Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	canonical_a	holy_a	scripture_n	5,721	5	6.0092	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A93887	Zerubbabel to Sanballat and Tobiah: or, The first part of the duply to M.S. alias Two brethren. By Adam Steuart. Whereunto is added, the judgement of the reformed churches of France, Switzerland, Geneva, &c. concerning independants, who condemne them with an unanimous consent. Published by David Steuart. March 17. 1644. Imprimatur Ja: Cranford.; Duply to M.S. alias Two brethren. Part 1	Steuart, Adam.; Steuart, David, fl. 1644.	1645 (1645)	Wing S5494; Thomason E274_14; ESTC R209896	100,836	110

yet promiseth an Answer M.S. his first Answer is that the Five Ministers ayme at no separation but as their Brethren the Scots did from Prelaticall coaction A.S. If it be only from Prelaticall coaction wherefore separate they themselves from their Brethren the Scots their Sacramentall Communion and the Scots from theirs if they separate not themselves from us wherefore are they suitors for a Toleration or approbation of their Religion since ours is already tolerated and approved as appeareth in the French Italian and Spanish Churches in this Kingdome Neither are you compelled to be Actors in any thing against your Consciences as your Brethren were by Bishops M.S. He saith the Church from which the five Ministers would separate testifies a great desire to reforme Defects yet saith he those Defects are but pretended A.S. Our meaning is to reforme Defects if any there be such as we acknowledge to be in manners as amongst you also or in the administration of Discipline as may be amongst us all But as for any Defects in the principall parts of our Ecclesiasticall Discipline we see none as yet that we travell not to reforme but believe such as hee objects us in them to be rather pretended then Reall Neither can we or shall we judge them to be any other thing but pretended till he make it appeare that they are Reall Will He that we beleeve them to be Reall because that he only sayes so but it is not the first untruth has falne from his pen. M.S. He would have the Five Ministers quit the Assembly A.S. This M.S. supposes that this last Proposition crosseth my Supposition But they may stay in the Church to reforme Abuses if there be any really as it is pretended by the Independents and live out of the Assembly as many others who are no wayes their Inferiours Neither said I that I wished them to be out of the Assembly only I propounded a question whether in consequence of the publishing of their Apologie they should not resolve themselves to quit the Assembly Now courtcous and conscientious Reader be thou judge I pray thee whether this man hath answered any of my Questions yea or not which are all the main points here to be debated Quest I. Whether it had not been honester and fairer dealing to have added the Author and Licencer's Name to M.S. his Booke then to have omitted them I Affirme it 1. because it testifieth a greater sincerity especially in these Times 2. Because it makes it appear more probably to the world that it is not a Libel 3. And that it conteineth nothing against the Law 4. Because the Name of the Author giveth authority to the Book if he be either learned or honest and the omission thereof may cut off the Authority of it and bring discredit unto it especially when the Law for this effect ordaineth it to be added 5. Because when it is suppressed and the Book a Libell it giveth too much adoe to the Magistrate to find out the Author to censure and punish him condignly according to his demerits 6. Because the Holy Writers did so and if their Names be omitted in some Books we know not whether it was with their consent or whether they did not put to their names howbeit not in quality of Canonicall Scripture or peradventure it was because they were not the Authors but as it were Gods Secretaries or Scribes for the Holy Ghost dictated them what they had to write 7. Because it hindreth men from being deceived in their moneys for sundry times men because of specious Titles put before Books buy them and afterward find nothing worth their money 8. The adding of the name of the Author and of the Licencer with the Licence will hinder the common people to be deceived in reading of hereticall and unsound in stead of Orthodox and sound Books So that this being confidered this Author should have done better that he had added his name and the Licence to his Book Quest II. Whether Mr. Cranford might not justly Licence A.S. his Consid and Answer to the Libell c. I Susteine the first part of the Question and deny the second As for the first it is evident 1. Because it is conformed to Gods word as we shall see hereafter 2. Because that Answer is nothing else but an Apologie for the Discipline of the Reformed Churches 3. Because it containeth nothing contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England or any other true Reformed Churches only it hath some new Sectaries for Enemies 4. Because the Church of England evermore entertained Union with the Reformed Churches that were ruled by that Discipline and they refused not one another to the Communion of the Sacraments 5. Because that a Bishop and the rest of the Commissioners from England at the Synod of Dordrecht approved that Discipline in the name of the Church of England 6. Because in England it selfe it hath been evermore approved by the King and Parliament who granted the Exercise thereof unto the French Dutch Italian and Spanish Churches in this very City of London and sundry other parts of this Kingdome 7. At this present Episcopall Government being put down it standeth by Law approved both by State and Church as conforme unto Gods word 8. The Kings Majesty likewise by consent of Parliament Licenced it in Scotland The second part of the Question may be proved by the contrary Arguments 1. Because it maintaineth a Discipline that is not conforme to Gods word which hath not one word of particular Churches Independent one from another of particular Church-Covenants distinct from that of Grace of not Baptizing Christians Children of not admission of Faithfull men and women who are without Scandall unto the Lords Table c. 2. Because the Discipline it maintaineth is repugnant to all other Disciplines of all other reformed yea of all Christian Churches 3. It containeth many things contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England as they confesse themselves 4. Because the Church of England never entertained any Union or Communion with any Church ruled by that Discipline 5. No Commissioners from England ever approved it 6. It hath never been received in England by King or Parliament 7. It hath never been put up here nor standeth here Legally as the other And therefore the first Legally might have been Licenced and the other could not be Licenced QUEST 3. Whether any man may not state and determine Questions agitated in Synods before the Synods Determination M. S. BLames me mightily for stating some Questions now in agitation in the Synod To the contrary I conceive that herein I have done nothing amisse But for the better stating and determining of this Question we must observe 1. That there are two sorts of Questions some that are already determined in Gods Word and his Church also Others that are not 2. That there are some Determinations by publick Authority as Lawes Statutes Ecclesiasticall Canons c. and others particular proceeding