made near the Apostles times But however the things being confessed of humane Institution and no Forreign Power having any Authority to command his Majesties Subjects and so the imposition being only by our own Governours we humbly crave that they may be left indifferent and the unity or peace of the Church or Liberty of the Ministers not laid upon them This makes the Liturgy void if every Minister may put in and leave out all at his discretion Repl. You mistake us we speak not of putting in and leaving out of the Liturgy but of having leave to intermix some exhortations or prayers besides to take off the deadnesse which will follow if there be nothing but the stinted Forms we would avoid both the extreme that would have no forms and the contrary extremes that would have nothing but forms But if we can have nothing but extremes there 's no remedy it s not our fault And this moderation and mixture which we move for is so far from making all the Liturgy void that it will do very much to make it attain its end and would heal much of the distemper which it occasioneth and consequently would do much to preserve the reputation of it As for instance it besides the Forms in the Liturgy the Minister might at Baptism the Lords Supper Marriage c. interpose some suitable exhortation or prayer upon special occasion when he finds it needful Should you deny this at the visitation of the Sick it would seem strange and why may it not be granted at other times It is a matter of far greater trouble to us that you would deny us and all Ministers the Liberty of using any other Prayers besides the Liturgy then that you impose these The gift or rather spirit of Prayer consists in the inward graces of the spirit not in ex
in this Church and Nation occasioning sad divisions betwixt Minister Minister betwixt Minister and People exposing many Orthodox Preachers to the displeasure of Rulers And no other fruits than these can be looked for from the retaining these Ceremonies Repl. We had rather you had taken our Reasons as we laid them down than to have so altered them Ergo having told you that some hold them unlawful and others inconvenient c. and desired that they may not be imposed on such who judge such Impositions a violation of the Royalty of Christ c. You seem to take this as our own sense and that of all the Ceremonies of which we there made no mention You referre us to Hooker since whose writings Ames in his fresh suit and Bradshaw and Parker and many others have written that against the Ceremonies that never was answered that we know of but deserve your Consideration Before we give particular Answer to these several Reasons it will not be unnecessary to lay down some certain general premises or rules which will be useful in our whole discourse 1. That God hath not given a power only but a command also of imposing whatsoever should be truly decent and becomming his publick Service 1 Cor. 14. After St Paul had ordered some particular Rules for Praying Praising Prophesying c. He concludes with this general Canon Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a fit Scheme Habit or Fashion decently and that there may be uniformity in those decent performances let there be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rule or Canon for that purpose Repl. As to your first rule we answer 1. It is one thing to impose in general that all be done decently and in order This God himself hath imposed by his Apostle And it s another thing to impose in particular that this or that be used as decent and orderly Concerning this we adde it is in the Text said Let it be done but not let it be imposed yet from other Scriptures we doubt not but Circumstances of meer decency order as determined time place utensils c. which are common to things civil and sacred though not the Symbolical Ceremonies which afterwards we confute may be imposed with the necessary cautions and limitations afterward laid down But 1. that if any Usurpers will pretend a power from Christ to impose such things on the Church though the things be lawful we must take heed how we acknowledge an usurped power by formal obedience 2. A just power may impose them but to just ends as the preservation and successe of the modified Worship or Ordinances And if they really conduce not to those ends they sin in imposing them 3. Yet the Subjects are bound to obey a true Authority in such impositions where the matter belongs to the Cognizance and Office of the Ruler and where the mistake is not so great as to bring greater mischiefs to the Church than the suspending of our active obedience would do 4. But if these things be determined under pretence of order and decency to the plain destruction of the ordinances modified and of the intended end they cease to be means and we must not use them 5. Or if under the names of things decent and of order men will meddle with things that belong not to their Office as to institute a new Worship for God new Sacraments or any thing forbidden in the general Prohibition of adding or diminishing this is a Usurpation and not an act of Authority and we are bound in obedience to God to disobey them 6. Where Governours may command at set times and by proportionable penalties enforce if they command when it will destroy the end or enforce by such penalties as destroy or crosse it they greatly sin by such commands Thus we have more distinctly given you our sense about the matter of your first rule Not Inferiours but Superiours must iudge what is convenient and decent They who must order that all be done decently must of necessity first judge what is convenient and decent to be ordered Repl. Your second Rule also is too crudely delivered and therefore we must adde 1. A Judgement is a Sentence in order to some Execution and Judgements are specified from the ends to which they are such means When the question is either what Law shall be made or what penalty shall be exercised the Magistrate is the only Judge and not the Bishop or other Subject In the first he exercises his judicium discretionis in order to a publick Act. In the second he exerciseth a publick judgement When the question is what order pro tempore is fittest in Circumstantials for this present Congregation the proper Presbyters or Pastors of that Congregation are the directive Judges by Gods appointment 3. The Magistrate is Ruler of these Pastors as he is of Physicians Pailosophers and other Subjects He may make them such general Rules especially for restraint to go by as may not destroy the exercise of their own Pastoral power As he may forbid a Physician to use some dangerous Medicine on his Subjects and may punish him when he wilfully killeth any of them But may not on that presence appoint him what and how and when and to whom he shall administer and so become Phisician himself alone 4. When the question is who shall be excluded from the Communion of a particular Church The Pastors of the Church or Congregation are the first proper Judges 5. When the question is who shall be excluded from or received into the Communion of all the associated Churches of which we are naturally capable of Communion The associated Pastors or Bishops of these Churches in Synods are Judgâ—â— Beyond this there are no Judges 6. When the question is whether the Laws of Magistrates or Canons of Bishops are agreeable or not to the Word of God and so the obedience is lawful or unlawful the Conscience of each individual Subject is the Judge per judicium discretionis as to his own practise And if men had not this judgement of discerning but must act upon absolute implicite obedience then first man were ruled as unreasonable Secondly the magistrate were made a God or such a Leviathan as Hobbs describeth him Thirdly And then all sin might lawfully be committed if commanded But we are assured none of this your sense These Rules and Canons for decency made and urged by Superiours are to be obeyed by Inferiours till it be made as clear that now they are not bound to obey as it is evident in general that they ought to obey Superiours for if the exemption from obedience be not as evident as the Command to obey it must needs be sin not to obey Repl. To your third Rule we adde It is first considerable what the thing is and then how it is apprehended if it be really lawful and well commanded and to be obeyed it is no ignorance doubt or errour of the
the Church to be confessed and of such Petitions and Thanksgiving as are ordinarily by the Church to be put up to God and that Puplick Catechismes or Systemes of Doctrine should summarily comprehend all such Doctrines as are necessarily to be believed and these explicitely set down The present Liturgy as to all these seems very defective particularly 1. There is no preparatory Prayer in your addresses to God for assistance or acceptance yet many Collects in the midst of the Worship have little or nothing else 2. The Confession is very defective not clearly expressing Originall sin nor sufficiently enumerating Actuall sins with their aggrivations but consisting only of generals whereas Confession being the exercise of repentance ought to be more particular 3. There is also great defect as to such Forms of publick prayers and thanksgivings as are suitable to Gospel-worship 4. The whole body of the Common Prayer also consisteth very much of meer generals as to have our prayers heard to be kept from all evil and from all enemies and all adversities that we may do Gods will without any mention of the particulars wherein these generals exist 5. The Catechism is defective as to many necessary Doctrines of our religion some even of the Essentials of Christianity not mentioned except in the Creed and there not so explicite as ought to be in the Catechism XVIII Because this Liturgy containeth the imposition of divers Ceremonies which from the first Reformation have by sundry Learned and pious men been judged unwarrantable as 1. That publick Worship may not be celebrated by any Minister that dares not wear a Surplice 2. That none may Baptise or be Baptised without the transient Image of the Cross which hath at least the semblance of a Sacrament of humane institution being used as an engaging sign in our first and solemn Covenanting with Christ and the Duties whereunto we are really obliged by Baptism being more expresly affixed to that Aery fign than to the holy Sacrament 3. That none may receive the Lords Supper that dares not kneel in the act of receiving but the Minister must exclude all such from the Communion although such kneeling not only differs from the practice of Christ and of his Apostles but at least on the Lords daies is contrry to the practice of the Catholick Church for many hundred years after and forbid by the most venerable Councila that ever were in the Christian world All which Impositions are made yet more grievous by that subscription to their lawfulness which the Cannon exacts and by the heavy punishments upon the non observance of them which the Act for uniformity inflicts And it being doubtfull whether God hath given power unto men to institute in his worship such mysticall teaching signs which not being necessary in genere fall not under the rule of doing all things decently orderly and to edification and which once granted will upon the same reason open a door to the arbitrary Imposition of numerous Ceremonies of which St. Aug. complained in his dayes and the things in Controversie being in the Judgement of the Imposers confessed indifferent who dare not so much as pretend any real goodness in themselves otherwise than what is derived from their being imposed and consesequently the Imposition ceasing that will cease also and the Worship of God not become indecent without them whereas on the other hand in the Judgement of the Opposers they are by some held sinful and unlawful in themselves by others very inconvenient and unsuitable to the simplicity of Gospel-Worship and by all of them very grievous and burdensome and therefore not at all fit to put in balance with the peace of the Church which is more likely to be promoted by their removal than continuance considering also how tender our Lord and Saviour himself is of weak Brethren declaring it to be much better for a man to have a Milstone to be hanged about his neck and to be cast into the depth of the Sea than to offend one of his little ones and how the Apostle Paul who had as great a Legislative power in the Church as any under Christ held himself obliged by that common rule of Charity not to lay a stumbling block or an occasion of offence before a weak Brother chusing rather not to cat flesh while the world stands though in it self a thing lawful than offend his Brother for whom Christ dyed we cannot but desire that these Ceremonies may not be imposed on them who judge such impositions a violation of the Royalty of Christ and an Impeachment of his Laws as insufficient and are under the holy Law of that which is written Deut. 12. 32. VVhat thing soever I command you observe to do it thou shalt not adde thereto nor diminish from it but that there may be either a total abolishion of them or at least such a liberty that those who are unsatisfied concerning their lawfulness or expedency may not be compolled to the practice of them or subscription to them but may be permitted to enjoy their Ministerial Functions and Communion with the Church without them The rather because these Ceremonies have for above an hundred years been the fountain of manifold evils in this Church and Nation occasioning sad Divisions between Ministers and Ministers and also between Ministers and people exposing many orthodox pious and peaceable Ministers to the displeasure of their Rulers casting them upon the edge of the penal Statutes to the loss not only of their Livings and liberties but also of their opportunities for the service of Christ and his Church and forcing people either to worship God in such a manner as their own consciences condemn or doubt of or else to forsake our Assemblies as thousands have done and no better fruits than these can be lookt for from the retaining and imposing these Ceremonies unless we could presume that all his Majesties Subjects should have the same subtilty of Judgement to discern even to a Ceremony how farr the Power extends in the things of God which is not to be expected or should yeeld obedience to all the Impositions of men concerning them without enquiring into the will of God which is not to be desired We do therefore most earnestly intreat the Right Reverend Fathers and Brethren to whom these Papers are delivered as they tender the Glory of God the Honour of Religion the Peace of the Church the Service of His Majesty in the accomplishment of that happy Union which his Majesty hath so abundantly testified his desires of to joyn with us in importuning His most Excellent Majesty that His most gracious Indulgence as to these Ceremonies granted in His Royall Declaration may be comfirmed and continued to us and our posterities and extended to such as do not yet enjoy the benefit thereof XIX As to that Passage in His Majesties Commission wherein we are authorized and required to compare the Present Liturgy with the most ancient Liturgy which have been used in
the Church in the purest and most Primitive Times we have in obedience to His Majesties Commission made Inquiry but cannot find any Records of known Credit concerning any entire Forms of Liturgies within the first 300 years which are confessed to be as the most Primitive so the purest Ages of the Church nor any Imposition of Liturgies upon any National Church for some hundred years after we find indeed Liturgical Forms fathered upon St. Basil St. Chrysostome and St. Ambrose but we have not seen any Copies of them but such as give us sufficient evidence to conclude them either wholly spurious or so interpolated that we cannot make a Judgement what in them hath any Primitive Authority Having thus in general expressed our desire we come to particulars which we find numerous and of a various nature some we grant are of an inferiour consideration verbal rather than material which were they not in she Publick Liturgy of so Famous a Church we should not have mentioned others dubions and disputable as not having a clear foundation in Scripture for their warrant but some there be that seem to be corrupt and to carry in them a repugnancy to the rule of the Gospel and therefore have administred just matter of exception and offence to many truly religious and peaceable not of a private station only but Learned Judicious Divines aswel of other Reformed Churches as of the Church of England ever since the Reformation We know much hath been spoken and written by way of Apology in answer to many things that have been obiected but yet the doubts and scuples of tender consciences still continue or rather are increased We do therefore humbly conceive it therefore a Work worthy of those Wonders of Salvation which God hath wrought for his Majesty now on the Throne and for the whole Kingdome and exceedingly becoming the Ministers of the Gospel of Peace with all holy moderation and tenderness to endeavour the removal of every thing out of the Worship of God which may justly offend or grieve the spirits of sober and godly people the things themselves that we desire to be removed not being of the foundation of Religion nor the Essentials of Publick Worship nor the removal of them any way tending to the prejudice of the Church or State therefore their continuance and rigorous Imposition can no ways be able to countervail the laying aside of so many pious and able Ministers and the unconceivable grief that will arise to multitudes of His Majesties most Loyal and peaceable Subjects who upon all accasions are ready to serve him with their Prayers Estates and Lives For the preventing of which evils we humbly desire that these particulars following may be taken into serious and tender consideration Concerning Morning and Evening Prayer 1. Rub. That Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in the accustomed place of the Church Chancel or Chappel except it shall be otherwise determined by the Ordinary of the Place and the Chancel shall remain as in times past We desire that the words of the first Rub. may be expressed as in the Book established by Authority of Parliament 5 6 Edwardi 6. thus The Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in such place of the Church Chappel or Chancel and the Minister shall so turn himself as the people may best hear and if there be any controversies therein the matter shall be referred to the Ordinary 2. Rub. And here it is to be noted that the Minister at the time of the Cimmunion and at other times in his ministration shall use such Ornaments in the Church as were in use by Authority of Parliament in the second year of the Reign of Edward the Sixth according to the Act of Parliament c. For as much as the Rubrick seemeth to bring back the Cope Albe and other vestments forbidden in the Common Prayer Book 5. 6. of Edw. 6. And for the reasons alledged against Ceremonies under our 18. general Exception we desire it may be wholly left out The Lords Prayer after the Absolution ends thus Deliver us from evill We desire that these Words For thine is the Kingdome the Power and the Glory for ever and ever Amen may be always added unto the Lords Prayer and that this Prayer may not be enjoyned to be so often used in the Morning and Evening Service And at the end of every Psalm throughout the year and likewise in the end of the Benedictus Benedicite magnificat c. Nunc Dimittis shall be repeated Glory be to the Father c. By this Rubrick and other places in the Common Prayer Book the Gloria Patri is appointed to be said six times ordinarily in every Morning and Evening Services frequently eight times in a Morning sometimes ten which we think carries with it at least an appearance of that vain repetition which Christ forbids for the avoiding of which appearance of evil we desire it may be used but once in the Morning and once in the Evening Rubr. In such places where they do sing there shall the Lessons be sung in a plain Tune and likewise the Epistle and Gospel Or this Canticle Benedicite omnia opera Except The Lessons and the Epistles and Gospels being for the most part neither Psalms nor Hymns we know no warrant why they should be sung in any place and conceive that the distinct reading of them with an audible voyce tends more to the edification of the Church We desire that some Psalm or Scripture Hymn may be appointed instead of that Apocryphal In the Letany From fornication and other deadly sins Except In regard that the wages of sin is death we desire that this clause may be thus altered From fornication and all other beynous or grievous sins From battle and murther and from sudden death Except Because this expression of sudden death hath been so often excepted against we desire if it be thought fit it may be thus read From battle and murther and from dying suddainly and unprepared That it may please thee to preserve all that travel by land and by water all women labouring with child all sick persons and young Children and to shew thy pity upon all prisoners and captives We desire that the term All may be advised upon as seeming liable to just exceptions and that it may be considered whether it may not better be put indefinitely those that travel c. rather then universally The Collect of Christmas day Almighty God which best given us thy only begotten son to take our nature upon him and this day to be born of a pure Virgin c The Rubrick Then shall follow the collect of the Nativity which shall be said continually unto New-years-day The Collect for VVhitsunday God which upon this day c. We desire that in both collects the words this day may be left out it being according to vulgar acceptation a contradiction Rubrick The same Collect to be read on Monday and Tuesday
diversity of Liturgies and Ceremonies be allowed where they allowed it May we but have love and peace on the Terms as the ancient Church enjoyed them we shall then hope we may yet escape the hands of uncharitable destroying Zeal we therefore humbly recommend to your observation the concurrent Testimony of the best Histories of the Church concerning the diversity of Liturgies Ceremonies and modal observances in the several Churches under one and the same civil Government and how they then took it to be their duty to forbear each other in these matters and how they made them not the test of their Communion or center of their peace Concerning the observation of Easter it self when other Holy dayes and Ceremonies were urged were lesse stood upon you have the judgement of Irenaeus and the French Bishops in whose name he wrote in Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 5. c 23. Where they reprehend Victor for breaking peace with the Churches that differed about the day and the antecedent time of fasting and tell him that the variety began before their times when yet they neverthelesse retained peace and yet retain it and the discord in their fasting declared or commended the concord of their faith that no man was rejected from Communion by Victor's predecessors on that account but they gave them the Sacrament and maintained peace with them and particularly Polycarp and Anicetus held Communion in the Eucharist notwithstanding this difference Basil Epist 63 doth plead his cause with the Presbyters and whole Clergy of Neocaesarea that were offended at his new Psalmodie and his new order of Monasticks but he only defendeth himself and urgeth none of them to imitate him but telleth him also of the novelty of their own Liturgy that it was not known in the time of their own late renowned Bp. Greg Thaumaturgus telling them that they had kept nothing unchanged to that day of all that he was used to so great alterations in 40. years were made in the same Congregation as he professeth to pardon all such things so be it the principal things be kept safe Socrat. Hist Eccl. l. 5◠c. 21. about the Easter difference saith that neither the Apostles nor the Gospels do impose a yoke of bondage on those that betake themselves to the doctrine of Christ but left the Feast of Easter and other Festivals to the observation of the free and equal judgement of them that had received the benefits And therefore because men use to keep some Festivals for the relaxing themselves from labours several persons in several places do celebrate of custom the memorials of Christs passion arbitrarily or at their own choice For neither our Saviour nor the Apostles commanded the keeping of them by any Law nor threaten any mulct or penalty c. It was the purpose of the Apostles not to make Laws for the keeping of Festivals but to be Authours to us of the reason of right living and of piety And having shewed that it came up by private custom and not by Law and having cited Irenaeus as before he addeth that those that agree in the same faith do differ in point of Rites and Ceremonies and instancing in divers he concludeth that because no man can shew in the monuments of writings any Command concerning this it is plain that the Apostles herein permitted free power to every ones mind and will that every man might do that which was good without being induced by fear or by necessity And having spoken of the diversity of customes about the Assemblies Marriage Baptism c. He tells us that even among the Novatians themselves there is a diversity in their manner of their praying and that among all the forms of Religions and parties you can no where find two that consent among themselves in the manner of their praying And repeating the decree of the Holy Ghost Acts 15. To impose no other burden but things necessary he reprehendeth them that neglecting this will take Fornication as a thing indifferent but strive about Festivals as if it were a matter of life overturning Gods Laws and making Laws to themselves c. And Sozomen Hist Eccles l. 7. c. 18. and 19. speaketh to the same purpose and tells us that the Novatians themselves determined in a Synod at Sangar in Bythinia that the difference about Easter being not a sufficient Cause for breach of Communion all should abide in the same concord and in the same Assembly and every one should celebrate this Feast as pleased himself and this Canon they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and c. 19. He saith of Victor and Polycarp that they deservedly judged it frivolous or absur'd that those should be separated on the account of a custom that consented in the principal heads of Religion For you cannot find the same traditions in all things alike in all Churches though they agree among themselves and instancing in some Countries where there is but one Bishop in many Cities and in other Bishops are ordained in the Villages After many other instances he adds that they use not the same prayers singings or readings nor observe the same time of using them And what Liturgy was imposed upon Constantine the Emperour or what Bishops or Synods were then the makers of Lyturgies when he himself made publick prayers for himself and auditory and for his Souldiers Euseb de vit Constantini l. 4. c. 18. 20 c. But the diversity liberty and change of Lyturgies in the Churches under the same Prince are things so well known as that we may suppose any further proof of it to be needless In the conclusion therefore we humbly beseech you that as Antiquity and the custom of the Churches in the first ages is that which is most commonly and confidently pleaded against us that your mistake of Antiquity may not be to our Cost or paid so dear for as the loss of our Freedom for the serving of God in the work of the Ministery to which we are called we beseech you let us not be silenced or cast out of the Ministery or Church for not using the Liturgy Cross Surplice kneeling at the Sacrament till ye have either shewed the world that the practice or Canons of the Catholick Church hav◠led you the way as doing it or requiring it to be done And make not that to necessary as to force men to it on such dreadful terms which the ancient Churches used with diversity and indifferency of liberty we beseech you shew the world some proof that the ancient Churches did ever use to force or require Ministers to subscribe to their Liturgies as having nothing in them contrary to the word of God or to swear obedience to their Bishops before you impose such things on us while yet you pretend to imitate Antiquity And have but that moderation towards your brethren as in suffering or at death or judgement you would most appear Remember how unpleasing the remembrance of such differences about Ceremonies was to Bp. Ridley as