Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	call_v	day_n	sunday_n	1,626	5	11.2192	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69535	The grand debate between the most reverend bishops and the Presbyterian divines appointed by His Sacred Majesty as commissioners for the review and alteration of the Book of common prayer, &c. : being an exact account of their whole proceedings : the most perfect copy.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Commission for the Review and Alteration of the Book of Common Prayer.	1661 (1661)	Wing B1278A; Wing E3841; ESTC R7198	132,164	165

note of distinction or notice given to the people that they are not Canonical Scripture they being also bound with our Bibles is such a temptation to the vulgar to take them for Gods Word as doth much prevail and is like to do so still And when Papists second it with their confident affirmations that the Apocriphal Bookes are Canonical well refelled by one of you the R. Reverend Bishop of Durham we should not needlesly help on their successe If you cite the Apocripha as you do other humane writings or read them as Homilies when and where there is reason to read such we speak not against it to say that the people are secured by the Churches calling them Apocripha is of no force till experience be proved to be dis-regardable and till you have proved that the Ministers is to tell the people at the reading of every such Chapter that it is but Apocriphal and that the people all understand Greek so well as to know what Apocripha signifieth The more sacred and honourable are these Dictates of the holy Ghost recorded in Scripture the greater is the sin by reading the Apocripha without sufficient distinction to make the people believe that the writings of man are the Revelation and Laws of God And also we speak against the reading of the Apocripha as it excludeth much of the Canonical Scriptures and taketh in such Books in their stead as are commonly reputed fabulous By this much you may see how you lost your Answer by mistaking us and how much you will sin against God and the Church by denying our desire That the Minister should not read the Communion Service at the Communion Table is not reasonable to demand since all the Primitive Church used it and if we do not observe that golden Rule of the venerable Council of Nice Let antient customes prevail till reason plainly requires the contrary We shall give offence to sober Christians by a causelesse departure from Catholick usage and a great advantage to enemies of our Church than our Brethren I hope would willingly grant The Priest standing at the Communion Table seemeth to give us an invitation to the holy Sacrament and minds us of our duty viz. To receive the holy Communion some at least every Sunday and though we neglect our duty it is fit the Church should keep her standing Repl. We doubt not but one place in it self is as lawful as another but when you make such differences as have misleading intimations we desire it may be forborn That all the Primitive Church used when there was no Communion in the Sacrament to say Service at the Communion Table is a crude assertion that must have better proof before we take it for convincing and it is not probable because they had a Communion every Lords day And if this be not your meaning you say nothing to the purpose To prove that they used it when there was none And you your selves devise many things more universally practised than this can at all be fairly pretended to have been The Council of Nice gives no such golden Rule as you mention A Rule is a general applyable to particular Cases the Council only speaks of one particular Let the antient Custom continue in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria have the power of them all The Council here confirmeth this particular Custom but doth not determine in general of the Authority of Custom That this should be called a Catholic usage shews us how partially the word Catholick is sometimes taken And that this much cannot be granted as least we advantage the enemies of the Church doth make us wonder whom you take for its enemies and what is that advantage which this will give them But we thank you that here we find our selves called Brethren when before we are not so much as spoken to but your speech is directed to some other we know not whom concerning us your reason is that which is our reason to the contrary you say The Priest standing at the Communion Table seems to give us an Invitation to the holy Communion c. what when there is no Sacrament by himself or us intended no warning of any given no Bread and Wine prepared Be not deceived God is not mocked Therefore we desire that there may be no such service at the Table when no Communion is intended because we would not have such grosse dissimulation used in so holy things as thereby to seem as you say to invite Guests when the Feast is not prepared and if they came we would turn them empty away Indeed if it were to be a private Mass and the Priest were to receive alone for want of Company and it were really desired that the people should come it were another matter Moreover there is no Rubrick requiring this service at the Table It is not reasonable that the word Minister should be only used in the Liturgy for since some parts of the Liturgy may be performed by a Deacon others by none under the Order of a Priest viz. Absolution Consecration it is fit that some such word as Priest should be used for those Offices and not Minister which signifies at large every one that ministers in that holy Office of what Order soever he be The word Curate signifying properly all those who are trusted by the Bishops with Cure of Souls as antiently it signified is a very fit word to be used and can offend no sober person The word Sunday is antient Just Mart. Ap. 2. And therefore not to be left off Repl. The word Minister may well be used in stead of Priest and Curates though the word Deacon for necessary distinction stand yet we doubt not but Priest as it is but the English of Presbyter is lawful But it is from the common danger of mistake and abuse that we argue That all Pastors else are but the Bishops Curates is a Doctrine that declares the heavy charge and account of the Bishops and tends much to the ease of the Presbyters minds if it could be proved If by Curates you mean such as have not directly by divine Obligation the Cure of Souls but only by the Bishops Delegation But if the Office of a Presbyter be not of divine Right and so if they be not the Curates of Christ and Pastors of the Church none are And for the antient use of it we find not that it was so from the beginning And as there 's difference between the antient Bishops of one single Church and a Diocesan that hath many hundred so is there between their Curates But why will you not yield so much as to change the word Sunday into the Lords Day when you know that the latter is the name used by the Holy Ghost in Scripture and commonly by the antient Writers of the Church and more becoming Christians Just Mart. speaking to Infidels tells how they called the Day and not how Christians called it All he saith is

that on Sunday that is so called by Heathens the Christians hold their meetings See the usage of the Church in this point in August Cont. Faustum Manithaeum Lib. 18. Cap. 5. Singing of Psalms in Meeter is no part of the Liturgy and so no part of our Commission Repl. If the word Liturgy signifie the publick Worship God forbid we should exclude the singing of Psalms And sure you have no fitter way of singing than in Meeter when these and all Prayers conceived by private men as you call the Pastors whether prepared or excemporate and by purity of reason-preaching are cast out what will your Liturgy be We hope you make no question whether singing Psalms and Hymns were part of the Primitive Liturgy and seeing they are set forth and allowed to be sung in all Churches of all the people together why should they be denyed to be part of the Liturgy we understand not the reason of this N. 13. 14. The 13. and 14. we suppose you grant by passing them by The phrase is such c. The Church in her Prayers useth no more offensive phrase than St. Paul uses when he writes to the Corinthians Galathians and others calling them in general the Churches of God Sanctified in Christ Jesus by vocation Saints amongst whom notwithstanding there were many who by their known sins which the Apostle endeavoured to amend in them were not properly such yet he gives the denomination to the whole from the greater part to whom in charity it was due And puts the rest in mind what they have by their Baptisme undertaken to be and what they profess themselves to be and our prayers and the phrase of them surely supposes no more than that they are Saints by calling sanctified in Christ Jesus by their Baptisme admitted into Christs Congregation and so to be reckoned members of that Soeiety till either they shall separate themselves by willful Schisme or be separated by legal Excommunication which they seem earnestly to desire and so do we Repl. But is there not a very great difference between the Titles given to the whole Church as you say from the greater part as the truth is from the better part though it were the lesse and the Titles given to Individual members where there is no such reason we call the Field a Corn field though there be much Tares in it because of the better part which denominateth But we will not call every one of these Tares by the name of Corn. when we speak of the Church we will call it holy as Paul doth But when we speak to Simon Magus we will not call him holy but say Thou art in the gall of bitternesse and the bond of Iniquity and hast no part or lot in this matter c. We will not perswade the people that every notorious Drunkard Fornicator Worldling c. that is burried as a Brother of whose Resurtection to life Eternal we have sure and certain hope and all because you will not Excommunicate them We are glad to hear of your desire of such Discipline But when shall we see more than desire and the edge of it be turned from those that fear sinning to those that fear it not The Connexion of the parts of our Liturgy is conformable to the Example of the Churches of God before us and have as much dependence as is usually to be seen in many petitions of the same Psalm and we conceive the Order and Method to be excellent and must do so till they tell us what that Order is which Prayers ought to have which is not done here Repl. There are two Rules of Prayer one is the nature of the things compared in matter and order with nature and necessity The other is the revealed will of God in his word In general the holy Scripture more especially the Lords Prayer The Liturgy for the greatest part of the Prayers for daily use is confused by which soever of those you measure it You seem much to honour the Lords Prayer by your frequent use of it or part of it we beseech you dishonour it not practically by denying it for matter and order to be the only ordinary perfect Rule we know about particular Administrations when it is but certain select requests that we are to put up suited to the particular subject and occasion we cannot follow the whole method of the Lords Prayer which containeth the heads of all the parts where we are not to take in all the parts we cannot take them in that order But that none of all your Prayers should be formed to the perfect Rule that your Let any which is the comprehensive Prayer and that the body of your daily Prayers broken into several Collects should not as set together have any considerable respect unto that order nor yet to the order which reason and the nature of the thing requireth which is observed in all things else and yet that you should admire this and be so tenacious of that which in conceived Prayer you would call by worse names than confusions this shews us the wonderful power of prejudice We were thus brief in this exception lest we should offend by instances But seeing you conceive the order and method to be excellent and to be willing to hear more as to this and the following exception we shall annex a Catalogue of defects and disorders which we before forbore to give you The Psalmes have ordinarily an observabe method If you find any whose parts you cannot so well set together as to see the beauty of method will you turn your eye from the rest and from the Lords Prayer and choose that one to be your President or excuse disorder on that pretence The Collects are made short as being best for devotion as we observed before and cannot be accounted faulty for being like those short but prevalent Prayers in Scripture Lord be merciful to me a Sinner Son of David have mercy on us Lord encrease our Faith Repl. We do in common speech call that a Prayer which containeth all the substance of what in that businesse and addresse we have to say unto God and that a Petition which containeth one single request usually a Prayer hath many Petitions Now if you intend in your addresse to God to do no more than speak a transient request or ejaculation which we may do in the midst of other businesse then indeed your instances are pertinent But why then do you not give over when you seem to have done but come again and again and offer as many Prayers almost as Petitions This is to make the Prayer short as a Sermon is that is cut into single Sentences every Sentence having an exordium and Epilogue as a Sermon but it is to make the Prayers much longer than is needful or suitable to the matter Do you find this the way of the Saints in Scripture Indeed Abraham did so when Gods interlocution answering the first Prayer called him to