Letter of Ministers Requesting Judgment Concerning Nine Positions, Position 1
I POSITION. That a ſtinted forme of Prayer and ſet Liturgie is unlawfull.
Anſw.
BEfore we proceed to declare our ſelves concerning this poſition: It will be needfull that ſome thing be premiſed, for the explication of the terms thereof. We ſuppoſe,
1 By a Liturgy and forme of Prayer, you mean not a forme of private Prayers compoſed for the helpe and direction of weaker Chriſtians: but the Syſtem or body of publike Prayers generally uſed in the Engliſh Pariſhes, compiled for the Churches uſe by other men not infallibly guided by God, to be ſaid or read out of a Book by their Miniſters as the Churches Prayers. And that this is your meaning, may appeare from your Letter it ſelf, wherein you complain that divers in many parts of that Kingdome have left their Aſſemblies, becauſe of a ſtinted Liturgy. Now we know not of any other ſtinted Liturgy from which the people do abſent themſelves, but onelyonly that which is in uſe in the Engliſh Churches.
For as for a forme of Prayer in generall, wee conceive your meaning cannot be of that. For it is evident that many Preachers conſtantly uſe one ſet form of Prayer of their own making before their Sermons, with whom the people refuſe not to joyn.
2 By ſtinted and ſet, you mean ſuch Prayers, as are ſo impoſed upon the Churches and Miniſters, as that they are limited to that very form of words expreſſed in the Book without addition, diminution, or alteration; for that Liturgy and forme among you, is in this ſenſe ſet and ſtinted.
3 By unlawfull, you mean that we looking at that form, as ſwerving from the Rule; neither dare firſt practice it our ſelves, nor ſecondly approve the uſe of it by others.
This being the true ſtate of the queſtion, ſo far as it appears to us, from the letter. We anſwer, 1 For our own practice, the Churches here doe not uſe any ſtinted forme of Prayer and ſet Liturgy, for theſe and other ſuch Reaſons. 1 Becauſe we finde no neceſſity of any ſtinted Liturgy to be uſed among us, by vertue of any divine precept. And ſeeing the Commiſſion of the Apoſtles limited them, to …each men to obſerve and do onelyonly what Chriſt did command them in matters of this nature, Math. 28. 20. Who are we and what are our Churches, that we ſhould preſume above this Commiſſion? And, we hope, it will not be offenſively taken by any godly Brethren, That we ſtand faſt in the liberty wherewith Chriſt hath made us free in this, as well as in all other things.
Secondly, becauſe the lawfulneſſe of ſet forms and ſtinted Liturgies is queſtioned and doubted of by many faithfull ſervants of God: whereas for Church-officers to edifie the Churches by their own gifts, as well in praying as in preaching, all ſorts without controverſie grant it to be lawfull. Now ſpirituall prudence guideth believers, when two ways are ſet before them, one doubtfull though ventured on by ſome, the other certainly ſafe and good, though neglected by many, to chooſe that which is ſafe, declining the other.
Thirdly, Becauſe Primitive paterns of all the Churches of God in their beſt times (when as touching this point they kept the rule in their eye) whether Jewiſh before Chriſt, or Chriſtian above a 100 yeers after Chriſt, yield not the leaſt footſtep to ſhew us another ſafe way to walk in, then this wch we have choſen. As for after times towards the end of the ſecond, and beginning of the third Century, we know how far the Churches were then degenerated and declined from the firſt purity; neither do we marvell at it, ſeeing in the Apoſtles time the myſtery of iniquity began to work, and it was then foretold, that the power of godlineſſe would be in aftertimes exchanged for empty formes. In which reſpect, we look not at them as our guides neither in this, nor other particulars not warranted by the Rule, herein following the adviſe of Cyprian, who himſelf ſaw the corruption of thoſe times, Non eſt attendendum quid aliquis ante nos faciendum putaverit, ſed quid qui ante omnes est Christus fecerit & faciendum praeceperit.
To conclude, ſeeing our Chriſtian liberty freeth us from binding our ſelves to any religious obſervances, whereunto the written word doth not bind us. And ſeeing ſpirituall prudence directs us to chooſe thoſe ways, which on all hands are confeſſed to be ſ…fe, avoiding thoſe that be doubtfull and hazardous. And ſeeing it will not be ſafe for us, needleſly to ſwerve from the conſtant practice of all Churches that are recorded in Scripture, and there held forth as a cloud of Witneſſes for us to follow in matters of this nature, wee therefore may not, doe not, dare not uſe ſet forms of Prayers and ſtinted Liturgies in theſe Churches.
More particularly, in that we doe not uſe that forme of Prayer and ſtinted Liturgy, which is in uſe among your ſelves: theſe and ſuch other like Reaſons have induced us thereunto. 1 The many and juſt exceptions whereunto that Liturgy is lyable both for matter and manner; for the proofe whereof wee referre you to thoſe faithfull ſervants of God, who have gone before us in witneſſing againſt the ſame: Amongſt others to Maſter Cartwright, and the Abridgment.
2 In as much as that Liturgy was never commanded of God, and hath been greatly abuſed to Idolatry and Superſtition, and is not of any neceſſary uſe, and therefore we are affraid to bring it into the Worſhip of God, as knowing the jealouſie of the Lord, in matters of this nature; Exod. 20, and how ſtrictly hee commandeth his people, that all monuments and remnants of Idolatry and Superſtition ſhould be aboliſhed from among them, Deut. 5. 25, 26. Exod. 23. 13. Eſay 30. 2…. 2 Cor. 6. 17. In which reſpect the holy Ghoſt hath greatly commended Iacob, David, Iehu Hezechia and Ioſiah for taking away the remembrance of ſuch things, Gen. 35. 2, 4. Pſal. 16. 4. 2 King 10. 26, 27. & 18. 4. & 2…. all the Chapter. And where other Kings of Iudah came ſhort of the like zeale, the Scripture notes it as a blemiſh in them that the high places were not taken away, albeit the people did not ſacrifice in them to falſe gods, but onelyonly to the Lord, 2 Chron. 15. 17. & 20. 33. & 33. 17. Yea, moreover, it appeareth by the Scripture, that ſomethings that had a good Originall and uſe (if they be not ſtill neceſſary and commanded of God) are unlawfull when once they are knowne to be defiled by Idolatry, and abuſed to it, 2 King. 18. 4. Hoſ. 2. 16, 17. As the brazen Serpent was at the firſt an Inſtitution though but temporary: but when the children of Iſrael burned Incenſe to it, Hezechiah, is commended for breaking it in pieces, and the Lord witneſſeth of him that he did that which was right in the ſight of the Lord, and according to his Commandement, which he commanded Moſes, 2 King. 18. 3, 6. how much more in the like caſe ought other things to be removed, which never were commanded of God, but onelyonly were deviſed by men? And that that Liturgy hath been ſuperſtitiouſly abuſed, may be cleer to any that ſhall conſider that it is the ſame for ſubſtance that was uſed in the days of Popery. And therefore when the Papiſts in Devonſhire and Cornwall, had made a Commotion and Rebellion upon the change of Religion, in the days of King Edward the Sixth. It was told them by the King, for the pacifying of them: That it was the ſelf-ſame Service in Engliſh, which had been before in Latine: and if the Service of the Church was good in Latine, it remayneth good in Engliſh, for nothing is altered: Fox Acts and Monuments, Edward 6. And Pope Pius the fifth did ſee ſo little variation in it from the Latine Service, that had been formerly uſed in that Kingdome, that he would have ratified it by his authority, if Q. Elizabeth would have ſo received it. And many of the people put ſuch holineſſe in it, that they think God is not rightly worſhipped, nor his Sabbath well obſerved, nor the Sacraments ſufficiently adminiſtred, if there be no reading of that Service. And others put ſuch holineſſe and neceſſity in it, that they preferre it before Gods holy Ordinance of preaching the Word. In ſo much as the Miniſters are in the danger of being called This Argument is uſed by the Abridgment againſt conformity to the Ceremonies, and we do not ſee but it is as ſtrong againſt this Liturgy.in queſtion, and of being cenſured, if they doe not read that Liturgy every Lords day without omitting any part thereof, either in reſpect of preaching or otherwiſe.
3 In regard of the many wofull ſcandals, and dangerous conſequences of uſing that Liturgie, of which we ſuppoſe you are not ignorant.
To mention but two, Viz. The hardning of Papiſts who are imboldned to think better of their own Breviaries, Maſſe-Books, Portuiſſes, ſeeing that Liturgie hath bin extracted out of thoſe books, and rather fetched from them then from the forms uſed in any of the reformed Churches.
2 The conntenancing and eſtabliſhing of an unlearned Idol Miniſtery, of not-Preaching curates, Non-reſidents, Pluralities, &c. in whoſe skirts is to be found the blood of ſo many mens ſouls living and dying in their ſins, while they ignorantly content themſelves with, and harden themſelves in ſome empty forms of Religion and blinde devotion, which are begotten and cheriſhed chiefely by ſuch prayers and miniſters. Neither is there leſſe ſcandall hereby (we meane not onelyonly taken but given) then by the eating of an Idolathite, in the Idols Temple condemned by the Apoſtle 1 Cor. 8. 7 10. For if the eating of an Idolathite by him that had knowledge, and knew that an Idol was nothing, and that all meats were lawfull, did imbolden others to honour the Idol, and therefore was a ſcandall given, ſo alſo it is in this caſe.
4 Seeing that booke is ſo impoſed as that the miniſter in reading of it, is limited to the very words ſet downe without any diminution, addition, or alteration; therefore we dare not uſe it.
For 1 The Lord himſelfe hath not limited his people to his own formes and therefore we ſee not, how it can be lawfull to be limited to other mens formes; For in thus doing we ſhould ſubject our ſelves to the exerciſe of ſuch an authority and power of the Prelates, as in this caſe puts forth a ſtronger act of limiting power then Chriſt himſelfe, who doth not limit us to thoſe formes, which himſelfe hath ſet downe in Scripture: For though we acknowledge the Lords prayer and other formes ſet down in Scripture, may be lawfully uſed as prayers (due cautions being obſerved) yet there is not a limitation lying upon the Churches in the uſe of thoſe prayers. And therefore we do not find that the Apoſtles ever uſed that form taught by Chriſt in thoſe very words, much leſſe limited themſelvs to it, when they prayed, nor did they teach the Churches ſo to doe.
2 If the Lord would not have us limit our ſelves in our own forms, whiles we are exerciſing our own gifts (which he hath ſpecially ſanctified to edify his Church Act. 6. 4. Eph. 4. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 7.) leaſt we ſhould quench or at leaſt ſtraiten his ſpirit in prayer, 1 Theſ. 5. 19. would he then have us limited to other mens forms, which have not beene in like ſort ſanctified of God, but will rather quench or ſtraiten the ſpirit of God, whiles we are ſo limited to them?
3 The entertainment of this form hath been a manifeſt ſnare unto the Churches who upon the ſame ground on which they have received this forme into the desks have beene limited to others in the pulpit, by meanes whereof the poore Church of Chriſt hath bin wholly deprived of the publike uſe of the Miniſters gifts in prayer, and the ſpirit of prayer in the Miniſters in publike, hath beene greatly reſtrained.
As for our Judgement concerning the practice of others, who uſe this Liturgie in our native Countrie, we have alwayes beene unwilling to expreſſe our mindes there againſt unleſſe we have been neceſſarily called thereunto, and at this time we thinke it not expedient to expreſſe our ſelves any further concerning this matter, as loath to intermeddle with the affaires of other Churches, but contenting our ſelves with, and bleſſing the Lord for thoſe liberties which we, by the merciemercy of God, do here enjoy, reſerving alſo due reverence to the judgements of our beloved brethren and deere Countreymen, who may concerning this matter be otherwiſe minded.
Reply.
THis poſition cannot beare that meaning which you give it, if you take it according, o our mindes, and the plain conſtruction of the words. We never queſtioned why you made not uſe of a ſtinted Liturgy, much leſſe why you did not wholly and in every part tye your ſelves unto, and approve of that forme in uſe amongſt us. You might well thinke we had little to doe to put forth ſuch a demand, viz. whether you thinke it lawfull to approve in others and practice your ſelves, what ſwerveth from the rule, and we thinke it ſtrange you ſhould give our words ſuch a meaning.
The thing we craved reſolution in was, whether in your judgements all ſtinted and ſet formes of prayer and Liturgies be unlawfull. The reaſon hereof was becauſe in writings from New-England, we had ſeene all ſet liturgies, and ſet formes of prayer condemned as deviſed worſhip which God would not accept, and partaking in the Sacraments of the Supper in our aſſemblies, therefore diſallowed, becauſe adminiſtred in a ſtinted Liturgie, which things were received with ſuch likeing among ſome brethren with us, and by them imparted and recommended to others, that they occaſioned that rent and diſtraction whereof we complain.
It is true, the people among us ſeparate from our forme of prayer or liturgy, but the reaſon hereof is becauſe it is ſtinted, not becauſe this or that or ours in particular.
You confeſſe you want not ſome brethren among you who look at all ſet formes of Prayer invented by one of another age or congregation, and preſcribed to their brethren, to be read out of a booke for the prayers of the Church, as Images and Imaginations of man forbidden in the ſecond Commandement, and that the lawfulneſſe of Liturgies, and ſet formes is queſtioned and doubted of by many faithfull ſervants of God, ſuch alſo as come over occaſionally, who withdraw themſelvs from the Sacraments in the congregation, doe it on this pretence, that a ſtinted Liturgie is a humane invention. And if we examine the reaſons brought againſt ſtinted formes and Liturgies, we ſhall finde them to ſtrike at all formes and Liturgies though deviſed by men of the ſame age and congregation, and to be uſed but now and then, or but once on ſet purpoſe, and that either in publike or in private, as elſewhere we may have occaſion to ſhew.
You ſay it is evident, many Preachers conſtantly uſe a ſet forme of Prayer of their own making before their Sermons with whom the people refuſe not to joyne; And you know (we doubt not) that ſuch ſet formes are diſliked alſo. And if the grounds be examined (in our underſtanding) they make as much againſt the one as the other. View but the reaſons why you admit not a ſtinted Liturgie and forme of prayer, and ſee whether the two laſt will not in the ſame terms directly conclude gainſt both. But what ever is to be thought herein, or whether mens practiſes agree with their opinions we now diſpute not. This is plaine and manifeſt, that mens opinions are to be judged by their expreſſe words and reaſons, not by their practiſes. The Browniſts (as they are commonly called) can ſeparate from no ſtinted Liturgie amongſt us, but that which is in uſe, and for ought we know they may joyne with their owne Paſtors, though they oft uſe the ſame forme of prayer in whole or in part, in thankſgiving before meat, or in prayer before Sermon, or the like. And yet their opinion is that all ſtinted Liturgies and ſet Formes of prayer be unlawfull, humane inventions forbidden by the ſecond Commandement.
But if any thing had beene left doubtfull in the Letter, that it might be ſtrained to another ſence, either becauſe we were ſhort in expreſſion, or many of you not informed in the paſſages which gave occaſion to the queſtion, it is well knowne what the words meane in ordinary conſtruction. And we doubt not but many brethren among you, might and could fully informe you of our meaning that there need no ſuch ſtraining to find it out.
That which followeth in your anſwer to the poſition (as you interpret it) wee paſſe over, becauſe it is not to the matter intended. And wee are as unwilling to trouble you with the affaires of other Churches taking you from your owne weightie occaſions, as you are unwilling to be interrupted. OnelyOnly in regard of promiſe, and becauſe plaine dealing ſerves to maintaine love, we thinke good to advertiſe you theſe few things.
1 That your reaſons why you accept not of a ſtinted Lyturgie be ambiguouſly propounded, for ſometimes you plead onelyonly for your libertie herein, and that a ſtinted forme is not neceſſary, and ſometime you ſpeake ſo, as they that looke at Stinted Lyturgies, as Images forbidden in the ſecond Commandement will eaſily draw your words to their meaning.
2 The reaſons you bring againſt a ſet forme of prayer or Liturgie doe hold as ſtrong againſt a ſet forme of Catechiſme confeſſion and profeſſion of faith, bleſſing, baptizing and ſinging of Pſalmes.
3 Wee have not called upon you at this time to witneſſe for, or againſt the corruptions in the Communion-Booke. This you fall upon by ſtraining the ſenſe of our demands contrary to the true meaning thereof.
The reaſons which you bring againſt it, we cannot approve them all; The exceptions which have bin taken both from the matter and manner thereof we know: But to eſteeme the whole for ſome corruptions found therein, a monument of Idolatry, that we have not learned.
The Argument in the abridgement which is uſed againſt conformity to the Ceremonies did not in their judgement who were authors of the Booke hold againſt the Lyturgie, of which opinion we are alſo.
4 If theſe reaſons be intended onelyonly to ſhew why you receive not our forme of adminiſtration, it is that which (we are perſwaded you know) we never required of you. If to diſallow the uſe of the Booke amongſt us altogether in things lawfull, good and pertinent, they will not hold weight.
5 You are generally (as you ſay) loath to meddle with the affaires of other Churches, unleſſe you have been neceſſarily called thereunto. But when ſome upon the requeſt (as we ſuppoſe) of private friends, and others out of their zeale and forwardneſſe have laboured to draw many to ſeparation from the Sacrament, becauſe miniſtred in a ſtinted Lyturgie: wee cannot apprehend any juſt ground of this apologie. The Rent is wide, and ſome brethren had their hands deepe therein, which made us at this preſent to crave your judgements, and the reaſons thereof to make up the breach.
6 I. D. objecteth to Maſter P. that his manner of preaching was diſorderly in carrying that matter, he ſpeakes of, to the Claſſes, before he had declared to the Church the equity of his refuſing Whereas the publiſher of this anſwer to the ſix Poſitions, refers the reader to Mr. Cottons anſwer unto Mr. Ball for ſatisfaction in this point concerning ſet formes of prayer. The reader is earneſtly intreated to compare Maſter Balls Treatiſe, and Mr Cottons anſwer with ſeriouſneſſe and indifferencie, becauſe Mr Ball having received that anſwer before the publiſhing of his Treatiſe (being much enlarged, whereof Mr, Cotton was ignorant) was confident, that with addition of ſome marginall no…es (which in reference thereto he added) his Treatiſe would ſufficiently defend it ſelfe, againſt all the aſſaults, which that anſwer made againſt it.the Miniſters deſired by the Scriptures. And may not we with like reaſon object, that this manner of proceeding is diſorderly in ſeeking to draw men to Separation, becauſe of ſtinted Liturgie, before you had ſhewed to us or other brethren (whom it may concerne) by Scripture, or reaſons drawne from thence, that a ſtinted Liturgie was unlawfull? but of this wee may intreat more fully elſewhere.