I do not _slight or contemn the offices_ of the church. I esteem them very highly. And yet I do not, at all times, worship God, even in public, in the very terms of those offices. Nor yet do I knowingly _slight or contemn her rules_. For it is not clear to my apprehension, that she has any rule which forbids using extemporary prayer, suppose between the morning and evening service. And if I am _not worthy to be called her minister_ (which I dare by no means affirm myself to be) yet _her minister I am_, and must always be, unless I should be judicially deposed from my ministry.
Your second argument is this. “If you suppose the scripture enjoins you to use extemporary prayer, then you must suppose our liturgy to be inconsistent with scripture, and consequently unlawful to be used.” That does not follow: unless I supposed the scripture to enjoin, to use extemporary prayer, _and no other_. Then it would follow, that a form of prayer was inconsistent with scripture. But this I never did suppose.
Your third argument is to this effect; “You act contrary to the rule of the church. Allow she in the wrong: yet while you break her rule, how do you act as her minister?” It ought to be expressed, _how are you her minister?_ For the conclusion to be proved is, That I am not her minister.
I answer, 1. I am not convinced, as I observed before, that I do hereby _break her rule_. 2. If I did, yet should I not _cease_ to be her minister, unless I were formally _deprived_. 3. I now _actually do_ continue in her communion, and hope that I always shall.
4. You object farther, “That I disobey the governors of the church.” I answer, I both do, and will obey them in all things, where I do not apprehend there is some particular law of God to the contrary. ――――_Here_, you say, _you confess that in some things you do not, and cannot obey your governors_ (page 8.)――――Did I _confess this_? Then I spoke rashly and foolishly: for I granted more than I can make good.――――I do certainly apprehend, that the law of God requires me, both to preach and (sometimes) to pray _extempore_. Yet I do not know that I disobey the governors of the church herein. For I do not know, that they have forbidden me to do either.
But your _♦behaviour and method of teaching is irregular.――――Have you any warrant from scripture for preaching_ up and down thus?――――I think I have: I think God hath called me to this work _by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery_, which directs me how to obey that general command, _While we have time, let us do good unto all men_.
♦ “hehaviour” replaced with “behaviour”
_But we ought to do this agreeably to our respective situations, and not break in upon each other’s provinces.――――Every private man may take upon himself the office of a magistrate――――and quote this text as justly as you have done_, (page 9.) No. The private man is not called to the office of a _magistrate_; but I am to the office of a _preacher_. ――――_You was indeed authorized to preach the gospel: but it was in the congregation to which you should be lawfully appointed.――――Whereas you have many years preached in places whereunto you was not lawfully appointed; nay, which were intrusted to others, who neither wanted nor desired your assistance._
Many of them wanted it enough, whether they desired it or no. But I shall not now debate that point. I rather follow you to the ♦Part of the _Farther Appeal_, where this objection is considered.
♦ “first” replaced with “Part” per Errata
5. “Our church (it was said) has provided against this preaching up and down, in the ordination of a priest, by _expresly limiting_ the exercise of the powers then conferred upon him, to the _congregation_ where he shall be lawfully ♦appointed thereunto.”
♦ “appoined” replaced with “appointed”
I answered, 1. “Your argument proves too much. If it be allowed just as you propose it, it proves, that no priest has authority either to preach or administer the sacrament in any other than his own congregation.” _Farther Appeal_, page 84.
You reply, _Is there no difference between a thing’s being done occasionally――――and its being done for years together_?――――Yes a great one. And more inconveniencies may arise from the latter than from the former. But this is all wide: it does not touch the point. Still if our church does _expresly limit_ the exercise of the sacerdotal powers, to _that congregation_ whereunto each priest shall be appointed; this precludes him from exercising those powers _at all_, in any other than _that congregation_.
I answered, 2. “Had the powers conferred been so _limited_ when I was ordained priest, my ordination would have signified just nothing. For I was not _appointed to any congregation_ at all: but was ordained as a member of that ‘college of divines,’ (so our statutes express it) ‘founded to overturn all heresies, and defend the catholic faith.’”