Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	read_v	word_n	3,155	5	3.9413	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38615	The use of the Lords prayer maintained against the objections of the innovators of these times by John Despagne ... ; Englished by C.M.D.M.; Usage de l'Oraison Dominicale maintenu contre les objections des innovateurs de ce tems. English	Espagne, Jean d', 1591-1659.; C. M. D. M.	1646 (1646)	Wing E3273; ESTC R21607	17,444	92

it is not necessary I answer Grant that it is in no wayes necessary to pronounce this Prayer is it necessary to omit it If it is indifferent to pronounce it or omit it ought we for an indifferency to bring a difference in the Church to affect a novelty to break an Universal Order and to raise scruples in mens consciences But besides there are degrees of indifferency as well as of necessity Will they say that the Use or omitting of this Prayer are in the same rank of indifferency as the use or abstinence from certain meats Certainly that which serves for edification is not at all indifferent Will they say then that the words of Jesus Christ serve not for edification Although they dare not say it expresly neverthelesse they say as much for they maintain that it is not expedient to pronounce them This is the knot of the Question and all the Dispute is brought to this Point Wherefore then is it not expedient to say this Prayer in the very words wherein Jesus Christ did dictate it What great inconveniencies arise thence What losse to Gods Glory What hinderance to the salvation of mens souls What ruine to the building of the Church Thereupon they alledge That we must not be tyed to words That there is danger to idolize the words in pronouncing them so often That the attention that is given to the syllables tyes up the spirit and diverts the thoughts That this frequent pronunciation is a vain repetition condemned by Jesus Christ himself That this Prayer doth not sufficiently particularize all the necessities which ought to be expressed That it is couched in divers words by the two Evangelists which have written it to shew that we ought not to heed the words wherein it is comprised That the Apostles themselves never said it That many cannot say it but to their condemnation because it obligeth every one to beg forgivenesse of his sins on condition of pardoning his enemies That it sutes not with a man that is ready to die because he hath no much need to say Give us our bread That it was not given to serve for a Prayer but onely to be a Patern and Rule of Prayer And that besides in their ordinary Prayers they comprehend all the substance thereof though in different words A general answer to these Objections TO all this I will first oppose a general answer which shall overthrow the greatest part of their Objections These men cannot deny which is most manifest that sometimes God hath prescribed several Forms of Prayer and other actions usual in the Church to the end that they should be pronounced word by word Such was the Form of the Blessing which the Priests usually pronounced over the people in the very words which are read in the sixth Chapter of the Book of Numbers Such was the Form of Thanksgiving prescribed in the offering of the first fruits Deut. 26. Such was the Form of the Protestation and Prayer dictated in expresse words to them which came to pay their triennial tythes Deut. 26. Such was the Form of Prayers which Moses commonly used when the Ark was set forwards or when it rested Numb. 10. 35 36. Such was the Form of Prayers or Thanksgiving which they sung dayly in the Church for were not the Psalms for the most part Prayers or Thanksgivings and were they not pronounced and sung usually I forbear to say that every company of Singers was expresly tyed to certain Psalms as if it were to one task as it appears by their titles The Psalm 92. was sung every Sabbath as we read in the frontispice thereof Consider here why God would dictate Prayers in form of verses if it were not to the end that they should be pronounced word by word For it is well known that it is a difficult thing to change the words of a line which is tyed to measures and fallings of the Art of Poetry Nay more For we have divers Psalms wherein God would have us observe even the very letters of the Alphabet The 25 Psalm which is a Prayer and comes near in substance to the Lords Prayer begins almost every one of its verses according to the Order of the Hebrew Alphabet The 34. 111. 112. and the 119. are of the same structure this last notably in each of his eights answering eight times to the number and order of the 22 letters Every one acknowledgeth that by this Method God would ease mans memory to the end that the most forgetful might easily retain the words of the holy verses whose beginnings were ranked in the form of A. B. C. Did he mean then that we should neglect the words thereof since he would they should be punctually pronounced even to the very least letter I might say also that there are Psalms as the 118. and the 134. which expresse a Dialogue betwixt the Priests and the people This interchangeable discourse consisting in a reciprocal communication of the one with the other could not be kept without an exact observation of words wherewith they answered each other But besides in the Reformation of the Church which the good King Hezekiah procured when there was question made of the re-establishing the holy Liturgie the Levites were commanded to praise the Lord with the words of David and Asaph that is to say to pronounce or sing the very words of the Psalms 2 Chron. 29. 30. It appeareth also that in the Celebration of the Passeover there was the Form of a Song which was alwayes used at this Solemnity And Jesus Christ himself at the end of this Action when he prepared himself for Death made no difficulty to pronounce it and would that his Disciples should pronounce it with him Matth. 26. If these people who condemn at this day the Use of the Lords Prayer had lived in those dayes they would have censured the Wisdom of God for having prescribed Forms of Prayers and for having bound the Church to pronounce them word by word For the same reasons which they bring against the Use of this Prayer the same inconveniencies which they find here the same evasions by which they decline and shun the pronunciation thereof all these may be alledged against all the Forms of Prayers Blessings and Thanksgivings which God had imposed upon his own people Could not one have said That one ought not to tye himself to the words of these Forms and that it sufficeth to speak in the same sense and That the spirit ought not to be limited That by amusing themselves at the words good thoughts are lost That these are continual repetitions That these set Prayers expresse not all that ought to be said That there is danger lest they should be converted to Idols and in sum That it was expedient to suppresse the Use thereof This is a strange thing that God never foresaw these inconveniencies I am amazed that these people have not also abolished the ordinary singing of Psalms for if their maxim be worth

Universal Church and of every Member thereof What supplement must we then make to our Prayers to the end they should not be defective Certainly we must necessarily come to general terms which comprehend implicitly all particularities As after we have specified such and such sins and being not able to make a full enumeration of all others Must we not say in general Forgive us our trespasses I retort then the Argument Since it is impossible for us to frame any Prayer which particularizeth all things we ought necessarily to use a Prayer which in its generalities contains all particulars OBJECTION VII But say they we read not that the Apostles ever pronounced it Answer 1. THis reason is not concluding A negative Argument concerning a fact which is not of the essence of Faith is not drawn out of Scripture We read not in the History that the Jews ever celebrated the yeer of Jubile one of the greatest Points of the Ceremonial Law yet without doubt they did celebrate it otherwise it is certain God would have censured them for an omission so reprovable We read not that the Apostles ever baptized in the Name of the three Divine Persons named in their Commission Shall we say then that they did not baptize in this form 2. I say rather that Jesus Christ did dictate to them this Form of Prayer therefore they used it Is it credible that having desired to have a Form of Prayer and Jesus Christ having dictated unto them this word by word that they never pronounced it 3. And if it were not so the Apostles were endowed with a Spirit which guided them in their Prayers as well as in their Doctrine But have we the same infallible Spirit which dictated to them such Prayers Are we certain that we faile nomore then they neither in the Matter nor in the Form OBJECTION VIII After this they ask us a Question This Prayer say they is found written in two Books of the New Testament to wit S. Matt. 6. S. Luke 11. but with diversity of terms and which is more the one of these Evangelists omits that which the other hath written How then ought we to pronounce it either by that which is expressed in S. Matthew or that which is couched by S Luke All this shews that the meaning of Jesus Christ was not that the words of this Prayer should be observed Answer 1. IF this Argument might take place When we celebrate the Lords Supper we must never pronounce the words which Jesus Christ spake in that Action for they are related diversly in four divers Books of the Scripture so that one of the Evangelists which registred them hath not these words Do this in remembrance of me Must we then in this Action wholly omit the words of Jesus Christ under colour of the diversity which we finde there S. Paul did not so understand it When he shews the Corinthians the form wherein they ought to celebrate the Lords Supper he rehearseth expresly the very words that Jesus Christ uttered in the institution of this Sacrament according as he had received them of him 1 Cor. 11. 2. This is a wrong Conclusion that we ought not to take heed to the words under pretence of the difference which we finde there On the contrary whereas God repeats the same thing in divers words by so much the more ought we to mark them for this difference tends to the clearing of one word by another So when one of the Evangelists says Remit us our debts the other expounds it by saying Forgive us our trespasses It is indifferent to take the one or the other of these two expressions both these two were dictated by Jesus Christ Must we make the difficulty so great in chusing Or must we suppresse both these two because Jesus Christ hath dictated both these two 3. To this that they alledge That one of the Evangelists hath not this clause For thine is the Kingdom c. it is easie to answer This is as if we should say We ought not to celebrate the Lords Supper because one of the Evangelists to wit S. John speaks not of it If they finde not this clause in S. Luke must they necessarily passe it over with silence although it is found in S. Matthew Or ought we upon this occasion to omit all this Prayer although it be not found in both these Evangelists We have divers Psalms which contain but one and the same subject as the 14. and the 53. are but the self-same thing notwithstanding there is in one a clause which is not in the other Must we suppresse them both OBJECTION IX There are some which strive against the Use of this Prayer for an absurdity which they think is found in it We desire therein our dayly bread But say they a man which is ready to die as he which is in an agony on his death-bed or he which is on the Scaffold and looks for nothing but the fatal stroke must he also ask for bread Is it to any purpose for him to demand a thing whereof he hath no more need and which is no more of any use for him Answer I Have divers answers to give thereupon 1. If this Request were convenient but for them which are assured to live no man could ever say it For those very men which are in perfect health and safety yet neverthelesse are not certain to live one moment So that Jesus Christ hath taught us to ask a thing which we ought never to demand 2. As there is no man which is assured to live a day so there is none that knows whether this day shall be his last Many touch the gates of death which enter not so soon in Although then a man shall be and see himself very near to go out of the World neverthelesse since that he is ignorant of the time of his departure must he boldly renounce bread Gods liberality which is the Doner thereof as though he was assured he should never have need of it 3. When I ask my bread this is alwayes under condition In case that I have yet any need thereof In case that my dayes may be yet prolonged upon Earth and not otherwise Is there any impertinence in this Request Or ought we not alwayes thus to speak 4. It is well known that this Petition is not restrained to nourishment In naming bread I presuppose all that which is necessary for my life the very air breathing May I not demand them for the time which I have to live though indeed it were but for one very moment to the end I might glorifie God 5. Grant that he which is dying hath no more need to ask bread hath he no need to say Forgive us our trespasses and Lead us not into temptation 6. Jesus Christ would not that a man should ask bread for himself alone but he commands us also to ask bread for others in saying Give us If then a man which is ready to