tels us of a School at Alexandria wherein Saint Mark had appointed that there should be continually such Doctors as should teach the Fundamentals of Christian Religion he nameth Pantenus who lived under Commodus the Emperour Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen and he saith from Tertullian and Socrates that in this School were taught the Creed the Decalogue and the Lords Prayer Saint Hieromes authority you have had already So Christ taught his Apostles saith he that they should constantly at the Sacrament of his body say Our Father and accordingly they desire c. repeating the whole Prayer The next testimony is Tertullians Praemissâ legitimâ ordinariâ precatione quasi fundamento jus est desideriorum jus est super struendi extrinsecus petitiones Haveing first said the lawful and ordinary prayer as a foundation we make it the rule of our desires and of framing all our Petitions according to it He calls it lawful as appointed in the Gospel by the Law of Christ and being ordinary it is an Argument that the general use of it had prevailed through ancient custome in more Primitive times and that Father is large in the commendation of it calling it Breviarium totius Evangelii a breviary of the whole Gospel which is not more succinct in words then it is inlarged in matter comprehending not onely all the Offices of prayer but all the sayings of Christ. If any credit may be given to the Clementine Constitutions it was of ordinary use even in Apostolical times They naming the Lords Prayer adde Ad hunc modum precamini ter singulis diebus use this Prayer three times a day and again Let the baptized person standing up say the Prayer which the Lord hath taught us Gregory being asked why he did annex the Lords prayer to the Canon for celebration of the Lords Supper gives this reason Mos fuit Apostolorum ut ad ipsam solummodo Orationem Dominicam c. It was the practice of the Apostles to consecrate the Holy Sacrament onely by the Lords prayer And indeed the many Comments and pious Expositions of this prayer in all those Primitive times of the Church by their chiefest Doctors is to me an argument of its ordinary use and were those Expositions collected into one volume and well digested it might prove as great a help to devotion as any that I know But I may easily tire my Reader leading him onely through a few of those many ancient paths where evident footsteps of the common and frequent use of this Prayer doe appear as in those most ancient Liturgies collected by Bignius and George Cassander many of which are for the chief parts of them and as far as concerns the matter in hand authentique though in other things they have suffered additions and alterations in these generally this prayer is inserted sometimes more then once thus in those that bare the names of Saint Mark Saint James Chrysostome and Basil his Greek Liturgie and that which he translated out of the Syriack the Ethiopian Armenian and the Roman before the defection of that Church in all these this prayer is used and Master Hooker hath observed That what part of the world soever we fall into if Christian Religion have been there received the ordinary use of this very prayer hath with equal continuance accompanied the same as one of the principal and most material duties of honour done to Jesus Christ. Saint Augustine makes many memorials of the use of it as in his Enchiridion Ecce tibi est Symbolum oratio Dominica c. You have the Creed and the Lords prayer what shorter rule is heard or read or more easily committed to memory And again They that walk in the wayes of the Lord say Forgive us our trespasses and again the dayly prayer which the Lord himself taught whence it is called the Lords prayer doth obtain pardon for dayly sins And speaking of the prayer used at the administration of the Sacrament he saith Which prayer almost all the Church concludes with the Lords prayer we cannot pray for any thing else saith he seeing whatever may be desired of God this one prayer taught by Christ doth contain and all in that order as it ought to be desired so that this prayer is to be preferred above all as for brevity of words so for plenty of things and their orderly disposure And that diligent and devout Father hath divers entire Comments upon it I shall adde onely one saying more of his Si quis vestrum non poterit tenere perfectè audiendo quotidie tenebit If any of you have not learned it perfectly by hearing it dayly he may Saint Ambrose on the fifteenth Petition of this prayer saith thus Therefore dayly say this Petition that thou maist dayly obtain pardon for thy debt And again Let us hear what the Disciple of Christ doth pray namely that which his master taught him Hear saith he what the Priest saith Through Jesus Christ in whom and with whom unto thee be honour praise and glory This was a clause added by the Latine Church to our Lords prayer instead of the Doxology of which more hereafter Saint Cyprian is most excellent in the commendation of this prayer and the use of it as a form his words are these seeing this prayer was breathed forth from God our Saviour what can be more acceptable what more effectual with God the Father what should be more dear and familiar to us Lest thou shouldest be ignorant how God is to be spoken to God himself puts words into thy mouth and lest thou shouldest doubt how ready he is to hear thy prayers he himself directs thee how to pray in such a manner as is fit to be heard and lest thou shouldest complain that a form of prayer being prescribed thou hast lost thy liberty of asking the things thou needest whatever things thou mightest rightly desire are all included and our Saviour hath included them in a prayer that gives us so great honour that raiseth us to so great hope that flowes with so much sweetness as no tongue can express and it is to be wished the understanding of the supplicant could aspire thereunto Let us therefore pray beloved brethren as he goes on as God our Master hath taught us it is a friendly and familiar Prayer to intreat God in his own words when the Prayer of Christ shall ascend from our mouths to the ears of God the Father will own the Sons words when we pray unto him in them if whatever we aske in his Sonnes Name he will give us how much more effectually shall we obtain if we ask in Christs Name by his Prayer Thus Saint Cyprian Lucas Brugensis speaking of the manner of saying the Lords Prayer in the Latine Church saith it was so ab istis Apostolorum temporibus from the Apostles dayes Saint Chrysostome doth record it as a Rule of the Church which we
have already mentioned out of the Clementine Constitutions and by this of Saint Chrysostome it receiveth a further confirmation that the baptized person should say the Lords Prayer from which custome he proves against the Hereticks of his time that the People of God were not by Baptisme secured from falling into sin nor were they excluded from all hope of remission if they did repent for the sins which were committed after Baptisme seeing that the Church doth not teach them in vain presently upon that Ordinance to say Forgive us our trespasses In the Canons of King Canut under Aethelnoth this is one Moreover we exhort that every Christian do so learn as that he well understand the true Faith and have the Lords prayer and the Apostles Creed familiar for Christ himself did first teach that prayer and gave it to his Disciples and he that will not learn these shall never partake of happiness with Christians when he dies not living shall be admitted to the Eucharist nor shall he be counted worthy the name of a Christian. I shall adde but one testimonie more and that for antiquities sake from the mouth of an heathen namely Lucian the Scoffer who in his Philopatris purposely derides the doctrine and practices of Christians he names our Saviour Chrestus by way of contempt he calls his scholar by the word used in the Primitive Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that is to be catechized He sets down the Doctrine of the Trinitie as it was then taught One in Three and Three in One which expression of his is acknowledged by Socinus to be so faire an evidence for the Doctrine of the Trinity that he sayes he never read any thing more strong He describes the Creation and Moses St. Paul and the Sacrament of Baptism and at last bespeaks Critias that personated a young Christian disciple thus But let these alone and goe say thy Prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beginning with Father and adding that famous Doxologie This Rigaltius on Tertullian notes that the Pagan meant it of the Lords prayer and it is brought by the learned Mr. Gregorie to prove against the Papists that the Doxologie is authentique and he that considers the design of that left-witted heathen cannot devise what else he should mean And if so it appears that it was the frequent practice of Christians in Lucians dayes that is in the time of Trajan less then two hundred years after it was delivered by Christ to use this form of Prayer publicly for how else could this Pagan come to the knowledge of it or scoffingly injoyn it as a dutie to be performed by him that would become a Christian And now let it be considered whence had these most Primitive times this custome of using and injoyning our Lords prayer if not as they do all testifie uno ore with one consent from the practice of the Apostles as they had it from the precept of Christ He must bring some convincing Argument or Demonstration that will disprove all these Evidences and until that be done we may safely acquiesce in these If I should now adde the authorities and opinions of modern Divines whose names and memories are and ever will be fresh and fragrant in all the reformed Church I should far exceed my intended limits I shall therefore mention onely the most eminent and them chiefly who are of greatest repute with the dissenters And first Mr. Calvin saith Now not onely a more certain rule but the very form it self of prayer is to be taught and again for Christ prescribed us a form And as this prayer was used in the Geneva Liturgy so frequently by Mr. Calvin himself at or before his Homilies And Beza became his scholar in this also for he sayes Our Lords Prayer is precum formula divinitùs nobis quasi praeseriptis verbis mandata A form of prayer commanded unto us from heaven as it were in prescribed words Next Chemnitius in his Harmony sayes That the Disciples desired of Christ after the example of St. John a certain form of prayer which they might use in their devotion and by which they might the more easily obtain what they desired Again we know that when we recite the Lords Prayer we injoy a great priviledge seeing that he who taught us sits in heaven the Master of our requests who also presents our prayers and intercedes for us Cum primis verò illud notatu dignum est as he saith This especially ought to be observed That when Christ in the first year of his Ministery had taught his Disciples how to pray and here again being desired to teach them to pray taught no new form but repeated the old it shewes we should not be troubled every day about new forms nor that our prayers are therefore unacceptable other requisites being observed because we repeat the same form for as he quoteth from St. Augustine All the prayers of the Saints are nothing else but the Pater noster c. inlarged and in it is comprised the marrow of all the prayers of the old Testament and hence saith he the word Collect is used to signifie a prayer this prayer being a collection of all good prayers that ever were made in the world Mr. Thomas Cartwright sayes I know in so few words it is impossible for any man to frame so pithie a prayer onely there is no necessity laid on us to use this and no more where he seems to grant a necessity of using this and again I confess the Church doth well in concluding their prayers with the Lords prayer And indeed the use of it hath been preserved in all famous Liturgies of the Reformed Churches as well Lutheran as Calvinists in that which was composed by the English exiles at Frankefort in the Marian daies and printed at Geneva 1556. it is twice inserted But of all Champions Pareus hath most succesfully defended it Seeing saith he this prayer is read in two different places it is made a question whether it was twice delivered and I see nothing to the contrary but it was prescribed twice once in the mount to the Disciples and people another time to the Disciples alone to which opinion the different occasions in Matthew and Luke do perswade me for it seems the Disciple who in Luke demanded a prayer was not present at the Sermon on the Mount or the form first given was forgotten for the Disciples were ignorant sua ruditate for their dulness of some things which were twice or thrice delivered to them Then it may be demanded saith he whether our Saviour did so strictly oblige us to this form and words as that we may not use any other thish e deservedly denieth using St. Augustines distinction viz. we may pray aliter or aliis verbis in other forms and words but we cannot pray for aliud any other thing then what is included in these words but yet he saith both to publick and
own thereunto and for fear of failing in this would they devoutly use the very form too as Christ hath injoyned them it would prove an excellent remedy against the above named evils and surely when neither in matter nor form we express any care to resemble this Architype we do as much as in us lieth make void this injunction of our Saviour Again this mischief hath been the product of disusing this Prayer that some whom we should judge more sober and knowing Christians by their profession if they hear a Minister summe up his devotions in it though he be a person of excellent parts and pietie they presently conceive a prejudice against him as being a man of a carnal formal temper and of a different perswasion from themselves and so deprive themselves of that Spiritual comfort and edification which otherwise they might receive by his Ministery yea it hath been known that on the very repetition of this Prayer some have immediately withdrawn themselves from the Ordinances of God and so forsaken their own mercies for whom my hearts desire is that they may have time and hearts in humilitie and faith to say this Prayer once at least before they die and God forbid that I should ceas to pray for them in another form of our Saviour Father forgive them they know not what they do If for thirtie or fortie years since or any age of the Church beyond that home to our Saviours time it should have been adjudged scandalous to use the Lords Prayer the Creed or the Commandements or any should have made it the mark of a faithful Disciple to omit these things the present Church would doubtles have branded the authors of that Opinion for Arch-hereticks and yet not this opinion onely but the practice too hath like a gangrene so spread it self over the face of the land and the hearts of the people that those Ministers are generally excluded from the number of Christs faithful and able Disciples who devoutly repeat these things And if this maladie only were cured I shall account this labour happily bestowed But beside this some sober men whose judgements and practices have been for the use of this prayer as a form being called to pray in Congregations of a contrarie perswasion to avoid the Charybdis of giving a groundless offence have run on the Scylla of disobeying Christ and swerving from their own principles as if they were ashamed of Christ and of his words in an adulterous generation And who knowes whether for our wilful neglect of this one many among us have not been justly deprived of other of Gods Ordinances and given up to contempt of them But there are yet sadder effects then these The disuse of it by some hath been improved to a contempt of it in others in so much that they whose dutie it was to have blessed God for it as for a Jacobs ladder to lift them nearer Heaven have degenerated so far from Christianitie as to thank God they have forgotten it and to abhor the teaching of it to their children as if it were some unluckie spell or charm yea and what is enough to make us all tremble have quaked at the repetition of it These are sad considerations and cannot be denied to be for the most part the proper effects of omitting this prayer and as ever we hope to have them cease we should joyn with one consent to remove the cause and renew our first love to this Ordinance bring back again with joy and gladness this Ark to the House of God and prove if he will not open the windows of heaven and pour down his blessings upon us To such as have conscienciously continued the use of this prayer I say as the Angel did to the Church of Philadelphia Hold thou that fast which thou hast Let no man take thy Crown it hath not been nor ever will it be a barren or fruitless prayer unless want of faith and true devotion in us do hinder its efficacie Take heed of a hastie perfunctorie posting of it over as if the words were too hot for our mouths whereby we may cause our good to be evil spoken of Let it be uttered with deliberation and servencie in faith and an actual apprehension of those mercies which we want and chieflie desire under each Petition that both our own and our peoples judgements and affections may accompanie it And on all occasions open this box of precious ointment or in a plain and familiar Exposition of the chief parts of it unto the people that the spices thereof may send forth their smell even a sweet savour of reconciliation and acceptation with God a savour of Pietie Charitie and Life unto the people cautionate them against formalitie and lio-labour onelie in this prayer which as the flie which Solomon speaks of will cause the whole composition to corrupt The drawing nigh unto God with the lips though in this most excellent Prayer while the heart is far from him will turn this Sacrifice of God into an offering of fools and therefore instruct them how every desire of theirs may and all their present wants and requests ought to be referred to and expressed in one of these Petitions the diligent Reader may see what Reverend Mr. Ball hath written to this purpose And let none thinke it enough to use it as a form onely but let him study to conform all his more solemn devotions to the matter and method of it and so we shall be sure to observe our Saviours injunction and obtain his blessing It remains onely now that we wipe off those Objections that stick on this practice which although as so many Vipers on Saint Pauls hand coming out of the fire which contentious spirits have kindled may seem to argue its guiltiness of divers accusations yet after that we have had the patience to look on them awhile we shall see them fall off of their own accord and the sight thereof I hope will cause the Objectors to change their minds The first Objection is this The form related by St. Matthew doth differ from that in St. Luke as in the fourth Petition what St. Matthew expresseth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 day by day St. Luke renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 day by day and in the fifth Petition for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Matthew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Luke Our debts our trespasses which varietie of readings argueth that it was not intended for a form of words to be precisely so used It is more then probable that our Saviour did deliver it both times in the same words they that hold it was but once delivered must of necessitie acknowledge it but our Saviour using the same Syriack Dialect which the Apostles afterward expressed in Greek as their own style guided them it is almost impossible to think how they should accord better considering that although the Holy Ghost did assist them in calling things
forgive others lest they should doe as Adonijah did the words of whose Petition were spoken against his own life To the first part of the Objection Dr. Lightfoot answereth thus They that doe deny this Prayer is to be used by any but real Saints because as they say none but such can call God Father either know not or consider not how usual this compellation was among that Nation in their devotions and Christ speaketh constantly according to the common and most usual Language of the Countrey And if Christ did from the common practice of the Jewes insert it into his own prayer it argues his approbation of it too in the common devotion of Christians 2. To both parts of the Objection I Answer that every man that would pray fitly and acceptably in the congregation or in his closet ought to follow this prayer as his Rule Directory in observing the matter of it at least if not the form also otherwise Christ hath made it a form and rule in vain Now I say if our keeping of the form be dangerous so is our observing the matter too and then by this reason if the most of men may not pray in this form neither may they pray according to this matter for as no solemn prayer should be made without asking God forgiveness so no forgiveness can be expected without the condition of forgiving our brethren it is as Montanus saith Praecisa irrevocabilis sententia sine exceptione a general unalterable rule without exception If ye forgive not men their trespasses neither will your Heavenly Father forgive your trespasses And what a vain excuse this will be in the ears of God I did not pray nor aske pardon because I could not call God Father nor forgive my brethren or because there were some in the Assembly that had not faith to call God Father or charity to forgive their brethren every Christian ear can try But if this be the reason why some have so long omitted it let me mind them of what our Saviour told some of his Disciples Ye know not what spirit ye are of Now the frequent use of this Petition would lay on new and strong Obligations upon all persons to perform that most excellent Christian dutie so much wanting among us of a free and full forgiveness of our brethren to which religious practice it is well if by any Art we could oblige our people yea this very terror of the Lord which is here put into our own mouths of obtaining no forgiveness from God but on condition of forgiving others would effectually perswade us to it or else keep us under a tacite sentence in our own consciences of being Excommunicated from the throne of Grace and of receiving no benefit by all our prayers And suppose there be some such in each Congregation as cannot or at least will not joyn with the rest in saying this Prayer must the rest of the Congregation be deprived of the benefit of it for their sakes It may be all the Ministers Prayers may not be as suitable and profitable to the most and best of the people as this and it is a sad thing if a Minister shall comply rather with the weakness and malice of a few then with the devotion and benefit of many The use of holy and honest things is not to be laid aside because some are causelesly offended at them especially when the greater part are justly prejudiced at the omission And finally this also is to be considered that the yielding to scrupulous and contentious persons in lesser things although I account this one of the greatest magnitude is the way to harden them in their present prejudices and to dispose them for more and greater Amicus SOCRATES Amicus PLATO Magis amica veritas THat which Dr. Owen hath said concerning the use of this form is in his Answer to Beedles 11. Questions and the Answer thereto Beedles Question is this Did not Christ prescribe a form of Prayer to his Disciples so that there remaineth no doubt touching the lawfulness of using a form To this he answers Luke 11. 1 2 3. To this thus replieth Dr. Owen If Christ prescribed a form of Prayer to his Disciples to be used as a form by the repetition of the same words I confess it will be out of question that it is lawful to use a form Reply But Christ did prescribe a form of Prayer c. Therefore it is lawful to use a forme The minor Proposition is chiefly to be proved and the conclusion viz. the lawfulness of using a form indefinitely which is that which Beedle contends for and the Doctor here grants will be of considerable importance hereafter Now the truth of this Proposition will appear by the proof of its parts thus Either it is not a form or not prescribed to be used as such but it is a form and prescribed to be used as such Ergo. That it is a form is granted by all and made the apple of contention by most that disuse it under that notion but the rottenness of this assertion is so apparent that the next scruple is added as a leaf to cover it i. whether it is prescribed to be used as such This although it be sufficiently clear cannot be seen by those who have entertained the former prejudice for being professed enemies to all forms of Prayer they are resolved to make it good that our Saviour was no friend to them which is contrary to his own practice as hath been shewed and against a double precept also in as plain expressions as could be used to that purpose But none are more unlike to discern the mind of God in the Scriptures then they that sift them rather to find or fancy something in them to confirm their opinions then to direct and settle their judgements otherwise they that observe and use a form of words prescribed in the administration of both Sacraments might with the same eyes observe this also prescribed for use in prayer But 2. It is also granted that there is a plain and positive prescription preceding this form When ye pray say And thus pray ye And I never heard as yet that any have questioned the sufficiency of the injunction about what then is the contest this they fancy that the matter onely of that form doth fall under the prescription and not the form of words So that the truth of both assertions is granted in sensu diviso viz. that there is a form and a prescription but not insensu composito that that form is to be used as such by vertue of this prescription But what God hath joyned together let no man put asunder for the decision of this I will make my appeal to any impartial person as Judge when there is a form composed by Christ himself and commanded to his Disciples with a plain precept prefixed viz. When ye pray say how unreasonable it is to affirm that the prescript should
done it themselves but given occasion to others to lift up the heel against or as the Marginal reading is have magnified every pettie imperfect prayer against it We applaud and admire the gifts and forms of Prayer used by divers men all which are beautiful in their kind and have done excellently and for them I shall joyn with any to bless God but when this Prayer which excelleth them all non laudatur or as Pagnines interlineary interpretation non Epithalamio celebratur is not celebrated and espoused but is neglected and slighted when as the Apostle observes One is of Paul another of Apollos another of Cephas to the having mens persons in admiration and slighting the things of Christ in their plainenesse and simplicitie this is utterly a fault As to the rise of this practice in former times I can discern no other ground but either the stifeling of some truth or the venting of some heresie or the continuing more securely in some sin one or more of which hath been certainly the ground why the use of it hath been formerly laid aside The first enemy to the use of it was Pelagius as both St. Augustine and St. Hierome assure us Pelagioni or ationem Dominicam impiis disputationibus auferre conabantur evertentes duos artieulos Dimitte nobis Ne nos inducas The Pelagians did indeavour with wicked disputations to take away the use of our Lords Prayer overthrowing these two Articles For give us our trespasses and lead us not into temptation You see they would have sacrificed this Prayer to their heresies for which among other things they are worthily branded for hereticks in Church-Historie Saint Hierome deals more roundly with him thus Sic docuit Apostolos suos ut quotidie in corporis illius sacrificio oredentes audeant loqui Pater noster c. Thus did Christ teach his Apostles that they should constantly at the Sacrament of his Body say Our Father and accordingly they desire that the name of God which is most holy in it self may be sanctified in them but thou sayest Lord thou knowest how holy innocent and pure my hands are They say Thy Kingdome come antedating the hope of Christs Kingdome that was to come that he reigning sin might not reign in their mortal bodies They say Thy will be done that humane weakness might imitate the Angels Thou saist a man may if he will be free from all sin They say Give us c. praying for that supersubstantial bread that they might be fit to receive the body of Christ And ye by supererrogatory holiness and a confident righteousness boldly challenge heavenly gifts They as it follows For give us c. coming from the Font of Baptisme and being regenerate through the Lord our Saviour presently at the first communion of Christs body They say Forgive us c. not in a feigned pretence of humilitie but in consciousness of their humane weakness They say Lead us not c. Thou saist with Jovinian that they who have by Faith received Baptisme cannot be tempted or sin any more Lastly They say Deliver us c. Why do they pray for that which they have in the power of their own freewill This is the Leader and these the grounds of his defiance against the Lords Prayer viz. that he might raise his errors upon the ruine of it And whether heretiques in our dayes have not served themselves and advantaged their errors both in Doctrine and Practise by the disuse of it ought by all sober Christians to be considered and laid to heart The Papists are marshalled in the next rank as enemies to this Prayer and that first for locking up the whole Prayer from the people under an unknown language and giving them onely the shell to chew upon their affections and understandings being unmoved and silent while their lips and tongues are busie Secondly for curtailing it and omitting the whole Doxologie Thirdly for preferring the use of their Ave Maria's and Prayers of other Saints above this as learned Chemnitius complains In Papatu circumtulerunt precationes Sanctae Brigiddae promittentes largas indulgentias iis qui eas recitarunt interim Orationis Dominicae prorsus obliti erant In the papacie they carry about the Prayers of Saint Bridget promising large Indulgencies to such as would recite them being in the mean time wholly forgetful of our Lords Prayer Lonicer reckoneth also the Disciples of one Martine Steinsback of Selestad in Germany for professed enemies to it who as once a proud Spaniard said that if he had been with God at the Creation he would have contrived things better did go about to correct the Lords Prayer as not well composed King James sayes the Brownists did not like it because it was a form Maresius a learned Frenchman numbers divers others that have imagined strange things against it And lastly for I am not so well acquainted with the enemies tenets as to reckon all Ross tells us of some that are against forms chiefly the Lords Prayer accounting such forms a choaking of the Spirit And when our Saviour tells us that He that is not with him is against him there are many more that are not so fast friends unto this Prayer as they ought to be for it is not enough to call him Lord and Master except we also do the things that he hath commanded us we profess to worship him in Prayers and Supplications of our own devising and these things indeed we ought to doe but then we should be sure not to leave the other undone that is to worship and invocate him in the same manner and form as he hath prescribed in his Word It may suffice to have offered these Arguments from the occasion and context of which this is a Sylloge 1. Forms of Prayer were in use among the Jewes 2. Their Doctors did ordinarily compose prayers to be used by their Disciples 3. Saint Iohn at first a Iewish Doctor upon new emergencies taught his Disciples a new form 4. The Disciples so used that form as that they were thereby observed and known to be Iohns Disciples 5. Upon this consideration the Disciples of our Saviour desired from him such a forme of Prayer 6. Our Saviour who was no enemy to forms in general nor to the forms of Prayer then used by the Iews in particular did agreeably to them compose for his Disciples a certain form to be used by them delivering it to them at two several times and on divers occasions but on both these with a plain injunction Thus pray ye and when we pay say Our Father c. It comes now to be considered whether the terms under which our Saviour injoyns it do aamount to the nature of a Precept so as to oblige Christians to the use of this Prayer in express words and as a form and this supposing it had not been twice delivered nor on such an occasion as St. Luke relates And in
order hereunto we have the import of two words in Saint Matthew to be considered viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And here I must remember you that our Saviour having reproved the tedious repetitions of heathnish forms passeth on to a most excellent form of his own and injoyns it with an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus pray ye Which word is in all languages used to signifie an identity and individuality with the thing to which it hath reference as when I endite to any and bid him write thus or thus I intend he should write the same words and so doubtless when Christ commanded his Disciples to pray Thus he meant in the same words Indeed when we deal in similitudes and make application by this word Thus or So there is onely a likeness to be understood but in all Problemes and School-Disputes in all quotations and repetitions it is used to signifie the same thing in terms to which it is annexed Thus when in the Philosopher we reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and when we repeat Syllogismes with a sic disputas we do or ought to respect the very terms and thus a good Grammarian tells us of the word Si Logicum spectes usum it is not a redditionis a note of Repetition and a disputant may be justly displeased if ye alter his terms and will tell you nonsic sed sic argumentatus sum I did not dispute so that is in your words but so that is in my own and in this sense the word is interpreted by most judicious Expositors as signifying not after this manner as our Translation paraphraseth it but which it will better bear in this form and in these words which Interpretation is warranted from the use of it in that signification in the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament Thus when Aaron and his sons were commanded On this wise ye shall bless the people the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Septuagint render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I am assured that the Priests kept to the very words of that Benediction and whether they should not have offended if they had done otherwise is to be considered Maimonides in his More Neuochim upon the words Sic benedicetis i. saith he hâc linguâ in this very language but there is no necessitie of understanding them so strictly onely it shewes they were far from varying the form And questionless they did and might with more faith and better success retain and use this and several other forms that were commanded them under this or a like expression then if they had varied them into any other words whatsoever If you or I should command a servant to deliver a message to a superior and put words in his mouth in oyning him to say thus or if you will after this manner I trow we think so well of our own expressions and know our own case and the qualitie of the person to whom we send so well that we should censure that servant as guilty of high presumption who should purt osely lay aside all our expressions which he might very well have remembred and deliver our message in words of his own framing nor are such servants like to mend the matter and therefore it is every where obvious in Scripture that the messengers of great and holy men Kings and Prophets have delivered their Embassie in the same words they received it and it would have been an act of disobedience and an argument of pride to have altered matter method and form and yet this is done to our Saviours injunction by all those who neither say this nor thus When God sent Moses to the children of Israel he commanded him Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel and the Text sayes Moses told Aaron all the words and Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses So in the New Testament when our Saviour sent two of his Disciples to bring him a Colt he commanded them if any should ask them why they loosed the Colt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus shall ye say unto them The Lord hath need of him such an answer might seem very unsatisfactory to the owner yet we find they say neither more nor less though their safety were at stake then what they were in express words commanded and therefore it cannot well be presumed that they made any variation here where the word of injunction is the same and the matter of a greater importance and so lastly when any Sentence is quoted out of the Old Testament in the New in the same terms The holy Penmen make â—se of this Word which also the Apostle parallels with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what saith the Law and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it speaketh thus And the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how are both used in one sense and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answereth to both And when in any of our writeings or sayings we quote the authority of learned men with a Sic dixit Aristot. Augustin c. we should be unfaithful did we not deliver their very words in their own language or as near as we can translate them in ours There is also somewhat considerable in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as joyned with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus pray ye Our Saviour doth not say look to this copy frame your Prayers after this example but when you actually pray Pray thus which is the same with St. Lukes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pray or say Our Father Pray or say Hallowed be thy Name for although the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be of a larger extent in its proper notion and like the materia prima be capable of all forms yet being here limited to the act of Praying and the act determined by a certain form the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath now received its principle of individuation and as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it respects a person is of the same signification with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 respecting a certain thing of the same signification as if our Saviour had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Pray ye in these words And when our Saviour delivers an intire uninterrupted Form of Prayer and immediately subjoyns a brief rational upon what seemed most harsh and obscure in it for if ye forgive c. But if ye forgive not c. This is to me a good Argument that that Prayer ought to be used by us without any addition or alteration pro hic nunc at certain times and occasions which he himself would not dismember by any Parenthesis or Exposition of his own But last of al supposing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did signifie only after this manner or to this purpose yet doubtless there is no danger in using the very words also whereas on the contrary if it
these later centuries then in the former nor doth he say much for the authority of it For first he saith it differs from other ancient copies especially in Saint Lukes Gospel so much as that for fear of giving offence he thought it fitter to conceale then publish it And secondly that some things in it differed from the received Scripture but so as it agreed with the Writings of Greeke and Latine Fathers Thirdly that it did in many things confirm the old Latine Edition And this last I take it is no great argument of its authority or purity Solomon Glassius suspects that it was corrected by the Latine for as Brugensis had said of his second copy that it was so conformed Quidni de antiquis Beza codicibus si qui fuerant asseri possit the same saith Glassius may be affirmed of Beza's And surely were not our Scriptures a more sure word then either the writings of Greeke and Latine Fathers I speak without any disparagement of them or if we had not a more pure and perfect copy of the Scriptures then the vulgate Latine we should not build on so sure a foundation as now by the mercy of God we do Besides Beza's copy differs from all others as in many things throughout and especially in Saint Luke so even in this Prayer retaining the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debts for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 trespasses which no other Greek copie doth But I shall use another medium because it is pertinent to the business in hand to prove the imperfection both of Beza's Greek and the Vulgate Latine copies which is this If the Doxologie in our Lords Prayer and those copies that retain it be authentique then such as leave it out are not so But the Doxologie c. Ergo. The authoritie of the copies retaining it we have proved alreadie and the verity of the Doxologie follows upon that but yet because the truth is generally opposed by the Papists and too much slighted by some Protestants I shall do my endeavour to assert it And I will not dissemble who they are and what they say that speak against it Erasmus saith Taxanda est illorum tomeritas qui non voriti sunt tam divinae precationi suas nugas assuers Their rashness is much to be blamed that were not afraid to annex their trifles to this Divine Prayer Kirstenius saith A pio quodam fidei imbecillis tanquam nova precatio additafuit more modestly that it was added as another Prayer by some pious man but of a weak faith Brugensis saith that it crept into the Greek of St. Matthew from the Liturgies of the Greek Church Grotius saith the same and Beza calls it Magnificam longè sanctissimam Sed irrepsisse in contextum quae in vetustissimis aliquot codicibus Graecis desit Here is much said by great men but Magna est veritas truth is great and will prevail To these things therefore thus I answer that Erasmus is not much to be confided in in this business for he gives an easie consent to the expunging that of 1 John 5. 7. which so plainly proveth the Doctrine of the Trinitie and that upon a weak ground because some Greek and some Latine bookes have it not the authoritie of which place hath beene irrefragably asserted by Gerhard in his dispute upon it But I shall prove this particular also ex concessis from premises granted by the Papists themselves viz. the authoritie of the Greeke books And first take the testimony of Brugensis though our enemy in this particular who speaking of the Doxologie saith thus Coronidem istam quae subsequitur in Graecis plerisque Syriacis libris c. That clause which followeth in most of the Greek and Syriack books we omit and Erasmus and Bellarmine grant that it is generally in the Greek books to whose authoritie you have heard their assent Solo. Glassius tells us particularly that it is in the ancient and correct copies of Henry Stephens and Aldus Manutius in others that are most ancient and approved Beza saith the same that it is in the Syriack and in most Greek copies And again Brugensis saith of one of the Greek copies at Paris which omits the Doxologie that it was corrected by the Latine because saith he in this place and in divers other all the Greek books adde what the Latine omit and so doth the Syriack interpreter and the Greek Fathers as he there observes Laurentius Valla saith Nihil hic erat Graecis additum sed à Latinis detractum i. Nothing was here added to the Greek but omitted in the Latine books And so Solomon Glassius Quis verò nos quove argumento certos reddat c. But who can assure us or by what argument that it was rather added to the Greek then substracted from the Latine seeing as he quoteth from Helvicus that the Greek is the fountain the Latine are the streams this the daughter and that the mother by which therefore it ought to be corrected and he thinks the Vulgate Latine inexcusable for maiming our Lords Prayer as it doth in St. Luke which he thinks a sufficient argument to justifie the Greek copies against it in other particulars So that if I may speak ingenuously what I think although Beza made very good use of his copie in his Annotations yet he seems a little too zealous in building the reputation of it on the disparagement of the many ancient Greek and Syriack copies that retain it which because they differ from his he saith they had those particulars supplied Olim long since which was indeed ab initio from the beginning as hath been proved but the Papists greedily swallow this concession and vomit it forth against Protestants as Huntly the Jesuite doth I shall therefore make my restringent the stronger by adding to the testimonies above the reasons for the authority of the Doxology 1. Because it is extant in the Syriack translation which is of greater antiquity and purity then any that wants it can pretend unto of this Brugensis saith Hoc teneo indubitanter This I firmly believe that the Syriack text of the New Testament ought to be had in esteem and honour with the ancient Greek exemplars And Franzius saith Omnes eruditi c. All learned men do assert the purity of this above all other versions which holy men did therefore so esteem because Christ did speak and preach in this Language so that without doubt the Apostles and Apostolical men did diligently inquire and conserve the formal words of Christ and by a pious labour did record them in this translation and moreover they did most happily translate the Apostolical Epistles seeing that these Syriack Doctors held frequent converse with the Apostles themselves And in p. 38. Of all the translations of the New Testament the Syriack is the chiefest most sure happy and divine compiled without doubt by Apostolical men which best knew the words of
which the Doctor addeth viz. that God calleth them to fervent Supplication as he should inable them to deal with him doth not overthrow but rather confirm the Prophets prescribing a form of words to be used for seeing Gods ordinary way of inabling his people was by directions given to his Prophets on their behalf by whose Ministrie the Lord puts words in their mouth as here and in Joel 2. It had been great presumption in them to have neglected the dispensation of the Spirit by the Prophet which with great Faith and confidence they might have used in the prescribed words and to have expected it by an immediate impulse on their own spirits in an extraordinary manner Dr. Owen And though the Apostles never prayed for any thing but what they were for the substance directed to by this Prayer of our Saviour yet we doe not finde that ever they repeated the very words here mentioned or once commanded or prescribed the use of them to any of the Saints in their dayes whom they exhorted to pray so fervently and earnestly Reply This Argument concludeth nothing being meerly Negative and it would certainly brand the Apostles with a note of disobedience as well for not observing the heads and matter of this Prayer as for omitting the form for we doe not hear or read of any publick or solemn Prayer of theirs wherein the matter and method was fully observed may we therefore conclude that they followed neither matter nor form If any one defect be enough to denominate a thing evil and nothing is good but what hath all its due circumstances attending I doe not see how those more solemne publicke Prayers can be so highly excellent which are hudled up without any respect to this either as to matter method or form and perhaps carry not the sense of more then one or two Petitions though they exceed it almost an hundred times in length But as for Apostolical practice there are many credible authorities among the ancients to induce us to believe that they did frequently use it as Saint Augustine Gregory c. nor can the bare denial of any one or more modern and prejudiced persons overthrow their testimonies or at least such a way of Arguing would raze many fundamentals of our Religion As for their commanding or prescribing the use of these words to others I cannot think so uncharitably of the Apostles as to conceive they omitted this dutie seeing our Savior gave them in charge To teach the people all things whatsoever he commanded them And the Apostle saith Hee had kept backe nothing that was profitable unto them And as in criminal Causes where there wanteth cleare Evidence concerning matter of Fact Judgement may justly be pronounced upon evident and pregnant Circumstances concerning the same So in this cause also Dr. Owen Nor in any of the rules and directions that are given for our praying either in reference to our selves or him by whom we have access to God is the use of these words at any time in the least recorded to us or recalled to mind as a matter of dutie Reply This was done twice by our Saviour in a most solemne manner and what need there should be of a third repetition by the Disciples I know not when the master had so authoritatively prescribed it what weight could the servants Fiat add doubless this double command was enough to oblige them nor will any good servant expect more then a twofold injunction to doe his dutie It is safer by far in a business of this nature to obey then dispute the commands of our Superiours Dr. Owen Our Saviour saith when ye pray say Our Father c. on supposition of the sense contended for and that a form of words is prescribed I aske whether we may at any time pray and not say so Reply Without doubt we may Our Saviour bids when we pray to enter into our closets Quere whether we may at any time pray and not enter into our closets Who doubts of this Again our Saviour bids us when we pray to observe the matter and method of this Prayer Quere whether we may pray at any time and not intirely observe the matter and method of this Prayer yes we doe and may both alter the method and omit many heads of the matter in our occasional Petitions Affirmative precepts bind us to the actual performance of such duties as are injoyned by them onely pro hic nunc as occasion shall require But yet when I consider that this Prayer is by our Saviour adapted to publick devotion and was given to his Disciples to be used as a Cognizance to whom they did belong I am somewhat of the Doctors mind that we may not at any time pray publickly and not say so Dr Owen Q. Whether the saying of these words be a part of the worship of God Reply That words are a part of the worship of God who requireth the service of the outward as well as of the inward man is undeniable and what words can lay better claim to this priviledge then Christs own If the varying of the matter of this Prayer into expressions of our own be to worship God then much more to present the same matter in Christs words for our alteration of the words may invert the method and change the sense and certainly the use of these very words other requisites in Prayer being adjoyned is as solemne and acceptable a service as any we can doe God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. When God bid the people Hos. 14. 2. to take with them words and the Priests in Joel 2. 17. to say Spare thy people c. it would sound harsh to make a Quere whether the saying of those prescribed words were a part of the worship of God If the praysing of God and praying unto God in the words of David be a part of Gods worship as undeniably it is then much more the praying unto God in the prescribed words of Christ. Dr. Owen Or whether any promise of acceptation be annexed to the saying so Reply Our Saviour was never yet reputed so hard a Master as to injoyn a Dutie and not to imply or express a promise of acceptation Every precept virtually carrieth a reward with it In keeping of them saith the Psalmist there is great reward What better promise then the forgiveness of sins yet this Christ annexeth to the due performance of the dutie in one of the Petitions For if ye forgive men their trespasses your heavenly Father will also forgive you and why is that Parable in Saint Luke adjoyned so immediately to this Prayer which our Saviour concludeth thus Aske and it shall be given you seeke and ye shall finde c. but to assure us that God will accept of their devotions who importune him their heavenly Father according to the manner and matter prescribed And when there is no Psalm or Prayer in Scripture either
like that which the Papists make against the use of the Scriptures by the Lay-people that one egge is not more like another viz. Because in them are some things hard to be understood therefore they permit them not to converse with them and to use means lay hold on opportunities to understand them better It is great pitty that the excellency of things should render them useless that the exemplary justice and goodness of Aristides should be the ground of his banishment Besides suppose the people be ignorant of the proper sense of one or two Petitions it cannot charitably be supposed that they are ignorant of all and their ignorance of some particulars will not be a sufficient excuse for the total omission of this duty no more I think then if a man should plead I am not in perfect charity I am dull and indisposed therefore I will not pray though such a one may sin in his prayer yet he sins more in the wilful omission and it is better to pray in a sense of our infirmities and unworthiness which still accompany us then not to pray at all because we cannot in some things justifie our selves Doctor Preston makes Prayer the best preparation to Prayer and Saint James commends it as a good mean to obtain spiritual knowledge If any man lack wisedome let him aske it of God and it shall be given him If this Prayer be so positively injoyned then it ought to be used as the only prayer at least it should be added to all other Affirmative precepts doe alwayes oblige us to the performance of them but not to the actual exercise of the duties injoyned by them at all times Thus when we are bid to pray continually we may as well conclude that we ought to do nothing but pray for which opinion the Euchites and Messalians were accounted Hereticks as to infer from hence that we ought to use this form only or this at all times of prayer and so from that Precept vers 6. of Matthew 6. we might as truly infer that all but closet prayers are unlawful because Christ there saith when thou prayest enter into thy closet whereas we might rather infer that as our Saviour commended closet prayers to his Disciples to distinguish them from hypocrites who were wont to pray chiefly in the streets and high wayes so he commendeth this form to difference them from the heathen and to be as a cognizance of their Discipleship to be used pro hic nunc on solemn occasions in publick and once a day at least in private as is implied in the fourth Petition 2. Supposing as some contend that our Saviour had injoyned this Prayer as a platform only as then there would have been no necessity of conforming every occasional Petition to the whole method and frame of it but it should have served as a rule by which to conform our more solemn Devotions so now our publick prayers being framed by it we ought to apply the form it self to these especially as a rule to discover their rectitude or deficiency and to supply their imperfections which if it were duly done as oft as we worship God in publick it would be as salt to season our Devotions and give the people assurance that we have done according to the pattern in the mount it might cover a multitude of infirmities and commend our Devotions to God and man And lastly it might prove an effectuall mean to revive that Unanimitie and Charitie which hath so long been cold and dead amongst us When I have kept close to the matter of this prayer in my devotion it is but a vain repetition to say over the form If those that fail in observing the matter and method would use the forme and the use of one of these is undoubtedly their dutie the farre greater part of our Ministers would use it 2. There can be no great danger in saying our prayers too oft whether in the same or other words Our Saviour repeated the same words three times when he was in an Agony Matthew 26. 44. O my Father if it be possible let this cup pass from me And if the same conceptions may be often repeated in other words of our own invention as is generally practised why may they not be once repeated in Christs words To goe from a less perfect form to a more perfect from our own to Christs is a good method There is an Art taught by Saint Paul how to make an old prayer new Phil. 3. 18. namely by renewing our fervent affections Of whom I have told you often and now tell you even weeping the increase of zeal and fervour of spirit will add new life and efficacy to any prayer But we find our hearts dull and cold under this as well as under other forms To this we may answer as the Apostle in another case ye are not straitned by this forme ye are straitned in your own bowels It may be your hearts are stupid at the reading of the Scriptures must that Ordinance therefore cease Mr. Ball telleth us of one Smith that would cast reading of Scripture out of the Assembly because in his opinion it quenched the Spirit But in such cases the deadness of our hearts is to be blamed not the form of Prayer which is full of life and spirit yet it is strange that any mans heart should be active and fervent under one that prayes a form to him ten or twenty times to him as long and presently grow stupid and cold at the devout repetition of this form perhaps by the same Minister Doth the holy Spirit assist you in hearing the Ministers form and withdraw from you in hearing this no doubtless but as we may be edified by Psalms and Hymnes and spiritual Songs brought into forms by men so much more by the use of this form composed and injoyned by the Son of God I should rather therefore think that the hearts of those that have been dull or disaffected under the prayers of the Ministers should be quickned and elevated by this as the drooping Disciples going to Emaus while Christ was speaking to them their hearts burned and so indeed the people in former dayes by their more reverend gestures their chearful and unanimous joyning with their Ministers in the use of this prayer were wont to express their most hearty devotion And here we may observe how little the enemies of the truth do agree One accusing it for being more large and comprehensive then their spirits and understandings can apprehend another for that it doth too much straiten and confine their spirits and make them flat and dull which accusations as they cannot be both true so without better proof we have no reason to believe either But most men cannot safe y say this Prayer they cannot call God Father nor pray for forgivenesse on that hard condition for such our Saviour maketh it of being forgiven as they doe