More Work for Priests, Answer 1 – Answer 2
IOHN GREENWODS Answer
Wisdome is Iustified of her Children.
IT is agreed upon & consented unto on both sides, that seeing God is a spirit, & onelyonly requireth such to worship him, as worship him in spirit & truth: all carnall worship is cut downe hereby, of what sort soever, as disagreeing from the nature of God: & that all fantastical devises of men; namely, whatsoever is not warranted in his worde, is carnall worship, a wearisomnes unto him, & lothsome in his sight: So that no man ought to intermedle, attempt, or practise any thing in shew of worship, wher of they have not sure grounde of his worde: For even our God is a consuming fire.
Now to put away all your (bodily) distinctions and earthly cavils, I still affirme (as I have proved) the stinting, imposing mens writings upon publique assemblies, to have them read over by number and stint, or any other way, as a worship of God instead of true invocation, is a meere devise of man, & so carnall worship; as also all other reading of mens writings publiquely or privatly in this abuse, for praying to God. Yet say you to apply this Scripture Iohn. 4.22.23. in this manner against read prayer, is frivolous, where I appeale to all mens consciences, for the weight therof. It is frivolous, you say, except I can prove that a man cannot pray by the spirit of God with sighes, and groanes upon a booke, or when prayer is uttered after a prescript forme, &c.. At the first step you goe about to alter the question. All our prayers ought to be uttered after a prescript forme, even that perfect rule and forme our Saviour gave to his Disciples and all posterities: But this is nothing to the matter.
For the other which is nothing but a begging of the question, I alleaged certayne reasōs to this effect. First that those sighes & groanes in reading instead of praying were not of faith, seeing that those sighes & grones that proceed of faith, minister matter to pray without a booke. 2. That you did but barely affirme the question in calling it prayer by the spirit, when one doth read, seing reading is not praying at all: for as I then alleadged, to invocate the name of God in spirit, is by the worke of the spirit to bring fourth of our hearts prayer to God, which is then in truth when it agreeth to Gods word. But reading is another matter, namely a receaving of instruction into the heart from the booke. Out of the first Mr. GIFFORD maketh men beleeve he hath fetched two heresies; the one a perfection of faith, the other that faith cannot be joyned unto, or stand with anie outward helpes for the encrease therof. Litle marveile, he found so many heresies in our whole writings, that could finde two or three in my first reason: but that you may remember your self better (though you had two yeares to consider) I will bring the wordes before you againe, if peradventure you may have grace to call backe your self. I said if the sighes & grones (in that kinde of praying) were of faith, it would minister matter without a booke, this sentence I may confirme by many testimonies of scripture, that no perverted spirit can gaine say or resist: the scripture teacheth us every where, that in praying the spirit onelyonly helpeth our infirmities, no other helpes mentioned or can be collected in the present action of prayer through the Scripture. He hath sent into our hearts the spirit of his Sonne crying:Rom. 8.26 Gal 4.6 2. cor. 4.13 Abba Father, we beleeve, therfore we speake. Yet here is not any shew of perfection of faith, but of the contrary, praying for our wantes. But this may be gathered, that God onelyonly accepteth the fruits of his owne spirit in prayer, and requireth no more of any, but that every one according to the proportion of faith, pray unto him, as occasion in them requireth. Now to conclude that because in praying we neede not a book to speake for us, when the heart it self & book of our conscience speaketh with God; that therefore sayth never needeth instruction, but is perfect, were slanderous, false, and senselesse. The cause then of these heresies proceed hereof, that your sel fe Mr. Gifford would needs frame two syllogismes, & in the moodes of your malice, constraine the propositiō of the present action in praying, to a generall sentence of all times and actions. though both our question here was of the very action of praying, & in the conclusion of that very point within six lines after this, you ad these wordes; Even in the time of their begging at Gods hands; so that these heresies must be Mr Giffords and not myne, seeing they are found to be coyned of his idle brayne, and godles heart, only to defame the trueth.
But (say you) the most part are ignorant, weak, short of memorie, &c. therfore need all helps to stir them up to pray, &c. where, by your own confession, reading is not praying, but a help to stir up to pray. And even hereupon al our errours arise, that you cannot discerne the difference of spiritual gifts, with the distinct use of thē. We doubt not but before prayer, & al the daies of our life, we have neede of helps of instruction to praye aright, & for the fitnes of the mind & bodie, often fasting, reading, meditating, &c. are great helpes to go before to humble our selves in praying: but in the present action of prayer whē the heart is talking with God, the eies, hands, &c. with attention lift up to heaven, all the powers of our soules & bodies conversant with God, to take a booke & read, cannot be called in this action a help, but a confounding of the mind, & of Gods ordinances, and a doing we know not what, though before and after, it be an exeellent meanes ordeyned of God, to instruct us to pray and al other dueties.
As for the conformation you talke of, where I alledged that a troubled minde is the penne of a readie writer, therefore needeth not a booke to speake for it in the action of praying:Psalm. 51, 17. By troubled minde I understood such a minde, as is presently moved with the sight of some sinne, or urged by other occasion: a broken spirit, a broken & contrite heart: & not such a minde as in dispayre or doubt is perplexed: and that the heart which is moved in faith with present occasion to cal upon God is the penne of a readie writer, (that is) hath matter and wordes enough without a book to utter his own wantes, we may reade throughout the Psalmes, My throte is dry (saith David) I am wearie with crying &c. But here againe in stead of answere, you tell me, I runne upon the rocke of an hereticall opinion of perfection: Wherein I wonder (but that I perceave your right eye is blinded) you should be so carelesse what you say, nay what after two yeares studie you put in print. Doth it follow, that because the heart, moved with occasion through the worke of faith, hath wordes and matter enough in praying without a booke to speake for it, that therefore faith is perfect? Let equall Judges consider.
Here you say manie are so troubled & perplexed in minde, that they cannot pray till they have some consolation by the direction of others; which when they cannot have, reading upon a booke is a notable help, I allowe all this and agree, if you would make reading one thing, and prayer an other, divers exercises of the spirit &c. But in the verie action of praying to have an other speake unto us never so good wordes of exhortation, were but a confounding of the minde and action, and an abuse of both those holie exercises. Even so, by your owne comparison, reading upon a booke in the action of praying, seing we cannot doe both at once. It is the spirit of God in the verie action of prayer that helpeth our infirmities. David in praying finding his soule heavie, stirreth up himself as thus. My soule why art thou cast down, why art thou disquieted within me, Psalm. 42, & 43.waite on God; For I will yet give him thankes, my present help and my God. He had a troubled minde, his mouth wanted no wordes to provoke the Lorde to heare his complaint, and his heart to waite upon the Lord, & so through all the Psalmes you shall finde the conversing of the soule with God to be such, as it were a mockerie to think reading vponupon a book could have anie place in that action, or that anie mans writing could lay out the present estate of the soule with the passions thereof. The Priest may say, my booke whie are thouso euill prynted, for when they reade the heart cannot reason and talke with God.
To the second poynt, which was but your bare assuming of the question, to say a man may pray by the spirit vponupon a booke &c. I alleadged that to worship God in spirit, is, when the inward faith of the heart, bringeth foorth true invocation, etc. this you graunt to be most true, and that none other is accepted of G O D; then that which proceedeth from the inward faith of our owne heart: But you think that reading vponupon a booke is to bring foorth of the heart true invocation. This cannot be, if wee consider the difference betweene proseuche and anagnosis prayer and reading, the one being a powring fourth of vowes, petitions, supplications, the other a receaving into the soule al such things as wee reade: This therfore I leave to all mens consciences to be considered, whether the matter we reade can be said a powring fourth of the heart, the whole vse of these divers actiōs through the whole Bible shew yt cannot. Now where I said that you teach men insteade of powring fourth their hearts, to help themselves with matter and wordes out of a booke, you say I speake fondly and foolishlie etc. Mine answeare now is, yt is well I lyed not, if I had said you compell men to read vponupon a booke in all your publique assemblies, certaine wordes of your owne writings by number and stint, from yeare to yeare, & day to day, & the same instead of powring out their hearts before the Lorde for their present wants, I had not lyed. Now let all men by that which hath bene said, consider the grossnes of it, and so the follie remayneth to your self. But to helpe this matter, & to deliver your self conniugly in such a strayte, you say you wish al men to use the help of the book, that they might the better powre fourth their hearts vntounto God, being such as are not throughly able. First you graunt here, the prayers read vponupon the booke is not the powring fourth of the heart, but ought to be vsed only as an help, wherbie you graunt the whole question, and furder all your assemblies have had no other invocation of Gods name this many yeares, but a help to teach them to powre fourth their hearts. But whether mens writings may be read in the publique assemblies to this use, we shall after make manifest, Here yet is graunted but an help, and not the powring fourth of the heart. And to whom is it graunted an help? to such as are not able to pray. Here eyther you must confesse your whole ministerie is vnable to pray, or that they transgresse in in this high worship of GOD: for in an other place you graunt in all your assemblies, this reading is vsed of mens writing for prayer, thus you may behold your best worship to be nothing, but a help to teach you to pray.
Where I said that you teach men to fetch the cause of their sorrowing from the booke, euen in their tyme of begging at G O D S hand, you say I speak fondly, to call that the cause, which is the manifestation of the cause etc. You here forget your artes, Is ther no more causes then one? if it be the instrumentall cause, it is sufficient to prove, that if your Ministers had not their booke, they had nothing to aske, or els asking that which is in the booke, they aske not that wich before was in their owne heartes, so not comming heavie laden, they goe emptie away, and leave the matter in the booke as they founde it, till the next day and then sing the same songe, But true prayer is when the heart is first prepared, and moued with the sight of their wants as the child that asketh breade: So we should not pray of custome, but aske the verie thing wherof our heart feeleth the want. Your comparison againe betwixt the being stirred up by a Sermon, and stirred up by reading, sheweth, that your self will not make the reading the powring fourth of the heart.
Ther is no question but the exercise of reading is chieflie for instruction and encrease of knowledge, and meditating is not the same, nether can be said to be al the use of reading, though we denie reading to be praying, but because we are forbidden contention about wordes, & I have offred you as much wrong in saying you denyed reading to be for meditation at all, I will proceede to the more necessarie doctrines. Also for the controversie of Canonicall and Apocryphall, we shall speak in due place. Thus (say you) you have answered nothing at all vntounto this Commandement giuen by our saviour Christ to vse that prescript forme of prayer, say, Our Father &c, but by shift and cavill &c. Here you thinke you have put me to a plunge, your self needed nothing doubt, but that I allowed the Commaundement holie and good, and to extend to all Christians, as well as to the Apostles, namely, to use that prescript forme of prayer as the perfect patterne, & direction to all mens true prayers. But you I trust will make difference betwixt a forme to all prayers, and praying, or prayer. And here you vehemently urge me to answeare you, before I see you conclude any thing from the place, and so I should runne into follie, to answeare a matter before I heare it. In your first entrance of this discourse, you were rounde in your Syllogismes, by two at once to wraft my wordes, and can find none for your self, Yt seemes your conscience is witnes the matter would not hang together. And me thinkes you had never more neede to have shewed what you would drawe from this place Luke 11. Seing I either mistooke you the last time, or els you make a simple collection: which was this: Christ said to his Disciples, when you pray say Our Father. &, and not when you meditate say Our Father. Now what would you conclude of this, except as I said, that Christ would not have them, meditate that Scripture: But this I perceave was not your meaning: now I partlie thinke your Argument should be (if the sworde were not broken in the sheath) thus: Christ commaunded his Disciples when they prayde, to say, Our Father, &c. therefore to be tyed to reade over or say by roate certaine wordes, is lawfull praying. For the first, that our Saviour Christ tyed no man, or commaunded none to say over those verie wordes when they prayde, but to pray according to that form, after that manner as Math. 6. I manifested in my first writing. I. that our Saviour did not commaunde us to use those wordes. 2. that Matth. 6. doth not keepe the same wordes, nor that number of wordes which Luke 11. doth. 3. that he did not say, read these wordes when you pray, or say these wordes by roate. After all which reasons slilye passed away in both your answeres, you come with your bare affirmation, that he commaunded those wordes to be said over by roate or reading: Yea a litle after you say, it is false to say that he commanded not the verie wordes to he said over when we pray. And you further conclude, that because Christ commaunded his Disciples to say over those wordes, therefore all mens writings in the forme of praier may be brought into the publique assemblies to be read for praier, being agreable to the worde. To which I answere that seing no mans writings are without errour, it is pernitious and blasphemous doctrine you collect. First because you make mens writings of equal authority with the forme of praier which Christ hath prescribed 2. for that you give men as much liberty and authority to frame and impose their Liturgies as Christ had to set downe a forme of praier, he being Lord of the house. The wickednesse of which collections you shall never be able to answere.
And because you here urge me thereunto, I will make answeare to your two places of Scripture, wherwith by false interpretation you deceave the simple, which taken from you, your matter is nothing but cavilling: The places are these, Luke 11. Num, 6. and because the one explanes the other, and your collections the same from both, I will beginne with numbers 6.32, 33.34: etc. Thus shall you bless the Children of Israell saying, the Lord bless thee and keep thee, etc. Here you say they were commaunded to use the verie wordes prescribed, in all their blessings. This I say is not true, for the Hebrew worde is Coh Tebaracu, thus shall you blesse: wher the worde Coh is an adverb of similitude, as we say, after this manner: which cannot be to say the same, but according to the same instructions. This worde Coh is used throughout the Bible in this maner, in all the Prophets when they say, thus sayth the Lorde: where the summe of their prophesies are onelyonly recorded to us by the holy Ghost, and not all the wordes. Againe this blessing is used in the Psalmes and Chronicles in prayer, for the people, in manie other wordes. Ely blessed Hanna in other wordes, etc. And where in Luke 11.2. it is recorded, that our Saviour Christ commaunded his Disciples, when you pray, I. Sam. 1 17say Our Father, &c. it is plaine by the doctrines following. 4.5.6.8.11. verses, that Christ tied no man to the verie wordes saying over, for he teacheth them to aske their particular wants, as a childe asketh breade or an egg of his Father: also to importune the Lorde for our particular wants. But to make this place more plaine, the same holy Ghost in the 6. of Mathew 9. verse saith, when you pray, say thus, Our Father, etc. where the greek word houtos hath the same signification that the Hebrew worde Coh hath, which is, after this manner: & cannot be referred to the verie wordes saying over, wher upon Mr. Calvin upon those wordes faith, Noluit filius Dei prescribere quibus verbis utendum sit: The Sonne of God would not prescribe what words we must use. Now consider how falslie Mr Gifford hath interpreted these Scriptures, to say the Priests were commaunded to use the verie wordes, and that Christ commaunded to use the verie wordes. As for his collections, that therefore mens writings may be imposed upon publique assemblies, by stint & number to be prayde, it is an intollerable error,& bringeth in all poopery.
Here I must call all men that reade this fruitlesse discourse to be witnes of Mr. Giffords abuse of his tougue, to the defacing of Gods truth. In his Epistle he proclaymed, that I called all men Idolāters; which you shall perceave to be his owne wordes, and to that end I will breifly repeat it. In my first writing I affirmed the reading imposed Liturgies by stint and limitation, instead of true invocation, as also all reading menswritings for praying, to be idolatrie. In his answere he said, he could not see by what collour it could be called Idolatrie, or maintayned out of Gods worde so to be; but it seemes the penners of these things take every sinne against the first table of the Lawe, to be Idolatrie: if they doe so (saith he) and with all doe hold, that no Idolater shalbe saved, then doubtlesse all are lost, &c. To this ignorant excursorie I answered, that all false and devised worship by mans intention was Idolatrie, as the first and second commandements did testifie. And to admit all the breaches of the first table were not idolatrie, yet reading of mens writings instead of praying must needs be idolatry, seing it is a transgression of the second Commandement. Further (though I needed not have followed his emptie head, even a cloude without water) yet I proceeded to prove, that no idolater could be saved but b y repentance for their knowne sinne, and craving pardon with David for their hidden sinnes and secreet faults.Psal. 119 Moreover (sayd I) doe you thinke anie man is free from all inward and outward idolatrie, seing we cannot keep one Commandement, and in some things we sinne all. In which wordes I plainely reproved his grossnes that concluded all men idolaters which committed anie idolatrie, and that no idolater could be saued, and distinguished betweene the sinne of ignorance, weaknes, and imperfection &c. in Gods children, and open professed obstinate idolatrie. Yet this godles man would lay to my charge, that I should call all men idolaters, wheras I never used such a worde in all my writings, But onlie answered his folly in this running out from the question, they were his owne wordes that brought this upon his owne heade, by concluding, that if every sinne against the first table were idolatrie, and no idolater could be saved, then all are lost, let the grosnes then be his, and not mine. And I leave it to the consideration of all men, whether I may not say, that they which transgresse the first or second Commandements, do commit idolatrie, without absurdity. But saith he though it be so, yet the Scripture calleth not the godly, murtherers, idolaters, etc. for the reliques of sinne remayning. I answere that therefore your former absurd cavilling, where you said, if we hold it idolatrie, etc. is by your owne mouth fully answered.
But to avoyde this foile, he hath an other evasion. J thought (saith he) we had reasoned about such grosse idolatrie as a church is to be condemned and forsaken, which is defiled therwith. Here againe you misreport me: J never reasoned to that end in in this whole discourse, but onlie laboured to shew all men this error of reading mens writings instead of praying, that they might learne how to converse with God & their owne Conscience, in prayer. And what mendes will you make for this slandering and defacing of the truth, to all the world all that I desire is your repentance and amendement, which God graunt unto you, if you be his.
It followeth in your booke thus: But seeing you confess that all men be Idolaters, that is touching the remanents of sinne, it must needs follow there is no Church free from spots, etc. This worde idolaters must still be yours, & then I willinglie graunt, that no man living is free from idolatrie, concerning the reliques of sinne: Also that no Church upon earth can be without spot upon earth: So that now, by your owne confession, I pleade not for perfection in this life, though the more we want, the more we ought to endevour. With what face then could you publish me an Anabaptist in your Epistle, and out of one mouth give contrarie sentence? Doth your ordinary teach you to cast out such bitter waters of untruthes? was it possible I should bold al men idolaters, & some men without committing of sinne after regeneration, especially to maintaine both such heresies as you give out? Wel consider yourself, before the Lord call you to accompt for defacing his truth, and pleading for Baal. I grant, yea, I were not of God if I should speake otherwise, that the deare servants of God fall into most lothsome sinnes after regeneration, that the riches of Gods merciemercy might appeare in their repentance, through the worke of his grace. Then you reason thus: if ther be alwaies spottes and imperfectnes in the true Church upon earth, then all your Arguments you bring against the Church of England, are of no force, except you will maintaine a perfection. Mine answere is, I will not meddle with your Ch. to prove it a false church in this treatise, but refer you to Mr Barrowes refutation of Mr Gifford, him that handleth that part of your booke. Yet I must tell you your argument is verie simple: For after the same manner you might reason thus: If ther be no true Church without spottes upon earth, then the Church of Rome is the true Ch. for it hath manie spottes, and you all Scismatiques: Againe you assume the matter you should prove. It will be proved against you, that you have not Ecclesiam a people called fourth of the world to the obedience of Christ: Then, that the spottes of your Church are Egyptian ulcers, incurable running botches. But I purposed not to deale with your Church, onelie my mind is to shew the unlawfulnes of this reading and imposing mens writings upon mens Consciences in stead of true praying. Of which sinne the Lord give you and this whole land grace to repent, that so men may learne more ferventlie to call upon God.
The first Argument against read Prayer, &c.
No Apocrypha must be brought into the publique assemblies: for there onelie GODS worde and lively voyce of his owne graces must be hearde in the publique assemblies. But mens writings and the reading of them over for prayer are Apocrypha, therefore may not be brought into the publique assemblies.
GEORGE GIFFORD.
First touching the Proposition, No Apocrypha is to be brought into the publique assemblies: What can be more false? Apocrypha is opposed against Canonicall: If nothing may be brought into the publique assemblies but Canonicall Scripture, then the Sermons and prayers of Pastors are to be banished, &c.