Five Disputations of Church Government, Proposition 6 – Proposition 9
Prop. 6. TO prescribe a Form of Prayer, Preaching (or other service where is no Necessity of it) and to lay a Necessity on it, as to the thing it self, or the Churches Peace, Prop. 6.&c. and to punish, silence, suspend, ex…ommunicate, or reproach as Schismaticks, the able, godly, peaceable Ministers or People, that (justly or unjustly) dare not use it, is so great a sin, that no Godly Ministers should desire or attempt it, nor any godly Magistrate suffer it.
This was the great sin of the late Magistrates and Prelates in England; and it is the main difference between their party and others at this day. The Magistrate doth not forbid men using a form or Liturgy (though they forbid one particular Liturgy more strictly then I could wish:) But there is a very few of these men that I know of, that can be contented with a Liberty of using it themselves, if they may not have all others compelled to do as they do, and go to God with the words that they have formed for them, or that are best in their esteem. They must be all Schismaticks that will not use their form, and the Churches Peace must be laid upon it, and no man must be thought meet to preach or pray that will not be of their opinion, but the ablest Pastors of the Church must be silenced and cast by, if they will not use the Common-Prayer. The sinfulness of this practice shall be manifested in the next dispute more fully, to which I reserve the most of my reasons against it: In the mean time let these few be well considered.
1. It is a certain way to the Division of the Church: when men will lay its Unity or Peace on that which will not bear it, they are the most desperate disturbers and dividers of it. If one form of Prayer or Preaching had been necessary to the Churches Unity or Peace, Christ or his Apostles might as easily have composed it, as they did other necessaries. Nay experience tells us, that it is not held necessary by men themselves: For the Romanists use one or more forms: and the Grecians another, and the Ethiopians another▪ and so of other Churches. In the Bibliotheca Patrum how many Liturgies have they given us? And if no one of all these is necessary to all Churches, then not to any one Church, further then accidents, and mens impositions make it necessary. And no man should make that necessary, that is not some way necessary before. It is easie to know that either the Form as such, or somewhat in the Form, is like to be scrupled by some, even godly, able men: and so it will prove an engine of division. The Church hath been brought to that torn divided condition that it is in, by this arrogancy of domineering imposers, that must lay its Peace on their unnecessary devices: and will not let us have unity in Christ and his Institutions and peace upon his terms.
2. By this means the people will be involved in the guilt of bitter contending, and hating all that conform not to their way, and uncharitably reproaching them as schismaticks, and consequently of disliking the very doctrine that they preach, or hold, and the way they take; and thus if uncharitableness, and all this sin, the off-spring of it▪ be the way to Hell, then you may see what a notable service they do to Satan, and how they ensnare and undo mens souls, that make such forms of common Necessity to the Unity or Peace of the Church.
3. By this means they will involve themselves and the Magistrate in the guilt of persecution: For no better will it prove, even in many cases where the refusers scruples are unjust.
4. By this means they will hinder the Edification of the Church. What if a Minister have a Congregation that (suppose upon mistakes) do scruple these forms, and by prejudice or weakness are hindered from serving God with cheerfullness and profit, where they are used; must we be bound to deny them that mode of worship which their weakness doth require? and to force them to that which will not down with them? Must a Physitian be bound to give all his Patients one kind of dyet? What if it be wholesome? Will you say, If that will not down with him, he shall have none: let him die? This is contrary to the end of our office: we are commanded to do all to Edification, which this doth contradict.
5. It is contrary to the Office, Power and Trust of the particular Pastors of the Church, to be thus compelled in variable things. As it is the office of a Physitian to judge what dyet and physick to prescribe his Patients, and to vary it as persons do vary in their tempers and diseases, and to vary it with the same persons, as their condition changeth and requireth it: and as it would be foolish Tyranny against the very office of the Physitian to restrain him from this exercise of his prudence by a Law, and to tye him to give one kind of food or physick to all; so is it in our present case. What is a Pastor, but the guide of a Congregation in the worship of God? &c. And if Magistrates and Bishops take this work out of their hands by their unnecessary prescriptions, they so far prohibite him to do the work of a Pastor. What a grief is it to a Minister (that being in the place, and knowing the people, is the most competent Judge what is fit for them) to be constrained by men that know not the state of his flock, to cross their Edification, and to be forbidden to use his prudence and due power for their spiritual good?
6. And what a sinful arrogant usurpation is this, for any man to be guilty of? It is Christ that hath given his Ministers their Power, and that for Edification: and who is he that may presume to take it from them? If they are unworthy to be Ministers, let them not be Ordained, or let them be degraded or deposed. But if they must be Ministers, let them do the work of Ministers; lest as he that despiseth them, despiseth Christ, so he that restraineth them from their duty, and depriveth them of the exercise of their power unjustly, be found one that would arrogate an authority over Christ.
7. And what intolerable Pride is this, for a few Bishops to think so highly of themselves, and so basely of their more …udicious Brethren, as if no man must speak to God but in their words? These forms of Prayer are conceived and invented by some body. A…d why should the Co…ceiver think so highly of his own understanding, as if he were fit to teach a whole Nation what they must daily say to God? and why should he think so unworthily of all o…hers in comparison of himself, as if none but he (and his Companions in this usurpation) knew how to pray or utter their minds, but by his dictates or prescriptions? Is this Humility?
8. Moreover this Imposition of forms (as before described) doth discover too much Cruelty to the Church: when they had rather Ministers were cast aside, and the people left in darkness, then Ministers should teach them, and worship God with them, that will not tye themselves to the very words that they devise for them. What abundance of ignorant, drunken Readers and other Ministers were suffered in England, while the learned, godly, painful Ministers were cast out, and silenced, or persecuted, because they would not conform to all the forms and ceremonies imposed by the Bishops? And so how many thousand souls may we think are gone to Hell, through the ignorance or ungodliness of their Guides, as if their damnation were more desirable, then their salvation by the teaching of Ministers that dare not use the Common Prayer Book and Ceremonies? I know they will say, that such Schismatical Preachers do more hurt by breaking the Churches peace, then they do good by converting souls. But who was it that laid these snares in their way? Who laid the Churches peace upon your inventions? Had not the Church a sure Rule, and an happy order, and unity, and peace, before your Common prayer Book or Ceremonies were born? Why must the Church have no peace but upon such terms? Who made this Necessity, that all men must be taken for intolerable schismaticks that dare not stint themselves in the publick worship by your impositions? Will you not be confounded before God, when these Questions must be answered? The Church might have kept both Peace and her Pastors, if you had let all alone as the Apostles left it, and had not turned the forms of your Devotions to be a snare for others.
9. And it is great unmercifulness to the Souls of particular men, when you will drive them into such snares, and c…mpell them to go against their consciences in indifferent things: what ever is not of faith is sin. And whether they believe it good or bad, you will compell them to practise all that you impose. Have you not Consciences your selves? Do you not know what it is for a man to be driven against his Conscience? If not, you are no Christians: and then no wonder if you want the Charity and compassion of Christians, and so easily for nothing, abuse and injure the Christian cause.
10. And in thus doing, you deal unjustly, and do not as you would be done by. You would have Liberty your selves now to use a Liturgy: And why should not others have Liberty to disuse it? Either you take it for a thing Necessary in it self, or for Indifferent. If as Necessary, then you are so much the more arrogant and injurious to the Churches, and your usurpation is the more intolerable, and you do much to Justifie them that deprive you of your own liberty: For I know no Liberty that you should have to make universal Laws for the Church: or to make new duties by your own meer wills, or turn Indifferent things into Necessary, and so to multiply our work, and burden, and danger; and to silence, suspend or excommunicate all that dare not submit to your usurped Dominion. But if you take it for a thing in it self Indifferent, whether we pray in a Form of prescribed words, or not, then as we are content that you have your Liberty on one part, you have as just cause to allow us our liberty on the other, and to do as you would be done by.
11. And by these Impositions, you set up a New Office or Power in the Church, Consisting of a New Legislation, and a Government of the Church by such new humane Laws. We know no Lawgiver but 1. Christ as to universal Laws of standing necessity to the Churches, in the matters of Salvation. And 2. Magistrates to make by-laws under Christ for a just determination of those mutable circumstances that ought to be determined by humane Prudence; and 3. The Ministers or Pastors of particular Churches to direct and guide the people as there is cause. As for Bishops or Councils, we know of no Legislative Power that they have over their Brethren, though Agreements they may make, which may be obligatory, 1. by consent, as other contracts, 2. and in order to unity, where the case requireth such Agreements. But to set up a New sort of Jurisdiction in the Church, by Legislation to make Forms and Ceremonies obligatory, and by Executions to punish Pastors that will not practise them, is a dangerous device.
12. Lastly by this means you will harden the Papists, that by their Inventions and Impositions have divided the Church, and been guilty of so much usurpation and tyrannie; For how can we condemn that in them that is practised by our selves? And though in number of Inventions and Impositions they exceed, yet it is not well to concur with them in the kind of unnecessary Impositions, and so far to Justifie them in their injury to the Church.
If none of these or other Reasons will alloy the Imperious distemper of the Proud, but they must needs by a usurped Legislation be making Indifferent things become necessary to others, and domineer over mens Consciences, and the Church of God, we must leave them to him, that being the Lord and Lawgiver of the Church, is Jealous of his Prerogative, and abhorreth Idols, and will not give his glory to another, and that delighteth to pull down the Proud, and humble them that exalt themselves.
But yet how far an Agreement or voluntary Consent of the Churches is desirable as to a Liturgy, I shall shew more anon.
Prop. 7.Prop. 7. THE safest way of composing a stinted Liturgie, is to take it all, or as much as may be, for words as well as matter, out of the Holy Scriptures.
Reas. 1. This way is least lyable to scruple, because all are satisfied of the infallible Truth of Scripture, and the fitness of its expressions, that are not like to be satisfied with mans. And it is a laudable disposition in the Creature to prefer the words of God before all other, and therefore not to be discouraged in any.
Reas. 2. This way tends most to the peace of the Church. All will unite in the words of God, that will not unite in the forms and words of men. If they understand not a word of God, yet knowing it to be true, they will not quarrel with it, but submit: But if they understand not the words of men, they will be ready to suspect them, and so to quarrel with them, and so the Churches peace will be broken. Besides, the judgements of men being fallible, many will suspect that its possible there may be some error in their forms, though we see them not, and God should be worshiped in the surest way.
Reas. 3. There is no other words that may be preferred before the words of God, or stand in Competition with them: and therefore me thinks this should easily be decided.
Object. But the Scripture hath not forms enough for all the Churches uses. Answ. It hath matter and words for such Forms. Without any additions, save only terms of Connection, the sentences of holy Scripture may suffice the Church for all its uses, as to forms.
Object. But men may speak untruths in Scripture words if they will, and by misplacing and misapplying them, may make them speak what was never meant in them. Answ. But 1. When they use no expository terms of their own, but meerly recite the words of Scripture, the perverting them will not be so easie or common: And 2. When they have placed them how they please, the people are left at liberty … to the sence they have in the … to what mens misplacing … put upon them▪ when we professedly make our forms out of Gods word, we do as it were tell the people that they must give each sentence its proper interpretation as its meant in Scripture, because we pretend not to change it, but to use it. But when its our own words that we compose our own imposed forms in, the people are left more uncertain of the soundness. For the maker is the Interpreter.
Object. But the Church hath antient venerable fo…ms already; and who may presume to alter them?
Answ. 1. Hath it any that are more Ancient or more venerable then the Scripture? undoubtedly it hath not; nor any but must stoop to Scripture. 2. All that is in the words of Scripture, we are contented be continued (at least.) 3. If it were lawful for the first devisers or compilers of these Forms, to make a new Liturgy, when the Church had so many before, then is it lawful for others to do the like. And if the compilers of the first of those Liturgies, might make a new one in their own words, why may not others make a new one in the Scripture words, that will be new only as to the connexion of Sentences? 4. The Church of Rome that is most for their forms, have yet so often innovated, that they have no reason to condemn it in others.
Prop. 8.Prop. 8. THough it be safest and most venerable in Scripture words, yet is not this of so great necessity, but that we may lawfully use a Liturgy that is not thus taken out of Scripture.
As long as the matter is agreeable to Scripture, it is more for Conveniency, then necessity, that the words be thence, as is easily proved.
1. In our Preaching we judge it lawfull to speak words that are not in the Scripture: therefore by parity of reason, we may do so in Prayer.
2. In our extempora… Prayers we judge it lawfull to use our own words that are … out of Scripture: therefore we …
… strange to Scripture language, that … Phrases may be more edifying to …
4. Words are but to express our minds: If therefore our words are congruous expressions of sound and well ordered conceptions, they are not only lawful▪ but convenient. And therefore it is not warrantable for any man to quarrel with expressions because they are not Scriptural, nor to scruple the use of Liturgies, because the forms are not in the words of Scripture.
Prop. 9. THE matter of a common Liturgy in which we expect any general Concord, prop. 9.should not be any doubtfull or unnecessary things.
1. It should impose no doubtfull or unnecessary ceremonies, (of which I shall speak by it self in the next Disputation.) 2. It should not restrain men needlesly in things indifferent, by determining of mutable circumstances, as time, place, gesture, vestures, words, &c. (Of which also in the next.) 3. It should not make those things to be of general indispensable immutable necessity, that are but sometimes necessary, or meet; but Pastors should have their Liberty to vary them as there is occasion. 4. Much less should any thing Materially dubious and uncertain be put in.
For God will be worshipped in knowledge and faith. And, as is said before, the Church will be divided, and the Consciences of men ensnared, by laying so much on unnecessary things. And therefore though such imposers pretend to a perfecter Unity and Concord, then in a few Generals or Necessaries can be had, yet they will find they miss their mark.