Reasons Showing the Necessity of Reformation of the Public, Part 2

Reasons Showing the Necessity of Reformation of the Public · Part 2

p. 8II. Of WORSHIP.

THe Form of Publick Worſhip in England, (except Preaching) is ſet down in the Liturgy or Book of Common-Prayer, eſtabliſhed by Law, in 1 Eliz. 2. intituled, An Act for the Ʋniformity of Common-Prayer and Service in the Church, and the Adminiſtration of the Sacraments. This Act repealeth another, made in 1 Mar. 2. which had repealed a former Statute made in 5.6. Edw. 6. for the Ʋniformity of Common-Prayer, &c. and re-eſtabliſhed that Common-Prayer-Book, which the ſaid laſt mentioned Act of Edw. 6. had ratified and confirmed. But yet the Act of 1 Eliz. which authorizeth and enjoyneth the uſe of that Book of 5.6. Edw. 6. doth it, with allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Leſſons to be uſed on every Sunday in the year, and the form of the Letany altered and corrected, and two ſentences onelyonly added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the Communicants: but, none other, or otherwiſe.

Now, it is here to be obſerved, that in the Act of 5.6. Edw. 6. for confirming that Book, it is ſaid, that, The Kings moſt Excellent Majeſty, with th' aſſent of the Lords and Commons in that Parliament aſſembled, and by the Authority of the ſame, had cauſed the aforeſaid Order of common ſervice, intituled, The Book of Common-Prayer, to be faithfully and godly peruſed, explained, and made fully perfect, and by the foreſaid Authority annexed and enjoyned it ſo explained and perfected, to that preſent Statute. So that the ſame was enrolled together with the Act it ſelf. Which being repealed by Queen Mary, the Original Book was taken off from the Parliament-Roll, and ſo loſt.

But, in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. there is no mention at all of joyning the Book then revived and re-confirmed, to the ſaid Act: nor doth it appear that ever it was again enrolled, whereby, by having recourſe to any Record or Parliament-Roll, it may be proved, that that Book of Common-Prayer, printed in the year 1559. (the firſt of Q…een Eliz.) is confirmed by Law, or that any man is bound to uſe it as the onelyonly form now eſtabliſhed by Parliament; or, to be puniſhed for not uſing it at all.

And albeit the Act of 1 Eliz. Quere therefore whether he that either uſeth them not; or uſeth other, be puniſhaable.taketh notice of ſome alterations above mentioned, to be made in the Book then ratified, yet it doth not name, nor expreſs what thoſe alterations were. So that all men are leſt in a blind touching the ſame, if put to prove that thoſe alterations now found in the printed Common-Prayer Books, are the very ſame, which the laſt mentioned Act intended to allow and confirm.

p. 9Howbeit, that we may go ſo far as we can herein, take notice that by-comparing the Book printed in 5, 6, Edw. 6. with that which was printed in 1 Eliz. the alterations therein found (which are onelyonly hinted in the Stat. of 1 Eliz. 2.) are theſe:

1. As touching Proper Leſſons. The Kalendar of 5.6. Edw. 6. appointed no Proper Leſſons for Sundays (except for Eaſter-day, Whitſunday, and Trinity Sunday) but onelyonly for Holy-Days. The Leſſons for all other Sundays, were onelyonly ſet down in the Kalendar in ordinary courſe of reading the reſt of the Bible, upon that, and other days of the week, in a continued way of reading all. But, the Book, in 1 Eliz. in the Kalendar of Proper Leſſons, hath it thus; Proper Leſſons to be read, for the firſt Leſſons both at morning Prayer and evening Prayer on the Sundays, throughout the year; and, for ſome alſo, the ſecond Leſſons. Then, it after adds, Leſſons proper for Holy Days. All which proper Leſſons were appointed in 1 Eliz. to take place of all Chapters which in ordinary courſe of reading, according to the day of each monethmonth, had been before ordered in the Kalendar to be read, without reſpect to either Sunday or Holy-Day, but onelyonly to the day of the monethmonth in courſe. What alterations have been made either in that Book printed An. 1559. 1 Eliz. of other proper Leſſons, not warranted by the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. (namely, of ſuch as were before appointed for Holy-days, &c.) or that have been made ſince, ſhall be afterwards ſhewed.

2. As touching the Letany, there is no material alteration in that, ſave onelyonly this; that whereas both the Books of 2 Edw. 6. ran thus: From all ſedition and privy conſpiracy, from the tyranny of the Biſhop of Rome, and all his deteſtable Enormities, from all falſe Doctrine and Hereſie, &c. thoſe words touching the tyranny of the Biſhop of Rome, and all his deteſtable Enormities, are leſt out in 1 Eliz. 2. and ever ſithence.

3. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, the words uſed at the delivery of the bread, and wine, ran thus: Take and eat this in remembrance that Chriſt dyed for thee, and feed on him in thine heart by faith with thanksgiving: but in the Book of 1 Eliz. and in all ſince, the words are theſe: The Body of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt which was given for thee, preſerve thy body and ſoul unto everlaſting life; take and eat this in remembrance that Chriſt dyed for thee, and feed on him in thine heart by faith with thanksgiving. The words at giving the Cup, in 5.6. Edw. 6. were theſe: Drink this in remembrance Chriſts blood was ſhed for thee, and be thankful. But in 1 Eliz. and ſince, the words are, The Blood of our Jeſus Chriſt which was ſhed for thee, preſerve thy Body and Soul into everlaſting life; drink this, in remembrance Chriſts Blood was ſhed for thee, and be thankful. Now, it is to be noted, that, whereas onelyonly the two former Clauſes, which run in the forms of Prayers, were in the Book of 2. Edw. 6. and the two latter Clauſes onelyonly, are in the Book of p. 105.6. Edw. 6. as here above ſhewed, that Book of 1. Eliz. takes in, and joyns them both together. If theſe be not the alterations to which the Act of 1 Eliz. referreth, it will be very difficult (if not impoſſible) to find what they were.

Now having thus prepared the way to ſpeak to the neceſſity of Reformation in Worſhip, it is deſired that all Readers of this Piece, will take notice, that there was lately printed, in one ſheet of Paper, ſome of the Differences and alterations in the preſent Common-Prayer-Book from that which was eſtabliſhed by Law in 5.6. Edw. 6. and in 1 Eliz. (or, at leaſt ſuppoſed ſo to be) which is but a Specimen, or ſhort hint of what is here intended to be ſet forth more largely and fully: and that, in the ſame Order and Method which is there propounded; (none of thoſe printed Papers being now left) it is thought fit to reprint and inſert that ſheet (with ſome few Reviſals) in this larger Tract, which ſhall now follow in the next place. And then after that, we ſhall add what ſhall be neceſſary for making out more fully the neceſſity of reforming the whole Liturgy; not by way of reducing, ſo much as of new moulding the whole.

Some of the DIFFERENCES and ALTERATIONS In the preſent Common-Prayer-Book, FROM The Book eſtabliſhed by Law, in quinto & ſexto, Edw. 6. and 1 Eliz.

The KALENDAR.

THere are ſundry Saints days (although in black Letters) not found in the Books of 5.6. Edw. 6. or 1. Eliz. to the number of 50. and moe. Which however it may ſeem a ſmall matter, yet Time may turn them into Red Letters, and ſo claim obſervance of them. For Dr. Couſens in his Kalendar (which he calls the Kalendar of the Church) in his Book of Devotion, hath put one of them already, viz. St. Barnabies Day, into Red. But, however the Epiſtle and Goſpel for that day, and for the Converſion of St. Paul, be extant in the Service-Book; (and, in the Liturgy printed for Scotland, An. 1637. both theſe are put into Red, and enjoyned to be obſerved) yet in 2. Edw. 6. and in 5.6. Edw. 6. thoſe days were expunged out of the Catalogue of Holy Days.

On Aug. 7. The Name of Jeſus is put in for an old Holy-day; which, however uſed in times of Popery, (but, under a more gentle Title aaFeſt. Jeſu.) yet even in 2. as well as in 5.6. Edw. 6. and 1 Eliz. it was expelled. Howbeit, Dr. Couſens, in his forementioned Devotions, hath already ſet down proper Leſſons for that day, viz. Mat. 1. and Philip. 2. which ſhews how deſirous ſome are to keep an Holy-day to a Name.

The Order for Proper Leſſons.

On Whitſunday, 1. Eliz. the firſt Leſſon at Even. Prayer, was Deut. 18. now, that is thruſt out, and Wiſd. 1. crept into the room. And if we look into the Leſſons for Holy-days, we ſhall find many Chapters of the Canonical Scripture laid aſide, and Apochyphal Chapters ordered to be read. See ſome inſtances in the Margent, at the Letter ccOld Kalendar. The New. Jan. 25. Gen. 46. Wiſd. 5. Jan. 25. Gen. 47. Wiſd. 6. Feb. 2. Exod. 12. Wiſd. 9. Feb. 2. Exod 13. Wiſd. 12. Feb. 2…. Numb. 33. Wiſd. 19. Jun. 29. Job 31. Ecclus. 15. Jun. 29. Job 32. Ecclus 19. Jul. 25. Eccleſ. 10. Ecclus. 21. Jul. 25. Eccleſ 11. Ecclus. 23. Aug. 24. Ezek 3. Ecclus. 25. Aug. 24. Ezek 6. Ecclus. 29. Sep. 21. Mic. 7. Ecclus 35. Sep. 21. Naum. 1. Ecclus 38. Sept. 29. Zach 7. Ecclus. 39. Sept. 29. Zach 8. Ecclus. 44. Octob. 18. Judg. 14. Ecclus. …1. Dec. 28. Iſa. 60. Wiſd. 1.Gen 46Wis 5Gen 47Wis 6Exod 12Wis 9Exod 13Wis 12Num 33Wis 19Job 31Sir 15Job 32Sir 19Eccl 10Sir 21Eccl 11Sir 23Ezek 3Sir 25Ezek 6Sir 29Mic 7Sir 35Nah 1Sir 38Zech 7Sir 39Zech 8Sir 44Judg 14Sir 1Isa 60Wis 1.

There are ſundry other Leſſons altered, which I here omit. It is true, the Stat. of 1. Eliz. alloweth one alteration or addition of certain Leſſons to be uſed on every Sunday in the year: but, after mention of ſome by name, it addeth, And none other, or otherwiſe. Alſo in the preſent Kalendars, there are four Chapters of Joſhua left out, that were in the Kalendars of 5. and 6. Edw. 6. And, on Octob. 13. Judith 15.16. are appointed now to be read; which was not ſo in 5.6. Edw. 6. This deſerves conſideration, ſeeing ſo many Canonical Chapters of uſe, are not at all appointed to be read in publick.

The RUBRICKS.

The firſt Page of the preſent Books, appoint Miniſters to uſe ſuch Ornaments as were of uſe in 2. Edw. 6. not declaring what they be. The Book of 2. Edw. 6. enjoyned onelyonly a ſur…lis in Pariſh Churches and Chappels. See laſt page of that Book, where are notes for explanation. So alſo, in Rubr. before Morn. Prayer. 5 6. Edw. 6.The Book eſtabliſhed in 5.6. Edw. 6. names a Surplice onelyonly. The Book of Canons, Can. 58. enjoyneth other Ornaments. Hereby ſome Miniſters muſt break that Canon, or the preſent Rubrick, which the 14th Canon requireth all to obſerve. So that the 14th Canon and the 58th contradict each other. And neither thoſe Canons, nor that Rubrick, nor this Book, are eſtabliſhed by Law.

After the Communion, there are in all Service-Books of 5.6. Edw. 6. ſeven Rubricks. Which number remaineth; but, the Third is divided into two, and the fourth wholly loſt. In which fourth, the Compilers had ſolidly and excellently declared in what ſenſe they intended Kneeling at the Communion. The loſs whereof hath occaſioned much ſtumbling and offence; yea, much trouble and perſecution. That Rubrick was this.

Although no Order can be ſo perfectly deviſed, but it may be of ſome, either for their Ignorance and Infirmity, or elſe of Malice and Obſtinacy, miſconstrued, depraved, or interpreted in a wrong part; yet becauſe brotherly Charity willeth that, ſo much as conveniently may be, Offences ſhould be taken away; therefore we willing to do the ſame. Whereas it is Ordained in the Book of Common-Prayer, in the Adminiſtration of the Lords Supper, that the Communicants, kneeling, ſhould receive the Holy Communion; which thing being well meant for a ſignification of the humble and grateful acknowledging of the benefits of Chriſt, given unto the Worthy Receiver, and to avoid the profanation and diſorder which about the holy Communion might elſe enſue. Leſt yet the ſame kneeling might be thought or taken otherwiſe, we do declare, that it is not meant thereby, that any Adoration is done, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread & Wine there bodily received, nor unto any real and eſſential Preſence there being of Chriſts natural fleſh and blood. For, as concerning the Sacramental Bread and Wine, they remain ſtill in their very natural Subſtances, and therefore may not be adored: for, that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Chriſtians. And, as concerning the natural Body and Bloud of our Saviour Chriſt, they are in Heaven, and not here: for it is contrary to the truth of Chriſts true natural Body to be in moe places than one, at one time.

The Body of the Book it ſelf.

There is a whole Prayer now left out, at the end of the Letany, which was extant in the Books of 5.6. Edw. 6. to be uſed in times of Dearth or Famine: which was this:

O God merciful Father, which in the time of Heliſeus the Prophet, didſt ſuddenly turn in Samaria, great ſcarcity and dearth into plenty and cheapneſs, and extream famine into abundance of victual; have pity upon us that now be puniſhed for our ſins with like adverſity. Encreaſe the fruits of the Earth by thy heavenly benedi, ction; and grant that we receiving thy bountifvl liberality, may uſe the ſame to thy glory. our comfort, and relief of our needy Neighbours, through Jeſu Christ our Lord, Amen.

Moreover, there are ſundry Prayers (ſome before ſome in King James his time) put into the preſent Leiturgy; as alſo ſome things into the Catechiſm, which are not confirmed by Parliament. Which Additions (although uſeful) being not legally ratified, hath imboldened ſome to make alterations at their pleaſure. For inſtance, The Prayer for the Queen and Royal Family, before the year 1627. began thus; Almighty God which haſt promiſed to be a Father of thine elect and of their ſeed: but now, thus; Almighty God the fountain of all goodneſs. Which change was a great Preſumption, and may ſeem to imply an excluſion of the Royal Stem out of the number of Gods Elect. This alteration was firſt made in the Books appointed to be uſed, about that time, at publick Faſts; and thence, was ſtollen into the Book of Common-Prayer. Of which, no reaſon can be diſcovered, unleſs this; that the word Elect, diſtaſted the favourers of Popiſh Arminianiſm.

Likewiſe the reading Pſalms, now thruſt into the Common Prayer Books, (pretended to be eſtabliſhed by Law) were no part thereof in 5.6. Edw. or in 1. Eliz. For neither of the Books then printed in Folio, for publick uſe in Churches, had the Pſalms in them; but only a direction what Pſalms ſhould every day be read; which were accordingly read out of the Bibles then uſed in Churches. It is therefore, very hard, and unreaſonable, to continue that Tranſlation; and, to enjoyn, and tye men to read out thoſe abuſed Pſalms, as now they ſtand in that Book. And it is a great wrong to the people: that Verſion being very defective and corrupt. Take ſome inſtances wherein that differs from the Kings laſt authorized Tranſlation now only allowed to be read in Churches; as alſo, from the Original it ſelf.

Pſal. 28.9. The Lord is my ſtrength. In the new, thus, Old Tranſt.The Lord is their ſtrength, ver. 8.

37.38. Keep innocency, and take heed to the thing that is right. In the new, Mark the perfect man, and behold the juſt, ver. 37.

58.8. So let indignation vex them as a thing that is raw. In the new, He taketh them away as with a whirlewind, both living and in his wrath, ver. 9.

68.6. Maketh men to be of one mind in an houſe. In the new, Setteth the ſolitary in families.

105.28. They were not obedient. In the new, They rebelled not againſt his word **Let which of thoſe by Fuller or Dr. Prideaux be thought the better; yet, while they both ſtand, they cauſe ſcandal..

107.40. Though he ſuffer them to be evil intreated. In the new, He poureth contempt upon Princes.

125.3. The rod of the wicked cometh not. In the new, the rod of the wicked reſteth not upon the lot of the righteous.

In Pſal. 14. there are three whole Verſes, which are not in the Original, nor in the reviſed Tranſlation, nor in the Greek 72. but only in the Popiſh vulgar Bibles. To excuſe it by ſaying, All thoſe Verſes are found together in Rom. 3. is a fig-leaf. For, the Apoſtle never meant to produce all thoſe words as taken out of one place; but only to collect out of ſeveral Texts of the Old Teſtament, ſundry teſtimonies to prove all men to be ſinners. Accordingly, he took three Verſes out of Pſal. 14. one out of Pſal. 140. another out of Pſal. 10. another out of Iſa. 59. All which, the Old Tranſlators unadviſedly thruſt into the 14. Pſalm, as parts of that one Scripture.

I forbear to mention other Pſalms, wherein, ſometimes words, ſometimes whole verſes are left out; and, much of the reſt is very improperly and impertinently tranſlated: which in the Leiturgy provided for Scotland, was redreſſed; yet the Book (for ſundry other defects, impertinencies, and redundances) was refuſed: This makes ſport for Papiſts and Atheiſts, to find how much our Tranſlations publickly uſed, do enterfere, and jar; and how corrupt ſome of them be.

Thus of the differences between the old Common-prayer-books confirmed by Law, and the preſent Common-prayer-books ſo much magnified and adored, not only by the common ſort, but by too many of thoſe who pretend to learning and skill in the Publike Offices of the Church of England; but abuſe the people; yea, Magiſtracy, and God himſelf therein. For, ſtill the Preface of the Book runs thus: That nothing is enjoyned to be read, but that which is the pure word of God, or that which is evidently grounded thereupon: which (as our bold Maſters have ordered the matter) is falſe; and a meer cheat put upon the people of God.

Having thus given a taſte of the Differences between the Old and New Books, I hold it needful to ſhew how unſafe it might be hereupon to conclude no more but this: Then let the preſent Book of Common-prayer be compared with the old that was eſtabliſhed, and be reformed by it. For, even in the Book that was eſtabliſhed by Parliament, there are ſundry incongruous and uncomely expreſſions, unwarrantable paſſages, and, ſome groſs miſtakes of the Scripture it ſelf; eſpecially in the Tranſlations of the Epiſtles and Goſpels. Which Tranſlation uſed in the Book of Common-prayer, is as antient as the 35. of Hen. 8. (and uſed firſt in private Primmars, being tranſlated out of the Maſs books and other Offices of the Romiſh Church) for want of a better Tranſlation in the Reign of Edward the ſixth. For Example,

G…ſp. The old Tranſlation.on 2 Sund. after Epiph. When men be drunk. But, in the new, When men have well drunk.

Epiſt. Indeed Dr. Prideaux ſaith, all theſe are amended in the Kings New Tranſtation of the Bible. But what is this to the Service-book, in which theſe corrupt paſſages are ſtill printed, and preſſed to be read in Divine Service?on 4 Sund. in Lent. Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia, and hordereth upon the City which is now called Jeruſalem: a groſs miſtake both of Scripture, and Topography. The new Tranſlation therefore renders it thus: This Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and anſwereth to Hieruſalem which now is. He ſaith not, Mount Sinai is Agar; for, that is not ſo. But, Hagar is mount Sinai: that is, a repreſentation or figure of it. Nor doth the Apoſtle ſay, that mount Sinai in Arabia bordered upon Hieruſalem. For, that is falſe; Arabia being many hundred miles diſtant from Hieruſalem. And the Mount whereof St. Paul ſpeaks, was a type of it, not bordering on it.

Epiſt. on Palm-Sunday. He was found in his apparel as a man. In the new, He was found in faſhion as a man. The word is foreign which imports, not apparel, but the form, or figure, which includeth the real ſubſtance and true nature of the thing whereof it is a form.

Epiſt. on 16 Sun. after Trin. Which is Father of all that is called father in heaven and in earth. Then, the Father, muſt needs be Father to himſelf. The new Tranſlation, therefore renders it, Of whom the whole family of heaven and earth is named. So the Original, foreign.

Much more might be added, not only againſt the preſent uneſtabliſhed Leiturgy, but againſt that which was confirmed. But this ſhall ſuffice. For my intention neither is, nor ever was, to deſtroy, or caſt off all Forms: but only to ſhew ſome grounds of exception againſt this. And ſeeing this is ſo much cried up, that the moſt, place all their Devotion and Religion in it, and come little ſhort of the Iſraelites in abuſing of the brazen Serpent, which by Gods own command, was erected in the Wilderneſs; Authority may conſider whether it be not honourable, ſafe, and neceſſary to deal with both Books, as Hezekiah did with that Idolized Serpent; and carefully to provide a better in the room; as p. 18that good King did, in reforming the whole Publick Service of God: there being now far better means, and fairer opportunities of ſo doing, than in the times of compiling the Antient Leiturgy by thoſe Reverend and Renowned Biſhops and Matyrs that did compoſe it.

ROM. 10.22.

Happy is he that condemneth not himſelf in that thing which he alloweth.

Having reprinted the foregoing Sheet, we muſt now go on, in the ſame Order and Method (as was before promiſed) to obſerve ſome more incongruous and unworthy paſſages (all which call for a New Form of Liturgy) in the reſt of the Kalendar, Rubricks, and Body of the Book it ſelf.

I. In the KALENDAR.

THe Kalendar is either that which appoints Proper Leſſons for Sundays and Holy-days (to ſpeak in the Common-prayer-book Language) or that which in each Month ſheweth what Chapters are to be daily read on week-days, according to the days of the month; and is prefixed, in all Editions, to the Book it ſelf.

In the Proper Leſſons appointed for Holy-days. The Kalendar of 5.6. Edw. 6. omitteth proper Leſſons for the Converſion of Paul, becauſe that was then no Holy-day, but abrogated by the Act of 5.6. Edw. 6. ca. 3. Therefore in the Common Kalendar then eſtabliſhed, the firſt Leſſons for that day (being Jan. 25.) as being a Common-day of the Week, were Gen. 46. and Gen. 47. But in the Book of 1 Eliz. theſe two Chapters are laid by, and Wiſd. 5, and 6. put in the room. This (however toucht upon in the printed Sheet) is here again taken notice of, to ſhew by this (among other arguments) that the Book then printed was not confirmed by 1. Eliz. 2. becauſe that Act admits of no alterations of Leſſons on Holy-days, or other days, ſave only on p. 19Sundays. Yet is this alſo thruſt into the New Scotiſh Leiturgy, and that day, made an Holy-day again.

And whereas in all the proper Leſſons for Holy-days in 5.6. Edw. 6. only All Saints day, had, for thoſe Leſſons, Wiſd. 3, and 5. and all other Holy-day Leſſons were Leſſons out of the Canonical Books; the Kalendar of 1 Eliz. hath appointed 20. more Apocryphal Chapters for Holy-days, and thruſt out ſo many Canonical Chapters, that by the Kalendar of 5.6. Edw. 6. were appointed for thoſe very days; as for inſtance.

Can we think there could ever have been ſo much boldneſs in thoſe that printed the Common-Prayer-Book in 1 Eliz. to make ſo many alterations, in that very year wherein the Act of Eliz. paſſed for confirmation of that in 5.6. Edw. 6. (which admits not of one of them:) if that Book (which hath been followed ever ſince) printed in 1 Eliz. were the very Book then re-eſtabliſhed? And is not every Miniſter which readeth thoſe Apocryphals on the days aforeſaid, puniſhable (if he perſiſteth therein) by the Act of 1. Eliz. 2?

And here, let it be noted, that albeit there be ſundry whole Canonical p. 20Books left out, and no leſs then 188. Chapters of the Old Teſtament not read at all: yet, of the Apocrypha, which contains but 173 Chapters, there are read 121 Chapters, by the Kalendar of 5.6. Edw. 6. as well as the Kalendars of later date. Whereas St. Hierom in his directions for reading the Scriptures in private, by an holy woman, gives warning, Caveat omnia Apocrypha. Let her beware of all the Apocrypha. Which is not unlike to that of King James, to his Son, who, by ſaying, (I omit them, becauſe I am no Papiſt) declares plainly, that ſuch husks were firſt caſt before the Church by Popery, and is fit food for none but doting Papiſts. No more is that Kalendar, of 5.6. Edw. 6. from Octob. 5. to Novemb. 28. wherein very few Canonical Chapters are appointed to be read.

We ſhall now offer one Obſervation out of the late compiled Liturgy for Scotland, which is this; that (however ſo many Apocryphal Chapters ſtill ſtand in our Liturgies:) in all the Kalendar for Scotland, there are but 12. Apocryphals to be read in their Churches (which yet, they would not endure:) this ſhews plainly, that our great zealous Maſters who gave order for the Compoſing of that Book, had ſomewhat upon their Conſciences that rounded them in the ear againſt the continuing ſo many Apocryphals in ours: eſpecially conſidering that ſome of them, have been reputed but Fables (as namely the Book of Judith, the Hiſtory of Suſanna, &c.) acted firſt in Interludes or Plays. And ſome of the Chapters contain meer deluſions and lyes: yet even thoſe very Chapters are appointed to be read in our Churches.

To make this laſt out, take notice of ſomewhat obſerved before, out of the ſecond Homily of Alms-deeds, which quoteth Tobit 4. and Ecclu…. 5. (both being appointed to be read, the one Octob. 6. the other Octob. 30.) which I here paſs over. In Tobit 3. (appointed by the Kalendar of 5.6. Edw. 6. to be read Octob. 6.) where mention is made, ver. 8. that Sarah the daughter of Raguel had been marryed to ſeven husbands, whom Aſmodeus the evil ſpirit, had killed, before they had lien with her. (a likely matter!) Yet was ſhe reproached by her own Fathers maids, that ſhe had ſtrangled them all. In Tobit 3. (ordered to be read Octob. 9.) ver. 9. it is ſaid, Alms doth deliver from death, and ſhall purge away all ſin. What need then the bloud of Chriſt? And in ver. 15. one Raphael telleth Tobit, thus: I am Raphael one of the ſeven holy Angels, which preſent the prayers of the Saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the holy One. Whereas none but the Angel of the Covenant, now at the right hand of God to make interceſſion for the Saints, do preſent their prayers, Revel. 8.3. This Raphael was far from being one of the Angels that go in and out before the glory of the holy one; for he was a lying either man, or ſpirit. This was he that was hired by Tobias, ſon to Tobit, to ſhew him the way to Rages; and being asked by Tobit himſelf, of what Tribe he was, anſwered, I am Azarias the ſon of p. 21Ananias the great, and of thy brethren, Tob. 5.12. Now, you find him in two tales to the ſame man: in one of which he muſt needs lye. They that deſire to read more of his pranks, may read that Book of Tobit: and particularly, Chap. 6. where he taught Tobias how to chaſe away the Devil, by taking the heart, the liver and gall of a fiſh, and thereof to make a ſmoak, which when the Devil (who was ſaid to be in love with Sarah before named, and therefore in the Marriage-Chamber, had killed thoſe ſeven husbands, before mentioned, who had marryed her) ſhould ſmell, he ſhould flee away, and never come again any more. And are not theſe gallant Chapters to be read in Churches? yet our Kalendar appointeth them to be read, viz. Tob. 5. and 6. on Octob. 7.

So likewiſe Judith, cap. 9. (appointed to be read, Octob. 16.) tells a ſtory of a prayer which her ſelf made to God, (when ſhe had it in deſign to cut off Holofernes head:) in which prayer ſhe takes notice of father Simeon (who with Levi ſlew the Shechemites, for deflouring their ſiſters; Gen. 34.) and tells God, concerning the Shechemites, ver. 4. Thou haſt given their wives for a prey, and their daughters to be captives, and all their ſpoils to be divided among thy dear children, which were moved with thy zeal, and abhorred the pollution of their bloud, and called upon thee for aid, &c. Can we think this pious Amazon, had ever read Jacobs cenſure of that fact of Simeon and Levi, and his curſe upon it, Gen. 49.5, 6, 7. even while he was bleſſing the reſt of his Sons (except inceſtuous Reuben) at the very point of death? Simeon and Levi are brethren, inſtruments of cruelty are in their habitations. O my ſoul, come not thou into their ſecret: unto their aſſembly, mine honour, be not thou united: for in their anger they ſlew a man, and in their ſelf-will they digg'd down a wall. Curſed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel. I will divide them in Jacob, and ſcatter them in Iſrael.

The reſt of her prayer is conformable to this. Therefore ſhe prayeth, ver. 10. (in reference to Holofernes and his men) ſmite by the deceit of my lips (for ſhe meant to deſtroy him by lying) the ſervant with the prince, and the prince with his ſervant, &c. And in ver. 13. Make my ſpeech and deceit to be their wound and ſtripe, &c. Was not this a brave reſolution, a pious petition, to tell a lye for God? We forbear more inſtances, becauſe we delight not to ſcrape in ſuch Dung-hills. We have done with the Kalendar.

p. 22II. Of the RUBRICKS.

RƲbricks are Directions given in the Common-Prayer-Book, how to officiate and read the ſaid Book, in the ſeveral parts thereof. And they are called Rubricks, becauſe anciently printed in Red Letters; and are as much eſtabliſhed by Law, as any other part of the Book of Common-Prayer it ſelf. I ſhall inſtance onelyonly in ſome of them, not medling with thoſe before noted in the inſerted Paper of Differences.

1. There are many Rubricks wherein the Miniſter is called Prieſt, which is the old Stile and Title in the Maſs-Book, from whence it was taken. We never finde it in the New Teſtament; but onelyonly in the Old: which Title was then given to ſuch of the Levites as were made Prieſts to ſacrifice at the Altar. And thence the Papiſts borrowed that name for their Popiſh Sacrificers at their Altars. It is now then, a meer Superſtitious and Antichriſtian Name, no way warranted by the Word of God, in the Pontifician Senſe; yet is it uſed above fifty times in our Liturgy. It is true, one ſeeks to excuſe it by ſaying, Uſe hath made this ſo Popular, as it is not ſafe to remove it; yet, confeſſeth it may be altered without prejudice to Religion. But why may not the Word Prieſt be taken away, and the word Miniſter put in the room? The Name of Miniſter is not unknown: yea, it is as often uſed in the Rubricks of the ſame Book, as the name Prieſt. Therefore it may, without the leaſt danger, or offence, be wholly obliterated. Hence it is, that in the Scots Liturgy it is wholly omitted, and Presbyter put into the room thereof. Whereas this is a more ſtrange and unknown name, being borrowed from the Greek foreign, which was never uſed to ſignifie a Prieſt, but an Elder, and thence borrowed to denote a Miniſter, as all the Learned know: and none but Papiſts uſe the word Prieſt; unleſs Scoffers at Miniſters, whom in ſcorn and deriſion they call and nick-name, Prieſts.

2. In the fifth Rubrick of the Order for reading of the holy Scripture, it is ſaid, That the Collect, Epiſtle and Goſpel appointed for the Sunday, ſhall ſerve all the week after, except there fall ſome Feaſt that hath his proper. By vertue of this, theſe in Cathedrals were read every day, albeit they had no Communions. But another Rubrick prefixed to the Epiſtles and Goſpels, runs thus: The Collects, Epiſtles and Goſpels to be uſed at the celebration p. 23of the Lords Supper, and holy Communion, throughout the year. Theſe therefore were never intended to be read, but when there is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper adminiſtred. This was anciently adminiſtred every day, in the Church of England; and ſo, to be uſed ſtill, at leaſt in Cathedrals, as appears by the Rubrick after the firſt Exhortation at the Communion. If then, upon any reaſonable cauſe, there be no Communion, there ought at that time to be no Epiſtle and Goſpel read. If there be any read, it is without warrant. So that theſe two Rubricks fight; and which to follow, is uncertain. And indeed, they are both but blind guides that lead into the ditch, and make a man obnoxious to the Law.

3. The Rubrick before the general Confeſſion at the Communion, runs thus: Then ſhall this general Confeſſion be made in the name of all thoſe that are to receive the holy Communion, either by one of them, or elſe by one of the Miniſters. This gives liberty to Lay, or private men to officiate, in part at leaſt, as to this Confeſſion, which is a branch of the Office peculiar to the Miniſter, to be the mouth of the people unto God in Prayer; eſpecially in the Adminiſtration of the Sacraments, in the Congregation. What is this but to admit a private perſon to aſſiſt and bear a ſhare in adminiſtring the Lords Supper? Is not this to hit againſt the 17 Article of Religion, which declares it to be unlawful to any but ſuch as be lawfully called, and ſent; to wit, Miniſters duly ordained? In all other parts of the Liturgy, all Confeſſions and Prayers are expreſly put upon the Miniſter alone, at leaſt to begin, and lead the Congregation therein.

4. In the Rubricks before the proper Prefaces at the Communion, it is ſaid, that upon Chriſtmas day, and ſeven days after; upon Eaſter-day, and ſeven days after; upon the Aſcention-day, and ſeven days after; upon Whitſon-day, and ſix days after, the ſame ſeveral Prefaces appointed for each of theſe ſolemn days, ſhall be read; as if every of the ſeven days following were one and the ſame with the firſt; and, what was done on the firſt day, was done over again every one of the following days: which yet was never done but once; and, but upon one day, at all; and perhaps, upon neither of thoſe days on which it is ſaid there to be done. But, of this, more, when we come to ſpeak of the Body of the Book.

5. The laſt Rubrick after the Communion, ſaith, Note, that every Pariſhioner ſhall communicate at the leaſt three times in the year, of which Eaſter to be one; and ſhall alſo receive the Sacraments, and other rites, &c. But, the firſt Exhortation before the Communion, to be uſed when the people are negligent to come unto it, requireth the Miniſter to ſay unto the whole Congregation, I bid you all that be here preſent, and beſeech you for the Lord Jeſus Chriſts ſake, that ye will not refuſe to come thereto, being ſo lovingly called and bidden of God himſelf. Yet the aforeſaid p. 24Rubrick ſeems to diſpenſe with Gods own Invitation: How rightly, let all ſober men conſider. And if thrice communicating will ſuffice, (contrary to the Primitive Practiſe, which was, for all to Communicate at every ſolemn meeting) why muſt Eaſter be one of the three times, more then any other Lords Day, ſeeing every Lords Day is celebrated upon the ſame account that that called Eaſter-day, is, viz. in memory of the Reſurrection of our Lord?

But where it is added in that Rubrick, He ſhall alſo receive the Sacraments, and other rites, &c. this is no other but non-ſenſe, or worſe. For, what Sacraments elſe are there for a Communicant of the Lords Supper to receive? Is Baptiſm to be reiterated? are the Popiſh Sacraments to be recalled? And if they were, muſt every Pariſhioner receive them; and that thrice a year? And what are the Rites he muſt receive? Be they Ceremonies? Humane Inventions? Superſtitious antique Croſſings; duckings, bowing to the Altar, towards the Eaſt, to Images, &c? If ſo, where are theſe, or any of theſe enjoyned? And, if not enjoyned, why muſt they be all received thrice a year; or, at all? But of this, more hereafter.

6. The laſt Rubrick before the Catechiſm, in order to Confirmation, concludeth thus: And that no man ſhall think that any detriment ſhall come to children by deferring of their Confirmation, he ſhall know for truth, that it is certain by Gods Word, that children being baptized, have all things neceſſary for their ſalvation, and be undoubtedly ſaved. Where is that Word of God? This cannot be underſtood of Children, after Baptiſm, dying in Infancy; for it ſpeaks of ſuch as are capable of Confirmation; and, of Confirmation deferred. This ſuppoſeth their living a good while after Baptiſm; even till they come to ſome underſtanding, and are able to give ſome good account of the Catechiſm, (elſe can they not be admitted to Confirmation, as appears by the firſt Rubrick before Confirmation:) before which time, they may be guilty of many actual ſins; every of which (without true repentance) makes lyable to Condemnation. So that this Rubrick gives to Children once baptiſed, more aſſurance of their undoubted ſalvation, than ever God hath given them. For, if they be baptiſed, let them live or die, be godly or wicked, they muſt know for truth, that it is certain, (but not by Gods Word:) they not onelyonly have all things (on Gods part) neceſſary to ſalvation; but, are undoubtedly ſaved. Is this a truth?

7. The Rubrick after Matrimony, ſaith, The new-married perſons the ſame day of their marriage, MƲST receive the holy Communion. Who do ſo? what neceſſity of ſo doing? And if they do not ſo, who ſhall be puniſhed for their omiſſion? The Miniſter, if any body; becauſe he is bound to do all things according to the Book, if eſtabliſhed; and not otherwiſe. And if the marryed Perſons will not receive, what can the Miniſter do? As for the marryed perſons, they (by the Rubrick p. 25before mentioned) are not bound to receive above thrice in one year: which, if they do, they need not receive on their marriage-day.

8. In the laſt Rubrick after Communion of the ſick, it is ſaid, In the time of the Plague, Sweat, or ſuch other like contagious times of Sickneſſes or Diſeaſes, when none of the Pariſh, or Neighbours, can be gotten to communicate with the ſick in their Houſes, for fear of the Infection, upon ſpecial requeſt of the diſeaſed, the Miniſter may onelyonly communicate with him. By this, the Miniſter is bound not onelyonly to viſit every perſon ſick of the Plague, &c. (ſtanding at ſome diſtance) but, to adminiſter the Lords Supper alſo to him, if he deſire it; and that alone, if none elſe will joyn, as it is not to be expected they ſhould. This is no way agreeable to Chriſtianity, or common Humanity.

Not to Chriſtianity: for, firſt, the very nature of the Sacrament requires a publick Adminiſtration, becauſe there muſt be a Communion of more then two perſons in the receiving of it. This appears plainly by ſeveral other Rubricks of the ſame Book. For, 1. in the firſt Rubrick after the publick Communion, it is ordered, that, if there be not above twenty perſons in the Pariſh, of diſcretion to receive the Communion, yet there ſhall be no Communion, except four, or three at the leaſt communicate with the Prieſt. If it be ſaid, this is the Order for Publick Communions; but, it concerns not Private Communions of the ſick: it is anſwered, 1. that it appears not by the Word, that there is any warrant, much leſs neceſſity for ſuch private Communions: for, the firſt Rubrick after Communion of the ſick, directeth the Miniſter thus: If a man, either by extremity of ſickneſs, or for want of warning in due time to the Curate, or for lack of company to receive with him, or by any other juſt impediment, do not receive the Sacrament of Chriſts Body and Blood; then the Curate ſhall inſtruct him, that if he do truly repent of his ſins, and ſtedfaſtly believe that Jeſus Chriſt hath ſuffered death upon the Croſs for him, and ſhed his Blood for his Redemption, earneſtly remembring the benefits he hath thereby, and giving him hearty thanks therefore, (without all which, what good will be get by receiving the Sacrament?) he doth eat and drink the Body and Blood of our Saviour Chriſt profitably to his ſouls health, although he do not receive the Sacrament with his mouth. 2. In the Rubrick before the Communion of the ſick, this Order is given, that the Curate having knowledge over night, or early in the morning, of the deſire of the ſick perſon to receive the Communion, and being ſignified alſo how many be appointed to communicate with him, and having a convenient place in the ſick mans houſe, where the Curate may reverently miniſter, and a good number to receive the Communion with the ſick perſon, with all things neceſſary for the ſame, he ſhall there miniſter the holy Communion. Therefore by theſe Rubricks, no Communion is to be miniſtred to the ſick, where there be but two to receive it.

p. 26Secondly, This is alſo no way agreeable to Humanity. Muſt a Miniſter, who hath the charge of many ſouls, adventure his health, and life, to gratifie an infectious perſon in that which (as by what hath been before alledged) is no way of neceſſity to the fick mans ſalvation? Muſt the Miniſter do this, or be puniſhed with Deprivation, or otherwiſe? What cruelty is this? Nay, the very Canons of 1603. Can. 67. provided more mercifully then ſo; which runs thus: When any perſon is dangerouſly ſick in any Pariſh, the Miniſter or Curate (having knowledge thereof) ſhall reſort to him or her, (if the Diſeaſe be not known, or probably ſuſpected to be infectious) to inſtruct and comfort them, &c. Here is a Diſpenſation in caſe of the Plague, or other infectious diſeaſe, for ſo much as viſiting the ſick: and no word at all of giving the Holy Communion. So much ſhall at preſent ſuffice to be ſpoken of the Rubricks.

III. Of the Body of the Book.

1. THe firſt words of it, (which the Miniſter is to read) are theſe: At what time ſoever a ſinner doth repent him of his ſin from the bottom of his heart, I will put all his wickedneſs out of my remembrance, ſaith the Lord. This is (in the Rubrick before it) called, A ſentence of Scripture: and the place alledged is Ezek. 21.22. But that Text runs otherwiſe in the Original, and in the new Tranſlation of the Bible; viz. But if the wicked will turn from all his ſins that he hath committed, and keep all my ſtatutes, and do that which is lawful & right, he ſhall ſurely live, he ſhall not die. All his tranſgreſſions that he hath committed, they ſhall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteouſneſs that he hath done, he ſhall live. Here is little harmony between the Service-Book and Gods Book: eſpecially conſidering the very firſt words in the Liturgy, At what time ſoever. Which hath no warrant from that Text, and is diſſonant from another, [To day if ye will hear his voice, &c.] and from that Application of it, Take heed, brethren, leſt there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God; but exhort one another dayly, while it is called To Day, leſt any of you be hardened through the deceitfulneſs of ſin. Moſt men are convinced of the neceſſity of repenting: but, ſuch is the deceitfulneſs of their hearts, that too many defer it, and that upon that very ground expreſſed in theſe words, (which have no ground or warrant from the Word of God) At what time ſoever a ſinner repenteth, p. 27&c. as if he could repent when he liſt; which carries many to Hell.

It is true, this is ſeemingly put off by a great Doctor, thus: D. P. de Diſci…. Eccl. 2.…. Sect. 3.Eccl 2Dixit Dominus quoad ſenſum, licet non verbatim. The Book ſpeaks the ſenſe, although not the very words of the Text. But this is too frigid an anſwer to ſatisfie the Objection. For, 1. It is ſaid to be a ſentence of Scripture; not an Exhortation according to the ſenſe onelyonly. It is one thing to give the ſenſe, another to repeat the words. 2. This agrees not with the ſenſe, but is contrary thereunto, as was but now demonſtrated. Therefore it is untrue and injurious to charge the Apoſtles with the like, in alledging the Old Teſtament in the New.

2. That expreſſion in the general Confeſſion of ſins, viz. There is no health in us, (although well meant) is incongruous, and improper, becauſe moſt of the common ſort underſtand not the true meaning of it; yet patter it over, out of cuſtom, without being (through their ignorance) duly ſenſible of what is indeed intended by it. Howbeit, the Miniſter may not alter the Phraſe.

3. After the firſt Leſſon, at Morn. Prayer, Te Deum, or, Benedicite, (both of them, being Apochrypals) are to be read before the ſecond Leſſon; and ſo they interrupt the continued reading of the holy Scripture; which, the Preface to that Book would bear us in hand, is provided againſt.

As for Te Deum; or, We praiſe thee, O God, &c. it is a piece taken out of the Maſs-Book; and in Popiſh Churches uſually ſung, at times of great Victories, Deliverances, and other Triumphs. From thence, ſome Biſhops (little to their credit) have introduced it, upon like occaſions, into Proteſtant Churches: that being no where enjoyned, nor warranted by any Law in force.

This ſhews what able men ſuch Biſhops are to govern, that know not how to expreſs their thankſgiving to God for any extraordinary mercy, ſo well, as in a ſuperſtitious formal dreſs uſually ſung in Popiſh Churches. And, as for Benedicite, viz. O all ye works of the Lord, &c. it is a piece of the Maſs-Book alſo, and taken out of the Apocryphal ſong of the three Children. And it is bungled too; not ſet forth as it is in the Song it ſelf, as by comparing them may appear. And whereas that Song is ſaid, in the Title of it, in the Apocrypha, to be the ſong of the three holy Children which followeth in the third of Daniel, after this place; [And they walked in the midſt of the fire, praiſing God, and bleſſing the Lord,] this is an abuſing, and belying of the Canonical Text, in Daniel 3. in which there is no hint of any ſuch thing. Yet muſt this come in, and be kept in, in our Liturgy (though, caſt out of the Scotch Book) to give another lye to the Preface of our Book of Common-Prayer; of which, more by and by.

4. The many Antiphonies & Reſponds (except the peoples ſaying, Amen) p. 28have no pattern or warrant in the Word. Yet above an hundred of theſe Antiphonies and Reſponſals, or Anſwerings between Miniſter, Clerk and people, are enjoyned to be uſed; beſide the accompanying of him, in the Confeſſion of ſins, Creed, reading every other verſe of the Pſalms, &c. How can ſuch things (having no warrant in the Word) be done in Faith, in the Publique Worſhip of God; and not rather be accounted Will-Worſhip? This is the rather to be excepted againſt, not onelyonly becauſe it is ſo frequent in the Maſs-Books, (but, no where elſe;) but becauſe alſo the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer, ſaith, That the reading of the holy Scripture is (therein) ſo ſet forth, that all things ſhall be done in order, without breaking one piece thereof from another: and for this cauſe, be cut off Antiphonies, Reſponds, Invitatories, and ſuch like things as did break the continual courſe of the reading of the Scripture. How then, do ſo many Reſponds and Anſwers of Clerk and People, while the Miniſter is reading; as likewiſe thoſe Anthems beforementioned, which interpoſe between the firſt and ſecond Leſſon (all which are ſtill continued in the Book) agree with that Preface ſtill printed with the Book?

5. If the Letany muſt be read (which contains petitions for more particulars then all the Book beſides; and, being put into one continued prayer, without ſo many interpoſitions and interruptions, might be of far better uſe then now it is) why muſt the praying part be ſo much performed by the People, and not by the Miniſter, whoſe proper Office it is in publique, to pray for the people as their mouth; and not they to be his mouth? There is no ground for this in Scripture: yet we muſt be made to believe, that there is nothing in the Leiturgy, but what is evidently grounded upon the Word. And wherefore muſt that clauſe in the Let any [from the tyranny of the Biſhop of Rome, and all his deteſtable Enormities] be ſtill left out? was there no fear of his return to tyrannize over this Land again? Had he ever more Inſtruments at Work in this Kingdom ſince the Reformation, then now? If it be ſaid, The Act for Ʋniformity gives notice of an alteration in the Letany: yet, that Act doth not tell us what that is in particular. Therefore, till that alteration be named, that clauſe needeth not, yea ought not, to be omitted, ſo long as the Letany is uſed.

6. In the Book printed in 1 Eliz. there be added (after the Letany) two Prayers; one for the then Queen, another for Biſhops (both which were prayed for before, in the Letany, and alſo in the Prayer at the Communion for the whole eſtate of Chriſts Church) which are not in the Book of 5.6. Edw. 6. And, in 1 Jac. theſe were continued, with one other Prayer for Queen Anne, the Prince, &c. Now, albeit the Prayers for the King, Queen, and Royal Family be uſeful, and neceſſary; yet, when the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. admits of no alterations from, or additions to that Book in 5.6. Ed. 6. ſave only in proper Leſſons p. 29for Sundays, one in the Letany, and two more in the Communion; and, none other, or otherwiſe; how can thoſe Prayers be uſed, without making them that uſe them liable to the Law (if rigorouſly urged,) till they be confirmed by Act of Parliament; Or rather, till that Act of 1. Eliz. 2. be repealed and taken away?

7. Albeit the Preface to the Book, ſaith, that therein, many things be left out, whereof ſome be untrue, ſome uncertain, ſome vain, and ſuperſtitious, and nothing is ordained to be read but the very pure Word of God, the holy Scriptures, or that which is evidently grounded upon the ſame: yet are there ſundry things more, in the Body of that Book, which are neither certain, nor true, nor evidently grounded on the Word. For, to omit the imperfect and corrupt Tranſlations mentioned before in the Sheet of Paper inſerted into this preſent Book; and, many more, not therein cited, (which ſhew there is too much, which is not the very pure Word of God:) it is too too palpable, that, in the Prayers, and proper Prefaces for Chriſtmas day, and Whitſunday (as they are called) there are ſome things not only uncertain, but falſe; yea, impoſſible to be true; and therefore, not evidently grounded upon the Word of God. In the Collect or Prayer for Chriſtmas day and ſeven days after, we muſt, in prayer, ſay unto God, that he hath given Chriſt, this day (viz. Decemb. 25.) to be born of a pure Virgin. On what Scripture is this (viz. that he was born that very day) evidently grounded? and, if it did ſo appear; how can we ſay the ſame (without manifeſt and groſs lying unto God) ſeven other days more, one after another, ſeeing he was born but once, and on one day onelyonly? The like muſt be ſaid of the proper Preface, for that Day; of which before, in the Rubricks. Such alſo is the Collect for Whitſunday, which begins thus: God which as upon this day, &c. And, more clearly, in the Proper Preface, it is ſaid, the Holy Ghoſt came down this day from heaven, &c. And this muſt be ſaid not only on that day, but on ſix days after. Can this be true, when he came down in that manner, but once? And, when that day was, is very uncertain; eſpecially with us, with whom Whitſunday is a Moveable Feaſt, falling out (as Lent, and Eaſter do) ſome years in one month; ſome, in another; but never on the ſame day of the ſame month, two years together, What horrible abuſing of God, and that in very Prayers, is this?

8. After the Proper Prefaces at the Communion, followeth this: Therefore with Angels, and Archangels, and with all the Company of heaven, we laud and magnifie thy glorious Name, &c. Here is another uncertainty (to ſay nothing of the untruth of it;) for the Scripture never ſpeaks of more Archangels then one: which is mentioned, 1 Theſ. 4.16. This one, was Michael, Jude 12. to wit, Chriſt, the Prince of his people, Dan. 10.21. which moſt, if not all, expound of Chriſt: Even Him who is mentioned in Revel. 12.7. where it is ſaid, There p. 30was war in heaven, Michael and his Angels fought againſt the Dragon, and the Dragon fought and his Angels, and prevailed not, &c. It is true, that the ſuppoſititious Dionyſius Areopagita, takes upon him, in his Celeſtial Hierarchy, to divide the Angels into three ſeveral Hierarchies: but, Quo warranto, further then his own bare word, he doth not at all ſo much as propound; only he pretendeth to take it from Epheſ. 6.12. Col. 1.16. (of which interpretations, ſee Zanch. in Epheſ.) that expoſition being a meer dream.

9. In one of the Prayers after the Communion, it is prayed, that thoſe things which for our unworthineſs we dare not, and for our blindneſs, we cannot ask, vouchſafe to give us, &c. This is a Contradiction: for, while we ſay we dare not ask, we do ask, and pray him to give us. Can we pray thus in faith? Yes, you will ſay, when we pray for this, for the worthineſs of Chriſt, as after followeth. But then take this Reply. If our own unworthineſs cauſeth us not to dare to ask, why do we pray elſewhere, for ought elſe at all? It is not mans worthineſs, but Gods promiſe (2 Sam. 7.18, 19. and ver. 25, 26, 27. and Pſal. 119.49) but eſpecially Chriſts warrant and command (Joh. 16.23, 24.) that gives us boldneſs, to dare to ask whatſoever we need.

10. In the ſecond Prayer at publique Baptiſm, we pray, that Infants coming to Baptiſm, may receive remiſſion of their ſins by ſpiritual regeneration. How can this be? it is true, Remiſſion of ſins and regeneration, flow from one and the ſame fountain, and are both conveyed and ſealed in Baptiſm, ſeminally at leaſt, to thoſe within the Covenant by the ſame Spirit. But remiſſion of ſins is not received by, or from ſpiritual Regeneration, but by, and from the bloud of Chriſt. For, without ſhedding of bloud there is no remiſſion, Heb. 9.22. that is to ſay, the bloud of Jeſus Chriſt cleanſeth us (in reſpect of guilt) from all ſin, 1 Joh. 1.7. It is not then by the grace of regeneration wrought in us, but by the bloud of Chriſt ſhed for us, that we receive remiſſion of ſins. Away then with that expreſſion in Baptiſm; unleſs we be more for mans falſhood, then for Gods Truth.

11. All that is in the Catechiſm, touching the Sacraments, was (contrary to the Act of 1. Eliz. 2.) added in King James his Reign, but never confirmed by Parliament, therefore not ſafely to be uſed, although ſomewhat in that kind be uſeful and neceſſary: yet not that model. The Anſwer to the firſt Queſtion [viz. to that, How many Sacraments hath Chriſt ordained in his Church?] is this, Two only as generally neceſſary to ſalvation: which Anſwer is very dubious, and liable to exception. For it may (without racking) be interpreted as a tacite admiſſion of more (as Marriage, Holy Orders, &c.] though not generally neceſſary for all. Again, where it is demanded, why are Infants baptized, when by reaſon of their tender age they cannot perform them? that is, they cannot repent, nor believe [which the Anſwer to p. 31the next preceding Queſtions, admits to be required of perſons that are to be baptized] the Anſwer is this: Yes, they do perform them by their Sureties, &c. which is a meer tale. For, however the Sureties promiſe, and engage for theſe, in behalf of the infant; and, upon that account, a charge (after Baptiſm) is given to the Sureties, to take care that the Infant, ſo ſoon as he is able to learn, be taught what he by them, vowed in Baptiſm, and what further is required of him: yet it was never read or heard of in Scripture, that one man either repented, or believed in the name and room of another, whereby that other did receive all or any of the ſpiritual benefits, exhibited and ſealed in either of the Sacraments to ſuch as are admitted to them. And to ſay, the Infants perform (repentance and believing) by their Sureties, becauſe the Sureties vow them both in the Infants names, is a ſtrange and untrue expreſſion: for it is not vowing by one, that another ſhall repent, and believe, when he is not at preſent able to do either, that can truely be ſaid, to be a performing of them, by him that makes that vow; ſuppoſing him to be a true believer, which many Sureties be not.

12. In the Commination appointed and enjoyned by the Rubrick before it, to be uſed divers times in the year, (however a learned Doctor would ſhift off the objection againſt it, by ſaying, Non tam exigitur quam conſulitur:) there is a ſervice ſet up, which, however it was appointed by God to be once uſed by the children of Iſrael ſo ſoon as they were gone over Jordan into Canaan, Deut. 27. yet is now no way warrantable in the Publique Worſhip of God: that is, for the Miniſter openly to denounce Curſes upon all ſinners, divers times in the year; and that, not in the ordinary Reading-place, but out of the Pulpit: To which, all the people are required to ſay, Amen: Whereby many of them are neceſſitated to curſe themſelves. But, as for that place in Deuteronomy, that is no warrant for this, now; Becauſe, that was no part of the Publique Service then incumbent on the Prieſts, or Levites, nor to be done by any in the place of Publique Worſhip: but upon Mount Ebal: and that by ſix of the Tribes, to wit, Reuben, Gad, Aſher, Zebulun, Dan and Naphtali, ver. 13. and that, but once. And let it be obſerved, that Levi was none of them that were appointed to Curſe; nor were they of that Tribe, ſo much as among them. But he was to be upon Mount Gerizzim, with Simcon, Judah, Iſſ…char, Joſeph and Benjamin, to bleſs, ver. 12. And this was the charge before given of God by Moſes unto Aaron and his ſons, (as their conſtant duty at all publique Aſſemblies of the Congregation for Worſhip) Numb. 6.23, &c. to bleſs the Congregation, thus: The Lord bleſs thee, and keep thee; the Lord make his face to ſhine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. This indeed was an Ordinance, to which God there promiſeth a good ſucceſs, ſaying; They ſhall put my Name upon the children of p. 32Iſrael, and I will bleſs them. For Miniſters of the Goſpel then, whoſe Office it is to be Meſſengers of Peace, and to bring glad tidings of good things to his people; to be imployed, and that often, in curſing the people as a part of his Office and of publique Worſhip, (not this or that particular offender, being according to Chriſts Ordinance convicted, and cenſured, and ſtill remaining refractory and impenitent:) is ſuch a piece of humane and unchriſtian-like invention, as hath no warrant from the Word of God, nor from the practiſe of the Primitive Church, which this very Commination it ſelf, in the firſt lines of it plainly confeſſeth, where it ſaith that, then the Diſcipline was, to put notorious ſinners to open penance, in Lent: and that, in ſtead thereof, until the ſaid Diſcipline may be reſtored, it is thought good, to uſe this. Which ſhews plainly, that this is no other then a later ſpawn of Antichriſt in his Popiſh Services. More might be ſaid of ſundry other particulars in the Service-Book: but we ſuppoſe that he that ſhall duly weigh that which hath been already noted, will think theſe enow.

III. Of RITES and CEREMONIES.

HAving ſpoken of the neceſſity of Reformation in Worſhip, it is neceſſary, in the next place, to ſhew the like neceſſity of Reformation in Rites and Ceremonies, which are appurtenances of, and appendents to Worſhip, in relation to the Injunctions of the Apoſtle, Let all things be done decently and in order aa1 Cor. 14.40.1 Cor 14:40; and, to the uſe of edifying bb1 Cor. 14.26.1 Cor 14:26.

And here we ſpeak not of Rites and Ceremonies, which be Divine, by Gods own Inſtitution; for theſe are all, in ſome reſpects, parts of external Divine Worſhip, in their uſe, preſcribed by himſelf (ſuch are, the outward elements in the Sacraments, &c.) and, in other reſpects, Ceremonies appendent to that Worſhip, which is internal, and principally intended in and by that which is external by Divine Inſtitution.

But we ſpeak of Rites and Ceremonies, appointed by the Lights and Guides of the Church, for decency, order and edification; being of Humane inſtitution, and alterable, although uſed in the exerciſe of Religious Worſhip: according to the 34th Article of Religion, which teacheth that it is not neceſſary that Ceremonies be in all places one, or p. 33utterly like; for, at all times they have been divers, and may be changed, according to the diverſities of Countries, Times, and Mens manners, &c.

The reaſons why ſuch Ceremonies not only may, but ſometimes muſt be changed, according to the diverſities of Countries, Times, and Mens manners, (which may make it evident that what is now deſired, no way tendeth to diſorder, confuſion, or Schiſm; but, to godly order, without the leaſt infringement of holy unity in the Church) are plainly ſet forth before the Book of Common-prayer it ſelf, under that Preface, or Title; Of Ceremonies, why ſome be aboliſhed, and ſome retained. Where it is ſaid, Of ſuch Ceremonies as be uſed in the Church, and have had their beginning by the inſtitution of man; ſome, at the firſt, were of godly intent and purpoſe deviſed, and yet at length turned to vanity and ſuperſtition; ſome entred into the Church by indiſcret Devotion, and ſuch a zeal as was without knowledge; and for becauſe they were winked at in the beginning, they grew daily to more and more abuſes, which not only for their unprofitableneſs, but becauſe they have much blinded the people, and obſcured the glory of God, are worthy to be cut away, and clean rejected.

The ſame Preface ſaith further, Some are put away, becauſe the great exceſs and multitude of them hath ſo increaſed in theſe later days, that the burden of them was intolerable: whereof St. Auguſtine in his time complained, that they were grown to ſuch a number, that the eſtate of Chriſtian people was in worſe caſe concerning that matter, then were the Jews. And he counſelled that ſuch yoke and burthen ſhould be taken away, as time would ſerve quietly to do it. But what would St. Auguſtine have ſaid, if he had ſeen the Ceremonies of late days uſed among us, whereunto the multitude uſed in his time was not to be compared? This our exceſſive multitude of Ceremonies was ſo great, and many of them ſo dark, that they did more confound and darken, then declare and ſet forth Chriſts benefits unto us.

Upon theſe and other reaſons it was, that many Ceremonies introduced into the Maſs-Books and other Popiſh Breviaries, ſuch as, ducking and bowing to the Eaſt, to the Altar, the ſtanding up at Gloria Patri, or Glory be to the Father, &c. at the reading of the Goſpels of the Day, the wearing of Robes, Copes, Lawn ſleeves, or other Veſtments, (ſave onelyonly a Rochet to be worn by an Archbiſhop, or Biſhop, and Surplice only by Prieſts and Deacons;) the wearing of Sandals or Slippers, when men go into Churches or Chappels; the turning Communion Tables, and ſetting them Altar-wiſe (at the Eaſt end of the Chan…l, or ſetting up Altars of ſtone in that place, whether the Congregation can hear or not:) womens wearing of Vails, and offering of Chriſomes at Churchings, and that at the high Altar; the reading of the Leſſons in one place, and the ſecond Service, at the Altar; which ſecond Service p. 34was never appointed by the Common-prayer-book to be uſed but onelyonly at the celebration of the Lords Supper: the ſetting up of Tapers of wax, Candleſticks, Baſons and Ewres, upon the high Altar, and ducking to them every time a man comes into the Church or goes out, or ſtirs, while he is in it: (Whereas Cups, Pots and Baſons for Alms, were never ſince 5. Edw. 6. to be ſet there, but at the Communion; nor then, to be bowed unto, though the Bread and Wine were on the Table;) The wearing of Hoods of degrees, and many other ſuch like devices, all which were laid aſide in 5.6. Edw. 6. as appears by the Rubricks, and the Act for Uniformity in 1. Eliz. 2. compared together, which allows nothing but what was in the Book of 5.6. Edw. 6. ſave onelyonly the alterations mentioned in the ſaid Act, as hath been before ſhewed. And, however the Rubrick before the Book printed in 1. Eliz. directeth to uſe ſuch Ornaments as were in uſe in 2. Edw. 6. yet that is no part of the Book eſtabliſhed: becauſe the Book of 5.6. Edw. 6. hath no ſuch Rubrick; and the Act enjoyns all to be done according to that Book, and none other, or otherwiſe. However, afterwards, another Statute of Q. Eliz. did ſo appoint.

Now, the ſame Preface before the Common-prayer, touching Ceremonies, giveth all men to underſtand, that the moſt weighty cauſe of the aboliſhing of certain Ceremonies, was, that they were ſo far abuſed partly by the Superſtitious blindneſs of the rude and unlearned, and partly by the unſatiable avarice of ſuch as ſought more their own luere, then the glory of God, that the abuſes could not well be taken away, the thing remaining ſtill. Upon which grounds, there was a removal of them in 5.6. Edw. 6. For then, was that Preface of Ceremonies firſt prefixed to the Book of Common-prayer.

But ſo great is the itch of mans corrupt nature after Humane inventions in Divine Worſhip, and ſo natural are Popiſh Gue-gaws and outward pompous toyes that pleaſe the ſenſes, that many of theſe (who had been laid aſide, as aboveſaid, in 5.6. Edw. 6.) and that, at the Conference at Hampton-court, it was deſired that thoſe Ceremonies and Rites of the Croſs in Baptiſm, kneeling at the Communion, the Surplice, &c. might be put away; yet ſuch was the violence of the prevailing party at that time; that, having obtained Licenſe under the Great Seal, they in Convocation, An. 1603. recalled ſundry of thoſe rejected Ceremonies again; and enjoyned all Students in Colleges to wear Surplices in time of Divine ſervice, Can. 17. Copes by him that Miniſtreth the Sacrament; Epiſtolers and Goſpelers, according to 7. Eliz. (there being no ſuch Statute, nor Parliament in 7. Eliz.) and ſundry other things: under colour whereof, by degrees, moſt of thoſe things before caſt out, viz. bowing to the Eaſt, and to the Altar, with the reſt before named, were retroduced; and now devoutly (or rather ſuperſtitiouſly) obſerved, without any ſhew or p. 35colour of warrant, but ancient cuſtom, which being, duly examined, will appear to all to be firſt uſed in the Popiſh Churches, as too palpably appeareth by the Preface touching Ceremonies before alledged.

Yea, thoſe very men who are ſo much for theſe; and not onelyonly urge the 18th Canon of 1603. but the Queens Injunctions **52 Injunctfor bowing at the Name of Jeſus, which no Common-prayer-book, or Statute hath enjoyned; yet, in other things, regard not thoſe Injunctions, nor the Book of Homilies; no, nor the Act for Ʋniformity it ſelf touching ſuch Ceremonies as they have a mind to recal and advance: witneſs their ſetting up Candles in Candleſticks on the High Altar (as they call it) and ſuch like ſuperſtitions which the third Injunction of Eliz. reckons among thoſe things which tend to Idolatry and Superſtition, which of all other offences God doth moſt deteſt and abhor. They muſt have their Antiphonies, Reſponds, &c. which the Preface to the Common-prayer-book, tells us are laid aſide, &c. Not content with this, they muſt have all (except Candles lighted) that are upon the Popiſh Altars where Maſs is uſed, upon their high Altars; yea, piping on divers Inſtruments, ſinging (ſo as none can underſtand the matter, but onelyonly be tickled with the muſick) playing upon Organs, &c. all which were laid aſide in Edw. 6. and even by the 2 Hom. of the Place and time of Prayer, (which is by vertue of Art. 35. ſubſcribed unto by every Miniſter in England that ever was admitted to any Eccleſiaſtical Promotion, according to the Act of 13. Eliz. 12.) are cenſured and declared openly to all, to be diſpleaſing unto God, and ſore and filthily to defile his holy Houſe and Place of Prayer. All which are here mentioned, to ſhew how far they deviate, and whither they are tending and poſting amain, who under colour of upholding, and practiſing of the laudable Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, do recal and retroduce many Popiſh Rites caſt out of this Church, and deſpiſe all Laws and Conſtitutions made againſt them; and are thereby lyable to Inditements every time they uſe them, upon the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. We ſhall forbear to inſiſt longer upon this, but leave it to others to judge what ſad and dangerous effects, theſe things (if they be ſuffered and countenanced) are likely to produce.

That which we chiefly aim at, is, to ſhew a neceſſity of reforming thoſe Rites and Ceremonies contained in the Book of Common-Prayer, or enjoyned by the Canons of 1603. Such are, the Surplice, Copes, &c. enjoyned to be uſed by Miniſters; the Croſs in Baptiſm, Kneeling at the Communion, Marriage with the Ring, Bowing at the Name of Jeſus, and ſuch like, impoſed upon all, as eſtabliſhed by Law. But, ſuch Eſtabliſhment, we do, and muſt deny, until we ſee a Record produced, by which that Book now in uſe, or printed in 1 Eliz. is by Act of Parliament, ratified and confirmed. For if either there be no Record, of that, to which an Act referreth, or that there be more alterations in p. 36the Book ſaid to be eſtabliſhed, than the Act mentioneth; can that Book be properly ſaid to be eſtabliſhed by Law, and not rather made void thereby? In all other things, nothing is admitted for Law, or as being of force by Law, but what is expreſly contained in verbis, in the Act it ſelf; eſpecially, if the Act refer to any thing to be confirmed by it, of which no Record can be produced, and which differs from ought elſe that is ſaid to be ratified by it. And this is the caſe of the preſent Liturgy, which neither is Recorded, nor agreeth with, but hath ſundry alterations from, and additions to that of 5.6. Edw. 6. beſides thoſe hinted in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. And if any Deed or Bond be raſed, or altered after ſealing; or, if raſed, or altered before ſealing, and that not witneſſed; will ſuch a Deed or Bond be admitted as good evidence at Law, or in Equity, if produced and pleaded? We therefore cannot underſtand how the preſent Service-Book can be eſtabliſhed by Law, it being no where Recorded; and, in ſundry things, (beſide thoſe mentioned in the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2.) varying from that which was once Recorded, as hath been before demonſtrated. To ſay, the Book, in what remaineth, ſtill bindeth, in tanto at leaſt, is but a miſtake: for, any Record, or Deed, vitiated in any one part, makes void the whole, in Law.

And as for thoſe Rites enjoyned in the Book of Canons, we ſhall forbear to ſpeak of the Legality of them, till we come to ſhew the neceſſity of Reformation in Diſcipline, a great part whereof is contained in that Book.

Nor is it our purpoſe to inſiſt upon the unlawfulneſs of thoſe Ceremonies, ſo as to make any diſpute thereupon, nor to juſtifie or condemn thoſe who hold them ſimply unlawful in themſelves. But we, taking it for granted that they are in themſelves foreign, or things indifferent, do humbly pray that theſe things may be duely conſidered, in the general:

1. That being ſuch, they ought not to be impoſed on thoſe, who cannot be fully perſwaded in their own minds and Conſciences that they are lawful, and therefore muſt ſin, if they uſe them. This is St. Paul's own Doctrine and Practiſe touching things of this nature, notwithſtanding his own judgement of the lawfulneſs of them. In his days, many godly Chriſtians, both in Rome, Corinth, and elſewhere, made ſcruple of ſundry meats forbidden in the Levitical Law, and of omitting days enjoyned by it. Others, ſatisfied of the lawfulneſs of both, did eat thoſe meats, and omit thoſe days; at which others were ſcandalized: ſome, by adventuring through other mens example, to do the like, albeit they were not fully ſatisfied of the lawfulneſs thereof, and thereby ſinned: others took offence, and were grieved, and thereupon cenſured all that uſed their Chriſtian Liberty in thoſe things of which they that uſed it, were fully ſatisfied: and hereupon, the weak, for p. 37cenſuring, ſinned alſo: and, by both theſe, the weak were in danger to be deſtroyed, Rom. 14.15.

Now, what was our Apoſtles Doctrine, and Practiſe herein? His Doctrine was this: I know, and am perſwaded by the Lord Jeſus, that there is nothing unclean of it ſelf: but to him that eſteemeth any thing unclean, to him it is unclean, Rom. 14.15. And, All things indeed are pure; but, it is evil for that man who eateth with offence. It is good neither to eat fleſh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother ſtumbleth, or is made weak, verſ. 20, 21. His Practiſe was this: 1. Touching himſelf; If meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no fleſh while the world ſtandeth, leſt I make my brother to offend, 1 Cor. 8.13. And, as toward others, he ſtraitly chargeth on all, theſe two things: 1. To take heed leſt by any means this liberty of yours become a ſtumbling block to them that are weak, ibid. verſ. 9. that is, by uſing that Liberty before others not ſatisfied in the lawfulneſs of it. 2. If the one will yet uſe this liberty, and the other will take offence, then, his charge is, Let not him that eateth, deſpiſe him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth, Rom. 14.3. But, as for enjoyning the eating of what himſelf held to be lawful, on thoſe that doubted the lawfulneſs of it, (although he had more Authority then all our Biſhops and Clergy in Convocation, to make Canons) we never find that he did it; but, warned and forbade all the very uſe of it, before any that, through weakneſs, took offence at it. If then, Authority will follow the Apoſtles rule, they will find a neceſſity, not onelyonly of taking off all Impoſitions already made, but the taking away of all the things ſo impoſed, at which ſo many able and godly peaceable Miniſters and People do take offence; and, for which, ſo many thouſands have deeply ſuffered, to avoid ſinning againſt God by conforming to them. For, whatſoever is not of faith, is ſin.

2. If it be ſaid, The inſtances laſt given concern onelyonly private things, and private practiſes; what is this to Publick Order in the Houſe of God, where the Service and Worſhip of Almighty God, by the Hedge of Ceremonies is preſerved from lying open to all profaneneſs; as a confident ſtickler for Ceremonies, groundleſly pretendeth? To this, it is anſwered, That Ceremonies are no ſuch Hedge; unleſs to keep out ſuch as have as good right to the Ordinances as they who do impoſe them, (for which they muſt one day give a ſad account;) and, that it is much more dangerous and ſinful to enjoyn things of this nature for Publick uſe in the Adminiſtration of Publick Ordinances. Becauſe, thoſe private meats, &c. may be avoided by ſuch as take offence at them; for, what neceſſity, to be preſent at the uſe of them? But, there is a neceſſity of being preſent at the other: which he that neglecteth, is lyable to puniſhment by the Law. The Law tyeth all to come to the Common Service, every Sunday, and Holy-day; to receive the p. 38Holy Communion thrice at leaſt in every year: and, impoſeth a ſharp penalty for neglect hereof. So that, while theſe are impoſed, or uſed, (where weak Chriſtians take offence at them) many godly men are forced to offend, either againſt God, by ſubmitting to that they are not ſatisfied in the lawfulneſs of it; or, againſt the Laws of the Land, by not conforming to them, which they cannot do without ſin. So that the impoſing of them upon all, or the uſing of them before all, who cannot, without ſin, ſubmit to them, is the abuſing of Authority, and the making it to ſin againſt Chriſt, by putting it upon the forcing thoſe for whom Chriſt died, to ſin againſt their own Conſciences, and to drive them on to deſtruction in Hell, as a man would force a Beaſt into the water, or fire that will ſurely devour him. It is then a groundleſs put off, to ſay, that ſuch things being commanded by juſt Authority, the indifference by that command determineth, and they become neceſſary: which is quite contrary to the Apoſtles rule.

3. If theſe be retained in ſome places where no offence is taken at them: yet there is no reaſon to impoſe, or uſe them in other places where any are offended at them. For, 1. to plead Impoſition for order and unity in the Church of England, is to no purpoſe; becauſe there is no neceſſity of the ſame, in all places, no more then of all the ſame Orders and Practiſes in all Corporations in England; and, of every Company within thoſe Corporations (who all have different Orders and Rules) to preſerve Order and Unity in the Civil Government of the Kingdom. 2. Our very Articles of Religion, (as hath been ſhewed) ſay, Art. 34.That it is not neceſſary that Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed, according to the diverſities of Countries, times, and mens manners. 3. If it be ſaid, Theſe refer to different Countries; not to different places within the ſame Country: It is anſwered, that times, and mens manners, muſt produce a Change, where ever a removal of thoſe in being, is neceſſary, as appears by the Article. And where things of this nature, that at firſt were of godly intent and purpoſe deviſed, but at length turned into vanity and ſuperſtition; by the Preface touching Ceremonies, (before cited) they are adjudged worthy to be cut away, and clean rejected: and ſo many of them have already been, (as was the Braſen Altar by Hezekiah.) And it further telleth us, that as thoſe be taken away which were moſt abuſed, and burdened mens conſciences without any cauſe: ſo the other that remain may (upon juſt cauſes) be altered and changed. So that here is nothing deſired, in the taking away the impoſition, yea, all uſe of them, but according to Law.

4. The Book of Common-Prayer of 2 Edw. 6. is in ſome things referred to, and particularly as to Ornaments and Rites, both by the Rubrick before Morning-Prayer in the preſent Liturgy; and, by the Stat. of 1 Eliz. 2. So that, as to this point, ſo much of that firſt Book is p. 39ſtill in force by Law. But, that Book hath expreſly given a liberty in ſome of the things here deſired to be no further impoſed, where (in the laſt Page thereof, called, Certain Notes for the more plain Explication, and decent Miniſtration, of things contained therein) it ſaith, As touching kneeling, croſſing, holding up of hands, knocking upon the breaſt, and other geſtures, they may be uſed or left, as every mans devotion ſerveth, without blame. This is ſtill good Law. So that whatever is enjoyned in the Canons for the impoſing this, is void in Law by the Stat. of 25. H. 8.19. (although made by the Kings Licence and Aſſent) becauſe contrary to that Law of 1 Eliz. 2. in this particular.

Now, if the Law it ſelf give a Liberty in ſome; we truſt that, upon the foregoing Reaſons, our Law-givers will take off the impoſition of the reſt, if not wholly remove them.

5. The Biſhops themſelves take Liberty to omit one Ornament impoſed on them to be uſed: namely, the Paſtoral Staff, which in the ſame place of the Book of 2. Edw. 6. he is enjoyned to have in his hand, or to have it born by his Chaplain; and this is not left Arbitrary, as the Rites laſt before named, are: yet the Biſhops herein can diſpenſe for themſelves: is there not reaſon then to diſpenſe with Miniſters in the reſt?

Having thus pleaded the neceſſity of Reformation in Rites and Ceremonies (but eſpecially of providing againſt the Impoſition of any of them) in general; we ſhall not enter into any debate of the particulars: for, of that there is no need in this place. But, becauſe we are ſubject to be upbraided, that many of us have both ſubſcribed to uſe all thoſe, contained in the Liturgy; and, ſome of us have accordingly uſed them: and that therefore we are Revolters from our Subſcription, and thereby lyable to the penalty of Excommunication, by the ſixth Canon: It behoves us to make this Apology for our ſelves. 1. That albeit ſome of us have unadviſedly ſubſcribed to uſe them, and perhaps have uſed them ſometimes; yet finding that many ſober Chriſtians are ſcandalized at them, we hold our ſelves bound to imitate the Apoſtle; and, what he did in the Caſe of meat (which he held to be lawful) we muſt do, in the Caſe of Ceremonies; to uſe them no more while the world ſtandeth, rather then make our brother to offend. 2. As to the danger incurred thereby, we muſt not ſo much ſtand upon that, as to chuſe iniquity rather then affliction. 3. And as touching the validity and force of the Canon, we fear it not, it being void in Law: of which we ſhall ſpeak more under the head of Diſcipline.