More work for PRIESTS: OR AN answer TO GEORGE Gifford's pretended defence of Read Prayers and devised Leitourgies, comprised in the first part of his book; entitled A short Treatise against the Donatists of England: Wherein Is proved that the serving of God in such away and manner is a superstitious and vain worship. Written By JOHN GREENWOOD Christ's faithful Martyr: Here-unto Is added by another man, many other arguments against stinted service and book prayer. Luk. 16. 15. That which is highly esteemed among men, is an abomination in the sight of God. Printed in the year 1640. The Preface MY first writing being about that spiritual exercise of prayer and true invocation of God's reverend name, whereby the distressed soul of man, loaden with the burden of sin, compassed also about with so many deceitful enemies, continual assaults of Satan, rebellion of the flesh, enticements of the world etc. seeketh daily help of God the Father, giver of all good gifts, having through Jesus Christ free access by the direction of his holy spirit, for all occasions to unburden itself of whatsoever grief, or occasion of thanks it is moved with: I ought still, and by God's assistance shall keep me in the meekness of the spirit, not withstanding his unchristian railings, slanders, & reproaches against me & the truth. I then showed that no other prayer could utter and ease the several occasions & distresses of this conscience, and that no other man's writing could speak for this soul unto God, but the heart and mouth of him that prayeth for himself, or is chosen the mouth of many, uttering to God his or their minds for their present wants or occasion urgeth, and the spirit giveth utterance. And I further proved that only this prayer pleaseth God, and is grounded on faith; to this effect I brought many reasons out of God's word, admiring the ignorance of this age, wherein (having had the gospel of Christ thus many years in our own language to search and try all things by) whole congregations do make no other prayer to God then reading over a certain number of words upon a book from year to year, month to month, day to day &c. the same matter and words as they were stinted, even out of that Portuis, englished out of Antichrists mass book; besides private reading of menswritings instead of praying. And seeing this counterfeit show of worship and pretended prayers was made common merchandise in every assembly by this Antichristian priesthood, and that all men everywhere, were compelled to bow down hereunto, and to offer up such counterfeit sacrifices; I perceaved the first principle of Religion) which is to invocate the name of the true God, through the meditation of Christ in spirit and truth, with heart and voice, for our present wants according to the will of God) was never yet sincerely taught by these time serving Priests: But as an agreeable service to the humours of earthly minded, men which have not the spirit of God, this ware was thrust upon all people. They well knowing, that such a ministry and such a Church of worldlings could never have stood, without such a Samaritan worship & Egyptian calf; and like earthly devices to counterfeit a Religion, all men inclined to some. And long have I heard this pretended worship inveyed against by many (sometimes zealous) for the errors and confused order thereof: Yet could I not hear any to set down or teach, which was the true prayer that only pleased God, many contriving divers forms of words, as though they had known the heart of man, counselled them to read them, day unto day, year unto year, at evening, morning, dinner, supper &c. by portion, measure, and stint, as an offering to God what state soever the soul was in; not teaching the difference between reading upon a book, and prayer unto God, all the time. So that true and only prayer hath not been taught all this time, & those that knew how to pray aright neglect it, this reading being most easy as they think, and they aptest thereunto, compelled in the public assemblies thus to mock with God, after the manner of the papists matins, true zeal nowhere found, but in the persecuted remnant. These my first writings, carried abroad by such as desired true instruction, and willing to make others partakers of such benefits as God imparted unto them, it fell into Mr Gifford's hand; Who (as it seemeth being a merchant of such ware finding the gain of the priesthood to depend here upon, or as he saith (the peace and uniformity of the Church) made head unto it; and that not with purpose (as the fruit of his labour showeth) to edify others, but standing himself a minister to this liturgy, having made shipwreck of that conscience he sometimes was thought to have; with all bitterness of spirit, and carnal wisdom, having no more savour of grace in his writings, than there is taste in the white of an egg, fleeth upon me with uncharitable railings, slanders &c. And loadeth not only me, but all the faithful that walk by the rule of God's word, with opprobrious titles, of Donatists, Brownists, Anabaptists, heretics, schismatics, seditious, foolish, frantic, &c. to bring not only us, but the truth of God into contempt with our sovereign Prince, and all that fear God: for he ceaseth not with laying all reproaches he can devise upon our persons; as one of those Locusts, Rev. 9 whose similitudes are like unto horses prepared to battle, whose faces like men, but their teeth as the teeth of lions; But also perverteth, blaspheameth, & by all means defaceth the truth offered to him. Welsing the natural man perceiveth not the things of the spirit of God (I will speak not here of the gifts of the spirit but of the grace of God which sanctifieth the same, many having Charismata that have not Charin.) And seeing I am already thus rent, God's truth delivered by me, trodden under his feet, I will follow the council of Solomon who forewarneth me that he which reproveth a scorner receaveth to himself shame, and he that rebuketh the wicked himself a blot: And so turn me from him, leaving him to the consideration of his own words: where he sayeth in his Epistle to the reader, He that seemeth most zealous in Religion and refraineth not his tongue, hath but bitterness in his heart in stead of heavenly zeal. And though nothing else can be looked for at their bands that are Apostate from that light they have sometimes themselves published, (of which sort the world was never more full) yet for the good of God's chosen scattered abroad, and for the defence of God's truth I cannot hold my tongue: And for the more plainness, I will answer as to him, though I mind not to have any more to do with him, till God give him repentance. Wishing grace by the direction of God's holy spirit to him that readeth, to weigh both sides uprightly, and to follow the truth to his own salvation. JO. GRENWOOD. More works for Priests. GEORGE GIFFORD. To condemn & overthrow read prayer, ye bring as the ground or foundation of all your matter, this Sentence, God is a Spirit & to be worshipped in Spirit, Iob. 4. This Scripture indeed is clear & strong to cut down all carnal worship, as disagreeing from the nature of GOD. And if any maintain that the very bodily action of reading is the worship of God, it may fitly be alleged against them, &c. John Greenwod's Answer wisdom is justified of her Children. IT is agreed upon & consented unto on both sides, that seeing God is a spirit, & only requireth such to worship him, as worship him in spirit & truth: all carnal worship is cut down hereby, of what sort soever, as disagreeing from the nature of God: & that all fantastical devices of men; namely, whatsoever is not warranted in his word, is carnal worship, a wearisomeness unto him, & loathsome in his sight: So that no man ought to intermeddle, attempt, or practise any thing in show of worship, where of they have not sure ground of his word: For even our God is a consuming fire. Now to put away all your (bodily) distinctions and earthly cavils, I still affirm (as I have proved) the stinting, imposing men's writings upon public assemblies, to have them read over by number and stint, or any other way, as a worship of God instead of true invocation, is a mere device of man, & so carnal worship; as also all other reading of men's writings publicly or privately in this abuse, for praying to God. Yet say you to apply this Scripture John. 4.22.23. in this manner against read prayer, is frivolous, where I appeal to all men's consciences, for the weight thereof. It is frivolous, you say, except I can prove that a man cannot pray by the spirit of God with sighs, and groans upon a book, or when prayer is uttered after a prescript form, & c.. At the first step you go about to alter the question. All our prayers ought to be uttered after a prescript form, even that perfect rule and form our Saviour gave to his Disciples and all posterities: But this is nothing to the matter. For the other which is nothing but a begging of the question, I alleged certain reasons to this effect. First that those sighs & groans in reading instead of praying were not of faith, seeing that those sighs & groans that proceed of faith, minister matter to pray without a book. 2. That you did but barely affirm the question in calling it prayer by the spirit, when one doth read, seeing reading is not praying at all: for as I then alleged, to invocate the name of God in spirit, is by the work of the spirit to bring fourth of our heart's prayer to God, which is then in truth when it agreeth to God's word. But reading is another matter, namely a receiving of instruction into the heart from the book. Out of the first Mr. GIFFORD maketh men believe he hath fetched two heresies; the one a perfection of faith, the other that faith cannot be joined unto, or stand with any outward helps for the increase thereof. little marvel, he found so many heresies in our whole writings, that could find two or three in my first reason: but that you may remember yourself better (though you had two years to consider) I will bring the words before you again, if peradventure you may have grace to call back yourself. I said if the sighs & groans (in that kind of praying) were of faith, it would minister matter without a book, this sentence I may confirm by many testimonies of scripture, that no perverted spirit can gain say or resist: the scripture teacheth us everywhere, that in praying the spirit only helpeth our infirmities, no other helps mentioned or can be collected in the present action of prayer through the Scripture. He hath sent into our hearts the spirit of his son crying: Rom. 8.26 gall 4.6 2. cor. 4.13 Abba Father, we believe, therefore we speak. Yet here is not any show of perfection of faith, but of the contrary, praying for our wants. But this may be gathered, that God only accepteth the fruits of his own spirit in prayer, and requireth no more of any, but that every one according to the proportion of faith, pray unto him, as occasion in them requireth. Now to conclude that because in praying we need not a book to speak for us, when the heart itself & book of our conscience speaketh with God; that therefore saith never needeth instruction, but is perfect, were slanderous, false, and senseless. The cause then of these heresies proceed hereof, that your sell fe Mr. Gifford would needs frame two syllogisms, & in the moods of your malice, constrain the proposition of the present action in praying, to a general sentence of all times and actions. though both our question here was of the very action of praying, & in the conclusion of that very point within six lines after this, you add these words; Even in the time of their begging at God's hands; so that these heresies must be Mr Gifford's and not mine, seeing they are found to be coined of his idle brain, and godless heart, only to defame the truth. But (say you) the most part are ignorant, weak, short of memory, &c. therefore need all helps to stir them up to pray, &c. where, by your own confession, reading is not praying, but a help to stir up to pray. And even hereupon all our errors arise, that you cannot discern the difference of spiritual gifts, with the distinct use of them. We doubt not but before prayer, & all the days of our life, we have need of helps of instruction to pray aright, & for the fitness of the mind & body, often fasting, reading, meditating, &c. are great helps to go before to humble ourselves in praying: but in the present action of prayer when the heart is talking with God, the eyes, hands, &c. with attention lift up to heaven, all the powers of our souls & bodies conversant with God, to take a book & read, cannot be called in this action a help, but a confounding of the mind, & of God's ordinances, and a doing we know not what, though before and after, it be an exeellent means ordained of God, to instruct us to pray and all other duties. As for the conformation you talk of, where I alleged that a troubled mind is the pen of a ready writer, therefore needeth not a book to speak for it in the action of praying: Psalm. 51, 17 . By troubled mind I understood such a mind, as is presently moved with the sight of some sin, or urged by other occasion: a broken spirit, a broken & contrite heart: & not such a mind as in despair or doubt is perplexed: and that the heart which is moved in faith with present occasion to call upon God is the pen of a ready writer, (that is) hath matter and words enough without a book to utter his own wants, we may read throughout the psalms, My throat is dry (saith David) I am weary with crying &c. But here again in stead of answer, you tell me, I run upon the rock of an heretical opinion of perfection: Wherein I wonder (but that I perceive your right eye is blinded) you should be so careless what you say, nay what after two years' study you put in print. Doth it follow, that because the heart, moved with occasion through the work of faith, hath words and matter enough in praying without a book to speak for it, that therefore faith is perfect? Let equal Judges consider. Here you say many are so troubled & perplexed in mind, that they cannot pray till they have some consolation by the direction of others; which when they cannot have, reading upon a book is a notable help, I allow all this and agree, if you would make reading one thing, and prayer an other, divers exercises of the spirit &c. But in the very action of praying to have an other speak unto us never so good words of exhortation, were but a confounding of the mind and action, and an abuse of both those holy exercises. Even so, by your own comparison, reading upon a book in the action of praying, seeing we cannot do both at once. It is the spirit of God in the very action of prayer that helpeth our infirmities. David in praying finding his soul heavy, stirreth up himself as thus. My soul why art thou cast down, why art thou disquieted within me, Psalm. 42, & 43. wait on God; For I will yet give him thanks, my present help and my God. He had a troubled mind, his mouth wanted no words to provoke the Lord to hear his complaint, and his heart to wait upon the Lord, & so through all the psalms you shall find the conversing of the soul with God to be such, as it were a mockery to think reading upon a book could have any place in that action, or that any man's writing could lay out the present estate of the soul with the passions thereof. The Priest may say, my book why are thouso evil printed, for when they read the heart cannot reason and talk with God. To the second point, which was but your bare assuming of the question, to say a man may pray by the spirit upon a book &c. I alleged that to worship God in spirit, is, when the inward faith of the heart, bringeth forth true invocation, etc. this you grant to be most true, and that none other is accepted of G O D; then that which proceedeth from the inward faith of our own heart: But you think that reading upon a book is to bring forth of the heart true invocation. This cannot be, if we consider the difference between proseuche and anagnosis prayer and reading, the one being a pouring fourth of vows, petitions, supplications, the other a receiving into the soul all such things as we read: This therefore I leave to all men's consciences to be considered, whether the matter we read can be said a pouring fourth of the heart, the whole use of these divers actions through the whole Bible show it cannot. Now where I said that you teach men instead of pouring fourth their hearts, to help themselves with matter and words out of a book, you say I speak fondly and foolishly etc. Mine answer now is, that is well I lied not, if I had said you compel men to read upon a book in all your public assemblies, certain words of your own writings by number and stint, from year to year, & day to day, & the same instead of pouring out their hearts before the Lord for their present wants, I had not lied. Now let all men by that which hath been said, consider the grossness of it, and so the folly remaineth to yourself. But to help this matter, & to deliver yourself conniugly in such a straight, you say you wish all men to use the help of the book, that they might the better power fourth their hearts unto God, being such as are not throughly able. First you grant here, the prayers read upon the book is not the pouring fourth of the heart, but aught to be used only as an help, wherbie you grant the whole question, and further all your assemblies have had no other invocation of God's name this many years, but a help to teach them to pour fourth their hearts. But whether men's writings may be read in the public assemblies to this use, we shall after make manifest, Here yet is granted but an help, and not the pouring fourth of the heart. And to whom is it granted an help? to such as are not able to pray. Here either you must confess your whole ministry is unable to pray, or that they transgress in in this high worship of GOD: for in an other place you grant in all your assemblies, this reading is used of men's writing for prayer, thus you may behold your best worship to be nothing, but a help to teach you to pray. Where I said that you teach men to fetch the cause of their sorrowing from the book, even in their time of begging at G O D S hand, you say I speak fondly, to call that the cause, which is the manifestation of the cause etc. You here forget your arts, Is there no more causes than one? if it be the instrumental cause, it is sufficient to prove, that if your Ministers had not their book, they had nothing to ask, or else asking that which is in the book, they ask not that which before was in their own hearts, so not coming heavy laden, they go empty away, and leave the matter in the book as they found it, till the next day and then sing the same song, But true prayer is when the heart is first prepared, and moved with the sight of their wants as the child that asketh bread: So we should not pray of custom, but ask the very thing whereof our heart feeleth the want. Your comparison again betwixt the being stirred up by a Sermon, and stirred up by reading, showeth, that yourself will not make the reading the pouring fourth of the heart. There is no question but the exercise of reading is chiefly for instruction and increase of knowledge, and meditating is not the same, nether can be said to be all the use of reading, though we deny reading to be praying, but because we are forbidden contention about words, & I have offered you as much wrong in saying you denied reading to be for meditation at all, I will proceed to the more necessary doctrines. Also for the controversy of canonical and apocryphal, we shall speak in due place. Thus (say you) you have answered nothing at all unto this commandment given by our saviour Christ to use that prescript form of prayer, say, Our Father etc, but by shift and cavil &c. Here you think you have put me to a plunge, yourself needed nothing doubt, but that I allowed the commandment holy and good, and to extend to all Christians, as well as to the Apostles, namely, to use that prescript form of prayer as the perfect pattern, & direction to all men's true prayers. But you I trust will make difference betwixt a form to all prayers, and praying, or prayer. And here you vehemently urge me to answer you, before I see you conclude any thing from the place, and so I should run into folly, to answer a matter before I hear it. In your first entrance of this discourse, you were round in your syllogisms, by two at once to wraft my words, and can find none for yourself, it seems your conscience is witness the matter would not hang together. And me thinks you had never more need to have showed what you would draw from this place Luke 11. Seeing I either mistook you the last time, or else you make a simple collection: which was this: Christ said to his Disciples, when you pray say Our Father. &, and not when you meditate say Our Father. Now what would you conclude of this, except as I said, that Christ would not have them, meditate that Scripture: But this I perceive was not your meaning: now I partly think your Argument should be (if the sword were not broken in the sheath) thus: Christ commanded his Disciples when they prayed, to say, Our Father, &c. therefore to be tied to read over or say by roate certain words, is lawful praying. For the first, that our Saviour Christ tied no man, or commanded none to say over those very words when they prayed, but to pray according to that form, after that manner as Math. 6. I manifested in my first writing. I. that our Saviour did not command us to use those words. 2. that Matth. 6. doth not keep the same words, nor that number of words which Luke 11. doth. 3. that he did not say, read these words when you pray, or say these words by roate. After all which reasons slilye passed away in both your answers, you come with your bare affirmation, that he commanded those words to be said over by roate or reading: Yea a little after you say, it is false to say that he commanded not the very words to he said over when we pray. And you further conclude, that because Christ commanded his Disciples to say over those words, therefore all men's writings in the form of prayer may be brought into the public assemblies to be read for prayer, being agreeable to the word. To which I answer that seeing no man's writings are without error, it is pernicious and blasphemous doctrine you collect. First because you make men's writings of equal authority with the form of prayer which Christ hath prescribed 2. for that you give men as much liberty and authority to frame and impose their Liturgies as Christ had to set down a form of prayer, he being Lord of the house. The wickedness of which collections you shall never be able to answer. And because you here urge me thereunto, I will make answer to your two places of Scripture, wherewith by false interpretation you deceive the simple, which taken from you, your matter is nothing but cavilling: The places are these, Luke 11. Num, 6. and because the one explains the other, and your collections the same from both, I will begin with numbers 6.32, 33.34: etc. Thus shall you bless the Children of Israel saying, the Lord bless thee and keep thee, etc. Here you say they were commanded to use the very words prescribed, in all their blessings. This I say is not true, for the Hebrew word is Coh Tebaracu, thus shall you bless: where the word Coh is an adverb of similitude, as we say, after this manner: which cannot be to say the same, but according to the same instructions. This word Coh is used throughout the Bible in this manner, in all the Prophets when they say, thus saith the Lord: where the sum of their prophecies are only recorded to us by the holy Ghost, and not all the words. Again this blessing is used in the psalms and Chronicles in prayer, for the people, in many other words. Ely blessed Hanna in other words, etc. And where in Luke 11.2. it is recorded, that our Saviour Christ commanded his Disciples, when you pray, I. Sam. 1 17 say Our Father, &c. it is plain by the doctrines following. 4.5.6.8.11. verses, that Christ tied no man to the very words saying over, for he teacheth them to ask their particular wants, as a child asketh bread or an egg of his Father: also to importune the Lord for our particular wants. But to make this place more plain, the same holy Ghost in the 6. of Matthew 9 verse saith, when you pray, say thus, Our Father, etc. where the greek word houtos hath the same signification that the Hebrew word Coh hath, which is, after this manner: & cannot be referred to the very words saying over, where upon Mr. Calvin upon those words faith, Noluit filius Dei prescribere quibus verbis utendum sit: The son of God would not prescribe what words we must use. Now consider how falsely Mr Gifford hath interpreted these Scriptures, to say the Priests were commanded to use the very words, and that Christ commanded to use the very words. As for his collections, that therefore men's writings may be imposed upon public assemblies, by stint & number to be prayed, it is an intolerable error, & bringeth in all poopery. Here I must call all men that read this fruitless discourse to be witness of Mr. Gifford's abuse of his tongue, to the defacing of God's truth. In his Epistle he proclaimed, that I called all men idolanters; which you shall perceive to be his own words, and to that end I will briefly repeat it. In my first writing I affirmed the reading imposed Liturgies by stint and limitation, instead of true invocation, as also all reading menswritings for praying, to be idolatry. In his answer he said, he could not see by what colour it could be called idolatry, or maintained out of God's word so to be; but it seems the penners of these things take every sin against the first table of the law, to be idolatry: if they do so (saith he) and with all do hold, that no Idolater shall be saved, then doubtless all are lost, &c. To this ignorant excursory I answered, that all false and devised worship by man's intention was idolatry, as the first and second commandments did testify. And to admit all the breaches of the first table were not idolatry, yet reading of men's writings instead of praying must needs be idolatry, seeing it is a transgression of the second commandment. Further (though I needed not have followed his empty head, even a cloud without water) yet I proceeded to prove, that no idolater could be saved but b y repentance for their known sin, and craving pardon with David for their hidden sins and secret faults. Psal. 119 Moreover (Said I) do you think any man is free from all inward and outward idolatry, seeing we cannot keep one commandment, and in some things we sin all. In which words I plainly reproved his grossness that concluded all men idolaters which committed any idolatry, and that no idolater could be saved, and distinguished between the sin of ignorance, weakness, and imperfection &c. in God's children, and open professed obstinate idolatry. Yet this godless man would lay to my charge, that I should call all men idolaters, whereas I never used such a word in all my writings, But only answered his folly in this running out from the question, they were his own words that brought this upon his own head, by concluding, that if every sin against the first table were idolatry, and no idolater could be saved, than all are lost, let the grossness then be his, and not mine. And I leave it to the consideration of all men, whether I may not say, that they which transgress the first or second commandments, do commit idolatry, without absurdity. But saith he though it be so, yet the Scripture calleth not the godly, murderers, idolaters, etc. for the relics of sin remaining. I answer that therefore your former absurd cavilling, where you said, if we hold it idolatry, etc. is by your own mouth fully answered. But to avoid this foil, he hath an other evasion. I thought (saith he) we had reasoned about such gross idolatry as a church is to be condemned and forsaken, which is defiled therewith. Here again you misreport me: i never reasoned to that end in in this whole discourse, but only laboured to show all men this error of reading men's writings instead of praying, that they might learn how to converse with God & their own Conscience, in prayer. And what mends will you make for this slandering and defacing of the truth, to all the world all that I desire is your repentance and amendment, which God grant unto you, if you be his. It followeth in your book thus: But seeing you confess that all men be Idolaters, that is touching the remanents of sin, it must needs follow there is no Church free from spots, etc. This word idolaters must still be yours, & then I willingly grant, that no man living is free from idolatry, concerning the relics of sin: Also that no Church upon earth can be without spot upon earth: So that now, by your own confession, I plead not for perfection in this life, though the more we want, the more we ought to endeavour. With what face then could you publish me an Anabaptist in your Epistle, and out of one mouth give contrary sentence? Doth your ordinary teach you to cast out such bitter waters of untruths? was it possible I should bold all men idolaters, & some men without committing of sin after regeneration, especially to maintain both such heresies as you give out? Well consider yourself, before the Lord call you to account for defacing his truth, and pleading for Baal. I grant, yea, I were not of God if I should speak otherwise, that the dear servants of God fall into most loathsome sins after regeneration, that the riches of God's mercy might appear in their repentance, through the work of his grace. Then you reason thus: if there be always spots and imperfectness in the true Church upon earth, than all your Arguments you bring against the Church of England, are of no force, except you will maintain a perfection. Mine answer is, I will not meddle with your Ch. to prove it a false church in this treatise, but refer you to Mr Barrowes refutation of Mr Gifford, him that handleth that part of your book. Yet I must tell you your argument is very simple: For after the same manner you might reason thus: If there be no true Church without spots upon earth, than the Church of Rome is the true Ch. for it hath many spots, and you all Scismatiques: again you assume the matter you should prove. It will be proved against you, that you have not Ecclesiam a people called fourth of the world to the obedience of Christ: Then, that the spots of your Church are Egyptian ulcers, incurable running botches. But I purposed not to deal with your Church, only my mind is to show the unlawfulness of this reading and imposing men's writings upon men's Consciences in stead of true praying. Of which sin the Lord give you and this whole land grace to repent, that so men may learn more fervently to call upon God. The first Argument against read Prayer, &c. No Apocrypha must be brought into the public assemblies: for there only God's word and lively voice of his own graces must be heard in the public assemblies. But men's writings and the reading of them over for prayer are Apocrypha, therefore may not be brought into the public assemblies. GEORGE GIFFORD. First touching the Proposition, No Apocrypha is to be brought into the public assemblies: What can be more false? Apocrypha is opposed against canonical: If nothing may be brought into the public assemblies but canonical Scripture, than the Sermons and prayers of Pastors are to be banished, &c. John Greenwod's Answer. IN the answer of this, you will needs oppose against both Propositions, & yet have nothing to say, if not, to roil the doctrines delivered with your feet, lest others should drink thereof. The part of a wise man had been to lay his hand on his mouth. In the first Proposition you would oppose the word apocrypha against the lively voice of God's graces when you see I said only, that no apocrypha might be brought into the public assemblies. And further to explain my mind, lest you should willingly find such a cavil, I added this reason for there only God's word & the lively voices of his graces are to be heard: where I acknowledged those lively voices to be God's ordinance, yet nether to be called Apocrypha nor Canonical. How can you say then I would have these, or that these are banished, if all Apocrypha writings be banished the public assemblies? Yet as I told you, I take Apocrypha to be all writings, but the canonical Authenique Scriptures. But (say you) than I will exclude the Paraphrases upon the Scriptures and the psalms in Meter etc. Affirm you them to be Apocrypha as you do, and can do no other, & I will through God's grace prove they ought not to be brought into the public assemblies. First, no man's writings are given to the Church by testimony of God's spirit, & we are only commanded to hear what the spirit saith: therefore though men's writings be permitted to be read privately of them that will, and thereupon called Apocrypha (that is hidden) they may not be brought into the public assemblies. Rev. 2. 11. Secondly no man's writings are without error and imperfections, therefore not to be brought into the public assemblies: 1 Tim. 3. 15. The Church is the pillar of truth. Thirdly the Church is builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and the Apostles Christ Jesus being the chief corner stone, Other foundation can no man lay, &c. and not upon men's writings, Therefore men's writings may not be brought into the public assemblies. Ephes. 2. 20. and 1 Cor. 3. fourthly if we might bring in any men's writings into the public assemblies, then all men's writings which we judge agreeable to the Scriptures. But this is forbidden, Ecclesiastes 12. 11. 12. My proof of the first Proposition is this: If any men's writings are to be brought into the public assemblies by God's commandment because they are agreeable to the Scriptures, as you in an other place allege, than all that are thought agreeable to the Scriptures ought of necessity by the same commandment, and if there be no commandment, than none are to be make authentic which God hath not made authentic, Gal. 3. 15 Heb. 2▪ 3 4. & 9 14 Mat. 5. 18. 2 Timot. 3 15. 16. 17 Rev. 22. 18. 19 For that were to set man in the place of God. No man's writings carry that majesty, as doth the pen of the holy Ghost. No man's writings are Cecuromenai, authentic, confirmed by signs and wonders from heaven, sealed by Christ's blood, that not one word of title shall be unfulfilled, The Scriptures are all sufficient. All men must walk by that one rule; To think there were not rules enough prescribed by the Lord for his house were blasphemous and papistical. Now for the explication, interpretation, etc. and speech unto God in prayer: God hath given gifts unto men to pray and prophesy, and ordained his ministry of Pastors, Teachers, whose lively voice is appointed to be the mouth of God unto the people, & of his people unto himself, in the public assemblies. And these graces are not apocryphal, for no prophecy of the Scripture is of private interpretation idias epiluseos: to every one is given the manifestation of the spirit to profit withal. Most execelent, 2. Pet. 1. 20. 1 Cor. 12 7. men serve but their time in the public assemblies. Now i may conclude as i began. That only God's holy word & the lively graces of his holy Spirit are to be heard & offered up unto in him the public assemblies. Where then in way of answer to the Minor Proposition, you say you see not how our speech unto God should be Apocrypha: It answereth not me, who deny an other man's writing to be our speech in prayer unto God. But convinceth yourself by you, own mouth thus: True prayer is not Apocrypha, but all men's writings are Apocr.; Therefore men's writing is not true prayer. Here when you have nothing to say for yourself, you would make me believe that I account the psalms and the other forms of prayer in the Scripture to be Apocrypha when they be read, though a little before you confessed, you had in your last writing done me wrong therein. I do account the reading of the for praying, to be a groffe and superstitious abuse of them, yet them to be holy & canonical script. And here you have flatly overthrown yourself: saying the word Apocrypha is used with us for that which is not God's undoubted word unto us: And in your last writing, which should have been your answer, you said, God speaketh to us only by the canonical Scriptures. Now seeing you would make your liturgy and devised forms of prayer, helps and instruction, and yet cannot make them canonical or God's undoubted truth, they must not be brought into the public assembly, much less imposed by law upon the consciences of all men. And here remember all your Liturgies are cast out of the door: besides that, you have not made in both writings one direct answer to this most firm Proposition: which I will still leave upon you, thus. Only the canonical Scriptures and lively voice of God's own graces are to be brought into the public assemblies for doctrine and prayer. But men's writings are neither canonical scripture nor the lively voice of God's graces in such as he hath appointed to speak in the public assemblies. Therefore no man's writings, may be brought into, nor imposed upon the public assemblies. Thus might I make an end with this vain man, considering the whole matter is proved against him, all that follows being but repetitions of these former cavils, but that I must clear myself of his unconscionable slanders. The Second Argument. We must do nothing in the worship of God without warrant of his word. But read prayers have no warrant in his word. Therefore read prayers are not to be used in the worship of God. GEORGE GIFFORD. To this I answer at the first, that it is a great audacity to affirm that there is no warrant in the word for read prayers. When there be sundry testimonies to warrant the same, unless you will make difference, between that which a man readeth upon a book, and that which he hath learned out of the book. Further I said, I do not remember that ever. I have read that God commanded in the Scriptures that prayer shall be read upon a book, &c. J. GREENWOOD. seeing you have indeed not answered one reason or proof I alleged in my last writing, but with must evil conscience (as the handling showeth) perverted them, I will leave them to be judged of them that shall see my writing. And here, seeing you would not print it, I will answer your chief objections. First than you grant, that if I put difference between reading upon the book, and that which he hath learned out of the book, mine Argument is found. For by your own confession, God hath not given any commandment for read prayer, and so it hath no warrant. Whereupon I gain thus much. First, that they which impose read prayer upon the Church, do that whereof they have no warrant in the word, and that in the high service of God then, that they which read upon a book for praying, do that whereof they have no warrant in God's word: whereupon all your Ministers must leave reading their stinted prayers upon the book, or else stand under God's wrath, & all that so pray with them, which will be a fearful reckoning if they repent not of their sin showed them. And although our question be chiefly concerning the reading of men's writings instead of praying, yet I am content the other abuse of the Scriptures be included also, though I make not both in the same height of sin, as shall appear in my several reasons. As an unconstant man then, you in the latter end of the answer to this Argument would, call back again that, which you here have granted: Namely, that there is no commandment to read prayer upon a book for praying. Of the contrary thus you reason The people of God did read the psalms upon a book when they did sing, therefore men may read upon a book when they pray. I deny your Argument: besides that all men may see Your unstableness in denying and affirming with one breath, you now go about to make reading of prayer a commandment: thus you prove it. Singing (say you) is a part of prayer. Singing may be read upon a book: therefore prayer may be read upon a book. Admit that Singing were a part of prayer, yet doth it not follow that all prayer may be read upon a book. But you speak like an ignorant man, to say that Singing is prayer, seeing they are two divers actions & exercises of our faith: the one never read for the other, nor said to be a part of the other, through the Scriptures, but are plainly distinguished I. Cor. 14.15. what is it than I will pray with the spirit, but I will pray, with understanding, I will sing with the spirit etc. Again, if you be sad, pray, and if you be merry sing psalms, prosuxomai and psalo. I will pray, and I will sing, are divers exercises of the faith, if a man should say reading a chapter of the scripture, and prophesying were alone, were he not wide. Even so every part of God's service is not prayer. I grant we are everywhere commanded to sing psalms unto God. And alleged that place of the Apostle to the Ephes. 5. 19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, etc. and that of the Coloss, only to this end, that in psalms singing we do not always speak unto God, as in those psalms which are only instructions and prophecies, in the 1. and 2. Psalms you have not one word spoken unto God. Again, as all reading of the prayers in the Scriptures, is not praying or speaking unto God, so the reading or singing of psalms I took to have been a speaking to ourselves, a stirring up of God's graces in us etc. But I do not now nor did not then hold it so, in all psalms singing. And where you say I purposely left out the latter part in both places, which was this. Sing unto God with a grace in your hearts, the Lord knows I had no purpose to injury the Scripture, nor maintain an untruth, But though we might do those things with a grace to God in our hearts, which were not properly and directly a conversing by thought & word with him alone, but one thing might have kept you from crying out, heresy, in that I added this, that I would not stand upon that reason, but desired to know it further. But how unjustly could you number this for an heresy maintained of us all in your Epistle, that we should deny that psalms should be song unto God. The Lord keep me from such error, And a woeful physician you are; if I had been in such an error; For the 102. Psalm, I never denied: but that it was a most excellent psalm penned by Daniel or some other Prophet, and given to the whole Church to be song or read as other psalms, in the form of prayer. But you must prove that the Church did use it as you say, to read it over for praying, or were commanded so to do. This is proof enough they did not, because it is a psalm. Now though the Ch. speak many times in the singular number, yet it is expressed in some other verse that it is so. But now admit that you could prove that the psalms were read instead of, or for invocation, which you shall never be able to do, it doth not follow that men's writings should be brought into the assemblies and read for prayer. The 6. of Numbers I have answered before: From the 92. Psalm you reason thus. If the psalms and other forms of prayer in the scriptures were read or said by rote, the very form of words for praying; Then reading instead of, or for praying. Here you durst not set your assumption, it was so false, which should be thus. But the psalms & other forms of prayer were read for praying, &c. This I showed you was very untrue, they were never commanded so to be used, nor never so used. My proof was this, they are given were by the holy Ghost for other uses, as singing, reading, etc. and not commanded any where so to be used, so that you do but cavil, not having one proof for all your shameless assertions. Now where I demanded what this made for your Liturgies, and reading men's writings for praying, except you would make your own writings of equal authority with the Scriptures: You answer. That if I deny the consequence, it was lawful to use the psalms, therefore men's writings, than I will shut out all prayers, even the prayer of the Pastor. See your carnal handling, shuffling, and confounding God's ordinances: Doth it follow that because men's writings may not be brought into the public assemblies, or there be read for praying, therefore the prayers uttered by the lively voice of the Pastor should hereby be excluded? this your shift was answered in the first Argument, your cavils are stale, you are again convinced. Touching the other matter of cunning phrases and forms of prayer by roate, to say over certain number of words, it is popish and a mere evasion, and bewrayeth your ignorance in prayer, In this you have granted me that he which prayeth not with a feeling of his present wants of his soul, but saith over certain number of words of custom or affectation, he is an hiprocrite, which is true, proved. Mat. 6.7. Now by this examine your daily, monthly, annual etc. saying over, nay reading over certain words, every time the same, as you are stinted. It is plain the sacrifice of fools. Ecclesiastes. 4.17. The two points wherein you protest so willingly to agree with me, were these. First whether only such prayers as were made without the book, were accepted of God's children. Secondly whether the same spirit teacheth us to pray, that taught the holy men of God before time. You grant both these, but that you would seem to alter the first question: well then, God's own spirit that taught them to pray without a book, or stinting of words, teacheth us so to pray now, & in the action of praying giveth the mouth to utter what the heart desireth, moved with the same spirit. Still then after your long shifting to and fro, I trust you will stand to your first words, that you never read in the Scriptures any commandment for reading of prayers. secondly, to say over certain numbers of words or phrases of the Scripture of custom or affectation, without feeling of, or asking for our present wants, is hypocrisy. Therefore I will conclude as I began, mine Argument standing good, that, To do any thing in the worship of God werof we have no warrant of God's word, is sin: But read prayers have no warrant in God's Word, Ergo, etc. The third Argument: We may not in the worship of God receive any tradition which bringeth our liberty into bondage. Read prayer upon commandment brought into the public assemblies, is a tradition that bringeth our liberty into bondage. Therefore read prayer &c. The Minor is thus proved, that God hath left it in all men's freedom to pray as the present occasion requireth and the spirit giveth utterance, according to his will. Again no man hath power to command any thing in the worship of God, which God hath not commanded &c. Mark 7.7.8.9. Math. 15. Gal. 5.1. &c. GEORGE GIFFORD. I say it is ungodly and near unto blasphemy, to affirm, that prescript form of prayer is a tradition bringing our liberty into hondage &c. my reason was etc is, that the Lord by Moses prescribed a form of blessing &c. Num. 6 the Prophets in the psalms, have prescribed many forms of prayer. Our Saviour Christ prescribed a form of prayer, &c. JOHN Greenwod's Answer. HEre is a great storm, & yet nothing but wind. If you were in Caiphas his place you would either have rent your clothes for zeal, or, else condemn me before you understand what I say. Is it simple dealing do you think to say I hold it a bondage breaking our liberty, for the Lord by Moses, the prophets, our Saviour Christ also, to set down a form of prayer or to prescribe a form of prayer? Did you not see that the Minor Proposition speaketh of the reading for praying, and not of the form of prayer? Again, of the commandment, whereby men are compelled to read instead of praying? Did you not see that these words brought into the public, assemblies, did specify the matter to be men's writings to be read in the assemblies as a worship, yea invocation of God's name: which is a gross mockery. Not that there is any commandment to read over those forms of prayer mentioned by you for praying, and so the commandment so to read them for praying, is an abuse of them, and a commandment of men and not of God, etc. But that much more odious it is to bring in men's writings into the public assemblies., is proved unlawful in the first argument, and then to commit idolatry with them by reading them jnstead of praying, and that to compel men by commandment where God had set no commandment so to use them, was a bringing all men into bondage of popish traditions. So that your common recital of these places of Scripture is abuse of them, and you do but palinodian cavere. I think if you get St. I H O N S gospel about your neck as the Papists do, you will think you have religion enough. The more fearful is your apostasy, you proceed from evil to worse. GEORGE GIFFORD. About the commanding a prescript form of prayer to be used, our Church doth agree with all godly Churches, yea the reformed Churches have and do practise the same, here therefore I wish the reader to observe that you Brownists do not only condemn the the Church of England, but all the reformed Churches whatsoever, and can be no other but Donatists. John Greenwod's Answer. I Trust your madness will appear to all men, the poison of asps is under your tongue: he that cannot rule his tongue his Religion is in vain. Shall i in your heat be pressed with multitude of, Churches? then hear what the Lord faith, Thou shall: not follow a multitude to do evil, we have the word amongst us, we shall by that word be either justified or condemned. Then either prove your matter from the scriptures or else give ear to the Scripture. If those Churches you speak of, bring men's writings into the public assemblies, & enforce them to be read for praying, I would see their warrant, we believe not because men say so, or do so, but because God speaketh: And where he speaketh, all men must be silent. You may accuse other countries as you will, know not their estate, but your drudgery instead of true worship, is loathsome, the priest with his massbook, & the beggar with his clapdish canuize over the Pater noster for their belly, which is your common worship, with other trinkets. We shall speak of a liturgy in due place, Here you breath out your accustomed lies, slanders, & railings. First you term us Brownists & Donatists, whereas I never conversed with the men nor their writings: I dereft Donatus his heresies. And if they had been instruments to teach us any truth we were not therefore to be named with their name, we were baptised into Christ's. Browne is a member of your Church, your brother, and all Brownists do frequent your assemblies. And here you wish the reader to consider, that I condemn all reformed Churches. do I condemn all Churches for reproving a sin by God's word & May not the true Churches (if they were such) err? Did I affirm at any time that they were no true Church that used read prayers, remember yourself, you know who is the Father of such untruths. But because your Conscience bare witness you had wrongfully charged me, and in from, all true Christians: you bring it in by necessary consequence thus. you assi'me (say you) prescript forms of prayer brought into the public assemblies to be the changing the work of the Spirit into an idol, a tradition breaking Christian liberty, a dead letter quenching the Spirit &c. and therefore most detestable. But all reformed Churches receive and use it &c. therefore: You can reason well to bring the truth into contempt, your moth is open and tongue whet as a sword thereunto. If the proposition be true, draw what consequence you will, it is yours & not mine, if the doctrine be true, it is God's word that giveth sentence against the sin. And if you have any spark of grace, procure that we may decide the truth with other Churches. Doth it follow that because imposing of men's writings to be read for praying is an heinous sin, therefore they that use it are no Church, If I should say so, I should justly be called an Anabaptist. And here you accuse me to plead for such a freedom in the Church, that nothing received which is imposed by commandment. Abaddon is the Father of such Prophets. Doth it follow that because we would have the Church free from all traditions of men which have no warrant in God's word, that therefore we would not receive God's ordinances by commandment. That we ought to receive nothing by commandment in the worship of God, which God hath not commanded, the second commandment with the scriptures I have rehearsed, are evident, Deut. 5.32.33. Mat. 2▪ 5.2.3 Gal. 4.9. Collof. 2, 20 But seeing yourself graveled, (considering all the world cannot lay a commandment to bring their own inventions into the assemblies, where God hath laid none, but forbidden it:) you ran to your former places of scripture to wrested them as before, where your collections are but vain repetions of that which hath been convinced before. Moses, the Prophets etc. prescribed forms of prayers, therefore men now may thrust their writings into the public assemblies: Your Argument is denied: and yet here is no warrant for the reading them over for prayer. G. GIFFORD. The Church had power to expound those prayers mentioned in the Scriptures, & to apply them to their several necessities &c. J. GREENWOOD. If you mean by expounding, the breaking of them up by doctrine up, and by doctrine and prayer to apply them to the several uses of the Church by lively voice, far be it from me to think otherwise. But if you mean by expounding. to make homilies upon them, or liturgies by writing to be thrust upon the public assemblies, you are wide, and now justify homilies instead of preaching, and written prayers instead of praying: show your warrant. The church's power is limited by the word. G. GIFFORD. When the prayers be framed and composed of nothing but the doctrine of the Scripture and after the rules of true prayer, nothing is brought in which God hath not commanded, J. GREENWOOD. THis might have come in before your railings, but you saw it was too silly: where is that commandment of God, that all men's writings in form of prayer agreeable to the Scriptures should be brought into the public assemblies, your bare word is not enough to put me to silence. And when you have got them into the Church, you must prove that God hath commanded they should be read for prayer. Where I said our saviour Christ never used the words when he prayed. in that form of prayer he gave to his Disciples, nether commanded his Disciples to say over these words, nether do we read that ever his Apostles did use them, or enforced others to use any certain number of words, you say I spoke untruly. For say you the Disciples desired him to reach them to pray, as John taught his Disciples, and he commanded them, when you pray, say Our Father; etc. Luke. 11. and S. Math. an Apostle hath delivered the same to the whole Church, I answer I have never heard that John Baptist taught his Disciples to say over certain words, nether can it be gathered by our saviour Christ's answer, for he answered not always the very demand according to their words, but thereupon took occasion to instruct them as the saw need. And I have proved by the 6. of Math. that our Saviour did not command them to say over the very words when they prayed: for the word Houtos in Matthew signifieth after this manner: again that Math. recordeth not the very number, or the very same words that Luke doth. And now I reason thus: if Christ had commanded those very words to be said over in praying, than we must always when we pray, say over those words: for in Math. 6. he saith when you pray, pray thus. Our Father etc. The etc. The word when showeth, that this commandment is to be observed at all times: And then the Apostles sinned in praying other words Acts. 4.24.25. Further it being the most summary form of prayer, most ample, most perfect etc. if those words were commanded to be said over, than we ought not to use any others, for he is accursed that bringeth not the best offerings he hath. Malach, 1.14. By all these it is evident that our Saviour nor his Evangelists tied no man to the very words saying over, but according to that form and those instructions: and now leave of your popish dreams. Yet you would make men believe, I reasoned thus, that the Apostles did not nether our Saviour himself, or any that we read of, use these words in prayer, therefore they did not use it. Nay I said, they did not use these very words in their prayers, but used other words according to their particular wants, as our Saviour in the 17. of John is said to do: therefore he nether used nor commanded others to say over those words. And so I may well conclude, that to impose certain words to be read or said by roate for praying, upon the Church, especially men's writings, is an intolerable pride, even a setting of men in the place of God: Also that to use them or bow down unto them in that order, is sin, and a breach of God's law. The fourth Argument. Because true prayer must be of faith, uttered with heart and lively voice: it is presumptuous ignorance to bring a book to speak for us unto God &c. The fift Argument. To worship the true God after an other manner than he hath taught, is idolatry. But he commandeth us to come unto him, heavy loaden with contrite hearts, to cry unto him for our wants &c. therefore we may not use reading of a dead letter, instead of pouring fourth out petitions. The Sixt Argument. We must strive in prayer with continuance &c. But we cannot strive in prayer and be importunate with continuance, reading upon a book. Therefore we must not read when we should pray, G. GIFFORD. These 3. I joined together as having no weight, you say I answer by plain contradiction without Scripture &c. And after wards is not my bare denial as good as you bare affirmation: &c. I. GREENWOOD. STay yourselves and wonder they are blind and make blind. Is there any doctrine more spiritual, any more inculcated by the holy Ghost, then this access unto God in the mediation of Christ, by his own spirit to make our minds known unto God, to offer up the fruits of his own spirit in us, and fetch increase from him by this secret work of true invocation with the heart and voice? This colloquy with the high majesty of God, is it a matter of no weight to learn to discern between diverse exercises of the spirit, and to exercise his graces aright according to his will? Right is it said, the wisdom of God is foolishness to the natural man. But Mr GIFFORD. will say he granteth the propositious true and weighty matters, it is the Assumptions that be so frivolous, & as he said a little after, ridiculous: well, let them he weighed. 1. That reading instead of praying is not a pouring fourth of the heart by lively voice. 2. That it is a quenching of the spirit, to read an other man's words upon a book, in the very action of pouring fourth our heart as we pretend. 3. That it is not an unburdening of a contrite heart by faith, but an ignorant action to read for praying. 4. That we cannot strive in prayer, continue in prayer, be importunate etc. by reading upon a book. These are matters he thinketh of so little weight, the bare denial and contradiction whereof he holdeth of such credit, that it must suffice for answer, seeing he saith he hath before proved the use of reading. See here he caleth it the use of reading; He could not say that reading is praying, nether that these two exercises of our Faith can be used both in one instant, as one action. I have showed that proseuche & anagnosis, praying and reading, are divers actions both of the mind and body: let the reader consider what weight then this matter is of, to talk with the living God. But for the benefit of such as have grace to savour the things that are of God, I will a little illustrate the Assumptions, at least some of them. 1. That it is a quenching of the spirit to read an other man's words upon a book, when I should pour fourth mine own heart, the word itself must be considered, the Apostle commandeth saying 1. Thessaloniaus. 5.19. extinguish ye not the spirit. Now to suppress and leave unuttered the passions of our own heart by the work of the spirit, giving us cause of our own heart by the work of the spirit, giving us cause of prayer, and instead thereof to read another man's writing, I doubt not will be found and judged of all that have spiritual eyes to see, a quenching of that grace, yea in that action, the reading hindereth us from pleading our cause with God, according to the occasions we see in our own hearts. And by not teaching men to draw out the graces of God in them, to offer up the sweet incense of his own spirit in prayer, but an other course devised by fleshly policy, the people grow into such atheism, that they learn not all the days of their life to lay open their own soul before the Lord in prayer. How much more then, by imposing stinted words to be read in the whole assemblies, instead of the lively graces, making it a sufficiennt ministry to read over such beggarly wares, do you abandon God's spiritual gifts, and make an assembly of Atheists in most places of this land, yea truly in the best assemblies compel such wares to be read, when and where the lively voices of God present graces should only be drawn fourth as an holy odour unto the Lord. Yea I appeal to the consciences of all that fear God, if this have not brought the land generally to atheism, that not one amongst an hundred can call upon God. 2 That it is an ignorance to presume to come into so near a conversing with God, and to do one action for an other, so offering the sacrifice of fools, let it be sufficient proof that reading is not praying. That it is presumptuous, to bring such lame sacrifices when you know to do better, let, it be considered whether you would so uncircumspectly, and carelessly approach to the presence of the Prince or any noble personage. Then if he be our Lord where is his honour, his fear etc. when we will teach men and compel men to do they know not what in his sight, and to offer such lame sacrifice. The Priests themselves care not what offering they bring to him Malach. 1. Thirdly the reading prayer can be at no hand a striving in prayer, for the word agoniso which is read Rom. 15, 30 signifieth to contend in fervency both in mind, and word, to prevail with God as Jaakob wrestled with the angel, and said, I will not let thee go except thou bless me, Genes. 32, 24.25.26. Such ●rist you shall see throughout the psalms in the prayers of David, and the Prophets, alas, how this should be performed either by fervency or continuance, let the wise consider. 4. For importunacy and continvance in prayer, whereof we have many precepts, let the word be looked upon, which is proscartereo to insist by perseverance etc. as we see our Saviour Christ make plain unto us by a parable, Luke 11.5▪ 6.7.8, and Luke. 18.1.2.3.5.7. now shall not God avenge his elect which cry night and day? Experience we see in Moses, who when he lifted up his hands to heaven the Israelites so long prevailed: Exod. 17. You can not make your read prayers serve in this use with all your devices, For how would you effect this, except to make the Priest read till he sweat again, with vain repetition, and the people that use such stinted prayers to say them often over, as the Papists their fifteen Aue marias & five Pater nosters as a cure of altheir grieves. By this little I have spoken, it may appear (though the Lord knows I am a man of uncricumcised lips, neither able to utter that God giveth me by faith to see in these high things, neither yet comprehending any title of the excellency, of them) it I hope it shall appear to God's children, how odious your merchandise is in God's eyes, and how you make the ordinances of God of true prayer, of none effect, by your traditions, he only approving the lively graces of his own ministry, and such as have gifts and are called thereunto, to be his mouth unto the people, and the people's mouth unto him in the public assemblies, you invent a new worship and extinguish his, which maketh men fall into dissoluteness and bloody tyranny against his saints. And where I alleged that Paul would pray with the spirit and understanding, and therefore not upon a book, you answer that Paul had no such need of a book as other men have. But if you had looked upon the text better, you should see, that the Apostle in his own person teacheth what ought to be done in all Churches & of all men, And that he there taketh away the abuse of spiritual gifts. I Corin. 14.15 and in the same Chapter showeth that this and all other his doctrines are commannments of God. vers. 37 now either God prescribeth two ways to pray, or else your reading for praying is a device of man. But yourself have confessed there is no commandment to read prayer for praying. Yet here you cavil with your stale shift, that Paul taught others to sing psalms upon a book, which is a mere evasion, seeing singing is not praying. The same Apostle faith to all that are borne of God, because we are sons God hath sent fourth into our hearts the spirit of his son which cryeth Abba Father. So that although we have not like measure of grace, yet if we cannot pray we have vot the spirit of God, Gal. 4.6. I alleged as you say a reason here, why prayer read cannot be true prayer. In reading we fetch the matter from the book which moveth the heart, In true prayer we fetch the matter from the heart which causeth the mouth to speak. Your answer is, that this a most ridiculous vanity, for tell me (say you) this, when we bring fourth in true prayer matter from the heart which causeth the mouth to speak, hath not the heart been first moved with the word of faith, etc. Let men here, witness with me, what cause I had to esteem you as a scorner. Again, how empty you are of any spiritual favour. And here you have no answer to give, but ask me certain questions: First whether when we bring fourth in true prayer. etc. the heart hath not been first instructed. To this I answer, that again you confess the reading prayer upon a book is not praying, but an instruction of the heart to pray. If you would stand to this, we should not need have so much labour, and all the places of Scripture which you have alleged for to prove reading praying, have been merely wrested by you to deceive the simple. Well (say you) but if the heart be first instructed before it can utter matter in prayer, why may not the heart again be moved with hearing or reading the word, and so utter prayer. Yes I grant and still you grant me, that reading is not praying but moveth to prayer: Then all your assemblies that have no prayer at all, and all that use read prayer for praying do not pray but mock with God. See if your ordinary will here be pleased with you, Yet you would deny all this with the same breath by a shift, saying: The heart in moved when one heareth the prayer of the minister and presently sendeth fourth prayers together with him. I trust you will not say that the heart of the hearer prayeth one thing, and the Minister an other, again the prayer of the minister is the prayer of the people, by God's ordinance, whiles they think one thing, and are mert to one end, for annoying confusion one speaketh, ye all pray together one thing. But the minister may as well preach and pray, or read any chapter and pray, as read prayers, and pray both in one action of the mind, and voice, which were strange. Your cavil then whether the heart may be moved, and pray, both at once, is taken away, seeing you grant reading and praying, two several exercises of the heart and voice, which cannot be performed at once with lively voice. The conclusion is then, that either ye must fetch the matter out of your book when you read prayer, and so do not pray for the particular wants where with the heart is moved and pressed before you come, or else you pray not with lively voice at all, when you read: The Lord then having taught us to break up our own hearts, and pour fourth our petitions with heart and voice, give grace to all his people so to worship him. The Seventh Argument. We must pray as necessity requireth. But stinted prayers cannot be as necessity requireth. Therefore stinted prayer is unlawful. G. GIFFORD. To this I answered, approving the Proposition. And in the assumption I did distinguish of matters to be prayed for, as that there be things necessary to be prayed for at all times. and of all men: of these a prescript form may be used at all meetings of the Church, there be matters not at all times needful to be prayed for, for such there can be no prescript form to be used continually, &c. I. GREENWOOD. I Have proved in the first Argument, that no men's writtngs are to be brought into the public assemblies, for there the lively graces of God's own spirit and Cononical Scriptures only must be heard: In the second, the unlawfulness of reading for praying, in the third, the unlawfulness to impose any thing by commandment, that God hath not commanded. And here we shall handle in few words the end of your stinted prayers. Your distinction is, far, differing from the wisdom of the spirit, for though many things be at all times needful to the public assemblies, yet stand not the assemblies either all at any time, or any at all times in the same need and feeling of them, or fitness to receive them, so that except you can make all assemblies in the same want of such things as are always needful, or any at all times in the same preparedness to ask, and use them that be needful, you can make no stinted prayers for them. Give ear then to the Scripture in this point 1 Cor. 2.11. For what man knoweth the things of a man, if not the spirit of man which is himself, &c. Again, who knoweth what (shall be) tomorrow? Iam. 4.14. Whiles you then thought to have found out more than the only wise governor of his house law needful for his worship in his Church, and of every soul, you have lifted up yourself into his seat: and taken the office of his spirit upon you, who searcheth the hearts and knoweth the reins, and teacheth his people how and when to ask, according to his will and their needs, Rom. 8.26.27. also the spirit helpeth our infirmities, for what we should pray as we ought, we know not: But the spirit itself maketh request for us with sighs and groans, which can not be expressed: Yet searching the hearts knoweth, the meaning of the spirit, because he maketh request for the saints according to the will of God. And where you say then, that if we mark the prescript form of prayers of all Churches, we shall see this regard, Rom 8.7. and 11 34.1 Cor. 2.16. & 3.19. that nothing be left out which is necessary, etc. This bewrayeth your shallowness, the wisdom of the flesh is foolishness with God: who hath searched the depth of God's spirit, or known the mind of man? who can prescribe the estate of all Churches, and what every moment is needful to be prayed for? Odious then is such dross of a fleshly man's heart. Your second provision, that nothing be prayed for in your liturgy that falleth seldom out, but they are limited to the time. Your Church hath not this provision, you compel men to pray against thunder and lightning at mid winter, and in your most solemn feasts against sudden death: But the truth is, till you amend your ways, God will accept no sacrifice of you, much less requireth this at your hands, to do more in his worship than he hath commanded. And where you say, in the Church of England the preachers are not limited touching the matter of their prayers, it is not true, you are all sworn to your portuis, howsoever, you may omit some of it for your Sermons, and under pretext thereof. what part you will. And why is there not a form for prayer prescribed, to be used after and before your Sermons? is it because the text is not always the same, or that the speaker is not in like fitness, or the auditory in the same preparedness? I assure you these things might be sufficient cause why you cannot use always the same words, and pray according to your necessities, and even so standeth the case for all other affairs in the Church. The disposition of the soul and the distresses thereof, continve not in one state one hour. But let me tell you why you have no form of prayer for your preachings, In many of your parishes, or (as you would have them) Churches, Sermons are of those rare things, whereof you say there can be no prescript form of prayer, yea your liturgy approveth a ministry and sufficient administration without any doctrine, which showeth it came out of the devil's forge, and not out of Christ's Testament. But seeing you would take upon you to set so many prescript forms of prayer, as there are things necessary for every assembly to pray for, where Christ hath set none. And if it were a thing so necessary to have prescript words at the administration of the Sacraments, I asked you whether our saviour Christ had not forgot himself as you thought, that when he commanded his ministers to go preach and baptise, and showed them the words of institution, and the elements to be used with all things thereunto needful, he did not prescribe some form of words for prayer in particular: In the tabernacle every pin was prescribed, so that either such forms of prayer are not necessary, or Christ's Testament hath some wants. To this you answer, that it is not of necessity there should be a sett form of prayer prescribed for the administration of the Sacraments: The minister may conceive prayer, etc. Hold you to this, that it is not of necessity: you will deny it again in the next Argument. Well here you grant, it is not of necessity. But you have not answered me, tell me whether you hold it necessary or no. if it be at all times necessary, the Testament is not perfect. Again do you not hold it of necessity, when you excommunicate men, & depose your ministry for not observing it? But you say, it is for conveniency, If it be a part of God's worship, and all times convenient, then is it necessary, and if it be not necessary, put such conveniency in your corner Capp, or surplus. Now if it be necessary at all times: you must prove it is commanded in God's word, or else say that all things necessary in God's worship be not contained in God's word, which were blasphemous and papistical to affirm. To this you grant all things necessary and convenientare contained, and ask if I be ignorant that there be many things contained in the Scriptures, that are not expressed in particular, but be gathered from the general rules. No, I am not ignorant of this; but if it may be gathered either by express words, or by general rules, that there should be prescript forms of prayer for the administration of the Sacraments, or any other particular action of the Church, then must it be so of necessity, because God hath commanded it, though not in particular, yet in general rules: But you grant it is not of necessity: therefore it is not commanded in particular, nor contained in any general rule, Yet you demand of me, if one should, object that there were not commandment in the scriptures, nor example for any prayers to be made at all before preaching etc. I would say he should lie against God, we 1 Tim. 4. 5. Act. 16.13.13 have both. For the Apostle shows it was the chief part of their office, to continue in the word and prayer. Act. 6.4.1. Cor. 14. and 1. Tim. 2, 1 Acts. 2.42. besides, all things are sanctified unto us by the word & prayer. And because they never used doctrine in the Ch., but prayer went before therefore their meetings is said to be unto prayer, some things there are I grant that are not prescribed in particular, and yet are commanded by general doctrine, as baptism of Infants. But whatsoever is commanded either in particular or necessary collections, from general rules, are of necessity to be obeyed, as the commandments of God and may not be altered, but your particular forms of prescript words have no such warrant. Now seeing you would have no prescript words of prayer for the minister to ule before his preaching, not of necessity for the Sacraments, & have none for excommunication, etc. I wondered where of your Portuis is made, & whereto it should serve, except for churchings, and burials and such popery, whereby you leave the commandments of God to set up your own traditions. And here upon I demanded, whereupon you would make your stinted and set prayers. You marvel I should be so babbling and make such questions, you mean about your babbling worship. You say of the particulars of the Lord's prayer. I demand now again, whether you can number the stars of heaven, or the sands of the sea, if not, much less the particulars of the Lord's prayer. There is medicine, and direction of prayer for every soul & every disease, therefore to be drawn fourth by doctrine & parier as need requireth, you would set a liturgy upon some things, and compel men thereunto every meeting, which were no thing else but to seal up the fountain, and send men to the dry pits of your execrable devices, from the whole fountain, to a pitcher of water, from the lively graces of Doctrine and prayer, to your own writings. Paul commanded to pray for Kings and Princes, yet bound no man what words to use. The Lord give you repentance of such presumptuous Tim. 2.1 34 5. sin, as to alter his worship. If you cannot know the estate of the soul before hand, you can make no forms of words for it. The Eight Argument. Read prayers were devised by Antichrist, and maintain superstition and an idol ministry: therefore read prayers and such stinted service are intolerable &c. G. GIFFORD. Antichrist devised many blasphemous wicked prayers. But to say that the making or following a prescript form of prayer was his, is most false, for there were Liturgies in the Church of old, before Antichrist was set in his throne &c. J. GREENWOOD. THe Scripture never enforced to read prayers for praying, nether stinted us what, or how many words to use, nether is the forms of prayer prescribed in the Scripture and devise of man. Let us then hold these two to be the matters in hand, the one, reading in stead of praying, the other, stinging and limiting by a written liturgy, what & how many words to pray, with all other such prescriptions as your liturgy containeth All may be affirmed antichristian which is not warranted by Christ's word: Yet your liturgy, is even from that Antichrist lifted up into the throne you speak of, as may by all men be seen that will compare it with the Portuis. And (as I have heard) the Pope would have approved of your liturgy, if it might have been received in his name. Now we have proved in the discourse before, that reading for praying hath no warrant from God's word, which maketh them two several and divers actions everywhere. Here than we must consider something for an other liturgy, than Christ's Testament which we shall find to be nothing else, than an other gospel. And because Mr Gifford saith there were liturgies in the Church before Antichrist was lifted up into his throne (which I will not deny) I would have all men understand that I do not go about to prove the church no church that hath a liturgy (as mine Arguments are falsely wrested to that purpose) but to prove the unlawfulness of such liturgy thrust upon men's Consciences, is only my determination through God's assistance. The word liturgy signifieth publicum manus, ergon Laon, the work of, or for the people: that is the very execution of the ministerial actions in the Church, according to the word, of all the officers thereof, that is the practice of those ministerial duties prescribed by Christ, we may every where read. In the first of the gospel of Luke the 23. verse it is said. And is came to pass that when the days of his ministration were past, he went home to his house, meaning, Zacharias: where we see the word liturgy for his execution of his ministerial function. Now this Leitourgia of the new Testament, is even the rule and function prescribed by Christ, for the puqlique actions to be done in his Church: which leiturgu Gal. 1.8.9 Rev. 22.18.19.2 Tim. 1.13, 1 Tim. 6▪ 14 of Christ is perfect, and he pronounced accursed that addeth any thing thereto, or taken any there from: yea all men are bound to keep the true pattern thereof, without alterration or innovating any part of the same as is called a commandment to be kept without spot, till the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ. Now, to make an other liturgy, is to lay other foundation, and to make an other gospel, not that there is an other gospel, but that there are some willing to pervert the gospel of Christ. Then your leiturgies to which you are sworn, and by which you administer, being (as you cannot deny) an other liturgy than Christ's Testament, is plainly an other gospel, for the Canons and rules you prescribe and impose are such, as he hath not prescribed or commanded, or at the best, a transforming of his ordinances. Now if you should say, you do nothing but make laws of particular things collected from the scriptures, and with that colour impose your leiturgies, we have showed the unlawfulness of bringing any man's writings, as rules into the Church, For the explaining of the whole will of Christ, so far as is meet for us, he hath given us his officers to administer, according to his liturgy by lively voice, and due execution of all things by one rule. Making then a new litourgia, you must also make a new ministry, for Christ's ministry cannot administer after a counterfeit liturgy. And that Antichrist was the chief innovator of this liturgy (howsoever the thing might be long a working by little & little) it is plain when he is called Antikeimenos that opposite man, or lay of an other foundation. Now we must not make all liturgies beside the Testam., of like wickedness or blasphemy. But how near the most heinousest yours approach, let him that answereth the other part of your book witness unto me. Now where I said you had confessed that you never read in the Scriptures any warrant to read prayers unto God, you say now, I know I have falsified your words. Surely it would be known, for I would not willingly so do, your words you say were these, to your remembrance: God never commanded a man to read prayer: upon the book: Is not this the same that I say: you confess there is no warrant for reading prayer: is there any thing warranted in his worship that he hath not commanded? Then you ask me if I will gather thus, is it not express commanded, therefore it is not warranted. No you forgot the word expressie to help yourself to say & unsay. I gathered, that because you said absolutely it was not commanded, therefore it was not warranted. Here you come again to show your ignorance in the scriptures, to say there is not any express commandment to use prayer before or after doctrine. And remember, you here will have it a commandment, and said before you hold it not of necessity. G. GIFFORD. There would sundry inconveniences grow for want of a liturgy or prescript forms of public prayers. I. GREENWOOD. Still I must put you in mind of the wisdom of that governor of his house the builder, beginner and finisher of our Faith Christ Jesus: he foresaw what inconvenience would have grown if either men or angels should make new liturgies, or other forms of prayer, than he hath prescribed, for the public assemblies. Here therefore you deeply charge him, not to have done all things that were needful, in not prescribing you more forms then he hath done, or not suffered learned divines to impose their own writings unto God. But see what the Scripture saith, who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he might instruct him. Again. 1 Cor 2.16. and. 2▪ 20. where is the wise, where the Scribe, where the disputer of this world hath not God made the wisdom of this world foolishness? To put you out of doubt then, that we need not any new liturgy, nor any men's writings to be brought into the public assemblies, the holy Ghost saith, 2. Timot. 3.16. The whole Scripture is Theopneustos, inspired of God, and profitable unto doctrine, unto reproof, unto correction, unto erudition which is in righteousness, that the man of God may be absolute, perfect fully furnished unto every good work. Now if only the Scriptures be Theopnestos, and sufficient to make God's children absolutely perfect, even fully furnished to every good work, what blasphemy is it to say, sundry inconvenience would grow, if men's writings were not imposed upon the public assemblies? And in this your wisdom, let us see what is the chiefest inconveniency that would grow. You say every frantic spirit (of which sort there be many in the ministry) would not only be unlike themselves, but vary from others. I answered, and still do, that the Papists have not so weak a reason for their Idolatrous Liturgies, rubrics, and Canons. You say it appeareth by all my Arguments, how meet a man I am to judge the weight of reasons alleged by the Papists, and others: well I am weak, and you strong, foolish & you wise, yet might you have showed me a weaker reason which they allege for their constitutions ecclesiastical, as they call them. But my chief answer was (Whereby you might have been satisfied) that if it were but in Parases the ministry should differ, it is no sufficient cause to ordain liturgies. And if they offend in matter of doctrine or conversation, the censure of the Church should help that. The first you grant, the second also you confess, that the Church should censure such things: But you say there are sundry other differences in administration of public prayers & Sacraments, as in order and ceremonies which the Ch. is is to have regard of, and not to leave arbitrary. All other ceremonies in God's worship than Christ and his Apostles have prescribed us, are diabolical, and not apostolical. Then, for all things done in the Church in those public actions, the offenders must be admonished, if they trasgresse the rules of the word. And for the others you speak of, you mean circumstances of time, place, kneeling, sitting, standing &c. of them there can be no further laws, than Christ hath prescribed, that all things be donnne to edifying, in comeliness and decency &c. of these to set particular laws, were to break the law of God, which leaveth them in the church's liberty as need requireth, to the glory of God. In these things to do any thing contrary to the general rules of order, edifying, decencye etc. the transgressor is by those rules to be instructed, admonished and censured. Well, here you have made a fair hand, to make read prayers but a matter of order, which is all the worship you have, to bring in men's writings into the public assemblies, to make them either rules to bind the conscience, and so put them in the place of God's book, or to read them over for praying, is but a matter of order, well than put them in your cornerr Capp, we have enough of rules for the ordering of Christ's spouse, without such Babylonish ware. Here you say mine experience is not so great as my boldness. I pass not to be judged of you, it is not like that the enchanters of Egypt should know the beauty of Zion: there is a cloud between you and us: we have (blessed be our God) a pillar of fire before us. An other fault you say in my former reason, is, that because the censure of the Church should redress defaults, therefore there needeth no liturgy. Nay take all with you: No fault can be censured that is not a transgression against the rules of God's word, and those to be censured by the doctrine and admonitions of the Church, therefore we need no liturgies. To the word of God only, ought all men to be bound by covenant, and for the transgressions thereof only, to be censured. G. GIFFORD. The Church hath this power, to ordain according to God's word, and to appoint such orders in matters of circumstance &c. as shall most fuly serve to edification. And then these orders being established the Church is to drive men to the observation of them. I. GREENWOOD. First, in this your papistical mud, I must tell you, your reading of men's writings for prayer, is a fall worship of God, and not a matter of circumstance, And for matters of order and circumstance, which are no part of the worship, there can be no other laws made of them, than Christ hath made: As for ordaining of laws in the Church, it is to plead for unwritten verities, and to make the law of God unsufficient: neither can it be according to the word, to make any law, that God hath not made, but an adding to his word, which is execrable pride: these your words then (according to God's word) was but a cloak to cover the grossness of your position: for the word, ordain, or create laws, is to make some, that are not made before: let us then see your clean sentence to be this, The Church hath authority in matters of order and circumstance to make and ordain laws in his Church for his worship: now see how you contradict these Scriptures: Rev. 22.18.19. Prov. 30.5.6. every word of God is pure etc. put nothing to his word lest he reprove thee and thou be found a liar. likewise Deut. 4.2. and 12.32. and Gal. 3.15. though it be but a man's covenant', when it is confirmed, no man doth abrogate it, or superordeine any thing to it. And the second commandment forbiddeth any such human tradition in the worship of God: all the Pope's trinkets might be brought in by the same ground: We would willingly have seen your warrant for this doctrine, your bare word is not sufficient to impose other laws than God hath made, upon his Church. This is the foundation of popery and anabaptistry, to give liberty to make laws in the worship of God. Yet you will go further, that such laws being ordained & established by public authority, the discipline and censures of the Church are to drive men to the observation of the same. By your judgement our Saviour Christ was an anabaptistical schismatic, that would not himself, nor his Disciples, obey and observe the traditions of the Elders: And what saith he unto pleaders for traditions. It is thus written Mark 7.5. then asked him the Pharises and Scribes, why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat meat with unwashed hands. Then be answered, surely isaiah hath prophesied well of you hypocrites, as it is written, this people honoureth me with their lips but their hearts are far from me. But they worship me in vain, teaching doctrines men's precepts. For you lay the commandment of God aside and observe the tradition of men. And to help forth your evil matter, instead of proof from the scripture, you fall out into furious exclamation against them that desire only to have the word practised: saying, who is able to imagine the innumerable divisions and offences in the practice of your anabaptistical freedom, in which you deny the Church to have power to ordain and impose any orders? let all men judge the venemousnes of this tongue, Christ pronunceth them accursed that add or superordeyne any thing to his word, and you pronounce judgement of them, that only obey his word. Shall it be said that Mr Gifford holdeth, that the only practice of God's word, would be the cause of iunumerable divisions and offences? This hath been Satan's old accusation in the mouth of the most enemies of Christ's gospel: now it must be Mr Gifford's accusation of God's ordinances, to be insufficient, unperfect, etc. fearful is his apostasy from that truth he hath known. I take it, it is more like to be Anabaptistry, to practise any thing without warrant of the word, to make their own devices laws, in God's worship, then to do nothing but what God hath commanded, within the limits of our callings. For the frantic ministry, it came of your own words, that therefore you must needs have a liturgy, because there are many frantic spirits in the ministry? then I say, it is like you have a frantic ministry, that cannot be governed without another liturgy than Christ's Testament: For their great gifts you speak of: I will not compare with them. My reason from the Colossians was, that as the Church there is commanded to admonish their Pastor Archippus, if he transgressed, and to stir him up to his business, so all ministers that caused divisions, contrary to the doctrine of Christ, were to be admonished, and avoided, if they repent not: so that the word of God, and admonition by the same, if they transgress, is the way to keep all men in due order, and not imposing liturgies upon the Church, besides Christ's Testament. And where you collected thus, that if read Prayers, and imposed liturgies be Idolatrous, then where will you find a visible Church say you. I answered that the true Church might err, even in this point, though not in like height of sin. Then you desire, that the Churches of England may find like favour at our hand: Mr. Barrowes refutation discovery, etc. to which I answer, let him that handleth that question with you, show you, how your sins herein exceed other countries, and persecute such as reprove you. Your church (as you all it) cannot plead ignorance. Your railing speeches, of blind schismatics, Donatists etc. bewray what sweet water is in the heart: if you cannot prove your Church to be the established Church of Christ, they light all upon yourself. There are none schismatics, but such as depart from the faith, show wherein we have transgressed, & will not be reformed. In the mean time you are schismatics from Christ, in that you practise the Statutes of Omry. You charge us with pride, for that (you say) we imagine to know more than all the Churches upon earth. This also hath been Satan's old weapon, to deface the truth Ierem. 18.18. why May not a simple babe in Christ see that, which whole nations have not seen? we cannot but speak the things God's word teacheth us: if we speak truth, you need not oppose that we judge any man, it is the word of God shall judge us all, and I say, it is an old papish Argument, to reason thus (all Churches do such a thing, therefore it is lawful) except you hold with the Pope, that the Church cannot err, which were blasphemous. You are not well pleased that I will not say it is no Church that hath a liturgy imposed upon it, and because you have so often slandered me, that I hold it so, you take great pains to conclude it. I have said that to impose men's writings, to be read in stead of praying,' is to worship God after a false manner, that it is a device of Antichrist, a dead letter, quenching the spirit, not of faith, Idolatrous changing the work of the spirit into an idol, breaking our Christian liberty, and so most detestable. By these speeches I condemn all Churches say you: this is not true, I condemn but the sin. But you have said i deny that to be the Church, that hath any thing imposed. I say you speak an open untruth; and remember the judgement of him that inventeth and maketh lies: And God give you grace to repent, if you belong to him. The consideration of this our discourse, I heartily commendo to be duly and uprightly weighed, of all that fear God, who grant us his grace to forsake any sin, where it shall be showed us, by how weak instruments soever it be reproved, and pardon me all my defaults, in this my hasty answer. Thus have we seen the unlawfulness of thrusting men's writings upon public assemblies, and reading instead of praying. A general Argument against their worship, in respect of their present estate, both of Ministers and people. The Prayers of such ministers and people, as stand under a false government are not acceptable, not only because they ask amiss, but because they keep not his commandments. The prayers of such Ministers and people as be subject to Antichrist are abominable: Those Ministers and people which stand subject to the Bishops and their Courts, are subject to Antichrist &c. Therefore their prayers &c. G. GIFFORD. These do concern the third and fourth accusation, and therefore the answer is included in the answer to them. Yet I take exception against the first, that the Church may be holden by force from executing God's commandments touching external government, and yet be the true Church of God, I alleged the Church that was holden captive in Babylon &c. J. GREENWOOD. HEre, after your accustomed manner, you offer me great wrong, first, instead of answer, you alter the question very subtly: then you dismember my former answer, and not only so, but you have nether let my former answer be answered, nor printed. Thus you alter the question, & answer not, where the proposition speaketh of a ministry & people standing under a false government, you say the church may be holden by force, from executing God's commandments in external government, whereof I never doubted: what is this then, but to deceive your Reader, both to judge sinisterly of me, and be drawn from the truth himself? But indeed you mean not this (holden by force) of civil bondage or persecution, for then there were no difference between us, and mine Argument should stand untouched, You affirm then that the Church may stand under a false government, enforced thereunto by the tyranny of the enemy, and yet in that estate be the true apparent Church, by open profession, which is nothing else, then that the Church may profess Christianism and Antichristianism, both at a time, subject in mind to Christ, and subject to Antichrist in outwatde obedience. That you hold this doctrine in this place, the process of your matter proveth, and to make all plain, your words in the last writing (which here you sum up) were these. But if the Church at any time be by main force restrained from some privileges, or have some government set over it, which agreeth not with God's word, which it cannot avoid & ct See now how smoothly this man hath put away the cross of Christ, by teaching men to stand under a government, contrary to Christ's. I thought the ordinances of the new Testament had been a kingdom that could not be shaken. Rev. 24, 9 10.11.12 Heb. 12.28. that none could have been a member of Christ, that receaveth the mark of the Beast, though it be but in his hand, or could be holden a member of Christ, by outward profession, that here had been the patience of the Sanicts, to suffer unto death, rather than to bow down, either in mind or body to an other government, than Christ's. How is he a Lord to them that are not governed by him? Well I needed not to have stod upon this doctrine, but that be nether printed my former answer, nor answered in these points, and mine own copy taken from me by the Bishops: so that this man may retract what he will, & accuse as please him: if he have any common honesty, let my former answer be seen. But to prove the Church may be subject to an other government than Christ's, which is even to say, that a man may give all allegiance by outward practice to the King of Spain, and yet be her Majest. true subject, He saith, the Church was holden captive in Babylon, where he as cunningly hideth himself as before, though in my last writing, I urged him to answer, whether the Church in Babylon was subject to their idolatry, or no. To the civil power I doubt not they were: But if the priests and Levites stood Priests to the Idolatrous worship in Babylon, whether the people of Israel bowed down to the outward practice and obedience of their idolatry, or no: then, if they did so, whether they stood by profession the children of God, or apostate in that estate. None of these things have you answered me. Let the examples of Hanania, Mishaell, and Azaria testify Dan: 3. The people that returned repented their transgressions, where they had any of them sinned, and made a new covenant with the Lord, before they were received, Ezia 9.14.15. and 10. cap. 2.3.8. Yea the voice of God was this, come out of her my people, and touch no unclean thing and I willbe your God. We are before thee (saith Ezra) in our trespass, & we cannot stand before thee because of it. You never renounced your Antichristian ministry, Esa. 52.11. Ierem. 51 6, 45. you never made a new covenant since the deep defection of popery, but still minister in that kingdom, and will not repent, yet boast yourselves to be the Church of God, crying out, the Temple the Temple. I answer then directly, that whiles you stand subject unto, and practise and communicate with other orders and governments, than Christ's, you are not by outward profession the churches of Christ. I may not with you omit the word (Wilful) because you persecute the light, & so much higher is your sin. Here I must forewarn the Reader, with diligence to consider Mr. Gifford's disagreement and mine, he having accused me of a fundamental heresy (as he callet hit) whereas he himself maintaineth most gross errors, whereof i reproved him, yet he persisteth, Namely, that the regenerate man may be said to stand in bondage to sin, by reason of the corruption of the flesh that is in us, and of our unperfectness in this life. Then, that one standing in outward bondage to open known sin, may in that estate be accounted and communicated with, as the servant of Christ by outward profession, both at one instant: which is as much to say, we may be to man's sight, the servant of the devil, and the servant of Christ, both at one time, by outward profession: so none should be excommunicate: none be without, the world and the church light and darkness, Christ and Belial, should be mingled together. These heresies whereof, he most unjustly and untruly proclaimeth to be maintained by us, is, that the regenerate man consenteth not to sin, after regeneration, although in the last writing I testified the contrary: Namely that the whole church might err, might commit some kind of idolatry, that no man was free from committing sin, etc: And now I testify to all the world, that I was never infected with any such Anabaptistery, but have every where resisted such damnable heresy. I have learned and taught many degrees of sin, and differences of transgressions, which the dear children of God fall into, after regeneration, in thought, word and deed, of ignorance, of knowledge, of presumption, slips, transgressions, and obstinate sin: Yea that there is no sin, except the sin against the holy Ghost, but God's children, may commit it after regeneration, and be renewed by repentance, which we ought to pray for in all sinners, but that one sin except. Not that men should here upon take boldness to sin, because God giveth repentance to his elect, wherein the riches of his mercy appeareth, but rather serve him in trembling and fear, as a jealous God, lest with Esaw we find no place to repentance, though we seek it with tears. Again, though in God's sight, his elected are never forsaken utterly, nor the Holy Ghost utterly extinguished in the repentance, yet to man's judgement he that committeth open known sin, and persisteth obstinately in the same, cannot be held the child of God to us, by outward profession, but must be cut of Numbers 15.27.31. Matt. 18.17. and 1 Cor. 5. till they repent. Much more none that stand open professed members of the false Church, subject by the least outward bowing down to this antichristian hierarchy, and so continuing in bondage to a false government, can be holden of us be true professors of Christ's Gospel. Now let us peruse the several doctrines. Mr Gifford affirmeth, that the true Church might stand in bondage to a false government, yet in that estate be held, & communicated with, as the true Church, by outward profession: his words in way of proof, be these. They may with St. Paul say, It is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. for if the yoke wherewith he was held captive in part, could not sake from him, but that he was the Lord's free servant, it is no reason that some outward bondage should make the Church not to be the spouse of Christ. If a man command his wife (saith he) to do a thing, and there be violent force to withhold her, she is not to be blamed. Rom. 7. Mine answer to this he durst not print, but perverted my words, so many as pleaseth him, nether can I yet come by a copy of my former writing to show, what I then replied. Now consider what government is, and what bondage is, and then behold the wickedness of this man: Spiritual government is that sovereignty, Dominion, and regiment that Christ Jesus, by his spirit, laws, ordinances, and officers exerciseth in, and over his church, as it is written: And thou Bethlehem Juda art not the least among the Princes of Juda, for out of thee shall come a governor that shall govern my people Israel. again, thy sceptre is an everlasting sceptre. I have set my king upon Zion my Holy mountain, Mat. 26. Psal. 3. and 45, and. 110, these laws and ordinances whereby this King reigneth, Mat. 116 are called a kingdom that cannot be shaken Heb. 12.28. they that have not him to reign over them, are by outward profession none of his. If I be your Lord, where is my honour? again those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and stay them before me, Luke. 19.27. Also bondage or servitude is to be commandment, and to yield obedience in subjection. Now to be in outward bondage to an other outward government, other laws, officers, and ordinances than Christ's, is to be by outward subjection servants of Antichrist, which hath another foundation: for by outward profession we cannot stand (to man's judgement) professed subjects to two kings at enmity. But we must be an enmity to the one, and so esteemed of all men, much less members unto two divers heads. This then is mine answer here. 1. That it is an heresy to say a man may stand in bondage to open known sin, and the free servant of Christ by outward profession, both at one instant. 2, That it is a falsifying of the Scripture, to say that St. Paul (in the 9 to the Romans) was in bondage to sin, when he, in the inner man resisted sin, and daily prevailed against the sin, which his flesh would have led him captive in, if there had not been a stronger power to overcome that enemy, For he there reasoveth of the benefits of the law, to manifest our sin, and our conquest over sin by daily repentance, and reproving of sin in ourselves, fighting against sin in ourselves, and labour to have victory over sin, though it continually rebel. 3. How blasphemous were it to continue in known sin, in bondage to it, and to say, it is sin that dwelleth in us, and not we, and so still to bless our selves without amendment. O horrible peruertinge of the Scriptures to men's destruction. 2. Pet. 3.16.4, That there is no Argument to be drawn, nor consequence to follow, from the relics of sin, and corruption of the flesh in one man, or the whole Church, and a professed bondage to all false government: no not between the open committing of sin in the whole Church, or some members thereof, and a professed homage and subjection unto false government, we cannot be partaken be partakers with the false Church & state, at no hand. 1. Cor. 10.21.5. lastly, that the subjection to an other government, is as a wife that committeth adultery. Hosea. 2. I then reason thus on the contrary with you. Any man that after regeneration committeth open known sin, and continueth obstivate, as a bond servaunt there unto, standeth not the professed servaunt of Christ, but of sin. Ezechiel. 18. till he repent, so the whole Church, that persisteth in the open known sin, and persecuteth the messengers that reprove the same. They, as every, member of the false Church standeth a professed servaunt of sin, so the whole assemblies that stand; professed subjects of false government, no censures of admonition belonging unto them, but calling of them, to repentance & separation from the false Church. Then, as the wife that giveth herself to be one with an other man, is an adulteress Rom. 7.3. so that Church that subiecteth herself to an other government, ordinances, and laws than Christ's, is an harlot. Now let all men say, whether I had not just cause to say, you speak like a carnal libertine, and an atheist, yea now, as one having his conscience seated. to affirm, that the Church, remaining in open known bondage to a false government, may say as Paul said, it is not I that sin. And, that continuing in that adultery she is the spouse of Christ by outward profession. You would say it were a false Argument, to say, the Church hath many imperfections, ignorances, transgressions etc. therefore standeth in bondage to sin, nay standeth in bondage to an other head, and an other government than Christ. Even so, to say the Church doth sin, therefore may continue in bondage to sin, is false doctrine: nay, to say it may stand in open professed subjection to Antichrist, & be esteemed the Church of Christ by outward profession in that estate, is damnable doctrine. It is the flat contradiction of all the rules of the Scripture, to say, a man may stand in bondage to sin, and the free servaunt of Christ by outward profession, by man's judgement, at one time, seeing the obstinate offenders are to be cast out of the assembly: But now, though the regenerate may fall into these high sins, and contynve in their sin a long time, yea many years deprived of God's grace, to man's seeming, & to us he is the servant of Satan for any thing we see, yet the Spirit of GOD is never utterly extinguished or or debarred, after regeneration, but will recover the man again, and bring him to repentance, as David after a whole year, for the strong man once displaced and cast out by a stronger than he, the spirit never utterly departed again, for than it were impossible that man should be renewed. Mat. 12.31. Heb. 10.29. and. 6.4. And hereupon I might say, Paul never continue captive in sin but was always renewed by repentance. Further, this spirit of God (the sparks whereof were never quenched utterly) did not, nor could not consent or give place unto sin, for here is the enmity and battle between the spirit and the flesh, every where spoken of. Gall, 5.16.17. Rom. 7. May I not now say then, that Paul never continue captive unto sin, nor consented unto sin concerning the inner man, or gave place unto sin in that place mentioned, without heresy: And still reprove you, that when Paul reasoneth of the old man, or corruption in him, you will conclude it of the new man, or inner man, and of the whole man, when you see evidently, he opposeth the one against the other: For whiles the spirit striveth against sin, and reigneth in us, though the flesh rebel, and cause us to sin seven times a day, yet are we not overcome of sine, so to remain in bondage no sin, that it should continue to reign in us, as you may see in the same chapter Rom 7.5.6. Where you allege then, that Paul saw a law in his members, which did lead him captive unto sin, you do falsify the text: for he saith leading me captive, and not did lead etc. for there was a stronger than man, that suffered not the law of his members to reign: for saith be, I myself in my mind serve the law of God, but in the flesh the law of of sin, so that the whole man could not be said to serve sin. But (say you) afterward as concerning then the inner man we may besaid to serve the law of God, and thereupon be called the free servants of Christ, notwithstanding this corruption of sin in the flesh: So the whole man by reason of our imperfectness may be said to be the servants of sin. No, it is not true, for the whole man is called after the part that hath greater rule in us: as if the flesh rule in us, we are the servaunts of sin, and ledded by Satan at his pleasure, but if the Spirit rule in us, we are the servauntes of God, sons of God, saints of God, Citizens of Jerusalem, a royal nation, holy and free people, Kings and Priests: not that we are perfect, or sin not, but that sin reigneth not in us, but the spirit, whereby we suppress sin, reprove sin, strive against sin, subdue sin, and though we fall seven times, yet we rise again by repentance, and serve not sin. Rightly therefore did I say, that man cannot serve 2 masters: for his servants we are to whom we give ourselves as servants to obey, whether it be of sin, unto death, or of obedience, unto righteousness. Rom. 6.16.18. being made free from sin, we are made the servants of righteousness: So that the regenerate man, or he that is by outward profession the servant of Christ, cannot be called the servant of sin, by reason of the corruption of the old man, and dregs of sin, neither can he that standeth in bondage to any sin and giveth himself over to it be called in that estate the servant of Christ, till he repent, but the servant of sin. 2. Pet. 2.19. Therefore you must recant your false interpretation of Paul in the 7. to the Rom. and cease your blasphemous railings, in calling the truth of God, the rock of Brownism. And consider the height of your sin, by concluding a bondage unto sin of the whole man, for the corruptions of the flesh, which through the work of the Spirit is daily subdued, though never, utterly rooted out of our earthly members, and from the committing sin through frailty, and obstinate professed bondage to the false Church, false government, false ministry etc. which is plainly the mark of the Beast, to whom with outward obedience they bow down, and stand servants in his kingdom Revel. 14.9.11.12. As for the 4, of the Galat. 26. where the Apostles aith, Jerusalem which is abone is free with her Children, you durst not open it, nor expound it, but blaspheme, rail, and slander, as though we should plead for such a freedom, as should detract from Magistrates lawful authorities, from having God's ordinances established by commandment upon the Church etc, yea, that we should hold anabaptistical free doom, as though we had power not to commit, or consent unto sin: whereas we have every where by practice and protestation, by word and writing testified to our sovereign Prince, and to all men, the contrary. But Satan that old accuser and detractor of God's children, to deceive the world, sendeth out such lying spirits to deface the truth. We, with all subjection and willing obedience to our sovereign Prince, teach all men their obedience to the higher powers: subjects to Magistrates, flock to Overseers, children to parents, wives to their husbands, servants to their Masters etc. in all things in the Lord: and if they command us any thing contrary to the law of God, we then patiently suffer without resistance, or rebellious thoughts, The freedom than we have to speak of here, which Christ had purchased for us▪ is, first that triumph over Hell, death, and damnation, through the merits of Christ apprehended by faith, waited for in hope, Rom. 8. Secondly, that because we were sons by election, he giveth us the spirit of adoption, and sanctification, whereby we mortify the flesh, have power and dominion over sin, that it shall never reign in us more unto condemnation, repenting daily of our trespasses, & craving pardon for our hidden sins, and secret faults. Thirdly, we are through the same spirit and word of truth delivered from all subjection of Antichist, of the false Church, false ministry, false government etc. And they that have not this freedom are not by outward profession the servauntes of Christ. Further, we have freedom from all traditious of men that seeing we are bought with a price, we are no longer servants of men, to be in bondage to any beggarly rudimentes or devices of men, but in all peaceable manner, to worship and serve God, within the limits of our callings, according to the word of God, as it is revealed unto us: We have freedom to speak the truth with all boldness, though all men should inhibit us: we would not have the doctrine limited, stinted, bought and sold for Jewish tithes or mercenary stipends. We have freedom to separate from such false Prophets as yourself, to come out of Babel, etc. And in the true Church to reprove and withstand any sin or traditions of men in due order only, & to be guided & governed by Christ's laws and ordinances. In all this I trust you shall not find any anabaptistry in the freedom we profess: this is the truth of the gospel, whereby we are made free. Thus than we still affirm, that they which stand in open known bondage to sin, are the servants of sin, and not of Christ, till they repent, by outward profession. Further, that all which stand members of your parish assemblies, stand not members of CHRIST by outward profession, but in bondage to a false and Antichristian ministry, government, worship etc. and the bond woman and her son must be cast out. Further for all liturgies, and other devices of men besides the canonical Scriptures and lively graces of his Spirit, we hold they ought not to be brought into the public assemblies, nor imposed upon men's conscience: But if any will write such, or read such, let it be for their private use, as all other men's writings: we despise not any directions by word or writing, that may further us any way to the practice of God's ordinances, yet may they nether be imposed upon men's consciences, not be made a part of God's worship. The Lord therefore that hath thus far far fourth discovered the chaff and mift of Antichrist delusions, even to babes and sucklings, publish the glorious light of his blessed Gospel, that the peopel may see the counterfeit judgglings of all such false prophets, and come out from amongst them, that you may be ashamed of your execrapale wares, and forsake your Romish priesthood and give glory to God, that yet offereth grace, Amen, Christ's unworthy witness for the truth of his gospel John GREENWOOD. 9 Other Arguments to prove that all set forms of prayer to be used for prayer are unlawful. 1. WE find that all the holy men of God according to their present need & occasion used to pray in the spirit, through the help of the Holy Ghost, which God hath shed in the hearts of all his Children, without reading or saying by rote any number of words; and for this we have plentiful Examples in Abraham, Isaak, Jacob, &c. 2. Not any prescript liturgy can possibly be an ordinance of Christ, because the Church without it may perfectly and entirely worship God, I say perform all the parts of holy and spiritual worship, & this appears by the constant and general practice of all the primitive Churches, who truly worshipped the Lord many years, before any such read stinted service was devised or imposed. 3. This external means and manner of worshipping God in prayer, is nowhere found in the written word (by the prescript whereof he is to be worshipped) whatsoever the Jews Fable of Ezra, or the Papists of S. James or S. Peter: Yea I do to the contrary affirm, that it did not seem good to the Apostles the last penmen of the Holy Ghost, that any certain forms should be repeated or read out of a prayer book. For if it had, they would have given commandment to the Churches for the practice thereof: 4. Reading of prayer in the act of prayer, is directly contrary to that act and nature of prayer; For in prayer we do pour out matter: to weet, the holy conceptions of our mind, from within to without: that is from the heart to God. On the contrary in reading we do receive and admit matter from without to within; that is from the book into our heart; Ergo, &c. 5. The stinted and devised forms do quench the spirit of prayer, and this appears in that men are so strictly tied unto them as till they stint be out the spirit which the Lord gives his children, may not suggest one thought or word otherwise; Neither when that is out any more, than what next follows, in the prescribed prayers; and this is contrary to 1 Cor. 12, 7. 6. We find it promised, that under the gospel the spirit should be plentifully poured out, which he daily graciously performeth in furnishing his children with spiritual gifts, who accordingly pray (or at least all may) not with prescript words, but with such as the spirit gives them utterance, God preparing their heart, and bending his ear. 7. The truth brings forth no absurdity; but this doth; Rom. 8.26. For Example, the spirit saith the Apostle (speaking of all Christians) helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what to pray as we ought: Yes Paul with your leave right well, for we have in our liturgy what we ought to pray word for word; and these things we can ask whether the spirit be present or no. 8. As it were a ridiculous thing for a Child, when he should ask of his Father bread, fish, or any other thing, to read it to him out of a paper; So is it, for the Children of God, to read unto God their Requests, even a most foolish and riduculous thing. 9 As the reasons published to the world, against the reading of the Apocrypha books in Churches, will serve as much and as well to condemn all devised and imposed forms of prayer; So likewise the arguments brought against kneeling before the bread and wine in the act of receiving, will prove that to fall down before the common prayer book, is every way as superstitious & sinful a thing. And so much the reader shall find certain, if he will indifferently compare the things together. FINIS.