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 [Page 7]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 [Page 9]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 [Page 10]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, [Page 11]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 [Page 12]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.

CHAP. II. Wherein your first Reason is propounded and considered.

THat Form of prayer (say you) is just and lawfull wherein all things essentiall to prayer, and necessa­rily required in the Word of God may be observed:

But all things essentiall to prayer, and necessarily re­quired in the Word of God may be observed in read pray­er, or in a prescript forme; what is required in holy prayer, more then that the matter be allowable and fit, the manner holy, reverend, faithfull, your hearts laid open, and petitions forced with as strong, or stronger Reasons than we are able of our selves to presse them with all; and may not a prayer holy and fit for the mat­ter [Page 14]thereof be read with knowledge, feeling of our wants, earnestnesse of our desires, holinesse of our affe­ction, and faith in Gods promises.

Answ. There is more required to a faithfull holy prayer, then allowable and fit matter, and ho­ly inward manner, in the good affections of the heart, for an outward holy manner is required likewise, else a man might pray to God allowable and fit petitions before an Image; and I deny not, but that God may sometimes assist a man in such a prayer with holy manner of inward gracious affe­ctions: as for instance, holy Bilney might find his heart warmed in prayer to Christ, when he look'd at him as really present in the Sacrament, or else he would never have called so zealously on the people to turn all that adoration of dead Images to the adoration of Christ in the blessed Sacra­ment; neverthelesse such a prayer was unlawfull, through a defect in the outward manner of it: an outward means being called in for help in prayer, which God had not sanctified for that end.

Let me give you another instance, when the Co­rinthians prayed in the Church publiquely, in the Spirit, but withall in a strange tongue, their pray­er wanted not allowable and fit matter, nor holy inward manner (for they prayed in the spirit) yet the prayer was unlawfull through defect of an outward holy manner, because it being put up in a strange tongue before others, did not tend to the edification of others: In the case in hand, though prayer upon a Book prescribed by the authority of man may sometimes be furnished with allow­able and fit matter, and sometimes uttered with inward holy affections; yet still it will be unlaw­full [Page 15]through the defect of an outward holy man­ner. If such a prescribed book be found (as we conceive it will) an Image or help to prayer, de­vised by men, but not ordained by God, and so no better than an Image forbidden in the second Commandement.

Disc. In reading the Scriptures, the eye doth lead the heart, and yet it may be read with judgement, reve­rence, meeknesse, joy, and why may not the like affe­ctions be moved in read prayer?

Answ. Reading of Scriptures is an Ordinance of God, and not an Image or imagination of man; and therefore God not only may assist and blesse the reading of the Scriptures, with inward good affections, but is usually wonted so to do in an honest and good heart, as delighting to breath in his own Ordinances: If it could be proved, that the reading of a prescript form of prayer upon a Book were an Ordinance of God sanctified for the edification of the Church (as the reading of the Scriptures is) we might ordinarily expect the like assistance and blessing in reading of the one as well as of the other; the comparison would be more suitable, if instead of reading the Scriptures, were put the reading of Sermons and Homilies in the Church, for which we find as little warrant as for reading of Prayers; nor can we expect a grea­ter blessing upon the one then upon the other; we do not deny that read prayer may lead and affect the heart, as may a Sermon read at home: But then neither is such a read prayer prescribed by others, nor set a part by me as my prayer; no more than the reading of such a Sermon is my preaching: which is not because the heart and [Page 16]the eye are at variance in such a case (as your dis­course speaketh) but because God doth not ordi­narily delight to blesse the heart with gracious affections, when the eyes go a whoring after the imaginations and inventions of men.

Disc. Asaph and his Brethren could praise God in a form of words, set down by the Prophet David; and if a set form of words may be allowed in thanksgiving (which is one part of prayer) it cannot be condemned in petitions.

Answ. We do not deny a set-form either of Petition or of thanks-giving appointed by God, either to be read or sung, but we deny that God hath allowed either the ordinary officers in his Church (whether Priests or Levites in the old Testa­ment, or Pastors and Teachers in the new) to ap­point such forms of read prayers for the Church, or the Church to take up such forms of read pray­ers from them; God that hath forbidden us to make any graven Image to our selves, hath not forbid­den or limited himself to devise and prescribe what forms of worship himself shall see good for our use; the pains which are taken to paralell petitions and thanksgiving might have been spared; we neither refuse the forms of the one, nor of the other, such as are commended to us of God in his Word; the eye doth not hinder the affection of the heart in reading such things as God hath appointed to be read; he that giveth the Word to be read, can give the affections to read it withall, and hath promised so to do, which the sons of men that give us prescript forms of prayer to be read can­not doe.

Disc. Whatsoever hath the true matter and form of prayer, is truly and properly prayer; but a pre­script form of prayer, sound, and fit for matter; grave for manner of penning, read as prayer with know­ledge, faith, reverence and fervency of affection, hath the true matter and form of prayer.

Answ. The Argument doth not conclude the Question in hand; we might grant the con­clusion without prejudice to the cause, for a prescript form of prayer may have the true matter, and essential form of prayer, and so be (for substance) truly and properly a prayer, and yet not every way an acceptable and law­full worship of God, through defect of some circumstances which may pertain to externall forme; Baptisme may be properly and truly baptisme, as wanting neither true matter nor form, when it is dispenced by a Minister of the Gospel to a believer or his seed by the dipping or sprinkling of water upon him, In the name of the Father, the Sonne and the Holy Ghost, and yet not every way a lawfull worship of God, if it be administred in an outward form corrupted with the devises of men: as with Salt, Cream, Spittle, Crosse, and the like; so is the case here; aprescript form of prayer may consist of law­full fit petitions, and be delivered with a faith­full holy humble spirit, and so be truly and properly prayer, and yet fall short of some rule requisite to be attended to make it a lawfull worship of God, to wit, if it be offered to God in a strange Tongue or before an Image, or by the help of an Image; such as we conceive a [Page 18]prescript form of words to be injoyned and im­posed, to be read upon a book for the Prayers of the Church.

Answ. 2. If by Matter and Form be meant not only Internall and Essential forme; but exter­nall also. Then we deny that a prescript form of prayer injoyned to be read upon a Book, is a lawfull externall form of prayer; no more than a prescript form of Homilies is a law­full externall form of preaching; These Answers seem to us sufficient and unavoid­able, and we rest in them; but the other Answers which are alledged by you in your Discourse, and much and often beaten up­on you, though it was delivered by one, whose works praise him in the gates, throughout all the Churches of the Saints: yet we do not in­sist upon it, as not willing to turn aside to un­necessary disputes, stinted set forms we do not look at, as lawfull to them that need them; but unlawfull to them that need them not: For though there be a good use of the distinction in this case (as we shall see anon) yet not in this case, where the necessity ariseth not from Gods Commandement, but from the sinfull defect of the Creature, for supply whereof God hath ordained sufficient help other wayes.

But yet in reply which you make to the An­swer, you give a distinction liable to the same exception which your self take against that Answer: For that Answer consisting of a di­stinction of arbitrary and necessary help.

Your Discourse rejecteth it as a distinction not grounded upon the Word of God, which in Divinity is (as you say) an unwritten tradition; and is this distinction of your own any better?

Helps say you and surtherances in Gods Service, are of two sorts, some in nature and use, the same with the true worship of God, instituted by his highnesse, and these are unlawfull, because they are devised; and others concern the Method, Phrase of Speech, outward manner of celebration, onely as meer circum­stances, and these are not forbidden.

A distinction ungrounded upon the Word, & so no better that an unwritten tradition, and withall, both the parts imply a fals-hood; for a prayer which a Minister deviseth for his own, and his peoples use, before the Sermon, is in na­ture and use the same with the true worship of God instituted by his highnesse; yet it is not unlawfull because it is devised, for it is devised by him, who is called of God to devise and in­dite it, as David did, Psal. 45. v. 1. and all the rest, and that by help of the Spirit of prayer: again, on the other part, a prescribed Homilie doth conserve the method, phrase of speech, outward manner of celebration, only as a meer circumstance; yet no Word of God ever al­lowed it to be read for the publick preaching of the Word unto the people.

It is true which the Discourse speaketh of the Method of Sermons, devised or studied by such as Preach them, there may be some liberty, whe­ther to preach by doctrine, reason and use, or some other way; the like may be said of forms [Page 20]of Chatechismes, Blessings, and Baptismes: But the reason of this liberty is because we find in Scripture severall forms of all these, and there­fore we limit or prescribe no set forms to any; Pauls Epistle to the Romans is carried along by Doctrine, reasons and uses, and so are sundry more of his Epistles. But Christs Sermon on the Mount, is carried in another Method: The A­postles Catechise is of one form, Heb. 6.1, 2. Davids of another, Psal. 34.11, 12, 13, 14. The Priests Bles­sings, were of one form, Numb. 6.23. to 26. The Apostles Blessings of another. 2 Cor. 12.13.2 Thes. 3.17, 18. Heb. 13.20, 21. Jude 24.25. The forms of baptizing did also sometimes vary, some using the words of our Saviour, Math. 28.19. Others ano­ther form of words, Acts 19.5. The thing is this, where God hath used variety of forms, he lea­veth us at liberty to use that one form or the other; But to gather a liberty to prescribe and limit a set form of any of these, where God hath not limited; is to pervert and abuse the pow­er of the keyes of Christs Kingdome: to wit, to bind where Christ looseth, but your Objection is (as you say) answered by others, and that more safely.

Disc. That mens inventions in the service of God are forbidden in the second Commandement: But Book Prayer is an Invention of men?

To this your Discourse replyeth by retorting upon a former Answer, which we said afore, we did not make use of in this case.

You reply again the Objection it self is of no weight, for by this reason all set forms of Cate­chismes, [Page 21]studied Sermons, Interpretations of Scripture, divisions of it into Sections and Chap­ters, reading one part this week, and another the next, conceived prayer it self may be dis­allowed.

Answ. Touching set forms of Catechisme, we do willingly approve diligent attendance to the Catechising of youth, and Novices in any form tending to Edification; but to devise and prescribe a set form of words, wherein all the Questions and Answers shall run, and no other; we know no warrant for that from Scripture, if God would have his people limited to a set form of words in catechizing: he would him­self have prescribed some set form of his own inspiration, which might be defective in no principles, nor incommodious in any expressi­on.

2. What though there might be some colour to put a set form of words of catechisme into the mouths of Children and Novices, the better to help their memory and capacities; will it therefore argue it to be a reasonable service of God, to put a set form of words and prayers, in­to the mouths of Ministers to help their memo­ries and capacities, in powring out their own and the Churches Petitions unto God.

Studied Sermons are of another nature, it is an Ordinance of God that Sermons should be studied, before preached; Jude made it his whole study, [...] to write his Epistle, Jude 3. How much more ought we to make it our whole study to preach: who are not so [Page 22]immediately inspired. Solomon gave good heed and sought out to find, and set in order fit words and matter for the edification of the people, Eccles. 12.9, 10. and behold lesse than Solomon are Ministers here, though in respect of the cleer discerning the Mysteries of Christ, The least in the Kingdom of God is greater than he. Ti­monthy is exhorted to give attendance to read­ing, Meditation, Doctrine, to meditate there­on, to give himself wholly to them, that his profiting might appear to all: That he might shew himself approved unto God, A work­man that needeth not to be ashamed, 1 Tim. 4.13, 14, 15. with 2 Tim. 2.15. But give me leave to speak without offence: You seem to me in this point to take too much liberty, in a serious cause to play upon equivocation: It is true, in studying a Sermon the Preacher useth his In­vention and Judgement; and in that sence his Sermon may be called mans Invention: But you are not ignorant, we speak in this cause of such inventions of men, as God hath given neither Commandement nor direction for in his Word; In which sence a studied Sermon is no more a mans Invention, than a studied an­swer, which Solomon commendeth as a path of the Righteous, Prov: 15.28. The like may be said of the next instance, which is, Interpretati­on of Scriptures, as also, a conceived Prayer: In­terpretation of Scripture is from a spiritual gift, which God hath given, and commanded to be used for the edification of his Church, 1 Cor. 14.26. Nehem. 8.8. So is Prayer conceived from a [Page 23]spirit and gift of prayer, which is to be used al­so and attended to, as a principall part of the Ministeriall office, 1 Cor. 14.15. Acts 6.4.

Obj: If it be said, but I may take an Interpretation, or Translation of Scripture from others, and therefore a form of Prayers from others also?

Answ. 1. There is a broad difference betwixt an Interpretation of Scripture, as it is put for translation of Scripture, and read Prayer, for reading of Scripture in the Church is an ordi­nance of God; so is the reading of it in a tongue which the people understandeth, and therefore it is an ordinance of God that the Word be read in some translation.

But the reading of a prayer, for the prayers of the Church is no ordinance of God, therefore there is not the like ground from the Word to make use of Prayer-Books, to read prayers, as to make use of a printed Bible for the reading of the Word.

2. Every Minister that hath understanding of the originall languages wherein the Scripture was written, ought to make use of his own gift in examining the truth of the translation which he readeth unto the Church, which will not be allowed in prescript Lyturgies: As for the division of Scriptures into Sections and Chapters, and the reading of one part this Week, and the other next; It is certain, division of Scripture is antient, even from the times of the Prophets: And evident it is, the whole Scrip­ture cannot be read over in one day: And therefore it is from God, that some divisions of [Page 24]Scriptures be observed, according to the varie­ty of matter therein contained, and distinctly devideth it selfe, and consequently it is from God, that one part of it be read at this Assem­bly another at the next, because all cannot be read at once.

And yet we know no warrant that one Church should prescribe another, what divisi­on to make of the Scriptures, or what part of it should be read this day, and what the next, what God hath lest free let no man limit.

Disc. Preaching is commanded of God; so is in­terpretation of Scripture, but phrase and method of Interpretation is of men: The matter of the Scripture is the immediate Word of God, but the Word and phrase, which are Vessels to convey this truth to us (I speak of Translations not of the Originall Text) are humane and not of God, by immediate inspiration, God commandeth us to call upon him, both in pub­lique and private, but the words in which we ex­presse our desires, are our own, both in conceived and stinted Prayer.

Answ. It is true preaching of the Word and the Interpretation of the Word are of God, but the phrase and Method is of men, yet so of men as they have commandement and warrant from God, to preach and interpret the Word: and not in what phrase and Method please them­selves: nor in such words as mans wisdome teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, 1 Cor. 2.13. Nor so from men as that the men of one Church may devise a set form thereof, and binde all men, as well of other Churches as [Page 25]their own, to this or that manner of phrase, or Method, the like is to be said of prayer also.

But when your Discourse saith, that the words wherein we expresse our desires are our own in conceived and stinted prayer, you might as well have said, that the words wherein we de­liver our Sermons are our own; both in con­ceived Sermons, and in stinted Homilies.

Disc. These two kinds of Prayer (conceived and stinted) agree in their Author, Matter, Form, Object, end, and common nature; the one is no more an In­vention of man than the other: so then devised Wor­ship is unlawfull but not a worship in a form of words devised.

Answ. And so might we say of prayer to God before an Image, and prayer without an Image; they are two kinds of prayer that agree in their Author, matter, form, object, end, and common nature, yet we cannot say the one is more an invention of men than the other: As devised Worship is unlawfull, so are devised forms, and means of worship unlawfull also: of which sort such set forms of words be as are de­vised and composed by the officers of one Con­gregation, and imposed upon the brethren of another Congregation, for the forms of their prayers.

Answ. 2. We cannot say (as you do) that such conceived and stinted forms agree in their Au­thors, for I am not the Author of the matter of that prayer which another man composed, and was the Author of, and is now stinted and prescribed to me; no more then I can be said [Page 26]to be the Author of that Sermon which another man indited. Battyllus was not the Authour of Virgil's Verses.

Though he resiteth them as his own, Virgil justly challengeth his own out of his hand, Hos ego versiculas feci, &c. Nor can we say that such conceived or stinted forms agree in their form, if by form be meant externall form, it is not the same form of walking to walk with Crutches, and to walk upright: It is not the same form of prayer, to pray with help of mens inventions, and with such helps only as the Holy Ghost supplyeth: which also hindereth that they cannot be said to agree in their com­mon nature; The one being a lawfull form of prayer, the other unlawfull; And therefore when your Discourse saith, that conceived and stinted prayer, the one is no more the inventi­on of man than the other, we cannot under­stand the truth of that: for in conceived pray­er, the Spirit of God within us teacheth us what to pray. And for that the Ordinance and Word of God is plain, Rom. 8.26. But in stinted pray­er the matter is not suggested or indited to us by the Spirit of God within us, but prescribed and imposed upon us, by the will, wisdome and au­thority of men; whom the Holy Ghost hath not called to such a work: as therefore a devi­sed worship is unlawfull; so it is unlawfull to worship God in a form of words devised by the Officers of one Congregation, and prescribed and imposed upon others.

Disc. Nay (saith your Discourse) for the form of words is not worship, but the Prayer tendered in that form.

Answ. As Prayer is Worship, so the form in which prayer is offered to God, is Modus, or Medium Cultus, the manner, or means, or help of Worship: which if it be not warranted, and instituted of God, it is forbidden in the second Commandement: when God forbad his people to worship him in such a manner, as the Gentiles served their gods, he ordained them a rule to be perpetually observed in all service to him, to wit, that we should worship him as himself hath commanded, which the opposition infer­reth, that his meaning is not only with such duties, but in such a manner as himself hath commanded, without adding ought thereto or taking ought therefrom, Deut: 12.30, 31, 32. Now he hath commanded us to pray in the spirit, Eph. 6.18. which implies not only with such affections as his Spirit kindleth and stirreth up, but also with such matter and words as his spi­rit helpeth us unto: For his Spirit is said to help us what to pray, which else we should not know, Rom. 8.26. Now in a stinted prescript form of prayer, we know what to pray with­out the Spirit; when we joyn in prayer with another who is our mouth to God, though we know what to pray by his help, yet it is such an help as the Spirit himself hath provided, 1 Cor. 14.16.

Disc. It followeth in the Discourse, that mens inventions in Gods worship that be of the same na­ture [Page 28]and use with true worship, or with means of worship ordained by God, be unlawfull; but method, phrase, order, of speech devised by man, was never judged an invention of man unlawfull.

Answ. 1. This hath been alledged, and an­swered before, but this further let me adde: 1. That the words imply, that mens inventions that be not of the same nature and use with the worship of God, or with the means thereof are lawfull: whereas it is evident that the making of perfume like unto the incense of the Taber­nacle, though not to the same use in Gods wor­ship, but to smell at, was rejected of God as ut­terly unlawfull, Exod. 30.38. The making of like things to the ordinances of God, or to the means of worship, though not to the like end, but to any religious end, will not be allowed in the second Commandement, as Gideons Ephod declareth.

2. These set forms of prayer prescribed to the Churches, we see not but that they are of the same nature, and enjoyned for the same use, for which any forms of prayer in Scripture are ordained of God; and therefore by the verdict of your Discourse they are unlawfull: For as those forms of prayer in Scripture are given of God to supply the Church with fit matter for their petitions, and praises upon sundry occa­sions.

And for the use to the edification of the Church: so the forms now in question are of the like nature, given to the like end, only injoyned with more strictnesse and severity, [Page 29]which maketh both their use lesse profitable, and their burthen more heavy, then Gods own in­stitutions.

3. Method, phrase and order of speech de­vised by men, was judged an unlawfull inven­tion by Paul, when such wisdom of words in preaching become not the simplicity of the Go­spel, 1 Cor. 2. therefore it cannot be said, that method, phrase and order of speech devised by man, was never judged an unlawfull inventi­on; and surely method, phrase, order of speech devised, and prescribed by one Congregation to another in prayer, doth as little beseem li­berty and purity of the Gospel, as the other in preaching did ill become the simplicity of the Gospel.

Disc. Set prayer is no strange manner of worship, because in it all things required to the nature of true prayer may be observed.

Answ. This hath been answered before; more goeth to the lawfulnesse of a prayer then the nature of true prayer; defect in any cir­cumstance, though but in externall form, ma­keth a prayer unlawfull.

Disc. In what method and frame of speech to pray, we find nothing prescribed of God in particular; neither do we judge any thing necessary, more then that order, decency, and edification be regarded.

Answ. Be it so, but how then shall men have power to prescribe to the Churches method and form of speech in prayer, when God hath prescribed nothing. The Apostles, who had the largest and highest Commission of any [Page 30]Church governours in the New Testament, yet they had no power to teach, or to prescribe to the Churches any other things then what Christ had commanded them, Matth. 28.19, 20. Say not, though no other things, yet Church go­vernours may command such and such manner of those things: for then a further Commission must be shown, where Christ gave to his Apo­stles, or their successors power to ordain and prescribe such and such manner of the admini­stration of his holy things, as themselves should see good.

But we never saw any such commission held forth to this day from any colour of Scripture light; that only place, 1 Cor. 14.40. which is alledged in this case, is farre off from reaching forth any such authority; for though the place do shew that it is the duty of the Church to ad­minister all the holy things of God, in order and decency, and to edification, and to see that all things be so carried; yet it doth not give to the Church any such power as to make orders, or to ordain forms of decency, or to devise means of edification, which himself hath not ordained; the Church may indeed appoint such orders, the neglect whereof would be disor­derly and confusion, as they may appoint one Prophet to speak at once; and when another is called to begin, the first to hold his peace, be­cause the neglect hereof would breed confusi­on: The Church may appoint such decencies, the neglect whereof would be undecent; as for men to pray bare-headed, and women co­vered, [Page 31]because the contrary were uncomely by the light of nature, and civill custome; The Church may appoint, and ought to use such helps and means to edification, as the Lord hath instituted to that end; but if the Church go beyond the bounds of this power they do at once both exceed the bounds of Apostolicall authority, and cut short the bounds of Christi­an liberty.

Disc. A set form of prayer is for substance and na­ture agreeable to the rules of direction delivered in the word of truth, though for method and word it be humane, as conceived prayer is.

Answ. A set form of prayer, as it is set by one Congregation for another, can find no rule of direction, nor any foot-step thereof in the word of truth.

In saying that for method and words, a set form of prayer is humane, as conceived prayer is; there is the like liberty taken of Sophistry, in an equivocation, which was observed be­fore: for though a conceived Prayer may be said to be humane, as it is conceived and indi­ted in the heart of a man, and by man offered as worship to God (as all other holy duties be in this sense humane) yet such a conceived prayer being indited by the Spirit of God in the heart of him that prayeth, and being expresly com­manded in the Word: it cannot be truly called an humane invention, which is only spoken of those things as have neither commandement, nor pattern from the Word, in which sense we called a set form humane.

Disc. If our Brethren dispair not of the goodnesse of their Cause; let them in an orderly Treatise set down what is necessary and essentially required, to the nature and being of true Prayer, and then shew that some one or other of them cannot be observ­ed in a stinted or Prescript forme of Prayer, and we will readily yeeld unto them; and some Reason or pregnant place of Scripture, shall put us to silence.

Answ. We see no cause to dispair of the goodnesse of the cause, which we conceive is not ours but Gods; we choose rather to be­waile the sinfulnesse of our former course, then eagerly to dispute for our present proceedings; we all of us have sinned with our Brethren, and with our Fathers in worshipping God after the precepts of men, and have as much cause to judge our selves for it, as you have: To write a Treatise of all the requisites to true prayer, is nothing to the standing or falling of the Cause.

As hath been said, prayer may be true, and have all those things which are necessary and essentially requisite to true prayer, and yet sin­fully def ective in some extenall circumstances: It were much more pertinen to write a Trea­tise of the Second Commandement, whereunto the consideration of the helps and Forms of Worship doth properly belong; & from thence to consider whether any sound reason at last (which you desire) may not be inferred against prescript Forms of Prayer.

Let us therefore consider together of the meaning of that Commandement, though not in the full latitude of it (for that were not so per­tinent [Page 33]to the Cause in hand) but so far as con­cerneth the present businesse; and yet not seek­ing thereby, nor striving to put you to silence, but to awaken both our selves and you (if it be the Will of God) to repentance.

The Second Commandement, in forbidding Images, forbiddeth not only bodily Images, (Graven or Molten, or Painted) but all spiri­tuall Images also; which are the Imaginations and Inventions of men, whether they be or­dained for worship (as Apocrapha Scriptures, and the Lawes of men binding the Conscience) or for helps and means of worship (as signifi­cant Ceremonies, to teach and stir up to spiri­tuall Duties) or finally, for formes, and man­ner of worship, yet when we speak of helps and means of worship invented by Men, and forbidden by God, in this Commandement we doe not speak either of naturall or artificiall helps to help the natural sense in Gods worship; (such as Scaffolds be to mens hearing) nor of the helps of Tongues and Arts which the wis­dome of God hath given for an help to the mind and understanding in all knowledge: As if God commanded the people to read in his Word all their dayes, and to read with under­standing the Translation of Scripture into the Mother-Tongue of each Nation, is a necessary help to this end, & the knowledg of grammer, & tongues is a necessary help to such a translation.

And so if God command the people to joyne together, as well in voyce as in heart, to sing Psalmes, and to sing them with understanding; seeing Psalmes are a kind of holy Poetry, even [Page 34]as Grammar will be a necessary help to translate the Psalmes into English; So Poetry will be re­quisite to translate the English into verse; and such kind of helps, though they be not expresly commanded by God, yet we look at them as warranted by necessary consequence from the Word; because God, who commanded thr du­ties of Reading the Scripture, and singing of Psalmes, (and both to be done with understand­ing) he doth imply a necessary warrant of such means as do naturally and necessarily lead to those ends, and without which those ends (without a miracle cannot be otained.

We speak therefore of such means and helps of worship forbidden in this Commandement, not which do naturally and necessarily help forward the same (though remotely) but of such Arbitrary helps, as are voluntarily taken up by the wisdome and will of man for spirituall ends, (as Gideons Ephod and Pharisaicall wash­ings, and superadded to those means and helps of worship; which God hath sufficiently, yea, and abundantly supplyed, his Church and peo­ple withall, by his Word and Spirit, for all spirituall duties.

Neverthelesse, this distinction of voluntary and necessary helps, may not be stretched so farre, as to justifie devise and set forms of Prayer, to supply the defects of sinfully igno­rant, or carelesly bashfull people, as cannot pray (especially before company) without a book: For, first, God would not have such persons (so sinfully ignorant and bashfull) to be [Page 35]called forth into publique Ministry; the lame and the blind shall not come into Sion, into Davids House, 2 Sam. 5.8. nor may such igno­rant and lame Christians be admitted to come into the publick place in the Church.

3. God hath provided other sufficient helps to supply these defects to private Christians: for besides the Spirit of God (which helps all our infirmities Rom. 8.26.) who supplieth both the ignorant with knowledge of what, and how to pray, and the bashfull with power; he hath also ordained instruction to help the ignorant, and frequent exercise, and diligent Catechising of a mans own family, to help his bashfulnesse in praying before them; and if strangers come in, (and they sit to partake in such an ordinance) God then offereth him the help of a Christian friend to supply his necessity before strangers; and when we speak of form, and manner of worship devised by men; we speak not of such as light of nature and civill custome taketh up for order and decency: but of such as are taken up by the voluntary choice of the wisdome and will of man, either for such ends as God hath not appointed (as uniformity in Rites, and conformity to Idola­ters) or for such ends, as for which God hath provided otherwise; as the Love-feasts in the Church to maintain brotherly love, for which God ordained the Lords Supper, and feasts in private houses: or contrary to such ends and wayes as God hath appointed, as the Chemarines to offer incense, (a type of Prayer) to main­tain [Page 36]a Praying Ministry, without sacrificing; as a read Liturgie to maintain a reading or praying Ministry without preaching.

It was touched upon before that, when God forbad us such a manner of worship, as Hea­thens use to their god, and against that one false manner of worship, establisheth his own insti­tutions in his Word ( Deut. 12.30, 31, 32.) He doth thereby evidently condemn under one false manner of worship all other forms or man­ners of worship, which are not instituted in his word. Hence conformity to Idolaters in cut­ting their hair and beards is forbidden, Levit. 19.27. Hence preaching in the wisdome of words, (or in carnall eloquence) is forbidden: as a painted Image against the second Comman­dement, 1 Cor. 21. Hence Prayer towards the East falleth under the same reproof: Hence the incense of Uzzia, the strange fire of Nadab and Abihu; the striking of the rock by Moses in the Wildernesse of Sin; the Love-Feasts brought into the Lords Supper.

And many more such like forms and man­ners of Gods worship are forbidden in the Word, as divers from the rule and pattern held forth in the second Commandement, as it is o­pened and illustrated by these and such like ex­amples in the writings of the Prophets, and Apostles: we are not ignorant that there is al­so a sinfull form and manner of worship which is forbidden in the third Commandement, as when we worship God unreverently, or drou­fily, but that is rather Ro. modus colendus, then modus cultus.

To apply then to this Rule and Commande­ment of God these set forms of Prayer devised by men, and prescribed to be read out of a Book, and so taken up by one Church from another, as the forms of their worship, and the helps of their devotion: We find no Comman­dement nor Pattern for them in the Word; nor any promise for their acceptance; They are injoyned for helps, and means of Gods wor­ship; which God hath not sanctified, and for forms of worship, which God hath not ac­knowledged, and therefore we know not how to excuse them from sin, against the true mea­ning of the second Commandement.

Object. If it be said that it was granted, before in stating the Question, that in reading a Prayer penned by another man ( say one of Calvins Prayers after his Lectures) a man may be so affected with it, as that his heart going along therewith, he may con­vey his own desires, and Petitions to God in reading thereof, and so make it his own Prayer, though de­vised by another, and read out of a Book.

Answ. We grant that a man may make use of another mans penned Prayers read in private, not only for an example, or instruction how to pray; but also occasionally for his present Prayer; If he find the Petitions sutable to his present occasions: Yea, we grant further, that in case one Church should send letters to another Church, and in the end thereof should conclude with some Prayer suitable to the state of the Church to whom they write: we doubt not but that the Church to whom the letters [Page 38]are sent, finding the Petitions suitable to their condition, may lawfully go along therewith in spirit, and in the end say Amen thereto, and so make it their own Prayer.

But yet here be two things different from the case in hand.

First, They that penned such Prayers did not prescribe them as forms of Prayer for the brethren to use, left them freely to their li­berty.

2. They that take them up occasionally for their present use, and make them their Pray­ers, they do not set them apart to be read for their ordinary Prayers, either in publique or in private, which seemeth to us a matter of weigh­ty consideration, and maketh a great difference in the cause in hand to clear it by a familiar in­stance: A man passing through a burying place may see a dead mans scalp cast up, and thereby take occasion from the present object to medi­tate (for the present) on his mortality, and to prepare for like change: but if he shall take up, and keep that dead mans scalpe in his Closet, or Bed chamber, to be an ordinary help to him, to put him in mind daily of his mortality: Now in so doing he maketh an Image of it, to him­self, by setting it a part to be an help to him in Gods worship; which not being sanctified and set a part by God for that end, it now be­comes a sin to him against the second Comman­dement in the former case, he took occasion to fall into a present good meditation of mortality, by the present sight of an object of mortaliy, [Page 39]as it was set before him occasionally by Gods providence, wherein he did well according to the second Commandement, not to passe by such a passage of Gods providence in vain: But in the latter case in setting it a part to be an ordi­nary help to him in such meditations, or injoy­ning the same to others; He in so doing maketh it to him and them an Image, it not being insti­tuted, or sanctified by God, but devised and set apart by man, for such a spirituall end, which is forbidden in the second Commande­ment.

If it be said again, when I read Prayer and sind some Petitions therein that sute well with my estate, I may not only then use them for my present Prayer, but may again and again ordinarily make use thereof in my own Pray­ers.

Answ. We deny not that, but it is one thing to take up a Petition, or two, or more, and to insert them here and there into mine own Prayers, and another thing to take up a whole intire prayer, or form of prayer, and use it ordinarily as mine own; see the like in Preaching, I may make use of a sentence or two, or more, here and there out of another mans Sermon, and it may be inculcate the same again and again, in many Sermons together of my own; But I may not therefore take up a whole Sermon penned by another, and preach it for mine own, though it were never so fit for my Text, and for mine own Congre­gation.

Whence also another reason (and in our apprehension of just weight) may be alledged against the ordinary use of set forms of Prayers devised by others. If every Minister be to edifie the Church by the dispensation of his own tal­lents, and gifts, as well in prayer as in preach­ing: Then he may not pray another mans pen­ned prayer, no more then preach another mans penned Sermon, but the former is true, 1 Cor. 12.7. Acts 6.4. Eph. 4.8.11, 12, 13. therefore the latter.

3. Let me adde a third reason, If I may worship God in the congregation with a set form of prayer, read out of a book, then I may bring into the Church another book besides the book of God, to be read ordinarily for the publique edification of the Church: But we know no warrant for the use of any book in the Church to be read ordinarily for the publique edificati­on of the Church; besides the book of God; to bring into the Church any other book besides Gods, is like the bringing in of another Altar into the Temple of the Lord, and set it up besides the Altar of the Lord: which did in time thrust the Altar of the Lord to stand behind, and give place, and at length to be laid aside, 2 Kings 16.14, 15. I need not apply it, experi­ence goeth far enough in applying of it; If it be an unsanctified way of preaching to fill a Sermon with Quotations, out of the Books of ancient Divines (whom more commonly then safely they call Fathers) though the sentences be godly, and pithy, how much more will it be an unsanctified kind of prayer, to make up not only many Petitions together, but also a [Page 41]whole form of Prayer out of a book, lesse an­cient, and much more offensive.

4. Let me conclude with a fourth reason, and adde no more in this place, He that sele­cteth a few prayers which in themselves are free from offensive matter but of a book lyable (in the whole bulke) to many just exceptions, and withall imposed by one Church upon ano­ther, he doth really therein hold forth and professe his subjection (not only to the irregu­lar exercise of that authority, whereby it is in­joyned) but also to the whole order of worship injoyned in that book; as Paul in practising (though but seldome) a few ceremonies out of the book of the Law, did therein hold forth and professe his orderly walking according to the whole Law, and his prosessed subjection to the whole order of worship prescribed by the authority of the Law, Acts 21.24.25, which had it not been warranted by God himself fora season, he had doubtless thereby sinned against the se­cond Commandement, Since then the second Commandement is so many wayes violated by reading of a Prayer-book, devised and prescribed by humane authority, for the publique Prayers of the Church, the Lord pardon all our provo­cations of his jealousie by our former ignorance in this point, & keep us blamelesse for after times, for his holy names sake, in Jesus Christ. Amen.

You know the sinnes against this Comman­dement, do more provoke the jealousie of the Lord against his people, and that for many ge­nerations, then the breach of any of the rest, which is the reason why the Lord setteth be­fore [Page 42]his people (as a flaming sword) his jealou­sie, for a sanction and fence of this Commande­ment above the rest, Eaeod. 20.5. And shall we then provoke the Lord to jealousie, are we stronger than he? but let us proceed with our Discourse.

Disc. They tell us (say you) God hath not or­dained a set prescript worship, he hath not indeed prescribed it as necessary, but his Word doth warrant it to us as lawfull.

Answ. First, shew us, but one Text of the word that doth warrant it as lawfull, any word of precept or promise, or pattern from the Scripture, and we shall do as you offer to do, sit down in silence.

Secondly, if God hath not prescribed a set form as necessary, why is such necessity put up­on all the Churches, for receiving of it, hath the Church power to bind where God looseth?

Disc. Touching the externall form of words, in which we should profer our Petitions, we know no­thing precisely commanded by the Lord, and there­fore judge it a thing meerly indifferent whether our requests be read or uttered; whether in a stinted or conceived form of words; neither do we bring in any strange manner of Prayer; for in substance the prayer read and conceived is all one.

Answ. First, touching the externall form of words in prayer, we may know (and must willingly know what the word hath taught us) that the Lord hath commanded (whether expressely or by just consequence, all is one):

First, that as in Preaching, so consequently [Page 43]in Prayer, we are to expresse our minds in such a frame of words, not which mans wisdome teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, 1 Cor. 2.13.

Secondly, that we are not to worship God after the precepts, or patterns of men, but do all things after the pattern in the mount, Esay 29.13. Deut. 12.30, 31, 32. Heb. 8.5.

Thirdly, that we should not worship God in an Image, devised by man, and such are all set forms of Prayer, devised helps of worship, and prescribed to be read in the Church of Christ.

Answ. 2. But suppose (as the Discourse presu­meth, that it were a thing meerly indifferent, whether our requests be read, or uttered, whe­ther in a stinted or conceived form of words, It seemeth to us a manifest transgression of the bounds, both of Apostolicall authority, and Christian liberty, to bring in or take up a form of Prayer stinted and limitted by men, which is left to us indifferent by God; nor can we ex­cuse a read prayer prescribed by men, from a strange form of prayer; seeing no such form is read or heard of, in all the Scripture; so great a difference is there betwixt a conceived, and prescribed read prayer, as is betwixt the fire from the Altar and the strange fire; the one is an ordinance of God, the other is an imagina­tion of men.

CHAP. III. Wherein Answer is returned to Reason the second.

IF it be lawfull to use a prescript form of blessing, prayer thanks-giving, and baptising set down in the Word of God, Then all prescript forms of Prayer or Liturgy, are not to be condemned; but the former appeareth from Numb. 6.22, 23. Psal. 102.1. Hos. 14.2, 3. Joel 2.17. Deut. 5.10. Psal. 92.1. Ezra. 3.10. Rev. 15.3.2 Chron. 29.30. Isa. 12.1. Math. 28.19. What answer do our Brethren re­turn to this Argument?

Answ. Our answer is ready, and plain, just and short, we deny both the Major Proposition, and the ground of the Minor; for (to speak first to the former) it doth not follow that pre­script form of prayer invented by men is law­full, because a form prescribed of God is good and allowable; the Reason whereof is sound and evident; though God forbid men to make themselves any Image, or likenesse in his wor­ship, yet he hath not forbidden himselfe this power to prescribe any Image or form to us; he appointed his people to make the Cherubims to worship him before them, both in the Taber­nacle and Temple; but yet when Jeroboam made to himself the like form at Dan and Bethel, [Page 45]and prescribed them to the people, it was a ma­nifest breach of the second Commandement; what reply doth the Discourser return to this?

Disc. A meer shift (say you) instead of an an­swer: for the question is not of this or that form in particular, but of a prescript form in it selfe conside­red; the Lords Prayer was indited, or prescribed by our Saviour himself, and they yet deny the use thereof as a prayer, and most of the Reasons which they bring, do conclude against every set form of prayer, as well as against any one; thus they argue: If a set form of Prayer be lawfull, then a man may carry his prayers in his pocket; buy them at the Book-binders shops, &c. and doth not this Reason disallow all penned and printed formes as well as ours?

Answ. Thus, with one sudden and blunt dash of a Pen, a holy and divine truth confirm­ed by plentifull evidence of Scripture, and ap­plyed generally and frequently by our best Di­vines against Popish Images, is at once blotted out, and branded as a shift: I say no more but this: This is a speaking evill of the Law; and condemning of the Law, and that in a higher degree than that which is reproved by the Apostle James, Chap. 4.11. for the Law it self in condemning Images, and the imaginations of mens devising, commandeth and establisheth the Images and imaginations ordained by God.

Therefore for you to call such a distinction of Images, as is established by the Law of God, [Page 46]a meer shift, is to make your self (pardon my plainnesse) in this case, not an observer of the Law, but a Judge; so farre will inordinate zeale to a way of error transport even godly minds.

But to speak to the grounds of such a cen­sure, though it were granted that the question is not of this or that form of Prayer in particu­lar, yet is of a set form devised by men, and pre­scribed to be read out of a book for an ordinary Prayer; yea, I might adde further, that the occasion of the Question in hand, springeth from an offence taken at some brethren (as ap­peareth by the letters sent to us about this mat­ter, by sundry Reverend godly brethren, and subscribed amongst others, by your own name) for their not joyning with others to worship God in a common stinted Liturgy, known to be devised by men, and prescribed to be read for the publique Prayers of all the Churches in the Countrey; howsoever therefore the question be reduced by your Discourses ab Hypothesi, ad Thesin (& by lawfull rules of dispute so may be) yet it is against the rule [...], so to palliate the matter, as to draw the question above the kind, and occasion of the question, you may upon occasion of one pre­script form of Prayer devised by men, put the question of any prescript form of Prayer devi­sed by men; but it is an utter changing and forsaking of the cause to put off the question in hand to forms of Prayer devised and prescribed by God; what though some that have spoken [Page 47]or written in this cause, have waved some forms of Prayer devised by God himself; and have used some arguments, that grasp at more than they can hold?

The state of the question must not be drawn to the arguments, but the arguments to the state of the question; It is true, some have doubted, and some have denyed the use of the Lords Prayer (as it is called) for a Prayer, but they would never have denyed it or doubted of it, if they had thought it had been prescribed by Christ for a Prayer: But howsoever (not to spend words and time in vain) we for our parts (I speak for the most part) do grant it may be lawfull to pray thut very Prayer, in the same words, and yet this will not at all prejudice the cause in hand, to justifie Prayers in a Book composed by men, and imposed by one Church upon another.

Neverthelesse, that Argument against such Prayers which are fetched from the Topicks of the Pocket, or of the Book-binders Shops, we neither use, nor allow, they which use them may clear their own intentions and drift in them.

Having thus cleared the denyall of the Ma­jor Proposition, we do as justly deny the ground of the Minor, for though it do appear from Scripture, that some forms of Prayer, or blessing, or baptizing, or thanksgiving devised by God, were sometimes used by godly men (and it was lawfull for them so to do) yet we deny (that which was the ground of the Minor) [Page 48]that God in his Word did set down any pre­script form of any of these: Prescript (I say) In such a sence as in this Question is intended; to wit, precisely injoyning the use thereof in all their publique holy Assemblies: nor will any of the Scriptures alledged reach that; in Numb, 6.22, 23. The Priests are directed to a form of blessing: But that they used that and not other forms, doth not appear: It is evident that the Apostles used divers other forms, as hath been shewed above, in Psal. 22.1. there is no pre­scribing of a form of words at all, only Christ used the same words, with a little variance up­on the like occasion, on the Crosse, or if you urge the title of the Psalms, from Junius his notes, as if the Psalm were appointed to be sung every morning by break of day: Bear with us if we rather fetch the meaning of these words [...] from the Psalm it self, vers. 19. where the Prophet alluding to [...] calleth the Lord [...] my strength hasten to help me, the words therefore in the title hold forth no more but the Argument of the Psalm [...] for speedy help a Psalm of David, In Psalm 102.1. the Title sheweth what an afflicted soul in such a case did pray; but doth not prescribe all afflicted soules to powre out the same form of words in their afflictions. Hosea 14.2, 3. The Prophet di­recteth them to take words to themselves, to such a purpose: But whether the self same words, or some other such like, he doth not li­mit or prescribe: The like may be said of Joel. [Page 47]1.17. Deut. 5.10. hath nothing sounding to­wards the point in hand. I suppose it is miswrit­ten by the errour of the Scribe. In Psal. 92.1. the Psalm is penned for the Sabbath, but whether for a word of instruction for the Sabbath, or for thanksgiving on the Sabbath it is not men­tioned, we willingly grant it was penned for both; But neverthelesse, it was not prescribed every Sabbath day to be sung. In Ezra 3.10. it doth appear, as also 2 Chron. 29.30. That they praised God with the words of David and after his Ordinance: But his Ordinance and words were appointed by God, 2 Chron. 29.25. And yet not so prescribed to be used as never to be omitted; In Rev. 15.3. when it is said, they sung the Song of Moses the servant of God, and the Song of the Lamb; It is only meant, they praised God with Psalms to the like effect as that of Moses; not with the same words, much lesse upon prescript. Isa. 12.1. It is prophesied the Church shall praise God to such a purpose as these words hold forth: But whether in these very words, is uncertain, certain it is, they are not so prescribed to do; but left at liberty. In Matth. 29.19. the place is miswrit­ten, as before.

Disc. But it sufficeth us that these forms of Bles­sing and Prayer, might lawfully be used as a blessing, or Prayer, though in conscience they were not neces­sarily tyed to the use of them: The lawfull, not the necessary use of a prescript form of prayer (or liber­ty) is now in question: for if the Saints in former times might pray unto God, or praise him in a stinted [Page 48]form of words, indited by others, or invented by themselves (as we find they might and did) we al­so at this day do the same.

Answ. We deny not that forms of Prayer and blessings indited by the Holy Ghost in Scrip­ture, may be lawfully so used, but we deny that they were prescribed, or limited to be so used, but still the Church left at liberty to use them, or some other holy forms in their stead; and therefore when the Discourse saith the lawfull, not the necessary use of a prescript form, is now in question, you make the question to imply a contradiction: for a prescript form is put upon the Churches, as necessary to be used in all pub­lique holy assemblies, else it is not a form pre­scribed, but described only.

Disc, But (saith the Discourser) if they will hear with patience, the consequence of that argu­ment, The use of a devised, and prescribed form of prayer will be justified from their own ground; for they teach that God hath not appointed in his Word any prescript form, which of necessity we are tyed to use at all; that the matter of our prayers are divers, according to the severall occasions, which happen and fall out; that the Inward frame is the elevati­on of the soul to God, in humility, love, fear and con­fidence; from which premises it will necessarily fol­low, if one godly forme of prayer may be used, ano­ther also fit for matter, grave for phrase of speech, may be allowed, for none is absolutely commanded.

Answ. The contrary conclusion doth rather follow from the premises; for if none be abso­lutely commanded by God, then none ought to [Page 49]be commanded or prescribed by men; what God hath left free in his worship, let no man limit; To what Church did God ever give power to bind where himself looseth? And if it be unlawfull for Church Governours to bind where God looseth, it will be unlaw­full for the people so deeply to offend the con­science of their Governours, as to build them up, or to harden them in their sins, by ready subjection to such injunctions, and serious and zealous pleading for them: How much safer were it for the people of God, to stand fast in the liberty which Christ hath purchased for them, in accepting no other yoke of ordinances, nor forms of worship, then himself hath put upon them? that so Church Governours might con­tain themselves within the power in Church af­fairs, wherein the Lord hath contained him­selfe throughout the Scriptures; when shall it once be that the servants of God will learn to be wise, and teach others to be wise, not above that which is written, but according to it, that so an end might be put at length to the inventi­ons and innovations of the sons of men, where­by they take upon themselves an usurpation beyond the bounds of Apostolicall Authority, and put upon the people an unjust restraint of the bounds of their dear bought Christian li­berty?

Disc. The use of a prescript form of prayer (or Liturgy) derogateth (as some say) from the honour, fruit and benefit of Christs ascention; who ascen­ding up on high, hath given gifts to men for the [Page 50]work of the Ministry, Eph. 4.8. Let it be granted that every particular Minister is able in so full and ample manner at all times to open his heart before God (which can never be proved) as that he shall not need the help of a book; Is there no warrant therefore for others to prescribe, or for themselves to read or use stinted prayer; why not? an able Mi­nister hath discretion to know what portion of Scrip­ture is fit to be read; Hath the Church then no pow­er to appoint what Books and Chapters shall ordina­rily be read; or hath a Minister no warrant to observe that appointment? A learned Linguist is able to translate a Chapter in the old or new Testament, peradventure as well as it is translated, may not the Church yet ordain one usually to be read?

Let our brethren judge the strength of their Rea­son, in one framed after the same manner; If a Mi­nister be indued with gifts to judge what portion of Scripture is meet to be read, then is there no warrant for another to prescribe, nor for them to read stinted portions of Scripture prescribed by men; pray­er is a part of Gods worship, so is reading of Scripture; the externall form of words are humane, so is the prescription of such a Book or Chapter.

Answ. The Reason is of more weight against prescript forms, then will so easily be cast off, at least to our best apprehensions; For if the Lord Jesus by his ascention hath given sufficient furniture of gifts to the Ministers of his Church for prayer, as well as for preaching; For the whole work of the Ministry, for the edification [Page 51]of the Church, For the perfecting of the Saints unto the fulnesse of the slature of the age of Christ; Then it is dishonourable unto Christ, and superfluous for the Governours of the Church, to prescribe unto Ministers set forms of Prayer in Liturgies, any more than set forms of preaching in Homilies; If Christ hath not gifted them as sufficient for the one as for the other, it doth indeed derogate from the honour and fruit of his ascention; if he have, then it is superfluous for Church governours, Actum Age­re, even as much as to tie bladders under the wings of Sea-fowls to keep them from sinking, or to help them to swim; It is true that every good Minister is not able at all times to open his heart to God in Prayer, but neither is he able at all times to open the mind of God in preaching, but if he be not able to do both without book, neither will he be able to do either upon a book prescribed to him; I have known a Minister to edifie the people more by silence in the Pulpit through strength of temptation, then ever I knew any do by reading a Homily upon the Book.

If an able Minister have discretion to know what portion of Scripture is fit to be read, to what end should the Church appoint him what Books and Chapter to read ordinarily; It is a commendable work in any state to procure a faithfull translation of the Bible to be extant in the mother tongue of each people under their dominions, for the common benefit of them all. And we do easily grant a Minister (though he [Page 52]be a learned Linguist) hath liberty not onely to make use of it in his private studies, but also to make use of it in the Congregation; for seeing reading of Scripture is an ordinance of God; yea, and reading of it in the mother tongue of each people, it will best agree with the edification of each people, to read it out of such a book as is frequent and currant in all their hands.

But yet the Church may not so bind him to such a translation, as not to give him leave to amend it, if need be; and he be able: And besides, this will no way reach the binding of Ministers to a set form of Prayer upon a book: seeing reading of Prayers in the Church, as Prayers, is not any ordinance of God; as all the reading of translated Scriptures be.

CHAP. IV. Answering to the third Reason.

Disc. IF it be lawfull to sing Psalmes in a form of words devised by men, then likewise to pray unto God in a stinted forme; If the one of these be an invention of men a strange prayer; a simili­tude of a prayer: so is the other a similitude of a Psalm.

Answ. First, the singing of Psalms (whereof you speak) in a form of words devised by men, may have a double meaning: for either you mean such Psalms as are compiled by ordinary men, or else Psalms penned by the Prophets; but translated by ordinary men into English verse, to be sung in the Churches; If you speak of the former, then this is our first answer:

1. We see as little warrant for singing Apocrypha Psalms in the Church, as for praying prescript Lyturgies of men in the Church: and for both together, as little warrant as for reading Apo­crypha Scriptures in the Church; but if you speak of the latter, then our second answer is this.

2. There is an observable difference between singing of Psalms and Prayer; as also, be­tween the Psalms penned by the Prophets, and by other ordinary men; for in the peoples joyn­ing [Page 54]in prayer, there is no more required but their going along in silence, with consent of the heart, and in the end of the prayer, expres­sing their consent in voyce, by saying, Amen, 1 Corinth. 14.16. But in singing of Psalms, all the people of God (as spiritual Priests) do sing with voyce together, according to Isa. 52.8. which putteth a necessity upon a set form of Psalms, else one should sing one thing, and ano­ther another thing, which would instead of harmony, breed confusion; but there is no ne­cessity of a set form of Prayer; for if the words of the Ministers prayers be understood of the people, they go along & joyn with him in silent consent, as well in a form conceived for the present occasion; as in a set form of words, whereunto they have been accustomed: besides the Psalms penned by the Prophets (as by Da­vid and the rest) being of divine inspiration, and part of the holy word of God (which we are commanded should dwell in us plenteously, and wherewith we are to teach and admonish our selves and one another, by the singing of them unto the Lord) we have therefore a lawfull warrant, to sing such Psalms; even in such a form of words, as they are translated into by men; when yet we have not the like war­rant to pray the forms of Prayer devised by or­dinary men, which are not of divine inspirati­on, but of humane invention and injunction. Psalms and Scripture translated are still as truly the Word of God in the translation, as in the originall language.

Disc. But (say you) If a man be disposed to rea­son against the singing of Psalms, he may a great deal more plausibly argue that the infancy of the Church when God saw a set form to be necessary; he inspired holy men to pen such as might be of use for that time, when such worship was approved; and therefore seeing at this day, no such forms are gi­ven us of God, they are not to be allowed.

Answ. Such an argument though you think it were plausible, yet indeed it is lesse defence­able; for the truth is, set forms of Psalms are as necessary now, as they were then; for see­ing it is necessary that all the people should joyn in voyce as well as in heart, in the singing of Psalms. It is therefore necessary they should know before-hand the same set form of words in which they should all joyn; and seeing a set form of words in Psalms is necessary, it pleased the Lord to devise himself to our hands a set form of them by his holy Prophets; who being carried by the Holy Ghost, farre above humane infirmity and possibility of erring; they have set down such forms as were fit not only for the infancy of the Church, but for the publique use of all Churches in all ages, and for all occasions, which cannot be said of any compilements de vised by ordinary men.

Disc. But (say you) a set form of words is as necessary in preaching, and publique prayers, as in singing; this or that form is necessary in neither; a set form is necessary in both; the people cannot sing with the Minister, unlesse what is sung be represen­ted to them in a set form of words; nor can they joyn in prayer, or attend to the word preached, un­lesse [Page 56]the matter of praying or preaching be conveyed to them in a set form of words.

Answ. You confound a form of words un­derstood and a set form: it is true, no man can joyn in prayer, or attend unto the Word prea­ched, unlesse the matter of prayer or preaching be conveyed in a form of words understood: but yet without a set form of words they may, the words being delivered in a known tongue; By set forms we understand standing forms, such as come to be used again and again, day by day in the same words; common sence ma­keth it evident, men may joyn in prayer, and attend to the Word preached, as well in a new form of words, according to the present occa­sion, which he never heard before, as in a set form which he heareth every day.

Disc. But you demand, Is a Minister able to ex­presse the necessities of the people, or the doctrine of salvation in a form of words devised and studied by himselfe? and is he not able by meditation and stu­dy, to dictate, and compose a Psalm to be sung by the people, as occasion requireth? and if so, is not a stinted form of singing devised by men, an arbitrary help to him, and so forbidden.

Answ. 2. Many a good Minister that is able to expresse the necessities of the people, or the doctrine of salvation, in a form of words devi­sed and studied by himself: is not able so to di­ctate and compose a Psalm to be sung by the people each several occasion, no, though he should meditate and study hard for it: Poetry is not every good Scholars faculty; nor the [Page 57]penning of holy Psalms the skill of every good Minister: nor is it required that it should. For seeing the Holy Ghost hath already dictated and composed to our hands divers forms of Psalms for all occasions, it would be superfluous for Ministers to take up their meditations and stu­dies, about the inventing other forms, though they had gifts fit for it: and therefore if such as have the skill to pen Psalms, do nevertheless sing the forms of Psalms set and composed by David, and other Prophets: as they cannot be said, therein to make use of the inventions of men, but of Gods institutions; so neither can they be said to sin upon the other respect, which you mention, because they use an help to them not necessary; whereas others that want their skill, do lawfully use Davids Psalms, because such an help to them, is not arbitrary, but ne­cessary: no, no, we do not approve of that distinction between arbitrary and necessary, in that sense, to that purpose; in that sense I say, for I here see you work upon an equivocation in this word necessary; For there is a double necessity spoken of in this case: a set form of worship may be said to be necessa­ry, either through sinfull defects in men, who should be able, but are not, to conceive a form of worship of themselves, or else through the nature and condition of the worship it selfe, which cannot be performed, but in a set form, whatsoever the gifts of men be; in this latter sense, not in the former, is the singing of Psalms in a set form necessary; for unlesse a Psalm be expressed in a set form of words, and so set be­fore [Page 58]the people, all the people cannot joyn in voyce (as well as heart) singing and praising God together in the same words; we admit of no necessity of any set forms of prayer (or other worship) in the former sense: as concerning such men unfit to be Ministers of the Gospel as want gifts to conceive a prayer according to the present occasion; but a set form of Psalms we allow as necessary in the latter sense, as ne­cessary (by consequence) from divine instituti­on; for if singing of Psalms be as it is of divine institution: and if Psalms be a kind of spiritual Poetry, and therefore to be put into verse; If it be also of divine institution; that all the peo­ple should joyn as well in voyce, as in heart, in singing of Psalms; and that in a language known, and understood by themselves; then it will be requisite and necessary by divine in­stitutions (for he that instituteth the end, insti­tuteth the necessary means that leadeth to the end) that in our English Churches the Psalms be translated into English verse, or metre; and re­ceived of the Churches in a set form; that so all the people may joyn with one voyce and heart to praise the Lord together in the same words, but there is not the like necessity of a set form of words in prayer: For in prayer (as hath been said) there is no more required of the peo­ple then when they hear the words of the Mi­nister, to go along with him in heart; and in the end of the prayer to answer with one ac­cord in voyce, Amen. And so whatsoever is required of the people by divine institution for [Page 59]joyning in prayer is fully attained, without a set form of words in prayer, which cannot be attained in singing without a set form of words in Psalms.

Disc. It is said of prayer, Christ hath given gifts to his Ministers for preaching and praying, hath he not for the singing of Psalms also? If it be a dishonour to Christ (as some affirme) that they should use a form of prayer devised by others; Is it not a disho­nour likewise, if they shall use a form of singing de­vised by others?

Answ. It hath been answered above, that though God hath given gifts to his Ministers for preaching and praying; yet he hath not given to many the gift of inditing Psalms also; and yet neither is it any dishonour to Christ, nor sinfull defect in his Ministers that he hath not so furnished them, seeing he himself hath suf­ficiently furnished them with all set forms of Psalms by the Ministry of his Prophets, divinely inspired for the service of the Church: and it is no dishonour to Christ or his Ministers that they should take up forms of words devised by him for his own worship.

Disc. If there be any such necessity (of a set form of Psalmes) as is pretended, because some Ministers are not enabled of themselves to furnish the necessi­ties of the Church: It should rather exempt them from the practise of singing Psalms, then give li­berty to a devised form; for it is a rule in divinity, that against a general negative precept no particular affirmative can be lawfull, unlesse that particular be warranted in Scripture, &c. But against this sup­posed [Page 60]generall negative precept, forbidding all devi­sed helps, and furtherances in Gods worship, there is no particular warrant alowing it in singing of Psalmes.

Answ. It is not a supposed, but a reall nega­tive precept that generally forbiddeth all de­vised helps and furtherances in Gods worship, meaning helps and furtherances devised by men without warrant from the word: For this is indeed the proper true meaning of the se­cond Commandement, as hath been shewed above: but we deny that set forms of Psalms recorded in Scripture as helps and furtherances devised by men, but given by the Holy Ghost; and though the translation of the Psalms both in English and in verse, be by men, yet not with­out warrant from the Holy Ghost, who hath commanded that the Word of God should dwell in us plenteously, teaching and admonishing one another in Psalms and Hymnes, and spiritu­al Songs, Coloss. 3.16. who hath also comman­ded that we should sing with understanding, 1 Cor. 14.15. which the people could not do to their own understanding, or the understanding of their brethren, if the Psalms were not tran­slated into their own mother tongue; and when the translation doth fitly expresse the sense of the originall Psalms: we have warrant also to make use of the translation, though com­piled by ordinary men, as we see the Apostles did many times make use of the translation of the Septuagints, provided the translation be not imposed upon us, as that was not upon [Page 61]and that liberty be still left to correct or reform whatsoever shall be found in the translation to swerve from the true meaning and just weight of the originall Scripture; besides, it hath been shewed above, (in opening the meaning of the second Commandement) that though the negative precept forbid all helps and means of Gods worship devised by men without war­rant from the word: yet not the help of Tongues and Art, which not the wit and will of man, but the wisdom of God hath provided as necessary helps for the furtherance of sundry parts of Gods worship.

The Scriptures cannot be translated into our Mother Tongue, without the help of Grammer, nor the Psalms into verse and metre without the help of Poetry, nor sung without the help of Musick (naturall Musick at the least) and therefore these kinds of helps we make use of, as not being means of worship devised, or sug­gested by the wit or will of man, but as they are indeed prepared and ordained (according to the light of nature) by God: And so not falling under the generall negative precept which forbiddeth all humane Inventions, and In­junctions in the worship of God.

Disc. Now whether the pretended necessity of a set form, should exempt from the generall negative precept, forbidding devised formes, or from the af­firmative precept of singing Psalmes let them judge who put the Exception.

Answ. We doubt not to judge it safe to obey the affirmative precept of singing Psalms, in a [Page 62]set form of words though translated into Eng­lish, and into verse by men, because set Psalms are ordained of God, and their translation in­to English verse is necessarily implyed and war­ranted by God himself: And yet neverthe­lesse we do not pretend any necessity to ex­empt any such set form from the generall nega­tive precept which falleth under the prohibiti­on of it; for these the negative precept did ne­ver intend to prohibit: You need not therefore to wonder (as you do in the following words) why such a necessity (as hath been opened) of a set de­vised form of singing should excuse a set form of Psalms, and yet not excuse a set form of prayer, but ra­ther excuse the people from joyning in it.

Answ. Because there is no necessity at all of a devised set form of prayer unless it be through the sinfull defect of the Ministers gifts in Pray­er, which is such a necessity, as God abhorreth both it and the Minister for it; But the necessity of a set form of Psalms is such which God him­self hath put, for the Celebration of that ser­vice with one accord, both in heart and voyce, as hath been shewed, and therefore you might well have forborn that confident ex­pression.

Disc. If Christians shall not exempt themselves from the stinted Prayers used in the Congregation, untill a materiall difference be shewed in these parti­culars, and that distinction of Arbitrary, and necessa­ry, devised forms be approved by solid Reasons, and holy Scriptures, the world shall end (I am confident) before they shall separate.

For you see a materiall difference in these particulars, between the necessity of a set form of Psalms, and the necessity of a set forme of Prayer. The necessity of the one is from Gods Ordinance, and therefore warrantable: The necessity of the other is from mans Ignorance, and such ignorance as maketh him unfit for the Ministeriall Office, and therefore sinfull.

As for the distinction of Arbitrary and ne­cessary devised forms in your sence, we neither use it nor approve it: And therefore have no cause to bring either holy Scriptures or solid Reasons for the proof of it: But in that sence wherein we use it, the distinction is so manifest from what we have said already, that we think your self will require no further proof of it.

CHAP. V. Answering to the fourth Reason.

Disc. YOur fourth Reason may be thus contra­cted, If the Spirit of God do work by means, and if he stir up good desires, yet giveth not ability to expresse our desires, in fit and significant words: Then it is lawfull for us to use all godly means to stir up the graces of God in us: and to premeditate how to utter our Requests, in such a form and manner, as may best serve for our quickning, and the edificati­on of others; and if the use of a premeditated form of [Page 64]words in prayer do not stint the Spirit; a set form of Prayer cannot be injurious to the Spirit, grant the one, the other will follow.

Answ. If the speech be of publique prayer, the same spirit that giveth the Minister ability to deliver a Sermon, in fit and significant tearms, doth in like sort give ability to expresse his de­sires in Prayer, in fit and significant tearms: no man is called of God to be a Minister of his Church, but he is as well apt to Pray as apt to Preach; But if the speech be of private persons, it is true, many good souls have better desires than utterance; In regard of which defect or without such defect we willingly condescend to you: It is lawfull, yea, and necessary to him, to use all godly means to stir up the gra­ces of God in him, and to premeditate how to utter his requests in such sort as best serves for his own quickning, & the edification of others: But this we deny, that the using of a prescript form of Prayer upon a book, devised and impo­sed by one man upon another to be used as their Prayer, is a godly means to stir up the graces of God in himselfe, or to edifie others; For that which the Holy Ghost hath not sancti­fied in his Word for the stirring up of the gra­ces of God in a mans self or others, that is not a godly means for such an end; But throughout the Scriptures we cannot find any where, that the Holy Ghost hath sanctified such a means to such an end: And then it is but an Image, which will rather teach a form of godlinesse, than edifie to the power of it.

Disc. Peradventure they would creep out by say­ing the Spirit of God is our only helper in the time of Prayer, so that though at other times we might use helps to stir up the graces of the Spirit, yet not in time of prayer: But this distinction is not found in Scripture, neither can be deduced by any sound reason from thence. The Spirit of God is at all times the sole mover, and enabler of us to pray, and the use of lawfull means, and such as sute with the nature of prayer, are at no time unlawfull, as it is fit we me­ditate and read before we pray, so it is lawfull in prayer to kneel and lift up our hands and eyes, to use the help of the voyce, and the benefit of a Chri­stian friend to stir up affection. Therefore we may dispute for the lawfullnesse of book Prayer, thus, if it be lawfull to use externall helps in time of prayer, the better to stir up affections, then book prayer is not to be condemned.

Answ. To creep out, being a borrowed speech from worms; It being put upon us hol­deth us forth as worms, and not as men, yea, worse than worms, (Serpents, rather than Worms:) That being compassed in with truth, are willing to creep out by any evasion, rather than to submit to the authority of the truth: But let our reverend and godly brother, be intreated, not to deal such measures to his Bre­thren: Least the God and Father of us both, be displeased and stir up others to returne like measure to you, heaped up, pressed down, sha­ken together: our plain and simple Answer (without creeping or shifting) Is this, that it is lawfll to use any externall or internall helps, [Page 66]either before Prayer, to prepare us for it, or in Prayer to quicken, or inlarge us in it, provided, they be such means and helps as God hath sanctified to such an end, at such a time.

As we readily grant the help of books and meditation, before Prayer, so we do grant also the help of holy and reverent gestures in Pray­er, as bowing down the knees, and lifting up of the hands, and eyes, and voyce, the presence and assistance of a Christian friend, for all these God hath sanctified, to help the inward affecti­ons of the heart in prayer, do but shew that God hath sanctified Book-prayers, imposed upon us for our prayers, and that by the members of other Congregations, and we will neither creep nor start away: But willingly blesse the Lord for his goodnesse to you in this case, (as well as in many others) like as Phineas and the Con­gregation of Israel blessed God; for the Rube­nites and Gadites that were able to give so good an account of their actions, beyond the expe­ctation of their brethren, Jos. 22.

Disc. In prayer penned by a godly and well expe­rienced Christian, the case of a distressed soul may more pithily and amply be deciphered and anatomi­zed then he of himselfe is able to do it; and in such a case to deny him this lawfull help, is to take away the Crutch from the lame, and bread from the hungry.

Answ. In case a distressed soul do meet with a prayer penned, by a godly and well experi­enced Christian, and do find his own case, pi­thily [Page 67]and amply deciphered and anatomized therein, we deny not but his heart and affecti­ons may go along with it, and say Amen to it: And thus far may find it a lawfull help to him; but if you set a part such a prayer to support him as a crutch in his prayers (as without which he cannot walk straight and upright in that du­ty) or if he that penned that prayer, or others that have read it, do injoyn it upon him, and forbid him to pray (especially with others) un­lesse he use that form, this instead of a crutch, will prove a cudgell to break the bones of the Spirit in prayer, and force him to halt in wor­shipping God after the precepts of men; as it hath been said before, so it may be again re­membred here; a man may help his spirit in meditation of his mortallity, by behol­ding a dead mans scalp, cast in his way by Gods providence; but if he should set a part a deaths head, or take it up as injoyned to him by others, never to meditate or conserre with others about his mortality, and estate of another life, but in the sight and use of the deaths head, such a soul shall find but a dead heart, and a dead devotion from such a means of mortification; if some forms of Prayer, espe­cially such as gave occasion to this Dispute, do now seem to be as bread to the hungry, we say no more but this, then hungry souls will never be starved, that never want store of such like bread as this is.

Disc. The ample and particular laying out of our necessities doth ease the heart, and move affections, [Page 68]and when this may be better done by the help of a Book in prayer then of our selves, it is senselesse to accuse the use hereof, as a lip-labour, and a quenching of the spirit; he stinteth not the Spirit that labours to blow the coals of grace, &c.

Answ. It is true, he stinteth not the Spirit, nor quencheth him; that useth any means sancti­fied by the Spirit to blow the coals of grace; but this we deny, that a stinted form of prayer upon a book, devised by men, and enjoyned to be used as the prayers of a Christian soul, is a means sanctified by the Spirit to blow the coals of his grace; or that the repeating of such a set form of Prayer, though ample and particular in laying out his necessities, will ease his heart, or move his affections according to God; God doth not delight ordinarily to breath in the Masterly injunctions of brethren upon bre­thren, or of one Congregation upon another, especially in such things whereof we have neither precept nor president in the Word.

Disc. He doth not substitute his Christian friend, in the place of the word, and Spirit, who not able to lift up his soul to God, by reason of straightnesse of heart, and grievous pressure, doth crave his help and assistance in prayer, and may not a godly Book sup­ply the want of a Christian companion?

Answ. It is an ordinance of God, to crave the help of the Prayers of our brethren, and to joyn with them; shew the like warrant for Prayer upon a book, prescribed to us, and then we will grant a godly book may supply even in this case the lacke of a Christian companion; [Page 69]If a Minister be not able to preach by reason of the straightnesse of his heart, and grievous pres­sure, he may get his Christian friend to preach for him; but he may not make use of a godly homily enjoyned to him by others, to supply the lack of a Christian friend.

Disc. Why should it be a sin to read or pronounce a godly form of Prayer, is it for that it is read and pronounced, or because a man cannot lift up his heart in faith unto God, when he uttereth his requests in a stinted form of words; to assigne the former, is super­stition: To say the latter is to offend against common experience?

Answ. We do not say it is a sin to read or pro­nounce a godly form of Prayer; but to read a form of Prayer devised by others, and to set it a part to read, being devised by others enjoy­ned to me as my Prayer; This is sin, not because it is pronounced, for all publique Prayer is pro­nounced; nor alwayes in private, because it is read; for (as hath been said) a man may go along in his spirit, and be affected with some Prayer, which occasionally he readeth, and may lift up his own heart in it to the Lord; but a sin it is, as it is set apart by himselfe for his Prayer; or as it is so enjoyned to him by others; and in publique it is of sin, both because it is read, as the Prayer of the Church (and so ano­ther book brought into the Church besides Gods Book) And because it is devised, not by the gift of Gods Spirit in themselves, but in others, and also because by other it is prescri­bed or enjoyned to be read, as the service, and [Page 70]worship of God in another Church: For we do not find that ever God gave warrant either for the offering up of read Prayers to God, as the ordinary prayers of the Church; and least of all for Prayers prescribed and enjoyned by one Church unto another.

It is so far off from superstition to affirm this, that we look at it as a superstition to deny it; for to speak of superstition according to the true nature of it (and not according to the old Etymologie) If superstition be cultus supra statu­tum, there is none of all these kinds, whether as read upon a book in the Congregation, for their ordinary Prayers; or devised by men of other Congregations for that end; or as impo­sed upon us by them: but they are all of them, and each one of them, cultus supra statutum, worships and helps, and forms of worship which never came into Gods heart to allow for his statute and worship.

Disc. Will any man object, that read prayer is not Gods Ordinance? It hath been answered already, that prayer is the ordinance of God; but whether our prayers be onely conceived in heart, or uttered by words; whether in our own, or other words; whe­ther by pronouncing or reading, that is not appointed; when spake he one word of prayer within Book or without, in this or that form of words?

Answ. Reply hath been made hereto before; as Prayer is an Ordinance of God, so are all the lawfull helps and means and forms of Prayer; God hath plainly expressed his allowance of Prayer conceived in the heart, and of prayer [Page 71]uttered, and pronounced by words both in our own words, and in the words of others, whom God calleth to be our mouths in the present as­sembly: but of set forms of read prayer devised by men of another Congregation, and prescri­bed and imposed upon others; it may justly be demanded, when did God speak one word of them? And therefore, what have we to do with them? If it be said as God never spake word of reading Prayer within book, so never did he speak word of pronouncing Prayer without Book; the Text doth plainly enough expresse the contrary; for the Word of God speaketh expressely, that Christ lift up his eyes to Heaven in Prayer, John 17.1. & 11.41. so did David, Psalm 123.1. and God hath in­graffed it in the hearts of all his people, to ex­presse the lifting up of their souls, their faith and hope, and desires to God, by lifting up their eyes stedfastly to Heaven in Prayer, yea, God hath ingraffed it in the hearts of all men, and even put some kind of instinct into all living creatures, to lift up their eyes to Heaven for what they want, Psal. 145.15. Now, if the lif­ting up of the eyes to Heaven in Prayer be ex­presly mentioned in the Word, then how can it be truly said, that God never spake word of Prayer without Book? for they that lift up their eyes stedfastly to Heaven in Prayer, cannot (without some distractions) cast them down in Prayer upon a book, if lifting up of the eyes to Heaven in Prayer, be a divine Insti­tution (as the Discourse said even now) if it be [Page 72]an externall means to help the affection of the spirit in Prayer) then it is against the Instituti­on, and an hinderance to Prayer, instead of an help, to set a mans self or others, a form of read Prayers, wherein whilest he is reading he must usually cast down his eyes upon a Book.

CHAP. VI. Tending to give Answer unto the fifth Reason.

Disc. WHere there is no breach of Law, there is no sin: But the use of a prescript form of Prayer is no breach of Law, or of any Com­mandement of God.

Answ. It hath been shewed above that it is a breach of the second Commandement more wayes than one, to devise and use a similitude and form, and means of worship, which God never appointed, and such is the reading of a ser form of Prayer, for the Prayers of the Church.

2. It is an usurpation of more than Prophe­ticall, or Apostolicall authority, to prescribe a set form of Lyturgie, to the Churches, and a greater usurpation for one Congregation to prescribe the same to another, which is a sin both against the second and fifth Commande­ments.

3. It is a sinfull and disloyall betraying of the souls of Magistrates to countenance their in­truding such prescript forms of Prayer, upon Churches, by taking up the same forms from them, which they have not authority from God to injoyne, and stifly to plead for them, a sin forbidden in the fifth and sixth Commande­ments.

4. It is a sinfull betraying of Christian Liber­ty, which Christ hath purchased to every Church of his by his precious blood: For one Church voluntarily to take up the Injunctions and prescriptions of another, contrary to Col. 2.20, 22. which argument may be applyed another way, by a Testimony from the book of Common-Prayer, Gods Service is perfect Free­dome, but the reading of a set form of Prayer devised, and prescribed by others is not perfect freedome (for many would be right glad to be freed from it) therefore such reading of prayers is not Gods service.

5. It is a sinfull breach of the rule of decency, to offer up prayers to God in such a form, as cannot well stand with that decent gesture which is most sutable to Prayer, It is a gesture most sutable to Prayer; to lift it up to God as with hearts and hands, so with eyes stedfastly lift up to Heaven: But this gesture cannot fitly, and stedfastly be used, in read Prayer, where the eyes must be usually cast down upon the Book.

CHAP. VII. Wherein Answer is returned to the sixth Reason.

Disc. IF a set form of prayer be disallowed, then a prescript form of Catechisme and Confession must of necessity be condemned; but how absurd this is he is very blind, or will full that seeth not, the ne­cessity, antiquity and excellency of catechising, is known to them that know any thing, touching the building and governing the House of God.

Answ. Touching set forms of Catechisme, we have answered twice before in clearing some objections against the first Reason: whereto we refer you, it hath been already shewed us, that God himselfe hath set before us sundry forms of Catechisme. Davids Catechisme was of one form, Psal. 34.11, 12, 13, 14. Solomons of another, Prov. 4. The Apostles of another, Heb. 6.2. Yea, the Apostles name the heads of their Catechisme, but neither propound the questions, nor answers them in use, An evi­dent Argument they never meant to bind Churches to set forms of Catechisme: The ex­cellent and necessary use of catechizing young men, and novices (as hath been said before) we willingly acknowledge: But little benefit have we seen reaped from set forms of questi­ons [Page 75]and answers devised by one Church, and imposed by necessity upon another: They must look at them with coloured Spectacles, that can discern them: The like may be said of forms of Confessions, when a Church is suspected and slandered with corrupt and unsound Doctrine, they have a call from God, to set forth a pub­lique confession of their faith. But to prescribe the same as the confession of the faith of that Church to their posterity, or to prescribe the confession of one Church to be a form, and pat­tern unto others, sad experience hath shewed what a snare it hath been to both, nothing in after ages must be held for a doctrine of the Church (though never so necessary a truth) unlesse it were found amongst the Articles of Religion agreed upon by their fathers, in the confession of their Faith.

CHAP. VIII. Giving Answer to the seaventh Reason.

Disc. IT is lawfull to aske common blessings of God dayly in a set form of words, Ergo. It is not unlawfull to use a set form of Prayer; and if to pro­nounce it, to read it also: for reading of it selfe, is not impure, as pronouncing cannot make an evill matter good, no more can reading make a good mat­ter evill, pronouncing and reading being Adjuncts in prayer both indifferent.

Answ. First, the Question with us is not so much about set forms of prayer in generall, as about set forms of Prayer devised by men of other Churches, precsribed, and injoyned to be read as the Prayers of the Church, or devised by one Christian, and set apart by another, as his prayers, to which this Argument reacheth not.

Though we do not deny it to be altogether unlawfull to seek common blessings of God dai­ly in a set form of words, yet we would not en­courage men to rest and content themselves in so doing, much lesse to bind themselves so to do: For besides that, a daily set form will easily de­generate to a formallity, how can a Christian be said to watch unto prayer (which we are [Page 77]commanded to do, Eph. 6.18.) If we content our selves with the same set form of prayer, this year, as the last: Besides, the common daily blessings, which the Discourser instanceth in; as faith, patience, meeknesse, love, sanctification of Gods name. Coming of Christs Kingdome, the state of these things doth ever and anon va­ry, and to bind a mans selfe daily to a set form of prayer, for such things as the state whereof is so daily varied, will bring in a loose and In­congruous kind of prayers, fit only for those, that do not discern, or are not affected with the present state of things, either in themselves, or others.

When it is said, if it be lawfull to pronounce a set form of prayer, then to read it; If the meaning be to read it, for a prayer, the conse­quence is not firm, for though (as the Discourser saith) the reading of prayer is not impure: Yet the praying of read prayers is the using of such a Crutch to pray (as he speaketh) which God hath not appointed, and that maketh such read­ing impure: And though pronouncing can­not make an evill matter good, nor simply read­ing make a good matter evill, yet reading to such an end, reading a set form of prayer, pre­scribed to me for my prayer, maketh to me a Will-worship of that which he that concei­ved the prayer might lawfully have pronoun­ced.

The pronouncing of a good Sermon by him that made it, is a good and acceptable service to God, and his Church: But to read a Sermon [Page 78]as my preaching, which was made by another, maketh it neither so acceptable to God, nor to his Church, yea the reading of a mans own Ser­mon instead of preaching will much detract from the life and power of it, and make a man of God unserviceable for his place: Though reading and pronouncing of a thing, be both of them adjuncts, and common adjuncts too, to that which is pronounced or read, yet accor­ding to the ends and subjects, to which they may be applyed, the one may be lawfull, the other not indifferent but sinfull, the reading of a Sermon for preaching, is a sinfull manner of preaching; The difference will ever hold be­tween the word read, and preached: They are two distinct Ordinances.

CHAP. IX. Answering unto the eight Reason.

THe Jewes before the coming of Christ used a prescript form of Prayer (as it is probable, and the learned note) in the celebration of the Pass­over, and that which they used (as is very pro­bable) was approved by Christ himself.

Answ. That the Jewes before the coming of Christ, did use certain Rites in keeping the Pass­over, It doth appear by the Testimonies alled­ged [Page 79]as also by Causabon, and others: And that some forms of Prayer they used, accor­ding as the severall passages of the Passeover required: But it doth not at all appear that they used any set forms of Prayer, but onely to that and the like effect, and that not by Prescript or Injunction from one to another, but leaving every father of a family at his liberty therein, much lesse will it appear that our Lord Jesus Christ, took up any set forms of Prayer by their example and least of all from their Injuncti­on.

CHAP. X. Giving Answer to the ninth Reason

Disc. ALL the reformed Churches at this day, do not only tollerate, but approve a set form of Liturgie, &c.

Answ. We count it a safe course to bewail our own sins and the sins of our fathers, where­by we have polluted the holy things of God, more or lesse, rather than to justifie our own alterations from the rule by their presidents; [...]reat cause we have to blesse the Lord for the [...]reat light which the instruments whom God [...]ed in reforming all Protestant Churches [Page 80]brought into the dark world, and left behind them: and yet it is well known in some thing or other, all of them, more or lesse failed: and it is more wonder they should see so much truth out of the midst of darknesse, then that they who saw so much, should fail in any thing but whereinsoever they failed the generation that have come after them, have too closely and ungodly stuck to their examples, yea, and have been more zealous in the defence there­of, than have sought to perfect what they less defective; yet this we may truly affirm, that we know none of all the reformed forraign Churches that do prescribe a set form of Pray­er with necessity to be observed; but leave their Minister at liberty to use the same, or some other form to the like effect at their own di­rection, which taketh off a great part of sin, and burthen of set forms; God knoweth how to passe by the remnant of iniquity of the trans­gression of them that seek him in truth, although all the high places be not taken away, 2 Chron 15.17. The Lord did not so look at their high places, as to reject his people for Idolaters or Superstitious Persons, when they sought him in (truth of heart) though in high places; nei­ther yet would he justifie their high places to after Ages, by the example and authority of their Ancestors: farre be it from us to censure the present Churches of obstinacy, who have persisted in the presidents left by our holy ance­stors, those first reformed; yet neither may we be so unfaithfull as to sowe Pillowes under [Page 81]the Elbows, no, not of publique Churches, who knoweth not they have all been more studious and tenacious of what form the doctrine and worship, and discipline was left unto them, then inquisitive after farther light, yea, some­times more inclinable to look back into Aegypt, than to hasten towards Canaan; it is true, we have cause to suspect our selves of error, ra­ther than so many glorious lights of former and present times (to wit) if our faith were built upon our selves, we should prefer their judge­ments and testimony before our own; but seeing our faith resteth only on the word of the Lord, and his Spirit breathing therein, and the Word hath promised more and more light shall break forth in these times, till Anti­christ be utterly consumed and abolished; we shall sin against the Grace and Word of truth if we confine our truth, either to the Divines of present or former ages.

Disc. Be that all the Churches may erre in this, yet I hope no moderate man can censure them of obsti­nacy, as men not willing to consent to the truth shew­ed and manifested; how then cometh it to passe, that none of them hitherto have subscribed to this opini­on, and to the practice of our brethren of the Se­paration? The true Churches of God cannot erre fundamentally, nor obstinately against knowledge; but how can they be freed from one of these, let the opposites themselves judge.

Answ. Though we do not believe (as you do) that the true Churches of Christ cannot erre fundamentally, but doe conceive for a time they may (as the Church of Israel in the golden Calfe, and afterwards more dange­rously in the crucifying of Christ, and many Christian Churches almost all, in that time, when Hierome complaineth the whole world was become an Arian) yet we do not look at the reading of devised prescript forms, as a fundamentall error: howbeit any error or sin persisted in against light, will in time argue an unsound and corrupt heart in the bottom. And although we dare not excuse true Chur­ches (as you do) from possibility of obstinacy, at least in some degree (for we see Moses and the Prophets often taxing the Church of Israel of rebellion and obstinacy, Deut. 31.27. Jer. 22.21. Ezek. 3.7.) yet we dare not think that the Churches of Christ do sin of obstinacy (espe­cially of reigning obstinacy) in this case; For many of them never saw the grounds, as have born witnesse against set and prescript read forms of Prayer; and those that have seen their grounds, have not been convinced of the solidity of them; and therefore may not be charged with obstinacy, till after they have been convict of sinne herein, and yet persist herein against light of conscience, which God forbid.

This Reason (from the judgement and pra­ctice of other Churches) hath been wont to be of [Page 83]great force in former times; otherwise the Apostle would never have alledged the practise and consent of the Churches to confirm the faithfull, and to stop the mouths of the contentious, Acts 15.22.28. 1 Cor. 11.16. and 14.34.

Answ. The Argument from the practice and judgement of Churches, was of greater force in the Apostles time than ever since: the estate of the Churches as then remained tanquam intemerata virgo, whilest the Apostles and the Apostolique men lived; men that could not erre themselves; and were more watchfull and zealous than to suffer any error to get head in any of the Churches; but let them that press the like argument now, let them shew us the like infallibillity, vigilancy and zeal, of the guides of the Churches in these dayes; and we shall readily captivate our own judgements to such divine testimony: otherwise the judge­ment of Churches now, being but humane te­stimony (unlesse it might appear grounded in Scripture warrant) we only hearken thus far to an Argument taken from the Churches, as reverently and meekly to attend to it, and if it dissent from Scripture, yet still to bear with meeknesse and patience, and brotherly love, any failing which is found in them; but not therefore to approve and justifie all their pro­ceedings.

CHAP. XI. Touching the other Question of the peoples joyning in prayer with the reading of a devised prescript Liturgie.

FInally, your Discourse cometh along to make good a third assertion, which you had at first made a part of the state of the Questi­on, to wit,

Disc. That though it were unlawfull for the Ministers to use a prescript form of prayer; yet no reason can be shewed, why it should be unwarran­table for the people to be present at such prayers and assemblies.

Answ. We conceive that good reason may be shewed. Why, if it be unlawfull for the Minister to pray upon a book, a devised and prescript form of prayer: it is unlawfull like­wise for the people so to be present at it, as to joyn with it, or seem to joyn with it.

Our first reason is taken from the unity of the Church, if the Officers or Ministers, and all [Page 85]the members of the Church be one body, (as they are said to be, 1 Cor. 10.17.) the sinne of the Minister of the Church openly committed in the publique worship of God, is the sin of them all that do joyne with him, and do not bear witnesse against his sinne according to God.

A second Reason may be taken from the compactnesse of Gods worship, and com­munion which all the members in the Church have in it; all the worship of God in the Chur­ches of Christ, is put up to God, as well by the people as by the Ministers [...] with one accord, Acts 1.14. The Prayer of the Minister is the Prayer of them; the matter of his prayer is the matter of all their prayers; the form of his prayer (I speak of the externall form, which is that wherein they can joyn) is the form of them; if then it be unlawfull for the Minister to pray upon a book, a devised prescript form of prayer: it is alike unlawfull for the people to joyn with him.

Disc. The people are commanded to examine themselves before they draw nigh unto the presence of God, but not to examine whether the Ministers pray in one form or other.

Answ. The members of the Church are not indeed to examine the secret sins of any but themselves, but the open sins of any of their brethren, they ought to admonish one ano­ther [Page 86]thereof, and to prevent with holy watch­fullnesse the sinnes of one another, else the sin of one Achan becometh the sin and plague of all Israel, Joshua 7.11, 12.

Disc. If the Minister pray coldly, (as they say all reading of stinted forms maketh but cold prayer: a drawing nigh to God with the lips; when the heart is far from him) yet this is the fault of the Minister only, not of all that are present, for such may be the Ministers fault to pray coldly, even in a conceived forme.

Answ. First, We do not say (for our parts) that all praying upon a book or instituted forms, is but cold prayer, because God may pardon the ignorance of his people, and ac­cept the sincerity of their hearts, help them with some spirituall affections, even in such prayers, howbeit, a form of prayer not allow­ed of God will not (of it self) affect the heart with heavenly warmth, neither do we say that the coldnesse of the Ministers heart in prayer, if it spring from the inward corruption of his own spirit, doth wrap the people into the fel­lowship of the same sinne, de secretis non Judicat Ecclesia, nor is it defiled by the tolleration of se­cret sins in others.

But if the people be convinced, that the rea­ding of prayer upon a book prescribed to them by man, is a sin against the second Commande­ment, and so no true help or means of Gods [Page 87]worship, is therefore some hinderance and im­pediment to it, then the people shall be guilty, not only of the fellowship of those forms of Prayer, but also of the coldness of the Mi­nisters heart therein, if they willingly joyn in that which corrupteth and cooleth his spirit.

Disc. Coldnesse and lip-labour in prayer is not helped with Separation, but by joyning the in­ward affections of the heart with the outward Ser­vice.

Answ. True, if the coldnesse spring onely from the corruption of the Ministers heart, and not from the unsanctified means and helplesse help of Prayer which he useth, to wit, a pre­script form of book-prayer; but as no man can wash his hands from sin, that removeth not away all outward occasions of such sin, as much as in him lyeth, from himself and others, so no man can be freed from the guilt of such cold­nesse as the Minister and the people do con­tract by the customary use of such devised pre­script forms of Prayer, if he do not so much as in him lyeth remove such occasions of evil from them.

Disc. The Jewes used a stinted form of prayer (or Liturgie) in the Synagogues, at the celebration of the Passeover, before the dayes of our Saviour Christ; yet Christ never perswaded the people to absent themselves, nor did he withdraw himself, but [Page 88]resorted to their Synagogues, and the Temple; as did also his Apostles after his ascension.

Answ. Of the Jewish forms of Prayer, we have spoken before, And have justly denied that they took up any book prayers, devised by others prescribed to them; and therefore no marvell if neither Christ nor his Apostles with­drew themselves from them; seeing the out­ward face of administrations, was only of Gods Ordinances, not of the inventions of men, at the least so farre as not to draw them into fel­lowship or communion with them therein; the corruptions sound amongst them, both in do­ctrine and worship Christ and his Apostles did freely bear witnesse against, both to themselves, and the people.

Disc. It is not lawfull to separate from the Chur­ches or assemblies of the Saints, in whose fellowship we may serve God with an holy worship, and believe in him with an holy faith; for if a prayer conceived in the heart and uttered with the voice be a pure service of God, the same read upon a book, becometh not impure to them that hear it with holy affecti­ons.

Answ. We do not separate from the Church and assembly of the Saints, but willingly joyn with you in every part of your holy worship; and in every doctrine of your holy faith only we withdraw our selves from such parts of your administrations, wherein we cannot [Page 89]joyn with you, but wrap our selves into the fellowship of such sin which (in our conscien­ces) we see committed by you: How the same Prayer conceived by the spirit of a Minister, and pronounced in his own, and in the peoples name to God, may be a pure service to God, yet the same written in a book, and prescribed to others to be read by them as their Prayers, may be an unlawfull form of worship hath been shewed above; it is wearisome to repeat the same things so often.

Disc. Lastly, The Scribes and the Pharisees sinned grievously in corrupting the Law with their false glosses, and defiling the worship of God with their own inventions; neverthelesse, the faithfull held fellowship and communion with them in the worship of God; and that by the approbation of the Prophets, and of Christ himself; but surely the health of the Church is more crazed by such great infirmities, than by the onely toleration and use of a prescript form of prayer.

Answ. The substance of this objection hath been answered even now; the faithfull did, and might lawfully joyn in worshiping God in his own Ordinances, notwithstanding the ac­cidentall pollution which the Scribes and Pha­risees brought in, both in doctrine and worship; for corruptions in doctrine do not draw the hearers into fellowship of the same faith: if they beware of the leaven of such doctrine, and bear witnesse against it; in time and place according [Page 90]to God; & as for the pollutions in worship, they chiefly lay in their private superstitious devo­tions, of washing their hands, and pots, and cups, and brazen vessels, and not in their out­ward administrations of publique Ordinances; especially in such wherein their act and the peoples was offered up together with one ac­cord; but there is not the like reason of pub­lique Prayer, wherein both Minister and people do all joyn together, as one man, with one ac­cord; where any known sin in the outward administration of the Minister is the sin of all the people that joyn with him. The Lord give us hearts to deny our selves, and to sit close to him; that he may delight to lead us on by his spirit of truth, in all truth and goodnesse; and still delight to be mercifull to us, in pardoning and healing all our forms and present polluti­ons, for his holy Names sake in Jesus Christ, Amen, Amen.