A Modest and Clear Answer to Mr Balls Set Forms of Prayer, Tract · Chapter 1
CHAP. I. The State of the Queſtion.
FOr ſtating of the Queſtion, you give ſix Rules, of which I will only touch ſo many, as do more neerly touch upon the Cauſe.
In your firſt Rule you ſay, it is not a Prayer, as penned, or printed, but as rehearſed, with underſtanding, feeling of wants, humility, confidence.
Anſw. Nor is it a prayer as rehearſed, though rehearſed with underſtanding, feeling of wants, humility, confidence, unleſſe a man therein powre out his own deſires unto God; for I may read and rehearſe a printed Prayer (ſay one of Davids propheticall prayers againſt the enemies of the Church) yea, I may read it with underſtanding, with feeling of the wants of ſuch a mercy, and alſo with humility, (in conſcience of the Churches unworthineſſe of ſuch a mercy, and with confidence that God will do for the Church now, as David prayed then, &c. Yet this will not be my prayer, unleſſe I put up mine own deſires in it: but about this there is no queſtion.
Anſw. 2. Though it be not a prayer, as penned or printed, yet is a means, and help and form of prayer, which either muſt find a warrant from the Word, or fall under the breach of the ſecond Commandement.
In the ſecond Rule you ſay, the controverſie is not of this or that preſcript form of Prayer in particular, much leſſe of one for ſubſtance of matter, faulty and erronious: But of a preſcript form of prayer in generall, whether it be lawfull to uſe any ſet form of prayer at all, though for the matter thereof never ſo ſound and allowable.
Anſw. But ſo to put the State of the Queſtion, is indeed, to leade your ſelf and others into temptations: for if it may be once obtained: that ſome preſcript form is lawfull in the Generall, this in the Theory will ſtraight be reduced to this practice, to perſwade men to joyn in ſuch a preſcript form of prayer as is juſtly liable to manifold exceptions, both for matter and manner.
If ſuch as were compelled to worſhip the Lord before the golden Calves at Dan and Bethel, ſhould put the ſtate of the Queſtion, not of ſuch particular Calves, but of Calves, or Cherubims in generall (for one form of Cherubims were like Calves) whether it be not lawfull to worſhip the Lord before any Cherubims at all? It may be eaſily conceived, what the iſſue would be, the Queſtion admitteth the lawfulneſſe of ſome Cherubims in Generall (which is out of queſtion.) The practice will conclude the lawfulneſſe of Jeroboams Calves in particular; which was the ſin which made Iſrael to ſin.
2. Your fift Rule acknowledgeth that neither Chriſt nor his Apoſtles, preſcribed any ſet form of prayer, and therefore that no preſcript form of prayer of Lyturgie is ſimply neceſſary.
Anſw. But this argueth not only no neceſſity of preſcript forms, but alſo no expediency thereof to the edification of the Church, unleſſe it might be preſumed that there is ſome help or means of Gods worſhip expedient to the edification of the Church, which never came into the heart of Chriſt and of his Apoſtles to commend unto the Church.
In your ſixt Rule you profeſſe, you never held it lawfull, to tye any mans ſelfe, or to be tyed alwayes to a ſet form of Prayer: as knowing that our requeſts are to be framed according to the preſent neceſſity and occaſion.
Anſw. But by the ſame reaſon, neither will it be lawfull to be tyed at any time to an ordinary uſe of any ſet form of prayer at all: for there is no change of time wherein the Church hath not ſome ſpeciall occaſion to change their Petitions, either by adding ſome Petitions more than formerly were needfull, or by taking away ſome Petitions which were formerly needfull (it may be at the laſt meeting) which are not needfull now: And look upon what grounds it may be lawfull to tye others, or to be tyed by them, to a ſet forme to day, upon the ſame grounds it will be as lawfull to tye them, and to be tyed by them to morrow, the next Saboth as well as this, and the third Saboth as well as both, and all Saboths as well as ſome.
If tying to ſet forms be lawfull, and thought expedient, for uniformity in Gods worſhip one day; the ſame uniformity is as expedient to be attended to in every Saboth, as in one: or if tying to ſet forms be requiſite to ſupply the defects of the gifts of ignorant Miniſters, then thereby a cloak is made for the covering and ſheltering of ignorant Miniſters: who had more need to be ſhouldred ſpeedily out of the Church, than to be ſheltered therein one day to an end. And beſides, if ſuch ſet forms be preſcribed for the ſuccour of ignorant Miniſters, then ſuch Miniſters as have received the gift of prayer, have no need at any time, nor uſe of preſcribed and ſet forms of prayer at all.
Object. And if it be ſaid that it is not intended, to make it lawfull at any time, to tye or to be tyed to a ſet form of Prayer, ſo as to offer up no more, nor fewer Petitions than what are preſcribed in the Book, but only to warrant the lawfullneſſe of ſome ſet forms of Prayer for ſome occaſions.
Anſw. It may be juſtly demanded, whether the ſame authority which tyeth to a ſet form of prayer, for ſuch or ſuch occaſions, may not as well tye to a ſet form of prayer for all other occaſions, and if authority may tye the Church to any ſet form of prayer upon any occaſion, whether may not the ſame Authority by the ſame Rule, forbid all other forms of prayers beſides upon the ſame occaſion.
Diſc. In Brief (ſay you) the controverſie is, whether it be not lawfull to read a Prayer upon a book, or to make our deſires known in a ſet form of words, when the things we beg, are allowable, fit, and neceſſary, and when it is done with underſtanding, feeling of our wants, faith in Gods promiſes, and reverence of his Majeſty.
Which Queſtion you ſpread forth into three branches.
Whether it be lawfull in private to uſe a ſet form of prayer, or upon any occaſion to read as prayer, a prayer upon a Book.
Whether a ſet form of prayer ſound, and pertinent, for the ſubſtance of the matter, grave and ſimple for the order and manner, not prejudiſing, abridging, or hindering by the length thereof, the preaching of the Word; may in any ſort be tollerated in the Church, or read by the Miniſter in the publique Congregation.
In caſe it ſhould be unlawfull for the Miniſter or the Maſter of the Family to read a preſcript form of prayer, yet whether it ſhould be unlawfull to be preſent at ſuch aſſemblies.
Your Aſſertion is, that a ſtinted form of prayer is lawfull to be uſed both in publique and private, &c. And though it ſhould be ſin in the Miniſter or in the Governour of the family, yet may the people in the Congregation, and the inferiour in the family be preſent at ſuch prayers without ſin or ſcruple of conſcience?
Anſw. How far we go along with you in the Queſtion thus ſtated and where we ſtick, may be expreſſed in theſe particulars.
Firſt, We grant, a Chriſtian man whether Miniſter, or of private place, may by the gift of prayer which he hath received, compile to himſelf a ſet form of prayer, and may uſe the ſame for his prayer, whether in publique or private according to his place: yet ſo, as not to limit himſelf to thoſe words: ſeeing he knoweth not what further occaſion may be given him of inlarging his Petitions, by new occurrences of matters from Gods providence, and by the inlargement of the help of Gods Spirit: nor ſo to limit himſelfe as to ſtick long in any ſet form of prayer leaſt it turn into a cuſtomary, and empty form, contrary to the watchfullneſſe unto Prayer, which muſt be Religiouſly kept of all growing Chriſtians.
2. A man may give unto another holy directions, and rules for Prayer, and may alſo ſet down ſome forms of prayer as examples of ſuch rules, but not to preſcribe them as ſet forms to them, to be uſed by them for their Prayers.
3. A man that readeth a form of Prayer in a Book, may be ſo affected with it, as in the deſires of his heart to go along with it, and to uſe it for his preſent prayer, as it may thus fall out in reading one of Calvins prayers, printed after his Lectures, or ſuch other like.
4. We deny not, but a man that is affected with ſome Petitions in a Prayer deviſed by others, he may lawfully make uſe of them, and interſert them ordinarily into his own Prayers; But not to take up an intire form of Prayer deviſed by another, and to make it his own ordinary form of Prayer.
5. We grant Magiſtrates or other Chriſtians may commend ſome Heads or Petitions to the Church according to the preſent ſtate of things (which the Church as they ſee fit) may preſent and commend to God in their Prayers.
Thus far we conſent, but farther we cannot go, but do rather conceive it to be unlawfull.
1. To ſet a part, and take up a ſet form of Prayer, and to uſe it as an ordinary prayer, that which is deviſed by others, whom God hath not called to be a mouth to me.
2. We conceive it alſo to be unlawfull to bring in ordinarily any other Books, into the publique worſhip of God, in the Church, beſides the Book of God, and therefore do ſee no more warrant to read out of a Prayer Book, the publique Prayers of a Church: then out of a book of Homilyes to read the publique Sermons of the Miniſters of the Church.
3. We account it alike (if not more unlawfull) for Anceſtors to preſcribe or injoyn ſet forms of Prayers to their poſterity, or for one Church to preſcribe ſet forms of Prayer unto another.
4. We hold it in like manner unlawfull, for one Church to receive ſuch ſet forms of Prayer from another, and to uſe them for their own Prayers.
5. We take it to be unlawfull alſo, for the people of God to joyn in ſuch prayers, which are ſo diviſed and preſcribed to be read unto them, and to be offered up in their names, as their prayers.
To apply theſe things more punctually to the particular branches of the Queſtion, as they are propoſed, and ſtated by you.
For your firſt branch, we do not make it a controverſie, whether it be lawfull to make known our deſires in a ſet form of words, in ſuch ſence as we granted above in our firſt point of conſent: nor do we hold it unlawfull to read a prayer upon a book and therein to expreſſe our deſires in ſuch ſort as we granted in our third point of conſent.
But nevertheleſſe, we do not diſcern it to be lawfull no not in private to uſe ordinarily a ſet form of prayer deviſed by others, nor to read ſuch a prayer out of a book, for the ordinary prayer of a mans ſelf much leſſe of his Family.
For your ſecond Branch, though we neither deny the uſe of ſet form in private, nor in publique, ſo it be compiled by a mans own giſts, or by thoſe whom God calleth to be his mouth.
Yet we dare not allow the reading of a ſet form of publique prayer out of a Book penned for the purpoſe, and thoſe prayers compiled by the members of one Congregation and impoſed upon others.
3. For your third Branch, we for our parts cannot juſtifie it to be lawfull for to be preſent, either in the family or in the congregation where, and when ſuch preſcript forms are read for the prayers of the company, as to joyn with them, or to ſeem to joyn with them in ſuch worſhip.
But proceed we now to conſider the weight of the Reaſons which you give for your judgement and practice.