Common-Prayer-Book NO Divine Service: OR, XXVIII REASONS AGAINST Forming and Imposing any Humane LITURGIES or COMMON-PRAYER-BOOKS; AND The main Objections to the contrary, answered; ALSO, The English Common-Prayer-Book anatomised.  
LIKEWISE Twelve Arguments against Diocesan and Lord-Bishops; with the main Objections answered.  
AND The Great Disparity between them, and Timothy and Titus, showed.  
By VAVASOR POWELL.  
The Third Edition: Corrected and Enlarged.  
Why do you also transgress the Commandment of God by your Traditions?  Mat. 15.3. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Not as though ye were Lords of (or over) the Heritage's,  1 Pet. 5.3. 
London, Printed for Livewell Chapman, and are to be sold at his shop at the Sign of the Crown in Popes-head-Alley. 1661.   

TO The 

Composers, of  
Imposers, of  
Readers, of  
Hearers, of  
Disputers and Writers for   Common-Prayer.  
I Would desire you all in the Name and Fear of the Allseeing, Almighty, and All-judging GOD, to set these following, and the like Considerations to your hearts, and your hearts to them.  
Consider 


1. How jealous the Lord of Heaven and Earth is of his own Worship, and of all the Parts and Circumstances thereunto belonging, Deut. 5.9. Hos. 5.11. Mat. 15 3. Col. 2.21, 22. Rev. 22.14, 20.  
2. How abominable and unacceptable to this holy just God have been and are all Idolatrous, Superstitious and False Services, and all that do serve him in any Way or Thing which he hath not himself commanded and appointed, Deut. 7.25, 26. Isa. 30.22. & 66.3, 4. Jer. 9.13, 14, Ezek. 20.4.  
3. How sorely and severely he hath punished those Kings, Priests, Prophets, and People that have been false Worshippers, and swerved from His Holy Commandments, 1 Kin. 11.6. Num. 11.3, 4.  
4. Whether God doth call upon any of you all, to offer him any such Service as this is. And whether he may not say to you, as he did once to Judah, Who hath required this at your hand? Isa. 1.12.  
2. How inconsistent with the Day and Light of the Gospel is this Service, God having sent his Word more fully and plainly to direct his Ministers and People, and given his Spirit in a more abundant measure to help and enable them to call upon him.  
6. How little good (if any at all) hath been done by the long use of the Service-Book, though men have prayed long by it, That the rest of their Lives might be holy, and righteous, and yet they still continue profane and unrighteous.  
7. How much hurt it hath done in shouldering and thrusting out many godly, painful, soulsaving Preachers; and in bringing in, and maintaining so many ignorant, scandalous, lazy and formal Priests and Curates, to the deceiving and utter undoing of precious Souls.  
8. Whether the imposing of the Scottish Liturgy (which in some things was better, though in some others worse than the English) was not the beginning, and first Cause of the late grievous Wars; and if so, whether men should not be more cautious to do the like for the future?  
9 Whether if the Truth were thoroughly and truly weighed and examined, the first end of composing the Common-Prayer-Book (which doth so much symbolise with the Mass) was not, to bring Papists to Church: but it effected so little therein (not because they so much dislike it, as because it was not in Latin, and commanded by the Pope) that it did rather confirm them in their Mass-Service.  
10. Whether some now may not intent by the re-establishing of this Book, to oppose and pull down that excellent and gracious Spirit of Prayer and Preaching, which God hath poured out upon his Ministers; and to make this a Snare and Net against all Preachers and People, that out of Conscience cannot conform thereto.  
11. Whether any Persons can produce any such Liturgy, or such Form of Prayer from the beginning of the World, either among the Jews or Gentiles, till above three hundred years after Christ, when Antichrist began to exercise Papal Power?  
12. Whether if there were no other Reason but that this Book hath been so much idolised by the generality of men, and offensive to so many Christians, it should not be done with as the Brazen Serpent was by Hezekiah? 1 King. 18.4.  
13. Whether one end of Christ's coming into, and one part of his work in the world, was not to redeem men from the Rudiments and Traditions of men? of which this is one. And whether it be not a Sin against the Blood, Spirit, and Gospel of Christ, to impose, maintain and continue still to use the same? 1 Pet. 1.18, 19 Heb. 9.10, 11.  
14. They that worship God in a false way, are said in Scripture to worship Devils, Leu. 17.7. Deut. 32.17. 2 Chron. 11.17. 1 Cor. 10.20.  
15. Whether at the great and terrible Day of judgement, any Magistrates, Ministers or People can justify before Christ the making, imposing, reading or hearing of this or the like Service? (And whether good men as far as they build with this Material, will not then suffer loss?) And whether those can then stand in the Judgement without fear, shame and sorrow, that have cast out, persecuted, imprisoned, or otherwise afflicted the true Preachers and Servants of God, who did choose to obey GOD rather than men, and to observe His Divine Will, rather than men's Traditions?     
Consider what I say, and the Lord give thee (you) understanding in all things, 2 Tim. 2.7.  
I esteem all thy Precepts concerning all things to be right, and I hate every false way, Psal. 119.128.   

Against Imposing the Common-Prayer-Book: COLLECTIONS OUT OF SM. EC. TY. MN. WS. Dedicated and presented to the Lords and Commons in Parliament.  
IN Page 5. that the first and purer times knew no stinted Liturgy, as it appears from Tertullian (in Apol. 9 cap. 30. Epist. 121.) who saith, The Christians of those times prayed, Sine monitore quia de pectore; That is, without any Prompter, but their own hearts. Austin also telleth us, Liberum est, it is free for us to ask the same things in the Lord's Prayer, aliis atque aliis verbis— sometimes one way, and sometimes another: and Justin Martyr tells us, He who instructed the people, prayed according to his ability, p. 7. yet have some Bishops blasphemed the Spirit of Prayer, and many able, learned, conscientious Preachers have been molested, and suspended, for letting the constant flames of their fixed conceptions mount up from the Altar of their zealous heart, unto the Throne of grace— p. 8. their tongues also have raged against this way of Prayer, have sealed up the mouths of Ministers for praying thus in public, and imposed Penances on private Christians for praying thus in their Families, and compelled to abjure this practice, endeavouring with raging violence to banish this Divine Ordinance from our Churches and Dwellings, professing in open Court, it was fit for Amsterdam, than for our Churches— as did Doctor Corbet, Mr. Nevil; and all this in behalf of that Book of Common-Prayer, the Original whereof is published in that Proclamation of King Edward the Sixth, p. 9 which they so rigorously pressed, to the casting out of all that scruple it, or any thing in it, to the (almost) justling out the preaching of the Word, and conceived Prayer, together;— which yet was taken out of Models from Rome, and hath since the first compiling of it, suffered alteration, to the worse; and so symbolizeth with the Popish Mass, as that the Pope himself was willing to have it used, if he might but confirm it— for the end of it was on purpose to bring the Papists to our Churches; but rather it hath brought many of us to them, not any of them to us; the clogging it with Ceremonies, the often and impertinent reiterating of the Lords Prayer, the ill translation of the Psalms, and of the Scriptures; the many phrases in the Prayers that are liable to just exception. And whereas the Minister by the Scripture is the people's mouth to God, this Book prescribes Responsaries to be said by the people, some of which are unsuitable to what the Minister pronounceth; some of them savour of Tautologies, some are made to be so effectual to the Prayer, as that all which the Minister saith, is no prayer without them, as in the Litany— p. 10. Again, it is so much idolised, as that it is accounted the only worship of God, and is made the upholder of an unpreaching Ministry, and is cried up to the height, so that some are not ashamed to say, That the wit of Men and Angels cannot mend it, and that it is a sufficient discharge of the Ministers Duty to read this Book.—  
Abbots Church-forsakers.  
The end of its first use was, not to tie godly men from exercising their gifts in Prayer; but the eld Popish Priests, that by a seeming to return to our Religion, did through indulgence retain their places, from returning to the old Mass, which yet did hinder Ministers (that had the gift of Prayer in an abundant measure, as well as of preaching) p. 10. In Bishop Wren's days, who forbidden all use of conceived Prayer in the Church.  
Thus much from that Book, called Smectymnuus.  
That Book for its worth, and present use, is newly reprinted, Anno 1660. for Jo. Rothwel.  
Republished by Mr. Manton, who prefixed his Epistle.  
In the Common-Prayer-Book unmasked, is showed its unlawfulness.  
I. Page 4. By its Name Liturgy, or Service, so the Papists call their Mass, etc.  
II. Page 7. By its original, taken from the Mass-Book.  

1. The Common-Prayers, from the Popish Breviary.  
2. The Administration of the Sacraments, Burial, Visitation of the sick, and Matrimony, from their Ritual.  
3. The Consecration of the Lords Supper, the Collects, Epistles and Gospels, from the Mass-Book.  
4. The Ordination of Bishops, Priests and Deacons (which at first was joined to the Service-Book) from the Roman Pontifical.    

Common-Prayer-Book NO Divine Service, etc.  
Quest. WHether is it lawful for Magistrates, Ministers, or any other Persons, to form, or make a stinted Liturgy, or Common-Prayer-Book, and to impose the same?  
Answ. It is not lawful.  
Reas. 1. Because no Magistrate, Minister, nor any other persons under Heaven, can produce any authority for so doing; if such power can be produced from God, let Commands, or any Instances or Examples thereof be shown out of the Scriptures: if not, let any presume upon their uttermost peril to introduce the same. And whereas some say it is not forbidden in the Scriptures, that is answered more fully afterwards, under the first Objection. But,  
Reas. 2. Because it is forbidden, both in the second Commandment, and in other Scriptures, which I prove thus: The Ordinances, Traditions, and Rudiments of men in the Worship of God, are forbidden in the second Commandment, as Expositors generally affirm [see Bishop Andrews, Dod, Byfield, and others on the second Commandment] and in other Scriptures, Deut. 4.2. & 12.32. Mat. 15.9. Col. 2.20.  
But stinted Liturgies, or Common-Prayer-Books, are the Ordinances, Traditions, and Rudiments of men, [and not as the Doctrine and Baptism of John, from Heaven.] Therefore Liturgies, or Common-Prayer-Books are forbidden in the second Commandment, and in other Scriptures.  
But whereas it is objected, that the Modes and Circumstances of Worship are left to the determination of men; see the Answer to the second Objection.  
Reas. 3. Because this teaches vain Worship, or to Worship God in a vain way; it being like the Traditions of the Elders, Mat. 15.9, 10. Mark 7.7, 8.  
Obj. But the Jewish Elders rejected the Commandments of God, which we do not.  
Ans. So do all those that do not worship God in the spirit and truth, according to his Word, Isa. 29.33. John 4.20, 24.  
Reas. 4. That only which is needful, in the Worship of God, is to be made, and imposed; but a Liturgy, or Common-Prayer-Book is not needful in the worship of God: therefore a Liturgy, or Common-Prayer-Book is unlawful to be made or imposed. The Major, or first Proposition is clearly proved, Act. 15.28. the Minor or latter I prove thus, 

1. The Scriptures themselves are a sufficient Directory and Rubric to the Church of God, and to make the man of God perfect, 2 Tim. 3.15, 16.  
2. If it had been needful, then doubtless Moses who was faithful in his House, 
Heb. 3 5, 6.  as a Servant, or Christ who was more faithful as a Son, would have enjoined the same: but neither of them did so.  
3. It is not necessary, because the Churches of God did thrive and grow best of all, when (as in the Primitive times) and where there was none.  
4. Because the Ministers of Christ, and his Gospel, aught to be so gifted, as not to need it, Rom. 12.6, 7, 8. 1 Cor. 12.6, 7, 8, 9, 10. compared with 1 Cor. 14.13, 14, 15. James 5.14.    
Object. But some Ministers may be without the gift of Prayer.  
Ans. 
1 King. 12.31. Levit. 21. Isa. 56.  Yes, some accounted Ministers; but such are liker Jeroboam's Simpletons, the blemished Priests under the Law, and the Dumb Dogs which the Prophet reproves, than Gospel-Ministers.  
Reas. 5. Because none of the godly Magistrates in the Old Testament (though those times did more require them, than the days of the Gospel) did form or enjoin any such Liturgy.  
If it be objected, and said, That there were Liturgies in the Jewish Church, and in the days of the Old Testament.  
Answ. Though that can hardly be proved, yet admit there were: so there were Idols, Altars, Groves, and many such things, which they idolatrously and superstitiously set up, without any authority from God.  
Reas. 6. Because the Churches of Christ are not edified thereby; and what is not to edification, ought not to be in the Churches, 1 Cor. 14.26. Ephes. 4.12, 16.  
Obj. But divers have gotten benefit by such Liturgies.  
Ans. So have many by the Writings of divers of the Papists (yea, Heathens) nay some have gotten good by the Sins of others, and by the Judgements that befell their sinful Companions; as Waldus was converted by seeing his companion fall down dead, by the immediate stroke and hand of God: and one was converted by seeing a true Christian hanged wrongfully: it doth not therefore follow that evil may be done, that good may come thereby, Rom. 3.8.  
Reas. 7. Because that which is to be a form, and rule, aught to be a form and rule for all the Churches of Christ, Act. 15.28. & 16.4. 1 Cor. 4.17. & 14.33. & 16.1. & 7.17. But such a Form or Liturgy cannot possibly (at least probably) be form by mere men, because neither the Magistrates, nor Ministers of all Nations where Churches are, can possibly be brought, either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, either into one place to debate, or into one Judgement to determine it: an experience of this we had in the two Nations of England and Scotland (though under the same King) yet the Liturgy form for and intended to be imposed upon the Scots, was different in divers things from that established in England.  
Reas. 8. Because the setting up of such a form, is equal to the setting up of men's Thresholds by God's Threshold, and Posts by his Posts, by which they defiled the Name of God, Ezek. 43.8.  
Reas. 9 No man, or men in these days, can pretend to have such an infallibility of spirit, as either to compose, or enjoin a perfect Rule for others; and if it be not perfect, they cannot tie any Saint, much less the Churches of Christ thereto: for the Rule of faith and obedience ought to be perfect, Psal. 119.128. Isa. 8.20.  
Reas. 10. Because all Prayers are to be made in the Spirit, as well public as private, Ephes. 6.18. Judas 19, 20.  
Obj. But may not men pray in the Spirit, and use a Form too?  
A. It is not denied, but that good men may pray by a form, and yet in some sense pray in the Spirit too; but since that it is the proper work of the Spirit, to help the infirmities of the Saints as well in matter, and expressions, as sighs and groans, Rom. 8.26. what need they use stinted forms? or how can they tie up themselves strictly to those forms, without limiting, stinting, and quenching the Spirit?  
Reas. 11. Because the forming and imposing of such a Book, is to exercise dominion over the Faith of God's people contrary to what the Apostles did, 2 Cor. 1.24.  
Reas. 12. Because if it be allowed that Rulers have such a power in one Country, or Nation, it must be granted (A pariratione) that the Rulers of all Nations and Countries, (at least that profess Christianity) have power to do the same: for their power from God is the same (though their Principles to exercise their power be not) especially since the dissolution of the Jewish Government. Thence it will necessarily follow, That where there are Arrian Rulers (who deny the Divinity of Christ) they may put up a Liturgy suitable to their Judgements, Popish Rulers may form and impose a Liturgy according to their Popish Principles, and so consequently all other Rulers, be they Heathemsh, Turkish, etc. may do the like.  
Reas. 13. It will also follow, that as oft as the Governors, or chief Magistrates of the same Nation, or Nations, do alter in their Opinions, the Liturgy must also be altered: an instance of which we have on Record in the Brother and two Sisters, King Edward the Sixth, Queen Marry, and Queen Elizabeth, who ruled by immediate succession in the same Nation, and yet their three Liturgies did differ, as they are yet to be seen.  
Reas. 14. That which doth unavoidably expose many Christians to sin against their Consciences, or to suffer for not so sinning, is unlawful; but form, and imposed Liturgies, do unavoidably do either, therefore they are unlawful. The Major none will deny, the Minor is proved thus: In all, or most Nations, where such Liturgies are (and true Christians too) some, if not most of them do conscientiously scruple either the whole Liturgy, or some part thereof, and cannot with faith (and therefore not without sin, Rom. 14.23.) conform thereunto; and if they conform not, they suffer: multitudes of Instances (both of godly Preachers and Professors) might be given, as in Q. E. K. J. and K. C. reign, where some were hanged (as Barrow, Penry, and Greenwood) and many imprisoned and cast out of their places, and necessitated to fly to strange Countries, because they could not conform to the Rubric; and Rules in the public Liturgies, etc.  
Reas. 15. Because the making and imposing of such a form doth maintain National Churches in the days of the New Testament, which doubtless is contrary to the Gospel, which saith, 
Act. 10.35.  That in every Nation he that feareth God, and worketh Righteousness, is accepted of him. And the Apostle speaks of the Churches of Judea, Galatia, 
1 Cor. 16.1. 1 Cor. 16.19. Revel. 1.4.  Macedonia, Asia, but never of any National Church since the partition-wall (between Jews and Gentiles) was pulled down.  
Obj. But doth not the Lord promise he will sprinkle many Nations? Isa. 52.15.  
Ans. Paul expounds that of the Gentile Believers, 
Rom. 15.21. Rom. 4.17. Gal. 3.29.  who were sprinkled with the blood and Spirit of Christ, as Abraham is called the Father of many Nations; that is, of the Believers in many or every Nation.  
Obj. But it is said, that a Nation shall be born in one day, which is a Gospel-Prophecy, Isa. 66.6, and in the 1 of Pet. 2.9. Ye are a holy Nation.  
Ans. Some (as the Dutch Translators) translate the word Nation in Esay, People, and expound it of those that are converted among the Gentiles, 
1 Pet. 5.1. Rom. 11.26.  and not any whole Nation; others understand it of the Nation of the Jews, and that this place relates to the last and general calling and conversion of them; 
1 Pet. 1.1.  and for that in Peter, it cannot be understood of any particular Nation, for he writes to people of several Nations or Provinces (in some of which, if not in all, were many Churches, as in Galatia, & Asia) and it is evident he means there the believers, 
1 Cor. 16. Rev. 1.4.  or godly, and he calls them a holy Nation, with relation to the Nation of the Jews, which was formerly a Nation separated by God from all other Nations.  
Reas. 16. That which: tends to make the seed of the Woman, and the seed of the Serpent one, and to yonk believers and unbelievers together in Church-Communion, and Worship, is contrary to the Scriptures, Gen. 3.15. 2 Cor. 6.14. and therefore unlawful: But the forming and making of such stinted Liturgies, or Common-Prayer-Books doth so, for it is the main end of making them, viz. to bring all the people in a Nation to be of one form and way of worship.  
Reas. 17. That which the wickedest people do earnestly desire, and willingly observe, is commonly unlawful, Jer. 44.15, 16. Act. 19.28, 29. but the wickedest people do earnestly desire and obey such Liturgies, and Common-Prayer-Books, Ergo. The Major is proved, Exod. 32.1, etc. Hos. 5.11. and in many other places; the Minor is sufficiently proved by general and daily experience among us, for we find most of the wicked (who care not for the pure Ordinances of God) as mad for this as the people were formerly upon their Idols. 
Jer. 50.38.   
Reas. 18. Because the best Rulers and Reformers in Judah, when they did reform, did no such thing, but rather searched the Word of God, and brought back the people to God's Institution, and did not fet up any invention of their own. See Josh. 1.8. with 12.13. 2 Chron: 17.9. and 34.15. to the 21. Nehem. 8.1, 3, 8. Ezra. 6.18.  
Reas. 19 To put a burden or yoke upon the neck of Christ's Disciples, which he hath not put, is unlawful, Act. 15. But to form and impose any such Liturgies, is to put a yoke upon the neck of Christ's Disciples: for many of them (that are best able to judge thereof) have complained of them, as Burdens and Yokes.  
Reas. 20. Because there can be no blessing expected upon such Liturgies and Forms, because they are not commanded of God: for the blessings are promised to the observers and keepers of his commandments only, Exod. 23.25. Deut. 7.9. and 28.2.  
Reas. 21. Either such Liturgies or Common-Prayers are indifferent, or not indifferent; if indifferent, than they are not to be imposed upon Christians, but they are to be left to their liberty (as Christians were left by the Apostles) but if it is not indifferent, 
Act. 15.29.  then unless a Prescript can be showed from God (it being in his Service) it is no less than Will-worship, forbidden, Col. 2.23.  
Reas. 22. To join an imperfect thing with a perfect, for to be a Rule, is to debase the perfect, but to form and impose Liturgies, or Common-Prayer-Books, is to do so, Ergo, etc. The Major is an Axiom among the learned, as Bishop Andrews shows: the Minor is proved thus, 
See Doctor And ewes upon the second Commandment.  The best Liturgies are imperfect (particularly the English Liturgy, as will abundantly appear, in answer to the next Question) and the Scripture is perfect, 2 Tim. 3.15, 16, 17. And to use these at the same Time, and for the same End (which is done as a Rule) is to join them together. 
Tertul. Apol. chap. 39 The Christians, saith he, prayed, Sine monitore quia de pecto e, without a Prompter, but their own hearts.   
Reas. 23. That which was not among the Churches of Christ, either in the Apostles days, or for two hundred years after, is unlawful, but a stinted Liturgy, or Common-Prayer-Book was neither in the Apostles days, nor for two hundred years after, Ergo, etc. The Major cannot be denied; for proof of the Minor, Tortullian, 
† Just. Mart. Apol. 2. He who instracted the people, prayed according to his ability.  Justin Martyr, etc. clearly show, that in their days there were no such, neither in Constantine's time, for he made forms himself for his soldiers to use upon Lords Days, which doubtless he would not have done, if there had been a public Liturgy.  
Reas. 24. Because the Elements and Rudiments of the world (as these are) tend to lead men from Christ, and into bondage again, which is absolutely condemned, Col. 2.8. Gal. 4.3.  
Reas. 25. Because if in matters of Religion the word of God only must, and doth prevail with, and bind men's consciences, then to impose any Traditions of men (which these Liturgies are) is to no purpose; but the former is true, Deut. 12.32. Mot. 15.19. And to set up a thing to no purpose, what wise or good men will endeavour?  
Reas. 26. Because the forming and setting up such Liturgies, doth derogate from Christ, as he is both Prophet and King, 
Heb. 3.6. James 4.12.  as if he had not lest sufficient means and Laws for his Churches to be guided and ruled by.  
Reas. 27. But God may (doubtless) say of this, as he said of another piece of unrequired service; 
Jer. 19.5.  They have built, etc. which I commanded not, nor spoke it, neither came it into my mind.  
Reas. 28. That which God doth not require is unlawful; but the forming of such Liturgies, and imposing of them God doth not require, therefore the making and imposing of a Liturgy is not lawful: if he doth require, show when, where, and by whom, and the controversy is ended.  

The main Arguments for stinted Liturgies (or Common-Prayer-Books) stated in Objections, and briefly answered.  
Object. 1.  
THat which is not directly, or consequentially for bidden by God, is lawful; but Liturgies are not forbidden directly or consequentially, therefore lawful.  
Ans. 1. In Civil and mere Indifferent things, the Major or first Proposition may hold; but in spiritual things, and matters relating to the worship of God, it will not: for men are not to practise therein upon Negatives, but upon Positive and plain Commands or Examples. For, 

1. Consider, that under the Old Testament all things relating to the Worship of God, were to be done according to the pattern given by God to Moses, as concerning the Tabernacle, Candlestick, Altar: 
Exod. 25.9, 40. & 26.30. & 27.15. Numb. 8.4. Heb. 8.5. 1 Chron. 28.11, 19 1 King. 6 38. Ezek. 43.10, 11, 12, 13, etc. Exo. 34.27, 33. Isa. 8. Ezek. 3.4. Hag. 1.3, 4, 13. John 7.16. & 17.6, 7.  so like wise David had the Pattern of all that he had (or did) by the spirit, of the Courts of the house of the Lord, and of all the chambers round about: and as he saith, The Lord made me understand in writing by his hand upon me, even all the works of this Pattern.  
2. The second and third Temple, have clear and full directions and prescriptions given by God, for every part of them, and in every particular.  
3. The Prophets directed the people in all things to observe the Word of God, and the People of God obeyed that Word only.  
4. In the days of the New-Testament, John the Baptist, and our Saviour Christ, taught the People to observe nothing, but either what was written in the Scriptures, or what they had received from God.  
5. Paul also observes, and teaches all the Churches to whom he wrote, 
1 Cor. 1.25. 1 Cor. 16.1.  to observe (in their Worshipping of God) the same manner that was prescribed, and appointed by the Lord himself.    
Secondly, If there be such a latitude granted in things relating to the Worship of God, that any thing that is not forbidden may be introduced, what can hinder the Papists to bring in their five new Sacraments, Organs, and a hundred such things, nay the Pope himself? and is it not upon that very ground that they, and the Bishops ushered in all their Popish Innovations, and Superstitions? But the Minor is denied, Liturgies are forbidden (consequentially) I prove thus,  
1. That which is not commanded in matters of God's Worship, is forbidden; but stinted imposed Liturgies are not commanded, therefore forbidden; the Major is fully granted in the Assemblies Catechism, in the second Question, on the second Commandment: But imposed, stinted Liturgies cannot be proved by Scriptures, being an Innovetion, and born out of due time, to have the word of God father or own it.  
2. That which is a Tradition and Invention of men (in the Worship of God) is forbidden in the Scriptures, but this is a Tradition and Invention of men, 
Deut. 5.32, 33. Mark 7. 8, 9 Tit. 1.14.  in the Worship of God: for who can or dare say, That any of these Liturgies are Oracles from God? If it be said, That there is no Law against it, and therefore it is no sin; There is Law from the mouth of the Lawgiver himself, who said (to the Jews) Why do you transgress the Commandment of God by your Traditions? 
Mat. 15.3.   
Obj. 2. The prudential determination of such Modes and Circumstances as God hath left to Humane determination, is lawful. But a stinted form is such, therefore lawful.  
Ans. I grant that God hath left some Modes and Circumstances to Humane determination; yet consider that these are either,  
1. Merely Civil and Natural, as matters relating to the outward man, as Civil and politic Laws and Government. Or,  
2. If there be any such things left to the determination of men (as to consider of the fittest day or hour to meet, or the convenientest place, etc.) yet this is left to the determination of the Churches, and Societies of Christians in their several places, and as occasions fall out, and not to Magistrates or Ministers only.  
3. If there were authority left in the hand of the Magistrate, or any other sort of men (which cannot be proved by Scripture) to appoint such Circumstances, yet how doth it appear that they may enjoin and impose this under personal, or pecuniary punishment?  
4. Liturgies do determine more than Modes and Circumstances; for they appoint how all, or most of the parts of God's Worship (as Prayer, administering the Sacrament, etc.) shall be done. But lastly,  
5. If the Word of God doth direct in all the Circumstances of God's worship, either by command, or example, then is there no need of such Liturgies. But the Word of God doth direct in those Circumstances, as for place, Joh. 4.23. 1 Tim. 2.8. in Synagogues, in Houses, and on Mountains. For time, 2 Tim. 4.2. 2 Thes. 5.17. For gesture, etc. Luk. 22.14. Aob. 20.36. all which, with other Circumstances, may easily be proved.  
Obj. 3. There are many express Examples in Scripture for forms of God's service, therefore they are unquestionably lawful, as Psalms, Songs, Praises, Blessings, and Prayers, as Psal. 92. and 102. Exod. 15. Numb. 6. Mat. 6 particularly the Lords Prayer.  
Ans. That there were Psalms, Songs, Praises, Prayers, and Blessings, composed by the Praphats and Servants or God heretofore upon occasions, is acknowledged. But yet,  
1. That those holy men of God spoke (and wrote) as they were moved by the Holy Ghost; 
2 Pet. 1.21.  and had such a spirit of infallibility in such things; which no men since the Apostles days can pretend to.  
2. What they then wrote (viz. their Prayers, Psalms, 
Rom. 15.4. 2 Tim. 3.16.  and Songs, etc.) are now become Scripture, and are written for our learning.  
3. To argue from an extraordinary, 
Ab extraordinario ad ordinarium non est consequentia.  to an ordinary practice, is not right, you may as well say, because Moses commanded every one to slay his Brother, therefore other ordinary persons may do so; or because David divided the Priests into four and twenty Courses, other Kings or Rulers may do the like with Gospel-Ministers; or because Moses and David wrote Canonical Scripture, therefore other persons may do the like.  
4. For the Lords Prayer (so called) though it be not denied, 
It may be called the Lerds' Prayer, as that Sermon he made on the Mount (with other Sermons) may be called his, because he taught it; though it doth not appear that he himself ever used it.  but that it may be used by any godly men (though not in the way it is by most, at the end of their own) yet it will be hard to prove it to be a form. Because,  
1. It was delivered by our Saviour at first as part of his Sermon on the Mount (which seems to be one of his first Sermons) and as a Direction to pray; as he gives in the same place, 
Mat. 6.  and at the same time, direction to fast, and give alms.  
2. The two Evangelists do differ, in relating the Prayer, in several particulars, and Luke hath not the conclusion, 
Luk. 11.  or the words, For thine is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory for ever. Amen. If it must be used as a form, which of the two Evangelists must be imitated, seeing they thus differ?  
3. If it was given as a Form, and enjoined and imposed, than it was a sin in the Apostles and Primitive Christians, and others since, not to use it constantly: But it doth not appear that the Apostles did use it at all afterwards, 
Act. 4.25. Eph. 1. 17, etc. Col. 1. 9, etc.  though we read of the Apostles joint-prayers, and of many of Panls Prayers, yet therein is no mention thereof.  
Obj. But doth not Christ, Luk. 11.2. command his Disciples to say, Our Father? etc.  
Ans. The meaning seems to be this, that when one of Christ's Disciples did desire Christ to teach them to pray, as John also taught his Disciples, Christ did send them to the direction which he had given before in his preaching upon the Mount.  
Obj. 4. It is lawful to pray to God in set words that we find in Scripture: but so to pray, is to pray in a form. Therefore a Form is lawful.  
Ans. For to use the same words in prayer, out of earnestness, vehemency, and Agony (and that by the Spirit) as Christ, and some of the Prophets did, at the same time, is no ground at all for men to form a whole Book of prayer, without any such eminent impulsions of the Spirit.  
2. The Repetition of the same words was by the same Persons, and peculiar to them that spoke them, and chief for that time, and therefore is no ground at all either to form prayers for others, or to impose them upon others.  
3. From those instances you may better infer, 
Ex particulari, non est Syllogizari.  that no form is to be used till a man is in such an Agony, or Energy of spirit, as Christ and those men were in; but as I said before, to argue from an Extraordinary to an Ordinary is not good, nor from a particular to a general.  
Obj. 5. If it be lawful for the people to use a form as they do when they join with the Pastor, than it is lawful for the Pastor.  
Ans. How can the extemporary, immediate, unconceived prayer of the Pastor be a form to the People, since they know nothing of it before? but if that be a form, such a form we will yield to, viz. an unwritten, unprinted, unheard of, and Non-imposed form.  
Obj. 6. Christ hath left his approbation of such forms, proved, Luk. 20.42. & 24.4.  
Answ. There is nothing to that purpose in either of those Scriptures, unless you make the citing of Scripture a proof. But put the case that Christ had left his approbation of Scriptural forms which are Divine, that therefore he gave his approbation of mere humane forms. This is like the Papists pleading from written Truths to unwritten Verities. But further, suppose all that the Objection supposes, that Christ did approve of such Forms, yet where do you find that Christ did impose such, or give authority to any sort of men to impose such.  
Object. 7. But Christ used the same words thrice in Prayer.  
Answ. See the Answer to the fourth Objection.  
Obj. 8. But Christ did use a Hymn.  
Ans. If by a Hymn, be understood one of the Psalms of Scripture, why might not Christ and his Disciples use it, the Psalms being in Metre, and then in use among the Jews? but others understand by an Hymn, 
On Col. 3.16.  an extempore Song, as divers Interpreters make that distinction between Hymns, and Psaelms, and Spiritual Songs; others understand by a Hymn no more than praising God, 
As the same word is used, Heb. 2.12.  as the word is taken; and that may serve for an answer to the other Objection, That the Apostles commanded it.  
Obj. 9 If it be lawful to use a form in preaching, then in prayer: but the former is 〈◊〉. Ergo the latter.  
Answ. When it can be proved that it is lawful for any Preacher to write all his Sermon verbatim, & then preach (or rather read) it so, without addition, substraction, or alteration, and afterwards print it, and impose it upon others, than I shall grant it to be lawful to make such forms, and read them instead of preaching.  
Obj. 10. Because it was the practice of the Churches in Scripture-times, and downwards, to have such Liturgies.  
Ans. The Bishops said so, and sought to prove it, as Bishop Andrews pursued in his inquiry, so hard after Lituagies, that he thought he had gotten a Jewish one, which he sent to Cambridge to translate; but it was there soon discovered to be one made long after the Jews ceased to be a Church, 
See Smect.  and so he himself suppressed it, and had there been any such in our Saviour's, or his Apostles time, doubtless we should have found some mention of it in the Scriptures where mention is made of their reading, and preaching in the Synagogues of the Jews, 
Luk. 4.17.  and where we read of giving the Book of the Prophet Isaiah, but not Common-Prayer-Book.  
Obj. 11. But a Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book is good to help those that cannot pray, as Crutches to help a lame man.  
Ans. It is rather a Hindrance than Help: for people would, if it were not for such Forms, seek the Spirit of God, which would be given to help them.  
2. Either these are to help those that have no grace, or those that have grace; not those that have none: for what good will Crutches do to a dead man? 
Ephes. 2. 1, 5. 1 Tim. 5.6.  as every graceless and natural man is.  
3. If he hath grace, than he wants no Crutches, for he is cured, and should do with those Crutches, as lame Persons when they are cured in the Bath, hang up their Crutches on the Cross, and leave them behind them, to show they are cured.  
4. If the lame should use Crutches, yet that is no ground why those that God hath cured of their lameness should be tied to carry Crutches, or walk on them.  
Quest. But what Reasons or Objections have you against the English Liturgy, or Common-Prayer-Book, in particular?  
Ans. In an English Book called Smectym-uus, published by divers godly and learned Presbyterian Ministers, (as Mr. Marshal, Mr. Calamy, Mr. Young, Mr. Newcombe, and Mr. Sp●rstow) about the year one thousand six hundred forty two, and this year one thousand six hundred and sixty reprinted, there are several Reasons set down against it, as also against Bishops, some of the former I here insert. As  
1. It symboleth (that is, agreeth) so much with the Popish Mass, that the Pope himself was willing to have it used, if he might but confirm it. I shall add this out of the Book of Martyrs, vol. 2 pag. 667. Printed Anno 1631. when there was a rebellion in Devenshire, in King Edward the sixth his days he writes to them thus,  
As for the Service in the English Tongue, it hath manifest Reasons for it, 
King James also did (as is credibly reported) commonly call it, An ill said Mass.  and yet perchance it seemeth to you a New-Service, and indeed is no other but the Old, the same words in English which were in Latin, etc. And then afterwards, if the Service in the Church were good in Latin, it is good in English.  
2. It was framed and composed on purpose to bring Papists to Church.  
3. Because it is so much Idolised, called Divine Service, as I heard one lately say, that brought a Bible to a Bookbinders shop to be new bound: 
In Shrewsbury last May.  when the Book-binder said he could hardly bind it, and that he would sell a new Bible for a little more money; The owner returned answer. That that Bible was worth twenty new ones, and the only reason was, because the Book of Common-Prayer was in it.  
4. Because many distaste it.  
5. Because it differs much from Liturgies in other Churches, and yet they are not enjoined. I may add,  
6. Because it hath tended to maintain a lazy and scandalous Ministry.  
7. Because it (together with other Ceremonies) hath been a means to bring many godly Preachers and Professors under great Persecution and Suffering, some (as Penry and Barrow, Greenhood) to suffer Death; some Bawshment, and many Imprisonment, Indictment, and other troubles, either for speaking, and writing against it, or for not reading and hearing it.  
8. Because it hath tended to harden many Papists in their false Religion (by seeing us come so near to them in our way of Worship, as you find in the first Reason) and ignorant scandalous people among ourselves thinking that they are true Christians by conforming thereto.  
9 Because it teacheth things that are Heathenish, as to call the Months, January, February, etc. and the days of the Week, Sunday, Monday, etc. from the old Saxon Idols, etc. Jewish, as Priests, and as was added in the Scots Liturgy, Altars, Sacrifice, and Popish, as Christmas, etc.  
10. Because it is a very imperfect form, there being many things wanting that men ought to pray for, as assurance, sending forth Labourers into God's vine-yard, and many the like, which cannot be found in it.  
11. Because there are so many unwarrantable things and (offenfive to good Christians) therein.  
Q. What are those things in the Book of Common-Prayer that are unjustifiable in themselves, and offensive to good Christians?  
Answ. 1. Adding to, and diminishing from the Scriptures in the very beginning of it, in the words, At what time soever a sinner doth repent him of his sins, etc. which in the Rubric and direction before it, is called one of the Sentences of the Scripture, and they cite Ezek. 18. compare these words with the Scripture there, vers. 21, 22, and you will find both adding and diminishing, contrary to Deut. 4.2. Prov. 30.6. Rev. 22.18.  
2. Leaving some part of Scripture out, as the Book of Canticles, etc. and not to be read throughout the whole year, and many, if not most part of the other Books of Scripture; so that by the Rubric in the Common-Prayer-Book, a great part of the Bible should never be read publicly at all, which is contrary to 2 Tim. 3.16.  
3. Gross alterations, and differences are between the Psalms in the Bible, and those appointed to be read in the Book of Common-Prayer, as in Psal. 14. in the Bible there is but seven verses, but in the Book of Common-Prayer there is eleven; so in Psal. 106. & 30 it is in the Bible, Phineas executed Judgement (which is according to the Hebrew and Greek Transsation, and according to Numb. 25.7, & 8.) but in the Book of Common-Prayer, he prayed. So in Psal. 22.31. in the Bible, and according to the Hebrew, a seed shall serve him; but in the Book of Common-Prayer, My seed. So in Psal. 40.9. in the Bible, and so in the Hebrew (and Greek and Latin Translations) it is, I have preached Righteousness; but in the Book of Common-Prayer, thy Righteousness, adding the word thy. So in Psal. 105.25. In the Translation of the Bible it is He, i. e. God, turned their hearts to hate his people: But in the Common-Prayer-Book, whose hearts turned.  
4. Some Chapters are appointed to be begun in the middle of them (though but short) destroying the Connexion between the words going before, and where they begin. As upon the day called the Nativity of Christ, the third Chapter of Titus is appointed to be read for the second Lesson, beginning at the fourth verse, which depends upon the third verse. So Luke 2.10. which is joined to the ninth verse.  
5. Appointing many Chapters to be read out of Apocrypha, as Wisdom, chap. 1.3, 6, 9, 19, 22. Ecclus. 19.29, 38, 44. 
Caveat omnia Apocrypha, saith Jerom, Take heed of all the Apocryphas, and yet of 172 chapped. (or thereabouts) in the Apoc. 104 chap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thereabouts) are appointed to be read every year.  contrary (as the last Synod observed in their Catechism) to Luke 24. 27, 44. Rom. 3.2. 2 Pet. 1.21. and yet in the preface before the book, it is said, That there is nothing ordained to be read but the Scriptures, etc.  
Obj. But why are not those Apocrypha Books to be read?  
Ans. Not only because the Scriptures are sufficient of themselves, 2 Tim. 3.15. but because there are many foolish and fabulous things therein, as in Tob. chap. 6.7. & 11.14. & 12.15. so Jud. 9.2, 10, 13. Ecclesiasticus 1.15. & 12.5. & 48.13. with many the like, compared with the Word of God, will easily appear to be false.  
6. In many places to call the Writings of the Prophets, and the Acts of the Apostles, and Revelations, Epistles, as Isa. 7.17. & 40.1. & 50.5. & 63.1. Jerem. 23.5. Joel. 2. Acts 1.1. & 2.1. & 8.14. & 11.17. & 10.24. & 13.26. Apec. 7.2. & 12.7. & 14. as the Epistle for the day of Christ's Nativity, the Epistle for Innocents' day. Did any of the Sectaries in citing a Scripture, call the Prophecy of Isaiah or Jeremiah, an Epistle, he should be hissed at.  
7. Calling the Lord's Day, and other the days of the week by the names of the old Saxon Idols, as Sunday from the Sun, Monday from the Moon, Tuesday from Tuiseo, Wednesday from Wooden, etc. contrary to Exod. 23.13. Hos. 2.17. and the way used in Scripture, Gen. 1. 5, 8. 13, 19, 23. Mat. 28.1.  
8. Dedicating days to the Angel Michael, and to the Apostles and other Saints, contrary to Exod, 31.15. Gal. 4.10. Col. 2.6, 16, 17. and calling those holidays. and yet the Sabbath Sunday, likewise dedicating one day to all Saints, answerable to what Heathen Rome did to their Idols, and what Antichristian Rome still doth to Saints. But God may say, Who hath required this at your hand? Isa. 1.12.  
9 That the Minister is called so often Priest in it.  
Obj. But are they not called Gods-Priests, and Gods-Clergie, 1 Pet. 2, 9 & 5. 3?  
Ans. Not the Ministers distinct from the People, but the believers are called a Royal Priesthood, and God's Clergy, or Heritage, speaking in an Old Testament-phrase, by way of allusion to the Jews. God's select people: but it is not in that sense that the Minister is called a Priest in this Book, but looking upon him, as one that belongs to a peculiar Tribe, and as they did, and usually do pray for themselves, as being of the Tribe of Levi; which if they be, they are Jews, and by the Law of England, if you believe some Lawyers to be banished.  
10. That the people should pray audibly, 
Turpe est Dectori, cum tuipa redarguit, ipsam.  or with a loud voice, with the Minister, as in the Confession, and other prayers; which is confusion, and contrary to good order, 1 Cor. 14.40. which they blame in other men.  
11. That the Lessons, Epistles and Gospels should be sung, as you find in the Rubric immediately before Te Deum laudamus. No such Command from God, nor such practice in the Churches of God.  
12. That Te Deum Laudamus, & Benedicite omnia, are appointed to be read throughout the whole year, after the first Lesson. Sure if a good Preacher did preach one and the same Sermon every Lord's day in the year, these men would distaste it. And what is meant by retaining still the Latin Titles (and those which are commonly used in Popish Nations) but that we seek uniformity with them? But what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what agreement hath the Temple of God with Idols? 2 Cor. 6.15, 16.  
13. In that called Te Deum, there is a difference made between Angels, Cherubims, and Seraphims, making as the Papists do, divers (to wit, nine) degrees of Angels, 
We read but of one Archangel in Scripture, which is Christ, Dan. 10.12. & 12.1. and not Arch-Angels, as the Com. Prayer-Book saith. See Communion.  and likewise in setting days apart for Michael, and all the Angels. Though it be very probable, that by Michael is understood Christ himself, by comparing Rev. 12.9. with Zech. 3.2. and Judg. 8.9. but were there such an Angel, who hath appointed a day, or days to be observed to him or them? This is contrary to Col. 2.18.  
14. That in their Canticle, or Benedicite omnia, etc. after the spirits and souls of the Righteous are called upon to bless the Lord; Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, are called upon to bless the Lord, As if they were not included in the spirits and souls of the righteous.  
15. After the second Lesson, 
This implies it is used in Latin, as divers other things in the Service-Book are, in the Romish Church, which much encourageth them in their way, as learned Parker, and others show.  Benedictus, in English is to be used. And yet that is part of a Chapter (or second Lesson) to wit, of Luke 1.68, etc.  
16. In the Creed, they make that part of one Article, That Christ descended into Hell, As if Christ bade descended into the place of the Damned (as the Papists hold) contrary to Mat. 12.40. Ephes. 4.8.  
17. The Priest, and the People (whilst they are at their Service) salute and compliment one with an other; The Lord be with you (saith the Priest) And with thy spirit, say the people.  
18. The Minister standing up in the midst of his Prayers, between one Prayer and another. The Prayer is not so long, that be should be so soon tired in kneeling.  
19 The chopping and mineing of Prayer between the Priest and the People in many places, which are liker Charmers than Christians Prayers.  
20. In that called Quicunque vult, where the Articles of the Catholic Faith are set down, one is, that Christ descended into Hell (some other expressions in it are liable to exception) and yet in the last verse thereof it is said, This is the Catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved; and yet many doubtless that never heard, understood, nor could believe several things therein, may be, and will be saved.  
21. The Litany is to be read upon Wednesdays and Fridays, and at other times when the Ordinary shall command. And why upon Wednesdays and Fridays, unless to comply with the Papists? and why at the Ordinaries command? Is not every Minister of Christ as fit to judge when 'tis meet to read it, as well as the Ordinary? An ordinary judgement, may discern this to be extraordinary folly.  
22. The Minister propounds the matter of Prayer, but the people pray, Good Lord deliver us; We beseech thee to hear us good Lord. It's strange that this liberty is allowed people in public, and yet denied to others in private: nay, that the women are suffered to speak (that is, pray) in the Church, and publicly too, this is contrary to 1 Tim. 2.11, 12.  
23. Many Tautolegies therein, the words, Good Lord deliver us used eight times; and the words, We beseech thee to hear us good Lord, 
Qui paratus est in alterum dicere, ipsum oportet carere vitio.  used one and twenty times; and using the Lords Prayer five times, or more, in one Morning Service. This is vain Repetition, forbidden in Mat. 6.6. and that which they much condemn in such as pray conceived prayers.  
24. From Fornication, and all other deadly Sins. Herein making a difference (as the Papists do) between Venial and Mortal Sins, though all sins be deadly, or deserve death, Rom. 5.12. & 6.23. yet true it is, that there is an unpardonable sin, 1 John 5.16.  
25. Praying against sudden death. This is no where commanded in the Scripture, but rather the contrary. 
* Some of the Ancients prayed for sudden death, as you find in Acts & Monuments.  See Eccles. 9.12. Mar. 13.33, etc. Luk. 12.29, 40, 45, 46. And what doth this but confirm ignorant Protestants (as well as Papists) in those corrupted Principles; That Repentance is in their own power, and that Repentance must be a man's lost Act, or else he cannot be saved: by which they exclude all those that die suddenly (especially violently) from Salvation; which is contrary to these Scriptures, 1 Sam. 4.18, 19, etc. Job 21.24, 25. Eccles. 9.2.  
26. That they desire to be delivered by Christ's Circumcision, Baptism, Fasting, and Temptation; yea Burial: some also take exception at the word By, being used as in an Oath, 
Mat. 5.34, 35, 36.  especially so many times as there it is.  
27. There's a Prayer, That God will bring into the way of truth all such as have erred; whereas some are not at all to be prayed for, Joh. 17.9. 1 Jo. 5.16.  
28. They pray for a sort of people called Curates (a Name and Office not known in the Bible) distinct from Bishops, and Pastors. Note here the Bishops and Curates are not looked upon as Pastors (that is, Feeders) and indeed they are not, for the one is a Starver, the other a Biter and Slayer of the sheep.  
29. The taking of God's Name so many times irreverently in their mouths, in saying, Lord have mercy upon us, Christ have mercy upon us; contrary to Exod. 20.7. Levit. 19.12. which forbidden men to take God's name in vain.  
30. That the Collect for Christmas Day (as they call it) is to be read till New-year's Day; and yet the Collect is thus: Almighty God, which hast given us thy only begotten Son, to take our Nature upon him, and this day to be born of a pure Virgin. What? could he be born that day, and every day of the six following too? The like upon Easter and Ascension-days (so called) is to be read, and six days after. 
And yet Easter is a movable Feast, sometimes in March, and sometimes in April, so called.  But it is more than all the learned Clerks either in England or Italy can prove, that Christ was born either on that day, or in that Month called December, but rather in the seventh Month, called September, which might be figured and held forth by the Feast of Tabernacles, which was upon the fifteenth day of the Month, Levit. 23.34. and the Jews, and divers learned Christians, held, 
John 1.14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and still hold, that the first day of that Feast shadowed his birth, as the last or eighth day, his Circumcision: and John seems to allude to that, in John 1.14.  
31. At the purification of Mary, 
Purification of Mary. Levit. 12.4.  the Collect runs, That as thine only Son this day was presented in the Temple. Which is as uncertain as the other: for if the three and thirty days according to the Law, that the woman was to continue in the blood of her purifying, did begin when Christ was born, than they were ended six or seven days before that time of Purification; but if those thirty three days begin after the day of Circumcision, than the day now observed is not probably the very day. But suppose it were that very day, why should that Jewish Ceremony be still retained? it is not with an intent to further the conversion of the Jews; for both Popish, and Prelatical (for the most part) deny that they will at all be converted.  
32. That the Priest is appointed to stand at the North-side of the Table; This is done (as many other things) in imitation of the Ceremonial Law, Levit. 1.11.  
33. That the people are appointed to kneel, at the reading of the ten Commandments. This is contrary to Neh. 8.2, 3, 5. and yet afterwards when the Minister is to pray, he is appointed to stand up. Unless men were addicted and resolved to walk contrary to God and his Word, they would not be such fanatics.  
Obj. But the people kneel because of their praying, Lord have mercy upon us.  
Answ. But who hath appointed them to do that? This is to be wise above what is written.  
34. Offerings are appointed to be paid to the Curate, which is to continue still that Ceremonial Law that Christ hath abrogated, Col. 2.14. Heb. 9.10.  
35. There is added in the Administration of the Communion, words of their own, 
Public Communion.  to the words of Christ's institution. As, Preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. See Mat. 26.26, 27, 28. Luk. 22.19, 20. 1 Cor. 11.24, 25.  
36. The Priest is appointed to kneel at one Prayer, and yet to stand at the very next: and why not kneel or stand at both?  
37. In the Rubric before the Communion, it is said, He shall receive the Sacrament, and other Rites. What are those Rites? would they give more than what is appointed, as the Papists do less?  
38. The people are to receive the Sacrament kneeling, (an unseemly gesture at Supper.) This is like the Papists, and not like Christ and his Disciples, Mat. 26.21. Mark 14. And what is this but to adore the body of Christ per suum signum, as a Bishop said? which is the next Door, if not the same Inlet to Popery. This brat (Ceremony) was begotten at the same time with their Breaden God, which is (as God called the Idol, Deut. 32.17. Jud. 5.8.) a new God.  
39 The Priest gives it to every one in particular, and saith, Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee: This also is contrary to the way and words of Christ, who said to the Disciples in general, and not to every individual and particular man, This is my Body which is given for you, and divide it among yourselves, 1 Cor. 11.24. Luk. 22.17, 19  
40. That all the people must partake three times a year at least. 
Act. 2.42. & 20. 1 Cor. 11. 25, 26.  And why not every Lord's Day, or every Month, as the Primitive Christians did? and yet in Cathedral, or Collegiate Churches, where be many Priests (too many, I sear) and Deacons, they shall receive the Communion with the Minister every Sunday at least, and why should that difference be, unless the Priests would receive it more for their Bellies sake, than their Souls? Have not the common people need to remember Christ as often as they? or would they make a Church of Clerks, distinct from a Church of Christians. Apage!  
41. That every one must reckon at Easter with the Parson, 
It was an usual thing to deny the Communion to those that could not pay for it; nay, it was proved against one (at least) of the ejected Ministers of Wales, (Mr. Humphrey, of Aberhaves in Mountgomery-shire) That he raised a woman off her knees at the Sacrament, because she had not paid him.  Vicar, or Curate: Where find you that Christ or his Apostles did ever reckon so? or in what Bible do you find the word Parson, Vicar, Curate, or either of them? These names are fit to be joined in the Apocryphal story with Toby and his Dog.  
42. Though they confess, that in the Primitive times Baptism was administered twice a year (viz. at Easter; and Whitsuntide) yet it is ordered, that the Pastors and Curates shall often admonish the people, that they defer not the Baptism of Infants longer than till the Sunday, or other Holiday next after the child be born, etc. Doth not this savour strongly that Baptism is looked upon as necessary to salvation?  
43. This is to be done upon Sundays, or other Holidays; where note, that the Lords day is called Sunday, and the other days holidays; and who appointed or consecrated those holidays? Not Christ, nor his Apostles, nor the Primitive or Apostolical Church: they err in observing such days as were introduced by men; 
See Brza's notes upon Gal. 4.13  yea, all holidays, or Feasts appointed by God himself (except the Christian Sabbath) are abrogated, Gal. 4.10. Col. 2.16.  
44. In one of the Prayers after the Communion, Those things which for our unworthiniss we dare not ask; which is contrary to John 16.23, 24. Ephes. 3.12. 1 John 1.14. which show, that the people of God have liberty to ask any thing according to the will of God. But peradventure the Parsons and their Parishioners mean (by those things) liberty to game on the Lords Days, be drunk, swear, etc. which things, though they dare not ask leave (yet will take leave without ask) to do.  
45. If necessity require, that children may at all times be baptised at home; Christ and the Apostles mention no such necessity, and Augustine and Ambrose would not have been without Baptism till they came to be about thirty years of age, if in those times they had judged such a necessity of Baptism. And how contrary is this private Baptism, to the Baptism of John, and of Christ; see Mat. 3. 5, 6. John 3.22, 23.  
46. That the Red Sea figured Christ's holy Baptism. It rather signified the miserable state of Sinners by Nature, out of which Christ leads them.  
47. That God did by the Baptism of Christ sanctify the River Jordan, and all other Waters, for the mystical washing away of all sin. There is no Scripture for this, but on the contrary, 1 Pet. 3.21. If so, I wonder the Bishops and their Clergy are not Anabaptists, and baptise in Rivers, since first Rivers are sanctified.  
48. To use Godfathers, and Godmothers, and they answer instead of the child; and thus the children perform them (that is, Faith and Repentance.) No such thing practised in Christ's, or in the Apostles times, 
Public Baptism.  as sureties, neither do the children perform any such thing by them, any more than they do perform their promise for the children to bring them to hear Sermons, when they come to age. See Matth. 3.6. Mark 1. 8, 9 Luke 7.29, Joh. 1.33. Acts 2.8. & 18.  
49. The Cross in Baptism, that hath more warrant from the Pope than from Christ, or his Gospel. And by the English Cross, some of the Papists (as Martial) justify the Popish Cross: But we in England do not find that virtue in the Cross, which they of Rome say there is, viz. to sanctify those upon whom it is set, to drive away the Devil, to expel diseases, etc. It is wonder that Christ and his Apostles left us without such a Panthamaton, or sovereign salve.  
50. The Minister both in his speaking to the People, and in his Prayer saith, That the Children were regenerated, (meaning by Baptism) whereas they should be regenerated before they are baptised, Acts 8.37. & 16. 14, 15, 16, 31, 32, 33, Mat. 3. 8, 9 And I certify you, saith the Minister, that this Child which being born in Original sin, and in the Wrath of God, by the laver of Regeneration in Baptism, is now received into the number of the Children of God, and Heirs of everlasting life, and doubt not that he hath given unto him the blessing of eternal life, and made him partaker of his everlasting kingdom: so in the Catechism, 
And is it certain (as you say) that children being baptised, have all things for their falvation?  The Child answers, Wherein I was made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven: and again, We are thereby made the children of grace. What clearer proof can be desired to prove that the Sacrament doth confer grace, than this? See the Catech. If every child be made so in Baptism, then sure every one that is baptised, must be saved, or else they may fall from a state of grace; but neither of these are true, Act. 8.13, 20, 21. 1 Pet. 3.21. John 4.14. and 10. 27, 28.  
51. That the Godfathers and Godmothers give the child his name, whereas the Parents should do it, Gen. 39.33, 34. Luk. 1.60, 63. 1 Sam. 1.20.  
52. The child being asked, How many Sacraments? the answer is, Two, as generally necessary to Salvation; wherein is implied, that two are necessary, and more than two may be, though two may suffice.  
53. In private communion it is said, 
Private Baptism.  First let the lawful Minister call upon God for his grace, and say the Lords Prayer, if time will suffer. Mark here how the Minister either is in such haste, or the child in such danger, that they may not have time to say the Lords Prayer.  
54. After the confirmation, 
Confirmation.  the Rubric saith, None shall be admitted to the Lords Supper, but those that are confirmed: There is no such prohibition in Scripture; and if it were, what should the greatest number of people in most Parishes do, who are not visited nor confirmed by the Bishops at all? 
Simile.  This is as if a Master should forbid his servants meat till he comes to cut it; and he comes not perhaps in seven years, if at all.  
55. The Bishop saith, We have laid our hands, when he himself only hath done it: mark, how ambitious the Bishop is of speaking in a Kingly stile.  
56. In the Catechism, the Minister's exhortation to the child is called a Question, and the Lords Prayer an Answer.  
57 Matrimony called frequently Holy. Though it be true, that in opposition to Uncleanness and Whoredom, it may be called Holy, yet it may be suspected, lest hereby a compliance with the Papists (who make this one of their seven Sacraments) is intended.  
57 It is said further, That as many as be coupled together otherwise than God's Word doth allow, 
1 Cor. 6.7. Mat. 19.9. Cham 5. 32, etc. Matriages are to be in the Lord, 1 Cor. 7.39. that is, after the Will of the Lord, Eph. 6.1. 1 Cor. 6.17. Mat. 19.9. & 5.32.  are not joined together by God, neither is the Matrimony lawful: In what sense the Matrimony is unlawful, or to what end those words are mentioned, is very doubtful. It is true, there may be divers things in Marriage unwarrantable by the Word of God; as for a Believer to marry an Unbeliever, or true Christians to marry Idolaters, or for Children to marry without Parent's consent, etc. But yet Marriages are appointed (as Christ saith) by God; and when once made, there is no ground of divorce, except adultery.  
58. Tying Marriage to the Minister, and so making it holy: which in itself is bat Civil and Natural, and did belong rather to the Civil Magistrate, than to the Minister to perform; Ruth 4.11, 12.13.  
59 The using of the Ring in Marriage; which in itself may be indifferent; yet making it essential to Marriage it ceaseth to be indifferent.  
60. The man in Marriage promiseth to the woman, that with his body he will worship her: 
Luk. 14.10.  Though there be civil worship, yet it is due from an Inferior to a Superior and not from a Superior to an Inferior or Equal, 
Matrimony.  as the woman is.  
61. There is one Prayer to be omitted by the Minister, where the woman is past child-bearing. Sure they are very skilful Parsons, Vicars, and Curates, that can judge what women are passed child-bearing: but no great matter, for they bear neither less nor more, for their praying or not praying for them.  
62. The new married persons the same day of their marriage must receive the Communion: They that will understand Rule or Reason for this practice, must go to Rome at least. And how shall those married persons have the Sacrament, that the Curate marries under a Hedge, or in a Wood, or in a blind Alehouse, as 'tis too common in some Countries?  
63. It is that the Marriage-Ring is a token and pledge of the Covenant made in Marriage; and that Marriage doth signify the mystical union between Christ and his Church; for the first, it is needless, and for the other it is utterly false, if it be understood of all Marriages. It is true, the union between Adam and Eve did signify the mystical union between Christ and his Church.  
64. In the Visitation of the sick, 
Visit. of the sick  the Minister saith, That Christ hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truly repent and believe; 1. Sure if he hath given power to his Church, yet he hath not given power to any Parson, no nor Pope, to say what he doth adventure there to say, I absolve thee from all thy sins.  
2. The power that Christ hath left in his Church to absolve, is to be exercised in restoring and receiving the Members that were before cast out for sin, upon their repentance, 2 Cor. 2. 6, 7, 8, 9 Gal. 6.1. Matth. 18.18. 1 Cor. 5.5.  
65. To give the Communion when a man is sick at home, and in the time of Plague, and upon special request of the diseased person. The Minister only may communicate with him. 
Private Communion.  Such a Communion is not warranted by the word of God; and to administer it thus, cannot but be Popish, both in the end and manner. By this also the Minister is tied to go to the Houses where the Plague is, and to communicate alone with him. This is contrary to the Scripture, 1 Cor. 10. & 11. and the Nature of a Communion, yea, to the Rule given in the end of public Communion.  
66. Appointing singing at Burials. 
At Burials.  Which is contrary to the Rule prescribed by the Apostle, James 5.13.  
67. To say of every one buried, This our dear brother here departed: They have a large Faith that can believe that all they bury are such: I would advise such to bury none of the Sectaries, or fanatics, lest at their burial they confess what in their life-time they did deny, (viz.) to account them Brethren.  
68 Reading and praying over the dead, without any command or example in Scripture.  
69. Churching of women, 
Churching of women.  applying Psal. 121. to the Woman, which is meant of the Church of God.  
70. The woman must offer an accustomed offering. Is not this to bring them back to the Law of Moses? Leu. 12. And are not these such as lead silly women away? according to that Scripture, 2 Tim. 3.6. For they (viz. the Parsons, Vicars, and Curates) creep into houses, yea, into women's chambers often to Church them, as they call it. Is not this a private Conventicle?  
71. That in the Primitive Church there was a godly Disscipline, 
Commination. Those Judgements denounced in Deut. 27. was not part of the public worship to be performed by the Priests, but only done upon Mount Ebal by six of the Tribes only; and therefore no example for Gospel-days.  that at the beginning of Lent such Persons as were notorious sinners were put to open Penance, etc. Are not these words as Honey and Wine to the Papists, to grant them at once Lent and Penance, and their Church to be the Primitive Church? Sed ab Origine non fuit ita.  
72. That Discipline is much to be wished. Is not to wish Penance, to wish Popery? for the Papists in the places where we read repent, they translate do penance; so after denouncing the Judgement, they say, Let us seek to bring forth fruits worthy of penance; which is otherwise, 
The word Penance is in several other places.  and more truly rendered in Mat. 3.8. Repent, or change your mind, as the word Metanoeite signifies.  
73. In the Prayer appointed to be said at the point of death, (mark, not prayed) the Common-Prayer-Book teaches the poor people that are ignorant to pray in Latin, In manus tuas commendo spiritum meum, and again, Domine Jesu accipe spiritum meum; this is not to pray with understanding, as the Apostle speaks: but to assure the Papists, 
1. Cor. 14.  that the person deceased died with their faith in his heart, as well as their language in his mouth?  
Many other things might be objected against, as the misapplying of divers Scriptures, as Mat. 4. is applied to the Lenten fasts, and Rev. 14.1, 5. concerning (the 44000 that are sealed) is applied to the children that Herod caused to be slain, etc. so there are Untruths in it, as in the Calendar. That nothing is ordained to be read but the very pure Word of God, and that all the Ceremonies pertain to edification, etc. Likewise somewhat that is good in the Book established by King Edward the sixth is left out, viz. From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome, and all his detestable Enormities good Lord deliver us. It is also worthy observation, that above twenty years ago, some godly Preachers (that did refuse to read, and that did also preach against the present Book of Common-Prayer, both in London, and in divers Counties) were acquitted from their Inditements: because the Act that enjoy us the Book of Common-Prayer (under paenalty) commands that very Book, and no other, established by Edward the sixth, with one sentence added in the Administration of the Sacrament, and a sentence altered in the Litany; but this is not altered, but quite razed out. And by that very act whoever reads this present Book of Common-Prayer, should for the first fault, forfeit half his yearly Ecclesiastical Revenue, which if all the Readers of Common-Prayer were forced to do, their zeal for that Idol would soon cool.   

Arguments to prove, that Lord-Bishops, or Diocesan-Bishops, etc. and their Authority, are contrary to the Word of God, and so consequently unlawful. And the chiefest Objections for Diocesan-Bishops, answered.  
Also a Discovery of the great Disparity between Scriptural, Apostolical, Congregational (particularly Timothy and Titus) Bishops, and Diocesan-Bishops.  
THat which is absolutely forbidden by Christ and his Apostle (viz. Peter) is unlawful: 
Argum. 1.   
But for any Ministers (extraordinary or ordinary) to exercise Lordship, or be Lords over one another, or the Heritage (or Church) of God is absolutely forbidden both by Christ and his Apostle (viz. Peter.)  
Therefore for any to be such, or to exercise such power, is utterly unlawful.  
The Major, or first Proposition, none can deny, But that which Christ and his Apostle do forbid, is utterly unlawful.  
The Minor is clearly and strongly proved out of Mat. 20.25. Luk. 22.25. 1 Pet. 5.1, 3. The words in Matthew are, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion (or as it is in the Greek there, and in Luke, exercise Lordship) over them. But it shall not be so among you: or, as Luke saith, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  But ye shall not be so. Observe here, to whom, of whom, and upon what occasion Christ spoke these words. He spoke these words to the ten Apostles or Disciples, v. 24. concerning James and John; and the occasion was the indignation of the other ten against their two Brethren. Where note, 1. That they were all Christians, Brethren, (Judas excepted) Preachers and Apostles. 2. That those that were offended were ten to two. 3. The ten had some seeming ground to exercise Authority over the two; 
A good Caution to Peter's Successor. Mark 10.35.  for the two began to seek pre-eminence over them first, (yea, of Peter and Andrew that were called before them to be Apostles) in desiring that they might sit the one on Christ's right hand, and the other on his left in his Kingdom: and yet mark how Christ allays that evil, proud, and Prelatical Spirit that was beginning to rise in them; he beats it down with both hands, urging three strong Arguments to dissuade them from this Lordliness. First, saith he, The Princes of the Gentiles do exercise dominion over them (not that Christ doth allow Princes and great men to exercise power over his Ministers and people to persecute them) and 'tis as if Christ had said, Princes and not Preachers should exercise Lordship; and the great ones among the Gentiles, to wit, sinners, and not the good ones among the Saints, claim and exercise this Lordly-power: and they and you will have enough, 
A seasonable Consideration. The best way to make Preachers good, is to keep them low, and from meddling with Lordly power.  and too much indignation and persecution from these; and therefore be not of a high and Lordly spirit over one another Secondly (saith he) Whosoever would be greatest and chiefest among them, should be their Ministers and Servants, v. 26, 27. Thirdly, He gives them his own example of humility towards them; Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto but to minister. Likewise that place be fore cited in Peter (better known than observed by the Clergy) is most pat, and like David's stone, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  knocking this Goliath Episcopacy in the forehead; Neither, saith he, being Lords over God's Heritage, or not as though ye were Lords of the Heritage's. Thus much for the first Argument. 
Argum. 2.   
That which is directly contrary to what the Spirit of God hath appointed, must needs be unlawful:  
But for one Bishop to be over divers (or many particular Churches) is directly contrary to what the Spirit of God hath appointed.  
Ergo, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  for one Bishop to be over divers particular Churches, is unlawful. The Major is larior sole, clearer than the Sun, and needs no proof.  
The Minor I prove thus: The Holy Ghost hath appointed several Bishops in one particular Church. The words are plain, in Act. 20.28. Take heed therefore to yourselves, and to the whole flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers. Or more near the Greek, Take heed therefore to yourselves, and feed the whole flock in which the Holy Ghost hath put you Bishops. In that particular Church of Ephesus there were several Bishops, or as they are called in the 17 verse. Elders (which are the same; for Peter, though an Apostle, calls himself an Elder) so in the Church of Philippi, there were several Bishops, as well as Deacous, 
1 Pet. 5.7,  Phil. 1.1. Then to appoint or set up one Bishop over divers Congregations, as over three or four hundred, nay some over a hundred Parishes, is to do contrary to what the Spirit of the Lord hath done. Therefore 'tis unlawful.  
That order which is contrary to the order which the Apostles set up in the Churches of the Gentiles, is unlawful: 
Argum. 3.   
But the order of Lordly or Diocesan-Bishops is contrary to that order which the Apostles set up in the Churches of the Gentiles. _____ Therefore unlawful.  
The Proposition will not be denied; for what the Apostles received from Christ, they set up in the Churches, 1 Cor. 11.23. & 14.3.7. Act. 15.29. & 16.4.  
The Assumption I prove thus: The order that the Apostles set up in the Churches of the Gentiles, was Bishops or Elders (which were of equal power and authority, as is showed before, and will more fully be afterward) in every Church, Act. 14.23. Tit. 1.5, 7. But Diocesan order is to set up one Bishop over many Churches; which order is contrary to the order set up by the Apostles, and so consequentially unlawful. They that walk contrary to the Rules of the Apostles, walk contrary to the Lord himself, 1 Cor. 11.1. Ephes. 5.1.2 Thes. 3.9. and they that walk contrary to the Lord, the Lord will walk contrary to them, Leu. 26.21, 41.  
That Office and Authority which makes a man utterly uncapable of performing the duties belonging properly to his Function, is unlawful: 
Argum. 4.   
But Lordly or Diocesan power makes a man utterly uncapable of performing the duties belonging to his Function.  
Therefore Lordly or Diocesan Power is unlawful.  
The Major none but such as are willing to shun performing their Duties, will deny.  
The Minor is proved by considering what the Duties are which belong to the Function of Bishops; to wit, to know their stocks, watch over them, feed, and comfort them; to resolve their doubts, visit them, and administer the Lords Supper often unto them, etc. Prov. 27.23. 1 Thes. 5.12, 13. Heb. 13.7, 17. Act. 20.28. 2 Cor. 1.4. James 5.14. 1 Cor. 11.23, 26. and how any Diocesan-Bishops (whose power extends in some Dioceses over several Counties) can possibly do this, let any judge.  
That which doth necessarily introduce the Pope's power over the Churches of Christ, 
Argum. 5.  is unlawful:  
But the office of Lord-Bishops, or Diocesan-Bishops doth necessarily introduce the Pope's power over the Churches of Christ.  
Therefore the office of Lord-Bishops and Diocesan-Bishops is unlawful.  
None but Papists will oppose the first.  
The second I prove thus: They that have their Ordination from the Pope (and so consequently their Ministry, for Ordinatio apud Episcopos, est causa sine qua non, etc. for a man, though never so well qualified, is not accounted by them a Minister without it) do introduce the Pope's power over the Churches of Christ: But Diocesan or Lord-Bishops have their Ordination from the Pope. Ergo. I prove they have their Ordination from the Pope: They that have their Ordination from the Archbishop, have their Ordination from the Pope, as holy Crunmer confessed they had (and as one lately made Bishop, 
Mr. Nichols, formerly Minister in Carmarthen in South-Wales now (as they say) Bishop of Gloucester.  acknowledged before many witnesses, in a conference with me in Carmarthen, for which some of his own friends blamed him.) For if the Archbishop hath not his Ordination from the Pope, than he hath none at all, and so is no Minister at all; and so hath no power to ordain other Bishops, nor they any other Ministers; for, Nemo dat quod in se non habet. So that it is easy to derive the Pedigree of our Diocesan-Bishops. And the learned Papists who are well versed in this Genealogy, know their descent perfectly, that the Bishops and themselves have but one Grandfather, whoever their Grandmother or Mother is,  
Obj. But if it be objected, That one Bishop hath power to ordain another, and so they need not have dependence upon the Pope for their Ordination.  
Ans. I answer, If one Bishop ordain another, either he ordains him as another ordinary Minister (or Priest, as they say) or as a Bishop: If as another ordinary Minister, than a Bishop is not of another or higher Order than the ordinary Minister is of; but they are Equal in degree, and then par in parens non habet imperium. And this will not satisfy the Bishops.  
If he ordained him first as a Minister, and afterwards as a Bishop, he hath had two Ordinations, for which there is no Rule in Scripture.  
Obj. But the Archbishop doth but consecrate and confirm the Bishop.  
Ans. Suppose that were a distinct thing from Ordination (which cannot be proved from the Word of God) yet who shall consecrate the Archbishop? either it must be his Inferior, Equal, or Superior: surely it will not be admitted that his Inferior should do it, for by that Rule and Reason, ordinary Ministers (which they call Priests, and account to be of a lower rank than Bishops) may ordain Bishops. An Equal cannot do it, because that the Archbishop of Canterbury hath no Fellow (unless the Archbishop of York) then of necessity there must be application to a Superior, and there is no such (that assumes any Authority to administer Ecclesiastical Ordinances) except the Pope himself. So that by close pursuit, you may find where these Foxes are, or will be kenneled. Let us therefore with the Church pray, Take us (or as it is in the Hebrew, gnalu for us) the little Foxes that spoil the Vines, for our Vines have tender Grapes, Cant. 2.15.  
That Order and Office which hath many unscriptural Inferior Officers depending thereon, 
Argum. 6.  and are as branches thereof, is unlawful.  
But the Order and Office of Diocesan and Lord-Bishops hath many unscriptural Officers depending thereon, and are branches thereof. Therefore it is unlawful.  
The former is proved, 2 Chron. 13.9. Ezek. 43.3. Act. 23.3. when Paul said to Ananias the High Priest, Thou whited wall, etc. doubtless he looked upon him to be irregular in the Office (as the corruption was grown among the Jews to have a Sagan; answerable thereto, sure are Suffragans) and when he said, I witted not that he was the High Priest, he spoke it Ironically, and 'tis as if he had said, I knew him not to be an High Priest, but I looked upon him as one that doth usurp the place. Surely Paul knew the High Priest, and his power well enough; but he spoke to him as Diogenes said to Alexander the Great, I do not know Alexander the King, but I know Alexander the Tyrant.  
The Minor or latter, that the Diocesan and Lord-Bishops have many unscriptural inferior Officers, as Deans, Deans and Chapters, Archdeacon's, Commissaries, Chancellors, Canons, Residents, Prebendaries, Peticanons, etc. such a rabble-rout, that some (who have searched the Nest) affirm, that there are from the bottom to the top, from the Van to the Rear, thirty eight distinct Officers, that is, thirty above what Christ hath put in his Church. So having done with these Syllogistical Arguments, I will now lay down a few more plain Reasons against Diocesan Lord-Bishops, and their Power.  
Because there is no difference made in the Scripture between Bishops and other Gospel-Ministers, 
Argum. 7.  called Elders. See Act. 20.17. and 28. Mat. 6.37. Col. 1.23. Phil. 1.1. Tit. 1.5, 6, 7. Note, that where the Church-Officers are mentioned in Scripture, the Bishops are never named as a distinct Order from the Elders, but only from the Deacons, Rom. 12.6, 7, 8. Ephes. 4.11, 12.  
Obj. Yea there is mention made of Helps and Governments, 1 Cor. 12.28.  
Ans. Though he speaks of Helps and Governments, yet it is in the fifth or sixth place after Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, etc. and not in the first nor second rank. So that if any can spy out Episcopacy here, I am sure they can neither in this place, nor elsewhere in Scripture find Lord-Bishop, neither in name nor power, nor in that Rank and Order they place themselves no though you thus reckon. First the Pope; secondly, the Cardinal; thirdly, the Archbishop; fourthly, the Diocesan-Bishop; there you find them in their proper place, but not in the Scripture.  
2. It is said, Aquila and Urbane, (nay, Priscilla a woman) were Helpers (of Paul) in Christ Jesus, Rom. 16.3, 9 and yet they were no Bishops. It were to be wished that the Bishops were as good Helpers as they were, and as like Timothy (whom they would have to be a Bishop) be ready to carry a poor painful persecuted Preachers Cloak, Books, etc. as he did Paul's. And thus they would obey the commands of Christ, who said, Whosoever will be great among you, let him be your Minister; and, Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant, Mat. 20.26, 27. I suppose all know who would be greatest and chiefest among the Ministers: but do any know which of them will be content to learn this Lesson of Christ? for such a Bishop would we give our voice: nay, I am contented that the Bishops should have the chiefest care of so many as they have converted, or fed. This granted, it is supposed their power will not be too great.  
Because they are created by men, (viz. by the Kings or Princes, 
Argum. 8.  in whose Dominions they are) and I may say to them, as the Boy said to the Doctor, That God made his Father's Ox a Bull, but his Father made him an Ox: God made them men, but the King made them Bishops. See Cook, De Jure Regis Ecclesiastico.  
Because they depend upon man, 
Argum. 9  which the true Ministers of Christ never did. Episcopacy is a Noun Adrective, that cannot stand by itself, but it must be supported by the hand of the chief Magistrate: And they shelter themselves under that Maxim of theirs, No Bishop, no King. And the Bishops say, No Ceremony, no Bishop, whether this be not to lay a weak foundation to Regal Authority, let any judge. The Proverb would be truer, No King, no Bishop; for the King may very well subsist without them, 
Simile.  but they like Colewerts close to the Vine, draw the fatness of the earth from it to themselves: Or like the Ivy to the Oak, 
Simile.  sheltering itself under its arms and boughs, but in the mean time, keeping much of the virtue of the Sun from the Tree.  
A tenth Reason to prove Diocesan Bishops to be unlawful, 
Argum. 10.  is, because they do imitate the Priests of the Law so much in respect of their different degrees, order, etc. as Archbishops answering the High Priests, the Presbyters, the other Priests, and the Deacons the Levites, and the Chorister and Cantors the Jewish Singers; so their Organs and other Instrument. They have also their Paul's answerable to the Temple; their Garments, Girdle, mitre, etc. like those which the Priests did use; 
Exod. 28.4, 5, 6.  also their Tables, Altars, Sacrifices, Oblations, Purifications of Women: and their holidays, Feasts, with many such things, answering to the Jewish Feasts: 
Heb. 9.7, 8, 9  but this is to set up the Legal Priesthood again, that was weak, and those things which were but shadows, and continued only till the time of Reformation; And is not this to do altogether as bad as the Jewish Teachers did, 
Gal. 3.4.  who endeavoured to bring back the Disciples, who had begun in the Spirit, to end in the flesh?  
Obj. But how can they be Jewish, and yet Popish?  
Ans. Very well; for the Pope and Papists are in a manner Imitators of the Jews; only they borrow some Heathenish Customs, and create some of their own for outward advantage. And doubtless it was the aim and endeavour of some of the late Bishops, as might easily be seen by their Writings and works, that they intended to unite England to Rome: and what some of the present ones may do (being Birds of the same feather) when their wings grow longer; Time (which is the discoverer of things) will show.  
Because Lordly and Diocesan power is more than the Apostles of Christ did exercise either jointly or apart. 
Argum. 13.  For they imposed no Canons or Decrees (except the pure Scriptures, the true Rule and Standard) upon any of the Churches (no, though a whole Synod of them were gathered together to make such) but delivered, and left them to the Churches with this Recommendation, If you keep yourselves, ye shall do well, Act. 15.29. Likewise Paul an Apostle, and Timothy a Bishop (if you will have him so) would not exercise Dominion over the Faith of the Christians, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lordship.  2 Cor. 1.1. compared with 24.  
Lastly, It will evidently appear that the Lordly Diocesan-Bishops, and their power are unwarrantable and unscriptural, if we compare them with the Bishops mentioned in Scripture; and particularly with Timothy and Titus, who are urged by them for Authority and Example.  

Timothy and Titus were  
1. Begotten again, and converted by the Gospel, 1 Tim. 1.1. Titus 1.4.  
2. True Disciples and Servants of Jesus Christ, Act. 16. Phil. 1.1.  
3. Men of good report, Act. 16.2. 2 Cor. 8.6.  
4. Inwardly and really affected to the people of God, 2 Cor. 7.15. Titus 1.8. as Brethren, Col. 1.1.  
5. Well acquainted with the Scriptures, and the Word of God, and having a gift to prophecy, 2 Tim. 3.15. and 1 Tim. 4.14.  
6. Doubtless chosen by the suffrages or voices of Church-members, as the manner was in choosing Officers, Acts. 6.3. and 14.22.  
7. Ordained solemnly by fasting and prayer, either by the Apostles, Presbyters, or Elders of the same Church or Churches they were of, Act. 6.6. and 13.3. 1 Tim. 4.14.  
8. Itinerant Preachers, going from Country to Country to preach the Gospel, Act. 17.14. 1 Thes. 1.3.  
9 Diligent Labourers in the Work of Christ and his Gospel, called, Paul's work-fellows, Rom. 6.21. 1 Cor. 16.10.  
10. Naturally careful of the things of Christ, and of the welfare of Christians, Phil. 1.19. 2 Cor. 8.16.  
11. Attendants and Ministers to the Apostles, Act. 18.5. and 19.22. Gal. 2.1. 2 Tim. 4.10. but not their Chaplains.  
12. Messengers of the Churches of Christ, going from one Church to another, and carrying contribution to the poor Saints, 2 Cor. 8.23. and 2 Cor. 8.6.  
13. Much refreshed in and among the Saints and Churches of Christ, 2 Cor. 7.14.  
14. Persecuted, imprisoned, and in bondage, for professing, preaching, and practising the Doctrine of the Gospel of Christ, Heb. 13.17. Col. 4.10.  
15. Such as did ordain Bishops or Elders in the Churches of Christ according to the appointment of the Apostles, Tit. 1.5.  
16. Doubtless blameless, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, etc. 1 Tim. 3.23. Tit. 1.2. 1 Tim. 3.2.   

Timothy and Titus (as appears in Scripture)  
1. Were not chosen to their Office by Dean and Chapter.  
2. Were not created by any earthly Kings or Princes.  
3. Were not consecrated and confirmed by any Archbishop or Pope.  
4. Did not call themselves, neither were they called Lords. Though these men call themselves so, as Dr. Godwyn, etc. whereas Christ forbids his Apostles to be called Masters, Mat. 23.8, 10. See James 3.1.  
5. Did not swear Canonical Obedience to any Archbishop.  
6. Did not require any that they did ordain, to swear Canonical obedience to them.  
7. Did not ask the Ministers they ordained at their Ordination, Will you reverently obey the Ordinary and other chief Ministers unto whom the Government and Charge is committed over you? etc.  
8. When they did ordain other Ministers, they did not say to them, Recipe Sanctum Spiritum, Receive the Holy Ghost, and, Take thou Authority to preach the Word of God.  
9 Tendered no Book of Articles, Canons, or Common-Prayer-Books to these they ordained, nor required any to swear to such things.  
10. Did not lay hands upon any to ordain them before they were elected; much less ordain, or licence any to be mere Readers.  
11. Did not intermeddle with Civil and Secular Affairs: they were neither honourable in Parliaments, nor Councils: nor Worshipful Justices in the Countries.  
12. Had not Stately Palaces, Bishops Lands, or thousands to maintain them yearly.  
13. Had not High-Commission-Courts, Court of Audience, Prerogative-Court, Court of Faculties, etc. nor power to convene people at their pleasures before them.  
14. Had not such Officers under them as Deans, Archdeacon's, prebend's, Chancellors, Commissaries, Advocates, Proctors, Pursuivants, Apparitors, etc.  
15. Used not such Oaths, as the Oath ex Officio (to examine a man against himself) or the Etcaetera Oath, to swear to what should, be added and put in afterwards by them.  
16. Did not impose penance, fines, imprisonment, etc. upon people at their pleasure.  
17. Did not wear Scarlet Gowns, Mytres, Laun-sleeves, etc.  
18. Did not sell Live for money, nor give them as Dowries or Portions with their Daughters or Kinswomen to Ministers.  
19 Did not silence any of the Ministers of the Gospel under the notion of Puritans and Factious persons, but if they silenced any, it was by Scriptures, and sound Arguments, as Titus was commanded, Tit. 1.  
20. They did not present Ministers (as the Bishops used to do) for preaching without licence, or in a Coat, or Cloak, or godly people for going out of their own Parishes to hear Sermons; or for meeting in private to read the Scriptures, repeat Sermons, pray, etc. or for not standing at the Creed, not bowing at the Name of Jesus, for wearing one's hat at Sermon-time, for not observing Popish-Holy-days, etc.  
21. Did not cause any of the Believers to be fined, imprisoned, stigmatised, and to have their ears cut off, etc. or banished under the notion of Sectaries, or Schismatical persons.  
22. Did not require the sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction, like Demetrius.  
23. Did not neglect to preach the Gospel, or think it enough to appoint others under, or for them to do it. Did not make Preachers, Physicians, Schoolmasters, Clerks, Midwives, etc. buy and often renew their licences, etc.  
24. Were not given to Wine, or greedy of filthy lucre: not soon angry, brawlers, self-willed, proud, contentious, and ill Examples in their Families or Country.  
25. Did not remove from one Diocese to another for greater preferment.  
26. Had not under them dumb, lazy, profane, Popish Priests, and Parsons, that have not only pluralities of Live, but pluralities of Offices belonging to their Hierarchy.   
Having thus laid down the Reasons against Archbishops and Diocesan Lord Bishops, and likewise having shown you the difference between these Worldly Monsters, and true Gospel-Bishops: it will in the last place be necessary to answer some of the main Objections: and they are not many (as I apprehend) that can be made, nor any but may be easily and soon answered; though men's wanton and worldly wit, self-interest, and sinful sophistry would imagine more than are real.  
Obj. But were there not Bishops in the days of the Apostles? Was not Timothy Bishop of Ephesus, and Titus Bishop of Crete?  
Ans. There is no Scripture that proves either of them to be Bishops at all, much less Bishops of those places.  
Obj. What? Doth not Paul in his superscription or subscription direct his Epistle to them as such? 2 Tim. 4. end Tit. 3. end.  
Ans. First, the superscriptions (or subscriptions) in the end of all Paul's Epistles seem, (and are judged by many learned) to be added by men since, and were not written by Paul. And it is evident, that some of those superscriptions are contradictory to the very Epistles to which they are suffixed. As the 1 Epist. to the Corinth. by comparing the subscription with Act. 19 9, 22. with 1 Cor. 16.8.  
Secondly, It is very probable that those particular subscriptions to Timothy and Titus were not written by Paul, For,  
1. Timothy and Titus were Evangelists, 2 Tim. 4.5. 2 Cor. 8.23. that is, men not tied to one place or Church, but sometimes accompanied the Apostles in their Journeys from Country to Country, and assisted them in the work of the Gospel, by preaching, visiting, and helping to settle Officers and good Order in the Churches, as appears, Act. 17.14. & 19.22. 1 Thes. 3.12. 2 Cor. 2.12. Gal. 2.1. 2 Cor. 5.6. 1 Tim. 1.3. Tit. 1 5. and as more fully (and particularly) appears in the positive part of the parallel (to wit, what Timothy and Titus were) between them and Diocesan-Bishops.  
2. It is clear, that in Ephesus (which was but one Church in one City, Act. 18.19. Rev. 2.1.) there were divers Bishops, Act. 20 17. compared with vers. 28. Bishops (so it is in the Greek) See Reas. first. And if there were divers Bishops there, how could Timothy be a single Bishop there? And if those Bishops were chosen and ordained in Ephesus, whilst Timothy was attending upon Paul in his Journeys and Voyages, how could he be the first Bishop there? as the subscription saith, that he was ordained the first Bishop of the Church of the Ephesians.  
3. If Titus were Bishop of Crete, 
Crete called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is a hundred Cities.  as the subscription saith, he must be Archbishop: For, 1. Crete had a hundred Cities in it (if we may credit divers Historians and Expositors.) 2. He ordained Bishops (or Elders, which is the same as was showed before) and that was one of the main ends, why Paul left him in Crete, Tit. 1.5. compared with vers. 7. And why Titus should be Bishop of many Cities, and that Timothy who was his equal at least in most or all regards, and that had that commendation from Paul himself, That he had no man like-minded, etc. and Timothy Bishop but of one City or Church, 
Phil. 2.20.  as Ephesus was, let the next Synod of Bishop's resolve and determine if they can. 
☜   
Obj. But in the Epistle directed to the seven Churches of Asia, there is mention only of one Angel.  
Ans. 1. It hath been showed already, that in one of those seven Churches, (viz. Ephesus) there were divers Bishops; and so in the Church of Thyatira, The Holy Ghost writes, to you, and the rest in Thyatira, which were more than one, cap. 2.24.  
2. Many good Angels termed one, as in Psal. 34.7. & 91.11. 2 King. 6.16, 17. & 19.35. So one Priest or Prophet is put for many, Isa. 3.2. Jer. 6.18, 19 Ezek. 7.26. Hos. 4.6. One Angel is here taken for divers; showing, that all the Officers in the Congregation were entire and one.  
3. If there were but one Bishop in those Churches; then the order in those Churches, and in other Churches, would not be the same, as was showed before, Phil. 1.1. Act. 14.23. & 20.28. But,  
4. Lastly, suppose it be granted that there was but one Bishop in every one of those particular Churches, and that their power did extend no further (as there is no ground to believe it did) than in their particular Churches, than they were not Diocesans.  
Obj. The Government of Bishops is ancient, of fifteen hundred years standing; therefore lawful.  
Ans. 1. The Devil and Antichrist may make that Plea as well as they, John 8.44. 2 Thes. 2.4. 1 John 4.3.  
2. 
See the differences clearly and fully shown in Smethy Annuus.  They that read the History of the Church (written by Eusebius, Sympson, etc.) will easily discern the differences between the Bishops of the three first Centuries, and our Diocesan-Bishops. The controversy is not about the ●●me (as is acknowledged by all) but about the power of Bishops.  
3. 
Mea entiquetas Christus est. August. Consuetudo sine veritate, est vetustas erroris.  If the word of God be a perfect Rule (as it is) what need we go any further? Bring your Episcopal Metal to this Touchstone, and if it will hold here, we will honour it with its Grey hairs, and receive and reverence it as the right Heir; If not, we must say with Gerhard, Antiquity without truth, is but a cipher.  1 Thes. 5.21. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. Isa. 8.20. To the Law, and to the Testimony, if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them. Is qui praeest, si praeter voluntatem Dei, vel praeter quod in sanctis Scripturis evidenter praecipitur, vel dicit aliquid, vel imperat tanquam falsus aut sacrilegus habeatur, Can. Law. 
FINIS.