Infirmities for we know not what we should pray for as we ought He gives his Spirit to his People they are joined to the Lord and one Spirit and his Spirit dwells in them as we often read in Scripture He hath promised that his Spirit shall bring to remembrance the things we have heard of him Joh. 14.26 But it may be he will say There is no Promise of Assistance as to Words in Prayer What should be the Meaning of that There is no Promise indeed of the Holy Spirit standing by and dictating to us what Words to speak nor yet of the Spirit 's so possessing us as the Evil Spirit doth a Demoniack so as to lay our Soules asleep while he useth our Tongue But there are Promises of his teaching us to cry Abba Father of his bringing to our remembrance what the Scripture hath of his making Intercession for us c. These are enough for us and to prove all that ordinary Assistance as to Words in Prayer which we plead for Nor doth our Casuist say any thing of Force to perswade us That such Influence and Assistance of the Spirit is not within the Latitude of the Promises in saying That there are many good Christians who would never pretend to any such Inspiration but are some of them beholden to their own Recollection and Invention for the Matter and Words of their Prayer and others for want of a sufficient Quickness of Invention to be beholding to Forms of Prayer of other Mens Composure P. 6. Now there are no such Blessings of the New Covenant to which good Christians may have no Right and Title and of which they may never actually partake which is utterly to destroy the Nature of the Covenant c. That there are no Blessings of the New Covenant to which every true Believer hath no Right or Title or which they may never actually partake of is most freely granted But that there are some Blessings of the New Covenant which every good Christian doth enjoy tho' he lieth under other Apprehensions and which he may have a Ius Remotum a Right and Title to which pro hic nunc he doth not actually enjoy and some Blessings of the Covenant which a Christian might enjoy if indeed he did not by his voluntary Fault deprive himself of the Benefit of them and some Blessings which a young Christian doth not at present enjoy must be denied by no Considerate Divine For who ever saith it must deny both the Quickening and Consolatory Influences of the Holy Spirit and many more also indeed for the Promises relating to Iustification and Regeneration as every Believer hath a Right to them so he actually partakes of them as he shall do of Eternal Life But for those Branches of the Covenant which concern further Grace or Gifts the Case is otherwise Every good Christian hath a Right and Title to the Spirit of Adoption teaching him to cry Abba Father influencing him in the manner I have opened as to Words in Prayer But yet it is very possible 1. That by his own voluntary Fault he may shut out these Influences by tying himself up to Forms of Words 2. He may want them through his own Default in not studying the Scriptures and gaining a full Knowledge of them 3. He may deprive himself of them by wilful Sinnings which may make the Holy Spirit withdraw himself in those arbitrary Manifestations 4. He may have them and not know it but take them to be meer Humane and Natural Recollections to which the Holy Spirit hath assisted by bringing to remembrance what Christ hath said Our Casuist's Second Reason p. 7. is Because there is no need of any such immediate Inspiration This indeed were it true were a great Argument and would Prove what he said before That there are no Promises of any such Tendency But how will he prove this He saith 1. As to the Matter of Prayer it is sufficiently revealed in Scripture 2. He saith For Words if we have not Quickness enough of Fancy and Invention to express our Wants and Desires in our own Words we may readily supply that Defect by Forms of other Mens Composure which with very short Additions and Variations of our own we may easily adapt to all our particular Cases and Circumstances This is the Summ of what he saith P. 2. p. 8 9. If the Matter of Prayer be sufficiently revealed in Holy Writ there neither is nor ever was since the Apostles Time any need of any extraordinary Assistance of the Spirit to dictate that But admitting this which we freely grant is there yet no need of the Spirit to bring to remembrance the things we have had of Christ's Our particular Violations of the Divine Law our particular Wants or the Promises warranting us to beg a Supply To assert no need of the Spirit 's Help we must not only assert the Perfection of the Rule of Prayer but the Perfection of an Human Memory too which I suppose our Casuist will not 2. As to Words our Casuist talks as if he thought we pleaded for the Spirit 's dictating formed Words to us or made use of our Tongues to speak Words not formed in our own Hearts What else doth he mean by Words immediately inspired Alas we mean no such thing but only a bringing into our Thoughts the Matter of Scripture relating to Things forbidden commanded promised c. From which our Souls by a natural Power form Words and warming and heating our Affections which also contribute to them and then thrust them out at our Lips as the Psalmist speaks Psal. 39. 3. Now how it can be that Forms should not shut out this Assistance and Influence poseth me to understand 3. Our Casuist's Third Reason is p. 9. Because there is no certain Sign nor Testimony of it amongst us By Signs as he expounds himself p. 10. he means Miracles He gives his Pretended Reason for this Because without such Signs to distinguish it from false Pretences we were better be without Inspiration than with it because we shall be left under an unavoidable Necessity either of admitting all Inspirations which pretend to be Divine or of rejecting all that are truly so According to this rate of Arguing we must conclude nothing to be the Effect of the Spirit of God but what we can confirm to be so by working some Miracle Alas how should Christians if this had a Grain of Truth in it ever be able to satisfie themselves that they truly believe in Christ or love or fear God or exercised or had any Habit of Grace God indeed gave the Gift of Miracles to confirm new Doctrines or some Prophecies or Persons extraordinary Missions But did ever any Divine make Miracles necessary to confirm every Manifestation of the Spirit And why are they necessary for this more than any other Is it not Sign enough to him who believeth the Scriptures to be the Word and Revealed Will of God that the Inspiration is from
Acquired 2. He saith That this Natural or Acquired Gift is no where appropriated by God to Prayer but left common to other uses and purposes Whether in Words of Scripture it be any where by God so appropriated is not worth the disputing if from the Nature of the Ability Gift or thing it self it be so appropriated which that it is I think is clear enough from the Description of it given by our Casuist p. 26. where he hath these Words By the Gift of Prayer they mean an Ability to express our Minds to God in Prayer or to offer up our Desires and Affections to him in Words befitting the Matter of them Nor hath our Casuist before contradicted this Notion now how it is possible that an Ability fitly to express our Minds to God in Prayer can relate to any thing but Prayer I cannot understand if he had indeed in stating the Question or explicating it have denied this Notion there might have been some colour for this Assertion but now to tell us as he doth p. 30. That the Gift of Prayer is nothing but a freedom of Elocution or Vtterance is very impertinent But this is fully answered in the Reasonable Account p. 10. and again in the Answer to Dr. Falkners Vindication of Liturgies p. 36 37. but to add yet a little further The Question is Whether an Ability fitly to express our Minds to God in Prayer be a Gift differing from the Lawyers Ability to plead well at the Bar or a Mans Ability to Discourse pertinently in good Company or a Schollars Ability to Dispute well in the Schools Our Casuist saith plainly they are but one and the same Gift 1. By our Casuists Ratiocination those also must be the same Gift with the Gift of Preaching which admitted it must necessarily follow that he who is able to plead a Case well at a Bar or to Discourse well in Company must be able also to Preach a good Sermon and to express himself fitly to God in Prayer Which besides that it would justifie the Socinian in telling the World That they have been a long Time troubled with a needless sort of Men called Preachers or Ministers is most demonstrably false there being some Thousands in the World that can Discourse well in Company and many Lawyers that can Plead very well at a Bar and several Schollars that can Dispute in Mood and Figure that if they were put to it to Pray and Preach in a Pulpit few would think they had a Gift that is an Ability for either 2. According to this Notion all Gods Gifts as to external Action might be reduced to the Gift of Motion All spiritual Habits to the one Gift of the Spirit but the Apostle speaks after another Rate 1 Cor. 12.4 Now there are diversity of Gifts but the same Spirit And tells ver 8. To one is given by the Spirit the Word of Wisdom to another the Word of Knowledge by the same Spirit Ver. 10. To another Prophecy to another the Interpretation of Tongues All these now flow from the same Spirit and are all Species indeed of the Gift of Vtterance but if the Apostle understood himself they were divers Gifts and by his Authority we must crave leave to call them so 3. Besides What can make or argue a Diversity of Gifts if a Diversity of Knowledge as the Foundation of their Exercise and a Diversity of End will not And with what Sense can two Gifts be made the same when it is demonstrable that every one who hath the one of them hath not the other nor any thing like it Neither is that true which our Casuist tells us and I admire to read him asserting what is contrary to all Mens Experience for he saith We find that those who have this Gift viz. of Prayer have it not only while they are speaking in Prayer but when they are speaking on their Occasions and that ordinarily they can express themselves to Men with the same Readiness and Fluency in Conversation as they can express their Minds to God in Prayer Either he means all such or only some such If he speaks of all it is most evidently false How many have we known that want no Words or proper Expressions in Prayer that in Worldly Affairs cannot speak to any purpose If he meaneth it of some only he speaketh true but nothing to the purpose for the same Man might in the Apostles Times have the Word of Wisdom and the Word of Knowledge and Prophecy and Interpretation of Tongues The Apostles doubtless had them all yet the Apostle determines them Diversity of Gifts I Cor. 12. 4 8 9 10. 3. In the Third Place he tells us That this Gift of Utterance not being appropriated by God to Prayer may upon just Reasons be as lawfully omitted in Prayer as in any other Use or Purpose it is designed for Here our Casuist supposeth that the Gift of Prayer is nothing but the Gift of Vtterance which we have disproved under the former Head 2. That the Gift of Prayer is not appropriated to Prayer which we have also disproved so as this Conclusion falls by the Fall of the two Pillars on which it is built only I must not omit what our Casuist hath here said excellently p. 31. I do confess had God any where appropriated it to the End of Prayer those who have it were obliged to use it to that End and to omit it ordinarily by confining themselves to Forms of other Mens indicting would be to neglect a Means of Prayer of God's special Appointment and Institution for had he any where intimated to us that he gave it us purely to inable us to pray without respect to any other End we could not have omitted the Use of it without crossing his Intention and frustrated him of the only End for which he intended it Here our Casuist hath spoke our Heart only we think that if this appears from the Nature of the Gift which is such as it is impossible to use it any other way it is the same thing as if he had told it us in so many Words in Scripture or by an Angel from Heaven Let it now be left to any Man of Sense to judge whether we have not proved this and that from our Casuist's own Words p. 26. where he accepts the Question as stated by us as well as from the Nature of the Gift it self being not Vtterance tho' a Species of it a Gift exercised from a different Species of Knowledge than other Gifts are that fall under Vtterance as the Genus and to a quite different End and not found in Thousands who have Utterance good enough in other things 4. Our Casuist's last Conclusion upon this Case is That to rend our Desires to God in other Mens Words is as much a Means of Prayer as to speak them in our own for to speak in our own Words is no otherwise a Means of Publick Prayer than as it serves to express to God
God than as they signifie the Graces and Affections of our Hearts without which he regards them no more then the whistling of the Wind. All this is very true but what then Therefore saith our Casuist since these Affections are the main of our Prayer and Words are nothing in his account in Comparison with them can any Man be so vain as to imagine that those Affections will be ever a whit the less acceptable to him because they are presented in a Form of Words and not in extemporary Effusions To which I Answer truly no. But admit that the Holy Spirit to Day or to Morrow bring to our Mind from Scripture some Particular Sins as Matter of Confession which are not mentioned unless generally in the Form we are to use and excites in us a shame and sorrow for them and an earnest Desire or Hope for the Pardon of them and the Christian hath no Words in his Form expressive of such Shame Sorrow Desire or Hope how acceptable do we think will this Prayer be unto God which is but half a Prayer For though the Motions of the Affections be a part of Prayer yet it is not all Prayer and scarcely any where in Holy Writ call'd by that Name at least not in one Place of Forty where Prayer is mentioned As for the Senses which our Casuist puts upon those Texts Gal. 4.6 Rom. 8.15 26. Iude v. 20. He should have done well to have proved what he Dictates that they concern not our Words in Prayer we are quite otherwise minded and think that the Spirit may influence us with Sighs and Groans that cannot be fully uttered as no great Passions can yet may be in a great measure uttered and so uttered as to let those that hear them know they are imperfectly uttered which is often discern'd though not by Non-sense yet by abruptures of Phrase and Expression and the incoherence of them also sometimes In the next Place our Casuist comes to explain stinting and limiting the Spirit Where first he quarrels at the Phrase as being not found in Scripture nor Antiquity he saith It is a Term of Art invented by us applied only to the present Controversie and this plainly argueth the Argument to be New I dare say the Author cannot find the Term of Natural Enthusiasms or Inspiration in Scripture nor yet the new invented Notion of Diabolical Inspiration of Men to the Duty of Prayer in any Antiquity Yet our Casuist maketh no scruple to use them both why may not we have the same Liberty Nor do we apply it meerly to the present Case we are every whit as much against Forms of Sermons And what matters it if the Argument be new provided it be an Argument and be strong But neither is it new it is a great while ago since the Apostle commanded the Thessalonians saying 1 Thess. 5.19 Quench not the Spirit Now if the Spirit Kindleth and inflameth the Affections and they influence the Thoughts to form suitable Words and then the Tongue cannot utter them because it is tied up to some certain Words and Syllables I think it is quenched so far as it is capable that is its Operations are quenched and made to die in the Heart Nor doth our Casuist perfectly express our meaning in this Phrase of Limiting the Spirit for we by it do not so much mean hindring the Spirit from affording us some Assistance which we might otherwise expect from it As That we hinder our selves from making a due and perfect use of that Assistance which the Holy Spirit is ready to give us both by bringing Things to remembrance which we have forgot and also exciting and inflaming our Affections For though they may yet burn within us yet in the use of Forms they cannot as they ought to make up a perfect Prayer burst out at our Lips we must not speak with our Tongues as David Psalm 39.3 And this indeed may provoke God to withdraw these Assistances from us And now in Opposition to our Casuists Conclusion I also conclude I have shewed at large that there is an ordinary Assistance which the Holy Spirit giveth to conscientious Christians about to Pray or in Prayer 1. By bringing to remembrance the Matter of Prayer recorded in Holy Writ proper for this or that Time of Prayer both for matter of Confession Supplication and Thanksgiving which through the frailty of our Memories we often do not at that Time think of 2. By exciting and inflaming Holy and Pious Affections suited to every Part of that Duty Now by keeping our selves to forms we shut out these Influences of the Holy Spirit either rejecting them or not being able because restrained by Forms to make use of them as to a perfect Prayer What our Casuist hath said or any one can say to disprove this I refer to any Reader indued but with common Sense to Judge So much in Answer to what our Casuist hath said as to the first Case stated by him The Second followeth Case 2. Whether the use of Publick Forms be not a sinful neglect of the Ministerial Gift of Prayer Our Casuist hath here very rightly stated our Case thus p. 26. By the Gift of Prayer they mean an Ability to express our Minds to God in Prayer or to offer up our Desires and Affectito him in Words befitting the Matter of them Which Ability say they is given by God to his Ministers as a mean for Publick Prayer and in order to their being the Mouths of the Congregation to God to represent to him the common Cases and Necessities of the People And therefore since God say they hath given us this Gift it may be justly questioned whether we may lawfully omit the use of it by using Publick Forms of other Mens Composure In speaking to his Case our Author premiseth two Things and then laieth down four Conclusions all which I shall candidly examine in their Order 1. That this Case concerneth the Clergy only not the Laity That is true so far as concerneth Publick Prayer in Churches This Argument will not indeed conclude it sinful for Christians to join in Prayer with such Ministers as use pious and good Forms What others may do I cannot tell 2. He premiseth That this is not the Case of the Clergy of the Church of England who though they stand obliged to the constant use of the Liturgy yet are not hereby restrained from the Exercise of their own Abilities in Publick Prayer in their Pulpits I shall say nothing to the Case of these or these Clergy-men There hath been enough said as to this by the Author of the Reasonable Account p. 12 and 13. I therefore come to his Conclusions 1. He saith That this Ability to express in our own Words the common Devotions of our Congregations to God is either Natural or Acquired We will grant this without more Words about it It is partly Natural speaking is so partly Acquired to speak fitly and properly to God in Prayer is
Liberty so to bring to our Remembrance and thus this Text is reducible to the first Case propounded by our Author Or let it be interpreted as to the Spirit of a Man under the Gospel renewed and sanctified so it relates to our Author's Second Case and enough hath been spoken to each of them We ought not so to pray if we be able to do otherwise as to exclude the former nor yet so as to omit our own Gift which is the Effect of the Spirit which is all we contend for For all that our Author saith about the Word in the Hebrew used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it sometimes signifie Prayer in the general signifieth nothing as to the Argument especially considering that if by the Terms of Praying and Prayer c. be thrice in Scripture signified meerly mental Prayer yet vocal Prayer is for those three times forty times understood and I believe it is not capable of Proof that meerly mental Prayer is thrice called Prayer For his next Texts 1 Cor. 1.5 2 Cor. 8.7 I know of none that hath pleaded that the Gift of Vtterance is to be restrained to Prayer for my own part I always thought it respected Preaching as well as Prayer but that it is to be understood and limited to extraordinary Gifts is what I cannot yield For what is the Gift of Utterance but an Ability to utter which certainly is applicable as well to the utterance of our Minds to God in Prayer as of God's Mind to us in the interpreting or applying of God's Will to us and let our Author prove the contrary if he can These extraordinary Gifts were certainly not so common as that of Vtterance which seems to have been the Portion of the whole Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 1.5 And by 2 Cor. 8.7 it appeareth no more extraordinary than Faith Knowledge and Diligence with which it is ranked there and if Vtterance be no more than Ability to utter or a Freedom of Speech it is demonstrable that it was not as our Author saith peculiar to the primitive Ages of miraculous Gifts because we find by Experience that Multitudes have it now and that both as to Prayer and Preaching Vtterance is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 1.5 Eph. 6.19 Col. 4.3 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now Speech or a Freedom of Speech was no extraordinary miraculous Gift Acts 2.4 quoted by our Author is thus They were all filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak with other tongues as the spirit gave them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to utter or speak It is also used v. 14. and Acts 26.25 I speak the words of truth and soberness for which Paul needed no extraordinary Gift By this Reply the Insufficiency of our Author's Answer to these Scriptures produced by Dissenters will appear But p. 33. he goeth on and saith But they object further That supposing God hath not given to all Christians the Gift of Prayer extempore yet to a great many he hath and therefore these at least he requires to pray by their Gifts not by a Form 1 Tim. 4.14 2 Tim. 1.6 1 Pet. 4.20 Rom. 12.6 It is very true that some Dissenters have quoted these Texts and see no Reason yet to quit them tho' they at first granted them ex abundanti not as needing them to to prove what is all that they do prove for even Nature it self teacheth Men and Women being able to do it to express the Wants and Desires of their Souls by Words formed in their own Hearts and tells us no Words are so natural and proper and what Nature teacheth we need no Institution for If any corrective Institution hath restrained us in the use of what is a natural proper Means to an Action it must be produced The Iews needed no positive Law requiring them to eat Flesh but it being the Will of God that to shew their Obedience to him they should forbear eating some kinds of Flesh there was need of an Institution corrective of what Nature otherwise taught them But yet what Nature it self teacheth may also be taught by Revelation as we have always thought this was by the Texts quoted which have not been brought to prove in Specie That those who have the Gift of Prayer ought to use it But that those who had any Gift serving them to the Performance of a Religious Act ought to use it in the Performance of that Act unless they be restrained by some corrective Institution that is by some Law of God declaring his Will for their Forbearance of the use of that Ability which the Declaration of his Will in his Word for the use of this or that Form of Words in Prayer we confess is This is the general Summ of what hath been said All that our Author saith as to these Texts is That by Gifts in those Texts is only to be meant Office What hath been said to this may be read in the Answer to Dr. Falkner's Vindication of Liturgies p. 62 63 64 65 66 67 68. Nothing of which our Author takes notice off 1. It is gratis dictum said and not proved that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies in three Texts Office not Gift it being manifest that in many Texts it signifies Gift not Office Erâ—smus in all those Texts translates it Donum the Gift Dr. Fulk against Martin sath it is never taken in Scripture but for a free Gift or a Gift of his Grace The Vulgar Latin so translates it Erasmus notes that Ambrose so understood it 2. Rom. 12.6 saith Having then Gifts differing according to the Grace given to us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It may be it is the only Text where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can with any Pretence be translated Offices and not necessarily there See Rom. 5.15 chap. 6.23 Rom. 2.11 1 Cor. 12.4 9 28 30. chap. 11.7 Rom. 11.29 1 Cor. 1.11 1 Cor. 12.31 I think it is hardly used in any other Texts and in no Heathen Author So as we must have the Sense of it from Holy Writ Let any one peruse those Texts and judge whether contrary to the Sense of most Authors he can translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Office or Dignity For what our Author saith as to 1 Tim. 4.14 that the next Words which was given thee by Prophecy make it plain that this is the Sense of it the Reader may see in the aforementioned Answer to Dr. Falkner p. 63. what is said to it That is obscurum per obscurius Piscator Vatablus and Beza make the Sense That thou mayest Prophecy Three ancient Versions viz. the Syriack Arabick and Ethiopick read it with Prophecy Our Translators indeed and Vulgar Latin read it by Prophecy The Greek Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated with great Variety per propter prae ob post cum quoniam which gives Interpreters such a Liberty Because of or for Prophecy is a very good Interpretation and justifyable from Matth. 10.22 and chap. 13.21 58. But
that Iesuites will turn themselves into all Shapes this very Iesuit was a Probationer for a Son of the Church he Preached before the Dean for that Purpose One of them may be all for the Prayers of the Church and for the heighths of Ceremonies as we know Popish Priests are generally Another of them may be for conceived Prayer and exclaim against the Ceremonies when both the one and the other drive the same Design that they may rule Now had we no Liturgy universally imposed nor any Ceremonies so imposed their Designs were spoiled and they would be put to new Topicks I never thought the good Angels in the least defamed by the Devils transforming themselves into their Appearance But this Story as related by the Author of Foxes and Firebrands hath as great Appearances also of a Forgery as can well be imagined 1. It comes to us only upon the Credit of a Registry and concerneth a Matter of Fact 115 Years since is justified by no Print though both Itolinshead and Cambden wrote the History of Queen Elizabeth's Reign with great Particularities Now we know the Authority of an Ecclesiastical Court is such as none of our Civil Courts will admit their Scripts for Records 2. We know there was for Twenty Years an Interruption of those Registrings in which Time they lost many of their Books and Papers this must be supposed to have escaped the common Fate 3. The Register must be presumed to have made a true Entry and that Verbatim of what the Bishop said and Heath answered Those who have been acquainted with those Courts will tell us they could never find a true Entry made of what was said between the Iudges and Parties questioned when they have looked for them within Fourteen Days or a Month. 4. This Examination was in Court Registers use not in Court to set down Questions and Answers at large but to make Minutes of them and then extend them at their Leisure so as this Examination was probably set down when the Court was done as Mr. Register's Memory would serve him and it was for the Interest of the Church to set down so as we cannot be assured that so much as one Question with the Answer to it is truly set down 5. By what Authority did the Bishop Sentence him to the Pillory to have his Ears cut off his Nose slit and to suffer perpetual Imprisonment And for what Crime All the World knows that since the Reformation no Bishop ever had such a Power The High Commission and Star-chamber in latter Years exercised some such Power but this was in the Bishops Consistorial Court which never had such a Power 6. It is neither probable that a Iesuit should put his Beads into his Boots nor keep a Letter of no more Moment in his Pocket to drop in a Cathedral Pulpit 7. The having of Popish Beads or Books denying Baptism or speaking such Words was by no Law a Crime subjecting a Person to so severe a Punishment 8. In the Year 1536. but Thirty Two Years before there were not Ten Iesuites in the World In the Year 1540. but Twenty Eight Years before Pope Paul increased them to Sixty In the Year 1543. but Twenty five Years before he established them without Limitation In the Year 1541. but Twenty seven Years before this Year Their Colledge at the importunity of Peter Mascarenhaz the Portugal Ambassadour to the Pope could afford but Two and those were Two of the first Twelve Xavierus and Rodericus for all Portugal This Story happening within Twenty seven Years supposeth them a formed Body with settled Correspondencies so as there was a Communication fixed betwixt Rome Madrid and England The probability of which I leave to my Readérs Judgment 9. Whereas Common Fame speaks the Iesuites the most subtle of all Orders This Narrative speaks their Fathers for so all their Missionaries are the veryest Coxcombs in Nature Otherwise Heath would never at first have owned himself a Iesuit 1562. muchless would he preaching a Probation Sermon and that in a Cathedral have so sillily reflected on the Prayers of the Church or told the Bishop That he had laboured to refine the Protestants and to take off all smaks of Ceremonies The poor Iesuit is made here beneath a tolerable Fool. 10. Nor was the Iesuit Malt made less Whereas the Anabaptists had been once up in Germany 1524. and finally quelled upon their after-rising in the Years 1534 1535. Malt the Iesuit is here brought in endeavouring to perswade his Friend that Hallingam Coleman and Benson Thirty one Years after and 1568. had raised this Faction Was not this a great Blockhead think we for a Iesuite These Difficulties as to Credibilty this Story laboureth under how much soever it pleased the Dean of Pauls or now pleaseth our Casuist I am aware of what the Dean hath further said to strengthen this Story and to evince the suitableness of these pretences about spiritual Prayer as he calls them to the Doctrine and Practice of the Iesuites but he hath received an unanswerable Answer by the Learned Author of the Book called A Modest and Peaceable Enquiry into the Design and Nature of those Historical Mistakes that are found in Dr. Stillingfleets Preface to his Vnreasonableness of Separation p. 7 8 9. where is proved 1. That the Iesuites were not the first Inventers nor the first bringers in of spiritual Prayer spiritual Prayer being owned acknowledged and privately practiced ever since the Apostles Days for the Church never did forbid the use of it faith Filiucius 2. That the Iesuites ever have and still do zealously oppose the use of Free Prayer 3. That wherein the Iesuites and the Dissenters agree as to this it is in no other respect than wherein the Universal Church agree with them 4. That wherein the Dissenters and the Doctor differ about spiritual Prayer the Dr. closeth with the Iesuit our difference if any being about the Publick Vse of Free Prayer against which the Iesuites are See these Four Things made good in the Book before-mentioned p. 6 7 8. But methinks the Dean and those other Divines we have to do with in this Controversie if they have a mind to make People a little Sport about this grave business of Prayer in the Use of Mens own Abilities they should give it another Name than that of spiritual Prayer Prayer is then spiritual when it is so with respect to the Matter being such Things as the Holy Spirit in the Word hath directed us to Pray for Or as to the Manner when it is the Action of our inward Man not the outward only not a meer Lip labour and so it is opposed to what is meerly Verbal Or else when it is attended with Holy and spiritual Affections excited and inflamed by the Holy Spirit I am sure all other Prayer is an Abomination in the sight of God All the Question is betwixt our Brethren and us whether the Words we use in Prayer should not be first
formed in our own Hearts and whether that Prayer which is such be not more spiritual than other That is 1. Whether there be not more of the Work of our own Spirit in it which I think no modest Man will deny 2. Whether there be not in such Prayer more room left to the Spirit of God to bring to our Remembrance what we have to confess to supplicate and give Thanks for No Words diminutive of spiritual Prayer become a Divine who ought to know that God is a Spirit and will be worshipped in Spirit and in Truth What if some Iesuites have discoursed for this kind of Prayer under the Name of Oratio acquisita acquired Prayer So they have discoursed very well for the Divine Nature of Christ the Trinity the Love of God c. All Sober Divines will grant that this acquired Prayer is the most perfect Prayer The Iesuites never discoursed for it but in Private They agree with some others that are no Dissenters as to Publick Prayer There was a Time when many can bear both the Dean and our late Casuist Witness that they both approved and practised this kind of Praying if they see better now they must Pardon others that cannot see by their Spectacles still acquired Prayer or free Prayer is what it was in the same Degree of Goodness and Praeference I know nothing that Spiritual Prayer can be opposed to but either carnal or meer formal Prayer from both which the good Lord deliver the whole Generation of those that seek his Face But this is enough to deliver free or conceived or acquired or if they will have it so spiritual Prayer from the false and fordid Calumny of being brought in by Iesuites 3. The Third is yet worse That the Devil may have a Causation in it The first that I remember I have met with who hath taught the World this new Imputation was the Author of Ravillac Redivivus proving it from the Instance of that prodigious Hypocrite in Scotland Major Weier The next that approved his saying was Dr. Falkner in his Vindication of Liturgies p. 41. who speaking how the faculty of Expression in Prayer may be procured faith It may be procured as he hath read in some particular Instances by Diabolical Contracts What his Answerer replieth to him see p. 43 44 45. Our Casuist hath improved the Notion Part 2. page 13. But then Secondly As for Diabolical Inspirations of Matter and Words in Prayer we have sundry very probable Instances such as Major Weier who is said to have received his Inspirations through a Staff Hacket David George and that Monster of Wickedness Iohn Basilides Duke of Russia who were all of them possessed with such a wonderful Gift of Prayer as did not only charm and ravish those that heard them but seemed in the Opinion of the most wise and impartial to exceed the Power of Nature which renders it very probable that the Matter of their Prayers was for the most part agreeable to Scripture otherwise it is hardly conceivable how they could have procured to themselves so many Admirers and abused so many honest Minds into a belief that they were immediately inspired by God For Answer to our Casuist his probable Instances of the Devil his inspiring ill Men with Matter and Words in Prayer I shall only desire the Reader to consider these few Things following First Consider That it is worth the observing how unreasonable this Casuist and his Liturgical Brethren are while they find a Difficulty to allow the Holy Spirit who is called The Spirit of Grace and Supplication Zech. 12.10 The Spirit of Adoption by which we cry Abba Father Rom. 8 15. Gal. 4.6 The Spirit that helpeth our Infirmities because of our Selves we know not what we should Pray for as we ought Rom. 8. 26. any influence on our Words in Prayer which is a good and Holy Action and yet find no difficulty to yield the evil Spirit such an influence who abhorreth Prayer and will leave the Room where he is molesting Men when they go to Prayer as we are assured in good Histories of such Molestations by the Devil such as that of the Devil of Mascon Published by Dr. Peter du Moulin and others Is not this very unfair dealing and an horrible Derogation from the Dignity and blessed influences of the Holy Spirit Secondly Consider That as for us we freely grant the possibility of all that our Casuist and his Brethren can reasonably demand and rightly infer from the foregoing Instances That is we grant it is possible that by Gods Holy Permission Satan may suggest many Things to ill Men he may represent various Objects to the Imagination and inward Sense he can impress the ideas of Objects upon Mens Fancy and Imagination and by means of those ideas he can raise their Passions and excite their Lusts and corrupt Affections He cannot only imprint new Idea's upon their Imagination but he can also revive in them the Memory of Things past and restore to them the Ideas of Things which they had forgotten and seemed to have lost and by the one or the other or by both these Means he can influence their corrupt Affections and put them into Motion These are his venemous Darts wherewith he agitates their Blood and Spirits and fixes their Lusts and Passions He can also suggest to them Thoughts that it is Gods good Spirit who thus moves them and makes those Impressions upon them and then their own wicked Hearts inclining them too readily to believe the Truth of his Suggestions because of the agreeableness of some of the things suggested to the Vanity of their Minds out of the abundance of their Hearts their Months naturally speak and that with such defining and flourish of Words as bears Proportion to the natural volubility of their Tongues or to that readiness of Speech which by Use and Exercise they have acquired Thus it is granted that without bodily Possession the evil Spirit might Work in those Children of Disobedience Ephes. 2.2 and so doing might furnish them with Matter of Discourse and thereby so excite and inflame their corrupt Affections and Passions that their wicked Hearts so warmed should readily prepare Words for their Tongues to utter by a natural or acquired volubility of Speech But now Thirdly Consider That in all this there is nothing of that truly spiritual vocal Prayer which is the proper and genuin Effect of Gods Holy Spirit influencing the Souls of true penitent Believers For that vocal Prayer as such consists of gracious Words proceeding from and reverently and aptly expressing the inward workings of Grace the gracious devout Affections of the Heart and the Holy and humble Desires of the Soul towards God through Christ. But the Words spoken from the aforesaid wretched Men were no such gracious Words they proceeded from no such Good and so were expressive of no such gracious Affections of no such holy and humbly Desires The utmost that with any colour of
Reason can be said is that they were the Counterfeit and had the Semblance and Appearance of so good a thing But then Fourthly Let it be considered That the Devils and wicked Mens counterfeiting the Inspirations of the Spirit of God and the spiritual Prayers of good Men is so far from being an Argument against the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit and against the spiritual Prayers of good Men influenced by the Holy Spirit of Prayer that it is rather an Argument for them Just as there having been so many false and counterfeit Miracles in the World is an Argument that there really have been true Miracles and as there having been so much counterfeit Coin in England is a good Argument that there hath been and there is in it true and good Coin For if there had never been any thing of that Nature true and good Devils and ill Men would never have been at the Pains to make their Counterfeits Fifthly Consider That what ever might be the Design of the Devil in being the Author of such counterfeit delusive Inspirations which to be sure was no good one and what ever also might be the Design of our Casuist in objecting against us such counterfeit delusive Inspirations yet certain it is that in Truth and Reality it is no Reproach to the Holy Spirit of God that he suffers the Devil and his Instruments to counterfeit his Holy Inspirations no more than it is a Reproach to Gods Holy Angels and faithful Ministers that Satan transforms himself into an Angel of Light and that Satans Ministers also are transformed into the Ministers of Righteousness 2 Cor. 11.14 15. Consider Sixthly That the right Use which Men fearing God should make of the Instances of Diabolical Inspirations before-mentioned is not to reject the true Influences of the Holy Spirit in Prayer for fear of being imposed upon by the counterfeit Inspirations of Satan that would be as wise a Course as to throw away all Money good and bad for fear of being cheated with counterfeit Coin but to be upon our Guard and to try the Spirits 1 Thes. 5. 19 20 21. 1 Iohn 4.1 examining the Motions of the Spirit within us by the sure Rule of Gods written Word which even Cardinal Bona confesses to be a sufficient Rule to try Spirits by Cum Scriptum sit inquit lucerna pedibus meis verbum tuum lumen semitisi meis sit que sacra Scriptura sicut Apostolus 2 Tim. 3 16. Divinitus inspirata utilis ad docendam ad erudiendum in Iustitia ut perfectus sit homo dei ad omne opus bonum instructus suffciens apparatus ad spirituum Discretionem in eâ â—rocul dubio reperitur Bona de discretione spirituum Edit Paris 1673. Cap. 5. p. 54. Without doubt saith the Cardinal there is in the Scripture sufficient means to discern Spirits by And withal we ought to be very modest humble holy and charitable exercising our selves to have always a Conscience void of offence toward God and toward Men. And if we do so God who is faithful will not suffer us to be tempted above that we are able 1 Cor. 10.13 The infinitely Good Wife and Faithful God will not suffer any of his Faithful People to be invincibly tempted by Satanical Delusions God by his Word and Providence always furnishes his People with Means to discern Divine from Satanical Inspirations and Enthusiasms Otherwise if we could not discern the one from the other Divine Inspirations would be of no use but might be a Trap and a Snare to the Best of God's People which were Blasphemy to assert and is contrary to the daily Pattern of the Church of England which continually prays That God would cleanse the Thoughts of their Hearts by the Inspiration of his Holy Spirit And let any sober intelligent Man read the Life of Hacket and his two Prophets as it was written and published by Dr. Cousms no Friend but an Enemy to Dissenters and he may see that their Pretended-Inspired Prayers had the Devil's Mark imprinted upon them in Capital Letters I will mention but one such Mark It was usual with them in their Prayers to call upon God to confound them to destroy and damn them if what they said was not true and they were not Men extraordinarily and immediately called of God to reform the Church as they pretended to be By this one Mark it is easie for any Man of Sense to see and judge that certainly they were Melancholly to a Degree of Madness or that they were deluded by the Devil or that they were both one and t'other So much is sufficient for an Answer to our Casuist his Instances of Men Diabolically inspired as he says which should indeed make Christians watchful against the Stratagems of the Enemy of God and Men but should never so far fright them out of their Wits as to make them reject the true genuine Influences and Inspirations of God's Holy Spirit who helps our Infirmities in Prayer Rom. 8.26 If my Style in handling this Argument appear to any too severe I must beg their Pardon if I want a little Patience to hear the more-than-probable Effects of the Operations of the Holy and Blessed Spirit traduced for Iesuitical Inventions and the Effects of the Vnclean Spirit in such Cases Difficile est Satyram non Scribere I have been large in this Argument because it is new and all I expect to find new in the Discourses I am Animadverting upon In the other Parts I believe fewer Words will serve the turn The First Case which our Casuist undertakes to speak to P. 3. and so to the 26th is 1. Case Whether Praying in a Form of Words do not stint and limit the Spirit of Prayer I must confess I have always thought it no inconsiderable Argument prevailing with me to judge it unlawful for me ministring in Prayer to use the prescribed Forms of others because by doing it I must necessarily exclude what Influence or Assistance the Holy Spirit may give me in the Performance of that Holy Duty It is true this is done as to all the People that join with him that ministreth but that is quite another Species of Prayer We know it is the Will of God that as we sometimes should minister to our selves and to others in the Duty of Prayer so at other times we should only pray by Communion or joining with another in Prayer This is evidently God's Will as appears by the constant Practice recorded in Holy Writ Now if it be the Will of God that we should sometimes pray only mentally whilst one only useth Words in Prayer and if it be lawful here to shut out the Spirit 's Influence upon our Words when we are to use no Words but only to join our Amen to him that useth them it will not therefore follow that we may do it when we are our selves to use Words as to which the Holy Spirit may influence us And this is all the Unlawfulness
in this Case we plead and which some phrase a stinting or limiting the Spirit For the clearer understanding of this Matter I will first set down what Influence upon our Words in Prayer we challenge for the Holy Spirit It lieth as I said in the former Chapter in two things 1. In bringing to remembrance the Word of God What Acts are contrary to it and have been our Sins and so are Matter of Confession what things the Word of God gives us leave to ask and under what Circumstances and what we have need of what Promises God hath made for giving them to us Now this is no more than Christ promised Iob. 14. 26. The Holy Ghosts shall bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you We challenge no such thing for the Holy Spirit as dictating new Matter not contained in the Word but bringing to our Minds what Things are in the Word fit for Confession Supplication or Thanksgiving as to us or others 2. Nor Secondly must that Power be denied the Holy Spirit which any of our Brethren have they can whisper such things in our Ears and so bring them to our Minds tho' it may be we were not aware of them or had forgotten them we believe the Holy Spirit can make immediate Impressions upon our Spirits proportionate to the Sounds Creatures can make in our Ears from which Impressions are made upon our Souls Those who deny this must deny all Spiritual Motions from the Blessed Spirit of God 2. We also challenge for the Holy Spirit a Power to excite and inflame the Affections which so beated thrust out Words in a natural Course This is all we plead for in the Case and say That if in Prayer we be limited by a Form of Words such kind of Impressions as these cannot affect us nor have any Effect upon us suitable to the Nature of them and the Holy Spirit 's Design in making of them and this we think is not lawful for us to allow because it is a quenching of the Spirit Our Casuist tells us That he will also examine What the Scripture attributeth to the Spirit in Prayer 2. What it is to stint or limit the Spirit He saith The Scripture attributeth something to the Spirit in Prayer which was extraordinary and temporary and something ordinary fix'd and standing That which he mentions as extraordinary is the Inspiration of the Matter of Prayer together with an Ability to express it in known or unknown Languages To which I answer There is thus much Truth in this That it is sufficiently probable that before the full Revelation of the Will of God in Scripture God did extraordinarily inspire his Servants as to some particular Matter of Prayer how otherwise could they know what was his Will And that also upon the first going of the Apostles to the Gentiles it pleased God also to inable the Apostles to pray with divers Tongues nor was this only for a Sign to them that believed not but as a necessary Mean by which the first Messengers of Christ to the Gentiles were inabled both to pray with and to preach to several Nations But that after the full Revelation of the Divine Will in the Holy Scriptures God at any time more than other hath revealed the Matter of Prayer unto his People more than the Matter of Preaching is more than I know or any can prove nor can any Reason be given for such an Assertion he had in his written Word told his Ministers and People what they should pray for nor might they pray for any thing but what was according to that his revealed Will. 2. If by revealing the Matter of Prayer this Author means no more than bringing to Ministers and Peoples Minds such things as they stand in need of and God in his Word hath declared himself ready to give it is no more than God yet doth every Day 2. If by it he meaneth his exciting them at this or that time to pray for some particular Good either for a Nation or Church or a particular Family or Person which he had only generally promised in his Word and left them at Liberty to pray for conditionally and with a reference and Submission to his Divine Will and Wisdom neither can this be called extraordinary with reference to any Period of Time it being no more than what God hath by his Spirit done in all Times and yet doth tho' in another Sense this be extraordinary such more-than-ordinary Impressions being but at such particular Times when God intendeth to give out such Mercies other extraordinary and temporary Revelations of the Matter of Prayer after the Sealing of the Canon of Scripture are such as nothing in Scripture guideth any to expect And to assert any such thing is but to dictate without Shadow of Proof eithe r from Scripture or Reason Nor is it more true that there ever were any extraordinary Assistances of the Spirit at any time as to the Words used in Prayer further than the inabling the first Ministers and Christians to pray and preach in other Tongues than they had learned Nor can it be proved that as to praying in their own Language the Holy Spirit ever was further promised or given to any than to bring to their Remembrance the Things they stood in need of and which God had given them leave to pray for and promised to give and the like and exciting their Affections and inflaming them which being heated they spake with their Tongues which Assistance we do say is an ordinary and standing Influence communicated as to former Ages so to our present Age and will be communicated to Believers to the End of the World Let us hear what Reason our Casuist hath to the contrary He pretendeth to give us Four P. 6 7 8 9 10 c. to 21. 1. His First Reason is Because there is no Promise of any such Gift which were it true were indeed a strong Reason tho' not against the thing for God may give what he hath no where particularly promised yet against our Expectation of any such thing But this is very far from being Truth For 1. There are general Promises of all good things and of his Spirit 2. There are particular Promises of the Holy Spirit to help us in the Duty of Prayer So that if this Influence be a good thing and what is possible without any Derogation to-the Honour of God there are Promises enough for it He who looketh for a particular Promise for every thing will deprive himself of the comfortable Expectation of much Good and disable himself from praying in Faith for most things he prayeth for God hath promised Psal. 84 11. No good thing will be with-hold from them that walk uprightly He hath promised to give his Holy Spirit to them that ask him and he hath told us that by this Spirit we cry Abba Father Rom. 8. 15. Gal. 4. 6. and told us Rom. 8. That the Spirit helpeth our
God if it be according to the Revealed Will of God Surely one who being about to pray hath any thing brought into his Mind to confess beg or give Thanks for which he knows is according to the Revealed Will of God his Duty to confess beg or give Thanks for may know or at least reasonably think it is brought to his Thoughts by the Holy Spirit of God tho' he cannot confirm it to be so by a miraculous Operation But saith our Casuist tho' the Scripture may be sufficient to discover the Matter of the Inspiration whether it be true or false yet it is not sufficient to distinguish the Inspiration whether it be Divine or Natural or Diabolical Then he runs into a Discourse of Natural and Diabolical Enthusiasms and concludes That Men may be inspired naturally or from the Devil and how dangerous it is to father such Inspirations upon the Spirit of God 1. For natural Inspiration it is a kind of unintelligible Thing for surely he that is inspired doth aliquid pati suffer something and to suffer it to receive the Action of a foreign Agent So that to speak modestly tho' Natural Inspiration be a Canting Term devised by some of late for no very good Purpose it is no very good Natural Sense carrying with it contradictionem in adjecto which is not very Scholastick It is true a Man may have a natural or accidental Fervency of Spirit occasioned several natural and honest ways as well as by some less honest and I do not think it much dishonourable to the Holy Spirit to make use of those natural Means to excite the Affections Our Casuist is aware that this Third Reason of his will have the same if not a greater Force against that Assistance of the Spirit in Prayer which he and others of his Mind are willing to allow that he might not be called the Spirit of Supplication for nothing viz. in exciting and inflaming the Affections whose Fervour cannot be denied also to proceed sometimes from the Temper of the Body and they will be at a Loss there also to distinguish betwixt the Fervour that is Divine and that which is Natural in its Causation But how will he avoid it He tells us p. 12. That as to this we have a sure Word of Promise but not for the latter and therefore if we can claim a Promise we have just Reason to conclude that how much soever other Causes might contribute towards it the Holy Spirit was the Principal Cause I hope my Reader from what I have said before will see Reason to conclude that we may as well claim Promises and more than one for that Influence which we claim for the Holy Spirit upon our Words in Prayer as for the Influence it hath upon our Affections and if he will but name us the Texts and Promises he hath for the Spirit 's Influence upon our Affections it is ten to one but we shall prove that those very Texts if Rom. 8. 15 26. Gal. 4. 6. as much concern Words and contain Promises for Assistance as to Words as the exciting of Affections and we are pretty sure of it considering the great Influence raised Affections have upon our Words expressive of them so as we are Even and if there need no Miracle to prove the one to be Divine neither doth there need any to prove the other Influence Divine also 2. As to Diabolical Inspiration we have spoken before The Probability of such a thing is a very bold Suggestion We cannot deny but the Devil may sometimes suggest Scriptures to us ' He did so to our Saviour Matth. 4. 6. But it is a sure Rule that he never doth it but for obvious and apparently sinful Ends. If a Minister or a consciencious Christian be conscious to himself that he hath no other Ends in Prayer than to glorifie God in obeying his Will to humble his Soul before God for his Sins and to beg and obtain his Pardon and such Influences of Grace as his Soul stands in need of and he finds Scriptures pertinent to these Things brought to his Mind he hath no Reason but to conclude they come from the Holy Spirit nor needeth he any Miracle to confirm it The End will both demonstrate the Act and also discover the Principle plainly enough But p. 14. Our Casuist riseth higher telling us That we have not only no certain Sign of any such Inspiration in the conceived Prayers of those which most pretend to it but many certain ones of the contrary Four he will instance in upon which he deseants p. 15 16 17 18 19 20. 1. The great Impertinence and Nonsense and Rudeness to say no worse that are sometimes mingled with these extempore Prayers 2. That they are so generally tinctured with the particular Opinions of those that offer them 3. That that which gives them the Reputation of being so inspired is not so much the Matter as the way and manner of expressing them 4. That that extraordinary manner and way of expressing them for which they are thought to be inspired doth apparently proceed from natural Causes The two latter be calleth Plain Signs Let us try the Certainty and Truth of any of them I observe his first Sign is wonderfully qualified with Sometimes which takes out all the Efficacy of it for I suppose our Casuist hath heard of such an Axiome as this Spiritus Dei non semper tangit Prophetatum c. The best Prophet is not always a true Prophet even Nathan himself falsly revealed the Will of God to David 2 Sam. 7.3 Go do all that is in thine heart for the Lord is with thee God sent him the next Morning to tell David the quite contrary And Paul who sometimes spake what he had received from the Lord 1 Cor. 11.23 and 1 Cor. 7.10 saith Vnto the married I command yet not I but the Lord v. 12. of that same Chapter saith But to the rest spake I not the Lord. So that with our Casuist's Leave supposing it true that at some time some Phrases may slip which some Criticks may call Nonsense and oft-times they will call that so which is not so or which should in their Judgment be rude and indecent or perhaps worse Supposing that some at some times should in their Prayers declare their own Opinions which are not Truth Neither of these would any more prove that these Mens Words in other Parts of their Prayers or at other Times in Prayer were not influenced by the Holy Spirit then David's Murther and Adultery Lot's Incest Peter's Denial of his Master would prove that they were not in the general Course of their Conversation led by the Spirit of God or that Nathan was never influenced in his Prophecy by the Holy Spirit because he was not when he approved of David's Resolution to build God an House So plain are the two first Signs that indeed they are no Signs nor have any colour of such a thing further than concerns
those Phrases so culpable 2. Nor it may be upon a strict Enquiry will it be found that in Publick there is more Nonsense in free Prayers than some make by their careless reading Forms I do not think our Casuist who hath sometimes used and doth still sometimes in the Pulpit use free Prayer so Chargeable and I have Reason to think there are some Hundreds of Ministers in England of whom it may be full as Charitably presumed 2. For this Second Sign I know no Error can be in a Man's declaring his own Opinions in Prayer if they be true I know no Man who prayeth by Forms or otherwise but must declare some of his own Opinions If he means by Opinions his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 singular Opinions which are false it will only prove that he did aliquid humanum pati and was not influenced as to those Words by the Spirit of Truth 3. For his Third which he calls a Plain Sign That that which gives them the Reputation of being so that is from the Spirit is not so much the Matter as the way and manner of expressing them What gives them the Reputation amongst weak People of coming from the Spirit is one thing what indeed makes them so is another thing That which makes them so with others indiscernable being the secret Work of the Spirit upon the Heart bringing Scripture to remembrance and exciting and inflaming the Affections which cause the Thoughts to form Words which are by the Affections thrust out of the Lips all this is now a thing indiscernable to an Hearer who can only probably and charitably judge from the expressed Affections by Sighs and Groans and proper Expressions I know none makes the Spirit 's Influence upon our Words to respect the Matter of Prayer further than bringing to the Mind of him that prayeth Matter before prepared in Scripture fitted for his Circumstances at this or that time All his other Discourse under this Head hath nothing in it of Argument but is only Defamatory of any other Prayer than by Forms so far as he is able to defame it and proceeds wholly upon a Mistake of the Principle for the Spirit 's Influence doth not only respect the way and manner of expressing but as I have said the very Matter of Prayer it self for this or that time bringing to a Christian's Remembrance the true Matter of Prayer and what at that time is proper for a Christian. Nor can I imagine with what Consistency to himself our Casuist makes this a plain Sign of conceived Prayers not being inspired That that which gives them Reputation to be so is not so much the Matter as the manner and way of expressing them when himself alloweth all along the Spirit 's Influence to excite pious and devout Affections which certainly do not respect the Matter but the manner and the way and manner of expressing our Prayers Our Casuist trifleth too much in making the only Difference between Forms and Conceived Prayers to be 1. That the one is in Set Words the other in Extemporary Words 2. In the Largeness of them and repeating the same things over and over again Before he had wasted his Paper in confuting such Fooleries he should have heard us asserting them here Qui capit ille facit 4. His Fourth plain Sign is That that extraordinary manner and way of expressing them for which they are thought to be inspired doth apparently proceed from Natural Causes Which neither he nor an Angel of Heaven can know nor any but he who knows the Heart and what Hand strikes those Strings of the Affections from the touching of which those Sounds proceed 2. How unreasonable is this for him to say who will allow the Holy Spirit no Influence but upon our Affections exciting and inflaming them 3. Suppose they do proceed from natural Causes why may not the Holy Spirit set those natural Causes on work All which being most certain there needs nothing be said to the further vain Philosophy he useth upon this Head Whether it be true or false is not of a Pin value as to the Cause in hand It may be from natural Causes and yet too from a first Cause setting them on Work None will say but the Holy Spirit makes use of natural Causes for spiritual Effects In his 21. p. he comes to a Fourth Argument to prove That the Gift of Inspiration of Prayer as he odly phraseth it doth not continue is Because then conceived Prayers must be Infallible and of equal Authority with the Word of God We are very unhappy that in these Debates we either will not or cannot understand one another Do we plead for any more than the Spirits helping our weak Memories in bringing to remembrance what Things are contrary to the Divine Law for the Matter of Confession and of what God hath declared in his Word he will give to them that ask him upon such Terms as he hath declared his Will for Matter of Petition and the Divine Promises for Arguments to inforce our Petitions c. So that if the Word of God be infallible that which is so brought to remembrance must certainly be so too and surely the Scripture must be of the same Authority with it self If we mistake in the Applications we father not our Mistakes on the Holy Spirit but beg Pardon for them This being rightly understood I refer to any Intelligent Reader what strength there is in this Argument more than in those we heard before Our Casuist having thus far given us his Opinion against the Continuance of that Influence of the Spirit upon us in Prayer which he called extraordinary comes p. 22. to favour us with his Opinion Wherein the ordinary influences of the Spirit consist relating to the Duty of Prayer He tells us it is In exciting in us the Graces and proper Affections of Prayer Such as Shame and Sorrow in the Confession of Sins a Sense of our need of Mercy and an hope surely he should have added also an intense Desire of obtaining it in our Supplications for Pardon c. In all this we most freely agree with him saving only in the Restriction of the Spirits influence to this only Nor can we possibly understand how the Spirit should thus influence our Affections and not our Words which are and ought to be thrust out by those Affections We will suppose a Soul to be guilty of wandring Thoughts in the Duty of Prayer a guilt common to all Persons and the Spirit who in the Word hath accused and condemned this to bring this to a Souls remembrance when it is praying or about to Pray and to excite in the Soul a shame and sorrow for it and inward Desire and Hope of Pardon for them Can this Soul be thus far in this Particular be influenced and not influenced as to Words also expressive of this Desire and Hope Our Casuist further tells us p. 32. That Words and Expressions are of no other Account with
in our own Hearts must necessarily more affect us than Words formed by others and are always attended in pious Souls with more of all those Affections the Exercise of which God requires than it is almost possible foreign Words should A Man cannot pronounce another Man's Oration with so much natural Life Vigour and Fervency as one himself hath composed and which is so fitted to his own Thoughts Now what should he that ministreth in Prayer attend to but his Business and the Work he is about Which is as much to utter Words expressive of his inward Shame and Sorrow and Hope and Desire as to be ashamed and sorrowful and to desire and hope Our Author p. 38. confesseth what none can possibly deny That he who prayeth by a Form being released from attending to the Invention of his Matter and Words his Mind is more at leisure to wander and instead of attending as he ought more closely to the Acts of Devotion by imploying those Thoughts which in conceived Prayer he employeth in Invention in a closer Attention to the Acts of Devotion he may if he please permit them to rove abroad but if he doth the Fault is in himself not in the Form he prayeth by He makes an ill use of a good thing To all which I reply That whether our Thoughts divert in Prayer to other Objects by Consent or from their own natural Wildness not being sent upon any Errand from the Will it must be confessed our Duty to use all lawful Means to keep them at home and to use no Means that shall give them further Scope and Liberty of Diversion Our Reverend Author grants That the Mind is more at Liberty to wander when it prayeth by a Form which is Argument enough to oblige us if we have an Ability to pray by conceived Prayer Our Author herein differeth from us for he saith the Fault is in our selves if our Thoughts do wander not in the Form Those Words the Fault is in himself may be taken in a double Sense either 1. The Fault is in the Will of Man which willeth them to wander 2. Or the Fault is in the Infirmity of Humane Nature which is such as they will wander if they have a Scope and Liberty Our Author thinks the former for he saith he may if he please permit them to rove But may he also if he please keep them from wandering and roving I do not believe there is that Man or Woman upon the Earth that can in truth say so upon his own Experience nay I much question whether any can say so who adds to willing the use of this Means praying by a free and conceived Prayer tho' it must be granted that he shall do it much better that way than any other The Fault therefore is in our selves that is in the common Infirmity of Humane Nature its Averseness and Awkwardness to Spiritual Imployment and the Contemplation of Spiritual Objects and Exercise of it self upon them and tho' it be such a Fault as will hardly be perfectly corrected whilst we are in the Flesh yet it is such as we may use Means to correct and in a good measure actually correct and praying by a conceived Prayer by our Author 's own Confession is one Means by which it may be corrected for he acknowledgeth that when we use Forms our Mind hath a greater Scope and Liberty to wander So that if free and conceived Prayer be what God hath not forbidden it is what he hath commanded where he hath given an Ability to it as a Means in order to this great End in the obtaining of which lieth much of the Life and Soul of Prayer for the Affections of a roving wandering Heart will be cold enough Thoughts of an Object being necessary to the Workings of the Affections about it and previously necessary But saith our Author p. 39. To invent the Words and Matter of Prayer is not to pray but to study a Prayer and till our Brethren have proved that our inventing the Matter and Words is a part of our Duty of Prayer which is the Question in debate betwixt us we can by no Means grant that our Attention to it is attending to the Duty of Prayer The Matter of all Prayer is already invented for us and prescribed to us in Holy Writ This our Author hath often already told us and we have agreed it The only thing to be premeditated and done is 1. To consider what of that Mutter of Prayer allowed and directed in the Word is proper for us under our Circumstances at the Time when we Pray 2. To form Words in our Hearts by which our Lips shall express the Desires of our Souls The first is and will be every good Christian's Work before he cometh to minister in Prayer and the Matter may vary every Day according to the various Contingencies to Persons and Families occasioned through the Wisdom of him that governeth the World and the daily Breakin gs out of Sin and Corruption occasioned through that Fountain of Lust in Man's Heart But yet can never be so well done through the unfaithfulness and slipperiness of our Memories but there will be room left for a Dabitur in hora the Spirit of God in the very time of our Prayer to bring to our Minds some Violations of the Divine Law we did not think of and some Wants which we had forgot 2. The Second needs no study or deliberation our Thoughts in a moment form Words when they are sensible of Wants The Beggar studieth not for Words to ask for Bread no more doth the Malefactor for Words to ask for his Life That Words are apart of perfect Prayer and of all Prayer where one ministreth to others in Prayer must not be denied and an essential part too for without them he cannot so pray So as he whose Thoughts are imployed in forming of Words whether to express his own Premeditations or present Impressions or Monitions cannot certainly be denied to have his Thoughts imployed about his Work in Prayer Our Casuist goes on p. 39. and saith It is pretended that conceived Prayer is more apt to fix the Minister's Attention in Prayer because he utters his Words in conceived Prayer immediately from his Affections by reason of which his Thoughts have not that Scope to wander as when he reads them out of a Book To which he answereth That if he hath devout Affections he may utter his Words as immediately from his Affections in a Form as in a conceived Prayer and therefore this Pretence is insignificant There is no doubt of this nor do I know who hath made this Pretence But the Question is Whether a Man can have the same devout Affections attending a Form of Words composed by another as he may have attending Words flowing from his own Heart as a Bullet taken up from the Ground and thrown by a Man's Hand is never so hot as one shot out from a Gun and heated with the Fire there
is not reasonable to imagine that Forms enough should be made suited to each Congregation So as our Author must assert that no Sins ought to be confessed publickly but the Sins that are common to all Christians no Mercies to be begged but what all Christians need no Mercies to be given Thanks for but such as all Christians receive or at least all within the Compass of those Churches to whom those Forms are to extend or his Second Conclusion will not hold 3. His Third Conclusion is but for a Quousque viz. That supposing such Provision for extraordinary Cases cannot be made in the publick Forms yet that is no Argument why it should not be used so far forth as it comprehendeth the Main of the common Cases of the People This indeed is true against such an Use this Argument doth not conclude but it doth not follow but some others may 4. The last thing our Author saith That the Defect of such new Provision may be supplied by the Minister in a publick Prayer of his own May may be here understood as referring to Naturally or Legally Of the first there is no doubt for the second our Author saith no more than that our Church allows or at least permits Ministers so to do As to this I have spoken before and it may be if it be inquired into it will be found that within these Twenty Years it would neither be allowed nor permitted in some Diocess Besides that Permission is the same with Connivance or Indulgence which is a very uncertain thing until it be established by an Act of Parliament Besides that many Ministers will not allow themselves any such thing the Reason of which doubtless is because they have at least an Apprehension that no such thing is allowed by the Law Whether it be or no I shall not dispute Our Author proceedeth to his Fifth Case Case 5. Whether there be any Warrant for Forms of Prayer in Scripture or pure Antiquity I dare say there is hardly one Dissenter of any Judgment that will not readily grant there is tho' some of them very much doubt whether there be any Warrant for Forms of Prayer to be universally imposed or used in Prayer By Warrant our Learned Author saith right must be meant some positive Command or allowed Example I cannot tell who it is that hath affirmed That nothing ought to be used in the Worship of God but what is commanded by him Whosoever hath so said hath spoken crudely and rashly and himself if he understand himself will at the next Breath grant That Pulpits and Pews Seats and Cushions and Habits of Cloaths not entailed to Worship only and many things more may be used in the Worship of God which God hath not particularly and in Specie commanded These things indeed Dissenters will say 1. That God may be worshipped by no Act but what himself hath directed because no other Act can be an Act of Obedience to him and where there is no Obedience there can be no Homage paid to God And here both Conformists and Nonconformists are I suppose fully agreed 2. That no Means by which any Act of Worship shall be performed may be used which God hath not directed either by the Light or Law of Nature or by a positive Institution in his Word Their Reason is Because the Law of God extendeth to the Means as well as to the Act nor hath God directed any Act of Worship or Homage to him but he hath also either by the Light or Law of Nature or by some part of his Revealed Will directed sufficient Means for the Performance of that Act which every obedient Christian is bound to observe use and prefer particularly as to Prayer they say the Act is directed both by the Light of Nature whence it is that the Heathens prayed and directed dies Supplicationem to the Divine Being and also by Scripture and his revealed Will which rectified the Light of Nature and hath taught us as to the Object that Prayer is to be directed to the Only True God and many things as to the manner of Performance viz. That it be directed to the Father in the Name of Christ and with the Spirit and for things only which are according to the revealed Will of God and under such Limitations as the Scripture hath directed 3. That even the Light of Nature as well as Scripture hath not only directed Men and Women to pray but to use Words in Prayer They are the Calves of our Lips the Homage of our Tongues unto God and whereas Prayer is the Expression of our Wants and Desires unto him who is able to supply them tho' God indeed understands the first Motions of our Souls in Desires yet these without Words are not what the Scripture ordinarily calls Prayer nor what Men have ordinarily called so 4. That God hath not directed the Words which we should use at all times tho' he hath directed some Words and Forms of Words which we may use but hath left us at Liberty to use what Words we please expressive of the Matter of Prayer directed in Holy Writ and this could be no otherwise the same Matter not serving us at all times and consequently not the same Words 5. That our Words are as the Philosopher expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inward and outward Our internal Words are our Thoughts our Hearts being our Shops wherein the Words of our Lips are first forged or formed Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh saith our Saviour While I was musing saith David Psal. 39.3 the fire burned then spake I with my tongue 6. That as we best know our own Wants so our own Hearts can best form Words by which our Lips shall express and utter them So as the forming of Words expressive of our own Wants and Desires in our own Hearts is the most natural and proper Means of Prayer and Divine because most Natural and not restrained by any par tof the Divine Rule 7. Lastly They think that nothing but a plain Divine Revelation of the Will of God as to the use of another Mean can excuse them from the use of a Mean that is proper and most natural for the End So as they think there must be something in Scripture either in a Command or something which hath the Force of a Command as universal Example hath which must justifie their ordinary use of Forms of Words not first formed in their own Hearts to express their Wants and Desires to God in Prayer This is all I think that Dissenters will say in this Case Let us now hear what our Reverend Casuist opposeth to this He will prove as he tells us P. 2. p. 6. 1. That supposing this were true yet it doth not conclude against Forms 2. That supposing it did conclude against the Use of Forms it equally concludes against conceived Prayer As to the First he saith 1. That they do not
pretend that God hath any where commanded us to pray by Forms and no otherwise So that then publick praying by Forms is not the only instituted publick Prayer 2. Nor Secondly do they pretend that all the Prayers we at any time offer unto him should be first composed into a Form Then some conceived free Prayer in Publick is our Duty or at least lawful But this our Casuist pleadeth for That God hath injoined some Forms to be used and offered up in Prayer Tho together with those Forms we grant there might be and doubtless were other Prayers to be offered up unto him This he proves p. 7. and to p. 19. of the Second Part. He instanceth in the Form of Blessing mentioned Numb 6.23 24 25 26. the Directions for Prayer forthe Expiation of Murther Deut. 21.7 8. and for the Prayer to be used at their Payment of their Third Year's Tythe the Prayers mentioned in the Psalms delivered to Asaph 1 Chron. 16.7 used in Hezekiah's Time 2 Chron. 29.30 and by Ezra chap. 3.10 11. and the Lord's Prayer upon which he enlargeth from p. 8. to p. 19. To all which so much hath been already said that nothing need be added See Mr. Cotton about the Lawfulness of Set Forms the Reasonable Account and Supplement c. But all these are indeed no Proof The Reason is Because what was lawful for God himself and Christ and Holy Men inspired by God by a Prophetical Spirit and imploied by him as David was to set his Temple-service in Order 2. Chron. 28.10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19. must not be concluded lawful for others and what might be lawfully complied with upon such Direction and indeed Divine Institution must not be concluded lawful to be complied with upon no such Direction or Divine Institution The Three first Instances produced by our Author are Forms instituted by God immediately the other by David imploied by God and made by his Spirit to understand his Will and the Pattern of his Temple-service The Last by Christ himself sent to erect a new way of Worship Not therefore to enter into any further Disputes 1. Whether Christ intended the Lords Prayer for a Form of Words or only a Direction for Matter if as a Form of Words it doth not agree with it self Matth. 6. Luke 11. the Words differ much in those Two Places whether for a constant Use or temporary Use are Things many Words have been spent about and I see no help but Men must opine as they please in the Case Our Author thinks that only Luke 11. it was prescribed as a Form of Words and truly it is probable if it were at all so prescribed but then those Words For thine is the Kingdom the Power and the Glory for ever Amen are no part of the Lord's Prayer for they are not in Luke at all but I say all this signifieth nothing for from Christs or the Apostles Acts is no Conclusion to justifie other Mens Acts without other Warrant of Precept c. and to this Answer to these Instances our Author cometh p. 19. for what he saith of the Lord's Prayer let Men judge as they please I know no sober Dissenter but will say it is their Duty to make the Matter of that Prayer the Matter of their Prayers and that they may use the Phrase or entire Form if they understand it as well as other Words of Scripture And if our Brethren judged that we should use that and none else we should have no other Liturgy for the Desk nor other Prayers in the Pulpit The Difference therefore about that is not worth mentioning and a Dispute about spelling this or thys That which we insist upon is that though Christ had Authority to prescribe a Form yet none else hath any Our Author saith very true p. 13. 1. That this Answer allows the prescribing Forms of Prayer to have in them no intrinsick Evil no contrariety to the Eternal Rules and dictates of right Reason 2. That the prescribing of Forms under the New Testament is good and useful This is expressed too indefinitely For nothing will follow but only That Christ's prescribing a Form was good and useful if we extend it further it must be upon this Principle That others have the same Authority to direct means of Worship that Christ had Now this will ask a great many Words to prove Christ had undoubted Authority to institute Acts and Means of Worship for and in his Church But how doth it appear that others have His very Apostles commissionated by him to settle the first Gospel Churches neither claimed nor practised any such Power 3. Thirdly He saith This Answer must also allow that God's prescribing Forms of Prayer by inspired Persons by his Son he should have said for we under the Gospel find no Forms of Publick Prayer prescribed by other inspired Persons is so far forth a warrant for our Imitation as the thing it self is good useful and imitable by us If God doth such or such a Thing because it is good and useful to some End that is sufficient warrant for us to do the same provided we have the same Reason for to imitate God is our Duty c. Here now is a great Fallacy Forms of Prayer in themselves are neither Good nor Evil God or Christ have not prescribed us any Forms because they are good and useful but because he hath prescribed them therefore they are good and 't is our Duty to use them if such a Prescription can be proved as Forms or the prescribing Forms hath in it or them no intrinsick Evil so neither hath it any intrinsick Goodness or suitableness to the Eternal Dictates or Rules of right Reason as our Author expounded it p. 19. It is very true we are bound to imitate God in any thing which he hath done because it is good and useful but not in such things which are made good only by his Command and Institution God instituted Acts of Worship which but for his institution had had no goodness in them Such were Sacrifices under the Old Testament The Two Sacraments under the New he directed Forms as means for the Celebration of both Sacraments Will it therefore follow that we may imitate God in making New Sacraments and New Forms But saith our Author Our Governours have the same Reason that God had viz. because they are useful What Christ's Reason was we cannot inquire so far as the Evangelist acquaints us with it it was to gratifie the Disciples desiring him to teach them to pray Luke 11.1 Indeed it is probable that our Saviour would not have gratified them if he had not known it had been useful for them But he never imposed upon them either never to use any other Words in Prayer nor yet always to use these Nor doth our Saviours Direction refer more to the Church than to the Family and the Closet besides what might be useful for some and at some times might not be useful