Concerning the Lawfulness of Joining with Forms of Prayer Part 1, Case 2
Case II. Whether the Use of Publick Forms, be not a sinful neglect of the Ministerial Gift of Prayer?
In order to the resolution of which Case, it would be necessary to give a brief state of it, according as it is put, and urg'd by our Brethren. By the Gift of Prayer then, they mean an ability to express our minds to God in Prayer, or to offer up our desires and affections to him in words, befitting the matter of them: which ability, say they, is given by God to his Ministers, as a means of publick Prayer, and in order to their being the Mouths of their Congregations to God, to represent to him the common Cases and Necessities of their People; and therefore since God, say they, hath given us this Gift, as a means of publick Devotion, and in order to our offering up the Prayers of the People, it may be justly question'd, whether we may lawfully omit the use of it, by using publick Forms of other mens composure.
Now, before I enter into a particular consideration of this Case, I shall briefly premise these two things:
1. That this Case concerns the Clergy only, and not the Laity: For suppose that it be unlawful for Ministers to omit the use of their own abilities to express the Devotions of their Congregations, what is that to the People? are they accountable for their Ministers faults? or will God reject their sincere Devotions, because the Person that utters them is guilty of a sinful omission? if so, it will be of dangerous consequence to them to joyn in any publick Prayers at all, whether they be Forms, or Extemporary; they being every whit as accountable for the nonsense, impertinence, and irreverence of their Ministers in the latter, as for their omitting the use of their own abilities in the former: if therefore this omission be a sin, it is the sin of the Minister; as for the People, they join'd with him indeed, in offering up the matter of Prayer, which is contain'd in the Form he pronounces; but they join not with him in the omission of the use of his ability; that is his own proper act, and deed; and therefore if it be unlawful, 'tis he, and he only that is accountable for it: and if the matter of Prayer in which they join with him be good, and express'd in decent and suitable words, they join with him in nothing but what is acceptable to God, and 'tis not to be imagin'd that God will be angry with them, because he neglected to express their desires in words of his own composure and invention.
2. I shall also premise, that this is not the case of the Clergy of the Church of England, who, though they stand obliged to the constant use of a stated Liturgy, yet are not hereby restrain'd from the exercise of their own abilities in publick Prayer: for after they have finish'd the Service appointed in the Liturgy, they are permitted to use their own conceiv'd Prayers in the Pulpit: in which they have the same liberty, that the dissenting Ministers can claim or pretend to; that is, to express in their own words all the matter of publick Prayer, with all the sobriety, affection, and seriousness they are able; and this permission being of long continuance, and hitherto uncontroll'd by our Church Governors, amounts to an allowance; and indeed it seems expresly allow'd in our 55th Canon, which directs, that before all Sermons, Lectures, and Homilies, the Preachers and Ministers shall move the People to join with them in Prayer, in this form, or to this effect, as briefly as conveniently they may. Now that to this effect, as it stands opposed to this form, is meant some Prayer of our own, composed to this purpose, seems evident from the general and uninterrupted practice of the Church, which in doubtful cases, is the best explication of her meaning. Since therefore the use of our Liturgy doth not exclude the exercise of our Gift of Prayer, but leaves us free to exert it, so far as it is fit, that is, with convenient brevity, I see not how this Case can concern our Clergy; for if the evil of Forms consists in the Ministers omission of his own Gift, as this Case supposes, then where the use of Forms doth not oblige us to this omission, but leaves us as free to exercise this Gift, as those are who use no Forms at all, the supposed evil is remov'd from it.
Having premised these things, I shall proceed to a particular resolution of the Case; which I shall do in these following Propositions.
1. That this Ministerial Gift of Prayer, or ability to express in our own words, the common Devotions of our Congregations to God, is either natural, or acquir'd. 'Tis true, if we had any reason to believe, that in their admission to holy Orders, God did inspire his Ministers with this ability, we might thence more plausibly infer, that 'twas his will that we should ordinarily exercise it, and that it was not lawful to neglect or omit it, by using Forms of other mens composure; it being unlikely that God should inspire them with an ability, which he did not intend they should make use of: but of Gods inspiring us in our Ordination with this Gift, or Ability, we have not only no promise in Scripture, which is the only foundation upon which we can reasonably expect it; but in fact, we have no experience of any such matter among us: for not only we, but the Dissenting Ministers must own, if they will speak ingenuously, that just before their Ordination, they were as able to express the Devotions of a Congregation, as they were just after; which shews that they had no new ability to Pray, inspired in their Ordination: and as yet, I could never find any proof, either from Scripture, or Experience, that this ability to Pray in words of our own composure, had any thing more in it, than a promptness of invention and speech; which some men have by nature, and which others have acquired by art and practice; and if so, this ability is no otherwise the Gift of God, than our natural strength and vigour, or our skill in Languages and History. And methinks it's very strange, that after all this talk of the Gift of Prayer, which is supposed ordinarily at least to be conferr'd on rightly ordained Ministers, our Brethren should not be able to produce one Promise, wherein God hath ingag'd himself, to confer it; no nor one Text of Scripture, which implies such a Promise; all that he hath promised his Ministers is, to concur with their honest indeavours, so far forth as it's necessary to inable them to discharge the Duties of their Office, and to suppose that they cannot do this, without praying Extempore, or in their own words, is to take the Matter in question, for granted.
2. That this natural or acquired Gift, is no where appropriated by God to prayer, but left common to other uses, and purposes: For though in Ministers especially, it is ordinarily called a Gift of Prayer, yet it is no where stiled so in Scripture: indeed the ability of praying in unknown languages, is once called a Gift, as I observed before, but as for this ordinary ability, whether natural, or acquir'd, of praying in our native language, it is no where spoken of in Scripture, under the name of a Gift of Prayer, nor is there the least mention of any such ability given by God to men, purely to inable them to pray; and unless our brethren can produce some Text of Scripture, which yet they never attempted, wherein God hath appropriated this Gift to the purpose of Prayer, they must give us leave to conclude, that he hath left it common to all other honest uses, and purposes that it can be apply'd to; and that in short, it is nothing but a freedom of Utterance, and Elocution, which in some is natural, and in some acquired, by which they are inabled readily to express their minds to God, or men; and therefore to how many honest purposes this common Gift of God is applicable, to so many 'tis designed, and intended; and consequently, may as well be call'd the Gift of Conversation in good company, and the Gift of pleading at the Bar, and the Gift of disputing in the Schools, or the Gift of Oratory in the Forum, as the Gift of Prayer in Private, or Publique worship; it being all but one, and the same Gift aplied to several uses, and purposes; accordingly we find that those who have this Gift, have it not only while they are speaking in Prayer, but when they are speaking upon other occasions; and that ordinarily they can express themselves to Men with the same readiness, and fluency in conversation, as they express their minds to God in Prayer, which is a plain argument that their Gift is not appropriat to Prayer, but common to all the other uses, and purposes of Elocution.
3. That this Gift of utterance not being appropriated by God to Prayer, may upon just reason, be as lawfully omitted in Prayer, as in any other use or purpose 'tis designed for: I do confess had God any where appropriated it to the end of Prayer, those who have it, were obliged to use it to that end, and to omit it ordinarily, by confining themselves to forms of other mens inditing, would be to neglect a means of Prayer of Gods special appointment and institution; for had he any where intimated to us, that he gave it us purely to inable us to pray without any respect to any other end, we could not have omitted the use of it in Prayer without crossing his intention, and frustrating him of the only end for which he intended it, but since he hath given us no such intimation, we may justly conclude that he intends it in common for all those honest ends to which it is applicable, and if so 'tis no more unlawful to omit using it to one end than to another, so that either it must be wholly unlawful to omit using our own Elocution to any purpose whatsoever whereunto it may be honestly applied, or it must be lawful to omit it in Prayer, and consequently supposing I have this Gift of utterance, either I may not use a form in petitioning my Prince, or a Court of Justice, or I may use a form in addressing my self to God in Prayer, since my Gift is common to both th…se purposes, and no more appropriated to the one than the other, in short therefore as for those common Gifts of God which are applicable to sundry purposes, and which he intends no more for one than for another, it is left to our own liberty and discretion whether we will apply them to this or that particular purpose or no, and no man is obliged to use his Gift to all those just and lawful purposes it is capable of, and if he hath two Gifts which serve to the same purpose, there is no doubt but he may lawfully omit the one, and use the other as he sees occasion; and so it is with this Gift of utterance, which is naturally serviceable to sundry excellent purposes, and among others to this of expressing our minds to God in Prayer, but it being serviceable to this in common with others, it is left to our liberty whether we will imploy it in this, in that, or in another purpose, and we are neither obliged to imploy it in all, nor in this more than in another, but if we have another Gift that is serviceable to the purpose of Prayer as well as this of utterance, it is left to our own pious discretion whether we will use this or the other, so that unless our Brethren can prove that this Gift of utterance or Elocution is by special command of God made an appropriate means of Publick Prayer, they will never be able to prove, either that it is more unlawful to omit the use of it in Prayer, than in any other Office of Elocution, or that if we have any other means of Prayer, we are determined to this more than to another.
4. That to read our desires to God in other Mens Words, is as much a means of Prayer, as to speak them in our own, for to speak in our own Words, is no otherwise a means of Publick Prayer, than as it serves to express to God the Common cases and necessities of the Congregation, and if these may be as well exprest by Reading them in other Mens Words, as by speaking them in our own, the end of Publick Prayer is as effectually serv'd by the one, as by the other, and sure no man will deny, but that by a Form of Words composed by another, he may express the common Devotions of a Congregation, as well as by extempore or premeditated words of his own invention; for this would be in effect to say, that none but himself can compose a publick Prayer, or at least none so well as he; for if another Prayer may be as expressive of the Devotions of a Congregation as his own, I can see no reason why the reading of that may not be as proper a means of publick Prayer, as the speaking of this; here then are two means of Prayer, viz. reading other mens Forms, and speaking our own Conceptions, and therefore unless our Brethren can prove, that God hath expresly chosen the one, and rejected the other, they must acknowledge both to be lawful; and if we cannot lawfully omit the one, because it is a means of Prayer, neither can we lawfully omit the other, because it is so too; and therefore either we must be obliged to use them both, which is impossible at the same time, or we must be left at liberty to use either, according to our own discretion. In sum therefore, since we are not inspired with any peculiar Gift of Prayer in our Ordination, and since our Gift of praying in our own words is not appropriated by God to this use, but left in common to other purposes, and since what is not appropriated by God, may be lawfully omitted, when there are other means of Prayer, and since in fact there is another means of Prayer besides this of praying in our own words, viz. praying in the words of others, which God hath lost as free to us as the former, it plainly follows from the whole, that to omit the use of our own Gift, and in the stead of it to use that other Gift of praying in the words of others, is not in it self any way sinful or unlawful.