Every sect of erring christians accordingly useth to err in worship, and have some badge and symbol of their sect and error.
For, 1. All sects and erroneous persons may turn holy words and duties into symbols of their errors. 2. All christians in the world being imperfect, do sometimes err in matter or manner in their worship. And he that will materially avoid all the badges or symbols of their errors, shall have no communion with any church or christian. 3. As we must do our best so to avoid all their errors, that we choose them not, and make them not formally our own practice; (as tautologies, vain repetitions, disorders, unfit phrases, &c. We must ourselves when we are the speakers do as much better as we can;) so we must not therefore separate from them that do use them, nor deny them our communion when they use them; else we must separate from all others, and all others from us. 4. But when we are present with them, our minds must disown all the faults of the holiest prayer in the world which we join in: we may be bound to stay with them, and join in all that is good and warrantable, and yet as we go along, to disown in our minds all that we know to be amiss.
Quest. CXVII. Are all indifferent things made unlawful to us, which shall be abused to idolatrous worship?
Answ. You must distinguish, 1. Of the symbol of idolatry before spoken of, and other by-abuses. 2. Of an abuse done in former ages or remote countries, and in our own age and country. 3. Of the reasons inviting us to use them, whether necessary or not.
1. The case of symbols or badges is not here spoken of, but other abuses.
2. An abuse committed in the age and place we live in, or any other, which will by the scandal imbolden others to the like, may not be complied in, without so great reason, as will notably preponderate the evil consequents.
3. But yet in many cases such abused, indifferent things, may after be lawfully used by believers. For instance:
1. Names may be things indifferent, abused to idolatry, and yet lawfully used by us: as the name God, Deus, Lord, holy, just, good, temple, altar, sacrifice, priest, heaven, sun, moon, Jupiter, Saturn, and a hundred such; I mean these letters and syllables in these languages. That these names are all in themselves indifferent appeareth in that they are neither naturally necessary, nor by God's institution, but arbitrary signs of human invention and choice: for we may easily and lawfully make new words to signify all the same things that these do: and that they are abused to idolatry is notoriously known: and that yet they are lawfully used, the practice of all christians, English and Latin, even the most scrupulous themselves, doth judge.
2. And the use of temples (these individuals which have been used to idolatry) is lawful.
3. So also of bells, pulpits, cups, tables, and fonts, and other utensils.
4. The Bible itself, as it is this individual book rather than another, is a thing indifferent, yet it may be read in after it hath been abused to idolatry.
5. If the king would not only give the garments, but the money, lands, lordships, houses, which have been consecrated or otherwise abused to idolatry, to any poor people, or most of the scrupulous, they would think it lawful to receive and use them; yea, it is lawful to dedicate the same lands and money afterwards to holy uses, and to maintain religious worship.
6. Otherwise it were in the power of any idolater whenever he pleased, to deprive all the christian world of their christian liberty, and to make nothing indifferent to us, seeing they can abuse them all.
7. Yea, almost nothing is then already indifferent, there being few things that some person in some time and place hath not abused to idolatry.
8. If the question be only of all individual things abused to idolatry, the decision now given will hold good; but if it be also of all species of such things, it will be a dishonour to a man's reason to make a question of it.
Quest. CXVIII. May we use the names of week days which idolatry honoured their idols with; as Sunday, Monday, Saturday, and the rest? And so the months?
Answ. 1. It were to be wished that the custom were changed; 1. Because the names have been so grossly abused; 2. And we have no need of them; 3. And as the papists say, Our monuments, temple names, and other relics among you prove ours to be the old religion, and keep possession for us till it be restored; so the heathens say to all the christians, Your very names of your days and months prove our religion to be elder than yours, and keep possession for us till it be restored.
2. It is meet that we wisely do our duty toward the reformation of this abuse.
3. But yet long custom and sound doctrine hath so far taken away the scandal and ill effects, that rather than be an offence to any by seeming singularity, it is as lawful still to use these names, as it was to Luke to use the names of Castor and Pollux, Jupiter and Mercury, historically.
4. In such cases the true solution of the question must be by weighing accidents and foreseen consequents together wisely and impartially; and he that can foresee which way is likely to do most good or hurt, may satisfactorily know his duty.
Quest. CXIX. Is it lawful to pray secretly when we come first into the church, especially when the church is otherwise employed?
Answ. 1. This is a thing which God hath given us no particular law about; but the general laws must regulate us, "Let all be done decently, in order, and to edification."
2. Our great and principal business in coming to the church assembly is to join with them in the public worship; and this is it that accordingly, as our great business, we must intend and do.
3. In a place where superstition makes ignorant people think it a matter of necessity, so to begin with secret prayer, when the church is otherwise employed, the use of it is the more scandalous, as encouraging them in their error.
4. It is the best way to come before the public worship begin, and then they that think it most decent may do it without scruple or just offence.
5. But as a man's heart may put up a short ejaculation as he walketh up the church, without losing what else he might hear, so a man may on his knees be so brief, as that his loss shall be but small; and whether his profit preponderate that little time's loss, he can judge better than another. Therefore though I like best keeping to concord with the assembly in our devotion, yet these are things in which it ill beseemeth christians to judge or despise each other; and I shall take on either side the judging and despising of those that differ from us, to be a far greater sin, than the doing or not doing of the thing.
Object. Is it not called in Eccles. v. 1, 2, "The sacrifice of fools who know not that they do evil?"
Answ. No: I have wondered to hear that text so ordinarily thus perverted. The text is, "Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to offer the sacrifice of fools. – " Which is no more, than that it is the imagination and custom of fools to think to please God by their sacrifices, and bringing somewhat to him, while they refuse or neglect to hear his commands and obey him. Whereas obedience is better than sacrifice; and the sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to the Lord: and he that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, his prayer is abominable: and because they hate instruction – they shall cry and God will not hear them. Therefore be first careful to hear what God saith to thee, and to learn his will and do it, and then bring thy sacrifice to him: leave thy gift at the altar, and go and be reconciled to thy brother: obey first, and then come and offer thy gift. This is all the meaning of the text. See also Psal. l. 8, and compare these cited texts, 1 Sam. xv. 22; Prov. xv. 8; xxi. 17; Matt. v. &c. But whether we should begin with prayer or hearing when we enter into the church, God hath left to prudence to be decided by the general rules.
Quest. CXX. May a preacher kneel down in the pulpit, and use his private prayers when he is in the assembly?
Answ. This will have the same answer with the former; and therefore I shall trouble the reader with no more.
Quest. CXXI. May a minister pray publicly in his own name singly, for himself or others? or only in the church's name, as their mouth to God?
Answ. It is good to be as exact in order and decency as we can; but they that would not have other men's ceremonies brought in on that pretence, should not bring in their own made doctrines.
1. It is certain that all the assembly come thither, not only to hear a prayer, but to pray as well as the minister; and therefore the practice of all churches in the world (as is seen in all the liturgies) is for the minister to speak in the plural number, and usually to pray in the church's name. And so he is both their guide and mouth in prayer. Therefore even when he prayeth for himself, it is usually fittest (or very fit) for him rather to say, We beseech thee, give the speaker thy assistance, &c. than I beseech thee.
2. And even subjectively it is not inconvenient to speak of himself in the third person, Give him, or Give the speaker thy help, instead of Give me.
3. But they that will place a necessity in either of these, and make the contrary a sin, must have more knowledge than I have to be able to prove it.
For, 1. In the latter case the minister doth not pray in his own person, but only for his own person, when he saith, We beseech thee, give me thy help, &c.
2. And I know no word of God that saith, either that the minister is only the mouth of the people, or that he is to speak only in their names, or that he may not pray for himself or them in his ministerial capacity in the first person.368
For, 1. He is a minister of Christ for the church, and not the minister of the church properly. And he is subordinate to Christ in his priestly office, as well as in his teaching and ruling office: and the priests did always take it for their office, not only to speak as the people's mouth, but as sub-mediators or intercessors for them to God; and as then they were types of Christ by standing between God and the people, so they were his officers as well as types; and so they are his officers to this day: and as they teach and rule in his name by office, so do they intercede in his name: all men confess that they may do this in private; and where is it forbidden to be done in public?
2. And there are some cases in which it is fittest that it should be so. That is, when it is supposed that the congregation doth not join with him. As, 1. When the whole church is fallen into some error of judgment, (as who hath not many,) and he knoweth that they differ from him, it is fitter for him to pray as a sub-intercessor for them in his own person, than to speak as in their persons, who he knoweth join not with him. For that hath a plain untruth in it. 2. If the whole church be fallen into some little sin, which seduction yet hindereth them from repenting of, he were better confess it, and profess sorrow for it, in his own person, than in theirs that join not with him in it. 3. When he prayeth for somewhat for himself and them, that is above their understanding, (as for direction in some difficult controversies, &c.) I know not that he is bound to speak in their names that understand him not.
Therefore this is no business for christians that are not possessed with a proud, peevish, self-conceited, quarrelsome humour, to censure or despise a minister for; nor should any introduce that false doctrine of man's invention into the church, that the minister is only to pray in public as the people's mouth. But the power of prejudice is great.
Quest. CXXII. May the name, priests, sacrifice, and altars, be lawfully now used instead of, Christ's ministers, worship, and the holy table?
Answ. 1. He that useth them in design to bring in the popish transubstantiation and real sacrifice of the mass, doth heinously sin in such a design and use.
2. In a time and place where they may not be used without scandal, or tempting or encouraging any to their errors, the scandal will be a grievous sin.
3. The New Testament useth all the Greek names which we translate, priests, sacrifice, and altars, therefore we may use the same in Greek; and our translation and English names are not intolerable. If priest come from presbyter I need not prove that; if it do not, yet all ministers are subordinate to Christ in his priestly office as essentially as in the rest. And Rev. i. 6; v. 10; xx. 6, it is said, that we are or shall be made priests of God, and unto God. And 1 Pet. ii. 5, we are "an holy priesthood," and ver. 9, a "royal priesthood: " if this be said of all, then especially of ministers.
And the word sacrifice is used of us and our offered worship, 1 Pet. ii. 5; Heb. xiii. 15, 16; Phil. iv. 18; Eph. v. 2; Rom. xii. 1.
And Heb. xiii. 10, saith, "We have an altar whereof they partake not," &c. And the word is frequently used in the Revelation, chap. vi. 9; viii. 3, 5; xvi. 7, &c. in relation to gospel times. We must not therefore be quarrelsome against the bare names, unless they be abused to some ill use.
4. The ancient fathers and churches did ever use all these words so familiarly without any question or scruple raised about them, either by the orthodox or any heretics, that at present I can remember to have ever read of, that we should be the more wary how we condemn the bare words, lest thence we give advantage to the papists to make them tell their followers, that all antiquity was on their side; which were very easy for them to prove, if the controversy were about the names alone. Extremes and passionate imprudence do give the adversaries great advantages.
5. The names of sacrifice and altar, were used by the ancient churches, not properly, but merely in allusion to the Jewish and heathen sacrifices and altars, together with a tropical use from the christian reasons of the names.
As the Lord's supper is truly the commemoration of Christ's sacrifice; and therefore called by protestants, a commemorative sacrifice; so that our controversy with the papists is not, whether it may be called a sacrifice, but whether it be only the sacrament of a sacrifice, or a sacramental, commemorative sacrifice, or also a real, proper sacrifice of the very body and blood itself of Christ. For we acknowledge, that This is a sacrifice, is no more tropical a speech, than This is my body and blood.
6. Yet it must be noted, that the Scripture useth the word sacrifice about ourselves, and our thanksgivings, and praises, and works of charity, rather than of the Lord's supper; and the word priests, of all men, lay or clergy, that offer these foresaid sacrifices to God. Though the ancient doctors used them familiarly, by way of allusion, of the sacrament and its administrators.
7. In a word, as no christian must use these or any words to false ends or senses, or deceiving purposes, nor yet to scandal; so out of these cases, the words are lawful: and as the fathers are not to be any further condemned for using them, than as the words (which they foresaw not) have given advantage to the papists, to bring in an ill sense and doctrine; so those that now live in churches and countries, where the public professed doctrine doth free them from the suspicion of a popish ill sense, should not be judged nor quarrelled with for the terms; but all sober christians should allow each other the liberty of such phrases without censoriousness, or breach of charity or peace.
Quest. CXXIII. May the communion table be turned altar-wise, and railed in? And is it lawful to come up to the rails to communicate?
Answ. The answer to this is mostly the same with that to the foregoing question. 1. God hath given us no particular command or prohibition about these circumstances; but the general rules, for unity, edification, order, and decency; whether the table shall stand this way or that way, here or there, &c. he hath not particularly determined.
2. They that turn the table altar-wise and rail it in, out of a design to draw men to popery, or in a scandalous way which will encourage men to or in popery, do sin.
3. So do they that rail in the table to signify that the vulgar or lay christians must not come to it, but be kept at a distance; when Christ in his personal presence admitted his disciples to communicate at the table with himself.
4. But where there are no such ends, but only to imitate the ancients that did thus, and to show reverence to the table on the account of the sacrament, by keeping away dogs, keeping boys from sitting on it; and the professed doctrine of the church condemneth transubstantiation, the real corporal presence, &c. (as ours doth;) in this case christians should take these for such as they are, indifferent things, and not censure or condemn each other for them; nor should any force them upon those that think them unlawful.
5. And to communicate is not only lawful in this case, where we cannot prove that the minister sinneth, but even when we suspect an ill design in him, which we cannot prove; yea, or when we can prove that his personal interpretation of the place, name, situation, and rails is unsound; for we assemble there to communicate in and according to the professed doctrine of christianity and the churches, and our own open profession, and not after every private opinion and error of the minister. As I may receive from an anabaptist or separatist notwithstanding his personal errors; so may I from another man, whose error destroyeth not his ministry, nor the ordinance, as long as I consent not to it, yea, and with the church profess my dissent.
6. Yet, cæteris paribus, every free man that hath his choice, should choose to communicate rather where there is most purity and least error, than with those that swerve more from regular exactness.
Quest. CXXIV. Is it lawful to use David's psalms in our assemblies?
Answ. Yes: 1. Christ used them at his last supper, as is most probable; and he ordinarily joined with the Jews that used them; and so did the apostles.
2. It is confessed lawful to read or say them; therefore also to sing them. For saying and singing difference not the main end.
3. They are suitable to our use, and were the liturgy of the Jewish church, not on a ceremonial account, but for that fitness which is common to us with them.
4. We are commanded in the New Testament to sing psalms; and we are not commanded to compose new ones; nor can every one make psalms, who is commanded to sing psalms. And if it be lawful to sing psalms of our own or our neighbour's making, much more of God's making by his Spirit in his prophets.369
Object. They are not suitable to all our cases, nor to all in the assembly.
Answ. 1. We may use them in that measure of suitableness to our cases which they have. You may join with a man in prayer who expresseth part of your wants, though he express not all. Else you must join with no man in the world.
2. If ungodly men are present when the faithful speak to God, must we not speak our proper case, because they are present? The minister in church administrations speaketh principally in the name of the faithful, and not of hypocrites. Must he leave out of his prayers all that is proper to the godly, merely because some wicked men are there? No more must the church do in singing unto God.
3. They that cannot speak every word in a psalm just as their own case, may yet speak it as instructive; otherwise they might not read or say it.
But the sectarian objections against singing David's psalms are so frivolous, that I will not tire the reader with any more.370
Quest. CXXV. May psalms be used as prayers, and praises, and thanksgivings, or only as instructive? even the reading as well as the singing of them?
Answ. The sober reader who knoweth not what errors others hold, will marvel that I trouble men with such questions. But I have oft been troubled with those that (having no other shift to deny the lawfulness of written and set forms of prayer) do affirm that psalms are neither to be read or sung at all as prayers, but only as doctrinal scriptures for instruction.371 But that this is false appeareth,
1. In that those that are real, material prayers, and praises, and thanksgivings, and were penned for that very use, as the titles show, and those that were so used by the Jewish synagogues where Christ was ordinarily present, may be so used by us: but such are the psalms both as said and sung.
2. And those that we are commanded to sing as psalms, and have Christ's example so to use, (who sung a hymn or psalm of praise at his last supper,) we also may so use: but, &c.
3. And those that are by God's Spirit fitted for use in prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, and never forbidden so to be used, may by us be so used: but such are the psalms, &c. I will weary you with no more.
Quest. CXXVI. Are our church tunes lawful, being of man's invention?
Answ. Yes: they are a lawful invention, allowed us by God, and fitted to the general rules of edification. Scripture is no particular rule for such modes and circumstances.
Object. They breed a carnal pleasure by the melody, which is not fit for spiritual devotion.
Answ. 1. It is a lawful sensitive pleasure, sanctified to a holy use, not hindering, but greatly helping the soul in spiritual worship.
Either you call it carnal, because it gratifieth the sinful, corrupt inclinations of man; or only because it is sensitive, or a pleasure in the imagination and lower faculties. If the former, 1. There is nothing in it which is a necessary cause of any sinful pleasure, nor any impediment to spiritual pleasure. 2. But a lustful person will turn all sensitive pleasure into sin; our meat, and drink, and clothes, and houses, and friends, and health: the bread and wine in the sacrament may be thus abused.372
2. But you must know, that as our bodies are here united to our souls, so they act together, and while the sensitive part is subordinate to the rational, it is serviceable to it, and not a hinderance: when you come to have souls that are separated from the body, you shall use no bodily instruments; and yet even then it is uncertain to us, whether the sensitive powers of the soul do not accompany it, and be not used by it. But certainly in the meantime, he that will not use sense, shall not use reason. And he that acteth not sensibly, acteth not as a man: it is not a sin to be a man; and therefore not to see, to hear, to taste, to smell, &c. Nor is it a sin to taste sweetness in our meat or drink; nor is it a sinful pleasure for the eyes to behold the light, or the variety of the beauteous works of God, or to take pleasure in them. "His works are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein," Psal. cxi. 2.
You know not what it is to be a man, if you know not that God hath made all the senses to be the inlets of objects, and so of holy pleasure into the soul. Would he have given us eyes, and ears, and appetites, and made his creatures sweet and beauteous, that all might either be sin or useless to us? No: all things are sanctified, and pure to the pure.373 The sense is the natural way to the imagination, and that to the understanding; and he that will have no sensible and natural pleasure, shall have no spiritual pleasure: and he that will have none but sensitive pleasure, were better have none at all. It is therefore a foolish pretence of spirituality, to dream of acting without our senses, or avoiding those delights, which may and must be sanctified to us. Harmony and melody are so high a pleasure of the sense, that they are nearest to rational delights, if not participating of them, and exceedingly fitted to elevate the mind and affections unto God.
And as it is the very nature of true holiness, to be so suited to holy things, as that they may be our delight, and he is the genuine saint, and the best of christians, who most delighteth in God and holiness; so that is the best means to make us the best christians, which helpeth us best to these delights; and if any thing on earth be like to heaven, it is to have our delight in God. And therefore if any thing may make us heavenly, it is that which raiseth us to such delights. And therefore a choir of holy persons, melodiously singing the praises of Jehovah, are likest to the angelical society, Psal. cl.
Quest. CXXVII. Is church music by organs or such instruments, lawful?374
Answ. I know that in the persecuted and poorer times of the church, none such were used (when they had not temples, nor always a fixed meeting place). And that the author of the Quest. et Resp. in Justin Martyr speaketh against it (which Perkins and others cite to that purpose). And I grant,
1. That as it is in the power of weak, diseased christians, to make many things unlawful to their brethren lest we be hurtful to them, and to deprive us of much, not only of our liberties but our helps; so in abundance of congregations, church music is made unlawful by accident, through their mistake. For it is unlawful (cæteris paribus) by an unnecessary thing to occasion divisions in the churches; but where one part judgeth church music unlawful, for another part to use it, would occasion divisions in the churches, and drive away the other part. Therefore I would wish church music to be no where set up, but where the congregation can accord in the use of it; or at least where they will not divide thereupon.
2. And I think it unlawful to use such strains of music as are light, or as the congregation cannot easily be brought to understand; much more on purpose to commit the whole work of singing to the choristers, and exclude the congregation. I am not willing to join in such a church where I shall be shut out of this noble work of praise.
3. But plain, intelligible church music, which occasioneth not divisions, but the church agreeth in, for my part I never doubted to be lawful. For, 1. God set it up long after Moses' ceremonial law, by David, Solomon, &c.
2. It is not an instituted ceremony merely, but a natural help to the mind's alacrity: and it is a duty and not a sin to use the helps of nature and lawful art, though not to institute sacraments, &c. of our own. As it is lawful to use the comfortable helps of spectacles in reading the Bible, so is it of music to exhilarate the soul towards God.375
3. Jesus Christ joined with the Jews that used it, and never spake a word against it.
4. No Scripture forbiddeth it, therefore it is not unlawful.
5. Nothing can be against it, that I know of, but what is said against tunes and melody of voice. For whereas they say that it is a human invention; so are our tunes (and metre, and versions). Yea, it is not a human invention; as the last psalm and many others show, which call us to praise the Lord with instruments of music.
And whereas it is said to be a carnal mind of pleasure, they may say as much of a melodious, harmonious concert of voices, which is more excellent music than any instruments.
And whereas some say that they find it do them harm, so others say of melodious singing; but as wise men say, they find it do them good. And why should the experience of some prejudiced, self-conceited person, or of a half-man that knoweth not what melody is, be set against the experience of all others, and deprive them of all such helps and mercies, as these people say they find no benefit by.
And as some deride church music by many scornful names, so others do by singing (as some congregations near me testify, who these many years have forsaken it, and will not endure it; but their pastor is fain to unite them, by the constant and total omission of singing psalms). It is a great wrong that some do to ignorant christians, by putting such whimsies and scruples into their heads, which as soon as they enter, turn that to a scorn, and snare, and trouble, which might be a real help and comfort to them, as it is to others.
Quest. CXXVIII. Is the Lord's day a sabbath, and so to be called and kept, and that of divine institution? And is the seventh-day sabbath abrogated? &c
Answ. All the cases about the Lord's day (except those practical directions for keeping it, in the Economical part of this book) I have put into a peculiar treatise on that subject by itself; and therefore shall here pass them over, referring the reader to them in that discourse.
Quest. CXXIX. Is it lawful to appoint human holy days, and observe them?
Answ. This also I have spoke to in the foresaid treatise, and my "Disput. of Church Government and Cer." Briefly, 1. It is not lawful to appoint another weekly sabbath, or day wholly separated to the commemoration of our redemption: for that is to mend (pretendedly) the institutions of God; yea, and to contradict him who hath judged one day only in seven to be the fittest weekly proportion.
2. As part of some days may be weekly used in holy assemblies, so may whole days on just, extraordinary occasions, of prayer, preaching, humiliation, and thanksgiving.
3. The holy doctrine, lives, and sufferings of the martyrs and other holy men, hath been so great a mercy to the church, that (for any thing I know) it is lawful to keep anniversary thanksgivings in remembrance of them, and to encourage the weak, and provoke them to constancy and imitation.
4. But to dedicate days or temples to them in any higher sense, as the heathen and idolaters did to their heroes, is unlawful; or any way to intimate an attribution of divinity to them, by word or worship.
5. And they that live among such idolaters must take heed of giving them scandalous encouragement.
6. And they that scrupulously fear such sin more than there is cause, should not be forced to sin against their consciences.
7. But yet no christians should causelessly refuse that which is lawful, nor to join with the churches in holy exercises on the days of thankful commemoration of the apostles, and martyrs, and excellent instruments in the church; much less petulantly to work and set open shops to the offence of others; but rather to persuade all to imitate the holy lives of those saints to whom they give such honours.