2. If it be the same work which belongeth to the magistrate, then it

is no new office, for they are magistrates.

3. If it be that which belongeth to private men, by God's appointment,

they cannot disoblige themselves by transferring it to a new officer.

4. If it be none of all these, what is it? I doubt it may prove some

needless or rather sinful work, which God committed to none of these

three sorts, and therefore unfit to make a church office of. Unless it

be such as I before described and granted. (1.) I confess that the

magistrate may make new inferior officers, to do his own part (as

church justices, churchwardens, &c.) (2.) I grant that the people may

make an office for the better doing of some parts of their own work:

they may make collectors, door-keepers, artists by office, to keep the

clock, and bells, and church buildings, &c. if the magistrates leave

it to them.

(3.) I grant that the bishops or pastors may do some circumstances of

their work by human officers; as to facilitate their concord in

synods, by choosing one to preside, to choose time and place, to send

messengers to take votes, to moderate disputes, to record agreements,

&c. as aforesaid; and these circumstantials are the things that

officers may be made for.

But the very modes and circumstances which are part of the work to

which every bishop or pastor is obliged, he cannot commit to another;

as to choose his text, subject, method, words, &c. These are parts of

his own work; though concord in these is the work of many.

Now what is the work besides all these that we must have new churches

and offices made for? Is it to govern all these bishops and churches?

How? By the word or by the sword? If by the sword, the magistrate is

to do it; if by the word, (or spiritual authority,) either God hath

made such an office as archbishops or general bishops over many, or he

hath not: if he have, we need no new human office for it, God having

provided for it already; if not, but God hath left all bishops

independent, and to learn of one another, as equal in office, and

unequal only in gifts, then either such an office is fit and

necessary, or not. If it be, you accuse God of omission in not

appointing a bishop over bishops as well as a bishop of the lowest

order. If not, then by what reason or power will you make new needless

officers in the church? when Cyprian and his Carthage council so

vehemently disclaimed being _Episcopi Episcoporum_?

19. I would fain know whether those new-made churches of human and not

of divine fabrication, (whether universal, (or papal,) patriarchal,

provincial, &c.) were made by former churches, or by no churches. If

by no churches, then either by other societies or by single persons:

if by other societies, by what power do they make new churches to

Christ, who are themselves no churches? If by single persons, either

they are before church members, or not; if not, how can those make new

churches that be not so much as members of churches, without a

commission from Christ? But if either former churches or their members

made these new churches, then, (1.) It followeth that there were

another sort of churches before these new or human churches. And if

so, either those other that made these were themselves made of God or

not. And so the question will run up till you bring it either to some

church of God's making which made these other, or some person

commissioned to do it. If you say the first, then he that will confess

that there is a species of churches of Christ's institution, and a

species not of his institution, must prefer the former, and must well

prove the power of making the latter. And so they must do, if they say

that it was done by particular persons that were no particular church

members. For if Christ commissioned them to settle any one species of

churches, those are to be esteemed settled by Christ. (2.) But if you

say that Christ left them to vary the species of churches as they saw

cause, and so on to the end of the world, 1. You must well prove it.

2. It is before disproved (unless you take the word church

equivocally).

20. Lastly, all christians are satisfied of Christ's authority; and

therefore in that they can agree: but so they are not of any human

church maker's authority; and therefore in that there will never be an

agreement: therefore such new churches, and ecclesiastical

governments, will be but (as they ever have been) the engines of

division and ruin in the churches; and the species of God's making,

with the mutability of mutable adjuncts and circumstances, will best

preserve the church's peace.

But if the true nature of pastoral or ecclesiastical government were

well understood, it would put an end to all these controversies. Which

may be mostly gathered from what is said before. To which I will add

this little following.

Quest. _Wherein consisteth the true nature of pastoral church

government?_

_Answ._ 1. Not in any use of the sword, or corporal force.

2. Not in a power to contradict God's word.

3. Not in a power co-ordinate with Christ's, to do his proper work, or

that which hath the same grounds, reasons, and nature.

4. Not in an unquestionable empire, to command things which none must

presume to examine, or judge of by a discerning judgment, whether they

be forbidden by God or not.

5. Not now in making a new word of God, or new articles of faith, or

new universal laws, for the whole church.

6. Not in any thing which derogates from the true power of

magistrates, or parents, or masters.

But, 1. It is a ministerial power, of a messenger or servant, who hath

a commission to deliver his master's commands and exhortations.[310]

2. As it is over the laity or flocks, it is a power in the sacred

assemblies to teach the people by office, and to be their priests or

guides in holy worship;[311] and to rule the worship actions for the

time, length, method, and orderly performance of them.[312]

3. As to particular persons, it is the power of the church keys, which

is, 1. To judge who is meet to be by baptism taken into the church. 2.

To reprove, exhort, and instruct those that by vice or ignorance, in

order to repentance, or knowledge, or confirmation, do need the

pastoral help.[313] 3. To judge who is to be forbidden church

communion as impenitent; or at least, with whom that church must be

forbidden to communicate. 4. To judge who is meet for absolution as a

penitent. 5. To deliver men personally a sealed pardon from Christ in

his two sacraments. 6. To visit the sick, and comfort the sad, and

resolve the doubting, and help the poor. This is the true church

government, which is like a philosopher's or schoolmaster's in his

school among volunteers, supposing them to have no power of the rod or

violence, but only to take in or put out of their schools: and what

need is there of a universal, patriarchal, or national head, to do any

of this work, which is but the government of a personal teacher and

conductor; and which worketh only on the conscience?

4. But besides this there is a necessity of agreeing in the right

management of this work; which needeth no new head, but only the

consultations of the several bishops or pastors, and the magistrate's

civil rule, or extrinsic episcopacy (as Constantine called it).

5. And besides this there is need to ordain pastors and bishops in the

church. And this is not done by any force neither; but, 1. By judging

what men are fit; 2. By persuading the people to consent and receive

them; and, 3. By investing them by a delivery of possession by the

imposition of hands. Now for all this, there needs no human species of

bishops or churches to be made.

6. Besides this there is need of some oversight of these pastors and

ministers and fixed bishops when they are made; and of some general

care of pastors and people, if they decline to heresies, errors,

vices, or lukewarmness: but for this, 1. When magistrates have done

their part; 2. And neighbour ministers to one another; 3. And the

consociated bishops to the particular ones; 4. And unfixed ministers

have done their parts in the places where occasionally they come; if

moreover any general pastors or archbishops are necessary, to rebuke,

direct, and persuade the bishops or their flocks, by messengers,

epistles, or in presence, no doubt but God hath appointed such as the

successors of the apostles, evangelists, and other general ministers

of those first times. But if no such thing be appointed by Christ, we

may be sure it is not necessary nor best.

If it were but considered that the ruling power in the church is so

inseparable from the teaching power, that it is exercised by teaching

and only by God's word, (either generally or personally applied,) and

that upon none but those that willingly and by consent receive it, it

would quiet the world about these matters. And oh that once

magistrates would take the sword wholly to themselves, and leave

church power to work only by its proper strength and virtue, and then

all things would fall into joint again; though the Ithacians would be

displeased.

[309] Which tempteth the Erastians to deny and pull down both

together, because they find one in the pastor's hands which belongeth

to the magistrate, and we do not teach them to untwist and separate

them.

[310] 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2.

[311] 1 Pet. v. 1-3; Matt, xxviii. 19, 20.

[312] 1 Thess. v. 12, 13.

[313] 2 Tim. iv. 1-3, 5.

Quest. LVIII. _Whether any part of the proper pastoral or episcopal

power may be given or deputed to a layman, or to one of any other

office, or the proper work may be performed by such?_

_Answ._ 1. Such extrinsical, or circumstantial, or accidental actions

as are afore-mentioned may be done by deputies or others (as calling

the church together, summoning offenders, recording actions, &c.)

2. The proper episcopal or pastoral work or office cannot be deputed,

in whole or part, any other way than by communication, which is, by

ordination, or making another to be of the same office. For if it may

be done by a layman, or one that is not of the same order and office,

then it is not to be called any proper part of the pastoral or

episcopal office: if a layman may baptize, or administer the sacrament

of Christ's body and blood, or may ordain, or excommunicate,

(ecclesiastically,) or absolve, merely because a bishop authorizeth or

biddeth him, then, 1. What need Christ have made an office work of it,

and persons be devoted and consecrated to it?

2. And why may not the people's election and the king's commission

serve to enable a layman to do it? For if commanding only be proper to

the bishop or pastor, and executing be common to laymen, it is certain

that the king may command all bishops and pastors to do their office

work; and therefore he may command a layman to do that which a bishop

may command him to do.

3. And is it not a contradiction to say that a man is a layman or of

another order, who is authorized by a bishop to do a bishop's work or

office? when as the office itself is nothing (as is oft said) but an

obligation and authority to do the work. If therefore a bishop

authorize and oblige any other man to do the proper work of a bishop

or pastor, (to ordain, to baptize, to give the sacrament of the

eucharist, to excommunicate, to absolve, &c.) he thereby maketh that

man a bishop or a pastor, whatever he call him.

_Object._ But doth not a bishop preach _per alios_, to all his

diocess? and give them the sacraments _per alios_, &c.?

_Answ._ Let not the phrase be made the controversy instead of the

matter. Those other persons are either ministers of Christ, or laymen.

If laymen, their actions are unlawful. If ministers, they are

commissioned officers of Christ themselves, and it is the work of

their own office which they do, and it is they that shall have the

reward or punishment. But if preaching to all these churches, or

giving to all these persons in a thousand parishes the sacraments, &c.

were the bishops' or archbishops' work, that is, which they are

obliged to do, then they would sin in not doing it. But if they are

the governors only of those that are obliged to do it, and are not

obliged to do it themselves, then governing the doers of it is only

their work; and therefore it is but equivocally said that the work is

theirs, which others and not they are obliged to do; and that they do

their work _per alios_, when they do but govern those others in doing

their own work.

Of this read the Lord Bacon's "Considerations," and Grotius "de Imper.

summ. Potest. circa Sacra," who soundly resolve the case, against

doing the pastoral work _per alium_.

Quest. LIX. _May a layman preach or expound the Scriptures? Or what of

this is proper to the pastor's office?_

_Answ._ 1. No doubt but there is some preaching or teaching and

expounding which a layman may use. So did Origen; so did Constantine;

so may a king, or judge on the bench; so may a parent to his children,

and a master to his family, and a schoolmaster or tutor to his

scholars.

2. It is not any one method or sermon fashion which is proper to a

minister and forbidden to a layman; that method which is most meet to

the matter and hearers, may be used by one as well as by the other.

3. It is not the mere publicness of the teaching, which must tell us

what is unlawful for a layman. For writing and printing are the most

public ways of teaching; and these no man taketh to be forbidden the

laity. Scaliger, Casaubon, Grotius, Erasmus, Constantine, King James,

the Lord Bacon, and abundance more laymen, have done the church great

service by their writings. And judges on the bench speak oft

theologically to many.

But that which is proper to the ministers or pastors of the church is,

1. To make a stated office of it, and to be separated, set apart,

devoted, or consecrated and appropriated to this sacred work; and not

to do it occasionally only, or sometimes, or on the by; but as their

calling and the employment of their lives.

2. To do it as called and commissioned ministers of Christ, who have a

special nunciative and teaching authority committed to them; and

therefore are in a special manner to be heard, according to their

special authority.

3. To be the stated teachers of particular churches, as their pastors

and guides (though they may sometimes permit a layman when there is

cause to teach them _pro tempore_). These three are proper to the

ministerial and pastoral office.

But for the regulating of laymen's teaching, 1. They must statedly

keep in their families, or within their proper bounds.

2. They must not presume to go beyond their abilities, especially in

matters dark and difficult.

3. They must not thrust themselves without a just call and need into

public or numerous meetings as teachers, nor do that which savoureth

of pride or ostentation, or which tendeth to cherish those vices in

others.

4. They must not live or preach, as from under the government of the

church pastors; but being members of their flocks, must do all as

under their lawful oversight and guidance: much less must they proudly

and schismatically set up themselves against their lawful pastors, and

bring them into contempt to get themselves reputation, and to draw

away disciples after them.[314]

5. Times and places must be greatly distinguished. In infidel or

grossly ignorant countries, where through the want of preachers there

is a true necessity, men may go much further than in countries where

teachers and knowledge do abound.

[314] Acts xx. 30; Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24; 1 Thess. v. 12, 13; 1 Tim. v.

17.

Quest. LX. _What is the true sense of the distinction of pastoral

power, in foro interiore et exteriore, rightly used?_

_Answ._ 1. Not as if the pastors had any power of the sword or outward

force, or of men's bodies or estates immediately: for all the pastoral

power is immediately on the soul, and but secondarily on the body, so

far as the persuaded soul will move it. Reason and love, and the

authority of a messenger of Christ, are all the power by which bishops

or pastors as such can work, _in foro interiore vel exteriore_; they

rule the body but by ruling the soul.

2. But the true use of the distinction is only to serve instead of the

usual distinction of public and personal obligation. It is one thing

to satisfy a man's private conscience about his own personal case or

matters; and another thing to oblige the whole church, or a particular

person, of his duty as a member of the society to the rest. When the

pastor absolveth a penitent person, _in foro interiore_, that is, in

his own conscience, he delivereth him a discharge in the name of

Christ on condition he be truly penitent; else not. But _in foro

exteriore_ he actually and absolutely restoreth him to his visible

state of church communion. The rest of the members perhaps may justly

think this man unlike to prove a true penitent; and then _in foro

interiore_ they are not bound to believe him certainly penitent or

pardoned by God; but _in foro exteriore_ that he is restored to church

communion, and that for order's sake they are bound to hold communion

with him, they are bound (internally) to believe. So that it comes

near the sense of the distinction of the secret judgment (of God and

conscience) and church judgment.

Quest. LXI. _In what sense is it true that some say, that the

magistrate only hath the external government of the church, and the

pastors the internal?_

_Answ._ 1. Not as external and internal are opposed in the nature of

the action. For the voice of the pastor in preaching is external, as

well as the king's.

2. Not as they are opposed in the manner of reception. For the ears of

the auditors are external recipients from the preacher as well as from

the king.

3. Not as distinguishing the parts that are to obey, the duties

commanded, and the sins forbidden, as if the king ruled the body only

and the pastor the soul. For the soul is bound to obey the king, or

else the body could not be bound to obey him; unless by cords. And the

body must obey the preacher as well as the soul. Murder, drunkenness,

swearing, lying, and such other external vices, are under the pastor's

power to forbid in Christ's name, as well as the king's.

4. Not as if all the external parts or actions of religion were

exempted from the pastor's power. For preaching, praying, reading,

sacraments, church assemblies, are external parts of religion, and

under the pastor's care.

But in two respects the external power is only the king's or civil

magistrate's. 1. As it is denominated from the sword, or mulcts, or

corporal penalties, which is the external means of execution; though

in this respect the distinction were far more intelligibly expressed

by, The government by the sword, and by the sacred word.[315]

2. But the principal sense of their distinction is the same with

Constantine's, who distinguished of a bishop without and within; or of

our common distinction of intrinsic and extrinsic government. And

though internal and external have the same signification, use maketh

intrinsic and extrinsic more intelligible. And by internal is meant

that power which intrinsically belongeth to the pastor's office as

instituted by Christ; and so is intrinsical to the pastorship and the

church (as preaching, praying, sacraments, the keys of admission and

exclusion, ordination, &c.). And by external is meant, that which is

extrinsical to the pastorship and the church; which princes have

sometimes granted them, but Christ hath made no part of their office.

In this sense the assertion is good, and clear, and necessary; that

the disposal of all things _circa sacra_, all accidents and

circumstances whatsoever, which by Christ's institution are not

intrinsical to the pastorship and church, but extrinsical, do belong

to the power of kings and magistrates.

[315] As Bishop Bilson of Obed. useth still to distinguish them; with

many others. See B. Carlton of Jurisdiction.

Quest. LXII. _Is the trial, judgment, or consent of the laity

necessary to the admittance of a member into the universal or

particular church?_

_Answ._ 1. It is the pastor's office to bear and exercise the keys of

Christ's church; therefore by office he is to receive those that come

in; and consequently to be the trier and judge of their fitness.

2. It belongeth to the same office which is to baptize, to judge who

is to be baptized; otherwise ministers should not be rational judges

of their own actions, but the executioners of other men's judgment. It

is more the judging who is to be baptized, which the minister's office

consisteth in, than in the bare doing of the outward act of baptizing.

3. He that must be the ordinary judge in church admissions, is

supposed to have both ability and leisure to make him fit; and

authority and obligation to do the work.

4. The ordinary body of the laity have none of all these four

qualifications, much less all. 1. They are not ordinarily able, so to

examine a man's faith and resolution with judgment and skill, as may

neither tend to the wrong of himself nor of the church; for it is

great skill that is required thereunto. 2. They have not ordinarily

leisure from their proper callings and labours, to wait on such a work

as it must be waited on, especially in populous places. 3. They are

not therefore obliged to do that which they cannot be supposed to have

ability or leisure for. 4. And where they have not the other three,

they can have no authority to do it.

5. It is therefore as great a crime for the laity to usurp the

pastor's office in this matter, as in preaching, baptizing, or other

parts of it.

6. And though pride often blind men (both people and pastors) so as to

make them overlook the burden and look only at the authority and

honour; yet is it indeed an intolerable injury to the laity, if any

would lay such a burden on them which they cannot bear, and

consequently, would make them responsible for the omissions or

misdoing of it, to Christ their Judge.

7. There is not so much as any fair pretence for the laity having

power to judge who shall be received into the universal church; for

who of the laity should have this power? Not all, nor the major vote

of the church; for who ever sought the votes of all the christians in

the world, before he baptized a man? Not any one particular church or

persons above the rest; for they have no right to show for it, more

than the rest.

8. It is not in the power of the laity to keep a man out of their own

particular church communion, whom the pastor receiveth; because, as is

said, it is his office to judge and bear the keys.

9. Therefore, if it be ill done, and an unworthy person be admitted,

the consciences of the people need not accuse themselves of it, or be

disturbed, because it is none of their employment.

10. Yet the liberty of the church or people, must be distinguished

from their governing power, and their executing duty, from the power

of judging. And so, 1. The people are to be guided by the pastors as

volunteers, and not by violence: and therefore it is the pastor's

duty, in all doubtful cases, to give the people all necessary

satisfaction, by giving them the reasons of his doings, that they may

understandingly and quietly obey and submit. 2. And in case the people

discern any notable appearance of danger, by introducing heretics and

grossly impious men to corrupt the church, and by subverting the order

of Christ, they may go to their pastors to desire satisfaction in the

case. 3. And if by open proof or notoriety it be certain, that by

ignorance, fraud, or negligence, the pastors thus corrupt the church,

the people may seek their due remedy from other pastors and

magistrates. 4. And they may protest their own dissent from such

proceedings. 5. And in case of extremity, may cast off heretical, and

impious, and intolerable pastors, and commit their souls to the

conduct of fitter men; as the churches did against the Arian bishops,

and as Cyprian declareth it his people's duty to do; as is

aforesaid.[316]

[316] John xx. 21-23; xxi. 15-17; Matt. xxviii. 19, 20; 1 Cor. iv. 1,

21; Tim. v. 17; Heb. xiii. 7, 17; 1 Cor. v. 3-6, 11; 2 Thess. iii. 6,

10, 14; Tit. iii. 10; 2 John; Mark xiii. 9, 23, 33; Mark iv. 24; Matt,

vii. 15, 16; xvi. 6, 11, 12; Mark xii. 38; viii. 15; Phil. ii. 2, 3;

Col. ii. 8; 1 Pet. iii. 17; Matt. xxiv. 4.

Quest. LXIII. _What power have the people in church censures and

excommunication?_

_Answ._ This is here adjoined, because it requireth but little more

than the foregoing answer. 1. As it is the pastor's office to judge

who is to be received, so also to judge who is to be excluded.

2. But the execution of his sentence belongeth to the people as well

as to himself. It is they that either hold communion with the person,

or avoid him.[317]

3. Therefore though ordinarily they must acquiesce in the pastor's

judgment, yet if he grossly offend against the law of God, and would

bring them, e. g. to communion with heretics and openly impious, and

excommunicate the orthodox and godly, they may seek their remedy as

before.

[317] 1 Cor. v. 3, 6, 11; 2 John; Tit. iii. 10.

Quest. LXIV. _What is the people's remedy in case of the pastor's

mal-administration?_

_Answ._ This also is here annexed for despatch, as being almost

sufficiently answered already.

It must be supposed that all church disorders and mal-administrations

cannot be expected to be remedied; but many while we are sinners and

imperfect must be borne.

1. The first remedy is to speak submissively to the pastor of his

faults, and to say to Archippus, "Take heed to the ministry which thou

hast received."[318] And if he hear not more privately, for the people

more openly to warn and entreat him; not as his governors, but as

christians that have reason to regard Christ's interest and their own,

and have charity to desire his reformation.

2. The next remedy is, to consult with the neighbour pastors of other

churches, that they may admonish him; not as his governors, but as

neighbour pastors.[319]

3. The next remedy is to seek redress from those governors that have

the power to correct or cast out the intolerable.

4. The last remedy is that of Cyprian, to desert such intolerable

pastors.

But in all this, the people must be sure that they proceed not

proudly, ignorantly, erroneously, passionately, factiously,

disorderly, or rashly.

[318] Col. iv. 17.

[319] Acts xv.

Quest. LXV. _May one be a pastor or a member of a particular church,

who liveth so far from it, as to be uncapable of personal communion

with them?_

_Answ._ The name is taken from the relation; and the relation is

founded in capacity, right, and obligation to actual communion,

duties, and privileges: 1. He that is so statedly distant is uncapable

statedly of communion, and therefore uncapable of the relation and

name.

2. He that is but for a time accidentally so distant, is but for that

time uncapable of communion with them; and therefore retaineth

capacity, right, and obligation statedly for the future, but not for

the present exercise. Therefore he retaineth the relation and name, in

respect to his future intended exercise; but not in so plenary a

sense, as he that is capable of present communion.

3. It is not the length or shortness of the time of absence that

wholly cutteth off or continueth the relation and name, but the

probability or improbability of a seasonable accession. For if a man

be removed but a day, with a purpose to return no more, his relation

ceaseth. And if a man be long purposing and probably like to return,

and by sickness or otherwise be hindered, it doth not wholly end his

relation.

4. If the delay be so long as either maketh the return improbable, or

as necessitated the church to have another statedly in the pastor's

place, where they can have but one, and so the people by taking

another, consent (though with grief) to quit their relation and title

to the former, there the relation is at an end.

5. It is a delusory formality of some, that call themselves members of

a separated (or other) church, from which they most ordinarily and

statedly live at an utter distance, and yet take themselves to be no

members of the church where they live, and usually join with: and all

because they covenanted with one and not with the other.

Quest. LXVI. _If a man be injuriously suspended or excommunicated by

the pastor or people, which way shall he have remedy?_

_Ans._ As is aforesaid in case of mal-administration; 1. By

admonishing the pastor or those that wrong him. 2. By consulting

neighbour pastors, that they may admonish him. 3. By the help of

rulers, where such are, and the church's good forbids it not. 4. In

case of extremity, by removing to a church that will not so injure

you. And what needs there any more, save patience?

Quest. LXVII. _Doth presence always make us guilty of the errors or

faults of the pastor in God's worship, or of the church? Or in what

cases are we guilty?_

_Answ._ 1. If it always made us guilty, no man could join with any

pastor or church in the world, without being a wilful sinner. Because

no man worshippeth God without sin, in matter or manner, omission or

commission.

2. If it never made us guilty, it would be lawful to join with

Mahometans and bread-worshippers, &c.

3. Therefore the following decision of the question, In what cases it

is a duty or a sin to separate, doth decide this case also. For when

separation is no duty, but a sin, there our presence in the worship is

no sin; but when separation is a duty, there our presence is a sin.

4. Especially in these two cases our presence is a sin: 1. When the

very assembly and worship is so bad as God will not accept, but

judgeth the substance of it for a sin. 2. In case we ourselves be put

upon any sin in communion, or as a previous condition of our communion

(as to make some false profession, or to declare our consent to other

men's sin, or to commit corporal, visible, reputative idolatry, or the

like). But the pastor and church shall answer for their own faults,

and not we, when we have cause to be present, and make them not ours

by any sinful action of our own.

Quest. LXVIII. _Is it lawful to communicate in the sacrament with

wicked men?_

_Answ._ The answer may be gathered from what is said before.

1. If they be so wicked for number, and flagitiousness, and notoriety,

as that it is our duty to forsake the church, then to communicate with

them is a sin. Therefore the after-resolution of the just causes of

separation must be perused. As if a church were so far defiled with

heresy, or open impiety, that it were justified by the major vote, and

bore down faith and godliness, and the society were become uncapable

of the ends of church association and communion: in this and other

cases it must be deserted.

2. If we do not perform our own duty to remove unlawful communions,

(whether it be by admonition of the offender or pastor, or whatever is

proved really our duty,) the omission of that duty is our sin.

3. But if we sin not by omitting our own duty, it will be no sin of

ours to communicate with the church, where scandalous sinners or

heretics are permitted. The pastor's and delinquent's sins are not

ours.

4. Yea, if we do not omit our own duty in order to the remedy, that

will justify us in denying communion with the church while wicked men

are there. But it will rather aggravate our sin, to omit one duty

first, and thence fetch occasion to omit another.

Quest. LXIX. _Have all the members of the church right to the Lord's

table? And is suspension lawful?_

Of this see the defence of the synod's propositions in New England. I

answer,

1. You must distinguish between a fundamental right of state, and an

immediate right of present possession; or if you will, between a right

duly to receive the sacrament, and a right to immediate reception

simply considered.

2. You must distinguish between a questioned, controverted right, and

an unquestioned right; and so you must conclude as followeth.

(1.) Every church member (at least adult) as such, hath the

fundamental right of stated relation, or a right duly to receive the

sacrament; that is, to receive it understandingly and seriously at

those seasons when by the pastors it is administered.

(2.) But if upon faults or accusations, this right be duly questioned

in the church, it is become a controverted right; and the possession

or admission may, by the bishops or pastors of the church, be

suspended, if they see cause, while it is under trial, till a just

decision.

3. Though infants are true members, yet the want of natural capacity

duly to receive maketh it unlawful to give them the sacrament, because

it is to be given only to receivers, and receiving is more than eating

and drinking; it is consenting to the covenant, which is the real

receiving in a moral sense, or at least consent professed. So that

they want not a state of right, as to their relation, but a natural

capacity to receive.

4. Persons at age who want not the right of a stated relation, may

have such actual natural and moral indispositions, as may also make

them for that time unmeet to receive. As sickness, infection, a

journey, persecution, scattering the church, a prison. And (morally)

1. Want of necessary knowledge of the nature of the sacrament (which

by the negligence of pastors or parents may be the case of some that

are but newly past their childhood). 2. Some heinous sin, of which the

sinner hath not so far repented, as to be yet ready to receive a

sealed pardon, or which is so scandalous in the church, as that in

public respects the person is yet unfit for its privileges. 3. Such

sins or accusations of sin, as make the person's church title justly

controverted, and his communion suspended, till the case be decided.

4. Such fears of unworthy receiving, as were like to hurt and distract

the person, if he should receive till he were better satisfied. These

make a man uncapable of present reception, and so are a bar to his

plenary right: they have still right to receive in a due manner; but

being yet uncapable of that due receiving, they have not a plenary

right to the thing.

5. The same may be said of other parts of our duty and privileges. A

man may have a relative, habitual, or stated right to praise God, and

give him thanks for his justification, sanctification, and adoption,

and to godly conference, to exercises of humiliation, &c. who yet for

want of present actual preparation, may be uncapable, and so want a

plenary right.

6. The understanding of the double preparation necessary, doth most

clearly help us to understand this case. A man that is in an

unregenerate state, must be visibly cured of that state, (of utter

ignorance, unbelief, ungodliness,) before he can be a member of the

church, and lay a claim to its privileges. But when that is done,

besides this general preparation, a particular preparation also to

each duty is necessary to the right doing of it. A man must understand

what he goeth about, and must consider of it, and come with some

suitable affections. A man may have right to go a journey, that wants

a horse; or may have a horse that is not saddled: he that hath clothes

must put them on, before he is fit to come into company: he that hath

right to write, may want a pen, or have a bad one: having of gracious

habits, may need the addition of bringing them into such acts as are

suitable to the work in hand.

Quest. LXX. _Is there any such thing in the church, as a rank or

classis, or species of church members at age, who are not to be

admitted to the Lord's table, but only to hearing the word and prayer,

between infant members, and adult confirmed ones?_

_Answ._ Some have excogitated such a classis, or species, or order,

for convenience, as a prudent, necessary thing; because to admit all

to the Lord's table they think dangerous on one side; and to cast all

that are unfit for it out of the church, they think dangerous on the

other side, and that which the people would not bear. Therefore to

preserve the reverence of the sacrament, and to preserve their own and

the church's peace, they have contrived this middle way or rank. And

indeed the controversy seemeth to be more about the title (whether it

may be called a middle order of mere learners and worshippers) than

about the matter. I have occasionally written more of it than I can

here stay to recite; and the accurate handling of it requireth more

words than I will here use. This breviate therefore shall be all.

1. It is certain that such catechumens as are in mere preparation to

faith, repentance, and baptism, are no church members or christians at

all; and so in none of these ranks.

2. Baptism is the only ordinary regular door of entrance into the

visible church; and no man (unless in extraordinary cases) is to be

taken for a church member or visible christian till baptized.

Two objections are brought against this. 1. The infants of christians

are church members as such, before baptism, and so are believers. They

are baptized because members, and not members by baptism.

[Sidenote: What makes a visible member?]

_Answ._ This case hath no difficulty. 1. A believer as such, is a

member of Christ and the church invisible, but not of the visible

church, till he be an orderly professor of that belief. And this

profession is not left to every man's will how it shall be made, but

Christ hath prescribed and instituted a certain way and manner of

profession, which shall be the only ordinary symbol or badge, by which

the church shall know visible members; and that is baptism. Indeed

when baptism cannot be had, an open profession without it may serve;

for sacraments are made for man, and not man for sacraments. But when

it may be had, it is Christ's appointed symbol, _tessera_, and church

door. And till a person be baptized, he is but irregularly and

initially a professor; as an embryo in the womb is a man; or as a

covenant before the writing, sealing, and delivering is initially a

covenant; or as persons privately contracted without solemn matrimony

are married; or as a man is a minister upon election and trial before

ordination: he hath only, in all these cases, the beginning of a

title, which is not complete; nor at all sufficient _in foro

ecclesiæ_, to make a man visibly and legally a married man, a

minister, and so here a christian. For Christ hath chosen his own

visible badge, by which his church members must be known.

2. And the same is to be said of the infant title of the children of

believers; they have but an initial right before baptism, and not the

badge of visible christians. For there are three distinct gradations

to make up their visible Christianity. 1. Because they are their own,

(and as it were parts of themselves,) therefore believers have power

and obligation to dedicate their children in covenant with God. 2.

Because every believer is himself dedicated to God, with all that is

his own, (according to his capacity,) therefore a believer's child is

supposed to be virtually (not actually) dedicated to God in his own

dedication or covenant, as soon as his child hath a being. 3. Being

thus virtually and implicitly first dedicated, he is after actually

and regularly dedicated in baptism, and sacramentally receiveth the

badge of the church; and this maketh him a visible member or

christian, to which the two first were but introductory, as conception

is to human nativity.

_Object._ But the seed of believers as such are in the covenant; and

therefore church members.

_Answ._ The word covenant here is ambiguous; either it signifieth

God's law of grace, or prescribed terms for salvation, with his

immediate offer of the benefits to accepters, called the single

covenant of God; or it signifieth this with man's consent, called the

mutual covenant, where both parties covenant. In the former sense, the

covenant only offereth church membership, but maketh no man a church

member, till consent. It is but God's conditional promise, "If thou

believe thou shalt be saved," &c. If thou give up thyself and children

to me, I will be your God, and you shall be my people. But it is only

the mutual covenant that maketh a christian or church member.

_Object._ The promise is to us and our children as ours.

_Answ._ That is, that you and your children dedicated to God, shall be

received into covenant; but not otherwise. Believing is not only bare

assenting, but consenting to the covenant, and delivering up

yourselves to Christ; and if you do not consent that your child shall

be in the covenant, and deliver him to God also, you cannot expect

acceptance of him, against your wills; nor indeed are you to be taken

for true believers yourselves, if you dedicate not yourselves to him,

and all that are in your power.

_Object._ This offer or conditional covenant belongeth also to

infidels.

_Answ._ The offer is to them, but they accept it not. But every

believer accepteth it for himself, and his, or devoteth to God himself

and his children when he shall have them; and by that virtual

dedication or consent, his children are virtually in the mutual

covenant; and actually upon actual consent and dedication.

_Object._ But it is profession, and not baptism, that makes a visible

member.

_Answ._ That is answered before: it is profession by baptism; for

baptism is that peculiar act of profession, which God hath chosen to

this use, when a person is absolutely devoted, resigned, and engaged

to God in a solemn sacrament, this is our regular initiating

profession; and it is but an irregular embryo of a profession, which

goeth before baptism ordinarily.

_Prop. 3._ The time of infant membership, in which we stand in

covenant by our parents' consent, cannot be determined by duration,

but by the insufficiency of reason, through immaturity of age, (or

continuing idiots,) to choose for oneself.

_Prop. 4._ It is not necessary that the doctrine of the Lord's supper

be taught catechumens before baptism; nor was it usual with the

ancients so to do (though it may very well be done.)

_Prop. 5._ It is needful that the nature of the Lord's supper be

taught all the baptized before they receive it, (as was opened

before,) else they must do they know not what.

_Prop. 6._ Though the sacrament of the Lord's supper seal not another,

but the same covenant that baptism sealeth; yet are there some

further truths therein expressed, and some more particular exercises

of faith in Christ's sacrifice, and coming, &c. and of hope, and love,

and gratitude, &c. requisite. Therefore the same qualifications which

will serve for baptism, justification, and adoption, and salvation,

are not enough for the right use of church communion in the Lord's

supper, the one being the sacrament of initiation and our new birth;

the other of our confirmation, exercise, and growth in grace.

7. Whether persons be baptized in infancy or at age, if they do not

before understand these higher mysteries, they must stay from the

exercise of them till they understand them; and so with most there

must be a space of time between their baptism and fuller communion.

8. But the same that we say of the Lord's supper must be said of other

parts of worship; singing psalms, praise, thanksgivings, &c. men must

learn them, before they can practise them; and usually these as

eucharistical acts concur with the Lord's supper.

9. Whether you will call men in this state, church members of a middle

rank and order, between the baptized and the communicants, is but a

_lis de nomine_, a verbal controversy. It is granted that such a

middle sort of men there are in the church.

10. It is to be maintained that these are in a state of salvation,

even before they thus communicate. And that they are not kept away for

want of a stated relation title, but of an immediate capacity, as is

aforesaid.

11. There is no necessity, but upon such unfitness, that there should

be one day's time between baptism and the sacrament of the Lord's

supper: nor is it desirable; for if the baptized understand those

mysteries the first day they may communicate in them.

12. Therefore as men are prepared, some may suddenly communicate, and

some stay longer.

13. When persons are at age, if pastors, parents, and themselves be

not grossly negligent, they may and ought to learn these things in a

very little time; so that they need not be settled in a lower learning

state for any considerable time, unless their own negligence be the

cause.

14. And in order to their learning, they have right to be spectators

and auditors at the eucharist, and not to be driven away with the

catechumens, as if they had no right to be there. For it is a thing

best taught by the practice to beholders.

15. But if any shall by scandal or gross neglect of piety, and not

only by ignorance, give cause of questioning their title, and

suspending their possession of those sacred privileges, these are to

be reckoned in another rank, even among those whose title to church

membership itself becometh controverted, and must undergo a trial in

the church.

And this much I think may serve to resolve this considerable question.

Quest. LXXI. _Whether a form of prayer be lawful?_

_Answ._ I have said so much of this and some following questions in

many books already, that to avoid repetition, I shall say very little

here.

The question must be out of question with all christians:

1. Because the Scripture itself hath many forms of prayer; which

therefore cannot be unlawful.

_Object._ They were lawful then, but not now.

_Answ._ He that saith so, must prove where God hath since forbidden

them. Which can never be.

_Object._ They may lawfully be read in Scripture for instruction, but

not used as prayers.

_Answ._ They were used as prayers then, and are never since forbidden:

yea, John and Christ did teach their disciples to pray, and Christ

thus prefaceth his form, "When ye pray, say"----

2. All things must be done to edification: but to use a form of prayer

is for the edification of many persons, at least those that cannot

otherwise do so well; therefore those persons must use a form. Full

experience doth prove the minor, and nothing but strangeness to men

can contradict it.

Quest. LXXII. _Are forms of prayer or preaching in the church lawful?_

_Answ._ Yes: most ministers study the methodical form of their sermons

before they preach them; and many write the very words, or study them:

and so most sermons are a form. And sure it is as lawful to think

beforehand what to say in praying as in preaching.[320]

1. That which God hath not forbidden is lawful; but God hath not

forbidden ministers to study their sermons or prayers, either for

matter, method, or words, and so to make them many ways a form.

2. That which God prescribed is lawful (if he reverse it not): but God

prescribed public forms of prayer; as the titles and matter of many of

the Psalms prove, which were daily used in the Jewish synagogues.

_Object._ Psalms being to be sung, are more than prayers.

_Answ._ They were prayers, though more. They are called prayers, and

for the matter many of them were no more than prayers, but only for

the measures of words: nor was their singing like ours now, but liker

to our saying. And there are many other prayers recorded in the

Scripture.

3. And all the churches of Christ at least these thirteen or fourteen

hundred years have taken public forms for lawful; which is not to be

gainsayed without proof.

[320] God gave forms of preaching to Moses and the prophets: see a

large form of prayer for all true people, Deut. xxvi. 13-15. And so

elsewhere there are many.

Quest. LXXIII. _Are public forms of man's devising or composing

lawful?_

_Answ._ Yes: 1. The ministers afore-mentioned throughout the christian

world, do devise and compose the form of their own sermons and

prayers: and that maketh them not unlawful. 2. And whoever speaketh

_ex tempore_, his words are a form when he speaketh them, though not a

premeditated form. 3. And when Scripture so vehemently commandeth us

to search, meditate, study the Scriptures, and take heed unto

ourselves and unto doctrine, &c. what a person is that who will

condemn prayer or preaching, only because we beforehand studied or

considered what to say! as if God abhorred diligence and the use of

reason. Men are not tied (now) from thinking beforehand what to say to

the judge at the bar for estate or life, or what to say on an

embassage, or to a king, or any man that we converse with. And where

are we forbidden to forethink what to say to God? Must the people take

heed how they hear, and look to their foot when they go into the house

of God? and must not we take heed what we speak, and look to our words

that they be fit and decent?

_Object._ Forms are images of prayer and preaching, forbidden in the

second commandment?

_Answ._ Prove it, and add not to the word of God. 1. The Scripture and

God's servants, even Christ himself, had broken the second

commandment, when they used or prescribed forms. 2. Forms are no more

images than extemporate words are, as they signify our minds. Are all

the catechisms, printed and written sermons and prayers, images or

idols? all forms that parents teach their children? O charge not such

untruths on God; and invent not falsehoods of his word, while you cry

down man's inventions.

Quest. LXXIV. _Is it lawful to impose forms on the congregation or the

people in public worship?_

Yes, and more than lawful; it is the pastor's duty so to do. For

whether he forethink what to pray or not, his prayer is to them a form

of words; and they are bound in all the lawful parts, to concur with

him in spirit or desire, and to say Amen. So that every minister by

office is daily to impose a form of prayer on all the people in the

congregation. Only some men impose the same form many times over, or

every day, and others impose every day a new one.

Quest. LXXV. _Is it lawful to use forms composed by man, and imposed

not only on the people, but on the pastors of the churches?_

_Answ._ The question concerneth not the lawfulness of imposing, but of

using forms imposed. And, 1. It is not lawful to use them merely on

that account because they are imposed or commanded, without some

greater reason of the unlawfulness. For else it would be unlawful for

any other to use imposed forms; as for a scholar or child, if the

master or parent impose them, or for the congregation when the pastor

imposeth them, which is not true.

2. The using of imposed forms may by other accidents be sometimes good

and sometimes evil, as the accidents are that make it so.

1. These accidents may make it evil: (1.) When the form is bad for

matter or manner, and we voluntarily prefer it before that which is

better, being willing of the imposition. (2.) When we do it to gratify

our slothfulness, or to cover our wilful ignorance and disability.

(3.) When we voluntarily obey and strengthen any unlawful, usurping

pastors or powers that impose it without authority, and so encourage

church tyranny. (4.) When we choose a singular form, imposed by some

singular pastor, and avoid that which the rest of the churches agree

in, at a time when it may tend to division and offence. (5.) When the

weakness and offence of the congregation is such, that they will not

join with us in the imposed form, and so by using it, we drive them

from all public worship or divide them.

2. And in the following circumstances the using of an imposed form is

lawful and a duty: (1.) When the minister is so weak that he cannot

pray well without one, nor compose so good a one himself. (2.) Or when

the errors or great weakness of the generality of ministers is such,

as that they usually corrupt or spoil God's worship by their own

manner of praying, and no better are to be had; and thereupon the wise

and faithful pastors and magistrates shall impose one sound and apt

liturgy to avoid error and division in such a distempered time; and

the ablest cannot be left at liberty without the relaxing of the rest.

(3.) When it is a means of the concord of the churches, and no

hinderance to our other prayers. (4.) When our hearers will not join

with us if we use them not (for error and weakness must be borne with

on one side, as well as on the other). (5.) When obedience to just

authority requireth it, and no command of Christ is crossed by it.

(6.) When the imposition is so severe that we must so worship God

publicly, or not at all; and so all God's public worship will be shut

out of that congregation, country, or nation, unless we will use

imposed prayers. (7.) In a word, when the good consequences of

obedience, union, avoiding offence, liberty for God's public worship

and preaching the gospel, &c. are greater than the bad consequences

which are like to follow the using of such forms: the preponderating

accidents must prevail. (8.) And if a man's own judgment and

conscience cannot be satisfied, to do God's work comfortably and

quietly any other way, it may go far in the determination. And the

common good of many churches must still be preferred before a less.

Quest. LXXVI. _Doth not the calling of a minister so consist in the

exercise of his own ministerial gifts, that he may not officiate

without them, nor make use of other men's gifts instead of them?_

_Answ._ 1. The office of the ministry is an obligation and authority

to do the ministerial work, by those personal, competent abilities

which God hath given us.

2. This obligation to use our own abilities, forbiddeth us not to make

use of the helps, gifts, and abilities of others; either to promote

our own abilities and habits, or to further us in the act or the

exercise of them. For, 1. There is no such prohibition in Scripture.

2. All men are insufficient for themselves; and nature and Scripture

require them to use the best help they can get from others. 3. God's

service must be done in the best manner we can. But many ministers

cannot do it so well (_consideratis considerandis_) without other

men's help as with it.

3. We may use other men's gifts to help us, 1. For matter; 2. Method;

3. Words; and so for a threefold form, of preaching or prayer.

4. He that useth a Scripture form of matter, method, or words, useth

his own abilities no more, than if he used a form out of another book.

But it is lawful to use a Scripture form; therefore it is lawful so

far to take in assistance in the use of our own abilities.

5. He that useth a form useth his own abilities also (not only perhaps

at other times, but) in the use of it. He useth his understanding to

discern the true sense and aptitude of the words which he useth: he

useth his holy desires in putting up those prayers to God; and his

other graces, as he doth in other prayers. He useth his utterance in

the apt and decent speaking of them.

6. A minister is not always bound to use his own gifts to the utmost

that he can, and other men's as little as he can. For, 1. There is no

such command from God. 2. All things must be done to the church's

edification: but sometimes the greater use of another man's gifts, and

the less use of his own, may be to the church's greater edification.

Instances of the lawful use of other men's gifts are such as these.

1. For matter, an abler minister may tell a young man what subjects

are fittest for him in preaching and prayer; and what is the sense of

the Scriptures which he is to open; and what is the true solution of

several doubts and cases. A minister that is young, raw, or ignorant,

(yea, the best,) may be a learner while he is a teacher: but he that

is a learner maketh use so far of the gifts of others. And indeed all

teachers in the world make use of the gifts of others; for all teach

what they learn from others.

2. For method; it is lawful to learn that as well as matter from

another. Christ taught his disciples a method of prayer; and other men

may open that method to us. All tutors teach their pupils method as

well as matter; for method is needful to the due understanding and

using of the matter. A method of divinity, a method of preaching, and

a method of praying may be taught a preacher by word, and may be

written or printed for his use.

3. For words, 1. There is no more prohibition in God's word, against

learning or using another man's words, than his method or matter.

Therefore it is not unlawful. 2. A tutor or senior minister may teach

the Scripture words to a pupil or junior minister; yea, and may set

them together and compose him a sermon or prayer out of Scripture in

its words. (For he that may use an ill-composed Scripture form of his

own gathering, may use a well-composed form of another's). 3. All the

books in our libraries are forms of words; and it is lawful sure to

use some of all those words which we read; or else our books would be

a snare and limitation to our language. 4. All preachers ordinarily

use citations, testimonies, &c. in other men's words. 5. All ministers

use psalms in the metre of other men's composing (and usually imposing

too). And there is no more prohibition against using other men's words

in a prayer, than in a psalm. 6. Almost all ministers use other men's

gifts and form of words, in reading the Scriptures, in their vulgar

tongues: for God did not write them by his apostles and prophets in

English, French, Dutch, &c. but in Hebrew, Chaldee, and Greek;

therefore the wording them in English, &c. is a human form of words:

and few ministers think they are bound to translate all the Bible

themselves, lest they use other men's words or abilities. 7. If a

young minister that can pray but weakly, hear more apt expressions and

sentences in another minister's prayers, than his own are, he may

afterward make use of those sentences and expressions. And if of one

sentence, why not of two or ten, when God hath not forbidden it? So

also in preaching. 8. It is lawful to read another man's epistles or

sermons in the church, as the primitive churches did by Clement's and

some others. 9. An imposition may be so severe, that we shall not use

our own words, unless we will use some of other men's. 10. All

churches almost in the world, have consented in the use of creeds,

confessions, and prayers, and psalms, in the words of others.

But yet, 1. No minister must on these pretences stifle his own gifts,

and grow negligent; 2. Nor consent to church tyranny or papal

usurpations; 3. Nor do that which tendeth to eat out seriousness in

the worship of God, and turn all into dead imagery or formality.

Quest. _Is it lawful to read a prayer in the church?_

_Answ._ 1. That which is not forbidden is lawful: but to read a prayer

is not forbidden (as such, though by accident it may).

2. The prayers in the Scripture psalms, were usually read in the

Jewish synagogues lawfully; for they were written to that end, and

were indeed the Jewish liturgy. Therefore to read a prayer is not

unlawful.

3. He that hath a weak memory may read his own sermon notes; therefore

he may read his prayers.

4. I add as to this case and the former together; that, 1. Christ did

usually frequent the Jewish synagogues.

2. That in those synagogues there were forms of prayer, and that

ordinarily read, at least Scripture forms: and if either the Jewish

rabbins (cited by Scaliger, Selden in Eutych. Alexandr. &c.,) or the

strongest probability may be credited, there were also human forms.

For who can imagine that those Pharisees should have no human forms,

(1.) Who are so much accused of formality, and following traditions:

(2.) And used long and frequent prayers: but if indeed they had no

such forms, then long and frequent extemporate prayers are not so

great a sign of the Spirit's gifts as is imagined, when such Pharisees

abounded in them. But there is little probability but that they used

both ways.

3. That Christ did not separate from the synagogues for such prayers'

sake.

4. Yea, that we never read that Christ meddled in the controversy, it

being then no controversy; nor that he once reproved such forms, or

reading them, or ever called the Jews to repent of them.

If you say, his general reproof of traditions was enough: I answer, 1.

Even traditions he reproved not as such, but as set before, or against

the commands of God. 2. He named many of their particular traditions

and corruptions, Matt. xv. xxiii. &c. and yet never named this. 3. His

being usually present at their assemblies, and so joining with them in

their worship, would be such an appearance of his approbation, as

would make it needful to express his disallowance of it, if indeed he

thought it sinful. So that whoever impartially considereth all this,

that he joined with them, that he particularly reproved other

corruptions, and that he never said any thing at all against forms or

reading prayers, that is recorded, will sure be moderate in his

judgment of such indifferent things, if he know what moderation is.

Quest. LXXVII. _Is it lawful to pray in the church without a

prescribed or premeditated form of words?_

_Answ._ There are so few sober and serious christians that ever made a

doubt of this, that I will not bestow many words to prove it.

1. That which is not forbidden is lawful. But church prayer without a

premeditated or prescribed form of words is not forbidden (by God);

therefore (as to God's laws) it is not unlawful.

2. To express holy desires understandingly, orderly, seriously, and in

apt expressions, is lawful praying. But all this may be done without a

set form of words; therefore to pray without a set form of words may

be lawful.

3. The consent of the universal church, and the experience of godly

men, are arguments so strong, as are not to be made light of.

4. To which Scripture instances may be added.

Quest. LXXVIII. _Whether are set forms of words, or free praying

without them, the better way? And what are the commodities and

incommodities of each way?_

_Answ._ I will first answer the latter question, because the former

dependeth on it.

1. The commodities of a set form of words, and the discommodities of

free praying, are these following.

1. In a time of dangerous heresy which hath infected the pastors, a

set form of prescribed words tendeth to keep the church, and the

consciences of the joiners, from such infection, offence, and guilt.

2. When ministers are so weak as to dishonour God's worship by their

unapt, and slovenly, and unsound expressions, prescribed or set forms

which are well composed, are some preservative and cure. When free

praying leaveth the church under this inconvenience.

3. When ministers by faction, passion, or corrupt interests, are apt

to put these vices into their prayers, to the injury of others, and of

the cause and church of God, free praying cherisheth this, or giveth

it opportunity, which set forms do restrain.

4. Concordant set forms do serve for the exactest concord in the

churches, that all at once may speak the same things.

5. They are needful to some weak ministers that cannot do so well

without them.

6. They somewhat prevent the laying of the reputation of religious

worship upon the minister's abilities: when in free praying, the

honour and comfort varieth with the various degrees of pastoral

abilities; in one place it is excellently well done, in another but

dryly, and coldly, and meanly, in another erroneously, unedifyingly,

if not dishonourably, tending to the contempt of holy things: whereas

in the way of set liturgies, though the ablest (at that time) doth no

better, yet the weakest doth (for words) as well, and all alike.

7. And, if proud, weak men have not the composing and imposing of it,

all know that words drawn up by study, upon sober premeditation and

consultation, have a greater advantage, to be exact and apt, than

those that were never thought on till we are speaking them.

8. The very fear of doing amiss, disturbeth some unready men, and

maketh them do all the rest the worse.

9. The auditors know beforehand, whether that which they are to join

in be sound or unsound, having time to try it.

10. And they can more readily put in their consent to what is spoken,

and make the prayer their own, when they know beforehand what it is,

than they can do when they know not before they hear it; it being hard

to the duller sort of hearers, to concur with an understanding and

consent as quick as the speaker's words are. Not but that this may be

done, but not without great difficulty in the duller sort.

11. And it tendeth to avoid the pride and self-deceit of many, who

think they are good christians, and have the spirit of grace and

supplication, because by learning and use they can speak many hours in

variety of expressions in prayer; which is a dangerous mistake.

I. The commodities of free extemporate prayers, and the discommodity

of prescribed or set forms, are these following.

1. It becometh an advantage to some proud men who think themselves

wiser than all the rest, to obtrude their compositions, that none may

be thought wise enough, or fit to speak to God, but in their words;

and so introduce church tyranny.

2. It may become a hinderance to able, worthy ministers that can do

better.

3. It may become a dividing snare to the churches, that cannot all

agree and consent in such human impositions.

4. It may become an advantage to heretics when they can but get into

power (as the Arians of old) to corrupt all the churches and public

worship; and thus the papists have corrupted the churches by the mass.

5. It may become an engine or occasion of persecution, and silencing

all those ministers that cannot consent to such impositions.

6. It may become a means of depraving the ministry, and bringing them

to a common idleness and ignorance (if other things alike concur). For

when men perceive that no greater abilities are used and required,

they will commonly labour for and get no greater, and so will be

unable to pray without their forms of words.

7. And by this means christian religion may decay and grow into

contempt; for though it be desirable that its own worth should keep up

its reputation and success, yet it never hitherto was so kept up

without the assistance of God's eminent gifts and graces in his

ministers; but wherever there hath been a learned, able, holy,

zealous, diligent ministry, religion usually hath flourished; and

wherever there hath been an ignorant, vicious, cold, idle, negligent,

and reproached ministry, religion usually hath died and been

reproached. And we have now no reason to look for that which never

was, and that God should take a new course in the world.

And the opinion of imposing forms of prayer, may draw on the opinion

of imposing forms of preaching as much, and of restraining free

preaching as much as free praying, as we see in Muscovy. And then when

nothing but bare reading is required, nothing more will be ordinarily

sought; and so the ministry will be the scorn of the people.

9. And it will be a shameful and uncomfortable failing, when a

minister is not able on variety of occasions, to vary his prayers

accordingly; and when he cannot go any further than his book or

lesson; it being as impossible to make prayers just fitted to all

occasions which will fall out, as to make sermons fit for all, or, as

they say, to make a coat for the moon; and the people will contemn the

ministers when they perceive this great deficiency.

10. And it is a great difficulty to many ministers to learn and say a

form without book; so that they that can all day speak what they know,

can scarce recite a form of words one quarter of an hour, the memory

more depending upon the body and its temper, than the exercise of the

understanding doth. He that is tied just to these words and no other,

is put upon double difficulties (like him that on height must walk on

a narrow plank, where the fear of falling will make him fall); but he

that may express the just desires of his soul in what words occur that

are apt and decent, is like one that hath a field to walk in: for my

own part, it is easier to me to pray or preach six hours in freedom,

about things which I understand, than to pray or preach the tenth part

of an hour in the fetters of a form of words which I must not vary.

And so the necessity of a book coming in, doth bring down the

reputation of the minister's abilities in the people's eyes.

11. But the grand incommodity, greater than all the rest, is, that it

usually occasioneth carelessness, deadness, formality, and heartless

lip-labour in our prayers to God; whilst the free way of present

prayer tendeth to excite our cogitations to consider what we say. And

it is not only the multitude of dead-hearted hypocrites in the church

that are thus tempted to persevere in their lip-labour and hypocrisy,

and to draw near to God with their lips when their hearts are far from

him, and are gratified in their self-deceit, whilst parrot-like they

speak the words which they regard not, and their tongues do overgo

their hearts; but even better men are greatly tempted to dead

remissness: I mean both the speakers and the hearers; for, (1.) It is

natural to man's mind to have a slothful weariness as well as his

body; and to do no more than he findeth a necessity of doing; and

though God's presence alone should suffice to engage all the powers of

our souls, yet sad experience telleth us, that God's eye and man's

together will do more with almost all men, than one alone. And

therefore no men's thoughts are so accurately governed as their words.

Therefore when a minister knoweth beforehand that, as to man's

approbation, he hath no more to do but to read that which he seeth

before him, he is apt to let his thoughts fly abroad, and his

affections lie down, because no man taketh account of these; but in

extemporate diversified prayer, a man cannot do it without an

excitation of his understanding to think (to the utmost) what to say;

and an excitation of his affections, to speak with life, or else the

hearers will perceive his coldness. And though all this may be

counterfeit and hypocritically affected, yet it is a great help to

seriousness and sincerity to have the faculties all awake; and it is a

great help to awaken them to be under such a constant necessity even

from man. As those that are apt to sleep at prayer, will do it less

when they know men observe them, than at another time.

(2.) And both to speaker and hearers, human frailty maketh it hard to

be equally affected with the same thing spoken a hundred times, as we

are at first when it is new, and when it is clothed in comely variety

of expressions. As the same book affecteth us not at the twentieth

reading as it did at the first. Say not, it is a dishonourable

weakness to be thus carried by the novelty of things or words; for

though that be true, it is a dishonour common to all mankind, and a

disease which is your own, and which God alloweth us all lawful means

to cure, and to correct the unhappy effects while it is uncured.

12. Lastly, set forms serve unworthy men to hide their unworthiness

by, and to be the matter of a controversy in which they may vent their

envy against them that are abler and holier than themselves.

III. Having now truly showed you the commodities and incommodities of

both the ways, for the other question, Which of them is the best? I

must give you but some rules to answer it yourselves.

1. That is best which hath most and greatest commodities, and fewest

and least discommodities.

2. For neither of them is forbidden, in itself considered, nor evil,

but by accident.

3. One may have more commodities and the other more discommodities in

one country and age than in another, and with some persons than with

others.

4. Sober christians should be very backward in such cases to quarrel

with the churches where they live or come, but humbly submit to them

in lawful things, though they think them inconvenient; because it is

not they that are the governors and judges.

5. The commands of authority and the concord of the churches may weigh

down many lighter accidents.

6. I crave leave to profess that my own judgment is, that somewhat of

both ways joined together will best obviate the incommodities of both.

To have so much wholesome, methodical, unquestionable forms as near as

may be in Scripture phrase, as is necessary to avoid the inconvenience

of a total exclusion of forms, and to the attainment of their

desirable ends; and to have so much withal of freedom in prayer, as is

necessary to its ends, and to avoid the deadness, formality, and other

incommodities of forms alone. Though by this opinion I cross the

conceits of prejudiced men on both extremes, I think I cross not the

judgment of the church of England, which alloweth free prayers in the

pulpit, and at the visitation of the sick; and I cross not the opinion

of any ancient church that ever I read of, nor of the fathers and

pastors whose works are come to our hands; nor yet of Luther,

Melancthon, Bucer, Zuinglius, Calvin, Beza, Zanchius, and the rest of

our famous reformers; nor yet of the famous nonconformists of England,

Cartwright, Hildersham, Greenham, Perkins, Bain, Amesius, &c. and I

less fear erring in all this company, than with those on either of the

extremes.[321]

[321] I have a manuscript of Mr. Cartwright's in which, having fully

proved the falsehood of Sutliff's suspicion that he was acquainted

with Hacket's project, he answereth his charge, as if he were against

forms of prayer, that all the years that he lived at Middleburg and

Antwerp, he constantly used the same form before sermon, and mostly

after sermon, and also did read prayers in the church; and that since

he seldom concluded but with the Lord's prayer.

Quest. LXXIX. _Is it lawful to forbear the preaching of some truths,

upon man's prohibition, that I may have liberty to preach the rest;

yea, and to promise beforehand to forbear them? Or to do it for the

church's peace?_

_Answ._ 1. Some truths are of so great moment and necessity, that

without them you cannot preach the gospel in a saving sort. These you

may not forbear, nor promise to forbear.

2. Some truths are such as God at that time doth call men eminently to

publish and receive (as against some heresy when it is at the very

height, or the church in greatest danger of it); or concerning some

duty which God then specially calleth men to perform (as the duty of

loyalty just in the time of a perilous rebellion, &c.) Such preaching

being a duty, must not be forborne, when it cannot be performed upon

lawful terms.

3. But some truths are controverted among good men; and some are of a

lower nature and usefulness: and concerning these I further say,

(1.) That you may not renounce them or deny them, nor subscribe to the

smallest untruth for liberty to preach the greatest truth.

(2.) But you may for the time that the church's benefit requireth it,

both forbear to preach them, and promise to forbear, both for the

church's peace, and for that liberty to preach the gospel, which you

cannot otherwise obtain. The reasons are,

1. Because it is not a duty to preach them at that time; for no duty

is a duty at all times: affirmative precepts bind not _ad semper_,

because man cannot always do them.

2. It is a sin to prefer a lesser truth or good before a greater. You

cannot speak all things at once. When you have all done, some, yea, a

thousand must be by you omitted. Therefore the less should be omitted

rather than the greater.

3. You have your office to the church's edification. Preaching is made

for man, and not man for preaching. But the church's edification

requireth you rather to preach the gospel, than that opinion or point

which you are required to forbear. Without this the hearers may be

saved, but not without the gospel.

And what a man may do and must do, he may on good occasion promise to

do.

He that thinketh diocesans, or liturgies, or ceremonies unlawful, and

yet cannot have leave to preach the gospel (in time of need) unless he

will forbear, and promise to forbear to preach against them, may and

ought so to do and promise, rather than not to preach the gospel.

_Object._ But if men imprison or hinder me from preaching, that is

their fault; but if I voluntarily forbear any duty, it is my own

fault.

_Answ._ 1. It is to forbear a sin, and not a duty at that time; it is

no more a duty than reading, or singing, or praying at sermon time. 2.

When you are in prison, or know in all probability you shall be there,

though by other men's fault, it is your own fault if you will deny a

lawful means to avoid it: for your not preaching the gospel is then

your own sin, as well as other men's; and theirs excuseth not yours.

Quest. LXXX. _May or must a minister silenced, or forbid to preach the

gospel, go on still to preach it, against the law?_

_Answ._ Distinguish between, 1. Just silencing, and unjust. 2.

Necessary preaching, and unnecessary.

1. Some men are justly forbidden to preach the gospel: as, 1. Those

that are utterly unable, and do worse than nothing when they do it. 2.

Those that are heretics and subvert the essentials of christianity or

godliness. 3. Those that are so impious and malignant, that they turn

all against the practice of that religion which they profess; in a

word, all that do (directly) more hurt than good.

2. In some places there are so many able preachers, that some

tolerable men may be spared, if not accounted supernumeraries; and the

church will not suffer by their silence. But in other countries either

the preachers are so few, or so bad, or the people so very ignorant,

and hardened, and ungodly, or so great a number that are in deep

necessity, that the need of preaching is undeniable. And so I

conclude,

1. That he that is justly silenced, and is unfit to preach, is bound

to forbear.

2. He that is silenced by just power, though unjustly, in a country

that needeth not his preaching, must forbear there, and if he can must

go into another country where he may be more serviceable.

3. Magistrates may not ecclesiastically ordain ministers or degrade

them, but only either give them liberty, or deny it them as there is

cause.

4. Magistrates are not the fountain of the ministerial office, as the

sovereign is of all the civil power of inferior magistrates; but both

offices are immediately from God.

5. Magistrates have not power from God to forbid men to preach in all

cases, nor as they please, but justly only and according to God's

laws.

6. Men be not made ministers of Christ only _pro tempore_ or on trial,

to go off again if they dislike it; but are absolutely dedicated to

God, and take their lot for better and for worse; which maketh the

Romanists say, that ordination is a sacrament (and so it may be aptly

called); and that we receive an indelible character, that is, an

obligation during life, unless God himself disable us.

7. As we are nearlier devoted and related to God, than church lands,

goods, and temples are, so the sacrilege of alienating a consecrated

person unjustly, is greater and more unquestionable than the sacrilege

of alienating consecrated houses, lands, or things. And therefore no

minister may sacrilegiously alienate himself from God and his

undertaken office and work.

8. We must do any lawful thing to procure the magistrate's licence to

preach in his dominions.

9. All men silenced or forbidden by magistrates to preach, are not

thereby obliged or warranted to forbear. For, 1. The apostles

expressly determine it, Acts iv. 19, "Whether it be better to hearken

to God rather than to you, judge ye." 2. Christ oft foretold his

servants, that they must preach against the will of rulers, and suffer

by them. 3. The apostles and ordinary ministers also for 300 years

after Christ did generally preach against the magistrate's will,

throughout the Roman empire and the world. 4. The orthodox bishops

commonly took themselves bound to preach when Arian or other heretical

emperors forbad them. 5. A moral duty of stated necessity to the

church and men's salvation is not subjected to the will of men for

order's sake: for order is for the thing ordered and for the end.

Magistrates cannot dispense with us, for not loving our neighbours, or

not showing mercy to the poor, or saving the lives of the needy in

famine and distress. Else they that at last shall hear, "I was hungry

and ye fed me not, I was naked and ye clothed me not, I was in prison

and ye visited me not," might oft say, Our parents, masters, or

magistrates forbad us. Yet a lesser moral duty may be forbidden by the

magistrate for the sake of a greater, because then it is no duty

indeed, and may be forborne if he forbid it not; as to save one man's

life, if it would prove the death of a multitude; or to save one man's

house on fire, if so doing would fire many. Therefore,

10. It is lawful and a duty to forbear some certain time or number of

sermons, prayers, or sacraments, &c. when either the present use of

them would apparently procure more hurt than good, or when the

forbearance were like to procure more good than the doing of them; for

they are all for our edification, and are made for man, and not man

for them (though for God). As if forbearing this day would procure me

liberty for many days' service afterward, &c.

11. It is not lawful at the command of man to forsake or forbear our

calling and duty, when it is to be judged necessary to the honour of

God, to the good of the church, and of men's souls; that is, when as

in Daniel's case, Dan. vi. our religion itself and our owning the true

God, doth seem suspended by the suspense of our duty; or when the

multitude of ignorant, hardened, ungodly souls, and the want of fit

men for number and quality, doth put it past controversy, that our

work is greatly necessary.

12. Those that are not immediately called by Christ as were the

apostles, but by men, being yet statedly obliged to the death when

they are called, may truly say as Paul, "Necessity is laid upon me,

and woe be to me if I preach not the gospel."[322]

13. Papists and protestants concur in this judgment. Papists will

preach when the law forbids them; and the judgment of protestants is,

among others, by Bishop Bilson of Subjection, and Bishop Andrews,

Tortur. Tort. plainly so asserted.

14. But all that are bound to preach, are not bound to do it to the

same number, nor in the same manner; as they have not the same

opportunity and call. Whether it shall be, in this place or that, to

more or fewer, at this hour or that, are not determined in Scripture,

nor alike to all.

15. The temples, tithes, and such adjuncts of worship and ministry,

are at the magistrate's disposal, and must not be invaded against his

laws.

16. Where any are obliged to preach in a forbidden, discountenanced

state, they must study to do it with such prudence, caution,

peaceableness, and obedience in all the lawful circumstantials, as may

tend to maintain peace and the honour of magistracy, and to avoid

temptations to sedition, and unruly passions.

[322] Matt, xxviii. 20; Rom. x. 14; 1 Cor. ix. 16; Acts v. 42; x. 42;

2 Tim. iv. 1, 2; Acts viii. 4, 12; xv. 35.

Quest. LXXXI. _May we lawfully keep the Lord's day as a fast?_

_Answ._ Not ordinarily; because God hath made it a day of

thanksgiving; and we must not pervert it from the use to which it was

appointed by God. But in case of extraordinary necessity, it may be

done: as, 1. In case that some great judgment call us so suddenly to

humiliation and fasting, as that it cannot be deferred to the next day

(as some sudden invasion, fire, sickness, &c.) 2. In case by

persecution the church be denied liberty to meet on any other day, in

a time when public fasting and prayer is a duty. 3. In case the people

be so poor, or servants, children, and wives be so hardly restrained,

that they cannot meet at any other time. It is lawful in such cases,

because positives give way to moral or natural duties, _cæteris

paribus_, and lesser duties unto greater: the sabbath is made for man,

and not man for the sabbath.[323]

[323] Luke vi. 5; xiii. 15; Mark ii. 27.

Quest. LXXXII. _How should the Lord's day be spent in the main?_

_Answ._ I have so far opened that in the family directions, that I

will now only say, 1. That eucharistical worship is the great work of

the day; and that it should be kept as a day of public thanksgiving

for the whole work of redemption, especially for the resurrection of

our Lord.[324]

2. And therefore the celebration of the sacrament of the Lord's supper

was always a chief part of its observation in the primitive churches:

not merely for the sacrament's sake; but because with it was still

joined all the laudatory and thanksgiving worship. And it was the

pastor's work so to pray, and praise God, and preach to the people, as

tendeth most to possess their souls with the liveliest sense of the

love of the Father, the grace of the Son, and the communion of the

Holy Spirit, on the account of our redemption.

3. Though confession of sin and humiliation must not be the chief work

of the day, yet it may and must come in, as in due subordination to

the chief. 1. Because there are usually many persons present, who are

members only of the visible church, and are not fit for the laudatory

and rejoicing part. 2. Because while we are in the flesh, our

salvation is imperfect, and so are we; and much sin still remaineth,

which must be a grief and burden to believers: and therefore while sin

is mixed with grace, repentance and sorrow must be mixed with our

thanksgivings, and we must "rejoice with trembling." And though we

"receive a kingdom which cannot be moved," yet must our "acceptable

service of God be with reverence and godly fear, because our God is a

consuming fire."[325] 3. Our sin and misery being that which we are

saved from, doth enter the definition of our salvation. And without

the sense of them, we can never know aright what mercy is, nor ever be

truly glad and thankful. But yet take heed that this subordinate duty

be not pretended, for the neglecting of that thanksgiving which is the

work of the day.

[324] Psal. xcii. 1-5; cxviii. 1-3, 15, 19, 23, 24, 27-29; Acts xx. 7,

9; Rev. i. 10; Acts xxiv. 14, 25, 26, &c.; Psal. xvi. 7-10; 1 Cor.

xvi. 1, 2.

[325] Psal. ii. 9-11; Heb. xii. 28, 29.

Quest. LXXXIII. _May the people bear a vocal part in worship, or do

any more than say, Amen?_

_Answ._ Yes:[326] the people should say Amen; that is, openly signify

their consent. But the meaning is not that they must do no more, nor

otherwise express their consent saving by that single word. For, 1.

There is no scripture which forbiddeth more. 2. The people bear an

equal part in singing the psalms; which are prayer, and praise, and

instruction. 3. If they may do so in the psalms in metre, there can no

reason be given but they may lawfully do so in the psalms in prose;

for saying them and singing them are but modes of utterance; both are

the speaking of prayer and praise to God: and the ancient singing was

liker our saying, than to our tunes, as most judge. 4. The primitive

christians were so full of the zeal and love of Christ, that they

would have taken it for an injury and a quenching of the Spirit, to

have been wholly restrained from bearing their part in the praises of

the church. 5. The use of the tongue keepeth awake the mind, and

stirreth up God's graces in his servants. 6. It was the decay of zeal

in the people that first shut out responses; while they kept up the

ancient zeal, they were inclined to take their part vocally in their

worship; and this was seconded by the pride and usurpation of some

priests thereupon, who thought the people of God too profane to speak

in the assemblies, and meddle so much with holy things.

Yet the very remembrance of former zeal, caused most churches to

retain many of the words of their predecessors, even when they lost

the life and spirit which should animate them. And so the same words

came into the liturgies, and were used by too many customarily, and in

formality, which their ancestors had used in the fervour of their

souls.

6. And if it were not that a dead-hearted, formal people, by speaking

the responses carelessly and hypocritically, do bring them into

disgrace with many that see the necessity of seriousness, I think few

good people would be against them now. If all the serious, zealous

christians in the assembly speak the same words in a serious manner,

there will appear nothing in them that should give offence. If in the

fulness of their hearts, the people should break out into such words

of prayer, or confession, or praise, it would be taken for an

extraordinary pang of zeal; and were it unusual, it would take

exceedingly. But the better any thing is, the more loathsome it

appeareth when it is mortified by hypocrisy and dead formality, and

turned into a mockery, or an affected, scenical act. But it is here

the duty of every christian to labour to restore the life and spirit

to the words, that they may again be used in a serious and holy manner

as heretofore.

7. Those that would have private men pray and prophesy in public, as

warranted by 1 Cor. xiv. "Ye may all speak," &c. do much contradict

themselves, if they say also that a layman may say nothing but Amen.

8. The people were all to say Amen in Deut. xxvii. 15, 16, 18-20, &c.

And yet they oftentimes said more. As Exod. xix. 8, in as solemn an

assembly as any of ours, when God himself gave Moses a sermon (in a

form of words) to preach to the people, and Moses had repeated it as

from the Lord, (it being the narrative of his mercies, the command of

obedience, and the promises of his great blessings upon that

condition,) "all the people answered together and said, All that the

Lord hath spoken we will do." The like was done again, Exod. xxiv. 3,

and Deut. v. 27. And lest you should think either that the assembly

was not as solemn as ours, or that it was not well done of the people

to say more than Amen, God himself who was present declared his

approbation, even of the words, when the speakers' hearts were not so

sincere in speaking them as they ought: ver. 28, 29, "And the Lord

heard the voice of your words when you spake unto me, and the Lord

said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people--They

have well said all that they have spoken. O that there were such a

heart in them--."

_Object._ But this is but a speech to Moses, and not to God.

_Answ._ I will recite to you a form of prayer which the people

themselves were to make publicly to God: Deut. xxvi. 13-15, "Then

shalt thou say before the Lord thy God, I have brought away the

hallowed things out of my house, and also have given them unto the

Levite and unto the stranger, to the fatherless, and to the widow,

according to all thy commandments which thou hast commanded me: I have

not transgressed thy commandments, neither have I forgotten them. I

have not eaten thereof in my mourning, neither have I taken away ought

thereof for any unclean use, nor given ought thereof for the dead; but

I have hearkened to the voice of the Lord my God, and have done

according to all that thou hast commanded me. Look down from thy holy

habitation, from heaven, and bless thy people Israel, and the land

which thou hast given us, as thou swarest unto our fathers, a land

that floweth with milk and honey." Is not here a full form of prayer

to be used by all the people? And remember that Joseph and Mary, and

Christ himself, were under this law, and that you never read that

Christ found fault with the people's speech, nor spake a word to

restrain it in his churches.

In Lev. ix. 24, "When all the people saw the glory of the Lord, and

the fire that came out from it, and consumed the burnt offering, they

shouted and fell on their faces;" which was an acclamation more than

bare amen.

2 Kings xxiii. 2, 3, "King Josiah went up into the house of the Lord,

and all the men of Judah, &c. and the priests and the prophets, and

all the people, both small and great: and he read in their ears all

the words of the book of the covenant. And the king stood by a pillar,

and made a covenant before the Lord, to walk after the Lord, and to

keep his commandments, &c. with all their heart, and all their soul,

&c. And all the people stood to the covenant." Where, as a king is the

speaker, it is like that the people used some words to express their

consent.

1 Chron. xvi. 35, 36, when David delivered a psalm for a form of

praise: in which it is said to the people, ver. 35, "And say ye, Save

us, O God of our salvation, and gather us together, and deliver us

from the heathen, that we may give thanks to thy holy name, and glory

in thy praise. Blessed be the Lord God of Israel for ever and ever.

All the people said, Amen, and praised the Lord." Where it is like

that their praising the Lord was more than their amen.

And it is a command, Psal. lxvii. 3, 5, "Let all the people praise

thee, O God, let all the people praise thee." And he that will limit

this to single persons, or say that it must not be vocally in the

church, or it must be only in metre and never in prose, or only in

tunes and not without, must prove it, lest he be proved an adder to

God's word.

But it would be tedious to recite all the repeated sentences in the

Psalms, which are commonly supposed to be the responses of the people,

or repeated by them. And in Rev. xiv. 2, 3, the voice as "of many

waters and as of a great thunder, and the voice of harpers harping

with their harps, who sung a new song before the throne and before the

four beasts and the elders, a song which none could learn but the

hundred forty and four thousand which were redeemed from the earth,

which were not defiled with women, who were virgins and followed the

Lamb," &c. doth seem very plainly to be spoken of the praises of all

the saints. Chap. xvii. 15, by waters is meant people, multitudes, &c.

And chap. xix. 5-8, there is expressly recited a form of praise for

all the people: "A voice came out of the throne, saying, Praise our

God, all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great.

And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the

voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying,

Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. Let us be glad, and

rejoice, and give honour to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is

come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her it was

granted," &c.

And indeed he that hath styled all his people "priests to God, and a

holy and royal priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable

to God by Jesus Christ, and to show forth the praises (τὰς ἀρετὰς,

the virtues) of him that hath called us out of darkness into his

marvellous light," doth seem not to take them for so profane a

generation, as to be prohibited from speaking to God in public any

otherwise than by the mouth of a priest.

And it seemeth to be more allowed (and not less) under the gospel,

than under the law; because then the people, as under guilt, were kept

at a greater distance from God, and must speak to him more by a priest

that was a type of Christ our Intercessor.[327] But now we are brought

nigh, and reconciled to God, and have the spirit of sons, and may go

by Christ alone unto the Father. And therefore though it be true that

ministers yet are sub-intercessors under Christ our High Priest, yet

they are rarely called priests, but described more in the New

Testament by other parts of their office.

_Object._ But the people's responses make a confused noise in the

assemblies, not intelligible.

_Answ._ All things are ill done, that are done by ill men that

carnally and formally slubber it over: but if the best and holiest

people would unanimously set themselves to do it, as they do in

singing psalms, so that they did not only stand by to be the hearers

of others, it would be done more orderly and spiritually, as well as

singing is.

[326] 1 Cor. xiv.; Psal. cl.; lxxxi. 2, 3; xcviii. 5; xciv. 1-3, &c.;

cv. 2, 7, &c.; cxlv. throughout; Col. iii. 16.

[327] Numb. i. 54; iii. 10, 31; Exod. xx.; Heb. iv. 16, 17; Eph. ii.

13; Heb. xii. 18, 21-23.

Quest. LXXXIV. _Is it not a sin for our clerks to make themselves the

mouth of the people, who are no ordained ministers of Christ?_

_Answ._ 1. In those places where ordained deacons do it, this

objection hath no place. 2. The clerks are not appointed to be the

mouth of the people, but only each clerk is one of the people

commanded to do that which all should do, lest it should be wholly

left undone. If all the congregation will speak all that the clerk

doth, it will answer the primary desire of the church governors, who

bid the people do it; but if they that will not do it themselves,

shall pretend that the clerk doth usurp the ministry, because he

ceaseth not as well as they; they might as well say so by a few that

should sing psalms in the church, when the rest are against it and

forbear. May not a man do his duty in singing or saying, when you

refuse yours, without pretending to be your mouth, or usurping the

ministry?

Quest. LXXXV. _Are repetitions of the same words in church prayers,

lawful?_

_Answ._ 1. It is not lawful to affect them as the heathens, who think

they shall be heard for their battology, or saying over the same

words, as if God were moved by them, as by a charm.[328] 2. Nor is it

lawful to do that which hath a strong appearance of such a conceit,

and thereby to make God's worship ridiculous and contemptible; as the

papists in their psalters, and prayer books, repeating over the name

of Jesus, and Mary, so oft together as maketh it seem a ludicrous

canting.

But, 1. It is lawful to speak the same words from fulness and

fervency of zeal; 2. And when we are afraid to give over lest we have

not yet prevailed with God. 3. And in God's solemn praises (sung or

said) a word or sentence oft repeated sometimes hath an elegancy, and

affecting decency; and therefore it is so often used in the Psalms;

yea, and in many Scripture prayers. 4. In such cases, to bring a

serious urgency of spirit to the repeated words, and not to quarrel

with the repetitions, is the duty of one that joineth with true

christian assemblies, as a son of piety and peace.[329]

[328] Matt. vi. 18.

[329] Psal. cxxxvi.; cvii, 8, 13, 21, &c.

Quest. LXXXVI. _Is it lawful to bow at the naming of Jesus?_

_Answ._ The question either respecteth the person of Jesus, named by

any of his names, or else this name Jesus only. And that either simply

in itself considered; or else comparatively, as excluding, or not

including, other names.

1. That the person of Jesus is to be bowed to, I never knew a

christian deny.

2. That we may lawfully express our reverence by bowing, when the

names, God, Jehovah, Jesus Christ, &c. are uttered, I have met with

few christians who deny, nor know I any reason to deny it.

3. Had I been fit to have prescribed directions to other ministers or

churches, I would not have persuaded, much less commanded, them to bow

at the name of Jesus, any more than at the name of God, Jehovah,

Christ, &c. for many reasons which the reader may imagine, though I

will not now mention them.

4. But if I live and join in a church where it is commanded and

peremptorily urged to bow at the name of Jesus, and where my not doing

it would be divisive, scandalous, or offensive, I will bow at the name

of God, Jehovah, Jesus, Christ, Lord, &c. one as well as the other;

seeing it is not bowing at Christ's name that I scruple, but the

consequents of seeming to distinguish and prefer that name alone

before all the rest.[330]

[330] Mic. vi. 6; Jer. xxiii. 27; Isa. lii. 5, 6; xxix. 24; xlii. 8,

9; Psal. ii. 10, 11; Phil. ii. 2, 9-12; Psal. xxxiv. 3; lxvi. 2;

lxviii. 4; lxxii. 19; lxxvi. 1, 2; xcvi. 2; c. 4; cxi. 9; cxlviii. 13;

cxlix. 3; Isa. ix. 6, 7; xii. 4; Psal. cxxxviii. 2, 3; Rev. xv. 4; 1

Chron. xxix. 20; 2 Chron. xxix. 30.

Quest. LXXXVII. _Is it lawful to stand up at the gospel as we are

appointed?_

_Answ._ 1. Had I been a prescriber to others myself, I should not have

required the church to stand up at the reading of one part of a

chapter by the name of the gospel, and not at the same words when the

whole chapter is read.

2. But if I live where rulers peremptorily command it, (I suppose not

forbidding us to stand up at the gospel read in chapters, but

selecting this as an instance of their signified consent to the

gospel, who will do no more,) I would obey them rather than give

offence, by standing up at the reading of the chapters and all; which

I suppose will be no violation of their laws.

Quest. LXXXVIII. _Is it lawful to kneel when the decalogue is read?_

_Answ._ 1. If I lived in a church that mistook the commandments for

prayers, as many ignorant people do, I would not so harden them in

that error. 2. And if I knew that many of the people present are of

that mind, I had rather do nothing that might scandalize or harden

them in it.

But, 1. That the thing in itself is lawful, is past doubt: as we may

kneel to the king when we hear him or speak to him; so it is lawful to

kneel to God, when we read a chapter or hear it read, and specially

the decalogue so terribly delivered, and written by his own finger in

stone. 2. And if it be peremptorily commanded, and the omission would

be offensive, I would use it though mistaking persons are present,

(1.) Because I cannot disobey, and also differ from the whole

assembly, without a greater hurt and scandal, than seeming to harden

that mistaking person. (2.) And because I could and would by other

means remove that person's danger, as from me, by making him know that

it is no prayer. (3.) And the rather in our times, because we can get

the minister in the pulpit publicly to tell the people the contrary.

(4.) And in catechising it is his appointed duty so to do. (5.) And we

find that the same old silly people who took the commandments for a

prayer, took the creed to be so too; when yet none kneeled at the

creed; by which it appeareth that it is not kneeling which deceived

them.

Quest. LXXXIX. _What gestures are fittest in all the public worship?_

_Answ._ 1. The customs of several countries, putting several

significations on gestures, much varieth the case.

2. We must not lightly differ from the customs of the churches where

we live in such a thing.

3. According to the present state of our churches, and the

signification of gestures, and the necessities of men's bodies, all

considered, I like best, (1.) To kneel in prayer and confession of sin

(unless it be in crowded congregations where there is not room). (2.)

To stand up in actions of mere praise to God, that is, at the singing

and reading of the psalms of praise, and at the other hymns. (3.) To

sit at the hearing of the word read and preached (because the body

hath a necessity of some rest).

4. Had I my choice, I would receive the Lord's supper sitting; but

where I have not, I will use the gesture which the church useth. And

it is to be noted that the church of England requireth the communicant

only to receive it kneeling; but not to eat or drink it kneeling when

they have received it. The ancient churches took it for a universal

custom, established by many general councils, (and continued many

hundred years,) that no churches should kneel in any act of adoration

upon any Lord's day in the year, or any week day between Easter and

Whitsuntide; but only stand all the time. But because the weariness of

the body is apt to draw the mind into consent, and make God's service

burdensome to us, it seemeth a sufficient compliance with their custom

and the reasons of it, if we stand up only in acts of praise (and at

the profession of our assent to the christian faith and

covenant).[331]

5. And because there is so great a difference between the auditors in

most assemblies, some being weak and not able to stand long, &c.

therefore it is utterly unmeet to be too rigorous in urging a

uniformity of gesture, or for any to be too censorious of other men

for a gesture.

[331] 1 Chron. xvii. 16; 2 Sam. vii. 17.

Quest. XC. _What if the pastor and church cannot agree about singing

psalms, or what version or translation to use, or time or place of

meeting, &c.?_

[Sidenote: I meddle not here with the magistrate's part.]

_Answ._ 1. It is the office of the pastor to be the guide and ruler in

such things, (when the magistrate interposeth not,) and the people

should obey him. 2. But if the pastor injure the church by his

misguidance and mal-administration, he ought to amend and give them

satisfaction; and if he do not, they have their remedy before

mentioned. 3. And if the people be obstinate in disobedience upon

causeless quarrels, the pastor must first labour to convince them by

reason and love, and his authority; and if no means will bring them to

submission, he must consider whether it be better as to the public

good of the church of Christ that he comply with them, and suffer

them, or that he depart and go to a more tractable people; and

accordingly he is to do. For they cannot continue together in

communion if one yield not to the other: usually or ofttimes it will

be better to leave such an obdurate, self-willed people, lest they be

hardened by yielding to them in their sin, and others encouraged in

the like by their example; and their own experience may at last

convince them, and make them yield to better things, as Geneva did

when they revoked Calvin. But sometimes the public good requireth that

the pastor give place to the people's folly, and stay among them, and

rather yield to that which is not best, (so it be otherwise lawful,)

as a worse translation, a worse version, liturgy, order, time, place,

&c. than quite forsake them. And he that is in the right, may in that

case yield to him that is in the wrong, in point of practice.

Quest. XCI. _What if the pastor excommunicate a man, and the people

will not forbear his communion, as thinking him unjustly

excommunicated?_

_Answ._ 1. Either the pastor or the people are in the error. 2. Either

the person is a dangerous heretic, or grossly wicked, or not. 3.

Either the people do own the error or sin, for which he is

excommunicated, or only judge the person not guilty. 4. The pastor's

and the people's part in the execution must be distinguished. And so I

conclude,

1. That if the pastor err and wrong the people, he must repent and

give them satisfaction; but if it be their error and obstinacy, then,

2. If the pastor foreknow that the people will dissent, in some small

dispensable cases he may forbear to excommunicate one that deserveth

it; or if he know it after, that they will not forbear communion with

the person, he may go on in his office, and be satisfied that he hath

discharged his own duty, and leave them under the guilt of their own

faults. 3. But if it be an intolerable wickedness or heresy, (as

Arianism, Socinianism, &c.) and the people own the error or sin as

well as the person, the pastor is then to admonish them also, and by

all means to endeavour to bring them to repentance; and if they remain

impenitent to renounce communion with them and desert them. 4. But if

they own not the crime, but only think the person injured, the pastor

must give them the proof for their satisfaction; and if they remain

unsatisfied, he may proceed in his office as before.

Quest. XCII. _May a whole church, or the greater part, be

excommunicated?_

_Answ._ 1. To excommunicate is by ministerial authority to pronounce

the person unmeet for christian communion, as being under the guilt of

impenitence in heinous sin; and to charge the church to forbear

communion with him, and avoid him, and to bind him over to the bar of

God.

2. The pastor of a particular church may pronounce all the church

uncapable of christian communion and salvation till they repent, e. g.

If they should all be impenitent Arians, Socinians, blasphemers, &c.

for he hath authority, and they deserve it. But he hath no church that

he is pastor of, whom he can command to avoid them. 3. The neighbour

pastors of the churches about them, may, upon full proof, declare to

their own churches, that such a neighbour church that is fallen to

Arianism, &c. is unmeet for christian communion and to be owned as a

church of Christ; and therefore charge their flocks not to own them,

nor to have occasional communion with their members when they come

among them. For there is authority, and a meet object, and necessity

for so doing; and therefore it may be done. 4. But a single pastor of

another church may not usurp authority over any neighbour church, to

judge them and excommunicate them, where he hath neither call nor full

proof, as not having had opportunity to admonish them all, and try

their repentance.[332] Therefore the pope's excommunications are

rather to be contemned, than regarded. 5. Yet if many churches turn

heretics notoriously, one single neighbour pastor may renounce their

communion, and require his flock for to avoid them all. 6. And a

pastor may as lawfully excommunicate the major part of his church, by

charging the minor part to avoid them, as he may do the minor part;

except that accidentally the inconveniences of a division may be so

great, as to make it better to forbear; and so it may oft fall out

also, if it were the minor part.

[332] 2 John 10, 11; 3 John 9, 10; Rev. ii. 5, 16; iii. 5, 6, 15.

Quest. XCIII. _What if a church have two pastors, and one

excommunicate a man, and the other absolve him, what shall the church

and the dissenter do?_

_Answ._ It was such cases that made the churches of old choose

bishops, and ever have but one bishop in one church. But, 1. He that

is in the wrong is first bound to repent and yield to the other. 2. If

he will not, the other in a tolerable ordinary case may for peace give

way to him, though not consent to his injurious dealing. 3. In a

dubious case they should both forbear proceeding till the case be

cleared. 4. In most cases, each party should act according to his own

judgment, if the counsel of neighbour pastors be not able to reconcile

them. And the people may follow their own judgments, and forbear

obeying either of them formally till they agree.

Quest. XCIV. _For what sins may a man be denied communion, or

excommunicated? Whether for impenitence in every little sin; or for

great sin without impenitence?_

_Answ._ 1. I have showed before that there is a suspension which is

but a forbearance of giving a man the sacrament, which is only upon an

accusation till his cause be tried; and an innocent person may be

falsely accused, and so tried.

2. Some sins may be of so heinous scandal, that if the person repent

of them this day, his absolution and reception may be delayed till the

scandal be removed. 1. Because the public good is to be preferred

before any man's personal good. 2. And the churches, or enemies about,

cannot so suddenly know of a man's repentance. If they hear of a man's

murder, perjury, or adultery to-day, and hear that he is absolved

to-morrow, they will think that the church consisteth of such, or that

it maketh very light of sin. Therefore the ancient churches delayed

and imposed penances, partly to avoid such scandal. 3. And partly

because that some sins are so heinous, that a sudden profession is not

a sufficient evidence of repentance, unless there be also some

evidence of contrition.

3. But ordinarily no man ought to be excommunicated for any sin

whatsoever, unless impenitence be added to the sin.[333] Because he is

first to be admonished to repent, Matt. xviii. 15, 16; Tit. iii. 10.

And repentance is the gospel condition of pardon to believers.

4. A man is not to be excommunicated for every sin which he repenteth

not of. Because, 1. Else all men should be excommunicated. For there

are in all men some errors about sin and duty, and so some sins which

men cannot yet perceive to be sin. 2. And ministers are not

infallible, and may take that for a sin which is no sin, and so should

excommunicate the innocent. 3. And daily unavoidable infirmities,

though repented of, yet awaken not the soul sometimes to a notable

contrition; nor are they fit matter for the church's admonition.[334]

A man is not to be called openly to repentance before the church for

every idle word, or hour.

4. Therefore to excommunication these two must concur: 1. A

heinousness in the sin. 2. Impenitence after due admonition and

patience.

[333] Luke xiii. 3, 5; Acts ii. 37-39, &c.

[334] Gal. vi. 1-4; James iii. 1-3.

Quest. XCV. _Must the pastors examine the people before the

sacrament?_