PAKT II. Reverend AinRichardBaxter. 307 ¡:Note that the methodof theLitany andgeneralPrayers,is according to the Direeti- on of theLord's Prayer, of which and the Ten Commandments it is a Commenta- ty. The firft Commandment £alleth in with the Preface, and the three firft Peti- tionsof the Lord's Prayer : All the other Commandments, with the Evangelical Precepts, come in under the third Petition; Thy Will de done ; and then I proceeded tô the other three Petitions and the Conclufion. Doubdefs the Lord's Prayer is the moltperf"e& method for univerfal Prayer or holy Delires, that can be poffibly in- vented, 4 t74. When I brought my Draught to the Brethren, I found them but entring on their Work of Exceptions againft the Common -Prayer, and fo I was fain to lay by mine above a Fortnight longer, till their work wasdone : In which divers of them took their Parts. The chiefAetorsin that part. were, Dr. Reignoldi, Dr.Wal- lis, Mr. Calamy, Mr. Newcomen, Dr. Bates, Mr. Clarke, Dr..7acamb, &c. Dr. Hor- tonnever came among us atall, nor Dr. 'randy (alledging his backwardtiefs to'fpeak, though he had been the Do&orof the Chair in Cambridge ) nor Dr. Lightfoot but. ,.. r . once or twice; nor Mr. Woodbridge but twiceor thrice (dwelling far off): Mr,;;, Clarke brought in that large Enumeration of Corruptions in the Liturgy recited in''" the Abridgment of theLincolnfhire Ministers; but it was refuted,, becaufe we'would be as little querulous, as poffible, left it fhould offend, and hinder our defired Ac- ¡ commodation and what Paffages foever feemed to make the Common.Prayer- Bookodious, or favour of Spleenand Paffion, they did reje& whoever offered them My principal Bufinefs was to keepout fuch Accufations as wouldnot bear 'weight, and to reprefs the Opinions of one of the Brethren ( who came from far, and fo camenot till late amongus) whowas abfolutely againft all parts of the Common-.-- Prayer, becaufe they had been ufed by Papilla to Idolatry. AndI drew up fuch Faults as inperuing the Common-PrayerBook it fell, did occur to me and which were theywhich I molt difliked in the Forms ; being not fo much offended with, fome other things, as fouie others were : But the Brethren reducedit'to a fewbrief Exceptions in general, andwould not by fo particular an Enumerationof Faults provokethofe that we had todo with (which I mifliked not). But from the begin. ing I told them that I was not of their Mind who charged the CommonPrayer with falfe Do&rine, or Idolatry, or falfe Worfhip in the Matter or Subitanee, nor that took it to be a Worfhip which a Chriftian might not lawfully join in, when he had not Liberty and Abilityfor better : And that I always took the Faultsof the Common Prayer tobe chiefly Di(order and Defeilivenef : and fo that it was a true Worfhip, though imperfe& ; and Imperfe&ion was the Chargethat we had againft II it (confidered as diftin& from the Ceremonies and Difcipline). I looked at it as at thePrayers ofmany a weakChriftian that I have heatd,who prayed withDiforderand Repetitions and unfit Exprefflons : I would not prefer fuch a weak Chriftian ití Prayer before a better; but yet if I feparated from fuchan one, or thought it un- lawful to join with him, I fhould be finfully Curious and Uncharitable. And I ¡ think this was the Mindof all our Brethren, faveone, as well as mine : And old j Mr. Alb hath often told us, that this was theMind of the old Nonconformifts, and i that he hath often heard fome weak Ministers fodiforderly in Prayer, efpecially its t Baptifm and,the Lord's Supper, thathe could have wilh'd that they would rather ufts i+ the Common.Prayer. Yet when wedefired the Reformation of it, efpecially at a time when the PeoplesHearts were fo much fee again; it, I thought it belt toopen; the true Diforders that they might be reformed. The Paper which I offered, and . we laid by, left it Ihould offend them, was this following. R 2 The
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=