A friendly trial of the grounds tending to separation in a plain and modest…A friendly triall of the grounds tending to separation in a plain and modest…
A friendly trial of the grounds tending to separation in a plain and modest dispute touching the lawfulness of a stinted liturgy and set form of prayer, Communion in mixed assemblies, and the primitive subject and first receptacle of the power of the Keys: tending to satisfy the doubtful, recall the wandering, and to strengthen the weak: by John Ball.A friendly triall of the grounds tending to separation in a plain and modest dispute touching the lawfulnesse of a stinted liturgie and set form of prayer, Communion in mixed assemblies, and the primitive subject and first receptacle of the power of the Keyes: tending to satisfie the doubtfull, recall the wandering, and to strengthen the weak: by John Ball.
John Ball 1585–1640Cambridge: printed by Roger Daniel printer to the University of Cambridge for Edward Brewster, 1640Cambridge: printed by Roger Daniel printer to the Universitie of Cambridge for Edward Brewster, 1640
[16], 314, [4] p. · 84k words · STC 1313 · ESTC S122227
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Secondly, they take that for granted evermore which should be proved, or prove the same by the same: as, Stinted prayer doth quench the Spirit. Why so? Because the Spirit is straitened by forms devised by men: which is as much in plain terms as to say, It is stinted in our sense because it is stinted. And the like might be noted in other arguments.
Secondly, they take that for granted evermore which should be proved, or prove the same by the same: as, Stinted prayer doth quench the Spirit. Why so? Because the Spirit is straitned by forms devised by men: which is as much in plain terms as to say, It is stinted in our sense because it is stinted. And the like might be noted in other arguments.
Where is the consideration of the people had,1 when the forms now are the same for matter and manner that they were almost an hundred years ago, and at the first dawning of the Gospel, the same for the Court, Universities, and the meanest congregation in the Country?
Where is the consideration of the people had,1 when the forms now are the same for matter and manner that they were almost an hundred yeares ago, and at the first dawning of the Gospel, the same for the Court, Universities, and the meanest congregation in the Countrey?
singing of psalms, the use of the Lords prayer for this fifteen hundred years without alteration? for these are the same now that they were many years agone, or at least may be: the same for City, Country, Court, University, and the meanest villages? There are some
⟨p. 94⟩
common blessings which we and others daily stand in need of, and those it is lawful to ask daily in a set form of words. Thus we may pray every day for increase of faith, patience, love, meekness, the forgiveness of sins, the continuance of those outward blessings which we enjoy, freedom from or victory over temptations, &c. Thus there is no petition in the Lords prayer which doth not always, in the main, concern every Christian mans estate. And if the matter of our prayers may be the same daily, in the City & the Country, Court and University, in this and former ages, the same phrase of speech, method and form external may be lawful, fit and expedient. For it is not the repetition of the same words in prayer every day that displeaseth the Lord, but the ignorant, rash, cold, customary, superstitious and irreverent pouring out of words before him, that is distasteful to his Majesty. Variety of phrase doth not delight the Lord: neither will he reject the desires of an humble and contrite heart because they are tendered often in one and the same phrase of speech. And if the matter of prayer be the same in places of greatest wealth and poorest condition, and the same form of blessing, baptizing, singing of psalms and putting up their petitions to God be fit and decent for them all; it can be no prejudice to a stinted Liturgy that it is the same in all places, and throughout all ages, if the language be the same. For this doth argue it to be the more not the less fit, and that the greater not the less regard is had to the people. The reason in brief is this; It is lawful to ask the same common blessings of God every day, in all assemblies and
⟨p. 95⟩
congregations, both of the City & Country, Court and University, met together to call upon God: therefore the same stinted form of prayer or Liturgy may be lawful in the greatest city and meanest village, in this and the ages following, whether read or uttered out of memory: for pronouncing cannot make an evil matter good;
Might not the same be objected against the use of a set translation,1 singing of psalmes, the use of the Lords prayer for this fifteen hundred yeares without alteration? for these are the same now that they were many yeares agone, or at least may be: the same for Citie, Countrey, Court, Universitie, and the meanest villages? There are some ⟨p. 94⟩common blessings which we and others dayly stand in need of, and those it is lawfull to ask dayly in a set form of words. Thus we may pray euery day for encrease of faith, patience, love, meeknesse, the forgivnesse of sinnes, the continuance of those outward blessings which we enjoy, freedom from or victory over temptations, &c. Thus there is no petition in the Lords prayer which doth not alwayes, in the main, concern every Christian mans estate. And if the matter of our prayers may be the same daily, in the Citie & the Countrey, Court and Universitie, in this and former ages, the same phrase of speech, method and form externall may be lawfull, fit and expedient. For it is not the repetition of the same words in prayer every day that displeaseth the Lord, but the ignorant, rash, cold, customary, superstitious and irreverent pouring out of words before him, that is distastfull to his Majesty. Variety of phrase doth not delight the Lord: neither will he reject the desires of an humble and contrite heart because they are tendred often in one and the same phrase of speech. And if the matter of prayer be the same in places of greatest wealth and poorest condition, and the same form of blessing, baptizing, singing of psalms and putting up their petitions to God be fit and decent for them all; it can be no prejudice to a stinted Liturgie that it is the same in all places, and throughout all ages, if the language be the same. For this doth argue it to be the more not the lesse fit, and that the greater not the lesse regard is had to the people. The reason in brief is this; It is lawfull to ask the same common blessings of God every day, in all assemblies and ⟨p. 95⟩congregations, both of the City & Country, Court and University, met together to call upon God: therefore the same stinted form of prayer or Liturgy may be lawfull in the greatest city and meanest village, in this and the ages following, whether read or uttered out of memory: for pronouncing cannot make an evil matter good;
Public prayers offered up by the minister in the church-assemblies must be framed according to the present and several occasions of the church and people of God:1 which cannot be done when men are stinted to those forms.2
Publick prayers offered up by the minister in the church-assemblies must be framed according to the present and severall occasions of the church and people of God:1 which cannot be done when men are stinted to those forms.2
1Object. 7. Copy of a Letter. pag. 21.Object. 7. Copie of a Letter. pag. 21.
Occasions are ordinary and common,1 or more special. In a stinted form prayers may be offered up by the minister according to the common and ordinary occasions of the church and people of God assembled, though not according to the special occasions, which may happen now and then, or more particularly concern this or that person. For if the same blessings are daily to be craved, he prayeth according to the present occasions that asketh the same blessings of God. If it be said, There be many occasions of particular use for the congregation and others, which are not mentioned expressly: that proveth not, That a man cannot in a stinted form pray according to the several occasions; but, that some stinted forms do not meet with all and every particular occasion: which is easily granted. But if a stinted form meet not with every mans occasions, or not so particularly as it ought, doth it hence follow that in a stinted form a man cannot pray according to the present occasions at all? If this be the ⟨p. 96⟩conclusion, I fear we shall find few conceived prayers which must not come under the same sentence. It may argue the imperfection of a stinted form, not the unlawfulness; it maketh somewhat against the sole use of a set form at all times;2 against the simple use it maketh nothing.
Occasions are ordinary and common,1 or more speciall. In a stinted form prayers may be offered up by the minister according to the common and ordinary occasions of the church and people of God assembled, though not according to the speciall occasions, which may happen now and then, or more particularly concern this or that person. For if the same blessings are dayly to be craved, he prayeth according to the present occasions that asketh the same blessings of God. If it be said, There be many occasions of particular use for the congregation and others, which are not mentioned expressely: that proveth not, That a man cānot in a stinted form pray according to the severall occasions; but, that some stinted forms do not meet with all and every particular occasion: which is easily granted. But if a stinted form meet not with every mans occasions, or not so particularly as it ought, doth it hence follow that in a stinted form a man cānot pray according to the present occasions at all? If this be the ⟨p. 96⟩conclusion, I fear we shall find few conceived prayers which must not come under the same sentence. It may argue the imperfection of a stinted form, not the unlawfulnesse; it maketh somewhat against the sole use of a set form at all times;2 against the simple use it maketh nothing.
It is found by lamentable experience, that when men began to observe that custom,1 there was great quenching of the Spirit, and very few there were who did know and observe the true nature and the manner of prayer.2
It is found by lamentable experience, that when men began to observe that custome,1 there was great quenching of the Spirit, and very few there were who did know and observe the true nature and the manner of prayer.2
How is this confirmed by experience? If ever the Christian church had no stinted form of prayer, lamentable experience will testify what great coolings and decays there was in the church before a stinted form was in use. If ever the faithful did by the Spirit of adoption cry, Abba, Father, they have learned to pray by the Spirit since the use of a stinted form as well as before. Whatsoever may be thought of the two first ages; for the space of fourteen hundred years the churches have had their stinted Liturgies: The reformed churches, since God was pleased to restore light again to the world, have approved a stinted Liturgy: Was there none or few in all this tract of time who did know or understand the true nature or manner of prayer? none or few that in spirit or truth did call upon the name of the Lord? The security of all ages hath been lamentable both before and since the use of a stinted form: but, that a stinted form was the cause of security and dullness, can never be proved.
How is this confirmed by experience? If ever the Christian church had no stinted form of prayer, lamentable experience will testifie what great coolings and decayes there was in the church before a stinted form was in use. If ever the faithfull did by the Spirit of adoption cry, Abba, Father, they have learned to pray by the Spirit since the use of a stinted form as well as before. Whatsoever may be thought of the two first ages; for the space of fourteen hundred yeares the churches have had their stinted Liturgies: The reformed churches, since God was pleased to restore light again to the world, have approved a stinted Liturgie: Was there none or few in all this tract of time who did know or understand the true nature or manner of prayer? none or few that in spirit or truth did call upon the name of the Lord? The securitie of all ages hath been lamentable both before and since the use of a stinted form: but, that a stinted form was the cause of securitie and dulnesse, can never be proved.
IN scripture we find prescript forms of blessing,1 prayers,2 and thanksgiving, both ordinary and extraordinary,3 approved of God, which might be used by the priests,4 Levites, and Saints or faithful people,5 and that upon deliberation, usually, constantly,6 as occasion was offered, and not by the immediate motion of the Spirit.7 I say not,8 that the priests in blessing,9 or the Saints in prayer, were necessarily bound to those very words and syllables: But they might lawfully use them and without sin. We find also stinted forms of salutations, valedictions,10 and blessing,11 which have been often used,12 and may lawfully be used still without variation;13 though we be not necessarily obliged thereunto.14 Our Saviour also prescribed a set form of baptizing,15 which we observe constantly without addition or variation;16 though we be not tied by absolute necessity to rehearse the same words in the same syllables.17 No substantial change is to be admitted which may alter the sense:18 but the very form of speech,19 as whether we say,20 I baptize, 21or as the Greek church,22 Be thou baptized, 23&c. is not of like necessity:24 nevertheless we may and do constantly use this form,25 I baptize, 26&c. without addition or variation at any time. Our ⟨p. 98⟩argument from these places is this; If a set form of blessing, thanksgiving, salutation, and administration of baptism be lawful to be used ordinarily without addition or variation; then a stinted form of prayer, to be used ordinarily without addition or alteration, is not unlawful: But a prescript form of blessing, thanksgiving, salutation, and administration of baptism, to be used ordinarily without addition or alteration, is not unlawful.
IN scripture we find prescript forms of blessing,1 prayers,2 and thanksgiving, both ordinary and extraordinary,3 approved of God, which might be used by the priests,4 Levites, and Saints or faithfull people,5 and that upon deliberation, usually, constantly,6 as occasion was offered, and not by the immediate motion of the Spirit.7 I say not,8 that the preists in blessing,9 or the Saints in prayer, were necessarily bound to those very words and syllables: But they might lawfully use them and without sinne. We find also stinted forms of salutations, valedictions,10 and blessing,11 which have been often used,12 and may lawfully be used still without variation;13 though we be not necessarily obliged thereunto.14 Our Saviour also prescribed a set form of baptizing,15 which we observe constantly without addition or variation;16 though we be not tied by absolute necessity to rehearse the same words in the same syllables.17
There is apparent difference betwixt prayer and blessing:1 For prayer is expressed from men to God;2 but blessing is pronounced from God to men.3 Prayer may be performed by one equal to another, by an inferior to a superior, yea by a man to himself:4 but blessing is always from the greater to the less. And Solomon used a different gesture in praying and in blessing the people.
There is apparent difference betwixt prayer and blessing:1 For prayer is expressed from men to God;2 but blessing is pronounced from God to men.3 Prayer may be performed by one equall to another, by an inferiour to a superiour, yea by a man to himself:4 but blessing is alwayes from the greater to the lesse. And Solomon used a different gesture in praying and in blessing the people.
Let prayer and blessing differ in these and other particulars as many as they please;1 in this they agree, that they are both parts or branches of worship: And if a stinted form be disallowed in the one, it is unlawful in the other: if it be a devise of man to be condemned in the one, it cannot be approved in the other: And therefore seeing a prescript form of blessing is lawful, a stinted form of prayer is not to be condemned.
Let prayer and blessing differ in these and other particulars as many as they please;1 in this they agree, that they are both parts or branches of worship: And if a stinted form be disallowed in the one, it is unlawfull in the other: if it be a devise of man to be condemned in the one, it cannot be approved in the other: And therefore seeing a prescript form of blessing is lawfull, a stinted form of prayer is not to be condemned.
Moses did not prescribe unto the priests a form of words whereunto they must be tied in blessing of the people,1 but only gave them a rule of direction according to which they should bless them: For otherwise the priests had sinned, whensoever, ⟨p. 99⟩pronouncing the blessing, they had used other words.2 And the particle, Thus, So, or In this manner, denoteth the form or similitude of the things whereof there is mention,3 &c. It is a troublesome thing that these ministers thus urge the letter of the scriptures, as if the question were not about their sense and interpretation; which they should prove to be for their stinted service, &c. but the question is, whether Moses tied and stinted the priests to that form of words in blessing the people.4 The like they say of the form of baptism.
Moses did not prescribe unto the priests a form of words whereunto they must be tyed in blessing of the people,1 but onely gave them a rule of direction according to which they should blesse them: For otherwise the priests had sinned, whensoever, ⟨p. 99⟩pronouncing the blessing, they had used other words.2 And the particle, Thus, So, or In this manner, denoteth the form or similitude of the things whereof there is mention,3 &c. It is a troublesome thing that these ministers thus urge the letter of the scriptures, as if the question were not about their sense and interpretation; which they should prove to be for their stinted service, &c. but the question is, whether Moses tyed and stinted the priests to that form of words in blessing the people.4 The like they say of the form of baptisme.
1Object. 2. copy of a Letter, pag. 6. Johnson, ubi suprà, pag. 12, •4.
It sufficeth,1 that these forms of blessing, prayer, and thanksgiving, and administration of baptism, might or may be used; though in conscience neither the priests then nor we at this day are necessarily tied unto them in so many precise words: For the lawful not the necessary use of a prescript form of prayer or Liturgy is now in question: which is proved by the places above rehearsed, and not gainsaid at all by this answer.2 For if the Saints in former times might pray unto or praise the Lord in a stinted form of words invented by themselves or indited by others▪3as we find they might and did; if the priests might use a stinted form of words in blessing the people, whereunto they were not tied;4 if Christians may salute one another in this stinted form of words,5 Peace be unto you, The Lord be with you, The Lord bless thee, though they be not tied thereunto, nor can reach every particular comprehended in those short sentences recorded in scripture; then a stinted form ⟨p. 100⟩of prayer or blessing, in words invented by themselves or indited by others, is lawful to us: for in that particular the ground and reason is common to them and us. Apply this answer to the reason, That the priest might use that form without variation, but was not tied unto it, That we may use the Lords prayer without alteration, and the form of baptism without addition and diminution, but are not necessarily obliged to use the very words and syllables precisely; and I know not how they should tie the knot faster. For is not this in plain terms to confess,6 That an arbitrary stinted form is lawful but not necessary? If God had commanded a form, it only had been necessary; if God had determined one precise form, that only and none other had been lawful: but seeing he hath commanded none, determined none precisely, but left us free to use those recorded in scripture, or some others in the selfsame or other words, a stinted form is apparently warranted of God though not commanded.
It sufficeth,1 that these forms of blessing, prayer, and thanksgiving, and administration of baptisme, might or may be used; though in conscience neither the priests then nor we at this day are necessarily tyed unto them in so many precise words: For the lawfull not the necessary use of a prescript form of prayer or Liturgie is now in question: which is proved by the places above rehearsed, and not gainsaid at all by this answer.2 For if the Saints in former times might pray unto or praise the Lord in a stinted form of words invented by themselves or indited by others▪3as we find they might and did; if the preiests might use a stinted form of words in blessing the people, whereunto they were not tyed;4 if Christians may salute one another in this stinted form of words,5 Peace be unto you, The Lord be with you, The Lord blesse thee, though they be not tyed thereunto, nor can reach every particular comprehended in those short sentences recorded in scripture; then a stinted form ⟨p. 100⟩of prayer or blessing, in words invented by themselves or indited by others, is lawfull to us: for in that particular the ground and reason is common to them and us. Apply this answer to the reason, That the priest might use that form without variation, but was not tyed unto it, That we may use the Lords prayer without alteration, and the form of baptisme without addition and diminution, but are not necessarily obliged to use the very words and syllables precisely; and I know not how they should tye the knot faster. For is not this in plain terms to confesse,6 That an arbitrarie stinted form is lawfull but not necessary? If God had commanded a form, it onely had been necessary; if God had determined one precise form, that onely and none other had been lawfull: but seeing he hath commanded none, determined none precisely, but left us free to use those recorded in scripture, or some others in the selfsame or other words, a stinted form is apparently warranted of God though not commanded.
6Fulc. in Rhem. in 1. Cor. 14. §. 14. Calvin. in Matth. •. 9. Noluit praescribere fil•s Dei quibus verbis utendū sit, ut ab ea quam dictavit formula deflectere non liceat.Fulc. in Rhem. in 1. Cor. 14. §. 14. Calvin. in Matth. •. 9. Noluit praescribere fil•s Dei quibus verbis utendū sit, ut ab ea quam dictavit formula deflectere non liceat.
It followeth not,1 that a prescript form devised by man is lawful, because a form prescribed of God is good. Moses was a prophet, and had an immediate commission from God for what he appointed in the house of God:2 which the imposers of the Liturgy cannot plead.3 Christs ordinance can make the writings of the Apostles a rule of faith: can men make another scripture? &c.
It followeth not,1 that a prescript form devised by man is lawfull, because a form prescribed of God is good. Moses was a prophet, and had an immediate commission from God for what he appointed in the house of God:2 which the imposers of the Liturgie cannot plead.3 Christs ordinance can make the writings of the Apostles a rule of faith: can men make another scripture? &c.
A form prescribed and determined by God is not only lawful and good,1 but necessary and only lawful, as it is prescribed: which prerogative ⟨p. 101⟩no form devised or prescribed by man can participate. But when God is pleased to give a form for direction only, and neither to command it precisely nor to determine it as the only allowable for words and syllables, in that case this reason is good, That seeing the forms set down in scripture may lawfully be used though not prescribed, therefore a stinted form is not unlawful. And thus we conclude from these passages of holy writ, The stinted forms of blessing, prayer, thanksgiving, and baptizing set down in scripture are lawful to be used, though not prescribed of God as necessary; therefore a stinted form of prayer is not unlawful. For that form of words which is neither determined nor commanded of God as necessary, but left at liberty to be used or not, that is not in point of conscience absolutely more lawful then another sound and grave. If no form of words be determined or commanded, any form just and good, one as well as another, is free in conscience. Gods commandment maketh a thing necessary; his determination maketh it only and none other lawful: but a form not tying to the words precisely, but given for direction only, doth authorize any other for matter the same and different only in words or phrase of speech. Every stinted form of prayer or blessing, &c. not prescribed of God or ordained of him, is an humane devise, though the matter be good and the words be gathered out of the scripture; because whatsoever is not from heaven, is of men; what is not of God by his institution prescribed or appointed, ⟨p. 102⟩that our brethren conclude to be humane: But no prescript form of blessing, prayer, or praise, &c. is appointed of God and commanded as necessary to be used of all or any man at all times, as they confess and labour to convince: Therefore it necessarily followeth, That if one godly form of prayer or blessing may constantly be used, another for matter the same, though different in phrase of speech, may be used also as occasion shall require: For none is absolutely commanded; and all things required by the word of God in prayer may be observed in the one no less then in the other.
A form prescribed and determined by God is not onely lawfull and good,1 but necessary and onely lawfull, as it is prescribed: which prerogative ⟨p. 101⟩no form devised or prescribed by man can participate. But when God is pleased to give a form for direction onely, and neither to command it precisely nor to determine it as the onely allowable for words and syllables, in that case this reason is good, That seeing the forms set down in scripture may lawfully be used though not prescribed, therefore a stinted form is not unlawfull. And thus we conclude from these passages of holy writ, The stinted forms of blessing, prayer, thanksgiving, and baptizing set down in scripture are lawfull to be used, though not prescribed of God as necessary; therefore a stinted form of prayer is not unlawfull. For that form of words which is neither determined nor commanded of God as necessary, but left at liberty to be used or not, that is not in point of conscience absolutely more lawfull then another sound and grave. If no form of words be determined or commanded, any form just and good, one as well as another, is free in conscience. Gods commandment maketh a thing necessary; his determination maketh it onely and none other lawfull: but a form not tying to the words precisely, but given for direction onely, doth authorize any other for matter the same and different onely in words or phrase of speech. Every stinted form of prayer or blessing, &c. not prescribed of God or ordained of him, is an humane devise, though the matter be good and the words be gathered out of the scripture; because whatsoever is not from heaven, is of men; what is not of God by his institution prescribed or appointed, ⟨p. 102⟩that our brethren conclude to be humane: But no prescript form of blessing, prayer, or praise, &c. is appointed of God and commanded as necessary to be used of all or any man at all times, as they confesse and labour to convince: Therefore it necessarily followeth, That if one godly form of prayer or blessing may constantly be used, another for matter the same, though different in phrase of speech, may be used also as occasion shall require: For none is absolutely commanded; and all things required by the word of God in prayer may be observed in the one no lesse then in the other.
1Answ.
The author
John Ball 1585–1640
PuritansEngland
Author of A Treatise of the Covenant of Grace.
Transcription key
•
an illegible letter
〈…〉
illegible words
〈non-Latin alphabet〉
Greek or Hebrew the transcribers did not key
▪
illegible punctuation
⟨p. 12⟩
a page break in the printed book
No substantiall change is to be admitted which may alter the sense:
&c. without addition or variation at any time. Our
⟨p. 98⟩
argument from these places is this; If a set form of blessing, thanksgiving, salutaion, and administration of baptisme be lawfull to be used ordinarily without addition or variation; then a stinted form of prayer, to be used ordinarily without addition or alteration, is not unlawfull: But a prescript form of blessing, thanksgiving, salutation, and administration of baptisme, to be used ordinarily without addition or alteration, is not unlawfull.
