This from Scripture might be very fufficient to Men, that are not wilfully blind, or extreamly misled by falfe Teachers. But ftill they urge on us the Practice of the first three Hundred Years, that there were no fuch thing as Set-Forms, and in this Point they will gain as little as from Scripture. For if they did not Worship God by Forms, with which the People was acquainted, their Worfhip was either by immediate Revelation, or by Extemporary Conception. If it was by immediate Revelation, why do not the Presbyterians follow their Example? If they fay, that they do, then what they utter must be as Canonical as the Pfalms of David, or S. Paul's Epiftles. Or how come they not to Preach by immediate Infpiration, as well as to Pray by it? Or how come they to Study their Sermons, left they speak Nonfenfe to the People; and not their Prayers, left they speak Nonfenfe to God? It lies at their Door to prove, that the Primitive Chriftians worshipped God in Publick by immediate Conceptions.

That the people worshipped God by Prayers,with which they were acquainted,& to which they were accustomed, may be proven by the Names which they gave to their publick Prayers, as Justin Martyr, Apol. Cap. 88. calls them Common Prayers. Ignatius, Ep. ad Magu. calls them Joint-Prayers. Origen, contra Celfum, Lib. 6. calls them Conftitute Prayers. S. Cyprian, de lapfis, calls them Solemn Prayers. Which in Propriety of Speech cannot be faid of Conceiv'd Prayers, which the People never heard nor knew. For the further Probation, I begin with S. James the Apoftle's Liturgy, which he truly wrote, tho' it underwent fome Variations in After-Ages: Which is the Fate of Creeds and Liturgies, according to the Exigencies and Emergencies of Times: As the Nicene Creed was enlarged by reafon of Macedonius's Herefy. Thus an Office upon the Martyrdom of King Charles the I. and upon the Restoration of King Charles the II. is added to our Book of Common-Prayer. So alfo the General Thanksgiving has been inferted into the Book it felf, fince the Days of King Charles the I.

I doubt not but the History, that goes under John Knox's name, was done by himfelf tho' things be there related ten Years after his Death, by the Publishers who had his Manuscripts in Cuftody.

The Learned Du Pin's Arguments againft S. James's compofing a Liturgy, are not half fo ftrong, as the Answers which the Learned and Pious Cardinal Bona gives for it.

One of Du pin's Arguments is, That the Virgin Mary is called the Mother of God. And the Son and the Holy Ghoft are faid to be confubftantial with the Father; terms, fays he, altogether unknown before the Councils of Nice, Ephefus, and Conftantinople.

The Answer is, as is faid before, That Additions of After-Ages do not prove, that S. James never wrote a Liturgy, but rather that he did write; tho' they mixed their own with his. It will not follow, fays Bona, de Reb. Lit. Cap. 8. but Mofes was not the Author of the Book of Deuteronomy, although the laft Chapter, which treats of his Death and Grave, was written by another Hand.

Another of Du' Pin's Arguments, is, that the Trifugion and Doxology, that is, the Sanctus, and the Gloria Patri, are in S. James's Liturgy, which were not generally recited till the fifth Century: For tho' it might be prov'd that they were in use before; yet it must be confeffed that it was not the general Custom of the Church.

The Answer that is given to Du' Pin's former Argument may ferve this, and all the reft of his Arguments upon this Head: Befides, the Trifagion, Holy, Holy, Holy, is a Scripture Phrafe, Ifa. 6. and 3. Rev. 4.8. And for the Gloria Patri, I fee no Shadow of Reafon for it, why the Words, in which the Apostles were daily Baptizing, might not be used as an Hymn.

That S. James made a Liturgy for the Church of Jerufalem, is proven from the fubfequent Ages that make mention of it. For S. Cyril Bishop of Jerufalem, who lived in the 350 Year of God,writes a Comment upon it, in his Catechef. Myftag.which S. Jerom tells, was written in his younger Year. Again Proclus Patriarch of Conftantinople, who lived in the 434 Year, makes mention of S. James's Liturgy; and the 6th General Council of Conftantinople, held in Trullo the Emperor's Palace in the Year 692. But that which contributes to put all beyond Doubt, is, That that great and admirable Light S. Bafil, Bishop of Cafarea, who lived in the 370 Year of God, is faid to have compendiz'd S. James's Liturgy. The Reafon given by Bona is, because the Chriftian Zeal in these Days began to cool, Men turn'd rich and lazy ; and therefore to oblige their Attendance he abridg'd that Liturgy.

If it be objected, that what the Apostles dictated was by immediate Revelation confequently it should be canonical Scripture, and no Perfon fhould meddle with it by their After-additions.

To which it is answered, That St Barnabas was an Apostle; yet his Writings are not received as Canonical but as Ecclefiaftical Scripture.

;

Again, if it be faid, That God permits not that to be loft which came from infpir'd Perfons.

It is answered, That feveral Books in the Old Teftament are mention'd, fuch as the Books of Gad and Nathan, &c. which are loft. 2dly, The Liturgy of St. James is not loft, tho' After-Ages added fome things to it. As the laft Chapter of Deuteronomy was added to the Writings of Mofes: And as the Conftantinopolitan Creed added to the Necene. Salmafius and other learned French Proteftants did not deny, but St. Ignatius wrote Epiftles; altho' they did not own, that these Epiftles, that were in their Hands were genuine.

We read of the Liturgies of other Apoftles, as St. Peter, and St. Mark, which is very probable, although After-Ages corrupted them. For we find, that Archbishop Ufber, in his Difcourfe of the Religion profefs'd by the Ancient Irish, fhows, that St. Patrick brought a Liturgy into Ireland, which he received from Germanus and Lupus, Two French Bishops, who came over into Britain in the 5th Century, to affift the Church againft the Pelagian Herefy; and that this Liturgy was taken originally from St. Mark. And the learned Uber affirms, that he had feen it in an ancient Fragment, well nigh Nine Hundred Years fince. See for this the learned Dr Shaw Rector of Whalton in Northumberland, in his Book called, No Reformation of the eftablished Reformation, Pag. 104.

Another Argument, to prove that Liturgies were in Ufe in the first Three Centuries, fhall be from the Words of Tertullian, who lived in the End of the fecond Century, and in the Beginning of the third, out of his Apology, where he fhews how Chriftians pray'd in his Time. The Words are, Sine Monitore, quia de pectore: We pray without a Monitor, a Promptor, or a Roufer, or one to ftir us up to pray, because it comes from the Heart. Which Words, the Oppofers of Set Forms think, make mightily for them; whereas upon the following Confiderations, they are ftrongly againft them. For not to speak of the Obfcurity of this Father's Stile, I fay, that Sentence cannot make Senfe in Two Cafes. Firft, if it be meant, that the Minifter precompofed a Prayer with which the People was not acquaint, and repeated it to the Congregation; then, he that pray'd was a Monitor, or a Prompter. 2dly, If it be faid, That the Minifter prayed ex tempore or off hand, in Words which the People know not before hand, then he was a Prompter.

But in the next place, the Words will make good Senfe in four Cafes.

First, If it be in Allufion to the Custom of the Heathens, which began with their Invocation of their greater Deities by Name, recited by the Prieft, and repeated by the People after him; and that both Priest and People had a Monitor and Cuftos over them, to correct them, when the one dictated and the other repeated falfly; as Rigaltius has it upon the fame Words of Tertullian: If this, I fay, be the Meaning, it makes good Sense.

2dly, If the Meaning be, we pray heartily for Heathen Magiftrates, without being forced or compelled thereto; the Words will bear that Senfe without any torturing of them: And 'tis moft probable, that this is the Meaning; for the Words run thus, fine Monitore, quia de pectore oramus pro Imperatoribus vitam prolixam. We pray for a long Life to the Emperours, and that without being compell'd thereto. Or 3dly, It is meant of every one in the Congregation going to their own secret Prayers, without a Prompter or Monitor; and then the Words make good Sense. Or

Lastly, It was a Worship, which the People, by daily Practice, was acquainted with, and in which they did vocally join; and this makes directly for joint and Common-Prayer. And that the People did join, is clear from another Paffage in Tertullian, upon Prayer; Our Voices must be low, and we must not speak louder than is neceffary to be heard. Which Words import, that the People vocally join'd; as in our Book of Common-Prayer, the Exhortation runs thus, 1 befeech you, as many as are here present, to accompany me with a pure Heart and humble Voice, &c.

In

In the next Place, it is very plain, that Common Prayer was used in the Third Century, when Hippolytus, Bishop of Porta, who lived in the 220 Year of God, in the Age of Miracles, faid, That it was a Sign of the Antichrift's coming, when Liturgies and reading of Striptures should be turn'd out of Churches.

And now to conclude, who would not be for a Liturgy, when, befides the Authority of plain Scripture, Primitive Antiquity, and the Practice of all Churches in the World, the Thing it felf is fo useful and reasonable, that the contrary is moft dangerous and unreasonable? For by the Book of Common Prayer, the three Kingdoms are like one Paroch Church; all have the fame Mouth, in Prayers and Praifes, and the fame Ear hearing the fame Scriptures. Whereas, by our Scotish Way, not one Paroch knows how the other worships God For if they fay, they have but the fame Worship; then, if one fpeaks Nonfence and Blafphemy, as Hundreds of them do, the whole extemporizing Kirk does the fame. Is not this like an House full of Fiddlers, every one playing a different Tune? Befides they cannot fhow their Worship more than Quakers, who have the very fame Arguments for their immediate Revelation, which Presbyterians have for their extemporizing, and truly to better Purpose. Moreover, how can any Perfon be faid to join in an extemporary Prayer, and have his Mind two Ways, his Attention to hear what the Conceiver fpeaks, and have his Heart fixt on God, in the Time that he is confidering whether he shall join or not? And how can an immediate Conception bring forth but a monstrous Birth? How can any fubfcribe the Presbyterian Prayers, more than he can write his Name upon the Water or in the Air? Withal, may not an Arian, Socinian, yea a masked Jew or Turk pray his own Principles by conceived Prayers, and never be discovered? But it is not poffible for him to pray by the Book of Common Prayer, and to pray his own Tenets and falfe Principles. For Antinomanifm, we know, is both preach'd and pray'd among Presbyterians, and never cenfured; as alfo, feveral other heretical Points as in the Matter of Set Forms, Magistracy and Epifcopacy.

To fum up all, fo long as Calvin's Reasons for Set Forms of Prayer laft, fo long there will be Ufe for a Liturgy: But fo long as there are Ignorance and Imperfections on Earth, his Reasons will endure. His Reasons are,

First, To help the Weakness of fome: He might have added, of many Thousands ; bccaufe for one knowing. Perfon in a Congregation, there are Hundreds of Ignorants.

Secondly, That the Confent of Churches may be known among themfelves. He might have faid, in Conformity with the Old and new Teftament Churches, and primitive Practice. Let any, who reads the large Hiftorical and Geographical Dictionary, or the Abridgment thereof, look the Word Liturgy, and he will find that there is no Church in the World that wants a Liturgy, but the Diffenters of England, and the confufed Kitk of Scotland, who are the very Pefts and Plague of the Ifle of Britain.

Thirdly, Calvin's third Reafon is, to put a Stop to the Ramblings of fome light Heads, who affect Novelties, and of this we have woful Experience: For there is hardly a giddy Head, but takes all the wild extravagant Fancies of his Brain to be Incomes of the Holy Ghoft. It is well known, that this popular Trick of extemporizing brought the Royal Martyr to the Scaffold, pull'd down the ancient Apoftolical Government, and brought in a Swarm of Sectarians, which revived the old buried Herefies; and in a Word brought a total Eclipfe upon the Shunfhine of the Gofpel. The Lord open the Eyes of the People, that they may fee their Intereft and their Duty, and that they may discern how much and how long they have been misled by falfe Teachers.

Du Moulin's Obfervation in bis Hiftory of the English and Scotifh Prefby

tery.

T was (faith he) a Point of Prudence in the Covenanters to lay afide the Liturgy, because it cro'd their politick Intentions, being to build themselves an Empire in the Confusion they made. His Animadverfiors follow.

1. In the Liturgy,the King is called,Our moft Gracious Sovereign; and this would give the Minifter the Lie, who us'd to call him,a Cruel Tyrant.

2. By the Liturgy, Subjects were taught to pray, God ftrengthen the King, that he might overcome his Enemies, which were to pray to God for the Ruin of the Holy Covenant.

3. In the Liturgy, God is called, The only Ruler of Princes, which is contrary to their Do

&trine, That Kings are accountable to their Subjects.

4. By it we pray, That the King's Subjects may duly confider whofe Authority be bath namely God's) which croffes the Doctrine of King's having Authority from Men.

5. There

+

5. There 'tis pray'd, That the Subjects of the King, may faithfully ferve, honour, and • humbly obey him: This would utterly spoil the Affairs of the Covenanters, if the Lord fhould hear this Prayer.

6. There 'tis pray'd, That the Lord would fo bless the King, that under him we may be godly and quietly govern'd; which would fpoil their Intentions of governing us, without him.

C

7. It prays for all in Authority under him; but they must pray for all in Authority above him.

8. There 'tis pray'd, That God would give Peace in our Days; but this was unfuitable to the Intention of the Covenanters, who preach no other Thing in Subftance, than that ill ap ply'd Text, Curfed is be that with-bolds his Sword from shedding Blood. And a little after, the fame Author tells us, That the prophane Contempt, wherewith they us'd this Holy Liturgy, ought not to be imputed to the Infolencies of Soldiers, but to the Inftructions which were given them, from a Book called, The Parliament's Soldiers Catechifm, publifh'd and recommended by ípecial Authority, which taught them to tear it in Pieces wherever they found › it,calling it, Amoft abominable Idol.

He obferves alfo, That the Authors of the Directory labour'd to turn the Eyes of Ignorant People, towards the Churches beyond Seas, hoping, that looking fo far off, they could not know what they did and therefore in the Preface to the Directory, they made People believe, That by long Experience, they found that the English Liturgy was offenfive to Foreign Reform'd Churches, and that it was to answer the Expectation of thefe Churches, that they rejected the ordinary Liturgy. Upon which cur Author falls upon this pathetick Exclamation. "Oh our good GOD! Thefe Perfons, do they meddle to preach the Truth? Because that France and England are feparated by Sea and Language? Do they think that their People fhall never be inform'd of the Truth of the Opinion of their Neighbours,touching the English Liturgy? I hope they will leave to others the Practice of this Maxim, Lie boldly, altho you be refuted after, there will remain fome Impreffion upon the Spirit of the Hearers. Where is their Honefty? Where is their Sincerity? Do they hope by thefe wicked Ways to draw down the Bleffing of God upon their Caufe? The Truth which they pretend to advance, must it be fet up by Lying?

Again (laith the fame Author) the Covenanters endeavoured to alienate Foreign Churches
from the Church of England, upon the Outward of Religion. His Majefty remembers them,
how at the Synod of Dort, both the Discipline and Liturgy of the Church of England were ap-
proy'd by Word and Writing by Eminent Divines of Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden
and Switzerland, as appears in the Act of that Synod; yet notwithstanding the Covenanters,
at this Day, are fo impudently bold, as to publifh, That, by long and fad Experience, they found
the English Liturgie offenfive to the Foreign Reform'd Churches:"

Short Reasons for Set Forms from Bishop Taylor's Preface to the Apology
for authorix'd Liturgies.

1.

may

TH

HAT we may imitate the perpetual Practice of the Jewish and Chriftian Churches 2. That we may follow the Example, and obey the Precept of Our Bleed Saviour, who established a Set Form. 3. That all that come, may know the Nature of publick Communion, the fettled Principles of their Religion, and Manner of Addrefs to God. 4. That we know before hand what to pray to God, and not do it by an implicite Faith of an Extemporizer. 5. That there may be Union of Hearts, Spirits and Tongues. 6. That there may be a publick Symbol of Communion, and that our united Prayers may have more Weight with God. 7. That the Minifters lefs Learn'd may have Provifions of Devotion made for them. 8. That the more Learn'd may have no Occafion of Boafting, and fo their Prayer be turn'd into Sin. 9. That extravagant Levities and fecret Impieties be prevented. 10. That the Offices Ecclefiaftical may the better fecure the Articles of Religion. 11. That they may edify the People by their Books of dailly Ufe. 12. That Men by the interveening of Authority, may be engaged to certain Devotions. 13. That not only the Duty, but the very Form of it's Miniftration, may be honoured by the Countenance of Authority, and not be expos'd Contempt by Reafon of the Sufficiency of it's external Warrant. 14. To fecure the Miniftry from the Intrusion of Men whomGod hath not fent. 15. That the Indetermination of the Office may not introduce Indifferency, nor Indifferency lead in a freer Liberty, nor Liberty degenerate into Licentioufnefs, or Licentioufness into Folly and Vanity, and thefe come fome Times attended with fecular Defigns, left these be curfed with the Immiffion of a peevish Spirit upon our Priests, and that Spirit be a Teacher of Lies, and thefe Lies become the Bafis of impious Theorems, which are certainly attended with ungodly Lives, and then either Athe1fm or Antichriftanifm may come, according as fhall happen in the Conjunction of Time, and other Circumftances; for this would be a fad Climax, a Ladder upon which are no Angels afcending or defcending, because the Degrees lead to Darkness and Mifery.

1

The Epifcopacy of the firft Three Centuries proved to be, in Subftance, the fame with the present Episcopacy which is impugn'd by the Pref byterians; and that their infifting against Diocesan Bishops, is falfe, ridiculous and impertinent.

TH

HE Scotifh Prefbyterian Champions with great Confidence tell us, That there was no Diftinction of Bishops and Prefbyters for the first three Centuries, which is to give the Lie to the learn'deft Advocates for Prefbytery, who wrote in France or any where elfe: Particularly Daille, de Script. Dion, & Ignat. falfo attrib. Lib. 2. Cap.

38. who afferts that,

It is clearer than the Sun at Mid-day, from fuch of the Writings of Origen as are extant, and efpecially from Cyprian's Epiftles, that towards the End of the third Century, not only the Offices and Functions, but also the Names of Bishop and Presbyter were diftinguished all the Roman World over. The Prefbyterians would wish, that they had no fuch great Primitive Lights to gain-fay the Caufe which they plead for. For,

Can there be any Thing more exprefs than Origen's Teftimony,in his Book concerning Prayer, after he has spoken of Duties common to all Chriftians, he fubjoins, Befides these common and univerfal Debts, there is a Debt peculiar to these that are Widows, maintain'd by the Church, and there is a Debt peculiar to Deacons, and another peculiar to Presbyters. But of all these peculiar Debts, that which is due by the Bishop is the greatest, it is exacted by the Saviour of the whole Church; and the Bishop muft fmart Severely for it, if it be not payed. Again, in the 11th Homily on S. Ferom's Prophecy, he has thefe following Words, More will be required of me who was a Presbyter, than of a Deacon; more of a Deacon than of a Laick: But he has most to account for who has Ecclefiaftical Principality over us, to wit, the Bishop.

I need not cite Authorities from S. Cyprian, the worthy Author of that Age having done it with that Evidence, that I think none, but a wilful Brain-fick Creature wedded to the Bigottery of a Party can deny it: For he has cited 50 of the Prefbyterian Champions,acknowledging that S. Cyprian wrote for fuch an Epifcopacy as we contend for.

Secondly, This Affertion of the Scots Prefbyterian Champions,to wit, That there was no Diftination betwixt Bishop and Prefbyter, in the first three Centuries, contradicts Blondel, who acknow ledges, that Epifcopacy began in the hundred and fifty Year of God; and that was in the Middle of the fecond Century. Here are the third and fecond Centuries ingenuously acknowledged by the learn'deft of the Party, to be Epifcopal. But againft Blondel, we oppofe the Government of the four famous Churches, to wit, Jerufalem, Rome, Antioch and Alexan

dria.

1. For Jerufalem, Thirteen of the Circumcifion fucceeded to S. James, who was the first Bishop of Ferufalem, whereof Judas was the laft, who, according to the Calculation of fome, died Anno 131, which is full Twenty Years before Blondel's Era.

2. At Antioch, after S. Peter, was Evodius, who lived till the 98, Ignatius fucceeded, who lived till the 108. After him Cornelius who died in 140.

3. Seven fucceffive Bishops fat in Rome till the 140.

4. At Alexandria, Five are accounted from S. Mark, the last whereof was Eumanės, confecrated in 134.

So that if Daille and Blondel be defeat, we need not trouble our felves much with any British Presbyterian, feeing they have faid Nothing to fo good Purpofe as thefe.

;

It is impoffible for the Adverfaries to affign the Time, when this pretended Change betwixt Bishop and Presbyter began the Distinction is vifible about the Middle of the fecond Century, which was little above 50 Years after the Death of the Apoftles. How then came fuch a fudden Change throughout Europe, Asia and Africa, without fo much as a Meeting upon it? Or a Proteftation of the Clergy against an Ufurpation, or an Encroachment upon their Rights? Is this in them any Thing elfe but a groundless Affertion? For Bishopricks then, were fo far from being tempting, that they were in a Manner forced upon Men of Merit, by the Clergy and the People; and frequently it expofed the Bishops to the most cruel Perfecutions, and tormenting Deaths which Tyranny could devise.

How this fudden Change came, is a Thing no Presbyterian can tell, nor can determine. However fome of the critical French Champions pretend, they have found out the exact Time of it's Rife; and that was in Hyginus's Time, the Ninth Pope of Rome, who was a Martyr for Chrift, and yet altered the Church Conftitution; and this they collect chiefly out of the Pon tifical of Damafcus, who fays, that Hyginus compofuit clerum & primus diftribuit gradus. So that according to them, this Holy Martyr began this Piece of Antichriftianifm, and made the first Innovation, which will be liable to a great many Difficulties. For,

First, What Influence could this have upon other Churches, to follow his Example? What Temptation had Hyginus to have Preheminence above his Brethren; when Martyrdom was the greatest Reward he expected for his Epifcopacy Yea, how will this agree with S. Ferom, who fays, toto orbe decretum eft. i. e. the Distinction betwixt Bishop and Presbyter was in the Days of the Apostles.

Befides, if this Diftinction of Bishop and Presbyter as to the Name, Order and Office, was long before Hyginus, then this Affertion falls to the Ground. But Telefephorus to whom he fucceeded