In 1649, the book Eikon Basilike (Portrait of the King) was published, in the name of Charles I. It's authorship was disputed from the first. Parliament had John Milton write a book against it, creatively entitled Eikonoklastes. Chapter 16, Upon the Ordinance against the Common-Prayer-Booke, referring to the legislation of the Parliament, makes some really good arguments for the English liturgy, though they are also found elsewhere. You may read the whole at: http://anglicanhistory.org/charles/eikon/. An excerpt from 16 is below. The final reference to the "Directory" would be the Westminster Directory for the Publick Worship of God.
As for the matter contained in the Booke, sober and learned men have sufficiently vindicated it against the cavils and exceptions of those, who thought it a part of piety to make what profane objections they could against it; especially for Popery & Superstition; whereas no doubt the Liturgy was exactly conformed to the doctrine of the Church of England; and this by all Reformed Churches is confessed to be most sound and Orthodox.
For the manner of using Set and prescribed Formes, there is no doubt but that wholsome words being knowne and fitted to mens understandings, are soonest received into their hearts, and aptest to excite and carry along with them judicious and fervent affections.
Nor doe I see any reason why Christians should be weary of a wel-composed Liturgy (as I hold this to be) more than of all other things, wherein the Constancy abates nothing of the excellency and usefulnesse.
I could never see any Reason, why any Christian should abhorre, or be forbidden to use the same Formes of prayer, since he praies to the same God, believes in the same Saviour, professeth the same Truths, reads the same Scriptures, hath the same duties upon him, and feels the same daily wants for the most part, both inward and outward, which are common to the whole Church.
Sure we may as wel before-hand know what we pray, as to whom we pray; and in what words, as to what sense; when we desire the same things, what hinders we may not use the same words? our appetite and disgestion too may be good when we use, as we pray for, our daily bread.
Some men, I heare, are so impatient not to use in all their devotions their owne invention, and gifts, that they not onely disuse (as too many) but wholly cast away and contemn the Lord's Prayer; whose great guilt is, that it is the warrant and originall patterne of all set Liturgies, in the Christian Church.
I ever thought that the proud ostentation of mens abilities for invention, and the vaine affectations of variety for expressions, in Publique prayer, or any sacred administrations, merits a greater brand of sin, than that which they call Coldnesse and Barrennesse: Nor are men in those novelties lesse subject to formall and superficiall tempers (as to their hearts) than in the use of constant Formes, where not the words, but mens hearts are too blame.
I make no doubt but a man may be very formall in the most extemporary variety; and very fervently devout in the most wonted expressions: Nor is God more a God of variety, than of constancy: Nor are constant Formes of Prayers more likely to flat, and hinder the Spirit of prayer, and devotion, than unpremeditated and confused variety to distract, and lose it.
Though I am not against a grave, modest, discreet, and humble use of Ministers gifts, even in publique, the better to fit, and excite their owne, and the Peoples affections to the present occasions; yet I know no necessity why private and single abilities should quite justle out, and deprive the Church of the joynt abilities and concurrent gifts of many learned and godly men; such as the Composers of the Service-Booke were; who may in all reason be thought to have more of gifts and graces enabling them to compose with serious deliberation & concurrent advise, such Forms of prayers, as may best fit the Churches common wants, informe the Hearers understanding, and stirre up that fiduciary and fervent application of their spirits (wherein consists the very life and soule of prayer, and that so much pretended Spirit of prayer) than any private man by his solitary abilities can be presumed to have; which, what they are many times (even there, where they make a great noise and shew) the affectations, emptinesse, imper-tinency, rudenesse, confusions, flatnesse, levity, obscurity, vain, and ridiculous repetitions, the senselesse, and oft-times blasphemous expressions; all these burthened with a most tedious and intolerable length, do sufficiently convince all men, but those who glory in that Pharisaick way.
Wherein men must be strangely impudent, & flatterers of themselves, not to have an infinite shame of what they so do and say, in things of so sacred a nature, before God and the Church, after so ridiculous, and indeed, profane a manner.
Nor can it be expected, but that in duties of frequent performance, as Sacramentall administrations, and the like, which are still the same; Ministers must either come to use their own Formes constantly, which are not like to be so sound, or comprehensive of the nature of the duty, as Formes of Publick composure; or else they must every time affect new expressions when the subject is the same; which can hardly be presumed in any mans greatest sufficiencies not to want (many times) much of that compleatnesse, order, and gravity, becomming those duties; which by this means are exposed at every celebration to every Ministers private infirmities, indispositions, errours, disorders, and defects, both for judgment and expression.
A serious sense of which inconvenience in the Church unavoidably following every mans severall manner of officiating, no doubt, first occasioned the wisdome and piety of the Ancient Churches, to remedy those mischiefs, by the use of constant Liturgies of Publick composure.
The want of which I believe this Church will sufficiently feel, when the unhappy fruits of many mens un-governed ignorance, and confident defects, shall be discovered in more errours, schimes, disorders, and uncharitable distractions in Religion, which are already but too many, the more is the pity.
However, if violence must needs bring in, and abett those innovations, (that men may not seeme to have nothing to do) which Law, Reason, and Religion forbids, at least to be so obtruded, as wholly to justle out the publick Liturgie.
Yet nothing can excuse that most unjust and partiall severity of those men, who either lately had subscribed to, used and maintained the Service-book; or refused to use it, cried out of the rigour of Lawes and Bishops, which suffered them not to use the liberty of their Consciences, in not using it.
That these men (I say) should so suddenly change the Lyturgie into a Directory, as if the Spirit needed help for invention, though not for expressions; or as if matter prescribed did not as much stint and obstruct the Spirit, as if it were cloathed in, and confined to, fit words: (So slight and easie is that Legerdemain which will serve to delude the vulgar.)
As for the matter contained in the Booke, sober and learned men have sufficiently vindicated it against the cavils and exceptions of those, who thought it a part of piety to make what profane objections they could against it; especially for Popery & Superstition; whereas no doubt the Liturgy was exactly conformed to the doctrine of the Church of England; and this by all Reformed Churches is confessed to be most sound and Orthodox.
For the manner of using Set and prescribed Formes, there is no doubt but that wholsome words being knowne and fitted to mens understandings, are soonest received into their hearts, and aptest to excite and carry along with them judicious and fervent affections.
Nor doe I see any reason why Christians should be weary of a wel-composed Liturgy (as I hold this to be) more than of all other things, wherein the Constancy abates nothing of the excellency and usefulnesse.
I could never see any Reason, why any Christian should abhorre, or be forbidden to use the same Formes of prayer, since he praies to the same God, believes in the same Saviour, professeth the same Truths, reads the same Scriptures, hath the same duties upon him, and feels the same daily wants for the most part, both inward and outward, which are common to the whole Church.
Sure we may as wel before-hand know what we pray, as to whom we pray; and in what words, as to what sense; when we desire the same things, what hinders we may not use the same words? our appetite and disgestion too may be good when we use, as we pray for, our daily bread.
Some men, I heare, are so impatient not to use in all their devotions their owne invention, and gifts, that they not onely disuse (as too many) but wholly cast away and contemn the Lord's Prayer; whose great guilt is, that it is the warrant and originall patterne of all set Liturgies, in the Christian Church.
I ever thought that the proud ostentation of mens abilities for invention, and the vaine affectations of variety for expressions, in Publique prayer, or any sacred administrations, merits a greater brand of sin, than that which they call Coldnesse and Barrennesse: Nor are men in those novelties lesse subject to formall and superficiall tempers (as to their hearts) than in the use of constant Formes, where not the words, but mens hearts are too blame.
I make no doubt but a man may be very formall in the most extemporary variety; and very fervently devout in the most wonted expressions: Nor is God more a God of variety, than of constancy: Nor are constant Formes of Prayers more likely to flat, and hinder the Spirit of prayer, and devotion, than unpremeditated and confused variety to distract, and lose it.
Though I am not against a grave, modest, discreet, and humble use of Ministers gifts, even in publique, the better to fit, and excite their owne, and the Peoples affections to the present occasions; yet I know no necessity why private and single abilities should quite justle out, and deprive the Church of the joynt abilities and concurrent gifts of many learned and godly men; such as the Composers of the Service-Booke were; who may in all reason be thought to have more of gifts and graces enabling them to compose with serious deliberation & concurrent advise, such Forms of prayers, as may best fit the Churches common wants, informe the Hearers understanding, and stirre up that fiduciary and fervent application of their spirits (wherein consists the very life and soule of prayer, and that so much pretended Spirit of prayer) than any private man by his solitary abilities can be presumed to have; which, what they are many times (even there, where they make a great noise and shew) the affectations, emptinesse, imper-tinency, rudenesse, confusions, flatnesse, levity, obscurity, vain, and ridiculous repetitions, the senselesse, and oft-times blasphemous expressions; all these burthened with a most tedious and intolerable length, do sufficiently convince all men, but those who glory in that Pharisaick way.
Wherein men must be strangely impudent, & flatterers of themselves, not to have an infinite shame of what they so do and say, in things of so sacred a nature, before God and the Church, after so ridiculous, and indeed, profane a manner.
Nor can it be expected, but that in duties of frequent performance, as Sacramentall administrations, and the like, which are still the same; Ministers must either come to use their own Formes constantly, which are not like to be so sound, or comprehensive of the nature of the duty, as Formes of Publick composure; or else they must every time affect new expressions when the subject is the same; which can hardly be presumed in any mans greatest sufficiencies not to want (many times) much of that compleatnesse, order, and gravity, becomming those duties; which by this means are exposed at every celebration to every Ministers private infirmities, indispositions, errours, disorders, and defects, both for judgment and expression.
A serious sense of which inconvenience in the Church unavoidably following every mans severall manner of officiating, no doubt, first occasioned the wisdome and piety of the Ancient Churches, to remedy those mischiefs, by the use of constant Liturgies of Publick composure.
The want of which I believe this Church will sufficiently feel, when the unhappy fruits of many mens un-governed ignorance, and confident defects, shall be discovered in more errours, schimes, disorders, and uncharitable distractions in Religion, which are already but too many, the more is the pity.
However, if violence must needs bring in, and abett those innovations, (that men may not seeme to have nothing to do) which Law, Reason, and Religion forbids, at least to be so obtruded, as wholly to justle out the publick Liturgie.
Yet nothing can excuse that most unjust and partiall severity of those men, who either lately had subscribed to, used and maintained the Service-book; or refused to use it, cried out of the rigour of Lawes and Bishops, which suffered them not to use the liberty of their Consciences, in not using it.
That these men (I say) should so suddenly change the Lyturgie into a Directory, as if the Spirit needed help for invention, though not for expressions; or as if matter prescribed did not as much stint and obstruct the Spirit, as if it were cloathed in, and confined to, fit words: (So slight and easie is that Legerdemain which will serve to delude the vulgar.)
Comments