a Rule for it He saith there was also some kind of uniformity in their Sacramental Prayers P. 5. that is a general agreement to pray for the same things Idem tho not in the same words He expresly relates what it is which is the point in dispute P. 2. And declares That by prescribing Forms are meant such as are imposed upon the Administrator so as those must be used and no other nor otherwise without adding detracting or transposing This saith Mr. Clarkson is it which is denied P. 6. That in the Ancient Church for many ages after Christ such Liturgies and Forms of Prayer were commonly imposed on those who administred the Sacraments as are before described Thus you see what was denied as well as what was granted by Mr Clarkson and therefore what the Doctor was to prove If the Doctor 's quotations be not home to this point they do not reach that for which he doth pretend to produce them And whether for the first three Centuries his Authorities do amount to a proof of what is in dispute yea or so much as of Forms of Prayer you may conclude as you shall see fit when you have considered the following account of them Before I enquire into the passages the Doctor doth quote for the proof of Liturgies in the particular Centuries as they come in their order I will take notice of a few passages which occur in his Discourse concerning the Grounds for Liturgies in Holy Scripture which takes up some Pages before he makes his entrance on the First Century The Doctor saith the Holy Bible makes it appear P. 2. that the People of God from the beginning did generally use Forms of Prayer and Praises in their Publick worship Now supposing this to be true to make it reach the present purpose he should prove they did not nor might not use any Prayers or Praises but those very Forms Idem Yea saith the Doctor God prescribes a Form of Prayer for the penitent Jews and charges them to take words with them and turn to the Lord and say Take away all Iniquity c. Hos 14.2 3 4. 'T is true God doth command them to use words in their Prayers and directs them what sort of words to use but let the Doctor answer when he thinks fit whether God doth bind them to use no words but what are there mentioned But further Forms of Prayer and Praise were indited by the Spirit of God for the publick service of the Temple and commanded by the Lord to be used there Is the inference from hence plain and just Therefore men may devise Prayers of their own and oblige the Church to use these and none but these The Doctor refers to Doctor Hammond and Doctor Lightfoot for proof that the Jews had a fixed Liturgy whether their proof be solid touching that matter would be too great a diversion to inquire But if occasion required I should not be afraid to undertake to produce the Authorities those two Learned Doctors build their proof upon for some things the Learned will not allow we must acquiesce in upon their testimony I will not insist on the difference betwixt the Jewish and Christian Church-State For we may suppose Forms might be of general use among the Jews and yet there be no necessity of an express abrogation of that way to warrant peoples addressing themselves publickly to God in another way than by stinted Forms For Prayer being commanded and there being two ways wherein this duty might be performed viz. by stinted Forms and by expressing themselves truly according to general Occasions and particular Emergencies There appears not any necessity that the use of Forms as to the Lawfulness thereof must of necessity be abrogated in order to it 's being Lawful to use the other way P. 5 6. But if we would prosecute the Doctors way of Arguing on this occasion aright somthing else will follow than what the Doctor doth conclude even what the Doctor I am perswaded would not be very willing to stand to For seeing the Jews did worship God acceptably c. by set Forms and Christ and his Apostles did joyn in these Forms and never reprove the Jews for using them The most obvious inference will be That Christians must now use those very Forms and none but them unless those Forms be abrogated and a positive institution of other Forms be left upon Record either in the Gospels or Epistles For by the Doctors discourse the Disciples had Forms of Prayers which must certainly be Jewish Forms and Christ only taught them another Form which they were to add to those they had before yea according to what the Doctor relates the Lord Jesus when he provided his Disciples a New Form to be added to the rest was not only so far from discharging people and setting his Disciples free from the stinted way of Liturgies but from their obligation to the Jewish Forms That he would consine himself in the very Prayer he made them whereby they were to be known from all others to be his Disciples to the Jewish Liturgy so that there should not be one sentence in his Prayer but what he took out of the Jewish Prayers then in use Now those who devote themselves to such notions as these may do well to consider whether if it be so as the Doctor reportes that Christ took every sentence of his Prayer out of the Jewish Prayers and taught it his Disciples that they might add it to their other Forms which were Jewish the obligation to use this as a Form of Prayer and to use those other Forms to which they were to add it be not of equal duration But alas whether will some mens pretences to reading hurry them What work will be made of Christianity if the forced conceptions of some men who would be thought to have read much must be entertained Some do represent matters in such a manner as if they had a mind to perswade people that the Lord Jesus was anointed with the Spirit only to supply the meanness of his education not to inable him to form and compose a Prayer himself but only to collect and cull sentences out of other peoples Prayers and then put them together into one form Not many years ago other matters were represented at such a rate by another hand as if the Spirit had been given to the Apostles to furnish them immediately because they had not been bred to such matters with Philosophical notions and some critical niceties and particularly was given to St. John to inable him to write his Epistle in a Platonick strain How far this sort of dealing may serve a particular interest for a while I will not inquire But it hath no probable tendency to promote the main design of Christianity The Doctor saith that Christ in giving his Disciples a new Form when they desired him to teach them to pray and Coppying the several Petitions out the Jewish
only for private use What hinders but if those variations are proper to answer the ends for which they were devised viz. the helping of people to perform the duty of Prayer with more understanding and better affections other variations in publick may be equally useful If P. 16. as the Doctor doth grant every good man may by the ordinary assistance of the spirit be moved to pray with Devotion and Fervency That is as I conceive may have his soul enlightned and possessed with a true apprehension and knowledge of his spiritual concernments and vigorously affected with them and carried out towards God in fervent desires inclinations and affections suitably to his present occasions What reason can be rendered why he may not by the ordinary assistance of the spirit be inabled to express his inward resentments in proper expressions The gift of utterance being the gift of the spirit as well as other gifts Mens discourses are usually answerable to their apprehensions and affections What we darkly apprehend we express obscurely and what we understand distinctly and clearly we discourse of plainly The principal thing indeed in Prayer is the frame and actings of our Souls the inward exercise of Faith Repentance Love and other Graces But saith the Doctor any good man may act these in the use of a Form And therefore may pray in or by the Spirit in the use of a Form But I say it must still be noted that if a man be to pray with others and that which we are now discoursing is concerning one that by way of Office is to perform this duty in the hearing of others so as to have them joyn with him in this performance he must use words and if he restrain himself to the words devised and put together by others and these words do not so well express and represent the sense he hath and which others should have of what is the matter of Prayer as others which do occur unto him and which he could very pertinently make use of for that purpose he cannot be truly said to pray in or by the Spirit according to the full import of that phrase But saith the Doctor then no man in the Publick Assemblies doth pray in the Spirit but the Minister for the Minister alone conceives the Prayer and it is a Form to the whole Congregation who must pray in his words To which I answer That the matter in dispute at present is only concerning him that officiates Besides it is not a Form to the Congregation taking a Form in the sense we are now discoursing of But the Congregation may joyn in the Spiritual Performance of this Duty acting graces suitably to the occasions which are administred and improving for this purpose the Abilities God hath bestowed upon others in order to the furthering and promoting of their devotion This is the work which pertains unto the Congregation at that time they not being called to express vocally their inward resentments during the Ministers officiating in this performance in the fittest expressions they are able The Doctor seems to be of the opinion that in the Apostles days there was an extraordinary gift of Prayer which some did partake of and that their Prayers were Divine Revelations They being immediately furnished by the Spirit both with the Matter and Words of their Prayers and that these Prayers were written down and after that gift failed they were preserved and used by the Church and were transmitted down to us by their Successors So that by this sort of discoursing our Liturgies are Divine Revelations But the Doctor hath none of the Ancients but St. Chrysostom to vouch for an Extraordinary Gift of Prayer in the Primitive Times This is certain before the Liturgies now extant or any part of them which is not expresly contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament will be owned by good Christians and sound Protestants for Divine Revelations very substantial particular proof must be made of their being such To father Liturgies in such an arrogant presumptuous manner on the Holy Spirit is not the way to bring them into credit with judicious and serious people It may effectually provoke God to pour forth in a little time so much contempt upon them they shall never get into repute any more This is further certain that our latest Liturgies have some prayers in them which by the very make of them any ordinary person may perceive they were not composed by Divine Inspiration And if the other could be proved to be of such an original surely these will not deserve to be thought the more venerable meerly because they have been added unto them Having said thus much concerning some passages in the Doctors Introduction before he enters upon the First Century I will now briefly consider the Testimonies he doth alledge for Liturgies In the First Century And he labours first of all to prove what he hath undertaken P. 28 c. by asserting that the Essenes who have been believed by divers learned men to be Christians had Forms of Prayer for Josephus saith they used Prayers which they received from their Forefathers which must be Forms and Philo saith they did sing alternately and Eusebius calls these the Hymns sung amongst us Christians And that excellent Historian labours to prove these Essenes were Christians by this Argument amongst some others Because they prayed and sung Hymns in set Forms as the Christians use to do Euscb Hist lib. 2. c. 17. Thus far the Doctor And I do readily acknowledge that Fusebius doth indeavour from what he sinds in Philo to prove the Essenes to be Christians And particularly from their way of singing Psalms and Hymns But he doth not say one word of their having set Forms of Prayers That they prayed in set Forms as the Christians use to do is the Doctor 's own saying for Fusebius doth neither say the Essenes had Forms of Prayers nor that the Christians did use any And yet Eusebius doth say That Philo's Book doth comprehend in it the Rules of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Valefius thinks this doth import that that Book did contain in it all the Rules or Canons which were observed by the Christian Church in Eusebius's time Further Eusebius doth gather out of that Book what he thought was proper to shew how exactly these Essenes and the Christians did agree in their Ecclesiastical Affairs as he himself assures us in the Chapter before referred unto And yet saith not one word of praying by set Forms which rather intimates there were no set Forms of Prayer used by the Christians in his time seeing he omits the mention of the Forms the Essenes used if as Josephus reports the Essenes had Forms of Prayer In the next place the Doctor thinks he hath a proof of Liturgies in Clemens Romanus But whoever considers Clemens will soon perceive that the passages the Doctor hath been pleased to quote are nothing at all to the present purpose
Liturgy P. 6. instead of intimating that he intended to reform the old method of praying by Forms did shew his approbation of praying to God in a prescribed Form But he might with as much clearness have pusht his inference from those premises further viz. That he did shew his approbation at least of his Followers composing Forms of Prayer if they are to compose any for constant publick use only out of the Jewish Liturgies I may further mind you that the Doctor doth ordinarily discourse too loosely concerning Forms of Prayer as not being mindful of what he hath undertaken to discourse of For if he find any words used in Prayer which were to be met with any where else before those words he alledges for proof that the whole Prayer was a Form Thus Christ used a Form of Prayer on the Cross saith the Doctor extracted out of the 22d P. 7. Psalm which begins My God my God why hast thou forsaken me But pray who did extract the Petitions and put them into a Form for him and oblige him even on that occasion to use no other words but what were ready provided to his hand In the next Paragraph the Doctor freely grants P. 9. that the Lords Prayer is not only a Form but also a direction to draw other Forms by so that we are not confined to the use of this Prayer but have Liturgies which are drawn up by the Lords Prayer But if we are not limited to the Lords Prayer but may use Liturgies which are no other words but such as are agreeable to it both as to the Form and Matter of them which is but an odd sort of expression to fall from a Learned Doctor why may not Ministers keeping to the direction of the Lords Prayer use other words than those which are in the Liturgy as well as those who are for Liturgies may use other words then those which are in the Lords Prayer This Concession we have from the Doctor upon his taking notice that Mr. Clarkson had said that the Lords Prayer was antiently used but not out of any apprehension that Christ did P. 3 4. in Mat. 6. injoyn his Disciples to use it Mr. Clarkson shews that some eminent persons both antient and more late Writers were of this opinion whether his quoting so many for that particular was to the purpose I leave the indifferent Reader to determine But because the Doctor saith Maldonat only tells us P. 11. we are not always bound to use those very words I would desire you to take notice that Maldonat's words are Non his necessario verbis c. Which I conceive do rather signifie we are not absolutely bound to use those very words at any time But take the words if you please according to the Doctors interpretation if he think Maldonat in the right provided such a construction may be borrowed for his words that is That we are not always bound to use our Lords very words I would gladly know then how we came to be bound to use always other people's words The Doctor next speaks of a Gift of Prayer which he represents as if we were to understand by it an extraordinary assistance of the Spirit to teach men new words and phrases in ordinary cases and for their daily prayers Whereas by the gift of Prayer no more is meant than an Ability to represent the sentiments of a Soul duly affected with the general and particular subject matters of Prayer in proper and suitable expressions and such as are proper to beget and excite and improve such Resentments and Affections in those who shall hear and join in the use of them for that purpose The gift of Prayer soberly considered does not imply any necessity as the Doctor hints constantly to vary and use all new words Indeed the exercise of this gift cannot very well consist with an obligation constantly to use the very same words Nor is it usually pretended that this is an extraordinary gift of the Spirit but as by the blessing of the Spirit the Heart or Soul comes to have a lively apprehension and affectionate sense of what is to be subject matter of prayer so the person who is thus inwardly disposed hath ordinarily a readiness to express himself in words which bear some proportions to the disposition of his Soul and Spirit and which are very proper to kindle and excite the like affections dispositions and inclinations in others who do seriously attend unto them Tho there are some particular words very pertinent to be used in prayer for general or particular mercies yet there may be other words every jot as pertinent which being used as occasion offers may be more serviceable and contribute more to further the common or more appropriate end of Publick Prayer than the constant use of the other words The Lords Prayer doth comprehend the whole of Prayer But yet those who are most for Liturgies are for having other Forms framed wherein the same things are asked in other words Now those judicious persons who pray for the same things which are prayed for in prescribed Forms without tying themselves up strictly to the words used in those Forms do differ no more from the Forms which have not their words in them than those Forms do from the Lords Prayer And if the variation of Forms from the Lords Prayer may be truly beneficial and advantagious unto the people why may not the like variations from Humane Forms be equally advantagious I will propound one thing the more to explain this matter which more nearly relates to the Doctor He hath paraphrased the several Prayers in our Common-Prayer Book so that the particular Prayers in that Book are by his labour and industry and gift made larger and expressed in other words The same things are requested c. in his larger Prayers which are requested in the shorter Prayers in our Common Book Now let him consider whether he had not such apprehensions and affections in his mind and soul relating to the particulars petitioned and confessed c. in the Prayers contained in our Common Book at that time as he thought might be more commodiously and advantagiously expressed and represented than they were by the words used in the Book Or whether such expressions did not occur to him as he thought would if duly attended to help peoples devotions more than the very words of the Common Prayers would by themselves He certainly had some design in varying and altering the words and I am willing to believe he had an honest design Now if his using other expressions about the same matter and altering Forms of Prayer so as to make of short Prayers long ones is of real use to promote devotion why may not others variations be in their measure useful too If it should be said that his variations are not to be used publickly I ask whether they be ever the better for that Or whether his variations are the more useful because
were exprest freely according as the occasion required I shall leave the indifferent Reader when he peruseth what the Doctor hath said about this matter to conclude as he shall see fit whether the Doctor hath cleared this Passage to his satisfaction For I think the Question is not whether those words he relates there were the very words they constantly used on that occasion but whether there was a Prayer ready prescribed for that occasion If there were not and they did ordinarily pray for the things mentioned without being confined to use the same words every time do you judge whether this Passage do make more for the Doctor or Mr. Clarkson It is in my judgment but a poor answer for the Doctor to insinuate P. 70. that a Primate may occasionally pray without a prescribed Form but inferiour Priests may not unless Ministerial abilities are not to be exercised proportionably to the measure in which God hath conferred the same but accordingly as those who have them can climb up towards the top of Ecclesiastical Dignity and Preferment His second Allegation saith the Doctor out of St. Cyprian for such occasional Prayers is P. 71. that there are also mention of such occasional Prayers in the Epistle to Moses and Maximus but he durst not saith the Doctor cite the place at large which only speaks of private Prayers made by these Confessors in prison c. Now because the Doctor hath such a mind to have the place cited at large I will do it and then leave you to judge whether it only speaks of private Prayers or whether the Passage do speak at all of the Prayers of these Confessors Mr. Clarkson refers to the particular Epistle and the words are these Et nos quidem vestri diebus ac noctibus Cypr. epist ad Mos Maxim me mores quando in sacrificiis precem cum pluribus facimus cum in secessu privatis precibus oramus coronis ac laudibus vestris plenam domini faventiam postulamus There is one instance more P. 71. the Doctor takes notice of and seems to be in some passion with Mr. Clarkson about it Now the matter stands thus Mr. Clarkson in one part of his Book is shewing that the Ancients were not so wedded to particular words and phrases as some have been in latter years And to give some proof of this he doth shew amongst other instances that they did not conceive Christ had so tied them up in the Administration of Baptism that they must necessarily use just those very words he had set down relating to this matter in the Gospel but that they had leave to vary their expressions and change those words related in the Gospel for others provided they did not change the sence He shews they did ordinarily vary in several particulars and amongst the rest he saith some thought themselves not obliged to Baptise expresly in the name of the Sacred Trinity so as to name every person as they are mentioned Mat. 28.19 but in the name of Christ or of the Lord Jesus or of the Lord. He farther adds and this supposed to be the practice of the best times hath great Advocates He names several who are and were far enough from being lookt upon as Hereticks Afterwards he quotes this very Passage in St. Cyprian which creates the Doctor so much disturbance The Doctor seems to be displeased because Mr. Clarkson did not quote the Passage entire P. 72. without leaving out any words and then tells us St. Cyprians words are these How then do some say who are cut of the Church yea against the Church that if a Pagan be any where or any way Baptised in the name of Christ Jesus he may obtain the Remission of Sins And hereupon the Doctor falls into a warm sort of short talk about Hereticks and Schismaticks Now St. Cyprians words are these Quomodo ergo quidam dicunt Cypr. ad Jubai foris extra ecclesiam modo in nomine Jesu Christi ubicunque quemodocunque gentilem Baptizatum Remissionem peccatorum consequi posse I will not dispute whether the Doctor hath translated this Passage as it ought to be translated though I do not know any necessity that there is that foris extra ecclesiam must be used as explanatory of quidam But all that Mr. Clarkson brought this Passage for was to prove that some in St. Cyprians days were of the above mentioned opinion And I think the quotation is full to that point He did not produce this place to prove they were Orthodox in St. Cyprians Judgement but he doth expresly declare St Cyprian did not allow it yet I am not sensible that it doth follow they were either Hereticks or Schismaticks because foris extra ecclesiam is in this sentence The Doctors next proof for Liturgies is from the account St. Basil gives concerning Gregory Thaumaturgus P. 72. who was so much for a Liturgy that we have the testimony of St. Basil saith the Doctor concerning him that he appointed a Form of Prayer for that Church of Noeocesarea from which they would not vary in one Ceremony or in a Word nor would they add one mystical Form to those which he had left them Now the Case was thus St. Basil was proving the Divinity of the Holy Spirit Basil de Spir. sancto cap. 29. from the Ancients Ascribing Glory and Power to the Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit And having named several of the Ancients who had taught that Glory and Power were to be Ascribed to the Spirit as well as to the Father and the Son he at last mentions Gregory the Great and proves that he was of the same mind from the present practice of that Church And to make it appear they had not varied from the Doctrine of that great man he reports the profound respect the people of that Country still had for him P. 73. So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as the Doctor relates in his Margin they would not add any Practice any Word or any mystical Form in the Church to what he had left with them By which I conceive he means that they did strictly observe that way and method for their ordinary Worship and kept strictly to those Doctrines and that way of Administring the Sacrament which were in use in Gregories time But he doth not say one word of Gregorie's appointing a Form of Prayer for that Church Nor does it follow that because they Worshiped God in the same manner a great many years after Gregory wherein they worshipped him in his time that therefore they used the very words he used Whereas it is said they did not add a word to what he left with them that doth not relate to their Prayers but to the Doctrine he taught for here St. Basil is speaking of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and proving that Doctrine And in other places St. Basil takes notice how tenacious they were