act contrary to the plain conviction of their Conscience and Conform If then there be any peace in the Church it must be either by a familiar sweet and plain discovery of their mistake or by a relaxing somewhat the rigor of the Terms of Communion The Forms by many years experience we find impossible and therefore as the Bishop of Cork and Ross expresses it the only probable expedient for Union left us is the later In the following History I must say that I have confin'd my self to urge those arguments of the Old Non-conformists which are against those parts of the Liturgy now in being and I have done it without passion or partiality My great care hath been to propose with indifference their judgment to the end the Reader considering it with the same equal mind as 't is written may be the better enabled to pass a Candid Censure on the whole I have not been curious in the choice of words for my design is only the information of the vulgar to whose capacity I have in the most familiar manner I could adjusted the following discourse That the God of Heaven will enable us all to follow peace with all men and Holiness for we must not so far pursue peace as to do any unholy thing in order thereunto ought to be our dayly Prayer to the God of Heaven April 3. 82. Farewell An Account of the Non-Conformists Principles concerning the Terms both of the Clergy and Lay-Conformity SINCE the 24th of August 1662 there have been many a Non-Conformist even among the Ministers and People of England who though they have different apprehensions concerning the Terms of Conformity do yet all agree in their not submitting unto all that is required by the Act of Vniformity There are some among the Ministers who can Conscientiously comply withall that is enjoyn'd the people and there are others that cannot That the Reader may with the greater clearness understand wherein the principal grounds of Non-Conformity consist I will with the greatest impartiality attempt the giving a particular account of the Principles of those who are now most commonly known by the name of Dissenters Not that I design to insist on all those principles they profess to embrace as they are sound Christians and good Protestants but only to shew what their Judgment is as they are Dissenters from the Church of England 1. There being a great difference between the Terms of Conformity imposed on the Ministers and those enjoyn'd the People there are some among the Non-Conforming Ministry who can submit unto the impositions laid on the people but not unto what is exacted from the Ministers They can hear yea read the ordinary Lord's days Service and joyn in the Communion of the Church but yet cannot Assent and Consent to every thing contained in the 39 Articles Book of Common Prayer and Homilies already extant and such as shall hereafter be set forth because they are fully convinc'd that there are several things contain'd in those Books which are not agreable unto the Word of God and because they cannot divine what may be inserted in the Book of Homilies hereafter to be published and are loath to subscribe to they know not what These have so great an advantage against the Conformists that Dr. Stilling fleet when he first entred on the controversies about the Terms of the peoples Communion with the Church wav'd that of the Ministers Conformity As these are Non-conformists so in their writings they triumph over the Conformists But then as they do ordinarily separate from the Communion of the Church and erect orderly Congregations for the Administrations of all Ordinances they have not that advantage which other Nonconformists have For say the Conformists unto 'em seeing you look on the terms of Lay-Communion to be lawfull and to shew so much you do occasionally hold Communion with us your Communion ought to be fixed and ordinary and that because the consideration of the Curches peace and the authority of our Governours in the enjoyning what is confessedly lawfull should oblige your Consciences There are several things replyed First The Ministers being consecrated unto God in that Holy Function of the Ministry dare not look back they commit Sacriledge should they withdraw themselves from the Ministry for wo unto them if they preach not Secondly The great necessity there is of their preaching in order to the reforming the people Moreover they add that they do not separate from the Church they do but preach as Lecturers or Curates unto the Parish Ministers In this controversie I 'll not engage my self for my business is principally design'd to give a right state of the controversie and so far as I can to offer somewhat in the Non-conformists defence which as to this particular shall be only to clear them from that reproach which is cast on them about their going to Church to Divine Service and the Communion and yet do not conform as Ministers The answer is easie viz. There is much more than these things required of them Viz. Subscriptions as enjoyn'd by the Act of Uniformity besides the abjuring the Covenant to the which several who have nothing to offer against the ordinary Lord's days Service and the other Terms of Lay-Communion cannot yield their Consciences 2. There are other Non-conforming Ministers who cannot conscientiously conform either unto the Terms impos'd on the Minister or People Of these there are two sorts 1. Some who look on the particular forms of Prayer imposed on all to be Lawfull but not Expedient 2. Others who consider this particular form of Prayer to be Vnlawfull 1. Of the first opinion are several Presbyterians if not some Congregational Divines For the clearer understanding their Sentiments we must consider 1. That there is a difference between the lawfulness of set forms of Prayer in Thesi and in Hypothesi A form of Prayer in general may be lawfull but this or the other set form in particular sinfull In the Popish Mass Book there are several forms of Prayer which are by sound Protestants esteemed sinfull not because they are forms so much as because they are such forms There are very few besides some Independents and Anabaptists who judge all forms of Prayer because they are forms to be Unlawfull 2. There is also a difference between the lawfulness of a form and its expediency A Stinted Liturgy may in some cases be both lawfull and expedient and in other though in it felf lawfull yet highly inexpedient For ought I can say to the contrary a set form of preaching is as lawfull as a set form of Prayer and 't is manifest that there was a time in the beginning of Edward the 6ths Reign that the making Sermons for the Ministers was as convenient as the making Prayers for them such was the ignorance peevishness and contentiousness of those in Holy Orders That a stinted form was as neeessary to be us'd in preaching as 't was in praying for which reason as an
be less so under a Catholick King then they may say you have with the approbation of his Holyness the Pope what formerly you had by the good liking of the Heretick only 'T is not improbable that at first the Pope will be content we shall use the same Liturgy we now have with very little alterations and to gain England under his Tyranny will consent to what Pope Pius would have done in Queen Elizabeth's days and a late Pope in Laud's time and then by little and little add unto the Liturgy sometime a few Prayers and again for the greater Solemnity Decency and Order in the Administration of Baptism may add to the sign of the Cross that of Salt and Spittle and Lights c. Seeing then this may be so there are many among the Dissenters who are afraid to comply with the use of the English Liturgy least by their practice they give an unanswerable advantage to their implacable enemy the Papist They are aware of the design they are sensible how the Romanists have been practising on the Church of England and what use they 'l make of their not driving on the Reformation much farther and therefore now in this day do think they shall highly provoke the Lord to jealousie should they give countenance to the Service Book which may be so easily improved to the advancing the superstition of the Roman Catholick But if after all it be said by any that these things are Light-points and not so much to be insisted on no other answer shall be given but that of the Reverend Mr. Dering in his reply to an objection of a like nature as 't is in a part of the Register If I seem curious or stand upon light points beside that in the worship of God there is nothing light so the Conscience of man is exceeding tender that it will neither be troubled nor touch'd in the least tittle contrary to the perswasion of truth The weight of sin is not in substance of matter but in the Majesty of God that is offended and be the thing never so little yet the breach of his Commandment deserveth death This faith we have learn'd of him that is the wisdom of the father and our only Prophet that is whoever shall break one of these least Commandments these words which are shall break one of the least have every one a greater weight than may be contemn'd of any man Argument IV. There is in this Service Book a strange disorder and confusion unworthy the grandure and Majesty of that God unto whom we make our approach in Prayer God is a great King his Name is dreadfull even among the Heathen he is great and greatly to be feared and reverenced even in the Assembly of his Saints God is in Heaven we on the Earth and therefore as our words must be few even so must they be utter'd in the gravest and most serious manner God is a jealous God and 't is dangerous to trifle with him when we come to worship him Yea God is a God of Order and not of Confusion and therefore our Addresses should be in the most Solemn Order This all will grant but the question is whether there be any such disorder in the Common Prayer Book For this has been formerly objected against the extempore and free Prayer of Dissenters who are said to enter rashly into God's presence and pray after the most disorderly manner conceivable how then comes this to be urg'd may some say against that set form of Prayer which has been with the greatest deliberation of the Fathers of the Church Compos'd I reply That the Reader may the more distinctly Comprehend what I have to offer on this Fourth head of Argument I must beseech him to consider 1. That I am not defending such as will inconsiderately Rush into the presence of Almighty God and prophane instead of honouring the name of God in Prayer I durst not plead for such an Irreverent or uncomely practice Neither 2. Do I design to offer any thing against those who will seriously meditate on what they have to do when they make their approaches unto the Throne of Grace Premeditation on the matter to be prayed for on the Method of the Address yea and on the choice of Expressions is so far from a Sin in my Judgment that I verily believe it to be a duty Neither 3. Do I Object against the prudent and necessary Use of some set form of Prayer in publick for many may be endow'd with the Grace of Gods Spirit who abound not with its Gifts and 't is not enough that a man has the Grace of Gods Spirit to enable him to be the Mouth of Others to God in Prayer 't is the Gift that in this Case is requisite the which some may not have who yet must pray in publick or publick Worship must be totally omitted in which Case the using a Form of Prayer is not only lawful but highly expedient These things premised the Reader may easily perceive who it is for whom I do not Apologize as well as that I am not arguing against the Divine Service Book as it Contains a Form of Prayers nor as it a form imposed which yet I approve not of but as 't is such a form so disorderly and Confused a Form This is insisted on in the Altar of Damascus and in the Lincoln Abridgment In the Altar it is thus expressed Then again their Prayers are shred into so many small pieces They pray in Two or Three Lines and then after having read some other things come and pray as much more and so to the Twentieth or Thirtieth time with pauses between Prayers should be continued together not cut off and interrupted or cut in small pieces They do with their Prayers as they do with their Gospels and Epistles which they rent from their Contexts which would serve for memory and greater Edification So sar he To whom I add That if a Dissenting Minister in Pulpit before his Sermon when he addresses himself to God in Prayer should utter Three or Four Sentences in Prayer and then go off to another thing to the reading Two or Three Verses in the Bible and then to his Prayer and then to Reading would not the generality of the Church say this Dissenting Minister by Confounding Reading and Prayer offers up his Requests after a most disorderly manner But to the Abridgment In the Abridgment 't is urg'd That by this Book sundry things that bring great Disorder and Confusion unto the Worship of God are appointed As that the People should say after the Minister whole Sentences of Prayer and Scripture yea the Minister one part of the Prayer and the people another and in sundry parts of the Letany the people make the Prayer and the Minister only directs them what to pray for The Minister at some time must pray and the People give the reason of the Prayer for Instance The Minister Prayes saying Give peace in our days
English Liturgy was drawn up for the Ministers help in prayer a Book of Homilies was prepar'd to be read instead of preaching unto both which at first all such as had not a License were equally oblig'd But though a stinted form of preaching be in it self lawfull doth it therefore follow that 't is always expedient The like may be said of a form of prayer 3. That about things lawfull that is about such things as are in their own nature indifferent enquiry must be made after their expediency or inexpediency pro hic nunc For many things which are in Thesi lawfull are yet in Hypothesi because of their inexpediency sinfull To eat flesh is in it self lawfull but to eat flesh offer'd unto Idols when another acquaints thee with it is inexpedient and therefore sinfull There are many things that are lawfull which because they edifie not but offend and grieve such for whom Christ dyed are inexpedient yea as so circumstantiated are unlawfull and cannot without sins be complyed with The Apostle Paul in his Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians doth somewhat amply treat of this point where he sayes that though all things are lawfull yet all things are not expedient that is as the Apostle himself explains it all things edifie not All things i. e. all indifferent things are lawfull but not at all times in every circumstance for God's glory and therefore not expedient In the exercise of our liberty about things indifferent if we will follow the Apostle Paul we must take heed that we do nothing that affords grief or proves a stumbling block to those for whom Christ dyed but must endeavour that all things be to the Glory of God and the edification of Souls This is evident from Rom. 14. and 1 Cor. 10. If then the Ordinary Lord's dayes Service be in it self lawfull and indifferent yet if it's use be a grief and a stumbling block to those for whom Christ dyed no way conducive to God's glory nor the peoples edification its use is so very inexpedient as to become unlawfull yea sinfull unto such as know so much the which inexpediency remains notwithstanding any Humane Law to the contrary For when the case is as here stated the word of God shews it to be inexpedient and therefore cannot be altered by any law of man That the Lord's dayes Service though in it self lawfull is in its use inexpedient Some may argue thus namely It becomes all good Christians to mind the Peace and Edification of those Churches where they live and unto this we ought to have a special regard in the exercise of our liberty about things indifferent There is a manifest division among Protestants in this Kingdom the which hath prov'd very pernicious unto the Protestant Religion and if encreased cannot but be much more mischievous and therefore all men must take heed that in the use of their liberty they do not what necessarily tends to the multiplying divisions If we cannot Unite the Conformist and Non-conformist we must do all that lawfully we can to fix an Union between Conformist and Conformist yea and between Non-conformist and Non-conformist This every judicious and sober Christian will I presume grant from which concession 't is thus argued even from the supposition of the lawfulness of the Lord's day Service against the expediency of its use pro hic nunc If a Non conformist's using this service dothnot contribute any thing towards an Vnion with the Conformist but tends to the dividing the Non-conformist though the service be in it self lawfull yet its use is not expedient But a Non-conformists using this Service doth not contribute any thing towards an Union with the Conformist As Mr. Read's experience does evince for sayes he in his case Though we yield as far as we can in things lawfull there is no Vnion no Peace nor Agreement to be had with such men but tends to the dividing of the Non-conformists as is most manifest to any that will but deliberately consider the general practice of the Dissenting Brethren Therefore the use of the Lord's dayes Service pro hic nunc highly inexpedient and not to be done The multiplying divisions among good Protestants cannot be for God's glory nor for the edification of the people but has been and still is a stumbling block unto some and great grief unto others for whom Christ dyed and therefore a man should rather suffer than use it 'T is quaeryed by some whether or no the generality of Non-conformists do esteem the use of the ordinary Lord's dayes Service expedient In answer unto which I may safely assert that the generality of the Non-Conformists do at least consider the Conforming unto the Lord's dayes Service so very inexpedient that they cannot Conscientiously comply with it This is manifest from their avowed Principles and Practises 1. Their Principle is that in matters of Religion whatever is in it self lawfull and pro hic nunc expedient is their Duty The expediency of a lawfull thing makes it Duty It has therefore been the Conscientious endeavour of Non-conformists to find out the expediency of those things which are lawfull i. e. whether the use thereof is for God's glory and the edification of the people and they judge themselves bound in Conscience to do whatever lawfully they may to the end God may be glorified and the edification of immortal souls advanced 2. The Practice of the Non-conformists hath been by this Rule as they dare not do what is to God's dishonour so they are afraid to omit what will be for God's glory and for edification Their being turn'd out of their places to the impoverishing the families of some the great prejudice of all does evince they cannot venture on the doing what is to God's dishonour Their greivous sufferings on the account of their publique meetings do as manifestly demonstrate that they are afraid to omit what is for God's glory and the edification of the people To thefe considerations add that if these Conscientious Non-conformists had been convinced that the use of the ordinary Lord's dayes Service had been both lawfull and expedient that is had been for Gods glory and the people's good would they have lived so many a year in the neglect and omission of so excellent a duty What do they make conscience of one duty but no conscience of another Surely I cannot believe it For this reason I think my self oblig'd to conclude that the true reason why the generality of the Non-conforming Ministers who do not use this Service is because they think it inexpedient they believe it is not for Gods glory nor for edification they fear that should they use it they should dishonour God and be a scandal and grief to many for whom Christ dyed But II. There are others who consider the particular forms of worship appointed in the Liturgy for the ordinary Lords dayes service to be unlawfull of this opinion are some Presbyterians the Congregational generally and
be to all according to the Rubrick and Canon or only to some part But If the latter it will not satisfie the Church for by refusing to be present at any part thereof they are to be denyed the Lord's Supper and if when call'd to shew their reason of such their refusal they speak any thing against either the Service it self or any Ceremonies or Rites in use they are by an Ipso facto Excommunication Excommunicated according to the 4th and 6th Canons whereby to some it seems apparent that unless their Conformity be full and compleat they are as lyable to the displeasure and censure of the Church as if they had not at all conform'd The Minister must read all required and the people must joyn with him in it or be expos'd to the severe lash of Ecclesiastical Fulminations but this many a Dissenter cannot do neither doth every Conformable Minister in this respect actually conform to the Canon 'T is true every Minister according to the import of the second Article unto which he that subscribes is oblig'd to use the form in the said book prescribed in Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and no other The which was expresly enjoyn'd all Ministers primo Eliz. Where 't is said That all and singular Ministers in any Parish Church or other place within the Realm of England shall be bounden to say and use all their Common and Open Prayer in such order and form as is mentioned in the said Book and none other or otherwise that is sayes Dr. Heylin neither before nor after Sermon no other prayer unless the bidding of prayer with the alone use of the Lord's Prayer is allowed by the Canon That this is the sense of the Church of England how contrary soever the practice of her Sons generally is will appear with conviction to such as soberly consider that the weightyest arguments which are produc'd to prove the usefulness of a publique Liturgy are fetch'd from such Topicks as necessarily inferr the unlawfulness of a publique praying ex tempore or by a form of a private Ministers Composing One great Argument is given us by Mr. Hutton in the words of the Counsell of Melevis which is that a publique Liturgy approv'd of either by a Council or Synod must be used least any thing peradventure be otherwise framed contrary unto Faith either by ignorance or for want of study or due meditation or as others add least those Ministers who pray ex tempore or use a set form of their own composing should be Immethodical in their Prayers using Tautologies or having in 'em Nonsense and several uncomely slips beside 't is added that we must use a publique Liturgy that the prayers of the several Congregations within this Realm may be sent up unto God in the same words c. All which is against the use of all free Prayer or Prayers Compos'd by the Minister himself for which reason many are of an opinion that the Liturgy was design'd to be instead of all other prayer the which seems to be the meaning of the 14th Canon where 't is exprest that there must be an using the Liturgy without either diminishing in regard of Preaching or any other respect or adding any thing either in the matter or form thereof But that many among the Dissenters cannot satisfie themselves in abiding by a form of prayer thus erected to the publique disuse of the gift of prayer is very certain see Dr. Collins on this Subject Though there are some circumstances wherein a form of prayer is lawfull namely when the person whose duty 't is to pray in publique has not a gift in that case to use a form is much better than not to pray at all which is enough to shew that the using a form of prayer is not in it self unlawfull seeing if it had been so it could never be a duty However to set up a form in opposition to the publique use if spiritual or free prayer is in the opinion of some not only a practice unknown to the Church for several hundred years but moreover contrary to the present dispensation of the Spirit 1. They assert that the imposing a publique Liturgy thus is a practice that was unknown to the Church for several hundred years The Reverend and Judicious Mr. Baxter in his Search for the English Schismatick asserts That no One Liturgy was imposed on any National Church or any Patriarchal for many hundred years after the Apostles dayes yea and after Constantine but every Bishop or Pastor was the chooser of his words and practice and as others a publique Liturgy was not Universally impos'd untill Antichrist did arise by the power of whose might Gregories Liturgy in contempt of that of Ambrose was impos'd on the Churches which Liturgy was not received from the Apostles nor in many years after but some part had its rise from Pope Sixtus the First another from Celestin c. as Platina in the lives of Sixtus Celestin and Gregory does assert Furthermore Bellarmine himself does acknowledge that the Bishops of particular Churches ever had allowed 'em a power of making Offices for their own Churches which point of Bellarmine is confirmed by uncontroulable evidences in this our own Country where untill the time of the Reformation there was great diversity in saying and singing in Churches some following Salisbury use and some Hereford some the use of Bangor and some that of York and others the use of Lincoln All which were suppressed by Edward the 6th in order to the carrying on a farther Reformation in the Room of which Offices one only was set up as what did most effectually answer the great design of our worthy Reformers which was the promoting a thorough Reformation with as much speed as the badness of those times would bear it 2. As 't is thus evident that there was no publique form of prayer impos'd on any particular Church the first 300 years nor Universally till Antichrists appearing in the World and that even then particular Churches enjoy'd the liberty of forming Offices for their own particular Churches in like manner the erecting any one publique form in opposition to the publique use of the Gift of Prayer is so contrary to the Gospel dispensation which is the dispensation of the Spirit that the Divines of the Church of England cannot but by their practice discover their dislike of such impositions They do not therefore adhere so firmly unto these forms but that before Sermon they use some of their own Composing which is a sufficient demonstration that praying extempore or the publique use of a prayer Compos'd by a Minister in private is neither unlawfull nor inexpedient and that the Arguments produc'd from the absurdities of such a practice to prove the usefulness of a publique Liturgy are not cogent enough to command their assent the which cannot but countenance and justifie the Dissent of the Non-Conformists as they refuse to conform unto the Liturgy as 't is enjoyn'd as the
Church of England But there are many things in their own nature according to the confession of the Church os England indifferent which yet are made so necessary a part of Christian Religion as to be enjoyned as Termes of Christian Communion Whoever conscientiously refuses to be present at their publique Prayers or to kneel at the Sacrament is by the 27th Canon deprived of the Sacrament yea and though the Minister who shall wittingly administer the same to notorious offenders and perjur'd villains incurres not for such a default the pain of Suspension Yet no Minister when he celebrateth the Communion shall wittingly Administer the same to any but to such as kneel under pain of Suspension nor under the like pain to any that refuse to be present at Publique Prayers according to the Orders of the Church of England Thus not only a form os Prayer but this particular form of Prayer in which form there are many things with which these Dissenters cannot comply are made so necessary a part of Religion that if they conform not unto them they are denyed the Lord's Supper and what Minister soever admits such unto the communion is lyable unto a suspension a greater punishment than is threatned against those Ministers who admit such as commit the horrible sin of perjury Moreover though they are convinc'd in conscience they sin if they kneel yet they cannot be admitted unto the Lord's Supper unless they kneel Let us put the best sense on these things and 't is this As the notorious offender and perjur'd villain cannot be admitted to the Sacrament because he complyes not with God's Terms the Holyest man on earth cannot be admitted unless he complies with Man's Termes But what is this less than setting up mans posts with Gods or a setting as high if not a higher value on the precepts of men as on the commands of God But seeing our Lord Christ has purchased a liberty for them whereby they may be admitted to the Sacrament on easier Termes than Man will permit they must abide by this liberty in doing which they do but discharge their duty in asserting the Lord Jesus Christ to be the Sole Author of the whole of Christian Religion and of all the Termes of Christian Communion But 2. To be more particular in shewing why they cannot joyn with the Church in the Sacraments In doing which I 'll contract my self in giving you no other than what I find in the Altar of Damascus 1. Of Baptism I 'll only offer a very little that is insisted on in my Author and therefore will pass by that passage in the Second Prayer before Baptism where the Remission of sins is defired by Spiritual Regeneration As if the pardon of sin consisted rather in the Sanctification of the soul than the dissolving the obligation to punishment and consider the Interrogatories which are these Dost thou forsake the Devil and all his works c. Dost thou believe c. Wilt thou be Baptized in this Faith The Child hath not Understanding nor Faith nor desire of Baptism And how be it the child had Faith can the God-father tell absolutely and in particular that this Child whom he presenteth doth Believe desire Baptism or forsake the Devil It is a foolish thing and great mockery of God's service to demand that of Infants which was at the first demanded of such as were come to years of discretion and were converted from Gentilism The children of Faithfull Parents are within the Covenant of Grace whereupon it is that they are made partakers of the Seal of the Covenant The Covenant being made with the Parents in their Faith and not the Faith of the child the Parents should give confession of their own Faith and not of the Faith of the child which is not because their own Faith is the condition of the Covenant upon their part whereupon God promiseth to be their God and the God of their Seed Whereupon also it followeth that the Father of the child should present the child and give confession and not another because the Covenant is made with him and his Seed and the child is his Seed not the Seed of another whom we call Godfather The Natural Father is the proper God-father Others may be Witnesses of Baptism but that the Father should or can resign this duty to another I deny After that the child is dipped or sprinkled and Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost the Priest maketh a Cross upon the child's Forehead Saying We receive this child into the Congregation of Christ's Flock and do sign with the sign of the Cross in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ Crucified and Manfully to fight under his Banner against Sin the World and the Devil and to continue Christ's Faithfull Souldier and Servant unto his Lifes end He saith not we have received but we do receive as if the child were not received by Baptism but by Grossing or as if the child were again received by Crossing which was before received by Baptism This signing with the cross is no decent gesture it is rather like a jugglers gesture than a gesture of decency and comeliness It must then be used as a Symbolical and Significant Rite But we have no such sign set down in the Word of God as to make two Cross Lines in the Air with our fingers to represent the cross of a Tree or to signifie unto us that we should not be ashamed of the Cross of Christ c. Thou shalt make unto thy self no Image that is any Representation forged in thy own brain to be set up in the Worship of God Admit once the Aerial Cross in Baptism ye cannot refuse to set up the material Cross and the Rood in the Kirck nor the Wooden or Stone Crosses in the High-way For all may signifie the same thing that the Cross on the forehead And by this reason every one may wear a Silver Cross upon his forehead also Further not only other significant crosses material may be brought in upon this ground but also the rest of the beggarly ceremonies of Baptism to deface and deform the purity plainness and simplicity of Christ's institution As to put salt into the mouth of the child to anoint with Oyl the breast and shoulders and the top of the head with Holy Crism and to put a burning Taper into his hands c. for these Toyes had their own glorious signification as well as the Cross Lastly What doth it signifie but that which is already signified in baptism The same valour and courage and constant profession and fighting under Christ's banner is a part of that Grace which is sealed by baptism But besides that it is a significant toy it is also esteemed effective for they say that the infant by it is dedicated to the service of him that dyed on the cross Who did sanctifie this sign for such an use Are men able to
do it It was made also a consecrator of Water Bread and Wine and all other Holy things in time of Popery for the which corruption we ought to abhorr it Again we Sign this child in token that he shall continue Christ's faithfull Souldier to his Lives end These words shall continue to his lives end compared with the like in the Epistle of the 22 Sunday after Trinity God shall continue the work in you to the end shew unto us that we use the cross for a pledge to give assurance to the child to continue in grace to the end which if it be so then it serveth to work faith and is used effectually saith Parker Hooker saith that there cannot be a more forceable means to avoid that which may deservedly procure shame If it be in some sort a means to secure from confusion Everlasting then it is in some sort effective of Grace In a word suppose there were no sinfull use of it for the present the horrible abuse of it in times by-past and the danger and peril of these same abuses are sufficient to remove it out of this Holy Sacrament where it is set up in such honourable State beside the Lord 's own Altar 2. Of the Lord's Supper I 'll not mention all is said of this I 'll only apply my self to what is said of Kneeling which gesture though not according to Christs example nor the nature of the Ordinance is imposed as a necessary condition of our Right in the Lord's Supper whatever right Faith and Repentance may give unto this Ordinance no jus in re no right in it is acknowledged to any among us but such as Kneel whereby Kneeling is made by the Church of England a necessary Term and yet look'd on but as indifferent as if a man had been invested with a power of making a thing in it self indifferent to become a necessary part of Christs Religion But to give you what I find in the Altar of Damascus Where 't is said That without any farther he and they viz. Minister and People Communicate Kneeling after the Popish manner that is with a gesture of Adoration when they are beholding the signs taking eating drinking and inwardly in their minds should be meditating on the signification and the fruit and benefit which they reap by Christ Crucified and consequently cannot without distraction of mind from this employment of the Soul and Meditation pray a set and continued prayer to God or cannot meditate and be employed in the present action without distraction of mind from the prayer and therefore either they pray irreverently which they will not grant or do Communicate this Gesture of Adoration to the other imployments of the Soul and of the outward senses and members of the body about the objects presented which they must grant and so nill they will they they must be forced to confess that they commit idolatry Kneeling is no decent gesture for a Table for commodity they say maketh decency but this gesture is confessed not to be commodious as sitting is It is then enjoyned for another reason to wit for Reverence but to kneel for Reverence and Religious respects is ever Adoration in the highest degree To kneel for reverence that is to adore is not enjoyned here for prayer neither may prayer lawfully be enjoyned in time of another action and part of God's worship to be performed by the same person And suppose it were enjoyned for the short prayer uttered by their priest yet are not the outward senses and inward faculties employed principally on that prayer but upon another action principally and directly intended in the institution whereas the other is only super-added by man Let them frame their Canons and Acts as they please and suppose that they kneel for reverence of the Sacrament common sense may teach us that it is done for that respect either totally or principally but let it be in the least part yet that least part is idolatry Beside the idolatry of this gesture it cannot stand with the right manner of celebration and rites of the institution For when they kneel for adoration they cannot carry the cup from hand to hand nor divide the elements among themselves as Christ hath commanded In many places the people are raised from their kneeling to come about the Table there to receive kneeling and then are directed to their places again saith the Author of the Survey The priest giveth the Bread and the Wine to every one severally out of his own hands When the cup is to be carryed from one to another the communicant is too prophane in their opinion to reach it the Priests Holy hand must take it from one and give it to the other but Christ willed his Disciples to divide it among themselves and it was carryed from hand to hand indeed after the manner of the last paschal cup. When Christ therefore gave the Bread and the Wine he said in the plural number take ye eat ye c. The English priest speaketh in the singular number when he giveth the elements he annexeth not Christs words containing a comfortable promise and uttered in an Enunciative form but other words invented by man and in form of a prayer converting one part of God's worship into another or else confounding them By this 't is manifest that many Ministers may conscientioufly refuse to conform to the Termes imposed on the people They can no more satisfie their consciences in complying with the Termes of Lay-Communion than others can with those of the Ministers Conformity Moreover II. As they cannot hold Communion with the Church in the Holy Sacraments and consequently not comply with what is required of the people in order thereunto so neither can they with a safe Conscience joyn in the ordinary Lord's dayes Service They cannot conscientiously approve of many things in that service unto which they must give their approbation if they conform thereunto Whoever conforms doth thereby shew his approbation of what he conforms unto To what a man conforms to that he manifests his good liking why is it that some cannot conform unto the By-Offices but because they do not approve of them and why do any conform to the ordinary Lord's dayes Service but because they approve of it which is as much as if it had been said Conformity is an Overt Act of Approbation 't is in practice an Approving the thing But some scrupulous Dissenters cannot conform unto the ordinary Lord's dayes Service without conforming to several things to which they refuse the giving their approbation By the ordinary Lord's dayes Service they understand all that Office that is according to the Liturgy and Canon of the Church appoynted to be read Ordinarily on the Lord's day or to speak in the Common Prayer Dialect that Service that is appointed to be read ordinarily on Sundayes against the use of which they do more generally argue thus I. If they must conform to the ordinary Lord's dayes Service it must
only form of prayer to be us'd in publique II. But to be more particular there are many among the Dissenters who are furnish'd with such Arguments as the Reader may find in the Abridgment of that book which the Ministers of Lincoln Diocess deliver'd to the King Anno 1605. as also in a part of the Register and among the reasons for Refusal of Subscription exhibited to Cotton Bishop of Exeter by the Devonshire and Cornish Ministry and in several other discourses as in Bayly's Parallel of the Liturgy with the Mass-book Ames his fresh suit against Ceremonies c. The which have fix'd such strong convictions on the Consciences of some Dissenters concerning the unlawfulness of the present Liturgy that they cannot safely joyn with any in the use of it Though some who have not receiv'd such powerfull impressions from the weight of those Arguments can read the Common Prayer and joyn with such as do to the end they may save themselves from the severity of Penal Lawes yet other Dissenters will rather submit themselves to the greatest extremities than venture to dishonour God by doing what they are convinc'd is a sin That the Reader may be mov'd to entertain some charitable thoughts concerning such persons and that the common objection that is laid in against their Non-Conformity which is Humour and Fancy and a Peevish Obstinacy may be fully answered I 'll give an Historical Account of some of those Arguments which do so fully convince some Dissenters that they cannot without laying an unnatural violence on their Families conform Argument I. I. They are perswaded that according to the Rubrick the same honour is put on the Apocryphal Books which is due alone to the Sacred Scriptures For they are appointed to be read as a part of the Old Testament without any note of difference from the Canonical In a discourse before the Common Prayer concerning the Service of the Church 't is asserted that nothing is ordained to be read but the very Pure word of God the Holy Scriptures or that which is agreable to the same beside this after the order how the Psalter is to be read 't is said in the Title how the rest of Holy Scripture is to be read under which Title several orders are to be found Namely 1. The Old Testament is appointed for the first Lessons at Morning and Evening Prayer so as the most part thereof will be read every year once and in the 3d. order 't is said that to know what Lessons shall be read every day look for the day of the Month in the Kalendar following and there ye shall find the Chapters that shall be read for the Lessons both at Morning and Evening Prayer and in the Rubrick after the Psalms are read 't is order'd that then shall be read distinctly with an audible voice the First Lesson taken out of the Old Testament as it is appointed in the Kalendar whereby 't is evident that what is appointed in the Kalendar to be read for the First Lesson is consider'd as a part of the Old Testament the Holy Scripture the pure word of God But the Apocryphal books are in the Kalendar appointed to be read for First Lesson for almost Two Months together even from the latter end of September untill November 24th beside the Holy dayes on which these books are appointed to be read To which add that this is done to the constant neglect of reading a great part of the Sacred Scriptures namely the two books of Chronicles Solomons Song and a great part of the Revelations That 't is the appointment of the Church to read the Apocryphal books as a part of the Holy Scriptures is farther confirm'd by Archbishop Bancroft in the conference held at Hampton Court where as the abridgment has it he tax'd Jerom for calling these books Apocrypha and said he was the first that gave them that name and called his objections against them the old Cavills of the Jews And the Bishops of Winchester affirm'd at the same time that they must needs be held Canonici ad informandos mores Canonical for the information of manners To these I 'll add what Mr. Hutton in his answer unto the reasons of the Ministers of Devon and Cornwall to this very objection They are saith he called Holy Scriptures in a signification at large because the subject they entreat of is God his Love Power our Sanctification and Obedience to him And they may be held Canonical wholsom Doctrines being thence deduced though not simply of themselves yet wherein they agree with the Canon as also because they may serve as they alwayes heretofore have done for a rule to direct and order our Conversation aright In this answer though he seems without the approbation of the Rubrick to make a difference between the Sacred Scriptures and the Apocrypha books yet at length falls in with the Bishop of Winchester asserting that they are a Canon or Rule to direct our Conversation aright But in opposition hereunto 't is generally by sound Protestants asserted 1. That the Apocryphal books are not a part of the Holy Scriptures the pure word of God 2. That there are several things appointed to be read which are not agreable to the word of God nor can be defended by any sound Protestant To make this point the more clear I 'll give the Reader an account of what is reply'd to the distinction of the Bishop of Winchester about the Canon of Faith and Manners and then offer what arguments have been urg'd against this practice of the Church In the second part of the defence of the reasons of the Devonshire and Cornish Ministers 't is thus reply'd to the aforesaid distinction But that we may farther see how heartless and unsound this distinction of Canonical for manners but not for Faith is let us observe how they here make a distinction of faith and manners where none is for all Doctrines of God's word are in this respect Doctrines of faith whether they concern matters of believing or of other Conversation of life wherefore the Apostle hath coupled them together in that place to Timothy saying all Scripture given by inspiration of God c. shewing us thereby that upon one and the same divine Revelation our knowledge and practice both must be grounded And I would entreat these men that give us this distinction to tell us whether it be not a point of faith That we must worship one God and him after his own manner reverencing his Name and keeping his Sabbaths c. And whether it be not a point of faith That we must honour our Parents and Superiors that we must not Kill commit Adultery Steal Slander Covet And whether our Consciences be not bound in these things by the Divine Testimony as well as in any point of our understanding surely unless our Divinity faileth all the word of God is the object of Faith that as well which directeth to manners as that which revealeth
aside the Translation that is most exactly agreeable to the Original and use one that is not only imperfect absurd and senseless but in some things so contrary to the Original But some Dissenters think that their Conformity in this respect cannot but prove pernicious to the Christian Religion as it casts a reproach not only on the last and best translation but even on the Original it self They know how jealous God is about his word unto which no additions diminutions or alterations can be made but to the provoking the most high and the wounding their Consciences and therefore are afraid to conform Argument III. III. The third Argument doth more immediately concern the very Service it self unto which the Dissenters refuse to Conform because of that similitude likeness and agreement there is between it and the formes of Prayer which the Papists use That the Reader may be the more fully acquainted with the true State of this controversie about the agreeableness there is between the English and Roman Service Books and what 't is the Dissenters aim at by their insisting so very much on it I must shew 1. What they say concerning the agreableness that is supposed to be between these Service Books 2. How this came to pass What occasion'd our adhering so closely to the Popish Service Book even when we forsook their Communion 3. The Reasonings of some Dissenters from that agreeableness is suppos'd to be between these two books against the English Service First What they say concerning the agreableness that is suppos'd to be between these two Service books The Dissenters do out of King Edward's Letter unto the Devonshire and Cornish Rebels give this following account of it namely As for the Service in the English Tongue thus manifest reasons for it and yet perchance it seemeth to you a new Service and indeed is none other but the old the self same words in English which were in Latine The difference is that you our Subjects should understand in English that which before was spoke in Latine If the Service of the Church was good in Latine it remaineth good in English for nothing is alter'd but to speak with knowledge that which was spoke with ignorance Furthermore these Dissenters add as I find in their Anatomy of the Service Book That every piece and parcel of the Liturgy word for word is out of these Popish peices namely the Breviary out of which the Common Prayers are taken the Ritual or book of Rites out of which the Administration of the Sacraments Burial Matrimony visitation of the sick are taken The Mass-book out of which the consecration of the Lord's Supper Collects Epistles and Gospels are taken As for the book of ordination of Arch-bishops Bishops and Ministers that is out of the Roman Pontifical These things being so whoever pleads for the English Service book doth so far defend the Romish Mass-book not that 't is a defence of the whole Romish Service for in the Anatomy of the Service Book 't is acknowledged that every thing in the Mass-book is not in our Liturgy though all that is in our Liturgy is word for word in the Mass-book But so far as our Liturgy is defended so far that part of the Romish Service is defended for which reason the greatest Champions who among our Church men have most zealously written in defence of the Liturgy and have been consider'd by the Church of Rome as men who have done great Service to the Roman Religion Thus Whitgift and Hooker have had their applauses from the Romanists 'T is not unworthy observation to find Arch-Bishop Whitgift reproaching Cartwright and the Dissenters as a people eminently serviceable to the Papist and Dean Stilling fleet to give the utmost countenance he could thereunto whereas the truth is that that on which Whitgift grounds his censure will not bear it and though none of Dean Stilling fleet 's adversaries have taken any notice of it that I can find yet Whitgift himself is the man who has had from the Jesuites great thankes for what he has written against Dissenters in defence of the English Service and Discipline That Whitgifts Censure concerning the Dissentes subserviency to Popish designes is groundless being rather the product of his indiscreet passions than of sound arguings is evident in that the great reason given to shew that the Dissenters are the Papists promoters is because they assert that the Papists ought not to be compel'd to receive the Supper of the Lord so long as they continue in their Popery that is they ought not to act contrary to their Conscience nor dissemble with Almighty God by professing themselves to be Protestants even when they are really and in heart Papists whether this be to gratifie the Papist let the impartial Reader judge But that Whitgift has gratify'd the Papist in his writings against Dissenters I 'll evince by producing what the learned Parker in his Ecclesiastical policy lib. 1. chap. 33. insists on in answer to this objection of Whitgift Bancroft and others where he shews how William Reignolds the Jesuit asserts that John Whitgift in his discourse against Cartwright has defended the Catholick Cause and accordingly the said Reignolds in the preface against Whitaker makes great use of Whitgift and in the book it self he sends Mr. Whitaker unto Dr. Whitgift for a supply of reasons for the confirming their notion about putting of our caps and making curtesie at the hearing the Name of Jesus Scultinyns and Stapleton give the same Character both of the writings of Whitgift and Bancroft against the Puritanes even as Gretzer the Jesuit triumphs in Saravias and Sutcliff's defence of the Episcopal Authority in Civils And as Whitgift even so Hooker for the service done the Church of Rome by what they have writ in defence of the worship and discipline of the Church of England hath had the praises of the Romanists This Mr. Walton in the life of Hooker has observ'd which is no more than what Dr. King Bishop of Chichester was acquainted with as he himself expresses in a letter to honest Isaac I am glad you mention sayes the Bishop how much value Robert Stapleton Pope Clement the 8th and other eminent men of the Romish perswasion have put upon this book having been told the same in my youth by persons of worth that have travelled Italy And what doth this discover less than that such is the agreement between the Service and Discipline of the Church of England and that of Rome that whoever pleads for the one defends the other Furthermore in the Anatomy of the Service Book we are furnished with an Historical Account of the Papists approving our Liturgy There be sayes the Author thereof abundance of instances for the Papists approving our Liturgy witness Mortons Appeal Pope Pius the 4th and Gregory the 13th offered to Queen Elizabeth to confirm the English Liturgy Witness Dr. Abbot then Prelate of Canterbury and Mr. Cambden in the life of Queen Elizabeth who
and design of Whitgift as one who acted rather like a Spanish Inquisitor than a good Protestant imposing Articles that were of an ensnaring tendency is what I find in the Letters of the Lord Cecil unto the Arch-bishop with Arch bishops reply Numb 4. 5 6. The which is more generally suggested in Cambden who mentions the dissatisfaction of several noble men with the Bishops proceedings but more expresly by a moderate writer in Queen Elizabeths who in his plea of the innocent doth in the name of the Non-Conformists speak thus of the Lords of the Councill And this is not all that bindes us to their honours for in our private troubles about the Ceremonies and Subscription we the poor and faithfull Ministers of Christ whensoever we have opened our cause and humbled our selves unto them we have found great justice and equity and divers times great relief and ease from our troubles No doubt they seeing our innocency that of meer Conscience without any the least inclination to disloyalty to our Sovereign we did forbear to do those things they have tendered our cause and lovingly effected that we might not be too much over-burdened Moreover concerning the Bishops they say What could we do less or better than to repair to the Reverend Bishops for Counsell and Comfort which for the space of ten years or the most part thereof they did in some good measure afford unto us till as I take it by the relation of some in the same broyles the Papists had cunningly wrested our good Fathers from us that they could and would do no further for us Then yet complaining of our case and opening our doubts unto them we did as the Law affordeth that the cause should be brought before the Ordinary in all doubts about ceremonies of the Church Established by Law and finding not our selves resolv'd by our ordinaries alas what could we do less than quietly to suffer our selves with great grief bewailing our flocks to be suspended imprisoned and deprived And this hath been the cause of all them which have not used the Ceremonies so fully as some other of their Brethren By this 't is evident that as Queen Elizabeth's Education natural temper Interest of State and I verily believe Conscience of Duty unto God inclin'd her to such an establishment in the Ecclesiastical Constitution as might be most gratefull unto the Papist even so some of the Clergy who by Heylin are called Melancthonians of whom Whitgift and Bancroft were principal in their times did their utmost by insisting so very much on the Ceremonies Subscription c. to the same end the Queens Majesty did whereby to the great grief of many Sound Protestants the Service of our Church was made to resemble as much as possible that of the Church of Rome But 3. I 'll now consider the reasonings of some Protestant Dissenters from this similitude likeness and agrement there is between these two service books against the ordinary use of the English Liturgy Whoever will make a due enquiry into the History of the Reformation will find that in Edward the 6th his dayes Hooper Lord Bishop elect for Glocester scrupled the Episcopal Vestments because they had been invented cheifly for celebrating the Mass with much pomp and had been consecrated for that effect In Queen Maries time the exil'd Protestants at Frankford such as Knox and those of his perswasion refused to Minister the Communion by the book of England for that there were some things in it placed only by warrant of man's Authority or no ground of God's word for the same and had also a long time very Superstitiously in the Mass been wickedly abused See discourse of the troubles at Franckford Moreover in Queen Elizabeth's and King James's dayes several manifested their dislike of our Liturgy for this very reason because 't was so like unto the Romish Service I 'll give some particular instances with those reasons that were by 'em urg'd against a complyance with a Service Book so like that of the Papists In a part of the Register you have the sense of Mr. Edward Deering who sayes that The similitude that this book has with the form of Prayer which the Papists used I think declineth from the equity of these Lawes Deut. 7. 25. Deut. 12. 30. Deut. 18. 9. which things our fathers so much regarded in the Primitive Church that their books are full of great complaints against all similitude to be had with the Gentiles Yea the second Councill of Bracca made a decree that no Christian should have either Bay-Leaves or Green Boughes in their houses because the Gentiles so accustomed And at this day all Reformed Churches in France Polonia Helvetia Scotland and other places have changed that form of Prayer which prudence of all ages if we shall condemn the rebuke of the Apostle I think will touch us 1 Cor. 14. 36. Came the word of God out from you or came it else to you only Secondarily we have the Psalmes Venite Benedictus Magnificat nunc dimittis usual in our Ministry of which we can give no good reason Nor I see no cause why we should more leave out the Ave Maria. And because of parting the Scriptures again into the Epistles and Gospels which was not heard of before the dayes of Popery I dare not avow that this is that reverent handling of the Scripture and the right dividing of the word of truth which St. Paul requireth 2 Tim. 2. 15. But the Abridgment is much more full on this Subject shewing what are the many Scriptural Arguments against all complyances with the Superstitions the which is farther confirm'd not only from the Fathers the Transmarine Protetestant Divines but also by our own Old Protestant Doctors of the Church of England Take it as in the Abridgment where 't is asserted that 't is contrary to the word of God to use such ceremonies in the worship of God as man has devised if they be notoriously known to have been of old and still to be abused unto Idolatry or Superstition by the Papists especially if the same be now of no necessary use in the Church Where note that the Ceremonial part of the English Service that is like unto that of the Romish is what has been abused by the Papists to Idolatry or Superstition but yet are not so necessary to Divine Worship but that the worship may be compleat decent and orderly without em but to their reasons this may appear say they 1. By the Second Commandment which forbids all provocation unto spiritual fornication as the 7th doth unto that which is Carnal 2. By the Commandment and direction God hath given us in his word to separate our selves from Idolaters and be as unlike to them as may be especially in their Religious Observations and Ceremonies to abolish not only all Idols but also all the Ceremonies and Instruments of Idolatry and that so as we may best shew our utmost detestation to them and root out the very
O Lord and the people make their Answer Because there is no other that fighteth for us but only thou O God as if Almighty God alone had not been able to defend them in the time of War whence they Pray unto God for the sending Peace But cannot that God who sendeth Peace by putting an end unto Wars preserve and protect in the day of Trouble If he can to what purpose is this Argument urg'd Again an alteration is made in the State of this Affair The Minister gives instruction or rather as a beginner of the Prayer mentions the Matter or Thing to be prayed for and the people must proceed to the making it a formal Prayer whence 't is that whereas the Minister in the publick Assembly should be the Mouth of the people unto God The Minister being silent the people altogether with a loud voice a distracting Murmur are their own Mouth Thus From Fornication and all other deadly Sin as if some sins were not Mortal but Venial and from all the Deceits of the World the Flesh and the Devil so far the Minister proceeds and then make a stop from whom the people take it adding Good Lord deliver us Again O Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World says the Minister with the greatest seeming fervour and affection but yet in the midst of the sentence his warm affection is ended and the people proceed to say Grant us thy peace O Lord. Again they must be as they were in Statu Quo and the Minister prayes O Lord let thy Mercy be shewed on us to which Petition the people either add their sence or Limitation or Reason of the Prayer as we put our Trust in thee Beside at some one meeting of the Assembly the Pater-Noster or Lords Prayer is to be repeated Six or Eight several times and the Gloria Patri Twelve beside the many Kyrie Eleesons and Christe Eleesons Lord have mercy on us Christ have mercy upon us the Responces the Versicles c. Alas how ridiculous would this be interpreted by the generality of those who are now Sons of the Church should the Dissenters have us'd such a practice This Argument receives strength from what I find insisted on by by some of His Majesties Commissioners in the Account of all the proceedings of the Commissioners of both perswasions where 't is thus Argued Vid. As we find that the Minister is the Mouth of the people to God in publick which Scripture and the necessity of Order do require So we are loath to Countenance the people's Invading of that Sacred Office so far as they seem to us to do By reading half the Psalms and Hymnes 2. By saying half the Prayers as the Minister doth the other half 4. By being the only Petitioners in the far greatest part of all the Letany by their Good Lord deliver us and We beseech thee to hear us good Lord. While the Minister only reciteth the Matter of the Prayer and maketh none of the request at all we fear least by purity of reason the people will claim the work of preaching and other parts of the Ministerial Office 3. And we mentioned that which all our Ears are witnesses of that until half the Psalms and Hymns c. are said by such of the people as can say them the Murmur of their Voices in most Congregations is so unintellgible and Confused as must hinder the Edification of all the rest for who is edified by that which he cannot understand This you 'l find page 29 but in page 60 we have account of the Rule and Order of Prayer with a full Demonstration That the Common Prayer is not agreeable unto any just Rule or Order There are say they Two Rules of Prayer One is the Nature of the things Compared in Matter and Order with Nature and Necessity The Other is the Revealed Will of God in his word in General the Holy Scripture more Especially the Lords Prayer The Liturgy for the greatest part of the Prayers for dayly Vse is Confused by whichsoever you measure it You seem much to honour the Lords Prayer by your frequent Use of it or part of it we beseech you dishonour it not practically by denying it by Matter and Order to be the only Ordinary and Perfect Rule We know about particular Administrations where it is but certain select Requests that we are to put up suited to the partcular Subject and Occasion we cannot follow the whole Method of the Lords Prayer which containeth the heads of all the parts where we are not to take in all the parts we cannot take them in that Order But that none of all your Prayers should be form'd to that perfect Rule that your Letany which is your Comprehensive Prayer and that the Body of your dayly Prayers broken into several Collects should not as set together have any considerable respect unto that Order nor yet to the Order which reason and the Nature of the thing requireth which is observed in all things else and yet that you should so Admire this and be so tenacious of that which is conceived Prayer you would call by worse names than Confusion this sheweth us the power of prejudice By this the Reader may perceive how much the Non-Conformists are for a decent Order and Comely Method in Prayers but the Conformist against it and how much the Non-Conformist are for the right use of the Lords Prayer even when the Conformist are not at least practically for it Whence we may see how unreasonable it is to make such a Noise and Clamour as if the Dissenters rejected the Lords Prayer or were against its use whereas in truth the Dissenters are much more for the Right use of the Lords Prayer than the Conformists are Whoever will understand the true State of this Controversie must consider what the great design of the Disciples in Asking and of Christ in granting their Request about Prayer was the which he can no sooner with just deliberation and impartially do but will be satisfied that the thing the Disciples desired was to be Taught how to Fray Lord Teach us as John taught his Disciples How to Pray and they desire to be taught not that they prescribe unto Jesus Christ a Method in which he should teach 'em for that became not Disciples even Scholars who are to Learn but not to teach This being the desire of the Disciples to be taught to pray not to have a form of VVords to be Verbally and Syllabically rehearsed or repeated but Rules or Presidents for the directing 'em how to pray The answering of their Request was the Design of Christ in giving 'em the Lords Prayer which was principally intended for the Direction of the Disciples who were as Matthew expresseth it Oblig'd by that Command when ye Pray say Our Father so say after that manner when you pray or whenever you pray The Command is perpetual Obliging at all times of prayer so far as the particular Occasions
of Prayer will admit every Prayer we make must be according to this Command of Christ But will any say That the meaning is when ever you pray repeat the very words and Syllables of the Lords Prayer Let not one Prayer be made without the Repetition of this Prayer If so then whereas now the Lords Prayer is repeated in the Church six or eight times some Mornings it should be so Twenty or Thirty even at the end of every Collect or other short Prayer This none will assert which is enough to shew that none do understand the words of Luke when you pray say to be in this sense namely when ever you pray repeat these words and Syllables for none do it none of the Church of England nor among the Papists The true sense then of those words in Luke is more fully given us in Mathew when you pray say after this manner that is The Lords Prayer is given as a Form a Rule a Directory of our Prayers A Rule to be prayed by which Rule is transgressed by such who when they pray will cut their Prayers into many shreds and pieces The Lord Christs Prayer was but One continued Prayer all its parts most admirably connected he did not say Our Father and teach his Disciples to add Which art in Heaven This is enough to evince that the Common Prayer Book is not according to the Rule of Christ and that although according to the Rubrick a part of the Lords Prayer is so frequently rehears'd in one Morning as if the rehearsing several Pater nosters was ex opere Operato sufficient to procure the pardon of Sin yet the Dissenters who do pray unto him unto whom they are directed by the Lords Prayer for such things as are more generally contain'd in it keeping as near as they can to the same Method do not only keep more close to the command of Christ in Luke but moreover set an higher value on the Lords Prayer than these Conformists who by keeping to the Rubrick at most do make it but the end of some of their Prayers But to return from this necessary Digression to what is farther insisted on by the aforesaid Commissioners p. 62. 'T is said But if we may according to the Common Prayer Book begin and end and seem to withdraw again and make a Prayer of every Petition or two and begin every such Petition with God's name and Christ's merits as making up half the Form or near Nothing is an affected empty tossing of God's name in Prayer if this be not we are perswaded if you should hear a man in a known ex tempore Prayer do thus it would seem strange and harsh even to your selves This being so there are some among the Dissenters who considering how jealous God is in matters of his worship how pure and how holy are afraid to draw near to God in this disorderly and confused manner when they have the opportunity of addressing themselves to the Throne of Grace in a way more agreeable to his Holy and most Blessed Will When they have a Male in their Flock they are afraid to offer a corrupt thing least they thereby expose themselves to that curse in Mal. 1. 14. If they should make their approaches in this disorderly manner unto God will he not say offer it now unto thy Governours will he be pleased with thee or accept thy person Argument V. In the Abridgment an Argument against the Ceremonies to which those who joyn with the Church of England must shew their approbation is fetch'd from the mystical significancy of 'em thus All humane Ceremonies say they being appropriated to God's Service if they be ordain'd to teach any Spiritual Duty by their mystical signification are unlawfull That this Argument may appear in its fuller strength 't will be requisite to consider the nature of Religious Worship as well as a Religious Ceremony and to make some enquiry after the power man has given him to appropriate Humane Ceremonies to God's worship 1. whoever will consult the Learned of most perswasions will find 'em to agree in the general about the nature of external worship and a Ceremony of Religion Dr. Covel a great asserter of the English Ceremonies in his modest and reasonable examination c. Chap. 6. has very handsomely given the sense of the Church of England in Bellarmine's words as neer as an English Translation can well be to a Latine Original Whoever will but compare Bellarmine's 29th Chapter de effectu Sacramentorum with what Dr. Covel has in his 6 chap. will find the agreement to be almost verbatim Ceremonia sayes Bellarmine est actus externus Religionis qui non aliunde habet laudem nisi quia fit ad Dei honorem that is as Covel without making any mention of his Master Bellarmine Translates it ceremonies are all such things as are the external Act of Religion which have their commendation and allowance from no other cause but only that in God's worship they are virtuous furtherances of his honour Thus Covel who borroweth his explications as well as arguments from Bellarmine in order to the making the stronger defence of English Ceremonies is so bold as to take the whole substance thereof from him without any considerable variation whereby we may find that the Church of England agrees so far with the Church of Rome in this matter as to make a Ceremony of Religion to be 1. An external Act expressive of inward worship Actus externus interno respondens qui est quaelibet externa actio quae non aliunde est bona nisi quia fit ad Deum colendum That is as Covel Translates it the External Act answering the internal which is no otherwise good or commendable than that it vertuously serveth to the inward worship of God 't is an outward sign representing the inward frame of the Spirit as 't is after God 2. 'T is also a virtuous furtherance of inward Religion which is to the honour of God It is apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and special signification whereby he might be edified Ceremonies of Religion are means whereby the dull mind is stirred up to the remembrance of duty and whereby the Soul is edified i. e. strengthned and confirm'd in grace Then is a man edified when his graces are suscitated stirred up strengthen'd encreas'd or confirm'd This description of a Religious Ceremony is not only what Bellarmine and Covel out of him give us but also the same to which a late Author in his verdict apon the Dissenters Plea gives his approbation Page 57. That such mystical Ceremonies or Symbolical representations are not sinfull sayes he I am fully convinc'd because they are good for the use of edifying For whatsoever is apt to inform me and put me in mind of my duty and to excite me to perform it That is certainly for my edification because to inform to admonish and excite