Selected quad for the lemma: grace_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
grace_n	prayer_n	spirit_n	supplication_n	3,599	5	11.3996	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49524	The reformed Presbyterian, humbly offering to the consideration of all pious and peaceable spirits several arguments for obedience to the act for unifromity, as the way to vnity and endeavouring to demonstrate by clear inferences from the sacred scriptures, the writings of some of the ancients, or several old pastors of the reformed churches abroad, and of the most eminent old non-conformists amongst ourselves : as Mr. Josias Nichols, Mr. Paul Baines, and other learned divines : as for Mr. Perkins, Mr. Iohn Randal, and Mr. Rob. Bolton, that there is nothing required by the act for vniformity that is forbidden by the law of God / by Rich. Lytler ...	Lytler, Richard.	1662 (1662)	Wing L3573; ESTC R1525	139,662	290

together with their sections of the same were not of Gods appointment Yet all these things which tend to an universal agreement in the publick Worship of God are by Mr. Ball acknowledged to be of men and no sinful additions though no where commanded Sect. 8. The like may be said saith Mr. Ball pag. 47. of the divisions of the Chapters and Verses in our Bi-Bles The phrase of speech and method used in Prayer Preaching Administring of the Sacraments and the very words of Translation wherein the Scriptures are read and cannot be one and the same in all Societies and so are circumstances how oft at what hour on what day in what place the Pastor shall Preach which are particular determinations of the Church and so variable This is when the Church seeth it necessary But to be more clear and satisfying as to what I have propounded to speak to as to the lawfulness of Uniformity by a form of prayer c. I shall offer further a very substantial argument that I find in the Five Disput 359. Proving a stinted Liturgy is in it self lawful this saith he is thus proved Sect. 9. Argument 1. That which is not directly or consequently forbidden by God remaineth lawful a stinted Liturgy is not directly or consequentially forbidden by God therefore it remaineth lawful The major is undoubted because nothing but a prohibition can make a thing unlawfull pag. 359. Now the minor that a stinted Liturgy is not forbidden we need no other proof then that no prohibition can be produced Five Disput. pag. 361. If it be prohibited it is either by some especiall prohibition or by the generall prohibition of not adding But it is by neither of these therefore not at all Special prohibition I never yet saw any produced God hath no where forbidden a form of prayer and the general prohibition of not adding extends not to it For first it is the Worship of God which is the matter we are there forbidden to adde but the praying with a form or without a form as such are neither any part of the Worship of God c. Secondly if prayer with a form be an addition to Gods Worship then so is praying without a form for God onely commands prayer but neither commands a form or that we forbeat a form Thirdly undetermined mutable modes and circumstances are none of the prohibited additions but left to humane determination Sect. 10. Beloved this argument is as I said before a very good one to prove the lawfulnesse of a set or stinted form of prayer and I desire heartily that the Author of the sober and temperate discourse against Liturgies and a form of prayer as well as against the Imposition thereof and so all such who are affected with his arguments as it hinders the intention of our souls and of the fervency of our spirits in prayer would consider of this arguments of Mr. Baxters before said and also of his second argument pag. 367. of his third also and of his fourth which is that Christ hath left his approbation of such forms by his own owning and citing them by his thrice repeating the same words in his prayer which if it had been any hinderance of the fervency of our spirits in prayer or limiting that spirit of grace or supplication which was in him above measure he would not in his Agony have used the same words in his own prayer three times as the Evangelists do record Sect. 11. But as I said before besides the usefulness of the first argument to prove a stinted form of prayer lawfull I shall crave leave to offer the same argument for to prove obedience to an imposed form of prayer with an Uniformity in rites and ceremonies to be lawful also That which is not directly or consequentially forbidden by God remaineth lawful Obedience or Conformity to the use of a Form of Prayer with certain rites and ceremonies tending to decency and order are not directly or consequentially forbidden by God The minor that proveth that a stinted Liturgy is not forbidden proveth also that obedience to a stinted Liturgy or form of publick or common prayers is not forbidden and therefore obedience when imposed or required is lawful Besides which aforesaid argument which doth well agree with Mr. Balls in answet to Mr. Cans as you shall read hereafter I desire you to consider whether that Mr. Baxters second proposition upon this head doth not hugely corroborate what I propound to speak principally to in this case That obedience to an imposed form of publick prayer is lawful viz. pag. 365. That a stinted Liturgy in some parts of publick holy service is ordinarily necessary that is excepting some unusual cases Sect. 12. The parts of Worship where a set form is necessary are 1. Reading of the Word 2. Singing of Psalms 3. Baptism 4. The use of a form of Consecration and Administration of the Lords Supper 5. The blessing people in the name of the Lord. 6. Ordinarily there should be somewhat of a form of Confession of Faith 7. If there be not a frequent use of many of the same words and so somewhat of a form in Marriage Confirmation Absolution Excommunication the danger will be more then the benefit by mutation will be 8. And with some Ministers even in prayer a form especially about the Sacraments the ordinary use of a form may be the best and fittest way Now if in all these parts which I have extracted First the nature of the thing sufficiently proves the ordinary fitness of a form Secondly the constant practice of almost all Churches if not all is for it c. that in these parts of Worship there should be a form commanded Then obedience to a form of prayer and other Rites c. by the Text also quoted by Mr. Baxter pag. 367. is lawfull Sect. 13. Now to what I have said proving the lawfulness of obedience to a form of prayer and other Rites and Ceremonies not forbidden I desire it may be considered that whether the third proposition in Five Disput. pag. 367. may not be serviceable to the end I propose That a form of prayer at some times may not onely be submitted to but be desired when the peace of the Church doth accidentally require it Concerning which I shall onely say that what I find there is very true in the same page He is far from the temper of a Christian that sets sought by the peace of the the Church that he would not use a lawful means for the procuring of it when Paul would become all things to all men to save some and would eat no flesh while he lived rather then offend his weak brother Sect. 14. Doubtless if S. Paul who while he was at his own liberty was so wary of offending his weak brother that he would eat no flesh while he lived rather then do so he would if under the command of his superiours for the peace of the Church been uniform in Gods publick

sign of Gods favour and gracious goodness towards them And that Matrimony signifie h to us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church Sect. 24. To begin now with the examination of the first proof Though this be granted that confirmation is appointed as a means whereby persons baptised may receive strength and defence against all temptations to sin doth it therefore follow that it is ascribed to Imposition of hands to be a sign and seal of the covenant This is a very great mis-apprehension and huge mistake about this ordinance of confirmation To evidence this I desire what I now offer may be considered and compared with the holy Scripture Sect. 25. Imposition or the Laying on of hands upon persons that have been baptized is not of meer humane invention but of divine authority and therefore the Author to the Hebrews 6.2 he doth reckon it amongst one of the beginnings of the Doctrines of Christ joyning it with the initiating ordinance of Baptism I say this Doctrine of Laying on of hands followeth next in order after the doctrine of Baptism Now for the warranting of this practice now in the Church I shall do two things first give example from Scripture secondly from the practice of the Christian Church in former Ages In Acts 8.14 when the Apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word and were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus ver 13. they sent Peter and John which were Apostles also from whence by the way if Peter had been the Prince of the Apostles he would have sent some of those Apostles that sent him to Confirm the people of Samaria in the profession of the Christian Faith Now when they came thither they prayed for those baptised persons ver 15. that they might receive the Holy Ghost both in its extraordinary gifts and saving graces by which they might be confirmed and receive strength against all temptations Now after this prayer what did they they laid their hands upon then ver 17. Behold here a Scripture-warrant for Imposition of hands and prayer for the Holy Ghost the giver of all grace whereby we may receive strength and defence against all temptations to sin Sect. 26. Now that this Ordinance continued in the Charch of God after the Apostles dayes what I have read alledged by St. Jerome doth prove the same saith he in his book advers Lucifer cap. 4. I deny not the custom of the Church was that the Bishop should go abroad and imposing hands pray for the gift of the Holy Ghost on them whom the Presbyters and Deacons for off in lesser Citie had al ealy baptised I desire that this proof may be well considered of for it is serviceable besides the end for which I bring it to inform also in that which is the subject of the third scruple about Deacons and that it may be the better understood I shall make it into these Propositions First that the Imposition of hands by Bishops was the custom of the Church before St. Jeromes time Secondly that this ceremony was attended with prayers as in the Apostles dayes Thirdly that the persons thus confirmed by this sign and prayer were such as were already baptised by the Deacons and Presbyters To all which let me adde but this observation being of great use in what followeth That in the Church of God in St. Jeromes dayes there were three degrees of order in the Gospel-Ministry or Ministerial Function viz. a Bishop a Presbyter and a Deacon Sect. 27. And thus having communicated my thoughts upon a diligent search of the sacred Scriptures as to this ordinance of Consirmation by the Imposition of hands and prayer I suppose it will appear to be a great mistake in those that are offended at what the Rubrick mention before Confirmation As to the second proof I shall say the less for having so fully cleared what is done by the Church of England to be according to the example of the holy Apostles as they affirm in their last prayer at confirmation and therefore this sign of Laying on their hands being no sign or ceremony of their own devising but by divine right it may charitably be concluded that such persons who are made partakers thereof may thereby be certified of Gods favour and gracious goodnesse towards them that they have not onely been baptised but have had an opportunity to make profession of their Faith and have had the prayers of the Church for them to receive strength and defence against all temptations to sin c. Sect. 28. And thus now having examined the proofs brought by Mr. Nicholls for making the sign of Imposition of hands and what is said of Matrimony to be a sacrament or seal of the covenant I leave it to your serious consideration whether this were a ground sufficient for refusal of an universal subscription CHAP. XI That to subscribe to the use of those Ceremonies which have significancy in them as the Surplice and Cross in Baptism is lawful and warrantable proved by the judgment of Forreign and our own Modern Divines both Conformists and Non-conformists Section 1. BEcause that I find this Principle so well improved once that this charge is fastned upon all such rites and ceremonies as have any significancy in them as the Surplice and Cross in Baptism and that to this day though so much be granted That the civil power or Church besides the circumstances of time and Place may order an hundred things which Reason and Nature it self teaches all sober persons to be such as that without some order to be observed in them the Worship of God would not be performed or would be undecently performed Discourse of Liturgies pag. 88. Yet it is denyed that they have any Authority to appoint significative ceremonies which are sensible signs to affect the understanding this is to give them Authority to institute Sacraments as Mr. Nicholls said of old Sect. 9. pag. 88. For the proof of this denyal I find not a word of Scripture or any other reason but this against significant ceremonies We believe them reducible to no command which is his great argument against an Imposed Liturgy We find no command of Christ for it Sect. 2. I am in great hopes that if I can by Scripture or the judgement of such as have been accounted for godly and learned now above all interest or right reason prove the contrary It may be a blessed means of inclining those that are concerned unfeignedly and universally to assent cons●nt and conform to all the Book of common prayer with all the rites and ceremonies according to the Act for Unformity But before I begin I shall lay down this distinction concerning Rites and Ceremonies viz. of Morall and sacramental A rite or ceremony may be significative and represent spiritual objects to our understanding and yet not be a sacramental ceremony Sect. 3. For a Sacrament according as I learned when a child is thus defined to be a signe