Selected quad for the lemma: prayer_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
prayer_n	book_n	common_a	prescribe_v	2,784	5	9.6616	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10179	Certaine quæres propounded to the bowers at the name of Iesvs and to the patrons thereof. Wherein the authorities, and reasons alleadged by Bishop Andrewes and his followers, in defence of this ceremony, are briefly examined and refuted; the mistranslation of Phil. 2.10.11. cleared, and that tet, with others acquitted both from commanding or authorizing this novell ceremony, here gived to be unlawfull in sundry respects.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1636 (1636)	STC 20456; ESTC S103164	42,726	52

ever the Bishop objects against it Whether Calvin Marlorat Bishop Alley Doctor Whitaker Bishop Babington Doctor Fulk Doctor Willet Doctor Ayry and other domestick Divines in their authorized workes resolved not in expresse termes that the bowing at the name of Iesus in time of Divine service and sermons is not a dutie either warranted by grounded on or commanded in this Text That the Sorbon Sophisters Papists Iesuites are more then ridiculous and absurd who will inferre and prove this Ceremony from it That it is an absurd and idle consequent and nonsequitur not deducible from it the name Iesus being neither the name nor this kinde of bowinge the bowing intended in the Text That those who used this Ceremony make the name of Iesus a kinde of magicall word which hath all its efficacy included in the sounde if so as they all doe then how absurd ridiculous superstitious and magicall are those who deduce such consequences from the Text now Whether this Ceremony of bowinge at the name Iesus in time of divine Service or Sermons be enjoined or prescribed in the Booke of common Prayer and administration of the Sacraments other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England if not which is most certaine whether those Bishops and Ministers who use or presse this Ceremony upon others or preach in defence of it or any others not prescribed in that Booke contrary to the expresse statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. which enacts that no Person Vicar Minister or Curate shall use and no other person or persons enforce or perswade any of them to use any other Rite or Ceremonie in saying of Mattens Evensonge or administringe the Sacraments then such as are prescribed in the Booke of common Prayer before which this Act is printed under paine of imprisonment and o●her forfeitures have not thereby incurred the severall penalties mentioned in that Statute And whether they are not more conformable to the Lawes and established doctrine and discipline of the Church of England who refuse to use this Ceremony then all or any of those who thus enforce or practise it contrary to the provision of Statute which inhibits it the Booke of common Prayer wherein all the ceremonies by Law and Parliament established in the Church of England are comprised so farre forth as concernes Divine Service Sacraments and Preachinge together with our Homilies and Articles of Religion not so much as mentioninge or requiringe it and so in truth exploding it by their silence Obj. If any object that the 18. Canon enjoynes it therefore it must be used Answ. I answere first that the Canon speakes not one word of bowinge or cappinge at the name Jesus but only saith That when in time of Divine Service the Lord Iesus not the name Iesus which is not the Lord Iesus shall be mentioned Due and Lowly reverence not putting off the cap since this Canon enjoynes all to si●t uncovered in the Church sh●ll be ●one by all persons present as h●th bene accustomed c. The Canon therefore speaking only of the Lord Iesus not of the name Iesus and of due reverence that is such as God requires in his Word not of bowing the knee or vaylinge the Bonnet which God no where prescribes or requires as due to Christ makes nothing for this purpose 2. The Canon if it doth any thing only adviseth it by way of direction not simply commands it as necessary to be obeyed Leavinge it arbitrary to men to use or not to use it and prescribinge no penaltie to those who shall omitt it Whence Archbishop Bancrofi in his Visi●ation Articles not long af●er the Canon made doth wholy omitt the urging or inquirie after the use of this Ceremony Bishop Andrewes● being the first that ever gave it in charg in Visitation Articles at least 16. yeares after its first compiling 3. These Canons were never confirmed by Act of Parliament or consented to by the temporall Lords and Commons but by the Major parte of the Prelates and Clergy in Convocation and that with much opposition of Bish●p Rudde and others of the better though the weaker side Therefore they are no wayes obligatorie or binding in point of L●w either to the Clergy or Laity neither can they controll the Statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. or Booke of common Prayer thereby establi●hed by prescribinge new Ceremonies in time of Divine Service and Sermons not mentioned in that Booke and Statute the Ceremonies whereof being confined and limited by Parliament can neither be altered nor multiplyed but by Parliament which hath the hole power and right of makinge Lawes and Canons to binde the Subjects as well in Ecclesiasticall and religious as temprall matters as Bishop Iewell recordes in his Defence of the Apologie of the Church of England part 6. c. 2. Divis. 1. p. 521 522. and Bishop Bilson in his true difference betweene Christian subjection and unchristian Rebellion part 3. p. 540 541 542 543. and the confirming of the Booke of common Prayer of the Order of makinge and consecrating Preists and Bishops Of the 39. Articles of Religion and all other Ecclesiasticall matters together with the very Subsedies of the Clergy by Act of Parliament witnesse As for the last clause in the Statute of 1. Eliz. c. 2. for the publishing of new Ceremonies by the Queene with the Archbishops or her Commissioners advice as it clearly shewes that Bishops have no power to make or alter Ceremonies as they dayly doe nor yet the King unlesse specially enabled and authorized by Parliament else this proviso had been idle so it is personall only to the Queen whom the Parliament knew and trusted not reaching to her heires and successors which were then unknowen and therefore purposely omitted and not named or trusted in this clause though they are since named in other clauses of this Act so that being personall only it quite expired with them and descending not to her successors can give them or the present Prelates no power to prescribe or enforce either this or other rites and Ceremonies as they doe I shall therefore conclude all with the Wordes of Doctor Willet in his Synopsis Papismi The 9. generall Controversie Error 51● The bowing at the name of Iesus as it is used in Popery to bende the knee at the sounde thereof is not commanded in this place of Phil. 2. 10 11. which shewed especially the subjection of all Creatures of Turkes Iewes Infidells yea of the Devills themselves to the power and ●udgement of Christ The kneeling at the name of Iesus is superstitiously abused in Popery for the people s●oope only at the sounde not understanding what is read and so make an Idoll of the Letters and Sillabes adoring and worshipping the very name when they heare or see it And againe in sitting and not veyling at the name of Christ Immanuell God the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost and bowing only at the name of Iesus as the Papists

the names of Iesus C●rist of the Lord of God of the Father of the Sonne or of the Holy-Ghost were names of ordinary account or reckoning or to be passed over without reverence as other names Nay whensoeuer wee heare or speake or think of them wee are to reverence the Majesty of God signified thereby And fearefull it may be to them that thinke or speak of them prosanely or slightly or upon each light or trifling occasion or o●herwise than with great reverence and feare that the Lord may not hould them guiltlesse But this I say that neither the sound of those Syllables of Iesus nor the name of Iesus should af●ect us more than any other names of Christ as though there lay some vertue in the bare word But whensoever wee heare or thinke or speake of him wee are to reverence his Majesty and in the reverend feare of his name to subject our selves unto his will This is a precept of that duty whereby wee must glorifie Christ Iesus After this in th● 3. Lecture hee proceeds to proove That by bowing of the knee in this Text is meant the subjection of all creatures unto Christ and that this text shall be actually and principally ●ulfilled before his Tribunall onely in tho generall day of judgement So that by his expresse resolution hee concludeth 1. First that this name Iesus is not the name above every name mentioned and intended in this Text of Phil. 2.9.10.11 2. Secondly that bowing or capping at this name is not heere enjoyned 3. That no more capping or bowing is to be given to the name Iesus then to any other names of Christ or God 4. Fourthly that the bowing and capping at this name onely is sup●rstitious and attributes some vertue to the letters and syllables of the name it selfe 5. Fif●ly that the bowing of every knee here mentioned is and shall be p●incipally performed in the day of judgement before Christs Tribunall and not till then 6. Six●ly Hee heere tacitely intimates that such as are most observant of this Ceremony are ignorant supersticious pe●sons and most disobedient to Christ in their lives and actions and that wee cannot bow to one name of Christ as to his name Iesus more than to another without appa●ent Superstition Finally our learned Doctor William Fulke in his Confutation of the Rhemists Notes and Testament on Phil. 2. Sect. 2.8.10 determines thus First IT IS CERTAINE that the bowing of the knee at the sound of the name of Iesus IS NOT COMMANDED NOR PROPHECIED IN THIS PLACE But it pertaineth to the subjection of all Creatures to the judgement of Christ when not only Turkes and Iewes which would y●eld no honour to Jesus but even the Devills themselves shall be constrained to acknowledge that he is their Iudge Secondly the capping and kneeling at the name of Iesus is of it selfe an indifferent thing therefore no duty of the Text and therefore may be u●ed superstitiously as in Popery here the people stoup at the name when it is read not understanding what it meaneth or what is read concerning him And also in sitting and not veyling at the name of Christ Emanuel God the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost and bowing ONLY at the name of Iesus It may be used also well perchance when the minde is free from Superstition in signe and reverence of his Majesty and as in a matter wherein CHRISTIAN LIBERTY OVGHT TO TAKE PLACE And DVE REVERENCE may be yeelded to our Saviour and so the very words of the 18. Canon which our Bishops much insist on fullfilled without any such outward Ceremony of capping and kneeling Thus this great Mall of the Papists Doctor Fulke whom Doctor Willet followeth in his fore-cited passages What the Fathers and forraine Writers have determined of this Ceremony hath beene elsewhere manifested not one of them making it a duty either commanded or insinuated by the Text I hope therefore the zealous Patriots of this new-coyned duty will forbeare the urging of it untill they shall proove it a duty of the Text by argument scripture reason and authority not meere will and power their present eagern●ss● in enforcing it on men against their conscie●ce and the expr●sse s●atute of 1 Eliza. c. 2. which inhibites all other rites and Ceremonies to be used in time of divine Service or Sermons than those prescribed in the Booke of Common Prayer which doth not so much as once mention muchlesse enjoyne the Ceremony shewing to be a mee●● superstitious humane invention to usher in advance and sett forward some Popish designes as bowing to Communion-Tables Altars Crucifixes Images and the Hostia not any divine institution tending to the advancement of Gods glory Christs honour or the peoples spirituall good for then these superstitious Popish Innovators would never be so zealous to promote it with such tyranny violence and earnestnesse as now they doe without either Law or statute to authorize them FINIS * Gal. 6.1 2. Tim. 2.25 Col. 3.12.13.14 * Page 84.85 86.110 unto 141. None of the Fathers tell us writes he that this reverence of bowing the knee is to be done at the name of Iesus neither is there ANY expresse or full authority in them Therefore all that I strive for is that the Fathers by their expositions of this text do not crosse and contradict that meaning which our Church doth seeme to gather out of it In a word I labour not that the fathers should bee fully for me but I hope to make good that they are not against me I desire in this matter to have them lookers on So he against Bp. Andrewes and others who say all the fathers are for them that is not for but against them * Apud Alchuvini Opera col 1830.1831 b In Isalam l. 5. ca. 55. Tom. 1. p. 362. E. In Ioannis Evang l. 11. c. 17. p. 666 de Incarn Vnigeniti c. 11. p. 114 Dialog de Trinit l. 3 p. 270. a. c Surius Concil Tom. 3 p. 274. d Bibl. Patrū Tom. 3. p. 75. b. e Bibl. Patrū Tom. 5. pars 3. p. 277. b. f Bibl. Patrū Tom. 9. pars 1. p. 770. b. g Bibl. Patrū Tom. 9. pars 2. p. 1156. b. h Bibl. Patrū Tom. 5. pars 1. p. 924. i Bibl. Patrū Tom. 12. pars 1. p. 880. l Page 73.74 75 80 81. m This Mr. Page confesseth p. 2.5 73 74 75 c. the later part of whose booke is a confutation of the ●ormer in all Scholl●rs judgement whereupon it was called in by the Bishops and not answered (a) Confe●rence at Hampton Court p 46. * See his Sermon on Phil 2.9.10 (b) S●e Acts. 3.6 c. 9.27.29 c. 16.18 1. Cor. 5 4● Ephes. 5.20.2 Thes. 3.6 with sundrie others * Acts 13.23 Gal. 3.20 2. Tim. 5.10 Tit. 1.4 c. 2.13 c. 3.6 * Bishop Andrewes Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10.11 * Tit. 1.3 Psal. 106.21 1. Tim. 1.1 (c) Bp Andrewes in his Sermon on Phil. 2.9.10 M. William Page in his treatise

mentioned or praescribed in the Booke o● Common Prayer are expressly against this act ought not to be used and those who use them may be indited for it and as such as urge or presse or prea●h for them too * And none is due but wha● Christ hims●lfe res●rves or prescribes in his Word (z) Hooker E●clesiasticall Polity l. 5. Sect. 3. W●llet Synopsis Papismi Contr. gen 9 Error 51 (a) See 25. H. 8. c. 14.19.21.1 Eliz. c. 1.2 The Petition of Right 3. Carl● 31. H. 8. c. 26.3 Ed. 6. c. 12.8 Eliz. c. 1.13 Eliz. c. 12. Kings Ecclesiasticall Lawes and all Acts touchinge Ecclesiasticall matters * See the Epistle of Pope Elutheriu● to King Lucius Fox Acts and Monuments 71.96 E●d Hist. Novor●m l. 3. p. 67. Ioannis Seldeni 5. Stat. 2. c Iurisdiction Spicilegium Ibidem p. 167.168 20. H. 3● c. 9.4 E 1. c 5.36 E. 3 c 8.2 H. 2.14 E. 3. Statute 3. for the Clergie 2. H. 4. c. 15.5 H. 2. c. 6. M. 19. F. 3. ●itz Iurisdiction 28. * As our people now generally doe use it * As most now doe * These names then are as much to be capped bowed to as the name Iesus * Note this * Why then it is now so strictly given in charge to all and Ministers and people so severely punished for omitting it or refusing to use it * As this is not so grounded ‡ The true grounds of this Ceremony * See Lame Giles the Appendix concerning bowing at the name Iesus * Note this Therefore Protestant now when Popery is so prevalent should rather omit then urge or use it ‡ In Rastall Accusation Bishop Alley * And are not many of our Prelates Ministers and people now in this rega●d as foolish as they Bishop Babington ‡ Isaiah 45.23 * 1. Kings 19.18 Iose●hu● Heb. 4 7. Aag 11 1. Ezra 3 2. Luke 2 11● Note this ‡ Mat. 1 16 * Iohn 7 43 ‡ Iohn 9 22 Iohn 10 33 Luke 22 67. * Vsed by Bp. Andrewes M. Page their followers Doctor Whitaker Doctor Whitaker M. Cartwright Mark this Note this D. Ayray * Lecture 30 upon Phil. 2. Pag. 345. to 348. * Accipit potestatem judicandi sicut Paulus Apostolus ait Et dedit ei nomen quod est super omne nomen ut in nomine Iesu omne ge●● flectatur St. Isiodor Hispal●nsis Comment in Gen c. 30. p. 301.2 (y) Ibidem Pag. 153 154 155. * Quando nosiris adspicimus oculis ineffabile c●elorum Regnum rursusque ex alia parte conspiciemus supplicia horrenda tormentaque expaveseenda revelari atque apparere Mediū vere horum adsistere omne hominum gentes omnemque Spiritu● à primo formato Adam ●●que ad ultimū omnium hominū cunctosque faciem praecedentes atque adorantes secundum illud Scripturae vivo ego dicit dominus quia mihi curtantur omne genu Tune quoque Sermo implebitur Apostoli dicentis in nomin● Iesu Christi omne genu slectetur caelestium terrestium infernorum omnis lingua cantilebitur quia Domin●● Iesus Christus in gloria Dei Patris Eph. Syrus de apparit Crucis tempore judicij p. 230. p. 703. * Isai. 45 23. * Apoc. 5.12 * Marke this Bowing * 1. Sam. 15.22 * Mark this * Sede à dextris meis donec mundi finis consummatio veneri● mittam te judicem vivorum mortuorum Et TVNC s●ectet omne genu caeles●ium terr●strium inferorum potentiae tuae tuique Inimico ●rosternentur velu● calcandum Scabellum pedum tuorū reddes unicuique secundum opera sua Haec veritas sit interpretatur exponit si modo velis assentire approba●e Gregentius Archiepisc. Tepheusis Disp. cum Herbano Iudaeo Bibl. Patris Tom. 1 5● ps 1 p. 924. ‡ Dum dicit sancta sanct● populus vicissim cl●mat unus Sanctus unus Iesus Ch●istus in gloria Dei Patris Quod à Paulo scriptum resonabit in extrema die quando Iesu f●ectetur omne genu omni● lingua confitebitur c. Simton Thess. Archiep. de D. Templo Bibl. Patr. T 12. ps 1. p. 880.

and names of each person in the Trinity which are proper and incommunicable one to the other where as the essence and name of the Deitie are common to each three persons Which were heresie and Blasphemy to affirme yea the very heresie of Nestorious condemned in the Councell of Ephesus Whether it be not heresie to say that Christ is not God nor the name Christ the name of God it beeing directly contrary to Rom. 9.5 Christ who is over all God blessed for ever Amen To Athanasius his Creede And the second Article of Religion of the Church of England Which say that God and man is one Christ Contrary to the Doctrine of all Orthodox Fathers and Writers against the A●●i●ns who unanimously averre that Christ is God Yea contrary to Titus 2. 13. Lookinge for that blessed hope and the glorious appearinge of the greate God and our Saviour Iesus Christ Where Christ is not only called God But the greate God and to the Booke o● Common Prayer which injoines us thus to pray CHRIST have mercie upon us O CHRIST heare us From our enemies defend us O CHRIST c. And to say Thou only O CHRIST with the holy Ghost art most high in the glory of God the Father All which passages expresly resolve Christ to be God and the name of God else we should not thus pray unto him as God Whether this be not a falshood that God cannot be annointed as annointing signifies a designation to an office Since Christ both as he is God and Man was designed to be a Saviour and since we reade thus of Christs annointinge Psal. 45.7 Therefore God thy God hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse aboue thy fellowes Which the Fathers thus interpret O God the Sonne Thy God to witt God the Father hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse to witt with the holy Ghost Acts. 10.38 Heb. 1.8.9 Whence S. Augustine Beda Paschatius Ra●ber●us with sundry others on the 44. our 45. Psalme write thus D●us ungitur a Deo c. God is annointed by God God the Sonne by God the Father with God the holy Ghost And whether this be not an error That Christ is not the name of God nor of our Saviours Divinity but of his humanity only Where as Iren●us advers Heres l. 3. c. 20. Athanasius in his Declaration Quod Christus sit verus D●us that Christ is true God P. 377. therefore this name of Christ the name of God Nazianzen in his 5. Oration p. 167. B. With Elias Cretensis on that place Damascen Orthodoxae fidei l. 3. c. 3. p. 365. with Clichtonius in his Commentary on that place p. 366. And Aquinas 3. parte Quaest 16. Art 5. Quaest. 17. Art 1. expressly resolve That Christ is called Christ in respect of his Divinity That Christ is the name both of his Divinity and Humanity In which are expressed and comprized both his Divinity annointing and his Humanity annointed And that he could not be called Christ if he were only man this name beinge predicated of both his natures and given to him in respect of both If this proposition be true That Iesus is the proper name of God and that God cannot be annointed and so Christ not the name of God as Bishop Andrewes argues How can this agree with Acts. 4.27 Thy holy Childe Iesus whom thou hast annointed c. And Acts. 10.38 How God annointed Iesus of Nazareth with the holy Ghost and with power Or with that of Tertullian to omitt other Fathers adversus Prazean p. 709. Siue Iesus tantummodo positum est intelligitur Christus quia Iesus unctus est sive solummodo Christus idem est Iesus quia unctus est Iesus Either Iesus therefore must not be the proper name of God but the name only of Christs humanity as Beda Anselme Alcuninus Aquinas teach us who say that Iesus est proprium nomen assump●ae carnis Iesus is the proper name of Christs assumed humanity And Hoc nomen Iesus signi●icat solam naturam humanam This name Iesus signifies only the humane nature And so by the Bishops owne Doctrine we must not bow unto it because it is not the name of God or Christs Divinity but of his humanity only as these Fathers teach Or else this proposition God cannot be annointed must be false because these two Texts expressly say that Iesus as Iesus was annointed And themselves confesse that Iesus as Iesus is God And so God may be annointed And then Christ will prove the name of God aswell as Iesus notwithstanding the Bishops reason and be therefore of right to be bowed unto aswell as it by the Bishops owne arguinge if it be solid Whether that Text of Acts. 4.12 Neither is there salvation in any other for there is none other name under heaven given among men w●ereby we must be saved be meant of the name Iesus As if men were saved by it alone or only of the Pe●son of Christ as the 10.11 verses and the very first words Neither is there salvation in any other with the Contents of our Bibles that by the same I●sus only we must be eternally saved and all O●●hodox Int●●preters expounde it If of the name Iesus only As the Patrons of this Ceremony glosse it How then can they be excused from Blasphemy in attributing our Salvation unto the bare name of Iesus which we receive only from his person and Merits which make him a Saviour and purchased him the Title of Jesus Matth. 1.21 Acts. 13.23 Or how will it follow hence There is noe other name under heaven whereby we must be saved but the name Iesus though not expressed in the Text E●go we must bow a● and to this name as oft as we heare it mentioned in the Church If of the person only as is most true why then doe they abuse this Text yea that place in Ps. 95.6 O come let u● worship and fall downe and kneel before the Lord our Maker not Iesus or Saviour being writen long before our Saviours Nativity or the name Iesus was given him and so not meant of it in applying it meerely to the name Iesus to cause simple people to adore it when as it speakes of the person only If the name of Iesus be thus to be bowed to and at Why then bow they not to it when they see it written printed carved paynted or ingraven as well as when they heare it why bow they not at the sight thereof as well as at the sounde why not out of the Church as well as in the Church Since Salmeron the Iesuite teacheth them That this name whether it be pronounced with the mouth or heard with the eare or where ever it is written painted or ingraven is worthy divine worship not for the bare word wri●ing or picture it selfe but for the signification of it as the Crosse and Image of Christ