A Vindication OF LITURGIES, SHOWING The Lawfulness, usefulness, and Antiquity, of performing the Public Worship of GOD, by set Forms of Prayer.  
Wherein several other things also of considerable use, are occasionally discussed.  
In Answer to a late Book, Entitled, A Reasonable Account, why some pious Nonconforming Ministers in England, judge it sinful for them to perform their Ministerial Acts in public solemn Prayer, by the prescribed Forms of others.  
By WILLIAM FALKNER, D. D.  
LONDON, Printed for Walter Kettilby at the Bishops-Head in St Paul's Churchyard, 1680.   

TO THE Right Reverend FATHER in GOD ANTHONY Lord Bishop OF NORWICH, My Honoured DIOCESAN.  
MY LORD,  
IT is too well known, that notwithstanding the purity of Doctrine and Worship, and the Primitive Orders of the Ministry, established in our Church; in all which Excellencies and Perfections no part of the Christian World doth excel her, if any equal her; it hath been and still is her portion, in Conformity to our Saviour, to his Apostles, and to the purest Primitive Church, to be assaulted and impugned, by the various oppositions of many Adversaries. Besides others, our Dissenting Parties within this last year have been very active, both by other methods, and by Books of several kinds, expressing their objections against our public Order and Constitution.  
And one of them, for the justifying their separation, hath adventured so far, as to charge the general use of prescribed Forms of Prayer to be sinful: which if it were true, would indeed be an high accusation against our public worship, and therewith against all the famous Christian Churches. He pretends an Answer to all that I had said, for the lawfulness and expediency of fixed Liturgies: unto which I have here returned, as I hope, a sufficient Reply. The manner of his writing, is in this respect, more commendable than of some others, in that he plainly stateth his Question, and then produceth his Arguments, that the strength of them may be fairly tried. But I could have wished for his own sake, that he had not oft intermixed his passionate and groundless aspersions, upon our public Constitutions and Ministry; and his talking at a high rate with confident words, upon very weak and slender appearances of Reason. For such things are testimonies, either of the rashness and weakness of the Writer, who brings these things as a supply, for want of what is rational and substantial; or else of the badness of the cause, which needs such supports to maintain it.  
And though I thought this discourse not at all like to prevail with understanding men; there were many things which inclined me to undertake an examination thereof. That Book is spread abroad, under the name of a person of as great esteem amongst our Dissenters, as any other in these parts. There is a fair appearance of a regular way of reasoning, though there wants strength of Argument; and he more than once declares, that he thinks himself to have fully answered what I had written for Forms of Prayer; and therefore I was particularly concerned to show his mistake. And though the more cautious and wary men among our Dissenters will not affirm the constant use of Forms to be sinful, because they think such a position not defensible; yet the Genius of that party is much set against them, and in their practice they reject them almost generally, with some eagerness: and therefore the determining this case, is of the greater concernment, with respect to our Non-Conformists in general.  
And I have had so much experience of the World, as to know, that the greater part of men are not so intelligent, and soberly considerative, as to search into the strength or weakness of Arguments, unless they be directed and assisted: which defect when it meets with an unsteady temper, is the occasion of much infelicity to Civil and Ecclesiastical Society. And as I think it in any case, a piece of Christian Charity, to guide men in their duty; so this is of greater moment, where the Peace of the Church is concerned, as well as the private duty of Christians. But it was not the least thing which prevailed with me to this undertaking, that the Book I answer, led me to the considering several mistaken notions and assertions, and I hope to the clearing them, which having been presumed to be truths, have misguided many well-disposed persons.  
Upon many accounts, this Discourse addresseth itself to your Lordship, humbly entreating your acceptance thereof. It defends that common way of Christian Worship, by public Liturgies; which hath been the constant use of this established Church, wherein your Lordship deservedly enjoyeth an eminent place; and of the Reasonableness and usefulness of whose public service, yourself gave a seasonable account. And probably the Book I answer, was also written within the limits of your Lordship's Jurisdiction: and therefore I present this Discourse to your view, craving your Approbation. And this I do with the greater confidence, because of the truth of what I defend; the clearness and evidence whereof is such, as will also, I hope, recommend itself to any sober and indifferent enquirer. I do confess I had this great advantage against my Opponent, that I have manifest truth on my side, and this advantage I have made the best use of that I could. I am so apprehensive of my own defects, that I cannot expect that this Treatise should be in all things free from them. But I am sensible, that if I have trifled in the main subject, which is a matter of weight and seriousness, I am so far from deserving your Lordship's favour herein, that I cannot reasonably presume on your pardon, for prefixing your name hereunto.  
But the chief reason of my presenting this to your Lordship, is, that I might express a thankful acknowledgement of those favourable respects I have received from you, and profess that real honour which myself, with the rest of your Clergy, have for you. And that God will preserve and bless your Lordship, is the hearty desire and Prayer of him, who according to his duty  
Hath a great and humble Reverence, both for your Lordship's Office and Person, WILLIAM FALKNER. Lyn-Regis June 9 1680.   

THE CONTENTS.  

THE Introduction, giving the Reader an Account of the occasion of this Discourse. Page 1  
Chap. I. Of the state of the Question proposed by this Writer, with some Observations thereupon. p. 10  
Chap. II. Of the gift of Prayer, what it properly is? How abilities of expression are the gifts of God? and how far Ministers are obliged, to use their own abilities in Religious Worship? p. 28  
Chap. III. Of Devotion and attentive fervency of mind in public Prayer, and whether the use of Liturgies be hindrances, or helps therein. p. 73  
Sect. I Various pretences for Forms of Prayer being hindrances to attention, or fervency examined, and the contrary manifested. Ibid.  
Sect. II. A defence of some things urged in my Libertas Ecclesiastica, to prove Forms of Prayer to be no disadvantage to devotion. p. 98  
Sect. III. The Antiquity of the public use of Liturgies, from the first Ages of Christianity, and in the Jewish Church, both in their Temple worship and Synagogues. p. 136  
Sect. IV. Some expressions vilifying Uniformity, and charging Forms of Prayer to be an Engine of perpetual discord, with some others, examined. p. 164  
Chap. IV. Forms of Prayer are not forbidden in Scripture. Some things are necessary to be determined in God's worship, which he hath not particularly enjoined. Of the Authority of Superiors, and the judgement of discretion, and some other things. p. 177  
Chap. V Of other Prayers, besides those in the Liturgy and public service. p. 193  
Chap. VI Of Preaching. Whether it be as useful and fit to preach, as to pray in a set Form of words? Of what account preaching is? Exceptions against the Sermons of our Ministers, as being satirical, advancing the power of nature, and justification by works, answered. p. 206  
Chap. VII. Praying by a Form, is rashly charged with mocking God. p. 219  
Chap. VIII. Forms of Prayer do not debase the Ministry. Of the Ministerial Office, and the need of learning and knowledge. Of the Priestly Office under the Law, and the large Revenue God appointed for the Priests and Levites. The pretence of ill effects from Liturgies refuted. p. 225  
Chap. IX. Several Arguments for Forms of Prayer, proved solid and substantial, and among them some things concerning submission to superiors. p. 241  
Chap. X. A Persuasive Conclusion directed to our Dissenters, to consider how unaccountable to God, and how dangerous to themselves, their separation is. p. 266    

A Vindication OF LITURGIES.  

The Introduction, giving the Reader an account of the occasion of this discourse.  
HAving several years since published my Libertas Ecclesiastica, wherein I endeavoured a Vindication of our Liturgy; there came lately to my hands a Discourse, in which is a pretended answer to two Sections of my Book, concerning the lawfulness, expediency, and antiquity of set forms of prayer. When I first looked into it, I thought it a strange undertaking, to attempt to prove, that it is sinful for Ministers, who are able to compose Prayers themselves, to make use of any form of Prayer in their Ministration, which was composed by other men; and that any man might justly suspect his own reasoning, when it engaged him in such an enterprise. But when I had read it, I found many things said therein, which might possibly misguide the weak and unwary Reader, but nothing which was of any great weight. And indeed no false position is capable of being firmly proved by solid Arguments, though to undiscerning men, it may be rendered plausible by mistaken fallacies.  
Yet because I am very sensible, that the Assertion maintained by this Author, is both in itself false and erroneous, and also tendeth to undermine the true exercise of Religion, and the Peace and  of the Church of God; I resolved to examine all his Arguments, and to return a fair Answer to so much of his Book, as was needful for the discussing of the Question proposed, and for the defending myself against his Oppositions. And this I thought myself the more concerned to undertake, because so far as this strange assertion should be received as true, it would make void the design of my former Book, which was to manifest, that it was both lawful and a duty, for Ministers and People, to embrace, attend upon, and join in the public service, worship and Ministrations of the Church of England. And I knew not how far any appearances of reasoning might be magnified, by such persons who are engaged against our Church, many of whom in a sinking cause, (so far as concerneth the evidence of truth and reason) may be willing to catch hold on any twig.  
The Author of this Book hath not published his own name therewith, and therefore I shall not be curious to inquire after it, but shall treat him as an unknown person. And I confess, I cannot easily conceive, that he under whose name it goes, should be so defective both in learning and consideration, as to be guilty of such mistakes and palpable oversights, as may be found in some places of this Book. For besides many other unaccountable positions and misunderstandings, divers of which I shall mention in my following Discourse; it is observable, that what he writes concerning the ancient practices of the Church, after the Apostles time; or concerning any thing written in those days, is generally done so loosely, and sometimes with such wonderful extravagancy, as may surprise an intelligent Reader with some kind of admiration: of which I shall give the Reader here one instance.  
4. When he speaks of the original of Liturgies, he saith 
a Ch. 2. p. 68, 69. , We do believe, that Gregory the Great, under the protection of Charles the Great, was the Father of all those that dwell in these Tents, and this eight hundred or a thousand years after Christ. But first to speak of Gregory the Great, eight hundred or a thousand years after Christ, is far enough from truth, when he died about the year 604. And secondly, that Gregory the Great should be under the protection of Charles the Great, is impossible, when he was dead about two hundred years, before Charles the Great began his Reign. And thirdly, it is altogether as unaccountable, that the original of Liturgies was in the time either of Gregory the Gerat, or Charles the Great, when they were in use many hundred years before them both, as I shall show 
b Ch. 3. Sect. 3.  in the following Treatise. This mistake concerning these persons, whose names were so famous in History, that a man of ordinary reading could not be unacquainted with them, is as if any person should presume to give an account of the Church of the Israelites, and should assert, that the offering of Sacrifices under the Mosaical Law, had its beginning in the days of Eli the Priest, in the Reign of King Jehosaphat, six hundred or eight hundred years after the Israelites came out of Egypt. Surely it is a strange confidence for any person to vent such things, and to write positively what he no better understandeth.  
5. But whoever the Author of this Discourse is, I shall apply myself to the clearing of the truth concerning the matter of it, which I shall do with as much succinctness as is expedient. And therefore though I shall not willingly omit any thing considerable, which he urgeth against the lawful use of constant public Liturgies, or against what I have said in their defence; yet where he mentions objections made by others, against the force of his Arguments, and gives his Answers to them, I shall pass by such things, where the insisting upon them is not needful for the defence of our Church, or the decision of the Case proposed. And in answering his Arguments, I shall wave the repetition of his long Syllogisms, which is a tedious way of proceeding; and in rational Discourses of this nature, is acceptable to few others, than those who may admire the art of making a Syllogism. But I shall give a faithful account of the substance of his Arguments, and leave it to the impartial Reader, to judge of the validity of my Answers. And that I may the more gratify such, who will compare his Discourse and mine, I shall keep to his method which he hath used, except where he speaks to the same thing in different places, and in that Case I shall think it sufficient to have spoken to it once for all. And I shall so order my Answer, that my first Chapter may answer his first, my second his second, and so onward to the end of his Book.  
6. But touching my former Discourse which this Writer opposeth, he seemeth not very well pleased, with my having chosen that subject 
c In his last leaf to the Reader.  to write on, viz. the defence of our Liturgy, nor with the time when my Book was written, which he saith was in that nick of time of his Majesty's most Gracious Indulgence, if it was possible to persuade the Parliament, that there was no need of any indulgence towards them. Now as to the subject matter of my Livertas Ecclesiastica, if he dislike my having engaged therein, or my undertaking now to defend so much of two Sections thereof, as he hath opposed, I am content so far to bear his dislike and censure; but I think myself to have given a sufficient 
d Libert. Eccles. B. 1. Ch. 1.  account thereof. And if what he observes concerning the time was true, I think that was a fit time to defend and justify our Communion, when they who divide themselves from us, made the greatest opposition against it; and involved themselves in the heinous sin of Schism. But the truth is, I was engaged in that work before that Declaration came abroad, but may Book was not published, till after his Majesty had canceled that Declaration: the Declaration which was made March 1671/2. was Canceled about the end of 1672. and my Book came abroad in Octob. 1673.  
7. But as to the persuading our Governors against any Indulgence or favour towards them, it is possible the positions of this Writer may do more to that purpose, than I have done. I did indeed justify the lawfulness of performing what is required of Ministers, concerning the Liturgy; which was no more than to vindicate, what the practice and acknowledgement of every conforming Minister had before owned. But I think it my duty, to leave the ordering of public affairs to my superiors, and did not by any expression that I am ware of, interpose in their work.  
8. But I know not how far such Discourses as this of this Author, ma● 〈◊〉 vince superiors, that such persons ar● 〈◊〉 capable of being taken in, into any duly regulated and settled establishment; because of the unreasonableness of their demands, and the weakness of their Arguments, since he declareth against the enjoining the ordinary use of any Liturgy, or set form whatsoever, in public Ministrations. And we may see by 
e Ch. 10. p. 164.  the close of his Book, that he accounteth it the only medium he can fancy, for a just comprehension, that there be no Forms of Prayer enjoined, though they may be recommended by superiors and left at liberty. And yet it seemeth probable from his 
f In the two last leaves.  Preface, that all this is not enough; for he there tells us of other six things he hath, to put in dispute besides this. I do not doubt but all those six things, may be as easily answered as produced: and the Reader may make a probable judgement of the strength and force of those other things, by this one which he hath singled out from the rest, and therefore surely he thought it to be as considerable as any of the other.  
9 And it might be expected, that he who is curiously severe, in judging of a fit time, for publishing other men's Discourses, should have a sufficient care of the seasonableness of his own. And he who considers the business of our Enemies abroad, and how they are encouraged by our discords at home, may well think, that they who have any true value for the Reformation, should at this time incline to promote a settled establishment of the Church, which may tend to uphold and secure it. And since our dissenters by sufficient trial, found in our late distracted times, that they could not erect, much less maintain any establishment in their way, we may thence discern that no settlement can reasonably be expected but upon the foundations of the Church of England, which hath also the advantage of truth, and agreement with Primitive Christianity. And therefore it was no fit time now to vent such notions which widen our breaches, are inconsistent with any public establishment of a Church, and which put advantages into the hands of other Enemies, and serve their purposes. And yet I confess this of the time, is the least fault of this Discourse; but that which is the greater is, that the drift thereof tends to confusion, and the things contained in it are unsound and untrue, which I shall now come to manifest.   

CHAP. I. Of stating the Question, concerning the established constant use of Forms of Prayer, in the public service of God.  
IN managing his opposition against the constant use of prescribed Forms of Prayer, 
The Question proposed, concerning the lawfulness of using Forms by Ministers who have gifts.  the forementioned Writer doth in his first Chapter, give us the state of the Question, which he undertakes to dispute, and therein he expresseth what he yieldeth, and granteth as lawful, and what he judgeth and esteemeth to be sinful, and undertaketh to prove it so: and herein he hath declared himself with sufficient clearness and plainness: What he contends for he thus expresseth, 
a Reasonable Account, p. 5.  All that we affirm is this, That our Consciences do from arguments, which to us at least seem highly probable, judge, That it is unlawful for Ministers, having the gift of prayer, ordinarily to perform their ministerial acts in solemn, stated, public Prayer, by reading or reciting forms of Prayer composed by other men, confessedly, not divinely and immediately inspired, although our superiors do requrie this of us.  
2. But he alloweth and acknowledgeth, 
b p. 2.  that their labours are profitable, who have drawn the matter of Prayer into Forms: 
c p. 3.  that any Form of Prayer contained in the Scripture, may be used as part of our Prayer, whether it be under any command or no; but if it be commanded, it undoubtedly aught to be used; 
d ibid.  That if a Minister distrusting his own memory or invention, shall compose Prayers for his own use, he may do it: 
e ibid.  that it is lawful, yea necessary, for them who join with others in Prayer, to make use of their words, which yet are but a Form to them: 
f ibid.  that he that ministers in Prayer to others may use a prescribed Form of another's composure, if he have not the gift of Prayer. And 
g p. 4.  that he alloweth short ejaculatory Forms; such as Lord have mercy upon us. This being the sense of this Writer, I shall concerning his stating this Question observe three things.  
3. Obs. 1. From these premises, the Reader may yet have a little further insight into the matter of this Question: to which end he may consider, First, that our Prayer is directed to the most high God, and therefore it was called by the ancient Writers 
h Greg. Nys. de Orat.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 
i Cl. Alex. Strom. l. 7.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an having to do with, and speaking unto God. Secondly, that the ordinary wants of Christians (except extraordinary emergencies, which may be otherwise provided for) and consequently the usual matter of Prayer, for public Assemblies especially, is constantly the same. He who will deny this, must as well condemn the Directory, for 
k Direct. Of Assembling the Congregation. Of public Prayer before Sermon etc.  directing to the matter of public Prayer, as the Common Prayer for expressing the words; nor can he have such honourable thoughts as he ought to have, and as the Christian Church always hath had, of the Contents of the Lords Prayer. Thirdly, that the granting it lawful, for a Minister to use a prescribed Form of Prayer, of another's composure, if he have not the gift of Prayer; is as much as to acknowledge, that such a Prayer, piously performed, is a true worship of God, and may be acceptable to him; otherwise it would not be lawful. Fourthly, That the difference betwixt praying for the same things in a Form, and praying for them without a Form is this, that in the former way the same words and methods are constantly used, whereas in the latter the expressions are altered and changed, 
The result of this Question is, Whether variety of expressions be of great consequence for the pleasing God?  and ofttimes the order and method also, according as the person thinketh fit, or as he is able to perform it.  
4. Wherefore fifthly, The main result of this Question, at the last comes to this: Whether men's changing of expressions, varying of phrases, and altering their order and method in their Prayers to God, be things so valuable and considerable in his sight, that his laws and will do require this, and that he hath such an eye unto it, that the humble, devout, and Religious supplications, and addresses of pious persons, are not acceptable to him, unless they be attended with such variety of expressions, where the persons have so much volubility of speech? Now upon a short view, it may appear, that the affirmative in this Question, is very unlikely and improbable upon several accounts.  
5. If we consult the rules of holy Scripture; 
The contrary appears from Scripture.  our Saviour particularly rebuked the vanity of them, who think they shall be heard by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, much speaking or many and various words, Mat. 6.7. And as a remedy against it, taught his Disciples that comprehensive Form of the Lords Prayer. And from this Text S. Aug. 
l Aug. Ep. 121. c 10.  accounteth superfluity of words, to be unmeet for Prayer for things necessary. And hence also S. Hilary inferreth, that we should 
m Hil. in Mat. Can. 5.  orare ad Deum, non multiloquio sed conscientia, pray to God not with a multitude of words, but with a good Conscience. And it is accounted a piece of reverence to God, which Solomon directed us to make use of in our addresses to him, Eccl. 5.2. Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not they heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.  
6. 
From the Jewish worship.  And it may be considered, that under the Law, God did not require daily various changes, of the real expressions of religious worship and service; but appointed them to be continually the same, Numb. 28.2, 3, etc. which makes it more than probable, that the variety of verbal expressions, is not requisite to obtain his acceptance under the Gospel. The daily burnt-offering was continually without any varying the thing, a lamb of the first year, with the same sort of meat-offering, and drink-offering; and the Priests without any varying of rites about that Sacrifice, were as Josephus saith, 
n Joseph. Ant. Jud. l. 3. c. 10.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, performing their office always in the same manner. Only upon their sabbath days, the ordinary sacrifice was doubled; and upon other days of great solemnity, there was an addition of other Sacrifices And I need not direct the intelligent Reader to observe, how much the service of our Church is in these things correspondent to what the wisdom of God himself then established: our Evangelical services being now morning and evening offered unto God, as then were the Legal: as hath been observed by 
o Bishop Sparrow's Ration. of Com. Pr. p. 3, 8. And from the nature of God.  our Reverend and Learned Diocesan.  
7. And he who considereth that God is a spirit, and that true piety, and goodness, and sincerity, are the things in which he delights, cannot easily persuade himself, that the use of different phrases in Prayer, can be of any great moment before him, unless he had particularly commanded this, and then indeed it would be a part of Obedience. Proper words are necessary in public Prayer, that by their expressive significancy, the whole Congregation may join in their united Petitions, and also for the promoting order and decency, and manifesting a due honour to God's worship, and reverence for his name; and all these things may be most usefully provided for, in a well ordered Form. But words are not in religious service valuable in themselves, further than they have respect to such things; but a pure heart, and the exercise of true piety, is that which God accepteth.  
8. This truth is so manifest, that even the Ethnic Writers do frequently express it. The Satirist declares of a well fixed integrity, and inward purity of mind and heart, 
p Pers. in Satyr. 2.  Haec cedo ut admoveam templis & fare litabo; that this is the most valuable thing without compare, in the public worship. And when Hierocles had declared, 
q Hier. in Pyth. p. 26.  what the Pythian Oracle spoke to the same purpose, he thus expresseth his own sense, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with piety of mind every expression is acceptable to God, and without it, none. And amongst the Christian Writers such expressions are frequent, as that of S. Cyprian, 
r Cyp. de Orat. Dom.  Deus non vocis, sed cordis auditor est; God hears not the voice but the heart: and that of Cl. Alexandrinus, that the most excellent service is 
s Cl. Alex. Strom. l. 7.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by a religious devotion, and that as men observe our words, so God observes our minds and thoughts. But now the affecting variety of words, in the worship of God (where fit words may be best secured by a good Form) is both apt to hinder due devotion, and it also speaks such persons much concerned, about that which is too low and mean to procure God's acceptance. And it implies a misconception of the divine nature and Being, in them who look upon such things, as of great concernment to please him; And the making that a necessary part of Religion which is not such, by laying a doctrinal necessity, upon it, where men are able to perform it, cannot be excused from being a piece of superstition, or a teaching for doctrines the precepts or fancies of men. 
Chap. I.   
9 Obs. 2. 
Opposition against our Church and Liturgy is upon uncertain grounds.  It may be noted, that this Author, though he sometimes talk high, doth not account himself certain of the truth of this position which he layeth down, in his stating the case, and in the following part of his Book undertakes to prove. His position expresseth the sinfulness of using Forms of Prayer, in the Case he proposeth: and he saith, 
t p. 2.  their judgement of Conscience is that they are unlawful, and this they 
u Ch. 8. p. 132.  from their hearts believe, and so must practise. But when he speaks of his Arguments, he saith, they have Arguments which 
x p. 2.  appear very probable, and 
y p. 5.  seem highly probable, with other like expressions. And how far this evidence doth prevail with himself, we may discern by these words, 
z p. 164 & p. 70.  We judge not ourselves infallible in our sentiments in this case; we condemn not our brethren which judge otherwise and accordingly practice, 
a p. 132. & in p. 22. We dare not judge those who we think have the gift of Prayer, but think not fit to use it in their ordinary service— Whether it be sin in them, we leave to God's determination.  we pray God that if we be in the mistake, God would reveal it to us. These words do plainly speak doubtfulness and uncertainty, as do those in the Margin: for no understanding man can use such expressions, concerning what he certainly knows to be sin. In speaking of the sinfulness of theft or lying, he would not say, we condemn not them who practise otherwise, etc. to wit, thiefs and liars, since he certainly knows these things to be sin, and therefore that the practisers of them ought to be condemned. Yet at sometimes he speaks, as if he proceeded on 
b P. 25. & p. 123.  demonstrations.  
10. Now I hope to make it manifest, that his Arguments do not so much as prove any probability of truth in his assertion: yet I could in the mean time hearty wish, that both he, and others with him, would seriously consider, how unsafe it is for themselves, 
The hurt and danger of such practices considered.  and dangerous to Religion, for men to oppose the state and order of a well settled Church, upon probable Arguments. Where we have certain evidence of any thing being our duty, we are bound to embrace it, whomsoever we contradict: but certain evidence no man can have of an error being truth. And to proceed upon probable Arguments only, yea or on such as men may by their mistake esteem, and confidently assert to be certain, is in an error no safe foundation for practice.  
11. The Donatists by their restless Pleas, and various disputations, manifested that they proceeded on such Arguments, which to them seemed highly probable; the same may be said of the Arians and Eunomians whose Arguments are frequently produced by 
c Athan. contr. Arian. Or. 4. & passim.  Athanasius, 
d Naz. Orat. 35, & 36. Gr. Nys. & Basil. adv. Eunom.  Gr. Nazianzene, and other ancient Writers, to a greater number than this Writer hath against Forms of Prayer. And almost all who were of old guilty of any Heresy or Schism, as also at this day the Romanists, Anabaptists, Quakers, and other such Sects, have their Arguments which they account probable. And for the Brownists, who declared in their 
e Praestant. Viror Epist p. 925.  Preface to their Confession, that the Church of England, its Ministry, and its worship, were all adulterous; Fr. Johnson published his 
f John ● Reason's for s●●●●tion.  seven Arguments of one sort, and seven of another sort, such as to them seemed probable, and all of them in Syllogisms, as our Author produceth his seven Arguments in Syllogisms against Forms of Prayer. And Erbury and others with him, had their Arguments which to them seemed probable, which they undertook 
g Mr. Long in Exam. of Mr Hales of Schism, p. 133.  at Oxford to produce, and urge against all ordination and ministry. Yet if I should ask this Author, whether he thinks all these persons did perform their duty to God aright, and were to be discharged from sin, in thus venting their errors and heresies, and that the Church of God received no disadvantage from them, I presume he would not assert this; however we are sure of the contrary. And then the consequence will be, that if it be a duty, to hold Communion with our public Assemblies, and to perform the worship of God according to our established Constitutions; they cannot be acquitted from sin, nor excused from doing hurt to the Church of God, who reject these duties upon their probable Arguments.  
12. But in requital for his so favourable expressions towards us, in not condemning our using the Liturgy of the Church, this Author expects that we ought not to change him, and others of his persuasion, with any blame in their dissent and separation. 
h Reasonable Account, p. 64. Dissenters are to be blamed.  We condemn not our brethren. Let not them, saith he, judge and condemn us; We are in our dissents in the case, another's servants. Now it becomes no man to pass that judgement on others, which is peculiar to God, as, concerning the hidden things of the heart of man, or his final state: but we are allowed to account and judge those actions of men to be evil, which are manifestly so. And it is very unreasonable, that if they who violate any Laws of God or Man, do not blame others for keeping them, that therefore they must not be charged with the breaking them. If S. Peter did not fault S. Paul, who according to his duty kept Communion with the Church at Antioch, S. Paul did not therefore think himself obliged not to rebuke S. Peter, for his unwarrantable withdrawing from it: but he declares in this case, Gal. 2.11. I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed; and v. 14. I saw that they walked not uprightly, according to the truth of the Gospel.  
13. Wherefore, because I think it my duty to deal faithfully and plainly in these things, I do freely profess, that besides what concerns the Laws of the Church and of the Realm; I account myself to have as plain evidence from the Laws of God, and the Constitution of the Christian Church, that Schism and unnecessary separation is a sin, in the breach of Christian Unity, as that Adultery is a sin in breaking the bond of Wedlock. And I account myself to be as certain, that if ever there was any unwarrantable separation, from any known Church since the Apostles time, the separation from the Church of England is really such: since our Church is truly as free from any just exception, in its Constitution, doctrine and worship, as any other since that time either was, or is. And it seemeth highly probable, if I do not mistake plain words, that some of our dissenters themselves, are at some times satisfied either of so much, or of that which comes very near it, concerning the excellent Constitution of our Church Dr Owen saith, 
i Of Evang. Love, p. 54, 55.  We look upon the Church of England, or the generality of the nation professing Christian Religion (measuring them by the doctrine received since the Reformation) to be as sound and healthful a part of the Catholic Church, as any in the World; and again, 
k ibid. p. 87.  We believe that the generality of the inhabitants of this nation, are by their profession constituted an eminent part of the Kingdom of Christ in this World. But if pitieth me to consider upon what weak and unwarrantable pretences, such persons venture upon the practices of real separation: and by what insufficient excuses, they plead for themselves in the defence thereof.  
14. 
This Author's opinion is a heavy charge against the most eminent Churches, and men.  Obs. 3. There are considerable prejudices against the truth of our Author's assertion, as it is by him stated, even such which, beside the more direct evidences (of which hereafter) will persuade a sober man, to be wary of entertaining it, if he duly observe them. For this opinion is not only against the Church of England, but the most famous Churches in the Primitive times, who used such set Forms in their public worship, as besides what hath been said already, will sufficiently appear in the following Discourse. This is also against the Constitution of many eminent Protestant Churches abroad, which I have elsewhere 
l Libert. Eccl. B. 1. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. n. 11, 12.  observed briefly, and shall not need here to add further proof, since this Author doth not deny the same, but tells us 
m Reason. Acc. Ch. 2. p. 9  the continuance of Liturgies upon the Reformation, owes itself in a great measure to their not having men able to pray without a Form. And yet I cannot but think, that this Author is a person of so much modesty, and hath such a respect to many of those Reformers, and their Successors, as not to think them inferior to himself; and then they must come under the censure of his assertion. And to me it seemeth a very hard thing to embrace such a position, as must cast reproach on almost all the Churches of Christ in all Ages; and must also conclude all the most famous Ministers therein, to have lived and died, in the constant practice of the same sin unrepented of. Now I can easily apprehend, that such a consideration as this, will have a different influence upon such men as this Author, according to the different temper in which it may meet with them. For at one time he tells us 
n Ch. 9 p. 163.  authority or practice is a lamentable Argument: but at another time he declares, concerning the sense and apprehensions of good men, that 
o Ch. 2. p. 44.  the sensus piorum, neither is, nor ever was judged by persons of sobriety and worth, an inconsiderable Argument; for the truth of a proposition (especially a practical proposition) not plainly determined in holy Writ.  
15. 
Nor is it consistent with itself.  his very stating his Question, overthrows the main foundations, and chief Arguments of his Discourse: and then he who will embrace our Author's assertion, according as he hath stated it, upon such Arguments as he chief urgeth, must learn to affirm and deny the same thing, or to reconcile things contradictory; which to me and to all rational men must be, when observed, another great prejudice against his opinion. Now in stating his Case, he grants, as I above observed, that such Forms of Prayer as God hath commanded in Scripture, (if any such be) must be used, and other Scripture Forms, though not commanded, may be used as part of our Prayer; and yet he declares it sinful for such Ministers who can pray otherwise, to use Forms. 1. From the duty of using their own 
p Ch. 2. p. 6, 7, etc. and Ch. 3.  gifts, and 2. From the hindrance of pious dispositions, or attention and fervency, from the use of a Form of words in Prayer; and yet if these Arguments are of any weight, they must conclude against the lawful use of Scripture Forms, as well as of others, which yet he asserteth to be lawful. And indeed, some Scripture Forms being in the New Testament commanded to be used, that sufficiently manifesteth, that a set Form of words in Prayer can be no hindrance to a religious temper of mind, unless we will grant that our Saviour's commands are hurtful to his Religion, and that such Positions of men, which are contrary to his Precepts, aught to be preferred before them.  
16. He acknowledgeth also, p. 3. that it is lawful, yea necessary, for them who join with others in Prayer, to make use of his words who speaketh, which c an be but a Form to them. And p. 19 he saith, such persons have nothing to do but to exercise their grace. And this consideration was made use of, to prove the lawfulness of Forms, by 
q Pract. Catechism, B. 3. Sect. 2. Bishop Tayl. Of Prayer Extempore, n. 46, 47. Disp. of Liturg. Prop. 1. Arg. 6.  Dr Hammond, Dr Tailor, and Mr Baxter. Now from hence it not only follows, that such Prayers are acceptable to God, which are put up by pious men with devout hearts, but without the exercise of their own gifts; but it must also be hence concluded, that Unity in public Prayer, is more acceptable to God, than the use of men's own abilities in conception or expression. For otherwise, it would be the duty of all persons in the public Assemblies, who have any such abilities, not to take notice of the Ministers words, or to join in them; but distinctly to exercise their own gifts, or make use of their private conceptions there, or else to withdraw themselves from the public Assemblies, that they may have the more free opportunity for the exercise of them.  
17. 
Nor generally owned by the Non-Conformists.  I shall only add in the last place, that this assertion of our Author is such, that a great part, and I think the greater part of the Nonconformists themselves will not own. Indeed in Qu. Eliz. her time, the 
r In Bishop whitgift's Defence Tr. 9 Ch. 2. Diu. 2.  first Admonition disliked the being tied to any Forms of Prayer invented by men, but Mr Cartwright in his 
s ibid. Diu. 3.  Reply, declares his agreement for a prescript Form to be used in the Church. And besides other particular persons, the Presbyterian Commissioners at the Savoy, made not our Author's Position any part of their objections, yea they were willing to have composed 
t Grand debate; in exceptions of Presbyt. p. 29.  new Forms, as themselves express. And it would be well if our dissenting Brethren would really consider, how great their disagreements are among themselves, even in so many things; that it cannot be expected that any way of settlement should be agreed upon among themselves, as it was experimentally manifested by the proceed of 1643, 1644, 1645. and the years ensuing.  
18. And I should be wanting in due returns of civility to our Author, if I do not do him so much right, as to acknowledge, that his perspicuous stating the Question, hath made way for the fairer examination thereof. And he also disowns those wilder extremes in denying the lawfulness of all Forms in general, and also declares, that he 
u p. 18.  doth not argue for praying ex tempore, but only in the use of our own gifts, which excludes not premeditation: But I must likewise do the truth that right, as to observe, that his position as he hath stated it, is not consistent therewith; and therefore ought not to be asserted or defended.   

CHAP. II. 
Ch. II.  Of the gift of Prayer.  
THE first Argument produced against the lawfulness of ordinarily using a set Form, by such Ministers who have a gift of Prayer, is because (saith he) this gift is a mean given by God for the performance of this religious act of Prayer, and therefore 
a Reasonable. Account. p. 5, 6.  may not be neglected or omitted. And he tells us by the gift of Prayer he means 
b p. 6.  a man's ability fitly to express his mind to God in Prayer. And that such a person, who is able fitly to express his mind in his own words, aught to make use of them in public Administrations, and may not lawfully pray by a Form; he endeavours to prove, by urging some Scriptures which require the use of some gifts, as 1 Tim. 4.14. 1 Pet. 4.10, 11. Rom. 12.3, 6.  
2. 
What the gift of Prayer is?  Now that I may give the clearest satisfaction to the Reader in this particular, I shall not content myself barely to answer this Argument, and to show the weakness thereof; but I shall first give an account, What that is which is and may be called the Gift of Prayer? and how far this is afforded? and how far men's own abilities must be exercised? 
Of the nature of Prayer.  And for the better understanding of this, it must be observed, that a pious and devout Prayer, doth contain a great part of the lively exercise, and practice of Religion and Piety; especially if we comprehend under the name of Prayer, both confession and thanksgiving. It includeth a professed owning the true God, and Faith in him, and acknowledging him to be the Governor and disposer of all things, and the Author of all good: and this is called by Philo 
c Philo lib. Quod Deus sit immutabilis, p. 306.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a great Prayer. It taketh in also a professed owning the Almighty power, infinite wisdom, goodness, faithfulness and Omniscience of God: and also the exercise of reverence, submission, humility, hope, affectionate desire, heavenly mindedness, and repentance; together with a lively sense and belief of the Gospel grace and promises, and of the merits, Mediation and Intercession of our only Lord and Saviour; and a sincere love to all men, and particularly to the Church, and our Governors, for whom we pray.  
3. Wherefore first, that is eminently and especially to be esteemed the gift of Prayer, which disposeth and enableth to the performance of the duty of Prayer. And therefore since Prayer is not so much a verbal thing, 
The gift of Prayer is a devout temper of mind  as a pious address of the heart, soul and spirit unto God, Gods bestowing the supplies and assistances of his grace, which kindle and excite pious dispositions in seeking unto God, with earnest and affectionate desires, a lively faith, and the exercise of inward devotion; this is most properly his vouchsafing, and bestowing the gift of Prayer: and our receiving and exercising them, is our having and using the gift of Prayer. For as the gift of Charity, doth not consist in speaking of the matters or rules of Charity, but in being inwardly disposed to the lively practice of that divine grace, so is it also in Prayer. Now if any persons shall here say (as some are used to speak) that what I have expressed, is not the gift, but the grace of Prayer, he may consider that by Grace, he can here understand nothing else but an excellent and gracious gift; and as S. Austin declared 
d Aug. Ep. 105. Sixto.  ipsa oratio inter gratiae munera reperitur; Prayer itself is to be reckoned amongst the works of grace.  
4. And whereas this Author 
e Reas. Acc. p. 19  produceth two places of Scripture, to prove the gift of Prayer from the holy Spirit, 
This shown from the Holy Scripture.  Zec. 12.10. and Rom. 8.26. it is remarkably observable, that both these places so far as they speak of the spirit or gift of Prayer, have particular respect to the inward affection and devotion of the heart, and not, according to his notion, to the ability of expression. The former place is Zec. 12.10. I will pour upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and supplications; and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn, etc. Where the Hebrew word translated Supplications is by divers Interpreters, as the Chaldee Paraphrast, the Septuagint, the Syriack and Arabic Versions, and Pagnine, agreeably to the derivation of it, rendered Mercies or Compassions. And since the spirit of supplications, is the spirit of grace, it therefore is to be understood according to the common sense of Interpreters, of piety of mind and affections, and an holy temper and disposition of heart, to trust in God and call upon him. And the following words, and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and shall mourn, etc. will infer the same thing, if those words be taken as expressions of true repentance, which is the sense of many good Expositors; though some modern and 
f Eus. Dem. Evang. l. 8. Test. 4.  ancient Writers, look upon them, as expressing the anguish of them who had despised and disobeyed our Blessed Lord and Saviour.  
5. The other place is Rom. 8.26. The spirit helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what to pray for as we ought, but the spirit itself maketh intercession for us, with groan which cannot be uttered. Now concerning the former part of these words, it cannot be conceived, that this great Apostle, and other Christians at that time, should be ignorant of the common matters of Christian Prayer, who could not but be acquainted with 
g Aug. Ep. 121. ad Prob.  the Lords Prayer, but a considerable part of the sense of this clause is, that whilst under troubles and sufferings, of which the Apostle was discoursing, even good men are apt to think their present redress and deliverance most desirable, as this Apostle himself did the departing of that outward affliction which he calls 
h Aug. ib. Chrys. in Rom. 8.26.  a thorn in the flesh, 2 Cor. 12.7, 8, 10. the influence of God's spirit directs them to seek his Kingdom, and with hope, and patience, and submission, to resign themselves unto the will of God, that that may be done on earth, and that his most wise Government should order all their affairs in this life. And the guidance of the Holy Spirit by keeping pious men humble, preserves them ordinarily from such irregular inclinations and desires, as appeared in the request of the two Sons of Zebedee, James and John, which they made to our Lord. And all this is performed by the influence of the grace of the Holy Spirit.  
6. And in the latter part of these words, the Spirits making intercession with groan which cannot be uttered, may well be applied to vehement affections, and inward gracious motions of the heart; but cannot consistently with common sense, be referred to words and expressions. But I see no great difference, whether this clause be understood immediately of the Holy Ghost himself, as most of the 
i Aug. Ep. 105. & Ep. 121. & passim●● Ambr●● ad Horon●●  Ancients understand it, that he gemendi inspirat affectum, promotes affectionate groans; as in a like way of expression they observe the Spirit is said to cry Abba Father, Gal. 4.6. because thereby we cry Abba Father, Rom. 8.15. Or whether it be understood of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, and the spirits of pious men who are influenced thereby, in dependence upon him; which is the interpretation of 
k Chrys. in loc.  S. Chrysostom, and is also mentioned by 
l Contra Serm. Arian.  S. Austin.  
7. The continued and increased supplies of this divine grace and gift of Prayer, 
This gift necessary to be exercised.  or inward devotion of mind, is usually vouchsafed to pious men, according to their diligence, and progress in piety, goodness and righteousness, and their frequent practice of these duties of Religion, with careful preparation of mind. And the exercise of this gift being so great a part of Religion, and of singular use for obtaining various blessings from God, it ought by all men to be performed with the greatest seriousness. And as that ability of expression, whereby a man largely professeth the particular doctrines of the Christian Faith, in the several Articles of our Belief, is not properly the gift of Faith or of believing, so neither is the like ability of expressing the matter of our Prayer, to be accounted in any proper sense the gift of Prayer, but rather of speaking, utterance, or Elocution. But it is the inward gracious dispositions, and motions of our hearts and minds, which is the most powerful Oratory, to prevail with God. And this whether with or without a Form of words; yea whether joined with outward expressions, or attended with silence, is the effectual and fervent prayer of a righteous man, which availeth much. Hereby as Cl. Alexandrinus 
m Cl. Alex. Strom. l. 7.  saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, We speak distinctly though with silence, 
Of the extraordinary gifts used in Prayer, in the beginning of Christiavity.  and utter inward loud cries, where no voice is heard.  
8. Secondly, There was also a gift of Prayer, and praying with the spirit, when together with what is above expressed, many Christians in the beginning of Christianity, were frequently enabled, by the extraordinary impulses and immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit upon their minds, so to pray either in their own or other Languages, that these motions of their hearts, and inward desires, and also their words and expressions, were the proper and extraordinary works and dictates of the Holy Ghost, 1 Cor. 14.14, 15, 16, 17. And it seemeth highly probable, that the Apostle had some respect to this gift, Rom. 8.26, 27. according to the interpretation of 
n Chrys. in Rom. 8.  S. chrysostom, who thinks that for the better clearing those words, there must be recourse had to the times of such extraordinary gifts, which in his days were ceased. And he saith, God then gave gifts which are called also spirits; and having mentioned the gift or spirit of prophecy, of wisdom, healing, miracles, tongues, etc. he addeth, after all these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, there was a gift of Prayer, which is also called a spirit (or spirit of Prayer) and he who had this, saith he, prayed for the whole multitude. And in another place the same Father observes, that this gift which he there also calls, 
o Chrys. in 1 Cor. 14.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was sometimes accompanied with the gift of tongues, or an ability by the inspiration of the spirit, to express these Prayers in other Languages: which is also manifest from the Scriptures themselves, 1 Cor. 14.14, 15, 16.  
9 
How far such extraordinary gifts were to be used?  Now he who had this gift, aught to make use thereof in a due and regular manner, especially so far as concerned the matter of this inspiration and guidance. For this was an extraordinary and singular favour from God, and these impulses were most excellent assistances, and infallible guides, for the right performance of the duty of Prayer, and making intercession according to the will of God, Rom. 8.27. But these eminent and extraordinary motions being miraculous, were peculiar to that primitive time, for which they were calculated, when the Christian Faith needed Confirmation, by the demonstration of the spirit, both for the establishing of Christians, and the Conversion of others. But no man now can justly pretend to speak or pray, by such infallible inspirations, nor ought he to be credited who shall so pretend. Yet they who then received these assistances, were not obliged always to make use of them, merely for the exercising of their gifts in the Christian Assemblies; but they ought only so far to use them, as was consistent with the rules of order, and decency, and edification; but in other Cases they were to forbear the use thereof, as is manifest from 1 Cor. 14. And upon this account, the Apostle argues against the public use of the gift of Prayer in an unknown tongue, though in the use of inspired gifts, 1 Cor. 14.14. my spirit prayeth, but my understanding, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is unfruitful; i.e. my gift is exercised, and my own mind and spirit is affected; but my sense and meaning is not declared, to the profit and benefit of others. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is here rendered understanding, appears to be used by S. Paul in this place, for the declared sense of his words and expressions, or the true 
p Valla, Lud. Cappel. in loc.  meaning of what he spoke, as appears from v. 19 and so it is used elsewhere in this Epistle, 1 Cor. 2.16. we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the mind of Christ, or the plain and true manifestation of his mind and doctrine.  
10. From this 1 Cor. Ch. 14. I had in my Libertas Ecclesiastica given this as an Answer to that Argument against set Forms of Prayer, that they limit the use of gifts: 
q Lib. Eccl. B. 1. Ch. 4. Sect 2. p. 120.  That by the will of God, bounds and limits were to be set, even to the use of the extraordinary gifts of God's spirit, that the Church might be edified, 1 Cor. 14.26, 27, 28, 30, 33. Whereas now no such miraculous emanations of the Holy Ghost can be pretended. Now in reply to this, this Author useth 
r Reas. Account. p. 14, 15, 16, 17.  many words, and saith these Precepts of the Apostle in this Chapter, were against two or three speaking or gambling together, and for the avoiding undue length in their Discourses, and that if any speak in an unknown tongue some should interpret. And then he declares, that such disorderly things may be restrained; but saith, it is one thing to restrain the notorious abuse of gifts, but it is a quite different thing to restrain the use of them. And to this purpose he misrepresents my sense, in a Syllogism of his own, and then triumphs over what himself had form; wherewith I shall not trouble the Reader, but shall in a few words declare, what manifest evidence there is in this Chapter, for that which I urged from it.  
11. 
Rules for the exercise of such gifts laid down 1 Cor. 14. considered.  My intention was to show, that the use of particular gifts, is not of so great necessity in the Church, because they are gifts, but that even some of the extraordinary emanations of the Holy Spirit might be, and aught to be forborn to be exercised, where this forbearance tended to decent order, or edification. And if this be plainly proved from this Chapter, the general urging the necessity of the use of all gifts given of God, further than that use is orderly and needful for edification, is an error and mistake. Now the Apostle in this Chapter declares that charity, edification, and the good and profit of others, are things to be preferred and valued, above extraordinary spiritual gifts, v. 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. that they who had these extraordinary gifts of the spirit, were not bound to use them in the Church, merely because they were gifts, unless the use thereof was for the profit and edification of others, v. 2, 6, 18, 19 Yea the use of the gift of tongues, though given by the special inspiration of the Holy Spirit, was totally forbidden, where there was no interpreter, v. 23, 27, 28. and yet so far as concerns the nature of gifts, an ability to speak with other tongues, by peculiar assistances of the Spirit, was as much, yea more a gift, than an ability of expressing ourselves in our own tongue, without any such extraordinary and peculiar assistance. And they who had other gifts of revelation, interpretation or doctrine, were to hold their peace, so far as was requisite to the observing the rules of order, and decency, and the avoiding confusion, v. 26, 30, 33, 40. But in our Case, there are no such gifts in being now, as then were in the Church, and therefore no restraint laid upon any such; here is no prohibiting that which is the proper gift of Prayer as I have above shown, nor is any thing forbidden directly or indirectly, by the injoining Liturgies, which is of greater use to the edification of the Church; as I shall 
s In Ch. 3.  hereafter show; but here is a direction for a better and more useful performance of the duty of Prayer prescribed.  
12. Thirdly, I acknowledge there is an ability in many persons, whereby they can express their minds in some degree fitly to God in Prayer. This our Author doth 
t Reas. Acc. p. 6, 8, 10.  divers times declare to be that which he accounteth the gift of Prayer. And I do not love to contend about expressions; yet the phrase of the gift of Prayer, is not where used at all in the Scripture, and the ancient Writers do usefully for the promoting devotion in Prayer, discourse of it as a work of the heart and soul, and not of words: Prayer, saith S. Basil 
u Basil. in Mart. Julitt. & in Bas. de Orat.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we do not at all define to be a business of words: and whilst we are warned against confidence in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, much speaking, it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a diligent disposition of heart, that is of great use. Wherefore as I before said, I esteem not this ability of expression, to be properly the gift of Prayer, but rather of speech or utterance, or a piece of elocution.  
13. 
How far readiness of expression in Prayer is a gift of God?  This facility of expression is procured and enlarged, in men who have a competent natural freedom of speech, by use and exercise, and is advanced by various methods. I acknowledge that in some an affectionateness of devotion doth contribute much thereto: and in others confident self-conceit, and an heated fancy, and (as I have read some particular instances) even diabolical contracts have promoted the same. And as I cannot admit these things last mentioned to be called the gifts of God, so neither is it to be allowed, that the natural product of them in those persons should be so esteemed; and much less are they to be called Gifts of the Holy Spirit. And it is manifest, that a readiness of expressing the sense of their minds, with fluency of fit words, and volubility of speech, doth attend even such men, who make use of their Prayers and other Discourses, to propagate and uphold errors, and heretical doctrines, and Enthusiasm, and even them who are sunk into the depth of impiety; as well as those who design to promote truth and goodness. And it must be an high dishonour to the Holy Spirit for any to say, that he gives his immediate and peculiar assistances, to the advancing of error and falsehood. S. Paul observed a sleight and cunning craftiness, in them who lie in wait to deceive, Eph. 4.14. and that by good words and fair speeches, they deceive the hearts of the simple, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, men of innocent and harmless intentions, Rom. 16.18. And Nazianzene describes the discourses of Heretics, that they had 
x Naz. Orat. 33.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a quick, nimble, and voluble tongue, and they spoke, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with a masculine and generous stile, and choice and approved words. And these persons and such like, might be forward enough to call these things gifts, and to use our Author's Argument against the restraint of them.  
14. The high advantages of the influences, and aids of the Holy Spirit in the Church of God, are with great thankfulness to God and our Saviour to be acknowledged; but the operations of this spirit tend to produce purity, holiness and goodness. Christians are commanded in the Holy Scriptures to pray in the spirit, which (besides what was extraordinary, and peculiar to those times) consists in inward piety of heart, and not in variety of words. And copiousness of expression is so far from being an evidence of his conduct, that in S. Chrysostoms' judgement, where there is an overflowing abundance, and multitude of words in Prayer, this cannot consist with that praying in the spirit, which is commanded by the Apostle, Eph. 6.18. It is saith he, 
y Chrys. in Eph. 6.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not to pray in the spirit, when any one useth multitudes of words and repetitions. And indeed to pray in the spirit, as the Apostle directs, is to perform the duty of Prayer with a pious temper of mind, according to the Christian rules; whereas the designed use of variety of words and expressions, and the affecting this, is contrary to the Precepts of our Saviour. The Commentaries under S. Ambrose his name declare, 
z In Eph. 6.  Hoc est in spiritu semper or are, munda conscientia, & fide integra precem ad Deum dirigere; This is to pray always in the spirit, to direct prayer to God with a pure conscience, and an upright faith: and Calvin explains praying in the spirit, by declaring the inward devoutness of affection, which is a fruit of that spirit; 
a In Ep. Jud. v. 20.  hinc ardour & vehementia, hinc denique gemitus illi inenarrabiles, Hence proceed warmth and earnestness of spirit and groans, that cannot be uttered.  
15. I acknowledge a sober and due freedom of expression, to be a gift of God, in the same manner that the capacities of men's understanding, and all other abilities of mind and body, are God's gifts. But it is plain that this liberty of expression, is the product of the natural capacities men receive from God, which are improved in well disposed persons by ordinary means, under God's blessing. And I cannot discern (and I think no man else can) that a Ministers ability of speech, either for Prayer, or Preaching, or Conference, is of any other nature, than that freedom of expression which a Lawyer hath to plead, or which other persons of good capacities and liberal education, and who have accustomed themselves to discourse, do make use of concerning such things, as they have well considered: only it may be advanced by a pious affection towards the things he may discourse of.  
16. I shall now consider, whether it be the duty of Christians, or particularly of Ministers, to make use of such abilities, at all times, in the exercises of Religion. And besides what I have said before, 
How far Ministers are obliged to exercise all their abilities?  it may justly be accounted a considerable, if not an unanswerable objection, against the necessity contended for, of a Ministers using a particular gift, or ability wherewith he is endued, merely because it is a gift; in that this would equally make it his duty, to use his present or extempore ability of conception, and expression in Prayer or Preaching, if he have any such ability, and the use of his memory, in declaring what he hath himself conceived, or thought on beforehand, and also his reading what hath been before composed, either by himself or by others. But the use of these several abilities at the same time, is impossible, because of their being inconsistent with one another. But God obligeth no man to impossibilities.  
17. And besides this, if it be necessary to the obtaining the favour of God, for Ministers to use their own gifts, in uttering variety of expressions in their Prayers to God, because they may not neglect the use of any of their gifts or abilities; than it must be necessary also, where the person who Ministers hath an ability to perform it, and the Auditory (among learned men and Scholars) hath a capacity to understand it; to perform the Offices of Prayer in the use of divers languages, some part in one language, and some part in another, exercising therein all his several abilities. For our Author's Argument will as much prove the necessity of this, as the necessity of his using his own parts, in different ways of expression, in his own language; since the former is a more eminent and extraordinary ability than the latter, and if no gift or accomplishment, may be totally neglected in the service of God, than not this, which is of so considerable a degree. But yet if we consider God, 
b Cl. Alex. Strom. l. 7.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he desires not, and is not pleased with the variety of sounds of words and languages; and the urging such a practice as a necessary duty of Religion, would represent Religion, as if it was a business of affectation, fancy and humour; and not of piety and seriousness. Now this I mention, to manifest hereby, of how low and little concernment in Religion, the mere exercise of a man's own abilities are, further than they have an influence upon the profit and edification of others.  
18. 
No duty to use any ability, further than is orderly and for edification.  And there are also many other abilities, gifts or perfections of another nature, which God bestows upon some Ministers, the exercise of which they may lawfully, and usefully, wholly omit in their Ministerial employments. For instance, he who is eminently able by critical learning, to explicate divers difficult Texts of Scripture; or who is one of a piercing judgement, to fathom the depth of the greatest controversies, will not only be free from sin, but may be commended, if he silence these his abilities in his popular Sermons, and acquaint common Auditories with such doctrines and duties, as are both useful for their practice, and suitable to their capacities. Thus S. Paul dealt with his Corinthians, feeding them with milk, 1 Cor. 3.2.  
19 I shall now go further, and show, 
'Tis best for the Church, that the ablest men in some cases ordinarily make use of what was form by others abilities.  that Ministers who have themselves gifts, and abilities of the greatest degree, both lawfully may, and for the greater good of the Church, aught, to make use of what is drawn up to their hands by others, in some great and weighty cases, rather than of their own gifts, in the neglect of what is so composed, drawn up and established. And of this I shall give two instances.  
20. My first instance shall be, concerning the translation of the Holy Scripture. Now I presume this Author will acknowledge, 
As the Translation of Scripture.  that Ministers ought to instruct their people, in the doctrine and Religion of Christianity, out of the holy Scriptures. But according to his Principles, he who is able to give an account of the Original, ought not to cite the Scripture according to our English Translation, but must use his own gift and ability, in making a new Translation of his own: and possibly, if he be guided by our Author's way of reasoning, he must be still making new Translations of the same Text of Scripture, when he citys it a second, third, and fourth time, if he be able to vary so oft. And yet it is easy to see, that a fixed and well considered Translation must be of more value and esteem, and of greater use for the instructing people in the doctrine of Christianity, than this changeable method. And in this case, we have the acknowledgement of this Writer himself, who saith, 
c Reas. Acc. p. 20.  both Christ and his Apostles made frequent use of the Septuagint Version.  
21. Our Author himself proposeth it, as an objection against his opinion, that according to it, 
d P. 19  Ministers who are able must be bound in reading the Scriptures, to make a Translation of their own. And here at first he makes a doubt, whether reading the Scriptures be a Ministerial act; and saith, Christ never said to them, Go and read, and he supposeth the Scriptures may be read by inferior officers, as is done in other Reformed Churches. But thus far his Answer is very insufficient, if it be considered, 1. That the reading the holy Scriptures in the Church, hath been a part of the public Offices in the Christian Assemblies, from the time of the 
e Tertul. Apol. c. 39 Just. Mart. Apol. 2.  first Centuries, and even in the Apostles times, and by their Precept, Act. 15.31. Col. 4.16. 1 Thes. 5.27. and that this is included in that charge to Timothy, 1 Tim. 4.13. Give attendance to reading, is acknowledged by many 
f V Dr Hammond, & in Baldw. in loc.  Expositors. And therefore if all public offices ought to be performed by the use of men's own gifts, why not this? 2. Even the public Prayers were also in the ancient Greek Church, usually performed or read, not by the chief Officers, but by the Deacon, as 
g Chrys. in Rom. & passim.  S. Chrysostom oft expresseth. 3. That yet when persons of great abilities do undertake to read the Scriptures publicly, they must either sin according to his Position, in neglecting the use of their gifts, or else must make New Translations. 4. That what ever such men as our Author will determine, concerning the public reading the Scriptures, which was also constantly 
h Buxt. Syn. Jud. c. 9  practised in the Jewish Church, Act. 13.15, 27. ch. 15.21. and where our Saviour himself, after he had begun to preach, stood up for to read, Luk. 4.15, 16. Yet so long as instructing the people out of the Scriptures, is acknowledged a Ministerial Act, they must according to his Argument, be hence obliged to make new Translations.  
22. But for a further Answer, he tells us, 
i p. 20.  That no single Minister is fit to be trusted with this, nor to enter a dissent to the ordinary Version,— but with great modesty and upon weighty grounds. Now I commend the modesty of these expressions, though I think in the former clause, they run too far into the other extreme. I do not see what reason our Author hath, to condemn S. Hieroms translating the Old Testament, out of the Original Hebrew (or his Translating the Scriptures, for the use of his 
k Hi●ron. Sophronio.  Countrymen into the Dalmatian or Slavonian Tongue, and the like undertake of divers other persons) because this was performed by a single Presbyter: and for this work, he hath been deservedly honoured in the Christian Church. And I did not think, he would have been so severe against the Version of Junius and Tremellius, or (if they may escape the better because they were two) against Beza's Version of the New Testament. Yet I suppose all understanding men will grant, that the undertaking new Translations of the Bible, when the old one is sufficiently perfect, is a very needless enterprise, to make them more numerous than learned men are.  
23. But why may not what he speaks of a Version, be as well and as truly affirmed concerning the public Prayers of the Church, when there are as great abilities required, (not indeed of skill in the learned languages, and ancient Customs, but) of true wisdom, care, consideration and prudence, and as much authority also, fitly to comprise the common addresses of the Church, and to recommend them to be presented to God in its public service, as to make a translation of the Scripture? And why private Ministers should have a greater liberty, to enter their dissents here, than concerning a Translation, I do not understand; especially since we are more certain, that our Liturgy is free from any mistake or error, in the matter of it, than we can be in some difficult Texts, concerning any Translation yet extant, every Age affording further helps, for the clearer understanding of some of them. And it is as easy a thing to make declamations against them who shall suppose, that many Ministers are not able to examine, and give the sense of the original Texts, especially of the New Testament, as our Author can make against them, who think all private Ministers not sufficiently able, with due fitness, exactness and comprehensiveness, daily to compose new solemn addresses to God, to present therein the common service of the Church. And yet if their private abilities could constantly enable them, to make Prayers every way as perfect, as a well-ordered Form is, I shall in the next Chapter show the advantages, that a fixed Form in the public service, would still have above them.  
24. But besides this, I know not how our Author will be able here to Answer his own instance. For whatsoever may be said of other Ministers; were not 
l Reas. Account. ibidem.  Christ, and his Apostles who were divinely inspired, of abilities sufficient to be entrusted with usual interpreting the Scriptures from the Original, yea and of making an infallible translation also? And yet they thought it neither necessary nor fit, when ever they cited the Scripture, to exercise their gifts, in making a new Version, but as he himself observeth, they frequently and for the most part followed the Septuagint. Indeed if our Author should embrace that Notion, from Aristaeus, which is mentioned by 
* Phil. de Vit. Mos l. 2. p. 659.  Philo, and espoused by many of the 
m Just. Mart. Cohort. ad Gr. Cl. Alex. Strom. 1. Epiphan de men's & Pond. Augustin. etc.  ancient Writers of the Church; and favoured by the 
n Novel. Tit. 29. Const. 146. c. 1.  Imperial Law, and by some 
o Salian. An. Mund. 3775. n. 71. etc. Mr Greg. in Opus●. and others cited by B. Walton Proleg. 9 in Bibl. Polygl.  learned men of later days, that the Version of the Septuagint was framed by a kind of divine inspiration, he would hereby in some degree avoid this difficulty. But he hath shut himself out from this Plea, since in the same place he declareth, that Christ and his Apostles made use of this Version, though as full of mistakes as any other. And in that the Penmen of the New Testament, did sometimes vary very considerably from the Septuagint; as for instance, in that Prophecy of Zech. 12.10. cited Joh. 19.37. where the Septuagint in 
p Hieron. in Zech. 12.  S. Hieroms time were observed, and affirmed by him to read it, as our most ordinary Copies thereof now do; this is evidence enough, that they did not esteem that Version to be of divine inspiration.  
25. A second instance I shall give, 
No new Creeds to be daily made.  concerneth the Creed, or profession of the Christian Faith. Now supposing according to the assertion of 
q Voss. de Trib. Symb. Dissert. 1. c. 25. etc.  Vossius, that the Creed called the Apostles, was not made by themselves: In reciting the Articles of the Christian Faith at Baptism, or according to the ancient Custom to the 
r Aug. de Symbol. ad Catechum.  Catechumeni before Baptism; it cannot be expedient, that every Minister should every time exercise his gifts, in forming a new Creed. And if he should do this, it would neither be so close and pithy in its matter and substance, nor of that authority, which the received Creeds are; and this would be the way to lose the old faith, by a changeable novelty of words. The ancient Custom of the Church, was to keep to their 
s Ruffin. in Symbol.  fixed Creeds. And then they who would not acquiesce in the received Symbol or Rule of Faith, were looked upon with 
t Socr. Hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  suspicion, of having designs against the true Faith.  
26. 
Public Forms allowed by Dissenters.  The like may be said of public Confessions. And which way soever our Author may be inclined in this Case, some of the chief persons of the Presbyterian Party, in our late times, discerned so much hurt by the rejecting these public Forms, as made them earnest in pleading the usefulness of them. Thus for instance, Dr Tuckney, on 2 Tim. 1.13. Hold fast the Form of sound words. Whence he declares, 
u Form of sound words, p. 246.  Forms so much decried in our times, were not so undervalved in Paul ' s, who you see left with Timothy a Form of words. And he said, 
x p. 248.  these have been ever in use, since God himself wrote the Decalogue,— and Christ taught us his own Prayer,— And the Apostles their Canons, Act. 15. and the Primitive Churches and Fathers their Creeds. And he not only asserts, 
y p. 252.  that the Forms of sound words are useful and in some cases necessary: but complains also, that our 
z p. 258.  experience in these woefully distracted times, too sadly cryeth aloud, that the not keeping more close to such Forms of sound words, (which our Church was sometimes famous for, in point of Doctrine)— hath miserably torn us in pieces, and divided us in semper divisibilia, with more to that purpose. And concerning every man taking the liberty, of venting his own novel composures of this kind, he declares 
a p. 272.  many such Forms are in these times of Deformation rather than Reformation, minted daily. So he in the Year 1650.  
27. And amongst the Independents, when their Elders and Messengers, from the several parts of the Realm, met at the Savoy, to publish their joint Declaration of Faith and Order; this their General Assembly, it seems, thought it not necessary or requisite for them, to make use of their gifts to compose a new Confession of Faith. For in the main part of what they published, 
b In Declare of the Faith and Order of the Congr. Churches.  in several whole Chapters, and most of their Paragraphs, they kept exactly even to the words of the Confession of the Assembly at Westminster, making very few alterations in any other things, save where the Independent opinions differed from the Presbyterians. And yet themselves 
c In the Preface.  highly magnified, and applauded their own proceed in this Convention, and their Unity therein.  
28. And it may be further considered, 
Well consi●●● Forms more complete than other varied compos●res.  that in all these things, viz. the Version of Scripture, the Declaration of the Articles of Faith, and in public Prayers, it may well be presumed, that what is well considered and settled, or prescribed as a Form, is more perfect and complete in the composure, than can be expected in any method of ordinary variation. And to assert, that these things may be always better (or as well) performed, and composed by every Minister, or even by the most eminent person whomsoever, in a constant way of varying, in the use of their own abilities, than in a well considered and digested Form; is as much as to affirm, that the varied expressions of men at every particular time, are more proper, pithy, expressive and full, than the best composed Prayer that is at any time made, and reviewed with the greatest consideration and care: for so it may be expected that a publicly established Form is.  
29. And he who talketh of this our Church, that if all her Ministers cannot constantly in their daily new Prayers, equal or outdo the perfection or exactness of a well considered Form, (for this must be his sense, if he speaks to any purpose) that 
d Reas. Account. p. 157.  this may be spoken to the shame of the Church of God in England: these raw and extravagant speeches will be to the shame of those who utter them, so far as they will be ashamed of uncharitable and reproachful calumnies against the Church of God, and of speaking against all sense and reason.  
30. Now the result of what I have hitherto discoursed is, that what our Author contends for, is neither the true and proper gift of Prayer, which is necessary to be exercised; nor yet any singular or peculiar gift of the spirit of God, as a special benefit of Christ's Exaltation; but it is an ability of a more common and ordinary nature. And that it is neither a duty, nor yet expedient, that such abilities should be used and constantly exercised, any further than is agreeable to the rules of edification and order. Thus much I thought fit to write for the Readers better satisfaction, concerning the subject or matter of his first Argument; but I shall not need to do the like concerning the rest: And now it will be no hard thing, to Answer the Argument itself.  
31. The substance of his Argument is, 
e Reas. Acc. p. 5, 6.  that a Ministers own gift, of expressing his mind fitly to God in Prayer, is a mean given by God, for the performance of the Religious act of Prayer; and therefore may not be omitted, no not at the command of man. To which I Answer,  
32. First, That a mean given of God, 
Means or abilities not necessary for the performing duties, may be omitted.  if it be only capable of being used, and not a necessary mean to the performance of the duty, may lawfully be omitted. Especially when there are several means, which may all of them singly be used, he who chooseth one of them, and the most profitable, is not to be faulted, because he doth not use the other which is less profitable. Thus in the public Prayers of the Church; whereas a Ministers present fluency of expression, or his remembrance of what himself hath before conceived, with respect to that particular time; or his using a set Form, are different ways or means of performing this service; he who chooseth the last, which hath many advantages of the other two, is not to be blamed because he doth not choose either of those two. And by this it may appear, that this Writers own Argument, if it were of any strength, might easily be inverted, and retorted against himself, if we put in the phrase of a Form of Prayer, instead of a Ministers own gift, etc.  
33. Secondly, That ability of expression was not peculiarly and particularly given by God to Ministers, that they might thereby perform the public Offices of Prayer. This is manifest, because this is also given to them, whom God never calls to perform the public Offices of Ministration. And also because if our Lord had intended it, to be the duty of all Ministers of the Gospel, that they must use their own abilities of expression in the Prayers of the Church, and might not make use of any Forms, he would not himself have given them an Example, of composing a Form of Prayer, and delivering this to be used by his own Apostles, and this too to be made use of, not as their private addresses, for themselves alone; but with respect to the whole Christian Society, and therefore beginning as was anciently observed 
f Cyp. de Orat. Dom. Non dicimus patermeus— publica nobis est & communis oratio.  Our Father, as being a public and Common Prayer. And this was the more considerable because it was agreeable to, and in approbation of what John the Baptist had directed his Disciples: and the like method had been before used, throughout all the state of the Jewish Church, as I have in 
g Libert. Eccles. p. 103, 104.  another place evinced, and shall further prove, Ch. 3. Sect. 3. n. 27, 28, etc.  
34. 
The Authority of our Governors is to be honoured.  The authority of our Governors is also in this Case of considerable weight. For though the command of man is not to be performed, if it be against the will of God; yet since it is fit, that a due order of public worship in Christian Assemblies, should be provided for by them, who have the chief Authority and inspection therein; the constant use of the Liturgy, being of itself agreeable to the will of God, becomes more obligatory upon us, because this way of worship is wisely established by our superiors. And the Apostle S. Paul declared, that the use ever of extraordinary spiritual gifts, must give place to decency and order, 1 Cor. 14.26,— 33,— 40.  
35. But he further saith, that a man own gift or ability of expression in Prayer, is 
h Reas. Account. p. 6, & 7, & 18.  a divine mean, but a Form o● Prayer is 
i p. 7. & 18. Liturgies are no mere humane means for God's worship.  a mere humane mean. Now this must be upon supposition, that an ability to compose a Prayer to speak it, is a divine ability, (which how far it is true, I have showed above) but the same ability to compose the same Prayer, if it be to be written, is a mere humane ability. But no man can see any truth in such a supposition, nor any reason for it.  
36. But however our Author think fit to talk; so far as he hath proved any thing, he hath proved the composing of Liturgies, to be by a divine ability, or gift of Prayer. For he thus argues against those who deny any such gift, as the gift of Prayer. 
k p. 8.  This is, saith he, either 〈◊〉 deny what is evident to sense, That there are some persons able, fitly to express then minds to God in Prayer, or to deny the Scriptures, which say, Jam. 1.17. th●● every good gift, and every perfect gift cometh from above, from the Father of lights. Besides that, it stubbeth up all Liturgies by the roots, none it seems having any ability to make them. Now the result of this Discourse is, that the ability to make Liturgies is the gift of Prayer, and a gift of God; and consequently they must be a divine mean for the performance of Prayer, or such an one as is afforded to us by the assistance of God. Besides this, God hath so far declared his approbation of Forms of Prayer, that he himself delivered such, and enjoined them under the Old Testament, as our Saviour did under the New: and if that may be further called divine, which serves the ends of God in the World, and conduceth to holiness and piety, upon this account also good and well-ordered Forms must be so esteemed.  
37. But it now remains, that I examine his proofs, produced to show that it is a duty, in the public Prayers of the Church, for a Minister to use his own gifts of expression, if he have such abilities. His first 
l p. 6.  proof is, 1 Tim. 4.14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by Prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. But Ans. 1. In this place the Apostle requires Timothy, to take care of executing his Episcopal Office, 
The Precepts of the Scripture concerning the use of gifts considered.  and exercising his authority (which things were given by the laying on of hands) and also to discharge the duty of his place and function, with care and diligence, according to the grace which God had giver him. 2. Here is not a word spoken it this Text concerning Prayer, or the performance thereof by any such gift as our Author pleads for, nor doth the Context which mentioneth reading, exhortation, and doctrine, speak any thing thereof. And I suppose this Author doth not account the gift of Prayer, to be given by the laying on of hands, when himself saith, the Church 
m p. 13.  should judge of her Minister's gift of Prayer, before she trust them with the public Ministry.  
38. And 3. if this Text had particularly expressed the use of the gift of Prayer, and intended this concerning utterance and expression, as it doth not; the Argument from Timothy, at that time, when public Offices of the Church were often performed by miraculous gifts, and who himself was in all probability furnished therewith, would not be of force, for them who have no such extraordinary gifts. Yet such Precepts do not enjoin the use of any gifts, further than may consist with order and tend to edification; which are general rules for the exercise of all gifts. And when the Apostle saith in this Verse, and 1 Tim. 1.18. that Timothy's Ordination, and the discharge of his Function, was by prophecy, even this hath respect to those miraculous emanations of the Holy Spirit, who in those times, did in an extraordinary manner, often make choice of persons to be ordained; and directed the Apostles by Prophecy, or some other way of guidance, whom they should make choice of. To which purpose 
n Ep. ad Corinth. p. 54.  Clemens Romanus speaks of the Apostles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, choosing and approving by the Spirit, those whom they ordained Bishops and Deacons. And 
o Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Eusebius from Clemens Alexandrinus, declares as a certain account of History, concerning S. John, that he ordained Bishops, and others of the Clergy, of persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who were signified and marked out by the spirit.  
39 Now how severe this Writer is inclined to be, against such like Arguments, produced by others against his opinion, from Texts where there is no mention at all of Prayer, we may discern by this instance. When he took notice that that Text Rom. 15.6. that you may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, was produced, as well it might be, in favour of Forms: he breaks out into a swelling passion, and in contempt cries out 
p Reas. Acc. p. 142.  Ridiculous! is there in that Text a word concerning Prayer, etc. Now though there be in that Text, a more general expressi●● of glorifying God, of the practice and exercise of which 
q Grot. in Rom. 15.6. i e. Ut cum Deum laudatis, eique preces funditis, faciatis id, non tantum eodem verborum sono (sicut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fieri solebant) sed & animo pleno mutuae dilectionis.  Prayer is one part 〈◊〉 branch: yet if there had been no su●● expression, if I had been of his Council I would have advised him to milder expressions, for his own sake, towards such ways of arguing as himself maketh 〈◊〉 of, but with less strength and evidence.  
40. Another place of Scripture he produceth is, 1 Pet. 4.10. As every one ha●● received the gift, even so minister the sa●● one to another, etc. Now this Verse is b● 
r Dr Hammond in loc.  many Writers, understood of givi●●alms, to which sense its Connexion wi●● the former Verse doth incline. But if 〈◊〉 be understood concerning any ministerial abilities, of which the following Ver●● discourseth, the main part of what I mentioned in the second and third Answer to the forecited place of Scripture, w●● equally agree to this. And indeed th●● place cannot be understood, to have a●● particular respect to Prayer; since 〈◊〉 speaks of ministering one to another: Whereas in Prayer, and all proper acts of w●●ship, as well as in sacrifice, he that ministereth, ministereth only to God, to who●● alone the Prayers and Service of the Church was directed.  
41. He mentioneth also Rom. 12.6. Having gifts, differing according to the grace given to us, whether Prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith. But the same Answer will fit this place also: for neither here, nor in 1 Pet. 4.10. is any mention at all of Prayer, but the other gifts, which the Apostles had their particular eye upon, are expressly named in the following Verses, in both these Chapters. And yet if the Apostle had then commanded them to have used such expressions in Prayer, as they were furnished with by the gifts of the Holy Ghost, as 
s Grot. in in Jud. 20.  Grotius seemeth to think, that praying in the Holy Ghost, Judas v. 20. is to pray, according to the dictates of the Holy Spirit, (which yet is more probably, from the connexion of that phrase, with their most holy faith preceding it, and the love of God following it, to be understood of the grace of the Spirit) this would not have a like respect to us now, since the like dictates, and effusion of spiritual gifts are not now afforded. They than not only prayed, but also sung by the peculiar guidance of the Spirit, as is manifest, 1 Cor. 14.15, 26. and were therefore infallibly guided in both; but neither assistances of infallibility are now pretended to, from the divine spirit, save only in the deceits of Popery and Enthusiasm, nor will our Author allow, that 
t Reas. Acc. p. 18, 19  new hymns ought to be composed by the exercise of gifts.  
42. And he produceth Rom. 12.3. where the Apostle requireth every one to think of himself soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith, and giveth us the last part of this Verse in Greek, as if there were some stress to be laid thereupon. But this appears to be so little to his purpose, that I cannot guess what he aimed at herein, unless it be that a Minister ought to think himself able, by his constant gifts, to outdo the perfection of Liturgies; which is directly against what the Apostle enjoined in the former part of that Verse, that no man should think of himself more highly, than he ought to think. For I conceive it to be a manifest truth, that there is now no man whosoever he be, who by constant alterations, and making new Prayers, according to his own abilities, can perform these services at all times, with that exactness, which may be had in a Form: but he will sometimes either omit something expedient, or be defective in due expression, or be wanting in that pithiness, closeness and comprehensiveness, which may be provided for by a Form.  
43. Now as there is not one word in any of these Texts, concerning the particular use either of extraordinary gifts, and much less of ordinary abilities, in public Prayer; so I cannot see, how any Christian can conceive, that they were at all intended against the use of Forms; unless he can first persuade himself, that these Apostles intended to contradict the direction and command of our Saviour, concerning the Lord's Prayer.  
44. Having now sufficiently, as I hope, answered what he produceth as his Argument, I shall not take notice of those other particular Answers, which he mentioneth, as having been by some given to this Argument, and unto which he gives his replies: though several of them are sufficiently vindicated, from what I have said. But there are two or three other passages in this Chapter, which I shall briefly reflect upon.  
45. His description of the gift of Prayer, for the public service of the Church, as being 
u p. 6, 8. This Author's account of the gift of Prayer very deficient.  an ability to express one's mind fitly to God in Prayer, is very defective and imperfect, especially in two things, though I use the phrase of the gift of Prayer here, improperly in his own sense. 1. In that he accounts this ability of composing or forming Prayers, to consist only in a persons being able to express his mind, whereas it is chief to be provided that the conceptions of his mind be sober, and well ordered, comprehensive, and every way suitable to the nature of the duty. 2. In that he only mentions the expressing his mind; Whereas in public Prayers, it is not a man's own private desires or wants, so far as they are peculiar to himself, which he is to present to God; but he is to express what is fit, to represent the minds of the whole Assembly, and the common desires and wants, and joint Devotions of all the Congregation.  
46. Another place I shall examine is, where he tells us they 
x p. 9, 10. His defav●ing the ministry of our. Church is unjust, and unreasonable.  think it will be hard to find nine or ten thousand Scholars in England, furnished with the gift either of praying or preaching, in any tolerable manner: and one great reason is, because they have been so tied to a Liturgy, that they have never applied themselves to the study of the Scriptures, and their own hearts, as they should. Thus in this place and in many others, he takes any occasion to reproach, and cast dirt upon the Ministry of the Church of England; even to such excess, as sometimes to call them (though he excepts very many particular persons from that charge) 
y p. 124.  an ignorant, lazy and sottish Ministry. And he is the more liberal in these exorbitant Censures, when he doth withal bespatter our Liturgy, as in both these places, or what he terms 
z p. 149.  that pitiful thing called Uniformity, in words, and syllables, and phrases.  
47. Now I conceive myself abundantly warranted to say, that the abilities of the present Ministry of the Church of England are such as were never in this Church outdone (if equalled) in any foregoing Age; nor as I verily believe, in any other part of the Christian World, since the Apostolical times, in any Church of so large extent. And it is an easy thing, but mightily unworthy of a Professor of Christianity, to speak bad and evil words of the mosT worthy men and things. But doth the use of a Liturgy hinder men from studying the Scriptures, or their own hearts, (which is a loud calumny upon our Ministry, and many other excellent persons, of eminent piety and goodness, who have a very high value for our Liturgy) and were the ancient Fathers, and our first Reformers, and their Successors, who closely adhered to a Liturgy, men of no understanding in the Scriptures, and men of no piety of heart, or holiness of life? Or is the daily reading the Scriptures, as is done in the Liturgy (and by the Ministry of England at other times also) that which must hinder men's study and understanding in them? and is the constant use of morning and evening devotions, which the Liturgy directeth, the great obstacle to piety, and to men's taking serious care of their own hearts, to have them possessed with fear and reverence of God, and disposed to the exercises of Religion, and universal obedience? And what a wild accusation is this, to revile and asperse a National Ministry at random, and at a venture, concerning such things, wherein every Reader may discern, that it is impossible for him to know what he speaks to be true, and others, blessed be God, know them to be false?  
48. And I wish our Author be not himself defective, in some part at least, of what he chargeth upon others. For in studying the Scriptures, he could not but meet with Precepts against evil speaking, false accusing, rash judging, and uncharitableness; and in studying his own heart, he would discern, whether he had not offended in any of these. And I presume him (though I am not very certain who he is) to be so much a Scholar, as to know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the usual Greek word for the Evil one, doth properly and primarily signify a Calumniator, and it is thence unlikely, that any of the spirit of Christianity should be contained in reproaching others, which Nazianzen accounted to be 
a Naz. Orat. 53.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, one of the greatest evils.  
49. In Answer to such words, I could also without much pains, find out defaming and reflective expressions, if I were inclined that way; but I am content herein to be inferior to him, but truly sorry to see what liberty he sometimes gives himself in such things. I have long since learned, from the example of our Lord and Saviour, from the rules of the Christian Religion, and particularly from our Church-Catechism, to keep my tongue from evil-speaking, lying, and slandering. And if he will not take it ill from me, which I assure him, I intent no otherwise than with a truly charitable mind; I dare confidently affirm, that if he shall please to be a strict observer of so much, though it be out of our Liturgy, he will not thereby be the worse man.  
50. And I hope he may be the less offended with me for this Counsel, because I do not write it out of any private provocation, or any apprehension of disrespectful expressions towards myself. I acknowledge his expressions towards me in particular, to have been very civil and courteous, and I thank him for them. And I shall not return to him any thing unmeet. But I should not be faithful to the truth, nor to himself, if I should not show the weakness and mistakes of his Arguments, so far as I discern them. And the duty I own to the Church, of which I am a member, cannot well be discharged, without taxing his reproachful words against it, where I meet with them.  
51. What he speaketh concerning 
b p. 18, 19  Hymns and Anthems, I shall have occasion to take notice of in the next 
c Ch. 3. Sect. 2. n. 38, etc.  Chapter.   

CHAP. III. Of Devotion, and attentive fervency of mind in public Prayer: and whether the use of Liturgies be hindrances, or helps therein.  

SECT. I. His pretences for Forms of public Prayer, being an impediment to attention and fervency, examined, and the contrary manifested.  
HIS second Argument against the lawfulness of the ordinary public use of Forms, by him who hath abilities of expressing himself without them, is, that they hinder the attention, intention and fervency, both of Minister and people, and therefore 
a Reas. Acc. p. 23.  may not be used. But this charge against well-ordered Forms, can never be made out: and his proofs will appear very weak and slender.  
2. Now I freely acknowledge and assert, 
Pious devotion greatly needful in Prayer.  that in our Prayer we ought to have a holy and Religious sense of God, and of Jesus our Mediator. We ought also to be serious in minding and attending to the duty in hand, 
Ch. III.  and as free as may be from distractions: and to have a lively exercise of faith, hope, reverence, and such other Christian Graces, as I mentioned in the 
b n. 2.  former Chapter. And the more devout we are, to the higher degree we are raised of this temper, and active disposition of mind. This is indeed of great consequence in our addresses to God, and as 
c Aug. de Temp. Serm. 157.  S. Austin saith, Prayer being a spiritual thing, it is so much the more accepted of God by how much our spirits and affections are answerable to this duty. If this be what he means by his attention and intention; it will be readily granted, that that way or model of service, which hinders these duties, and is not consistent with their exercise, is thereupon unlawful And this seems to be his sense, when he saith, 
d p. 33.  attention is for the soul, hoc agere, to do what it pretends to do: and by 
e p. 34.  intention and fervour, he means, an holy zeal and heat— of the inward man, of sorrow in confession, desires in petition, joy in thanksgiving. But there may be too great a stress laid upon zeal, earnestness and fervency: since this is sometimes found, even to some degree of ecstasy, in men of hot heads, strong imaginations, and deluded minds, in whom it is far from the temper of sober devotion. 
Sect. I.  And an awful reverence of God, a Religious and godly fear, a humble submissiveness, and sober exercise of other Christian graces, is far to be preferred before it. Now I doubt not, but that a pious man may pray seriously, religiously and affectionately, either in the use of a Form, or without one; but I think the former hath in many cases the advantage, and specially in the public service of the Church, as may hereafter appear.  
3. When he comes to prove, that the use of set Forms of Prayer hindereth attention and fervency, he useth high words, and saith, 
f p. 25.  it is to them next to a demonstration, and 
g p. 26.  it is impossible for any without self-condennation to deny it. But if after all this, his proofs shall appear shallow and insufficient, than these will be evinced to be rash words, and talking lavishly with immoderate confidence.  
4. In his discoursing concerning attention, instead of Arguments he proposeth three questions, which he would have considered. First, 
h p. 25.  Whether it be possible for any person, to read any discourse, with that degree of attention of thoughts, 
Diligent attention may be easily given to what is read.  as he must pronounce the same with by heart. To which I Answer, that it is certain this may be easily done, and I think it strange it should be questioned. How usual is it t●● read the Scriptures, and other Books, wi●● as great attention, as the same things ca● be spoken without reading? Particularly in considering his Arguments, I shoul● have thought him big with strange conceits who should tell me that I must b● at the pains of getting them without Book, before I could attend to their sense● and I know I can do it better, by viewing them in his Book. If our Author ca●● not do thus much, he cannot be of capacity to make any great proficiency, by any thing he hath read: and he must b● the unfittest man, of any I know, to answer other men's Writings, when he cannot well attend to their sense in reading them. And it is strange to me that any man should write a Book, if he think 〈◊〉 man can much attend to its sense in reading it; and he that is of this opinion needs not be much concerned how carelessly he writes.  
5. The ancient Christians declared, the reading the Holy Scriptures to have had 〈◊〉 mighty efficacy upon their minds and spirits, insomuch that he devout Reade● was thereby, as 
i Orig. cont. Cells.  Origen expresseth it, i● a manner inspired: which could not have been, without a diligent attention 〈◊〉 them. But if our Author's way of Discourse course were of any force, the delivery of Christian Doctrine by Oral Tradition, must be much more vigorous, lively and powerful, than by the Scriptures. I confess, he doth make a particular exception concerning the Scriptures, when he speaks of oft reading what we are before acquainted with; and saith, 
k p. 27.  God hath secured an abiding reverence for them in all pious souls. But I suppose he doth not mean, that this is done in any extraordinary and miraculous manner. And it is plain, that even the Scriptures are read by many with carelessness, and have been long observed to have been perverted, and abused by 
l Iren. adv. Haer. l. 1. c. 1, etc. 15. Tert. de prescript. adv. Haer. c. 17.  Heretics. Wherefore the reverence that pious men have for the Scriptures, in reading them, is chief with respect to God, because they are his word and his laws, whereby his will is declared to men. But since as 
m Aug. de Temp. Serm. 112.  S. Aug. observed, when we pray, we speak to God; and when we read, God speaks to us; a Religious honour and fear of God, so far as it prevails, will secure a reverence to the frequent use of the same Prayer, because therein also we have to do with God, and address ourselves unto him.  
6. A second thing he would have considered, (which, as the former, hath particular respect to him that Ministereth) is, whether any thing can more conduce to 〈◊〉 the thoughts upon the duty, and God, 
n p. 26.  than when a man can trust his affection to thrust out words. 
A pious temper of mind doth more six men's hearts on God in Prayer, than the greatest freedom of expression can do.  Now having considered this, I think it past all doubt, th●● a devout sense of God's presence, and o● his purity, and of the great assurance w●● have of his readiness to help and ble●● them who Religiously and diligently see● him, together with humble considerations of our dependence upon him, and a careful preparing our hearts to approach unto him, do wonderfully more conduce to fix our thoughts and minds upon God and our duty, than using our own word with freedom of expression, and a voleble tongue can do. And by this method the whole Christian Assembly, as well as the Minister, may be prepared for the right performance of this service. Our Author's method may occasion him who ministereth, to attend the more carefully 〈◊〉 his words, but this only is that, which commands and guides the heart. And that men's hearts may be as much composed, an● their Spirits as fervent, in the use of a fet Form, as in any other way, is manifest from what I formerly observed, 
o Libert. Eccl. B. 1. Ch. 4. p. 135.  that our Saviour's praying more earnestly in his agony, was in repeating again and again the same words. And the Leyden 
p Syn. pur. Theol. Disp. 36. n. 33.  Professors observed, that when upon his Cross he said, my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? he used a Form of deprecation from the Psalmist; and yet sure not Christian can think, that he the less attended to what he spoke.  
7. The third thing he would have considered, is, whether any such attention be to be expected from people 
q p. 27. Of the attention of the People in Prayer.  to Forms of Prayer, which they oft hear, as to a conceived Prayers? Now that part of attention, which consists in considering the way and manner of expressions, conceptions or method, is like to be the greater in the use of a conceived Prayer, by reason of its being new: but this is of no benefit to Religion, but a real hindrance to true devotion. But a pious attention of soul, to join in the matter of Prayer, may be the better performed, by persons Religiously disposed, in a set Form, when they know beforehand what Prayers they are to present, and come prepared to join in them.  
8. But to render what he aims at the more plausible, he saith, 
r Ibid. God requires attention to his word in known duties as much as in new things.  it is at least an ingenious observation, that God to stir up his people's attentions and affections tells them, he would do a new thing; and that I did in my Preface to my Libertas Ecclesiastica say, the humour of this Age is more apt to seek for new Books, 
Ch. II.  than to read 〈◊〉 ones. Concerning what he first observeth 1. The Scriptures sometimes call that 〈◊〉 new thing, which is so wonderful and miraculous, that the like was never hear● before. Thus when the earth was to op●● its mouth, and swallow up Corah and 〈◊〉 Company, this is called Gods making 〈◊〉 new thing, Num. 16.30. The like expression is used in Jer. 31.22. which Te●● was by the 
s Hieron. in loc. Aug. de Temp. Serm. 9  ancient Writers expounded concerning the miraculous conception 〈◊〉 Christ. But are varied expressions thing of this nature? 2. Doth God never inten● to stir up the attentions and affections 〈◊〉 men by his word, but when he tells the● he will speak or do a new thing? Surely God declared, Jer. 7.23.— 28. that the command of obeying his voice, was th●● which all the Prophets had urged, an● yet he did not thereupon allow, that 〈◊〉 should be the less attended to. An● whereas in this very page he said, th●● God hath secured an abiding reverence, 〈◊〉 all pious souls to the holy Scriptures, it wa● not so ingenious an observation as our Author thought it, to contradict himself here, as if no such reverence and attention would be given by God's people to h●● word, but in new things.  
9 And which way soever in other things, the genius of men, and the humour of the age may tend; true devotion in Religion always inclines to the same things; to wit, to glorify God for his infinite excellency, to praise him for his abundant goodness, to confess our sins, and implore his pardon, grace and protection; and the blessings both of this life and of eternal life. He who would leave out these old and constant matters of Prayer, will but badly guide others in that duty: and they who are diligently attentive to what is new in the variety and novelty of expressions, but neglect attention to these old things, will not be the better Christians. Our Author tells us, none gives that attention to a discourse or story he 
t Ibid.  hath heard an hundred times over, that he gives to a new one. 
A devout temper not like that of hearing a Story, to be pleased only with new things.  And I wonder he should have no greater sense and understanding in these things, than to argue from such comparisons. For though in things that tend to instruct men's understandings, or gratify and humour their fancies, those things which are new, do most affect them; yet in the exercise of grace, the fear and reverence of God, and desires after the same kind of divine blessings, are more serious and earnest in those persons, who by a long continued practice, have accustomed themselves to these very things, 
Ch. III.  than in them who have been hitherto strangers to them, and unacquainted with the, and to whom they are altogether new things.  
10. He next comes to prove, 
Of fervency in Prayer.  that fervency and intention of spirit in Prayer, is hindered by the use of Forms. To this purpose he saith, 
u Reas. Acc. p. 28. & p. 52.  as to him that ministereth; there is a great deal of difference between words following the affections, and affections following the words. And this he saith is an old Argument of Didoclavius. And the very same was urged by 
x De Conscient. l. 4. c. 17. qu. 4.  Amesius, and therefore surely was thought to be the best Argument, these Writers could meet with. And our Author also saith, 
y p. 31, 32.  they believe the people do find a different flame in these Prayers: but it is not easy to assign the reason of the difference.  
11. Now here I grant, 
A Religious man is more devout in a Form of Prayer by his frequent use of it.  that in such a Form of Prayer, as the person hath never before read or used, there can be no particular previous preparation of heart or affections, to join in the several Petitions thereof; and this in the first use of such a Form, I admit and acknowledge to be a disadvantage to devotion. But if thus much be true, it will manifest, that the people must be hindered in the fervency of their devotions, by joining in a conceived Prayer: because being unacquainted beforehand, with what would be therein expressed, 
Of affections following words in Prayer.  their affections must follow the speakers words. And thus the former part of what he asserts, doth wholly undermine and disprove the latter, which was laid down without any proof at all: and this is the more considerable, because the devotion of the people or the whole Congregation, rather than of the Minister, is chief to be regarded in public Prayer, and on their part lieth this disadvantage.  
12. But in such an ordinary Form, which he who ministereth is well acquainted with, there is no such impediment to his devotion. For he may come with his heart particularly disposed, to apply himself to God for those special blessings (and so may the people do also in the like case) and so the pious disposition and acting of his spirit, as to those particular Prayers, is not only the sudden consequent of his present reading those words, but is previous thereunto. 
This Author partial.  But here I cannot but take notice of our Authors great partiality, concerning the preparation of men's hearts to Prayer. He declares in his own way 
z p. 26.  that a premeditation of the greatness and majesty of God, and of ones own vileness, etc. are of great use: but to him who useth 
a p. 28.  prescribed Forms, he allows only that there may be some general previous preparation of affections, but it is hard to keep them warm so long, as until he comes to his work. Thus prejudices hurry men into the most unreasonable absurdities, and unaccountable censures of others. And that we may further see how much this Writer fights in the dark, and doth not weigh the force and tendency of what he urgeth; to prove Forms to be an obstruction to fervency in Prayer, he tells us, they 
b p. 28, 29.  think it not possible, that the words of another should so well fit our hearts, and be so expressive of raised affections as our own. 
Some things urged against forms of Prayer, will equally conclude-against all public worship.  Now these words are of no weight against Forms, since they may best express what things we ought to desire: But I suppose he did not consider, that what he thus speaks, tends to declare, that the people cannot with fervent affections join with the Minister in any Prayer whatsoever, because they are not their own words: and then all public Prayer fitted to the people must be condemned; and so they must either take up with the Quakers silence, or the Romish service, where the Assembly are not capable of understanding, and consequently of joining with the Priests in their Service.  
13. But he hath another thing to urge, which particularly concerneth the Ministers reading of a Form: and that is, that then 
c p. 29.  the soul looks through the eye, and is diverted from its contemplation upon God. His sense is, that the looking upon the words in the Book, must hinder his heart from being directed unto God, because as he after saith, 
d p. 31. and the same sense p. 52.  it is impossible, that any created being should in the same action duly intent two objects. Now our Author is so unhappy in his Arguments, that they not only recoil with equal violence upon himself, but what he urgeth, is against all vocal Prayer, whether of Ministers or others, in public or in private; and also against others joining with them. For the considering of words, phrases, method and sense, is a different thing in conceived Prayer, from the directing the heart and spirit unto God; and this must take up more of his mind and thoughts, than the looking upon a Book doth. And the people's hearing and observing the words of Prayer spoken, is as different a thing from the motions of the mind toward God, as the seeing the same words is. 
Reading or hearing words hinders not the minding the sense of them.  But in truth, since the main use of words is, that they are to express things, the use of the same act about the word and the thing signified by it (as to understand each of them) or the use of such different acts about the word and the thing signified by it, as to read or hear the one, and to understand or be affected with the other, are no impediments at all to the vigorous actings of our souls and minds. He must be no ordinary man, that is able to make out, that the seeing or hearing the words of any Proposition or Discourse, hindereth from clearly understanding the sense thereof, when these words are wholly subservient to the thing, to express the sense and meaning thereof. Nor can I be persuaded, that I affect any thing of God or goodness the less, for hearing or reading such words, as represent and express them, or direct and excite my affections towards them. And withal he who is well acquainted with a Form of Prayer, needeth no industrious exercise of his eye in the use thereof.  
14. But on the other hand, 
Manifold advantages to piety from the use of Forms of Prayer.  since in such conceived Prayers as our Author pleads for, the Minister's mind must be employed in considering and conceiving and digesting his words, and his method, and sense; and is apt to be sometimes solicitous, lest he do amiss in any of these, and may sometimes have pleasing reflections upon his own fluency; or the contrary; these things may more justly be esteemed hindrances to his devotion. And besides what I have abovesaid concerning the devotions of the people, the using conceived Prayers as the public service of the Church, may be an impediment thereof, upon these several accounts.  
1. They are not certain, that they can join in the matter of a new conceived Prayer, till they have well considered it, and therefore are the more apt to hesitate concerning it. 2. In the time of Prayer they may be too apt to give their mind's liberty of observing the expressions, and the manner of the composure of the Prayer, either to judge of it or imitate it, which tend to distract the mind, and divert it from the worship of God. 3. And they further want this benefit which attendeth our public Form, that the joining in that Prayer, which is with one accord put up to God, in the several Assemblies of our Church, may reasonably be, and to many is, a quickening of their devotion, from the benefit of Christian Unity, and the 
e Bishop Sparrow's Rationale of Com. Prayer, p. 9  promise annexed thereunto, Mat. 18.19, 20. Concerning which Text S. Cyprian observed, that though some, not considering the whole discourse, made use of the last clause to encourage division: yet it appears from the Connexion of that with the former Verse; If two of you shall agree, etc. that, 
f Cypr. de Unit. Eccl.  si collecti unanimiter oraverint, duo aut tres licet sint, impetrare possunt de Dei Majestate, quod postulant; if they be gathered together with one accord, though they be but two or three, they may obtain what they seek for of the divine Majesty. And therefore there may be a greater hope of obtaining those very things, which we particularly know to be the joint desire of so great a number of Christians. 4. Besides this, there are very many persons, who have not that quickness of capacity, which is necessary for their hearts and affections to go along with new Prayers, who yet can piously and devoutly join in those they have been well acquainted with. 5. And withal, whensoever there are (as is too frequent) any impertinencies, or unadvised and unbecoming expressions in conceived Prayer, or whatsoever is the result of passion, imprudence, negligence, weakness or bad principles and erroneous opinions, this must be expected to be a disturbance and hindrance to the fervency and devotion of the Auditors.  
15. But because I am apprehensive, 
Whether in the Apostles times all public worship was performed by extraordinary gifts.  that some may be apt to think, that much of what I have said in the preferring the use of public Forms to other conceived Prayers, may seem applicable at first view, to the Apostolical times also, as if the use of their miraculous gifts, when they used no Forms, were to be undervalved, I shall therefore desire these things may be considered. First, that as it is manifest, that under the Old Testament, they who had the gift of prophecy, were not at all times under the special impulses of the divine spirit; so it is neither certain nor probable, that in all the Primitive Churches, these extraordinary gifts were constantly afforded to all its Ministers, for the performing all their Ministrations thereby. The Apostle's directions to Timothy, to give attendance to reading, meditation, care and diligence, 1 Tim. 4.13, 15, 16. 2 Tim. 2.15. do seem plainly to evince the contrary. And since the Jewish Church, both at, and before the coming of our Saviour, made constant use of Forms of prayer, as hath been observed by divers 
g Buxt. Syn. Jud. c. 5.  learned men, and the same hath been particularly proved, both both from their Talmud, and Rituals, as well as from their other Rabbins by 
h Seld. in Eutychium.  Mr Selden, as was observed by Dr Hammond, in his view of the Directory, Ch. 1. Sect. 15. and also by 
i Hor. Heb. in Mat. 6.9.  Dr Lightfoot; and conformably hereunto, the Baptist and our Saviour, taught their Disciples Forms of Prayer: I see no reason at all to conclude, that the public Prayers in those early Primitive times, were never performed by the use of Forms. But of this the Reader may judge more when he hath read to the end of this Chapter.  
16. Secondly, When they had these extraordinary assistances, it is but reasonable to think, that the Holy Spirit did not put them upon designed constant using variety of words, and new phrases, in those things which were their common and usual parts of worship. For since our Saviour himself shown his dislike to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or many and various words in Prayer, and gave an example for the due performance of it, in his comprehensive Form; the Spirit of God in the Primitive Christians, acting according to the will of God, would not guide them to what was contrary to our Saviour's prescriptions. Thirdly, 
Great difference between Prayer by Apostolical and extraordinary gifts, and other conceived Prayer.  Where there were such extraordinary motions of the spirit, for the composing Prayers, Psalms or Hymns, these were free from those disadvantages I have above expressed, which attend conceived Prayers of other men. Under those impulses, the speaker need not be solicitous in his thoughts, about words and composure. There could be no defects in the matter, or fullness of expression, where these things were directed by the guidance of the Spirit. And the plentiful effusion of that Holy Spirit, tended rather more to promote inward fervency, and devotion of pious men, both speaker and hearers, than to guide their expressions, since grace and holiness were his chief gifts, and principal design. And the people could not make any doubts or demurs, about their ready consent to every part of those supplications, which were directed by extraordinary inspirations. And the knowing that they were the special motions of the Holy Spirit, would both excite their attention, and raise the exercise of their faith and hope, in a firm confidence that those intercessions by the Holy Spirit, being certainly according to the will of God, were accepted of him.  
17. Now though what I have said may be sufficient to answer his Argument, and to vindicate Forms of Prayer, from being any obstructions to serious piety; yet with respect to this Argument, I shall desire three things to be observed.  
Obs. 1. That Attention, and intention and fervency, as our Author expresseth them, is not the whole business, that is needful to be minded and taken care of in the public service of the Church, as he seems to intimate, both in the tendency of this Chapter, and particularly when he saith, 
k Reas. Acc. p. 27.  Attention of thoughts is not all our duty in Prayer, intention of spirit, and fervency of affections is also a prime requisite. 
Other duties as necessary in Prayer, as intention and fervency.  But men may be vigorous and earnest in the exercise of all this, while the matter of their Prayer may not be in all things suitable to the will of God, and even when several things which ought to be part of our Religious Addresses, are omitted. Wherefore there must be a chief care that the matter of our Prayers be rightly ordered, and that our expressions and behaviour be such, as manifest a due reverence to the Majesty of God. And in this Case, a well composed Form hath a manifest advantage above other Prayers.  
18. And we must also take care that our zeal and devotion be regular and orderly, and that they do not cross any other duties, which we are obliged to perform: and the care of such duties, are in many Cases of greater consequence, than the degree of fervency. Thus if any man think he can be more fervent in his private Prayers, than in joining in any public service; he is not thereby allowed to neglect the public Assemblies, and to retire himself at that time to his Closet: since this public worship is a special homage we are to do to God, and is particularly enjoined in the New Testament, Heb. 10.25. as it was in the Old Testament, and by the Laws of nature: And if any man conceiveth, that a different method from that used in the Church, whereof he is a member, would more conduce to raise his affectionateness, he may not thereupon separate, and make a Schism: but as a member of the Church he is to endeavour the preservation of its Unity, and to obey them who have the rule over it, and not to intrude into the place of the Chief Governors. Otherwise Schisms would be perpetuated and multiplied without end; and yet must they be all justified, since they have been generally observed to have appeared under the disguise of exalting Piety and Religion. Other Cases might be produced to the same purpose (as if a Minister could be more fervent in the public Assembly, in expressing such things as are peculiarly his own private concernment, or if the Jews thought their zeal for God to be the highest, and their service to him the greatest, in their opposing the Gospel) but these may manifest, that this pretence, of fervency being hindered by Forms, if it were true, as it is not, is so ill managed by the Dissenters, in being made a principle of separation, that it could not justify their undertaking.  
19 Obs. 2. There may be in many persons a want of due devotion, or attention and fervency in the use of a Form; and yet this not at all proceed from the Form itself, which therefore is not to be blamed; but from other manifest causes, which ought to be removed. 
Want of devotion in the worship of God, is the fault of the person, and not of the service, in a wel-composed Form.  It is not possible, that well ordered expressions of the matters of Prayer, and Religious service, should of themselves hinder men's affectionate joining in them. Nor can I think that there is any hindrance in any Christian whomsoever, of the most Religious exercise of Christian graces, or of the most raised devotion in the use of a Form of Prayer; unless it be where persons are under prejudices against Forms, or else are negligent in the exercises of Piety. And both these are faults of the person, which ought to be amended. It is too manifest, that the censures our Dissenters unjustly vent, and the out-cries and oppositions they make, against our useful and pious public Forms, hath made many, in their attendance upon the public service of God, more irreverent in their gestures, and more careless of their devotion; and hath caused others to neglect the public, and I fear all private exercise of Religion too; and have made others to engage in separation with that giddiness, that at last they know not where to stand, nor which way to go. And can they think they have hereby done good service, either to God, or the souls of men, in occasioning the worship of God to be by many neglected, and the minds of men to be perperted from true Piety? Our Author speaking concerning Forms of Prayer saith, that 
l p. 40.  it is a great cooling to a Christians spirit, when his mind suggests doubts to him, whether this be a way, mode or method of worship, which God will accept. This is one effect of suggesting needless scruples against Forms, and which the Authors of them must Answer for.  
20. Obs. 3. Public service being that, 
That is the best model of worship, which is most guided by the rules of our Religion.  in which the whole Church is interested, it ought to be so ordered, as may fit the general temper of the true Christian spirit, but must not be censured, if it suit not with the inclination of all particular persons (which is not possible to be done) especially where their minds are disordered by passion or prejudice. And this due order is best effected, where there is most care taken of due reverence to God, and of using the best consideration, for the digesting and ordering all things duly, and according to the rules of Religion. But Forms have manifestly this advantage, of having been most considered; and of reverence to God, in not being rash and hasty to utter any thing before God, Eccl. 5.2.  
21. There are several other expressions, in the former part of this Writers third Chapter, which might deserve some reflections. Some of them I shall wholly wave. But when he so oft inculcates, that we may not use less proper means, in God's service, 
m p. 22, 43, 44. & passim.  if our superiors command, or if man command, or whoever require it, with other such like expressions, these things seem to have no favourable aspect upon our Governors, but rather to insinuate, that the Question under debate is in the Issue, whether Gods command, or man's which is contrary to it, must be obeyed? But I hope I have sufficiently showed, that he hath said nothing hitherto, to prove the Sanction of our Common-Prayer to be against the command of God. If it were so, he need not name, nor we would not plead, the commands of men.  
22. When he describes the Soul's attention in Prayer, to be its 
n p. 33. & p. 61. In Prayer is required a more immediate intuition and contemplation of God.  immediate contemplation of God: his expression here, and that in the margin seems to me to be too high for such persons, as have not outdone S. Paul, who said, now we see through a glass darkly. And I shall only further note, that our Author is at sometimes more kind and complying to wards, and hath more savourable expressions concerning the use of Forms, than at other times. For speaking concerning Prayer without Forms, as most exciting fervency of affections, he saith, 
o p. 32.  We believe this will justify itself to the experience of every pious deliberate soul. But he yields a little farther when he said, 
p p. 44.  We do not think, but the experience of Christians may be different in the case, and some may find the use of their own gifts the more advant ageous, others may possibly find Forms more advantageous. And in another place he saith, concerning attention in the use of public Forms, against which he had levied so many forces, 
q p. 53.  the Minister may (for aught we yet discern) do his work with equal attention of thoughts: for the attention of the hearers, we yet a little doubt it.   

SECT. II. A defence of some things urged in my Libertas Ecclesiastica, to show Forms no disadvantage to devotion.  
FOR trying whether Forms were any prejudice to piety and Religion, I proposed it 
a Lib. Eccl. B. 1. Ch. 4. p. 121.  as useful, to consult the judgement of them, who are least partial, and yet able to make a true estimate, and especially to consider the evidences of Reason, which may be produced. This method this Author approves of; and undertakes first to examine what I mentioned under the former head.  
2. And in the entrance upon it, he tell us (what I lately noted from him) of the different experiences of Christians. And thence he saith, 
b Reas. Acc. p. 45.  every one is bound in Prayer to use that lawful mean, which he finds most conducive to keep his thoughts attentive, and his affections fervent; so as one may be under an obligation not to use Forms, another under an obligation for the present to use them. And then he declares, that things of this nature are no fit matter for a superiors command; and compares it with superiors making a law, that all Ministers should pray with their eyes shut.  
3. Now concerning his former clause, 
Sect. II.  I desire it may be observed, that what ever is pretended, there is more of sincere piety and true Religious fervency exercised, in complying with a well ordered establishment, than by breaking it. For the preserving Unity, and giving due reverence to superiors, are duties which our Religion enjoin. And that Argument whereby 
c p. 24. More of piety and fervency in the keeping peace and unity, than in breaking them.  this Writer proves attention and fervency to be necessary, because we must love the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our soul, doth also require an universal practice of all piety and Religious obedience: this being the love of God to keep his Commandments. And he who seriously minds his duty, must have a conscientious regard to Unity, order and the duties of due submission; and the observing them are not the way to make him less devout and fervent, unless we can imagine, that the breaking some of the divine Precepts, is a way of preparation to fit and dispose us for the keeping others. Whereas in truth, all practices of sin do more or less indispose men for the pious discharge of their duties; but Religion is so uniform, that the exercise of one part of our duty, will never hinder a pious man from the best performance of another; nor can it, unless the duties of Religion should thwart and cross one another; to assert which, would be a reflection upon God himself. And I have in 
d Libert. Eccles. B. 1. Ch. 1. p. 16, 17, 18.  another place observed, that the promises of God's grace and presence, are chief made to them who embrace Peace and Unity; and that therein is the greatest increase of Christianity, in persons who are serious and diligent.  
4. And concerning the acceptable worshipping of God, I desire that it may be further considered, that when our Saviour commands him, 
●●●king V 〈…〉 and 〈…〉ing superiors ●●in 〈◊〉 s●●●ces.  who brings his gift to the Altar, if his Brother hath aught against him, to go first and be reconciled to his Brother, and then come and offer his gift, Mat. 5.23, 24. this Precept must needs be of the greater force, when it hath respect to the whole Church, or Society of Christians, and also to our superiors. For if the Church of which any one was a member, hath this against him, that he hath unwarrantably broken its peace and unity, and forsaken its Communion; and if his superiors have this against him, that he hath disobeyed that authority, which God and our Saviour hath established, and hath not yielded due submission and respect thereto; he must according to our Saviour's direction, first return to his duty, and be reconciled to those whom he hath injured, before he can expect that God will receive his service.  
5. Concerning the fitness and reasonableness of superiors making laws about Forms of Prayer, I shall discourse somewhat in 
e Sect. 4. a. 〈◊〉.  another place. But whilst he compareth the enjoining a well-ordered Liturgy, 
〈◊〉 estrepement of the order of ●●●●hip to be honoured.  which is really of great use to Religion, with making a law that all Ministers should pray with their eyes shut, which can be of no advantage: this looks too like a design of humouring the vain fancies of unruly men, in exposing the pious actions of superiors, to their contempt and derision; as if they were empty and foolish things. But these are not things to be sported with; when according to S. Peter's doctrine, 2 Pet. 2.9, 10. the speaking evil of dignities, is one part of the description of them, whom God chief reserves to the day of judgement to be punished.  
6. And there can be no public worship in any Congregation, unless it be first determined to be either with, or without a Form. And is it allowable, and necessary for order, that he who officiateth in any Christian Assembly, should determine this by his authority; but only unfit, that our Governors should determine any thing herein, though God hath charged them with the care of his Church, and hath fixed in them a supremacy in matters Ecclesiastical? 
Without this, great confusion.  But if our Author's opinion be, as it seems to be by his discourse, that all private Christians ought so to determine themselves, as to join in the several different modes of worship according as themselves are inclined (and consequently they must change these too, as oft as their inclinations vary; and all their Church-Covenants and obligations to continue in Communion with any particular Society, will be as unjust encroachments upon Christian Liberty, as penal Laws and an Act of Uniformity) this also is very unaccountable. For this makes our Saviour's constitution of his Church so far void, as to account the members born and baptised in an established Church, to be under no obligation to the guides and Pastors of the Church, but that they are wholly left to themselves, to seek or found a new one, and it takes away all possibility of any furture establishment. And the Issue of any future establishent. And the Issue of this must also be at last, that it shall be necessary, that there be as many several ways of public worship, exercised in every Precinct, as there are different opinions and fancies of men living in it, that none of them may be at a loss, for such a public worship which themselves best approve. And likewise there must be no care of establishing such things, as may express most reverence to God, or tend most to the real prosit and advantage of men, but in Religion every man must do what is right in his own eyes. But this is such a way of confusion as gratifies the fanciful inclinations of men, but doth not provide for the honour of God, and the care of true piety.  
7. That Forms of Prayer are not disadvantageous, but useful and profitable to piety, I 
f Lib. Eccl. p 121.  produced two testimonies, against which I supposed our Dissenters would not object. The first was of the Leyden Professors, who say, they contend, 
Of the Leyden Professors.  that they are not only lawful but very advantageous, because every Christian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers, and the attention of Auditors in great Assemblies, is not a little helped by usual Forms. Now o●● Author doth not deny that they 〈◊〉 to this purpose, but first saith, 
g Reas. Account, p. 46.  〈◊〉 without reason signifieth nothing. But it signifieth as much as I intended, that is, to express the sense of such persons, whom he cannot charge with partiality; but my reasons I afterward expressed. But he further observeth, that they recommend the ability 
h Syn. Theol. Di● 36. n. ●.  of praying without previous Forms upon emergent occasions. But doth their adding this, deny what they before declared with some earnestness, concerning the ordinary public service? We do esteem such abilities also in their proper place, and do set a value upon those Books of devotion, which are composed by them, with prudence and piety. And how far Prayers without Forms are  to be used, I shall give my sense in 
i Ch. 5.  another Chapter, where he treats of them.  
8. The other testimony I produced, 
Of the Walachrian Classis.  was from the Walachrian Classis, who commend Forms, for helping the attention of the Anditors in great Assemblies, and for 
k Consid. Cont. in Angl. c. 7. p. 173, 174, 176.  keeping Uniformity, preventing scandals, and increasing edification; and they declare how piously God may be worshipped in the use of them. Now though our Author saith little to the former testimony, he hath much to say to this. Sometimes he seemeth ●o acknowledge them, to speak against his sense and opinion. And therefore 
l Reas. Acc. p. 51. & 54.  he sets himself, to answer some few of their Arguments, which they urge for the use of Forms. And speaking concerning a prescribed Form promoting attenting, saith, 
m p. 53.  He admire, that our Reverend B●●iren should so much as mention it, 〈◊〉 a due medium in the case. And he acknowledgeth, 
n p. 54.  They have some expressions, which would make one think, they judged it lawful, for some Ministers, having the gift of Prayer, in public to use the prescribed Forms of others, commended to them sometimes. In which words he useth a great deal more wariness of expression than will appear agreeable to their sense. And again he saith, 
o p. 55.  authority apart from the reasons they give, signifieth little in the case.  
9 And now I must entreat my Readers patience a while, that I may examine his exceptions he enters against this testimony, or its being intended to the sense for which I produced it. And though some of these lie scattered in his Discourse, I have so collected them, as to digest them under particular heads.  
10. He first objects that 
Reas. Acc. p. 46, 47, 48.  the 
q Cons. Cont. in Angl. p. 171.  Walachrians profess themselves to agree with Amesius de Cas. Consc. l. 4. cap. 17. qu. 4. and with the Leyden Professors. And then he takes pains to prove, that Amesius was not for preferring the use of public Forms, as of most advantage to Piety, but in the place cited, speaks of them, as the less perfect way of praying. Now I acknowledge this to be the sense of Amesius. But it should have been observed by our Author, that the Walachrians only declared their Agreement with him, in that Question which was by them proposed, viz. Whether Forms were lawful, and not superstitious, and whether it be lawful to communicate with them who use them? And in the resolution of this Question, they agree with Amesius: in hac controversia faciles accedimus iis quae ab Amesio super hac Quaestione scribuntur. But it is another Question, Whether praying by public Forms, be the most useful way of performing that service; and though Amesius in the same place, seems by general expressions to take in this Case, they could not in this agree both with him, and the Leyden Professors, and their own sense of this they fully express, 
r Cons. Cont. p. 173, 174.  that Forms in public worship help the attention of Auditors and are for edification. And they declare not their own sense alone, but 
s p. 178, 179.  in omnibus pene Ecclesiis Reformatis approbantur Ecclesiasticae Liturgiae precumque formulae, ut utiles, & aedificationi Ecclesiae conducentes; In almost all the Reformed Churches, Church-Liturgies and Forms of Prayer are approved as profitable, and conducing to edification. And more concerning their sense may appear from n. 13, 14, 16.  
11. Secondly, he saith, 
t Reas. Acc. p. 48.  the Walachrians rejected our English Common-Prayer Book, and therefore their testimony ought not to have been produced, to countenance it. Now I acknowledge that they did rashly condemn 
u Cons. Cont. p. 172.  the English Service, nor did I produce their testimony, as if they had particularly favoured it. I am inclined to think, it was misrepresented to them. But their evidence is the more considerable, in what they say concerning Forms in general, for which purpose only I cited them, since they were so far from being partial on our side, that they closed too far with them, who were for the subverting our Liturgy, and censured it as Idolatrous and superstitious.  
12. Thirdly, he saith, they, 
x Reas. Acc. p. 53.  and the Leyden Professors, speak rather of the lawfulness of Forms in general, than of Ministers using them. Whereas they propose their Question, concerning Forms, 
y Consid. Cont. p. 171.  in publico cultu, in public worship: They and the Leyden Professors declare their usefulness, in magnis praecipue Ecclesiarum conventibus, especially 
z p. 173.  in the great Church Assemblies, and in publici cultûs exercitiis, in the performances of public worship: and they discoursed of them, as 
a p. 179.  Forms of Prayer and of administration of Sacraments. Now in these Cases they must have special respect to Ministers using them: and the same appears from what I cited concerning Liturgies, n. 10. and also from the following Paragraph.  
13. Fourthly, He saith, 
b Reas. Acc. p. 53, 54.  there is not a word in them, to justify the lawful use of Forms imposed upon all Ministers. Now the Reader may observe these words; say they, 
c Cons. Cont. in Angl. p. 179.  Mascula est sententia J. Calvini in Epistola 87. ad Protectorem Angliae. Quod ad formulas, inquit, precum, etc. It is an excellent sentence of Calvin, in his 87th Epistle to the Protector of England. Concerning Forms of Prayer and Ecclesiastical Rites, I much approve, that it may be certain, from which the Pastors may not departed in their function, both to provide for the unskilfulness of some, and that the consent and agreement of all Churches may be more manifest, and that a stop may be put to the changeable levity of some, who affect novelties. And they add, 
d Ibid.  there ought to be a stated Catechism, statam Sacramentorum Administrationem, publicam item precum formulam, a stated Administration of Sacraments, and a stated public Form of Prayers.  
14. Fifthly, He saith, they say 
e Reas. Acc. p. 50, 51.  holy affections may accompany a Form, This saith he, toucheth not the Question, which is about the magis and minus. And so he excepts against them, as not speaking an equal intention and fervency to be exercised in Forms. Now I might say, that they do speak of due attention and reverence, in the use of Forms, p. 174. and our Author saith, due attention must be equal attention, p. 52. And when they declare Forms to be profitable, and that by them attention is helped, p. 173, 174. this not only speaks the devotion to be equal in the use of Forms, to what it might otherwise be, but that it may be hereby the greater. And they commend them, 
f Cons. Cont. p. 174.  ad majorem Ecclesiarum aedificationem, for the greater edification of Churches; and this must be for the making them the better.  
15. Sixthly, He saith, 
g Reas. Acc. p. 53.  they speak not a word of the lawfulness or utility of reading Prayers. And what they speak of Forms, he would it seems have meant, not of Forms read, but gotten without Book, of which he discourseth, p. 25, 26. But they judge Forms profitable, 
h Cons. Cont. p. 174. & p. 176.  modo cum debita attentione, reverentia, etc. ex libro pronuncientur, if they be with due attention and reverence pronounced out of a Book. This our Author but half a page before p. 52. thus expressed, so they be read with attention: so the Walachrians. If this be not enough, they further declare 
i p. 176.  sacras Scripturae literas legunt fideles, etc. Christians read the holy Scriptures, with understanding, humility, reverence, zeal, etc. and why may not Prayers be pronounced in the same manner, 
Ch. III.  out of prescribed Forms? And here again our Author but two pages before, p. 51. translates these words of the Walachrians, quidni & orationes eodem modo ex praescriptis formulis pronunciari possunt; and therefore why may not Forms of Prayer be so read. These frequent contradictions in this Discourse, make me sometimes apt to think, that whereas it always speaks in the plural number, as we believe, we judge, we say, it may possibly be, that some part of it may be written by one hand, and something added by another, and that may be the cause of its so many disagreements with itself.  
16. Lastly, We are told, 
k Reas. Acc. p. 53.  the Walachrians in stating the question, profess only to speak to the case, where men want an ability, or a liberty to exercise it. But the Classis of Walachria tell us, they discourse of Prayers prescribed, 
l Cons. Cont. p. 173.  ut utiles etc. as profitable for them who want ability, or a liberty of exercising it, & ut attentio auditorum, etc. and that the attention of the Auditors in great Assemblies, may be helped and guided. And again they commend them as 
m p. 174.  profitable, non tantum in necessitatis casu, etc. not only in a case of necessity, where fit ability is wanting; but also that the Auditor's attention may be helped and directed, etc. And their sense herein may be also manifest from n. 13.  
17. Now though I laid no great weight upon this testimony, as is manifest from the words immediately following it, 
n Libert. Eccl. p. 122.  But the surest way of trial, is from considering several Arguments; yet the Reader may easily see, that they spoke fully enough to the purpose, for which I produced them. And though our Author when he first mentioned this testimony of the Walachrian Classis, promised 
o Reas. Acc. p. 46.  We will give our Reader a full account of what is said by them; he hath not only been very defective in his account, but hath uttered divers manifest falsehoods. This must discover either an high degree of carelessness, which is not to deal faithfully with his Reader, especially after his particular promise to the contrary; or else which I am not willing to suspect, a design of imposing upon those, who will take things of this nature upon his credit. And if all these things were mere mistakes and oversights, as I am most inclined to believe, it pitieth me greatly to see, how strangely some men's minds lie open to them, against very plain and clear evidence.  
18. To prove Forms of Prayer to be no disadvantage to piety, I urged in my 
p Ch. 4. p. 122, 123. Arguments to show Forms of Prayer to be no hindrance to piety. 1. From God and our Saviour prescribing them.  Libertas Ecclesiastica three Arguments. My first Argument was, That God himself prescribed a constant Form of Prayer, for the Jewish offerings, and for the Priest's blessing, and our Saviour directed the Lords Prayer as a Form: but the Holy God and our blessed Saviour, would not enjoin what is of its own nature an hindrance to godliness, piety and Religion.  
19 In answer to this Argument, our Author turns every way. He sometimes misrepresents my sense, as if I affirmed, that God and Christ had appointed the Forms of Prayer which are now ordinarily used, p. 56. or as if the scope of my Argument was to prove, that men may lawfully appoint what God may appoint, and saith the same Argument would prove a liberty for men to make new Scriptures, p. 56, 58. But the Question under debate, was not at all concerning the authority of men, nor concerning the lawfulness of appointing Forms merely, but it was whether the use of them be an advantage or prejudice to Religion. Nor am I so void of all reverence to God, as ever so much as to think, that any Creature hath an authority to do or command, whatsoever God himself can do or command. But the substance of what he further Answers, is reducible to two heads.  
20. First, That God 
q Reas. Acc. p. 56, 57, 58.  may legitimate some things by his Precept, which otherwise would be unlawful: and then such things being commanded, will be no prejudice to devotion, since God will secure his own institutions. And here he tells us God might direct Images of Oxen and Cherubims to be in his Temple, and the people might worship before them; but Aaron might not make a golden Calf. And God might command Abraham to offer up Isaac. And therefore this will only conclude, that Forms of Prayer are not in themselves unlawful as murder (though by his instance, they may be as unlawful as for a Father to kill his Son) or incest.  
21. Now the sense of this part of his Answer, is, That the God of infinite goodness and purity, may appoint and enjoin, and consequently may be pleased with, such things as are in their nature hurtful to piety, and oppose goodness and purity in the World. And I desire our Author upon his further thoughts, to consider what high reflections these things cast upon the divine majesty. Indeed God did appoint the Ceremonial worship of the Israelites, 
Nothing which God commands is a rule of practice, can hinder piety.  which was a more imperfect way of serving God, than that under the Gospel; yet considering the state of the World as it then was, and how God condescended therein to the infirmities of men, and that this was typical of Christ to come, it was at that time a real help to Religious Piety. But it is contrary to the divine nature to assert, that God should give institutions and rules, for ordering that part of his worship, which is moral and perpetual as Prayer is, and these to be of force both throughout the Jewish and Christian Church; which yet are a disadvantage to Piety. But besides many other Forms, those in Deut. 21.8. and Deut. 26.3, 5 .... 10. and v. 13, 14, 15. were to be of use throughout the Jewish State; and the Lords Prayer throughout the Ages of the Christian Church. It was called the daily 
r Conc. Tolet. 4. c. 9  Prayer, by one of the Councils of Toledo, and to be used thrice a day, in the time of the 
s Const. Ap. l. 7. c. 25.  Constitutions called Apostolical.  
22. The pretences on which our Author relies are very weak. 
How far God's institutions are secured from men's making ill use of them.  For it is unreasonable to imagine, that God should establish standing institutions, which in their own nature tend to hinder piety, and then should undertake by some extraordinary method, to preserve them from being abused; when it is plain, he doth not further secure his most excellent institutions, from being abused, than their own excellency and the piety of the Christian Spirit doth conduce thereunto. The holy Scriptures have been wrested, and perverted by evil men, and Prayer itself hath been abused to Hypocrisy; and yet both these are divine institutions.  
23. And concerning the Images of the Oxen and Cherubims, he is mistaken in saying, that the people might lawfully worship before them which were in the Temple: for the people might not come within the Sanctuary where they were, and so might not so much as see them. But there is a greater mistake than this, 
Of the Images of Oxen within the Temple; and of Cherubims upon the walls and doors thereof.  concerning their use in worship. There were indeed Cherubims graven upon the walls, and doors of the temple, 1 Kin. 6.29, 35. but God never allowed or appointed these to such ends and purposes, as the Golden Calf was made and used, but for the adorning the Temple. They were not intended as representations of God himself, nor might the people give to them any part of divine honour, or say to them, these are thy Gods O Israel, Ex. 32.4. But molten or carved work, when it was not made to be worshipped, or to be a Symbolical representation of God, was never forbidden to the Jews, as many of the Jews themselves have by mistake imagined; nor were those pieces of art, when secured from these abuses, any disadvantage to Piety and Religion. There was anciently the stamp of a Castle, and other resemblances upon the Shekel of Solomon, and other Jewish Medals, as appears from the representation of them in 
t Waser. de Antiq. num. Hebr. Walton. in Supplem. ad Brerewood de Pond. etc.  Waserus and Bishop Walton; and neither this, nor the Lions about salomon's Throne, were to be condemned as unlawful, 1 Kin. 10.19, 20. Nor did the second Commandment forbidden the likeness of any Creature to be made; so as in general to condemn the Arts of limning, carving, and engraving; but only forbade it to be made, so as to receive any part of that worship, which is due to God, as 
u Ant. Jud. l. 3. c. 4.  Josephus truly gives an account thereof.  
24. Nor will the command given to Abraham, to offer up his son, prove that God's Precepts require any thing to be performed, which is in its own nature prejudicial to Piety. For this was only a Precept of trial, God did not desire that the Father should slay his Son, but as 
x Amb. de Abr. l. 1. c. 22.  S. Ambrose said, tentabat si Dei praecepta praeferret filio, made a trial, whether he esteemed the commands of God above his son. 
Of the Precept for Abraham's Offering Isaac.  And this Trial was no disadvantage to Abraham's Piety, but a great evidence, and high exercise of it. But Gods withholding Abraham from slaying his Son, by giving him a countermand, after he had tried his obedience, is a considerable instance to show, that nothing is grateful and pleasing to God, that is not every way reconcileable to goodness: and the ancient Christian Writers accounted justly, the bloody, inhuman, and obscene rites, of many of the Pagan Deities, to be a sufficient objection, both against them, and their worship. And besides this, isaac's bearing the Wood, and being laid upon the Altar, hath been accounted 
y Aug. de Civ. Dei. l. 14. c. 22. First Lesson on Good Friday, in our Common Prayer.  a figure of the suffering of our Saviour, and this act of Abraham's obedience, might be commanded with some respect thereunto: and upon this obedience, Abraham received some peculiar instructions, and promises concerning the Messiah, Gen. 22.16, 17, 18. all which tended to promote, and advance his Faith and Piety. Now as it is unsafe, from such instances as this, to censure the usefulness of any of God's ordinary Precepts, which he appointed to be of continued use; so I desire our Author to consider, whether this branch of his discourse be an help or hindrance to piety and Religion, in teaching men to slight and disesteem, and consequently to neglect and break, any of the least of God's Commandments.  
25. But he further saith, 
z Reas. Acc. p. 57  it is not unquestionable, whether God and Christ prescribed Forms of blessing and prayer, to be used by Ministers and people. 
God's command is express in the Old Testament for Forms of Prayer.  Now the Forms of Prayer I above mentioned out of Deuteronomy, are so plainly and expressly directed, that he who will be so bold as to assert, that God only intended that they should use those words, or such others as themselves should think more fit for that purpose; he may as well say, that when God appointed his particular Sacrifices, his meaning was, that they should either offer those sacrifices, which he had appointed, or some other, which they should think more expedient. For the injunction of the special sacrifices God appointed, is not more express, than of those Prayers which he commanded.  
26. And as the particular Form of the Priestly benediction is plainly appointed, Num. 6.23, 24, 25, 26. so it hath been observed by 
a Buxt. Synag. Judaic. c. 21.  Buxtorfe, Drusius, and other learned men, that upon the day of atonement, the High Priest solemnly pronounced this Form of blessing the people in the Temple, 
And for the Priest's blessing.  and did then peculiarly pronounce the name of Jehovah. And some Christian Writers have thought, that the name Jehovah being thrice expressed in that Benediction was some intimation of the Trinity. And the 
b Par. Chald. Jon. in Num. 6.23, 24, 25, 26.  Chaldee Paraphrase under the name of Jonathan ben Vziel, to express the constant and strict observation, of the very words of this solemn Benediction, in the Hebrew Tongue, reciteth all the words thereof in the Hebrew, before he gives the sense of it in his Paraphrase, but doth not do the like in other places of the Law. And this very blessing is not only used as a Form by the Church of England, in the Office for the Visitation of the sick, but the same is in the Geneva Liturgy composed by 
c Prec. Eccles. Form. Genev.  Calvin, and also in that drawn up by 
d Luther. Tom. 3. f. 10.  Luther, at the beginning of the Germane Reformation. And the members of that Assembly, which set up the Directory in the place of our Liturgy, did so far assert the Form of this Priestly Benediction, that in their 
e Assembls. Annot. on Num. 6.23.  Annotations on those words, On this wise ye shall bless saying, they say, Or thus, in a set Form of words.  
27. All that our Author hath against this, is to declare in these strange words of Mr Cotton, 
f Reas. Acc. ubi sup.  The Priests are indeed directed to a Form of blessing, Num. 6.22. etc. but that they used that, and no other Form, doth not appear; It is certain, the Apostles used divers other Forms. Now though what I have said be sufficient, to give an account of the use of this Benediction; yet it is very unreasonable to suppose, that God's Precepts have not authority enough, to make what they prescribe a duty, unless we can prove, that men undertook the ordinary and constant practice of them. Nor is the Apostles using other Benedictions, at all to his purpose; since this Benediction was not prescribed for them, but only for the Priests, Aaron and his Sons in the Temple Service. And besides this, a Benediction prescribed for any solemn public service, doth not hinder the use of other Benedictions out of that particular service, and upon other occasions; though they be given by the same person, as was the Benediction of Eli the High Priest, to Hannah and Elkanah, 1 Sam. 1.17. & Ch. 2.20.  
28. He goes on to tell us that they 
g p. 57  do not think, that ever our Saviour intended the Lords Prayer to be used syllabically. And 
h De Casib. Consc. l. 4. c. 17. qu. 5.  Amesius also declares, that our Lord did not intent to prescribe a Form of words, to be constantly observed, in the Lord's Prayer. Now it may well seem strange, that any persons should harbour such an opinion as this, if they had not some interest, which inclined them to have such apprehensions concerning the Lord's Prayer. But as our late Gracious Sovereign observed, 
i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 16.  its great guilt is, that it is the warrant and Original Pattern of all set Liturgies in the Christian Church. And I cannot but wonder, that 
k Grot. in Mat. 6.9. & in Luc. 11.1.  Grotius should entertain this extravagant and unreasonable conceit.  
29. But that our Saviour delivered this Prayer as a Form, to be of ordinary use, I gave manifest evidence, 
l Libert. Eccles. p. 100, 101, 102.  from the expressions of his precept, from the occasion of his delivering it, from the manner of its composure, and from clear testimonies, concerning the usual practice of the Primitive Church, in the first, second, and third Centuries, in observing it as a Form. And our Author thought not fit to answer any thing to these proofs, 
The Lord's Prayer was directed to be a Form.  nor indeed to take any notice of them, unto which I shall refer the Reader. But this novel and groundless notion, is also greatly opposite to the sense of the ancient Church, in the following Centuries, and would have been then earnestly exploded; since they looked upon the Apostles themselves, and all other Christians, to have been enjoined by divine Precept, to make use of this Prayer as a Form. S. Hierome declared, 
m Hieron. adv. Pelag. l. 3. c. 5.  Docuit Apostolos suos, ut quotidie in corporis illius sacrificio credentes audeant loqui Pater noster, etc. He taught his Apostles, that every day believing in the sacrifice of his body they should say, Our Father which art in Heaven, etc. And 
n Aug. Epist. 89.  S. Austin saith, Omnibus necessaria est Oratio Dominica, quam ipsis arietibus gregis, i. e. ipsis Apostolis suis, Dominus dedit, ut unusquisque Deo dicat, Dimitte nobis debita nostra, etc. The Lord's Prayer is necessary for all, which the Lord gave to the chief of his flock, that is, to the very Apostles themselves, that every one should say to God, Forgive us our trespasses, etc.  
30. Among the Protestants, as their Writers do generally acknowledge it to be a prescribed Form, so Apollonius and the Classis of 
o Consid. contr. Ang. p. 177, 178.  Walachria observed, In omnibus Reformatarum Ecclesiarum Liturgiis, etc. In all the public Liturgies which are extant of the Reformed Churches, the Lords Prayer is prescribed to be used. But our Author's Assertion not only contradicts the sense of the ancient Catholic Church, and the generality of Protestants abroad; but he herein clasheth as well with the Directory, and with that Assembly at Westminster which rejected our Common Prayer, as with the Church of England. In the 
p Direct. Of Prayer after Serm.  Directory they said, The Prayer which Christ taught his Disciples, is not only a pattern of Prayer, but itself a most comprehensive Prayer, and we recommend it to be used in the Prayers of the Church. And the members of that Assembly in their Annotations affirm, that 
q Assembls. Annot. on Luk. 11.2.  It is the most exact and sacred Form of Prayer, indicted and taught the Disciples (who were to teach the whole World the rules and practice of true Religion) by Christ himself, who is best able to teach his servants to pray. And again, Christ prescribed this Form of Prayer to be used by them.  
31. Now it is an unreasonable confidence and presumption, to oppose and contradict the general sense of the Christian Church in all Ages, and even the truly Primitive and Reformed Churches, if it be not upon great evidence. Wherefore I shall now examine, what this Writer hath to say for his opinion. He saith, 
r Reas. Acc. p. 57  If the Apostles had apprehended it left for a Form of words and syllables, we should have found some after record of the use of it. But if he mean, there would be some record of this in the Scriptures and writings of the Apostles; this is very vain, since it is certain, they do not contain such Prayers as were used in the public Assemblies: and it is as unreasonable to expect this in them, as to expect that all Books of instruction, written by any of our Church, should repeat our Public Liturgy: and it is very usual for such Books, to have other expressions of Prayer and Supplication, than those of our Common-Prayer. And if this objection were of any weight, it would as much prove, that our Saviour never intended, that Christian Baptism should be administered, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, as that the Lords Prayer should not be used, though he plainly commanded both.  
32. But if by record, 
The Lord's Prayer used as a Form in the Primitive Church.  he means evidence beyond all exception, from authentic ancient Writers, concerning the practice of the Primitive Church; though the producing such evidence is not necessary, to make the Precepts of our Saviour valid; I have sufficiently manifested so much, in the place lately referred unto; but if he took no notice thereof, I cannot help that. And besides what I mentioned above, n. 29. S. Aug. assures us, 
s Hom. 42. inter 50.  Ad altare Dei quotidie dicitur Oratio Dominica, The Lord's Prayer is daily said at God's Altar. And in another place, speaking of the Communion Service, he saith, that the Prayers thereof, 
t Ep. 59 ad Paul. Qu. 5.  fere omnis Ecclesia Dominica Oratione concludit; almost every Church doth conclude with the Lords Prayer. And the use of it after the receiving the Sacrament was also observed by 
u De Sacr. l. 5. c. 4.  S. Ambrose.  
33. But our Author saith. 2. If Christ intended it for a Form, 
x Ibid. p. 57  all that can be concluded is, that Christ may appoint a Liturgy for his Church, which surely none denies. But it will also follow, that Forms of Prayer are not to be rejected and condemned, but aught to be esteemed of profitable use. 
It gives an approbation to other public Forms.  For since such Forms were of use among the Jews, in our Saviour's time, as I have observed, and shall more particularly manifest in the end of the next Section, our Lord was so far from reproving this practice, or John the Baptist his conforming to the like, that himself taught his own Disciples a Form also, as the Baptist had taught his. Wherefore this manifestly declares an approbation of Forms of Prayer, taught and directed by others, who have the chief authority in the Church.  
34. The last thing he urgeth is, 
y p. 57, 58.  that supposing that Christ intended this as a Form at that time, whether it was to last beyond his Resurrection, and the descent of the Holy Ghost, is a farther Question. And though he doth not positively assert this, yet he would have his Reader to be of this opinion, and offers in proof of it, what he saith, was well observed, which I shall by and by consider. 
The Precepts of Christ which all ancient Churches reverenced, may not now be laid aside.  But first, Is it not a strange boldness and irreverence towards any Precept or Institution of our Saviour, for him to suggest to men, that it is expired and antiquated, when our Lord himself gave no intimation of its being temporary, and the Universal Church hath understood it otherwise? Is not this a new piece of Pharisaism, in teaching men how to make void the Commandments of God, by looking upon them as out of date? This Author may by these means, do some service for them, who contend that the Sacrament of Baptism was only intended for the first admission of Nations into the Christian Church, so far as the reputation of his bare authority will go. Yea, and for those also who look upon the Lord's Supper, the Ordination of Ministers, and many other Christian duties, not to be needful for the succeeding Ages after the Apostles.  
35. 
The Apostles had extraordinary assistances and abilities before the Resurrection of Christ.  Secondly, His supposing Forms might be requisite for the Apostles before Christ Resurrection, and the coming of the Holy Ghost, but that no such low things are since that time fit to be continued, doth too plainly manifest, that some persons are strangely big with swelling conceits of themselves. Dare our Author speak out the plain sense of this suggestion? which is this, That himself and other dissenters are men of far greater abilities than the Apostles of our Saviour were, before his Resurrection, though they were then called to be his Apostles, were sent forth to preach his Gospel, and were enabled to work miracles, and cast out Devils: and consequently that these men now, may reasonably look upon such directions and precepts to be of too low and inferior a nature for them to observe, which yet were enjoined upon, and were fit for the state of the Apostles before the Resurrection.  
36. Thirdly his pretence of proof for this opinion is very shallow, which is 
z p. 58.  that Christ left out his own name in the Lord's Prayer: 
Of praying in the name of Christ.  but in that name his Disciples were afterwards enjoined to ask: Joh. 14.13, 14. Joh. 16.23. But to ask in his name, is to ask through his mediation, upon the encouragement of his merits, and his being our intercessor, and advocate at God's right hand in our nature, which is a privilege peculiar to the time since the ascension of our Lord; and also to ask suitably to the rules and doctrine of Christianity. This is the sense which is generally given, of this expression, of ask in the name of Christ: and even the Assemblies Annotations declare, ask in the name of Christ to be 
a Assembls. Annot. on Joh. 14.14. & Ch. 16.24, 26.  through his mediation, and they also add from S. Gregory, si id quod non expedit petitur, non in nomine Jesu petitur pater; if that be desired which should not be, God is not asked in the name of Jesus. And this sense of this phrase, In his name, that it signifies upon his account, and though him, is evident from Joh. 1.12. Joh. 20.31. and many other places. But the Apostles under the guidance of God's Spirit, did not always verbally express the name Jesus, in all their Prayers, as Rom. 15.13. 2 Thes. 3.16. and elsewhere.  
37. Now in the Lord's Prayer, we know that what we ask, is according to the will of our Lord, being directed by him. We call not God Our Father, but upon the account of Christ, and upon his account we desire all our Petitions in the Lord's Prayer to be granted. And our desiring that God's name may be hallowed, that his Kingdom should come, and that our trespasses may be forgiven, etc. have particular respect to our Mediator. And in this whole Prayer, we according to the direction of our Church-Catechism, trust that God of his mercy and goodness 〈◊〉 do what we ask, through our Lord Jesu● Christ, and therefore we say, Amen. And this is also the general sense of all 
b Formula à Resormatis usurpata ante illius Orationis recitationem. Haec & alia quae nosti Domine nobis esse necessaria, à te postulamus in nomine Christi ea Orationis formula quam ipse nos docuit. Pater noster, etc. Thes. Salm. Par. 3. loc. Com. 47. n. 13.  sober Protestants.  
38. My second Argument to prove Forms of Prayer to be no disadvantage to devotion, was 
c Libert. Eccles. p. 122, 123.  because it is generally acknowledged, that the singing Psalms of Prayer and praise, may be advantageously performed in a set Form of words: and the Scriptures are not the less edifying because they are contained in a set form of words. But concerning singing Psalms this Writer saith, 
d p. 59  this is a mistake of the Question; and 
e p. 60.  that these are such Forms, as God hath Canonised. And he tells us he is against singing by any Forms not made of God, which he calls 
f p. 18, 19 & p. 60.78.  Apocryphal Anthems, as much as he is against Liturgical Forms of Prayer. And yet he allows 
g p. 78. & p. 60.  singing the Psalms in Meter, though the words be not dictated of God, 
My second Argument was, that the Psalms in a set Form of words are useful to devotion; and so are the Scriptures.  because the sense and matter in the Psalms in Meter is so directed.  
39 But when he saith, this Argument mistakes the Question, the Reader will easily see it was proper enough, for the Question or Case of which I was discoursing, which was in general, whether Forms of Prayer are disadvantageous to Piety. But our Author, that he might avoid the force of this and some other Arguments, hath put the Question into another method, but hath not done it solidly, nor hath he avoided the force of this Argument thereby. For first when he grants, concerning the Psalms of Prayer and praise, that God hath Canonised those Forms; he here asserteth, what in Answer to the former Argument he would not own, viz. that God ever appointed or prescribed any Forms of Prayer. And as the matter of many of the Psalms is Prayer; So S. Hierome observes, there are 
h Hieron. Epist. 139. & Comment. in Ps. 189.  four Psalms, which bear the title of Prayers, to wit as he counts them according to the Septuagint, Psal. 16.85.89.101. but in our English Bibles, Psal. 17.86.90.102. And from hence we may infer the usefulness of Forms, for the promoting piety, according to the purport and design of my foregoing Argument.  
40. 
Liturgies justified, by allowing Psalms in Meeter to be sung.  Secondly, Whilst he allows the using set Forms of Prayer, and praising God in metre, to be good and Religious, because the matter is directed by God, though the expressions are not; he doth hereby, so far as concerns reason and Argument, yield that which will necessarily infer the usefulness of Liturgies, to be in like manner generally used. For the like allowance may certainly be made to the use of words in prose, which may be made to them in metre; which is according to his sense, that they may by all Christians be profitably used, where the matter of them is none other, than what God himself hath directed us to pray for, and the words such as are fit to express that matter, which is according to his will. And there is greater security of the matter of a fixed well-considered Liturgy, being such as God approves of, than there can be in the usual variations of the conceived Prayers of some thousands of persons.  
41. Thirdly, Whilst our Author declares, he 
i p. 78. Ecclesiastical Hymns of public use in the Christian Church.  abhorreth any singing in public worship, or what is not composed by the Penmen of holy Writ, even this also is very unreasonable. The Scriptures indeed direct us both to pray, and to sing praises to God: but it is the matter and pious performance of them, and not the different tone, or flexure of the voice, which God regardeth. And it is certainly as hard a task for him to prove, that we may sing to God in no other Hymns, but what are expressed in Scripture, as it would be for him to prove, that we may pray to God in no other Prayer, than what is contained in Scripture; which would be as much against other conceived Prayers, as against Forms. Especially when in some ancient Churches, as well as modern, their practice was, what 
k Aug. Cons. l. 10. c. 13.  S. Augustine commends in Alexandria, in the time of Athanasius, that their reciting Psalms or Hymns, was modico flexu vocis, with a small alteration of the voice, and the manner of uttering them was, pronuncianti vicinior quam canenti, more a deliberate speaking, than a proper singing. But there must be an extraordinary acuteness of nicety to discover, why any person may express the praises of God, according to his own conceptions, in his ordinary way of speech, but may not do it in somewhat a more deliberate way of pronunciation.  
42. Fourthly, If it had been for our Author's purpose, he would have thought it a sufficient proof from Scripture, for the composing new Hymns; that the Prophet Isay, with respect to the Gospel times, commands to sing to the Lord a new song, Is. 42.10. And that the Angelical Hymn, Luk. 2. and those of the Virgin Mary, of Zechary, and of Simeon, were all of them newly composed for the special occasions; that the Apostle declared he would sing with the spirit, 1 Cor. 14.15. and that S. John, in his Vision of the Gospel worship, representeth the Church, as singing a new song, Rev. 5.9. and ch. 14.3. And however this Writer censureth this, the general practice of the Christian Church hath ever admitted and used some hymns composed by men, having a particular respect to Christianity, as our Church ordereth the Son of S. Ambrose. Very many such Ecclesiastical Hymns are collected by 
l Cassand. Hymn. Eccl.  Cassander. And this practice was as early in the Church, as the end of the first Century, when Pliny upon Examination of the practice of the Christians, in their Assemblies, found that they were wont upon a set day, to meet together before it was light, 
m Plin. Epist. l. 10. Ep. 97.  carménque Christo quasi Deo dicere secum invicem, and to say an hymn to Christ as being God, one towards another. Now in that it was their usual practice to say such an Hymn, and that this was expressed by the generality of the Assembly, this speaks it a Form which they used: and the phrase of secum invicem is a considerable intimation, that they expressed it by parts, or Responsals, one towards another. And its being said to Christ as God, makes it highly probable, that it was an Hymn, particularly composed under Christianity, in honour of Christ. But this is fully confirmed, in that it was part of the charge against Paulus Samosatenus, by 
n Eus. Hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the Council of Antioch, that he suppressed the use of those Hymns, which were upon our Lord Jesus Christ, as being new things, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the compositions of men of late days. And that there were various Psalms and Odes composed before that time by Christians, concerning the Divinity of Christ, is also declared in 
o Eus. Hist. l. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Eusebius.  
43. But the true cause, why our Author doth not allow of any Hymns, composed since the Apostles time, is not from any Reason or Scripture, but because this would not serve the interest of his opinion, and withal secure the practice of our Dissenters. For he acknowledgeth, that the whole Congregation joining in singing, 
p Reas. Acc. p. 78.  cannot possibly be done but by a set Form, without notorious confusion: and therefore the allowing new Hymns to be composed, would include an allowing men to appoint Forms of Prayer and praise. And besides this, he is sensible, that they cannot without running into many indecencies, pretend to abilities of constant varied conceptions in the making Hymns, since as he saith 
q p. 78.  not one of many attain the gift of Hymn-making.  
44. Concerning the Holy Scriptures, he saith 
r p. 60.  there are Precepts for reading them, and also promises in the same case. But this doth the more strengthen my Argument; because such Forms as are so far appointed and approved of God, can be no hindrances to Piety. He saith also 
f p. 61.  that there are different workings of the Soul to God in Prayer, and in reading. But though there be different acts of the mind, exercised in these duties: yet that consideration, reverence, faith, submission, and other gracious dispositions, which suit the special parts of divine truth, doth require as much seriousness, diligence and care, in reading the Holy Scriptures, as in Prayer. And however, having showed that a Form of words in Prayer, doth not hinder any exercises of piety therein, I do not think this exception to deserve any further answer.  
45. But what he saith, 
t Ibid.  that there are different workings of the soul towards God in singing and in Prayer, I suppose he will upon further consideration, discern to be an oversight: Since the application to God, for the same things, require the same pious exercises of mind, whether it be in prose, or in metre. And it was another oversight that he declares me to know and confess, what he thus asserts; when I never declared any such thing, but know the contrary.   

SECT. III. Of the Antiquity of set Forms of Prayer.  
MY third Argument for Forms being no hindrance to Devotion, was 
a Libert. Eccl. p. 123.  that all the Ages of the Christian Church, from the first Centuries, have used them as an advantage to Religion. 
My third Argument was, from the use of Forms of Prayer, in all the Ages of the Primitive Church.  And when I added that it is not at all probable, that such excellently devout and judicious men, as the fourth and fifth Centuries abounded with, should be so stupid and dull-spirited, as not any of them to discern between the helps and hindrances of devotion, in matters of most ordinary practice; This Author first saith 
b p. 62.  Certainly it was possible, i. e. possible all those judicious men should be so stupid. Now this is a rash and contumelious expression, and if this be true concerning such men, as S. Athanasius, Basil, Ambrose, Hierome, Eusebius, chrysostom, and S. Austin, and others such like, all pretence from experience must in this case be laid aside. For though our Author sometimes intimates, that these famous men are now outdone by those for whom he pleads; there is so little appearance of the truth hereof, that this needs no particular answer.  
2. When I said 
c Lib. Eccl. B. 1. Ch. 4. Sect. 1. n. 9 p. 106.  that Forms of Prayer were of use in the Church about thirteen hundred years since, is acknowledged by them who plead most against them, from Conc. Laod. c. 18. 3 Carth. Can. 23. and Con. Milev. c. 12. he 
d p. 66.  somewhat misrepresenting my words, saith, we hold no such thing. But whatever singular and unreasonable conceit, he or some other persons may have, 
c Smect. Answ. to Remonstr. p. 7.  Smectymnuus derive the Pedigree of Liturgies from those three Canons, acknowledging that the Church in the Laodicean Canon ordained, 
Our chief Dissenters own Forms of Prayer to have been used 1300. years.  that none should vary but use always the same Form; that the Carthaginian Canon further limited the Form; and the Milevitan Canon would have none other used than what was approved in the Synod. Thus they. And the Presbyterian Commissioners at the Savoy say, they 
f Grand Debate. p. 11.  cannot find any Records of know credit, concerning any entire Form of Liturgies, within the first three hundred years. And their fixing this period of time, is sufficient to justify my assertion.  
3. But our Author saith, he believes 
g p. 67.  they might have denied any such Record of a Liturgy generally imposed for six hundred years, and fixeth the Original of Liturgies upon 
h p. 69.  Gregory the Great, under the protection of Charles the Great, and this eight hundred or a thousand years after Christ; 
Liturgies not first established by Gregory the Great, under Charles the Great.  Of which gross mistake in History, having taken notice of it in my Introduction, n. 4. I shall say no more here, but that we may not reasonably expect any accuracy in the right computation of the time, of the birth and first production of Liturgies, from him who talks so loosely and falsely, about the Age in which Gregory the Great lived, whom he would make the Father of them. And it is speaking enough at random to fix their original now at six hundred years after Christ, and then at eight hundred, or a a thousand years after Christ: but if in which soever of these periods they began, it must be under Gregory the Great, he must then suppose against the credit of all certain History, that Gregorius Magnus was Pope for above four hundred years, in imitation of the Jewish fancy that Phinehas the High Priest lived 
i R. Dau. Kimch. in Mal. 2. v. 5. V Scalig. in Eus. Chron. an. ab Abrahamo 861.  above three hundred years. And if this could be true, which I never saw so much as hinted in any Author before, then Gregory the Great might become contemporary with Charles the Great, and being by that time unable to govern himself, by reason of his extreme Age, might be put under his protection.  
4. Now though something was done by Gregory the Great, in the new modelling Sanction of Charles the Great, for the enjoining the Roman Offices: I shall before the end of this Section, produce as much evidence as is necessary, for the satisfaction of the unprejudiced Reader, concerning the use of set Forms of Prayer in the Christian Church, in the several Centuries, before the six hundredth year of Christ. And thereby I hope to give a fair proof, for that assertion of Cappellus (and for a more early practice also) who said 
k Syntag. Thes. Thes. Salm. Part. 3. Loc. Com. 47. n. 49.  Earum (formularum) usus in universa Ecclesia Christiana, toto terrarum orbe, jam à plusquam 1300. annis perpetuo obtinuit. A public Form of Liturgy hath obtained in the universal Christian Church throughout the whole World for above thirteen hundred years. And he addeth in the same place, that it doth now every where obtain, nisi apud novitios istos Independentes, but amongst them who embrace the new upstart Innovations of Independency.  
5. But our Author will not allow all the three Canons above mentioned, to have any respect to Liturgies, and their establishment: and herein he hath engaged himself against what Smectymnuus asserted, to whom my words had a particular respect. He first excepts against what is inferred from the Canon of Laodicea, which Council Baronius (though he had sometimes thought 
l Annal Eccl. An. 125. n. 158.  otherwise) upon a more accurate consideration, as he thought, 
m In Appen. ad Tom. 4. n. 1,— 7.  concludes to have been before the time of the first Nicene Council. But I must confess, the other opinion that this Council sat about the year 364 is the more probable, from the observation of 
n de Conc. Sacerd. & Imper. l. 3. c. 3. n. 5.  De Marca, That Conc. Laod. c. 7. condemns the Photinians, when Photinus himself lived in the Reign of Constantius.  
6. But he saith, The Bishops 
o Reas. Acc. p. 64.  in that Council may not be called the Church in that Age. Indeed, this was a Provincial Council, yet many Bishops from the several Asian Dioceses were here assembled, 
The eighteenth Canon of the Council of Laodicea considered.  as appears from the title of that Council. And this may appear a remarkable testimony concerning the general state of the Church, if we consider that this very Canon was taken into the Code of the universal Church, being the 122d therein, which Code was extant at the time of the Council of Chalcedon, An. 451. (which was the greatest of the four first General Councils) and was so far approved therein, that that Council cited some Canons of Provincial Councils, which were taken into that Code, as general and authentic Rules, not taking any notice of the Provinicla Councils, by which they were first made; but only citing them according to the number and order they were in that Code. This is manifest from the testimonies produced out of that Council, which are prefixed to Justellus his Edition of the Codex canonum Ecclesiae Vniversae: and thereby it appears, that the Canons of this Code were owned to be of universal authority, by this their reception, though they were many of them only provincial, in their first Constitution.  
7. And this Code or Collection of Canons, was also confirmed and established in this 
p Conc. Chalced. Can. 1.  General Council: and therefore this Canon, which was one branch thereof, is sufficient to acquaint us, what was generally approved in the Christian Church, at that time when this Code was composed and received. And we have this further argument, to prove that this Canon was of general approbation, when it was first composed; because there was no appearance of any part of the Christian Church then opposing it, or declaring against it. For it was then usual, that when any Bishops or Synods, asserted or determined any thing, either concerning doctrine, or rules of order, wherein other Bishops or Churches thought them to err, they would withstand them. Thus concerning the receiving penitents, the Novatian errors were condemned by 
q Libel. Synodic. Syn. 21, 22, 23.  Western, Eastern, and Carthaginian Councils: and the oppositions against the general rebaptising Heretics, and the contests about the Roman and Asian time of celebrating Easter, are obvious in the Histories of those ancient times.  
8. Our Author further tells us, 
r p. 65.  that Council of Laodicea saith nothing of stated Forms of Prayer, c. 18. only orders Prayers to be poured out, Morning and Evening. Thus he clasheth with Smectymnuus above produced. And to clear this matter, this Canon declares, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that there ought always to be the very same service of Prayers, both in the Mornings and in the Evenings. That is, there must be the same Morning service, and the same Evening service continually, and as 
s Zonar. in Conc. Laod. c. 18. &c Balsam. ib.  Zonaras expounds it, that those Prayers only should be used in their public service, which had been received in the public Assemblies; and to the same purpose Balsamon. And for further confirmation, that this Council had a particular respect to set forms of Prayer then in use, in its next 
t Conc. Laod. c. 19  Canon it gives an account of some part of the order of their service, that after the Sermon or Homily, they had first the prayer for the Catechumeni, and when they were gone out, the prayer for the Penitents, and when they were gone away, three prayers for the Fideles, the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in silence, the second and third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by open pronouncing. And all this was performed before the Communion or Consecration thereof, the whole Assembly, as I conceive, being to join in heart and affection, but silently in the first prayer, but in the two other they were to join in vocal expression. Now this cannot be otherwise understood, than to include the use of a form, and also an obedience to orders and rules established by the authority of the Church.  
9 He next takes some notice of 3. Conc. Carth. c. 23. which enjoins, Quascunque sibi preces aliquis describit, etc. Whatsoever prayer any one shall copy out for himself, he may not use them, unless he first confer with the understanding Brethren. Our Author saith, 
u p. 65.  This plainly hints that Ministers were wont to compose their own prayers. But if he had considered what account I gave concerning this Canon, in my 
x Libert. Eccles. p. 119.  Libertas Ecclesiastica, he might have seen reason to have been of another mind. But he takes no notice at all of what I said concerning it, when I particularly considered it, and did show, that that Canon gives no proof, that constant forms were not in use before that time: but he observes only that I quoted this in Libertas Ecclesiastica p. 106. where I only mentioned it, as being owned by our Dissenters, to have contributed something toward the establishing of forms.  
10. The next 
y Conc. Milev. c. 12. Liturgies established by the Council of Milevis.  Canon which Smectymnuus allow to give a full establishment in the African Territories, to Liturgical forms, is something (though not much) differently expressed, in several Copies thereof, both in the title, and in the body of the Canon. But as it is in the African Code, which is the most authentic and of highest authority, its Title is, Of Prayers to be said at the Altar. And the 
z Conc. Carth. Gr. in Zonar. c. 117. in Balsam. c. 106. Cod. Can. Eccl. Jusicl. c. 103.  Canon itself requires, that the prayers which are approved in the Council (in the several parts of public worship) should be celebrated of all persons, and that none other which be against the Faith be at all used, but those shall be said which are collected by the wiser men. But that which our Author saith to this Canon is, 
a p. 64, 65, 66.  that the African Ministry being tainted with Pelagianism, Prayers agreed by the Council, were thereupon decreed to be used in that Province: and yet they do not say, no other, but no other against the Faith, should be used.  
11. Now in the sense he taketh it, it doth go as far for the establishing Forms of Liturgy, as agrees with the practice of our Church. But when I consider, what S. Austin, who was a Member of this Council of Milevis, declareth, 
b Aug. de Bapt. cont. Donat. l. 6. c. 25.  that the Prayers used by many persons were daily amended, when they were declared to the more learned men; and that many things were found in them contrary to the Catholic Faith,— and that many persons took up with Prayers composed not only by unskilful persons, but also by Heretics; I say when I consider this, I incline to another sense of this Council. And that is, that in the former part it makes constant provision, for the use of Forms ordered by the Council, in the public service of the Church; and in the latter part it takes care, that no private Books of devotion, which were composed by Heretics, should be entertained by any Catholic Christians; and the same thing was very probably taken care of in 3 Conc. Carth. c. 23. above mentioned.  
12. But though both Heretical and Schismatical Principles had spread themselves in Africa, it is no way probable, that their Ministry was at this time tainted with Pelagianism, nor could that be the foundation for enjoining Forms. For it appears by this Council of 
c Conc. Milevit. 1. c. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.  Milevis, that the Bishops and chief of the Clergy, were very severe against it, and yet they obliged themselves to constant Forms. And when Coelestius an African Presbyter, had before this time earnestly espoused Pelagianism, there was 
d Oros. de Arbitr. Libert. p. 621, 622.  no stay for him in Africa, but he was forced to desert those parts. I shall only add further, that the vast Precincts of the African Church, who were directed by this Canon, were much larger than our national Church, and might equal a considerable part of Europe.  
13. And whereas I gave several testimonies, in my 
e p. 106, 107, 108, 109.  Libertas Ecclesiastica, of the use of Liturgies, before the time of those Canon's , our Author takes no notice at all of most of them, and what he doth mention, is with great oversight and carelessness. I declared, that I yield it most probable, that the ancient Roman, Jerusalem, and Alexandrian Offices, 
Of the Liturgies under the name of S. James, etc.  were called the Liturgies of S. Peter, S. James and S. Mark, because of their certain early use in the Churches where they presided, though it is not certain that they were composed by them, this being mentioned by no ancient. Writer of the first Centuries. But our Author intimating as if I did assert these Liturgies to these Authors, adds 
f Reas. Acc. p. 66.  what a lamentable shift it is to tell us that they have undergone divers alterations: but those words were not at all used by me, concerning any of these Liturgies, but concerning those of S. Chrysostom, S. Ambrose, and S. Basil, Libert. Eccl. p. 107. But I might well have used them concerning these other Liturgies also. He speaking of 
g Ibid.  the horrible imposture of these, and other Liturgies of S. Andrew, S. Matthew, Clemens, Dionys. Areop. etc. which I did not so much as name, declares, they are so generally rejected by all sober and learned Authors, both Papists and Protestants, that we stand amazed (it seems a little thing will affright him) to hear our Reverend Brother so much as naming them.  
14. Now I grant, that these Liturgies according as they are now exhibited, under the names of S. James, etc. are manifestly proved, not to be entirely their genuine offspring, both from several doctrines, and names, which are expressed in several of them. But this is not enough to prove, the other parts thereof to be of no primitive composure. For so far as concerns the mention of some names of persons, living in after Ages; it seems to me no sufficient Argument to prove, that our English Liturgy which was in use at the beginning of our Wars, was not in substance established, under King Edward the Sixth, or Queen Elizabeth; because there were then Prayers for King Charles, Queen Marry and Charles Prince of Wales. And concerning doctrines (for instance, that the Liturgy now extant, under the name of S. James oft expresseth the Blessed Virgin to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which yet was never urged against the Heresy of 
h Eus. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Artemon, or against Nestorianism, by the ancient Fathers, who made use of all the testimonies they could meet with; whereas this must have been a testimony very obvious, and of great authority, if this had then been in that Liturgy as received from S. James) I think it but reasonable to imagine, that when a general Council had declared any doctrine to be Heresy, some such expressions might thereupon be added, to the constant Liturgies then in use, as may manifest their holding the Catholic doctrine, in detestation of those Heresies. And in like manner, when corrupt doctrines became generally received, especially if they concerned any thing of worship, (as of adoration of Saints, etc.) it cannot but be expected, that they should be inserted into the Liturgy of that Church which embraced them.  
15. But I fear our Author spoke without his Book, when in general and with respect to all the Prayers therein, he said, these Liturgies are generally rejected, by all sober and learned Authors, both Papists and Protestants. To instance particularly in the Liturgy of S. James. Amongst the Romanists, it is asserted to him by 
i An. 63. n. 220.  Baronius, and 
k De Ritib. l. 2. c. 3. n. 6.  Durantus, and very great numbers of other Authors. The same is affirmed in a peculiar Tract, written to that purpose, by 
l Allat. de Liturg. S. Jacobi.  Leo Allatius, who also produceth the testimonies of Sixtus Senensis, Possevinus, Pamelius, Sanctius, and many other Latin and Greek Authors, even as early, as to Proclus, who was Bishop of Constantinople in the next Age to S. Chrysostom, being educated under, and ordained Deacon by 
m Socr. Hist. l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & l. 7. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Atticus, who was Bishop of Constantinople, the next year after S. Chrysostom was thence banished. And Bellarmine also owns it to have been S. James', though he admits it to have been greatly altered.  
16. Amongst the Protestants also, many appear inclined to own Liturgies, to have been established from and by the Apostles. Even 
n In Annot. minor. in 1 Cor. 11.34.  Beza saith, Quae ad ordinem spectant ut precum formulae, & caetera hujusmodi,— disposuit Apostolus in Ecclesiis; The Apostle did set in order in the Churches, such things as had relation unto order, as Forms of Prayer, and other things of like nature. And the Walachrian Classis acknowledged, that the Churches 
o Cons. Contr. in Angl. p. 180.  ab Apostolicis & Primitivae Ecclesiae temporibus, from the Apostolical and primitive times unto this day, have performed the public worship of God, out of certain and prescribed Forms. And if they were from the Apostolical times, it may well be that some Apostles had an hand in making them.  
17. And more particularly in our own Church, 
p Annot. on S. Judas, v. 20. and View of the Directory, Sect. 17.  Dr Hammond judged that the Apostles and they whom the Holy Ghost set apart to plant the Churches, had miraculous gifts, and by them they prayed; he addeth, some of these special Prayers thus conceived, were received and kept by those whom they thus taught, and are they which the ancients mean by the Liturgy of S. James, etc. And 
q Eccl. Angl. Vind. c. 10.  D. Durel concerning these Liturgies of S. James, etc. saith, mihi dubium non est, I make no doubt but some things are found in them, which do proceed from the Authors to whom they are attributed. And 
r Salmas. contr. Grot. opus Posth. p. 254.  Salmasius as was observed by Dr Hammond in his view of the new Directory, said Jacobi, Clementis, Basilii, Chrysostomi Liturgiae, partim verae sunt, partim falsae; the Liturgies of James, Clement, Basil, chrysostom, are partly true, and partly false. Which words show that he accounted some things to be genuine in them, but with an addition of other things spurious. See also Mr 
s Of Religious Assembl. c. 7. p. 248.  Thornedike to the same sense.  
18. Our Author also takes a slight notice of that weighty evidence I produced, for the proof of Forms of Prayer, 
t Lib. Eccl. p. 107, 108.  in the time of Constantine. And he only tells us, that 
u Reas. Acc. p. 67.  Constantine's composing Godly Prayers for his Soldiers, is a good Argument that the Church had then no public Liturgies: for surely Constantine need not then have made any, and it had been a great derogation from the honour of the Church.  
19 But if our Author had duly observed what I produced, 
Forms of Prayer used in public service in Constantine's time.  and consulted Eusebius in the places to which I referred, he would have found 1. That these Prayers which Constantine made, and Eusebius applauded, were peculiarly fitted for his Soldiers, as is manifest from that particular Prayer related by 
x De Vit. Const. l. 4. c. 20.  Eusebius: and therefore his inferring from hence, that the Church had no Forms before that time, is as if he would conclude, that because we have had Prayers lately framed, to be used at sea, that therefore we never had before that time any Common-Prayer. And besides this, 
y Ib. c. 19  Eusebius declares, that these Prayers he composed were to be used on the Sunday, by that part of his Soldiers, who had not embraced the Christian Religion, whilst the other part of his Army who were Christians, did attend the Assemblies of the Church, and join in its Prayers. 2. He might also have further observed, that Constantine was said by Eusebius, de Vit. Const. l. 4. c. 17. to order his own palace, according to the manner and usage of the Church; in that taking into his hands the Books, he either applied himself to the Scriptures, or expressed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, those Prayers which had received an authoritative sanction. But this clear evidence for the use of Forms of Prayer he was willing to overlook; as also what I produced from Origen, Cyprian, and others.  
20. But because this Author pretends, 
Liturgies more ancient than six hundred years after Christ.  that there was not established Liturgy before the time of Gregory the Great, nor till six hundred years after Christ; that the Reader may see, how much he would be imposed upon, by giving credit to any such untrue and groundless Assertion, I shall (waving very many Citations of some Clauses of Liturgies in St. Austin, St. chrysostom, and many other of the ancient Writers) produce as many testimonies as are sufficient to satisfy an indifferent Reader, that in all the first Ages of the Christian Church, for the first six hundred years, there were public forms of Prayer, and Liturgies established.  
21. Justinian the Emperor began his Reign above seventy years, 
— Enjoined by the Imperial Law An. 541.  and ended it almost forty, before the year 600, and his Imperial Sanctions were of as large extent as his Empire. He accounteth it a great fault, 
z Novel. 137. in Praef.  that there were some persons of the Clergy and Monks, who were not versed, as his Canons required, in the prayers of the usual Service, and of Baptism. And he declares that he would have things canonically ordered, which if it had been before done, they would every one have acquainted themselves with the holy Liturgies, 
a ibid. c. 1.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And he also by his Imperial Sanction required, that every person ordained Bishop 
b ibid. c. 2.  should recite the office for the holy Communion, and the prayer for Baptism, and the other prayers. And he also enjoins 
c ibid. c. 6.  these prayers in the performing public offices, and in the administering Baptism, not to be said by the Bishops or Presbyters silently, but so as they may be heard. Which things are plain testimonies, both that the Church then had Liturgical Forms, and that they were established and enjoined by an Imperial Law.  
22. And besides this, it was enacted by Justinian 
d Novel. 131. c. 1.  that the Canons of the four holy Synods, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, both such as were made by them, and such as were confirmed by the Council of Nice, Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, should have the force of laws. And therefore if there was any Canon, which enjoined the use of forms of prayer, confirmed by the Council of Chalcedon, (for the proof of which, I refer to n. 6, 7, 8. and 23. of this Section) then by virtue of this Constitution, that Canon had an equal authority with a law of the Empire, throughout all the Dominions thereof. And both these Constitutions of Justinian bear date in the same year 541. which is fifty nine years before the period our Author fixeth upon.  
23. In the middle of the foregoing Century, from the year 400. and downwards, 
Their ordinary and established use in the fifth Century manifested.  was the General Council of Chaladon, An. 451. in which that Code, wherein was the Canon of Laodicea, which required the constant use of Liturgies, was both approved and confirmed, as may appear above, n. 6, 7, 8. and therefore the use of Liturgies was hereby established in the Christian Church, as far as the authority of a general Council did extend. In this time Proclus, a Bishop of Constantinople of good note, declared forms of divine service, to have been 
e Procl. Const. de Tradit. Liturg. in Bibl. Patr.  delivered from St. James and Clement, and to have been ordered by St. Basil and St. chrysostom. But how far soever his authority may prevail, concerning the time almost four hundred years before him, when St. James and St. Clement lived, he being the first Writer which I have met with, who mentions the ancient Liturgies under their particular names; yet for the later times, his authority is unquestionable, that there were then Liturgical forms, and that these had been so long in the Church, as not to be then accounted new upstart things. And he could not but have sufficient opportunity to understand fully what he delivers concerning St. chrysostom especially, since 〈◊〉 was Bishop in the same See of Constantinople, and was educated there about the en●● of St. Chrysostom's time. And at the beginning of this Century, was the Council of Milevis, whose Canon enjoining se● forms of Prayers, is 
f n. 10, 11, 12.  above produced i● this Section.  
24. In the Century beginning An. 300 the attestation to the Liturgy of St. chrysostom, in the foregoing Paragraph, 〈◊〉 the more considerable in this Case, because, as 
g Theod. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 28.  Theodoret informs us, his Government and Authority extended it sel● over Thracia, Asia and Pontus, and he established excellent laws, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to twenty eight Provinces, within those Regions. 
The like in the fourth Century.  St. Basil's ordering a public form of Liturgy in this Age, is not only what hath been generally received and acknowledged in the Greek Church but hath a further confirmation from Pr●clus above mentioned, and also from the testimony of the 
h Conc. in Trull. c. 32.  sixth General Council, commonly so called, where they also mention the Liturgy of St. James. And when Julian, for the begetting a greater respect to Gentilism, ordered many thing therein, 
i Soz. Hist. l. 5. c. 15.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, after the order of the Christian worship, one thing which Sozomen declares, they were to imitate the Christians in, was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in their constituted prayers: which 
k Naz. Or. 3. p. 101, 102.  Nazianzen calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a form of prayers to be expressed by parts: this must manifestly prove the use of such forms then, in the ordinary offices of the Christian Church. Concerning this Age, the Reader may add what I above mentioned, from Eusebius, n. 19 and from the Council of Laodicea, n. 5, 6, 7, 8.  
25. In the preceding Age from the year 200. what I cited in my 
l Lib. Eccl. p. 108.  Libertas Ecclesiastica, from Origen in his Homilies on Jeremy, urging a Clause out of their usual Forms of Prayer, and speaking in his Books against Celsus, of the Christians using, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
And in the third Age, beginning An. 200.  the appointed prayers, with what I there added from St. Cyprian and Tertullian, may be considerable evidences, that the Church then used forms of prayer. To this may be added, what I above observed, 
m Sect. 2. n. 41.  concerning the ordinary public use of set Hymns, composed by pious men, under the time of Christianity; which the Council of Antioch against Paulus Samosatenus censured him for disuseing.  
26. In the two first Centuries, 
Public forms in the two first Centuries.  we meant with few Christian Writers, and yet the● are some things expressed in Justin Matyr, and Ignatius, which seem to favour the use of forms of prayer, as I noted in my Libertas Ecclesiastica. But the testimony I produced 
m Sect. 2. ibid.  above from Pliny, in his Epistle to Trajan, at the entrance of the second Century, doth sufficiently show, that the Christians in their public Assemblies, used a set form in Hymns of Ecclesiastical composure. And the words of 
n In Philopat. ver. sin.  Lucian, who also lived under Trajan, give us a fair intimation, if not certain evidence, of a form of Liturgy then used by Christians. Where he brings in Tr●●phon in his Dialogues, expressing several things concerning the doctrine and practice of the Christian Church, and at last he directs, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for the beginning, the prayer from the father (the Lord's prayer) and adding at the ending the Ode with many names, or the famous hymn. Indeed, a learned man was of opinion, that 
o J. Greg. Not. & Observe. in Scr. c. 38.  the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, was the Clause at the end of the Lords prayer, For thine is the Kingdom, etc. but it is much more probable, if not certain, that there must be more than one single Clause, in that which he called an Ode; and it is very likely, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may here strictly imply the expressing many names, or many titles. According to this sense 
p View of the Direct. Ch. 1. Sect. 17.  Dr Hammond thought, that Ode or Hymn intended, might be that in the end of our Communion service, Glory be to God on high, etc. And an Hymn much like to this appears to have been very ancient, being expressed in that Collection, under the name of 
q Const. Apost. l. 7. c. 48, 49.  Apostolical Constitutions. And that this Clause in Lucian, hath respect to a particular Hymn, composed for the giving Glory to our Lord and Saviour especially, I am inclined to believe, from the testimony of Pliny, lately referred unto, from whence it appears, that such an hymn, (which he expresseth soliti sunt carmen Christo quasi Deo dicere secum invicem) was at that very time looked on, as a remarkable thing in the Christian service, and was of ordinary use in the Christian Assembly. Now though I cannot be positive in determining the particular Hymn; it is a considerable evidence, that the Christians than used a form of public service, in that they began it with the Lords prayer, (which 
r Tertul. de Orat. c. 9  Tertullian also shows, to have been anciently used before any other prayers) and ended it with a particular known; and remarkable hymn.  
27. And as before this time, 
Our Saviour joined in a form of prayer, and taught his Disciples a form.  our Saviour instituted that excellent form of the Lords Prayer; so that is the greater warrant for the use of forms of prayer, if we consider, that such public forms, composed by such men, who had chief authority in the Church, were before our Saviour's time, and in his time, of ordinary use in the Jewish worship. But our Lord complied so far with the use of these forms, that himself usually joined in this Synagogue-worship. Luke 4.16. being of another temper, as to the honouring of God's public worship, than this Author, and others of his mind; since the farthest that they will go is, as he tells us, 
s Reas. Acc. p. 21.  that some of them at a pinch can hear prescribed forms. And moreover, our Lord thought fit, as John the Baptist had done, to continue this practice, of directing forms of prayer amongst his Disciples; and thereby gave a general approbation to this ancient usage in the Jewish Church, and gave his own example for the like practice in the Christian Church, of praying to God in forms piously composed, and to be devoutly used.  
28. In their temple service, their sacrifices and offerings were rites of 
t Phil. de Vict. p. 842, 843.  supplication and thanksgiving. But these sacrifices being always the same, upon the same occasion, and the manner of performing them being unvaried and uniform, 
The Temple-Sacrifices were real expressions of Divine worship in an unvaried form.  they were as constant forms of supplication, or the same expressions of the same thing, in the worship of God. And as the daily service was constant and invariable, so the several extraordinary Sacrifices, were as different offices for special occasions. And herein it also appears, that God is so little pleased with variety of expressions, that amongst the several numerous sorts of  and Fowls, 
u ibid. p. 835.  only three sorts of the former, as Philo observed, viz. Oxen, Sheep and Goats, and two of the latter, Pigeons and Turtles, might be presented to God in Sacrifice. Nor was there any alteration in the method of their ordinary service. For whereas there was sacrifice and incense daily offered, the same Author acquaints us, that the Priests strictly observed this order, 
x Phil. de Victim. offerent. p. 850.  first to offer the incense, as a rite of thanksgiving; and after that their Sacrifice. And their incense was daily offered, before the rising of the Sun, as 
y Anriq. Jud. l. 3. c. 10.  Josephus declares, which is also agreeable to the direction of the Law itself, Exod. 30.8. But in the evening service, the incense was constantly offered after the Sacrifice.  
29. And their Sacrifices were attended in the Temple with particular prayers and praises. The Levites in the Temple sung praises, in a set form of words, 2 Chr. 29.27, 30. And the Priests joined prayers with their Sacrifices; and that these in their constant and ordinary service, were set forms, (besides what hath been by 
z Thornd. of Rel. Assemb. Ch. 7.  some observed from the Samaritan Chronicle) hath probable evidence from Philo, who describing the Priest in this action, saith he is 
a De Victim. p. 843.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, making common lauds for all the people, 
Public forms of prayer accompanied their temple-sacrificis.  in the most holy prayers. And we can produce instances of set forms of prayer, used not only by the people, but even by the Priests themselves, upon the most high and solemn occasions. Such is that, when in case of a great impendent danger of sad calamity, the Priests weeping between the Porch and the Altar, were to say, Joel 2.17. Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thine Heritage to reproach, etc. And both the Talmud and other Jewish Writers, declare how upon the day of atonement, the High Priest himself used several stated prayers, as 
b Hor. Heb. in Mat. 6.13.  hath been observed by learned men; and the very prayers themselves, are thence expressed by 
c de Sacrif. l. 1. c. 8. p. 95. etc. 15. p. 169, 170.  Dr Outram. And the forms of prayer used at the Jewish Passover, have been noted by Scaliger, Buxtorf, Syn. Jud. c. 13. Ainsworth in Exod. 12.8. Dr Lightfoot on Mat. 26.26. and divers others.  
30. In their worship in the Synagogues and their Schools, besides other prayers added of latter times, the eighteen prayers, which are much mentioned, and of great account amongst the Jewish Writers, are asserted by 
d Seld. in Eutych. Buxt. Syn. Jud. c. 5.  the Rabbins to be as ancient as the time of Ezra. But that little or nothing of this whole number of the eighteen prayers, is of any later date than the time of our Saviour, Dr. Lightfoot 
e Hor. Heb. in Mat. 6.9.  affirmeth, might be proved at large if need did require. And I shall think it sufficient for me further to observe, 
The like used in the Jewish Synagogues.  that it is certain they had forms of prayer of ordinary and common use, in the Jewish Nation, as early as the times of our Saviour, from the testimony of Josephus, concerning the Essens, expressing before Sun-rise in their supplications, 
f de Bel. Judaic. l. 2. c. 7.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, some such prayers as were delivered to them from the foregoing Ages, and were received amongst the Jews. And upon a view of what I have now produced in this Section, the Reader may see reason to believe the truth of what was asserted by 
g in Loc. Theol. de Precat.  Melancthon, concerning forms of prayer, Ecclesia semper eas proposuit, & publicè & privatim eas exerceri jubet, The Church of God hath always proposed them, and thought them fit to be used, both publicly and privately.   

SECT. iv Some expressions vilifying Uniformity, and charging forms of prayer to be an engine of perpetual discord, with others in the latter part of his third Chapter, reflected on.  
HAving sufficiently, I hope, answered what hath been urged in this Discourse, to prove the use of forms of prayer, to be any hindrance to piety and devoutness in religious worship; and vindicated my arguments, whereby I undertook to prove the contrary; it is but expedient to consider some other reflective expressions, which are in the latter part of this his third Chapter.  
2. When our Author observed, that the Walachrian Classis commended forms of prayer, as conducing to several good ends; and particularly to this, 
Sect. IU.  That uniformity in public worship may be in all Churches observed: 
Of Uniformity, or the having the same form of worship throughout the whole Realm.  he takes occasion to fall foul upon that Uniformity, which they thought valuable, and which is established in our Church. But he first declares his approbation of 
h p. 54, 55.  Uniformity in the ordinary matter of prayer, pursuant to an unity in Doctrine, and this he tells us is necessary. And then he thus expresseth his contempt of Uniformity, in that sense our Church approves it, and our Laws and Government establish it, calling it 
i Reas. Ac. p. 55.  that pitiful thing now called Uniformity, which lies in an oneness of syllables, words and phrases; a thing which never came into the heart of God to command. And in another place, he inquires how it shall be proved, that 
k p. 149.  that pitiful thing called uniformity in words and syllables and phrases, was ever desired of God, or that it ever came into his or his Son's heart. Thus he can come very nigh to a form of words and phrases, in reviling them in others. And here is one part of the difference between us, that whilst we use a form of words in the holy exercises of Religion, he useth his form of words in scoffing at this religious exercise, and the Constitution of our Governors: and to us it appears, that the deriding religious exercises, is not so good a work as the practising them.  
3. But whether God or Christ ever commanded a set form of words to be used in prayer, which our Author so confidently denies, 
Excellent benefits by the establishing this uniformity.  may be sufficiently discerned from what I have said in the foregoing Sections. But is this Uniformity, in the use of a devout and pious form, such a pitiful thing, as he represents it, when by this means almost all the advantages in the use of forms, which I have above mentioned, are obtained? Hereby a decent and regular way of worship, in full and comprehensive sense, and fit words, is secured in all Assemblies of the Church of England. Hereby sober and understanding Christians are assured, that they can hearty join in the public service, which is to be presented to God. Hereby the minds and affections of the people may be particularly prepared beforehand, to go along with the several parts of worship. Hereby both Ministers and people are relieved against various distractions, which new variety of words and expressions do suggest. Hereby the Unity of desiring the same things, in so many several Assemblies, may quicken a considerate man's devotion. And hereby all unbecoming and scandalous expressions, which disturb the soberest Christians, and administer matter for derision to others (of which too many instances might be given) are in the chief parts of Divine service and worship prevented.  
4. And besides this, how much this Uniformity, which is una & eadem publici Divini cultûs externi forma, in the expression of 
l Thes. Sal. de Liturg. Par. 3. n. 32.  Cappellus, doth contribute towards the promoting Unity, Peace and Charity, I shall represent in his words. It is that, saith he, qua arctius colligantur, in eadem sincerae Religionis, Fidei & Charitatis communione, inter se fidelium animi, etc. in which the minds of the faithful are more closely knit together, in the same communion of sincere Religion, Faith and Charity amongst themselves, and thereby in the Church in every Nation, etc. there is less of disturbances, factions, contentions, schisms and divisions, from that infinite diversity and multiplied variety of external worship, which must necessarily arise, if there be no certain and prescribed forms of that worship, to which all are kept. And now is it a pitiful thing, that our Governors should in the best manner take care for the preventing so much evil, and the promoting so much good? or is it not rather an unworthy thing, to reproach and calumniate the good deeds of others, and especially of our Superiors?  
5. But whereas our Author declares for an Uniformity in matter of Prayer, pursuant to an unity in doctrine; and calls that a 
e Reas. Acc. p. 149.  beauteous Uniformity, when we all speak the same thing, as to the matter of Prayer; do the same thing, in the same specifical acts of worship; and on the same day, the Lordsday, I desire two things may be here observed: First, that our Author doth not pretend that men ordinarily aught to pray for other things, than what may be contained in a well-disposed Form, so that the Question only is, whether, where the matter is the same, we are to prefer fixed, known, and well deliberated words, or sudden, uncertain, and changeable expressions. Now all the great advantages mentioned in the foregoing Paragraphs, and in the first Section of this Chapter, are on our side: when on the other side, men may have the greater opportunity of showing what a volubility of speech they have attained unto, and what store of good expressions they are furnished with; which may gratify the inclinations and fancies of some ●●en, but are not of chief advantage to piety.  
6. Secondly, Let it be considered, 
Ill effects of the want of such an Uniformity.  whether it can be reasonably expected, that Uniformity in the matter of Prayer, and the worship of God, and Unity in doctrine, should be continued, where public Forms are rejected. Now no better trial can be made of such a case as this, than by experience, unless it can be proved, that the minds of men are now otherwise disposed than they were in those days, when this Kingdom had a plain experimental proof hereof. But concerning Uniformity in the matter of Prayer, it is a thing notorious, that in our late times, when the Liturgy was taken away; the Presbyterians, Independents, and other Parties, prayed one against the other, and against the establishing that way of Government which others of them prayed for: divers persons made their own passions, singular opinions and errors, a considerable part of their Prayers: others rejected all confession of sins, as not owning it to be any part of their devotion. In many places of this Kingdom, that great part of Christian worship, in the Administration and participation of the Lords Supper, was for ten, twelve, fourteen and sixteen years together totally laid aside: the administering Infant Baptism, was by some Ministers disused, and by others appropriated to a select Company. I might instance in other things, wherein the matter of Prayer then varied too generally from what our Liturgy and the rules of our Religion direct us to; particularly concerning our Prayer for the King: it being not amiss observed, by our 
f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 16.  late gracious Sovereign, that one thing which made many be the more against our Liturgy then, was on this account.  
7. And they were then so far from Unity of doctrine, that one who professed himself a Nonconformist acknowledged about 1646, 
g Gangraena. Part. 1. p. 175.  We in these four last years have overpast the Deeds of the Prelates, in whose time never so many nor so great errors were heard of, much less such blasphemies and confusions. We have worse things among us, more corrupt doctrines and unheard of practices than in eighty years before; denying the Scriptures to be the word of God, denying the Trinity, and the Divinity of Christ, the Immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the Body, Hell, and Heaven, etc. And I know no sober Christian will call this unity in doctrine.  
8. But though our Author thinks fit unreasonably to vilify uniformity, I suppose some Readers will be apt to think, that of the two, his words may be the more truly returned upon himself, That the affecting that pitiful thing called va●●ing of words and phrases, never entered ●●o the heart of God to command, to ●●e a part of his Religion; and it should not enter into the heart of any good man 〈◊〉 think that such things will please him.  
9 In another place this Author expresseth much evil to be produced by Liturgies. As that they are 
h Reas. Acc. p. 63.  an engine of perpetual discord, and are made use of to deprive the Church of God of hundreds of ●●dly and painful Ministers: and to the like purpose he speaks 
i p. 130. Of the causes of ourdiscords and divisions.  elsewhere. Now ●e who shall consider, that there have been Liturgies in all ages of the Church of God from the beginning, and that no discord was occasioned by them; and that they are of themselves of excellent use; and that when our Liturgy was laid aside, almost forty years since, this was far from procuring concord; he will be apt to think that our Author hath mistaken the true cause of our discords and divisions. But there are other plain and manifest causes thereof, viz. from an ill temper of mind, whereby men neglect the due reverence they own to their superiors, and the care they ought to maintain of peace and Unity in the Church; when some men set themselves with eagerness to oppose regular establishments upon slight grounds, and others yield themselves to be led by the passions and errors of those whom they esteem; and when many causelessly affect new things, and indulge themselves to set up for new models, of ordering the Communion of the Church, and the way of divine worship; These things will indeed perpetually cause divisions, unless they be removed. And if any Ministers shall rather forsake their Ministry, than admit of any Forms of Liturgy; the true cause of this will be from some of the things now mentioned: or else from their own great mistakes, in being persuaded by such weak Arguments, as his discourse may furnish them with: or else from their going too far to comply with and please other men.  
10. But in truth, the establishing Liturgies doth in a considerable measure put a stop to discords and divisions. To this purpose Cappellus accounted it very fit, that as far as may be, there should be 
k Thes. Salm. ubi sup. n. 46.  una in Ecclesia externi cultûs divini fermula; the same Form of public divine worship in the Church, and this he thought of great use, ad unitatem spiritûs, & charitatis, inter fideles, quantum obtineri id potest, conservandam, for the preserving, as far as that can be obtained, the unity of the spirit, and of charity amongst believers. And though our Author would be content that some should use Liturgies, but other Ministers should use their own words and method, Cappellus in the same place declares, that this is by no means adviseable, and that this would be so far from procuring peace, that from hence would arise, contemptus, odia, rixae, contentiones, etc. contempt, hatred, clashings, contentions, strife, and infinite quarrels to the great scandal of the Church.  
11. But plain experience doth beyond all authority prove, that concord is never like to be the effect of the laying aside all Forms of public worship. For when this was done in our late sad times, thereupon all manner of errors, sects, heresies and blasphemies, were broached and vented. After this it was that 
i Jus div. Min. Evang. Ep. to Read. 1653.  the Presbyterian Ministers complained of the bitter, woeful, and unutterable fruits of divisions, which, say they, have almost destroyed, not only the Ministry, but even the very heart and life of Religion and Godliness.  
12. Our Author saith also, that Forms of Prayer 
m p. 63.  hinder Ministers care to study the Scriptures: which he before urged, and I before answered, Chap. 1. n. 47.  
13. He saith also, 
n Ibid.  that hereby many such Ministers have crept into the Church, of whom every one who hath any concern for God's glory, or the Church's repute, hath cause to blush and be ashamed. Now I shall leave him to consider by himself, whose work he is doing, whilst he takes all occasions to reproach that Ministry, and thereupon to hinder their labours whom our Saviour hath called to serve him in his Church. And we have so little reason to blush and be ashamed of the generality of the English Ministry, that we have abundant reason to bless God for their great worth. And besides this, the faults which can be chargeable upon any particular persons in the Ministry, must be either from their being 1. not sound in doctrine, or 2. not of a holy and good life, or 3. from their not being men of sufficient abilities, and such as diligently ●●charge their Ministerial work. But set Forms of Prayer piously composed, and instantly used, can contribute nothing 〈◊〉 either of the two former, when they manifestly promote the contrary good. And for the last, as the great abilities of our Ministry is very evident; so I shall answer this, where he doth more particularly insist upon it in 
o Ch. 8. n. 10.  another place.  
14. This Writer in the end of this Chapter declareth, 
p p. 70.  that he thinks he ●●th fully answered whatsoever I had offered, but I leave it to the diligent Rea●er to judge, how little reason he hath to think so. But he there saith, his strict design is not to answer me, but to show they ●●ve probable Arguments, inducing them to believe, that it would be sinful for them, ordinarily to use the prescribed Forms of others: and therefore he proceeds to add further Arguments. Nor is it my design in this discourse mainly to vindicate myself, much less to oppose him; but to vindicate the truth, and therefore I shall add my Answer to his remaining Arguments, contenting myself only to give an account of the main substance of them, if I may so call it, and not to interpose myself, in what he speaks against other particular persons, or in any digressions, which are of no necessary concern, to the Vindication of fixed Forms of Prayer, or defending other public Constitutions.    

CHAP. IV. 
Ch. IU.  Forms of Prayer are not forbidden either in the Second Commandment, or by any other Divine Precept.  
HIs third Argument is, that it is Sinful for Ministers, having the gift of Prayer, to use prescribed Forms, no necessity compelling; because God hath 
(a) Reas. Account, p. 71.  neither by the light of Nature directed them, nor in his Word prescribed them. Now it is acknowledged, that all the parts of Divine Worship must be such, 
Of the parts of Divine Worship, and the manner of performing it.  as the light of Nature, or the revealed Will of God do direct. By the former, our dependence as Creatures, doth oblige us to acknowledge and honour God; and to call upon him, and pray unto him: And the holy Scriptures give us further Precepts, and encouragements in these Duties. And in the parts and duties of Divine Worship, the manner of performing them, and our outward expressions therein, must be such as is suitable to the Duty itself; as swerveth from no Divine Precept, or Institution; and is recommended either by the light of Nature or Scripture. But from what I have said in the former Chapter, it may appear, 
Forms of Prayer are agreeable to the light of Nature and Scripture.  that Forms of Prayer in the public Worship of God, are recommended by the Light of Nature, as it directeth us to choose the best, and most expedient and profitable way of performing that Worship; and that the Scriptures also do encourage us in, and give their approbation of the use thereof.  
2. But there is yet a further design in this Argument, which is, That nothing may be used in God's Worship, which he hath not himself prescribed. To this end, he saith, the sense of the Second Commandment is this, 
(b) P. 73.  Thou shalt worship in no other Way, by no other Means or Religious Rites, than what I have prescribed: And again, 
(c) P. 75. & the like P. 74.  We judge all Acts, Rites and Means of Worship prohibited by God, which either in express Terms, or by first consequences from Scripture, are not prescribed. Now if he will be consistent with himself, and conclude any thing in the Case under debate from these things, which are rather Positions, 
And are not forbidden be the the Second Commandment.  and unproved Assertions, than Arguments; his Inference must be, That no words and expressions (for of these we are now discoursing) ought to be used in the Worship of God, which are not by him prescribed. But concerning this Argument, I shall observe three things.  
3. Obs. 1. That he here contradicteth, what he declared in the stating his Question, and hath oft repeated, having as he tells us, 
(d) P. 91.  Again and again, said, That they do not think Forms of Prayer unlawful. 
This Argument Clasheth with himself.  But if they be not prescribed, and all means not prescribed be prohibited, they must be asserted to be unlawful. And being thus prohibited, no pretence of necessity on Man's part, can make them lawful. For according to that ancient rule, Nulla est necessitas delinquendi, quibus una est necessitas non delinquendi, 
(e) Tertul.  It can be never necessary for them to sin, for whom it is only necessary that they do no sin. And it is more necessary, to forbear any present external expression of Homage to God, than to make use of that which is unlawful and forbidden, as is manifest in the instance of Saul's sacrificing.  
4. Obs. 2. By this way of arguing, the particular conceptions and expressions, of him who prayeth without a Form, are as much forbidden, 
And will conclude Prayers without Forms to be fitful.  as the use of a Form is pretended to be; since God hath not prescribed these Expressions. But here our Author tells us, that the light of Nature shows our own invention to be a mean, and a sufficient mean in this act of Worship. Thus Men who talk at this lose rate can tell, when it serves their own turn, how to allow what God hath not prescribed, and to justify it upon this very account; because it is the Invention of Man, though they can declaim against Ecclesiastical Constitutions, under the very name of Inventions of Men. But if we may use words and expressions, and a method and composition of Prayer, not particularly prescribed of God; what an unreasonable vanity is it, to argue from this Topick against a Form of Prayer, because these particular things in this Form, are not appointed of God.  
5. But possibly he may tell us, as some have done, that by keeping to the constant use of a Form of Prayer, we make that a proper part of Divine Worship. Now though this was answered 
(f) Thes. Salmur. Part 3. de Liturg. n. 35.  by Cappellus, and in part by 
(g) Lib. Eccles. B 2. p. 305, 306.  me elsewhere, I shall here say, That we are far from thinking, that any particular Form of Prayer, appointed in any part of the Church, is necessary to be used in all Christian Churches in the World; who all of them are obliged to perform all the proper parts of Divine Worship. Nor is Religion, and the Worship of God placed in the bare reciting the words of a Form, but chief in the pious devotion of the Heart, of which these words are an expression and guide. And thus much must be allowed to the use of words in those Prayers, which for distinction sake, I call Conceived Prayers. I hope he will not say, that it is the constant and prescribed use, of the same thing not commanded of God, which only is forbidden in the Second Commandment; as if the worshipping an Image was only forbidden, where there is a constant Adoration given to the same Image, but that it is allowable where there is so great a number of them, that men sometimes make choice of one, and sometimes of another, with various changes. We allow the Second Commandment, and the Rules of Scripture concerning God's Worship, to require that no act of Divine Adoration be given to any thing else besides God himself; 
What God hath forbidden, or commanded concerning his Worship.  and that that Homage and Service which is suitable to his Nature, and according to his Will, be religiously performed; and that no such pretended Worship, which is unsuitable to his Nature, or disagreeing to his Will, aught to be presented to him. But this suggestion, that Forms of Prayer are forbidden by the Second Commandment, as included under Idolatry, is so unreasonable, that 
(h) View of Direct. Chap. 1. Sect. 22.  Dr. Hammond might justly wonder, at the strangeness and prodigiousness thereof; and Cappellus might well declare, concerning them who urge this, as an Argument, 
(i) Ubi sup. n.  Crasse admodum hîc homines isti hallucinantur; These Men are herein exceeding grossly deceived.  
6. Obs. 3. This Position, That nothing may be used or appointed in God's Worship, but what is particularly enjoined by God himself, (besides 
(k) Reas. Acc. p. 75, 76, 77. & p. 86, 87.  necessary circumstances to humane actions as Humane) is that, concerning the falseness and dangerous consequence of which I discoursed largely in my Libertas Ecclesiastica 
(l) B 2. c. 1. throughout, & c. 2. , to which I refer, nor is any answer given thereto by this Writer. And I shall here note, that as it is improved, 
That Position that nothing not prescribed, may be used in God's Worship, is destructive of all Religion.  it is destructive to public Worship and Religion. For since God hath commanded us to pray, but hath not in all acts of Worship, enjoined our Words, or the performance of this Duty with or without a Form; it must according to this Position, be done in neither, since each of these are by consequence sequence pretended to be forbidden, being not prescribed. The same may be said of our Saviour's Precept, concerning the celebrating his Supper in Bread and Wine, but he hath not prescribed or determined the sort of Bread, or the kind of Wine. And though God hath commanded us to sing Praises to him; whatever this Writer saith, he can never prove, the singing continually the Psalms of David, and others recorded in Scripture, to be particularly enjoined by a Divine Institution, under the Gospel; though the Church of God hath very generally and advantageously used them. Wherefore the result of this assertion is, for men to contradict themselves, in the performances of Religion, and (which is far more intolerable) to look upon God, as having contradicted himself, in giving such Laws, which so clash with one another, that they cannot be obeyed, and that by the one he hath set us free from observing the other.  
7. But if these things may be determined by men, as they indeed must be, the common rules of Prudence will not allow that it should be lawful and fit, for every Minister by his more sudden and vario thoughts, to determine these things for the Congregation where he ministers; 
Things necessary to be determined in Religion, may be best determined by public Constitutions.  and that it should be unlawful and unreasonable, that any such things should be considered and resolved on, by the deliberate Consultations of the most prudent Men: And if we consider the Authority of our Superiors, to reject pious Forms of Prayer by them appointed, and which I have showed to be of excellent use, speaks a wnat of just Reverence and Submission to them, and a not yielding to them that due Superiority in matters Ecclesiastical, for the right ordering the exercises of Religion, which belongeth to them; of which I have in another Book discoursed somewhat.  
8. But whilst this Author in this Chapter observes, that some urge the Duty 
(m) P. 74, 85, 86.  of obeying Superiors in things lawful, and not forbidden of God, as an obligation upon Inferiors in our Case, to join in our public Forms of Prayer; besides what he urgeth against this, that Forms of Prayer are things forbidden of God, as I above noted, he hath some other expressions, concerning the Power and Authority of Superiors, and our obedience to them, which I shall reflect upon.  
9 He grants that the Superior may in some cases determine of such a thing, 
(n) P. 88  which both he and the Inferior confess to be in itself indifferent; but not in things, 
(o) P. 77.  which the Superior acknowledgeth not necessary, and the Inferior thinks are forbidden. 
Useful things are fit to be established, though some by mistake may rashly Condemn them.  Now if any Inferior, or any Person whosoever, account any thing to be forbidden, and proceed in his judgement upon good and true grounds; no such thing may be appointed, being in itself evil; whether the Superiors acknowledge it not necessary, or by mistake think it is so. But where any Superiors do upon good grounds, judge any thing to be of good and profitable use for the public good, though not absolutely necessary in itself: And some Inferiors out of mistakes, or forwardness to censure, will condemn such things as sinful and unlawful; it is no way fit that such good Orders be laid aside; and many others, and the Church itself, be deprived of the good they might receive from them, by yielding a Compliance to these mistakes. And whereas he here urgeth 
(p) P. 77.  the duty of Charity, he ought to consider, that real charity in providing for the good and profit of the Souls of Men, is of far greater value, than that which he calls Charity, in gratifying the Opinions, and complying with the Errors of Men, in their mistakes. But of the appointments of such things as are scrupled, I have treated more at large in another 
(q) Libert. Eccl. B. 2. Ch. 2. § 3. throughout  Discourse.  
10. Concerning obedience to Superiors, he saith, 
(r) P. 80.  Doth this make a sufficient reason for practice in Divine Worship, that Man commandeth it? And he produceth 
(s) P. 81.  Bishop Jewel's Testimony, that God is to be obeyed, rather than Men; which we assert: And 
(t) P. 82, 83, 84.  Bishop Davenant, condemning the blind obedience of the Jesuits, and asserting unto all men such a judgement of discretion, that they may consider whether the things be true, or lawful, which are directed by their Superiors. And then he tells us, That 
(u) P. 84.  blind Obedience is the very foundation of Popery; but the judgement of private and practical Discretion, is the foundation of the Protestant Religion.  
11. Now it is true, That to yield such a blind Obedience to Superiors, as to account them Infallible, and thereupon to account that all they deliver must be received, without any liberty to examine the truth, and lawfulness thereof, is a foundation of Popery. But to own the due Authority of our superiors and Spiritual guides, and to acknowledge, that they may determine matters of Order and Decency in the Church, and that it is the duty of Inferiors to submit themselves to such Determinations, if they be not contrary to the Will of God, is that which Christianity requireth, and is a necessary foundation of Peace and Unity. 
What judgement of discretion, the true principles of Religion do allow in all Men.  And to make use of our own judgements and understandings, so as to reject whatsoever we certainly know to be false and evil, is that which all true Religion and good Conscience, and the Christian and Protestant Principles will direct. But for any to think it their duty, to close with such Arguments as seem to them probable, but are weak and fallacious, and are of no clear evidence and undoubted certainty; and to account themselves warranted thereby, to pursue what is against the established State and Order of the Church, and its Peace and Welfare; and against the Authority of their Superiors, or any rules of Duty; this will lead Men into all manner of evil Faction, Schism, and Fanaticism, and such Principles cannot justify themselves in the sight of God, or good Men, as I have 
(w) Ch. 1. n. 9 etc.  above showed.  
12. This is that which the Writers of our Church declare against, and so do Protestants generally, and so doth particularly 
(x) Daven. de Judice Controvers. c. 1.2.  Bishop Davenant, who first reserving to god the Supreme power of judging, 
(y) ibid. c. 16.  asserteth to our Superiors, the ministerial judgement, whereby, besides other things, they have Authority to judge, de constitutionibus ad externam Ecclesiae politiam pertinentibus, of Constitutions belonging to the external Polity of the church. And he than declares the necessity of a judgement of discretion in all Christians: which he understands, according to the sense I have in the former Paragraph expressed, as is manifest both from that Treatise, and the other cited by this Writer, In Epist. ad Colos. c. 2. v. 23. And he particularly acknowledgeth it, to be the general sense of Protestants; 
(z) ibid. cap. ult.  Judicium hoc discretionis vanum, falsum, fanaticum esse concedunt, quando ex privato sensu & phantasmate ipsius judicantis dimanat; verum, firmum & legitimum, cum oritur ex lumine infuso Spiritus Sancti, & dirigitur ad normam verbi: That they acknowledge that judgement of discretion to be vain, false and Fanatical, when it proceeds upon the private sense and fancy of him that judgeth; but that it is true, firm and allowable, when it is enlightened by the Holy Spirit, and directed by the rule of the word. Wherefore he gives no allowance to men's proceeding upon probable and uncertain arguments, but only upon manifest and clear evidence, in opposing what is established by Superiors. And indeed disobeying upon such grounds as are not manifest, is but a blind disobedience, which may well be ranked with blind Obedience. We and all sober Protestants are against both; and if the former should be followed, by Children to their Parents, and Servants to their Masters, especially in working Fancies, and weak Judgements, it would bring nothing but confusion into Families.  
13. This Author also tells us, That to justify the Subjects obedience, 
(a) p. 89.  there must appear to him, some reason from a Divine command, requiring the thing. Here if the Precepts of Unity, Peace, Order and Obedience be sufficient, these are frequent and clear; but if he still mean, that no particular thing may be established, unless, it be some way determined, by a Divine Precept, this I have above refuted, n. 2. etc.  
14. He declares also 
(b) ibid.  that Gestures or Actions, that are idle or insignificant, are in worship sinful; and therefore may not be submitted to. Now it is well, he hereby disallows the fond notion of them, who decry our Rites or Ceremonies, because they are significant. 
The appointing Liturgy in what sense to reckoned among things indifferent.  But this can make nothing against Forms of Prayer, where the words express the sense of the Prayer, and are not only significant, but very useful. And though such thngs as are appointed, in the due order of the Church; as the Forms and Orders of Prayer, Hymns, and such like, have been usually and frequently called things indifferent: the word indifferent here, is only to be understood in opposition to what is in itself absolutely necessary, but not in opposition to, or distinction from what is good, useful, and profitable to Edification. so that such things are, if I may so call them, in themselves legally indifferent, being particularly established by no Divine Law, and which may as things of Ecclesiastical liberty be appointed by Superiors, not morally indifferent, as if the appointment and practice of them, was not useful, profitable and good.  
15. He saith also, that 
(c) ibid.  an appropriated habit is in worship sinful (the contrary I have sufficiently proved in my 
(d) B. 2. ch. 1. p. 320, 321. & ch. 4. p. 492, etc.  Libertas Ecclesiastica) and that for the Superior to command any such thing, will be a sin unto him, as gideon's Ephod was a snare to his house. Jud. 8.27. But the Scripture saith, concerning gideon's Ephod, which he made and put in his own City; that all Israel went thither a whoring after it; which thing became a snare unto Gideon, and his house. So that public Idolatry in which gideon's family did in all probability join, was that whereby ●● became a snare unto them. 
Of gideon's Ephod.  But neither was the Ephod of Samuel, 1 Sam. ●. 8. nor of David, 2 Sam. 6.14. nor the Levites garments, 2 Chr. 5.12. at all blamed in the Holy Scriptures, but approved, though none of them were appointed by the Law of God: and therefore it must be something of another nature, than the bare making an habit, that was of so ill consequence to Gideon and his Family. And as this at last came to a manifest and general Idolatry, so there was probably something  in its first Constitution. St. Austin 
(e) Quaest. super Judic. c. 41.  from the great proportion of Gold, allotted tot he making this Ephod, Jud. 8.26. thinketh that other ministerial things, relating to God's service, were made therewith: and others think that Gideon making an Ephod, like the high Priests, intended to worship God, and inquire of God thereby, in his own city, and not in God's Tabernacle, which was to erect a Schism. Now Schism and Idolatry, whether they be commanded by Superiors, or practised by Inferiors, jointly or separately, will be a Snare unto them, as they were to the house of Gidcon.  
16. Our Author takes notice, that 
(f) p. 91.92.  commands in Scripture, and examples, are urged for forms of Prayer; and saith, it can never be proved, that there were forms of Prayer in the Jewish Church, or that the Lords Prayer was intended as an ordinary form: and however what is produced from these things, concerning the State of the Gospel, he calls pitiful inconclusive Arguments. And saith he, if David made Psalms (which are Prayers) he was a Prophet, but did he make an Act of Uniformity too? But that the Jewish Church had forms of Prayer; that the Lords Prayer (which surely was delivered under the Gospel) was delivered as a form, and that the Arguments from hence are cogent, I have proved in the former chapter. And since the ordinary practice of the Jews, in using forms, was approved by our Saviour, it is not considerable, whether any of them were established by David, or other persons in Authority. Yet David did in some things appoint rules and orders for the service of God, 1 Chr. 25.2, 6. And Hezekiah and his Princes, ordered in what form of words the Levites should sing praise to God, 2 Chr. 29.30.   

CHAP. V 
Ch. V.  Of other Prayers, besides those in the Liturgy, and public service of the Church.  
HIs fourth Argument is, That the admitting, or agreeing 
(a) Reas. Account. p. 93.94.  Ministers to use ordinarily prescribed forms of Prayer, is of sufficient force to restrain the total exercise of the gift of Prayer, which is sinful. And that by this principle, Ministers may not pray otherwise, before and after Sermon. And that if the Magistrate shall hereafter make a Law, 
(b) p. 95. Of the use of other Prayers, besides forms.  of the Latitude of that of Nabuchadnezzar, to tie men to pray no where to God, neither in Family, or Closet, but in the use of a form, or the Church's Prayers, they must obey this also, by the same reason, which obligeth them, to use set forms in the public use of the Liturgy. And, saith he, 
(c) p. 97.  who shall determine, how far the Magistrate may impose, or not impose? Now in this Chapter he produceth nothing new, to prove it a Duty, for men to use their own abilities of expression in Prayer; but saith, 
(d) p. 93.  he takes this to shine sufficiently in its own light.  
2. Wherefore, in answering this Chapter, I shall premise three things, First, That I have above shown, 
(e) Chap. 1.  that men's abilities of expression, which are not properly the gift of Prayer, are not on other accounts necessary to be used; unless, where they be requisite, for the better performing the worship of God.  
3. Secondly, that since I have manifested, the usefulness of set 
(f) Chap. 1. & 2.  forms in themselves, for the public offices of Religious worship, and do not found their lawfulness, and expediency merely upon Obedience to our Superiors; therefore I can be no way concerned here, to determine, or inquire after, the extent or boundaries of the Authority of our Governors, in ordering things relating to the worship of God.  
4. Thirdly, 
The extent of Governors' Authority, not requisite to be questioned, in every act of Obedience.  That it doth not express any great reverence to Superiors, for any to deny submission, to the lawful and useful Constitutions by them established; and to plead for this, by putting other Questions, about their power of commanding things, which seem disadvantageous to Religion, and by declaring, that the extent of their Authority, is not sufficiently stated. What confusion would it bring into Families, if when Children, or Servants, are commanded there to join in any exercise of Religion, as in prayer in the Family (which our Author grants, must be a form to them, who join in the words of others) they may be allowed to answer, they will not comply therewith, because, by so doing, they may be imposed on in Religion, from one thing to another: and they must first know the strict bounds of that Authority they are under, and who shall fix them. And the like may be said, of the several conventions of different Separatists. But if it be enough, to say in the case of a Family, that they may then deny actual obedience and subjection, when any thing is required of them, which they know to be evil; we acknowledge the same in our case.  
5. And thus much might be sufficient, 
Whether it be a duty, to use other Prayers besides form●.  for answer to this Chapter, as it hath a particular aspect upon the Authority and commands of our Governors; yet because, I would not avoid any thing, which may seem material and useful, I shall farther here consider, Whether, and how far, Christians, or Ministers, are under any obligation to Duty, to use any other prayers, besides set forms, in all those particular cases mentioned in this chapter; before and after Sermon, in the Family, and in the Closet. Now comprehensive and well ordered forms, being with deliberation fitted to the common state of Christians, and the ends of our Religion; are as I have above shown, to be preferred, in the public worship of God. And that before or after Sermon, there should ordinarily be new and varied Prayers, I know no rule of reason, or precept of the Christian Religion, which requireth this, and maketh it a Duty.  
6. 
Before Sermons.  Before Sermons 
(g) Of Religious Assembl. c. 7 p. 237. & 252.  Mr. Thorndike observes, That in the flourishing times of the Church, Preachers were wont to commend themselves, and their labours to God's blessing. But this was frequently, at least, done by a set form. A short form to this purpose, of St. Ambrose is, as Mr. Thorndike there observed, yet extant, may be seen in Ferrarius de ritu contion. and from thence in 
(h) Alliance of Divine Offices. Chap. 6. p. 183.  Mr. Hamon L'estrange, and the form of Aquinas, is published by 
(i) Casland. Prec. Ec.  Cassander. And some of the most eager of our Dissenters, ahve formerly kept themselves ordinarily to set forms before their Sermons. And our Church in her 
(k) Can. 55  Canons, hath given direction for a form of Prayer, to be used before Sermons, as is there expresed, or to that effect: but among the different practices, it is not necessary for me here, to consider what liberty is hereby allowed to Ministers.  
7. In the close of the Sermon, 
After Sermons.  many Homilies of the ancient Writers, had some supplicatory expressions, interwoven as a conclusory part thereof, and sometimes with particular respect to the subject of their Discourse. Such things were in some of their popular Discourses, practised by 
(l) Basil. Hom. 2. & 6. in Hexaem. De Jejun. Hom. 1. de Mam. Mart. & de Lib. Arb.  St. Basil, 
(m) Naz. Orat. 2.6, 10, 28, 42. V. Scholar Gr. in Not. Billij in Naz. Orat. 18.  Gr. Nazianzen, St. Chrysostom, in some Homilies, ad Pop. Antioch, and others, and also in St. Augustine, St. Gregory, Bernard, and divers others: and our Church doth not seem to dislike this Method, which is imitated in some of her Homilies. But yet this was used but in some, either of the ancient Homilies, or of those of our Church; St. Austin used most requently the same conclusory Prayer, or Collect, which is extant in 
(n) Aug. Tom. 8. pag. ult.  his works. The method used by several persons, of the several persuasions among our Dissenters, who frequently have prayed over the several heads and parts of their Sermons, that their Auditors might be persuaded of them, stands chargeable with this fault among others; that as 
(o) Disc. Prayer extemporet.  Bishop Taylor observed, as their Sermons according to their different parties, were oft directed against one another, and in contradiction to one another, so by consequence were their Prayers, and therefore the matter of Prayer must be, in many of them unsound. But that excellent Collect, Grant we beseech thee Almighty God, etc. much used in our Church after Sermons, (besides, the expressions in the Prayer for the Church militant, to the same purpoe) is so pithy, in desiring the blessing of God, for obtaining the best effect of the Sermon, that no pretence can remain, to charge any blame upon those, who use no different concluding supplicatory expressions of their own.  
8. Indeed there are sometimes extraordinary cases and occasions, which are proper matter for our public Prayers and Thanksgivings, and ought not to be omitted. It is observed by 
(p) Ann. Eccl. An. 37. n. 7.8.  Banonius, that the Church presented their especial Suffrages to God, for the good success of Gratian against the Alemans': and 
(q) Athan. Apol. 2. ad Constant.  Athanasius did publicly do the like, for Constantius against Magnentius. Such cases as are most weighty, or usual, are provided for by particular Collects in our Liturgy; and if they be cases of particular persons, they may be comprised in the Prayer for all conditions of men, and the general Thanksgiving, according to the directions in our Liturgy. And these parts are as blameless, and as commendable in their use, as the ordinary parts of the Liturgy. And if there should yet be some great and extraordnary case, which is not sufficiently contained, under any of these Prayers or Praises: Dr. Hammond declared, 
(r) Pract. Catechism l. 3. Sect. 2.  The Church sometimes permits, and upon incidental occasions prescribes, other forms in the Congregation. Such are upon great special reasons, the Prayers for particular public days of Humiliation and Thanksgiving. And if saith Mr. 
(s) Discour. 1. on Mat. 6.9. ●  Mede, There be any sudden unexpected occasions, for which the Church cannot provide, the spirit of her Ministers is free. Who will forbid her Ministers to supply in such a case, that by a voluntary and arbitrary form, that the Church could not provide for in a set form? But such cases where this is necessary, will be very rare, and must keep their place.  
9 And for Family, and Closet Prayers, what ever freedom of expression any man hath, whensoever he devoutly and piously addresseth himself to God in a form of words, in the daily and constant matters of worship, 
Of Prayer in Families and Closets.  as acknowledging, and adoring the Divine excellencies and perfections, blessing God for daily benefits, and seeking to him for such mercies, as we always stand in need of; I do not see, how the least blame can be charged upon such a Person, but his mind may be enlarged, his memory helped, and his affections quickened thereby.  
10. And so far as I can discern, the ordinary use of a well composed form, may usually in a Family, most conduce to the promoting inward and serious Piety, upon many of the same grounds that prove it expedient in the public service. and the disparaging the use of forms of Prayer in Families, is both unreasonable, and really hurtful to Religion: 
Forms of Prayer of great use in Families.  it being the probable occasion of the total neglect of such Religious services in many Families; many persons on this account, omitting the use of all Prayer in their Families, rather than to expose themselves to be censured as weak, in using a Form. And other persons of greater confidence, perform this much worse, both as to matter and words of Prayer, and the profit of others, than they might do in the use of a good form. And I desire, that this thing may be seriously and carefully considered, it being of concernment to the real profit and good of men, however it may be slighted by some conceited and self-pleasing Persons. To this purpose, Cappellus declared his dislike of them, who 
(t) Thes. Salmur. de Liturg. n. 30.  certas orandi formulas, etiam in privatis familijs damnant, condemn fixed forms of Prayer, even in private Families. And what Melancthon speaks, in approbation of forms in private, as well as in public, I have 
(u) Ch. 3. Sect. 3. n. ult.  above noted.  
11. But because, many private cases, which may be of great concernment to particular persons and Families, may be more properly taken into the subject of Family Devotions, than of public Assemblies: it is expedient, and ordinarily necessary, that such things also be upon emergent occasions presented to God, for obtaining his help and blessing, in as suitable words, as the person is able to express, and without affecting variety of words. And in the Closet, many things concerning the persons own particular case and wnats, which cannot be comprised in a form, are needful matters of his private and retired Devotion: which may either be by vocal expressions, or only by the inward lively motions of a contrite spirit, as the person himself finds most expedient. Wherefore Dr. Hammond declared, 
(w) ubi sup.  That it is supposed by the Church, that in the Family and Closet, every man may ask his own wants, in what form of words he shall think fit. and what he said, and the liberty therein expressed, was observed as an instance of the moderation of our Church, by my worthy friend 
(x) Moderate. of the Chur. Ch. 7. §. 6.  Dr. Puller. And I acknowledge, That if any Superior should forbid all such private Confessions and Petitions, this being against the duty of a Creature, and a Christian, ought not to be submitted to. But blessed be God our Governors are far enough from any such thing, nor ought our Author to propose it.  
12. Wherefore the result of this matter, is this, That the performing the public offices of the Church by a set-form, is that which is really profitable to Christianity: and the appointing them to be so performed, ought not to be looked on, as mere act of Power and Dominion, in our Superiors, which is designed no farther than to try the Subjects obedience; but in this case, it is a pious act of their Christian care and prudence. If all Ministers should perform these Offices, without prescribed Forms, how many inconveniencies, 
Constant use of Liturgies is advantageous.  and what impediments to piety must constantly in some things, and might frequently in others thence ensue, is easy to be considered; and in many things hath been, and in part will 
(y) Ch. 9  farther be expressed in this Book. the celebrating these Offices by some with a Form, and by others without one, would be an engine of Discord and Faction; and men of high conceit and rash confidence, who are most apt to miscarry, would be most impatient of that restraint, from which others are free. And if any one person under a wel-constituted order, use his own different way of celebrating Divine Offices, (being member of that, and not of any foreign Church) even this would be against the peace of the Church, and so not to be desired of any good man. And this man also, whoever he be, unless he keep himself to the same seriously premeditated things, will not perform these with that exactness, that is in a Form, and may be sometimes liable to defects of memory or expression. And Forms of Prayer are also of excellent and singular use in Families and in Closets.  
13. Yet we account other Prayers, besides Forms, in their place 
(z) Dr. Hammon. Pract. Catech. of Prayer.  allowable. God forbidden, that any should speak, against the general matter and design of such a Work, as St. Augustine's Confessions, or the pious Meditations and Soliloquies, 
Other Prayers in their place useful.  of many ancient and modern devout men. And we esteem it so useful an exercise of Religion, for Christians frequently to set themselves to take a strict account of themselves, and penitently to confess their particular neglects and trespasses, and to implore the needful mercies and blessings of God, that none need to fear, that any Christian Governor will ever prohibit such things. And whereas by a constant strict course of Piety, some persons have arrived in a tranquillity of mind, to an higher degree of Mortification, 
Of the highest and most raised Devotions.  and holy sublime affections to, and sense of God, and his Goodness, than the generality even of other pious Christians; it is fit that in their private Devotions, they express, as they think most expedient, the noble, grave and sober sentiments of their Souls, in acts of Adoration. But such things are unfit for public conventions, being too high for the common state of men, who can more easily admire them, than join in them. And all En. husiastical pretences, and the methods of speaking mystical nonsense, deserve not where either commendation or any allowance.  
14. And I humbly beseech Almighty God, in the name of his only Son, who founded his Church in Unity, that all men who have any love of God or goodness, may at length learn to study, and to do and speak those things, which tend to peace in the Church, and not to make breaches therein, and to divide it. And that we may all more thankfully acknowledge the signal mercy of God to us, That we have the privilege of having been educated, in so excellent a part of the Christian Church, as our Church is. And God grant that this Discourse, may have some influence towards these ends.  
15. But it would be diligently considered, 
No peace and order, where every person or party will undertake to new-model the Church  That no Church can enjoy Peace, but that whose members keep their own station, and the governing and ordering part, is left to the Governors and Superiors, to be determined by them, others yielding due submission in things lawful. But if every man, or every several club, or distinction and party of men, may claim to themselves a power, of new-modelling the state of the Church; this not only tends to confusions, but speaks them to intrude themselves into the office of the Supreme Governor; 
Ch. VI  and that they may overlook and overturn, all the foundation and fabric of a well ordered Church.   

CHAP. VI Of Preaching, and whether it be as reasonable, to preach in a Form of Words composed by others, as to pray in a prescribed Form?  
HIS fifth Argument is, 
(a) Reas. Acc. p. 98, 100  that if Ministers may obey Men, in performing their Ministerial Acts of solemn Prayer, by the prescribed Forms of others; upon the same principle may all Ministerial Gifts in preaching be suppressed, and Ministers may be appointed to read some Discourses of others to the People. Now what I premised to the foregoing Argument, may be again useful to be considered here. But since I have manifested, the ordinary and constant usefulness, of set Forms of Prayer in Public Worship, for the advantage of Religion; if he be able to prove the same, concerning the ordinary using the Discourses of others in Preaching, (as I conceive he never can) he hath then, and not till then, made the Cases parallel.  
2. The different practice of the Christian Church, 
Forms of Prayer, being most expedient, do not prove it best to have constant Forms of Preaching.  which for many Ages before the Romish Corruptions overspread it, constantly used set Forms of Prayer, when their Sermons were composed by the Preachers themselves, and the like usage in our own Church, may incline modest men to think, that these Cases are not alike. The Apostolical Doctrine required of the Clergy, that they should be apt to teach, and so doth our own Book of Ordination, and the 
(b) Can. Ap. 58. Syn. in Trul. c. 19  Ancient Canons required their diligent practice herein: And the use of such Instructions or Exhortations, in the Christian Assemblies, is of as early Original as from the first Ages, as appears from the Testimonies of 
(c) Just. Mar. Ap. 2.  Justin Martyr, and 
(d) Tert. Apol. c. 39  Tertullian; and the continuance thereof is evident from very many Homilies, Tractates and Orations of following Ages, which are yet extant. And our Author may, if he please, consider such differences as these.  
3. First, Preaching is directed to Men, but public Prayer to God in the name of Men. And therefore as both 
(e) Disc. 1. on Mat. 6.9.  Mr. Mede, and 
(f) Of Prayer extem. n. 57  Bishop Taylor, observe, It is convenient the People should know beforehand, what the Minister puts up to God in their names, but there is not the like reason for Preaching. And variety of Words and Expressions, have a considerable efficacy upon the minds of Men: Whereas it is a thing unworthy of God, as 
(g) Instit. l. 3. c. 20. n. 29.  Calvin observes, to think that he is humano more persuadendus, to be wrought upon by words as Men are. For while he searcheth the Heart, his attention is not to be procured by arts of Speech, or himself moved, affected, or pleased by a new composure of words. 
Several things which make the case of Prayer and Preaching herein different.  And besides this, a pious reverence not only in our Hearts, but in well-deliberated words, and in gestures also, is considerable in the sight of God; and this is more due to God to whom we pray, than to Men to whom we preach.  
4. Secondly, As the matter for Sermons, or popular Discourses, is of so large extent, as to include all the great and necessary Doctrines and Rules of Religion, so that are too oft corrupt Notions and Opinions which subvert Piety, and ill practices which may be apt to prevail, at some special times and places. Now here a watchful Minister, will endeavour to beat down all such Notions and Practices, which cannot well be done but by his own Abilities, in answering all their Pleas, Pretences and Objections.  
5. Thirdly, By this means he can acquaint his People with such things as he thinks, in the Matter of them, most proper and suitable to them, and can propose these things in such a manner, as is most agreeing to their Capacities; which thing was noted by 
(h) Tr. 13. Ch. 1. Diu. 7,  Bishop Whitgift, to be of great advantage in order to profiting. And to this purpose also it is reasonable, that the Method and manner of Composure, of popular Discourses, be such as suit the Place, Time and Age, wherein we live.  
6. Fourthly, It is not only requisite that our Public Service of God be at all times so comprehensive, as to take in all the usual parts of Religious Worship: Adoration, Thanksgiving, and Supplication, for all ordinary Blessings; but this also seemeth enjoined by Apostolical Precept, 1 Tim. 2.1, 2. and therefore it is expedient to secure this Comprehensiveness, by a public Form. But it is no way needful, that every Sermon should contain all the necessary points of Doctrine and Practice, but such a particular Branch thereof, as the Speaker thinks most proper. But was he to declare or express all the Articles, or Doctrines of the Christian Faith; certainly a known Creed is more fit for this purpose, than a new Composure. And besides this, as the temper of the Age accounteth it a Disparagement to preach a Sermon composed by another Man; this temper having nothing of hurt in it (as the condemning Forms of Prayer hath) is fit to be complied with, for the benefit of the Hearers. And these things will show, that able Ministers ought ordinarily to preach Sermons of their own preparing. See also Chap. 7. n. 4.  
6. But notwithstanding this, 
Instructions and Exhortations in some cases best performed by a Form.  it is far from being a Sin, for Ministers in their instructing others, to make use of what is Composed by others, in such cases, where this may tend to the greater profit or advantage, of the Persons to be instructed. In acquainting others with the principles of Religion, or Catechising them, it is certainly best, that this be done in the use of a known set Form of Catechism. The short exhortation in administering the holy Communion, (and the like may be said of other Offices) where the Graces to be exercised, and the Duties to be performed, are constantly the same, may be better performed in a well composed pithy Form, than by a continued varying.  
7. And for Sermons, as it may be very allowable, to cite one or more sentences from an approved Author, when this may be of good use: So I know no reason, why in some cases the using a larger portion of another's Discourse, openly and freely owning the Author, may not be done without any blame, where the authority of the Person, or the Discourse itself, might have a greater efficacy, on the promoting Goodness and Religion, than what the Speaker might express in his own words. It was 
(i) Aug de Doc. Chr. l. 4. c. 29.  St. Austin's judgement, that such of the Clergy who could not compose Discourses, so well as they could speak them, might do good service to the Church, by publicly pronouncing what was made by others. And I doubt not, it had been much better for many Teachers, and for the Church of God too, if they had sown good Seed, received from other faithful Hands, rather than to have dispersed their own Tares, Errors, and unsound Doctrines. In the Primitive Times, it was ordinary, to read publicly on the Lord's Days, in the Christian Assemblies, the Epistles of some eminent Men, and some Historical Relations which concerned the Church: And there would be the same reason for a Sermon or Homily, where that might have a remarkable influence on the Churches good. And it is most probable, that the Apostle 
(k) Whitak. Controu. r. 1. Qu. 3. c. 4. Daven. in Loc.  requires an Epistle written from the Church of Laodicea, to be read in the Church at Coloss, Col. 4.16.  
8. But though I have a due value and esteem for Preaching, yet I can by no means come up to our Author's height, who not only calls Preaching the 
(l) Reas. Acc. p. 99  greatest Ordinance of the Gospel; but he also declares 
(m) P. 108.  from the Commissioners in the Savoy, that Preaching is such a Speaking in God's Name to the People, and a speaking his Word, Truth, or Message, that we make God a Liar, if we speak a falsehood in his Name. Surely he who thinks, 
Of the due esteem and value for Preaching.  that every expression he useth in Preaching, must be a Divine Oracle, and that if he be guilty of any Mistake, he becomes thereby so horrid a Blasphemer, as to make God a Liar; had need confine himself to the manifest Articles of the Christian Faith, and the clear and plain rules of Practice, or to some certain form of sound words; and for other things had need shut and seal up his lips, until he have surely attained (what he must never expect) the gift of Infallibility: and our Author, if he preach at that lose rate which he writeth, hath reason then to tremble and stand amazed.  
9 In preaching, the Minister by considering the general rules of Goodness and Truth, and the particular Doctrines of the Scripture, and divine Revelation, is conscientiously towards God and man, to declare what he discerneth to be useful and wholesome Truth. And in the main and necessary things of the Christian Faith and Life, there is such certain evidence thereof, that I do willingly call it infallible: and other Expositions, Directions and Notions, he is to express with pious care and sincerity, but not with any pretence to Infallibility. I do acknowledge, that it is matter of Lamentation, that very many persons are much wanting in that due Reverence, they ought to have for their spiritual Guides, whom God hath set over them; and their Counsels, Instructions, Exhortations and Discourses are not received with such an humble temper of mind, as is suitable to be expressed, to God's officers and Ministers, unto whom he hath committed a very great Authority. And there is also another great miscarriage on the other hand, in them who lay too high a stress upon preaching and hearing, and too little upon practising; or upon the fearing God, and keeping his Commandments; upon honouring the peculiar Institutions of our Saviour, in reverencing the Ministry he sent, highly esteeming the Unity and Communion of the Church which he founded, celebrating the Sacraments which he instituted; and in being peaceable, humble, meek and charitable towards men, and obedient to Superiors.  
10. I shall take no further notice of any thing in this Chapter, save of one clause wherein he reflects on the Ministry of our Church, and their preaching, saith he 
(n) p. 107  How many Discourses of late years, have we had in Pulpits, pretending to prove, men have a natural power to things spiritually good; That we are not justified by the imputed righteousness of Christ, but by our own works? How many perfect Satyrs, Railleries', and evomitions of the lusts and choler in the Preachers hearts? These are the kind words and meek expressions, of one who judgeth and censures the sharpness of other men; and in almost every Chapter, he breaks out into the same temper and spirit of Reproaching. Now whosoever they be, 
Our Author no fit person to complain of contumelious expressions in Sermons.  who are over fierce and Satirical in their words, I shall neither justify nor excuse them. But thus much I shall add, that within these Twenty years last passed, I have heard very many Sermons, preached by Reverend and worthy persons of the Church of England, besides what I have preached myself; and in all these Discourses, I do not remember, that I ever heard so many Contumelious expressions, towards our Dissenters, as may be found against the Ministry of our Church, in this one little Book of our complaining Author.  
11. And concerning Discourses, to prove that men have a natural power to do things spiritually good, 
Of the power of men to do things spiritually good.  it is easy to see through his mistake. All the Ministers of our Church, with thankfulness believe and profess, Jesus Christ to be the Saviour of the World; and that the new Covenant of grace is confirmed through him, and that we are now under this day of grace and Salvation; wherein God gives his aids and assistances, besides the instructions of his word, the mighty motives of his Gospel, and the benefits of the Ministry of reconciliation, and his holy Sacraments. And surely all this, is more than the power of Nature. Now to say, That men under these helps, if they be not wanting to themselves, may work out their own Salvation, believe and submit themselves to the Doctrines of the Gospel, and live Godly, Righteously and Soberly: this is not to exalt the power of Nature, as our Author mistakes it, but it is to own the advantages of the Gospel-Grace, and of the mediation and undertaking of our Saviour. But if under these gracious circumstances, men are in no capacity of doing any spiritual good, or of being persuaded to it; I cannot understand to what end Preaching can tend, when it must be in vain to exhort them to their Duty, and unreasonable to reprove their neglect of it; Nor can they act without natural powers and faculties.  
12. And concerning Justification there is as little reason for his complaint, as in the former head. We disclaim every where merit in our own works and actions, and do here acknowledge, That our Saviour hath, as our mediator, interposed by his Obedience, Righteousness and Sacrifice, to expiate our Sins, give the sanction to the new Covenant of Grace and Righteousness and to assure the mercy of God, and pardon and forgiveness upon the terms thereof. 
Of the terms arnd condition of our justification, an its dependence upon the Righteousness and Sacrifice of Christ.  But if we speak of the Gospel-condition of Justification, that must be performed by us ourselves, and we do account, that as Repentance, which excludes forsaking evil and doing good, is a necessary condition to the obtaining pardon of sin (which I presume no sober Christian will deny) so consequently, it must be necessary to our being justified; unless we can be justified, and yet unpardoned.  
13. Or to speak plainly, all sin whatsoever stands forbidden by the Holy rules and precepts of the Gospel, as much as by any other Dispensation: but the terms of the Gospel-Covenant, are so gracious and extensive, that they admit Repentance, tender pardon, and accept the sincere obedience of the Christian faith and life; yet all that is necessary, as the condition of the Gospel, in order to our being accepted into God's favour, is necessary to our justification. And that a renewed and Holy life is necessary hereto, is manifest, from that wrath and threatening, denounced against workers of Iniquity, and from the impossibility for them to find favour, in the sight of God, who do not do the Will of our Father which is in Heaven.  
14. Yet the Gospel- justification, upon these terms of Grace in the new Covenant, is still through the redemption of our Saviour, and faith in him: and from the benefit of his Sacrifice, we receive the pardon of our sins, in the Holy Sacraments of the Gospel especially; in the administration of which Sacraments, is a principal part of the benefit of the Ministry of Reconciliation. But it cannot be, that the Righteousness of Christ, should be so imputed to us, that we should be looked on, as having done or suffered, what he did or suffered: for than must every Christian be reputed and looked on, as having performed the office of Mediator, and having paid to God the price of Redemption, for the sins of the World, and as having made Reconciliation, and obtained thereby Remission: and then besides many other gross absurdities, they might be invocated on this account, for the dispensing the same. And they who are reputed to have performed complete actual sinless Obedience, need no such Grace, whereby they must receive pardon and Remission. But the Holy Jesus by his Sacrifice, hath made a way of Reconciliation, and, as our Mediator, hath by his Blood established that new Covenant of Grace, whereby through his Redemption, we may be justified, upon performing the Conditions of his Gospel. And I see no other blame can be charged on this Doctrine, unless it be, that it is consistent with itself, and with what was delivered by the Apostles of our Lord.   

CHAP. VII. Praying by a Form, is very rashly and injuriously charged with mocking of God.  
IN his seventh Chapter, he produceth his sixth Argument, which is, That for 
(a) Reas. Acc. p. 115.  Ministers who have the Gift of Prayer, to perform public Vocal Prayer, by the prescribed Forms of others, is to pretend to do an act of Worship, and at the same time not to do it, and is 
(b) P. 115  to mock God and deceive their own Souls.  
2. Now this is a very heavy Charge, if it be true, and can be proved; but if all this shall appear to be a false Accusation, and to be untrue, 
Ch. VII.  it is then no little Slander and Calumny, upon the Religious Worship of God; 
Praying by a Form no mocking God.  and upon all those Churches of God, and Pious Christians, who make use of Forms in their Prayers. And to make good his Charge, our Author must here recall and deny, what he hath so often granted, That the use of Forms of Prayer are in themselves lawful, and that they may be lawfully used by Ministers in some cases. For if they be a mocking of God, and the duty of Prayer is not really performed, in the use of them, but is only pretended so to be, to the deceiving men's own Souls, than they are certainly unlawful.  
3. Now his chief and yet trifling Argument, to make good this very weighty and heavy Charge, is this, 
(c) P. 116, 117.  That the command to go and Preach, requireth the Minister's exercise of his own Inventing and Composing, and therefore so must the Command to make public Prayers. Now in answer to this, it may be sufficient to say, 
The nature and exercise of Prayer is suitably performed by a Form.  That every Duty is to be performed, suitably to the nature of the Duty itself, or in such a manner, as may best tend to the pleasing of God, and the exercising true Piety therein. But in public Prayer, Religious Devotion, and gracious dispositions and desires towards God, are the great things to be practised; and to that end, the use of a Form of words in public Service, is well accommodated, as I have showed, and therefore may be not only fitly, but profitably used.  
4. And with respect to Preaching, though our Author will find it a difficult task to prove, that in every Instruction, a Minister is bound to have new matter of Invention and Composition; yet his greatest mistake is, in supposing the cases of Instruction, Exhortation, or Preaching, and of Praying, to be parallel. For where in instructing others in the knowledge of Religion, 
Of the comparing Preaching and Praying.  it is the Ministers duty to teach them what they before understood not, and to that end to use new Words, that they may learn Knowledge; it can never be imagined, that he ought also to acquaint God in Prayer, with what he before understood not. And when in Exhortations to Men, to make them better, and to change their Tempers, it may be of good use, to suggest to them, and urge upon them, such Arguments and Considerations, as before they either never thought of, or at least did not duly consider the weight and force of them; there is not the like reason of using frequently new words and expressions to God, as if men were to put him in mind, of the force of such things, as he had not considered. Surely nothing can be more weak, than to insist on such unlike Comparisons, instead of Arguments.  
5. But besides this, he tells us, that those words in Scripture, which are used in commanding public Prayer, are not used concerning the reciting or reading the words of others. Thus he saith when Prayer is commanded, Hos. 14.2. and Joel 2.17. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, say, and he saith, 
(d) P. 118.  He is not awar of any Text in the Old Testament, where that word signifies the Recitation, or repetition of Words form by others. 
Of the words of Scripture which enjoin Prayer.  Now if this was true, it would be very little, or not at all to purpose, unless he could prove, that the using of the words of a Form, is not Speaking, or Saying. But yet in truth, notwithstanding his pretence to Critical Observations, in which he is also very unhappy, this very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Speak, or Say, is very frequently in the Old Testament, used for reciting the words prescribed by others; as in Gen. 32.4. Deut. 26.5. Deut. 27.14. and in many other places.  
6. And he tells us, 
(e) P. 119.  That in the New Testament, the Precepts for Prayer are expressed, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Pray, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to Say, to wit, in Praying. But what meaneth he? Are these words never made use of for the reciting a Form of Prayer, when they are the very words, by which the Lord's Prayer is prescribed? The former 
(f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Mat. 6.9. and both of them 
(g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Luke 11.2. And the former of them, together with the Noun derived from the latter, is used 
(h) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Mat. 26.44. to express our Saviour his Praying the third time, saying the same words. I might also mind our Author, that giving thanks to God, is in Scripture expressed to be done, in reciting the words of others, 1 Chron. 16.7. But though I was not willing to pass by any thing which he urged, though but under the appearance of an Argument, I must entreat the Readers pardon, in giving him the trouble of perusing a thing so very inconsiderable, as this Argument is.  
7. Indeed he tells us, 
(i) p. 120.  he lays a greater stress upon his former Arguments, than upon this: but what little reason he hath, to lay any such stress upon them, may, I hope, by this time appear. But he saith, he cannot think this altogether vain and impertinent; but of that, let others judge. But withal, this Argument had need to be of great force, when upon the account of this, he tells us again, in the 
(k) Ibid.  close of this Chapter, he makes it a great question, whether if we think to fulfil the command of God, for vocal Ministerial prayer, by reading Forms, we should not come short of what God requires, and both mock God, and deceive our own Souls. Thus some men with extravagancy enough, can speak great and swelling words, supported, or rather unsupported, by weak, feeble and impotent Arguments. And his last words of this Chapter are, That there is neither Precept nor Precedent, for praying by Forms; which assertion, he hath peremptorily avowed again and again, though it be plainly against both the Scriptures, and the sense of the Universal Church, and the contrary thereunto I have above 
(l) Chap. 3. Sect. 2, & 3.  plainly proved.   

CHAP. VIII. 
C. VIII.  Forms of Prayer are falsely accused, of debasing the Ministry, and of several unblessed Effects.  
HIs seventh Argument is, 
(a) Reas. Acc. p. 120, 121.  That Ministers performing their Ministerial acts in Prayer, by prescribed Forms, tends to levelly the sacred Office of the Ministry, to the capacity of the meanest of the People: but saith he, 
(b) p. 121.  God would never have erected an Office, to do what the meanest person in the Church, hath a natural ability to do. And he there adds, there is nothing plainer in the whole Book of God, than that God hath established a peculiar order of persons to be his Ministers, to declare his will unto his People, and on their behalf to intercede with God in Prayer. And he saith, if this 
(c) p. 122.  might be performed by Forms, there would be no great reason for any peculiar maintenance for the Ministry, nor for Honour and Reverence to them. Now in answer to this, I shall observe four things:  
2. Obs. 1. That he gives a very defective description, of the work and business of the Ministry; as if it only consisted in being Orators, and in the well using words and expressions. 
Of the work and Office of the Ministry.  And this is no more than a master of a Family may do, to instruct and pray for those of his Family: but it must be the exercise of a special power of Office, which must be the chief Ministerial performances, of those who are in the Sacred function of the Ministry. Wherefore by special Authority and Commission, to receive persons into the Church, in the name of Christ; and to govern them in it, to exercise the power of the Keys, to consecrate the holy Sacraments, and therein to exhibit in Christ's name, the tender and seal of remission of Sins, and by his Authority Ministerially to dispense Absolution and Remission, to them who are qualified to receive it, by performing the conditions of the Gospel; these and other such acts of Authority, are the great and chief parts of the Ministerial office, which he wholly omits. And even instructions and prayers, performed by those who are in this Sacred function, are of greater moment, because of their Office. But what God worketh by their Ministry, is especially to be regarded; and if this was nothing, as 
(*) Chrys. in 2 Tim. c. 1. Hom. 2.  St. chrysostom argues, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Thou thyself neither haste any Baptism, nor dost thou receive the Sacraments, nor dost thou enjoy Benedictions, nor indeed art thou a Christian.  
3. Obs. 2. The use of Forms of Prayer is far from rendering learning, knowledge, and such like abilities useless, or needless for the Ministry: nor can any man that knows the work and duty of a Minister, judge so. Besides his preaching, so as to approve himself a workman that need not be ashamed; he is by his Office, to be a spiritual Guide to the consciences of others, 
Learning and knowledge greatly requisite to the Ministry.  when they apply themselves to him for Counsel and Advice, not only for their comfort, but chief for their practice. He is to direct and oblige Offenders, who are under his care, to observe the due rules and exercises of Repentance; and this with respect to conscience, men ought to take more notice of, than most persons do. And in a time, when the Church and Truth hath many enemies (and this Author might have been better employed, than to have appeared as one) the Ministers of the Church are to be able to convince, or at least to confound their Adversaries, and detect their errors, and the danger of them. They are also to watch over their charge, and as much as may be, to preserve them from being led aside, by the slight and cunning craftiness of them, who would deceive them. And these are things, which require far greater abilities, study, care and diligence, than is needful to enable any man, to use fluent expressions in Prayer.  
4. 
The weanest persons A●●ristred in the Church, when forms of Prayer were dis●●ed most.  Obs. 3. The time when Liturgies were laid aside in England, was that time when many of the meanest of the People, both men of weak abilities, who yet could speak confidently, and also men of bad and erroneous Principles, were thought fit to be taken into the Ministry, in the place of many sound and able men, who were cast out. And the performing Prayer, and popular Sermons, after that method our Author contends for, in expression of their own, may be effected, to the satisfaction of great numbers of ordinary hearers (whatever may be pretended to the contrary) by a man who hath a forward tongue, and but indifferent parts, without any considerable learning or study, and without much knowledge of the Doctrines of Religion and Christianity. There are so many evidences of this, among the several parties of our divided Separations, that the chief persons among our Dissenters, do very well know the Truth thereof.  
5. Obs. 4. Our Author's assertion, That God would never erect an Office or Order of Persons, to do what the meanest of the People, have a natural capacity to do, is also certainly false. 
The Priest's Office under the Law.  For under the Law, the office of the Priests, was particularly appointed to minister before the Lord, by offering Incense and Sacrifices, though Corah and his Company, and any other of the Israelites, had Natural Capacities of knowing how to order the Incense and Sacrifices, as well as the Priests. And the High Priest was to offer the Sacrifices for Atonement, and to enter into the Holy of Holies, with the Blood thereof; and performing other Rites of Expiation, to bless the People; and upon occasion to ask counsel of God by Vrim and Thummim. The Levites also, were to wait on the service of the Tabernacle. And these and such like Rites, were accompanied with Prayers and Praises; but I have 
(d) Changed 3. Sect. 3.  above shown, that prescribed Forms were used in that Service. But none of these Persons were by their relation to the Tabernacle, or Temple, or by virtue of the Offices of Divine Appointment, Scribes or Rabbins, or Doctors of the Law, and Sons of the Prophets, to teach the People in their Synagogues. Indeed after the time of David, when the Ark had rest in the Tabernacle he pitched, many of the Levites were made Officers and Judges of the People, and were therefore to direct them in the Law of God, and the knowledge of his Will, and some of their Scribes might also be of this Tribe, as well as of any other. But this was not their Original Office, further than as good Men, and the special Servants of god to attend upon his Worship, they would by their Example, and no doubt by their Counsel also, excite others to perform carefully the Service of God, and to keep his Law.  
6. And with respect to what our Author speaks, 
God's Law made a large provision for the Maintenance of the Levites  concerning the Maintenance of the Ministry, it is worthy to be observed, that God himself than thought fit, for the Honour of his Worship and Ministry, to allot and appoint a greater Income, for the support and plentiful subsistence of the Priests and Levites, than our Clergy now enjoy, and the Revenue of their Priests, was greater than that of our Bishops. For the manifesting of which, it may be considered, that after the Israelites came out of Egypt, the other Tribes besides the Levites, had males from twenty years old and upward, six hundred thousand, three thousand, five hundred and fifty, Numb. 1.45, 46, 47. But the Levites being numbered from a month old and upwards, were only twenty and two thousand, Numb. 3.39. And in reasonable conjecture, those of them who were under twenty years old, might be near as many, as those who were above it. But if there were thirteen thousand Levites, who were twenty years old and upwards, we will proceed upon that Supposition as probable. Now God gave the Tribe of Levi all the Tenth, or tithe of the Land of Israel, Numb. 18.21, 24. and the other nine parts being reserved to the other Israelites, these thirteen thousand Levites, who were grown Men, had a larger provision, from these Tithes alone, than sixty seven thousand grown Men of the other Israelites had, though every one of these Israelites, was to have their inheritance of Freehold, and none was to be poor among them. So that every man of the Levites, had from this Revenue alone, a more ample Provision and Subsistance, than five Men of the other Tribes, who were heads of Families, taking them one with another. But then if to this be added, their own Flocks, and the Suburbs of their Cities, Numb. 35.2, 3. and their share, in the extraordinary Tithe of the third Year, Deut. 14.28, 29. and in some other Oblations, Deut. 12.12. Chap. 16.11. These things with other Accessions and Privileges, which they had, make their proportion much more considerable.  
7. 
The great Revenue appointed by God for the Priests.  And whereas at that time, there were only five Persons consecrated Priests; Aaron the High Priest, and his Sons, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar, Exod. 28.1. Nadab and Abihu being dead without any Issue, Leu. 10.2. Num. 3.2, 3, 4. there remained then only three Persons, who ministered as Priests, in the Service of God. I confess their number after increased, and so did the number of the other Tribes. But these Priests had the tenth of the Tithe allotted to them, Numb. 18.26, 28. and upon this account alone, there was appointed by the Divine Law, for these three Priests, a much greater Revenue, than for six thousand Men fit for War, of the other Tribes. But besides this, the Priests had the First-fruits of the Land, which God gave to them, Numb. 18.12. which, as 
(e) Philo. de Sacerdot. Proem. & Honor. p. 830, 831.  Philo, agreeably to the Scripture observes, included even the First-fruits of their Bread, and the best of their Corn, Wine, Oil, and other increase. And it hath been observed from other Jewish Writers, that some gave the Fortieth part of their increase, others the Fiftieth, and others the Sixtieth part for their First-fruits. The Redemption also of the Firstborn of Men, and of them who were under a Vow, the Firstlings of the clean Beasts, and the redemption of other Firstlings; their proportion in the several Sacrifices, in some the wave Breast, and heave Shoulder, and the Skins of several Burnt-offerings, as 
(f) Ibid. p. 833.  Philo noted, and the Scripture itself declares, Leu. 7.8. These things, besides their interest in  Offerings, and voluntary Oblations, do very much add to the greatness of their Revenue, which was assigned them by the Law.  
8. And we may further note from Josephus, who was himself one of the Priests, that notwithstanding this ample Provision, God then made for these his Priests, yet they were not at the expense of the daily Sacrifice, or the Lamb that was offered every Morning and Evening; but that was defrayed 
(g) Jos. Antiq. Jud. l. 3. c. 10.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by a public or common Charge: Only the daily Meat-offering was prepared by the Priests, upon their own expense, and the Bullock offered for the High Priest, upon the day of Atonement, was at the charge of the High Priest himself, as 
(h) Ibid.  the same Author attesteth.  
9 Thus whatsoever our Author may think to the contrary, the Wisdom of the most High God did annex a great, and honourable Revenue, (such saith 
(i) Ubi sup.  Philo, as might resemble the glory and majesty of Princes) for them who were his Officers, though their Work was none other, than what other Persons had a natural capacity to do. But other Persons had not a Divine Authority to act as God's Officers, and to intermeddle in his sacred Institutions. And it is a much more high and honourable thing, in the sight of all who have any lively sense of God upon their hearts, to be his Officers, invested with a special and excellent authority from him, than to be so far popular Orators, as to be able to speak to the satisfaction of the People, or even to their admiration.  
10. Having now ended his Syllogistical Arguments, he tells us, 
(k) P. 123.  He shall only instance in one thing more, and that is those unblessed effects, which, saith he, are matters of Demonstration to us: These 
(l) P. 131.  he calls, Effects obvious to every Eye; and entering upon them saith, 
(m) P. 124.  Let us instance in some too evident effects of Forms of Prayer, etc. And the first of these is, The filling the Church of God, with an ignorant, lazy, and sottish Ministry. He indeed here excepts very many Persons, but yet these are his reproachful words, reflecting upon the generality of our Ministry, or in his own expression, those that fill the Church. Now such an open notorious and shameless Calumny, ought not to pass without just rebuke. The great accuser of the Brethren, to his grief and indignation knows, that there is now in England as Learned, Able, 
The English Clergy falsely aspersed as Ignorant, Lazy, and Sottish.  and Industrious a Clergy, as this Church ever had, or any other of so numerous a Ministry: Nor can the main Body of our Clergy, be called Ignorant and Sottish, but by such Persons as make no conscience of Slandering, and speaking falsely. And truly, Sir, to say no more, the reason and understanding part of this your Discourse, which you entitle, A Reasonable Account, etc. is very far from being above the pitch, of the generality of that part of our Ministry, which I have had the opportunity to know. And if you were indeed the main Men, acquainted with Knowledge and Learning, and had the advantage of Truth also on your side, as you pretend, how easily might you baffle and confute us, by clear and plain Evidence, which yourselves are sensible enough you cannot do. And therefore your most usual Methods are, to work upon the fearful and melancholy temper of some, and upon the fierce and angry disposition of others, and upon the earnest and weak affections, and the prejudices of many well-disposed People: But you can hope to prevail little, on men of even, calm, and composed Tempers, and Persons of the best judgement and understanding.  
11. A second effect he instanceth in, is, 
(n) P. 125.  The loss of Ministerial Gifts and Abilities. But blessed be God, there is no loss in our Church, of any Abilities, requisite for the due discharge of the Ministry. But he here again falls upon the gift of Prayer; of which, as also of the lawfulness, and profitableness of using of Forms of Prayer, I have sufficiently discoursed, in the former part of this Book.  
12. His third and last, 
(o) P. 130.  If not effect, yet experimented consequence of prescribed Forms, is a flood of Iniquity, for more than an hundred Years, caused thereby, in our parts of the World. Hence saith he, Bitter words in Pulpits, and printed Books, which have vexed righteous Souls, who have had nothing to reply, but, The Lord rebuke you. (They it seems wholly imitating the pattern of the Archangel, contending with the Devil, Judas 9 
Ill effects charged upon Liturgies, proceed from another cause.  Or of the Lord checking of Satan, Zech 3.2.) Hence saith he, Are ungodly representations to Superiors, of Men of whom the World was not worthy; hence suspensions of so many thousands, and Ruins of so many eminent Servants of God and their Families, and hence the separations of Christians from one another. Thus our Author chargeth a great deal of evil, upon our Laws and Governors, which according to his rash Position they must stand guilty of, unless all enjoined Liturgies, and Uniformity be utterly rooted out of the Church, and unless they will lay aside that care they ought to have, of the due order and decency of the public Worship of God; and unless an Inlt may be opened, to such Confusions, Heresies, yea, and Blasphemies, as in these Kingdoms were brought into the Church, when Liturgies were shut out, and the public Worship was performed even by men of Erroneous principles, according to the vanity of their own minds. But that our Author hath mistaken the true cause, of that evil he complains of, I have showed 
(p) Ch. 3. Sect. 4.  above, to which I refer. But that the violent and ungrounded oppositions, against lawful constitutions, are too great an inlet into much iniquity, will I think appear manifest enough, from what I wrote in my 
(q) B. 1. Ch. 1. throughout  Libertas Ecclesiastica. And I do both hearty pity, and am really grieved and sorry, for the temper of such persons, who by their mistakes, and too much of eagerness and passion in them, not only expose themselves to outward inconveniencies, but which is of far greater concernment, both run themselves into many sinful undertake, and are the occasion of much hurt and evil to the Church of God; and make use of the latter, as a remedy against the former.  
13. If any persons among us, have spoken or written, with overmuch passion or sharpness, we will defend no man, wheresoever he deserves blame: but our Governors, and the Constitution of our Church, are not concerned herein. But have our Dissenters replied nothing but calmness and meekness, as this Author suggests? One might be apt to think, upon considering such words, that he is a stranger in England, and unacquainted with affairs here, and may have lately come from some unknown Island, separated from converse with other parts of the world. I hearty wish their party had been as free from all fierceness, as this Author pretends, 
Many sad and evil effects from the opposers of our Liturgy  and then both Church and State, would have enjoyed more quiet, and many things had never been heard of which have been a scandal to Christianity. But if their writings be reviewed from Martin Mar-prelate to this present year, many of them will manifest that keen and bitter words, and reproaches and revile, are no strangers to their Tents. It seems not wholly to have savoured of the spirit of Christian meekness, patience and gentleness, when they made such violent invectives against our Governors, and Establishment, as kindled our late dreadful civil Wars, when they ejected, sequestered, imprisoned, and put to Death, great numbers of the Clergy, Gentry and Nobility, for their loyalty to the King, and their honourable respect to the Church, when they strained their hands, and more deeply their Consciences in eager and forward shedding the blood of many thousands of Christians, and dared to stretch out their hands against the Lords Anointed, and to take away the life of one of the best Princes, that ever the Christian world enjoyed. All this seems not to speak only the meekness of the Lamb, and the innocence of the Dove.  
14. Besides the writings of particular persons, could it be any other than a strange fierceness in 
(r) Answ. to Remon. p. 83.84.  Smectymnuus, in charging the Clergy of our Church, with bringing in a new Creed, other Scriptures, another Baptism and Eucharist, and another Christ too; and another Heaven, from what Christianity proposeth; which they call an Heaven receptive of Drunkards, Swearers, Adulterers, etc. Can it be otherwise, than that passion and uncharitableness made them write, what they could not but know to be far from Truth? They who have much conversed with very many men of this way, cannot be unacquainted with their temper of rash censuring, and uncharitable speaking, and may see reason to conclude, that these are not the great examples of Christian meekness. These things I should not have mentioned, but that as a charge against the establishment of our Liturgy, and the care of our Governors therein, our Author pretends many unblessed effects to proceed from it, 
Ch. IX.  whilst there is nothing but goodness and mildness in them who oppose it; though he afterward acknowledgeth passions in them.   

CHAP. IX. The Arguments for set Forms of Prayer, are solid and substantial.  
IN his ninth Chapter, he mentioneth divers Arguments, produced for Forms of Prayer, to which he returns his answers. Now since I have above, not only answered his Arguments, but in several parts of my Discourse, have proved the profitable use of Forms of Prayer, and have in my third 
(a) Sect. 2.  Chapter, vindicated several Arguments, which I urged in my Libertas Ecclesiastica, it is not necessary for me to undertake the defence of others, which are insisted on by other men. But the five last Arguments expressed in this Chapter, which were urged by myself, I shall particularly consider, reflecting also upon some other Arguments and expressions.  
2. And indeed my foregoing Discourse, hath given a sufficient reply to many of his answers, 
Ch. VIII.  to the Arguments he recites in this Chapter. For instance, To the first Argument for the lawfulness of Ministers using Forms, 
(b) p. 134. Forms of Prayer are not forbidden.  that what God hath not forbidden is lawful, he answers, that Forms in the case by him stated, are forbidden by the second commandment; which I spoke to, Chap. 4. that they are forbidden by the precepts to stir up gifts; which I considered, Chap. 2. and are forbidden by those commands, which require us to worship God with all our hearts, and with the greatest attention and fervency; and of this I discoursed Chap. 3.  
3. To the second Argument, from the Lords Prayer being a Form, and from the use of the Psalms of David, and the Priestly blessing under the Law, 
(c) p. 135.136.  he only repeats what he had before spoken, and the mistakes of which I have manifested, Chap. 3. Sect. 2.  
4. The third Argument (which hath respect to 1 Cor. 14, 40.) is, that Forms of Prayer 
(d) p. 136. Of matters of order, decency & circumstance.  are matters of mere decency, order and circumstance, and therefore may be lawfully commanded and practised. Now though I account them to be more than so, and not to be only things of external order, but to be more internally of profitable use, and conducive to the edification and good of the Church and its members; yet I shall observe what weak answers he gives to this Argument. As to order he saith 
(e) ibid.  order only respects prius and posterius first and last. This was I conceive rashly written; for surely he could not be ignorant, that the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, had respect to order of regular constitution and appointment, and not to order of number and mere succession of one thing after another. Concerning Decency, he saith 
(f) ibid.  nothing can be decent, but the contrary must be indecent. Now though a Form, and no Form, are not properly contrary, but rather contradiction; and though many indecencies have been committed, where Forms of Prayer have been rejected; and the condemning Forms is worse than indecency, being an hurtful error; yet his assertion is also false; a white Garment may be decent, and so may a black one, and yet white and black are contrary. Concerning Circumstances, he saith 
(g) p. 137.  Forms are no Circumstances relating to the action as humane, because it may be performed without them. By this reason standing, or any other particular gesture in reading, is no circumstance, which yet hath been usually thought so: 
Ch. IX.  and some gesture is at all times, and in all actions necessary. And as for the words of public Prayer, there can be no such Prayer without any words, nor unless these words be fixed on, and determined by some person: but the sense and matter, taken care of in Forms of Prayer, is of an higher nature than a Circumstance. And he adds 
(h) ibid.  that he conceives no Circumstances appropriated to an action as Religious, are left to men's liberty to determine. According to which rule, it must be sinful for a Father to command his Child, or for any man to determine himself, to kneel in Prayer, out of any reverence to God, because, this is a circumstance to the action as Religious. If all this be not trifling, I know not what is.  
5. The fourth Argument is, that 
(i) ibid.  all the essentials to Prayer may be found (I would add, may in public Prayer be best secured) in a prescribed Form. This Prayer may be in the matter agreeable to the will of God, it may be put up in the name of Christ, and it may be attended with exercise of Graces, and sanctified Affections. But he here answers 
(k) p. 138. All things necessary and essential to Prayer, may be in the use of a Form.  that the use of his own gifts is also necessary: but this pretence I have refuted, Chap. 2. and I presume, no pious man can easily think, that the will and pleasure of God, should require a man's own abilities to be exercised, merely to show his parts, when the whole business of Religion, may be every way as well, or better performed without them; as may appear in every Minister undertaking to make new translations of Scripture, whensoever he citys them, that his gift may be exercised. But he saith also, that 
(l) ibid.  he hath given his reasons, why Praying by Forms cannot be with the same attention, and intention and fervency: But these reasons I have answered in my third Chapter, and have manifested the contrary.  
6. In his sixth Argument, he produceth 1 Tim. 2.1, 2. where the Apostle commands, that Prayers, etc. be made for all men, and here 
(m) p. 140.  he takes notice of what I said, in my Libert as Ecclesiastica, p. 109. that many have thought the Apostle had a special eye to the composure of Forms of Prayer, agreeably to what the Baptist, and our Saviour prescribed to their Disciples, in this his command to Timothy, the Governor of the Church. And he observes that I added, though the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may either signify, that Prayers be put up to God, or that they be composed, in this place it may well intent both. And I now add, That the evidence I have given of the use of Forms, in the earliest Ages of Christianity, and also in the Jewish Church, makes it the more probable, that the Apostle might have some eye unto them.  
7. But he tells me, but upon what reason I know not, 
(n) P. 141.  that I am a little critical with the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and saith he, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a Poet comes from it; but he is but a miserable Poet, who should only read or recite, Copies of Verses composed by others. Now though I speak of composing Prayers which might be recited, or publicly used; yet to gratify our Author, I shall acquaint him, that though the Imperial Law of Justinian, established the use of Forms of Prayer, as I 
(o) Ch. 3. Sect. 3.  above shown, yet the praying by these Forms is 
(p) Justin. Novel. 137. c. 6.  there expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But besides this, he is but a little Critical, in imagining so unreasonable a thing, as that the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, must be every where accommodated to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Poet. 
Our Author's fancy about Poetry.  And he is so unhappy in this his Fancy, as well as in his Arguments, that as weak as it is, it is not so much as fitted to serve his own Design. I am persuaded that upon further thoughts, he will not open his mouth, 
Ch. VIII.  for practising according to his own little Criticism, or for making Prayers, after the manner that Poets make Verses; who are for exercising their own Fancies, and gratifying the Humours of other men, more than for keeping close to truth, or minding what is serious. And I wish, that no such miscarriages may prevail with any, according to our Author's way and method, which he contends for. And with respect to the Speaker, if this Criticism was of any weight; as they are not the best Poets, who trust themselves to their present sudden abilities of expression; but rather they, who with great care, consider both matter and words, and write them down, and have left their Writings for lasting Monuments; those also must be the best Prayers, which are composed in like manner. But for the People, they are utterly cut out, from having any part in making public confessions, or supplications to Almighty God, according to this conceit, though the Scriptures, and the Language of the Church, admit them to have a share therein.  
8. His seventh Argument, being only intended as a general proof for the lawfulness of Forms enjoined, is this, 
(q) Reas. Acc. p. 146.  that a man may lawfully determine himself to the use of Forms, and therefore may be lawfully determined to them by his Superiors. Here he first tells us, this doth not reach his Question, concerning Ministers who have the gift of Prayer. But he saith further, A Christian hath a liberty to determine himself, where he may not lawfully be determined by his Superior; as in case of Marriage to a particular Woman, in the choice of his Trade and course of Life, and a Minister may determine himself, to write his Sermon constantly at length. Now these words, as many others in this Discourse, being written with reflection upon the authority of Superiors, I shall consider the weight of them, with respect to the Case in hand.  
9 Wherefore it may be observed, that there are two Cases, concerning the matter of a Law, which may render it unlawful, 
Of the lawfulness of being determined by our Superiors, where we may determine ourselves.  to be enacted by Superiors: The one when it takes away the just civil Rights, and freedoms of the Subject, and imposeth unreasonable needless burdens; the other when it is against the rules of Conscience. In the former case it is true, that a man's own civil rights, are so far at his own disposal, and in his own power, that he may here determine himself, to what his Superior may not determine him. Thus a free Subject of a considerable estate, may if he please settle his Estate upon another Person, or remove his Habitation into another Country, or resolve upon a single Life, or put himself into the condition of a Servant. Another Person of like competent Estate, may determine himself to a retired Life, a sparing Diet, and a mean Garb; and if he be free from dependent Relations, may resolve to give the surplusage of his Estate to pious, public, and charitable Uses. But it is not fit nor lawful for his Superior, so to deprive him of his civil Rights, as to put upon him so much burden and trouble. But in things which are lawful or unlawful, according to the rules of Conscience, where he may lawfully as to Conscience determine himself to any thing, he may lawfully be determined by his Superior; and if from the unlawfulness in Conscience, he may not be determined, to any particular thing by his Superior, neither may he determine himself to it. And the reason of this is, because if this thing be a Sin, a man may not lawfully determine himself to it, but if it be no Sin, no principle of Conscience will oblige him, not to be determined by his Superior. Now the appointing prescribed Forms of Prayer (taking this in general as our 
(q) P. 163, 164. In the present Question, we suppose Forms as good ●nd perfect, as the W●t and Piety of men can make.  Author discourseth of it) can be no invading the civil rights of Subjects, or imposing things burdensome to their outward condition considered apart from Conscience; and therefore if there be any dispute about the lawfulness hereof, it must proceed from the rules of Conscience. And therefore if a man may lawfully determine himself in this case, or any other of like nature, he may also be lawfully determined by his Superior.  
10. He also tells us, 
(r) P. 147. It is no Popery for People to think their Spiritual Guides, and Governors wiser than themselves.  That the Author of this Argument, would persuade us to be Papists, in that he would have men think, that the judgement of Superiors is better than our own. But he might consider, that since God hath appointed Spiritual Guides, it is both the most prudent course, and the duty of private Persons, in cases of practice which themselves do not throughly understand, to consult them, receive their counsel, and be directed by them. And his establishing other Governors, manifesteth that they are appointed to consider, what within the sphere of their Power, is useful for the public good, and others are to be directed by them, and to rest satisfied in their determination. Nor is this any thing of Popery, but due Christian sobriety. Only this limitation must be admitted, that as I have 
(s) Ch. 4. n. 11.12.  above shown, if any thing be proposed by them, which upon plain and certain evidence appears to be unlawful, those who are under them, ought then to reject their Direction and Authority, as being contradicted by a greater and higher.  
11. The tenth Argument mentioned by him is, That 
(t) Reas. Acc. p. 149.  Forms are necessary for Uniformity. And here he again declares, against that pitiful thing, called Uniformity in words, and syllables and phrases, as he upbraidingly styles it. But having answered this in a 
(u) Ch. 3. Sect. 4.  former Chapter, and therewith justified Uniformity, and shown the great benefit of it, and of Forms of Prayer upon this account, I shall not need to repeat it again here.  
12. But that he may vent himself the more, against Liturgy and Uniformity, he tells us, that in the case of Daniel the Princes resolved 
(w) p. 150.  it necessary to establish an Uniformity in Prayers; and all must be commanded to pray only to Darius. Yet here was nothing of Uniformity in words and phrases, of which he was discoursing; but that matters not, 
An act for Uniformity is no such wicked thing, as the prohibitive Act of worship by Darius.  so long as an occasion can be taken to reproach Uniformity. He might as well, if he had pleased, have called that precept of our Saviour, Mat. 4.10. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve; an act of Uniformity, only that would not serve his purpose, to insinuate that Liturgy and Uniformity, are like that act in the time of Darius, designed wholly for mischief, and to hinder the worship of God, and to establish Idolatry against the second commandment, though not so grossly as in worshipping the Persian Kings, who were wont to receive Divine worship, as is evident in the many testimonies produced by 
(x) Drus. in Esther. c. 3  Drusius. But these things are so manifestly uncharitable, that every sober considering man may easily discern them. And since the Holy God appointed certain Forms of Prayer, to be used under the old Testament, and our Blessed Saviour prescribed the Lords Prayer under the new; and since the ancient Jewish Church, and the Christian Church in the purest times, used Forms of Prayer; no considering person, who hath any sense of God or Religion, can think that all these must be condemned of designing nothing but mischievous things, and the ruining the true way of Religion; how far soever some men's angry temper may be unjustly displeased, with Forms and Uniformity.  
13. This Writer in some following pages, discoursing about the ability or gift of Prayer, at length saith, 
(y) p. 154.  as we judge, the Apostle, Heb. 5.1. hath given us the perfect notion of a Minister, in the description of the high Priest, he is but a person taken from men, and ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he might offer Prayers and praises, Preach and administer the holy Sacraments. So he. But I hope he was not knowingly so bold with the Holy Scripture, as to alter and change both the words and sense of it, as he pleaseth: when the Apostle speaks nothing in that place of Prayer, Praise, Preaching or Sacraments, but of offering gifts and sacrifices for Sins. And therefore I shall pass by this, as a gross oversight in him; or possibly something may be left out by the Printer.  
14. I now come to justify five Reasons, mentioned in my 
(z) Ch. 4. p. 97.98, 99 Expediency of set Forms proved.  Libertas Ecclesiastica (besides others which I vindicated, in the third Chapter of this discourse) for the requisiteness of set Forms of Prayer, which I there produced, to show not only the lawfulness, but the usefulness and expediency of Forms.  
15. My first Reason was, because hereby a fit, true, right and well ordered way of worship, in addresses to God, may be best secured to the Church, in the public service of God. To this he saith, 1. That alone is 
(a) p. 156. 1. as best securing a fit and right way of worship.  a right way of worship, which God hath instituted. And I reply, that Prayer performed with a devout heart, where the matter is holy, pious and religious, and expressed without affecting variety of words, is according to his will, and appointed by him. But he hath not instituted the very words we are to use, upon all occasions, whether we pray by a Form, or by any conceived Prayer, of which I said more, Chap. 4.  
16. He saith 
(b) ibid.  2. That God should be so worshipped is reasonable, but that this should aforehand be secured, is not possible, in men who may err: nor will Forms secure it, which may be read falsely and disorderly enough. To which I answer, That when he requires, that none should be admitted to the Ministry 
(c) p. 153. and in other places.  who have not the gift of Prayer, is not the intent of this, to secure as much as may be, the right performance of that duty? but this may be best provided for by a Form, as I shown in the second and third Chapters. And what he speaks of reading falsely, as a disparagement to Forms is inconsiderable, and is one of the weak Arguments, of the meanest disputants for Oral Tradition, against the Scriptures. For there may be as many mistakes, 
Of reading falsely, see also n. 24.  in reading the Scriptures, as the Prayers of the Church: and besides that, they who would decry their Authority, can talk of their being possibly printed false, or it may be in some things translated amiss, or that the copies whence they were translated might not be every where pure and right. But such little objections, are easily seen through by men of understanding.  
17. He saith 3. 
(d) p. 157.  That for twenty years together, the worship of God was performed in a well-ordered manner, in hundreds of Congregations in England without Forms. Now though I have showed, (Chap. 2. & 3.) that it cannot be reasonably expected, that it should be constantly performed so well in any one Congregation, by any Person whomsoever, in a way of constant varying, as in the use of a good Form; yet there ought to be respect had to all our Congregations. And we do not think that a well ordered Worship, where one or both the Sacraments were in many places disused, and other considerable parts of Worship and Prayer, (as confession of Sin) purposely and generally omitted by others, as I observed above: And the several Sects, ordered the Worship of God according to their own Errors. And I can as easily be persuaded, that the Papists, Arians, and Donatists, did rightly order the Worship of God, as that all our several Sects and Parties did so.  
18. My second Reason was, That needful and comprehensive Petitions, for all spiritual and outward wants, with fit thanksgivings, may not in the public supplications of the Church be omitted, which can be no other way so well, or at all secured. To this he saith, 
(e) P. 157.  It is to the shame of our Church, 
2 As providing for a comprehensiveness of Prayers.  if there be not Persons enough sufficient for this, and however there are some. Now in this Answer he contradicts what in the foregoing Page he said, in answer to my former Reason, to wit, That it is not possible to secure this right Worship beforehand. And I have above shown, that no Persons, in using constant alterations, can perform public Worship, with that due fullness, comprehensiveness, and pithiness, which is in a well-ordered Form.  
19 But that able men may not be under restraint, he is willing that 
(f) Ibid.  Forms be composed, extant and left at liberty This he again mentions, in the last Paragraph of his Book. And this method was declared by Didoclavius, 
(g) Al●ar: Damasc. p. 613.  whom our Author citys in his Title Page, to have taken place in his days in Scotland: Who also tells us, that himself having been many years in the Ministry, had never used them, nor did he think them wise that did. And the leaving Forms of Prayer at liberty, 
Ill effects of having Forms left at liberty.  would besides the inconveniences above observed, have this ill issue in the end. That they who seek to be esteemed of a dividing Party, or are solicitous to avoid the fierce censures of rash Men, or who are highly conceited of themselves and affect singularity, or who are Erroneous, and not willing to walk in the sound path of Religion, will be most sure to avoid Forms, for the promoting these ill purposes, which will be to the great damage of the Church.  
20. He adds that 
(h) P. 158.  This Argument would hold stronger, for Forms of Sermons. It holds indeed to prove, a comprehensive summary of the Articles of the Christian Faith, to be better expressed, in the fixed words of known and received Creeds, then in the composing of new Creeds, of every man's own making. But for ordinary Preaching, I have showed the contrary, Chap. 6.  
21. My third Reason was, That the hearts of pious men may be more devout, and better united in the Service of God, by considering beforehand, what Prayers and Thanksgivings they are to offer up, and come the more ready and prepared to join in them. To this he saith, 
(i) P. 158.  Such a particular foreknowledge is not needful, and 
(k) P. 159.  it rather hinders devotion and affection, as he hath proved. But this pretended proof I have answered, 
3. As conducing to the better preparation of men's hearts and affections.  and evidenced the contrary, in the third Chapter. And sure the Ministers premeditation, what he should ask, in the way and method our Author proposeth, which he alloweth, (and so must every one, who thinks care and consideration to be useful, in the most weighty things, or who would not be rash to utter any thing before God, which he would not do before a Prince) must be an hindrance to his devotion, if the People's knowledge beforehand what they shall pray for, must hinder theirs.  
22. He further saith 
(l) P. 158, 159.  there needs no more than a general composure of spirit to seek God, to ask whatsoever they or others stand in need of, and to confess all Sin. Now I acknowledge this to be very good and pious. But possibly, what they come thus prepared to do, as to confession of Sin may be omitted, and also the ask of many other things, which are reliefs for our constant wants, and other things may be prayed for, which they cannot so readily join in. And this general composure or preparation, where these parts of service are omitted, can be of no more use, than such a general preparation is, in the worship of the Romish Church, where the vulgar, know not particularly what is expressed by the Priest. But in a well-composed Form, according to the use of the Reformed Churches, these things are much better provided for.  
23. He saith also, 
(m) P. 158.  If the Minister transgress his Rule, 
Concerning the People correcting the erring Minister.  and ask what is not according to the Will of God, the People may withhold their Amen. But such a worship in others, our Author would be apt to call, offering the Blind and the Lame; and when they have a Male in their flock, to offer to God a corrupt thing; when the Speaker in his part doth amiss, and the People at best, must forbear their act of public worship, in the time of it, and when they come to perform it. But besides this, the people are not able thus to overrule their Teachers, and it is a great distraction and discomposure to them, where they must be constantly put upon these doubtful disquisitions: and it is too plain, that many thousands are misled, by the errors of them whom they receive as their guides, into Antinomianism, Popery, Quakerism, and the worst of Sects.  
24. But that he may catch at every thing, he saith again here, 
(n) ibid.  that Forms may be read falsely. But beside what I above answered, this is very unlike, in what is so well known, and constantly used: but if there should be some words pronounced amiss, the People may more easily help themselves here, they having oft heard and joined in this Form, which is no new thing to them, and many of them having the advantage of their Books also.  
25. 
4. As best fitted for the difficultest offices of Sacramental Administrations.  My fourth Reason is, That such difficult parts of Church-offices, as Baptism and the Lords Supper, the matter of which requires great consideration, may in composing a Form be so framed, that men of greatest understandings may with readiest assent entertain them, and that they may be sufficiently vindicated, against the boldest opposers. Now this Argument is of the greater weight, because of the great concernment of Sacramental Administrations. If an error be committed in any thing essential to Baptism, the Baptism itself, and the persons membership in the Church, must thereupon be questioned. If the like happen in the Lord's Supper (which without Forms, may sometimes be occasioned by defect of memory, and some present confusion) there may not only be a loss in the high benefits and blessings of that ordinance, but (as in Baptism also) a profanation of the ordinance itself.  
26. Here he saith, 
(o) Reas. Acc p. 159, 160, 161.  In the Lord's Supper, the Consecration is by reading the words of Institution and Prayer; the distribution hath nothing of difficulty, and the application is by Exhortation and Prayer, and surely he that can pray and preach can do that. And for Baptism: the Baptising in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, with a foregoing Prayer, and Prayer or Thanksgiving concluding, is, he judgeth, sufficient without a Form. Now it is well, that the words of Christ's Institution in the Lord's Supper, and the Form of Baptism, are thought needful to be retained and observed. But I know not why other persons may not think, themselves to have a liberty of varying here, with as much reason, as our Author rejects the use of the Lords Prayer. And therefore it is not certain, if Forms were laid aside, how far, and how long, he could give any security in this particular; when some may, as 
(p) Irenaeus adv. Haeres l. 1. c. 18.  Irenaeus tells us, some who forsook the Catholic Church did, vainly by obscure Paraphrases, altar the Form of Baptism in the name of the Father, etc. and the matter also, or the use of Water.  
27. And touching Prayer in this case, (and Exhortation also) there is no small difficulty. For there are various mistakes concerning the Sacraments, which some would have only significative signs, others will have them to be an absolute sealing in Christ's name, remission and other blessings, to every person who communicateth in them, and that therefore certain evidence of actual grace in the Communicants, is necessary to the Administration thereof. And other mistakes there are, concerning the effects and gracious benefits of the Sacraments, concerning their efficacy and operation, and the manner of Christ's presence therewith. Now they who keep a well ordered Form, are in the most sure and safe way. But they who affect to vary constantly, may from the difficulty of the Subject, more easily go astray here, than in other cases. And here particular Persons will be apt to express themselves, according to their own different opinions, whereby they may err and miscarry, and great inconvenience and hurt may ensue.  
28. My fifth Reason for the expediency of Forms of Prayer, is, That this may be an evidence to other Churches, and future times, after what way and manner we worship God, and that such a Church is in its measure a pure and incorrupt Church. To this he saith 
(q) p. 162.  1. Where hath God required the leaving any such Testimony? Now we need not a special command, 
5. As leaving a testimony to others of our right worship.  for every particular thing, which is of good use; and his question might equally be put concerning Forms of public Confession, which all Protestant Churches have owned, amongst other ends, for a Testimony of their owning the true principles of Religion. And the precepts of Christian profession, and the case of Unity with all true parts of the Christian Church, doth at least greatly recommend such a Testimony as this. And since in all cases of Religion we are to give an answer to them who accuse us, where that is needful; to this end, Forms may be of considerable use. Besides the charge of the Romanists, some earnest Lutherans accused the Churches of the Palatinate, for not having the Sacraments truly Administered, for the refelling of which, 
(r) Ursin Praesat. in Apol. Catech.  Vrsin appeals to their public Forms.  
29. He saith 2. 
(s) ibid.  That Forms of Sermons are also needful to this end; but though we have many volumes of our Printed Sermons, they are no direct part of our common Worship.  
30. He saith, 3. While we declare ourselves Christians, and that we worship God according to his word, 
(t) ibid.  we leave a sufficient Testimony, that we are a true Church of God. If this be true, our Author hath now found a precept for giving such a Testimony, if he allow any precept for declaring ourselves Christians: But indeed if persons so declaring themselves Christians, etc. do enough in this case, than all manner of Sects and Heretics, who own the Christian name, give sufficient Testimony of their being a true Church, and of their right worshipping God. But we are further to profess the true Catholic Doctrine, and to worship God according to the true rules of Christianity.  
31. He saith, 4. 
(u) ibid.  a confession of Faith, is a sufficient Testimony. It is so, as to our Doctrine, not as to our Worship: since several chief parts of worship (as the Sacraments) may still be neglected: and there may be many other defects in worship, performed without the use of Forms, by forgetfulness, or being at a loss. And withal, no such Confessions of Faith, were kept to in England, by all those who undertook to guide others in the worship of God, in our late times when the Liturgy was taken away: nor do all our several dividers, who reject our Church and Liturgy, agree in any such Confession at this time.   

CHAP. X. 
Ch. X.  A persuasive Conclusion.  
HIs tenth and last Chapter, which contains little more than one Page, is has Conclusion; wherein in some things, he more particularly repeats his own sense, but addeth nothing of any further Argument, which requires my answer. Among these things he saith, 
(a) Reas. Acc. p. 164.  We do not think it unlawful, to join with another praying by the use of Forms, provided the matter be good and pious. 
It is granted that the Congregation may discharge their duty by joining in public Forms.  We have in such praying nothing to do but to say Amen, whether he who ordinarily doth so, doth his ministerial duty, we confess that we question. But that we may do our duty, though he fails in his, we do not question. From these words it is apparent, that after all his discourse, he here freely grants, that all the Congregation, except the Minister who officiateth, may without question do their duty in the use of Forms of Prayer. And then they cannot be justified and excused from Sin, who make separation out of dislike of them.  
2. But as the conclusion of my Discourse, I shall hence take occasion to apply myself a little to all those, who dissent and divide from our Church, both Teachers and People, 
Our dissenting Brethren entreated 〈◊〉 consider how they will answer for such sad divisions.  (and among them to the Author of that Discourse which I have examined, if he shall please to take notice of it) by serious and earnest persunsion. And that I would entreat of them is, that they would calmly consider, what good account they can give to God, and what security they have from the dangers of Sin, in making that sad separation, wherein they engage, and too much please themselves. That these Divisions do hinder Religion and Piety, and disorder the Spirits and Minds of men, is so manifest, that some among yourselves have much complained thereof; That these are the great encouragements to Popery, and that here is the greatest danger of undermining our Protestant Reformation, both many Romish Authors, and some of your own Writers do acknowledge: And many other sad effects there are of these Dissensions.  
3. Friends, can you think rending the Church, to be a slight thing? Hath God given you any special leave or authority, to overlook all your Obligations to a Constituted Church? Or may any Christians at their pleasure, divide themselves from any Church, 
When they cannot and mostly do not charge our Commution with sin.  and frame new Models to themselves? Or will your dislike of some things, upon highly probable Arguments (as our Author calls them) and yet without any certainty of truth, secure you? Very few men of any note among yourselves, dare charge any sin upon our Communion, and they who do it, are not able to give any tolerable proof of their Accusation; and without evidence of sin in communicating, separation can never be justified. I hope, what this Writer I have dealt with, hath insisted on, for the unlawfulness of ministering by a Form, will sufficiently appear to be weak enough. And yet his undertaking goes not so high, as to urge these things against the lawfulness of Communion, or joining in the Religious Worship, which is so performed.  
4. If some things be said in behalf of your Separation, or as proofs that your withdrawing is no Separation, and your dividing no Schism; which till they be throughly examined and understood, may seem plausible to you, even this is not enough, 
Plausible Arguments are no security to them who neglect their duty.  to justify your practices, without certain evidence that Communion is sinful. Those who are men of any parts and learning among yourselves, know how easy it is, to make some fair pretence and plea for almost any Error; yea, and to bring some subtle Arguments, against any truth in the World: But no Christian may hence conclude, that hereupon he may safely neglect his duty, of embracing that Truth, or rejecting that Error, And I presume that those who are of the meanest rank among you may know, that there are few causes so bad, but that a Lawyer, who hath used himself to pleading, though he be not a person of profound skill in the Law, may say something plauble in the behalf thereof. But this will not justify him who doth an injury to his Neighbour in his civil Rights: Much less will the like secure you, if you act against that which is really your duty to God, his Church, and other Christians, in matters of Religion.  
5. In reading the holy Scriptures, nothing can be more plain, than that the Peace and Unity of the Church, 
The Precepts for Peace and Unity are plain and weighty parts of of our Christian duty.  is frequently and earnestly commanded and enjoined, and Divisions vehemently condemned and censured, in the Christian Religion. We profess ourselves the Disciples of that Jesus, who before his Death, expressed his affectionate desire and prayer for Unity in his Church: And he declared this to be a great means, whereby his Religion might be propagated, and take the greater place in the World, John 17.11, 21, 23. In Christianity, while many are eager, in prosecuting their Contests too highly in other things, the Apostle assures us, that Peace is one of the great parts in which the Kingdom of God consists, Rom. 14.17, 19 And he persuades to Unity in the Church, with very great and affectionate earnestness, Phil. 2.1, 2. and urgeth the same in almost every Epistle: Declaring also, that they who make Drvisions contrary to this Christian Doctrine, serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, Rom. 16.17, 18. But can any persons be the better Christians, by despising the weighty, and frequently inculcated Precepts of Christianity? Or can they be the faithful Disciples of Christ, who are earnest in disobeying him, even in such Precepts, which (besides his Authority) are intended for the Honour, and the progress of his Religion?  
6. 
The ancient Church zealous practisers hereof.  How unlike are these practices, to the ancient Catholic temper of Christianity, which long continued in the Church, suitable to Rules of our holy Religion; by the ancient Canons of the Universal Church, they who would withdraw from the established Church, 
(b) God. Can. Eccl. Uniu. can. 65.  and as disesteeming that, would privately, and without the consent of the Bishop, set up another Church, were under an Anathema. And that the Ancient Fathers and Christians, accounted the Precepts of the Gospel for Peace and Unity, to forbid and condemn Divisions and Separations from the Church, and that they themselves were zealous in rejecting such practices, may sufficiently appear from what I have showed in 
(c) Libert. Eccles. p. 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24.  another Discourse. But are the rules and practice of Christianity now changed, and become quite different from what they were in the Primitive Times? Or can any man pretend to a sufficient Warrant and Authority, for altering the nature of these Duties, or cancelling their Obligation?  
7. I know that some plead on your behalf, that you are not chargeable with any  separation. You meet indeed by yourselves, to perform public worship, in a different way from us, as one Church may do distinctly from another: but you do not censure the Church of England, to be no true Church, but profess to own her to be a true Church, and her Communion to be lawful, and therefore you are chargeable with no Schism, 
Those Dissers not excused from schism who professedly acknowledge us to have a true Church, and a true worship.  or unwarrantable division. Now though this profession is not always made, with sufficient clearness and freedom; the acknowledgement thereof, is so far from being a plea on your behalf, that it is rather an unanswerable charge against you. For you reject in your practice, the Rules and Constitutions established by Authority, concerning the order of the Church and its worship; you generally express your dislike of our way of worship, or at least your disesteem and undervaluing thereof, many of you use your utmost endeavours, to draw off persons from our Communion, and to bring them to your Congregations; and some of your chief Teachers have written their Letters to that purpose, to such persons in whom they think they have any great interest, some of which I have seen, some years since; your party frequently useth sharp censures, against such pious persons, who will not forsake our Church, to join with you. Your people ordinarily use reproachful expressions of our service, yea concerning our Church and Ministry (and so do your Teachers too frequently) and if any persons forsake you, and return to our Church, they then fall under the load of your displeasure. And because this behaviour is used towards that Church, which you acknowledge to be a true Church, and her Communion not sinful, this is so far from justifying your practices, that it renders them unaccountable and unexcusable.  
8. Can it be supposed, 
The contrary proved, from one end of Christian Unity.  that the Unity and Peace our Saviour recommended, for the gaining upon the world, was only this: that his Disciples and followers should all profess his Name and Doctrine, but might make themselves of as many several parties as they pleased, all of them openly before the world, protesting their dislike of the several models, the other parties embraced, and also of that worship, which was most publicly used and established by the chief Guides and Governors of the Church? Now if all this might be done, and care must only be taken, that the dividing parties, do not charge the main body of the Church, to be no true Church, or to have no true worship; could this be the way to promote the honour of Religion, or would it not rather make it appear contemptible? And in our own present case, do the enemies of the Protestant Reformation, when they observe your dividing behaviour, honour our Reformation, because of our Unity? or do not you know, that upon this account they upbraid our discord and divisions, and make ill use of them. And besides this in the 
(d) Can. Apost. c. 8.  ancient Church, the very forbearance of open Communicating, when this might only be feared to have such effects, as to cause offences, and raise suspicions in the people, was esteemed so , though it might continue but a short time, that unless a sufficient account was given thereof, it was severely punished.  
9 We know that St. Peter's withdrawing from the Gentiles at Antioch, 
2. From S. Peter's withdrawing at Antioch.  was deeply censured by St. Paul, Gal. 2.11, 12, 13, 14. because of the disturbance and trouble it might create, to the minds and consciences of the Gentiles. But none can think, that St. Peter, who immediately before communicated with them, did now charge them to be no true Church, or that their worship and communion was sinful: Wherefore it is hence manifest, that there may be a scandalous and sinful separation from a Church, where there are no such uncharitable censures.  
10. And I appeal unto any party of our Dissenters themselves, whether if any members of their own number, should new model themselves into different Forms under several lesser divisions, 
3. By appeal to the dissenting parties themselves, concerning the ill consequences of this their Plea.  and setting up themselves to be new parties, shall desert and declare their dislike of that Society or Communion, with which they before joined: still calling them a true Church, and not charging their worship with sin; I say, whether the Teachers, and remaining members of this first party, will justify these dividers, who thus separate from, and forsake them. If they will approve these things, they must profess themselves Patrons of Confusion, and that any part of a Christian Society may separate itself, when there is no apparent danger of sin in the Communion, and consequently where no rules of conscience, will oblige them to forsake that Communion. But if they will blame this practice, let them reflect upon themselves. And yet these new parties of dividers are the less to be condemned by them, because they followed their example.  
11. 
The danger of dividing to be considered.  And now let me prevail with you to consider, what danger they run upon, who causelessly rend the Church of Christ; whence it will appear necessary, that they who forsake a well-established Church, must proceed upon necessary grounds. Now disobedience to any Divine precept, and therefore to this for Peace and Unity; if it be from carelessness and gross neglect, in not minding the will of God; or from a temper resolved rather to please itself, than to be obedient; or from the rule and dominion of pride or passion; is so opposite to the spirit of Christianity, that he who is guilty hereof, cannot find acceptance with God, v. n. 16.  
12. 
Joining in divisions are dangerou to wel● disposed men.  But besides this, I have one thing more to add, which I think is very considerable, and which possibly you have not observed. It seems plain enough in the Apostolical Doctrine, that even such persons who unwarily join in dividing and rending the Church, though they hold fast the fundamental doctrines of Religion, and a care of many other duties of a holy life, yet for this miscarriage, and their persisting therein, they diminish their future happiness, and the degrees of glory, which they might otherwise attain unto, in the other world. For the proof whereof, I shall give some account, of the third Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians.  
13. When the Apostle reflected upon the Strife, and divisions of the Church of Corinth, he thence pronounceth them to be carnal, and Babes in Christ, 1 Cor. 3.1, 3, 4. or that they were of the lowest sort, 
1 Cor. Ch. 3. Considered. Dividers are not of the highest rank of Christians.  and meanest rank and degree of Christians, if they were Christians at all; however they might value and esteem themselves. And whereas they were one of Paul, and another of Apollo's, he shows them, that Paul and Apollo's, and all other Ministers of Christ were labourers under God, and neither could, nor did, lay any other foundation than Jesus Christ, v. 5.11. which is an Argument against dividing, Ch. 1.11, 12.  
14. And the Apostle, 
Sincerity in Christian Doctrine, Piety and Unity is greatly rewarded.  still continuing his Discourse, with a particular respect to this Subject concerning Divisions; tells them, concerning what is built upon this Foundation, that every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, v. 14. and that the Apostle speaks this of the day of judgement, or the day of the Lord (as being opposed to man's day, Ch. 4.3.) is manifest, from Ch. 3.8. and especially from Ch. 4.4, 5. He acquaints them, that he who shall build upon this foundation, Gold and Silver, and precious Stones, and whose work shall abide; that is, who shall keep close to the integrity of the Christian Faith and Doctrine, and to the purity of the Christian Life, and therein to Christian Unity, which is one great duty thereof, and a means of growth therein: (v. 1.3, 4.) he shall receive a reward v. 12.14. or obtain great and perfect happiness.  
15. And he lets them know, that they who build Hay and Stubble, upon this foundation, and whose work shall be burnt, they shall suffer loss, ver. 15. Which shows, that they who shall join hurtful Opinions and Errors, though not in things Fundamental, with the Christian Religion; and irregular Practices, though they be not wholly opposite to a Christian Life: 
Well disposed persons, by closing with Divisions, lessen their future reward.  And particularly (which is the special occasion of this discourse of the Apostle) they who upon this Foundation build Strife, Factions, or Divisions, shall suffer loss. Or these, though they act from mistaken Zeal, or from some other Principle, which is not inconsistent with all integrity of heart; they shall with respect to another World, have abatements of reward: Though they shall be saved as by Fire, or with appearance of difficulty and danger. And besides the evidence that this Truth hath, from the scope, series, and connexion of this Apostolical Discourse; it is manifest of itself, that such Divisions, as these at Corinth were, which are so much decried and condemned, in the Doctrine of Christianity, must be reckoned amongst those works, which shall not abide, but be burnt, to the loss of them who are engaged in them. And they who are Babes and carnal, (ver. 1, 3.) may well be thought inferior in reward, to them who are Spiritual and grown men, when every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour, ver. 8.  
16. And this Apostle still eyeing their Divisions in the Church, 
Dividing the Church, is a practice in many destructive of their salvation, v. n. 11.  goes on to declare their danger, Ver. 16. Know ye not that ye are the Temple of God? And Ver. 17. If any man defile the Temple of God, him will God destroy. That is, that they who deprave the genuine Purity of the Church of God, in Doctrine or Practice, or who defile themselves by any Vice; and particulaly who so engage in Divisions, as thereby to turn aside from the Christian Life, their end will be misery. And to this purpose, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Divisions, or Seditions, are reckoned among those fruits of the Flesh, which exclude from the Kingdom of God, Gal. 5.20, 21. And yet further, with respect to the same thing, the Apostle, Ver. 18, 19, 20. shows, That what men may sometimes account to be their Wisdom, if it lead them amiss (as particularly by bringing them into the paths of strife and discord) is no true wisdom, but folly. And the same thing is asserted by St. James, Jam. 3.13, 14, 15, 16, 17.  
17. And to make it manifest, that in this discourse of the Apostle thus far, and also in his proceeding yet further, what he wrote was particularly directed to the case and miscarriage of their Divisions: From what he had hitherto said, 
The sense above mentioned further cleared.  he deduceth this Inference, Ver. 21. Therefore let no man glory in Men, i.e. to make Factions and Divisions, out of pretence of the esteem they have, even of Paul, Apollo's, Cephas, or any other. And he directs, Chap. 4.1. Let a man so account of us, as of the Ministers of Christ, and Stewards of the Mysteries of God. And Chap. 4. v. 6. he tells them, These things I have in a Figure, transferred to myself and to Apollo's, for your sakes, that you might learn in us, not to think of men, above that which is written, that no one of your be puffed up for one against another.  
18. And that no man may slight and despise this consideration, and still conclude, that as he can please himself in such undertake, so God surely cannot be so displeased, with these Divisions, I shall take a little notice of the evil temper, that generally attends them. Besides, 
The evil attendants of Schism.  the hurt that is done to the Church of God, to Religion, and to other men; the engaging in Separation, is also usually accompanied with many disorders of Mind and Practice. Here are Prejudices towards them, from whom they divide, with disordered heats and censoriousness; a neglect of due reverence to Superiors; and a proneness to embrace some particular Opinions, concerning some things in Religion, whereby they may distinguish their Party, and by opposing others herein, keep themselves at a greater distance from them. And withal, the offending Persons are here ordinarily so far pleased with, and ready to justify, and approve their miscarriages, that they are not willing to examine their own Errors and Mistakes; are far from being pleased with him, who shall reprove their faults, and sometimes with him also, who shall in the mildest and kindest manner persuade them, to consider of their Duty, and return unto it. And this temper of mind, besides the various woeful fruits, and manifest consequents of Divisions themselves, may well provoke the Divine displeasure.  
19 Wherefore as every Person valueth and esteemeth the pleasing God, and minding the duties of the Christian Religion, which are things of mighty concernment and absolute necessity; they must not think, 
Care of Unity is greatly necessary.  they may safely omit the duty of Unity, or any other great command of the Gospel, and practise only such Rules and Precepts, as themselves please. When St. Paul did beseech his Ephesians, Eph. 4.1. to walk worthy of the Vocation wherewith they were called; he to this end, among other duties, insists most particularly, and most largely, upon keeping the Unity of the spirit in the bond of peace; and enforceth this by very many Arguments, and Obligations to Christian Unity, v. 3.4, 5, 6. And I hope I need add no more, but the Apostles conclusive words, in his latter Epistle to the Corinthians, before he gives his Apostolical Blessing, to them, who had been drawn into Divisions, 2 Cor. 13.11. Finally, Brethren farewell, be perfect, (or 
(e) v. Dr. Hammonds Annot. in Loc.  be compact and knit together) be of good comfort (or as others render it not amiss, receive exhortation) be of one mind, live in peace, and the God of love and peace shall be with you.   
FINIS.