Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	apostle_n	church_n	minister_n	2,916	5	6.7721	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33979	A supplement to a little book entituled, A reasonable account why some pious nonconforming ministers cannot judg it lawful for them to perform their ministerial acts in publick solemn prayer, ordinarily, by the prescribed forms of others : wherein is examined whatsoever Mr. Falconer in his book called, Libertas ecclesiastica, and Mr. Pelling in a book called, The good old way, have said to prove the ancient use of forms of prayers by ministers : and it is proved, that neither of the two aforementioned authors have said anything that proveth the general use, or imposition of such forms of prayer in any considerable part of the church, till Pope Gregories time, which was six hundred years after Christ, nor in any church since the reformation, except that of England, and (which is uncertain) some in Saxony.	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.; Falkner, William, d. 1682. Libertas ecclesiastica.; Pelling, Edward, d. 1718. Good old way.	1680 (1680)	Wing C5343; ESTC R18940	53,644	120

inspiring some Prophets and holy men to do it or that Christ by prescribing a Form of prayer to be used by his Disciples hath determined That Forms of prayer are not like forms of blasphemy which God himself cannot make lawful being in their own nature evil but such things as his command may make lawful or necessary This none ever denied The question is Whether they be not such things as with reference to some men in some circumstances nothing but the command of God can make lawful For the same things may be sinful as to some men which may be lawful yea and necessary to others It is lawful yea necessary for those who cannot otherwise avoid burning with lust to marry it may be sinful for others who are Eunuchs by nature and lawful for some to make themselves Eunuchs for the Kingdom of heavens sake expedient for others for the present necessity as the Apostle speaks The having or not having the gift of continence makes the difference as in the present case the having or not having the gift of prayer doth § 3. God or Christs immediate command may make things of this nature necessary which have no essential and inseparable evil in them so that whatever is said of Gods prescribing Forms of prayer sometimes and Christs prescribing a Form signifies just nothing nor can possibly amount to more than this Therefore Forms of prayer are not in their own nature considered abstractly from Gods will revealed in his word sinful Or therefore God may or Christ may command us Forms of prayer now to be used in our Ministry or may commissionate others to do it Now all this will be granted Only the question is Where it doth appear that God hath commission'd any thus what direction is there in any leaf of Scripture for Bishops or Churches or any persons to compose Forms of prayer to be ordinarily used by all Ministers § 4. I have been amazed that those who are so zealous in this point have not seen that the Reverend Bishop of Norwich hath fixed upon the only medium in nature to prove this assertion in his Rationale on the Common-Prayer pag. 8 9 10. viz. That God hath commissionated some to prescribe a form of the publick Worship Upon which Hypothesis what he there saith is indisputably true That the publick Worship of God prescribed by those to whom he hath given commission is the only true and right publick Worship and all other Forms and methods offered up instead of that though never so exactly drawn are strange worship because not commanded The Nonconformists most freely agree that whatsoever Worship is not commanded by God or whatsoever Worship is offered up to God instead of that which he hath commanded is strange Worship Now for any Forms of prayer used in any Church setting aside the Scriptural Forms which may make part of them neither God nor Christ nor any Prophets or Apostles by authority from God have commanded them So then the sense of this Reverend Prelate must be That God hath commissioned the Bishops Pastors or chief Ministers of the Church to prescribe Forms of Worship publick Worship and universally to impose them Admitting this we agree all other praying is abomination God hath commanded another way of praying by commissionating chief Pastors in his name and stead to draw up the only Forms in which Ministers in publick may speak to him in prayer This is the Proposition which our Brethren should spend their pains to prove and as I said before I think to be the only Medium on their side if we could apprehend this to be true or it could be so evinced to us we should never speak a word more about conceived prayer or praying by our own gifts We should all strike sail to a command of God made out to us If God or Christ hath commanded us the constant use of any form or forms in his Word if his Prophets or Apostles have enjoined us any such we also agree our selves bound to use them But we are not patient of these trifling arguments If the use of Forms of prayer prescribed by God himself or by Christ or by the Prophets and Apostles either for a time to be used or to be perpetually used be lawful for all then the use of Forms of prayer neither made by God nor by Christ nor by his Prophets or Apostles is also lawful 2. If Forms of prayer be lawful then they are lawful for all under all circumstances 3. If they be good for instruction and may be so lawfully used then they may be used in Devotion c. 4. If they may be lawfully used even in devotion by some or under some circumstances then they may be lawfully imposed on all under any circumstances § 5. But yet though if it were true that God by himself immediately or Christ or the Apostles or Prophets did prescribe the people of God in the Old Testament some particular forms from which they must not vary nothing could be concluded in our case yet for diversion-sake let us examine how well our Reverend Bishop hath proved this He beginneth pag. 99. with Christs prescription of the Lords prayer from whence he saith Isiodor Hispalensis thinketh the Church took its pattern for Liturgies Isiodorus Hispal lived more than 600 years after Christ about the time Liturgies began to be in common use and 200 years before they were any thing generally imposed But the business is not what the Church in his time did but upon what ground Admit the Lords-prayer was directed by Christ as a Form of prayer By what authority did the Church after the effusion of the Spirit do what Christ did By the same authority as I presume they made seven Sacraments because Christ made two But our Reverend Brother thinks it wonderful manifest that the Lords-prayer was delivered as a form 1. Because of the Text Luk. 11. 2. When you pray say 2. Because of the ground of the Disciples request Teach us to pray to which this is an answer 3. From the manner of the composure 4. From the ancient Churches acknowledging and using it as a form for which he quoteth Cyprian Tertullian and Gregory Our Reverend Brother knows that many great Divines have doubted it and do doubt it some thinking it only a direction for the matter others for the true method of Prayer Nor doth any thing our Brother saith conclude in the cause he knows that Mat. 6 9. it is only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pray on this manner and whereas he saith that it ia so in the Seventy Numb 6. 23. On this manner bless you yet those words have been taken for a constant invariable form of blessing and was used so by Luther and at Geneva Who have taken them so I cannot tell but I am sure it cannot be proved that the Priests never varied from that form and I do know one or two great Divines that have thought the Priests only tyed to the sense not

as now who would ill understand it Can. 8. It also pleased them c. That if any should say That the words of the Lords Prayer Forgive us our debts are only used by the Saints to signifie their humility not to express a truth Let him be Anathema For how can one be induced in prayer to lye and that not to men but to God with his lips desiring that his sins might be forgiven him when in heart he thought he had no sins to be forgiven I have been a little more large in this story because I am pretty confident and dare challenge all our adversaries to give us but one proof that any part of the Church before this time assembled in any Council took upon them to impose Forms of Prayer to be used by all Ministers within their Jurisdiction If some men made themselves Forms and used them they yet served God in their Ministry in the use of their own gifts this signifieth just nothing to our case who have known divers worthy men do the like We have now the case here was a Council of worthy men all relating to the Province of Numidia who met at Mela. The occasion of their meeting was the woful spreading of the Doctrine of Pelagius who denied Original Sin Assisting Grace or that justified persons could sin or need beg the pardon of sin Many if not the greatest part of their Ministers were tainted with these Opinions In this distress to stop the diffusing this venom and that the people through the error ignorance or carelesness of their Ministry might not be without any to go before them in publick prayers who could or would put up due confessions or necessary petitions for them having first in eight Canons condemned the Doctrines of Pelagius they make their twelfth Canon in these terms It also pleased them c. That those prayers or Masses or Prefaces or Commendations or Impositions of hands which shall be approved in the Council be used of all and that no other be used in the Church but what shall be treated on and approved in a Synod lest perhaps something should be composed contrary to the true faith either through ignorance or carelesness I observe 1. That this Canon extends to all Ministerial services not to prayers only as to all they were limited to forms 2. That it was not to any forms that before this time had been enjoined or used in this or in any other Church but such as should first be treated of and approved in a Synod or Council 3. That it was done in a case of woful distress when the Ministers were known to be so corrupted in their judgments that they could neither put up such confessions or supplications as they ought they could not confess original sin nor pray for assisting grace nor for pardon of sins renewing after Justification 4. I observe this was in the fifth Century and if we will believe Vossius it must be after 505 for he saith Histor Pelag. l. 1. c. 3. that in that year Chrysostome being in banishment and near his death he first spread his Doctrines Others make it 402. It must be in the Popedom of Innocent 1. who was not Pope 18 months for Aurelius was President there in the notion of his Legate Take this story in its circumstances it 's far from a justifiable authority to maintain that it was the judgment of the Church in the purer ages That forms of prayer might be lawfully enjoined all Ministers whether under such circumstances or no. Their ends were that the poor people might have due prayers put up for them and be taught the Doctrine of Original sin the impotency of mans will to what was spiritually good the need of assisting grace that they sin seven times a day and had need beg pardon That original sin might in prayer be confessed and the impotency of human nature to that which is truly good with their daily renewing sins that so pardon might be beg'd for them and assistance of Divine grace against them and unto spiritual duty How should this end have been obtained in that corrupted state but by set-forms of Prayers and Sermons too Should they on the sudden have turned out all these Ministers it is not probable they on the sudden could have found enough fitted for the work Because in this exigent this Council judged it lawful shall it therefore be concluded to b● the judgment even of those few Bishops in that Council That it is lawful for any in any state of a Church to do the like Besides what hindred but that according to this Canon every Minister might compose his own prayers and bring them to be approved in a Council § 11. The truth is this proved a sad president all know how long Peldgius his Doctrine spread a very great part of the Church how many Councils assembled against it 'T is very probable other Churches followed this Canon not in force of it for it could oblige none but the Province of Numidia but as thinking it lawful till at length as the Grandieur of the Romish Bishops required a pack of ignorant and sottish Ministers of which there was a remarkable plenty in the sixth and seventh age it crept into a custom and a piece of Ecclesiastical Common Law But we shall hereafter shew that the practice of the visible Church after 400 years in Rituals is not very imitable by those that will make the word of God a light to their feet but we must go back a little to consider what our Author insinuates p. 105. of the Liturgies which the Papists have invented in all probability and intituled St. Peter St. James and St. Mark and St. John too as also those which they have intituled St. Chrysostome St. Basil and St. Ambrose to● § 12. For the former our Reverend Brother speaketh thus pag. 105. And I yield it most probable though even Protestant writers herein differ that the ancient Roman Jerusalem and Alexandrian Offices were called the Liturgies of St. Peter St. James and St. Mark because of their certain early use in the Churches where they presided though it is not certain they were composed by them this being mentioned by no ancient writer of the first Centuries Nor do I doubt but the Liturgy or Anaphoca of St. John and that of the twelve Apostles are supposititious From which I observe 1. That if during the time that the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost lasted the Ministerial Services were by the Apostles performed by them it is very absurd to say Peter James Mark and John who all were possessed of them prayed by prescribed forms 2. I observe our Reverend Brother I hope unadvisedly hath granted here the Papists a great point That Peter was the first Bishop of Rome for he calls Rome the Church where he resided for we know James resided at Hierusalem Mark at Alexandria this is both a liberal and groundless grant Magni hoc mercentur Achivi 3. Did Saint