are not to be always understood of praying Extempore but sometimes of praying by a Form and therefore by the way I cannot but wonder why they should appropriate as they do the name of vocal Prayer to praying in their own words and not as well allow the expressing our desires to God in the words of a Form to be called Prayer but onely saying or reading of a Prayer for I would fain know did the Priests and Levites praise the Lord when they praised him in the words of David and Asaph did they pray to him when they exprest their desires to God in those Petitionary Psalms which were directed to be used in their publick Worship or did the Primitive Christians pray when they pronounc'd the Lords Prayer in their solemn Devotions If so then there is no doubt but speaking to God in a Form of words may as well be called Prayer as speaking to him in our own Extempore words for vocal Prayer consists in the speaking of our devout affections to God and if they are spoken they are vocal whether it be in our own Extempore words or in a Form if we onely speak the words of Prayer whether they be Form'd or Extempore and do not send up our affections with them we onely say a vocal Prayer but do not vocally pray but if the words we speak carry our affections with them we vocally pray whether they be the one or t'other If our Brethren can prove that vocal Prayer consists in speaking our desires to God in words of our own Extempore effusion we will readily yield them the whole Cause but this they will never be able to prove whilst there are so many instances in Scripture of vocal Prayer by a Form But they pretend that whatsoever instances there may be of Forms in Old times God hath declared in the New Testament that it is his will we should pray by our own Gifts of Expression and Utterance for the future which if they can prove we will readily yield that praying by Forms is unlawful though not impossible but as for the matter of proof they do not so much as pretend to produce any express prohibition of praying by Forms and all that they urge is onely some remote and far-fetcht consequences against it Now supposing it had been the will of God and our Saviour that we should not pray by Forms it seems very strange that in all the New Testament there should be no express prohibition of it for first the Jews as I shewed before had several Forms prescribed them in their publick Worship and that they used Forms in our Saviours time not onely their Modern Rabbins do assert but Philo himself who lived not longer after makes mention of the holy Prayers that Phil. de victim p. 843. were offered by the Priests in the time of Sacrifice And the Samaritan Chronicle as hath been observed upon this Argument makes mention of a Book in the year of the World 4713 which contained those Songs and Prayers that were always used before their Sacrifices And since the Jews who were a most tenacious People of their Rites and Customs were always wont in their publick Administrations to worship God by Forms how necessary was it to have given some express prohibition of them had it been his intent to exclude them out of his Worship for the future especially considering that the Sect of the Essenes who as it 's highly probable did of all the Sects of the Jews most readily embrace Christianity are particularly remarkt by Josephus for that De Bel. Jud. l. 2. c. 7. p. 785. they did use before the Sun-rising 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 certain Prayers which they receiv'd from their Ancestors And when those Jews who were the most disposed for Christianity and did most readily embrace it insomuch that in a little time the whole Sect of them seems to have been swallow'd up into the Christian Church were so addicted to the use of Forms how can it be imagin'd that had our Saviour intended they should use them no longer he would not have taken care to give them some express warning of it But when instead of so doing he bids them when they pray'd to say Our Father how could they otherwise apprehend but that it was his meaning that they should still continue to pray by a Form as they had always done before And if he had not so intended it seems very strange he should take no care to undeceive them or to prevent their being deceiv'd in this matter by some express command to the contrary for considering all there was not a more urgent occasion for an express prohibition of any Rite or Usage of the Jewish Church than of this of praying by a Form supposing the prohibition of it had been intended and yet I dare boldly affirm that there is not one Rite of that Church which our Saviour intended to forbid but is much more plainly and expresly forbidden than this is pretended to be For the proof of this and which is more of the main assertion viz. that there is no injunction in Scripture of praying by our own gifts of utterance without a Form I shall particularly examine the several Pretences from which our Brethren infer such an Injunction 1. Therefore they pretend that God hath promised and given to all good Christians an ability to utter their minds in vocal Prayer to him and therefore for them to omit the using this ability to the end for which God hath given it to them and pray by Forms of other mens composure is contrary to his mind and intention which Objection hath for the main been answered already Part 1. Case 2. wherein it hath been prov'd at large that this ability which they pretend is promised and given by God for the purpose of vocal Prayer is a common Gift which God hath no more appropriated to Prayer than to any other common end of utterance and elocution and that therefore to omit the using it in Prayer is no more contrary to the intention of God than to omit the using it upon any other just and lawful occasion But because our Brethren urge some places of Scripture to prove that God hath promised and given it meerly to inable them for vocal Prayer I shall briefly inquire whether it be so or no. First therefore they urge Zech. 12. 10. I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and supplications which as I shew'd before Part 1. Case 1. singnifies nothing to their purpose 'T is urg'd indeed that the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here translated Supplications doth always denote vocal Prayer and that therefore pouring out the Spirit of Supplications must imply communicating an ability to Pray vocally but this is not so for if we examine the places where this word is used we shall find 't is no more restrain'd to vocal Prayer than any other word by which Prayer is
onely oversaw their being dictated rightly in order to their being repeated rightly When therefore Tertullian saith We pray without a Monitor his meaning is not that we pray without a Priest to dictate our Prayers to us whether it were out of a Book or extempore but that we pray without a Custos or Overseer either to admonish our People of their repeating the Prayers falsly or to admonish our Priests of their dictating them falsly in order to the Peoples repeating them rightly Because saith he we pray from our hearts which words may admit of a twofold interpretation first because we do not vocally repeat our Prayers after our Priest but onely joyn our affections with them and send up our hearts and desires after them or 2ly because we can say our Prayers by heart and so are in no great danger of repeating them falsly and consequently have no such need of a Monitor to observe and correct us for it is well known how much Tertullian in all his Writings affects to imitate and express the Greek which renders him oftentimes so very obscure and therefore it 's probable enough as hath been observ'd (p) (p) (p) Thornd Relig. Assem p. 237. that his de pectore here or from the heart may be onely a translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to say by heart according to which account these words of Tertullian are so far from testifying against the use of Forms that they rather argue the use of them for since he onely denies their having a Monitor he doth in effect grant their having a Priest to read the publick Prayers to them as well as the Heathen and if from the heart be in Tertullian's Language the same with by heart it 's a plain case that they used Forms for otherwise how could they have them by heart That this is the true account of this difficult phrase I will not confidently affirm because it is onely my own single guess but whether it be or no it 's certain it can no more signifie without a Form of Prayer than without a Minister to pray extempore the one being as much a Monitor to the People as the other The last Testimony which our Brethren urge against the Antiquity of Forms of Prayer is that of Sucrates Scholasticus (q) (q) (q) Soc. Hist l. 5. c. 21. whose words they thus translate Everywhere and in all Worships of Prayer there are not two to be found that speak the same words and therefore say they it 's very unlikely they should pray by receiv'd Forms But how far this is from the sence of the Author will evidently appear by considering what he had been before discoursing of In short therefore he had been just before relating the different Customs that were used in several Churches and among the rest he tells us that in Hellas Jerusalem and Thessalia the Prayers were made whilst the Candles were lighting according to the manner of the Novatians at Constantinople and that in Caesarea of Cappadocia and Cyprus the Presbyters and Bishops always interpreted the Scripture on the Saturday and Lord's-day in the evening the Candles being lighted that the Novatians in the Hellespont did not observe the same manner of praying with those of Constantinople but that for the most part they followed the Customs of the chief Churches among them and then he concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. upon the whole every where and among all the Worships of Prayer there are not two to be found that agree in the same thing where by Worships of Prayer it 's plain he means the Ceremonies and Rites of Prayer that were used in several Churches for 't was of these he had been immediately before discoursing and therefore his meaning can be no more than this that among all the constituted Rites and Ceremonies of Prayer that were used in the several Churches there were not two to be found that agreed in the same and how doth it follow that because they did not use the same Rites and Ceremonies of Prayer therefore they did not use Forms of Prayer for even now we see there are different Rites of Prayer among those Churches which do yet agree in using Forms of Prayer And now I proceed to the second thing proposed which was to prove the use of Forms of Prayer in the primitive Ages by a short Historical Account of the Matter of Fact That in the first Age there was a Gift of praying extempore by immediate inspiration seems highly probable both from what the Apostle discourses of praying in unknown Languages 1 Cor. 14. and from what St. Chrysostom asserts concerning it (r) (r) (r) Chrys in Rom. 8. 26. viz. That together with those miraculous Gifts which were then poured out there was a Gift of Praying which was called by the Apostle a Spirit by which he who was endued with it poured out Prayers for all the People and while this Gift continued perhaps which how long it was is very uncertain there might no other Form be used in publick Worship in those places especially where it abounded but onely that of the Lord's Prayer and it may be in imitation of this Gift upon which even in the Apostles time the Christians were apt to over-value themselves some might affect to pray extempore after it was wholly expired but it is highly probable that upon the ceasing or abatement of it it was in most places immediately supplied by Forms of Prayer which were composed either of the words or according to the method and manner of those inspired Prayers by Apostolical persons that heard and remembred them for so as the same St. Chrysostom goes on (s) (s) (s) Chrys ibid. For we being ignorant of many things which are profitable for us do ask many things which are unprofitable and therefore this Gift of Prayer was given to some one person that was there i. e. in the Congregation who ask'd for all that which was profitable for the universal Church and taught others to do so that is to form Prayers according to those inspired Models for though I do not pretend that there were no other Prayers used in publick but onely Forms either in or presently after the Age of the Apostles yet it seems most probable that even from the Apostolical Age some part at least of the publick Worship was perform'd in Forms of Prayer and if so we have all the reason in the world to conclude that these Forms were composed according to the Pattern of those primitive inspired Prayers Now that there were Forms from the Apostolical Age seems highly probable because so far as we can find there never was any dispute among Christians concerning the lawfulness of praying by a Form Had this way of praying been introduc'd after the Primitive Ages it would have been a most observable innovation upon the Primitive Christianity and that in such a publick matter of fact that every Christian could not but take notice
who it is they joyn with and whose Cause they advance while they thus decry our Liturgy and advance their own extempore Prayers in the room of it they will at last see cause to retract a mistake which none but the Church of Rome will have cause to thank them for CASE VI. Whether it be lawful to comply with the use of Publick Form s when they are imposed IN answer to which a very few words will suffice for it hath been already proved that the use of publick Forms is universally lawful there being nothing either in Scripture or the nature of the thing that forbids it but a great deal in both that approves and warrants it so that now the Question is no more than this Whether a lawful thing when imposed may be lawfully complied with The affirmative of which is sufficiently proved in the Case of Indifferent Things And indeed if the Imposition of Praying in publick by Forms though lawful in it self may not be lawfully complied with then neither may the Imposition of praying extempore and if so then we must act quite contrary to what we are commanded by Authority and pray by Form when we are commanded to pray extempore as well as extempore when we are commanded to pray by Form and if in lawful things Authority can oblige us to comply with this by commanding the contrary our liberty will be altogether as liable to restraint this way as the other because we shall be as much obliged this way to forbear a lawful thing as we are to comply with it the other And if all men were of this opinion that no lawful thing ought to be complied with when it is commanded Authority might as effectually oblige them to do whatsoever it would have by commanding the quite contrary as it can now by commanding the thing it would have But this being quite besides the Province I have undertaken I shall insist no farther upon it FINIS BOOKS Printed for Fincham Gardiner 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of Englands Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in answer to his three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to Separate from a Church upon the account of promiscuous Congregations and mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other parts of Divine Service prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament stated and resolved c. In two Parts 11. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where men think they can profit most 12. A serious Exhortation with some important Advices relating to the late Cases about Conformity recommended to the present Dissenters from the Church of England 13. An Argument to Union taken from the true Interest of those Dissenters in England who profess and call themselves Protestants 14. Some Considerations about the Case of Scandal or giving Offence to Weak Brethren 15. The Case of Infant-Baptism in Five Questions c. 16. A Discourse concerning Conscience wherein an Account is given of the Nature and Rule and Obligation of it c. 17. The Charge of Scandal and giving Offence by Conformity Refelled and Reflected back upon Separation c. 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. The difference of the Case between the Separation of Protestants from the Church of Rome and the Separation of Dissenters from the Church of England 3. The Protestant Resolution of Faith c. AN ANSWER TO THE Dissenters Objections Against the COMMON PRAYERS And some other Parts of Divine-Service Prescribed in the LITURGIE OF THE CHURCH of ENGLAND LONDON Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street B. Took at the Ship in St. Paul's Church-yard and F. Gardiner at the White-horse in Ludgate-street 1684. AN ANSWER TO THE Dissenters Objections Against the COMMON PRAYERS And some other Parts of DIVINE SERVICE Prescribed in the LITURGIE of the CHURCH of ENGLAND I Believe all Considering Persons are by this time sensible what advantage the Papists make of the Separation of some Protestants from the Church of England And the ill effects of it at present and the worse which we have reason to fear are so very discernible that it may now be hoped the Consideration hereof will something abate those Prejudices of Dissenters against us which we think have hitherto hindred the prevailing of our Reasons Though Prejudice is hard to be remov'd yet 't is not impossible Several Ingenuous Persons of that Persuasion have been rescu'd from their Prejudices against our Communion when the mischief of these Divisions was not so apparent as 't is now I trust therefore that at this time many more will and I pray God that all of them may seriously and impartially look over the Grounds upon which they have kept up the Separation For I am persuaded that their Objections against our Communion are not of that Conseâ—uence â—s to Justifie their forsaking it and that themselves would discern it if they would consider our Answers with the same Meekness and Charity wherewith we offer them I have with great pleasure read some short Discourses lately Publisht that tend to this purpose the Good Spirit where with they are written seeming to be a very likely means of conveying the Argument with all its advantage into the Minds of those that shall take the pains to read them And though I think that which hath been said already is enough to satisfie Judicious Men yet by the persuasion of some Friends I have taken upon me to Answer those Particular Objections against the Publick Service of God by the Book of Common Prayer which the Dissenters are said to insist most upon I must confess that I have always thought the Liturgie of the Church of England to be such a truly Evangelical Form of Publick Worship that it would rather have invited Protestants to our Communion than kept them from it And I believe if the Dissenters would seriously read over that Sermon of Dr. Beverege concerning the Excellency and Vsefulness of the Common Prayer they would go near to be of the same mind And I hope many of them are so excepting only as to those Particulars wherein they are not so well satisfied And therefore I
would have ours to be And though there is greater need of Caution against it in such places yet the way of their Confession makes the mistake more difficult to be prevented Indeed we find in the Scripture Examples of Holy Men confessing such Sins as themselves were not guilty of Thus did Jeremiah Nehemiah Ezra c. But this was upon Solemn Humiliation for those known and publick Idolatries of the Nation which had brought Gods heavy Judgments upon them or for Common and Scandalous Transgressions afterward They considered themselves as part of that Community which had provoked God to send them into Captivity and therefore they bore their part in the Common Calamity with such meekness and confessed the Common Sins with such humility as if themselves had offended as greatly in their own Persons as their Countrey-men had done But I conceive there is a great deal of difference between those Confessions of Sin that such extraordinary occasions of Publick Humiliation require and those that are fit for the ordinary Service of God in the constant and stated Assemblies of the Church But it ought not to be forgot that those particular Confessions of Sin which some Men want in our Liturgie are not properly the matter of that Publick Service we are to offer daily unto God in Religious Assemblies but of that Private Devotion which is necessary to be performed in our Closets And if we could be persuaded seriously to enter upon this Work of Examining our selves impartially concerning those Sins which we have more openly or secretly committed and then to humble our selves before God for them with particular Confessions and sutable Prayer for his Grace and Pardon we should then find our Affections prepared to comply with those more General Confessions of Sin which we make with the whole Congregation we should then have less reason to complain that those Confessions are not apt to move us because this way would cure the deadness of our hearts which commonly are most to blame when we find fault with the means that God hath provided for us To conclude this Matter There is great need of Particular Confession of Sins in Religious Assemblies but that of another sort than what I have yet been speaking of and that is the particular and humble Confession which every Scandalous Sinner ought to make in the Congregation for the satisfaction of the Church and the declaration of a true Repentance This is not properly an Act of Worship but of Discipline but alas almost lost in this miserably divided state of the Church a loss never enough to be lamented For so it has fallen out that by quarreling for a Reformation in things of an Indifferent Nature that ought to be left to the Prudence of Governours and the Communion of Christians is broken and the Spiritual Authority which Christ left in his Church is exposed to Contempt which is a Matter of a thousand times more concern then all the Objections against the Book of Common Prayer put together though they were as considerable as our Adversaries seem to believe they are The second Objection I shall take notice of is that against the shortness of the Collects by reason of which it is pretended that the Prayer is often suddenly broken off and then begun again And this is thought not so agreeable to the Gravity wherewith this Duty ought to be performed nor so likely a means of exciting Reverence and Devotion in the People as one continued Form of Prayer that might be as long as all those put together Now in answer to this I say 1. That the meer shortness of a Prayer is not to be found fault with by any understanding Christian since this would be to disparage that Form of Prayer which our Lord taught his Disciples it being not much longer than most of our Collects and not so long as some of them 2. That it will be hard to prove That many of these short Prayers being offer'd up unto God one immediately after another is either not so Grave or not so Edifying as one Continued Form I do not believe the difference to be so great as it is made by those that do not approve our way For the Work of Praying is as much continued all the while as if there were but one Continued Form Indeed in the Book the Printed Prayer breaks off somewhat often and there is a distinction made between the several Collects by a New Title shewing the Matter of the Prayer and by beginning a New Line But I hope our Brethren do not mean that in this there is a defect of Gravity or any hindrance of Devotion and Edification For the abruption of the Printed Forms is by no means an interruption of our Prayer since we still go on in Praying or in giving Thanks to God and without breaking off pass from one Petition or Matter of Invocation to another as immediately as if the Distinct Forms we use together were all brought into the Compass of One. And as there is no Interruption of our Praying caused by the frequent beginning and ending of the Collects so neither can this cause an Interruption of Attention in the People which is rather helped by that frequency of saying Amen which this way requires Nor can it be charged with a tendency to Interrupt that Devout Affection and Godly Disposition of Mind which is the best thing in Prayer But on the other hand this may be kept alive and more effectually secured by calling upon the Name of God and pleading the Merits of Christ so often as we do I know some have said this is done more frequently than is meet But it would be a lamentable thing if there should be any difference about this Matter When the Decence and Convenience of a thing is considered we should attribute much to the Wisdom of Authority and to the Judgment of Prudent and Holy Men such as our first Reformers were and great numbers of Learned Persons since their time were also who thought this manner of Praying to be Grave and Edifying And I believe others would be of the same Mind if they would not altogether dwell upon their Prejudice against our way but attend a little to those considerations that favour it and which discover the advantage and usefulness of it which sort of Equity they that are Wise and Humble will shew to all Men much more to their Governours Now the Invocation of God somewhat often by his Attributes does of it self tend to maintain in our Minds a reverent sense of his Majesty and Presence which we all know is of necessary use to make us Pray unto him as we ought to do I make no question but those that have been blamed for repeating Lord Lord so very often in their Extempore Prayers would think themselves somewhat hardly used if they should not be believed in saying that this was not for want of Matter but for the exciting of a reverent sense of Gods Authority in
full of Comfort as more largely is expressed in the Homily of Justification As to the Doctrine of Supererogation this is confuted Article 14. Voluntary Works besides over and above Gods Commandments which they call Works of Supererogation cannot be taught without Arrogance and Impiety For by them Men do declare that they do not only render unto God as much as they are bound to do but that they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is required whereas Christ saith plainly When ye have done all that are Commanded to you say We are unprofitable Servants As to making simple Fornication a meer Venial sin Our Church will endure no such Doctrine For as in the Litany she calls Fornication expresly a deadly sin so hath it ever been accounted in Our Church one of the most deadly even considered as distinct from Adultery As to the Church of Romes Damning all that are not of her Communion the Church of England is guilty of no uncharitableness like it and never pronounced so sad a sentence against those in Communion with the Church of Rome as great a detestation as she expresseth in the Homilies especially of her Idolatrous and Wicked Principles and Practices She is satisfied to Condemn the gross Corruptions of that Apostate Church and leaves her Members to stand or fall to their own Master nor takes upon her to Vnchurch her And as to the remaining most Immoral Principles and Practices of the Romish Church which are all as contrary to Natural as to revealed Religion the greatest Enemies Our Church hath cannot surely have the forehead to charge her with giving the least countenance to any such There being no Church in Christendom that more severely Condemns all instances of Unrighteousness and Immorality Thirdly The Church of England is at a mighty distance from the Church of Rome in reference to their Publick Prayers and Offices Whereas our Liturgy hath been by many Condemned as greatly resembling the mass-Mass-Book all that have compared them do know the contrary and that there is a vast difference between them both as to matter and form Although some few of the same Prayers are found in both and three or four of the same Rites of which more hereafter To shew this throughout in the particulars would be a very long and tedious task I will therefore single out the Order of Administration of Infant-Baptism as we have it in the Roman Ritual and desire the Reader to compare it with that in our Liturgy and by this take a measure of the likeness between our Liturgy and the mass-Mass-Book c. there being no greater agreement between the Morning and Evening Services and the other Offices of each than is between these two excepting that besides the Lords Prayer there is no Prayer belonging to the Popish Office of Baptism to be met with in ours For the sake of the Readers who understand no more of the Language that the Popish Prayers and Offices are expressed in than the generality of those that make use of them take the following account of the Popish Admonistration of Infant-Baptism in our own Tongue To pass by the long Bedroul of Preparatory Prescriptions the Priest being drest in a Surplice and Purple Robe calls the Infant to be Baptized by his Name and saith What askest thou of the Church of God the God-Father answers Faith The Priest saith again What shalt thou get by Faith The God-Father replies Eternal Life Then adds the Priest If therefore thou wilt enter into Life keep the Commandments Thou shalt Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart c. and thy Neighbour as thy self Next the Priest blows three gentle puffs upon the Infants face and saith as if we come all into the World possessed by the Devil Go out of him O unclean Spirit and give place to the Holy Ghost the Comforter Then with his Thumb he makes the Sign of the Cross on the Infants Forehead and Breast saying Receive the Sign of the Cross both in thy Forehead and in thy heart Take the Faith of the Heavenly Precepts and be thy manners such as that thou maist now become the Temple of God After this follows a Prayer that God would always protect this his Elect one calling him by his Name that is Signed with the Sign of the Cross c. And after a longer Prayer the Priest laying his hand on the Infants head comes the Benediction of Salt of which this is the Form I exorcize or conjure thee O Creature of Salt in the Name of God the Father Almighty ✚ and in the Love of our Lord Jesus Christ ✚ and in the Power of the Holy Ghost ✚ I conjure thee by the Living God ✚ by the true God ✚ by the Holy God ✚ by the God ✚ which Created thee for the safeguard of Mankind and hath ordained that thou shouldest be consecrated by his Servants to the People entring into the Faith that in the Name of the Holy Trinity thou shouldest be made a wholesome Sacrament for the driving away of the Enemy Moreover we Pray thee O Lord our God that in Sanctifying thou wouldest Sanctifie ✚ this Creature of Salt and in Blessing thou wouldest Bless it ✚ that it may be to all that receive it a perfect Medicine remaining in their Bowels in the Name of the same Jesus Christ our Lord who is about to come to judge the quick and dead and the World by fire Amen This Idle and prophane Form being recited the Priest proceeds in his Work with the poor Infant and next putting a little of this Holy Salt into his mouth he calls him by his Name and saith Take thou the Salt of Wisdom and adds most impiously be it thy propitiation unto Eternal Life Amen This ended with the Pax tecum God Almighty is next mockt with a Prayer That this Infant who hath tasted this first food of Salt may not be suffered any more to hunger but may be filled with Celestial Food c. Now follows another Exorcising of the Devil wherein he is conjured as before and most wofully becalled And next the Priest Signs the Infant again with his Thumb on the Forehead saying And this Sign of the Holy Cross ✚ which we give to his Forehead thou Cursed Devil never dare thou to Violate By the same Jesus Christ our Lord Amen And now after all this tedious expectation we see some Sign of Baptism approaching for the Priest puts his hand again on the Infants head and puts up a very good Prayer for him in order to his Baptism The Prayer being ended he puts part of his Robe upon the Infant and brings him within the Church for he hath been without all this while saying calling him by his Name Enter thou into the Temple of God that thou mayest partake with Christ in Eternal Life Amen Then follow the Apostles Creed and the Pater Noster But after all this here 's more exercise for our Patience for the Priest falls to his fooling
appoint Patriarchs and Primates in every Province that by this bond of Concord the Bishops might the better be knit together In short for I must not proceed farther upon this vastly large head of discourse I know not how our Brethren will defend the Apostolical Institution of the Observation of the Lords Day while they contend that this of Episcopacy cannot be concluded from the uninterrupted Tradition of the Catholick Church for so many Centuries from the time of the Apostles Nor how those that Separate from our Church upon the account of its Government by Bishops and call it Antichristian can defend the Lawfulness of Communicating with any Church in Christendom for about 1500 years together Secondly As to Our Churches prescribing a Liturgy or set Forms of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments and other publick Offices It is easie to shew that Symbolizing with the Church of Rome herein is so far from being culpable and much more from being a just ground of Separation from our Church that 't is highly Commendable For as herein our Church no less Symbolizeth with the Primitive Church than with that of Rome as she is now Constituted nothing being more certainly known than that Liturgies are of most Ancient standing so nothing is more highly expedient for the due management of the publick Worship of God than the use of a Liturgy And indeed instead of Expedient I might say Necessary it being impossible to secure the performance of publick Worship with that solemnity and gravity that becomes it in a Church where its Ministers are wholly left free to the Exercise of Extemporary invention But the handling of this Argument is the business of another new Discourse to which I refer the Reader I shall therefore conclude it with a citation out of Calvins Epistle Ad Protectorem Angliae saith he As to a Form of Prayers and Ecclesiastical Rites I do very much approve of the publishing of a fixed one from which it may not be Lawful for the Pastors to depart in the exercise of their Function Thereby to provide against the simplicity and unskilfulness of some and that the consent of all the Churches with each other may more certainly appear And lastly to put a barr to the skipping Levity of others who Affect certain innovations And therefore as he proceeds Statum esse Catechismum oportet Statam Sacramentorum Administrationem publicam item precum Formulam there ought to be an Established Catechism an Office for the Administration of the Sacraments Establisht and also a Publick Form of Prayers And he accordingly composed a Liturgy to be used by the Ministers in Geneva on Sundays and Holydays And the Exiles that resided at Geneva in the days of Queen Mary did by his advice draw up a Liturgy which was Printed in the English Tongue in the year 1556. Thirdly As to a Liturgy so contrived as that of our Church is what hath been said of the vast distance between our Church and that of Rome herein is sufficient to shew that there can be no warrantable pretence for Separation from our Church upon the account of the Symbolizing that is between these two Churches in this particular But we will perticularly consider those instances of agreement between ours and the Roman Service which are most offensive to our Brethren they are especially these four 1. Our many short Prayers which some have too lighly called short Cuts and Shreddings and rather Wishes than Prayers But there needs no other reply hereunto than that our Learned Hooker gives viz. That St. Augustin saith Epist 121. That the Brethren in Aegypt are reported to have many Prayers but every of them very short as if they were Darts thrown out with a kind of sudden quickness lest that Vigilant and erect attention of mind which in Prayer is very necessary should be Wasted and dulled through Continuance if their Prayers were few and long But that which St. Austin alloweth they Condemn c. He might as well have said What that good Father Commendeth nay his words imply no small commendation And I fear not to appeal to all Pious Souls who without prejudice joyn with us in our Publick Prayers whether they find the shortness of many of them an hindrance or help to their Devotion I don't question but that such will readily acknowledge that they find it an help And therefore in my weak judgment our Symbolizing with the Church of Rome in this particular is Symbolizing with her in that which is highly commendable as 't is so also in that wherein she Symbolizeth with very Ancient Churches 2. Another instance is The Peoples bearing a part with the Minister in Divine Service But Mr. Baxter hath said enough in his Christian Directory on Q. 83. not only to vindicate the Lawfulness but the Fitness and Expediency also of Symbolizing herein with the Church of Rome Saith he 1. The Scripture no where forbids it 2. If the People may do this in the Psalms in Metre there can be no reason given but they may Lawfully do it in Prose 3. The Primitive Christians were so full of Zeal and Love of Christ that they would have taken it for an injury or quenching of the Spirit to have been wholly restrained from bearing a part in the Praises of the Church 4. The use of the Tongue keeps awake the Mind and stirs up Gods graces in his Servants 5. It was the decay of Zeal in the People that first shut out the Responses while they kept up the Ancient Zeal they were inclined to take their part vocally in the Worship Though I were under no obligation of brevity I should add nothing more of mine own about this matter 3. Another instance of this Nature is the taking of some of the Collects out of the mass-Mass-Book But to this I give this I hope as satisfactory as short Answer viz. That these Prayers are either good or bad if they are bad ones they may not be used though they were not in the Mass-Book and upon that account the use of them would be Unlawful not upon the account of our Symbolizing in them with the Roman Church But if they are all good ones as they are very good then from what hath been said 't is Evident that this Symbolizing cannot make them bad and 't is a hard case that we should not be allowed the use of whatsoever is good in their Service Our Brethren will allow of reading the same Scriptures that they do and why then should they disallow of using what perfectly agreeth with Scripture because they use it Our departure from them was designed to be a Reformation not a total Destruction and Extirpation 4. The last instance is The appointing of Lessons out of the Apocryphal Books But herein we Symbolize with the Primitive Church rather than with this of Rome For as hath been shewed out of the 6. Article of our Church they are not appointed to be read as Canonical Scripture and we perfectly agree with
there are many expressions in the Fathers that may seem more distant from that sense we are willing to take them in and we should be very loth to yield them up as the Authors or Defenders of some dangerous Opinions in the Church of Rome because some phrases of theirs in the rigour of them may be prest to a kind of meaning that may seem to favour them There is a necessary allowance to be given to some schemes of Speech and meaning of words or else we should be in a perpetual wrangle and dispute about them However there doth not need even this sort of Charity for this word dedicated upon which such weight of Argument hath been lay'd For as in all Authors it hath been variously used so is it properly enough apply'd in this Canon for the design for which it was used and the declaration is plain and intelligible enough to the candid and unprejudic'd mind The word dedication as they use it may properly enough signifie a Confirmation of our first dedication to God in Baptism and a declaration of what the Church thinks of the Person Baptiz'd what she doth expect from him and what Obligations he lieth under by his Baptism And as a medium of this declaration the sign of the Cross is made being as expressive as so many words what the Infant by his Baptism was design'd to the Apostle himself having comprehended the whole of Christianity under that term and denomination of the Cross Now that our Church did design this declarative dedication by the use of this sign and none other is very evident in that though the word dedicated is used in the explication of their sense in that Canon yet do they there refer to the words used in the Book of Common Prayer By comparing therefore the Canon and the Office for Baptism together the Canon directing to the Office and the Rubrick belonging to the Office directing to the Canon we may observe what stress is to be lai'd upon the word Dedicated that is how far they were from desâ—gning the same sort of immediate dedication that is made by Baptism and yet how by the Cross we may properly enough be said to be dedicated too As to the Sacrament of Baptism we are all agreed that by that we are dedicated to the Service of Christ and the Profession of his Gospel Now the Church of England both in the Rubrick and Canon do affirm and own that the Baptism is complete and the Child made a Member of Christ's Church before the Sign of the Cross is made use of or if upon occasion it should not be made use of at all It is expresly said We receive this Child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock and upon that do sign it with the Cross So that the Child is declar'd within the Congregation of Christ's Flock before the Sign of the Cross be apply'd to it Beside that in the Office for private Baptism where the Sign of the Cross is to be omitted we are directed not to doubt but that the Child so Baptiz'd is lawfully and sufficiently Baptiz'd the Canon confirming it that the Infant Baptiz'd is by vertue of Baptism before it be sign'd with the sign of the Cross receiv'd into the Congregation of Christ's Flock as a perfect Member thereof and not by any power ascribed unto the sign of the Cross If therefore we be dedicated in Baptism and the Baptism acknowledg'd complete and perfect before or without the use of this Sign the Church cannot be suppos'd ordaining so needless a repetition as this would be to dedicate in Baptism then to dedicate by the Cross again but that which they express by dedicated by the Cross must be something very distinct from that dedication which is in Baptism that is the one is a sign of dedication the other is the dedication it self as distinct the one from the other as the Sign of Admission is from Admission it self and a signification of a priviledg is from an Instituted means of Grace It seems a thing decent and seasonable enough that when it hath pleas'd God to receive a person into his favour and given him the Seal of it that the Church should give him the right hand of fellowship solemnly declaring and testifying he is receiv'd into her Communion by giving him the Badg of our Common Religion So that this is plainly no other than a Declaration the Church makes of what the Person Baptiz'd is admitted to what engagement he lies under when capable of making a visible Profession It expresseth what hath been done in Baptism which is indeed not a sign of Dedication but Dedication it self as I have already said as also the Cross is not dedication itself but a sign of it Which Declaration is therefore made in the name of the Church in the plural number We Receive this Child into the Congregation of Christs Flock and do sign him with the sign of the Cross c. Whereas in Baptism the Minister as the immediate agent of Christ by whom he is Authoriz'd and Commissionated in the singular number as in his Name pronounceth it I Baptize thee in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost As to what is urg'd above that nothing can be more immediate than in the present dedicating act to use the sign and express the dedicating signification they must know it might have been more immediate either to have plac'd this Sign before Baptism or to have appointed some such form of words in applying it as the Church of Rome doth or if it had been pretended to be of divine Institution and necessary to make the Sacrament of Baptism compleat and perfect And thus I presume I have run through the main debate betwixt us and our dissenting brethren as to this Case Wherein I hope I have neither misrepresented their objections nor let pass any material strength in them nor in replying to them used any one provoking or offensive word Would they but read and weigh this and the other Discourses of this kind with the same calmness of temper and study of mutual agreement wherewith I dare say they have been written I cannot think there would abide upon their Spirits so vehement a desire for the removal of these things but it might rather issue in a peaceable and happy closure in the use of what hath been made appear was so innocently taken up and might with so much advantage under the encouragement of serious and good Men be still retained I do not indeed think any of our Church so fond of this Ceremony particularly but that if the laying it aside might turn to as great Edification in the Church as the serious use of it might be emprov'd to our Governours would easily enough condescend to such an overture Instances of this have been given in our Age and our Presbyterian-Brethren in their Address to the Bishops do own that divers Reverend Bishops and Doctors in a Paper in Print Except
the rest 5. The Sacrament was Instituted to be a means of Receiving the benefits of his Death and Passion and a Pledge to assure us thereof If we do but Consider what invaluable Blessings we expect to receive by our worthy partaking of the Consecrated Bread and Wine at the Table of our Lord such as the forgiveness of all our Sins the plentiful Communications of his Grace and Spirit and a Right and Title to Eternal Life we can't think Kneeling an Unmeet and Unbecoming Gesture in the Act of Receiving the Outward Signs and Pledges of this Inward and Invisible Grace If a Graceful Hearty sense of Gods infinite mercy through the Merits and Sufferings of his Son and of the manifold rich benefits which our Lord hath purchased with his most Precious Blood if a mind deeply Humbled under the sense of our own Guilt and Unworthiness to Receive any mercy at all from the Hands of our Creator and Soveraign Lord whom we have by numberless and Heinous Crimes so highly provok't and incensed against us If such an inward temper and disposition of Soul becomes us at this Holy Feast which I think no Man will deny then surely the most Humble and reverential Gesture of our Body will become us too Why should not a Submissive Lowly deportment of Body sute with this Solemnity as well as a Humble Lowly Mind And this is that which our Church Declares See the Declaration at the end of the Communion-Service in the Book of Common Prayer to be the end and design of her Injunction in requiring all her Communicants to Kneel viz. for a Signification of an Humble and Grateful acknowledgment of the Benefits of Christ therein given to all worthy Receivers 6. They who urge Sitting as necessary and the only agreeable Gesture to the Nature of the Lord's Supper because it 's the Common Table-Gesture must make the Sacrament either the same with an Ordinary and Common Feast or onely like it in some respects and unlike it in others as every like is not the same To make it the same is directly to unhallow and prophane the Ordinance it is to Eat and Drink unworthily not discerning 1 Cor 11 29. the Lord's Body as St. Paul charges the Corinthians For it 's clear from that Discourse of the Apostle that their not distinguishing between the Lord's Supper and a Common Meal or Supper was their great fault which he sharply reproves them for as that which render'd them unworthy Communicants Which will appear to any that will take the pains to examine Vid. 20 21 22. and compare them with 33 34. the matter If the Lord's Supper be not the same with an Ordinary Feast how comes it to pass that the same Gesture must be necessarily used at both If they differ in their whole nature then that which is agreeable to the nature of the one must be Repugnant to the nature of the other If they agree in some respects only and differ in others but not in their whole nature then Kneeling may be as proper and sutable in some respects as Sitting is in others For though the Civil Custom of a Table-Gesture be allowed to strike some stroke in a Spiritual Ordinance where there is Eating and Drinking yet other respects in the Lord's Supper have a stroke too and that the greatest if we duly weigh and consider the ends of its Institution which I have already described And if upon such Examination it appear that Kneeling or an adoring Gesture holds fitting Correspondence with the principal respects and ends of the Lord's Supper then the Banquetting Gesture though Lawful and Sutable in some less respects must and ought in reason to give place at least it ought not to be Insisted on as the onely agreeable and necessary Gesture without which we cannot worthily Communicate Whatsoever Gesture answers the principal respects and ends of this Holy Feast best Sutes to its Nature and consequently ought in reason to be best esteemed of and sway more with us than any other if we will wholly guide our selves by the Nature of the thing And that Kneeling or an adoring posture doth best answer the Nature and Ends of the Sacrament I think is clear and undenyable if the account I have given of the Sacrament be good I am sure howsoever that there is no reason why Sitting should justle out Kneeling as Sinful and Unsutable to the Nature of this Holy Ordinance Let Mr. Cartwright a Learned Advocate Annot. in Luk. 22. 14. for Nonconformists be heard in this matter and determine it A Man must not saith he refuse to Receive the Sacrament Kneeling when he cannot have it otherwise 4. The Primitive Church and Ancient Fathers had no such notion of the necessity of a Table-Gesture as is maintained and urged by Dissenters at present which will appear from those Names and Titles they gave to this Holy Feast And First I observe from the Learned Mr. Mede that for the space of 200 years after Christ there is not the least mention made of the name Table in any of their Writings They call the place on which Can. Apost 2. St. Ignat. in 3 Epistles and Philad Trallen Eph. Justin Mart. Irenaeus the Consecrated Elements stood the Altar and the Eucharist An Oblation and a Sacrifice because at this Solemnity they did Commemorate and Represent that Sacrifice which Christ once offered on the Cross for the Sins of the World Now the Eucharist conceived under the Notion of a Sacrifice and the place on which it was offered of an Altar doth not necessarily require a Table-Gesture there is not that strict Connexion and Relation between an Altar or a Sacrifice and a Common Table-Gesture as is conceived to be between a Feast or Table and a Feast or Table-Gesture 2. The Primitive Christians and Ancient Fathers of the Church did not entertain any such conceits about the necessity of a Common Table-Gesture as our Dissenters do As that Kneeling or an adoring Gesture is against Dispute against Kneeling Arg. 1. p. 6. p. 26 27 28 31 37. the Dignity of Guests and Debarrs us the Priviledges and Prerogatives of the Lord's Table such as Social admittance and Social Entertainment that it is against the purpose of Christ whose intention was to Dignify us by Setting us at his Table and much more of this Nature and to this effect Now the Primitive Church little dreamt of this Dignity and Priviledge of Communicants of this purpose of Christ and of this kind of Fellowship and Familiarity with him as the Phrases they use and the August and Venerable Titles they give the Holy Sacrament even when they consider it as a Feast and Supper and speak of the Table on which it was Celebrated plainly demonstrate They call it as St. Paul doth the Lord's Supper the Kingly Royal and most Divine Supper which Import Deference Distance and Respect on our Parts the Dreadful Sacrifice the Venerable and Vnbloody Sacrifice the Wonderful and
unlawful And upon the Reasons given in they agreed such Communion to be lawful and meet when it would not do more Harm than Good that is they agreed that it was lawful in it self 2. They hold that they are not to separate further from such a true Church than the things that they separate for are unlawful or are conceived so to be that is that they ought to go as far as they can and do what lawfully they may towards Communion with it For they declare * * * Burrough's Irenic p. 182. That to joyn in nothing because they cannot joyn in all things is a dividing Practice and not to do what they can do in that case is Schism for then the Separation is rash and unjust †††Vindication of Presbyter Governm Brinsly's Arraignm p. 16 32. Therefore if the Ministerial Communion be thought unlawful and the Lay-Communion lawful the Unlawfulness of the former doth not bar a Person from joyning in the latter The denying of Assent and Consent to all and every thing contained in the Book of common-Common-Prayer doth not gainsay the Lawfulness of partaking in that Worship it being sound for the substance in the main c. * * * Corbet's Plea for Lay-Communion c. p. 2. as a judicious Person hath observed This was the Case generally of the old Non-conformists who notwithstanding their Exclusion from their Publick Ministry held full Communion with the Church of England We are told by a good Hand That as Irenicum by Discipulus de tempore Junior alias M. Newcomen Epist to the Reader Friendly Tryal c. 7. p. 121. heretofore Mr. Parker Mr. Knewstubs Mr. Vdal c. and the many Scores suspended in Queen Elizabeth and King James's Reign So also of later times Mr. Dod Mr. Cleaver c. were utterly against even Semi-Separation i. e. against absenting themselves from the Prayers and the Lord's Supper So it 's affirmed of them by Mr. Ball They have evermore condemned voluntary Separation from the Congregations and Assemblies or negligent frequenting of those Publick Prayers And * * * Hildersham Lect on John R. Rogers's 7 Treatises Tr. 7. c. 4. p. 224. some of them earnestly press the People to prefer the publick Service before the private and to come to the beginning of the Prayers as an help to stir up God's Graces c. And others did both receive the Sacrament and exhort others so to do as I shall afterwards shew 2. Again if in Lay-Communion any thing is thought to be unlawful that is no reason against the things that are lawful This was the Case of many of the godly and learned Non-conformists in the last Age as we are told that Vindicat. of the Presbyt Govern p. 135. were perswaded in their Consciences that they could not hold Communion with the Church of England in receiving the Sacrament kneeling without Sin yet did they not separate from her Indeed in that particular Act they withdrew but yet so as they held Communion with her in the rest And thus much is owned by those of the present Age as one declares The Church of England Jerubbaal p. 28 30. being a true Church so that a total Separation from her is unwarrantable therefore Communion with her in all parts of real solemn Worship wherein I may joyn with her without either Let or Sin is a Duty So another saith of them Throughton's Apol. p. 107. They are ready and desirous to return to a full Vnion with the Parishes when ever the Obstacles shall be removed And again They hold Communion with the Parishes not only in Faith and Doctrine but also in Acts of Worship where they think they can lawfully do it This those of the Congregational-Way do also accord to that they ought in all lawful things to communicate with the Churches of England not only in Obedience to the Magistrate in which case they also acknowledg it to be their Duty as well as others but Mr. Nye's Case of great and present use p. 4 and 5. Mr. Read's Case p. 14. also as they are true Churches and therefore plead for the Lawfulness of hearing the established Ministry and undertake to answer the Objections brought against it whether taken from the Ministers Ordination * * * Burrough's Irenic p. 183. Lawfulness of hearing the publick Ministers of the Church of England Nye's Case p. 24 25. or Lives or the Church in which they are Ministers c. as you may find them in Mr. Robinson's Plea for it of old and Mr. Nye's of late as they are printed together Upon the Consideration of which the latter of these thus concludes In most of the Misperswasions of these latter Times by which Mens Minds have been corrupted I find in whatsoever they differ one from another yet in this they agree That it 's unlawful to hear in publick which I am perswaded is one constant Design of Satan in the variety of ways of Religion he hath set on Foot by Jesuits amongst us Let us therefore be the more aware of whatsoever tends that way Of this Opinion also is Mr. Tombs though he continued Theodulia Or a just Defence of Hearing c. c. 10. § 15. p. 369. c. 9. § 8. p. 319. an Anabaptist who has writ a whole Book to defend the hearing of the present Ministers of England and towards the close of the Work hath given forty additional Reasons for it and in opposition to those he writes against doth affirm Sure if the Church be called Mount Sion from the preaching of the Gospel the Assemblies of England may be called Sion Christ's Candlesticks and Garden as well as any Christians in the World I shall conclude this with what Mr. Robinson saith in this Case viz. For my self thus Treatise of the Lawfulness of Hearing c. p. ult I believe with my Heart before God and profess with my Tongue and have before the World that I have one and the same Faith Spirit Baptism and Lord which I had in the Church of England and none other that I esteem so many in that Church of what State or Order soever as are truly Partakers of that Faith as I account thousands to be for my Christian Brethren and my self a Fellow-Member with them of that one Mystical Body of Christ scattered far and wide throughout the World that I have always in Spirit and Affection all Christian Fellowship and Communion with them and am most ready in all outward Actions and Exercises of Religion lawful and lawfully done to express the same And withal that I am perswaded the hearing of the Word of God there preached in the manner and upon the grounds formerly mentioned both lawful and upon occasion necessary for me and all true Christians withdrawing from that Hierarchical Order of Church-Government and Ministry and the uniting in the Order and Ordinances instituted by Christ Thus far he From what hath been said upon
That they thought it altogether unlawful to separate from a Church for the sake of stinted Forms and Liturgies This is not only frequently affirmed by Mr. Ball (g) (g) (g) Trial p. 121 129 140 156. but little less even by Mr. Norton (h) (h) (h) Resp ad Apol c. 13. who saith It is lawful to embrace Communion with Churches where such Forms in Publick Worship are in use neither doth it lie as a Duty on a Believer that he disjoin and separate himself from such a Church And they give this reason for it that then they must separate from all Churches So Mr. Baxter c. Is it not a high degree Sacril desert p. 102. Defence Part 2. p. 65. Balls Trial p. 138. Rogers 7 Tr. p. 224. of Pride to conclude that almost all Christ's Churches in the World for these thirteen hundred Years at least to this day have offered such Worship unto God as that you are obliged to avoid it and that almost all the Catholick Church on Earth this day is below your Communion for using Forms and that even Calvin and the Presbyterians Cartwright Hildersham and the old Non-conformists were unworthy your Communion I know there are several Objections against Forms of Prayer but I know also that these are answered by them But since the most common is that of quenching and stinting the Spirit I shall briefly give their sence of it They say 1. To say that Persons should use no set Form but Roger's 7 Tr. Tr. 3. c. 4. p. 223. Balls Tryal c. 5. p. 83. pray as moved by the Spirit is a fond Error 2. They say that the Spirit instructeth us what to ask not in what phrase of speech It stirreth up in us holy Desires but giveth not ability suddenly and without help to express and lay open our Hearts in a fit method and significant words Ability of Speech is a common Gift of the Spirit which the Lord bestoweth upon good and bad c. 3. That the measure of the Spirit standeth not in Ibid. p. 91. Words and Forms but in fervent Sighs and Groans 4. That there is nothing letteth but that in such Rogers Ibid. Forms the Hearers Hearts may profitably go with the same both to humble to quicken and to comfort And Dr. Owen cannot deny but that they may Disc of Prayer p 222 231 232. be for edification and that Persons in the use of them may have Communion with God 5. They say that the Scriptures insisted upon in this Case are grounded upon Mistakes and are misapplied as Mr. Tombs in particular hath clearly manifested Theodulia p. 164 238. Fourthly I shall consider what their Opinion is as to the English Liturgy or Common-Prayer both as to the Liturgy it self and Communion in it As to the Liturgy it self it 's acknowledged 1. That the Matter for the most part is good sound Bryan's dwelling with God Serm. 6 p. 312. Baxt. Def. pa. t 1. p. 29 59. Crofton Refor no Separ p. 25. T. D. Jerubbaal p 35. and divine and that there is not any Doctrinal Passage in any of the Prayers that may not bear a good construction and so Amen may be said to it as Dr. Bryan with others do maintain 2. That as no Church for this 1400 Years has been without its Publick Forms so ours is the best So the old Non-conformists Compare the Doctrines Leâ—ter of the Minist in Old-Engl p. 12. Prayers Rites at those Times throughout in use in the Churches with ours and in all these blessed be the Name of the Lord we are more pure than they And it 's not much short that we find in Mr. Baxter in the name of Second Plea for Peace p. 101. the present Non-conformists 3. That which is accounted faulty is tolerable and hinders not but that it 's acceptable to God and edifying to pious and well-disposed Persons Tolerable So Mr. Corbet The Worship contained Plea for Lay-Communion p. 2. V. Ball 's Tryal c. 9. p. 58. in the Liturgy may lawfully be partaked in it being sound for substance in the main and the mode thereof being laudable in divers Forms and Orders and passable in the most though in some offensive inconvenient or less perfect Acceptable to God So the old Non-conformists Letter of the Minist in Old-England p. 13. In them that join with the Prayers according to Christ's Command and liberty of absence from Christ hath not been shewed notwithstanding the Corruptions we hold the Prayers to be an holy acceptable Sacrifice to God c. Edifying to well-disposed Persons To this purpose Mr. Hildersham Mr. Rogers c. Treat 3. c. 4. p. 224l And accordingly Mr. Corbet professeth his own experience (a) (a) (a) Corbet Plea p. 3. Though I judg their Form of Worship to be in many respects less perfect than is desired yet I have found my Heart spiritually affected and raised towards God therein and more especially in receiving the Lord's Supper I judg this Form may be used formally by the Formal and spiritually by those that are Spiritual It is my part to make the best of it being the established Form As to Communion in the Liturgy it is granted 1. That there is no cause to renounce it or the Communion of the Church for it and that so to do is a Sin (b) (b) (b) Gifford's plain Declaâ—ation Ball 's Trial c. 7. p. 121. Sacril desert p. 105. 2. That all the Reformed Churches in Christendom do commonly profess to hold Communion with the English Churches in the Liturgy if they come among us where it is used (c) (c) (c) Mr Baxter's Def. of Cure p. 68. 3. It 's declared on the part of the old Non-conformists That they ordinarily and constantly used the Communion-Book in their Publick Ministrations (d) (d) (d) Ball 's Tryal p. 121. c. 8. p. 155. and that the People generally were in their days satisfied in it (e) (e) (e) Let. of Ministers of Old-Engl p. 14. And for the present it 's declared We can lawfully not only hear Common-Prayer but read it our selves (f) (f) (f) Mr. Mead's Case p. 7. M. Humphry's Healing Paper p. 5. Mr. Baxter's Disp 4. of Church-Gov p. 364. Mr. S. Fairclough's Life p. 157. I shall not trouble the Reader with the several Objections against the Liturgy and the Answers return'd to them by the old and present Non-conformists but shall content my self with that which it seems was much Trial. c. 8. p. 152. insisted upon in the days of Mr. Ball and their Reply to it The Liturgy in the whole Matter and Form thereof is Object too like unto the Mass-Book If the Liturgy be Antichristian it is so either in Answ respect of the Matter or of the Form Not of the Matter for that which properly belonged to Antichrist the foul and gross Errors is purged out Not of the Form for Order and Phrase of
Speech is not properly Antichristian 2. That the English Liturgy is gathered according P. 155. V. Letter of the Minist in Old Engl. p. 14. Dr. Bryan's dwelling with God p. 309 310. Mr. Baxter's Cure p. 281. to the Ancients the purest of them and is not a Collection out of the Mass-Book but a refining of that Liturgy which heretofore had been stained with the Mass c. and is not a Translation of the Mass but a Restitution of the Ancient Liturgy Thus saith that Learned Person and much more to whom many others do likewise consent And in this Mr. Tombs is so zealous that he concludes I cannot Theodulia p. 102. but judg that either much Ignorance or much Malice it is that makes any traduce the English Common-Prayer Book as if it were the Popish mass-Mass-Book or as bad as it and to deter Men from joining with those Prayers and Services therein which are good as if it were joining with Antichrist the Pope when they can hardly be ignorant that the Martyrs in Queen Mary 's days were burnt for it is impudent falshood Having thus far considered the Forms I shall now Sect. 2. proceed to shew what their Opinion is of the Gestures required in Lay-Communion such as Kneeling at the Sacrament and standing up at the Creed and Gospels As to Kneeling 1. It 's granted that the Posture in the Sacrament is not determined So Mr. Baxter I never yet heard Christian Direct p. 616. any thing to prove Kneeling unlawful there is no Word of God for or against any Gesture 2. It is granted whatever the Gesture of our Saviour V. Faldo's Dialogue betwixt a Minister and a Quaker Noye's Temple measured p. 81. Theod. p. 168. in it was yet that doth not oblige This Mr. Tombs hath undertaken to shew 1. Because this Gesture seems not to have been of choice used by Christ 2. Because St. Paul omits the Gesture which he would not have done if it had been binding 3. He mentions the Night and calls it the Lord's Supper and if the Time be not necessary much less the Gesture 4. If the Gesture doth oblige then Christians must use the self-same that Christ used 3. It is granted that the nature of the Ordinance doth not forbid Kneeling So Mr. Bains Kneeling Christian Letters Let 24. p. 201. Direct p. 616. is not unbeseeming a Feaster when our joy must be mingled with reverent trembling So Mr. Baxter The nature of the Ordinance is mixed And if it be lawful to take a Pardon from the King upon our Knees I know not what can make it unlawful to take a sealed Pardom from Christ by his Ambassador upon our Knee Hence Mr. Bailey reckons it as an Error of Disswasive c 2 p. 30. c. 6. p. 121 122. V. Johnson's Christian Plea Treat 3. c. 10. p. 285. some Independents that they accounted sitting necessary as a Rite significant of fellowship with Christ and a part of our imitation of him and for both these reasons declared it necessary to keep on their Hats at the time of participation 4. It is granted not to be Idolatrous So Mr. Bains Letters Ibid. Kneeling is neither an occasion nor by participation Idolatry Kneeling never bred Bread-worship And V. Baxt. Christ Direct p. 616. our Doctrine of the Sacrament known to all the World doth free us from suspicion of adoration in it To these Mr. Tombs adds 1. That the Papists adore Theodulia p. 256 c. not the Bread at putting it into their Mouths but at the Elevation It being inconsistent with their Principles to worship that which is not above them 2. That the Worship of God not directed to a V. T. D. Jerubbaal p. 41. Mr. Crofton's Answ p. 28. V. Ames Fresh Suit c. 4. § 4. p. 382. Perkins Cases Creature but before it as an occasional Object of adoration to God is not Idolatry 3. That yet in the Church of England the Elements are not occasionally so but the Benefits of Christ in the Lord's Supper And 4. Kneeling is not to the Bread but as the signification of an humble and grateful mind as he shews from the Rubrick Fifthly Those that do account it inconvenient yet account it not to be unlawful Thus Mr. Cartwright Evang. Harm on Luk. 22. v. 14 c. Second Reply p. 262. Kneeling in receiving the Sacrament being incommodious in its own nature and made far more incommodious by Popish Superstition is not therefore so to be rejected that we should abstain from the Sacrament if we cannot otherwise be partakers of it because the thing is not in its own nature unlawful So it 's said of the old Non-conformists Troughton's Apol. p. 90. Kneeling at the Sacrament was disliked by all but yet thought tolerable and that it might be submitted to by some of the most Learned From all which we may conclude with Mr. Vines On the Sacrament p. 102. that the Posture being a circumstance of Action as well as the Time and Place is not of the Free-hold of the Ordinance and with Mr. Baxter that those that think Sacril desert p. 19. they must not receive kneeling think erroneously As for standing up at the Creed c. Mr. Baxter Christ Direct p. 858. Sacril desert p. 96. saith his judgment is for it where it is required and where not doing it would be divisive and scandalous Nay elsewhere he saith that 't is a convenient praising Gesture c. Thus I have considered the most material Points in which the Lay-Members of the Church of England are concern'd and shew'd that the lawfulness of the things injoined upon such is declared and justified by the Suffrage and Judgment of as eminent Non-conformists as have lived in the several Ages since that unhappy Controversy was first set on foot amongst us And now what remains but that every one concerned set himself seriously and impartially to consider it and it becomes such so to do when they go against the stream of the most experienced Writers of their own Party who might pretend to understand the Case as well if not better than any that were conversant in it It becomes such when they bury that under the condemnation of false Worship which the Lord the Author of all Truth doth allow in his Service Ball 's Tryal Epistle to Reader When they forsake the Prayers of the Congregation and depart from the Table of the Lord and break off Society and Communion with the Churches of Christ c. when they expose Religion to Contempt and the Truth of God to Reproach by the Rents and Divisions in the Church as Mr. Ball doth represent it It becomes them when our Division gratifieth the Papists Defence p. 17. 52. and greatly hazardeth the Protestant Religion and by it we may lose all which the several Parties contend about as Mr. Baxter hath proved It becomes them when the Church of England is the Bulwark of
As for their Sacrifices he saith the Rule was sufficient pag 32. and perfect we hope though one Jew brought a Bullock another a Goat c. I may confidently say it was not sufficient if so they did for God was pleas'd to require more who is the most competent Judge of the perfection of his own Law For there was a particular prescription not only as to the kinds of the Beasts but as to the disposing and ordering of them in Sacrifice what was to be eaten and what not whether the bloud should be poured out or sprinkled whether upon the Altar or at the bottom of it c one would think that a person that talks so loosely of these things had never read the Book of Leviticus But now as to Prayers in the Christian Church we have only a general Form given us and direction to Pray in the Name of Christ but nothing as to Words Time Posture Company c. So that what can be more manifest then that there is no such particular direction given in Worship as they had under the law And therefore however it comes to pass that this Author hath here so bewildred himself yet it 's what he hath granted before when he was fain to make exceptions as to things naturally necessary c and of which he saith in the beginning of this argument that for such it is impossible there should be a Rule though there I Page 8. conceive he hath as much erred on one side as he did before on the other when he saith it's impossible for then it had not been possible to assign time posture place c under the Law Had he said in some not possible in others not fit he had been much more in the right However to let that pass in either way he grants that there is no expectation of Scripture-Authority for such things nor doth the sufficiency of that or the faithfulness of Christ suffer by such an opinion I suppose I may now close this Argument For as for his Or 's and Alias's which this Author so much depends upon I shall consider them in another place Conclus 4. If things indifferent are neither commanded Conclus 4 nor forbidden and things are not unlawful because not commanded then the doing of such things as are not commanded is not contrary to the second Commandment The contrary to this is maintained by our Author Case examined pag. 27 who saith that the doing of such things in Acts of external Worship as are not commanded is indeed a violation of the second Commandment For which he offers this reason because as in the 6th Commandment it is agreed that all injuries to our neighbour's person is forbidden under the highest species of such Acts and in the 7th all species of uncleanness are so in the 2 d commandment all errors in the matter of external Worship are forbidden under the species of Idolatry The answer to this depends upon the understanding of his phrase Matter of Worship which he hath given us no light in which either signifies parts of Worship and then we yield it that all such instituted by men are forbidden in this commandment for it 's false worship but then we deny that we are concern'd in it or that any thing not commanded and used by us is a part of Worship And if he thinks otherwise he is as upon other reasons also concern'd to take up the cause of Dr. Ames that he saith he is not concern'd in If by matter of Worship he means the administration Pag. 27. and ordering of it then I deny the parallel that all errors in Matter of Worship areas much forbidden in the second commandment as injuries by the 6th c. For injuries are of the same Species with Murder and Acts of uncleanness are of the same kind with Adultery but errors in the administration of Worship are nothing akin to Idolatry 2. I deny that the doing of things not commanded in the Matter of Worship are so much as errors in his sence since forbidden by no Law as I have shewed The Second point undertaken in the Case of Indifferent Sect. 2. Case of Indiff Things p. 4. c. Things was to shew that there are things Indifferent in the Worship of God and that such things though not prescribed may be lawfully used in it Of this saith our reverend Author none that we Case examined p. 19 20. know of ever doubted and again as it 's stated in that Tract none in his wits did ever deny it I do not think my self obliged to answer for some mens understandings but if that be true what must we think of those whom Mr. Baxter writes of that will have a Rule for every thing and adds take heed of Defence of the principles of love part 2. p. 97. them What of such that when they grant Things Indifferent to be neither commanded nor forbidden will yet say that things not commanded are forbidden What of such that when they have granted and so it 's then granted on both sides that there are Things Indifferent in the Worship of God will yet say that the Case examin'd p. 15. Indifferency of actions to be done while they are employ'd in the Worship of God is all the Question Lastly What of those that when they have yielded that things Indifferent though not prescribed may be lawfully used in Divine Worship will have it put to the Question Whether things not necessary to all human actions may be used in it Who they are or how far they are concerned in the foregoing Character I leave to this Reverend persons Consideration But although none in his Wits did ever deny the Question as stated by me yet because it may be of use toward the clearing of the matters hereafter to be discoursed of I will briefly consider the case as it was then stated and that will appear from the things considered in the state of it and the ways taken to prove it 1. It was granted that things naturally necessary to the Action were excluded since generals act but in their particulars and if some of the kind must accompany the Act then this or that particular of the kind is lawful to be used as it is in time place habit This he grants but only adds that Habit surely is not Pag. 7. necessary we read of none before the Fig-leaves were sown together Gen. 3. But 1. We indeed read of no habit before the Fall but is there nothing natural to man since the Fall What doth our Author think of the Apostle's Natural 1. Corinth 15. 44. Body c as opposed to Heavenly or of the description he gives of the state of mankind when he saith we are by Nature Children of Wrath We read of no Eph 2. 3. such Body or state before the time of the Fig-leaves And yet the Apostle makes bold to call them Natural as belonging to man in his present fallen State
2. Therefore we have a further notion of Natural given us and that is when any thing is suted to the Nature or State of the thing or person Thus Ames and others tell us of Natural Ceremonies as lifting up Fresh Suit p. 1. c. 4. 5. the eyes to Heaven in Sign of Devotion which by the way is not so Natural but that casting them down Luke 18. 13. in Worship is a sign of it too as in the publicans And so habit is Natural to man as belonging and suted to his present condition But saith he it is not Natural for a person may Pray naked and so he may pray blindfold and yet will any one say sight is not natural to man But how may he pray naked in Regious assemblies for we are speaking of publick Worship can he say it 's sutable to the Solemnity And so going naked is as little sutable to the nature of man 3. Again that 's natural which is the effect of Nature though not born with us And I am apt to think that did our Author live within the Circle of the Frigid Zone he would without any Tutor without the knowledge of what is the custom of Civilized Nations without any moral reason have thought upon the benefit of Frieze or somewhat of the like use with that But suppose I am mistaken how hath he mended the matter He tells us that by the custom of Civilized Nations some habit is necessary But then what becomes Gen. 3. 21. of the Fig-leaves what of the coats of Skins God clothed Adam with Now to say it came from custom before custom was for it was in the beginning I think is much more absurd than to say that Habit was natural But it 's time to pass on to a more profitable argument 2. It was proved that all things which in general and for kind are morally necessary are also lawful in their particulars This was made evident from a parity of reason 'twixt what is naturally and what is morally necessary and therefore he that grants the particulars of what is naturally necessary to be indifferent must also grant the particulars of what is morally necessary to be indifferent And as it follows this Time or that this Place or that this Habit or that is lawful and indifferent because Time Place and Habit are necessary So it also follows this Method or that this Form or that this Order or that is lawful and may be used because Method Form and Order are necessary And therefore we need look no more for an institution for a Form than as he saith for a Case examined pag. 18. Bell to call to Worship or for a Gown or Cloak to preach in c. For what Naturally necessary is to the particulars of its kind that is Morally necessary to its particulars And one is no more unlawful for want of an institution or command than the other This our Author also yields to We saith he having agreed Pag. 14. that there are some circumstances of Humane actions in Gods Worship not only Natural common to all actions but of a Moral nature too relating to them as such actions which God having neither commanded nor forbidden may be used are not much concerned in what our Author saith upon his second Head 3. It was further shewed in the aforesaid Treatise that such things in Divine Worship as were agreeable to the Rules of the Apostle and served for Order Decency and Edification were also lawful though they were neither Naturally nor Morally necessary nor did necessarily arise from the nature of the Thing as Method and Form c. do that is that there are a certain sort of things that are ambulatory and contingent that Case of indifferent things p. 8 12 13. vary with circumstances ages places and conditions c. As the being cover'd or uncover'd in Worship such and such fixed hours of Prayer The Love-feasts and Holy-kiss and besides several Civil usages transferr'd from secular affairs into the Service of Religion which were used therein not as meer Civil Rites as I there shewed This argument taken from Civil usages our Author endeavours to avoid several ways 1. He saith If we do not mistake the reason why Case examined pag. 18. Dr. Ames and others do think that Civil usages may be used in Acts of Worship is because they are either necessary to the action as Humane or convenient comely or grave c. And because I had said * * * Case of indifferent things pag. 14. that if the being Civil usages did make them lawful in Divine Worship then there is nothing in Civil cases but may be introduced into the Church though never so absurd he saith he cannot apprehend the consequence because Case examined pag. 19. what is granted about Civil usages is to be applied to grave actions and none other But to this I answer Grant they are thus to be understood of such Civil usages as are grave yet then it is not so much because they are Civil as because they are grave that they may be used and provided that they were grave they might be used if they were not Civil as well as if they were and are not the sooner to be used because they are Civil And then what becomes of their argument for such and such practices and customs that they were Civil And what have they got when to avoid the force of what we say from the Love-Feasts c. plead as he doth that they are Civil usages So that when he and his brethren grant that such usages which may ordinarily Pag. 18. be used in other Humane actions of a grave nature may be used in Acts of Worship which is more than we dare say for then standing crosses may be introduced into Worship which are used to very grave purposes in Civil matters as to distinguish Christian from Heathenish or Turkish Dominions c. I know not what they can deny 2. He gives a very partial account of Civil usages when he tells us of Orators Pulpits and Seats and Bells Gowns and Cloaks But in the mean while forgets that there are Civil usages that are of a Ceremonial Nature and that are used by way of signification distinction c. As now a garment is I may still say Naturally or as he will have it Morally necessary but when in a particular case it 's required that it be White or Purple it 's a Civil usage and is by way of signification and so the signification is transferr'd with it from a civil to a sacred use which how consistent it is with their principles I leave it to his consideration 3. He takes no notice of the Argument used by me that if civil usages without institution may be lawfully used in Divine Worship this with his concessions before about Natural and Moral circumstances will justifie most I had almost said all the practices of our Church as I instanced in the
Jean's Uniformity in answer to Dr. Hammond And it amounts to this that Decency and Indecency are contraries rather privatives saith Jeans And if one of them be not Indecent the other cannot be Decent And if the Action may be performed decently without what is called Decent then that which we call so is not Decent As suppose it 's pleaded that a Surplice is Decent but if the contrary be not Indecent and the Service may be performed decently without it then that Vestment is not Decent In answer to which I shall not concern my self in a tedious and nice dispute about the nature of Contrarieties and Privatives but readily grant the opposition which they insist upon betwixt Decent and Indecent And yet notwithstanding shall make bold to deny the whole they infer from it And that for this reason because our Dispute is not about the Nature of Decency and Indecency but about things Decent and Indecent And although Decency and Indecency be opposed as above said yet it is not so in the things controverted but that things different may be both of them Decent As for Example he grants that it 's comely and grave to preach in a Gown and that they look therefore for Pag. 18. no Institution but now by this way of arguing it could not be so For if a person may preach decently without a Gown then it cannot be Decent to preach with it because Decency and Indecency are contraries and if the contrary be not Indecent as it is not to preach without it must he say then to preach with it is not Decent So again what Decency is to Indecency that is Reverence to Irreverence But he saith that kneeling at the Sacrament is Decent for saith he no Pag. 36. Pag. 13. Dissenter refuseth to receive the Sacrament kneeling because it is not Decent and Reverent But it can be neither of these by his argument for they also affirm that it may be Decently and Reverently received though they do not kneel and therefore the contrary to kneeling being not Indecent kneeling cannot be Decent And thus I might run on in infinitum and the like may be argued from the account he gives of Order The ground of his and the others mistake is that they argue from the kind to the individuals of the kind as if one individual was as much opposite to the other as kind to kind whereas the individuals are mutable things which the guise of Countrys and custom c. alter and two things different in use or figure or the like may be both of them Decent as to wear a Cloak or a Coat in Secular business a Cloak Gown or Surplice in Religious Solemnities according as the custom is Therefore the Brethren at the Savoy let this curious Proceedings at the Savoy p. 62. speculation fall and grant there are some things Decent and orderly when the opposite species is not undecent or disorderly And a greater than they said it was comely with respect to the then state of the Church not to marry and yet without doubt it was 1 Cor. 7. 35. not thought uncomely to marry too which yet the Apostle could not have said if our Authors way of arguing had been of any force After all this pert discourse against things instituted we are little concern'd not only because there is nothing like things meerly instituted by men in our Church except the Cross which Lay-Communion is not concerned in but also because even that and all things that can be forced to look this way are not now instituting but are received as having been so long before and are not the subject matter of Institution but of Civil and Ecclesiastical Command betwixt which there is a vast difference as Mr. Jeans Against Dr. Hammond pag. 80. rightly observes There is difference 'twixt Institution and Commandment or Appointment for though every Institution be a Commandment or Appointment yet every Commandment or Appointment is not an Institution And hence a Church in a place may command and appoint the uniform observance of Ceremonies instituted unto its hand by the Church in former ages As for such particular things as were owing to meer Institution which I produced in the above said tract in respect of their use and signification I shall keep them in my eye though I lay them aside for the present to come to his next head Nothing though necessary or convenient or Prop. 2. comely ought to be used in and much less appropriated to the Worship of God being all such things are to be considered therein only as they have a reference to humane acts This he asserts not only in the Propositions which he draws from his general position but also elsewhere so he saith that they comply with meer necessary or conventent circumstances Pag. 23. either of Actions or such or such Actions considered abstractly from any Religion And therefore he concludes 1. They must not be used in Religious Worship So he saith Those who stumble at the Surplice as not Pag. 15. many do or the Cross or kneeling at the Eucharist scruple to do it in an Act of Worship So again The Minister must wear his Surplice in his Acts of Worship and sign with the Cross within the complex Act of Worship for he after it with prayers concludes the Action The People must kneel in the act of Receiving What then Why then they are unlawful Now how the things that are necessary in general as Posture Habit c. can be used without particulars or how those particulars can be used in Worship lawfully and yet be unlawful because used in Worship I understand not For then sitting would be unlawful if alike required and a Gown be unlawful and the Ring in Marriage unlawful and the laying the hand on the Book unlawful at the former of which is a prayer annexed and at the latter it is implied and all Civil Usages in Worship would be unlawful And then what will become of what he hath elsewhere said Dr. Ames and others do think that such usages which may ordinarily Pag. 12. be used in other humane actions of a grave nature may be used in Acts of Worship and being so used are no more than appendants to the Action c. But being sensible that this will not do and that unless he can make the being used in Worship to be the same with Worship to be an act or a part of it he cannot make it unlawful and that if he should attempt it it would be but to disparage the cause he makes a second adventure 2. That which is appropriated to Worship is unlawful Some of them cannot but look for an Institution Pag. 12. for a Garment meaning the Surplice which they must be tied to use in the Worship of God and restrained from the wearing of at other times Now because this would open a gap too wide for him to stand in and would condemn Places as
or leave out of it till all Parties amongst us are satisfied which indeed can never be effected as it doth consist in our becoming more truly Christian in our Lives and Tempers They are our vicious Dispositions more than our different Apprehensions that keep us at such a distance Let the terms of Communion with the Church be what they will yet as long as Men retain the same quarrelsom Mind and industriously seek for Doubts and Scruples and are glad to find them and prefer their own private Opinion and Judgment before the Wisdom and Authority of all their Governours whether Civil or Ecclesiastical it is plain our Divisions and Animosities will not cannot cease But this leads me to the last thing I design'd to discourse of which was to propound to you the best ways and means by which men may get rid of and ease their Minds of such Scruples where I shall especially consider those that relate to our communicating with our Parish-Churches You must not expect that I should descend to and answer the particular Exceptions which hinder men from constant Communion with us but only in general I shall crave leave to advise some few things which would mightily tend to the removing those Doubts and Scruples that yet detain so many in a state of utter Separation from us or at least discourage their total and hearty joyning with us Which charitable Design and Attempt however unsuccessful I may be in it yet cannot I hope be unacceptable to any whose Consciences are pester'd with such Scruples since I endeavour only to deliver them from those Mistakes which beside the disservice they do to Religion and the Protestant Interest do also expose them to trouble and danger from the Publick Laws and Civil Magistrate Of many Rules that might be given in this case I shall insist only on these following 1. We should take great care to beget and cherish in our Minds the most high and worthy and honourable Thoughts of God Almighty This is the Foundation of all Religion and as our Apprehensions of God are such for the most part will be his Worship and Service Accordingly as we conceive of his Nature so shall we judge what things are most pleasing to him as also what they are that are most offensive and distastful to him Now consider I beseech you Can that Man have becoming and excellent Thoughts of the Divine Nature who imagines that God regards any particular Gestures Habits and Postures so far as that the acceptance of our Service and Worship should depend upon such Circumstances of our Religious Actions When with all Humility and true devotion of Heart a sincere Christian prostrates himself at the Throne of God's Grace and with earnest Desire and Affections begs those good things that are according to Gods Mind and Will can we believe that the Father of our Spirits shall refuse and reject his Petition because it is delivered in a certain prescribed form of Words Shall his importunate renewed Requests fail of Success because he still useth the same Expressions and reads his Prayers out of a Book Is God pleased with variety of Words or the copiousness of our Invention or the elegancy of our Phrase and Stile Is it not the Heart and inward frame of Spirit that God principally respects in all our Prayers Or can we think so meanly of God that he should shut his ears against the united Prayers of his People because offended at the colour of the Garment in which the Minister officiates Suppose two Persons both with equal Preparation with true Repentance and Faith to approach the Lord's Table one of them out of a deep sense of his Unworthiness to receive so great Blessings and out of a grateful acknowledgment of the Benefits therein conferr'd upon him takes the Sacrament upon his Knees in the humblest Posture the other sitting or standing can you think that the Sacrament is effectual or beneficial or that God blesses it only to him that sits or that it would not have been of the same advantage to him if he also had received it kneeling To surmise any such thing is surely to dishonour God as if he were a low poor humoursome Being like a Father that should disinherit his Child tho in all Respects most dutiful to him and every way deserving his greatest Kindness only because he did not like his Complexion or the colour of his Hair The wiser and greater any Person is to whom we address our selves the less he will stand upon little Punctilio's Under the Jewish Law the minutest circumstances of Worship were exactly described and determined by God himself and it was not ordinarily lawful for the Priests at all to vary from them But it was necessary then that it should be thus because the Jewish Worship was typical of what was to come hereafter and those many nice Observances that were appointed were not commanded for themselves as if there were any Excellency in them but they were shadows of things to come which are all now done away by the Gospel and the bringing in of everlasting Righteousness the only thing always pleasing to God and agreeable to his Nature It is a spiritual rational Service God now expects from us and delights in and he must look upon God as a very fond and captious Being who can perswade himself that our Prayers and Thanksgivings and other Acts of Worship tho we be most hearty and devout in them yet shall be rejected by him only because of some particular Habits or Gestures we used which were neither dishonourable to God nor unsutable to the nature of those religious Performances Such mean Thoughts of God are the true ground of all Superstition when we think to court and please him by making great Conscience about little things and so it hath been truly observed that there is far more Superstition in conscientious abstaining from that which God hath no where forbid than there is in doing that which God hath not commanded A man may certainly do what God hath not commanded and yet never think to flatter God by it nor place any Religion in it but he may do it only out of obedience to his Superiours for outward Order and Decency for which end our Ceremonies are appointed and so there is no Superstition in them But now a Man cannot out of Conscience refuse to do what God hath not forbid and is by lawful Authority required of him but he must think to please God by such abstaining and in this conceit of pleasing or humouring God by indifferent things consists the true Spirit of Superstition 2. Lay out your great care and zeal about the necessary and substantial duties of Religion and this will make you less concerned about things of an inferiour and indifferent nature As on the one hand our fierce Disputes and Debates about little things and circumstances are apt to eat out the Heart and Life of Religion so on the other side minding those things most in
of what he doth 3. It is truly observed by some that considering the known temper of the Nonconformists it is not very likely any such mischief should ensue viz. that by the example of one or more leaving their Separate Assemblies others should be moved to follow them against their own Judgment and Conscience It is abundantly notorious how they have used to treat those that have deserted them with what irreconcileable enmity they have prosecuted them looking upon them as their worst Enemies passing more grievous censures upon them than upon those who have all their lives long continued in our Communion 4. I proceed in the last place to observe from what I have discoursed concerning giving Offence that if to Offend any one be to lead him into sin then we may Scandalize and give Offence to others as soon by pleasing them and complying with them as by dipleasing them and going contrary to their mind and humour St. Paul who Circumcised Timothy Acts 16. 3. in favour of the weak Jews that he might insinuate and ingratiate himself into them refused to Circumcise Titus Galat. 2. 3. tho he made the Jews angry by it yet he would not give place by subjection or submission and condescension to them no not for an hour He considered the different states and conditions of the persons he had to deal withal He complyed to Circumcise Timothy lest all the Jews with him should have forsaken the Christian Faith and for the same reason he denied to Circumcise Titus lest those of Jerusalem should think he was of opinion that the Jewish Law held still in force and so the Cross of Christ should become of no effect to them He pleased indeed the former for fear of driving them from Christianity and for the same reason he displeased the latter lest he should give them occasion to think the observation of Moses's Law always necessary He had truly Scandalized them if he had done as they would have had him He had Offended them in the true Scripture sense if he had pleased and humoured them and this is the most ordinary way of Scandalizing Christians amongst us by not plainly telling Men of their faults and mistakes by not speaking freely and roundly to them nor acting couragiously whereby they become hardned and confirmed in their folly and ignorance To this purpose I cannot but repeat the words of Mr. Baxter in the Book I have so often cited Many a time saith he I have the rather gone to the common-Common-Prayers of the publick Assemblies for fear of being a Scandal to those same men that called the going to them a Scandal that is for fear of hardning them in a sinful Separation and Error because I knew that was not Scandal which they called Scandal that is displeasing them and crossing their opinions but hardning them in an Error or other sin is true Scandalizing Vnderstand this or you will displease God under pretence of avoiding Scandal p. 135. Thus by complying with our Dissenting Brethren we really do them that mischief which we would avoid and fall into the sin of giving Scandal whilest we are running from it We countenance and encourage their sinful Separation and Division we confirm them in their dangerous Errors and Mistakes we by our practice condemn those things which yet in our Consciences we allow and approve of and by our Authority and influence harden others in their unreasonable prejudices and opposition against the lawful Commands of their Superiours They think us of the same mind with themselves whilst we do the same things and that we judge as ill of the Church of England as long as we refuse to Communicate with it as themselves do and thus we give occasion to their sin and those infinite mischiefs which have happened both to Church and State upon the account of our Religious disputes and divisions which surely ought to be well thought of and considered by a sort of Men amongst us who shall go to Church in the Morning and to a Conventicle in the Afternoon who halt between both and would fain displease neither side but indeed give real Offence to both From all this I think it is very plain that he who is satisfied in his own mind of the lawfulness of Conformity but is afraid of giving Offence by it if he be true to this principle ought to hasten the faster to his Parish-Church that he might not Offend those very Dissenters of whom he would seem to be so tender and thus I have done with the Second thing I propounded to shew what is meant by Offending or Scandalizing 3. It remaineth in the Third and Last place to enquire how far and in what instances we are bound to consider the ignorance or weakness of our Brother In Answer to this that I may proceed with all the clearness I can I shall now suppose notwithstanding all I have already said that our Dissenting Brethren are truly weak persons and that there may be some danger of their being through their own fault Offended by our Conformity yet taking this for granted I shall plainly shew that he who is in his own mind convinced of the lawfulness of coming to his Parish-Church and using the Forms of Prayer and Ceremonies by Law appointed ought not to forbear doing the same for fear of giving such Offence to his weak Brethren There are many other things to be considered in this Case besides this matter of private Scandal and if there be greater evil in and greater mischief to others and a more publick Scandal doth follow our forbearing Communion with the Church and withdrawing into private Assemblies than can happen by our leaving them and returning to the Church and complying with its orders we ought then to conform notwithstanding the Offence that is imagined may be taken at it For these two things as I suppose are agreed on all hands one is that nothing which is sinful may be done to avoid Scandalizing others the other is that to avoid a less Scandal being taken by a few we must not give a greater Scandal and of vastly more pernicious consequence to a much bigger number of persons and by these two Rules I shall now judge of the Case at first propounded 1. Nothing that is sinful may be done to avoid others being Scandalized which is directly the Apostles Doctrine Rom. 3. 8. That we must not do evil that good may come nor is any necessary duty to be omitted out of prudence or charity to others lest they through Error or Ignorance be hurt by it We must not to prevent the greatest sin in another commit the least sin our selves nor disobey Gods Law and so run the hazard of our own damnation tho it be to save the Soul of our Brother Thus Calvin tells us Instit lib. 3. c. 19. Quae necessaria sunt factu nullius offendiculi timore omittenda sunt Whatever is necessary to be done by vertue of Gods Command is not to be omitted
Prayer and since in fact there is another means of Prayer besides this of praying in our own words viz. praying in the words of others which God hath left as free to us as the former it plainly follows from the whole that to omit the use of our own Gift and in the stead of it to use that other Gift of praying in the words of others is not in it self any way sinful or unlawful Case III. Whether the Vse of Publick Forms of Prayer doth not deaden the Devotion of Prayer For thus our Brethren argue that by the command of God we are obliged not only to pray but to pray with the utmost devotion we are able and accordingly to use such means of Prayer as are most apt to heighten and intend our devotion and thus far we agree with them if therefore Forms are in themselves and not through our fault and erroneous prejudice less apt to quicken and raise devotion than conceiv'd Prayers it will be granted of all hands that this is a good Argument against the use of them This therefore is the case wherein we differ our Brethren say that Forms of Publick Worship for 't is that we are now discoursing of are in themselves apt to dispirit and deaden the Devotions of those that use them we say the contrary viz. that publick Forms are in themselves more apt to improve and quicken the common Devotions than Extemporary Prayers of the Ministers own conceiving In order therefore to the clearing and full resolution of this Case we will briefly enquire into these three things 1. What these advantages to Publick Devotion are which conceived or extemporary Prayers pretend to 2. Whether these Advantages are not for the most part fantastical and imaginary and whether so far as they are real they are not much more peculiar to Forms than to extempore Prayer 3. Whether besides these common advantages publick Forms have not peculiar advantages which conceiv'd Prayers cannot pretend to 1. We will enquire what those advantages to the publick Devotions are which conceiv'd or extemporary Prayers pretend to in short it is pretended in the behalf of conceiv'd Prayers that they do much more fix the attention and raise the intention of the Peoples minds in Prayer than publick Forms that is that they do more confine the rovings of mens thoughts in Prayer and keep their minds more attentive to it and that they do much more warm and enliven their affections in it for say our Brethren the Devotions of the people are very much rais'd or deaden'd by the performance of the Minister according as he is more or less devout in it and as for the Minister he must needs be much more devout in a Prayer of his own conceiving than in the use of a publick Form because first say they 't is impossible for him to keep his mind so attentive in reading a Prayer as in conceiving one in his own mind and speaking it from his own conceptions the care of performing which naturally bounds the wanderings of his thoughts and keeps them more fixt and attentive and secondly because when he utters his words immediately from his affections his thoughts have not that scope to wander as when he reads them out of a Book And as conceived Prayer doth more fix the attention of the Minister so it doth also more raise his intention or in other words more warm and inflame his affections for first whereas in reading a Form his affections follow his words and are raised and excited by them in conceived Prayer his words follow his affections and are immediately utter'd from and indited by them and secondly How is it possible say they that the words of another which he reads out of a Form should so well express his affections as his own besides thirdly that while he is reading his Form his soul is so intent in directing his eye to read that it cannot direct its affections to God with that fervour and intention as it might do in conceiv'd Prayer These are the supposed helps which the Ministers devotion and from his the Peoples receive from conceiv'd Prayers above what Forms of Prayer can afford and as conceiv'd Prayer hath these peculiar advantages to raise the Ministers devotion and by his the Peoples so it hath another advantage by which it more immediately influences the devotion of the People viz. that the matter of it is still exprest in new words which must needs much more affect the attention of the People than when it is always exprest in the same words without any variation And this so far as I can gather from the Writings of our Brethren is the sum of what they plead in behalf of conceiv'd Prayer as to its peculiar advantageousness to publick Devotion above stated Forms 2. Therefore we will inquire whether these Advantages are not in a great measure imaginary and whether so far as they are real they are not much more peculiar to Forms than to conceiv'd Prayer And here I will readily grant that by expressing a serious and devout affection the Minister doth really advantage the Devotion of the Congregation even as by his good example in all other things he excites the people to a pious and virtuous imitation in whose eyes devotion never looks so amiable as when 't is exprest in serious and well compos'd words accompanied with a devout a sober and affectionate behaviour both which are equally necessary to excite the devotion of the People if therefore it be really true that the use of conceived or extempore Prayer is in its own nature most apt to fix the attention and excite the intention of the Minister in Prayer it must be confest that herein it hath the advantage of Forms 1. Therefore we will inquire whether these advantages it pretends to as to the exciting the Ministers attention in Prayer be real or no The first advantage is that the very conceiving the matter of his Prayer and speaking it from his own conceptions doth naturally more bind his attention than the reading it out of a Form but I beseech you what doth it more bind him to attend to is it to attend to the words and phrases if so then 't is not to attend to the acts of Prayer or is it to attend to those acts which are the proper business of Prayer that is to be asham'd of sin and to bewail it in confession to be sensible of the common wants and common dependancies upon God for supply in petition to admire God's perfections and gratefully commemorate his goodness in praise and thanksgiving for in these things the true devotion both of Minister and People consists and 't is only by being an example of these in his Prayer that the Minister excites the devotion of his people 't is by confessing sin as if he were asham'd of and sorry for it that he excites their shame and sorrow by petitioning for mercy as if he were sensible of the want of it and did
heartily desire it and depended upon God for it that he excites their sense of need and their desire and hope of relief and supply by praising and thanking God as if he heartily admired his excellencies and gratefully resented his goodness that he excites their admiration and gratitude that mode of Prayer therefore which is most apt to fix the Ministers attention to these acts of devotion must needs be most apt to excite the devotions of the people Now as for the mode of praying from his own conceptions I really think that it is much more apt to unfix the Ministers attention to these acts than that of praying by a Form because it forces him to attend to other things at the same time viz. the recollection of matter and invention of sutable expressions which must more or less divert him from attending to the inward acts of devotion according as his fancy and tongue are more or less pregnant and voluble it being impossible for him to attend at the same time to several things as closely as he may to one but when he prays by a Form his matter and words are ready before him and so he hath nothing else to do but to attend to his devotion and certainly when a man hath but one thing to do in Prayer he may attend to that more fixedly and closely than when he hath two or three 't is true by being released from attending to the invention of his matter and words his mind is more at leisure to wander and instead of attending as he ought more closely to the acts of devotion by imploying those thoughts which in conceiv'd Prayer he imploys in invention in a closer attention to the acts of devotion he may if he please permit them to rove abroad but if he doth the fault is in himself and not in the Form he prays by the design of his Form is to release his mind from all other business in Prayer but only that of inward devotion which is the life of Prayer that so it may be the more attentive to it but if instead of applying his mind to this design he suffers it to wander abroad he makes an ill use of a good thing and converts that which is in it self a help to devotion into an occasion of indevotion But 't is objected that while his thoughts are imployed in inventing the matter and words of his Prayer they are attending to the duty of Prayer and while they are so they are well imploy'd though they should not be so attentively fixt upon the inward devotion of Prayer as they might be in the use of a Form to which in short I answer That to invent the matter and words of Prayer is not to pray but to study a Prayer and till our Brethren have proved that our inventing the matter and words is a part of our duty of Prayer which is the Question in debate between us we can by no means grant that our attention to it is attending to the duty of Prayer we believe that when we pray devoutly by a Form we discharge the whole duty of Prayer though we do not invent the matter and words our selves and when we see the contrary proved we will not only yield that to attend to inventing is to attend to the duty of Prayer but that it is unlawful to pray by a Form but in the mean time we can yield neither one nor t'other Seeing then that Forms are in themselves more apt to fix the Ministers attention to the inward acts of devotion and seeing that 't is by attending to these acts or at least by seeming to do so that he influences the attention of the people it necessarily follows that in this respect Forms are more advantageous to publick devotion than conceiv'd or extemporary Prayer But then 2. It is pretended that conceiv'd Prayer is in it self more apt to fix the Ministers attention in Prayer than Forms because in conceiv'd Prayer he utters his words immediately from his affections by reason of which his thoughts have not that scope to wander as when he reads them out of a Book to which in short I answer That if he hath devout affections he may utter his words as immediately from his affections in a Form as in a conceiv'd Prayer and therefore this pretence is altogether insignificant for his own invention is as much a medium between his affections and utterance in Praying extempore as the Book in praying by a Form as for instance suppose that in confessing sin he be affected with shame and sorrow he cannot express it in words but by using his own invention or a Form and whether he uses one or t'other he uses a medium to express it and why those words which he reads should not be as immediate to his affections as those which he invents provided they do as fully express them I am not able to apprehend in short therefore if he hath devout affections they will at least as much confine his thoughts from wandering when he prays by Form as when he prays Extempore if he hath not he cannot utter his words from his affections either in the one or t'other 2. We will inquire whether those advantages which our Brethren ascribe to conceiv'd Prayer above Forms as to the raising the Ministers intention in Prayer be real or no first they pretend that in reading a Form his affections follow his words and are raised and excited by them whereas in praying extempore his words follow his affections This I confess is a very curious distinction but I am not able to apprehend either what foundation there is for it or how it is applicable to the matter for first what necessity is there either that his affections should follow his words in a Form more than in a conceiv'd Prayer or that his words should follow his affections in a conceiv'd Prayer more than in a Form why may not a man be devoutly affected with the matter he prays for before he expresses it in a Form of words as well as before he expresses it extempore since if he be acquainted with the Form he cannot but know before-hand what he is to pray for in it and therefore if he be truly devout cannot but be affected with it before he prays for it and so on the other hand why may not a man as well be unaffected with the matter he prays for in conceiv'd Prayer till he hath exprest it as with the matter he prays for in a Form or what reason can be assign'd why the affection may not follow the words and be excited by them in the one as well as in the other may not a man pray inconsiderately and suffer his tongue to run before his heart in both and may not his affections which were before asleep be awakened by the sound of his words in either In short therefore since in praying by a Form a man may know as well at least and hath as much time to consider the
at the Consecration of the Eucharist make use of the Lords Prayer By these and sundry other Testimonies which are quoted by learned men upon this argument it 's evident that the Church of Christ in all Ages look'd upon the Lords Prayer as a standing Form given by our Saviour to be perpetually used by Christians and to be sure they who believed the institution of it to be perpetually obliging could not make the least doubt but that it was constantly used in the Apostolick Age. And my thinks 't is very strange that had the institution been temporary the Church of Christ for fifteen hundred years should never be wise enough to discover it and it seems to me a very high presumption for us to determine against the constant belief and practice of the Church in all Ages without the least warrant so to do either from our Saviour or his Apostles By all this therefore it 's abundantly evident that both in the Old and New Testament there have been Forms of Prayer instituted and appointed by God himself so that were that true which our Brethren affirm that nothing ought to be admitted into the Worship of God which he hath not commanded yet this will not conclude against the admission of Forms of Prayer since there are Forms which God himself hath commanded But they object yet farther That all that this proves is that Forms of Prayer of Gods appointment may and ought to be admitted into his Worship which no body doubts of but from hence it doth by no means follow that men may appoint Forms of humane composure for those Forms of Prayer which God prescribed were immediately dictated by him to those inspired persons who delivered 'em and therefore we may as well pretend to appoint new Scripture for publick instruction because those inspired persons did so as to appoint new Forms for publick Worship Now because I perceive this Objection is very much insisted on by our Brethren I shall endeavour to return a full and clear answer to it in these following Propositions First That this Objection allows the prescribing of Forms of Prayer to be lawful in its own nature Secondly That it must allow the prescribing of publick Forms to be not onely lawful but good and useful Thirdly It must also allow that Gods prescribing Forms of Prayer by inspired persons is so far forth a Warrant for our imitation as the thing it self is good and useful and lawfully imitable by us Fourthly That though it follows that because God by inspired persons hath prescribed Forms of Prayer therefore the Church may prescribe them upon Gods reasons yet it doth by no means follow that therefore it may prescribe them as Scripture or divine Inspirations First That this Objection allows the prescribing of Forms of Prayer to be lawful of its own nature that is to be void of all intrinsick evil and to have no contrariety in the nature of it to the eternal Rules and Dictates of right reason for this Objection granting as it doth that God hath prescribed Forms of Prayer must either admit that God may do and hath done that which is intrinsically evil and repugnant to right reason or grant that the prescribing of Forms hath no intrinsick evil in it And in particular it is to be considered that our Saviours prescribing his Form was a tacit approbation of other Forms that were prescribed before and that not onely by God but by men too for though besides those Forms which were prescribed by God for the publick Worship of the Jews their Doctors tell us of sundry Forms of humane Composure that were used in their Temple and Synagogues in our Saviour's time yet he was so far from disapproving either them or that which John Baptist taught his Disciples that in conformity to the later he prescribed a Form to his own Disciples which Form of his as our Learned Gregory hath proved he collected out of Forms of Prayer which were then used among the Jews in whose Books the several parts and clauses of it are extant almost verbatim to this day and certainly had he disapproved their Forms as evil and sinful he would never have collected his own Prayer out of ' em Since therefore our Saviour hath not onely given us a Form but hath also given it under such circumstances as do plainly signifie his approbation of other Forms it necessarily follows that either he hath approved that which is evil or that Forms of Prayer are not evil Secondly That this Objection must allow the prescribing of publick Forms to be not onely lawful in it self but also good and useful for whatsoever God doth he is directed to do by his own infallible Wisdom which always proceeds upon the best reasons and proposes the best ends of action to him and the most effectual means to compass and obtain 'em when therefore we grant that God hath done such or such a thing we must either allow the thing to be good and useful to some excellent end and purpose or suppose that he did not consult his Wisdom in it or that his Wisdom was mistaken He therefore who allows that God hath prescribed Forms of Prayer must either blaspheme his Wisdom or grant the prescribing 'em to be good and useful But it is objected that the prescribing 'em was good and useful onely at that time and under those circumstances wherein they were prescribed as for instance in the times of the Old Testament it may be allowed that the prescribing of Forms might be good and useful the Jews to whom they were prescribed being a carnal dull and stupid People and yet under the times and circumstances of the Gospel-state which is so vastly different the prescribing 'em may not onely cease to be good but become hurtful and injurious To which in short I answer 1st That supposing it were the Carnality Dulness and Stupidity of the Jews that render'd Forms so useful to 'em I doubt that as to those particulars the case is not so much alter'd with the generality of Christians but that they may be useful still and though 't is to be hoped we are not altogether so very dull and carnal as they were yet as it hath been made appear in the former part of this Treatise we are not so perfectly refin'd from Dulness and Carnality but that Forms of Prayer may still be very useful to us But 2ly this Objection allows not onely that there were Forms of Prayer prescribed in the Old Testament but that our Saviour himself hath also prescribed one in the New for all successive Ages to pray by and if so then we must either blaspheme the Wisdom of our Saviour for prescribing what is vain and useless or grant the prescription of Forms to be good and useful not onely for the Jewish but also for the Gospel-state Thirdly This Objection must also allow that Gods prescribing Forms of Prayer by inspired persons is so far forth a Warrant for our imitation as the
the Ministers pray'd by their own Gifts and Abilities But this hath been so fully answer'd by our learned Doctor Faulkner (b) (b) (b) Libert Eccles 113. that I am apt to think 't will hardly be objected any more for he hath prov'd at large that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie with all his might i. e. with his utmost intention and fervency for so as he shews it must necessarily signifie in another place of his Apology (c) (c) (c) Apol. 2. p. 60. where speaking of the praying of Christians in general at the Eucharist he tells us that they did praise God with Prayers and Thanksgivings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is with all their might which cannot signifie according to their Gifts and Abilities Since whatsoever the Minister might do it 's certain the People did not compose their own Prayers at the Eucharist and therefore it must signifie with their utmost fervour and intention in which sence as he shews the same phrase is used by Nazianzen (d) (d) (d) Nazian Orat. 3. Another Testimony they object against the use of Forms is that of Tertullian who affirms (e) (e) (e) Sine Monitore quia de pectore Oremus Tertul. Apolog. That the Christians did pray without a Monitor or Prompter because they pray'd from their hearts in which words say they he plainly alludes to a Custom of the Heathen who in their publick Worship had a Monitor to direct them in what words and to what God they were to offer up their Prayers When therefore he says that they pray'd without a Monitor his meaning must be say they that they pray'd without any one to direct them what Form of words they were to pray in To which I answer first That supposing he here speaks of the publick Worship as it seems most probable it 's evident that by this phrase without a Monitor he cannot mean without any one to dictate or prescribe a Form of words to them for in their ordinary publick Prayers their Minister was the Mouth of the Congregation and whether he pray'd by Form or Extempore his words were a Form of words to them in which they were obliged to frame and express their Devotions so that either this phrase without a Monitor must import that they had none to dictate and minister to them in their publick Prayers or it cannot import that they had no publick Forms to pray by because if they had any to dictate to them his extempore Prayer would have been as much a Monitor to direct them what words to pray in as if it had been a stated Form of Liturgy Whatever therefore this obscure phrase means it 's certain it cannot mean without a Form unless it be allowed to mean without a Minister too But then 2ly not to take notice of the various guesses which learned men make at the meaning of it and by which it is sufficiently vindicated from meaning without a Form of Prayer it seems to me most probable that without a Monitor here is meant without any one to correct them when either they repeated or the Minister recited the publick Prayers falsly for the Gods of the Heathen being various and having each their various Offices and Provinces allotted them it was the manner of their Priests to begin their publick Sacrifices with a Form of Prayer (f) (f) (f) A. Gellins Noct. Attic. l. 13. c. 21. which began with an Invocation of Janus and Vesta and proceeded with various Invocations of all the greater Deities by name (g) (g) (g) Rosm Antiq Rom. l. 3. c. 33. in which they implored such favours of each Deity as lay within their particular Province to bestow thus for instance when they invocated Bacchus they began thus O Bacchus Son of Semele the bestower of Riches (h) (h) (h) Casaub in Ann. Eccl. Exercit 16. N. 42. when they offer'd the Cake to Janus O Father Janus with this I offer thee my good Prayers that thou wouldest be propitious to me c. (i) (i) (i) Festus in verbor signif So for Jupiter Dapalis With this Cake O Jupiter I offer thee my good Prayers that thou wouldest have mercy on me my House and Family (k) (k) (k) Cato de re Rustic c. 134. and so for Mars I pray thee O Mars to be propitious to me my Field and Corn and Wine and Cattel (l) (l) (l) Ibid. 141. Which several Invocations that there might be none of the names of their greater Gods pretermitted nor none of the Prayers falsly or disorderly recited or repeated were with great care recited by a Priest out of the Ritual and repeated after him by the People (m) (m) (m) Brison de formal l. 1. p. 61. there being another Priest appointed for a publick Monitor for so Pliny tells us (n) (n) (n) Plin. l. 28. cap. 2. Vidimus certis precationibus obsecrasse summos Magistratus ut nequid verborum praetermitatur aut praeposterum dicatur de scripto praeire aliquem rursusque alium custodem dari qui attendat When any of the Chief Magistrates offer certain Prayers lest any of the Sacred Words should be omitted or preposterously pronounc'd they have one to dictate them to them out of a Book and another who is Overseer diligently to attend And accordingly Livy observes (o) (o) (o) Liv. l. 4. Obsecratio itaque a populo duumviris praeeuntibus est facta That Prayer was made by the People two men going before or dictating to them now that this latter of the two whom Pliny calls the Custos or Overseer was the Monitor whom Tertullian alludes to seâ—ms very probable because as Livy observes his business was proeire populo i. e. to dictate to the People after him who according to Pliny's account did de scripto praeire i. e. dictate to them out of the Book and to what other purpose should he dictate to them what had been dictated before but onely to admonish and correct them when they repeated falsly or disorderly especially considering that the reason which Pliny assigns why this Custos was appointed was lest any of the Sacred Words should be omitted or preposterously repeated which was look'd upon as a very ill Omen But how could he prevent this unless it were his Office to admonish and correct either the Priest or People or both when he read or they repeated them falsly This Monitor therefore was not he who read the Prayers or dictated them to the People out of the Book but he whose Office 't was to oversee either that they were rightly dictated or rightly repeated or both and indeed there was more need that he should oversee that they were rightly repeated than that they were rightly dictated because they were dictated out of a Book and so could not be so easily dictated as repeated falsly But suppose his Office were to oversee both yet since they were dictated in order to their being repeated he
preces aliunde describit non eis utatur nisi prius eas cum instructioribus Fratribus contulerit i. e. And whosoever shall write out Prayers for himself from elsewhere that is from any Book that hath not been publickly received and allowed for what else can be meant by aliunde he shall not presume to use them till he hath first consulted about them with his more learned Brethren Which is a plain evidence that they used Forms before otherwise how could they have written them out from elsewhere or from other mens composures Whereas before therefore they had liberty to add new Forms as they thought fit to the received Liturgy they are so far restrained by this Council as not to do it without the advice and approbation of their more learned Brethren but this restriction being found insufficient to prevent the ill consequences of their former liberty it was ordained a few years after in the Council of Mela (s) (s) (s) Concil Milev c. 12. That those Prayers which had been approved of in the Council whether Prefaces or Commendations or Impositions of Hands should be used of all and that none should be said in the Church but such as had been treated of by the more prudent or allowed in the Synod lest any thing contrary to the Faith should be inserted either through ignorance or want of care Now though these indeed were but Provincial Councils and so in themselves could oblige no farther than their particular Provinces yet the very Canon above-cited out of the first of them (t) (t) (t) Concil Laod. c. 18. is taken into the collections of the Canons of the Catholick Church being the 122th therein which Collection was received and establish'd in the General Council of Chalcedon (*) (*) (*) Concil Chalced. c. 1. An. 451. By which establishment the whole Christian Church was obliged to the use of Liturgies so far as the authority of the General Council extends And then in the year 541 these Canons are made Imperial Laws by the Emperour Justinian who enacted (u) (u) (u) Justin Novel 131. c. 1. that the Canons of those four General Councils of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcadon should oblige as far as the Empire did extend Of what authority the use of formed Liturgies were in this Emperour's time and long before may be easily collected from his Novels for he complains of the remissness of some Bishops that they did not take care to inforce the observance of the sacred Canons and tells us that he had received several complaints against the Clergy Monks and some Bishops that they did not live according to the Divine Canons and that some among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not acquainted with the Prayer of the Holy Oblation and Holy Baptism (w) (w) (w) Id. Nov. 137. Preface and then he declares that for the future he was resolved to punish the Transgressors of the Canons which had it been done before saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (x) (x) (x) Id. ib. c. 1. Every one would have endeavoured to learn the Divine Liturgies that he might not be subject to the condemnation of the Divine Canons Which is a plain argument not onely that there were form'd Liturgies before Justinian for otherwise how could he expect the Clergy should learn them but that these Liturgies had been long before establish'd by the Canons of the Church And then among other things he requires that for the future such as were to be ordained should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (y) (y) (y) Id. ib. c. 2. Recite the Office for the Holy Communion and the Prayer for Holy Baptism and the rest of the Prayers which Prayers were not made in Justinian's time but long before they being as he tells us before establish'd by the Ecclesiastical Canons And after this he enjoyns all Bishops and Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (z) (z) (z) Id. ib. c. 6. That they should not say these Prayers silently but so as that the People might hear them that so their minds might be raised to an higher pitch of Devotion Thus for near six hundred years after Christ we have sufficient testimony of the publick use of Forms of Prayer And from henceforth or a little after down to Mr. Calvin's time all are agreed that no other Prayers were admitted into the publick Worship but what were contain'd in the establish'd Liturgies of the respective Churches and even that great Light of the Reformation Mr. Calvin though he used to pray extempore after his Lecture yet always used a Form before (a) (a) (a) Praef. ad praelect Calv. in Min. proph and his Prayers before and after Sermon were rather bidding of Prayers according to the ancient usage than formal Prayers (b) (b) (b) Beza in praef ad Conc. Calv. in Job and as he used a Form himself so he composed one for the Sunday-service which was afterwards establish'd by the Order at Geneva And in his Letter to the Lord Protector in the Reign of Edward the Sixth he thus declares his judgment concerning publick Forms (c) (c) (c) Calvin Ep. 87. For so much as concerns the Forms of Prayers and Ecclesiastical Rites I highly approve that it be determined so as that it may not be lawful for the Ministers in their Administration to vary from it Nor is there any one reformed Church whether Calvinistical or Lutheran but what hath some publick Office or Form of Prayer especially for the Administration of the Sacraments So that our Dissenting Brethren in England who disallow the use of publick Forms do stand alone by themselves from all the World And as for that extempore way of praying which they so much celebrate and for the sake of which they despise and vilifie our publick Liturgy as a Relick of Popish Idolatry they would do well to consider who it was that first introduc'd it into England and set it up in opposition to our Liturgy For first there was one Faithful Commin a Dominican Friar who in the 9th of Eliz. to seduce the People from the Church thereby to serve the ends of Popery began to pray extempore with such wonderful Zeal and Fervour that he deluded a great many simple People for which he was afterwards amply rewarded by the Pope (d) (d) (d) Vid. Foxes and Fire-brands p. 7 c. After him one Thomas Heath a Jesuit pursued the same method exclaiming against our Liturgy and crying up Spiritual or Extempore Prayers (e) (e) (e) Id. p. 17. thereby to divide the People from our publick Worship telling the Bishop of Rochester by whom he was examined That he had been six years in England labouring to refine the Protestants and to take off all smacks of Ceremonies and to make the Church purer (f) (f) (f) Of which see more in the Preface of the Learned Treatise The Vnreasonableness of Separation beginning at p. 11. And I hope when our Brethren have well considered
also to be observed that the Chapters omitted are those of the Old Testament which either recite Genealogies or the Rules of the Levitical Service or which relate matters of Fact delivered also in other Chapters that are read or which are hard to be understood This seems to Apologise for the Churches leaving those to be considered at home by them that have ability so to do and appointing some Apocryphal Chapters to be read which are more plain and in that respect more profitable for the Common People Unless a Man will say that because the Scripture is all of Divine Authority it must be always more profitable to read any part of that to the people than to use any other Exhortation or read any other good Lesson And then I do not know what place will be left for Sermons since as I said before they are no more of Divine Authority than the Apocryphal Lessons 3. If it be said that the reading of these as Lessons is a prevailing Temptation to the Vulgar to take them for God's Word or to think them equal to the Writings of the Old and New Testament I believe there is no sufficient ground for this I never heard of any of our Communion that were led into that mistake It is certain that our Church declareth those Lessons to be no part of Canonical Scripture and in the 6th Article saith That they are read for example of Life and instruction of Manners but that it doth not apply them to establish any Doctrine And herein she follows the Judgment and Practice of the Primitive Church which distinguisheth between the Canonical and Apocryphal Books esteeming those to be of Divine Authority these not so but indeed Godly Writings profitable to be publickly read And why the same use of them may not be retained with the same distinction I can see no good Reason For the Church of Romes receiving the Apocryphal Books into her Canon is not likely to mislead any of our Communion since we are not so forward to take their Opinion in any Matter of Religion But in the last place There is no Apocryphal Lesson read in our Churches upon any Lords day in the year and so there is not this pretence against Communion with us upon the Lords days when it is that we do so earnestly desire the Communion of those that have separated from us And therefore I shall at present say nothing to those Exceptions which are taken from the Matter of some of the Apocryphal Books as that some Relations are pretended to be Fabulous c. For this would engage me to a greater length than I intend But whoever thinks himself capable to judge of this Controversie may receive satisfaction from what Dr. Falkner has said upon it in his Libertas Ecclesiast p. 164 c. To proceed Although the Communion Service for the Gravity and Holiness thereof is preferred by the Dissenters before all other Offices in the common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book yet that has not past free from Exception The Passages that seem to be disliked are two 1. That Petition in the Prayer before Consecration That our sinful Bodies may be made clean by his Body and our Souls washed by his most precious Blood Here they say a distinct efficacy of cleansing and a greater efficacy is attributed to the Blood of Christ than to his Body inasmuch as the cleansing of our Souls is attributed to the Blood of Christ whereas our Bodies are said only to be cleansed by his Body Now in answer to this I suppose it is plain from those Words at the delivery of the Bread and Wine The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy Body and Soul unto everlasting life And the Blood of our Lord c. It is I say plain from hence that our Church teaches the Sanctification and Salvation of our Souls and Bodies to flow from the Body as well as the Blood of Christ And therefore that former Passage is not to be Interpreted as if our Souls were not cleansed by the Body of Christ because they are said to be washed by his Blood For the saying of this does not exclude the other When the Apostle said We being many are one Bread and one Body for we are all partakers of that one Bread 1 Cor. 10. 17. Though he exprest only the Bread of the Eucharist yet no man will say he meant to exclude the Cup as if the Unity of the Church would be argued only from their partaking in that one kind And when he said that we have been all made to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12. 13. he meant not to exclude the Participation of the Bread as if that one Spirit which animated the Church was signified only by partaking of the Cup. Nor will any Man argue from hence that he attributes a distinct efficacy to the Bread to prove the Unity of the Body and to the Cup to prove the Unity of the Spirit I must needs say that this Exception was sought but never offered it self 2. The Ministers delivering the Elements into every Communicants hands with a Form of Words recited to every one of them at the Distribution is blamed also as being thought a departure from the Practice of Christ at the first Institution of this Sacrament For they say our Lord's Words were Take ye Eat ye Drink ye all of this and therefore the People are not to take the Elements one by one out of the Ministers hand nor ought any Form of Words to be used particularly to every one that receives To this I answer 1. That it does not appear from those Words Take ye c. which are spoken in the Plural Number that our Saviour did not speak particularly to every one of his Apostles when they received or that he did not deliver the Elements into every particular Mans hand For the Evangelists may well be supposed to give a short account of the Institution of Christ not of every Word he then said but what was necessary to be related And then what might be particularly said or done to every one would be sufficiently related in being related as spoken or done Generally to all That is if Christ had said Take thou Eat thou to every one of them this were truly related by the Evangelists who tell us that he had said to all Take Eat c. And therefore I do not see how it can be proved that our Practice varies from this Circumstance of the Institution Tho if it did I suppose it might be as easily defended as the Celebration of the Eucharist about Dinner time and not at Supper which the Dissenters themselves scruple not But he that thinks not this Answer sufficient let him consult the aforesaid excellent Book of Dr. Falkner p. 218 c. where he shall find that it is indeed more probable that our way is agreeable to the way of the First Institution in this Matter than that which the Dissenters would have instead
that since themselves were desired by them to undertake for this Child they as such Sureties are particularly concerned to mind the Parents of their Duty and if need be to rebuke them sharply for neglecting it since they did in effect and to all purpose of Obligation undertake for the performance of it when the Sureties undertook for the Child Moreover when the Child is grown to years of Knowledge and come abroad into the World he is liable to the Charitable Admonitions of his Sureties as well as of his Parents in case he does amiss and their Reproofs are more likely to take place than those of most other Persons Now though all Christians as Members of one Body are to take care of and to watch over one another yet some are more Particularly Obliged and have greater Advantages to do those Works of Spiritual Charity than others And I appeal to all considering Men if Sureties at Baptism may not with great Authority and with likelyhood of good effect Reprove both those Negligent Parents and Vnruly Children for whom they have undertaken to the Church The Parents for not minding to Educate their Children in the knowledge and keeping of the Baptismal Vow or the Children for not hearkening to good Admonition And in this Age when the Duty of Christian Reproof is so generally omitted it were well if the defect were this way a little supplied But it is by no means desireable that the opportunity thereof and the obligation thereunto should be taken away I know some will be apt to say that this is but rarely Practised But that is no sufficient Answer to what I have said For when we use to judge of the goodness of a Rule or Custom by the good that comes of observing it we must look where 't is kept though it be kept but by few and not where 't is broken And if the Dissenters have nothing to say against the use of Sureties but that the end of this Appointment is seldom regarded themselves may help to remove this Objection by returning to the Church and encreasing the number of those that do pursue the End of it And thus doing they shall have the benefit of this Order of the Church and the Church the benefit of their good Examples As for the use of the Interrogatories put to the Sureties and their Answers they are a Solemn Declaration of what Baptism doth oblige all Baptiz'd Persons to and that Infants do stand ingaged to perform the Vow of Baptism when they shall come to years of knowledge This is the known meaning of the Contract nor did I ever hear of any that otherwise understood it and therefore I see not why it should be said to be liable to misunderstanding After all there is one General Objection yet remaining which still prevails with some Persons and that is That some of our Prayers are to be found in the mass-Mass-Book and the Breviary and the Offices of the Church of Rome This Objection hath made a great noise but I appeal to Understanding Men if there be any sense in it No Man will say that 't is enough to make any Prayer or Form of Devotion or Instruction unlawful to be used that the same is to be found in the mass-Mass-Book c. For then the Lords Prayer the Psalms and a great part of the Scriptures besides and the Creeds must never be used by us And therefore whether any part of the Roman Service is to be used by us or not must be judged of by some other Rule that is by the Word of God So that 't is a vain Exception against any part of our Liturgie to say it was taken out of the Mass-Book unless it could be shewn withal that it is some part of the Romish Superstition I know it has been said that the Scriptures being of necessary use are to be retained by us though the Church of Rome retains them but that there is not the same Reason for Forms which are not necessary but in those we ought to go as far from that Church as ever we can But what reason is there for this For the Danger that may happen to us in coming too near them lies in things wherein they do ill not in which they do well And as for the Papists themselves we do not in the least countenance them wherein they are wrong by agreeing with them wherein they are right And as for the Things themselves they are not the worse for being used by them We should allow the Papists a greater Power to do mischief than they have if their using of some good things should render all use of them hurtful to us The Case in short is this When our Reformers were intent upon the Reformation of the Liturgie they designed to Purge it of all those corrupt Additions which the usurpt Authority of the Church of Rome had long since brought into it and to retain nothing but what was agreeable to the Holy Scriptures and to the Practice of the purer Ages of the Church And in this they did like Wise Men because thus it would be evident to all the World that they Reformed upon just necessary Reasons and not meerly out of a desire of Change and Innovation since they Purged the Forms of Divine Service from nothing but Innovations and Corruptions and an unprofitable croud of Ceremonies No Man can shew a good Reason why those Passages in the Common-Prayer-Book which are to be found in the Mass-Book but which were used also by the Church before Romanism had Corrupted it are not as much to be Valued because they were once used by good Christians as to be run down because they have been since used by Superstitious and Idolatrous Men. But to conclude this Matter If any Man would set himself to expose the Mass-Book he would I suppose lay hold upon nothing but the Corruptions that are in it and things that are obnoxious to just reproof not on things that are justifiable and may easily be defended And the reason of this is plain because the Mass-Book is to blame for those parts of it only but not for these Now for such Passages as the Mass-Book it self is not to be blamed for neither is our Liturgie to be blamed if we will speak justly of things and without Prejudice and Passion I have now considered all those Exceptions against the Solemn Service of God by our Liturgie which the Dissenters are thought to insist most upon Not but that some other Exceptions have been made by the Ministers of that persuasion But this I hope was without design to prejudice the People against our Communion but rather to gain some alterations which in their Judgment would have been advantageous to the Book of common-Common-Prayer and given it a greater perfection whether they were right in this or not I will not now dispute being very desirous as I pray God we may all be to avoid Controversies in this Matter as much as may be Nay
appointment it was first Erected But there was no necessity for this upon supposition that it had ceased to be abused for any considerable time and there were no appearance of an inclination in the People to abuse it again And no doubt all things of an indifferent Nature that have formerly been abused to Idolatry or Superstition ought to be taken away by the Governours whensoever they find their People again inclined so to abuse them at least if such abuse cannot probably be prevented by other means Sixthly But had Hezekiah suffered the Brazen Serpent still to stand no doubt private Persons who have no authority to make publick Reformations might Lawfully have made use of it to put them in mind of and affect them with the wonderful mercy of God expressed by it to their Fore-Fathers notwithstanding that many had not only formerly but did at that very nick of time make an Idol of it And much more might they have Lawfully continued in the Communion of the Church so long as there was no constraint laid upon them to joyn with them in their Idolatry As we do not read of any that Separated from the Church while the Brazen Serpent was permitted to stand as wofully abused as it was by the generality I will also conclude this Head with the sense of Mr. Calvin concerning Rites used and consequently superstitiously abused by the Papists expressed in these Words Let not any think me so austere or bound up Calv. de vitandâ Superstitione c. as to forbid a Christian without any exception to accommodate himself to the Papists in any Ceremony or Observance for it is not my purpose to Condemn any thing but what is clearly Evil and openly Vitious To which may be added many other such like sayings of this Learned Person And thus much shall suffice to be discoursed upon our second general Head viz. That a Church's Symbolizing in some things with the Church of Rome is no Warrant for Separation from the Church so Symbolizing We now proceed in the Third and last place to shew That the Agreement which is between the Church of England and the Church of Rome is in no wise such as will make Communion with the Church of England unlawful We have shewed what a vastly wide Distance and Disagreement there is between the Church of England and that of Rome And we have sufficiently though with the greatest brevity made it apparent that a Church's Symbolizing or agreeing in some things with the Church of Rome and those such too as she hath abused in Idolatrous and grosly Superstitious Services is no just ground for Separation from the Church so agreeing And we have answered the Chief of those Arguments which have been brought for the Confirmation of the contrary Doctrine And now from what hath been discoursed it may with the greatest ease be prov'd that those things wherein our own Church particularly agreeth with the Romish Church do none of them speak such an Agreement therewith as will justifie Separation from our Church's Communion Now the particulars wherein our Church Symbolizeth with that of Rome which our Dissenters take offence at and make a pretence for Separation though all Dissenters are not offended at all of them and much less so offended as to make them all a pretence for Separation are principally these following First The Government of our Church by Bishops Secondly Our Churches prescribing a Liturgy or Set-Forms of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments and other Publick Offices Thirdly A Liturgy so contrived as that of our Church is Fourthly Certain Rites of our Church Particularly the Surplice the Cross in Baptism the Gesture of Kneeling at the Communion the Ring in Marriage and the Observation of certain Holy-days And to all these I shall speak very succinctly the limits I am confined to not permitting me to enlarge much upon any of them But I must first premise concerning them all in the general these following things First That I take it for granted that they are all indifferent in their own nature That there is nothing of Viciousness or Immorality in any of them to make them unlawful I know no body so unreasonable as not to grant this Secondly That there is no Express positive Law of God against any of these things I do not know of any such Law objected against any one of them And therefore if all or any of them are unlawful they must be made so either by Consequences drawn from Divine Laws or certain Circumstances attending them Thirdly That I am concerned in this Discourse to vindicate them from being unlawful upon the account onely of this one Circumstance viz. Our Symbolizing with the Church of Rome in them Now then First As to the Government of our Church by Bishops This is so far from being an Vnlawful Symbolizing with the Church of Rome that we have most clear Evidence of its being a Symbolizing with her in an Apostolical Institution And what Eminent Divines of the Presbyterial Party have acknowledg'd and is too evident to be denied or doubted by any who are not wholly ignorant of Church-History is sufficient I should think to satisfie unprejudiced persons concerning the truth of this And that is that this was the Government of all Churches in the World from the Apostles times for about 1500 years together Beza in his Treatise of a Threefold kind of Episcopacy Divine Humane and Satanical asserts concerning the second which is that which we call Apostolical that of this kind is to be understood whatsoever we read concerning the Authority of Bishops in Ignatius and other more Antient Writers And the famous Peter Du Moulin in his Book of the Pastoral Office written in defence of the Presbyterial Government acknowledgeth that presently after the Apostles times or even in their time as Ecclesiastical story witnesseth it was ordained that in every City one of the Presbytery should be called a Bishop who should have preheminence over his Collegues to avoid Confusion which oft times ariseth out of Equality And truly saith he this Form of Government all Churches every where received Mr. Calvin saith in his Institution of Christian Religion Quibus docendi munus injunctum erat c. Those to whom was committed the Office of Teaching they called them all Presbyters These Elected out of their number in L. 4. cap. 4. §. 2. each City one to whom in a special manner they gave the Title of Bishop lest Strife and Contention as it commonly happeneth should arise out of Equality And in his Epistle to Arch-bishop Cranmer he thus accosts him Illustrissime Domine Ornatissime Praesul c. Most Illustrious Sir and most Honourable Prelate and by me heartily Reverenced And tells him that if he might be serviceable to the Church of England he would not think much of passing over ten Seas for that purpose Again in his Epistle to the King of Poland he thus speaks of Patriarchs and Arch-bishops The Ancient Church did
not fearing any thing of Humane Weakness but trusting in God Consecrated the Child to the Priest-hood almost as soon as he saw the Light Thou wilt have no need of Superstitious Charms and Amulets for him in which the Devil steals to himself from silly Souls the Honour which is due to God but call upon him the name of the Holy Trinity which is the most safe and excellent of Charms And afterwards a a a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so far the Baptism of those who desire Baptism but what shall we say of Infants who are sensible neither of the gain nor loss of it shall we Baptize them Most certainly if they be in danger for it is better that they be Sanctified without the Sense of it than that they dye uninitiated and unconsigned and my reason is taken from Circumcision which was administred on the Eighth Day unto Infants that had no Reason to which I may add the saving of the First-Born in Goshen by the sign of the Blood on the Lintel of the Door and the two Side-Posts The Brevity which I design in this Treatise will not permit me to recite many more Authorities which are very b b b Vid. testim Veter Script de Baptism apud Cassand Gerhard Joh. Voss disp 14. de Baptismo numerous out of Chrysostom Ambrose Jerom Augustin c. But I shall rather superadd some Considerations which confirm this Ancient Tradition of Infant-Baptism and are sufficient to induce any considerate and impartial Man to believe that so Ancient and universal a Practice was as old as the Planting of Churches by the Apostles and originally derives its Authority from them For first if Infant-Baptism was not the Practice of the Apostles but an Innovation it is very hard to imagine that God should suffer his Church to fall into such a dangerous Practice which would in time Un-Church it while Miracles were yet Extant in the Church The same Holy Spirit that was the guide of the Apostles into all Truth was the Author of Miracles too but the first four Witnesses which I have produced for Infant-Baptism to wit Irenaeus Tertullian Origen and Cyprian do all likewise assure us that Miracles were then not extraordinary in the Church c c c Adversus haereses l. 2. cap. 56 57. Euseb Hist Eccles l. 5. cap. 7. Irenaeus tells us that the true Disciples of Christ did then dispossess Devils and had the Gift of Tongues and of Praescience and Praediction and of healing the Sick and that the whole Congregation meeting together did by Fasting and Prayer often raise the Dead and that many so raised were then alive in the Church Nay he tells us that the number of Spiritual Gifts were innumerable which the Church all the World over then received from Christ and I truly confess it cannot enter into my heart to believe that God should suffer the Church to Embrace such a pernicious Error as Infant-Baptism was if it was not of Apostolical Tradition and fill the Christian World with Mock-Christians while he bore them Witness with Signs and Wonders and divers Miracles and Gifts of the Holy Ghost Tertullian in his a a a Et ad Scapulam c. 2. Apologetic tells us that the Christians had then power to make the Gods of the Heathen confess themselves to be Devils Nay he Challenges the Heathens to bring any one of those that were acted and inspired with any one of their Gods and Goddesses whom they worshipped and if that Daemon God or Goddess not daring to tell a Lye before any Christian should not confess it self to be a Devil then they should shed the Blood of that Christian upon the Place Origen in his Answer to Celsus frequently appeals to the Miracles which the Christians wrought in his Days particularly in the first b b b Cambridge Edition p. 34. Book he saith that they exorcised Daemons healed the Sick and foresaw Future Events And in the c c c p. 334. See also p. 62 80 124 127 376. seventh Book he proves that Christians did not their Miracles by any curious Magical Arts because Idiots or illiterate Men among them did by nothing but by Prayers and Adjurations in the Name of Jesus banish Devils from the Bodies and Souls of Men. d d d In Epist ad Donatum vid. Epist ad Magnum ad Demetrianum p. 202. Ed. Rigalt St. Cyprian tells us that the Christians in his days had power to hinder the Operation of deadly Poisons to restore Mad-men to their Senses to force Devils to confess themselves to be so and with invisible strokes and Torments to make them cry and howl and forsake the Bodies which they possessed These are the first four Witnesses which I have produced for the Practice of Infant-Baptism and let any man judge whether the Church could yet run into a Church-destroying Practice within such an Holy and Miraculous Period as this But secondly If Infant-Baptism was not an Apostolical Tradition or were derivable from any thing less than Apostolical Practice how came the a a a Vid. Vossii hist Pelag. l. 2. pars 2 Thes 4. 13. disp de Bapt. Thes 18. disp 14. Thes 4. Cassand praefat ad Duc. Jul. p. 670. Testim veteru de Bapt. parvulorum p. 687. Pelagians not to reject it for an Innovation seeing the Orthodox used it as an Argument against them that Infants were guilty of Original Sin It had been easie for them had there been any ground for it to say that it was an Innovation crept into Practice since the time of the Apostles or that it was brought up by False-Apostles and False-Teachers in the Apostles Times but then they were so far from doing this which they would have been glad to do upon any colourable Pretence that they practiced it themselves and owned it for an Apostolical Tradition and as necessary for Childrens obtaining the Kingdom of Heaven tho they denied that they were Baptized for the Remission of Original Sin But thirdly If Infant-Baptism were not in Practice from the first Plantation of Christian Churches or were derivable from any other Cause than Apostolical Tradition let the Opposers of it tell us any other probable way how it came to be the uniform practice of all Churches not only of such as were Colonies of the same Mother-Church or had Correspondence with one another by their Bishops and Presbyters but of such as were Original Plantations and betwixt which there was likely none or but very little Communication by reason of the vast distance and want of intercourse betwixt the Countries where b b b Brerewoods Enquiries c. 23 Cassand exposit de auctor Consult Bapt. Infant p. 692. they lived Among these of the latter sort are the Abassin-Church in the further Ethiopia and the c c c Osor l. 3. de rebus gest Eman cit à Vossio in disp 14. de Baptismo Brerewoods Enquiries c. 20.
a Table for us and set before us the bread of life we will not come and feed upon it with joy and thankfulness THE END A Catalogue of Books and Sermons Writ by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury Viz. 1 SErmons Preached upon several Occasions in two Volumes in Octavo 2. The Rule of Faith c. 3. A Sermon Preached on the 5th of November 1678. at St. Margarets Westminster before the Honourable House of Commons upon St. Luke 9. 55 56. But he turned and rebuked them and said ye know not what manner of Spirit ye are of For the Son of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to save them 4. A Sermon Preached at the first General Meeting of the Gentlemen and others in and near London who were Born within the County of York Upon John 13. 34 35. A new Commandment I give unto you that ye love one another c. 5. A Sermon Preached before the King at White-hall April 4th 1679 upon 1 John 4. 1. Beloved believe not every Spirit but try the Spirits whether they are of God c. 6. A Sermon Preached before the King at White-hall April 2d 1680 upon Joshua 24. 15. If it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord chuse ye this day whom ye will serve 7. The Lawfulness and Obligation of Oaths A Sermon Preached at the Assizes held at Kingstone upon Thames July 21. 1681 upon Heb. 6. 16. And an Oath for Confirmation is to them an end of all Strife 8. Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Mr. Thomas Gouge November 4th 1681 with an account of his Life upon Luke 20. 37 38. Now that the Dead are raised even Moses shewed at the bush c. 9. A Persuasive to Frequent Communion in the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Preached in two Sermons upon 1 Cor. 11. 26 27 28. For as oft as ye eat this Bread and drink this Cup ye do shew the Lord's Death till he come c. 10. A Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Benjamin Whichcot D. D. and Minister of St. Lawrence Jewry London May 24th 1683 upon 2 Cor. v. 6. Wherefore we are always confident knowing that whilst we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. Sold by Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill and William Rogers at the Sun against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet Advertisement of Books THE Works of the Learned Dr. Isaac Barrow late Master of Trinity College in Cambridge Published by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson Dean of Canterbury in two Volumes in Folio The First containing Thirty two Sermons preached upon several Occasions an Exposition of the Lord's Prayer and the Decalogue a Learned Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy a Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church also some Account of the Life of the Authour with Alphabetical Tables The Second Volume containing Sermons and Expositions upon all the Apostles Creed with an Alphabetical Table and to which may be also added the Life of the Authour Sermons preached upon several Occasions by the Right Reverend Father in God John Wilkins D. D. and late Lord Bishop of Chester Never printed before Printed for William Rogers at the Sun against S. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet THE CASE OF KNEELING AT THE Holy Sacrament STATED RESOLVED PART I. Wherein these QUERIES are considered I. Whether Kneeling at the Sacrament be contrary to any express Command of Christ obliging to the observance of a different Gesture II. Whether Kneeling be not a Deviation from that example which our Lord set us at the first Institution III. Whether Kneeling be not Unsutable and Repugnant to the Nature of the Lord's Supper as being no Table-Gesture The Second EDITION LONDON Printed by J. C. and Freeman Collins for Fincham Gardiner at the White-Horse in Ludgate-street 1683. THE CASE Whether it be Lawful to receive the Holy Sacrament Kneeling THe Resolution of the most weighty and considerable Doubts which may in point of Conscience arise about this matter and do at present much influence the minds and practices of many honest and well-meaning Dissenters will depend upon the Resolution of these following Queries 1. Whether Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Holy Sacrament according to the Law of the Land be not contrary to some express Law of Christ obliging to the observance of a different Posture 2. Whether Kneeling be not a deviation from that example which our Lord set us at the first Institution 3. Whether Kneeling be not altogether Unsutable and Repugnant to the nature of the Sacrament as being no Table-Gesture 4. Whether Kneeling Commanded in the Church of England be not contrary to the general Practice of the Church of Christ in the first and purest Ages 5. Whether it be Unlawful for us to receive Kneeling because this Gesture was first introduced by Idolaters and is still notoriously abused by the Papists to Idolatrous ends and purposes 1. Whether Kneeling in the Act of Receiving the Sacrament in Obedience to the Law of the Land be not a Transgression against some express Law of Christ which obliges us to observe another Gesture For satisfaction in this Point our onely recourse must be to the Holy Scriptures contained in the Books of the New Testament wherein the whole body of Divine Laws delivered and enacted by our Blessed Saviour are collected and recorded by the Holy Ghost And if there be any Command there extant concerning the use of any particular Gesture in the Act of Receiving the Lord's Supper we shall upon a diligent enquiry be sure to find it But before I give in my Answer I readily grant thus much by way of Preface Whatsoever is enjoyned and appointed by God to be prepetually used by all Christians throughout all Ages without any alteration that can never be nullified or altered by any Earthly Power or Authority whatsoever When once the Supreme Lawgiver and Governour of the World hath any ways signified and declared that such and such positive Laws shall be perpetually and unalterably observed then those Laws though in their own nature and with respect to the subject matter of them they be changeable must remain in full Force and can admit of no Change from the Laws of Men. It would be a piece of intolerable Pride and the most daring Presumption for any Earthly Prince any Council any Societie of Men whatsoever to oppose the known Will of the Soveraign Lord of Heaven and Earth In this Case nothing can take off the Force and Obligation of such Laws but the same Divine Authoritie which first passed them into Laws Thus much being granted and premised I return this Answer to the Question proposed God hath been so far from establishing the unalterable use of any particular Gesture in the Act of Receiving that among all the Sacred Records of his Will there is not any express Command to determine our practice one way or other We are left perfectly at our
to Idolatry But here a few things must be premised to prevent Cavils and Mistakes 1. I take it for granted that indifferent things may be lawfully See the Case of Indifferent Things used in the Worship of God This is supposed in the present Question for otherwise it would be sinful in us to Kneel whether that Gesture had been ever used or abused by Idolaters or no. 2. I grant that the Worship of God is to be preserved pure See Dr. Fal. lib. Eccles p. 443. from all sinful Mixtures and Defilements whatsoever whether of Idolatry or Superstition and that things otherwise indifferent which either in the design of them that use them or in their own present tendency do directly promote or propagate such Corruptions do in that case become things unlawful To follow Idolaters in what they think or do amiss to follow them generally in what they do without other reason than onely the liking we have to the Pattern of their Example which liking doth intimate a more universal approbation than is allowable in these cases I think with the Reverend Mr. Hooker Conformity Hook Ecles Pol. l. 4. p. 165. with Idolaters is evil and blame-worthy in any Christian Church But excepting these Cases it is not sinful or blame-worthy in any Society of Christians to agree with Idolaters in Opinion or Practice and to use the same Rites which they abuse And consequently our Church is not to be blamed or charged with Idolatry for her Agreement with the Church of Rome in using the same Ceremonies unless it can be proved that the Church of England doth abuse the said Ceremonies to sinful ends or that the Ceremonies used and appointed by our Church naturally tend to promote the Corruptions practised in the Church of Rome and were ill designed or that she did not follow the general Rules of Gods Word the Directions of the Holy Ghost in appointing and enjoyning the use of Ceremonies as being godly comely profitable but overlooking all this had an eye purely to the Example of Idolatrous Papists in what they did amiss Now this I am sure can never be made good against our Church who hath sufficiently vindicated her self by the open declarations she hath printed to the World from all accusations of this nature Let but any man consult the Articles of Religion Art 20. Art 34. Canon 18. the Preface to the Book of common-Common-Prayer just after the Act of Vniformity the two excellent Discourses that follow it concening the Service of the Church and Ceremonies and the Reasons she hath publisht at the end of the Communion-service for enjoyning her Communicants to receive Kneeling I say let any man peruse these and he will receive ample satisfaction that our Governours in Church and State in appointing the use of Ceremonies did not steer by the Example of Idolaters nor enjoyn them out of any ill design or to any ill ends but were conducted by the light of Gods Word the Rules of Prudence and Charity the Example of the holy Apostles and the Practice of pure Antiquity These things being premised I proceed to prove this Assertion That it is not sinful to use such Things and Rites as either have been or are notoriously abused to Idolatry Or which is all one That to Kneel in the Act of Receiving according to the custom of the Church of England is not therefore sinful because it hath been and is notoriously abused to Idolatry for these Reasons 1. In general No abuse of any Gesture though it be in the most manifest Idolatry doth render that Gesture simply evil and for ever after unlawful to be used in the Worship of God upon that account For the abuse of a thing supposes the lawful use of it and if any thing otherwise lawful becomes sinful by an abuse of it then it 's plain that it is not in its own nature sinful but by accident and with respect to somewhat else This is clear from Scripture for if Rites and Ceremonies after they have been abused by Idolaters become absolutely evil and unlawful to be used at all then the Jews sinned in offering Sacrifice erecting Altars burning Incense to the God of Heaven bowing down themselves before him wearing a Linnen Garment in the time of Divine Worship and observing other Things and Rites which the Heathens observed in the Worship of their false Gods No say the Dissenters we except all such Rites as were commanded or approved of by God and such are all those fore-mentioned But say I it 's a silly Exception and avails nothing For if the abuse of a thing to Idolatry makes it absolutely sinful and unlawful to be used at all then it 's impossible to destroy that Relation and what hath been once abused must ever remain so that is an infinite power can't undo what hath been done and clear it from ever having been abused And therefore I conclude from the Command and Approbation of God that a bare Conformity with Idolaters in using those Rites in the Worship of the true God which they practice in the Worship of Idols is not simply sinful or formal Idolatry for if it had God had obliged the Children of Israel by his express Command to commit sin and to do what he strictly and severely prohibited in other places In truth such a Position would plainly make God the Author of sin 2. This Position That the Idolatrous abuse of any thing renders the use of it sinful to all that know it is attended with very mischievous consequences and effects First It intrenches greatly upon Christian liberty as dear to our Dissenting Brethren as the Apple of their Eyes and I wonder they are not sensible of it At other times they affirm that no earthly power can rightly restrain the use of those things which God hath left free and indifferent and that those things which otherwise are lawful become sinful when imposed and enjoyned by lawful Authority and yet these very men give that power to Strangers both Heathens and Papists which they take away from their own rightful Princes and lawful Superiours An Idolater may yoke them when a Protestant Prince must not touch them And what more heavy and intolerable Yoke can be clapt on our necks than this That another mans abuse of any thing to Idolatry though in its own nature indifferent and left free by God renders the use of it sinful Whether this be not a violation of Christian Liberty let St. Paul determine who tells us that to the pure all things are pure and affirms it lawful to eat of such things as had been offered to Idols and to eat whatsoever was 1 Cor. 10. 25 27 28 29. sold in the shambles And what reason is there why a Gesture should be more defiled by Idolaters than Meat which they had offered up in Sacrifice to Idols and why should one be sinful and idolatrous to use and not the other Certainly St. Paul would never have granted them
variety of Cases in Humane Affairs I pray from my Heart for the bettering but I dread the tinkering of Government The Conclusion IF then Dissenters are not likely to obtain their Ends of Establishing themselves of rooting out of Popery and promoting pure Religion by overthrowing the Church of England the Inference is natural they ought both in Prudence and Christianity to endeavour after Vnion with it They will it may be say to me Can Men be persuaded two contrary ways Can they both Assent and Dissent And whilst they secretly Dissent would you force them into an Hypocritical Compliance I Answer thus First Though a Man cannot at the same time wholly Assent and Dissent yet there are means for the rectifying of a false persuasion and he may upon good Grounds change his Mind Secondly No Man's Mind can beforced for it is beyond the reach of Humane Power Thirdly Good Governours do not use Severity to force Men to dissemble their Minds and to make them Hypocrites but to move them after a Tryal of fair means to greater consideration I am not concerned in the Emblem of the Persian Dervi * * * Tavern Pers Trav. l. 4. c. 6. p. 155 156. who whilst they go about their Office of teaching the Law to the People carry a great Club in their hands But neither do I think that the best way to remove pernitious error from Men is never to give them any disturbance in it I have two things only to recommend first to the consideration and then to the practice of such as Dissent First This is a time of Prosecution and a time of Adversity is a proper time for Consideration and Consideration is a means to make us hold fast that which is good and reject that which is evil I beseech you make such advantage of this Juncture Sit down and think once more of the Nature of this Church Confer with the Guids of the National Religion read without prejudice the Books commended by them to you Peruse seriously the Books which Authority hath set forth Some who have spoken against them have by their own confession never read them Examine and Judge Many of your Scruples have arisen from what you have heard and read they would not have otherwise been ingendred in your Minds Hear and Read for your Information as well as your entanglement Secondly Do as much as you can do Do as much as the Dissenters who are most eminent for Learning Piety Preaching Writing Experience and Fame sometimes actually do They have owned our Communion to be lawful * * * See Lawf of hearing the publick Ministry c. by Mr. Nye Mr. Robinson c. and Mr. Corbet's Non-Conformists Pâ—ea for Lay-Communion They have received the Communion kneeling They have bred up Children to the Ministry of this Church They have joyned in the Liturgy They have been Married according to the Form of it Nay one who assisted in making the Directory would have his own Daughter in those times be Married in the way of the Book of common-Common-Prayer * * * Mr. Marshall in Hist of Indep 1 part p. 80. Do as the antient Non-conformists did who would not separate though they feared to Subscribe Who wrote with such Zeal against those of the Separation that Mr. Hildersham was called * * * See Dr. Willit's Epistle Dedicatory before his Harm on 1 Sam. Schismaticorum Qui vulgo Brownistae malleum The Maul of the Brownists Do more for the Peace of God's Church than for a Vote or Office or Fear of Legal Penalty Come as Christians to the Sacrament and not as Politicians Those who have so done yet break the unity of the Church are said to use the Arts of Jesuits and to be without all excuse by a Dissenter * * * Vox Clam Sect. 6. p. 49 50 c. who writes with commendable temper Do constantly what you do upon occasion No Preaching or Praying which is better liked can ballance the evil of Separation from a Church which imposeth no terms of Communion which are sinful For Peace sake let that be more constant in which your Conscience alloweth occasional exercise A Member who joyns himself to any established Church and also to any Churches which are set up not as legal Supplements of it but as Forts against it seems to be a kind of Wooden Legg if I may represent so grave a matter by so light a Similitude He is tyed on and taken off at pleasure he is not as by natural Ligaments and Nerves knit to such Ecclesiasticrl Bodies If all would do constantly what they can in Conscience do sometimes they would create a better Opinion of themselves in the Governours and move them to all due favour and hinder all the destructive breaches amongst us For the remain of other Dissenters would be so inconsiderable as to abide in the Body of the Nation as ill humors thrown off the extream parts from which there may arise some little pain but no mortal danger Now the God of Peace grant Peace to us always by all fit means The END A SERIOUS EXHORTATION With some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about CONFORMITY Recommended to the Present Dissenters From the CHVRCH of ENGLAND LONDON Printed for T. Basset at the George in Fleet-street B. Tooke at the Ship in St. Paul's Church-yard and F. Gardiner at the White Horse in Ludgate-street 1684. Books Printed for FINCHAM GARDINER A Continuation and Vindication of the Defence of Dr. Stilling fleet 's Unreasonableness of Separation in Answer to Mr. Baxter and Mr. Lob c. Considerations of present use considering the Danger Resulting from the Change of our Church-Government 1. A Perswasive to Communion with the Church of England 2. A Resolution of some Cases of Conscience which respect Church-Communion 3. The Case of Indifferent things used in the Worship of God Proposed and Stated by considering these Questions c. 4. A Discourse about Edification 5. The Resolution of this Case of Conscience Whether the Church of England's Symbolizing so far as it doth with the Church of Rome makes it unlawful to hold Communion with the Church of England 6. A Letter to Anonymus in Answer to his Three Letters to Dr. Sherlock about Church-Communion 7. Certain Cases of Conscience resolved concerning the Lawfulness of joyning with Forms of Prayer in Publick Worship In two Parts 8. The Case of mixt Communion Whether it be Lawful to separate from a Church upon the Account of promiscuous Congregations and Mixt Communions 9. An Answer to the Dissenters Objections against the Common Prayers and some other Parts of Divine Service Prescribed in the Liturgy of the Church of England 10. The Case of Kneeling at the Holy Sacrament Stated and Resolved c. The first Part. 11. Certain Cases of Conscience c. The Second Part. 12. A Discourse of Profiting by Sermons and of going to hear where Men think they can profit most 13. A
serious Exhortation with some Important Advices Relating to the late Cases about Conformity Recommended to the Present Dissenters from the Church of England 1. A Discourse about the charge of Novelty upon the Reformed Church of England made by the Papists asking of us the Question Where was our Religion before Luther 2. A Discourse about Tradition shewing what is meant by it and what Tradition is to be Received and what Tradition is to be Rejected A Serious EXHORTATION With some Important Advices c. Recommended to the Dissenters from the Church of England THE offering friendly Advice and Counsel especially in great and important Cases is tho often a Thankless yet a very Charitable Office a thing agreeable to the best Inclinations of Humane Nature and highly conducive to the Necessities of Men and consequently needs no Apology to introduce it We live 't is true in an ill-Natured and Censorious Age wherein 't is rare to find any one who will not take with the Left-hand what 's offered to them with the Right But I am not discouraged from this Attempt by the Peevishness and Frowardness of many that differ from us Remembring that all Honest Undertakings and such I am sure this is are under the more peculiar Conduct and Blessing of the Divine Providence which can and will succeed and prosper them to an happy Issue if Mens own Obstinacy and Perverseness do not put a Bar in the way to hinder it I do therefore beseech our Dissenting Brethren with all the earnestness that becomes a matter of so much Importance and with all the Kindness and Tenderness that becomes a Christian that they would suffer the VVord of Exhortation and duely weigh and consider the Requests and Advices that are here plainly laid before them which I hope will be found such as carry their own Light and Evidence along with them I. And First We beg of them to believe That they may be mistaken about those matters which are alledged as the Causes of their Separation This one would think were as needless as 't is a modest and reasonable Request For did ever any Man the Bishop of Rome excepted lay claim to Infallibility Do not the woeful Infirmities of Humane Nature the Weakness and Short-sightedness of our Understandings the daily Experience of our selves and the lamentable Failures we observe in others sufficiently convince us how prone we are to Error and Mistake But tho this be granted and owned on all hands yet in Practice we frequently find Men acting by other Measures For how many are there that in the most Controverted Cases bear up themselves with as much Confidence and Assurance censure others with as Magisterial a Boldness condemn the things enjoyned by our Church with as positive and peremptory a Determination as if they were infallibly sure that they are in the Right and all others in the Wrong that differ from them The early Prepossession of a contrary Opinion the powerful Prejudices of Education an implicite and unexamined Belief of what their Guides and Leaders teach them have a strange force upon the Minds of Men so that in effect they no more doubt of the Truth and Goodness of the Cause they are engaged in than they question the Articles of their Creed Wherefore I do once and again intreat them that laying aside all Pride Partiality and Self-conceit they would not think more highly of themselves and of their own way than they ought to think especially remembering that the Matters contended about are confessedly Disputable and that they cannot be ignorant that the Case seems otherwise to others who may at least be allowed to be as wise Men and as competent Judges as themselves Truth makes the easiest Entrance into modest and humble Minds The Meek will he guide in Judgment the Meek will he teach his way The Spirit of God never rests upon a Proud Man II. Secondly We beg of them that they would seriously and impartially weigh and consider as well what is said on the one side as on the other This is a piece of Justice that every one owes to Truth and which indeed every Man owes to himself that is not willing to be deceived To take up with Prejudices which Education or long Custom have instilled into him or wherein any other Arts or Methods have engaged him without strictly enquiring whether those Prejudices stand upon a firm Foundation is to see only on one side to bind up ones self in the Judgment or Opinion of any Man that is not Divinely-inspired and Infallible or pertinaciously to adhere to any Party of Men how plausible and specious soever their Pretences may be without examining their Grounds and endeavouring to know what is said against them is to choose a Persuasion at a peradventure and 't is great odds whether such a one be in the right In all Enquiries after Truth we ought to keep an Ear open for one side of the Controversie as well as the other and not to think we have done enough till without Favour or Prejudice and to the best of our Understandings we have heard tryed and judged the Reasons brought as well for as against it And till this be done I see not with what pretence of Reason Men can talk so much of their Scruples or plead for Favour on the account of their Dissatisfactions Consciences truly tender are willing and desirous to embrace all opportunities of Resolution are ready to kiss the Hand that would bring them better information and are not wont to neglect much less thrust from them the means that might ease them of their Doubts and Scruples We justly blame it in them of the Church of Rome that in a manner they resign up their Understandings to their Guides and Confessors and are not suffered to be truly acquained with the Protestant Principles and the Grounds and Reasons of the Reformation nor to Read any of the Books that are written for their Conviction without a special and peculiar Licence Whether our Brethren of the Separation be under any such Spiritual Discipline I know not sure I am it looks very odly that so many of them are no more concerned to understand the true State of the Church of England and the Nature and Reasons of her Constitutions that so few of them care to Confer with those that are able to Instruct them but Cry out They are satisfied already nay some of them to my knowledge when desired to propose their Scruples in order to the giving them satisfaction have plainly and absolutely refused to do it Little reason there is to believe that such Persons have ever Read and Examined what the Church of England has to say for her self Are there not many that not only Scruple but Rail at the Book of common-Common-Prayer that yet never heard it nor perhaps ever read it in all their Lives And if this be not to speak Evil of what they know not I cannot tell what is How many incomparable Books
We desire them to Consider Whether it be not a Just Prejudice to their Cause and that which ought to prevail with Men Modest and Peaceable that in those things wherein they differ from us they are Condemned by the Practice of the whole Catholick Church for Fifteen Hundred Years together This were I minded might afford a large Field for Discourse but I shall instance only and that very briefly in a few Particulars And First We desire them to produce any settled part of the Christian Church that ever was without Episcopal Government till the time of Calvin it being then as hard to find any part of the Christian World without a Church as to find a Church without a Bishop This is so evident in the most early Antiquities of the Church that I believe our Dissenters begin to grow sick of the Controversie And if Blondell Salmasius and Daille whose great Parts Learning and indefatigable Industry could if any thing have made out the contrary have been forced to grant That Episcopacy obtained in the Church within a few Years after the Apostolick Age We are sure we can carry it higher even up to the Apostles themselves There are but two passages that I know of in all Antiquity of any Note and both of them not till the latter end of the Fourth Century that may seem to question Episcopal Authority The One That famous and well known passage of St. Jerom which yet when improved to the Idem Presbyter qui Episcopus antequam diaboli instinctu studia in religione fierent c. Hier. in Epist ad Tit. c. 1. utmost that it is capable of only intimates Episcopacy not to be of Apostolical Institution And very clear it is to those that are acquainted with St. Jeroms Writings that he often Wrote in haste and did not always weigh things at the Beam and forgot at one time what he had said at another that many expressions fell from him in the heat of Disputation according to the warmth and the eagerness of his Temper that he was particularly chased into this Assertion by the fierce opposition of the Deacons at Rome who began to Usurp upon and over-top the Presbyters which tempted him to Magnifie and Extol their Place and Dignity as anciently equal to the Episcopal Office and as containing in it the common Rights and Priviledges of Priesthood For at other times when he Wrote with cooler Thoughts about him he does plainly and frequently enough assert the Authority of Bishops over Presbyters and did himself constantly live in Communion with and Subjection to Bishops The other passage is that of Aerius who held indeed that a Bishop and a Presbyter differed nothing in Order Dignity or Power But he was led into this Error meerly through Envy and Emulation being vext to see that his Companion Eustathius had gotten the Bishoprick of Sebastia which himself had aimed at This made him start aside and talk extravagantly but the Church immediately branded him for an Heretick and drave him and his followers out of all Churches and from all Cities and Villages And Epiphanius Cont. Aer haeret 75. who was his Contemporary represents him as very little better than a Madman and adds that all Heresies that ever were from the beginning of the World had been hatched either by Pride or Vain Glory or Covetousness or Emulation or some such Evil Inclination But his Heresie it seems was not long-liv'd for we hear no more concerning this matter till the Reformation at Geneva Secondly We desire them to shew any Christian Church that did not constantly use Liturgies and Forms of Prayer in their Publick Offices and Administrations of Divine Worship I take it for granted that there were Forms of Publick Prayer in the Jewish Church and I make no doubt but that the use of such Forms was together with many other synagogue-Synagogue-rites and Usages transferred into the Practice of the Christian Church and did actually obtain in the most early Ages in all Churches where there were not Miraculous Gifts and every where as soon as those Miraculous Gifts ceased it being very fit and proper and agreeable to Order and Decency that the Peoples Devotions should be thus Conducted and Governed in their Publick Ministrations Not to insist upon the Carmen or Hymn which even the Proconsul Pliny says the Christians upon a set Day were wont one among another to say to Christ as to their God Apparent footsteps of some Passages of their Ancient Liturgies are yet extant in the Writings of Origen and St. Cyprian And when Eusebius gives us an account how Religiously Constantine Devit Constant lib. 4. c. 17. the Great ordered his Court That he was wont to take the Holy Bible into his Hands and carefully to Meditate upon it and afterwards to offer up Set or Composed Prayers together with his whole Royal Family he adds He did this after the manner or in imitation of the Church of God Nazianzen tells us of St. Basil That he composed Orders and Forms of In Sanctum Basilium Orat 20. Bas Ep. 63. Prayer and appointed decent Ornaments for the Altar And St. Basil himself reciting the manner of the Publick Service that was used in the Monastical Oratories of his Institution says That nothing was done therein but what was Consonant and Agreeable to all the Churches of God And the Council of Laodicea holden much about the Year 365 expresly provides that the same Liturgy or Form of Prayers Can. 18. conf Conc. Milev can 12. Conc. Carth. 3. c. 23. should be always used both Morning and Evening That so it might not be lawful for every one that would to compose Prayers of his own Head and to repeat them in the Publick Assemblies as both Zonaras and Balsamon give the reason of that Canon Further than this we need not go the Case being henceforward evident beyond all Contradiction Thirdly Let them shew us any Church that did not always set apart and observe Festival Commemorations of the Saints besides the more solemn times for Celebrating the great Blessings of our Redeemer his Birth-day and Epiphany Easter in Memory of his Resurrection Pentecost or Witsuntide for the Mission of the Holy Ghost they had Annual days for solemnizing the Memories of the Blessed Apostles they had their Memoriae and Natalitia Martyrum whereon they assembled every year to offer up to God their Praises and Common Devotions and by Publick Panegyricks to do honour to the memory of those Saints and Martyrs who had suffered for or Sealed Religion with their Bloud Not to mention their Lent Fast and their Stationary Fasts on Wednesdays and Fridays which Epiphanius more than once expresly Sâ—rm compâ—nd de Expos fid p. 466. â—dv Aer Haeres 75. says were a Constitution of the Apostles But the less need be said on this head because few that have any Reverence for Antiquity will have the hardiness to oppose it Fourthly We desire them to produce any
Printed Licensed dispersed up and down in City and Country openly a Quarter of these Errours Heresies Blasphemies which have been all these ways vented by the Sectaries the People would have risen up and stoned them and pulled down their Houses and forced them to forbear such Doctrines O how is the Scene changed within these few Years and not long after he tells us that These are Risen Increased Reign and Prevail so far under a Parliament Sitting not under the Bishops Corrupt-Clergy Court-party but under a Parliament And in his Epistle to the Lords and Commons before the first part of his Gangraena he tells them That the Errours Heresies Blasphemies and Practices of the Sectaries of this Time had been Broached and Acted within these Four last Years in England and that in Your Quarters and in the places under your Government and power for which I tremble to think least the whole Kingdom should be in Gods Black Bill that together with their Reformation come in a Deformation and worse things were come upon them than ever they had before they had put down the Book of common-Common-Prayer but there were many amongst them that had put down the Scriptures slighting yea Blaspheming them he tells them they had cast out the Bishops and their Officers and they had many that had cast down to the ground all Ministers in all the Reformed Churches they had cast out Ceremonies in the Sacraments and they had many that had cast out the Sacraments themselves with many more sad complaints which he there makes To sum up all in the words of my Author Vbi supra p. 73. In this Catalogue the Reader may see great Errors and yet may turn himself again and behold greater namely damnable Heresies and yet turn himself again and read Horrid Blasphemies and a third time and read Horrible Disorders Confusions strange and unheard of Practices not only against the Light of Scripture but Nature as in Women's Preaching in Stealing away Men's Wives and Children from Husbands and Parents in Baptizing Women Naked in the Presence and Sight of Men c. And thus we see by what means it was that the Nation came to be Pestred with Opinions and Practices Impious beyond the Example of former Ages and such as were not once named among the Gentiles to the A Letter from a Noble Venetian to Card Barbarino translated and Printed 1648. p. 19. Infinite Prejudice and dishonour both of our Religion and our Nation It being the Observation which an Ingenious Foreigner who resided at London in those times made upon this occasion one of the Fruits says He of this Blessed Parliament and of these two Sectaries Presbyterians and Independents is that they have made more Jews and Atheists than I think there is in all Europe besides I doubt not but that the greatest part of our Dissenters do from their Souls detest the Heresies Blasphemies and Wickednesses that have been mentioned but then the Consideration ought to oblige them to double their diligence to prevent the like dismal Effects for the time to come and not to open the Gap again at which they must necessarily flow in upon us By what has been done they may see what a Blessed Reformation they may expect by the Ruin of this Church for the thing that hath been is that which shall be the same causes set on foot by the same Principles will Eternally produce the same Effects and though Men at first may mean never so well yet Temptations will insensibly grow upon them and Accidents happen which in the Progress will carry them infinitely beyond the Line of their first Intentions and engage them in Courses out of which when they come to discern their Errour it may be too late for them to Retire In the beginning of the long Parliament I make no question but the far greatest part of them met together with very honest and good Intentions and designed no more than to Correct some little Irregularities which they apprehended to be in Church or State But wee see how these very Persons where cariied from one passage to another and in time transported to those very things which at first they had so vehemently protested and declared against till at length Horrid Enormities came to be acted by and under them which no age can Paralel which ought to be a Sufficient Caution to all how they shake the least Stone that belongs to the Foundation least by picking out one after another the whole House tumble about their Ears when it is beyond their own Power to support it I shall shut up this Head with a brief Recapitulation of some of those Inferencs which Mr. Edwards makes from the State of those Loose and Licentious times we have been speaking of and then leave the Reader to judg whether they be not as Applicable to present Circumstances under which we are He infers thus First we may hence see how dangerous it is to Cat. and Discov Part 3 d. p. 52 53 57 70. Further Discov p. 195 203. despise and let alone a small Party Secondly That it is more than time fully and Effectually to settle the Government and Discipline of the Church Thirdly What the Mischief Evil and Danger of a Toleration and pretended Liberty of Conscience would be to this Kingdom and what it would Prove and Produce Fourthly That it sufficiently Justifies in the Sight of the World those Ministers and People who are Zealous for setling Religion and cry out for Government who Preach Petition speak often one to another of these things Fifthly what a great Evil and Sin Separation is from the Communion of the Reformed Churches and how highly displeasing to God for Men to make a Rent and Schism in the Church of God Sixthly That all such who have been deceived and drawn away under pretence of greater Purity Holiness c. and have any Fear and Awe of God and his Word be Exhorted to leave and forsake them and return to the Publick Assemblies and Communion of this and other Reformed Churches And God grant we may hearken to this Counsel and may seriously lay these things to heart VIII Eighthly We desire it may be considered what plain and apparent Advantages Separation gives to the Common Enemy of the Protestant Religion in these Nations The Church of England is notoriously known to have been the most strong and standing Bulwark of Protestancy ever since the Reformation for being Founded on Scripture-grounds and the Practice of True Genuine Primitive Antiquity and having been reformed by the most wise regular and justifiable Methods it stands like a Rock impregnable against all the Assaults which the Church of Rome makes upon it This has engag'd them to Plant all their Batteries to beat it down as being the only Church considerable enough to stand in their way and when not able to effect it by any other Arts they have betaken themselves to the old Artifice of Ruining us by dividing us In
owned it at his Condemnation that perhaps he thought Colemans Tryal p. 101. Def. of his Answ to the Admonit p. 349. that Popery might come in if Liberty of Conscience had been granted And this is that which wise Arch-Bishop Whitgift long ago foresaw would come to pass when he told the Dissenters of those Days I am persuaded that Anti-Christ worketh effectually at this Day by our Stirs and Contentions whereby he hath and will more prevail against this Church of England then by any other means whatsoever And now upon the whole matter I desire our Dissenting Brethren to consider whether the orderly and truly Primitive Constitution of the Church of England or Innovation Schism and Separation be the likelier way to keep out Popery and do therefore Conjure them by all the Kindness which they pretend for the Protestant Religion heartily to join in Communion with us as which I believe humanely speaking to be if not the only at least the only safe and durable means of shutting Popery for ever out of Doors IX Ninthly We desire of them that if neither these nor any other Advices and Considerations can prevail with them they would at least cease to Reproach the Government for Reviving the Execution of the Laws about these matters I know it is very natural to Men to complain when any thing pinches them but then they ought to be so just as to consider whose fault it is that has brought it upon them The Laws in this case were framed with great Advice and upon dear bought Experience and every Nation in the World thinks it self obliged when no other ways will do it by Penalties to secure the Publick Peace Safety and Tranquility of the State though it may sometimes press hard in some particular Cases when Men through Fancy Humour Mistake or Design especially about little and as themselves confess indifferent matters shall endanger the Publick Welfare and by an ill Example expose the Reverence and Majesty of the Laws And yet notwithstanding all this and a great deal more that might be said we find them at every turn charging the Government for using them Cruelly and with the hardest Measure censuring their Superiours and speaking Evil of Dignities and this not only the Cry of the mean and common Sort but of their chiefest Leaders even to this Hour It being no hard matter but that I love not to exasperate to instance in several things that are no very good Arguments of that Obedient Patience which some of them so much pretend to It is far from my Temper to delight in Cruelty much more to plead for Severity to be used towards Dissenting Brethren and therefore should have said nothing in this Argument were it not necessary to Vindicate the Government which upon these occasions I have so often heard Blamed and Censured I would these Persons who complain so much would consider a while how their Predecessors were dealt with in the times of the good Queen Elizabeth which will appear either from the Laws then made or from the Proceedings then had against them The Laws then made against them were chiefly these In the First of the Queen An Act for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer c. wherein among other Clauses and Penalties it is provided That if any Person shall in any Playes Songs Rhimes or by other open Words declare or speak any thing in the derogation depraving or despising the Book of common-Common-Prayer or any thing therein contained being thereof lawfully convicted he shall forfeit for the first Offence an hundred for the second four hundred Marks for the Third all his Goods and Chattels and shall suffer Imprisonment during Life A Clause which had it been kept up in its due Life and Power our Liturgy and Divine Offices had been Treated with much more Respect and Reverence then I am sure they have met with especially of late In Her Fifth Year an Act was passed for the due Execution of the Writ de Excommunicato capiendo amongst others particularly levelled against such as refuse to receive the Holy Communion or to come to Divine Service as now commonly used in the Church of England with severe Penalties upon those that shall not yield up themselves to the same Writ Anno. 13. passed an Act of general Pardon but it was with an Exception of all those that had committed any Offence against the Act for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer or were Publishers of Seditious Books or Disturbers of Divine Service Anno 23. By an Act to retain the Queen's Majesty's Subjects in their due Obedience it is provided That every Person above the Age of Sixteen Years which shall not repair to some Church or usual place of common-Common-Prayer but forbear the same by the space of a Month shall for every such Moth forfeit Twenty Pounds Which Act was again Confirmed and Ratified by another in the 29th Year of Her Reign with many Clauses and Provisions for the better Execution of it And by the Act of the 35th of Her Reign If any Person so forbearing shall willingly joyn in or be present at any Assemblies Conventicles and Meetings under colour or pretence of any Exercise of Religion contrary to the Laws of the Realm such Person being lawfully Convicted shall be Imprisoned without Bail or Mainprize untill he Conform and if he do not that within Three Months he shall be obliged to Abjure the Realm and if refusing to Abjure or returning without Licence he shall be Adjudged a Felon and suffer as in case of Felony without benefit of Clergy Such were Her Laws and such also were Her Proceedings against those who faultered in their Conformity or began to Innovate in the Discipline of the Church and these Proceedings as quick and smart as any can be said to be against the Dissenters of this time Do they complain of their Ministers being Silenced now so they were then being deprived of their Benefices and Church-Preferments for their Inconformity Thus Sampson was turned out of his Deanry oâ— Christ-Church for refusing to Conform to the Orders and Ceremonies of the Church Cartwright the very Head of them Expelled the Colledge and deprived of the Lady Margarets Lecture Travers turned out from Preaching at the Temple with many more Suspended from the Ministry by the Queens Authority and the Approbation of the Bishops for not Subscribing to some new Rites and Ceremonies imposed upon them as appears from Beza's Letter to Bez. Epist 8. Bishop Grindal Anno 1566. Are any in Prison so they were then Benson Button Hallingham Cartwright Knewstubbs and many others some in the Marshalsey others in the White-Lion some in the Gatehouse others in the Counter or in the Clink or in Bridewel or in Newgate Poor Men miserably handled with Revilings Deprivations Imprisonments Banishments if we may believe what themselves tell us both in the First and Second Admonition And what is yet far beyond any thing which God be thanked our Dissenters can pretend to complain of
Sedition Sedition Rebellion and Rebellion the Ruine of Church and State And what wonder if the Laws bear a little hard there where there are the same Appearances and where there seem to be the same Tendencies and Inclinations to the same Dismal State of Things Whoever considers by what Ways the most flourishing Kingdom in the World and the best Church that ever was since the Primitive Times were miserably Harrassed and Destroyed cannot think that those who sit at the Helm should be content to have them Ruined again by the same means especially after the King for several Years together has in vain tryed by all the Methods of Favour and Indulgence to win upon them Thirdly Let those who now complain so much consider How little Favour themselves shewed to others when they were in Power How the Loyal and Episcopal Party were Plundered Sequestred Decimated Dungeoned Starved and often stunk to Death What Oaths and Covenants were Rigorously Imposed upon them what Restraints laid upon their Liberties both Civil and Ecclesiastical though all this while they had Law and Right standing for An Ordinance for putting in Execution the Directory August 11. 1645. them In the Year 1645 an Ordinance of Parliament was published That if any Person hereafter shall at any Time use or cause to be used the Book of common-Common-prayer in any Church or publick place of Worship or in any private Place or Family within the Kingdom every Person so offending should for the first Offence pay the Sum of Five for the second ten Pounds and for the third should suffer one whole Years Imprisonment without Bail or Mainprize This one would think was very hard but there is something harder yet behind For Cromwel being got into the Throne Published a Delaration 24 November 1655. at that time Equivalent to a Law That no Person who had been sequestred for delinquency or had been in Arms against the Parliament or adhered unto or had abetted or assisted the Forces raised against them should keep in their Houses or Families as Chaplains or Schoolmasters for the Education of their Children any sequestred or ejected Minister Fellow of a Colledge or Schoolmaster nor permit any of their Children to be taught by such upon pain of being proceeded against as was directed and that no Person who had been sequestred or ejected for delinquency or scandal shall hereafter keep any School either publick or private nor preach in any publick place or at any private Meeting of any other Persons then those of his own Family nor Administer Baptism or the Lords Supper or marry any Persons or use the Book of common-Common-Prayer or the Forms of Prayer therein contained upon Pain that every Person so Offending in any of the Premisses shall be proceeded against as by the said Order is provided and directed There needs no Comment upon these Proceedings they do not only Whisper but speak aloud to the present Generation of Dissenters to tell them how little reason they have to complain X. Lastly We beg of them that before they pull down any further Trouble or Suffering upon themselves they would Consider Whether the Cause they engage in be such as will bear them out with Comfort before God another Day 't is not Suffering or refusing to comply with the External Circumstances of our Religion that can be said to be a Persecution for Righteousness sake it not being the Suffering but the Cause that makes the Martyr Then I suffer as a Christian when the Honour of Christ or something that offers Violence to my Religion and Christianity is concerned in it when I suffer for that which I cannot avoid without disowning my self to be a Christian and making Shipwrack of Faith and a good Conscience But where the Case is not evidently this a Man may draw Miseries upon himself and yet not suffer as a Christian because it may proceed from Humour or Interest or the Conduct of a misinformed Judgment mistaking things for what they are not Men very often place Religion in doing or not doing what is no part of it and then think they may safely Suffer upon that account when there is more it may be of Passion or Prejudice of Fancy or Opinion of Humour or Mistake then of the real Concerns of Piety or Religion I am very sure neither the Ancient Christians would have passed through the Fiery-Tryal every Day nor the Holy Martyrs in Queen Mary's Days have thought themselves obliged to Forfeit their Estates much less their Lives had no more been required of them then there is of us to come to Khurch or to Kneel at the Sacrament but would rather have Blessed God and thankfully owned the Favour of the Governours under which they lived might they have enjoyed both upon the same Terms as we do In Cases that only concern indifferent things and meer Circumstances of Worship stiffly and obstinately to stand out is rather for a Man to be a Martyr to his own Humour and Opinion then to the Cause of Christ Whether this be not the Case of our Dissenting-Brethren they themselves might quickly see would they but lay aside the unreasonableness of their Prejudices and lay no more stress upon things than they Obed. Patience p. 79. ought to bear Let us hear what Mr. Baxter in a late Book says to this matter I am One that have been first in all the Storms that have befallen the Ministry these Twenty Years past to look no farther back and yet my Conscience commandeth me to say as I have oft done that many through mistake I am persuaded now Suffer as Evil-doers for a Cause that is not Good and Justifiable I shall leave with them the Wise and Excellent R. Bernard's Christian Advert Counsels of Peace 1608. Counsel which was given by one in the time of the Elder Puritans Follow true Antiquity and the general Practice of the Church of God in all Ages where they have not Erred from the evident Truth of God If thou Sufferest let it be for known Truth and against known Wickedness for which thou hast Example in Gods Word or of the Holy Martyrs in Church-Story But beware of far-fetched Consequences or for Suffering for new Devices and for things formerly unto all Ages unknown seem they never so Holy and Just unto Man All that now remains is to call upon our Dissenting-Brethren by all the Considerations of Love and Kindness to themselves of Tenderness for the Honour of Religion the Edification of their Brethren and the Peace Security and Welfare of the Church and State wherein they live that they would duely and impartially Weigh and Consider things put a stop to the Separation wherein they are engaged return to and hold Communion with us and keep the Vnity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace Let them bethink themselves what a mighty Evil Schism is and will be so found before God at the last Day and whether any thing can be meet to be put in the Ballance with the Peace and Unity of the Church and those vastly-important Consequences that depend upon it Let us consider a little what a deep Sense the best and most pious Christians that ever were had of it It 's better to Suffer any thing than that the Church of God should be Rent asunder it is every whit as Glorious and in my Opinion a far greater Martyrdom to dye for not Dividing the Church than for refusing to Sacrifice to Idols says Dionysius the good Bishop of Alexandria in his Letter to Novatian Ap. Euseb lib. 6. c. 45. Epist 52. ad Antonian de Vnit Eccles fol. 181 184. c. And St. Cyprian speaks very severe things to this purpose That a Person going from the Church to Schismaticks tho in that Capacity he should dye for Christ yet can he not receive the Crown of Martyrdom And how oft elsewhere doth he tell us That such a one has no part in the Law of God or the Faith of Christ or in Life and Salvation that without this Unity and Charity a Man cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and that although he should deliver up himself to the Flames or cast his Body to wild Beasts yet this would not be the Crown of his Faith but the Punishment of his Falshood not the Glorious Exit of a Religious Courage but the Issue of Despair such a One may be Kill'd but he cannot be Crown'd He rents the Unity of the Church destroys the Faith disturbs the Peace dissolves Charity and Profanes the Holy Sacrament And were it necessary I could shew that the Ancient Fathers generally say the same thing And can we now be such degenerate Christians if we can be said to be Christians at all as to make nothing at all of Schism and Separation Are not the Glory of God the Peace of the Church and the Good of Souls things as considerable as necessary and indispensable now as they were of old I beseech you Brethren return from whence you are fallen and let us all with one Shoulder set our selves to Support that Church with whose Ruine we are all likely to sink and fall Let us lay aside Envying and Strife Confusion and every Evil Work and let us follow after the things which make for Peace and things wherewith one may Edifie another FINIS
have been heretofore written in defence of our Church her Rites and Usages that yet generally lie by the Walls little known and less read by those that so much Cry out against her And at this time how many excellent Discourses have been Published for the satisfaction of Dissenters written with the greatest Temper and Moderation with the utmost plainness and perspicuity with all imaginable evidence and strength of Reasoning so short as not to require any considerable portion either of Time or Cost so suited to present Circumstances as to obviate every material Objection that is made against Communion with us and yet there is just cause to fear that the far greatest part of our Dissenters are meer strangers to them and are not so just to themselves or us as to give them the reading And that those few that do look into them do it rather out of a design to pick quarrels against them and to expose them in scurrilous or cavilling Pamphlets than to receive satisfaction by them I do heartily and from my Soul wish an end of these Contentions and that there were no further occasion for them but if our Dissenting Brethren will still proceed in this way we desire and hope 't is but what is reasonable that the things in difference may be debated in the most quiet peaceable and amicable manner that they may be gravely and substantially managed and only the Merits of the Cause attended to and that the Controversie may not be turned off to mean and trifling Persons whose highest Attainment perhaps it is to write an idle and senseless Pamphlet and which can serve no other use but only that the People may be borne in hand that such and such Books are Answered Which is so unmanly and disingenious a way and so like the shifting Artifices of them of the Church of Rome that I am apt to persuade my self the wiser Heads of the Dissenting Party cannot but be ashamed of it If they be not 't is plain to all the World they are willing to serve an ill Design by the most unwarrantable Means But however that be we think we have great Reason to expect from them that they should hear our Church before they condemn Her and consider what has been said for the removing of their Doubts before they tell us any more of Scruples Tender-Consciences and the hard measure that they meet withall I confess could I meet with a Person that had brought himself to some kind of Unbyas'dness and indifferency of Temper and that design'd nothing more than to seek and find the right way of Serving God without respect to the Intrigues and Interests of this or that particular Party and in order thereunto had with a sincere and honest Mind read whatever might probably conduce to his Satisfaction fairly proposed his Scruples and modestly consulted with those that were most proper to advise him and humbly begged the Guidance and Direction of the Divine Grace and Blessing and yet after all should still labour under his old Dissatisfactions I should heartily pity and pray for such a Man and think my self obliged to improve all my Interest for Favour and Forbearance towards him But such Persons as these I am afraid are but thin sowed and without Breach of Charity it may be supposed there is not One of a Thousand III. Thirdly We desire that before they go on to accuse our Church with driving them into Separation they would directly charge her with imposing sinful terms of Communion And unless they do this and when they have done it make it good for barely to accuse I hope is not sufficient I see not which way they can possibly justifie their Separation from us 'T is upon this account that the whole Protestant Reformation defends their Departure from the Church of Rome They found the Doctrine of that Church infinitely corrupt in several of the main Principles of Religion New Articles of Faith introduced and bound upon the Consciences of Men under pain of Damnation its Worship overgrown with very gross Idolatry and Superstition its Rites and Ceremonies not only over-numerous but many of them advanced into proper and direct Acts of Worship and the use of them made necessary to Salvation and besides its Members required to joyn and communicate in these Corruptions and Depravations nay and all Proposals and Attempts towards a Reformation obstinately rejected and thrown out in which Case they did with great Reason and Justice depart from her which we may be confident they would not have done had no more been required of them than instead of Worshipping Images to use the Sign of the Cross in Baptism or instead of the Adoration of the Host to kneel at the Receiving of the Sacrament A Learned Amyrald de Secess ab Eccles Rom. pag. 233. Protestant Divine of great Name and Note has expresly told us That had there been no other Faults in the Church of Rome besides their useless Ceremonies in Baptisme and some other things that are beyond the measure and genius of the Christian Religion they had still continued in the Communion of that Church Indeed did the Church of England command any thing which Christ has prohibited or prohibit any thing which Christ has commanded then come ye out from among them and be ye separate saith the Lord were good Warrant and Authority But where do we meet with these prohibitions not in the word of God not in the nature and reason of the things themselves nor indeed do we find our Dissenting Brethren of late very forward to fasten this charge and much less to prove it whatever unwary sayings may fall from any of them in the heat and warmth of Disputation or be suggested by indirect consequences and artificial insinuations And if our Church commands nothing that renders her Communion sinful then certainly Separation from her must be unlawful because the Peace and Unity of the Church and obedience to the commands of lawful Authority are express and indispensable duties and a few private suspicions of the unlawfulness of the thing are not sufficient to sway against plain publick and necessary Duties nor can it be safe to reject Communicating with those with whom Christ himself does not refuse Communion This I am sure was once thought good Doctrine by the chiefest of our Dissenters who when time was reasoned thus against those that subdivided from them If we be a Church of Christ and Christ hold Communion with A Vindication of the Presbyterial Government 1649. p. 130. us why do you Separate from us If we be the Body of Christ do not they that Separate from the Body Separate from the Head also we are loath to speak any thing that may offend you yet we entreat you to consider that if the Apostle call those Divisions of the Church of Corinth wherein Christians did not separate into divers formed Congregations in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Schisms 1 Cor. 1. 10. may not your