to be added to their Liturgy But further Mr. S. B. doth in effect grant they had such a Liturgy for he conceives p. 52. they strictly kept to that way and method for their ordinary worship and administring the Sacraments which were in use in Gregories time and he owns That S. Basil is here proving three words of his Doxology viz. with the Holy Spirit by that which Gregory taught them Therefore that which S. Basil refers to must be something more than an arbitrary way and method it must be something fixed and invariable the words of which as well as the method had never been altered since Gregory's time otherwise he could never have proved three words by appealing to this way of Administration which Gregory left them It was also a part of public Worship he would prove Orthodox viz. a Doxology and S. Basil saith Gregory and he had the same manner of Doxology as any man who would enquire might easily be satisfied out of the Traditions kept in that Church Baside Sp. Sanct. cap. 29. p. 221. So that in that Church there were some known Traditions which preserved the very Form and words of Gregory's Doxology to which he appeals and no doubt these Traditions were written Records because they might so easily be found upon search and 't is probable he means they were preserved in their Liturgy And 't is certain he could never have appealed thus if at Naecaesarea they had only kept Gregory's method in their Administration but varied the words every day Mr. S. B's last refuge is to make S. Basil contradict himself in another place of his Works where he saith He gives a very different account of these Naeocaesareans viz. in his 63. Ep. for when they objected the difference between his way of Singing and Gregories he asks them By what testimonies they will make this difference evident since they had preserved nothing of Gregory ' s until that time But first It will not easily be believed that Mr. S. B. expounds S. Basil aright when he makes one place of his Works directly contradict another Mr. S. B. will sooner be suspected of a misrepresentation than this excellent Father of a contradiction And 2dly These two places may fairly be reconciled The former Quotation lib. de Sp. Sanct. refers to a whole Liturgy the latter Ep. 63. relates only the different manner of Singing which consisting chiefly in sounds could not properly be set down in any Rubric but must be conveyed by constant and invariable practice down from Gregory's Age their Rubric might direct the use of the Psalms but not the particular manner of singing them If they alledge They sung them now exactly as their Forefathers did in Gregory ' s time he asks How they can prove a practical thing wherein their Rubric was silent to be the same it was so many years before Doubtless no way but by making it appear they had varied from Gregory's practice in nothing and here S. Basil takes occasion to mind them who were so zealous for their way of singing in how much greater matters of Piety and Morality they had varied from Gregory's practice For he used reverent gestures in prayer he would not Swear nor call his Brother Fool c. and these are things enjoyned by Holy Scripture And while nothing of Gregory's Manners in these considerable Instances was to be found among them it was unreasonable in them to contend with him for a mode of singing not determined it seems in Gregory's Liturgy and so only to be proved by their fancy that it was in use in Gregory's days So that by this Rhetorical phrase that nothing of Gregory ' s was preserved S. Basil did not mean nothing of his Doctrin nor of his Liturgy but of his Usages and Manners in the greatest and best things viz. his Practices grounded on Holy Scripture and since the Manner of Singing was a practice also their failing in greater matters made it very suspicious they had varied in that which was less As for Mr. S. B's Objection That S. Basil cites not Gregory's Rubric or Liturgy but Scripture for these Observances it is easily answered because those acts of Piety and Morality are not the proper Subject for a Rubric but are expresly enjoyned in Gods Word and that makes his Argument the stronger and their tenaciousness the more unreasonable For S. Basil at most differed from S. Gregory but in a supposed rite or mode of Singing but they differed from that holy Bishop in material duties positively required by Holy Scripture and till they corrected these Variations in their practices it was very undecent for them to quarrel at him for a slighter difference And now I hope I have rescued this holy Father from the pretended contradiction and sufficiently proved there was a Liturgy left by Gregory and invariably used till S. Basil's time § 5. Pag. 55. From the prescribed Hymns writ at least as early as the beginning of this Century and rejected by Paulus Samosatenus mentioned by Euseb lib. 7. cap. 24. it is certain they used Forms of Praise in their public Worship and from parity of Reason I argued the probability of their praying by Forms also Mr. S. B. instead of giving a solid Reason as he hath often been desired why they might not pray to God as well as praise him by Forms 1st Pretends he is not sensible this way of arguing is cogent But I think that Argument to which he can give no solid Answer and which puts him into a fit of Railing is very cogent For 2dly He rudely falls upon my Character and Qualifications and exposes me for conceiting my Tautologies to be graceful Flights I might in return to this enquire into his Qualifications for that Office he once assumed of going about with the vile Regulators of Corporations in the last Reign to procure the choice of such Members as would take away the Penal Laws and Test and level the way for Popery to come in under the mask of Toleration But I will be content to vindicate my self and must tell him I have so much skill both in Liturgies and Singing that I know Hymns Psalms and Praises are a large and essential part of all Liturgies and so mixed with Prayers that it is impossible to separate them and I am so far from knowing any difference between Praying and Singing that I can sing a Petition as well as a Thanksgiving and so can Mr. S. B's Friends at their Meetings where they sing Psalms of Prayer as well as Praise The Lutheran Protestants sing all their Prayers some of our Anthems also are Collects and we have musical Notes adapted to the Litany as well as to the Te Deum We read many of our Praises and sing some of our Prayers And many of the Dissenting Pastors use such variety of Tone in their Prayer that if it did not want regularity it might be called Singing and if a skilful man heard their inartificial Modulation and odd Cadencies
in too much haste for an Examiner otherwise he would not have asked how 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes to be a proof of Liturgies he should have said of one Form of Praise If he will stay for my answer I will tell him Tertullian proves That Christians must not go to Pagan shews because of the indecency of using the same words and actions in a vain Theatre and at the Church to clap those hands to a Stage-player which had been lifted up to God in prayer to give testimony to a Gladiator with that mouth which had pronounced Amen in the Sacrament to say World without end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so 't is in the best Copies de spect p. 83. Here is a plain comparison between Words and Actions to be used in the Church and in the Theatre by persons who went to both places they clapped and lifted up the same hands they shouted and said Amen with the same mouth to very different objects and on occasions that did no way agree In the Theatre they said in a solemn Form of acclamation World without end to a mortal yea to a wicked man that is to Commodus the Emperor for Xiphiline notes the Romans a little before this had used those words in a solemn Exclamation to Commodus Epist Dion in Com. p. 383. But in the Church these very words were in a Form of praise to God and Christ as out of Irenaeus and Clemens Romanus I noted before wherefore it would be little less than Blasphemy to apply the words of a Christian Hymn proper to an Eternal Being unto a lewd mortal Man Thus Tertullian argues and if his Comparison be truly made as it was a Form used by all the people at the Theatre so it must be in some Form which the People repeated at Church that is probably in the Gloria Patri because it still stands in that part of this Hymn which the People say but it serves my purpose as well since it must be a Form said by the People as if it were the end of any other Hymn But he wonders that the Africans who belonged to the Latin Church should say the Gloria Patri in Greek Whereas it doth not follow from Tertullian that they said it in Greek his Argument is as good if they had said it in Latin Only the Romans used many solemn Forms in Greek both in their Theatres and their Temples and Xiphiline sets down this in Greek so that probably Tertullian refers to that passage in the Historian and only means it was used in Greek in the Theatre He might also read it in Greek in Clemens Romanus and in Irenaeus and so cite it in Greek but that will no more prove the African Service was in Greek than that the Roman or Gallican Churches used to say it in Greek in Clemens or Irenaeus times Only from this and many other Greek words left uninterpreted in Tertullian and other African Fathers we may be sure the African People knew some Greek especially short and common Forms and Phrases Pag. 34. Mr. Cl. had produced three places of Tertullian to justifie the Extempore way all which I answered For the two first Mr. S. B. refers the Reader to Mr. Cl. because I said so little concerning them though I said so much indeed that he is not able to answer it nor clear Mr. Cl. who is evidently mistaken in referring that Singing which was used after the Love-feast to the Christians public Devotions 'T is known that they were always fasting till after their Morning solemn Service of which this Singing could be no part because it was after the Common Meal Secondly I shewed there is nothing in Tertullian which hinders us from believing that the Hymns made de proprio ingenio were composed at home and if so then they were Forms as well as those taken out of Scripture Thirdly The use of private Composures in an Inspired Age will not justifie the use of them now As to the second place I proved expresly out of Tertullian and S. Cyprian that the Christians did often look down in Prayer and so shewed Mr. Cl. was mistaken when from their constant looking up to Heaven in prayer he argued they used no Books to pray by Which I think is as full an Answer to Mr. Cl. as can be desired And the true Reason why Mr. S. B. doth examine nothing of all this is because he could find no evasion Pag. 35. But Mr. Cl's main proof for Extempore Prayer is Thirdly from Tertullian's saying they prayed de pectore which phrase I shewed in four pages was capable of several more proper Interpretations Mr. S. B. replies not to any of these Proofs but diverts his Reader by telling him what he conceives and apprehends to be Tertullian's meaning First He resets to a place of S. Paul 1 Tim. ii 8. where though the Apostles first words Lifting up holy hands may explain Manibus expansis c. yet how without wrath and doubting should expound Tertullian's praying Bare-head and without a Monitor I cannot imagine Secondly He would explain this place by another in the same Author a few Lines after which speaks of a Prayer proceeding from a chaste Body an innocent Soal and from the Holy Spirit Yet here again a chaste Body and an innocent Soul doth not explain praying with Lifted-up hands and a Bare-head and none but the worst of Enthusiasts will pretend that a Prayer out of our own Breast is the same with one proceeding from the Holy Spirit Besides if his bad Edition do not mislead him he is much to blame in reading and pointing this place majorem hostiam quà m ipse mandavit orationem de carne pudicâ c. which makes the sense or non-sense to lie that the good Christian offers a greater Sacrifice than God hath commanded But the true reading is Ei offero opimam majorem hostiam quam ipse mandavit orationem de carne pudicâ de animâ innocenti de Spiritu Sancto profectam Apol c. 30. He speaks here of the Lords Prayer the very same Prayer which Christ commanded which was a greater and better Sacrifice than any that the Heathen offered when it was offered up with a chaste Body a holy Soul and those devout affections which are excited by the holy Ghost Now let him try his faculty how the purity innocence and devotion of Christians saying the Lords Prayer a Form commanded by Christ can prove that praying out of the breast in praying for the Emperors in the former place signifies Praying extempore as he and Mr. Cl. pretend I will only add to my former Exposition that the Breast signifies the Memory these Notes A Monitor is properly to help memory but the Christians who could say their Forms by heart or out of their breast needed no Monitor as the Pagans did in reciting their Forms So of a person fixed in the Memory Persius Sat. 5. saith sinuoso in pectore fixi And Socrates clearly uses Tertullian's
James's Liturgy not above 70 year according to S. Hierom after Cyprian's time tells us so early that he had this and other mystical Forms from the Tradition of his Fathers The Author of the Constitutions who writ as I have shewed in the middle of the next Century hath also this Preface in the Eucharistical Office which was so old then that it challenged an Apostolical Original And since the Form was so ancient and not only in these Churches but in those which followed the Liturgies of S. Basil and S. Chrysostom and in the West the same words were used it is evident the Form must be so very old that none presumed to alter it Let Mr. S. B. before he despise this Evidence give an instance of some Extempore or arbitrary Prayer or Exhortation wherein so many distant Churches did so universally or could so exactly agree till then his Harangues about a possibility of exhorting or praying in various words is nothing to the purpose Nor is his Objection material that Cyprian doth not speak of it as being used in the Eucharist For he speaks of it as used so oft as the Priest and people met at solemn Prayer that is daily and he saith § 13. that they then received the Eucharist every day wherefore this Preface was used daily in the Eucharist where all the Liturgies and where all the Fathers Cyril Ambrose Augustin Chrysostom c. expresly say it was used yea S. Chrysostom reckons it up as one eminent part of the Liturgy in Coloss hom 3. Tom. 4. pag. 106. So that this Preface which also gives name to the Lauds that follow it was a part of the Communion Office in Form as early at least as S. Cyprian's time and we have proved the Lords Prayer was so also which is a good step toward a prescribed Liturgy both these being always and invariably used Pag. 46. The next Quotation was not produced for a more evident proof of Liturgies than the Preface Lift up your hearts c. as he fuggests but to shew the agreement of the African and Greek Churches in another Form Give holy things to the holy The Examiner alters the main word on which my Observation was grounded and cites this place Sanctum quoque jubeamur c. but my Edition 〈…〉 lart Genev. 1593. reads it Sanctum quotidiè jubeamur c. which implies there was a daily charge given to the Christians who then daily received the Eucharist to give holy things only to the holy And S. Cyprian doth not cite the Gospel Math. vii 6. for the charge it self but only he shews it was grounded on that piece of the Gospel Give not that which is holy to the Dogs And I hope Mr. S. B. doth not think this piece of the Gospel was every day read to them therefore S. Cyprian refers to a daily charge in the Eucharistical Office in Africa and there being the same charge found in all the ancient Eastern Liturgies as I shewed it shews an agreement between the Greek and African Offices which was the only thing to be proved and which proves Forms usedin both these ancient Churches Pag. 47. Again I did not pretend to find a Christian Litany in the same Tract but the general heads of one the words of which as I noted they concealed from Pagans but the resemblance between Tertullian's and Cyprian's heads and those in the Litanies whose Original is so ancient we cannot positively assign it This I say is at least a probable proof they were then in Litanick Forms especially if with S. Chrysostom we believe these Forms were made at first by Inspired persons preserved by some and imitated by following Ages with no more variation than must be occasioned by the difference of time and distance of places I grant this is but probable Evidence but in these early times we must be content with such and though Mr. S. B. can see no strength in this way of arguing for Liturgies yet he discerns a mighty strength in Mr. Cl's most remote Conjectures for extempore Prayer So he doth in that of Cyprian's Epistle to P. Lucius wherein there is an account that they at Carthage prayed for Pope Lucius in his banishment and this in their Prayers and Sacrifices whence Mr. Cl. infers they were at liberty to put up-any occasional Petition in the Eucharist and so could not be confined to a set Form The weakness of which Inference I shewed by observing 1st That these are not the Petitions put up for us by Lucius but the general purport of them described in a Letter 2ly That a constant liberty for inferior Ministers in this Age when Inspiration is ceased which is that Mr. Cl. would have can by no means follow from the Chief Primate of Africa's making a new Petition or two in the times while Inspiration continued 3dly Nor a daily liberty in ordinary cases be inferred from some variety on so extraordinary occasion as the exile of the chief Patriarch of the West For if one of the most eminent Bishops at Liberty in the late Reign had put up one or two new Petitions for his Seven Brethren in the Tower none could infer from thence that all our Clergy were always at liberty to pray in what words they pleafed As to Mr. Cl's Note That if this had been the African Form for Confessors Cyprian need not have told Lucius of it I replied The distance between Rome and Africa was so great that Lucius might probably be ignorant of that Churches Forms but however this Letter is rather to acquaint Lucius they did pray for him than to give him an account of the very words Mr. S. B. saith very little to all this but with respect to my 2d Answer he scoffingly reflects upon my supposing a Primate had more liberty than an inferior Clergy-man as if this liberty were to be exercised only by such as could climb up to the top of Ecclesiastical Dignity and not in proportion to mens Gift To which I shall only say That though there be some such as Mr. S. B. who have extraordinary Abilities and are not advanced according to their merit to be Governors of the Church the public Peace requires these Persons to forbear exercising these Abilities unless their Superiors command them for even in the very Apostles Age God himself ordered the spirit of the Prophets to be subject to the Prophets to prevent confusion in the Churches of the Saints 1 Cor. xiv 32 33. The like proof for Extempore Prayer is that our of Cypr. epist ad Mos Max. which is only the general account Cyprian gives these Confessors in a Letter of prayers made for them but there is no intimation the Petitions were Extempore So that they must either refer to the common Form for Confessors or some Form made by this great Primate on this great occasion but a daily liberty for the inferior Priests to vary then doth not follow from this place and if all the Priests in
The Examiner Examined BEING A VINDICATION OF THE HISTORY OF LITURGIES By T. C. D. D. LONDON Printed for Robert Clavell at the Peacock at the West-end of S. Pauls 1691. Imprimatur Jan. 29. 1690 1. C. Alston R. P. D. HEN. Episc Lond. à Sacris The Examiner Examined CHAP. I. Of the Title and Preface § 1. AFter my Second Part of the History of Liturgies had been Public near Six Months comes out An Examination of Dr. C's Scholastical History of Liturgies by S. B. Which Title was designed to make the Book look like and pass for an Answer to both Parts which consist of 600 Pages whereas the Examination reaches no further than to 76 Pages of the First Part and in that compass 23 whole Pages and a great part of 10 more pass Unexamined so that there is an odd Synechdoche in this General Title I will not enquire whether Mr. S. B. be so Eminent that all Men know him by that Cypher or so obscure that he may be concealed under those two Letters Only I wish when he design'd to garnish his Title-page with Causabon's Sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he had not fixed upon his account of the remote and general meaning of that word and purposely omitted the only sense of that word which is proper to our Question which he might have found in the same Page of Causabon That Liturgy signifies a description of the Order for celebrating Divine Offices as in the Liturgies of Peter and James Exercit. pag. 384. § 2. If the Preface were writ by Mr. S. B. it was politicly done to give us his own Character under another Name if it were writ by the Publisher 't is strange that his Friend who tells us His Sayings his Judgment his Wishes yea his very Thoughts should so hastily put out this inconsiderable part of the Controversie without the Authors knowledge But his Zeal to serve a Party in a Critical Juncture and the rare Character he gives of Mr. S. B. will expiate for that seeming Rudeness He tells us Mr. S. B. is a Conformist and it is well the Preface saith so otherwise nothing in the Book discovers it probably he is one of those Mr. Clarkson calls Prudential Conformists who comply to avoid the Lash of the Law but care no more for the Liturgy than the Philosophers of old did for the Vulgars Notions about the Gods Disc of Lit. pag. 19. But the Preface saith He Conforms upon Principles he thinks he can justifie It seems he can Dispute probably of all sides for he justifies Nonconformity in this Tract 'T is said He uses the Liturgy as fully as the Law requires in his public Administrations I wonder how he can justifie that since his Book declares he thinks he can pray better by his own Expressions and there is a Curse upon the Deceiver who hath in his Flock a Male yet offereth to the Lord a corrupt thing Malach. I. 14. He hath tied himself up to an invariable use of the Common-Prayer yet counts them not only Pious but Judicious who will not be so tied up therefore he must now doubt the piety and the prudence of his Subscription I perceive he joyns with Dissenters in their public Worship And I would gladly know how many of them this open allowance of their way hath brought over to joyn with him in the Liturgy He accounts the Established Church a Party and is not wedded to it neither Probably he gave Her his Hand against his Will and thinks the Contract null ab initio He thinks there is somthing to be rectified in every Party but in this Book he finds no faults with one Party and complains of none but the Churches Friends It is not he alone but all Men think that which is good in every Party should be approved and what is not so laid aside or amended But who must be the indifferent Judge over all Parties Mr. S. B. whatever his Friend thinks will never be chosen to this Office The real Conformists will not like a man who writes against Liturgies and the Dissenters will never trust one that reads Common-Prayer 'T is pretended He is sorry to see such an aversion to the general Union of Protestants and that old Animosities are awakned Yet he widens the Breach by increasing the Dissenters ill Opinion of all prescribed Forms which no well ordered Church can want and he defends Mr. Clarkson's Book which first awakned this Controversie after it had slept for many years Perhaps in his Opinion none prejudice the Church of England so much as those who seem most zealous for Her But others see she is far more prejudiced by such as are so indifferent what become of Her that they expose her Constitutions and while they enjoy her Revenues combine with those that are for removing her very Foundations He that states Matters so falsly is no fit Judge how others state their Questions and I shall neither value the Censures or Reflections of one so manifestly partial that he never speaks ill of the Dissenters nor well of the Church He told the Prefacer it seems his Thoughts That in a History of Liturgies notice should have been taken of the various use of the Word and the time it came first to be used in the strict Modern sense as Mr. Cl. hath rightly done This aims at me whom he supposes to have omitted this but I spent Five Pages together from pag. 121 to pag. 125. Part I. in considering the use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and shewing Mr. Carkson had stated the time of its being taken in the Modern sense very falsly Now if he read my First Book over why doth he not confute this If he never read so far Solomon will tell him He that answereth a Matter before he heareth it it is folly and shame to him Prov. XVIII 13. However Mr. S. B. conceives this is not the signification of a Liturgy as used and enjoyned by the Church of England Right for no Man ever said that Liturgy without some Epithet signified a Liturgy enjoyned by this or that Church But it hath from some of the earliest Ages signified a Public Form of Prayer and we have now such an one enjoyned But he thinks that 's proof enough instead of proving the Antiquity of Liturgies in that Sense we should rectifie the Mistakes that have arisen concerning a Liturgy as used and enjoyned in our Church He forgets that Mr. Cl. was the first who gave occasion to prove their Antiquity and the first who questioned it Smectymnuus and all that Party formerly owned them to be 1300 year old and must we let so new so false and so singular an Opinion pass without controul As to rectifying Mistakes Mr. Cl. and Mr. S. B. do not charge the Dissenters with any both of them justifie their way so that it seems the Church alone is mistaken either in using or enjoyning her Liturgy and they would have her give it up for their sakes who would
never make one step towards her for the sake of Peace But Men so wofully mistaken as Mr. Cl. and Mr. S. B. are very unfit to rectifie the practice of this and all other regular Churches since they cannot make out any mistake in this Matter The mistakes lie on the Dissenters side which also had been long since removed if their own Pastors and some of ours had not flattered and supported them in their Errors That false representation of the state of the Question with which the Preface concludes must be charged upon Mr. S. B. who misled his Friend and therefore it shall be considered in the Discourse I have now done with the Armour-bearer and proceed to the Champion who fights against that side under which 't is said he takes double Pay CHAP. II. Of the grounds for Liturgies in Scripture § 1. Pag. 1. MAster S. B. begins with an assurance He hath read my Book and a promise that he will forbear Reflections I have given a Reason already why I doubt the First and his whole Book confutes the Second for it abounds with Reflections not only on my Cause but on my Person my Office my Qualifications c. but they are so groundless I can easily forgive them Pag. 2. But I cannot excuse him for telling his Prefacer and the World that I undertook to prove Liturgies were only and invariably used in the first Three Centuries For this was not needful for me to undertake either to Answer Mr. Cl. who gave me the liberty of the first Five or Six Centuries to prove this Or to carry on my main design which was as I declared in my Introduction to collect in every Century such Testimonies of the Original Use and Antiquity of Liturgies as the Argument needed Now every proof of a Form frequently or constantly used in the Three first Centuries the Ages of Inspiration before the Church was setled tends to illustrate the History of Liturgies which began first by the voluntary use of Forms and by degrees as the Church drew nearer to a Settlement to the constant and invariable use of many Forms even to the use of a whole Liturgy before these Three Centuries were ended Which had so few Writers and those say so little of the Forms themselves that I declared beforehand this Evidence must be made up of particular and probable Proofs all which put together would amount to these Conclusions That Forms were used from the beginning and so were ancient and lawful which some Dissenters deny and that it is very probable whole Liturgies were both prescribed and used before the end of this Period Which is a sufficient foundation for the Evidence in the Fourth Century That when the Church was setled Liturgies were then enjoyned and invariably used I am forced to be the larger in the discovery of this Fallacy because nothing he hath said would look like an Answer if he did not every where repeat this piece of Sophistry and set aside my Proofs only because they did not reach his Point as he had falsly stated it Again He supposes I was only to Answer Mr. Cl. and on that occasion determines what I was to prove and what not He saith Mr. Cl. doth not assert Forms to be intrinsically Evil but some Dissenters do tho this Opinion reflect upon Jesus who taught a Form to his Disciples and Forms being the parts of Liturgy to confute those who condemn all Forms and justifie the foundation of Liturgies in a History of them it is not improper to prove Forms lawful 2ly Mr. Cl. denies not that there were arbitrary and particular Forms of old And did not I disprove all his particular Instances of arbitrary Forms and shew they were constantly used and fixed in every Eminent Church 3dly Mr. Cl. owns the Lords Prayer was used anciently though far otherwise than of late This I considered also proving the use of it as a Form and the annexing it to all solemn Offices as it is used now 4ly He grants divers Churches agreed in a certain Order to administer the several parts of Worship And I proved this Order could be nothing but a prescribed Liturgy Par. II. Chap. 4. pag. 201. Now if he will be answering a Book before he have read it over I cannot help that 5ly Mr. Cl. saith They prayed for the same things but not in the same words But I shewed his Instances were mistaken and that in the same Church many parts of Service were in the same words 6ly Mr. Cl. declares he meant by prescribed Forms such as are imposed on the Minister so as those and no-other must be used without adding detracting or transposing This is indeed the strictest Notion of an enjoyned Liturgy yet I agreed with Mr. Cl. as to this definition only we differed about the time when Forms began to be thus enjoyned he affirmed it was not sooner than the end of the Fifth Century I proved many Forms were invariably used in the first Three Centuries and enjoyned in the Fourth and beginning of the Fifth Centuries which sufficed to confute Mr. Cl. So that Mr. S. B. calls on me to do that which I had done before and though he meddle with nothing but the first Three Centuries where I was only to shew what steps were made towards enjoyned Forms in this strict Sense he most disingenuously brags That my Quotations reach not my Point unless they prove Forms enjoyned in the strictest Sense in these Centuries which were Ages of Inspiration and before the Church was setled Now this bare-faced Fallacy takes away two whole Centuries which Mr. Cl. had freely given me to prove such enjoyned Forms and starts a New Question being designed meerly to prepossess his Reader against all my probable Proofs and all my Instances of the constant use of Forms of all kinds yea against the invariable use of a whole Liturgy under the false pretence That I undertook to prove by every particular Quotation that Forms yea Liturgies were strictly enjoyned throughout these Ages But I appeal to my Introduction to Par. I. pag. 77. and to all my Inferences whether I undertook to do this in this Period or no and the Candid Reader shall judge whether it was necessary for me to do all this to confute Mr. Cl. who said such enjoyned Forms came not in till 200 years after Mr. S. B's Period was ended though after all to compleat my History I have found divers Proofs that shew enjoyned Forms in the strictest sense in these Ages Before I proceed to examine his Particulars I shall requite these general Observations of his by some general Remarks on the proceedings of both my Adversaries First Neither of them hath produced one positive Evidence so much as of the use of arbitrary or extempore Prayer they offer nothing but remote Conjectures and very slender Probabilities for it in this Period Now I have brought express proof of the use of Forms in this time and more as well as clearer Probabilities of
unexceptionable by imitating that Method which God and inspired Ages have set them which is enjoyning Forms taken out of the Psalms and other places of Holy Scripture and out of such ancient Composures as are no way repugnant to it But further I cited six learned Authors in the Margen and two in the Text to prove the Jews anciently had a Liturgy Mr. S. B. knew the thing could not be denied wherefore he politickly pretends It would be too great a diversion to enquire whether their proofs are solid and intimates he could shew that two of my Authors build their proof for some things upon unjustifiable Authorities This is to evade not to answer Surely it was the business of an Examiner to enquire and to say he can do that which he doth not when there was a just occasion for it is an intimation he cannot answer their proofs So that I shall take it for granted the Jews had a Liturgy till the contrary be better made out and refer the Reader to the consequences deduced from that Truth Hist of Lit. pag. 4. and at last Mr. S. B. supposes that Forms might have been of general use among the Jews And then the next question is Whether this way of serving God was abrogated in the New Testament I I gave divers Reasons why such an abrogation was necessary if Christ had disliked that way to which the Jews had been generally and long accustomed and intended to set up a new one He answers that he sees no necessity of such an abrogation to warrant People to address themselves to God in another way for he supposes both ways lawful Now if he grant that First Then the way of stinted Forms is not unlawful nor unsuitable to Gospel-worship Secondly This way was never disliked by Christ nor hath he brought any proof that he instituted any other way Thirdly Therefore it is most likely the Jewish Converts would keep to their old way of stinted Forms and that implies them to be very ancient Fourthly If both ways were now equally lawful yet the Church having chosen and enjoyned the Liturgick way as the most ancient universal and profitable way and rejected the other Her determination makes this way which was only lawful before to become necessary to us till that determination be revoked Pag. 5. But Mr. S. B. foresees a dreadful consequence which he hopes I never thought of from my arguing That the Jews worshiped God acceptably by set Forms and that Christ and his Apostles joyned in that way and never reproved it Ergo Christians now must use none but the Jewish Forms This gives occasion to his pity for those who by Reading learned Books entertain Notions destructive of Christianity I wish this Examiner had read more or writ less for then the World had not been troubled with long Harangues upon his own imaginations He cannot deny the Antecedent all learned Men assert it but this Consequence is a Mormo of his own dressing up which vanishes by considering That when Christ and his Apostles joyned in the Jewish Forms the Temple and Synagogue-worship was the lawful established way of serving God But when the Levitical part of their Religion was altered that part of their Liturgy which related to it became unpracticable to Christians and fell of it self yet still the Psalms and the Moral part of the Jewish Forms suited the Christian Doctrin and our Lord had approved of that way therefore these Forms might be and were retained and imitated by the Primitive Church and they did this the rather to win the Jews who as I noted never objected that Christ or his Apostles or the first Christians had set up a new way of praying and praising God Wherefore to make so many spiteful Reflections upon those great men from whom I borrowed the Antecedent for the shadow of a sham Consequence that no Logick can infer from the premisses discovers neither a Christian spirit nor common Ingenuity For no man who considers will think that Christ and his Apostles joyning in the Jewish worship before it was fully abrogated can oblige us to copy out their whole Service after the Ceremonial Law is dead and long since buried Pag. 6. That Christ did collect his Prayer out of the Jewish Forms and order his Disciples to add it to their other prayers as a badge of their relation to him is too so true and so well proved by variety of learned Men that Mr. S. B. instead of disproving the premisses terrifies us with another dangerous consequence which is that this is a reflection on the infinite wisdom of the Son of God This makes me think of him David speaks of Psal L. 21. who thought wickedly God was even such an one as himself Some men fancy it is a reflection on their gifts and great parts not to be at liberty to shew them in Extempore Composures and will needs apply this to the Blessed Jesus who indeed had the Spirit without measure and was infinitely able to make what new Prayer he pleased Extempore But our Dear Lord designed not on all occasions to shew his infinite ability he came to teach us humility and submission to innocent Establishments and so might judge it more expedient for his Disciples to collect a Prayer out of the practical part of the Jewish Liturgy endited at first by men who had the Spirit of God than to make a new one And if they were really endued with his Spirit who pretend to it they would follow his Example herein and not for ostentation of their imaginary abilities reject our lawful enjoyned Forms disturb our peace and leave our Communion However since it is certain our Lord did collect his Prayer out of the Jewish Forms it is they who make frivolous consequences from hence who reflect upon him not they who relate the Matter of Fact for which doubtless our Saviour had excellent Reasons and far better perhaps than we are able to assign Like to this is his laft frightful consequence That this would prove our Saviour would have his Followers compose Forms only out of the Liturgy of the Jews If he means this of the Ceremonial part of it 't is evidently false for Christ did not collect one Petition from thence if he means from the Moral part of it I see no harm in the consequence at all and it is certain the Primitive Christians did use the Psalms the Hosannah Hallelujah Holy Holy Holy c. and other Old Testament-Forms in their Service which were parts of the Jewish Liturgy But it could never be the intent of Christ to oblige us to collect our whole Liturgy from thence because he taught New Doctrins and instituted new Rites and gave his Apostles a miraculous Gift on purpose to suit new Administrations to that which was New in the Christian Religion and the early agreement of those distant Churches which they planted in these Administrations not only as to the method but the main words of them is a
good evidence That the same Spirit directed them all to appoint Forms from the very beginning § 3. pag. 7. His own loose consequences do not discourage him from censuring me as discoursing too loosly Wherefore having passed by our Saviours Hymn and his Prayer in the Garden clear instances of his choosing allowing and using Forms both of Prayer and Praise He gives our Saviours Prayer on the Cross which I said was probably taken out of Psal xxii as an instance of my loose discoursing asking me Who put the petitions in Form for Christ and obliged him to use no other words I reply to his Insinuation That if my Conjecture be too loose he should and might have confuted it but his not attempting that shews it was close enough To his Question I answer David by the Spirit of Prophecy long before composed this Prayer for Christ as appears by his voluntary choosing of this Form when he could have made a New prayer and if my Examiner will allow he prayed by the Spirit when he used this Form then it is no loose inference to say We may pray by the Spirit in using Forms and to affirm It is no hardship to enjoyn men to serve God in that way which Jesus chose as the best when he was free from all constraint and infinitely more able than any of us to have prayed otherwise In my 8th page I proved by S. Austin and Beza That the Apostles both used and setled Forms and from others that prescribed Forms had been used from the Apostolical times Mr. S. B. I doubt thought this too close and so never offers to answer it But when I had granted the Lords Prayer to be both a Form and a Direction to draw other Forms by And That Liturgies are other words indeed but such as are agreeable to it i. e. to the Lords Prayer both as to the Form and Matter of them The Examiner first adds No to my words and cites them thus Liturgies are No other words c. and then insinuates they are Non-sense and an odd Expression to fall from a learned Doctor But I am sure 't is an odd Trick of a Non-conforming Conformist to put No into the midst of a Sentence to be so greedy of making reflections after his promise to the contrary that he falfies my words to get an opportunity The adding No to Scripture it self may make it non-sense or blasphemy and if I should add it to his Preface and say He is no Conformist he useth not the Liturgy some think I had not done him much wrong though he would no doubt have resented it Well leave out No then here and my sense is plain That Liturgies are other words different in syllables from the Lords Prayer but agreeing to it both as to the Form or method of the Petitions and as to the Subject matter of them which I proved by an induction of particulars pag. 10. to which he doth not vouchsafe any answer But upon my granting the Lords Prayer was a Direction as well as a Form he asks a notable Question and repeats it again pag. 9. viz. Why may not à Minister keeping to the words of the Lords Prayer use other words than those in the Liturgy as well as the Liturgy-men use other words than those in the Lords Prayer this had been close if he had not forgot our Ministers circumstances The Church hath drawn up a Liturgy very carefully following the direction of the Lords Prayer and for such Reasons as he may find in my 2d Part pag. 325 enjoyned all Ministers to use it constantly and they have sincerely I hope consented thereto Now to ask his Question in our case is to ask why every Captain who thinks himself wiser than his superior Officer may not cross the Orders given by his General or a Council of War and give new ones to his own Company He must find out some Reason as New as an Extempore prayer to prove that private Ministers in a setled Church ought to have liberty to do all those Acts which their Governors may do before his Question can concern us or be worth answering To go on Mr. Cl. brought many Authorities to shew that the ancient Christians used the Lords prayer not out of any apprehension that it was enjoyned Math. vi These Quotations I examined particularly and shewed they were not sufficient for his purpose Mr. S. B. who loves not to meddle with reading instead of examining my Answers refers the Reader to examine them himself only among eight Authors he picks out Maldonat whose sense without citing his very words I said was only That we are not always bound to use the very words of the Lords Prayer And Maldonat doth not only say Non his necessariò verbis but ut quotiescunque oramus omnia aut aliqua aut nihil certe his contrarium peteremus However Mr. S. B. conceives his Sense to be That we are not absolutely bound to use those very words at any time Which not only contradicts Maldonat's words but shews my Examiner did not know this Author was a Jesuit and a rigid Papist bound by the Rules of his Church and Order to say so many Paternosters every Day otherwise he could not have asserted this Jesuit so openly turned Fanatick as to affirm in a Book which was to pass the Censors That no man is bound at any time to say a Pater-Noster He follows this with a notable Question which Examiners and some others claim a priviledge to ask viz. If we be not always bound to use the Lords words how we came to be bound to use always other peoples words I reply We of this Church are bound to use the Lords Prayer as often as we use the Liturgy in public and sincere Conformists deliberately bound themselves to use the Lords words and the Churches too in all their public Administrations believing them to be fitter for those occasions than any they can invent How Mr. S. B. came to be bound he knows best perhaps Advantage drew him to do that which he now dislikes but he should have asked this Question before and then he had escaped the Snare of making enquiry after Vows Prov. xx 25. § 4. pag. 8. I had owned there was an extraordinary Gift of Prayer in the Apostles times and long after which I observed none could claim by Scripture in this Age and answered all the places produced by some for this claim in four or five Pages To which Mr. S. B. gives no Answer but is very large in giving us his own Notion of the Gift of Prayer which he defines An ability to represent the sentiments of a Soul duly affected with the general and particular matter of prayer in suitable Expressions proper to beget and improve such affections and resentments in those who shall hear and joyn in the use of them to that purpose A Logician can no more reduce this definition to his Rules of Art than he can give a regular
himself affirms pag. 11. The matter now in dispute is only about him that officiates But my Paraphrases being not at all intended for the use of Ministers or others in public therefore they are nothing to the purpose of Variations designed for public use exclusive of the Liturgy His next Question is Whether my Paraphrases be ever the better for being only for private use I answer This makes his alledging them in an Argument about publick Variations appear frivolous and impertinent But if he delight in Comparisons a private Minister who makes Variations for private use to promote Uniformity and Devotion and to beget in all a just esteem of the established way of Worship doth much better than he who to shew his ability to vary uses his faculty in public to exclude the established way and thereby breeds a contempt of it and promotes separation from it Pag. 10. I granted pag. 16. That every good man might pray by the ordinary assistance of the Spirit devoutly and fervently even by a Form Mr. S. B. leaves out the main words even by a Form and falls to make Inferences from half my Sentence asking If Men may be so enlightned and affected c. why they may not by the ordinary assistance of the Spirit express their resentments in proper Expressions If he mean in private perhaps they may but that is nothing to our Question which is only about public Prayer if he mean in public I have already given him divers Reasons why this cannot be permitted much less established in a setled Church But in short I will give him here three Reasons First This liberty is needless because there are more proper Expressions already composed by Holy men who had the ordinary assistance of the Spirit than any of us can invent on the sudden Secondly This liberty would be pernicious occasioning Envy among the Clergy and Factions among the People some of the most learned and pious would be despised only for their modesty and others of the most ignorant and profane admired for their fluency and confidence Thirdly Supposing both ways of praying by enjoyned Forms and Extempore were equal yet when our Church being guided by antiquity reason and the practice of other modern Churches hath prohibited that way and prescribed Forms they are certainly the better way for us Pag. 11. He yields at last That the frame and actings of the Soul the exercise of Faith Repentance Love c. are the principal thing in Prayer Now when I had proved that a Minister may do all this and so pray by the Spirit in a Form why may he not be obliged always to use a Form in public Mr. S. B. can object nothing but this If the enjoyned Form do not so well express that sense which he and others have of the Matter of Prayer as other words which occur to him then he cannot be said to pray in or by the Spirit in the full import of the phrase Now this Supposition shews first That these men have a high opinion of their own Invention who think they can devise better words Extempore than our Reverend makers of the Liturgâ— could frame by much study Secondly 'T is plain That using these new Phrases is by his account the full and only import of Praying by the Spirit for he makes varying the phrase necessary to the exercise of it and his Extempore man is singular in nothing else But he should consider this is a Scripture-phrase and the import of it is to be learned from thence wherefore he should have brought some Text where Praying by the Spirit signifies Inventing new Phrases but that he can never do and reason is against his Exposition as well as Scripture for since he owns new Words not to be the principal thing in Prayer no man will believe the Spirits assistance is necessary for the less principal yea where we have proper Phrases already for a needless thing Wherefore when in the use of our Forms our Soul is in good frame and we exercise all proper Graces by the assistance of the Spirit we Pray by the Spirit in all Senses that the phrase is capable of but Two which are of Mr. S. B's own devising first that we do not daily invent new Words nor secondly do we vainly imagine we can invent more proper Words than the Church hath provided After this he runs back to my 15th Page where I had shewed That if Praying by the Spirit signifie making new Words and Phrases then none but the Minister in public prays by the Spirit since the people never invent new Words but the Ministers words are a Form to them The Examiner tugs hard to get off from this Rock and saith first The dispute is only about him that officiates But had he read over the place he pretends to confute he must have seen I was answering Mr. Clarkson who Disc of Lit. pag. 128 129. makes Praying by the Spirit a gift common to all Christians and yet afterwards saith He that was able to conceive a Prayer himself yet made use of prayers formed by others he did not pray as he was able which he makes to be all one with praying by the Spirit The absurdity of which Assertion I proved by this scandalous Consequence of it that then the People whom he affirms to have this Gift in all Ages did never pray by the Spirit because they make use of Forms made by others so that here our dispute was about the People For by this I made it appear how falsly they expounded the phrase of praying by the Spirit by inventing new Words which excludes the People from ever praying by the Spirit at all Secondly Mr. S. B. saith The Ministers prayer is not a Form to the Congregation in the Sense we are discoursing of I answer It is a prayer framed by another and that is Mr. Clarkson's sense of a Form and I think Mr. S. B's too who saith in this very Page if a man restrain himself to the words and phrases put together by others which express not their sense so well as some that occur to them c. Here a Form is defined Words and Phrases put together by others and the using it restraining ones self to those words Now the people are restrained to words and phrases put together by the Minister therefore his Prayer is a Form to them And if one of the Congregation conceive he can express his sense better than his Minister doth and yet sits by silent and uses the Ministers words to express his sense according to Mr. Cl. this man doth not pray as well as he is able and according to Mr. S. B. he prays not by the Spirit in the full import of the phrase which natural yet odious Consequence should make them ashamed of their explaining this phrase of Praying by the Spirit by inventing new Expressions Thirdly Mr. S. B. saith The Congregation may joyn in the spiritual performance of the duty acting Graces suitable to
who knew the Essenes better affirms they had Forms of Prayer so that the thing is certainly true and sufficiently proved And Philo adds They were wont every day to pray Morning and Evening De vit contemp pag. 893. which Eusebius leaves out as he also doth many other things about the Essenes in Philo contenting himself to tell us That this Book of Philo's which describes their practices contains all the Rules and Canons of the Church in his time and refers the Reader to the Book it self for fuller satisfaction So that the most he can make of this Objection is That Eusebius doth not expresly mention their Prayers in Forms but he mentions their Hymns in Forms which are so near of kin to Prayers and generally contain Petitions as well as Praises that the one makes it probable both were Forms however Josephus puts it past all doubt and therefore my Point is gained which is That the first we read of who were taken to be Christians had and used Forms both of Prayer and Praise § 2. pag. 14. Clemens Romanus is my next Author who useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for an Order or Form of Divine Offices and speaks of a determined Rule of Ministration Mr. S. B. pretends I mistook the sense of this word which he saith signifies a business office or work and in his false and forced Paraphrase of this place applies it to the work of Lay-mens ordinary Calling To confute which designed mistake I shall give this brief account of the Author and submit it to their Judgment who can read the Original There was a Schism at Corinth some of the Pastors despising the People and some of the People intruding into the Pastors Office which gave occasion to this Epistle wherein Clemens adviseth them to leave Divine Administrations to the Clergy and to submit to them as Souldiers to their Captain and the Members to their Head He orders the Inferiors to be submissive and the Superiors not to be proud and then comes in the first place cited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let all things be done in Order whatever the Lord hath commanded us to perform and let the Oblations and Liturgies be celebrated at the certain or appointed Times Clemens imitates S. Paul 1 Cor. xiv 40. and speaks of Divine Offices as well as he advising that in them all things should be done in order for these are the things about which our Lord hath given commands and appointed the set-times for Oblations that is either the Eucharist in general which is often so called or the Alms then offered up appointed at Corinth on the First day of the Week 1 Cor. xvi 2. and then also they Celebrated Liturgies that is the solemn Offices of Prayer and Praise But Mr. S. B's Paraphrase of this place which he durst not cite at large is this God hath provided for every man an office and work to which he must attend and do every part of his work or Liturgy in the manner God hath prescribed and at the Season he hath appointed c. he leaves the word Oblations wholly out because he could not well wrest that word to his feigned Sense of ordinary business which the whole Period contradicts for where did Christ require Lay-men to do all their business in order Where hath he prescribed the manner and set-time for Lay-mens Work And the next Sentence in Clemens baffles this pretence also for he goes on thus The Lord hath not only determined the seasons for these but also where and by whom they must be performed Is this true of mens ordinary Callings So that they who make their Oblations at the set-time are accepted and blessed and cannot err since they obey God Even as the Chief-Priest had his proper Liturgy appointed the Priests and Levites theirs and the Laity were obliged to Lay-duties 't is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there We see he compares the Order of the Christian Church to that of the Jews where there was a prescribed Rule for the High Priest Priests and Levites to officiate by which he calls a Liturgy as he had named the Rule for Christian Priests performance of Divine Offices before and the comparison shews as well the same word That the Christians were prescribed as well as the Jews as also he supposes Lay-men might not meddle with these Offices now having duties of their own as well as under the Law And from this Order in the Mosaick Oeconomy Clemens infers That the Christian Clergy were every one of them in his proper place to offer up the Eucharist to God keeping a good Conscience and with all gravity keeping close to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the determined Rule of his Liturgy Which refers to those various parts of the Offices which were performed some by the Bishop others by the Priests or Deacons and every ones part was allotted by the Liturgy which therefore must at least be as I noted before a fixed Rule or Order for Divine Administrations And if they needed such a prescribed Order then and had one as well as the Sons of Levi in this Inspired Age we need a compleat Liturgy enjoyned now when Inspiration is ceased Clemens goes on to shew what Christ had determined about the place where and the persons by whom Divine Offices were to be performed pag. 95 97. And the whole Discourse shews the shameful prevarication of Mr. S. B. in explaining these passages of all Christian People and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Ordinary work when in one Page viz. pag. 92. it is thrice used For the Rule for celebrating Divine Offices which was fixed and prescribed and that was a good step towards an enjoyned Liturgy invariably to be used if it were not the very thing it self § 3 pag. 15. Pliny relates That the Christians said an Hymn carmen alternately to Christ as God early in the Morning My Examiner saith this only relates to Psalms or Hymns and I would draw in Prayers with them which Pliny speaks not of But he should not have said this till he answered the proof I brought in my 23d Page that Carmen among the Romans signified any solemn Form and is often used for a Prayer and till he had confuted the Observation I made that Pliny doth not express it that they sang but said this Carmen which makes it probable it might be a Prayer and we know the Christians used Prayers as well as Hymns to Christ Moreover Pliny evidently describes all the Service by this word and whatever it notes Prayers or Praises 't is certain they were in Forms because they said them alternately And finally if it do signifie Hymns I gave many Reasons why the Prayers and the Hymns might be alike All which to pag. 25. though fit enough to be examined Mr. S. B. wholly passeth by which is to me a Confession that he could give no reason why this testimony should not be evidence for the use of Forms both in their Prayers and
the manner of praying to the Father that we may be heard more easily are those Instructions that spiritual and true Prayer pronounced by Christ's mouth are they Christ's prayer which ascends to his Fathers ears and are owned by him as his Sons words when we pray is our following his Instructions asking forgiveness in his own words and by his own Prayer Alas to what absurdities hath his Resolution to defend an ill cause reduced him 'T is true S. Cyprian digresseth a little as Tertullian had done to explain the directions which our Lord gave about the manner of praying but he soon returns to the Form it self repeating it verbatim and as he explains every single Petition affirming that the Christians said so and so in their Prayers And it is clear from him that they both used this Prayer and others formed by this pattern wherefore alitèr orare praying otherwise in S. Cyprian which he so severely censures cannot be designed to condemn those Churches who framed other Forms by this pattern and always used this Form for one as our Church hath done it is levelled at those who either wholly omit the Lords Prayer or in their arbitrary Composures take no care to suit them to this Heavenly pattern of both which some Dissenters are guilty He concludes with observing that I noted Origen's phrase of using Prayers imported they were composed by others and he wonders what I would note upon Cyprian's phrase of making Prayers And I have a Note upon that which will not please him viz. That S. Cyprian saith a Man makes his Prayer when he uses the very words of the Lords Prayer the Form of Christ's making And if Mr. S. B. would infer from hence That they prayed extempore or arbitrarily he cannot draw that conclusion from S. Cyprian where he that prays by a Form is said precem facere to make a Prayer So that using Prayers in Origen plainly supposes them made before-hand but making Prayers here do not at all suppose them to be Extempore nor can they infer that from the words of S. Paul who would have prayers c. to be made for all men 1 Tim. ii 1. Pag. 44. I brought that passage in S. Cyprian Publica est nobis communis oratio to prove that the Congregation vocally joyned with the Priest in prayers which doth suppose a Set Form Mr. S. B. saith Common-prayer signifies no more than that we must pray for all People Now S. Cyprian indeed doth make this one sense of Common-prayer as appears by the words he cites but then the Father goes on to shew that the Lords Prayer for it is of that he speaks is a Common prayer because it is said as that of the Three Children was Who saith he all agreed in their prayer in voices as well as in hearts and sung their Hymn as it were with one mouth note here the meaning of that phrase And so saith he did the Apostles who are said to pray with one accord Thus far S. Cyprian Mr. S. B. wholly omits this sense of a Common-prayer and which is worse denies that this is any meaning of it But let it be considered that the people then vocally repeated the Lords Prayer the Common-prayer here spoken of and let it be remembred what I said about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon pag. 20. and then I hope it will be granted this is one sense of a Common-prayer that is a Form in which Priest and People may vocally joyn Yea this seems the only sense in the second Quotation which I cited Cypr. ad Cler. Pleb ep 8. We must pray for all as the Lord taught there where he enjoyned not every one a single Prayer but commanded us to pray for all men with a Common-prayer in which all agree For here S. Cyprian saith The Lords Prayer was a Prayer for all Men and then adds it was a Common-prayer Now this would be a tautology If the only sense of a Common-prayer were a Prayer for all Men this had been as if he had said We must pray for all men in a Prayer for all men if that were all S. Cyprian might have left out Orare pro omnibus or communi prece but his using both these phrases shews not only that the subject of the Lords Prayer was general for all men but the way of using it was by the peoples joyning with the Priest and reciting it in common And if S. Cyprian believed Christ taught us to pray thus by vocal joyning in one common Form then they who will have the Minister alone make all the prayers Extempore while the people silently sit by and hear teach another manner of praying than Christ taught Pag. 45. The Preface Lift up your hearts with the Response We lift them up unto the Lord in Cypr. de orat § 22. I still take to be a firm proof of the use of alternate Forms in the public Service and think it probable he cited them out of the Liturgy A Versicle and Response is an alternate Form and S. Cyprian mentions it as a thing known and daily used in public The Centuriators infer hence That there were Forms in his time and Goulartius a learned Protestant in his Notes on the place Owns it was a Form used of old at the Eucharist where it continued to be used in S. Augustin ' s days Goular not in Cypr. p. 322. I might produce innumerable eminent Authors who are of the same Opinion but Mr. S. B. saith He is not to enquire into the Inferences which others make form this place yea he threatens me with Reflections for my observing them Which minds me of that Saying of old Fabius related by S. Hierom ad Pammach ep 26. It were happy for Arts if none but Artists might judge of them However his Reflections could not have hurt me in so good Company if he had vented them they must have returned on his own head for he that despises such Evidence brings both his learning and modesty into question Again he retires to his old Fallacy That I should first have proved there was then a Liturgy before I had supposed this passage was cited out of it I hope I have proved this to every body but Mr. S. B. who will not allow any proof to be the first and by that politick Supposition hopes to persuade such as take his word there can be no second proof but whatever become of my former Evidence in his Opinion I am sure there was one in this place which he could not answer viz. That this very Preface in so many words is found in all Liturgies of the African Eastern and Western Churches To which I add now that S. Aug. saith All Mankind as with one voice used these words de ver Rel. c. 3. And the Liturgies wherein these words are prescribed must be elder than S. Cyprian's time for S. Aug. believed this Form came from the Apostolical Age. S. Cyril who explained this Form in S.
Cyprian's Diocess had made their own Forms for Moses and Maximus or had daily prayed for them in various phrases it had been impossible for Cyprian to pretend to set down in a Letter what was the substance of those many various prayers So that whether it were the old Form or a new one such as our Bishops make and send us on extraordinary occasions it was a Form and that sufficiently confutes Mr. Cl. and secures the point in question Indeed Mr. Cl. had not cited this place at large in his Disc of Lit. pag. 68. and I thought he had referred to the beginning of that Epistle where S. Cyprian desires the prayers of Moses and Maximus but Mr. S. B. hath obliged me by citing the true place at large by which I perceive I was mistaken before and I shall freely own it wishing he may follow my Example so oft as I convince him he was in an Error and then our Controversie will soon be at end and he may see by this Reply now that it was more difficult for me to find Mr. Cl's Quotation than to answer it Pag. 50. Instead of repeating Mr. S. B's partial account of the dispute between Mr. Cl. and me about the liberty the ancients took to alter Christs own Form of Baptizing I shall refer the Reader to my Hist Lit. par 2. pag. 247. where that matter is fully considered and all Mr. Cl's pretended Evidence disproved As to the last place out of Cypr. ep 73. ad Jub Both Mr. Cl. and Mr. S. B. cite it falsly and fraudulently Mr. Cl. hath it Quomodo ergo quidam dicunt modo in nomine Jesu Christi c. Mr. S. B. adds nothing but these words foris extra Ecclesiam But the true reading in Pamelius in a later Paris Edition in Goulartius and the Oxford Edition is Quomodo ergo quidam dicunt for is extra Ecclesiam ims contra Ecclesiam modo in nomine Jesu Christi c. So that Mr. Cl. leaves out all and Mr. S. B. half the Character of those persons who said Baptism was valid if it were administred only in the Name of Jesus Christ they were such as were out of the Church and against the Church that is Schismaticks and Hereticks Which being evident I beg the liberty to examine First Whether it were not fraudulent in both my Adversaries to omit the Character of those men by whose opinion and practice they would prove an usage of the Church 2ly Whether they might not as well prove the antiquity and lawfulness of Extempore Prayers from the notions and practice of Montanus and the Messalians 3ly Whether they believe the present Church is obliged now to follow their Examples who were out of the ancient Church and Enemies to it When Mr. S. B. hath considered well of these Questions I hope he will be satisfied that this place doth not prove that the true Church then took liberty to vary Christs Form nor can any thing be inferred from it to justifie the granting such liberty now § 4. Pag. 51. That clear instance of a Liturgy left to them of Naeocaesarea by Greg. Thaumaturgus from which for a long time after they would not vary in a Ceremony a word or a mystical Form looks so like a proof of Forms invariably used that Mr. S. B. labours by all means to evade it and 1st He pretends this passage of not varying c. relates only to Doctrin 2dly He saith S. Basil mentions not Gregory ' s appointing a Form of Prayer for that Church Both which I shall disprove For first this passage cannot refer to Gregory's Doctrin any further than that must be supposed agreeable to the Forms of Worship he left behind him because the things they would not vary from nor add to were Actions Words and Mystical Forms 'T is true if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had stood single as it doth Ep. 75. it might have been applied to Doctrins but what Actions or Mystical Forms are there in Articles of Faith these can relate to nothing but Divine Worship Again S. Basil saith Many things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in their Administrations were now become defective by the antiquity of their Institution and yet they would not vary from them Now let Mr. S. B. consider whether Gregory could institute any new Orthodox Doctrins or whether true Doctrins can ever become defective by their antiquity and then he must confess this Answer was a meer shuffle to cover a bad Cause Doctrins can be instituted by none but Christ and his Apostles and are the better for being old but a Liturgy is capable of growing obsolete and it is that of which S. Basil here evidently and undeniably speaks which answers his second Objection For though he do not use the very words Liturgy or Form of Prayer yet he mentions Administrations and declares they would not add to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not an Action a Word nor a mystical Form These are the main parts of a Liturgy which consists of Rubrics for Ceremonies the words of ordinary Prayers and Praises and the mystical Forms of Administring the Holy Sacraments Now if they added nothing in any of these particulars to the Administrations he left them doubtless they made no new Extempore Prayers nor varied at any time therefore they confined themselves invariably to what he had prescribed them in Ceremonies Words and mystical Forms and these words of S. Basil evidently suppose he left them a Liturgy consisting of all these particulars prescribed Besides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had it stood alone signifies a Form for the Mysteries so very clearly that it would suffice to have proved the Sacraments were administred by such a prescribed Form When S. Luke writes down the very words of a Letter he saith it contained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts xxiii 25. so Nazianzen S. Basil's Friend calls Divine Offices 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the prescribed Forms of the Church which were preserved and Julian imitated these by making 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Form of Prayers Naz. orat 3. p. 101 102. Cedrenus in the Life of the Emperor Zeno calls the Imperial Edict sent to Alexandria 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Form And Zonaras informs us that the Fathers assembled in the Council of Trullo call the Emperors Edicts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the public or political Forms Can. 38. vid. Beveridg Concil Tom. I. p. 201 202. In the Euchologion the Priest is directed to do all things as he is directed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Formularies Euch. p. 11. And the learned Dr. Duport in his Greek Version of our Common-prayer useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his Title-page and elsewhere for our prescribed invariable Forms of Ordination of Administring the Communion of solemnizing Matrimony c. So that if these Authors understood Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a prescribed Form for the Sacrament and S. Basil implies they had such an one and would not make a new one