and it were really desired that the People should come it were another matter Moreover there is no Rubrick requiring this Service at the Table when there 's no Communion It is not reasonable that the Word Minister should be onely used in the Liturgy for since some parts of the Liturgy may be performed by a Deacon others by none under the order of a Priest viz. Absolution Consecration it is fit that some such word as Priest should be used for those Offices and not Minister which signifies at large every one that ministers in that holy Office of what order soever he be The word Curate signifying properly all those who are trusted by the Bishops with Cure of Souls as anciently it signified is a very fit word to be used and can offend no sober Person The word Sunday is ancient Just. Martyr Ap. 2. and therefore not to be left off Repl. The word Minister may well be used instead of Priest and Curate though the word Deacon for necessary distinction stand yet we doubt not but Priest as it is but the English of Presbyter is lawful but it is from the common danger of mistake and abuse that we argue That all Pastors else are but the Bishops Curates is a Doctrine that declares the heavy charge and account of the Bishops and tends much to the ease of the Presbyters minds if it could be proved If by Curates you mean such as have not directly by Divine obligation the Cure of Souls but onely by the Bishops Deligation But if the Office of a Presbyter be not of Divine Right and so if they be not the Curates of Christ and Pastors of the Church none are And for the ancient use of it we find not that it was so from the beginning And as there 's difference between the ancient Bishops of one single Church and a Diocesan that hath many hundreds so is there between their Curates But why will ye not yeeld so much as to change the word Sunday into the Lords Day when you know that the later is the name used by the holy Ghost in Scripture and commonly by the Ancient Writers of the Church and more becoming Christians Just. Martyr speaking to Infidels tells how they called the day and not how Christians called it All he saith is that on Sunday that is so called by the Heathens the Christians hold their Meetings see the usage of the Church in this point in August Cont. Faustum Manich. lib. 18. cap. 5. Singing of Psalms in Meeter is no part of the Lyturgy and so no part of our Commission Repl. If the word Lyturgy signifie the publick worship God forbid you should exclude the singing of Psalms And sure you have no fitter way of singing then in Meeter When these and all Prayers conceived by private men as you call the Pastors whether prepared or extemporary and by purity of reason Preaching are cast out what will your Lyturgy be We hope you make no question whether singing Psalms and Hymnes were part of the Primitive Lyturgy And seeing they are set forth and allowed to be sung in all Churches of all the People together why should they be denyed to be part of the Lyturgy we understand not the reason of this N. 13. 14. we suppose you grant by passing them by The Phrase is such c. The Church in her Prayers uses no more offensive Phrase then Saint Paul uses when he writes to the Corinthians Galatians and others calling them in general the Churches of God sanctified in Christ Jesus by vocation Saints amongst whom notwithstanding there were many who by their known sins which the Apostle endeavoured to amend in them were not properly such yet he gives the denomiation to the whole from the greater part to whom in Charity it was due and puts the rest in minde what they have by their Baptisme undertaken to be and what they professe themselves to be and our Prayers and the Phrase of them surely supposes no more then that they are Saints by calling sanctified in Christ Jesus by their Baptisme admitted into Christs Congregation and so to be reckoned Members of that Society till either they shall separate themselves by wilful Schisme or be separated by Legal Excommunication which they seem earnestly to desire and so do we Repl. But is there not a very great difference between the Titles given to the whole Church as you say from the greater part as the truth is from the better part though it were the lesse and the Titles given to individual members where there is no such reason We will call the Field a Corn-field though their be much Tares in it because of the better part which denominateth But we will not call every one of these Tares by the name of Corn. When we speak of the Church we will call it holy as Paul doth but when we speak to Simon Magus we will not call him holy but say Thou art in the Gall of bitterness and the bond of Iniquity and hast no part or lot in this matter c. we will not perswade the People that every notorious Drunkard Fornicator Worldling c. that is buryed is a Brother of whose Resurrection to Life Eternal we have sure and certain hope and all because you will not Excommunicate them We are glad to hear of your desire of such Discipline But when shall we see more then desire and the Edge of it be turned from those that fear sinning to those that fear it not Sect. 1. The Connexion of the parts of our Lyturgy is conformable to the example of the Churches of God before us and have as much dependance as is usually to be seen in many Petitions of the same Psalm And we conceive the Order and Method to be excellent and must do so till they tell us what that Order is which Prayers ought to have which is not done here Repl. There are two Rules of Prayer one is the Nature of the things compared in matter and order with nature and necessity The other is the revealed Will of God in his Word in General the holy Scripture more Especially the Lords Prayer The Lyturgy for the greatest part of the Prayers for dayly use is confused by which soever of these you measure it You seem much to honour the Lords Prayer by your frequent use of it or part of it we beseech you dishonour it not Practically by denying it for matter and order to be the onely ordinary and perfect Rule we know about particular Administrations where it is but certain Select Requests that we are to put up suited to the particular subject and occasion we cannot follow the whole Method of the Lords Prayer which containeth the heads of all the parts where we are not to take in all the parts we cannot take them in that order But that none of all your Prayers should be formed to that perfect Rule that your Letany which is the comprehensive
of our dear Brother here departed We therefore commit his body to the ground in sure and certain hope of resurrection to eternal life These words cannot in truth be said of persons living and dying in open and notorious sins The first Prayer We give thee hearty thanks for that it hath pleased â—â—ee to deliver this our Brother out of the miseries of this 〈◊〉 world c. That we with this our Brother and all other departed in the true Faith of the holy Name may have our perfect Confirmation and Eliss These words may harden the wicked and are inconsistent with the largest rational charity The last Prayer That when we depart this life we may rest in him as our hope is this our Brother deth These words cannot be used with respect to those persons who have not by their actual repentance given any ground for the hope of their blessed estate Of the thanksgiving of women after Child-birth commonly called Churching of Women The woman shall come unto the Church and there shall kneel down in some convenient place nigh unto the place where the Table stands and the Priest standing by her shalt say c. In regard that the womans knâ—eling near the Table is in many Churches inconvenient we desire that these words may be left out that the Minister may perform that service either in the Deâ—k or Pulpit Rubrick Then the Priest shall say this Psalm 121. O Lord save this woman thy servant Ans. which puttteth her trust in thee Exception This Psalm seems not to be so pertinent as some other viz as Psal. 113. and Psal. 128. It may fall out that a woman may come to give thanks for a child born in Adultery or Fornication and therefore we desire that something may be required of her by way of profession of her humiliation as well as of her Thanksgiving Last Rubr. The woman that comes to give Thanks must offer the accustomed offerings This may seem too like a Jewish purification rather then a Christian Thanksgiving The same Rubrick And if there be a Communion it is convenient that she receive the holy Communion We desire this may be interpreted of the duly qualified for a scandalous sinner may come to make this Thanksgiving Thus have we in all humble pursuance of his Majesties most gracious endeavours for the publike weal of this Church drawn up our Thoughts and Desires in this weighty Affair which we humbly offer to His Majesties Commissioners for their serious grave Consideration wherein we have not the least thought of depraving or reproaching the Book of Common-Prayer but a sincere desire to contribute our endeavours towards the healing the distempers and as soon as may be reconciling the minds of Brethren And inasmuch as his Majesty hath in his gracious Declaration and Commission mentioned new forms to be made and suted to the several parts of Worship We have made a considerable Progress therein and shâ—ll by Gods assistance offer them to the Reverend Commissioners with all convenient speed And if the Lord shall graciously please to give a blessing to these our endeavours We doubt not but the peace of the Church will be thereby setled the hearts of Ministers and people comforted and composed and the great Mercy of Unity and Stability to the immortal Honor of our most dear Soveraign bestowed upon us and our posterity after us To the most Reverend Archbishop Bishops And the Reverend their ASSISTANTS Commissioned by his Majesty to treat about the Alteration of the Book of COMMON-PRAYER Most Reverend Fathers and Reverend Brethren WHen we received your Papers and were told that they contained not onely an Answer to our Exceptions against the present Liturgie but also several Concessions wherein you seem willing to joyn with us in the Alteration and Reformation of it Our Expectations were so far raised as that we promised our selves to find your Concessions so considerable as would have greatly conduced to the â—ealing of our much-to-be-lamented Divisions the setling of the Nation in Peace and the satisfaction of tender Consciences according to his Majesties most gracious Declaration and his Royal Commission in pursuance thereof But having taken a survey of them we finde our selves exceedingly disappointed and that they will fall far short of attaining those happy Ends for which this Meeting was first designed as may appear both by the paâ—city of the Concessions and the inconsiderableness of them they being for the most part Verbal and Literal rather then Real and Substantial for in them you allow not the laying aside of the reading of the Apocrypha for Lessons though it shut out some hundreds of Chapters of Holy Scripture and sometimes the Scripture it self is made to give way to the Apocryphal Chapters You plead against the addition of the Doxologie unto the Lords Prayer You give no liberty to omit the too frequent repetition of Gloria Patri nor of the Lords Prayer in the same publick Service nor do you yeild that the Psalms be read in the new Translation nor the word Priest to be changed for Minister or Presbyter though both have been yeilded unto in the Scotish Liturgie You grant not the omission of the Responsals no not in the Letany it self though the Petitions be so framed as the People make the Prayer and not the Minister nor to read the Communion-Service in the Desk when there is no Communion but in the late Form instead thereof it is enjoyned to be done at the Table though there be no Rubrick in the Common-Prayer-Book requiring it You plead for the Holiness of Lent contrary to the Statute You indulge not the omission of any one Ceremony You will force men to kneel at the Sacrament and yet not put in that excellent Rubrick in the v. and vi of Edw. 6. which would much conduce to the satisfaction of many that scruple it And whereas divers Reverend Bishops and Doctors in a Paper in print before these unhappy Wars began yeilded to the laying aside of the Cross and the making many material alterations you after twenty years sad calamities and Divisions seem unwilling to grant what they of their own accord then offered You seem not to grant that the clause of the fourth Commandment in the Common-Prayer-Book The Lord blessed the seventh day should be altered according to the Hebr. Exod. 20. The Lord blessed the Sabbath day You will not change the word Sunday into the Lords Day nor adde any thing to make a difference between Holy-days that are of Humane Institution and the Lords Day that is questionless of Apostolical practice You will not alter Deadly Sin in the Letany into Heynous Sin though it hints to us that some sins are in their own nature Venial nor that Answer in the Catech. of Two Sacraments onely generally necessary to salvation although it intimates that there are other New Testaments Sacraments though Two onely necessary to Salvation You speak of singing Davids Psalms allowed by Authority by
abler Brethren If there had been a stated Form before imposed on the Churches what room could there be for this course And even this much seems but a caution made newly upon some late abuse of Prayer The same we say de Concil Malevit Can. 12. if they were but a prudentioribus tractatae vel comprobatae in Synodo new Prayers might by any man at any time be brought in which sheweth they had no such stated publick Lyturgy as is now pleaded for and even this seemeth occasioned by Pelagianism which by this caution they would keep out We hope your omission of our eighth Desire for the use of the new Translation intimateth your Grant that it shall be so But we marvel then that we find among your Concessions the alteration of no part but the Epistles and Gospels As they would have no Saints dayes observed by the Church so no Apocriphal Chapter read in the Church but upon such a reason as would exclude all Sermons as well as Apocripha viz. because the holy Scriptures contain in them all things necessary either in Doctrine to be believed or in duty to be practised If so why so many unnecessary Sermons why any more but reading of Scriptures if notwithstanding their sufficiency Sermons be necessary there is no reason why these Apocriphal Chapters should not be as useful most of them containing excellent Discourses and Rules of morality it is heartily to be wished that Sermons were as good if their fear be that by this means those Books may come to be of equal esteem with the Canon they may be secured against that by the title which the Church hath put upon them calling them Apocriphal and it is the Churches Testimony which teacheth us this difference and to leave them out were to cross the Practise of the Church in former Ages Repl. We hoped when our desires were delivered in writing they would have been better observed and understood we asked not that no Apocriphal Chapter may be read in the Church but that none may be read as Lessons For so the Chapters of holy Scripture there read are called in the Booâ— and to read them in the same place under the same Title without any sufficient note of distinction or notice given to the People that they are not Canonical Scripture they being also bound with our Bibles is such a temptation to the vulgar to take them for Gods Word as doth much prevail and is like to do so still And when Papists second it with their confident affirmations that the Apocriphal Books are Canonical well refelled by one of you the R. Reverend Bishop of Durham we should not needlesly help on their success If you cite the Apocripha as you do other human Writings or read them as Homilies when and where there is reason to read such we spake not against it To say that the People are secured by the Churches calling them Apocripha is of no force till experience be proved to be disregardable and till you have proved that the Minister is to tell the People at the reading of ever such Chapter that it is but Apocriphal and that the People all understand Greek so well as to know what Apocriphal signifieth The more sacred and honourable are these Dictates of the holy Ghost recorded in Scripture the greater is the sin by reading the Apocripha without sufficient distinction to make the People believe that the Writings of man are the Revelation and Laws of God And also we speak against the reading of the Apocripha as it excludeth much of the Canonical Scriptures and taketh in such Books in their steads as are commonly reputed fabulous By thus much you may see how you lost your Answer by mistaking us and how much you will sin against God by denying our desires That the Minister should not read the Communion Service at the Communion Table is not reasonable to demand since all the Primitive Church used it and if we do not observe that Golden Rule of the venerable Council of Nice let antient Customs prevail till reason plainly requires the contrary we shall give offence to sober Christians by a causless departure from Catholick usage and a greater advantage to enemies of our Church then our Brethren I hope would willingly grant The Priest standing at the Communion Table seemeth to give us an invitation to the holy Sacrament and minds us of our duty viz. to receive the holy Communion some at least every Sunday and though we neglect our duty it is fit the Church should keep her standing Repl. We doubt not but one place in it self is as lawful as another but when you make such differences as have misleading intimations we desire it may be forborn That all the Primitive Church used when there was no Communion in the Sacrament to say Service at the Communion Table is a crude Assertion that must have better proof before we take it for convincing And it is not probable because they had a Communion every Lords day And if this be not your meaning you say nothing to the purpose To prove they used it when there was a Communion is no proof that they used it when there was none And you your selves disuse many things more Universally practised then this can at all be fairly pretended to have bin The Council of Nice gives no such golden Rule as you mention A Rule is a general applyable to particular Cases The Council onely speakes of one particular Let the ancient Custom continue in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria have the Power of them all The Council here confirmeth this particular Custom but doth not determine in general of the Authority of Custom That this should be called a Catholick usage shewes us how partially the word Catholick is sometime taken And that this much cannot be granted us lest we advantage the Enemies of the Church doth make us wonder whom you take for its Enemies and what is that advantage which this will give them But we thank you that here we find our selves called Brethren when before we are not so much as spoken to but your speech is directed to some other we know not whom concerning us Your reason is that which is our reason to the contrary you say the Priest standing at the Communion Table seems to give us an invitation to the Holy Communion c. What! when there is no Sacrament by himself or us intended no warning of any given no Bread and Wine prepared Be not deceived God is not mocked Therefore we desire that there may be no such Service at the Table when no Communion is intended because we would not have such grosse dissimulation used in so Holy things as thereby to seem as you say to invite Guests when the Feast is not prepared and if they came we would turn them empty away Indeed if it were to be a private Masse and the Priest were to receive alone for want of Company
Subject In the first he exercises his judicium discretionis in order to a publick Act. In the second he exerciseth a publick Judgement When the question is what order pro tempore is fittest in Circumstantials for this present Congregation the proper Presbyters or Pastors of that Congregation are the Directive Judges by Gods appointment 3. The Magistrate is Ruler of these Pastors as he is of the Physicians Philosophers and other Subjects He may make them such general Rules especially for restraint to goe by as may not destroy the exercise of their own Pastoral power As he may forbid a Physitian to use some dangerous Medicine on his Subjects and may punish him when he wilfully killeth any of them But may not on that pretence appoint him what and how and when and to whom he shall administer and so become Physician himself alone 4. When the question is Who shal be excluded from the Communion of a particular Church The Pastors of that Church or Congregation are the first proper Judges 5. When the question is Who shall be excluded from or received into the Communion of all the associated Churches of which we are naturally capable of Communion The associated Pastors or Bishops of these Churches in Synods are Judges Beyond this there are no Judges 6. When the question is Whether the Laws of Magistrates or Canons of Bishops are agreeable or not to the Word of God and so the obedience is lawful or unlawful the Consciences of each individual Subject is the Judge per judicium discretionis as to his own practice And if men had not this judgement of discerning but must act upon absolute implicite obedience then first man were ruled as unreasonable Secondly the Magistrate were made a God or such a Leviathan as Hobbs describeth him Thirdly And then all sin might lawfully be committed if commanded But we are assured none of this is your sense Sect. 5. These Rules and Canons for decency made and urged by Superiours are to be obeyed by Inferiours till it be made as clear that now they are not bound to obey as it is evident in general that they ought to obey Superiours for if the exemption from obedience be not as evident as the Command to obey it must needs be sin not to obey Repl. To your third Rule we adde It is first considerable what the thing is and then how it is apprehended if it be really lawful and well commanded and to be obeyed it is no ignorance doubt or errour of the Subject that can exempt him from the duty of obeying But it may ensnare him in a certainty of sinning whether he obey or disobey For as God commandeth him to obey and also not to do that which man commandeth when God forbiddeth it So he obligeth the erronious first to lay down his errors and so to obey But if a thing be forbidden of God and commanded of man and one man erroniously thinks it lawful and that he should obey and another is in doubt between both it is neither a duty nor lawful for either of them here to obey For mans errour changeth not Gods Laws nor disobligeth himself from obedience But this mans duty is both to lay by that errour and to refuse obedience But if the question be only of the order of such a persons duty We answer If the thing be really lawful and obedience a duty then he that doubteth or erreth should if possible suddenly lay by his errours or doubt and so obey But if that cannot be he should first goe about the fittest means for his better information till he be resolved and so obey And so on the contrary if really the thing commanded be unlawful if he be sure of it he must resolve against it if he hesitate he is not therefore allowed to do a thing forbidden because he is ignorant For his ignorance is supposed culpable it self but he is first to consult and use the best means for his Instruction till he know the truth and in the mean time to suspend his Act. But yet because of humane frailty between several faults we must consider when we cannot avoid all as we would in what order most safely to watch and to avoid them And so when I have done my best and cannot discern whether a Command be just and the thing lawful or not If it hath the face of Idolatry Blasphemy or some hâ—inous Sin that is commanded and our disobedience have the appearance but of an effect of involuntary Ignorance it is more excusable in us to fear the greater sin and so to suspend till we are better satisfied than to do that which we suspect to be so hainous a Sin though indeed it prove no sin So on the contrary if our obedience be like to bring Infamy or Calamity on the Church and our Obedience appear to be but about a very small sin if we doubt of it it is more excuseable to obey than to disobey though both be faulty supposing the thing to be indeed unlawful and we discerne it not So that your Rule of obeying where you are not as sure c. Is an unsure Rule unless as we have fullier cautioned it Sect. 6. Pretence of Conscience is no exemption from obedience for the Law as long as it is a Law certainly binds to obedience Rom. 13. Ye must needs be subject and this pretence of a tender or gainsaying Conscience cannot abrogate the Law since it can neither take away the Authority of the Law-maker nor make the matter of the Law in it self unlawful Besides if pretence of Conscience did exempt from obedience Laws were useless whosoever had not list to obey might pretend tenderness of Conscience and be thereby set at liberty which if once granted Anarchy and Confusion must needs follow Repl. To Rule 4. Neither pretence of Conscience nor real Errour of Conscience exempteth from the Obligation to obey though sometime it may so ensnare as that obeying shall become of the two the greater sin so also real Errour or pretence of Conscience will justifie no man for obeying when it is by God forbidden Sect. 7. Though Charity will move to pitty and relieve those that are truly perplexed or Scrupulous yet we must not break Gods Command in Charity to them and therefore we must not perform publick Services undecently or disorderly for the case of tender consciences Repl. O that you would but do all that God alloweth you yea that he hath commanded you for these ends how happy would you make your selves and these poor afflicted Churches But as to the instance of your Rule we answer 1. VVhen the indecency and disorder is so smal as that it will not crosse the ends so much as our disobedience would we are here so far more comfortable and peaceable than you as that we would even in Gods worship do some things indecent and disorderly rather than disobey And so should you do rather than destroy your