Of Liturgies Power of the Keys, Chapter 2
CHAP. II.
Qu. 1. That a ſtinted Forme of Prayer and ſet Liturgie i… unlawfull.
Reply. THis Poſition cannot beare that meaning which you give it, if you take it according to our minds, and the plaine conſtruction of the words. We never queſtioned why you made not uſe of a Liturgie, &c.
Anſw. Let our Anſwer bee viewed, and it will appeare that wee had juſt cauſe to premiſe thoſe diſtinctions of Formes of Prayer into private and publike; and publike into ſuch as are impoſed by others, or compoſed and uſed by Miniſters themſelves before their Sermons; otherwiſe we muſt have involved ſuch in the Poſition, as wee doe not condemn. Now if your generall theſis juſtly admit ſuch limitation to publike impoſed Formes, where ſhall wee finde any ſet ſtinted impoſed Liturgies, but in Churches of the Papacy or Prelacy? no Reformed Churches ſtinting or impoſing their Formes of Prayer, but leaving Miniſters and people at much liberty. OnelyOnly the Engliſh Liturgy therefore is ſuch, according to the plaine conſtruction of the words.
2 Concerning your minds in the Poſition, wee deny not but you might intend to draw from us an approbation of ſtinted Liturgies in generall, that ſo you might have to ſtay the ſeparation of people from your Liturgy, whereof you complaine: but by that it appeares plainly, what your chiefe ſcope and ayme was in the Poſition: according unto which wee thought it moſt ſafe and pertinent for us to anſwer. And this wee did the rather, for our reaſon mentioned in our letter, becauſe though all of us could not concurre to condemne all ſet Formes as unlawfull, yet wee could in this, viz. that though ſome ſet Forms may bee lawfull, yet it will not follow, that this of the Engliſh Liturgy is, therefore to remove all obſcurities, and breake all ſnares, and reſolve the queſtion in the true intent of it, wee were forced to diſtinguiſh of Formes, and ſo touch the true Helena of this controverſie; and therefore if any ſhall narrowly obſerve Mr. Ball his large defence of ſet Forms in generall, they ſhall finde thoſe wings ſpread forth in a very great breadth, to give ſome ſhelter and warmth to that particular Liturgie, then languiſhing, and haſtening (through age and feebleneſſe) towards its laſt end.
Reply. It is true, people ſeparate from our Liturgie, becauſe ſtinted, not becauſe this, or that, or ours in particular.
Anſw. If becauſe it's ſtinted, then becauſe yours, for we know none properly ſuch, but yours, and it may well bee one offence to all godly conſciences, that yours are ſo impoſed and ſtinted as they bee: though it is hardly credible to us, (ſo farre as our obſervation reach) that the main cauſes of the godly withdrawing from your Liturgy, ſhould be the ſtinting of it, when ſo many corruptions in Matter and Forme have been objected againſt it, by the beſt godly Reformers. And ſeeing the ſame perſons will joyne with Prayers of godly Preachers, though they uſe the ſame forme of prayer uſually, and ſo in a large ſenſe freely ſtinting themſelves thereto, though not properly in ſuch ſenſe as your Liturgy is ſtinted.
Reply. But ſay you, ſuch ſet Formes uſed by Preachers are diſliked alſo, and your reaſons, eſpecially the two laſt, why you admit not a ſtinted Liturgie, conclude againſt both in our underſtanding.
Anſw. Wee deny not but ſome may diſlike the conſtant uſe of ſuch Formes, eſpecially when ſtudiouſly framed with elegancy of phraſes, and as the manner of ſome is; but doe any we now ſpeak of, condemne all uſe thereof? or withdraw from them that uſe them? which is now the caſe in hand: For our parts, wee neither know ſuch men; or if we did, we ſhould condemn ſuch minds. As for our Reaſons in generall, or the two laſt you mention in particular, it paſſeth our underſtanding to conceive, how any ſuch inference can bee made; if the Reply had formed the inferences from our arguments, it may bee wee ſhould have ſeene more by the helpe of ſuch ſpectacles. But paſſing over what we ſay to the Poſition, as we interpret it, you think fit to advertiſe us of ſome things, which are …ix.
Reply. Advert. 1. Your reaſons why you accept not a ſtinted Liturgie, are ambiguouſly propounded, and ſo, that ſuch as looke at ſtinted Liturgies as images, forbidden Command. 2. may eaſily draw your words to their meaning.
Anſw. If our Reaſons themſelves being ſound, and unanſwered by you, contain any thing that may be drawn to ſuch a Poſition; that cannot ariſe from the ambiguouſneſſe of words which are plaine, but from their abuſe who miſ-apply them.
Reply. Advert. 2. The Reaſons you bring againſt a ſet forme of Prayer, doe hold as ſtrong againſt a ſet forme of Catechiſme, confeſſion and profeſſion of faith, bleſſing, baptizing, and ſinging of Pſalmes.
Anſw. 1 Concerning forms of Catechiſmes, and confeſſions of Faith, if religiouſly and perſpicuouſly framed, wee account them of ſingular uſe, (though abuſed by men) nor without ſome ſacred allowance: yet from hence to infer the like uſe of ſet Formes of prayers, neither our reaſons, nor any other will in force: for Catechiſmes and Confeſſions (as well as Pſalmes) in the nature of the thing, require in ſome ſenſe a ſet and limited Forme; but publike prayers, though they may admit of a ſet and comely order in the generall, to prevent errour; yet of their owne nature they require no ſet Forme; for God gives us no new matter or doctrine daily to be beleeved, but he gives new matter of new affection in prayer daily.
2 If by ſet Forms of Catechiſmes and Confeſſions, bee meant (according to the termes of the Queſtion) ſtinted Formes, like ſtinted Liturgies, i. e. beyond, or ſhort of which, Miniſters may not teach, or Chriſtians beleeve and profeſſe, then wee ſhould ſay the ſame of theſe as wee doe of ſtinted Formes of Prayer; wee confeſſe there is danger in caſting by all Formes of Confeſſions and Catechiſmes, leſt through the inſtability of ungrounded and heady men, pretending new light, or ſearching after further light, the Churches adhere to nothing: and their Faith (as the learned Leyden Profeſſors terme it) become fides h…raria, or menſtrua, The faith of an houre or monethmonth, and then caſt it off the next. And on the other ſide there is danger, that by impoſing ſuch Confeſſions too far, that which is indeed further light be ſuppreſt; wee therefore thinke it uſefull and needfull to pave out ſuch high wayes of Catechiſmes and Confeſſions, ſo as the ſubjects of Chriſt Jeſus our King and Law-giver may walke therein without ſhackles, reſerving liberty for further future light, in points leſſe cleare, yet ſtanding in a readineſſe alwayes to confeſſe and hold faſt the preſent truth which appeares moſt cleare.
3 Concerning Forms of bleſſing, baptizing, ſinging Scripture Pſalmes, there is a far differing reaſon from this caſe, for the Lord himſelfe hath left us Formes in theſe caſes, not onelyonly for inſtruction, but allowing the uſe of the ſame, as Numb. 6. 23, &c. Luke 10. 5. Matth. 28. 20. 2 Chron. 29. 30. and therefore ſuch may bee uſed as hee hath left; yet the Lord hath not impoſed (ſome of theſe at leaſt) to bee uſed alwayes and onelyonly in his Churches, much leſſe doth hee allow any man to impoſe their own Forms upon his Churches, or conforme to ſuch as are tyrannouſly impoſed.
Reply. Third Advert. We have not called you at this time to witneſſe for, or againſt the corruptions of the Common-prayer-book, this you fall upon by ſtraining the ſenſe of our demands.
Anſw. Wee have ſpoken to this before, and we thinke whatſoever your intent and deſire was, yet the nature of the thing, and the caſe it ſelfe gave us a juſt call to teſtifie againſt it, eſpecially ſeeing the corruptions then increaſed in England, and the impoſitions were more rigid and violent.
Reply. The reaſons you bring againſt the Communion-booke, wee cannot approve them all; the exceptions againſt it wee know, but to eſteem the whole for ſome corruptions found therein a Monument of Idolatry, that we have not learned.
Anſw. The Anſwer calls it not a Monument of Idolatry for ſome corruptions onelyonly found in it, though the corruptions in matter and manner, bee objected as the firſt reaſon why wee uſed it not; but being never commanded of God, greatly abuſed unto Idolatry and ſuperſtition, and o… no neceſſary uſe, the ſame that was in Popery for ſubſtance, which are the uſuall arguments for aboliſhing Images, Ceremonies, and all Monuments of Idolatry; and wee marvaile how any could paſſe over theſe things in the Anſwer which might evince it to bee a Monument of Idolatry, as the argument of the Abridgement to which we referred, doth prove.
Reply. The argument in the Abridgement uſed againſt conformity to the Ceremonies, did not in the judgement of the Authors bold againſt the Liturgie, of which judgement we are.
Anſw. It matters not whether they ſaw ſo far, and ſo judged, if indeed the reaſon and nature of Ceremonies, and the book be the ſame; for the firſt Reformers thought their arguments ſtrong againſt oyle, creame, and ſpittle, &c. in Baptiſme, but ſaw not that they would hold againſt the Croſſe, Surplice, &c. as well; yet we doubt not but the Reverend Author did judge of all in the ſame manner; and ſo it is in this caſe.
Reply. Advert. 4. If theſe reaſons bee intended onelyonly to ſhew why you receive not our forme of adminiſtration, it is that which wee are perſwaded you know we never required of you, if to diſallow the uſe of the Book amongst us altogether in things lawfull, good, and pertinent, they will not hold weight.
Anſw. 1 Wee were told in the firſt Epiſtle of our Reverend and deare Brethren, that whiles wee lived in England, wee joyned in the ſame Ordinances and purity of worſhip, and therefore wee might have ſome juſt cauſe to cleare up our differing practiſe from diſuſing that forme of Adminiſtration there, conſidering that our differing practiſe might occaſion others to rend off from your Adminiſtrations there, whereof you complain.
2 We doubt not but in the Popiſh Forms of Maſſe, Matten, and Evenſong, &c. ſome things lawfull, good, and pertinent may bee found, yet would not the godly allow theſe very reaſons wee alledge in the Anſwer ſufficient to refuſe the whole Forme, and ſo thoſe good and lawfull things in that Forme? as that they are deviſed by men, without the command of God, impoſed by an Antichriſtian power, abuſed to Idolatry and Superſtition, wherein the people place much holineſſe, and neceſſity, full of ſcandall, &c. and if theſe Reaſons do not hold againſt this Forme in the Communion booke, the Reply ſhould have acquited it from them: or elſe the conſequence muſt bee yeelded in this caſe, as in the other, notwithſtanding all the good and pertinent things therein. John Sim…ſon, and John Ardly Martyrs in Q. Maries dayes, and faithfull Witneſſes, made anſwer to the ſixt article of Bonner, concerning the Maſſe, that 'tis of the Pope, not of Chriſt, and therefore not good, not having in it any goodneſſe, ſaving Gloria in excelſis, the Epiſtles and Goſpels, the Creed and Pater Noſter; and for this cauſe (they ſaid) they have not, nor will not come to heare Maſſe: the ſame anſwer was made by ſix more in thoſe dayes, mentioned by Mr. Fox. If therefore corrupt Formes may bee uſed becauſe of ſome things good and lawfull mixt with them, there ſhould have been ſhewn us ſome proofe for it, but if the meaning bee, that there may bee a lawfull uſe of thoſe things which are lawfull and good in it: wee ſay ſo too, (due circumſtances of their uſe being obſerved) but then wee fall off from the queſtion between us; otherwiſe wee know that things lawfull and good in themſelves, yet (not duly circumſtantiated) may be evill and ſcandalous in their uſe. Heare what Paul ſaith, it was lawfull for Paul to eate ſome kindes of meat, yet if it maketh my brother offend, I will eate no fleſh whiles the world ſtandeth, 1 Cor. 8. 13. Heare what the Authors of the ſecond admonition to the Parliament ſay, in Queen Elizabeths dayes, the Booke of Commonprayer, which of all others muſt not bee touched, becauſe they have gotten the State to beare it out, yet hee hath but a bad conſcience, that in this time will hold his peace, and not ſpeake it for feare of trouble; knowing that there are ſuch intolerable abuſes in it: if there were never an ill word or ſentence in all the Prayers, yet to appoint it to bee uſed, or to uſe it, as the Papiſts did their Mattens and Evenſong, as a fit ſervice to God, though the words bee good, yet the uſe is naught. But if this ſeem too ſharpe, heare what—a late godly and learnedG. Apol. cap. 7. Q. 2. Writer ſpeakes, Rejicimus ill as precum, cultuſque publici formulas, quae tyrannide quâdam, conſcientiis hominum, ut …ultus divini partes eſſentiales impo…ntur; quamvis quoad materiam ſunt legitime diſpoſitae, quoad formam & modum tamen quo inducuntur, illegitima crudelit…tis inſtrumenta fiunt, & praetextus improbae malitiae & occaſiones violentae tyrannidis in digniſſimos & optimos Eccleſiae filios.
Reply. Advert. 5. You are generally (you ſay) loath to meddle with the affaires of other Churches, unleſſe neceſſarily called thereunto: but when ſome upon requeſt (as we ſuppoſe) of private friends, and others out of their zeal and forwardneſſe have laboured to draw many to ſeparate from the ſacrament, becauſe miniſtred in a ſtinted Liturgie, wee cannot apprehend any juſt ground of this Apologie; the rent is wide, and ſome brethren bad their hands deep therein, which made u… crave your judgements and the reaſons thereof, to make up the breach.
Anſw. 1 What you impute to ſome, if juſtly, wee grant will not allow this apologie to bee generall for all; but how many that ſome is, or who we know not, it may bee one or two; and if ſo, one or two exceptions will not much infringe a generall rule, nor hinder this generall apology.
2 If ſuch brethren had a neceſſary Call to ſpeake or write what they did, it hindreth not our apologie at all: the deſire of private friends, which you onelyonly ſuppoſe the moving cauſe, might bee very weighty, the ſatisfying of tender conſciences of neare friends, or ſuch as once depended upon our Miniſtery, in ſuch a time of preſſing humane inventions upon men, as that was; might bee a very urgent call to interpoſe: but that any have endeavoured out of zeale to draw many to ſeparation from the Sacrament, upon ſuch a ground as you ſay; as we utterly diſlike ſuch fire upon the top of the houſe, ſo it muſt be proved, before we can call to minde or acknowledge any ſuch thing.
Reply. Advert. 6. J. D. object to Mr. P. that his manner of preaching (proceeding it ſhould be) was diſorderly, in carrying to the Claſſis a matter, before hee had declared it to the Church, &c. and may not we with like reaſon object that this manner of proceeding is diſorderly, in ſeeking to draw men to ſeparation, becauſe of a ſtinted Liturgie, before you had ſhewed us or other Brethren, whom it may concren, by Scripture, or reaſons that a stinted Liturgie is unlawfull?
Anſw. What J. D. objects, wee cannot tell, ſeeing you neither quote the place, nor the Printer give us his words in any way to make ſenſe; but ſo far as we gueſſe at the meaning, the caſe is very wide from this in hand. J. D. might juſtly complaine of wrong offered to him and the Church, in neglecting them, to goe immediately to the Claſſis, and yet ſome of our Brethren, at the requeſts of tender conſciences, might declare their judgement, when no rule called them to write to their Paſtors, which perhaps, were bitter perſecutors, or if better, yet ſuch as they had no knowledge of; and if any by ſuch writings did abſtaine from the ſacrament for ſuch corruptions, as their conſciences would be defiled with, no hinderance from us was in the way, but that you might call them to account before the Church, and convince and cenſure them, if there were juſt cauſe; which was the objection againſt Mr. P. in flying preſently to the Claſſis.