Why Nonconforming Ministers Judge it Sinful, Treatise · Chapter 7
CHAP. VII.
The Sixth Argument Stated and Juſtifyed, Whether the precept for miniſterial Vocal prayer, includes not the uſe of our own gifts? The precept for preaching ordinarily ſo interpreted, There is in all languages a difference betwixt the words that ſignify to Read, and thoſe by which the Action of Prayer is expreſt.
§. 1 WE proceed to a Sixth Argument which we thus form,
To pretend to perform an act of Divine worship, and at the ſame time not to do it, is ſinful:
But for miniſters furnished by God with the gift of prayer to perform their miniſterial Acts in prayer, by the preſcribed forms of others, is to pretend to the performance of an act of Divine worship, and at the ſame time not to do it; Ergo.
The propoſition will be granted, by all who will be ſo juſt as to acknowledge, It is ſinful both to mock God, and to deceive our own ſouls, ſo as all we have to prove, is the Aſſumption, and that depends upon the reſolution of this ſingle queſtion.
Whether the Precepts for Vocal miniſterial prayer, doth not imply the firſt forming of the petitions in our hearts, which we utter with our lips.
Where we deſire our Reader to obſerve, That the queſtion is not about the precept for Prayer in the general, but about Vocal prayer, when we are to expreſs the deſires of our hearts by the words of our lips, ſuch is all Miniſterial prayer. The caſe is quite otherwiſe when we onelyonly pray, but do not miniſter in prayer. We know Hannah may pray, and her voice not be heard: but we alſo know, That a miniſter in his publick miniſtry muſt not ſo pray (as we hope all will grant) Now we profeſs we do very much incline to the affirmative part of the queſtion, That is, we think, whereſoever God hath commanded his miniſters in their Publick miniſtry to pray, The meaning is, That they should firſt in their own hearts form ſuch petitions as they judge according to the will of God, both on their own behalf and their peoples, and then to expreſs ſuch conceptions and deſires by their own words: and we are induced thus to judge from theſe reaſons.
§. 2 The whole world almoſt (the Chriſtian world we mean) thus interpreteth for Preaching. No ſober Divine (that ever we met with) ever ſaid that a miniſter of the goſpel could diſcharge his miniſterial office in preaching (no not in one Individual Act) by reading or reciting another mans ſermon. Mr. Perkins & Dr. Amer (two of our Proteſtant Caſuiſts) determin the quite contrary, and tell us, That, To Read or recite another mans ſermon is not to preach, and therefore a late hypercritical ſon of the church took himſelf concerned (in a book printed ſome few years ſince) to diſtinguish between Preaching, and Teaching: and took upon him to learn us a new leſſon, That a Miniſter is not bound to Preach but to Teach. And that (if we may believe him) he may do, By reading anothers Sermon, or good book, By writing a good book, By ſetting another to teach, By living a good life, &c. But none we know off ever affirmed, That to read or recite another mans Sermon was a lawful diſcharge of the miniſters duty in Preaching. What is the reaſon? Becauſe he who doth not exerciſe his own gift in inventing and compoſing. Chriſt hath bid us, Go Preach. What then is the meaning of that? Have not all Divines agreed to interpret it thus? Go ſtir up the gift that is in you, Give your ſelves to the ſtudy of the holy Scriptures, and to Meditation. Compoſe diſcourſes of Chriſt and Goſpel-doctrines, then communicate them by your voice to people; opening to them the ſenſe of the Scriptures, applying the will of God reveiled in them to the conſciences of all, dividing the word of God aright, that you may shew your ſelves workmen that need not be ashamed. Chriſt hath alſo bid us Pray, his great Apoſtle hath commanded, That ſupplications, prayers, interceſſions and givingthanks be made for all men. How come we to interpret this thus? Go read a form or forms of words which other men have made for you. We do not ſo interpret Go preach. It is true (as we hinted before) there is a praying in the Spirit, which ſome who have no mind to conſider the force of an argument may object to us; but we are ſpeaking of Vocal miniſterial prayer, and what is the will of God in commands which relate to that ſpecies of prayer: Such prayer alone he can uſe, who in that duty miniſtreth unto others; and every one will grant, That there is ſuch a duty. A whole Congregation muſt not pray in the Spirit onelyonly, without any voice heard. The Queſtion is, Whether he who in prayer miniſtreth to others, more fulfilleth the precept of God, concerning miniſterial prayer; then he who readeth, or reciteth onelyonly other mens Sermons fulfilleth the precept concerning Preaching? We think not.
§. 3 It is yet a farther queſtion, If he onelyonly readeth ſuch prayers, Becauſe the words uſed in Scripture in all languages to expreſs reading, are quite other from thoſe uſed to expreſs our duty in praying, and the action of Reading, and praying are quite differently expreſſed to us? Thoſe who know any thing know, That the Hebrews had a great ſcarcity of words, the Radical words in their language, hardly bearing the proportion of a fifth part to thoſe in Greek or Latine: So as they are forced to make uſe of the ſame words to ſignify ſometimes quite contrary actions: Ordinarily, to ſignify diverſe actions if they have but the leaſt cognation each to other. So that it is not ſo eaſy to argue from the old Teſtament upon this Topick. Yet we cannot but obſerve that the words uſed, Hoſ. 14. 2. Joel 2. 17. is foreign. We will not be too confident of it, but we are not aware of any text in the old Teſtament, where it ſignifieth that kind of ſpeech which is but the recitation or repetition of words formed by others. foreign indeed which is generally uſed to expreſs Reading, when it is joined with [upon the Lord] or [upon the name of the Lord] doth ſometimes ſignify the action of prayer. As it never ſignifys to read without the addition of, The book of the law, or the law, or ſome ſuch ſubſtantive following it. Both Pagnine and Buxtorf ſay, it properly ſignifyes, Clamare voce ſignificativâ verbis expreſſis & conceptis; But as we before ſaid, the execeding penury of words in that language makes it hard to eſtablish an argument from proper and ſignificant words in it. In the Greek the caſe is much plainer, The precepts for prayer are every where expreſſed there, by foreign, and foreign, &c. never by foreign the proper word uſed to ſignify reading. In short, Speaking may be conceived by us as a Generical term, and is either Mental, or Vocal. The firſt we call foreign. The Second foreign or foreign, which is a ſpeaking to the capacity, and underſtanding, or ſenſe at leaſt of others, ſo as they may know what we ſay. And this again is twofold. 1 The one is, The re-forming of words which others have firſt conceived in their minds, and committed to writing for us, or which they dictate to us. If they be written down or printed for us, and we recite them, looking upon the characters in the books, This we call Reading. Criticks tell us, That Legere, eſt oculis ſcripta percurere, quoniam literae oculis legi, id eſt, collegi videntur. This cannot be done without the help of our eyes, which gathering up the letters, makes a repreſentation of them to our underſtandings, This action the Greeks expreſs by foreign. Or elſe we Reform words conceived by others and dictated to us, our ears there gathering up the ſounds of them. This in English we call Reciting, or Repeating. The Latines Recitare, Repetere, from re and cito, or re & Peto. 2 There is a ſpeaking which is the forming of words, which we have firſt formed and our ſelves conceived in our own hearts. Neither Legere, nor repetere, nor recitare in Latine. Nor foreign or foreign in the Greek, are expreſſive of this action. Every one would deride him; that being to expreſs the action of him who made an argument, or pronounced an Oration, should either in Greek ſay, foreign, or in Latine Legit orationem. The words expreſs Actions ſpecifically diſtinct, ſo as though we lay a greater ſtreſs upon our arguments before mentioned then upon t is, yet we cannot think this altogether vain and impertinent; we cannot but make a great queſtion, Whether if we should think to fulfil the command of God for our duty in Vocal and miniſterial prayer, by a reading forms, ready compoſed for us: we should not come short of what God requires of us in the action, and ſo both mock God and deceive our own ſouls? we can find neither precept nor preſident for ſuch praying.