Justification of Separation from the Church of England, Treatise · Section 173

Justification of Separation from the Church of England · Treatise · Section 173

p. 459The Ministers 3. exception that their Church was gathered by the Minist:preaching of the word: and that the first conversion of their land to the fayth of Christ was by the preaching of the gospell, as appeares by the best historyes. And so they go on▪ and tell vsus of many from age, to age, called by the same meanes: who in the tyme of persequution sealed the truth with their blood, and in the time of freedom did openly professe the same.

In the page immediately before going, a Church might be gathered Answ:without conversion: and now their Church was lawfully gathered, for it was converted to the fayth of Christ, by the preaching of the gospell. 2. It is both vntruly and vnadvisedly affirmed of these ministers, that p. 460their land was converted to the fayth of CHRIST. The defence of their nationall Church, and of the compulsion of all the flagitious persons in the nation to ioyne, & continue members of it, drives them to this absurd assertion, that the whole nation, or land was at the first converted to the fayth of Christ.

And where they speak of many in all ages since called by the gospell which also they have sealed with their blood, as I confesse this with Mr Ainsworth, (and rejoyce for the mercy of God towards them this way) so I doubt not but the truthes taught in Rome have been effectuall to the saving of many: for which also there have many of them (and no doubt, would many more if there were occasiō) lay down their lives against Pagans, & Infidels.

But these men should prove first, that the body of the land have been converted to the fayth of CHRIST, and orderly joyned into particular congregations: and 2. that it hath so continued ever since, even in the tymes, when the blood of those Martyrs now spoken of, was shed by the lawes civil, and Ecclesiastical, made by the body of it, through the seduction of Antichrist, for that purpose: and so that there needed no new gathering after the Romish apostasy, by the preaching of the gospell on the one side, and by willing subjection in free, and personal profession, on the other.

That which they ad of sundry secret congregations in Queen Maryes dayes in many parts of the land, is but a boast: there were very few of them in any. But where they say, that these did vponupon Queen Elizabeths entrance openly professe the gospell, it is vntrue; there was not one congregation separated in Queen Maryes dayes, that so remayned in Queen Elizabeths. The congregations were dissolved, and the persons in them bestowed themselves in their severall parishes, where their livings, and estates lay. The circumcised were mingled with the vncircumcised, whence came that monstrous confusion, agaynst which we witnes. And shew me one of your ministers continuing his charge in Queen Elizabeths dayes, over the flock to which he ministred (in Queen Maryes dayes) the persequuted gospell. It is certayn the congregations (whether many, or few) were all dispersed, and that the members of them joyned themselves to the prophane Apostate Papists, where their outward p. 461occasions lay. As then an handfull, or bundle of co…e shufled into a feild of weeds, though in it selfe it retayn the same nature, yet cannot make the feild a corn feild: so neither could this small hādful of separated people in Queen Maryes dayes sanctify the whole feyld of the idolatrous, & prophane multitude in the land, by their seating themselves amongst them.

As then it is not true, that the body of the land, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reigne, did joyne vntounto the secret congregations (so remayning) in Queen Maryes dayes: but on the contrary, these congregations did dissolve, and joyne themselves with the vnhallowed rowt in the popish, & profane parishes vnderunder their late (masse, & their dūb) priests for the most part: so neyther matters it which ioyned ūto which since the vnhallowed, & graceles multitude neither could by the word of God ioyn vntounto others, nor be ioyned to by them in the covenant of grace and of the gospell, with the seales and other the ordinances thereof, to which they had, or have no right. Vpō the same groūd also I infer, that it is not materiall, though the people were not compelled to the profission of the gospell before the midsomer after the Queen came to the crown: if they were compelled to professe the gospel, of, and vntounto which, they were apparantly, and notoriously ignorant, and disobedient, as they were. They knew what they were to look for: and so being, for the most part, of no religiō, they set themselves to conform, as the tymes were, to that, which they discerned the Queen to be of.

And for the Preachers, and Cōmissioners, which were sent before this set day, for the catholik fayth of all the Queens subjects, as I think it was well, so was it not sufficient to make the whole land, or to prepare them to be a true Church: besides that the people were of the Church all this while: the same nationall, provinciall, diocesan, and parochiall Church, & Churches consisting of the same persons generally, still continuing vnderunder the same government, & ministery, & in the same will-worship, though in a measure reformed, as before in Queen Maryes dayes.

Now for the Preachers you name, as Mr Knoxe, Lever; &c. which exercised their Ministery in some of the best reformed Churches, during Q. Maryes reign, as the good they did to some few. (in comparison) by the truthes they taught, could not make all the Queens subjects p. 462a true nationall Church, so do we all know how hardly they were suffered in the begīning of the Queens reign, & that contrary to the publick Church-government, & ministery: as also that neyther they, nor any others, could or can be admitted to any Church by any ministery received in the reformed Churches, but onelyonly by the ordination of a popish Praelate whether English, or Romish, it matters not: by which also it is apparant to all men vponupon what string the English ministery hangeth.

Lastly where these men say that many are dayly added to the Church by the ministery of the word preached, I marvayl how this can be, and from whence they are added. Addition is a motion, and in every motion, there must be the terms, or bounds, from and to which it is made. All they to whom they preach, are of the Church already: for recusant Papists come not to their Church; and besides the number of them encreaseth dayly. It seemes then they are added from the Church to the same Church. Bycause this practise of adding men to the Church by the preaching of the gospell was in vse in the primative Churches, and this phrase vsed in the scriptures: therefore these ministers think they may abuse the phrase, without the thing: and so feed their simple readers with words of the winde.

Of the ministers 4 exceptiō, viz: of the vniting of the Queens subiects Minist:vntounto those professours, whose fellowship in popery they had forsaken: and of the course taken for that purpose by the example of the godly KingsAnsw: of Iudah I have formerly spoken: of the former part even now: and of the latter els where, declaring. 1. first that the English nation, and all the people of the kingdom never was admitted into the LORDS covenant, by the rules of the new testament, to become a nationall CHURCH, vnderunder nationall government, as was IUDAH, and all the people in it vnderunder the old. If this can be proved I acknowledge my self in many great errours: if not it is vanity, and errour, thus to instance in IVDAH, and indeed to revive Iudaism, and the old testament.

2. That though England had been somtimes a true nationall Church, as was Iudah, yet that it did not so remayn in the deep Apostacy of p. 463Antichrist but was divorced in Rome her mother: whereas Iudah on the other side, (into what transgression soever she sell) was never divorced by the Lord, but still remayned his (though vnfaythfull) wife: the L. ever & anon, stirring vp some extraordinary instrument or other for her reformation, & the renovation of her covenant: with which also the Lord so effectually wrought, as the things are wonderfull which are written of all the people, and such, as never shalbe found in any whole kingdom to the worlds end.

3. That the reformation by King Edward, and Queen Elizabeth (though great in it self, and they in it vnderunder GOD greatly to he honoured) was nothing comparable to that which was made in Iudah, by Iehosaphat, Iosiah, Asa, Ezechiah, and Nehemiah.

These poynts I have proved at large **Page 276. 277. 278. 279. &c: to 304else where, and do refer the reader thither for answer, onelyonly I will note some particular oversights of the ministers in this fourth exception: as first, where they say they have proved there was a true Church in the land before Queen Elizabeths reign; they should have proved, that the Land was a true Church: for so was Iudah. 2. Where they say, that the noble men were sent by Iehosaphat onelyonly to accompany, & assist the Levites, & to 2 Chr: 17. 7countenance their ministery, where the scriptures affirme they were sent even to teach. You will have no teaching but by Church officers: therfore you so put the scripture of. 3. That they say, Iosiah compelled See pag 295. 296. 297. 298.his subiects to the service of the true God: taking compulsion as they do; where it is evident the people did it freely: though I acknowledge he made compulsive lawes. 4 Speaking of the authority of magistrates over their subjects they bring in Ezechias proclamatiō, as they call it, sent to Israell: wheras the ten tribes were not his subiects, nor he their King. And lastly, that the Ismaelites were separated from the Church of God: therein acknowledging that IVDAH was alwayes the true Church of God: which I suppose they will not say of Engl: alwayes, or of Rome: if they do, it is their sin to separate from the true Church.

The fifth, and last exception of the ministers is, that MrMinist: BARROVV & Mr GREENVVOOD required that the people in the begīning of the Queens reign should by solemn oth, & covenant, have renounced Idolatry, & have professed fayth, & obedience to the gospel, after the example of Asaes reformation. To which their answer is, first that such p. 464a covenāting by oath is not absolutely necessary, as appeares in Iehosaphats, & Iosiahs reformation. 2. That the people was before that oath, & covenāt, Gods true Church: which their people also may be. 3. That sundry congregations as in Coventry, and Northampton did publiquely professe repentance for their Idolatry, and promised to obey the truth established. 4. They doubt not to affirm that the whole land in the first Parliament did enter a solemn covenant with the Lord for renouncing of Popery, and receiving the gospell.

That Mr Barr. and Green: should requyre, that the covenantAnsw: into which the Church entereth, should be by oth necessarily, is more then I know: or then we practise. But that they required, that the people, that is, the whole nation, should so have passed a solemn oth, and covenant, I know is most vntrue. All men know they thought the ignorant prophane, popish multitude vncapable of the Lords covenant, and the seales of it: & to have requyred of them an oth for such a purpose had been to have requyred of them the taking of Gods name in vayn. Where it is sayd in the 2. place that the people of Iudah were Gods true Church, before the tyme of that oth, and Covenant, it is true, and agaynst you. And I would demaund of you whether your people were Gods true Church, when Popery reigned. Your answer is, so may our people bee. You dare not say they were; for then you should acknowledge the Romish Synagogue the true Church of GOD, and that you had sinfully, schismed from it, as Mr Bern. proves agaynst you, and himselfe: you will not say, they were not: for that would make against you in the poynt in hand: and would manifest, (as in deed it doth) that the course taken with Iudah (being the true Church) for her reformation, cannot agree with Rome, or Engl: as a member of the Romish Church for her reformation.

To that which is added in the 3. place of Coventry, Northampton, and some other congregations, my reply is, first that this is not likely to have been the deed of the congregations, but of some two or three forward ministers, (a few of the people it may be approving of it) which their successours were as like to reverse. 2. They did not repent of their publique idolatry nor purpose to obey the truth in sincerity: of their prophane mixture, p. 465Romish hierarchy, and ministery, popish leyturgy, and constitutions (according to which all things are administred amongst them) they repented not: and besides they knew right well many truthes, which they purposed not to imbrace. 3. graunt it were (as they pretend) with these few parishes, what must be sayd of the rest which did not so practise? with whom they make, and alwayes have done one entyre nationall Church, or what is this to the publique, and formall state of the Church of England agaynst which we deale. The truth is, these men thus practising, were reputed, (and truely) schismatiques in the formall constitution of the Church: and by which this their dealing hath no warrant at all. If we should object vntounto you the Papists doctrines and practises, of two or three ministers amongst you, not warrantable by law, you would not admit of our exception agaynst the formall established estate of your Church: so neyther may we admit of yours, for the practise of two or three, disliking the present state of things, and seeking for reformation of them.

Lastly, wee see indeed that those Ministers doubt not to affirme, that the whole land (Papists, and Atheists and all) did in the first Parliament of the Queen enter a solemn covenant for renouncing of Popery, and receiving the gospel: but we would see first, how all these swarmes of wicked Atheists, and most flagitious persons were by the revealed will of God capable of the covenant of the new testament, and the seales, and other rites, and priviledges of it. Otherwise this haling them into covenant with the Lord agaynst his expresse will, was a prophane, & presumptuous enterprise in it self, though I doubt not arising from a godly intent in the Queen, & her cheif connsellers being mislead by them, whom they too much trusted. 2. We would see what warrant there is in the new testament for this nationall covenant, or that all the people in a Land (since the Land of Canaan was prophaned) should unite into a nationall Church, vnderunder a nationall government, and ministery. 3. That which wee answered in the 2. place to the former branch of this exception, must here agayn be remembred. 4. this vndoubted affirmation of the ministers touching the whole lands covenanting in the Parliament, first inferreth that the enacting of civil p. 466lawes, and penall statutes by Kings, and States, doth gather CHVRCHES: for none other covenant was there in the Parliament. 2. It confirmeth the popish doctrine of implicite fayth:see pag: 302 303. 304. & that men may receive, and professe a fayth whereof they are ignorant, yea which they dislike and hate, so farre as they know it: for so was it with the body of your nation, the greatest part by farr being mere ††1 Cor. 2. 14.1 Cor 2:14naturall men, and so not knowing the gospel: yea ““Ioh. 3. 20John 3:20evil doers, which hate the light.

Our 2. objection touching the outward worship wherein the Ch: of England communicateth, comes now to be enforced. In the clearing of which the Ministers do (to speak on) insist onelyonly vponupon their stinted, & set formes of prayer: for the justification of whichMinist. they bring sundry scriptures as Numb: 6. 2. 3. 24. Deut. 26. 3. 15. Psal. 22. 1. & 92. Luk. 11. 2. Now for our more orderly proceeding, I will reduce the things they say to threeAnsw. generall heads (vnderunder which I will consider of the particulars) shewing how in all, and every of them they are mistaken.

First, in that they do confound, and make all one ordinance, Blessings, Psalmes, and Prayers.

2. In misinterpreting the scriptures they bring to prove a set, and stinted form of words to be imposed in prayer.

3. In concluding (as they do) that if Moses, and Christ might appoynt, and impose a certayn form of words to be vsed for prayer, that then the Bishops in England or others, may vse the same power, and appoint an other form of words so to be vsed. Of these three in order.

And first, it is evident, that, howsoever some kinde of blessing, and prayer be all one, and so may be confounded, yet that solemn kinde of blessing spoken of Numb: 6. and which the PATRIARKS, and PREISTS did vse in their places, wasI. cleane of an other nature. In prayer the MINISTER stands in place of the PEOPLE, and in their name offersII. vp petitions, and thanksgiving to GOD: But in blessing, the Minister stands in the place of God, and in his name pronounceth a blessing, or mercy vponupon the people. 2. Whereas this duety of prayer may be performed by one equall to another, by an inferiour to a superiour, yea by a mā to himself: that other of blessing p. 467is alwayes from the greater to the lesser: and therefore the Apostle to the Hebrews, to shew that the Preisthood of Melchi-sedek wasHeb. 7. 17.Heb 7:17 more excellent then that of Levi proves it by this, that Melchisedec blessed Abraham; taking this for granted without all contradiction, that the lesse is blessed of the greater. 3. Mr Ber: himself in this bookIII. makes prayer one thing, and the blessing pronounced vponupon the people, pag. 148.when they departed, another thing: as he also makes singing of psalmes a third distinct thing from them both: as there is cause he should.

For first, the Apostle writing to the Corinthians of the diversI. giftes, and administrations in the Church, speaketh thus. **2 Cor. 14. 15.I wil pray with the spirit, but I will pray with the vnderstanding also: I will sing with the spirit, but I will sing with the vnderstanding also. Answerable vntounto which is that in ††Ch. 5. 13.Iames, Is any among you afflicted? let him pray; is any merry? let him sing: both the one, and other Apostle making singing, and praying distinct exercises. Ad vntounto this, that whereasII. in praying we are to speak onelyonly vntounto God, it is otherwise in singing, where we are taught to ““Ephe. 5. 19. Col. 3. 16.Eph 5:19Col 3:16speak vntounto our selves in psalmes, and to teach, and admonish our selves in Psalmes, and himnes, and spirituall songs. What greater difference? In prayers wee speak onelyonly to God: in psalmes to our selves mutually, or one to another. Neyther had Mr Giffard any advātage in the words following, where wee are taught to sing with a grace in our harts to the Lord: for by singing with a grace is meant such singing as ministreth grace vntounto the hearers, contrary to that corrupt, or rotten communication. Eph. 4. 29. And in this, as in all other things, we must propound the glory, and honour of God vntounto our selves.

3. There are very many both of Davids, and others Psalmes,III. wherein there is no title of prayer: but they are merely to be sung for doctrine, instruction, and meditation, as Psal. 1. 2. and manyMinist: pag. 192. 593. more. The Ministers write, that the most Psalmes that David made, were sung not onelyonly as meditations, and doctrines, for the instructions of the Ch: but as prayers to God: bycause they are sayd to be sung vntounto the Lord: for which purpose they instāce in one onelyonly, which is Psal. 66. 2. 3.

Well, not to fall to reckoning with them (wherein they andAnsw: I should not agree: for I would except against their picked instāce: Ps. 66. 2. 3. which all mē may see was not sung for prayer, nor vntounto the Lord, as they mean, but for instruction, and provocation of p. 468the Church to prayse God) if they consider it, they should have proved, not that some, but that all psalmes are prayers; otherwise they may not be confounded, & made one ordinance, as by them they are. But to come to that which is specially to be observed: even those Psalmes, whose matter is prayer, are not prayers: neyther is the singing of them, the outward ordinance, and exercise of praying, And this is the very state of the controversy▪ Which that it may be vnderstood the better, it must be considered, that the very same matter of prayer may be vsed diversly, and so formed into divers externall ordinances. It may be read, preached, heard, written, sung, or prayed. Now who is so simple, as to say herevpon that reading, preaching, hearing, writing, singing, praying, are all one? If a man read Davids prayer, that **2 Sam. 15 31.2 Sam 15:31the Lord would turn the counsayl of Ahitophel into foolishnes: or eyther read, or sing the 6. Psalm where in his prayer, he professeth, that he causeth his bed v: 6.every night to swim, and waters his couch with teares: or Psalm. 42. that he remembers God frō the Land of Iorden &c. doth that man thereforever: 6. pray to God, that he would turn into foolishnes the counsel of Ahitophel? or doth he professe, that he waters his couch with teares every night, & remembers God from the Land of Iorden? or is it not evident he reads, and sings those prayers onelyonly for instruction of himself, & others? And so wee read in the inscription of the last named psalm that it was committed to the sonnes of Corah (not to pray it, which they could not do without folly) but for instruction. And as truely may it be sayd, that the reading of Noahs curse, or Schemies, is cursing,Gen. 9. 25. 2 Sam. 16. 5.Gen 9:252 Sam 16:5 as that the reading, or singing (for singing is, but a reading in tune) of Davids prayers, is praying.

But it will here be asked, is it not then lawfull for a man in the singing of Davids psalmes (consisting of prayer) to lift vp his hart, and to have it affected accordingly, as he can apply the matter in them to his present state, & occasions? yes certaynly, it is both lawfull, and godly: but withall it must be remembred, that the quaestion here is not about the inward affection of the heart, but about the outward ordinance: and 2. that a man may so lift vp his heart, and have the affection of prayer, and thanksgiving, in preaching, hearing, writing, reading: and yet not perform the outward exercise, and outward ordinance of prayer, of which our p. 469quaestion is.

Lastly, in psalmes there is of necessity required a certayn known form of words, that two or more may sing together: according to the nature of the ordinance, wherein many joyning vocally, do make a concent or harmony. But who will say there is such simple necessity of a set form of words for prayer? wherein one is to utter a voyce, according to the suggestions of the spirit in his heart, and the rest to consent by silence, with saying Amen. By which it appeareth how vnadvisedly these ministers and others, do thus agayn and agayn vrge set formes of psalmes to prove set formes of prayer.

Thus much of the first head; the second followeth, in which such scriptures are to be considered of, as are brought to prove a set, & stinted form of words to be imposed for prayer. The principal scriptures for this purpose, and vntounto which the rest may be reduced, are Numb. 6. 23. 24. Math. 6. 9. Luk. 11. 2.

It is a troublesome thing that that these Ministers thus vrge the letter of the scriptures: as if the quaestion were not about their sense, and interpretation: which they should prove to be for their stinted service: as they should also disprove our reasons to the contrary. But herein they are vtterly silent, and think it sufficient to inculcate the words, Thus shall ye blesse the children of Israel, Numb. 6. 23. Mat. 6. 9. Luk. 11. 2.Num 6:23Matt 6:9Luke 11:2and say vntounto them &c: &, when you pray, say thus, Our father &c. even as the Papists vrge these words this is my body.

First then wee do acknowledge these words to be in the scriptures by them cited: 2. wee hold it lawfull to vse those very words in our-prayers, all, or any part of them, if wee be therevnto guided by **Iude, 20. Rom. 8. 26. 27.Rom 8:26Rom 8:27the Holy Ghost in whom we must alwayes pray, and by whose help we must make our requests vntounto God. But the quaestiō is, whether Moses tyed, and stinted the Preists to that form of words in blessing the people: and whether Christ tyed, and stinted his disciples to that very form of words for prayer, so to be vsed by the one, and other, without alteration, addition, or diminution.

And that this is not the meaning of the holy Ghost, I do manifest by these Reasons.

First, these particles thus, or on this manner, & say, do not vsuallyI. p. 470in the scriptures designe, or note out the form of words, but the substance of the thing spoken of. Take an instance, or two. When the Lord sent Moses vntounto ““Ex: 4. 22. 23.Pharaoh King of Aegypt, it was vnderunder these terms. Thou shalt say to Pharaoh, thus sayth the Lord, Israel my sonne, my first born: wherefore I say to thee, let my sonne go, that he may serve me: &c. But when Moses came to deliver his message in the next chapt: ver. 1. 2. he doth not ty himself to the self same words, nor vseth them. He did not vnderstand, thou shalt say to Pharaoh, & thus sayth the Lord, of the form of words, but of the substance of the thing. The same in effect may be sayd of ††Gen: 24. 12. with 42. &cAbrahams servant going about a wife for Isaak, who, relating to Laban the prayer he made for direction in the buesines, doth not vse the same words, when he tels him what he sayd in his prayer. It seems in his vnderstanding, a man might say thus, & thus, in prayer, though he vsed not the same words if he spake to the same purpose.

Many more scriptures might I bring, as others have done before me, to prove, that these words, and particles, (upon which these men vvould recken the words of their prayers do no way enjoyn any such stint of words, and sillables, but onelyonly a similitude of matter, and are for direction therein.II.

It is evident in the scriptures, that neyther Moses, nor the Preists, or other holy men stinted themselves to these words. 1 Sam. 1. 17. and 2. 20. Deut. 33. 1. 2. &c. 2 Chron. 6. 3. 4. &c.III.

Thirdly, why do not the ministers now ty themselves to this form of words in blessing the people: they being **Isa: 66. 21. Gal: 6. 16.the Lords Preists, and Levites, & the Ch:, the Israel of God? This blessing was no ceremony, or shadow to be abolished, but moral, & perpetual.

4. If the Lord Iesus in directing his disciples to pray, praescribeIIII. them a certayn form of words, to be vsed, when he bids them pray thus, or after this manner: & when they pray, say, then eyther Mathew, or Luke misse in Christs intendement▪ for they (as all may see) record not the same certayn form of words. If defence be made, that they speak of two severall tymes, wherein Christ gave this direction, I answer such a man, that if that be graunted, it makes against him: for Christ intēded the same thing in both places, & at both times: wherevpon it followes that the vse of a certayne form of words, was no part of Christs intendement.

p. 471It is evident that these words of Christ, pray thus, and when you pray, say, are a commandement, binding his Church to the worlds end, in all places, and at all tymes: and that when you pray, say, isV. as much as▪ whensoever, or … what tyme soever, you pray say: as, when they deliver you up, Math. 10. 19. when one sayth I am Pauls, &c. 1 Cor. 3. 4. when ye come together &c. Chap. 14. 26. is as much as, when or at what tyme soever, they deliver you; when soever one sayth, I am Pauls: whensoever yee come together. And to let passe all other scriptures, in the 6 of Mathew where Christ delivers this form, & speaks of this, and the like matters, when thou givest thine almes, v: 2. when thou prayest, v: 5. when ye fast, v: 16. that is, whensoever thou givest almes, fastest, or prayest. Wherevpon it followeth necessarily, that, if Christ the Lord intended a set form of words, when he directed his disciples to pray, and bad them, when ye pray, say, then, whensoever we pray, we must vse that very form of words, & none other. For the words of Christ are not a permission, as the Ministers insinuate, but an absolute commaundement: neyther is the quaestion, as they vntruely lay it down, whether it be lawfull to vse these very words in prayer, but whether it be necessary, and that when, or whensoever we pray: for that which Christ intends, he commands: and what he commaunds, he cōmaunds to be done, when, or whensoever, wee pray. And these things considered, it is no absurd obiection, (as these Ministers make it) that we never read the Apostles did use this prescript form of words in prayer. For reading of many formes of prayer they vsed, and never of this, wee are assured that Christ did not stint them to this form of words, nor cō maund them when they prayed to vse them: for then they had sinned, when they prayed, and vsed them not.

Christ Iesus in the same place teacheth his disciples as well touchingVI. almes, & fasting, as prayer: and in particular, that **v. 17.when Mat. ….they fast, they should annoynt their head, and wash their face. Now who is so ignorant as to affirm, that Christs purpose herein is to bind them to these ceremonies? and why not as well, as to ty them to these very words? He sayth as well, when thou fastest, annoynt thine head, and wash thy face, as when thou prayest, say, Our Father, &c. yea touching prayer it self, he as well directs, and teacheth his disciples what, or how to do, as what, or how to speak. p. 472He sayth as well, when thou prayest, enter into the Chamber, & shut v. 6.the dore, as when thou prayest, say, Our Father: As then the purpose of Christ in teaching his disciples, when they fast to annoynt their head, and wash their face; and when they pray, to enter into their chamber, and to shut the dore, is not to ty them to that very form of ceremony, but to advertise them to beware of all hypocrisy, & vainglory in these things: so when he teacheth them to pray on this manner, his purpose is not to ty them to the very form of words, but to admonish them to beware of all vayn bablings, and superstitious repetitions: and to ask in fayth of God the father who knowes their wants beforehand. v: 7. 8.

Lastly, as wee are commaunded to pray the Lords prayer, (as itVII. is called) so are we to preach the word of God. But as if a man take2 Tim. 4. ….2 Tim 4 the scriptures, and read them, or some part of them vntounto the people, or commit the same to memory, and so vtter it, this is not preaching: so neyther is the reading of this praescript, or repeating it by memory, praying. Indeed in preaching we must ever make the scriptures our text, and groundwork, and must speak according vntounto them: and may take a verse, two, or more, & vse them, even word for word, as they fit our occasion, and may be applyed to our purpose: so in praying we must make this praescript ever (as it were) the text, and groundwork of our prayer, & must pray according vntounto it: and may vse a petition, two, or more, or all in, or of it, even word, for word, if so the holy Ghost (by whose immediate teachings, and suggestions all our requaests must be put vp) do direct vsus, and that wee can apply the same words to our present occasions, and needs. The same which I have sayd touching the preaching of the word, may be added in respect of the administration of the sacraments.

The Apostle writing to the Corinthians about the Lords supper, advertiseth them, that ††1 Cor. 11. 23.1 Cor 11:23he received of the Lord, that which he delivered vntounto them. Now he that looks into the 3. Evangelists, that mention this institution, and compares eyther one of them withMath. 27. 26. Mark. 14. 22. Luk 23. 19.Matt 27:26Mark 14:22Luke 23:19 another, or Paul with any of them, he shall finde, that the ordinance stands not at all in the prescript form of words, wherein they all differ ech from others. It is evident that the Lord administred this supper but once: & that in a certayn form of words. p. 473And that which the Lord delivered vntounto his disciples, these four pen-men of the Holy Ghost delivered to the Churches. Now the great liberty, which they vse in respect of forms of words▪ (wherein they differ ech from others) shewes, how litle this institution▪ and ordinance stands vponupon such stints: as also how far it is from the meaning of Christ, that the Churches should be thus short tyed in the vse of them. The same may be sayd of the ordinance of prayer, by Christ given to his Church: wherein the two Evangelists, that mention it, do vse the same liberty: as most likely would the other two also have done, in respect of forms of words, had they made mention of it.

But graunt, that the words of Christ, pray after this manner, & when you pray, say, are to be interpreted, as these men would have it, yet do I except agaynst their service-book in a double respect. The first is, that the reading of prayers vponupon a book hath no justification from them. If it be sayd, that to commit a certayn form of words to the memory, and from it to vtter them, and to read thē vponupon a book, are all one, I deny the consequence: and though I approve not of the former, yet is the latter far the worse. For (besides, that he, that readeth, hath an other speaking to him (as it were) even he, whose wryting he reades, and himselfe speaks not to God, but to the people, to whom he reads) in the former, there is a kynde of vse, though not lawfull of the gift of memory: where in the other book-praying there is no vse of that, or any other gift.

Secondly, it followes not, that bycause the Lord Iesus might impose a set forme of words to be vsed for prayer, that therefore the Lord Bbs of England may impose an other set form so to be vsed. The consequence is notably both erroneous, and presumptuous. So bold indeed are they, and so high do they advance themselves in their ordinances, and impositions. Bycause the Lord hath separated one day from the rest, and made it holy, therefore they wil also make other holy dayes: bycause Christ hath set down canons, and constitutions for the government of his Church, therefore they also will have their canons, and constitutions: bycause he hath appointed a form of administring the sacramēts, therefore they may appoynt another form, yea and that such a p. 474one as altereth, and inovateth the very nature of the words of institution. For where Christ would have the words of institution published, and preached, this is my body which is given for you, theyLuke 22. 19. 1 Cor: 11. 24.Luke 22:19 turn this preaching into a prayer, the body of our Lord Iesus Christ, was given for the, preserv thy body and soul into eternall life &c. repeating the same also to every severall communicant: which Christ would have pronounced once for all, according to the nature of the ordinance. And thus they will ††Ezech: 43. ….set their thresholds by the Lords threshouldes, and their postes by his postes: and rather then they will want rowm for their own, they wil pare of part his, yea wholy dimolish them. If the Lord Iesus appoynt one ordinance for his Church, they will appoynt an other; and surely, so they may lawfully: if they be, as they are reputed, & protend themselves, Lord Bishops, and Arch Bishops of the Church, and spirituall Lords, over Gods heritage.

To these things I will adde a few reasons agaynst this read stinted service, and so conclude both the matter, and the book.

And first it cānot be an ordināce of Christ, bycause the ChurchI. may perfectly, and entyrely worship God, without it, with all the parts of holy and spirituall worship; as did the Apostolick Churches for many years before any such leiturgy was devised, & imposed: and as do many Churches now: and as appeares by that which is done before & after sermons, where no such stint is read of, what may be done at all times, and in all places, where able & lawfull ministers of the new testament, are.II.

As the administrations of the publique prayers of the Church is a principall duty of the minister, for which a speciall gift andIsa: 56. 7. Math: 21. …3. Act. 6. 4Acts 6:4 qualification is required, so cannot the reading of a service book be that administration, bycause no speciall, or ministeriall gift is required for it.III.

The two feet vponupon which the dumb ministery stands, like Naebuchad-nezzars Image vponupon the feet of iron, and clay, are the book ofDan: 2. common prayer, and of homilyes: the reading of the former (which is the right foot) serving them for prayer, & of the other for preaching: which feet, if they were smitten as were the other, with the stone cut without hands, the whole Idol-preisthood would fall, and be broken a peices, as that other image was. And here I p. 475would intreat them, that have written, and are perswaded so much agaynst the reading of the Apocrypha books of the Machabies, & those which follow them, in the congregation, especially them, which have so sufficiently dealt against Mr Hutton, & his fellowes, to turn the face of their Arguments generall agaynst the Apocryphall service book; and they will silence that book, as well, and as much, as the rest (like women in the Church) as they speak.

As it were a ridiculous thing for a child, when he would askeIIII. of his father bread, fish, or any other thing he wanted, to read it to him out of a paper: so is it for the children of God (especially for the ministers of the gospell in their publique ministrations) to read vntounto God their requests, for their own, and the Churches wants, out of a service book, wherin they are also stinted to words and sillables: by which also they, and the people with them, areEzech: 4. 16. vnderunder a greater death, then if they ate bread by weight, & drank water by measure.

Lastly if this vse of the service-book be sanctified of God for the publique, and solemn prayers of the Church, & so deemed by these ministers, and others the forward people in the kingdom, what is the reason why they so seldom, yea or rather never, vse the same, or any other of the like nature in their familyes, but do on the contrary lay aside all books save that of the spirit, by whose alone, and immediate direction they are taught, and according to whose suggestiōs, they do put vp their supplicatiōs vntounto God? Do we not all know, that the more forward sort of proffessours would be ashamed of any such book prayers in their families. And hath the Lord sanctified that for his house which is not holy, and good enough for their houses? will they worship God with that worship publiquely, whereof they are ashamed privately? can private men bring forth the conceptions of the spirit without the help of any such service book, and do the lawfull ministers of the gospell stand in need of it for the manifestatiō of the spirit of prayer given them, for the vse, and comfort of the Church? **Mal: 1. 14.cursed be the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and voweth, and sacrificeth vntounto the Lord a corrupt thing. If these ministers then, and others, have a better sacrifice of prayer and thanksgiving, then their service book (as their own practise both private, and publique (when they p. 476have liberty,) shewes they have) and that so themselves judge, see them learn to feare him, that is a great King, and whose name is terrible, even the Lord of hostes. To him through Christ the onelyonly “mayster and teacher of his Church, be prayse for ever. He, even God the Father, for his sonne Christs sake, shew his mercy in all our aberrations, and discover them vntounto vsus more, and more; keep vsus in, and lead vsus into his truth: giving vsus to be faythfull in that wee have received, whether it be lesse or more; & praeserving vsus against all those scandalls; wherewith the whole world is filled,

Amen.

CHristian Reader, whilst I was printing my defence against Mr Ber: Invective, his reply came forth in a second treatise; to which I have also given answer in all the particulars which are of weight. And for that I have been occasioned by the one, and other book, to handle all the poynts in difference, I entreat the to compare with this my defence such other oppositions especially as respect myself, whither in print, or writing, till more particular …nswer be given.

The principall scriptures, brought on both sides for the present controversy, expounded and applyed.

LEviticus 20. 24. & 26. 11. 12. pag. 328. 329.

Ieremy 23. 22. pag. 103. 377.

The two parables of the feild, and draw net, Mat. 13. p. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. Math. 18. 17. Tel the Church p. 170. 171. 172. 177. 178. &c. to 235. 238. 239.

Math. 23. 1. 2. 3. pag. 433. 434. 435. 436.

Mark. 9. 39. pag. 77.

Ioh. 10. pag. 385. 386. 387. 388.

Ioh. 17. 6. 9. 14. 15. 16. p. 332. 333. 334.

Act. 2. 40. p. 330. 331.

Act. 13. 1. 2. p. 366. 367.

Act. 1…. 2. 3. 4. 199.

Act. 19. 8. 9. pag: 331. 332.

Act. 21. 18. pa. 200.

Rom. 10. 14. pag. 380. 381.

1 Cor. 1. 11. pag. 190 191.

1 Cor. 5. pag. 158. 159. 190. 191. 239. 240. 241. 242.

1 Cor. 9. 1. 2. p. 11. 381. 382. 383.

1 Cor. 11. 18. pag. 252. 253.

1 Cor. 14. 1. 3. 22. 24. pag. 235. 236. 237.

2 Cor. 2. 6. pag: 243. 206. 207. 208.

2 Cor. 6. 12. 15. 16. 17. 18. p. 322. 323. 324. 325. 326. 327. 328. 334. 335. 336. 337.

Ephe. 4. 11. 12. pag. 159. 160. 162. 163.

Phil. 1. 15. 16. pag. 119. 435.

1 Tim. 4. 6. pag. 378.

Titus 1. 15. pag. 251.

1 Pet. 2. 9. 10. pag. 44. 45.

Rev. 2. & 3. pa: 167. 168. 169.