The Liturgical Considerator Considered, Part 2

The Liturgical Considerator Considered · Part 2

p. 14Part. 2.

Sectio prima.

IN the next place he takes our Liturgy into conſideration, 1. He excuſes the Liturgy.and here:

Firſt, As I ſaid, he yields, pag. 5. ſome ſmall faults, verbal defects, which are very venial in any things of human conſtitution: But pag. 33. gives it a fair abſolution.

Anſw. Anſw. Could the Doctors Rhetorick help him to ſpeak, and yet not to ſpeak, he would do it; but, Sir, you may ſpeak out; not onelyonly our King that now is, foreign.but his Royal Father ſaid, that He would eaſily conſent, that what was inconvenient for matter or manner, ſhould be amended. I have ſeen a paper printed, I think about the year 1641, in which were divers things ſet down by p. 15ſome of the Biſhops, which they intended to Correct. I perceive you intend to give it but a gentle purge: I pray, Sir, are you the man alone intruſted in this work? truly I do not take your judgment to be the meaſure of all the judgments of the Divines in England, though you ſay your Liturgy must be of all our Devotions in publick, pag. 27. But of this more afterwards.

Sectio ſecunda.

THe ſecond Conſideration is, 2. He defends the Liturgie.His endeavouring to defend it againſt the objections brought againſt it. Object. 1 The firſt of which is that Prayer which is uſed after Baptiſm, wherein thanks is given to God becauſe he hath been pleaſed to regenerate this Infant: Here he defends Baptiſmal Regeneration briefly, of which in a more proper place afterwards.

Object. 2 The ſecond Objection is this, That ſome men (and one Miniſter he ſaith he knows) have charged it with a Lye in the beginning, becauſe the words are not the ſame with the Text in Ezek. 18.21, 22. And theſe men he loads with Impudency, Ignorance, Blaſphemy, intolerable Confidence, pag. 24, 25.

The Doctor wants not words, what ſhame hath he poured upon theſe men, and that one Miniſter? I wonder who he is. This indeed I have heard; That take theſe words.

1. As the Line before them orders the Miniſter to read with a loud voice one of theſe Sentences of Scripture which follow, and this is the firſt, At what time ſoever a ſinner repents him, &c.

2. As theſe words are ſaid to be the Sentence of Scripture, in Ezek. 18.21, 22.

3. As they have theſe words, ſaith the Lord, annexed: In this ſenſe I have heard them charged with a Lye, not denying, what may be drawn by Conſequence from Scripture.

For my own part I have been much offended with theſe words.

1. Becauſe they are ſaid to be a Sentence of Scripture in ſuch a Text.

2. As they have helped to procrastinate Repentance, and p. 16have been a Trap-board for Hell; your meaner ſo…t whom you labour to edifie, have got theſe words, At what time ſoever, &c. laid them up.

3. As they help to bolſter up many a wretch, who when he comes to dye, and his luſts forſake him, now from the bottom of his heart (as he phanſies) he repents, and there is Comfort for him.

But all that you have ſaid will not ſave thoſe words from being very falſe in the ſenſe mentioned, in which I am confident they were ſpoken; and how much that which is very falſe differs from a Lye in this caſe, judge you. And truly, Sir, if this be the taſte you give us how you will correct the Prayer-book, the Jeſuites have by their Index expurgatorius done more ſervice to their Romiſh Synagogue in purging out of Authors what was good, than you will do ſervice to the Church of England by purging out what is unſound. Let us read what you ſay,

All the words of that Sentence (in the Common-prayer book) are not in that place, Ezek. 18. 21, 22. This is very true, ſay you: Then ſay I, it is very falſe, that thoſe words are the ſentence of that Scripture: You confeſſe it; You ſay, All the words are not, &c. how many think you are? I have viewed theſe Verſes in the old Engliſh Tranſlation when that Prayer-book was compoſed, (as I ſuppoſe) there I find above 63 words, in our Tranſlation about 59. and though I eaſily yield you wicked and ſnner, turn and repent, for Synonomies, yet I find not above five of the ſame words in the Common-prayer Book which are in that Text which the Common-prayer Book refers unto: So that they are not All indeed.

How then? But (ſay you) the Evangelical Soundneſſe and Sence is more fully united, and comprehenſively ſet down in the Book of Common-prayer, than in theſe verſes cited in the Margin.

Hold a little. 1. The Lord inſpires his holy Prophets immediately with ſuch words to expreſſe his will and mind, which are written by his Pen-man.

2. Shall ordinary men take theſe words and alter them, and that very much (as I ſhall ſhew) and this Sentence thus altered, be called the Sentence of Scripture in that Text.

3. Yea ſhall men ſay the ſenſe is more fully united, and comprehenſively p. 17ſet down in the Sentence altered, than in thoſe words, the Lord did immediately inſpire, ſurely then it is better; well, let us ſee what will follow.

1. Thus we may alter the whole Scripture, and make a new Scripture of it, and tell the people we give you the ſame Bible that God inſpired his Servants to Write, but in a ſence more Evangelical and fully united, than in thoſe words the pen-men wrote them. So that we have mended the Scripture; By the ſame reaſon you alter two verſes, you may twenty; ſo make a ſhorter Bible.

2. When we preach and quote Texts, we may read them otherwiſe than they are in the Original, or any Tranſlation, and when the people look for the Texts in their Bibles, and cannot find the verſes as we quote them, we may tell them, we give the ſound Evangelical ſence, more fully united, &c. than you have in your Bibles, or in the Original, were not this a good Anſwer? Doctor, who is bold.

3. This Doctor is ſo exact in our Prayers to God, that he will bind us all to the very ſame words in a Common-Prayer-Book, we muſt not pray for the ſame things by our own gifts, though more enlarged; thus he ties us up to mens words in his humane Invention, but for Gods words he can plead for the altering of them, leaving abundance out.

4. I deny what you ſay, That the Evangelical Soundneſs and Sence is more fully united in the Common-Prayer-Book.

For the Evangelical ſence muſt lie in the bottom of the heart: Now that you are fain to interpret, elſe we could not tell what the ſence is of thoſe words.

2. But eſpecially, thus it appears, 'tis not true; for in Ezek. 18.21, 22. The nature of Repertance is opened, if you ask what is Repentance? I anſwer out of Ezek. It is the turning from all a mans ſins, and keeping all Gods Statutes; But in your Common-Prayer-Book, there is not one word of this, only the Definitum Repentance mentioned.

3. In Ezekïel there is nothing of the Time expreſſed, but in your Common-Prayer-Book, there we muſt read with a loud voice the firſt words, At what time ſoever.

The Texts you adde, make nothing to your purpoſe. The queſtion was not, what may be gathered from Scripture by Conſequence p. 18(this was yielded) but whether thoſe words in the Common-Prayer-Book were the ſentence of Scripture in Ezkeiel 18. Methinks a great Doctor, yea now an elder Biſhop, ſhould underſtand Ignoratio Elenchi.

Then you come to prove the lawfulneſs from parallel Texts in the N. T. where the Apoſtles do quote Texts out of the old T. not verbatim, but to the ſence; as Hebr. 10.5, 6. from Pſal. 40.6, 7. and bid the Supercritical Cenſors compare words. So Mat. 27.9. Not verbatim out of Jeremy, but moſt out of Zechariah.

Anſw. What Franciſcus David would ſay to this I know, but ſpare his words, and I could propound a ſad queſtion here, which I ſhould thank thoſe who could reſolve me; I muſt leave it, and ſee your Logick.

1. Becauſe the Apoſtles did ſo, when guided as the Pen-men of the Scripture, Therefore, ordinary men may do ſo; prove the Conſequence.

2. As to the ſence in Heb. 10. unleſs it be where the Apoſtle follows the Septuagint in thoſe words, A body thou haſt prepared; the ſence and words are the ſame with the Pſalm, it is not as in your Common-Prayer-Book, to give us five words of 59. and not the nature of the thing, though there be a little difference from the Pſalm.

3. As to your quotation out of Mat. 27. I can give you the ſame Anſwer, but adde withal, it ſeems I muſt needs take your Reconciliation of the Texts, when I may make bold to tell you, as Learned men as your ſelf (Salvà Reverentià) have other notions of that Text. See Ʋoetius diſp. Selat. l. 1. p. 159. Salomon Glaſſius. Philolo. lib. 2. p. 156. So that your example fails. How well you have cleared your Liturgy, and deſervedly charged your Adverſary with Impudence, Ignorance, and Blasphemy, Let the Reader judge.

Sectio tertia.

AFter this from p. 26. to p. 35. he fills his pages with his Rhetorical Encomiums of his Liturgy, and then Anſwers other Objections, ſo methodical is this Rhetorician. Some diſcreet regulation in the Muſick he will allow.

p. 19Object 3 What this ſinging of ſervice is, I cannot tell, p. 35.I was never acquainted with places where this Trade is ſet up, I ſuppoſe none ſo void of Chriſtian Reaſon to ſing any thing but Pſalms, Hymns, or Spiritual Songs in the Church. Now as to Muſick, if the Doctor means only Ʋocal, I ſhall declare my opinion thus, I could heartily wiſh, That in all Churches we had ſome perſons that had good voices, and skilful to ſing their parts when we ſing Pſalms. I think it doth very much help to the very nature of the Ordinance, that men ſhould skilfully ſing, to help raiſe the Affections, and not to make a ſhreaming inſtead of ſinging. If the Doctor contends for Inſtrumental Muſick, I ſhall only deſire him to Anſwer Aquinas, Sum. 2a. 2ae. q 91. a. 2. againſt it.

Object. 4 The Fourth Objection ſome make againſt the Liturgy, is, the Ceremonies, concerning which, p. 36. he tells us his Opinion after the old faſhion in Rhetorick, but in p. 38. his zeal breaks out, telling us, This National Church, as all others have power and authority from God to judge what is decent, as to any Ceremony in the worſhip of God, which God hath left indifferent in its nature, which the conſent of the major part of the Church, &c. may enjoyn, &c. and that this is moſt true and undeniably to be maintained even to the death; he is ſo tedious, that I am weary with tranſcribing.

What? Is it not only true, but moſt true? I know one thing truer Doctor, and what to be maintained to the death? Biſhop Wren, give him a clap on the back for this Heroick Sentence, we ſhall have a Ceremonious Martyr at laſt, but Doctor it ſhal be, you ſhall maintain it to the death for me. Reader, if you have better eyes than I, pray ſee if you can find what Texts of Scripture he brings for this bold Aſſertion, and why a National Church may do this, more than the Church of Corinth, Philippi, Epheſus, &c. elſe it may be if we ſay theſe Apoſtolical Churches know their power as well as Dr. Gauden, yet in them we find no ſuch Ceremonies as in our Liturgy, and if they be uſeful for us, they were for them; it may be if we urge this, he will tell us they were indeed Apoſtolical, but not National Churches, and could not: but prove that.

As to this Queſtion, I only hear of excellent books written about it, my purſe and diſtance cannot reach them; but ſuch they p. 20are in the judgement of underſtanding men, as they are not Anſwered, ſo never can be from Scripture and ſound reaſon, but by the old way of Priſons and ſilencing.

Only a word to the Dr. in pag. 36. You ſay theſe Ceremonies are ſignal marks of Faith, Humility, Purity, Courage, &c. I pray, to your Decencie, and Significancy, add Efficacy, and to Efficacy. Neceſſity, as it was of old, and ſo without them no Ordinances, nor Miniſtry, then you are right.

They are indifferent before enjoyned, but what are they when enjoyned? I have read Neceſſary; give me leave to ſay, What God hath left indifferent in his Church in matters of Religion (I do not ſay in common Humane Society, and things of civil order, wherein I confeſs the Magiſtrate may direct and reſtrain) it is not in the power of any creature to make neceſſary. That creature who doth it, takes one ſtep above God; for God le…ves liberty, you will not allow it: If a Lord ſhould leave it indifferent to his Servants to wear what coloured Cloaths they would (ſo not fooliſh) and the Steward will force them all to wear White, or put them out of his Service, is not this Steward above his Lord? What is any creature but a ſteward to God?

I cannot ſee but ſuch a creature takes as much upon him as God did; for take all the Ceremonies of the old Law, conſider them abſtractedly from Gods command, they were as indifferent as your Ceremonies, there was no goodneſs in them, why God did command them, when they were in the higheſt uſe of them; as ſuppoſe in their day of Atonement, if God had declared that he repealed his command concerning all thoſe Ceremonies, in that very Inſtant, they had been all indifferent to any uſe: What difference between the High Prieſts Garments, and your Surplice, as to their own abſtracted nature? I know no Moral good in one more than the other; And truly if you can ordain things in the worſhip of God, which ſhall ſignifie ſpiritual things, and ſhall have in them an aptneſs and Efficacy, to ſtir up our dull minds (as you were wont to ſay) and now theſe muſt be uſed, for being enjoyned they are neceſſary, I cannot ſee how much you are inferiour to God: only thus indeed, God did not make a ſign of a ſign, as you do in the Croſs., move a mans finger over the face of a Child, and ſay, I ſign with the ſign, when there is no ſign at all left, for Courage, p. 21Conſtancy and Faith, and I know not what; but no more of this, I pray Anſwer the Books upon this Queſtion.

Sectio quarta.

HIS third Conſideration about the Liturgy, is, He comm…nds Liturgy.His high commendation of it; and here I muſt go ſearch up and down to get things into a method; I will do it as well as I can.

Firſt, He commends it from the efficient cauſes of it; theſe were (ſaith he) Martyrly men who compoſed our Liturgy. p. 3.

Anſw. 1. Did Martyrly men compoſe it all? you will not ſay ſo I hope; I think the Romiſh Party did much of it, from whom they took it.

Secondly, However diſtingue tempora; they came new out of Pope…y, the Nation wedded to that Whore; in a time when there were not ſo many well-qualified Miniſters in the whole Kingdom, as were lately in one City, that of London: Rare to find a Pulpit with a Clapper (ſaid father Latimer;) forced to admit meer reading Proteſtants well-affected to the true Religion into the Miniſtry. But, what muſt we enjoy the Goſpel an hundred years, and men not grow in knowledge, gifts and grace? Will you ſhame the Goſpel, Promiſes, and Engliſh Chriſtians? Muſt they be ever children? I am confident if thoſe worthy men were now alive, and knew what the Lord had done for the Engliſh Miniſtry, they would abhor to impoſe, as you would have the Liturgy impoſed; only this remember, we honour thoſe Martyrly men more than many of your perſwaſion have done, or do, it were well if all abhorred that Biſhop of Rome as they did.

Secondly, He commends it from the Matter; the excellent matter, for the main muſt ſtill be retained, p. 3. If it be only the excellent Matter, let it ſtand; but if you will only purge ſome verbal defects as you ſay, I fear you will leave ſomething that is not excellent. The Reaſons ſhewing the neceſſity of Reformation, &c. publiſhed by divers Miniſters, ſhew more than p. 22verbal defects. I pray anſwer that Book like a Divine and Lawyer: Mr. Powel, with whom, though I agree not in all things, hath obſerved ſixty nine offenſive things in that Liturgy, you may pleaſe to conſider them.

Thirdly, Whereas great offence hath been taken at the Form of it, popular reſponds, verſicles, intermixtures, abbreviations, abruptions, ſtops, with a preſent poſting on again with a Let us pray, when prayer before was in hand.

3Thirdly, Now he commends it from this Form, the popular reſponds, pag. 34. which he calls the Ecchoes of humble and intent affections, and in the two honourable Temples finds, they excite the Miniſters affections, &c.

Anſw. 1. Yea Sir, your Templars are Lawyers I ſuppoſe; and as for Lawyers, unleſs they be a very few, they are crucified men to the World, they keep firm to their Baptiſmal Covenant, forſaking the Devil and all his works, the vain pomp, &c. But in other Congregations, where we have perſons very vain, love money abhominably, drink Sack like fiſh, and very Drunkards, rap out Oaths commonly, unclean, ſcoff at the power of their own profeſſed Religion; to have ſuch as theſe in our Congregations, only to make the reſponds, when godly men will not come at us to hear the Service; this makes a Miniſters ſtomack ſick, inſtead of quickning his affections.

Secondly, I pray Sir, can you prove that this was the Form the Lord appointed at his Temple? I have read in the Word, of the peeples ſaying, Amen; but I never read this kind of worſhip.

Thirdly, Then it ſeems the Miniſter is not the mouth of the people, their own mouths ſpeak for themſelves; and why ſhould not the Miniſter ſay Amen to their prayers?

Sectio quinta.

44thly. HE commends it from the final Cauſe; the more August and Reverent worſhip of God, &c. of which before; only pag. 27. I find another, it is to be the p. 23main Standard, Teſt and meaſure of our publick Devotion.

Anſw. I pray open your meaning; what is the Teſt and the Matter of it? I pray firſt make it pure; and when it is purged, yet we abhor to give that honour to your. Book, which is due to the Lords prayer, and the Word of God onelyonly.

But do you mean the Form of it? then it ſeems we muſt make our prayers with popular reſponds, intermixtures, abruptions, &c. It's our meaſure you ſay; How is that, as on a Yard-wan? they have one Nail, two Nails, a quarter of a Yard, &c. ſo they meaſure cloth: So if we will make a prayer of three ſhort lines, or ſix, &c. we muſt meaſure by this, where we have variety of lengths, and thus we muſt make various prayers ſutable to this main Standard; what elſe you intend I know not by your Meaſure.

5Fifthly, He commends it from the effects, pag. 12, 13, 18, 33. It is the Bulwark againſt, firſt, Romiſh Superſtition, as the Maſs and Popery.

Firſt, For the Maſs, while Bread and Wine are ſo conſecrated and communicated, as in the Liturgy, we ſhall for ever keep out the Maſſe.

Anſw. 1. What the Doctor means by Conſecration, I know no…; how others underſtand it, I know: but I can ſee nothing in the Book that is done to keep out Maſſe, that is not done by other Miniſters, who yet ſtumble at a Liturgy impoſed upon all; a ſtrange Argument, that onelyonly by reading of the words the Maſs is kept out, elſe nothing that makes againſt the Maſs in it, but we uſe.

Secondly, But doth not your Book by commanding kneeling, do ſomething which may help in the Maſſe; till Tranſubſtantiation began to be ſtarted, kneeling was not known; you know the geſture for ſome hundred years was quite oppoſite.

Secondly, it is a Bulwark against Popery, he ſaith.

Anſw. 1. How then did Biſhop Davenant prove Papiſts p. 24ought to be compelled to come to Church; for as to our Liturgy he ſaith, Determ. 27.What is there in it that is not approved of Papiſts themſelves, which he thus confirms, That ſome of the Biſhops of Rome have offered to approve our Form of prayers, provided we would accept it by their Authority.

Secondly, Why then ſaid one of your Biſhops, The Servicebook of the Church of England was now ſo dreſſed, that if the Pope ſhould come and ſee it, he would claim it as him own, but that it is in Engliſh. Yea, the Papiſts boaſted it was a compliance with them, &c.

You would ſeem to be afraid of Popery, I know who is; and he that reads Biſhop Bramhal's book, printed at the Hague, will fear more.

Why then was that paſſage left out in this Liturgy againſt the Pope; which, with divers other things makes us ſure, this is not the Liturgy which the Law eſtabliſhed.

Thirdly, It is a Bulwark againſt Anabaptiſm, for it maintains Baptiſmal Regeneration; and this you are forced firſt to prove as well as you can, knowing it is one of the things that give offence, and will do. Had you carried this ſtoutly, I would have given you many thanks, and ſaid it was a ſtrong Argument; though it doth not follow we muſt be tied to a Book.

I obſerve two things in your diſcourſe:

1. You give this Regeneration to all Infants baptiſed.

2. You mention nothing of the Parent. Then briefly I anſwer.

Anſw. 1. Why then did Dr. Gauden refuſe to baptize the Infant of a Parent (being abominably ignorant) in his Pariſh, till the Parent got ſome knowledge? (I am certain of the truth of this) what wrong did he to the Child, by refuſing to put it into a Regenerate and ſaved Eſtate, by refuſing to Baptize it? What if the child had died.

Secondly, You allow a perſon in a Regenerate and ſaved eſtate, and yet falling from that ſtate you cannot ſave this.

Thirdly, Infants, as Infants, are the ſubjects of Baptiſm, they need no depending Title; I thought Abrahams ſeed (viſibly ſo) had been the ſubject.

p. 25Fourthly, Though natural affection work, yet who in his judgment loving the ſoul of his Child, would not wiſh it might die, when it is under a certainty of ſalvation?

Fifthly, Though all the Ordinances of God are honourable, yet Baptiſm ſurpaſs them all; for that puts all ſuch Subjects into a certainty of ſalvation; but the Word preached doth little: Paul did not ſpeak right, when he ſaid he was ſent, not to baptize, but to preach; the firſt ſaved all, if died in ſuch a ſtate. Theſe are my ſudden thoughts, but I pray view Mr. Gataker his Stricturae upon Biſhop Davenants Epiſtle to Dr. Ward about this queſtion, and anſwer him; when I read him long ſince he gave me ſatisfaction. It is true, he was one of the Members of that illiterate Aſſembly that Dr. Gauden ſo much uſeth to deſpiſe, and that in his Looſing Peters Chains; but though he did not wear a long Scarf, he need not go to School to Dr. Gauden; no more needed Dr. Twiſs, nor Dr. Reynolds, Members of the ſame Aſſembly; but if the Doctor will ſwagger with his Rabbinical Learning, let him help Dr. Lighfoot (another Member) a little, and he will talk with him; many other men there were of excellent worth, for Learned, Orthodox, and truly plous men that underſtand the Goſpel, and live accordingly; I fear the like Aſſembly will not be in ours, nor in our Childrens dayes; they get no honour who deſpiſe that Aſſembly.

Sectio ſexta.

2ly. THE next Effect of the Liturgy is this; it unites the King and the People; and this Reaſon he urgeth, ſo that on the contrary, he ſaith, Subjects cannot be ſo tite, firm, zealous, chearful, nor constant in our Loyalty and Love to our Soveraign; a heap of words, pag. 28.

Anſw. 1. What mean you Doctor, to create jealouſies between the King and his Subjects, when He is newly come to His Throne, the Lord rebuke you? Why then did you take the Covenant (ſo croſs to what now you practice) the removal of the Liturgy was in purſuance of the Covenant, as both Houſes declared; becauſe you can bring no Scripture-proof, you go to State-policy; but let us weigh him.

p. 26Secondly, Why not then the ſame Sermon that is preached before the King, and the ſame prayer the Miniſter makes before Him? that there be nothing in all the Worſhip of God, through his Kingdoms, but verbatim, the ſame that is before the King: This uniformity is ſtronger.

Thirdly, It is true, in were a deſirable thing if the King and His Subjects could agree in every punctilio of Religion, Doctrine and Worſhip; but His Majeſty knows it is impoſſible, and that He, though our King, is a Subject to God as well as we; there is darkneſs abides upon us in ſome degree while we are here; but if we be united to our King in the ſound Doctrine of the Church of England, as we are, and the ſame Ordinances of God owning all; if in leſſer matters and circumſtances there be various apprehenſions upon conſcientious grounds, Can we not be firm to Him in Love and Loyalty?

Fourthly, As to prayer: Is it not ſufficient that we pray for the ſame things, and for His Majeſty, much more enlarged, than in the Liturgy, unleſſe we uſe juſt the ſame words and ſyllables? You can allow men to uſe other words, and contract places of Scripture, which the great God inſpired, and commanded ſo to be written (as I inſtanced before in your Liturgy) and yet we muſt be tyed to mens words.

I think our hearts were united to him in Love and Loyalty, when we poured out our ſouls for him under his affliction without a Common-prayer Book.

Fifthly, The union between King and Subjects is then ſureſt, when he hath the hearts of his Subjects united to him; His Majeſty took a better courſe for this heart-union by His Declaration from Breda: I am ſure no King ever had the hearts of his Subjects more united to Him, than He had by that; not that His Majeſty is bound by that to tolerate every one who pretends conſcience, then He muſt ſin in tolerating the vileſt Hereſies, and thoſe who deſpiſe and caſt off all the Ordinances of God, and Civil Government alſo.

Sixthly, The King of France hath thoſe who are Loving and Loyal to Him, unleſſe you will condemn all the Proteſtants there; yet I hope they uſe not the ſame words in their Worſhip that are uſed before the King: How much more we, who are of the ſame Proteſtant Religion with our King, and uſe the ſame p. 27worſhip only, though we expreſs the ſame things in different words.

7. God hath the hearts of People in his hand, and can turn them to their Prince as he pleaſe; and the beſt way for that, I think, is both for King and Subjects to keep cloſeſt to him and his worſhip, according to his own Inſtitution, which if your Liturgy only be, and you can prove it, you need ſay no more, but for this Argument Doctor, you get no hearts I am ſure from the Kings Subjects. If a man look back to the times of our troubles, what began them? you may remember what made theſe unhappy breaches, your Argument is experimentally confuted.

Sectio Septima.

66. THe next Topick he argues, the excellency of it is ab oppoſitis. Firſt, here I think he doth notably laſh thoſe who laid it aſide; but the efficient Compoſers, they were Martyrly men, but the efficient Depoſers, who are they? we know they were both Houſes of Parliament, as the Ordinan. 3. Jan. 1644. declares, and none elſe but thoſe could lay it aſide (I mean no private perſons) but let us hear the Doctor. And we ſee this piece of policy wat early uſed by ſome Jeſuitick Engines to foment our ſad Diviſions, the Liturgy muſt be laid aſide, &c. p. 30. If the Doctor will ſtoop ſo low to read the Ordinance of Parliament, and the Preface of the Learned (for ſo I call it) Aſſembly to the Directory, there read the Jeſuitick Engines. Were thoſe men Jeſuits?

2. He argues from the contrary evil effects which have followed ſince the Liturgy was laid aſide: Theſe effects he tells us are Errors, Ignorance, Prophaneneſs, &c. p. 11, 12, 32, 33.

Anſw. True, too many errors, and too much profaneneſs we have known; but did they riſe from this being laid aſide? ſurely you miſtake.

For Errors. Firſt, Let us ſee whether the uſe of it now will hinder Arminianiſme from ſpreading; I am ſure we have good ſtore of thoſe who are deeply engaged in thoſe Opinions, and they are croſs to ſeveral Articles of the Church, ſo that I think p. 28they are Errors, unleſs the Articles be erroneous; I ſpeak of your Clergy. Why are theſe men ſo zealous for it?

2. Fewer Errors in Scotland, than have been in England fifty years, and yet they will not own our Liturgy.

3. The preſſing of this Liturgy and other humane Inventions, have m…de, and will make people ſeparate from publick worſhip, and te…ching, into Corners, which at firſt gave the occaſion to breed and foment many Errors.

2. As for Ignorance and Profaneneſs.

1. Go to the Pariſhes where the Liturgy hath been moſt uſed, and ſee if Ignorance and Profaneneſs be not there more than in other Pariſhes.

2. Were it not for that I intend but a ſhort diſcourſe, I would have given you ſuch inſtances of Ignorance; and of profaneneſs, in ſome perſons who have been devoted to your Liturgy in theſe divided times, inſomuch that they abhorred ſo much as to ſuffer any of their ſervants to hear a Presbyterian, yet their profaneneſs ſuch that is ſcarce found amongſt Heathens, and ignorance in others as abhominable.

3. If among private Chriſtians who refuſe the Liturgy, I find not many, who in the great points of Regeneration, Faith in Christ, Juſtification, and all the main practical points ſhall give a better account, and in gifts of prayer, far exceed many hundreds of your Liturgical Miniſters, then I will bear the ſhame: Indeed for ſome Terms about the Trinity, as Subſiſtentia, perſonum modus, ſuppoſitum, they underſtand not, nor do many of your Curats, but elſe ſound in the Trinity, &c. How then is the laying aſide of the Liturgy the cauſe of this Ignorance? And for their Converſations, few of your Liturgical-men muſt come near them for holineſs.

Sectio Octava.

77. NExt he argues the Excellency of it à comparatis: And here Firſt, He compares it with the Directory. p. 6, 7. which he adorneth with theſe Epithites: Ʋſeleſs, Suppoſitious, Looſe, Illegitimate.

p. 29Anſw. Doctor, theſe are but four Epithites, have you no more? add as many more, or as many as you will, yet I muſt tell you, there is ſo much Chriſtian, grave, and wiſe counſel, in order to the Worſhip of God, there is ſo much divine ſolidity in that Book, that no judicious godly Chriſtian will be beaten out of love with it by all your flaſhy Rhetorick: Let but a man who knoweth God, the work of Grace on his heart, and hath judgment to diſcern the nature of an Ordinance, but compare, I know where he will ſee the difference. As for the Confeſſion of Faith, the Catechiſm, the Directory, made by that Aſſembly (of which Doctor Reynolds was one) let your new Epiſcopal men ſit till doomſday, they will never mend them.

He tells us of a wilderneſs of ſin, ſtings of fiery Serpents, venemous Inflammations, &c. that followed upon the removing of the Liturgy, and bringing in the Directory. Ibid.

But, Sir, your Liturgy and the Directory reſpect the worſhip of God, have the evills you ſpeak of befallen thoſe who cleave faſt to the Directory? Name one; but if men never obſerved the Directory, is the fault in that? Thus you ſtumble upon the fallacy of non Cauſae pro Causâ.

2. He compares it with all the gifts of other Miniſters, this is frequent, and exalts it above the gifts of any Miniſter, pag. 9. I give no anſwer to this, the naming of it is enough to refute it.

88. He comes to his inartificial Argument, and will prove the excellency from Teſtimony, which were worth all he hath writ, both in this book and all the reſt; if it were certain the Witneſſes he alledge would give in the Teſtimony he ſuppoſeth: For thus, p. 34. he writes, Nor can I believe but that the bleſſed Apoſtle St. Paul, if living, and the other Apoſtles would have joyned with it, and ſaid Amen; Rejoycing to ſee the ſoundneſſe of our Faith, the Sanctity of Sacraments, the Ʋnity of Devotion, the Order and Decency of holy Duties, &c.

Anſw. Theſe bleſſed men are in Heaven, how ſhall we know their minds? We need not aſcend to know, the word is near, Rom. 10.8. To Paul then let us go, who Act. 20.27. when he ſent for the Elders of Epheſus (whom alſo he calls Biſhops, making p. 30no difference) he tells them, I have not ſhunned to declare unto you all the counſel of God. That Counſel it ſeems taught not him to ſet up a Biſhop above a Presbyter, neither now, nor when he wrote to Timothy and Titus, I never thought of any difference, will holy Paul ſay, if I had, I would have ſomewhere appropriated the word Biſhop to a diſtinct Officer, as though in ſome places I call my ſelf a Miniſter, yet in others I ſay I am an Apoſtle. I told this Church, Eph. 4.11. what Officers Chriſt appointed, and ſo 1 Cor. 12.28. But I find amongſt you Arch-Biſhops, Lord-Biſhops, above Presbyters, Deans, Arch-Deacons, Prebends, Chancellors, Chapters, &c. I never declared the Counſel of God for ſuch Officers; theſe are your own Counſel ſure enough.

Nor did I, will St. Peter ſay, for Epiſt. 1. chap. 5. verſ. 2. I thought Biſhop and Presbyter to be the ſame, and appointed them the ſame work.

2. I declared all the counſel of God; but I never told you it was his mind to Conſecrate a Day to God for the Nativity of Chriſt. Surely God hath revealed more of his Counſel to you than to me, if it be his mind, yet the cauſe was exiſtent in my time, and I ſuppoſe I loved Chriſt as well as Dr. Gauden.

3. I find you are impoſing of your Forms of prayer on the ableſt Miniſters of God, to whom he hath given both ſufficient gifts, and a Spirit to aſſiſt, as I delivered in the Goſpel: Had not I, and my fellow-Apoſtles, as much authority and wiſdom as you, but neither I nor they had ever ſuch Counſel from God, nor did we ever impoſe ſuch Forms upon the Churches; though we often called for Unity in Doctrine and Affections, yet not in the ſame ſyllables in prayer; whence had you this counſel?

4. I find you are in matters of Religion preſſing things indifferent on Miniſters and Chriſtians; my Doctrine, Rom. 14.20.21. and my Practice, 1 Cor. 8.13. you may find quite contrary.

I find you are urging of Ceremonies. Had not I and the other Apoſtles as much Authority to invent and impoſe Ceremonies as you? Are you the men who only care for the Decency of worſhip, and were we onelyonly careleſſe? Were not we as induſtrious and ſtudious to advance the honour and worſhip of God, good of Souls, p. 31as you? but we dare not act but as we had Counſel from God. I have declared the mind of God, Col. 2.20, 23. concerning ſuch Ordinances of men, and call them Will-worſhip. We know God hath not remitted his jealouſie in the ſecond Commandment. As for our Commiſſion it ran thus, Matth. 28.20. Teaching them to obſerve all things whatſoever I have commanded you; but you turn the Commiſſion thus, Teach them to obſerve all things (in my worſhip) whatſoever I have not forbidden, and that in particular alſo; elſe you might know I have forbidden the Doctrines of men in general, Mar. 7.7. and the ſecond Commandement ſhould tye you cloſe to my Inſtitutions.

To conclude theſe things, I find amongſt you; after a ſolemn Covenant made on the contrary, and for extirpation of theſe your humane inventions: I am not of your Faith Doctor, that Paul would rejoyce, but would ſend you ſuch a kind of Epiſtle as he did to the Galatians.

Sectio Nona.

THus I have done with all the ſtrength I can find in his Book; onelyonly p. 31. he ſtrains his Rhetorick to the heighth to ſet out the expcellency of the Liturgy, and the miſchief that muſt befall us if it be not impoſed; I will not weary my ſelf to tranſcribe all his words, thus he begins, Nothing will be conſiderable in England for publick piety, honour, order, beauty, &c. if in this point of publick Devotion, Miniſters and People be left to eternal variations, &c. And in the cloſe of it thus; Farewel the Glory; Charity, Unity, and Safety of England; farewell both Reformation and true Religion.

Give the Orator a Humm, but not very loud, for his Divinity deſerves a Hiſs. I ſhall conſider this preſently.

The things which he touches collaterally, I thought to have ſpoken to; as the fault he finds with many Presbyterians for not uſing theſe words in Ordinations, Receive ye the Holy Ghoſ…p. 20. But I muſt now let it alone, onelyonly leave this with him if he will pleaſe, or any of his perſwaſion to maintain this Theſis, viz. That Ordination by Presbyters is not Ordination according to the Scripture; if he can carry it, I will be ordained again; or if he p. 32will prove thoſe words he hath mentioned to be eſsential, or ought to be uſed in Ordination.

The other thing is, pag. 28. his calling for Coercive Authority to be given to the Biſhops by the King.

I cannot but ſmile to ſee how the ſtupendious vertue of Epiſcopacy to heal Schiſm, for which it was firſt invented by men, is now proved to be a fallacy. What will not great Titles, Lordſhips, and Riches do the work, but you muſt call for a Civil Law of the Nation? You uſe to laugh at the poor deſpiſed Presbyters; Had they a Law which you call for, they could have done ſomething: But will not all your greatneſs and favour of great men be ſufficient? you have ſhamed Epiſcopacy extreamly; for now we ſee it is the Law of the Nation, not your Epiſcopacy, which can heal our Schiſms, or do any good in the Church.

Now I come to his Exhortation, to the reading of the Liturgy, having before, pag. 5. charged Miniſters with peeviſhneſſe, ingratitude, ſchiſmatical petulancy, pride, if now they were averſe; but pag. 41. he gives his Motives.

One is, The remembrance of the ſore Tribulations which we have felt and fear'd.

Very true, we do remember them, and have not forgot the cauſes of them, why did you not ſet them down? When we ſee the ſame things which afflicted the Church before, coming ſo near us again, we do fear it indeed.

His other is, The Kings benignity and gentleneſſe, &c. Bleſſed be God we have ſuch a King to ſtand between you and us, elſe we ſee how it would go quickly with us.

…ut, Sir, we are at a ſtand about reading it upon theſe grounds.

Firſt, Many are ſcrupulous about the lawfulneſſe of uſing ſuch Forms, being thus impoſed; for we find no Divine Authority for the impoſing ſuch Forms upon all men, becauſe the Holy Penmen p. 33were directed and inſpired by God to pen a prayer for the uſe of the Church at ſometimes; that therefore ordinary men may impoſe their Forms on able men qualified by God, ſo as to take up moſt of the Ordinance of Prayer publickly, we think it to be a lame conſequence.

You ſhould ſhew us what ordinary men made their Forms, and impoſed them on thoſe who were able to pray without them; as for your part you give not one Scripture-ground; and your Reaſons being weighed, are found very light.

Secondly, Though His Majeſty hath declared, yet the Parliament could caſt out His Declaration; and as for ſome of the Biſhops, they can act contrary to His Declaration, impoſing the Canonical Oath on ſome who have had His Majeſties Preſentation, and denying Inſtitution and Induction for refuſing it: Now we fear if we ſhould begin before the Book be throughly purged, we ſhall be forced to go forward, over ſhooes over Boots; and when we have blemiſhed our Miniſtry (which Paul was tender of) by beginning; if now we will not go through-ſtitch, the Biſhops will turn us out. For we cannot forget the High Commiſſion violence uſed againſt ſober pious Conformiſts who did uſe the Rites directed in the Service-Book, and yet were cenſured for not paſing it with the Prelates, to rail-in the Table, and bow to it, and uſe other Ceremonies not therein directed; nor yet the face of Bellum Epiſcopale animated by the hope of Scotlands receiving the Liturgy; nor the Plaints preſſed on the Parliament by multitudes oppreſſed with Biſhops, and humane inventions; to which, if men can now again return, I muſt conclude they ſhew themſelves very blame-worthy for raiſing ſuch ſtirs as were occaſioned by their preſſing groans.

Thirdly, We find that ſome have begun to read where they thought they could moſt ſafely, according to His Majeſties Declaration; preſently, the Chriſtians who walked moſt cloſe with God, were offended, the Miniſters loſe their hearts; and other men, becauſe all is not read, they are offended alſo, and thus a man loſes all.

Fourthly, When I obſerve who they are that are ſo hot for this Liturgy, I find out abundance of men who can rap out Oaths, and ſuch as His Majeſties Excellent Proclamation againſt vicious profane perſons, would reach, theſe are very hot for it; ſome Formaliſts, p. 34and but very few Chriſtians that know the power of godlineſs, care for meddling with it; now I thus think with my ſelf, Can this be of God? what ſpirit Acts theſe profane ones, I know.

Again, on the other ſide, If any men know the work of Regeneration, of Faith with power, and are afraid of ſin, walk up in good meaſure to Goſpel-Rules, have their Families in order, the body of ſuch people diſtaſte it: Now I am aſſured God gives his Spirit to his people; and it is ſomething to ſee the chief part of that people twenty to one decline it; I know not how to Anſwer this.

Fifthly, From that Sacred Oath and Covenant, wherein we have ſworn to the moſt High God to endeavor the Reformation of his worſhip according to his Word, and the example of the beſt Reformed Churches.

Firſt, As to the VVord of God; we know no Text of Scripture which will warrant this Mode of worſhip; we much deſire to have that VVord brought which will juſtifie a few ordinary men in their compoſing, and impoſing ſuch Forms upon the Churches, to hinder the gifts which God requireth to be in his Miniſters, and hath beſtowed on them, as in my firſt Reaſon.

Secondly, Much leſs can we look on this Liturgy to be according to the Word, wherein we find ſo many things that agree not with the Word; the ſame humane Law which binds to one, binds to all things in it for ought I know.

Thirdly, Yet further; when we find an humane conſtitution ſo cryed up, and Idolized, as if God had no true worſhip but that; Gods own Inſtitution [the brazen Serpent] when the people abuſed it, Hezekiah brake in pieces, much more a faulty humane conſtitution; though Dr. Gauden ſticks not to compare it with the Ark of God.

Secondly, As to the beſt Reformed Churches, to ſay which are the beſt, is very inconvenient; but this we know.

1. Some of them have no forms or Liturgies, nor will admit any.

2. Others who have ſuch, yet tie not up gifted men to theſe Forms as we are tyed.

3. Neither is our Liturgy ſo clear from offence as theirs are.

p. 354. The Parliament did aboliſh this Book in reference to the Reformation of the worſhip of God, according to their Covenant.

Now for Miniſters who have not only taken the Covenant themſelves, but alſo given it to their people [as our Congregations have taken it in a Solemn manner, ſubſcribing their names alſo to it] bring in this Mode of worſhip again, at leaſt before it be throughly purged, I think we ſhould bring our ſelves and people upon the brink of perjury, if not perjured; not only our ſelves, but our people are concerned in this.

Sixthly, To uſe this Book as it is, we cannot conceive but it is a way to blaſt our Miniſtry for ever doing good; for what may people ſay, Theſe Miniſters have taken a Covenant, and given it to us; they have laid by the Common-Prayer-Book in order to the Reformation of the worſhip of God, and now they turn to it again! who will believe or regard theſe Miniſters, or Turn-Coats, in what they ſay? To be ſure it will weaken our Miniſtry much; and we ought to be wary of whatever might hinder it: And is it not one Reaſon why ſome men do ſo urge it upon Miniſters, that when they ſee men take it up again, they may deride the Covenanted Preſbyterians?

Sectio decima.

7thly. DOctor Gauden himſelf hath ſuggeſted two or three ſtrong Arguments againſt it in my apprehenſion: As

Firſt, He juſtifies all the things in it, only a few verbal defects, and he lets us know that he is one, if not the chief Corrector. Mr. Crofton. Analepſis. p. 34.I hope he will take care to correct the ſentence in Pſ. 15.4. commended to his care by Mr. * Crofton, that it may not ſpeak ſo plainly againſt his Politique Notion of an hurtful incommodious Oath.

Secondly, He grants, page 5. it is but an humane conſtitution, ſubject to imperfections. Now

Firſt, To have an humane conſtitution to be impoſed upon the Church, as being abſolutely neceſſary, or as an eſſential part of Gods worſhip, I cannot yield to that; but thus will he have this p. 36Mode of worſhip, this humane invention impoſed. Prayer, without any default, gives him no content; but theſe prayers with ſuch a Mode: For this Liturgy, he tells us, we muſt make it the main Standard, Teſt, and Meaſure of our publick devotions, p. 27. then ſurely that muſt needs be abſolutely neceſſary and eſſential to our Devotions. He tells us, that publick piety, reformation, true Religion are gone, bids Farewel to them all, pag. 31. if it be not uſed.

Now as for the ſound Doctrine in it, we own as much as himſelf; but the conteſt hath been about the things offenſive as to matter, and the Mode; and he doth conſider it as a Liturgy, a Mode of worſhip, and not as having Doctrine which we own, when he ſpeaks thus.

Again, pag. 27. He will have all Miniſters commanded to uſe theſe Forms wholly and ſolely at Sacraments.

As if Miniſters underſtanding theſe myſteries, without which they are not fit to diſpenſe them, may not pray as ſutably to them, as before a Sermon. Here that part of worſhip muſt neceſſarily be perform'd by a humane conſtitution, be men never ſo able to pray without it, and more aptly and affectionately than by a Book.

Apollonius, in the name of the Walachrian Claſſis, declaring his and their judgment about Forms of prayer which he determines for; Page 172.having in his firſt Theſis ſhewn his diſlike of the Forms of publick Worſhip and Ceremonies in the Church of England, in later times, as being Superſtitious and Idolatrous, then he comes to his ſecond, and thus he writes:

VVe alſo reject thoſe Forms of prayer, and publick worſhip, which are impoſed upon the conſciences of men with a certain Tyranny and violent command, as abſolutely neceſſary and eſſential parts of Divine worſhip, although as to the matter they be lawfully dispoſed, yet as to the form and manner by which they are induced, they are made the unlawful inſtruments of cruelty, and pretexts of wicked malice, and occaſions of violent Tyranny, over the moſt worthy and beſt ſons of the Church, &c. His Reaſon is, Becauſe Chriſt nor his Apoſtles did ever preſcribe any p. 37ſuch forms as ſimply and abſolutely neceſſary. When all other prayers muſt be thruſt out [unleſſe before and after Sermon, and there your Reaſons will hold as well as in other Ordinances] be men ſo able, I think you make your Forms abſolutely neceſſary, when eſpecially you will thruſt the ableſt men out of the Miniſtry for not yielding to your Forms, I think Apollonius is on my ſide.

Secondly, I cannot admit that Liturgy, being but an human conſtitution, when it hath that attributed to it which is proper onelyonly to the Word of God. The Text ſaith, To the Law, Iſa. 8.20.Isa 8:20to the Teſtimony; Dr. Gauden ſaith, To the Liturgy for your Test, your main Standard, your Meaſure in your publick worſhip of God. And look what the Apoſtle ſaid, Gal. 6.16. As many as walk according to this Rule, Peace be on them; the ſame ſaith the Doctor, as many as walk according to his Rule, ſyllabically, peace to them, and …o…e elſe.

Thirdly, Religion, Piety, Reformation, come or go, are put or removed, according as Gods Word, Gods own Inſtitutions are ſet up in their purity and power; but they depend not upon a human conſtitution, a humane mode of Worſhip, as Doctor Gauden makes them all depend on this Liturgy, ſo that they come or go with it. I am ſure this humane conſtitution wants Reformation, and it was taken away by Ordinance of Parliament in order to Reformation. Liturgy is concretum quid, 'tis not bare Doctrine; nay, the Doctor takes it ſtrictly for a Form of prayer. Since then he puts ſo much upon it, I cannot admit it; ſtrange that theſe three ſhould depend upon ſuch Forms of prayer.

Fourthly, Neither can I admit of ſuch Forms of prayer as are impoſed upon the Church with deſiance and ſcorn of all the gifts of the Spirit of God in all his people; but ſo doth Dr. Gauden impoſe this Liturgy. I have heard it called an Idol, but I thought it a little too much heat, till now I have read Dr. Gauden, who I fear ſpeaks the mind and heart of our Liturgical men; thus much from this Doctor, who ſets me off more then ever I was before.

Theſe things all laid together do ſo trouble me, that I know not how to meddle with it as it is.

p. 38Beſides, there are worthy Divines of the Presbyterian perſwaſion, both learned and godly, whom we honor, who it ſeems declared their judgments for a Liturgy to His Majeſty; now we wait for their grounds, who we expect will deal with us upon Scripture foundations, and to ſuch we ſhall willingly li…en.