duleuâ—in but this quircke hath bin so sufficiently answered by diuers of our learned countrimen that I dare scarse attempt any thing in it The second reason therefore followeth which may be collected out of the Apostles word Rom. 14. how shall they call vpon him on whom they haue not beleeued which may be framed thus To him only we must pray on whom we beleeue but we onely beleeue in God therefore we must only pray to God for seeing prayer hath two parts desire and faith if faith be wanting prayer is imperfect Now I doe suppose that there is no papist dare say that we may trust in the Saints or Angels which were flâ—t idolatrie and cursed is he that putteth his trust in an arme of flesh Wherfore for conclusioÌ„ of this fourth point seeing we are only to beleeue in God and to serue God therefore we must onely pray to God Furthermore this fourth person to whom we must make our prayers which is God is expressed vnto vs two waies First by a name of relation in that he is intituled Father Secondly by the place he inhabiteth Heauen VVhether Father be a word of nature or person For this title Father which is here mentioned it is to be enquired whether it is Naturae or Personae nomen that is to say whether it is to be referred to the first person in Trinitie or to the whole Trinitie whether we speake to God the Father of his onely begotten sonne Christ or to God the Father and maker of all his creatures for answere whereof thus much it seemeth that there is no absurditie to take it either way or both waies rather if Christ prayed this prayer as it is probable he did then without doubt it was directed to the first person in Trinitie and it signifieth personally if Christ prescribed it to his disciples for a forme of prayer then in all likelihoode it signifieth the whole Trinitie who is to be called vpon by the creature Now as I coniecture for that Christ did both pray it and prescribed it to others for a forme of prayer therefore I incline to thinke that there is a compound meaning of the word signifying both the first person in Trinitie and the whole Trinitie which affordeth vs this instruction That when we pray we are so to direct our prayers to the Father as that we do not exclude the other persons of Trinitie who with the Father are equally to be worshipped being God equall with him And here it shall not be impertinent to consider how we are to conceiue of God in prayer which ariseth partly out of the title which is giuen to God partly out of the place where he dwelleth this point may be comprehended in fiue positions which followe First we must not think God like any creature as the Papists haue painted him for in the fourth of Deuteronomie Moses expresly forbiddeth the Israelits so to doe Hoâ— we must concâ—iue of God in prayer Deut. 4.15 and he rendreth a reason in that place because they saw nothing when the law was deliuered and therefore the practise of many now adayes is reprouealbe who though they will not paint God yet they paint two hands giuing the two tables one to Moses and another to Aaron which is false monstrous and idolatrous false because the tables were giuen onely to Moses monstrous because there are hands without a body idolatrous because there are hands whereas God hath no shape at all any way sensible Secondly although in the holy Scripture figuratiuely there are hands armes feete face eares and other manly parts attributed to God yet we must not thinke that God hath any of these parts properly indeede God hath something answerable to these parts or rather something whereunto these parts in the creatures are sutable for God made man not onely according to his image which consisteth in holines and righteousnes but also according to his similitude for the words may aptly be distinguished so that man is a similitude of God Gods armes and hands and fingers argue his power and actiuitie his feete argue his vbiquitie his face eyes and eares declare his wisedome and fauour c. and proportionable to these attributes of God there is a configuration of the lineaments of the body in man wherein man is like God Psal 115. wherefore we may say and so we must conceiue of God contrarie to the gods of the heathen They haue eyes and see not but God seeth and yet he hath no eyes they haue feete and walke not but God walketh euery where and yet hath no feete and so of whatsoeuer other part may be applied to God which figure is called Anthropopathia being a speciall metaphor Thirdly we must conceiue of God as he hath reuealed himselfe in his word and workes namely most mightie iust mercifull wise true holy simple and euery way infinit eternal and blessed Creator Redeemer Sanctifier and Sauiour of all his creatures c. Fourthly we must so direct our prayers to one person as that we doe not exclude the other for that is idolatrie to diuide the persons which are onely distinct Lastly for order sake we must pray to the Father directly and primarily and that through the merit and mediation of the Sonne with the instinct and inspiration of the holy Ghost yet it is not vnlawfull to direct our prayers to the Lord Iesus Christ 2. Cor. 13.13 or to the holy Spirit personally according to the example of the Apostle who blesseth the Corinthians from the Father Sonne and holy Ghost which blessing is a prayer Genes 48.16 and by the example of Iacob who prayeth that the Angell which deliuered him from all euill which Angell was Christ would blesse the sonnes of Ioseph We see then to which person of Trinitie our prayers are primarily to bee directed with the manner how we are to conceiue of God in time of prayer This may serue for the title Father Now followeth the place which God inhabiteth which is the second argument descriptiue and that is vttered in these words which art in heauen which also doth impart vnto vs his condition that hee is heauenly of which two points a little in order How God is in heauen First God is in heauen not circumscriptiue as though he were included within the compasse of heauen for he is infinit and therefore euery where neither is he in heauen definitiue as though when he were in heauen he were no where else for he is euery where at once for God is in euery place and yet not included in any place he is out of euery place and yet excluded from no place but God is in heauen first because that in heauen he doth especially manifest himselfe in his mercie grace and glorie to the elect Angels and Saints through the humanitie of Christ Iesus which is exalted in heauen secondly because that from heauen he doth visibly manifest himselfe to the creatures in the works of his
yet if it be said that the word Father may be either proper to the father or common to all the three persons or both there will no absurditie follow and the obiection is answered Againe if it be obiected further that Christ should pray for the pardon of sinnes he hauing committed no sinne thereby giuing occasion to thinke that he had sinne the answere will be very indifferent that Christ might vse that petition as an instrument of intercession for vs and not as a petition for pardon of his sinne prescribing it neuerthelesse vnto vs for a prayer of remission who had sinned or else it might be answered that Christ being the suretie might intreate God to pardon his sinnes not the sinnes which he had committed but the sinnes which were to him imputed or the petition being deliuered plurally forgiue vs it may bee Christ prayed for both and there was no doubt of misconceit in his Disciples to whom hee priuately expounded doubtfull matters and if the matter bred any misconceit in the other auditors it was through their own corruption and ignorance and therein the Lords iustice might appeare in blinding their mindes and hardening their hearts as himself teacheth who oft times spake obscurely and ambiguously 2 How oft Christ vsed the Lords prayer and how How oft Christ vsed the Lords prayer and how The answere of this question is partly certaine partly probable It is certaine that Christ vsed the Lords prayer twice first he vsed it when he taught the doctrine of prayer and so Matthew hath propounded it as a part of the sermon in the mount Secondly he vsed it when he taught his Disciples a forme of prayer according to the example of Iohn who taught his Disciples a paterne of prayer and this was presently after Christ had ended his prayers in a certaine place as Luke reporteth whence in all probabilitie it may be collected that Matthew prescribeth this prayer one way and Luke another for in Matthew Christ taught the doctrine of prayer and so it is dogmaticall in Matthew Luke saith Christ taught a prayer for his words are When ye pray say and so it is practical so that Christ taught it both for a prayer which his Disciples might vse and for the doctrine of prayer which his Disciples might teach Againe it is probable that Christ neuer vsed this prayer but twice although it cannot be demonstratiuely proued onely this coniecture we haue that whereas Christ maketh diuers prayers to his Father in the Euangelists this is not mentioned nor any petition of it in so many words and the Euangelists neuer name it elsewhere by any speciall name and the Apostles in their writings neuer make mention of it but when they pray in their writings vse other formes though still they keep themselues within the compasse of the matter and affections of this prayer which we call the Lords prayer both for that it was composed by Christ and vsed by him hence therefore it followeth probablie that the Apostles neuer tied themselues to the words of this prayer but varied vpon occasion Briefly then Christ vsed this prayer twice but it cannot certainly be determined whether he vsed it oftner neither can it be proued that the Apostles vsed it often VVhether Christ spake all and onely the words of the Lords prayer 3 Whether Christ spake all and onely the words of the Lords prayer The answere is onely coniecturall for it cannot be proued that he vsed the very words set downe by the Euangelists the reason is for that the Euangelists vse to set down not all and onely the words which Christ spake but the summe and substance of them and if it be graunted that the Euangelists haue done it in other places why may they not doe it in this place especially seeing the Euangelists doe differ in words in reciting many of Christs speeches as namely of the Beatitudes Mat. 5.3 Luk. 6.20 Matthew maketh eight Luke reciteth but foure and Luke expresseth the contrary woes and Matthew doth omit them whence this may in al likelihood be collected that Christ vsed diuers other words by way of exposition to the Beatitudes and so by consequent to the petitions of the Lords prayer and wee see directly that Christ expoundeth one petition viz. the fifth and why might he not also expound others seeing that other petitions are as hard to bee vnderstood as that and this doth not any whit call into question the truth of Canonicall Scripture but doth rather commend vnto vs the spirit of wisedome and truth wherewith they spake in that diuers writers differing in words still agree in matter and substance of doctrine Vpon this question and answere dependeth another like vnto it viz. 4 How the Euangelists Matthew and Luke differ in rehearsing the Lords prayer Matth. 6. Luk. 11. 〈◊〉 â—nce beâ— Matthew â—nd Luke 〈◊〉 â—atâ—ng the Lords prayer For answere whereof wee are to consider what the Papists say They make a very great difference for in the vulgar Latin translation there are these three clauses in Matthew which are wanting in Luke First in the preface which art in heauen is wanting Secondly the third petition is wholie wanting Thirdly the last petition wanteth one halfe Deliuer vs from euill Yet they say all these things are included in the other petitions or else may necessarily bee deduced from them but let the Popish dreames goe and let vs see the true differences which are three in words but the substance is all one The first difference in words is of the fourth petition for Matthew saith sémeron Luke cath ' eméran The second difference in words is in the fifth petition for all the words in the originall differ except two or three The third difference is in the conclusion which Matthew hath and Luke wanteth Now by this difference betwixt Matthew and Luke which is verbal not material this coÌ„sequence ariseth either that the Euangelists did not precisely bind themselues to the words that Christ vttered or else that Christ vttered the Lords prayer in diuers words at the two seuerall times when he vttered it 5 Who prayeth best he that saieth the Lords prayer VVho maketh the best prayer or he that saieth not the Lords prayer For answere of this question thus much The Lords prayer is the best forme of prayer that euer was deuised The Lords prayer is the best prayer that euer was deuised He that prayeth the Lords prayer in words and matter prayeth well Hee that prayeth the Lords prayer in matter onely prayeth well though he vse other words as Christ vsed other words Iohn 17. It is one thing to say the Lords prayer another thing to pray it It is one thing to vse the Lords prayer aright another thing to abuse it for a good thing may be absurdly abused He that vseth a deuised forme of prayer aright prayeth more acceptably to God than he that abuseth the Lords prayer It is likely that he which can say nothing but the Lords prayer when he prayeth cannot pray but abuseth the Lords prayer It seemeth that that man doth not sinne which neuer vseth the words of the Lords prayer for a prayer for that Christ did neuer intend to bind vs to the forme of words but of matter He that in particular hath conceiued his wants and accordingly made his petitions to the Lord in a conceiued prayer may neuer the lesse end and conclude his prayer with the Lords prayer Diuers other doubtes concerning the vse of the Lords prayer may bee propounded but it is not profitable to make doubts except that they could well be dissolued only thus much for a conclusion of this treatise of prayer I had rather speake fiue words to God in prayer from vnderstanding faith and feeling than say the Lords prayer ouer a thousand times ignorantly negligently or superstitiously FINIS
the next place to be considered and they are opposite to the things wee pray for and they may be referred to fiue heads also which are these following First ignorance and errors Secondly vanitie of minde Thirdly a prophane heart Fourthly prophane speeches Lastly prophane actions all which are so many meanes to obscure or deface or abolish the glorious name of God out of the world Of these in order Ignorance dishonoreth God First ignorance either of Gods workes or word is the cause of prophaning Gods name for as pearles cast before swine or dogs so are the works and word of God amoÌ„g ignorant persons swine or dogs will trample pearles vnder their feete in the durt but skilfull Lapidaries will vse them carefully and set them in gold and costly garments so the ignorant people that know not the works or word of God wil contemne reiect or at least neglect the excellent instructions and documents of Gods glorie therein exhibited and so prophane the name of God but they that know them may vse them aright and glorifie God in them The dunghill Cocke as the fable moralizeth regardeth a barly corne more than a pretious pearle knowing the profit of the one but not the price of the other so the blind dunghill people of the world Atheistlike through light estimation because of their ignorance preferre the dirtie commodities of this life before the glorious footsteps of Gods Maiestie imprinted in his workes and word thereby marueilously disparaging the Lord himselfe and dishonouring his name Againe Error dishonoreth God Matth. 22. Ioh. 4. ignorance being the cause of superstition and errors as Christ teacheth saying Ye erre not knowing the Scriptures and ye worship ye know not what therefore it must needes bee a maine cause of blemishing Gods glorious names and memorials for errors and heresies are so many lies against the truth of God charging false and slanderous imputations vpon God making him the author of that which he abhorreth and condemneth and as it is blasphemous to make God the cause of sinne so is it of error for it is to call God by a false name and to belie God which is a great dishonour to God For as it is a disgrace to a Prince to bee belied or blasphemed or backbited so is it much more inglorious and dishonourable to God to make him the master and teacher of lies for it is customable with false teachers and their followers to father their doctrines vpon Gods word which God himselfe inspired to his Church and so by necessarie consequent in that they are found liers against the truth of God they shamefully dishonour God In the second place also we are to marke how vanitie of minde prophaneth the name of God Vanitie of minde prophaneth Gods name Rom. 1. The Apostle defineth this sinne to be the withholding of the truth of God in a lie that is to make a false consequent or vse from a true doctrine to know God and not to glorifie him as God for example to know God to bee inuisible and yet to make an image of him to know God to bee incorruptible and yet to resemble him to corruptible creatures as beasts birds creeping things c. and thus the Gentiles thinking themselues to bee wise hauing some truths of God became starke fooles in deducing foolish consequents from that truth so through their vanity of mind defaced that truth with a lie and this is a great indignitie offered to Gods truth For as a subiect knowing his Prince yet making as though he knew him not and so vsing himselfe vnreuerently before him doth disgrace the prince so they that know God and his workes and word yet notwithstanding doe not glorifie God but become vaine in their imaginations and discourses and conclusions from Gods word and workes thereby occasioning and encouraging themselues in licentious liuing and by their liues denying the power of their knowledge which otherwise might haue been auailable to their saluation do shamefully abuse their knowledge iniuriously dishonor the truth reuealed vnto them which they should haue glorified A prophane heart d shonoreth God As blindnes and vanitie of minde so prophanenes of heart also which in the third place commeth to be considered doth greatly dishonor God which is when mens affections are not stirred according to the qualitie of Gods workes or word his titles or attributes and that is especially of three sorts Atheisme dishonoreth God The first is an Atheists heart which is the extinguishing of al affections in respect of God for as an Atheist laboreth for a perswasion that there is no God so also he desireth that the feare of God may be cleane taken away also that the loue of God the hatred of sinne the loue of vertue and of the word of God may be put out and that he may liue as he list without any conscience or difference of good and euill which is to bury the memorie of God and to banish his name out of the world which is the greatest indignitie that may be VVorldlines dishonoreth God The second is a worldly heart when a man is so estranged from heauenly matters and so wholy possessed with the loue and liking of worldly things as that he careth not for God nor any goodnes further than he may gaine thereby which men doe greatly dishonor God and his truth making it a meanes of compassing the world whereas indeede we should make the world a meanes of religion for to this purpose hath God created and bestowed the world vpon man that thereby they might be the better prouoked and furthered to the worship and glory of God hither are to be referred all couetous persons that minde nothing but their goods all proud persons that minde nothing but the trimming of themselues gay apparrell and the credit of the world all wanton persons that minde nothing but the pleasures of the flesh generally all such as dishonor God by presuming any thing in their estimation and affection before God for seeing God is the chiefest good and the most high he therefore ought to bee the chiefest and mosâ— highly esteemed of vs otherwise we honor the creature more than the Creator Rom. 1.25 and dishonor God by communicating his glory to another The third is a secure heart Securitie dishonoreth God when men that haue the grace of God in them notwithstanding doe not so carefully and diligently â—â—irre vp the grace of God in the meditation and application of Go is workes and word as the condition thereof doth require for sometime it falleth out that euen Gods children slumber and sleepe Cant. 5.23 2. Sam. 12. so we reade that the Church in the Canticles complaineth or excuseth her sluggish disposition so we reade that Dauid slept in securitie almost a whole yeere in which time no doubt hee vsed the word of God and the rest of Gods worship though with dulnes and great flatnes of spirit whereby it came to
the good things we obtaine of God for the bodie ought of vs to bee applied as arguments of confirming our faith for the obtaining the best things for the soule and we must make them so many pledges and seales of Gods loue and mercie to vs in Christ Iesus for otherwise wee partake in Gods blessings which respect our daily bread no otherwise than the bruite beasts or the wicked who haue many good things from Gods generall bountie and liberalitie but not from his speciall goodnes and mercie Wee reade that the land of Canaan was by faith inherited of the Israelites that by faith they passed through the red sea Heb. 11.30.31 and many other temporall blessings were through faith receiued by them which is thus to be vnderstood viz. by faith they receiued these temporall deliuerances and blessings and vsed them as seales and pledges of heauen and heauenly blessings whereof the former were types onely And this is to rise from earth to heauen from the daily bread of the bodie to the spirituall bread of life to support and vnderprop our faith in Christ for the remission of our sinnes and the saluation of our soules with the earthlie pillars of meate and drinke and apparell and what other things are the staffe and stay of our bodily life This doctrine the outward shape of the Sacrament seemeth to teach vs for there is bread and wine the nourishers and comforters of our life whereby the Lord doth seale vp vnto vs the spirituall nourishment and comfort of our soules heauenly matters in earthly creatures In like manner by analogie and proportion though not sacramentally yet by discourse of reason and by a worke of faith wee may allegorize all outward matters As for example God giueth vs clothes for to couer our nakednes therefore hee will giue vnto vs the wedding garment of Christs righteousnesse to couer our sinnes God giueth the light of the Sunne for our comfort therefore he will giue vs the light of his countenance in mercie to lighten our darknes and affliction And thus we may ascend from things visible sensible and palpable to things inuisible insensible and intelligible and with the Apostle Iohn say 1. Ioh. 1.1 that wee see feele taste and handle the Lord Iesus Christ yea and grope him in these outward matters Act. 17.27 as Paul saith the Gentiles might haue done God And this may bee sufficient for the three particular branches of that doctrine which riseth from the order here vsed by our Sauiour Christ in preferring the petition for daily bread to the petition for grace 2 The meaning of this petition VVhat bread signifieth Now followeth the second thing to bee considered in this petition which is the meaning of the words for the discussing of the particular words we are to remember this distinction This prayer containeth Rem rei circumstantias the subiect and the adiuncts that which is desired and the circumstances thereto appertaining That which is here desired is generally called Bread The circumstances hereto appertaining are fiue following First circumstance is Modus acquirendi the manner of obtaining the bread which is by free gift Giue Second circumstance is Persona the persons for whom wee aske this donation or gift of bread vs viz. our selues and others Third circumstance is Tempus for how long time wee begge this bread this day for the present Fourth circumstance is Qualitas the condition of that bread which we aske daily bread for repairing our life Fifth circumstance is Dominus the owner or to whom the bread appertaineth ours to the children of God Of all which circumstances with the subiect thereof something must be vttered First therefore of Bread Bread as some of the ancient Fathers interpret VVhat bread signifieth signifieth Christ Iesus which is that bread of life or liuing bread that bread that came downe from heauen or heauenly bread and so they expound that other word supersubstantiall that is celestiall or heauenly according as Christ saith I am the liuing bread which came downe from heauen Ioh. 6.51 To this exposition some of the new writers incline Others and namely the greater and better part of ancient and new writers to whose iudgement as it is meete we subscribe in such a matter of doubt not determined in Scripture expound the bread here named the corporall bread the foode of our bodies yet so as the word containeth a Synecdoche bread being put for all outward prouision so that bread here must signifie three things First bona corporis the good things of the bodie Bona corpoâ—is a part of bread which may be generally called health or the due constitution and temperature of the bodie whereto appertaineth Nourishment Apparell Recreation and Physicke Secondly Bona fortune a part of bread Eccles 9.11 Bona fortunae if the word fortune may be tolerated namely such outward good things as doe indifferently befall good and bad men viz. 1. Wealth 2. Honour 3. Libertie 4. Peace 5. Plentie whereto appertaine 6. Labour in our callings 7. Magistracie 8. Fruitfull seasons Thirdly Gods blessing a part of bread the blessing of God vpon all the former good things whether inherent in the bodie or adherent thereto Now that bread may generally signifie all these things it is is but a meere vsurper of all his substance and therefore hath need to aske this second interest to his goods of God whose is the earth and all that therein is Psal 24.1 and who only giueth his creatures through Christ Iesus to the faithfull his friends and not to the wicked his enemies Secondly it will further be obiected that Gods seruants that are rich neede not aske their daily bread of God seeing they haue before men the ciuill title to their goods and before God a religious interest also they being Gods friends and members of Iesus Christ through whom they are made the heires of all things But for answere of this obiection also wee must remember to distinguish betwixt the title to the bread or the vse of the bread and the benefit or commoditie which is reaped by the bread or by the vse of the bread for the children of God oft times vse bread and yet haue no benefit by the vse thereof as they vse mariage and want children they vse Physicke and recouer not their health therefore Gods children are taught to aske a staffe to their bread Gods powerfull word or blessing vpon the meanes without which man cannot liue and hence it is that all Gods creatures and ordinances must bee sanctified by prayer 1. Tim. 4. as the Apostle teacheth This prayer then includeth these foure particulars following First Lord giue vs a ciuill title to bread Secondly Lord giue vs a religious title to bread Thirdly Lord giue vs leaue to vse the bread Fourthly Lord giue vs comfort by the vse of the bread The first is opposed to pouertie the second to vsurpation the third to the taking of
concluded A king that is of abilitie will aduance his kingdome cause himselfe to be honoured cause his subiects to obey his will and prouide for the outward prosperitie and inward felicitie of his subiects God he is of abilitie being a powerfull king Therefore he will prouide for his honour c. The third argument is taken from the glory of Gods kingdome Glory of Gods kingdome Where first consider the meaning of the words Thine is glorie that is 1. Thou hast made al things for thy glory 2. The things we aske are meanes of thy glory 3. The things we aske shall by vs be referred to thy glory and so the conclusion followeth Ergo graunt vs these things which we aske in these petitions Secondly let vs also consider the argument framed thus directly confirming our faith for the first petition That which is most deere to thy selfe thou wilt procure But thy glory is most deere to thy selfe Therefore glorifie thy selfe by vs or in vs or giue vs grace to glorifie thy name Indirectly it confirmeth our faith in all the other petitions after this manner Thou Lord wilt further all the meanes of thy glorie But the enlarging of thy kingdome the obedience of thy will our daily bread remission of sinne and perseuerance in grace are meanes of thy glory Therefore Lord we are perswaded thou wilt cause c. The eternitie of Gods kingdome The fourth argument wherby our faith is strengthened is taken from the eternitie or euerlasting continuance of this kingdome and of the two other properties thereof mentioned in the second and third arguments for the kingdome power and glory of God is euerlasting or Gods powerfull and glorious kingdome is eternall and that in a double respect 1 In themselues for that they neuer haue end 2 In the faithfull who doe and will euerlastingly remember and magnifie the Lord the most mighty and glorious king This fourth argument is framed after this manner If thy kingdome power and glory shall euerlastingly be remembred and magnified by vs as it is euerlasting in it selfe then grant these our praiers which are means thereof But by granting these our petitions we shall be prouoked to procure the euerlasting remembrance of thy kingdome power and glory by our selues as long as we liue by our holy seede after vs and for euermore in thy heauenly kingdome Therefore we are perswaded thou wilt graunt vs these our petitions Faith is supported God is not perswaded by arguments Thus our faith is supported and strengthened by arguments which are vsed not to perswade God who is vnchangeable and immoueable in his purposes but to perswade vs who are of little faith and scarse beleeue God himselfe and therefore haue need to find out in our selues strong arguments as it were maine pillars to support our faith as it were a crasie house ready to fall to decay continuallie Desire a part of feruency The second part of feruencie is desire which is expressed in the word Amen As faith is the principall worke of the vnderstanding so desire is the principall worke of the will in regard of that which we want and as faith may well be compared to the hand or arme laying hold vpon blessings so desire may be compared to the brawne or sinewes of the arme or hand the instruments of strength whereby wee holde fast that which we apprehend Mat. 7.7 This is expressed by Matthew in very significant and forcible metaphors Aske as a begger doth to get an almes Seeke as one with a candle looketh for a iewell lost vpon the ground Knocke with strength and force to get open the gate of Mercie The word whereby desire is expressed is an Hebrue word and it signifieth VVhat Amen doth signifie verely truely certainely so be it let it bee so O Lord I desire it might be so as I aske And this may afford an argument for the confirmation of our faith to obtaine taken from the trueth of God framed in this forme Thou Lord art a God of trueth Amen containeth an argument to support our faith thou art true in all thy promises thy promises are yea and Amen thou art Amen the faithfull and true witnesse thou keepest fidelitie for euer But thou hast promised to grant the petitions of thy seruants made in feruencie of desire and faith Therefore grant these our petitions so qualified Thus the manner of making our prayers is taught vs in the conclusion of this prayer which is feruencie in the two parts thereof faith and desire Now contrary to feruencie is coldnes in prayer Coldnes in prayer whereof something briefely must be spoken that contraries may be more perspicuous by their opposition A cold prayer is either when a man vnderstandeth not that which he bableth with his lips or hath no assurance to obtaine that hee asketh or regardeth it not in comparison or prayeth liuing in sinne vnrepented of for all these conditions are as it were colde water cast into a boyling caldron which boyling before through heate now ceaseth Iam. 1.6 The Apostle Iames compareth such prayers to waues of the sea tost to and fro with the wind and at length are consumed into froth or beaten in peeces vpon the rocke A cold prayer obtaineth nothing for although perhaps a cold prayer may swell in great and eloquent words and roare with pitifull complaints and outcries and be tumbled vp and downe in the mouth by repetitions or in the mind by imagination yet at the length the winds of wandring thoughts faint affections or grosse ignorance driueth them vpon the rockes of presumption doubting despaire and impenitencie and so suddainely they are dissolued into froth and consumed into nothing In briefe therefore to conclude this conclusion wee must striue and wrastle with the Lord in time of prayer as Iacob did with the Angell Genes 32.24 Hosea 12.4 holding him fast not letting him goe till he blesse vs till he change our names and call vs Israel men preuailing with God that so after our prayers we may find spirituall ioy and comfort and incouragement in all our waies which is the fruite of feruent prayer Here should bee the end of this treatise but that there are certaine extrauagant questions to bee discussed which could not be referred to any one proper place of the former method and yet containe matter very profitable though onely probable and consisting of vncertainties and coniectures for the most part The questions with their answeres are briefely these following VVhether Christ prayed the Lords prayer 1 Whether Christ euer prayed the Lords prayer The answere It is probable that Christ did pray the Lords prayer himselfe for himselfe and for vs for although the expositors say that the word Father is Naturae nomen non personae that is to say common to all the three persons not proper to the first person and therefore it would follow that if Christ prayed this prayer he should pray to himselfe