Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	ancient_a	church_n	time_n	1,721	5	3.2471	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40812	A vindication of liturgies shewing the lawfulness, usefulness, and antiquity, of performing the publick worship of God by set forms of prayer, wherein several other things also of considerable use are occasionally discussed : in answer to a late book intitules, A reasonable account why some pious non-conforming ministers in England judge it sinful for them to perform their ministerial acts in publick solemn prayer by the prescribed forms of others / by William Falkner.	Falkner, William, d. 1682.	1680 (1680)	Wing F336; ESTC R24032	135,488	300

from the first Ages of Christianity and in the Jewish Church both in their Temple worship and Synagogues p. 136 Sect. IV. Some expressions vilifying Uniformity and charging Forms of Prayer to be an Engine of perpetual discord with some others examined p. 164 Chap. IV. Forms of Prayer are not forbidden in Scripture Some things are necessary to be determined in Gods worship which he hath not particularly enjoined Of the Authority of Superiours and the judgment of discretion and some other things p. 177 Chap. V. Of other Prayers besides those in the Liturgy and publick service p. 193 Chap. VI. Of Preaching Whether it be as useful and fit to preach as to pray in a set Form of words Of what account preaching is Exceptions against the Sermons of our Ministers as being satyrical advancing the power of nature and justification by works answered p. 206 Chap. VII Praying by a Form is rashly charged with mocking God p. 219 Chap. VIII Forms of Prayer do not debase the Ministry Of the Ministerial Office and the need of learning and knowledge Of the Priestly Office under the Law and the large Revenue God appointed for the Priests and Levites The pretence of ill effects from Liturgies refuted p. 225 Chap. IX Several Arguments for Forms of Prayer proved solid and substantial and among them some things concerning submission to superiours p. 241 Chap. X. A Perswasive Conclusion directed to our Dissenters to consider how unaccountable to God and how dangerous to themselves their separation is p. 266 A Vindication OF LITURGIES The Introduction giving the Reader an account of the occasion of this discourse HAving several years since published my Libertas Ecclesiastica wherein I endeavoured a Vindication of our Liturgy there came lately to my hands a Discourse in which is a pretended answer to two Sections of my Book concerning the lawfulness expediency and antiquity of set forms of prayer When I first looked into it I thought it a strange undertaking to attempt to prove that it is sinful for Ministers who are able to compose Prayers themselves to make use of any form of Prayer in their Ministration which was composed by other men and that any man might justly suspect his own reasoning when it engaged him in such an enterprize But when I had read it I found many things said therein which might possibly misguide the weak and unwary Reader but nothing which was of any great weight And indeed no false position is capable of being firmly proved by solid Arguments though to undiscerning men it may be rendred plausible by mistaken fallacies Yet because I am very sensible that the Assertion maintained by this Author is both in it self false and erroneous and also tendeth to undermine the true exercise of Religion and the Peace and Well-fare of the Church of God I resolved to examine all his Arguments and to return a fair Answer to so much of his Book as was needful for the discussing of the Question proposed and for the defending my self against his Oppositions And this I thought my self the more concerned to undertake because so far as this strange assertion should be received as true it would make void the design of my former Book which was to manifest that it was both lawful and a duty for Ministers and People to embrace attend upon and join in the publick service worship and Ministrations of the Church of England And I knew not how far any appearances of reasoning might be magnified by such persons who are engaged against our Church many of whom in a sinking cause so far as concerneth the evidence of truth and reason may be willing to catch hold on any twig The Author of this Book hath not published his own name therewith and therefore I shall not be curious to enquire after it but shall treat him as an unknown person And I confess I cannot easily conceive that he under whose name it goes should be so defective both in learning and consideration as to be guilty of such mistakes and palpable over-sights as may be found in some places of this Book For besides many other unaccountable positions and misunderstandings divers of which I shall mention in my following Discourse it is observable that what he writes concerning the ancient practices of the Church after the Apostles time or concerning any thing written in those days is generally done so loosely and sometimes with such wonderful extravagancy as may surprize an intelligent Reader with some kind of admiration of which I shall give the Reader here one instance 4. When he speaks of the original of Liturgies he saith a Ch. 2. p. 68 69. We do believe that Gregory the Great under the protection of Charles the Great was the Father of all those that dwell in these Tents and this eight hundred or a thousand years after Christ But first to speak of Gregory the Great eight hundred or a thousand years after Christ is far enough from truth when he died about the year 604. And secondly that Gregory the Great should be under the protection of Charles the Great is impossible when he was dead about two hundred years before Charles the Great began his Reign And thirdly it is altogether as unaccountable that the original of Liturgies was in the time either of Gregory the Gerat or Charles the Great when they were in use many hundred years before them both as I shall shew b Ch. 3. Sect. 3. in the following Treatise This mistake concerning these persons whose names were so famous in History that a man of ordinary reading could not be unacquainted with them is as if any person should presume to give an account of the Church of the Israelites and should assert that the offering of Sacrifices under the Mosaical Law had its beginning in the days of Eli the Priest in the Reign of King Jehosaphat six hundred or eight hundred years after the Israelites came out of Egypt Surely it is a strange confidence for any person to vent such things and to write positively what he no better understandeth 5. But whoever the Author of this Discourse is I shall apply my self to the clearing of the truth concerning the matter of it which I shall do with as much succinctness as is expedient And therefore though I shall not willingly omit any thing considerable which he urgeth against the lawful use of constant publick Liturgies or against what I have said in their defence yet where he mentions objections made by others against the force of his Arguments and gives his Answers to them I shall pass by such things where the insisting upon them is not needful for the defence of our Church or the decision of the Case proposed And in answering his Arguments I shall wave the repetition of his long Syllogisms which is a tedious way of proceeding and in rational Discourses of this nature is acceptable to few others than those who may admire the art of making a Syllogism But I

shall give a faithful account of the substance of his Arguments and leave it to the impartial Reader to judge of the validity of my Answers And that I may the more gratifie such who will compare his Discourse and mine I shall keep to his method which he hath used except where he speaks to the same thing in different places and in that Case I shall think it sufficient to have spoken to it once for all And I shall so order my Answer that my first Chapter may answer his first my second his second and so onward to the end of his Book 6. But touching my former Discourse which this Writer opposeth he seemeth not very well pleased with my having chosen that subject c In his last leaf to the Reader to write on viz. the defence of our Liturgy nor with the time when my Book was written which he saith was in that nick of time of his Majesties most Gracious Indulgence if it was possible to perswade the Parliament that there was no need of any indulgence towards them Now as to the subject matter of my Livertas Ecclesiastica if he dislike my having engaged therein or my undertaking now to defend so much of two Sections thereof as he hath opposed I am content so far to bear his dislike and censure but I think my self to have given a sufficient d Libert Eccles B. 1. Ch. 1. account thereof And if what he observes concerning the time was true I think that was a fit time to defend and justify our Communion when they who divide themselves from us made the greatest opposition against it and involved themselves in the heinous sin of Schism But the truth is I was engaged in that work before that Declaration came abroad but may Book was not published till after his Majesty had cancelled that Declaration the Declaration which was made March 1671 2. was Cancelled about the end of 1672. and my Book came abroad in Octob. 1673. 7. But as to the perswading our Governours against any Indulgence or favour towards them it is possible the positions of this Writer may do more to that purpose than I have done I did indeed justify the lawfulness of performing what is required of Ministers concerning the Liturgy which was no more than to vindicate what the practice and acknowledgment of every conforming Minister had before owned But I think it my duty to leave the ordering of publick affairs to my superiours and did not by any expression that I am aware of interpose in their work 8. But I know not how far such Discourses as this of this Author ma● 〈◊〉 vince superiours that such persons ar● 〈◊〉 capable of being taken in into any duly regulated and setled establishment because of the unreasonableness of their demands and the weakness of their Arguments since he declareth against the enjoining the ordinary use of any Liturgy or set form whatsoever in publick Ministrations And we may see by e Ch. 10. p. 164. the close of his Book that he accounteth it the only medium he can fancy for a just comprehension that there be no Forms of Prayer enjoined though they may be recommended by superiours and left at liberty And yet it seemeth probable from his f In the two last leaves Preface that all this is not enough for he there tells us of other six things he hath to put in dispute besides this I do not doubt but all those six things may be as easily answered as produced and the Reader may make a probable judgment of the strength and force of those other things by this one which he hath singled out from the rest and therefore surely he thought it to be as considerable as any of the other 9. And it might be expected that he who is curiously severe in judging of a fit time for publishing other mens Discourses should have a sufficient care of the seasonableness of his own And he who considers the business of our Enemies abroad and how they are encouraged by our discords at home may well think that they who have any true value for the Reformation should at this time encline to promote a setled establishment of the Church which may tend to uphold and secure it And since our dissenters by sufficient tryal found in our late distracted times that they could not erect much less maintain any establishment in their way we may thence discern that no settlement can reasonably be expected but upon the foundations of the Church of England which hath also the advantage of truth and agreement with Primitive Christianity And therefore it was no fit time now to vent such notions which widen our breaches are inconsistent with any publick establishment of a Church and which put advantages into the hands of other Enemies and serve their purposes And yet I confess this of the time is the least fault of this Discourse but that which is the greater is that the drift thereof tends to confusion and the things contained in it are unsound and untrue which I shall now come to manifest CHAP. I. Of stating the Question concerning the established constant use of Forms of Prayer in the publick service of God IN managing his opposition against the constant use of prescribed Forms of Prayer The Question proposed concerning the lawfulness of using Forms by Ministers who have gifts the forementioned Writer doth in his first Chapter give us the state of the Question which he undertakes to dispute and therein he expresseth what he yieldeth and granteth as lawful and what he judgeth and esteemeth to be sinful and undertaketh to prove it so and herein he hath declared himself with sufficient clearness and plainness What he contends for he thus expresseth a Reasonable Account p. 5. All that we affirm is this That our Consciences do from arguments which to us at least seem highly probable judge That it is unlawful for Ministers having the gift of prayer ordinarily to perform their ministerial acts in solemn stated publick Prayer by reading or reciting forms of Prayer composed by other men confessedly not divinely and immediately inspired although our superiours do requrie this of us 2. But he alloweth and acknowledgeth b p. 2. that their labours are profitable who have drawn the matter of Prayer into Forms c p. 3. that any Form of Prayer contained in the Scripture may be used as part of our Prayer whether it be under any command or no but if it be commanded it undoubtedly ought to be used d ibid. That if a Minister distrusting his own memory or invention shall compose Prayers for his own use he may do it e ibid. that it is lawful yea necessary for them who join with others in Prayer to make use of their words which yet are but a Form to them f ibid. that he that ministers in Prayer to others may use a prescribed Form of anothers composure if he have not the gift