doth not Prayer as I told him p. 61. is in Scripture called a crying to God a wrestling with him a powring out of our Souls it must be with strong cries and groans Is there any such thing said of Reading the Scriptures Or of Singing Psalms Attention of our thoughts indeed is required in all so are such degrees of Fervor as are proper to those duties but what if God will require some degrees of Homage to be performed to him one way some another some in a way not capable of the like degrees of Attention and Fervour as others are such I take reading the Scriptures to be is it not enough for us to do that duty with such degrees of Attention and Fervour as he requires in that duty tho we do not do it with such degrees of Attention and Fervour as in that duty he hath not required Or shall it be concluded by any man of reason that the mean which God hath appointed by which we may serve him in one duty as in Reading the Scripture it is nothing but the use of our ability to read which is not by reason of the infirmity of our nature capable of such an attention of our thoughts which will wander if they have the least liberty may be used in another duty of another Species where God requires other degrees of Attention and Fervour or that the mean which he hath given us for that duty is not necessary but that duty also may lawfully be performed in the use of a mean which doth hinder such degrees of Attention and Fervour 19. This was the substance of one of my Answers tho a little further opened now what saith our Vindicator to this Truly little what he saith is p. 135. in these words and no more But what he saith That there are different workings of the Soul towards God in Singing and in Prayer I suppose he will upon further consideration discern to be an oversight since the Application to God for the same things require the same Pious Exercises of Mind whether it be in Prose or Meeter and it was another oversight that he declares me to know and confess what he thus asserts when I never declared any such thing but know the contrary As to the last Clause Reader judge see Libertas Eccles p. 123. Both in reading the Scriptures and in Prayer our hearts ought to be religiously moved towards God tho in somwhat a different manner Wherein have I wronged him here Neither see I reason to acknowledg the oversight let him prove if he can that we are obliged to Sing Psalms with an equal degree of Fervor of Spirit at all times as we are to Pray Though we may sing the Words of a Prayer yet it is more then I know that we are to make those words our Petitions or to address our Souls unto God for the same things which are the matter of the Psalm we Sing If I thought so I should hardly sing many of Davids Psalms having no occasion for the things he asked of God Nor do I think Singing is the Application of our Souls to God for obtaining Mercies but the Praedication of the Holy Name and Will of God and only to differ from Reading the Scripture as the first is done with the Modulation of the Voice the other not so which Modulation is required as having some force in it to excite several Affections either of Joy or Grief according to the matter sung Further in the same page he saith Tho there be different Acts of the Mind exercised in these duties yet that Consideration Reverence Faith Submission and other Gracious Dispositions which suit the special parts of Divine truth doth require as much seriousness diligence and care in reading the holy Scriptures But doth it require as much Fervour of Spirit and Affections That is the Question and the contrary was shewed by the Phrases wherein Prayer is in Scripture expressed but as to this not a word onely he had shewed before that a Form of Words in Prayer doth not hinder any Exercises of Piety therein What he hath formerly said I have formerly answered I leave the Judgment to any Intelligent Reader 20. I had further told him That the Scriptures are Divine Forms and reading them is a Divine Precept and the Forms we Sing Divine Songs and the Singing of a Congregation by a Form naturally necessary and the duty impossible to be performed but by a Form The Question was only stated about Humane Forms and in a Case where no such thing is necessary all the World will see the inconclusivenes of such Arguings I shall not trouble my self to answer such things further which nothing relate to the Question in issue which himself owned to be plainly and cleerly stated I wish I could say that on his side it had been as plainly and clearly Argued against CHAP. V. An Answer to what the Vindicator hath said in his Third Section of Chap. 3. concenring the General use or Impositions of Forms in the Primitive Church Some further things noted of the Canons of the Provincial Councels of Laodicea Carthage and Milevis Further Discourse upon the head of this Argument waved because the Argument it self if true concludeth nothing as to Lawfulness or Unlawfulness 1. I am now come to the Argumentum Palmarium of our Adversaries in this Question the pretended Practice of the Church for 1300 years Indeed I always looked upon the Practice of Men a very poor Argument where the Question was about the Lawfulness or Vnlawfulness of an Action And it is doubtless no Argument tho Ex Abundanti I did speak somthing as to that point and since at the request of some Friends have spoken much more in a Supplement to that Book I shall now say little but refer my Reader to my former Book and the Supplement to it 2. Our Author hath told us That it is not probable that such excellently Devout and Judicious Men as the 4th and 5th Century abounded with should not discern helps and hindrances of Devotion I told him it was possible Like one in Cathedra he tells me This is a rash and contumelious Expression What is That some particular Men may be mistaken in a particular point This is all can be made of my words and such a point too as is of a mutable Nature for I have shewed before That that may be an hindrance to Devotion to one which is not to another which is most certainly true Is this a contumely when David saith All Men are Liars and tho he spake it in haste yet it hath thus much truth in it that there are in all Men grains of Falshood and Error and Fability Did ever any modest and judicious man talk at this rate When our Articles tell us That the Churches of Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch and all Rome erred both in matters of Worship Ceremonies and Doctrine Artic. 1562. n. 19. may not we say it was possible that some Churches in the
and so far as man can judge mind what they are about with all Indication of Reverence and Godly fear Whether they be the Persons that talk or sleep out Sermons or that hear the word of God so far as men can judge with trembling Not that none but they do so my concern is not to discourse of others but for them Whether they generally be not a People against all Idols and Idolatry that dread to use the name of God idly or to swear by it or by any Creatures Prophanely Whether they be those that prophane the Sabbath by unnecessary Journyings or Labours or Recreation and do not ordinarily spend it in the publick and private Duties of Gods Worship For their behaviour towards men Are they generally the Sons and Daughters of this age that dare curse their Fathers and Mothers and reproach the Womb that bare them Are they Murtherers Thieves Adulterers Fornicators Perjured Persons Do they not generally make Conscience to Owe nothing to any but to love one another to deal justly with men I will not speak for every Individual Christ had a Judas in his Flock Nor do I reflect on any others I know there are many that are no Dissenters who are Pious towards God Righteous towards Men. I would only have these on both sides made one What have their worst Enemies to Object but disobedience to an Humane Law in matter of Divine Worship wherein they do in all sincerity profess they cannot do or omit the thing commanded or forbidden without sinning against God In the mean time your Honours see their bitterest Enemies can disobey Laws against Pluralities and Non-residents Others of them can disobey Laws against Drunkenness Swearing Cursing Adulteries c. and not see the beams in their own eyes tho they cannot but say these Laws are against things plainly and syllabically forbidden in the Word of God And indeed none lives on either side but violates some Humane Laws Nemo sine crimine vivit Optimus ille qui minimis urgetur said an Heathen Poet and truly without doubt 5. Nor most Honoured Patriots are the Arguments of those who are charged as disobedient as to this very point of Prayer invaluable nor can any mans confidences make them appear so to your Reasonable and Generous Souls It is not so evident as some Infallibles of our age would make it That the Holy Spirit of God hath not or may not have a special and immediate influence upon Pious Ministers Souls as to their words in Prayer as well as upon Gods Peoples words in Confession or Ministers words in Preaching both which the Scripture asserts which ought not to be excluded in that Prayer where words are to be used Nor is it certain that words are not an Essential Part of all Ministerial Prayer and these or these words an Essential part of this or that Prayer Nor that any Superior can direct an Essential Part of Gods Worship nor that in an Act of Worship where God hath left any thing to Ministers or Peoples Liberty that they may do this or that any Superiors can determine them to one part against the other Nor many things more in the following sheets which are inlarged upon Some parts of some of these Questions may appear clear to some the other part to others But this will conclude the things in themselves not to be plainly and clearly lawful Your Honours abhor an Infallible Judge boasted of by the Papists let it not be pretended to in the Tents of Protestants Nor one Infallible person suffered to triumph over others in the near concerns of Divine Worship In things necessary for all by a Divine Law we humbly allow it the Kings and your Honours duty to command us But if they appear not such upon plain evidence to our Superiors we beseech their Pardon if we say They cannot with any security to themselves from the Divine Law enjoyn them to or inforce them from those who judge them sinful in Divine Worship 6. And as it is not possible that any Divine Rule should be produced to make such a thing as this necessary to be brought into or continued in Publick Worship So these two last years have given abundant Evidence that it is not Expedient to tye all men to the use of them We are sure your Honours will grant from the Instances of the Songs of Thanksgiving Recorded in Scripture both those of Moses and Miriam and Deborah and David and from the Prayers in Scripture of Solomon David Jehosaphat Hezekiah Ezra c. That when Persons are under Signal Providences whether of Deliverances or Distress or in respect of some general Sin the Servants of God have not thought it sufficient in Publick Prayer To give thanks in general words for all Mercies and Preservations but to tell him of his particular wondrous works to recognize him the Author of this or that Salvation To confess and bewail those particular Sins if they be the Sins of the generality of the People To put up Petitions suited to those particular distresses the Church or State is in This is plain in all Scripture And where it is not done God is eminently restrained in his Glory our duty is eminently neglected We are sure God within these two years hath made England as remarkable a Stage of Provividence as ever any Nation in the World was made We have been in most eminent distresses and have had most eminent deliverances Both of them concerning the whole Nation and all that in the Nation can be dear to every good man The life of our Soveraign the life of our Religion The life of our Ancient Government The lives of several of our Noblemen multitudes of our Gentry and many thousands of our Commonalty Plots upon Plots have been discovered Uno Succiso Pullulat alter We have had to deal with an Hydra Now we humbly refer it to your Honours to judge what particular Homage either of Prayer or Praise God hath had relating to these distresses in all our particular Congregations And whether the limiting all Ministers to Old Forms of Prayer hath not been the cause of this High Omission The Practice of our Ministers satisfied as to Confirmity is two-fold Some take themselves obliged not only as all are in the Desk to add nothing to the Forms But in their Pulpits to keep to the Bidding of Prayer in the Canon or at least to Preface their Sermons with half a dozen lines taken out of some Collect and conclude them with either Gloria patri c. or that excellent Collect our Vindicator tells us of Grant we beseech Almighty God c. those and these are not a few could never put up one Prayer except upon 11 April 1679 for which were indeed good and particular Forms made for any deliverance nor yet offer up one Publick Thanksgiving Others there are who conceive that though the Statute gives them in the letter of it no further liberty yet the continual Practice of our Church
Prayer may be properly call'd the Gift of Vocal Prayer I affirm it The Vindicator denies it Chap. 1. 5 Quest Whether in Acts of external instituted Worship or any part of it any thing can be call'd Order or Decency Or be said to be Pious Religious Devout and for Edification antecedaneously or without respect to the Divine Will revealed in the Law of Nature or in Holy Writ I deny it The Vindicator affirms it Chap. 4 c. 6 Quest Whether considering the infirmity of our Nature a Person in Prayer can keep his thoughts as close to and have his affection as warm in the Duty reading a Form as in speaking from his own conceptions I deny it The Vindicator affirms pag. 75. 7 Quest Whether where God hath left Minister or People a liberty to use one or another mean in an Act of Worship but commanded all to serve him with the greatest fervor of spirit they can they be not by a Divine Precept obliged to use that means which upon experience they find most conducive to the attention of their thoughts or fervor of their spirits I affirm it 8 Quest Supposing Superiors should command Ministers and People in the Publick Worship or in their Families to pray by Forms onely which they appoint such a Command were lawful and obliging to them I deny it The Vindicator affirms pag. 193 c. 9 Quest Whether there be not equal reason for Superiors to command Ministers to perform their Ministerial Acts of Preaching by reading other mens Sermons as their Acts of Prayer by reading orbâ—rs Forms of Prayer I affirm The Vindicator denies 10 Quest Whether the Promises we have in Scripture of the influence and assistance of the Holy Spirit in Prayer may not or do not extend to words as well as pious and devout affections or our contending for a liberty as to words in Prayer he not a meer Contention for shewing our Parts and a varying of Phrases As to the first part I affirm as to the latter I deny The Vindicator affirms the latter 11 Quest Whether Prayer Preaching and Administring the Sacraments be not the main works and parts of a Gospel-Ministers ministration I affirm it The Vindicator denies it 12 Quest Whether if Ministers perform their Acts of Prayer and Preaching by prescribed Forms of others and administer the Sacraments by other Forms than Christ hath given them to use in the case they by it do not transform themselves from Ministers of Christ to meer Ministers of men The last hath not been touched and may make a new Argument in my Case I must confess the dread of it is not the least thing that aweth me The Russian Priests are brought to think they fulfil their Ministry by reading their Liturgy and in stead of Preaching reading an Homily out of Chrysostom But in these things whether they approve themselves indeed Ministers of Christ or meer Servants of Men may be considered The famous Ministry of England hath ever been judged another thing as soon Reader as thou canst fix thy answer to these Questions satisfactorily to thy own Conscience thou wilt be able to determine whether what I have said in the Reasonable Account c. or what Dr. Falkner hath said in his Vindication be of most weight and whose Positions are most extravagant false and erroneous Legat penes Lectorem sit Judicium THE INTRODUCTION The Vindicator's Title not proper to his Work nor justly proportioned to the Title or Matter of the Book he pretendeth to answer The Author of the Reasonable Account pretends to no Oracular infallibilities onely to Reason working on Scriptural Principles The design of his Book The Vindicator's false account of it in his Epistle Dedicatory His slighty apprehensions of it The Policy of that The Undertaking not so strange as the Vindicator would make it The reason why the Arguments may appear to have no weight to the Vindicator yet may not be so light The Vindicator's unkind reflection upon the Author for his want of skill in Chronology as to the times of Gregory the Great and Charles the Great shewed to be only produced for sport and to have nothing of charge in it but the Vindicator himself hath commited a greater Error about Gregory the Great making him to have died Fâ—fteen years before Platina saith he was Pope The Vindicator's declining Syllogistical Arguing The seasonableness of the coming out of the Reasonable Account through the intervention of Gods Providence tho the Author at the writing of it had no prospect of any such thing The Conclusion of the Answer to his Epistle Dedicatory and Introduction 1. THE Author hath intituled his Book A Vindication of Liturgies that is of what strictly taken none of any sound mind ever found fault with for a Liturgy it ought to be wrote Liturgy tho it be by vulgarer ror neglected fignifies nothing either according to the notation of the word coming from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Scriptural usage of it or the usage of it in the ancientest Writers in Philology or in ancient Ecclesiastical Writers without an addition to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the like but a Publick Service or Ministry but he by and by adds Shewing the Lawfulness Vsefulness and Antiquity of performing the Publick Worship of God by Set Forms of Prayer Nor hath any that I know denied this It is onely the Lawfulness of an Vniversal Vse or Imposition of Set Forms and those too prescribed by other men and imposed on all men that is the matter in question which by the Title of his Book it seems the Author had no mind to vindicate 2. He goes on In answer to a late Book intituled A Reasonable Account why some pious Noncon Ministers judge it sinful for them to perform their Ministerial Acts in Publick Solemn Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others But how shall a Vindication of Liturgies shewing the Lawfulness Vsefulness and Antiquity of performing the Publick Worship of God by Set Forms ever answer that Book which meddles not with the Lawfulness of Liturgies but Forms of Prayer onely composed by those who do not use them and imposed on them Nor doth it say they are unlawful only shews the reasons of some persons why they cannot judge that it is lawful for them to use them 3. Neither the Author of that Book nor his Friends pretend to have the Propositions they delivered suggested to them by the Roman King's Goddess Aegeria nor yet whispered to them by Mahomets Pigeon nor yet impressed upon them as John of Leyden pretended at Munster that his were nor yet to have had them from the Possessor of any infallible Chair they pretend to no more than that Light which enlighteneth every man that comes into the World They think There is a Spirit in Man and the Almighty hath given him Vnderstanding that God hath given all men a Principle inabling men to dis-Course conclusions from Principles which we call Reason That these Principles are
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
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
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
the obtaining of Pardon of Sin so consequently it is necessary to our being justified Nor shall I examine tho I cannot find it out the sense of the next words but take him up again where I do understand what he meaneth And that a renewed Holy Life is necessary to Justification is manifested from that wrath and threatning denounced against workers of Inâ—quity yet he tells us p. 218. That the Gospel Justification is through the Redemption of our Saviour and Faith in him and from the benefit of his Sacrifice But it cannot be that the Righteousness of Christ should be so imputed to us as that we should be looked upon as having done or suffered what he did or suffered for then we should be looked upon as Mediators and might be invocated And he can see no other blame in this Doctrine then that it is consistent with it self and with what was delivered by the Apostle 16. I will begin my Answer with the 11th Article of our Church We are accounted Righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith and not for our own works or deservings wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome Doctrine and very full of comfort and that they may not say that by Faith is understood Works or a Practical Assent Faith in the two next Articles is made the Spring and Fountain of all good Works The Articles of the Church of Ireland are yet more plain Artic. 34 35 36 37. I shall only mention one clause Art 34. This Righteousness which we receive of Gods Mercy and Christs Merits imbraced by Faith which Faith Artic. 37 they declare to be a particular Application of the Promises of the Gospel to the comfort of our Souls whereby we lay hold an Christ c. is taken accepted and allowed of by God for our perfect and full Justification 17. Our Answerer knew well enough that by imputed Righteousness we did never understand that the Acts or Sufferings of Christ as Mediator were imputed so as to make them as if we had done them This Reader is just such another Argument as if a Prince should employ his Embassadour to pay a Redemption Price for an 100 Slaves at Algiers and he should do according to his Commission and when he had done some learned Musselman should come to prove that the Embassadors Action in Payment of the Ransome could not be reckoned his or as if he had done it because he was a Mediator for an 100 neither did he actually pay the money Certainly the Slave would tell him that his Action so far as concerned him might notwithstanding be imputed to him that is reckoned as if it had been his Action 18. But it may be this is but a word-bait a contest De Lana Caprina it may be what they grant is enough to express the end of Christs coming into the World the Mercy of God in Christ and to secure the Salvation of Souls Doth he think so I would gladly then have him answer these Questions Whether the Righteous Lord can clear the Guilty without a satisfaction given to his Justice contrary to Exod. 34.7 If a satisfaction must be given for every Mans sin to make him in a capacity to be declared Righteous that is justified before God who could ever satisfie but Christ 3. Whether this satisfaction which we call Christs Righteousness could ever be ours without a gracious Act of God so reckoning it as if we our selves had made it Whether therefore it be possible that the Righteousness whereby any Soul can be in any capacity to be declared Righteous bâ— God should be any other then the Righteousness of Christ and any Righteousnes of our own can possibly be antecedaneous to our Justification 19. In the mean time we grant that God pardoneth no Souls Sins but theirs in whom he hath wrought so much Repentance as lies in a Resolution through his Grace to leave sin and to do good but this may be separated from all Actual good works and is no more then an habit of Sanctification which God gives at the same time that he justifieth the Soul but he doth not for that justifie the Soul That is very far from the Righteousness for which God in this life declareth any Soul Righteous and pardoneth its Sin It is true no Soul in the day of Judgment shall be justified but that Soul that hath wrought Righteousness and every Soul which hath in sincerity done that tho not in a legal perfection shall be acquitted from guilt by vertue of the Covenant of Grace founded upon the satisfaction of Christ who in this sense is called The Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World 20. Nor is the contrary Opinion so finely blended by our Vindicator so harmless as he would make it much less so consonant with the Apostles Doctrine 1. It makes Justification a meer Act of Grace which the Scripture makes also an act of Justice and Righteousness in God Rom. 3.25 26. To declare his Righteousness for the Remission of sins to declare I say his Righteousness that he might be just and the Justifier of him who believeth in Jesus 2. It gives Christ no place in Mans Redemption but that of establishing a Covenant upon which God might exercise his Grace It indeed talks of his Redemption and Merit but takes away the work of a Redeemer and maketh his Merits needless 3. It maketh Faith as it is an Application of the Soul to his Righteousness and Merit needless tho the Scripture makes an inseparable connexion betwixt it and Salvation Hence it is very rarely that we hear the necessity of such Faith urged 4. It gives man the principal parts in his Justification for they are his works for which God justifieth tho indeed it be upon the account of a Covenant established by the Blood of Christ Much more might be said In short it alloweth Christ to be a great Prophet a great Benefactor to Man-kind but denies him to be a True Priest such a one as atones by Blood he onely doth it by Mediation Intercession and a Covenant According to this Doctrine his Blood only sealed a Covenant in what sense they call his Death a Sacrifice they know best 21. In the mean time no sober persons deny good works their due place without them no Soul shall be justified in the great day They are necessary to Salvation and that final Justification Ambsdorsius is the only Protestant I have met with who indeed in one place denies them to be necessary to Salvation no valuable person hath since that I know of approved his wild saying But they have no place in the justification of a Soul in this Life unless in the Justification of its Faith to be true and not counterfeit And a Soul may be declared Righteous before God and have its sins pardoned before it hath actually done any good works tho not before it be prepared by God for them by
a disposition wrought by Gods holy Spirit in the heart and a resolution to do them which is indeed Repentance in the Seed but such a Seed as must necessarily afterwards produce its Fruit. For it is as impossible any Soul should truly trust and hope in Christ for that Eternal Life which he hath only promised to an Holy Life and not live such a life as it is that a man or woman should truly trust and hope in a rich man for an Estate without doing the things to the performance of which he hath made the promise which is even naturally impossible for any to do tho they may pretend to it CHAP. VIII A Reply to what the Vindicator hath said Chap. 7. p. 219 c. The Vindicator will not understand that the Question was at first stated only as to Vocal Prayer nor speak to the thing in difference Two Errors running through all the Vindicators Book He hath brought no sufficient Reasons for a different Interpretation of the Divine Precepts for Prayer and Preaching He trifleth in applying what I said as to Reading to a recitation of anothers words tho it be without Reading The impertinent ways of modern Answerers the Vindicator too much followeth them 1 IN the 7th Chap. p. 219. Our Vindicator comes to Answer my Sixth Argument which I had thus laid down To pretend to perform an Act of Worship Reasonable Acc. p. 115. and yet not to do it at the same time is sinful But for Ministers furnished by God with the Gift of Prayer to perform their Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others is to pretend to the performance of an Act of Divine Worship and at the same time not to do it Ergo The Major I conceived needed no proof for to do such a thing were but to mock God and to deceive our own Souls The Minor I proved 1. Because we so interpret the precept for Preaching not Go read other Mens Sermons 2. If he read such Prayers I said it was a further question because in all languages the words used to express Reading are different from those used to express Praying I said we laid a greater stress upon other Arguments then upon this yet we could nor think thiâ— vain anâ— impertinent I said at first That the question is not about Prayer in the general but about Vocal Prayer p. 115. again p. 117. We are speaking of Vocal Prayer and what is the Will of God relating to that species of Prayer 2. In our Vindicators Chapter relating to this Argument two things are considerable 1. The Answer 2. The Reflections that have nothing of an Answer in them I shall only inform my Readerâ— that it may appear by the Title of my Book and by the conclusion of it and by many passages in it that I did not pretend in this case to define but only to argue not to determine what is lawful and unlawful for all Men in it self absolutely but to give our Reasons why we judge this thing unlawful leaving others to the conduct of their own Consciences Nor had I done this if the World had not been so often and so impudently told That we grant these things lawful That we have no reasons nothing to say Wisdome Reason and Learning were all born with them and with them alone they must dwell and dye Now these things being first called to mind let us hear what our Answerer saith to the Argument 3. First he saith This is an heavy Charge a false Accusation a Slander a Calumny but whom doth it accuse Not a person in the World Do I giving my Argument why I so judge a thing unlawful condemn others who think the same thing lawful especially when I profess against it p. 164. n. 2. Next he saith I contradict my self having granted before Forms in themselves lawful and may lawfully be used by Ministers in some cases Very pretty and I contradict my self forsooth because I now say that I think it unlawful for Ministers furnished with the Gift of Prayer and in a capacity to use it nothing naturally hindring I would gladly know in what degree of opposition these Propositions are Shall we continually be troubled with Arguments Ex ignoratione Elenchi not concluding against the Question or to whom do such Arguments signifie any thing Let the Reader see the Question stated p. 5. 4. But at length our Vindicator thinks he shall speak to the point telling us That there is not the same reason to interpret the precept of Preaching as the precepts for Prayer Very good why did not he say so at first I do think there is how doth he prove there is not He saith instead of every precept is to be interpreted every duty is to be performed suitably to the Nature of the Duty it self or in such a manner as may best tend to the pleasing of God and the exercise of true Piety Very true it being always understood that those things best please God and are the truest exercises of Piety which are according to his will For to talk in matters of External Worship of any thing pleasing to God being an Exercise of Piety or any vertue in them antecedent to or separate from the Divine Will is very odd discourse God hath not willed acts in External Worship because they are good and pious but because he hath willed them therefore they are so But he tells us That in Publick Prayer Religious Devotion and Gracious Dispositions and Desires towards God are the great things to be practised and to that end the use of a Form is well accommodated I suppose he means for all Ministers for otherwise he saith nothing 8. We are speaking as I said at first not of Prayer in the general but of Vocal Prayer of which as I have proved words are an Essential Part and being so our Author hath told us None but God can institute what words we shall use If he hath appointed any Forms of this Nature they are therefore lawful and best because he hath appointed them If he hath left us some but not commanded us to use them but leaving us at liberty to use them or others to that sense Man can no more determine then in the case of the Turtle Doves or young Pigeons If he hath only Instituted words as a part of Vocal Prayer but left it to the liberty of his Ministers what words to use only requiring them to ask nothing contrary to his Revealed Will it is not in the Creatures power to determine to another what words he should use 6. Two Errors and no small ones I have observed running through all our Vindicators Book He seems not to allow of Vocal Prayer to be a distinct species of Prayer from what is meerly Mental which it must be or it would be sufficient for a Minister in the publick Congregation to Pray Mentally and 2. Prayer would be no Homage of our Lipps and outward man And if it be there is
been imposed or not universally imposed Here now our Vindicator runs a division of 4 pages and when he hath said all he can he must needs say I have said what is truth But this is to charge a great deal of Evil on our Laws and Governours And may not a great deal of evil be the fruit of some humane Laws which when Governours see it is their duty to repeal such Laws tho they made them in the simplicity of their Hearts not foreseeing such effects and consequents of them 2. He saith they must be guilty unless they root out all Liturgies Is there a word by me spoken to that purpose See the contrary said by me p. 164. n. 4. Confusions Heresies Blasphemies came in when Liturgies were shut out But the question is Whether if Forms of Prayer had been admitted and not Forms of all Sermons it had been any proportionable means to have prevented them 14. For what he further inlargeth upon p. 239 240. I shall only tell him That not one of ten of those who are now against universally used or imposed Liturgies of Prayers had any concern in the things he mentioned as things done when Liturgies were shut out For my own part I appeared not as a man to the World till the year 1645 so could have no concern in imposing or perswading the imposing of the Covenant the Ejection Sequestring or Imprisoning any for refusal of it If I remember right I saw not London from 1645 twice till 1659. I never saw Olivers face never came near an Army I did very well know all the persons who are said to have wrote the Book called Smectymnuus and did know that they were all persons not short of our Vindicator for Learning Pity Ministerial Abilities and all which was good and much his Superiors in age and that there is no such words or sense of theirs expressed in the 83 and 84 p. of their Answer to the Remonstrance nor any where else that I know I am not bound to read over all that Answer because I am not bound to justifie every Phrase of theirs 15. For what our Vindicator seemeth to threaten p. 238. telling me of Exposing my self to outward Inconveniences by which I suppose he meaneth sufferings I must confess such a political consideration might have had and it may be had too much influence on me 15 or 16 years ago But having nothing capable to be impaired but my Name and Repute my Estate my Liberty and my Life and having experienced that notwithstanding all my Candor owning the Lawfulness of Forms in General the Lawfulness of People joyning in Prayer with those that use them in Devotion my self doing so very often not condemning any Ministers who judge it lawful and more expedient to use them only forbearing my self to do it because I judge it sinful for me and giving my reasons for judging it so yet because I think it my duty to Preach the Gospel and have sometimes done it I have not escaped the rude Tongues of some who are Zealots for it nor been able to enjoy my Estate and Liberty without a very considerable impairing by Imprisonment most malicious and vexatious Prosecution without any colour and pretence of Law I am much hardened against and prepared to answer such little Topicks and tho I yet think it my duty to use all lawful means to preserve my self yet I see reason to suspect I may have been mistaken as to the lawfulness of some of my prudentials and to be more confirmed in what our Saviour hath taught us Matth. 16.25 whosoever will save his life shall lose it and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall save it Yet I trust I shall be always careful not to suffer as a Murtherer or as a Thief or as an Evil doer or as a busie body in other mens matters Pet. 4.15 but as a Christian and not be ashamed but to glorifie God on this behalf 16. I shall conclude this Chapter with minding my Reader of a fable which Luther makes use of in his opposition to the Papists in the beginning of the Reformation There was a City saith he in which was a Law That none should come into their great Meetings that had any bodily imperfections If he did he was to pay a Fine It happened on a day one came in in whom those who were set to take care to the Execution of that Law discerned one imperfection they demand his Fine he denies and struggles with them till they had discerned four Imperfections he had and then stood upon four Fines Our Vindicators struggling with me to this degree and in this manner in this case putting me upon a more narrow inquiry into this matter hath helped me to two or three new Arguments which I before hardly thought of I will but propound them let who will improve or answer them I think I shall hardly take up a pen again in this cause having said much more then I judge answered or capable of a solid answer 1. To institute any part of Worship is not lawful for any Superiors But to institute words in Vocal Prayer is to institute a part of Divine Worship Ergo. 2. To determine in Acts of Worship what God hath left at liberty to his Ministers is unlawful But to determine Ministers what words Ministers shall use in publick Ministerial Prayer is to determine to them and that in an Act of Worship what God hath left at liberty Ergo. 3. To submit to the use of any thing in the Worship of God which God hath not by his precept made necessary and many in the present age make a meer Idol thinking and declaring by their words and actions that no other way of Prayer is acceptable to God is sinful But c. 4. To submit to such a method of Prayer as must necessarily shut out the immeditate Influence of Gods Spirit as to words in Prayer which may be and often is is sinful and unlawful But there may be and often is an influence of Gods Spirit upon Ministers even as to Words of Prayer and such a thing is probably promised and to tye our selves to Forms of Words prescribed by others manifestly shuts out such an influence or the use of it Ergo. But thus much shall be sufficient to reply to our Vindicator answering my Arguments Let me now inquire how happily he hath Vindicated his own or other mens from my Answers Chap 9. of the Reasonable Account CHAP. X. A Reply to the Vindicators 9 Chap. p. 241 c. The Vindicators Fortification of the 10 Arguments for Forms of Prayer before battered beaten down and himself proved to have alledged no reason in his five Reasons cogent for the general use and imposition of Forms 1. I took notice of Ten Arguments brought for such Forms of Prayer and such an use of them as I had been speaking about The first was because Forms are not by God forbidden p. 135 I told them They were
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
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