Closet do it If not there is another kind of Prayer besides this and our Author knew well enough that it is that we are speaking of The Question is What is the Gift of Prayer relating to Vocal Prayer Our Answerer grants It is that which inableth and disposeth to the performance of the duty Now I appeal again to any one that understandeth sense Whether those things which the Answerer mentions inable any person to Vocal Prayer as it stands contradistinguished to meer heart Prayer which is that we are not at all speaking of It is manifest it is not for then no Vnbeliever no Wicked Man hath any Ability to pray and St. Paul had given very impertinent Counsel to the Sorcerer to Pray that the thoughts of his heart might be forgiven him which it seems he had no Gift no Ability to do for it is certain he had no Faith nor Pious Affections It might have been expected that he who Faults others for Impropriety of Speech should himself have spoken Ad idem at least i. e. to the thing in Question which whether he hath done or no I leave to any one who understands sense to judge The Author of the Book he answereth had often enough told him that he spake not concerning Heart Prayer but Vocal Prayer that Praying wherein in obedience to the command of God the voice is used to express the desires of the heart It is an easie thing to answer at this rate 12. For what he saith p. 31 32 33. in Answer to what the Author had spoken from Zech. 12.10 Rom. 8.26 to prove a Gift of Prayer to be a Divine Gift issueth in this Whether by the Spirit of Grace and Supplication and the Spirits helping our Infirmity in Pra er be to be understood as well the Spirits giving us an Ability fitly to express our minds to God in Prayer as furnishing us with Gracious Habits disposing us so to Pray as we may find favour with God It is our Answerers concern to affirm the latter onely But the Author is of another mind because he finds in Scripture Gifts that are not saving called Spiritual Gifts 1 Cor. 12.1 and 1 Cor. 14.1 and the Manifestations of the Spirit 1 Cor. 12.7 where are reckoned the Word of Wisdom the Word of Knowledg the Gifts of Healing Working of Miracles Prophecy Tongues some of which are by the same Apostle determined no saving gifts 1 Cor. 13.2 3. The Author is of the mind that all these are comprehended under the Promises of powring out of the Spirit mentioned in the Old Testament And tho an Ability to Pray be not mentioned in that 1 Cor. 12.7 yet he never thought to have met with any who regarded what he said who would have denied That it is a gift and a Spiritual gift nor doth yet believe it shut out of those Promises Zech. 12.10 Rom 8.26 tho not solely perhaps not Principally intended in them both which the Author grants to the Answerer if he can make any Market with them 13. Our Answerer is again at it p 34. As that Ability of Expression whereby a Man largely professeth the particular Doctrines of the Christian Faith is not properly the Gift of Faith of Believing so neither is the like Ability of expressing the matter of our Prayer to be accounted in any proper sense the Gift of Prayer Still we are upon the old fallacy and whatsoever I Answer our Answerer will avoid us by telling us he spake of meer Heart Praâ—er where no words are needful that is nothing to the point in Question Is Beleeving a Vocal Action think we Or is it a meer Action of the Heart and to say an Ability fitly to speak is that Gift were to own my self simple enough But I hope an Ability fitly to speak is the Gift of Confession of Faith with our Lipps Let our Author speak out and tell us If a Praying with our hearts be all the Prayers God requireth of Ministers in their publick Ministrations If it be not he saith nothing to the purpose for still the Gift of Prayer in that sense and I spake of another is an ability fitly to express our Minds to God in Prayer 14. But he tells us This is but the Gift of Speaking Vtterance or Elocution p. 34. I have scarce patience for such Assertions Then every one who hath an Ability to speak utter or to speak out or Oratoriously hath the Gift of Prayer which is demonstrably false and contrary to the experience of every day 15. But at length our Answerer can find a Gift of Prayer and with the Spirit this he saith was that whereby Christians in the beginning of Christianity were inabled by the extraordinary Impulses and immediate Inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon their Minds so to Pray either in their own or other Languages that those Motions of their Hearts and inward Desires and also their Words and Expressions were the proper and extraordinary Works and Dictates of the Holy Ghost Admit this true what followeth Then an Ability to Pray is the Gift of Prayer only given to some in a more extraordinary to others in a more ordinary way I freely grant him all he saith if he doth not say or by this cunningly go about to perswade people that now no people have an Ability to express their Minds fitly to God in Prayer which he must not because he is so liberal as to grant the contrary p. 40. 16. But he saith these extraordinary Gifts were peculiar to the primitive times Who denys it But is there not a more ordinary Gift of Prayer still continuing and the only question is Whether this be omitted in the performance of the Act 17. He tells us p. 36. that those who had these extraordinary Gifts were to use them only so far as was consistent with the rules of Order Decency and Edification Who denieth this too But these Rules of Order and Decency were such as either Nature it self shewed or the Infallible Spirit by the Apostles directed let him prove any thing further if he can and if he understands no more it is freely granted 18. As to what he saith in Reply to what I answered to that which he objected from 1 Cor. 14. I know not what his Intentions were but his words are these Libertas Eccles p. 120. The Argument against the lawfulness of set Forms because they limit the use of Gifts needeth not much consideration since it is manifest that by the Will of God bounds and limits were set even to the use of extraordinary Gifts of Gods Spirit that the Church might be edified 1 Cor. 14.26 27 28 30 33. Could any one make this less than an Argument a majori ad minus affirmando if the greater Gifts might be Limited then the lesser may In my Answer I observed the fallacy might lurk under the term Limited and distinguished betwixt the Regular use and the Irregular abuse of Gifts and denied that consequence That because the
joyneth with him who Ministreth in Prayer For the Ministers reading a Form can be no part of External Worship because in it he is neither directed by the Light of Nature nor by the Will of God in Scripture It is only an help to himself or others or both to order himself and people by in their Mentall Prayers 7. Neither can I see how it can properly be called a Mean unless the Form be particularly by God directed of Mental Prayer For in reason the mean of meer internal adorotion must be an Ability so to adore which a man hath partly from Nature whence is his Ability to think and conceive partly from the influence of the Holy Spirit of Prayer and Supplication 8. His next Observation is as idle as his Reflection in that Paragraph founded upon it is impertinent it is this p. 179. That according to this Argument the conceptions and expressions of him who Prayeth without a Form are as much forbidden as the use of Forms is pretended to be because God hath not prescribed these Expressions I had told him that both the Light of Nature and the Will of God declared in his Word 1 Tim. 4.14 1 Pet. 4.10 Rom. 12. have shewed us That an ability fitly to express our minds that is our wants and desires to God in Prayer is the means which God hath prescribed for Vocal Prayer how well he hath disproved what I said let the Reader judge from my reply so that in further answer to this his Observation I shall but oppose another observation and commend it to my Reader viz. That he hath answered my Argument learnedly by begging the Question for this was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betwixt us 9. But yet because our Author hath no mind to treat of Means and to grant us that Means as well as Acts and Parts of Divine Worship must have a Divine Institution Let us take him at his own concession That parts of Worship must have such an Institution this he yieldeth in terminis p. 177. I say that words in Vocal Prayer are parts of Worship his friend Capellus he owns hath affirmed it That by keeping to the constant use of a Form men make it a proper part of Worship This he doth not like But why then in the very same case about Forms of Prayer doth he choke us with what Capellus hath said Vindicat. p. 167 173 201. It is a just Rule in Law That he who hath produced a Witness in the same cause for himself hath granted him a sufficient Witness and shall never be allowed to except against him as not such I hope if Capellus his Authority be valuable against us it is so for us 10. But I have another Argument to prove that Forms of Prayer Vniversally imposed are parts of Prayer proper parts of Prayer that is Vocal Prayer which alone is Ministerial Prayer For the parts of that religious Action are Two The one is Internal which lyeth in the Motions of the Heart and Affections The other is External which are Our words And these are the two Essential parts of Worship in that Prayer take away either of them and it is no Prayer that is no Ministerial Vocal Prayer And these or those words are essential parts of this or that Ministerial Vocal Prayer Now if Men without express direction from God may prescribe us words they may prescribe an Essential part of VVorship which our Vindicator justly denieth they may 11. His third Observation p. 182. is That in his Libertas Ecclesiastica 2. Sect. Chap. 1. He hath largely proved That it is a false and dangerous Position to say that nothing may be used or appointed in Gods Worship besides necessary Circumstances of humane Actions but what is appointed by God himself He addeth here That it is destructive to Publick VVorship and Religion For since God hath commanded us to pray but hath not in all Acts of Worship enjoyned our words or the performance of this duty with or without a Form it must needs according to this Position be done neither by a Form nor without because both by consequence are forbidden being not prescribed Then he telleth us That God hath not prescribed what sort of bread or wine should be used in the Supper of the Lord nor what Psalms should be sang To which I reply 12. I am not at leisure to reply to all he hath said in 72 pages of his Libertas Ecclesiast but I do not remember that he hath there said That Men may appoint Essential or integral parts of VVorship if he hath I am sure he hath denyed it here p. 177. Now I have both said and proved that words are an Essential part of Ministerial Vocal Prayer If there be no words used there can be no such thing therefore by our Answerers own concession words in this Prayer must be directed by the Light of Nature or by the VVill of God VVriten in his Word I have shewed that Gods VVill is revealed in the cause both in the Light of Nature which directeth us to express our own thoughts in our own words and by his VVill revealed commanding us to Minister our Gifts and according as we have received the Gâ—ft or Grace Neither do I remember that our Vindicator hath asserted That Men not divinely authorized and inspired for that end may appoint Means of VVorship I am sure in this Book he is very shy of it if he hath said any such thing elsewhere it is false and contrary to the Second Commandment For any appointments of other things in about or relating to the Worship of God we are not here disputing nor was the Question stated with reference to them 13. It is rashly if no worse said That there can be no Publick Worship or Religion according to that Position For it plainly inferreth That in the Churches of God in Scotland Holland France New England c. there is no Publick Religion or VVorship for it is certain that in all or most of them there are no Forms of Prayer Vniversally used or imposed tho there be in some of them some made and left at liberty to be used or not used 14. Whereas he saith That according to this Position there can be no Administration of the Sacraments because according to this Principle all Bread and VVine is forbidden to be used in that Ordinance because the particular kind of Bread and Wine is not prescribed It proceedeth upon this Hypothesis which is false That we say That nothing is left to our liberty in about or relating to the Worship of God because we say no Acts Parts or Means of VVorship are left to liberty We say that particular Phrases in Prayer and Preaching so the particular kinds of Bread and VVine to be used in the Lords Supper are left to liberty but yet words are not left to liberty Nor whether any Bread or Wine should be used are not left to liberty and where God hath left any thing to
we perform that Religious Act is sinful But for a Minister having the Gift of Prayer ordinarily to perform his Ministerial Act in Prayer by reading or reciting Forms of Prayers composed by others confessedly not divinely inspired is for him to omit a natural and proper mean given him by God in order to the performance of such Religious Act and in the Omission of it to perform such Religious Act. Ergo The Major Proposition shineth so much in its own light that it was not to be denied but by affirming That it is lawful for us at the command of Men in an Act of Gods W rship to omit a mean given us of God for that end and to perform that Act in the use of other means under no sâ—ecial prescription from God which is to say it is lawful to allow Men to â—e wiser then God in directing the means of his Worship which certainly is a strange position 4. Yet our Answerer tho he will not in plain terms deny the Major p. 57. tells us That a mean given us of God if it be only capable of being used and not a necessary mean to be used may lawfully be omitted especially when there are several means What doth he mean by several means Several means given by God for that end that are Natural and Proper then it is most true But it lieth upon him to prove that God hath in this case prescribed several means But if he means several Humane means under no Divine Prescription it amounteth to no less then I said before the praeference of the Wisdom of Men to the Wisdom of God 5. What doth he mean by telling us A Divine mean may be omitted if it be not necessary to be used when the very drift of the Argument is to prove That it is necessary to be used because it is a Divine Mean and there is no other can lay claim to that Notion nor can be so Natural nor is so Proper Now this quite spoiles the retorting the Argument 6. But altho our Answerer thinks fit to nibble a little about the Major yet plainly discerning that was not to be denied by any Person of his Reputation in the World his whole force is spent about the Minor Proposition as to which he saith much which himself summeth up p. 57. 1. That an ability fitly to express our mind to God in Prayer is not the gift of Prayer nor any singular or peculiar gift of the Spirit of God 2. That it is neither a duty nor yet expedient that such abilities should be used and constantly used any further then is agreeable to the Rules of Edification and Order 7. Whatsoever our Answerer saith upon the first head which is very much one while confounding the Gift of prayer and the Grace of Prayer as one and the same thing another while telling us of an Extraordinary Gift of Prayer is so much from the purpose that our Author owns it as a digression p. 28. So as I am not concerned in any thing of that discourse further then to mend a Term in my Minor and make it to run thus But for a Minister having an Ability fitly to express his mind to God in Prayer to perform his Ministerial Acts in Prayer ordinarily by reading or reciting c. Nor was there any need at all thus to mend it but to save my self trouble of a Word-bait 8. But yet to vindicate my self from being as much out as to proper speaking as it seems to this Author I was in my Chronology of Gregory and Charles the great we will have a few words about the Gift of Prayer for I do suspect that this multitude of words is but to darken knowledge It shall go under the Title of a Digression in Reply to a Digression of the Answerers concerning the Gift of Prayer I hope the Reader will pardon my going out of my way seeing it is but to follow my Leader and to Vindicate my self from improper speaking that is not to this Learned Mans mind or Sentiment and who but Men of his Principles can speak Properly 9. He doth p. 40. acknowledge That there is an Ability in many Persons whereby they can express their Minds in some degrees fitly to God in Prayer But this he saith is not properly the Gift of Prayer but rather of Speech Here then is the Question The Scripture no where mentioning the Gift of Prayer whether an Ability to express our Minds fitly to God in Prayer may not properly be called the Gift of Prayer My opinion is That it may which I thus prove 10. By the same reason That an Ability to speak to Men to Edification and Exhortation and Comfort 1 Cor. 14.3 is in Scripture called the Gift of Prophecy 1 Cor. 13.2 1 Cor. 14.1 An Ability also fitly to express our Minds to God in Prayer may be properly called the Gift of Prayer But such an Ability is in Scripture called the Gift of Prophecy as appeareth in the forementioned Texts If our Answerer can shew a disparity of Reason he may I cannot fancy any by the same reason that Abilities to Actions are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the same reason they may be and are properly called Gifts for what is the English of that Greek word but Powers or Abilities and it is past all contradition that what the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Powers 1 Cor. 12.29 He calls the Gifts of Healing in the very next words Have all the Gifts of Healing What tho these were Gifts given at an extraordinary time or in an extraordinary manner which indeed they were yet I appeal to any indifferently Learned Man to determine Whether this alters the Genus or only distributes the Species All Spiritual Abilities are Gifts but they are not all Saving Gifts or extraordinary Gifts And this is enough to vindicate my self from impropriety of Speech 11. But saith our Author p. 29. That is eminently and especially to be esteemed the Gift of Prayer which disposeth and inableth to the performance of the duty of Prayer very true Vindication p. 29. and is not this all I have contended for And therefore since Prayer is not so much a verbal thing as a pious address of the Heart Soul and Spirit to God the Supplies and Assistances of his Grace which kindle and excite pious Dispositions in seeking unto God with earnest and affectionate desires a lively Faith and the exercise of inward Devotion this is most properly his vouchsafing and bestowing the Gift of Prayer and our having and exercising them is our having and using the Gift of Prayer This now is well said as to Truth but not a tittle of it to the purpose Here is a manifest Transition from one kind to another That a Christian may in his heart Pray tho his Lips move not is out of doubt Hannah did so But can any Minister discharge his Ministerial Duty in Publick Prayer thus Nay can a private Christian in his Family or
Irregular use of Gifts might be restrained therefore the Regular use of them might I shall leave the Reader to judg of what I said and he hath here answered whether he hath taken off the least of my Answer Only adding That an Argument from the Power of the Apostles to the Power of any Superiours now till the Author hath proved those now impowred Possessed of the same Infallible Spirit and of the same Divine Right to make new Rules of Order for the Church is very inconclusive 19. In his 41 p. He tells us that This faculty of Expression in Prayer Vindication p. 41. is procured and enlarged by men who have a competent Natural freedom of Speech by use and exercise and advanced by various Methods I acknowledge saith he that in some an Affectionateness of Devotion doth contribute much thereto in others confident self conceit and an heated fancy and as I have read some particular Instances even Diabolical Contracts have promoted the same What he calls facility of Expression is the same with what I called an ability fitly to express our minds to God in Prayer and of this he speaks or he saith nothing to the purpose This he saith is procured and enlarged by use and exercise he saith true provided the Person hath first a due knowledge of God and of himself and of the Scriptures which till one hath acquired all Vse and Exercise is to no purpose This also must be supposed to Affectionateness of Devotion which he truly saith contributeth much thereto but how confident self conceit a meer heated fancy or Diabolical Contracts should do it which the Answerer it seems believeth he would never else have troubled us with a Romance are matters of wonderful subtil disquisition especially that How the Devil should help a Man if he would be so kind fitly to express his mind to God in Prayer I tremble while I mention such a thing as ever spoken by a Divine to help the already too much Atheistical and Blaphemous World with an Authority and that no less then Dr. Faulkners to say Godly Ministers do that by the Devil which they do by the assistance of the Holy Spirit of God The Answerers granting it may be will be warrant enough to harden hundreds in such Blasphemies How much Evil speaking soever I be charged with I hope I shall avoid that Evil speaking because of those Texts Mar. 3.28.29 and that Matth. 12.31 32. The Crime there was the Pharises asserting that what Christ did by the Spirit of God v. 28. Was done by Beelzebub the Prince of Devils The Doctor doth not indeed boldly assert such a thing but he hath so phrased what he saith that besides the Scurvy Innuendo in his words he plainly grants it nut be But surely the Devil fills none with the Knowledge of God or with Affectionate Devotion Now whether the Pharises guilt there were not an intituling the Devil to the Operations of the Blessed Spirit I leave to his serious thoughts Nor can I be so uncharitable even to the Pharises as to think that they in saying so Lied against the Holy Ghost speaking what they knew to be otherwise I do judge they thought as they spake which if they did I know no difference in the case but in the means of Conviction they had further then any can novv have that the People of God Praying in the use of their Spiritual Gifts Act by the Spirit because of the Miracles they saw wrought by Christ which indeed was a great means but the judgment of a true Miracle from the Phaenomenon of it in one of Satans lying Wonders mentioned 1 Thessa 2.9 is so difficult that I cannot see the heighth of their guilt lay there so much as in their speaking Evil with reference to the blessed Spirit in a thing which they knew not but had good Evidence to the contrary I pray God that it may not he laid to the charge of so Worthy a Person that by this unaccountable Suggestion He hath as David was charged in a case wherein the Holy Spirit was not so immediately concerned 2 Sam. 12.14 made the Enemies of God to Blaspheme That to Pray in the Spirit or with the Assistance of the Spirit is to perform the duty of Prayer with a pious mind as he tells us so many times over 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is what none denies but that this is the whole of it that it is not also with such words as the Spirit teacheth them to utter which Spirit is therefore called the Spirit of Supplication the Spirit of Adoption sent into our hearts by which a Child of God crieth Abba Father is what the Dr. neither hath proved nor ever can 20. He tells us p. 43. that he acknowledgeth a sober and due freedom of Expression to be a Gift of God in the same manner that the capacities of Mens Vnderstandings and all other Abilities of Mind and Body are Gods Gifts But it is plain this liberty of Expression is the product of the Natural Capacities Men receive from God which are improved in well disposed Persons by ordinary means under Gods Blessing c. Socinus in his Dialogue of Justification saith the same of Faith a Spiritual Gift of a more Salvifick Nature Faith saith he is such a Gift of God as God gives to all and a little before Hearing is the Gift of God c. I do not compare Faith and the Gift of Prayer I know Faith is a far more excellent gift But I believe he speaks as much truth with reference to Faith as our Answerer speaks as to an Ability to express our minds fitly to God in Prayer for Faith in the exercise is the exercise of the Natural Capacity of a Soul to put a confidence in a person or Assent to a Proposition which is evidenced to it to be truth and every man hath a Natural Power to Assent and Rely on proper Objects But to Assent to a Spiritual Truth above the Evidence of Sense and Reason to receive Christ and Rely on him for Life Eternal these are no Natural Capacities So to speak is but a Natural Capacity the generality of Men have a Natural Capacity to express their Minds by Speech but an Ability fitly to express our Minds to God in Prayer is no product of a meer Natural Capacity but of the Spirit of God having first enlightened the Soul with the knowledge of God 21. If he saith it is but such a Gift as Men may have and Perish eternally it is granted him but such were Prophecy the Mysteries of Knowledge Miraculous Faith Rom. 13.1 2. Yet I hope they were Spiritual gifts and not the meet products of Natural Capacities and different from such Natural Abilities as are necessary to make a Man perfect in Naturalibus and it is easie to prove that common gifts in the Service of God are of use and means to Spiritual Acts. I know none that ever called the Gift of Prayer a Spiritual saving Gift
and so may be under different Obligations of Divine Precepts in the case God not commanding those to whom he hath not given the best means to pray with the greatest Attention of thoughts and Intention of Mind and Fervor who are not able to do it but only to do it so far as they are able But in the mean time these precepts oblige all to their utmost Ability to do it And this is a full or at least a sufficient Answer to what our Vindicator saith in his long Vindication of his Argument from his 113 to his 129 page For not to multiply words to no purpose let men believe what they will whether the Form of Blessing was to be used as a Form and the Lords Prayer to be used as a Form yea or no. Great Authors are in both sides in the case It proveth no more then that Forms of Prayer are not in themselves so evil that God himself cannot prescribe and legitimate them which none but mad men will say they are or as this Author phraseth it that they are not in their own Nature hurtful and so hurtful as God cannot command the use of them which is a degree of badness which very few things have In the mean time they may be sinful enough as contrary to the Divine Will and that tho not to all Persons yet to some Persons which is all I contend for 15. And here I must crave pardon of my Reader for giving some instances of things which God by his command could not legitimate as to those persons to whom he gave the command Murther and Incest I admire how they slipt my pen tho our Vindicator who lasheth me sufficiently for much lesser Errors then this taketh no notice of it for tho it be true God cannot make Murther and Incest lawful yet that is but trifling because they will not be Murther or Incest when he hath commanded them But God by a Special command to particular persons may make those actions lawful which if any others did without such a special command they would be Murther and Incest and unlawful So it was lawful by vertue of Gods command to Abraham for him to think upon and design the killing of his Son to prepare means for it and go about it and also to have done it But I hope our Vindicator doth not think this would have been or is lawful for any other persons under the circumstance of no such special command and this will let the Reader see how little to the purpose the Vindicator speaks of this p. 116. I appeal to every man of Sense whether that instance was not good enough to prove That God by his command may make some things lawful which without such command to those particular persons had been unlawful and are unlawful as contrary to his Revealed Will as to any others who have no such command but his General Rule to the contrary What but the special Command of God to Magistrates makes it lawful for them to execute malefactors or by their Souldiers to kill men in just wars What but the special permission or license of God makes it lawful to kill men breaking open their houses or in their own defence The General Precept is Thou shalt not kill But this is abundantly enough to shew his poor Vindication of his first Argument founded on this Mistake That we say Forms of Prayer do in their own Nature hinder Piety 16. The truth is there are some things so intrinsically evil that God cannot make them lawful but these are very few nor are all men agreed in this for my own part I do agree with those who think there are Eternal Idaea's both of Good and Evil I know it is a Subtil Question but I cannot think that God can authorize a person to deny his Being or to Blaspheme himself God cannot deny himself nor expose his own Essential Glory But that God cannot make the same thing both lawful and unlawful the doing of which at all or in such or such a manner does meerly depend upon his Will is to me little better then Nonsense Now whether God would be worshipped or should be worshipped by Vocal Prayer or no certainly depends upon his Will and nothing but his Will and if it be his will that all Persons should do it with the utmost attention of thoughts and intention of mind and fervor of spirit they are able And if one person be not able to do it by forms prescribed by other men and another be best able to do it so it is plain that the Will of God in the case is different as to these two persons and to tell us that the first person may do it without prejudice to his piety in the action when all the piety of the action lyeth in Obedience to the Will of God sounds in my Ears very Atheologically and awkly to say no worse concerning it 17. This miserable arguing makes me quite weary of replying my hand is in and I shall go through but I think never to take up a pen again in this Case p. 129. the Vindicator comes to Vindicate his Second Argument which was from the lawfulness of Singing Psalms in Meeter and Reading the Scriptures We must put it into Form or the Reader will never see the force or weakness of it His Argument could be but this If the Scriptures may be read with utmost attention of thoughts and fervor of Spirit and Psalms may be sung and that in Meeter with the utmost intention of Spirit and attention of Thoughts and they yet be Forms and not the the dictates of our Hearts to our Lipps Then Prayers may be put up to God by Forms composed by other Men not divinely inspired with the utmost attention of our thoughts and intention and fervor of our spirits But. Ergo The summ of my Answer was a denial of the consequence My reasons were and are Because these were Duties of different species and the same Motions Affections and Degrees of Affection are not by God required of us in all Duties It is no Rule of Logick or Reason that whatsoever may be affirmed or denied of one Species may be affirmed of another for then we might conclude in Animals that an Horse can discourse because Man can It is as true in Actions in Religious Actions Worship here is the. Genus Reading the Scriptures Singing Psalms Praying Preaching c. are Species contained under Worship as the Genus We can neither affirm nor deny all things concerning one of these Species that we may affirm or deny of another This is evident now to all and might be justified in forty instances The Question therefore is Whether God requireth the same affections and the same degree of fervor of Spirit in Reading the Scriptures and Sing ng of Psalms that he doth require of us in Prayer If he doth not the Argument is fallacious because of the manifest Transition De Genere ad Genus 18. It is plain he
that common place it appears plainly that Melancthon did think All Ministers might not perform ordinarily their Ministerial and Family Acts of Prayer by the prescribed Forms of other Men for his whole business is to instruct Students for the Ministry in the true nature of Prayer the parts and methods of it the understanding of the Lords Prayers c. He first determines Supplications and Thanksgivings the two great parts or species of Prayer then p. 532 533 he goes on shewing the difference betwixt the Prayers of Christians and those of Pagans Jews and Mahumetans directing the first to distinguish themselves by praying in the Name and Mediation of Jesus Christ After this he casts his discourse under 5 heads of all which he discourseth severally 1. In order to a due Compellation of God he adviseth a Premeditation what God is who Christ was what he hath done c. 2. He adviseth a Meditation concerning the Precepts enjoyning Prayer several of which he mentioneth 3. He adviseth the consideration of the Promises for this life and that which is to come and instanceth in many p. 536 537. 4. He sheweth the necessity of the exercise of Faith in Prayer and directeth the different exercise of it in Petitions for Temporal and Spiritual and Eternal good things 538 539 540 541. Then he comes and directs men what to pray for others and how 5. He directs that the matter of Prayer Cogitetur ac Ricitetur should not only be Endited in and by the Heart but Recited by the Lipps He again repeateth the Matter and Order and Method and justifieth the lawfulness of begging Temporal good things and giveth reasons for it answering the Arguments of some against Praying for Temporal good things to p. 555 and 556. He tells us there may be Prayer Gemitu by a sigh but it is profitable both for the Younger and Elder to keep a well ordered Form in Compellation of the true God that they may distinguish true Christian Prayers from those of Jews Turks and Pagans minding us of the Divine Promises and comprehending the certain matter of Prayer Such he saith were Jacobs Prayers and many others Recorded in the Prophets p. 557 he saith let us therefore accustom our selves to Recital and we may use well composed Forms without Superstition or Magick that is provided those Forms have no Superstition in them nor are thought to have a Magical Vertue or Operation from the meer sound of such and such words rather than other for which no reason can be given Let us not saith he recite the Hymns of Homer Orpheus or Callimachus but let our Souls move towards God with a confidence in Christ revealed He adds in the same page many Lazy Drunken Careless persons contemn Recital in Prayer but saith he let good Men be perswaded to accustome themselves to others for which he giveth Reasons after which come in the words at first cited I can understand nothing by this but that many Lazy Drunken Careless Papists both Priests and others despised Vocal Praying some of them pretending they prayed in heart others perswading the people that if the Priests muttered over the Church Prayers tho the People heard not a Petition nor understood none of them yet it was well enough the Church Prayers were said and they were of avail enough for them Melancthon doth indeed say but it is three sides before in my book That a well ordered Form may be useful both for young and old provided men did not use it Supeâ—stitiously which they must do who judge it Universally necessary nor have any Magical Conceit of it as if the very words in it were acceptable to God tho no reason could be given why those words more then others expressing the same matâ—er should be so But his immediate oposing that to that Prayer which he saith may be by a meer sigh and opposing Cogitetur and Recitetur makes it apparent that he meaneth no more then a Vocal Prayer opposed to what is meerly Mental and as may be seen by what there followeth he chiefly referreth in that place to a Form of Compellation of God whether Scriptural or according to the sense of Scripture This was to bring off such as were newly converted from Popery from Prayers to the Virgin Mary and other Saints Yet Melancthon afterward doth indeed direct the use of the Lords Prayer which he largely openeth but saith nothing of any Forms but those upon a Scriptural Record and commendation not a word of St. Peter's St. James's St. Marks St. Andrews St. Clâ—ments St. Ambrose St. Basils or St. Chrysostomes or Gregory's Liturgies Yet indeed in that State of the Church the Proposal of some Forms of Prayer composed by men was necessary in Publick Service tho not for all Ministers they were newly come and still coming off from Popery where in their Publick Worship they had no other Prayers nor any liberty for others and the generality of their Priests were very unfit for any thing but Reading a Prayer In this case what is necessary is lawful tho not the full duty of Ministers in Prayer nor to be rested in and transmitted as the only way of Worship from age to age 32. Which Melancthon was manifestly far from for it is his whole business in that common place to fit Ministers and Christians for Prayer by instructing thâ—m in the Nature Parts Matter Method of it giving them Copies of Forms to imitate largely giving them the sense of every Petition in the Lords Prayer This as I said at first confirms to me that tho Luther made a Missal at first for the Reformed Churches in Saxony yet it was left at liberty nor did other Reformed Divines so well like it when it was first made as all to write after his Copy Yet I will not be too confident of it But Melancthon speaketh of no Forms which the Church proposed and willed to be used both publickly and privately but the Lords Prayer 33. Now I should have done with the Vindicator but that I remember p. 152 153 he heavily complained that I took but a slighty notice of his weighty Evidence for proof of Forms of Prayer in the times of Constantine for which he quoteth Eusebius de Vita Constantini Cap. 17 19 20. He shall complain no more I will be at the pains to transcribe all the 3 Chapters and to leave it to the Reader to judge what he can make out of them for the Vindicators purpose But you may see much more noble things then these If you consider how he ordered his Court like unto a Church Eusebius de Vita Constantini Cap. 17. Himself when the rest were assembled beginning He took the Books into his hands and either applyed his mind to Meditate on the Scriptures or prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the whole Church He diligently also taught his whole Army to reverence the day which we call the Suns day Ibid cap. 19. or the Day of Light For those in
and I have troubled him with no more in any Argument But Latet anguis in herba I fear had our Vindicator tied up himself to Syllogisms he would hardly have been able to have crouded in this momentous Proposition The Author of the Reasonable Account did not know what time Gregory the Great or Charles the Great lived Nor got in this conclusion Ergo He was an ignorant man defective in learning very confident from whom no accuracy is to be expected But let him run his looser method for certainly Logick and Syllogistical arguing is the Palma contracta if he so discourseth that I can but understand whether he denys the Major or the Minor or the Conclusion onely it shall be enough for my purpose 15. For what follows I have said enough before to excuse me from any imputation as to the time of my Book coming out which was in 1679 about Mich. it was printed beyond Sea six moneths before I had no concern in it nor seen it since April 1677 when I gave it to a friend who begg'd it of me But so various are our Apprehensions that my opinion is it could never have come out in a more seasonable time when it is in the heart of our Rulers to unite all Protestants which I am sure cannot be while the Imposition of Forms of Prayer on all Ministers in their publick Ministerial Service in Prayer holds But may easily be by leaving such Forms to liberty I do very well know what a clamour some make for Imposed Forms and therefore think it is highly necessary we should tell them why we judge them as to our practice unlawful that our Rulers and People may judge whether we be such illiterate nonsensical irrational persons such strange undertakers and meer confident men as we are represented to the World to be Or whether these Clamours be meerly Crys of Interest like that of old Great is Diana of the Ephesians So I have done with our Vindicators Introduction Only desiring my Reader may know that I am not arguing Forms of Prayer now most generally used and imposed unlawful but justifying the Reasons which I have formerly given why we cannot judge them as to our practice lawful let them be in themselves what they shall be evinced to be If our Vindicator can quit himself of the Arguments I have brought I I have no more at present to say CHAP. I. An Answer to the Vindicators First Chapter concerning the stating of the Question 1. I Am beholden to the Learned Author for allowing me or any Noncon an ability to state a Question with sufficient plainness and clearness and shall requite him owning that he hath truly repeated my stateing of it a favour not ordinary in this age But his Observations deduced from my Concessions must not pass wholly unexamined 2. That our Prayers must be directed to God as he observeth needed not the attestation of two of the Fathers 2. That our general wants such as Pardon Sanctification Daily Bread c. I like not so well to say all our ordinary wants may be expressed in Forms I doubt not Nor 3. That a pious Soul not able to pray from his own Gifts may truly worship God mentally by reading a Form I doubt not but to make this true external worship I think will be required a command from God It is also true that one difference betwixt Praying with and without a Form is that in the former way the same words and methods are constantly used in the other not so But if by praying we mean the Action of a Man the main difference contended for is That he that prayeth in the use of his Gitfs doth the will of God whether the other doth so is the very Question 3. And so indeed the Answerer tells us only represents it something too invidiously for no man saith That God is pleased with our varying of phrases or altering our methods but we are sure God is pleased with our doing of his will in as little things as those are It certainly had been vain Philosophy under the Jewish Paedagogy to have argued that it was not probable that God saw any beauty or valuableness in the killing of a Beast for he was a Spirit and true Goodness Piety and Sincerity are the things which he delighted in Who knows not all this But he is pleased in obeying his will in the least things The Question therefore is What is Gods Will in the case To obey God is certainly better than Sacrifice and needs must be because all the value of a Sacrifice lay in the obedience testified by it If it be the will of God that his Ministers should serve him in the use of their own Gifts from whence must necessarily follow the altering of Phrases and Methods though there be no intrinsick value in these things yet they are better then all other Sacrifices 4. But our Author thinketh not this probable And why 1. Because our Saviour rebuked the vanity of them who think they shall be heard by their much speaking Mat. 6.7 And as a Remedy taught his Disciples that comprehensive Form of Prayer Austine from hence judged superfluity of words needless What he saith as to the Lords Prayer is elsewhere spoken to so did Hilary and it is a piece of Reverence injoyned by Solomon Eccl. 5.2 5. But what is all this but a wasting of Ink and Paper May not then a Minister pray in the use of his own Gifts unless he prayeth to an unreasonable length Must he needs use a superfluity of words or a multitude of words because he doth not use those words others have prepared for him Who seeth not these inconsequences 6. In the next place p. 14. he argues Because under the Law God did not require daily various changes of the real expressions of Religious Worship and Service but appointed them to be continually the same Num. 28 2 3. which maketh it more than probable that the variety of verbal expressions is not requisite to obtain his acceptance under the Gospel I do not wonder that our Author at first though of Learning enough to make them and answer Arguments in that Form declared his dislike of the use of Sylogisms for if such Arguments as this be put into those Forms they would be too much exposed Is there the same reason for the Service of God under the Gospel as under the Law because Typical Services prefiguring one Christ were invariable must therefore Spiritual Services under the Gospel be so too consider then why the Minister doth not always preach the same Sermons because the Jews were to offer Morning and Evening Sacrifices and we under the Gospel are also bound to pray in all parts of time must therefore the Will of God be that in all things else they should agree Is there the same reason for the performance of Acts of Worship after the plentiful effusion of the Spirit in the days of Pentecost as before Nay is our Author sure
him to read any Book of mans making a thousand times with that Gift and holy Reverence and with so little taedium as he may so read the Books and Chapters of Holy Writ So as all he saith is just nothing to the purpose the Author at first restraining his Question to Forms composed by Men that are confessedly no part of Holy Writ For Forms that are part of Holy Writ they are throughout his Book excepted nor doth he any where conclude they hinder pious Dispositions or that they may not be used as part of the exercise of the Ministerial Gift But something must be said to expose Authors instead of answering him 14. In his 25 page to raise up a prejudice against the Author he very learnedly passeth from Prayer of one kind to Prayer of another kind and concludeth That because he sinneth not who joyneth with another ministring in Prayer when it is apparent by all Scripture that he is not to pray vocally but onely to pray in his heart Therefore he sinneth not who doth it ministring in Prayer when he is to pray vocally not mentally onely It is easie to raise such prejudices and for ordinary Readers to see through them 15. Our Authors last prejudice mentioned against the Authors Opinion That a great part and he thinks the greater part of the Nonconformists will not own his Notion I fear will appear an hasty prejudging the Nonconformists 16. Though the Answerer speaks warily in the case of the Commissioners appointed 1662 for he onely saith They made this no part of their Objections yet he would plainly suggest they who by the way except the Episcopal men were all Presbyterians were of another mind What to say for those who attended not the Commission I cannot tell but for those who appeared and daily met till they had wholly drawn up what they intended to propose to my Lords the Bishops I can tell The Bishops desired them to meet by themselves which they did at Mr. Calamy's House till they had agreed all which afterward they offered at the Savoy to the Bishops What they agreed in this point may be read in these words in their Seven General Proposals That the Gift of Prayer being one special qualification for the work of the Ministry bestowed by Christ in order to the Edification of his Church and to be exercised for the profit and benefit thereof according to its various and emergent necessities It is desired that there may be no such Imposition of the Liturgy as that the Exercise of that Gift be totally excluded in any part of Publick Worship 17. That Men may not please themselves with Dreams and think those last were meer completory words upon which no stress was laid I will assure them that that Proposal had never been agreed without them they being brought in by the Reverend Mr. Mat. Newcomb after as I remember three days spent in debates about that Proposal I do know but three Men of those who appeared and would declare their minds who would hear of any Liturgy Vniversally Imposed Those three indeed were great Men. The most Reverend Bishop Reinolds was one Mr. Calamy was another the third yet living I shall not name Mr. Calamy often urged That if forms of Prayer were lawful the Imposing of them did not make them unlawful It was answered If forms of Prayer were Vniversally lawful Imposing could not make them unlawful but it was denied That they were as to use in publick Devotion Vniversally lawful 18. The debate of the 19 General Proposals was the ordinary work of the Commissioners met together In the mean time they had according to the Instructions of their Commission committed the several Offices of the old Liturgy to several Brethren to be reviewed that they might see what exceptions were reasonable to be offered The drawing up a New Form was committed to another These in their Seasons were brought in and read But the far Major part of the Commissioners present having obtained the 7th Proposal and in that a perfect liberty of the use or not use of any were very incurious as to those things onely listned so far to them as to see there was nothing but what they might own This is the truth of that story so far as it passed before they came to give in what they agreed to receive the Bishops Answer and to make their Reply What was then done the Printed Account fully tells us 19. This is enough to have spoken to this Chapter of the Reverend Doctors only I must requite him with thanks for his Complement the good Milk wherewith he suckles me and tho he presently with an oblique stroak of his heel throws it down again yet I have such a value for it as in the following Chapters I shall endeavour to gather it up and if such a thing be possible for a Non-Con redeem my reputation from such an ugly imputation as the writing of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inconsistencies CHAP. II. An Answer to the Vindicators Second Chapter concerning the Gift of Prayer Whether the Gift of Prayer as to Vocal Prayer be properly an Ability to express our minds to God in Prayer or whether it be the same with the Grace given us to be used in Prayer or an Extraordinary Gift peculiarly relating to the Apostles and Christians in their Age 1. ALL this while methinks I have been in a Drapers Shop staring upon the lofty and Oblique Lights which I discerned in it and wondering wherefore â—o make up a judgment whether the Sun shined or no I must be put to a troublesome elevation of my Eye stretching my Nerves and contracting my Eye-lids till at last I discerned the Art and that a nearer and more direct light though it might have been possibly of more advantage to the buyer yet to the seller would have been less profitable giving his Customer a too near an advantage to judge of his Wares and the Arts used about them 2. I had thought that in the beginning of the former Chapter The Issue was joyned or as the Civilians speak we had had Litene contestatam The Question was stated The Opponent agreed it clearly and plainly staâ—ed The Arguments were brought What had an Answerer to do but to deny one or other Proposition or to distinguish of some Terms Twelve Pages since that have been spent and nothing of this done To what purpose is this prejudicating a Reader but to possess his mind one way before the cause is tryed and to raise his passion with strange stories before he be suffered to use his Reason to judge who hath the best cause upon hearing what each party can say But at length we shall it may be come to something which is to the purpose 3. The first Argument was stated thus To omit a mean for the performance of a Religious Act given us by God for the performance of it and being natural and proper Reasonable Account p. 5. at the command of man when
may be avoided nor is there the least shadow of Reason for what he saith Yes saith he he speaks of ministring one to another now he that prayeth ministreth only to God He speaketh of Officers in the Church ministring now surely they in Prayer Minister not to God only but to the Church or else the Church and they pray diverse things 36. He comes to answer what I urged from Rom. 12.6 Having Gifts given according to the Grace given us whether prophecying let us prophecy according to the proportion of Faith or Ministry let us wait on our ministry or he that teacheth on Teaching or he that exhorteth on Exhortation He that giveth let him do it with Simplicity he that Ruleth with Diligence he that sheweth Mercy with Chearfulness As to this he only referreth to his former Answer to 1 Pet. 4.10 and tells us there is no mention of Prayer there but the other gifts which the Apostle meaneth are there named Let me a little enlarge on this Theme because it will give some light to that text 1 Tim. 4.14 The Apostle is plainly there speaking of the Whole Church Service which he distinguisheth into Prophecy and Ministry Ministry distinguisheth it into the Ministry of him that giveth or sheweth Mercy which is that of Deacons or Ruling under Prophecying he comprehendeth all other Acts of a Gospel Minister for though Prophets and Prophecying in the New Testament sometime signify persons or acts predicting things to come as it is used with reference to Agabus Acts 21. sometimes some Acts which were the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost as is in some places in 1 Cor. 12.13.14 yet it also signifies the Ordinary Ministry of all those who had something to do besides Ruling and shewing Mercy These we call Ministers tho the Apostle speaks otherwise in this Text to distinguish them from Deacons and meer Rulers and therefore calls their whole Ministration Prophecy That precept 1 Thess 5.20 Despise not Prophecying is not to be restrained to Praedictions or immediate Revelations but comprehends all Gospel Ministrations of the Ordinances of Christ tho expressed by one of the Eminentest among them which is Preaching the Gospel Now as to these the Apostle saith Having Gifts let us Minister Being in these Offices let us Minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the grace of God given to us that is according to that Ability which God hath given us I Appeal to any thinking Reader whether this bids not very fair for the true and plain sense of that Text which if it doth 1. Prayer is there spoken to included in the general term Prophecying tho no more particularly named then Baptizing or Giving the Lords Supper or Visiting the Sick c. 2. If that difficult Phrase 1 Tim. 4.14 be not to be understood By Prophecy that is by God who is the Author of Prophecy but To or for Prophecy according to Vatablus Piscator and Beza a very fair Sense may be put on that Text without restraining it most unreasonably to the Extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit 37. The Answerer saying no more to deliver these Texts out of my hands cometh p. 67 c. to except against my description of the Gift of Prayer for the publick Service of the Church as very defective especially in two things My Description was An Ability to express our Minds fitly to God in Prayer 1. He saith the Conception of the Ministers mind must be sober well ordered comprehensive suitable to the Nature of the Duty Is not all this comprehended in Fitly To what purpose so many words I never loved long Descriptions 2. He tells me the Minister is not to exâ—ress his mind his desires or wants but the Mind he should have said the wants of the whole Assembly I would gladly know how he should know the Wants and Regular desires of the whole Assembly but from the Scriptures and whether their ordinary wants be not his also For emergent wants how they who made Forms 100 Years ago could know the Wants and Desires of the several Assemblies of Christians at this day more than the Ministers now living and conversing with them and whether this be in the least probable if God or Christ who did know all things past present and to come did not draw those Forms I am not able to conceive 38. Another place he must except to that is p. 9 10. and put a Marginal Note upon it too that is this I said We thought it would be hard to find Nine or Ten thousand Schollars in England furnished with the Gift of Praying or Preaching in any tolerable manner Is not this one of their own Arguments for the necessity of Forms of Prayer I have read and heard it forty times from them I hope he will now be reconciled to me who have told him and do from my heart believe it that there are twice Ten thousand Persons in England who either are or might be Ministers who have the Gift of Prayer He might before have been Friends with me if he had pleased for I find I had told him so before Reasonable Account p. 154. CHAP. III. An Answer to what the Vindicator saith in his Third Chapter beginning at p. 73. Whether any can with equal Attention of his Mind read in a Book as speak the Conceptions of his own Heart Whether Ministers can by Forms Pray with equal Fervency and Devotion The contrary proved The People not so much concerned in it c. 1. THe Argument which our Answerer comes to answer in this Chapter was falsly Printed and I thank him for not imputing the Error of the Printer to me who saw not the Book till it was too late to Correct any thing in it I shall therefore transcribe and amend it here It lyeth thus To use such a mode in the ordinary performance of our duty in publick Solemn Prayer as either from the necessary workings of Humane Nature or otherwise upon experience we find either hindring the Attention of our own or others thoughts to the duty or the Intention of our own or others Spirits in the performance of the duty when we can so perform it as neither of them will be to that degree hindred is unlawful But for him who hath the Gift of Prayer I now expound that term by an Ability fitly to express his Mind to God in Prayer to perform his Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer by the Prescribed Forms of other Men not divinely inspired these words were left our is for him to use such a mode in those Acts of Worship as either from the Natural workings of Humanâ— Nature or from some other cause scarce â—voidable is upon experience found to hinder our own Attention and also the Attention of others thoughts to the duty and the intention and fervency of our own and others Spirits in the duty when in the mean time we have an Ability so to perform it as neither of them will at least to that degree
of any Form but if it cannot be once lawfully used how shall it be lawfully used a second third fourth time But it is not to be helped after once reading without Previous Preparation as our Answerer grants So as the Question is Whether it can be expected that ordinarily men should use such a Preparation as should inflame their Affections to such a degree as the heat should not abate before they come to their Work For what he saith of the Peoples Fervency as it is not here spoken to for himself quoteth me saying no more then As to him that ministreth there is a great deal of difference betwixt words following the Affections and Affections following the words so neither are the People to use any words at all when they joyn with Ministers in Conceived Prayer therefore their Fervency is not hindred by Conceived Words It is a quite different Species of Prayer The Minister Prayeth Vocally the People onely in their Hearts as to which the Ministers conceived Words and Fervency doth help not hinder them coming with prepared hearts and this is a sufficient Answer to what he saith again p. 84. as if I had spoken very absurdly in saying p. 28 29. That I could not think it possible That the words of another should so well fit our hearts and be so expressive of raised Affections as our own He saith I did not consider that what I thus spake tended to declare that the People cannot with Fervent Affection joyn with the Minister in any Prayer soever because his words are not theirs and then all Publick Prayer fitted to the People must be â—ondemned and we must take up with Quakers or Papists Still he seeks occasions against me and exposeth me without Wit or Reason 8. Now I would have him know that I did consider it But I also considered that there is a Vocal Prayer and a meerly Mental Prayer both of them our Duties at several times the latter only the Peoples Duty in Publick Assemblies where it is Gods Ordinance that one should minister to the rest I do believe that no one of the People can be so Fervent when he joyneth with the Minister ministring words to him as when in his Family or Closet his Affections thrust them out of his own heart But yet they may be so fervent as God requireth of them in such a service where he hath to avoid confusion forbidden them the use of that Mean of geater Fervency By which it appears our Answerer here triumphed before the Victory 9. He cometh p. 85 86. to speak to something which I had said p. 29. That the Minister reading his Forms there was a manifest impossibility of the like degree of Intention for it is the Soul which looking through the Eye directeâ—h it so as a Man readeth true and so it is plainly diverted from its immediate Contemplation of and Fixation upon God I think it beneath me to speak any thing to what he afterward speaks p. 96 97. reflecting on me for saying in Prayer there is or should be a Contemplation or Intuition of God as if none could say so but those who had outdone St. Paul The Answerer knew well enough that St. Paul there speaketh of a seeing God in Glory And that I was speaking of Beholding him in this life Where I hope tho none can see him as he is nor face to face yet they may immediately contenplate God not with their bodily eyes but the Eâ—es of their mind In all Meditation of God in a mans closet there is such an immediate Contemplation It is nothing but the Souls direct Motion to God In all Prayer there is such a contemplation or should be at least This was therefore nothing but another attempt to expose me to such as know nothing of a Souls Communion with God in the Spirit Let it pass Et valeat quantum valere potest Our Answerer to return to his 85 p. saith That this Argument doth not only recoile with equal violence upon my self unhappy me to be Felo de se so often but it is against all Vocal Prayer I should be sorry for that but how doth that appear For saith he The considering Words Phrases Method and Sense is a different thing in Conceived Prayer from the directing the Heart to God and must take up more of his thoughts then the looking upon a Book doth But did I say then that in Prayer the Soul had nothing more to do then to direct its Eye to God I desire to know where if I did not this is nothing to the purpose If he had but considered p. 30. of the Book he would have found a great part of an Answer to this The Soul in Prayer is to consider what it hath to say to God which being considered or known it is to direct it self unto God with the greatest Intention and least Diversion that it can Now this I say cannot be done so well by a Form as in Conceived Prayer for tho it is true he who Prayeth De pectore from the Conceptions of his own Heart must first consider his Matter and Words yet 1. This is necessary so are not Forms 2. The Soul is all the while imployed upon the work of Prayer and its Acts are meerly Spiritual and immanent Acts within its self But so are not its Acts in looking upon and reading a Form these are plain Diversions of the Soul to objects without it self neither naturally necessary nor from any Divine Precept necessary to the Action So that he seeth I have not by my Argument destroyed all Vocal Prayer but onely reformed and established it And for what he faith of the Peoples hearing and observing the words spoken by the Minister it is naturally necessary for they cannot else say Amen It is necessary by all those Divine Precepts which have established Mental Prayer as the Peoples duty in Communion with him that ministreth 10. He comes in the next place p. 87. to prove That Conceived Prayers as the publick Service of the Church may be an Impediment of Devotion I have proved that Forms must be from a necessity of Nature as to the Ministers Devotion at least He only undertakes to prove That Conceived Prayers may be concerning the Devotions of the people and of this he giveth us a five-fold Account 1. They are not certain that they can joyn in the matter of a new Conceived Prayer till they have considered it 2. They may be too apt to give their minds too much liberty to observe the manner or composure to judge of it or imitate it 3. They hinder Peoples Praying with one Accord 4. Some want quickness of Capacity to go along with New Prayers who can Devoutly and Piously joyn with those they have been aequainted with 5. All Impertinencies unbecoming Expressions results of Passions Imprudencies c. which may be inconceived Prayers hinder Devotion For the first of these There is no need of any such thing that People should afore-hand be
not generally used nor by any Persons universally imposed on any considerable part of the Church till Pope Gregories time Anno 600 nor then more then Canonically till 200 years after this and am assured of this by Durandus a Papist and my Lord of Morney a learned Protestant yet whether this be true or false is not a farthing matter in the case and I have something else to do then disputing De lanâ caprinâ or whether it or that be the truest Orthography No understanding person that minds to keep the Protestant Religion as to Rites and Ceremonies will value any quotations at any rate as to Rituals which are out of Writers that lived at the distance of 300 years after Christ 8. In his next Section he doth not pretend to Answer any Argument of mine but only to reflect upon some passages which how justly let my Reader judge he calls Reviling and he hath if it be so indeed answered it with full measure pressed down and running over I am not concerned to Reply to him nor to the Authorities of Capelus all whose words were no Oracles as our Answerer himself also judgeth p. 180. CHAP. VI. A Reply to what the Vindicator saith in his 4 Chap. beginning p. 177. Whether in Vocal Prayer words be not an Essential part of the Worship which no Superiors can institute Whether things in Acts of Worship by Gods Institution left to liberty of Ministers or People may be determined by any but those to whom the liberty is left About the Power of Superiors to command in Divine things Whether he can command what he judgeth to be indifferent and the Inferiours judge Unlawful 1. OUR Vindicator in his 4 Chap. which beginneth in his 177 p. pretendeth to Answer the Authors third Argument which he had thus laid To use a Mean in an Act of Worship which God hath neither directed by the light of Nature nor by his Word prescribed no natural necessity compelling us so to do is sinful But for us or any of us to whom God hath given the Gift of Prayer ordinarily to perform our Ministerial Acts in Prayer Reasonable Account p. 71. by the prescribed Forms of other Men read or ricited were for us no natural necessity compelling us so to do in Acts of Worship to use means neither directed of God by the light of Nature nor yet by him in his Word prescribed Ergo. In proof of the Major I said 1. That Divine Worship is nothing else but an Homage performed to God upon account of his Excellency 2. That it belongs to God to appoint those Acts and Means by whom this Homage should be paid 3. That God hath determined by the light of Nature and his Word given us sufficiently both as to Acts and Means of this Homage 4. That he hath forbidden any other Means in the Second Commandment where under the Notion of Graven Images he forbids all Acts and Means of Publick Worship which himself hath not appointed and if this were not the sense of it it were impossible to reduce to that Commandment all the Precepts in Scripture as to External Worship and Adoration I also further referred to what Mr. Cotton hath said in this Case in his Advertisements upon a Discourse of Set Forms of Prayer p. 17. 18. c. In my further Discourse upon this Argument I was led in Answer to another into a discourse about The power of Superiors in Gods Worship to command what they judged indifferent but their Inferiors or Parties commanded judged sinful and unlawful 2. Possibly that discourse contained two Questions in Divinity upon which the main hinge of this Controversie lay viz. 1. Whether man can lawfully institute at his pleasure Parts or Means of Divine Worship 2. Whether Superiors can command Inferiours in Divine VVorship to do any thing which they the Superiors judge indifferent that is neither commanded nor forbidden by God but the Inferiours judge sinful upon Arguments which to them appear highly probable Let us but be agreed in these two things and we shall in this Controversie have little to contend about Our Vindicator who in the Section immediately preceding had spent 6 leaves in nothing but Reflections spends but 8 leaves about this Chapter which I doubt not but to shew him except he had spoken closer to the thing in question was much too little But what doth he say 3. He granteth p. 177. That all the parts of Divine VVorship must be such as the light of Nature or the Revealed VVill of God directeth Tho this be very true yet what is it to the purpose The Argument spake not of Parts but of Means of Divine Worship nor doth the second Commandment speak only of Parts but of Means Why doth he not either affirm or deny that the Means of External VVorship must be directed from God either by the light of Nature or Scripture But instead of this he runs to his usual way of Observations 4. He first observeth That this contradicteth what I had before said That Forms of Prayer may be lawfully used by some men and at sometimes what if it did contradict what I said before The Argument may be good enough notwithstanding Nemo omnibus horis sapit 2. But this is not so for we are discoursing of what is lawful or unlawful not as to what is meerly Mental Prayer but as to Ministerial Vocal Prayer which is the most perfect kind of Prayer I have told him that I believed that he who prayed by the Vse of Forms only prayeth in his Heart Now as to that Act Forms may be helps and so lawful to be used by those to whom God hath not given due means for Ministerial Prayer which must be Vocal where the heart inditeth a good Matter and the tongue the proper Secretary to the heart is as the Pen of a ready Writer Now supposing what our Answerer so zealously contends for that God prescribed Forms to the Jewish Ministers and that Christ Prescribed his Disciples Forms of Prayer to be ordinarily used Means as to Heart-Prayer are prescribed by God in his Word as to which kind of Prayer words are not necessary for it may be performed without words so as words are no parts of it 5. Forms not directed by God or Christ or any where in Holy Writ cannot be an External Homage to God or part of External Worship for our Author grants that Parts of Worship must be directed by Nature or Scripture now such Forms are not directed by Scripture I am sure they are not directed by Nature Besides if they were an External Worship or part of it they must be never omitted Now that Vocal Prayer is a part of External Worship distinct from what is meerly Mental cannot be denied for that Prayer which is meerly in the heart I am sure is not the Publik Worship of a Minister in the Congregation 6. Hence it followeth That he who prayeth by Forms only prayeth Mentally as all the People do who
very far from believing to have any truth in it and not Forms of Sermons doth this prove that the one is more lawful then the other Are the Opinions and Practices of Men things to be urged argumentatively to prove a thing Lawful or Sinful They may be urged indeed to put us upon a strict Enquity but no further I may consider these differences when I believe the thing is true in matter of fact but I shall never so consider them if I knew the thing was true as to determine lawfulness or sin from them 5. But Preaching is directed to Men therefore there must be no imposing Forms as to that but Prayer to God therefore Forms may be appointed as to that Can any Mortal understand why there should be more care taken what a Minister speaketh in mans name unto God then in Gods Name unto Man Hath not an Embassador more reason to take care what he speaketh in the Princes name unto People then what and how he speaketh in ordinary Petitioners name unto his Prince But Men may be taken with varying of Phrases but God cannot But God may be pleased I hope with the doing of his Will and by the exercises of those Abilities in his Service which he hath given us on purpose for that Service and it speaketh no great Reverence for God for any to express these things by the Puerile expression of Varying Phrases 6. The next thing he saith p. 208 is very admirable That Erroneous Notions and Practices cannot be so well beaten down by Forms as by every Ministers Abilities This is to say that Errors may be better confuted and Arguments for them better answered by any Ministers private Conceptions and Expressions on a small premeditation then by a Book or Forms deliberately by many composed and written for Forms may be made every Month of this nature if they be lawful and necessary 7. He tells us thirdly p. 209. That by leaving men to the use of their own abilities in Preaching Ministers may acquaint People with such things as are suitable to them and in a Phrase suitable It is much that he could not consider also that if Ministers were left to pray by their own Abilities they might also pray to God for such things as new Emergencies make needful for them which they can never do by Forms except they were renewed every Week And surely God never left his Church so ill provided for that if at any time he bestowed a new Mercy upon them or the particular Members of any particular Congregation either preventing or removing some great Evil or conferring some great benefit or by his Providence brought them into some great distress they could not obey his command calling upon him in the day of Affliction that they might be delivered nor being delivered praise him till a Council was called to make a Collect for the purpose 8. Our Vindicators next difference or further need of Forms of Prayer then of Sermons assigned by him is Because in publick Prayers must be compreheâ—ded Adoration Thanksgiving and Supplication for all ordinary good things 1 Tim. 2.1 2. what he means here by Adoration as a part of Worship distinct from Confessions Supplications and giving of Thanks I cannot imagine the Apostle 1 Tim. 2.1 speaks of nothing but Supplication Prayers Intercessions Thanksgivings I hope he doth not mean bowing at the Name of Jesus or towards the Altar for they are neither of them mentioned 1 Tim. 2.1 2. For such things indeed there is need yet not so much of Forms of Prayer as of a Rubrick for there is nothing about them In Albo S. Scripturae He saith to secure this Comprehensiveness there is need of publick Forms But it is no way he saith neeedful that every Sermon should contain all the necessary points of Doctrine and Practice Now here all the Fallacy lies in the term every Sermon for there is the same need of one as of the other but not indeed in eveâ—y Sermon But how doth this prove that there is no need of Forms of Sermons Suppose that in a thousand such forms there might be all comprehended were it lawful for the Superiors to impose them Or Ministers to use them when all Ministerial Gifts in Preaching must necessarily be so supprest He seems to think it is for his next words have a scurvy hint that the contrary liberty is but indulged to comply with the humour and temper of the present age And he saith much more in his 6 and 7 Paragraphs p. 210 211 in commendation of instructing people by Set Forms as a Ministerial Act. 9. He is not pleased p. 212 that I should call Preaching the greatest Ordinance of the Gospel or from the Commissioners at the Savoy tell him That Preaching is a speaking in Gods Name unto People so that if we speak falshoods there we make God a lyar I must confess so dull was I that I did say so for if that be not what is Preaching is the publishing of the great glad tidings of the Gospel to the Children of Men. It was Christs great work for he left Baptizing to his Disciples and himself Baptized none John 4.2 and St. Paul tells us 1 Cor. 1.17 That Christ sent him not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel that is the administration of the Sacraments was not his principal work for he tells us there v. 14.16 That he did Baptize Crispus and Gaius and the houshold of Stephanas and v. 21. he tells us that Preaching is Gods Ordinance to save them that believe and Rom. 10.14 How shall they believe on him of whom they have not heard and how shall they hear without a Preacher Is there any such things spoken of any other Ordinance of the Gospel Or are there any other greater things then saving of Souls to be expected from any Religious Institution And to speak Vntruths in Preaching is as much as in us lieth to make God a lyar for it is a speaking to People in the name of the great God The Commissioners at the Savoy it is like understood as much as our Vindicator what Preaching was and whether our Vindicator be of their mind or no signifieth not much I must confess from some Mens Sermons which I have heard and read I have seen reason to suspect that they and others have had a vastly different Notion of Preaching from us The Noncon generally and very many Conformists too looking upon it as a great Institution of Christ for the publication of the Grace of Christ and perswading Men to the acceptance of that Grace to Repentance Faith and Holiness without which none can be saved Accordingly they have preached Scripturally and proved from thence what they say and the bent of their Sermons is to perswade Men to a life worthy of the Gospel to Acts of Morality out of a Principle of Faith in Christ Love to God c. Others looking upon it as a meer Exercise of Wit or an entertainment for peoples ears
or an opportunity to discharge their lusts and passions have call'd a flanting piece of Oratory a Lecture out of Aristotles Ethicks or Plato or such a discourse as lately was made before my Lord Mayor to the admiration of all men Preaching which is just such Preaching as before the Reformation the people had from the Popish Priests whose Preaching was but a Lecturing out of Scotus and Aquinas or a story out of the Legend and as the story of that age tells us they had not onely the brutish impudence to do this but also to Petition Magistrates for a liberty to do it when the common people discerned the folly and madness of it and would no longer endure to be so abused and deluded 10. In his 214 p. he groweth very angry that I should say How many discourses of late years have we had in Pulpits pretending to prove Men have a natural power to things Spiritually good That we are not justified by the imputed Righteousness of Christ but by our own works How many perfect Satâ—res Raillerys and Evomitions of the Lusts and Choler in the Preachers hearts To this he subjoyneth These are the kind words and meek Expressions of one who judgeth and censures the sharpness of other Men. Then he comes to defend those who have spoken for Mens Natural power to Spiritual Acts and against the imputed Righteousness of Christ These things must not pass unexamined 11. Will our Answerer say there have been no such discourses of late years I appeal to thousands and ten thousands of Witnesses Will he say Ah but they should not have been spoken of because they reflect on the Ministry of our Church That is false they reflâ—ct not on the Ministry tho upon many Ministers of our Church or who call themselves so The Ministry of our Church are those who Preach according to the Doctrine of our 39 Articles which these Doctrines are not others are but Intruders whom our Church owneth not they are but our Churches Natural Sons Our Church hath declared against them in her Articles and Homilies 12. Besides did not our Answerer inforce me to what I spake he had before often told us of the Impertinencies Errors Nonsense Blasphemy to which conceived Prayer gave a scope and That a Prayer may be put up and the People could not joyn in one Petition I told him Reasonable Account p. 106. That was a rare and an hard case 2. That their not joyning might be from the Lusts and Error of their own Hearts 3. That it was the same case as to Preaching and therefore the Argument was as strong for Forms of Sermons to be Vniversally imposed and used He told me there had been many such Prayers I told him there had been also many such Sermons But must our Vindicator who knows this plead for it too as he doth now to the end of this Chapter p. 215 216. Let us hear what he saith 13. He tells us that all our Ministers own Christ to be the Saviour of the World so did Pelagius and that the New Covenant of Grace is confirmed through him so did he for ought I ever heard or read and that in this day of Grace God gives his Aids and Assistances besides the Instructions of his Word the mighty motives of his Gosâ—el and the benefits of the Ministry of Reconceliation and his Holy Sacraments Hold here a lirtle for here lieth the pinch What doth our Vindicator mean by Aids Helps and Assistances besides the Instructions of the Word and Motives of the Gospel c. doth he mean any more then the Remonstrants have in their confession 1622 thus expressed Chap. 17. n. 8. That the Holy Spirit gives to all and every Man to whom the word of Faith is ordinarily preached so much Grace or is ready to give so much as is sufficient for the begetting of Faith If he meaneth no more by those terms then this he meaneth no more then a common Grace granted unto all men that are in the Church and tho this indeed be more then a Natural Priviledge yet I do not understand how it is more then a Natural Power under the advantage of those Priviledges For Natural here is opposed to Adventitious and such adventitious assistance as is more then the improvement of meer natural Abilities by ordinary and common Means Which improvements we commonly call The common Gifts or Grace of the Holy Spirit All these are comprehended under the term of a Natural Power and are opposed to Spiritual which here signifies the mighty workings of the Spirit of God in a way of special and distinguishing Grace inabling the Soul to do some truly Spiritual Acts which it cannot do without the Assistances either from the powers of meer Nature or improved Nature but must be done from a Soul changed born again of the Spirit renewed transformed c. 14. I am sorry to read our Answerer declaring That he cannot understand the End of Preaching unless a man under no special Circumstances differencing him from none who lives within the Church hath a power to believe and work out his own Salvation and to live Godlily Righteously and Soberly I am sure no man can truly believe what he hath no sufficient Evidence of the truth of and our Saviour told Peter Flesh and Blood had not given him a sufficient Evidence That Christ was the Son of the Living God Matth. 16.17 But what our Author saith is the Arminians Argument and hath been sufficiently answered in multitudes of Books and what our Vindicator saith is confuted by the experience of many good Christians who will own the quite contrary and I am sure the Church of England saith in her 10th Art We have no power to do good works pleasing and acceptable to God without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will And Art 13. Works done before the Grace of Christ and the Inspiration of his Spirit are not pleasing to God because they spring not of Faith in Jesus Christ neither do they make men meet to deserve Grace 15. As to the point of Justification our Author saith thus We disclaim every where merit in our own works so do the Socinians and acknowledge Vindication p. 217. that our Saviour hath as our Mediator interposed by his Obedience Righteousness and Sacrifice to expiate our sins give the Sanction to the New Covenant of Grace and Righteousness and to assure the Mercy of God and Pardon and Forgiveness upon the Terms of it But if we speak of the Gospel condition of Justification that must be performed by our selves and we do account that as Repentance which includes that I dare say he meant not Excludes as it is Printed though he hath not been so charitable to me as to think I meant the Opinion and Practice not the Person of Gregory the great was protected by Charles the great is a necessary condition to
something else required to it besides Gracious Dispositions and Desires towards God viz. Audible words and they must be an Essential part of it as being that which alone distinguisheth it from the other Species 7. Secondly Our Author all along this discourse seemeth to talk of a Piety and Devotion in External Worship antecedaneous to the Will of God revealed concerning that Worship Hence he thinks to conclude Forms according to the Will of God because in his opinion they tend to promove Piety and Devotion yea and pleads these things in barr to our proof that It is the Will of God that his Ministers who have the Gift of Prayer or an Ability fitly to express their minds to God in Prayer should use that Gift in Praying We think that that Duty in External Worship which is performed most strictly according to the Will of God is performed with most Devotion and Piety otherwise the Papists have more to say for their Images then I think they have 8. But he further addeth That Ministers are to teach People what they before understood not This is in part true but this is not half their work in Preaching We are not to acquaint God in Prayer with what he before knew not Therefore the precept for Preaching may not be interpreted go and read another Mans Sermon but the Precept for Prayer may be interpreted go read another Mans Prayer We cannot indeed in Prayer tell God what he is not acquainted with But how doth it therefore follow that therefore we must not interpret the precept of God as to Ministerial Prayer Go and study the Mind and Will of God and according to the Abilities I have given you express your and others thoughts to me as to the things which are according to my Will seeing it may be done by words conceived in our own hearts and I have proved them most Natural most proper and very probably the Will of God and considering words are an Essential part of this Worship which no Man can institute or determine if Gods Word hath left the particular words to our liberty and that the matter of Prayer is more variable then of Sermons 9. I had said p. 118 That the words in both Languages in Scripture used to express Reading are quite other from those used to express our duty in Prayer In the same page I had repeated the same We will not be too confident of it but we are not aware of any Text in the Old Testament where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth that kind of Speech which is but the recitation or repetition By Reading of the words of others Either the Printer or perhaps my self carelesly having plainly expressed my mind before in the first lines of that Paragraph left out those words by Reading which manifestly was my sense as appears from what I laid down at first and was proving I had also said That the Hebrews had a great penury of words and it was hard to establish an Argument from proper and significant words in that language But I did not remember any text in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated Read Here he mightily triumphs over my unhappiness in Critical Observations nor do I much pretend to them or affect them but yet shall tell him that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the three Texts he hath brought Gen. 32.4 Deut. 26.5 Deut. 27.14 cannot be proved to signifie Reading which is that I undertook ro prove p. 118. n. 3. For the Greek words it is plain Here he cryeth out what meaneth he That which our Vindicator had no mind to understand and which I plainly enough exprest That the Greek words signifying to read are never used to express the Action of Prayer but instead of them words that signifie a recitation of a thing without the help of our eyes Instanced in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Exegetical in part to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now where shall we find that word signifying to read in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we may find but all this referred to the Reading of Forms and touched not the pronouncing of them by heart I do not think an Argument from words and the usages of them alone conclusive but it is not so slight as our Author would have it Quae non profunt singula juncta juvant 10. I have done with what in this Chap. pretends to an Answer I come now to consider the Reflexive part of it and indeed this is the way of answering in these Cases 1. To look if any words can be catched at to suggest the Adversaries Irreverence or Disobedience to Superiors 2. Next if any can be found to bring the Adversaries under Odium or Envy or Prejudice of any multitude 3. If any lapses of Pen or otherwise can he found to make the Author appear Ignorant Silly Self contradicting Vnlearned 4. To put the Ergo before the premises beginning with telling the Reader there s no weight no strength in the Authors Arguments they are slight trivial trifling inconclusive things Quod erat demonstrandum which ought to have been the conclusion after a good answer had been given to the premises Our Answerer is too much guilty of it as hath appeared all along in his Discourse in this Chapter 11. He first entituleth his Chapter Praying by Forms is very rashly and injuriously charged with mocking of God There is no such thing in my Argument as the term mocking of God nor is it named but in proof of my Major 2. Nor doth it refer to any but Ministers who have Abilities to express themselves fitly to God without them 3. Nor is it asserted but as the private opinion of some Ministers not satisfied in the use of them and a reason and that of which they were least confident of the strength of why they cannot judge it lawful And the same Men tell you p. 264. n. 2. They take not themselves to be Infallible they onely speak as they believe condemning none that judge or practice otherwise But this was a fit title to expose the Author by 12. Next he tells the World this was an heavy Charge and Accusation tho no single person was charged only a private opinion declared Then the Reader is told this is a trifling Argument and the Reader must be asked pardon for giving him the trouble to peruse a thing so very inconsiderable he should have said in my opinion for he is not infallible as this Lastly he must be told of great swelling words extravagancy enough words supported or not supported by weak feeble and impotent Arguments That is such as our Vindicator thinks and it is his interest to think such CHAP. IX A Reply to what the Vindicator hath said Chap. 8. p. 225 c. Ministers main work described in their Commission The Priests and Levites work more then the Vindicator owns They were a whole Tribe in Israel Their maintenance proportionable No arguing from Gods appointments under
I could believe that I ought to do or believe what the Church or my Superiors believe because they so believe or do or command me to do so tho I verilâ— believe it sinful I should think it most eligible to be of that Church which pretends to an Infallible head 7. And I humbly offer it to the Consideration of those who are or who are like to be our Legislators whether it be possible that that Religion can long be kept out if men may thus teach Blind Obedience the very mother of it and as others have done confidently assert not only a Real but a Corporeal presence of Christ in the Sacrament so ascribing such a body to Christ as is no true body invisible illocal multi present c. yea and Purgatory too leaving order for Prayers to be made for their Souls departed as others have done to instance in no more particulars of very many and when they have defended themselves with the most nice unintelligible distinctions they can the best of this is but to teach people Quam prope ad peccatum sine peccato licet accede re which it is a thousand to one if people the generality at least can understand 8. To take off my Answer to the 10th Argument for the 8th and 9th he will not own he refers to what he said before concerning the necessity of Vniformity which I denyed I shall also refer my Reader to what I have before said I do presume my instance from the Decree of Darius was good enough to prove that all Superiors Precepts for Vniformity in Worship are not lawful 9. What he saith p. 253 upon my quotation of Heb. 5.1 to prove the due notion of a publick Minister in the Worship of God He is a person taken from amongst men and ordained in things pertaining to God to offer up such services as God had instituted which as to the Jews were Gifts and Sacrifices as to us are Prayer Praise Preaching Administring the Sacraments He had no mind to understand I designed from thence to conclude that we having twice ten thousand Christians that wanted not the Gift of Prayer blessed be God our Church could not want sufficient Ministers for that work seeing she had such Men and it was her own fault if she did not call them to it 10. Our Vindicator comes in the last place to reinforce his own 5 Reasons against the Batteries I had given them His first was p. 253. That a true right and well ordered way of Worship in address to God might be best secured to the Church in the publick Service of God To this I replyed 1. That is onely a right way of Worship which God hath instituted He saith God hath not instituted the very words we are to use but he hath instituted That we should use words in Vocal Prayer and left the particular words to his Ministers liberty Words are an essential part of his Worship man cannot institute them nor determine what of that Nature God hath left to liberty I mean no other men besides he that Ministreth in Prayer which appeareth to be a part of his Institution because he hath directed no other way 2. I had told him that the security he talked of was not possible nor attainable by Forms He tells me it must be secured as much as may be that is his sense but I hope not by depriving Ministers of the just liberty and rights which Christ hath left them not by making Ministers the Ministers of Men to read what they have prescribed instead of the Ministers of Christ doing his work by the means he hath in Nature and by Scripture directed 3. I told him that in Hundreds of Congregations for twenty years together the Worship of God was in England well and orderly performed without Forms I here add and hath been and is in Scotland New England Holland so as admit what he saith were true in the late times of all the Congregations in England which it is very far from yet there is proof enough ro overthrow his Reason 11. His second reason was That needful and comprehensive Petitions for all Spiritual and outward wants with fit Thanksgivings may not in the publick Supplications of the Church be Omited when as the tying of all men to the Forms is the ready way to have them Omitted as we have had now the experience of two years last past for a sufficient proof nor are the ordinary and common wants of Christians proportionable to the particular renewing wants of States and Churches Congregations and Persons 12. His Third Reason was That the hearts of Pious Men might be more devout and better united in the Service of God by considering before-hand what Prayers and Thanksgivings they are to offer up and come the more ready to joyn and prepared to joyn in them And when they come not hear one word about the particular Sins they have been thinking to confess but onely sins in general nor of their present and renewing wants nor of their lately received mercies how great soever they be nor how Universal soever for which God certainly expects a particular Recognition and Thanksgiving but onely words of General Thanksgiving for all Mercies and general Confessions of all Sins and general Petitions for all good things 13. He seems displeased that I should tell him Forms may be read falsly This he saith is very unlike but I my self with a hundred more have heard it more then once I could name him the particular persons times and things but then I should be exclaimed against again for reflecting yet it is not yet 14 days since I heard it from one who as one would have thought read the Forms with great Zeal But then he saith the people may help themselves having often heard and joyned in the Form that is provided they have the most by heart which not one hath of Ten thousand and 2. then not without great distraction for they have great reason to believe their Leader can Read more perfectly then they can remember 12. His fourth Reason was That such difficult parts of Church Offices as Baptism and the Supper of the Lord the matter of which requires great consideration may in composing a Form be so framed that men of greatest understandings may with readiest assent entertain them and that they might be sufficiently Vindicated from the Calumny I suppose he means of the boldest Opposers My Answer was to that sense That these were the easiest parts of a Ministers Office as to External work for besides the use of his Natural Motions of his his hands he had nothing to do but to repeat the words of our Saviour which are very short Forms of Divine Institution and to apply the general acts of his Office Prayer and Exhortation to that Work This now our Vindicator denieth not but he would have security that men should not Vary Let him have a Law with all our hearts But he rhinks that according to mens
different Notions they may vary in their Prayers and Exhortations So they may in their Sermons before the Sacrament and what help for that 12. His last Reason was thus delivered That this may be an Evidence to other Churches in future times after what way we Worship God and that such a Church is in its measure a pure and incorrupt Church I answered where hath God required such an Evidence He tells me We need not any special command for every good thing Nor need every good thing be brought into Publick Worship and made a part of it I always took the recital of the Creed to be a good thing but no Part of Worship and thus himself answers what I next said That to this end Forms of Sermons are also needful on this Account I told him a publick Confession of Faith is a sufficient Testimony He tells us it is so as to our Doctrine but not as to our Worship Well let theâ— be then a Law made with all our heaâ—â—s That none in the publick Worship of God should do any other Act nor use any other mean but what God in his Word hath established We should think this Act as good an Act as ever was made And this would give a better Evidence to the World then Forms can how we Worship God And now I am come to an end of my long journey where I have not been tyred with the length of my way but for want of one Stile or Difficulty to give my hand or pen the least stop I am resolved without great reason to tread this path no more I see there is no end of Writing where Men will take a liberty to repeat what is said as they please and run Vagaries nothing concerning the matter in hand onely studying to divert the Reader from understanding the truth and how to expose those that will venture to contradict their Sentiments Let those who have a mind to talk at this rate talk on for all me and please themselves with the noises themselves make and with having the last word FINIS 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A REVIEW Of the Third Section of the Third CHAPTER OF THE VINDICATION OF LITURGIES Beginning Vindicat. p. 136. 1. THose who are but meanly versed in this Controversie will easily understand that our Adversaries three great Topicks are Vnity Authority and Antiquity Themselves know as well as we and will sometimes confess that to argue from the Institution of God and Chriâ— to the Institutions of Men is very weak and the Pleas from Christs using the same words as we translate it from the Precepts for speaking the same thing and glorifying God with one Mouth from the command to Timothy That Intercessions and Prayers and Supplications should be made for all Men from Pauls order for bringing the Parchments from Troas are such as none of them would offer to bring in the Schools being fit only for a Countrey Auditory They also know that not one of their pretended Arguments from Reason will conclude either necessity or lawfulness but Vnity Obedience to Superiors and Antiquity are the three great Bulwarks from which they think to Batter us who are of another mind Indeed none of all these will conclude the general use of such Forms of Prayer as the Question speaks of either necessary or unlawful nor can have any force upon an Intelligent Soul till the point of Lawfulness be determined within it self for Peace is no further required of us then as it can be kept together with our Peace with God and who so perswades another by Sin to seperate himself from God that he may keep an Vnion with Men hath not learned his Doctrine from the Old or New Testament which commands us to follow Peace and Holiness which certainly lies in a first respect to Gods Commands and no further then as much as in us lyeth and as far as it is possible to have Peace with all Men which must certainly be interpreted not concerning our Natural but Moral Power nor are we to obey man but in Subordination to God and in my preceding Discourse I have I think made it appear That no man hath power to appoint an Essential part of Worship which in Vocal Prayer words must be nor when God hath prescribed One Mean in Worship to direct another nor yet when God hath commanded us to serve him with the utmost Attention and Fervency and consequently to use all means he hath given us in order to that end can any command of men limit us to a Mean which we upon experience find hinders our Attention and Fervency nor yet when he hath in any duty promised the influence of his Holy Spirit can Man command any such mode of performance of that duty as must necessarily shut it out which must be in the present case if any influence of the Holy Spirit upon our Words in Prayer be any part of his promise And for the Practice and Examples or Opinions of good and Holy Men it is impossible they should further lay hold upon our Consciences in this matter then to double our thoughts upon the matter in question to make us seriously to weigh on what grounds they Act our selves being as likely to be mistaken as they This made me pass over our Vindicators third Section of his Third Chapter wherein he laboureth to load us with the prejudice of the Constant Practice of the Church against our Opinion and Practice something slightly looking upon it but as loss of time and paper to reply to an Inconcludent Argument and seeing that the question being about Sin or Duty no Practice could conclude on either side 2. But yet as the most of Men so I my self have a great Reverence for things that can be made out to be Vniversal Traditions Of which nature I hardly know any thing not plainly revealed in Scripture except the observation of the Christian Sabbath and Infant Baptism neither of which stand upon that single foot much less do I think that there is any such thing to be pleaded for Ministers Vniversal porformance of their Ministerial Acts in Solemn Prayer by the prescribed Forms of other Men. Though therefore enough is said partly in the Reasonable Account partly in the Supplement to answer whatsoever hath been said of this nature yet having my pen yet in my hand I shall add a few lines to justifie what is before said against the Attaques upon it and to shew the weakness of what is brought a-new in the Vindication 3. Only because we are so apt to vary from the Question I desire the Reader would first consider what we do not deny and therefore needeth no proof 1. We deny not but from the beginning Publick Prayers Were made by the Minister and Congregation 2. We also believe That very early the use of the Lords Prayer was general in the publick Congregations tho we find none enjoyned it under Penalties 3. We do believe That even from the first there were
his Army who were Christians he gave them a free liberty to go to Church and to pray without let For the others who were no Christians he ordered they should be drawn out into the fields in the Suburbs and there one calling them together by a sign they should all use the same Prayer for he said they ought not to use their Spears and to place all their hope in their Arms and in their own Strength but spreading out their hands and lifting up their hearts to the King of Heaven they ought to render him Prayers ordained and thereby recognize him who is the God of the World as the Author of all good things and even of Victories themselves and by Prayer to implore him who bestoweth Victories on us who is our Preserver Keeper and Helper and himself commanded a short Form of Prayer to be by them used in the Latine Tongue We acknowledge thee O God alone and own thee as our King and we invoke thee as our Helper Ibid cap. 20. By thee we have gained Victories By thee we have overcome our Enemies we confess that by thee we have obtained our present good Estate and hope to obtain future happiness We all beseech and begg of thee to preserve our Emperor Constantine with his Pious Children in Health and as a Conqueror He generally saith Eusebius made such Edicts and commanded his Souldiers to pray in such like words 34. Mr. Falkner in his Libertas Eccles had brought this as a Weighty Proof to prove the general use and imposition of Forms of Prayer as he doth here p. 152. I have replyed shortly to it in my Reasonable Account p. 67 and more largely in my Supplement to it p. 22. The summ of what I said was That this was a good Argument to prove that at that time there were no Stated Forms in the Church for then Constantine needed not to have made any In my Supplement I repeated this and further added That had there been Stated Forms the Chaplains of his Regiments surely would have used them and thought it piacular to use others as ours do now 2. That these Prayers were not by Constantine made for his Christian Ministers but for his Pagan Souldiers who could not be presumed to have an Ability fitly to express their Wants to God in Prayer So that this was nothing to our purpose which only is about the lawfulness of the use of Forms made by other Men for those Ministers who have an Ability fitly to express their Minds to God in Prayer To instance thus is perfectly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 35. I must confess I did not look into Eusebius to examine this Quotation partly because I had him not in Greek partly because both Helvicus and Alstedius and others assure us Eusebius was an Arrian Bishop and so no very fit man to give us a good account of the practice of the sound part of the Christian Church Alsted saith St. Hierome saith he was the very Principal and Standard bearer of the Arrians 3. Because he is noted by Dr. Rivet and others as a most Hyperbolical Flatterer of Constantine who tho he was an Excellent Emperor yet had his great Errors 4. Because I know his story is by sober men concluded to be full of Fables and not wrote till 300 years after Christ and upward 5. And Principally because his design in that Chapter is not to shew us what Prayers the Church used but how Constantine was as to his Domestick Devotion Now men use to be very careless of words they use that do not strictly relate to the thing they have in hand Eusebius his design was to tell us how Constantine behaved himself in his Chappel joining with the Church in Prayers not to tell us whether the Ministers Prayed by Forms or no. But considering that Eusebius lived in the time of Constantine some may cry him up for a pretty competent Witness in matter of Fact and so we will allow him as to what he design'd to speak to Viz. That the Emperor was very devout in his Chappel spending all his time when there either in private Meditations and Reading the Scriptures or injoyning with the Church when Praying 36. Eusebius saith That when Constantine was abroad with his Army part of which were Christians part Heathens He was wont on the Lords-days to give order the Christians should go to the Publick Congregations of Christians For the Heathens who could not be admitted there he himself made a Prayer of which cap. 20. is a Copy and ordered those Souldiers by beat of Drum or sound of Trumpet or some such probably Military sign to be call'd together and one to read the Prayer to them which Constantine had made for them who were not able to pray for themselves What is this to the purpose This as Eusebius saith was admirably done and no more then we do for our Children or Neighbours who have not Ability to pray without a Form and allow to be done for any such who in the present State of any Church are to be allowed as Ministers tho they are deficient in Ministerial Gifts Only one Question cometh into my mind Suppose there were Publick Forms then used in the Churches thereabouts Was there a Collect for Constantines success in his Wars at that time or in general and a proportionable thanksgiving yea or no If not then surely Forms are not so comprehensive as Prayers in a Publick Service of God should be If there were any such Collect why doth Constantine make another and not take that It is a great Presumption that in that age there were none and Ministers being left to their Abilities to pray in the Christian Congregations there was gteat reason Constantine should otherwise provide for those that might not come in the Christian Assemblies Let the Vindicator take which tine of the Fork he pleaseth it killeth instead of helping him in the case of Set Forms 37. For what Eusebius saith cap. 17. That Constantine ordered his Court like unto a Church neither will that help For if Constantine made the Prayers which were there used it is what we plead for That Ministers may mak◠their own Prayers If the meaning be no more than that he kept 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ministry or Order of Prayer this proves nothing for Forms for a Ministry of Prayer might have been as well without Forms as with them The upshot of this Weighty Evidence is here is not in it one Tittle of pretended Proof for the matter in Question unless it be in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now if that can be evinced to signifie nothing but Ordained by Publick Authority it will prove what none denies That the Church in obedience to Gods command had ordered Publick Prayers to be offered up to him but not that it had ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Forms of Prayer for Prayers and Forms of Prayer are not convertible terms sure Besides I have before proved that there
is no evidence that at this time which was betwixt 306 and 335 there were any Forms of Prayer constituted either by any Imperial Law or by any General Councel or by any Provincial Council The first Provincial Council that did any such thing was that of Milevis more then 60 years after this that supposed one of Carthage was above 30 years after That of Laodicea pretended 30 years after the General Council of Chalcedon more then 200 years after Justinians Imperial Law 200 years after So that if any in Constantines time ordered any it was himself for his Family which is nothing to our purpose admitting it were true for we will allow any master of a Family or any Minister apprehending that he or others are not able fitly to express their own or oâ—â—ers wants and desires to God in Prayer to compose a Form or Forms for themselves or others to be used by him or them until they shall have attained to such an Ability God forbid persons should not pray as well as they can because they at present cannot pray so perfectly as they ought to do and to strive after Nor can I possibly understand by what Authority our Vindicator interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers which had received Authoritative Sanction as he doth p. 152 and unless it be necessarily to be so translated the Weight of this Weighty Evidence he speaks of n. 18 is not above the Weight of a feather Every body knows that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but a compound of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and can signifie no more then lawful or within a Law and so all the Lexicographers which indeed are but 3 or 4 which I have translate it They make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all to be Synonymous Only they seem a little to differ in the Etymology of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some making 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be equipollent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laws given others to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Laws Any Child that looks into Scapula will find that he expounds the word of any Laws whether they were vvrote in Mens Hearts or in Tables or confirmed by Custom that Plutarch in Romulus hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacred Laws and Xenophon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Laws and Hesychius again and again expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Laws and all know Hesychius is no invaluable Author for giving the true sense of Greek words Constantine ordered his Court like a Church he had in it constant Reading of the Scripture and Prayers Himself was present at the Worship of his Family and being there he spent his time either in Reading the Scripture or Praying as God had appointed What is all this to prove that Forms of Prayer were used or appointed This is the utmost of this Weighty Evidence which surely would not have been called so had not the Vindicator suspected all his Evidence to be very light 39. The Case is now tryed I will but summ up the Evidence and leave the judgment to the whole Intelligent World as the Jury The Question is Whether the Nonconformists have not probablet Arguments on their side to induce them to judge that the Church of God for six hundred years after Christ never by their general Practice of its Ministers nor any general Impositions upon its Ministers judged it lawful for all Ministers ordinarily to perform their Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer by the Prescribed Forms of other Men not directed in Holy Writ They think they have the Vindicator thinks the contrary The Evidence on the Nonconformists side is this Within the first 200 years after Christ 1. They find no Forms left them by Christ or the Apostles the Lords Prayer only excepted if that were so intended to be used after Christs Resurrection But on the contrary they find that Justin Martyr saith that in the Christian Assemblies the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they translate as he was able The Vindicator wi h all his might They are sure it is truly translated so The Vindicator is not Infallible assertinâ— it must be translated with all his might The Non-conf also have Tertullian telling them that in those days they prayed without a Monitor because from their hearts The Vindicator saith without a Monitor cannot be without a Form because a Monitor is a person They conceive those that make Forms are Persons and that mute things are very ordinarily called Monitors doing the things which persons that are Monitors do The Vindicator thinks he hath some advantage from Ignatius and Justine Martyr telling us the Christians made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Non conformists say The Supplications and Petitions are common in a Congregation when the People make use of the words of one that ministreth whether he speaketh from a Form or no. In the next 200 Years The Vindicator tells us That he finds in Cyprian Lift up your Hearts We lift them up to the Lord. That Origen speaks of Prayers Ordained and quotes an usual expression in their Prayers Almighty God give us a part with thy Prophets and that they sang by Set Hymns the Non-con answer That this will no more prove the Ministers Prayed by Forms then it will prove that we do so who ordinarily begin our Prayers with Let us Pray Let us lift up our Hearts to the Lord and usually in our Prayer say Lord forgive us our Sins and use several such general Petitions constantly They say it is impossible without Forms of Psalmes or Hymns for any Congregation to Sing but they ought to keep only to Scriptural Forms left us on Sacred Record for that purpose From the Year 300 to 400. the Vindicators proof is from Liturgies pretended to be made by Basil and Chrysostome from the Councils of Laodicea and Carthage The Non-con say That Basil and Chrysostomes making Forms prove nothing unless it can be proved they were by them imposed or used by all Ministers 2. That very learned Men have denied the Liturgies going under their names to be theirs and the Vindicator himself will grant That the Liturgies we have could not be theirs only he thinks they made some tho much hath been foisted into them since which is impossible to be proved the corruptions come to us on the same credit the whole comes The Non-conformists prove that the Council of Laodicea onely ordered Prayers not Forms of Prayer to be Morning and Evening Either there was no such Council of Carthage in this age or they made no such Canon saith Justellus nor is it brought into the Code of the Vâ—iversal Church so could concern one Province only nor doth the Canon establish Forms of Prayer The Vindicator saith Constantine in this age made a Prayer for his Pagan Souldiers who were not able to Pray for themselves nor might joyn with Christian Congregations
And that he Prayed in his Family The Non-conformists say They allow those may use Forms to guide their Mental Prayers who cannot Pray Vocally therefore Constantine did well to make a Form for such and tho Eusebius saith Constantine in his Family Prayed yet it cannot be proved it was by Forms not of Dâ—vine Institution Prayers were appointed but not Forms of Prayer He quotes a speech of Sozomen relating to this Century and a Phrase of Nazianzen which he maketh expository of Sozomen or Julian but the Non-conformists say Nazianzen was dead many years before that Sozomen wrote and so could not expound his words From the year 400 to the year 500. He quotes the general Council of Chalcedon 451 confirming the Canon of Laodicea 364 but the Nonconf say that the Canon of the Council of Laodicea as appears by the words ordered not Forms of Prayer only a Publick Ministry of Prayers Morning and Night He quotes Proclus also asserting Liturgies delivered by James and Clement Basil and Chrysostome The Nonconformists say the Vindicator himself rejects the Authority of Proclus for St. James and Clement and they may as well do it as to the other and that the pretended Writings of Proclus are of no Authority On the contrary the Nonconformists say That in this Century Sozomen saith there were no two Churches to be found which spake the same words in Prayer From the year 500 to 600 he quotes Justinians Novellae confirming the Canons of Chalcedon But the Nonconformists say They have proved that Council established no Forms He quoted indeed before this the Council of Milevis but the Nonconformists say It was a particular case of a particular Province infected notoriously with Pelagianism nor was that Canon by the Council of Chalcedon 451 taken into the Code After the year 600 the Noncon wil agree that Gregory by his Canon Law established Forms of Prayer as far as his Authority went but with so bad success that if Adrian the Pope 200 years after had not obtained of Charles the Great to protect his Canon by a Civil Sanction and by an horrible Persecution to inforce it it had never obtained amongst Christians But they say at this time the true Christians were fled into France the Vallies of Piedmont Alsatia and Bohemia where we read not that their Ministers generally prayed by Forms Now upon this Evidence let all the Consciencious and Intelligent World judge and bring in their Verdict as they please whether this Question can be determined against us by any valuable Practice of the Church in the purer primitive times and whether Our Reasons be not much more valuable to prove the Vnlawfulness Viz. 1. Because we that are Ministers cannot do it without omitting a mean God hath given us for the Action and using one under no special divine Prescription 2. Because in doing it we cannot pray with the like Attention and Intention of heart and Fervent affections 3. Because we judge words an Essential part of Vocal prayer and these or these words an Essential part of this or that Vocal Prayer 4. Because in an Act or Part of Worship where God hath left a liberty to Ministers or Christians other Men cannot determine them 5. Because in doing it we must grant a principle improveable to the total Suppression of Ministerial Gifts 6. Because the Holy Spirit hath or may have an influence on our words as well in Prayer as in Preaching or Confession and it ought not to be shut out unnecessarily 7. Because we cannot understand why the precepts for Prayer should be interpreted differently from the Precept for Preaching which was never by the Church expounded Go read another Mans Forms 8. Because it transforms Ministers from Ministers of Christ to meer Ministers of Men. 9. Because it makes the highest performances of Ministers to be such as ordinary people may do so as there were no need of such an order of persons 10. Because by Experience we see That many idolize Forms of Prayer and think there is no other right Praying to God which is an horrid Error not fit for us to give the least countenance to This is the Summ of all Let the Reader read and judge and we trust he will be so candid as to think we have something to say for our Dissent in this Cause The Conclusion IT is now Reader high time to have done drawing this Saw which will goe no further I remember in the Ancient Practice of the Canon Law after the Pars Rea or as we call him the Defendant had put in his Answer to the Promoters Libel so as there was Lis contestata as we call it Issue joined the Promoter or his Proctor took an Oath which they called Juramentum Calumniae and expressed in these terms Illud juretur quod lis tibi justa videtur Et si quaeretur verum non inficietur Nil promittetur nec falsa probatio detur Vt lis tradetur dilatio nulla petetur That is the Promoter was to swear That he believed he had just cause of action That being asked he would not deny the truth That he would promise no Bribe nor bring in any false Testimony nor without just cause delay any proceedings I have observed likewise some Writers of late interposing some Solemn Professions and Protestations amongst others our Vindicator saith thus p. 21. I do freely profess that besides what concerns the Laws of the Church and of the Realm that I account my self to have as plain Evidence from the Laws of God and the Constitution of the Christian Church that Schism and Vnnecessary Separation is a sin in the breach of Christian Unity as that Adultery is a sin in the breach of Wedlock And I account my self to be as certain that if ever there were an unwarrantable Separation from any known Church since the Apostles time the separation from the Church of England is such since our Church is truly as free from any just exception in its Constitution Doctrine and Worship as any other since that time either was or is A very large Assertion I shall only in like manner enter my Protestation 1. That I do believe all unnecessary Separation from any Church of which we are or have been Members is Sinful 2. I am equally certain That Seperation is necessary where Ministers or People cannot keep communion without sin or so far forth as they cannot do this 3. I have the same certainty That the practical judgment of Ministers or Peoples Consciences must as to their practice determine what is lawful and unlawful tho it be a fallible judgment and they are therefore bound to use the best means they can for information before they form it 4. I do in like sincerity profess That I have wilfully omitted no means of a true Information as to the Will of God in this Cause and I do truly believe it is not lawful for me as a Minister of Christ ordinarily to perform my Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer