allowable their Synagogue wâ—â—â—â—â— which was thereby guided and dâ—â—â—cted must necessarily have been altogether impracticable or at least utterly confesed Tr. 2. Ch. 6. div 1. And it is not amiss observed by Bâ—â—hop Whitgist that that command Dâ—ui 12. did as well concern the Judicial part of the Mosaical Law as the Ceremoniâ—l and therefore it may with as much plausibleness be urged to prove that no seâ—â—â—â—ar laws may be made under Christianity as that no Ecclesiastical Constitutions should be therein established unless it can be shewed that under the Gospel the Divine Law hath particular 〈◊〉 joined all circumstances of worship and Rules of Order in all Ecclesiastical Cases where it is presumed he hath not prescribed a Platform of civil polity And yet even in matters judicial also the Jewish Doctors as is manifest from their Bava Kama Sanbedrin Maccoth and other Talmudical Treatises did give divers resclutions of various particular Cases and circumstances not expressed in the Law of Moses and both these decisions and their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or their Constitutions to be a bedge of the Law Macc. c. 1. Sect. 1 3. as when the Law did not allow above forty stripes to him who was to be adjudged to be scourged their Doctors required them never to exceed thirty nine not thereby altering Gods Law but taking care lest it should by mistake be violated are well allowed of by Christian Writers However Grot. in Deut. 25.3 2. Cor. 11.24 Coccei in Mac. c. 3. n. 12. Since the Gospel requireth a care of order and decency in the Christian Church to deny this liberty would be a diminishing from its commands but to grant it is no addition to them Wherefore though superstitious placing Religion where we ought not and irreverent neglect or making no Conscience of any Divine Institution are sinful prudential Constitutions remain lawful SECT VII Other Objections from the New Testament cleared 1. From the New Testament it hath been objected 1. That our Saviour defended his Disciples for not obeying the tradition of the â—lders which required them to wash before meat Mat. 15.2 Ans As this tradition did not refer to the order of the publick worship of God in Religious Assemblies so the true reason why our Saviour defended his Disciples in their practising against this tradition was because washing before meat was enjoined by them as a proper rule of Religion and of Purity In Loc. For as to general it hath been observed by Drusius and Dr. Lightfoot that many of the Jews esteemed not the written Law but that given by tradition to be their foundation and chief Rule of Doctrine and declared that he who transgressed the words of the written Law was not guilty but he who transgressed the words of the Scribes was guilty so in this particular discourse our Saviour chargeth them with teaching for Doctrines the commandments of men v. 9. and declareth against their errour and faltâ— Doctrine v. 20. that to eat with unwashen hands defileth not the man So that the question between our Saviour and the Scribâ—s and Parisees was this Whether it was to be admitted as a Doctrine that eating with unwashen hands defileth the man and our Saviours justifying his Disciples in this Case doth declare that wheresoever salse Doctrines are obtruded as parts of the Law of God it can be no mans duty to receive them and practise upon them which is that our Church also professeth 2. But our Saviour was so far from opposing prudential Rules and Observations for the orderly performance of Religious services that himself frequently practised such things according to the Custom and Constitutions of the Jews Thus as the Jewish Doctors sat in their Synagogues when they taught the people our blessed Lord ordinarily used the same gesture in teaching He also ordinarily joined in their Synagogue worship which was ordered by the Rules of Ecclesiastical Prudence and observed the gesture and other Rites of the Jewish Passover which the Authority of their Elders had established for order and decency And whereas in the Jewish Synagogues and Schools their Doctors used to sit about in a Semicircle and their Scholars before them upon lower Seats to whom the asking of Questions was allowed our Saviour also n the Temple which in the holy Scriptures oft encludeth the whole Court and building of the Temple among which were Religious Schools and Synagogues sate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the middle of the Doctors hearing them and asking them Questions Luk. 2.46 3. Some have also against the use of external Rites in the worship of God urged those words of our Saviour Joh. 4.23 The hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth collecting thence that the Gospel worship is so wholly spiritual that it doth not admit outward Rites and signs Ans 1. This must needs be a false construction of these words which would tend to disclaim the two New Testament Sacraments the open and visible profession of Faith the publick meeting in Church Assemblies the praising of God and praying with the voice the reading and hearing Gods word reverent gesiures in Religious service and such like necessary parts of Religious duty in all which there is use of bodily actions and external signs 2. Our blessed Lord by these words of worshipping the Father in spirit and truth expresseth that worship which the Gospel directeth this is often called the truth and the worshipping of God in the Spirit Gal. 3.3 Phil. 3.3 and is opposite to the false worship of the Samaritans and different from the serving of God in Jewish Figures yet it both admitteth and requireth external expressions of reverence And in this place our Saviour declareth that under the Gospel the worship of God should be so properly suitable to God who is a Spirit that it should not be confined to any one particular place and therefore neither the Jewish Temple nor Mount Gerizim about which places of worship Christ then discoursed with the Samaritan Woman should be the peculiar place for divine adoration Because God who is a Spirit would under the Gospel be so spiritually known and honoured that he would not in any singular and peculiar place six any special outward Symbol of his divine presence as in the Jewish dispensation he had done in the Temple over the mercy Seat nor would he endure to be worshipped under the representation of a corporeal image as the Samaritans in Mount Gerizim did worship God in the form or image of a Dove as hath been observed by Mr. Mede Mede Disc en Jo. 3.23 and is declared concerning them in the Talmud in Cholin and by the Jewish Chronicler in Tzemach David whose testimonies and words are produced by Bochartus Bochart Hieroz Part. pester l. 1. c. 1. Vossius de Idololatr l. 1. c. 23. Indeed the Learned Eochartus as did also Vossius accounteth this charge upon the Samaritans to be a Fable
contended for amongst us I shall observe that this hath been many ways also grosly abused First it was the ordinary gesture of worship in the Romish Pagan Idolatry The ancient laws of their Pagan worship required ut adoraturi sedeant which as Plutarch affirmeth Plut. in Numa was appointed by Numa Pompilius and Tertullian informeth us that at their Gentile solemnities even in his time they worshipped their images sitting Tertul. de Orat. c. 12. adoratis sigillaribus suis residendo 11. And in the Romish Church it is by some asserted and appeareth very probable that the Pope himself at some solemnities receiveth the Eucharist sitting When the Emperour receiveth his Coronation their Master of Ceremonies telleth us that at the time of Mass the Pope with the Emperour following him in the place of a Sub-Deacon goeth to the Altar whence Pontifex ad sedem eminentem communicaturus revertitur Sacr. Cerem l. 1. Sect. 5. Cap. 3. the Pope who at that time doth himself celebrate goeth to his seat of eminency therein to receive the Communion And a Book called the Quench-Coal written many years since as an Answer to Dr. Heylins Coal from the Altar produceth this testimony from William Thomas in his History of Italy who declared himself an eye witness thereof in the year 1547. that the Altar in the Cathedral Church of Rome Quench Coal p. 12. even in the time of Mass when the Pope received the Sacrament was standing in the midst of the Quire and the Pope sitting in a Chair of State about it And Didoclavius telleth us which is the only instance he produceth out of any History for sitting at the Sacrament and he may be mistaken in that that the Benedictine Monks receive the Sacrament sitting upon the Thursday before Easter Altar Damasc c. 10. and yet I suppose if his observation be true he will not imagine that they receive it with less adoration of the Host than other Papists do 12. And sitting at the Sacrament hath yet been much more abused by the Arians in Poland as their Synods called the Socinians who as denying the Divinity of Christ In Synodis Cracoviens Petricoviens Wlodislav Toruniens in Corp. Confessionum and not giving due reverence to him were the first Authors known to those Churches of this sitting gesture upon which account the Churches both of the Bobaemian Augustan and Helvetick Confessions residing in Poland and Lithuania disclaimed the use of that gesture though they esteemed it lawful in it self as being upon this occasion scandalous Wherefore to assert that every gesture grosly abused by others ought to be utterly relinquished is not only contrary to truth and to the practice of the Church of England but is herein opposite to the use of all the reformed Churches and it would make void Christs institution of the Sacrament by admitting no gesture to be lawful to communicate therein 13. Yet that we may discern the various working of mens minds in their arguments against this kneeling gesture and how copiously every thing affordeth matter to them who will take up with any thing we may observe Div. Right of Ch. Gov. Ch. 2. q. 1. p. 195. that as kneeling is sometimes disliked as having been Idolatrously abused so sitting is sometimes pleaded for as being the gesture practised and allowed by Christ because it was the gesture say they in the Idols Temple Thus Mr. Rutherford in these strange expressions undertaketh to prove that Christ did sit at the Lords Supper because sitting at the Idols Table 1 Cor. 8.10 declareth that in Religious Feasts sitting was ordinary and a sign indicant of honouring the spiritual Lord of the Banquet and a religious Communion with the Lord of the Feast was hence signified 14. Another thing urged against kneeling at the Sacrament Obj. 5. Rutherf Divine Right of Ch. Govern Ch. 1. Qu. 5. Sect. 1 3. which of the others is most strange and uncharitable is this that kneeling at the Sacrament is Idolatry and is parallel with worshipping god by an Image and even with the Pagan Idolatry it self upon this ground Altar Damasc c. 10 p. 801. because to kneel before any Creature as a memorative object of God though there be no intention of giving divine adoration to that Creature is Idolatry in the opinion of some men 15. Ans 1. This rash position tendeth to make the Jews worshipping God before the Ark or mercy Seat and before the Temple at Jerusalem or the Tabernacle in the Wilderness to have been equally Idolatrous with the serving Jeroboams Calves or worshipping Baal which was so far from that great sin that it was then a necessary duty of Religion And the cause of this gross mistake is the want of considering the vast difference of worshipping a false God or making use of a memorative object to represent the likeness of the divine being which is contrary to his nature and forbidden by his Precepts and of using such a memorative object in worship as is to be a memorial of the Covenant and grace of God and Christ and his Communion with us being to that end appointed and instituted as a remembrance of him If these things be not accounted vastly different it must be concluded not very considerable whether we do things appointed of God or forbidden of him and things agreeable to the nature of God or apposite thereto And besides this to worship God alone making use of such memorative objects as an help thereto which do properly call to our minds Gods mighty works and glorious Attributes is far from being either Idolatrous or blameable If a pious man taking a view of the mighty works of Gods Creation or any part thereof should upon this sight be put in mind of the power and wisdom of their Creator and thence should glorify admire and worship not the Creature but God alone such actions are not evil but devout and religious 16. 2. This assertion is of so dangerous consequence as to disown this holy Sacrament from being an Ordinance of Christian worship and to hinder the principal duties therein to be performed For it is directly contrary to the duties of this Sacrament to condemn the worshipping of Christ as sinful at the view of this memorial of Christs Death in this Sacrament when Christians here ought to magnifie his grace mercy and love to glorifie him for the wonderful Salvation and Atonement effected by his Death to implore his grace and spirit with all the blessings and benefits of the New Testament to acknowledge him and submit to him as our only Soveraign Lord with other such like which are proper actions of our worshipping and inwardly adoring him And it is unreasonable as well as uncharitable where these inward acts of Religion are necessary and a duty to condemn the outward expression thereof as either Idolatrous or any was sinful being directed to him who is Lord both of our Souls and Bodies 17. And though some mens
haec ut plurimum adhibetur formula I say after this was established at Geneva Calv. Ep. 87. Calvin who composed it expressed his judgment to be for the strict use of set forms in his Letter to the Lord Protector in England Wherein he writeth to this purpose For so much as concerneth the form of Prayers and Ecclesiastical rites valde probo I much approve that it be determined so that it may not be lawful for the Ministers in their administrations to vary from it And this he judgeth necessary for these reasons that it may be an help to the weakness of some that it may be a testimony of the Churches consent and that it may slop the desultorious levity of those who are for new things 12. And these very expressions of Calvin are cited with great approbation by the Walachrian Classis of Zealand in what they wrote in the time of our late Wars to the Assembly at London and they further declare their great distast against them who condemn the use of forms in these words Consid Contr. in Angl. c. 7. qu. 2. Durum putamus omnes illas pias Ecclesias condemnare quae ab Apostolicis primitivae Ecclesiae temporibus usque ad hodiernum diem cultum Dei publicum ex praescriptis certisque formulis celebrarunt prâ—inde hominum illorum praecisam singularitatem arguimus qui omnes praescriptas formulas ex cultu divino eliminant Say they We account it grievous to condemn all those holy Churches which from the Apostolical times and the primitive Church unto this day have celebrated the publick worship of God out of prescribed forms Wherefore we blame the precise singularity of those men who would cast out all prescribed forms from divine worship So they And indeed it must be a rash sentence to condemn forms of Prayer as evil and sinful which were embraced by the ancient Church while it retained its soundness and before the corruptions and distempers of the Church of Rome took place and by the Protestant Churches since their recovery there from And in the determining what is expedient or inexpedient he had need have strong foundations to erect his high confidence upon who will oppose his own judgment with some very few persons besides against the concurrent judgment and practice of the Church of Christ in so many several Ages and Nations and against the determination of God himself under the Old Testament and our blessed Saviour under the New SECT II. Objections against set forms answered 1. What is opposed against the former Section must be here considered both concerning the antiquity lawfulness and expediency of set forms It is acknowledged that publick Prayer even at the Celebration of the Holy Communion was at the beginning of Christianity performed by the extraordinary and wonderful effusion of the gifts of the Holy Ghost when also prophesying and singing were performed by the same But some attempt hath been made to prove that there was no ordinary use of forms of Prayer in the three first Centuries and that they were not established till the end of the fourth Century 2 To this purpose Justin Martyr is first produced Apol. 2. prope fin p. 98. who declareth concerning his time that at the Communion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chief Minister sendeth forth Prayers and Thanksgivings according to his ability or rather with all his might Now all the proof here dependeth on the use of the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Objectors understand according to his ability in composing a Prayer But this is a sense not consistent with the use of the same Phrase in another place of the same Apology where he discourseth also of their Prayers at the Eucharist p. 60. and speaketh of all Christians who were not all to compose Prayers according to their ability for that service that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praising God with Prayers and Thanksgivings with all their might that is with the greatest intention and fervency of heart and spirit and this is properly the sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as may be evinced from the use thereof in other places and from the use of like expressions referring to Prayer 3. It was Nazianzens exhortation Naz. Orat. 3. Let us being cleansed in soul and body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all our might sing that song which the Israelites sung when the Egyptians were destroyed where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies affectionateness and earnestness of mind in the use of a set form of words Lex Rab. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Buxtorf noteth it as an expression used among the Jews that he who shall say Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with all his might which answereth to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Gates of Paradise shall be opened to him but here could be no variety of expression but as he interpreteth it by this Phrase is meant omni intentione devotione a joining with all earnestness of intention and heartiness of devotion Linw. Prov. l. 3. Tit. 23. Sect. 1. About 450. years since was framed an English Canon requiring the daily publick Prayers and service to be performed religiously prout Deus dederit and again prout Deus inspiraverit which are Phrases as plausible and pregnant as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet these Phrases were used concerning the set diurnal and nocturnal offices requiring that they should behave themselves therein with Religious devoutness according as God should give them ability and breath by his spirit Wherefore this citation from Justin Martyr though managed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or with the utmost might will prove nothing but the weakness of the attempt of the Vndertakers 4. Another place objected is from Tertullian Apol. c. 30. who saith the Christians did pray sine monitore quia de pectore without a monitor or prompter because from their heart The sense of these words of Tertullian hath been variously apprehended by divers learned men some judging that they intend praying by heart as we call it and therefore by a form others that they expressed the readiness of Christians to put up hearty and devout supplications to God Bishop Bilson of Christian subjection Part. 4. from the Religious inclinations of their own spirits and some very worthy men have thought that sense of these words which is closed with in the management of this objection not to be improbable concerning Tertullians time And it is not much of be wondred if some obscure Phrases of so dark a Writer as Tertullian be either not well understood or sometimes misunderstood among this number I account this Phrase which I suppose to refer to an ancient custom in the Primitive Church But 5. In answer to this objection it might be sufficient to observe that sine monitore can in no propriety of speech be construct without a form since the Monitor must needs be a person not a Book whose words were to guide and