The Vindication of Liturgies Proved No Vindication, Introduction · Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII.
A Reply to what the Vindicator hath ſaid, Chap. 7. p. 219, &c. The Vindicator will not underſtand, that the Queſtion was at firſt ſtated only as to Vocal Prayer, nor ſpeak to the thing in difference. Two Errors running through all the Vindicators Book. He hath brought no ſufficient Reaſons, for a different Interpretation of the Divine Precepts for Prayer and Preaching. He trifleth in applying what I ſaid as to Reading to a recitation of anothers words, tho it be without Reading. The impertinent ways of modern Anſwerers; the Vindicator too much followeth them.
1 IN the 7th Chap. p. 219. Our Vindicator comes to Anſwer my Sixth Argument, which I had thus laid down:
To pretend to perform an Act of Worſhip,Reaſonable Acc. p. 115. and yet not to do it at the ſame time, 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 Major I conceived needed no proof, for to do ſuch a thing were but to mock God, and to deceive our own Souls. The Minor I proved, 1. Becauſe we ſo interpret the precept for Preaching, not Go read other Mens Sermons. 2. If he read ſuch Prayers. I ſaid it was a further queſtion, becauſe in all languages the words uſed to expreſs Reading are different from thoſe uſed to expreſs Praying. I ſaid we laid a greater ſtreſs upon other Arguments then upon this yet we could nor think thi… vain an… impertinent. I ſaid at firſt, That the queſtion is not about Prayer in the general, but about Vocal Prayer, p. 115. again p. 117. We are ſpeaking of Vocal Prayer, and what is the Will of God relating to that ſpecies of Prayer.
2. In our Vindicators Chapter relating to this Argument, two things are conſiderable; 1. The Anſwer. 2. The Reflections that have nothing of an Anſwer in them. I ſhall only inform my Reader…, that it may appear by the Title of my Book, and by the concluſion of it, and by many paſſages in it, that I did not pretend in this caſe to define, but only to argue; not to determine what is lawful and unlawful for all Men, in it ſelf, abſolutely, but to give our Reaſons, why we judge this thing unlawful: leaving others to the conduct of their own Conſciences. Nor had I done this, if the World had not been ſo often, and ſo impudently told, That we grant theſe things lawful, That we have no reaſons, nothing to ſay (Wiſdome, Reaſon, and Learning, were all born with them, and with them alone they muſt dwell and dye.) Now theſe things being firſt called to mind, let us hear what our Anſwerer ſaith to the Argument.
3. Firſt he ſaith, This is an heavy Charge, a falſe Accuſation, a Slander, a Calumny; but whom doth it accuſe? Not a perſon in the World. Do I, giving my Argument why I ſo judge a thing unlawful, condemn others, who think the ſame thing lawful, eſpecially when I profeſs againſt it? p. 164. n. 2. Next he ſaith, I contradict my ſelf, having granted before, Forms in themſelves lawful, and may lawfully be uſed by Miniſters in ſome caſes. Very pretty, and I contradict my ſelf (forſooth) becauſe I now ſay, that I think it unlawful for Miniſters furniſhed with the Gift of Prayer, and in a capacity to uſe it, nothing naturally hindring. I would gladly know in what degree of oppoſition theſe Propoſitions are. Shall we continually be troubled with Arguments, Ex ignoratione Elenchi, not concluding againſt the Queſtion, or to whom do ſuch Arguments ſignifie any thing? Let the Reader ſee the Queſtion ſtated p. 5.
4. But at length our Vindicator thinks he ſhall ſpeak to the point, telling us, That there is not the ſame reaſon to interpret the precept of Preaching, as the precepts for Prayer. Very good, why did not he ſay ſo at firſt; I do think there is, how doth he prove there is not? He ſaith (inſtead of every precept is to be interpreted) every duty is to be performed, ſuitably to the Nature of the Duty it ſelf, or in ſuch a manner as may beſt tend to the pleaſing of God, and the exerciſe of true Piety. Very true, it being always underſtood, that thoſe things beſt pleaſe God, and are the trueſt exerciſes of Piety, which are according to his will. For to talk in matters of External Worſhip, of any thing pleaſing to God, being an Exerciſe of Piety, or any vertue in them antecedent to, or ſeparate from the Divine Will, is very odd diſcourſe. God hath not willed acts in External Worſhip, becauſe they are good and pious, but becauſe he hath willed them, therefore they are ſo.
But he tells us, That in Publick Prayer, Religious Devotion and Gracious Diſpoſitions and Deſires towards God, are the great things to be practiſed, and to that end the uſe of a Form is well accommodated. I ſuppoſe he means for all Miniſters, for otherwiſe he ſaith nothing.
8. We are ſpeaking (as I ſaid at firſt) not of Prayer in the general, but of Vocal Prayer of which (as I have proved) words are an Eſſential Part; and being ſo, our Author hath told us, None but God can inſtitute what words we ſhall uſe. If he hath appointed any Forms of this Nature, they are therefore lawful and beſt, becauſe he hath appointed them. If he hath left us ſome, but not commanded us to uſe them; but leaving us at liberty to uſe them, or others to that ſenſe; Man can no more determine, then in the caſe of the Turtle Doves or young Pigeons. If he hath only Inſtituted words as a part of Vocal Prayer, but left it to the liberty of his Miniſters what words to uſe, only requiring them to ask nothing contrary to his Revealed Will; it is not in the Creatures power to determine to another what words he ſhould uſe.
6. Two Errors and no ſmall ones, I have obſerved running through all our Vindicators Book. He ſeems not to allow of Vocal Prayer to be a diſtinct ſpecies of Prayer, from what is meerly Mental, which it muſt be, or it would be ſufficient for a Miniſter in the publick Congregation to Pray Mentally, and 2. Prayer would be no Homage of our Lipps, and outward man. And if it be, there is ſomething elſe required to it, beſides Gracious Diſpoſitions and Deſires towards God, viz. Audible words, and they muſt be an Eſſential part of it, as being that which alone diſtinguiſheth it from the other Species.
7. Secondly, Our Author all along this diſcourſe, ſeemeth to talk of a Piety and Devotion in External Worſhip, antecedaneous to the Will of God revealed concerning that Worſhip. Hence he thinks to conclude Forms according to the Will of God, becauſe (in his opinion) they tend to promove Piety and Devotion, yea and pleads theſe things in barr to our proof, that It is the Will of God that his Miniſters who have the Gift of Prayer, or an Ability fitly to expreſs their minds to God in Prayer, ſhould uſe that Gift in Praying. We think that that Duty in External Worſhip which is performed moſt ſtrictly according to the Will of God, is performed with moſt Devotion and Piety; otherwiſe the Papiſts have more to ſay for their Images then I think they have.
8. But he further addeth, That Miniſters are to teach People what they before underſtood not. This is in part true, but this is not half their work in Preaching. We are not to acquaint God in Prayer with what he before knew not. Therefore the precept for Preaching may not be interpreted go and read another Mans Sermon; but the Precept for Prayer may be interpreted, go read another Mans Prayer. We cannot indeed in Prayer tell God what he is not acquainted with: But how doth it therefore follow that therefore we muſt not interpret the precept of God as to Miniſterial Prayer, Go, and ſtudy the Mind and Will of God, and according to the Abilities I have given you, expreſs your and others thoughts to me, as to the things which are according to my Will; ſeeing it may be done by words conceived in our own hearts, and I have proved them moſt Natural, moſt proper and very probably the Will of God; and conſidering words are an Eſſential part of this Worſhip which no Man can inſtitute or determine, if Gods Word hath left the particular words to our liberty, and that the matter of Prayer is more variable then of Sermons?
9. I had ſaid p. 118, That the words in both Languages in Scripture uſed to expreſs Reading, are quite other, from thoſe uſed to expreſs our duty in Prayer. — In the ſame page I had repeated the ſame: We will not be too confident of it, but we are not aware of any Text in the Old Teſtament where foreign ſignifieth that kind of Speech, which is but the recitation or repetition By Reading of the words of others. Either the Printer, or perhaps my ſelf careleſly (having plainly expreſſed my mind before, in the firſt lines of that Paragraph) left out thoſe words, by Reading, which manifeſtly was my ſenſe, as appears from what I laid down at firſt and was proving. I had alſo ſaid, That the Hebrews had a great penury of words, and it was hard to eſtabliſh an Argument from proper and ſignificant words in that language. But I did not remember any text in which foreign is tranſlated Read. Here he mightily triumphs over my unhappineſs in Critical Obſervations; nor do I much pretend to them, or affect them, but yet ſhall tell him that foreign in the three Texts he hath brought Gen. 32.4. Deut. 26.5. Deut. 27.14. cannot be proved to ſignifie Reading, which is that I undertook ro prove p. 118. n. 3. For the Greek words it is plain. Here he cryeth out what meaneth he? That which our Vindicator had no mind to underſtand, and which I plainly enough expreſt. That the Greek words ſignifying to read are never uſed to expreſs the Action of Prayer, but inſtead of them words that ſignifie a recitation of a thing, without the help of our eyes Inſtanced in foreign, as Exegetical (in part) to foreign Now where ſhall we find that word ſignifying to read in Scripture foreign and foreign we may find, but all this referred to the Reading of Forms, and touched not the pronouncing of them by heart. I do not think an Argument from words and the uſages of them alone concluſive; but it is not ſo ſlight as our Author would have it, Quae non profunt ſingula, juncta juvant.
10. I have done with what in this Chap. pretends to an Anſwer. I come now to conſider the Reflexive part of it, and indeed this is the way of anſwering in theſe Caſes, 1. To look if any words can be catched at, to ſuggeſt the Adverſaries Irreverence or Diſobedience to Superiors. 2. Next if any can be found to bring the Adverſaries under Odium, or Envy or Prejudice of any multitude. 3. If any lapſes of Pen, or otherwiſe can he found to make the Author appear Ignorant, Silly, Self contradicting, Ʋnlearned. 4. To put the Ergo before the premiſes, beginning with telling the Reader, there s no weight, no ſtrength in the Authors Arguments; they are ſlight, trivial, trifling, inconcluſive things, Quod erat demonſtrandum; which ought to have been the concluſion, after a good anſwer had been given to the premiſes. Our Anſwerer is too much guilty of it, as hath appeared all along in his Diſcourſe in this Chapter.
11. He firſt entituleth his Chapter, Praying by Forms is very raſhly and injuriouſly charged with mocking of God. There is no ſuch thing in my Argument as the term mocking of God, nor is it named but in proof of my Major. 2. Nor doth it refer to any but Miniſters who have Abilities to expreſs themſelves fitly to God without them. 3. Nor is it aſſerted, but as the private opinion of ſome Miniſters not ſatisfied in the uſe of them, and a reaſon (and that of which they were leaſt confident of the ſtrength of) why they cannot judge it lawful. And the ſame Men tell you, p. 264. n. 2. They take not themſelves to be Infallible, they onelyonly ſpeak as they believe, condemning none that judge or practice otherwiſe. But this was a fit title to expoſe the Author by.
12. Next he tells the World this was an heavy Charge and Accuſation, tho no ſingle perſon was charged, only a private opinion declared. Then the Reader is told this is a trifling Argument, and the Reader muſt be asked pardon for giving him the trouble to peruſe a thing ſo very inconſiderable (he ſhould have ſaid in my opinion, for he is not infallible) as this. Laſtly he muſt be told of great ſwelling words, extravagancy enough, words ſupported, or not ſupported by weak, feeble, and impotent Arguments. That is, ſuch as our Vindicator thinks (and it is his intereſt to think) ſuch.