laws; not ufurping over fpiritual things, as Lucifer beyond his fphere. And the fame precept bids him likewife, for confcience fake, be fubject to the parliament, both his natural and his legal fuperiour. Finally, having laid the fault of these commotions not upon his own mifgovernment, but upon the "ambition of others, the neceffity of fome men's fortune, and thirst after novelty," he bodes himself "much honour and reputation, that, like the fun, fhall rife and recover himfelf to fuch a splendour, as owls, bats, and fuch fatal birds fhall be unable to bear." Poets, indeed, ufed to vapour much after this manner. But to bad kings, who, without cause, expect future glory from their actions, it happens, as to bad poets, who fit and starve themselves with a delufive hope to win immortality by their bad lines. For though men ought not to "fpeak evil of dignities" which are juft, yet nothing hinders us to speak evil, as often as it is the truth, of thofe who in their dignities do evil. Thus did our Saviour himfelf, John the Baptift, and Stephen the Martyr. And thofe black veils of his own misdeeds he might be fure would ever keep "his face from thining," till he could "refute evil speaking with well doing," which grace he seems here to pray for; and his prayer doubtlefs as it was prayed, fo it was heard. But even his prayer is fo ambitious of prerogative, that it dares afk away the prerogative of Chrift himself, "To become the headftone of the corner." XVI. Upon the Ordinance against the Common Prayer Book. WHAT to think of liturgies, both the fenfe of fcrip ture, and apoftolical practice, would have taught him better, than his human reafonings and conjectures: nevertheless, what weight they have, let us confider. If it "be no news to have all innovations ushered in with the name of reformation," fure it is lefs news to have all reformation cenfured and oppofed under the name of innovation, by those who, being exalted in high place above their merit, fear all change, though of things never fo ill or fo unwifely fettled. So hardly can the dotage of thofe that dwell upon antiquity allow prefent times any fhare of godliness or wifdom. The removing of liturgy he traduces to be done only as a "thing plaufible to the people;" whofe rejection of it he likens, with final reverence, to the crucifying of our Saviour; next, that it was done "to pleale thole unen who gloried in their extemporary vein," meaning the minifters. For whom it will be beft to anfwer, as was anfwered for the man born blind, "They are of age, let them fpeak for themfelves;" not how they came blind, but whether it were liturgy that held them tonguetied. "For the matter contained in that book," we need no better witness than King Edward the Sixth, who to the Cornifh rebels confeffes it was no other than the old mafs-book done into English, all but fome few words that were expunged. And by this argument, which King Edward fo promptly had to use against that irreligious rabble, we may be afiured it was the carnal fear of thofe divines and politicians that modelled the liturgy no farther off from the old mafs, left by too great an alteration they fhould incenfe the people, and be deftitute of the fame fhifts to fly to, which they had taught the young king. "For the manner of ufing fet forms, there is no doubt but that, wholesome" matter and good defires rightly conceived in the heart, wholefome words will follow of themselves. Neither can any true Chriftian find a reafon why liturgy fhould be at all admitted, a prefcription not impofed or practifed by thofe firft founders of the church, who alone had that authority: without whose precept or example, how conftantly the priest puts on his gown and furplice, fo conftantly doth his prayer put on a fervile yoke of liturgy. This is evident, that they "who use no fet forms of prayer," have words from their affections; while others are to feek affections fit and proportionable to a certain dofe of prepared words; which as they are not rigoroufly forbid to any man's private infirmity, fo to imprifon and confine by force, into a pinfold of fet words, thofe two moft unimprifonable things, our prayers, and that divine spirit of utter ance ance that moves them, is a tyranny that would have longer hands than thofe giants who threatened bondage to Heaven. What we may do in the fame form of words is not fo much the queftion, as whether liturgy may be forced as he forced it. It is true that we " pray to the fame God;" muft we, therefore, always ufe the fame words? Let us then ufe but one word, becaufe we pray to one God. "We profe's the fame truths," but the liturgy comprehends not all truths: "we read the fame fcriptures," but never read that all thofe facred expreffions, all benefit and ufe of Scripture, as to public prayer, fhould be denied us, except what was barrelled up in a common prayer-book with many mixtures of their own, and, which is worfe, without falt. But fuppofe them favory words and unmixed, fuppofe them manna itself, yet, if they fhall be hoarded up and enjoined us, while God every morning rains down new expreffions into our hearts; inftead of being fit to ufe, they will be found like referved manna, rather to breed worms and ftink. "We have the fame duties upon us, and feel the fame wants;" yet not always the fame, nor at all times alike; but with variety of circumftances, which atk variety of words: whereof God hath given us plenty; not to use fo copiously upon all other occafions, and fo niggardly to him alone in our devotions. As if chriftians were now in a worle famine of words fit for prayer, than was of food at the fiege of Jerufalem, when perhaps the priets being to remove the fhowbread, as was accuftomed, were compelled every fabbath day, for want of other loaves, to bring again ftill the fame. If the "Lord's Prayer" had been the "warrant or the pattern of fet liturgies," as is here affirmed, why was neither that prayer, nor any other fet form ever after used, or fo much as mentioned by the Apostles, much lefs commended to our ute? Why was their care wanting in a thing fo ufeful to the church? fo full of danger and contention to be left undone by them to other men's penning, of whofe authority we could not be fo certain? Why was this forgotten by them, who declare that they have revealed to us the whole counfel of God? who, as he left our affections to be guided by his fanctifying tpirit, fo did he likewise our words to be put into us without our premeditation*; not only thofe cautious words to be used before gentiles and tyrants, but much more. thofe filial words, of which we have fo frequent ufe in our accefs with freedom of speech to the throne of grace. Which to lay afide for other outward dictates of men, were to injure him and his perfect gift, who is the fpirit, and the giver of our ability to pray; as if his minif tration were incomplete, and that to whom he gave affections, he did not alfo afford utterance to make his gift of prayer a perfect gift; to them efpecially, whofe office in the church is to pray publicly. And although the gift were only natural, yet voluntary prayers are lefs fubject to formal and fuperficial tempers than fet forms: for in those, at least for words and matter, he who prays muft confult firft with his heart, which in likelihood may ftir up his affections; in these, having both words and matter ready made to his lips, which is enough to make up the outward act of prayer, his affections grow lazy, and come not up eafily at the call of words not their own; the prayer alfo having lefs intercourse and fympathy with a heart wherein it was not conceived, faves itself the labour of fo long a journey downward, and flying up in hafte on the fpecious wings of formality, if it fall not back again headlong, inftead of a prayer which was expected, prefents God with a set of stale and empty words. No doubt but oftentation and formality" may taint the best duties; we are not therefore to leave duties for no duties, and to turn prayer into a kind of lurry. Cannot unpremeditated babblings be rebuked, and reftrained in whom we find they are, but the fpirit of God must be forbidden in all men? But it is the custom of bad men and hypocrites, to take advantage at the leaft abuse of good things, that under that covert they may remove the goodness of thofe things, rather than the abuse. And how unknowingly, how weakly is the ufing of set *The promise of the Spirit's affiftance, here alluded to, was extraordinary, and belonged only to the first age; fo that the author's argument is in this part inconclufive. forms forms attributed here to "conftancy," as if it were con ftancy in the cuckoo to be always in the fame liturgy. Much lefs can it be lawful than an Englished mafs-book, compofed, for aught we know, by men neither learned, nor godly, fhould juftle out, or at any time deprive us the exercise of that heavenly gift, which God by fpecial promise pours out daily upon his church, that is to fay, the spirit of prayer. Whereof to help thofe many infirmities, which he reckons up, "rudeness, impertinency, flatnefs," and the like, we have a remedy of God's finding out, which is not liturgy, but his own free fpirit. Though we know not what to pray as we ought, yet he with fighs unutterable by any words, much lefs by a ftinted liturgy, dwelling in us makes interceffion for us, according to the mind and will of God, both in private and in the performance of all ecclefiaftical duties. For it is his promife alfo, that where two or three gathered together in his name fhall agree to afk him any thing, it fhall be granted; for he is there in the midft of them. If then ancient churches, to remedy the infirmities of prayer, or rather the infections of Arian and Pelagian herefies, neglecting that ordained and promifed help of the fpirit, betook them almoft four hundred years after Chrift to liturgy, (their own invention,) we are not to imitate them; nor to diftruft God in the removal of that truant help to our devotion, which by him never was appointed. And what is faid of liturgy, is faid alfo of directory, if it be impofed: although to. forbid the fervice-book there be much more reafon, as being of itself fuperftitious, offenfive, and indeed, though Englifhed, yet ftill the mafs-book; and public places ought to be provided of fuch as need not the help of liturgies or directories continually, but are fupported with minifterial gifts antwerable to their calling, Laftly, that the common-prayer book was rejected because it "prayed fo oft for him," he had no reason, to object for what large and laborious prayers were made for him in the pulpits, if he never heard, it is. doubtful they were never heard in Heaven. We might now have expected, that his own following prayer fhould D 4 add |