Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	book_n	divine_a	scripture_n	2,963	5	6.0860	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33981	The vindication of liturgies, lately published by Dr. Falkner, proved no vindication of the lawfulness, usefulness, and antiquity of set-forms of publick ministerial prayer to be generally used by, or imposed on all ministers, and consequently an answer to a book, intituled, A reasonable account why some pious nonconformists judge it sinful, for them to perform their ministerial acts in by the prescribed forms of others : wherein with an answer to what Dr. Falkner hath said in the book aforesaid, the original principles are discovered, from whence the different apprehensions of men in this point arise / by the author of the Reasonable account, and Supplement to it.	Collinges, John, 1623-1690.	1681 (1681)	Wing C5345; ESTC R37651	143,061	307

61. in his 36 Paragraph is much of the same strength The Author did say That if none have an Ability to express their own and others Minds fitly to God in Prayer then no Man hath an Ability to make publick Forms for in them there must be such an Ability exercised What doth our Answerer conclude from hence Then The Ability to make Liturgies is the Gift of Prayer and consequently must be a Divine Mean for the performance of Prayer How doth this follow It will follow indeed that it is a Divine Mean for the composure of a Prayer but not for the Action of Prayer because it it not the ability of him that prayeth but of other Men whom God never imployed so far as we yet see proved to find out means for others Actions in his Worship But I am not difficult to grant That an Ability to make Forms of Prayer is a Divine Mean for some persons viz. such as have not attained to an Ability of themselves fitly to express their mind to God but will it therefore follow that it is so for them to whom God hath given another mean more proper and natural 33. The Answerer p. 61. comes to answer my Proofs which were drawn from those Texts where Ministers are from God commanded not to neglect their Gifts 1 Tim. 4.14 1 Pet. 4.10 11. Rom. 12.3 6. As to the first Text he tells us 1. That it was a charge not to neglect his Office 2. That there is not a word spoken of Prayer To which I reply 1. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in many other places signifies a Gift or Ability to a Religious Act in this place signifies an Office and not a Gift is spoken without any proof 2. That both the words before-going Give Attendance to Reading to Exhortation Doctrine and those immediately following Meditate on these things give thy self wholly to them Take heed to thy self and to thy Doctrine are vehement Presumptions to the contrary 3. I will not deny but it may signifie both Gift and Office if that will please our Answerer and that it doth signifie both is plain from 20 Texts in the New Testament But it seems that it will not for he goes on and tells us there is not a Word about Prayer Who said there was I onely urged it as a general Prohibition of the neglect of any Ministerial Gifts of which surely the Gift of Prayer is one The Argument is Ministers must neglect no Ministerial Gift Therefore not that of Prayer But he saith The Gift of Prayer is not given by the laying on of hands nor doth the Text say so it saith By Prophecy with the laying on of hands By Prophecy that is that you might prophecy so Piscator Vatablus and Beza render it or with Prophecy so the Syriack Arabick and Aethiopick Versions expound it or by Prophecy so the Vulgar Latine and our Translation which is hardest to expound unless as some we will expound it per oraculum immediately from God With Impositions of hands that is with the Office of the Ministry in which sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here cannot signifie the Office but the Gift But besides may not are not Ministerial Gifts in a more plentiful measure given at the time vvhen God calls a man out to the Pubiick Ministry I am Sure the Scripture tells us of another Spirit given to Persons at their calling out to Places of Magistracy I believe the same as to the Ministry But our Answerer saith it might be meant of Extraordinary Gifts which might not be neglected May then Ordinary Gifts be neglected And is not this an Infallible Answer as to any thing we can produce of this Nature It is but saying Those Texts refer to the extraordinary Gifts tho no pretence can be brought of proof for it Our Vindicator p. 63 seems again a little displeased That I should bring a Text to prove an obligation as to the manner of Performance of Prayer in which there is no mention of Prayer who p. 142. cryed out upon it as Ridiculous for another to argue from Rom. 15.16 Because the Apostle praying for like-mindedness prayed That with one mouth they might Glorifie God he might have told the Reader also that in that place I fairly stated the Argument which could be drawn from that Text thus Those who are to speak the same thing and are with one mouth to glorifie God may lawfully or must use set Forms of Prayer But Christians are to speak the same thing 1 Cor. 1.10 and with one mouth to glorifie God Ergo If our Vindicator can make more of it why doth he not I denied the Major and told him the same Argument would prove Forms of Preaching necessary and the same Forms to be used in all Churches Families and Closets yea and that it was necessary for all Christians to speak the same words in all Religious Discourse but then I should not have used the same Logick It is true none ought to do that himself which he disalloweth in another But have I done it Let us try My Argument from that Text 1 Tim. 4.14 lies thus Those who ought not in their Ministry to neglect their Ministerial Gift ought not to neglect their Gift of Prayer But Ministers in their Ministry in Prayer ought not to neglect their Ministerial Gift 1 Tim. 4.14 Ergo. I think this Arguing is according to an old Rule in Logick Quicquid praedicatur de genere praedicatur etiam de specie Let but our Vindicator prove That Ministers all Praying by one and the same Form of Words is a Species to Glorifying God with one Mouth as I will prove that Gifts of Prayer are Species of Ministerial Gifts and he will say something otherwise this is nothing but an ugly Reflexion of which his Book is too full What his quotation from Grotius means I cannot tell He was no Father no Divine but a Learned Politician very Erroneous in his Divinity of what Authority his Sentiment should be with any sober Divine I cannot imagine 35. He comes p. 64. to my Quotation of 1 Pet. 4.10 in the case as every one hath received the Gift so let him minister the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The same what The same Gift As to this he saith Many understand that Text of Alms and why Because the verse before spake of Hospitality Why may not others understand it of Spiritual Gifts considering that the following words are As Stewards of the Manifold Grace of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that Alms If any man speak let him speak as the Oracles of God Then he refers us to the second and third Answer which he gave to the aforementioned Text that is by Gift may he meant Office but whether is more proper to say Men minister their Office or their Gifts in their Offices But which was his third Answer it might be understood of extraordinary Gifts Then this Text now signifies nothing of Duty to us thus any thing

shunned my Company and I never yet wanted enough so far as to tempt me to be an Intruder upon any How little I was concerned in any Publick Affairs will appear from this That if I remember right from 1646 when I entred the Ministry till 1653 I never but once saw London nor I think twice more betwixt that and 1659. I much kept home and could hardly be a month from my People but my Conscience was ready to ask me in the words of Eliab With whom hast thou left those few sheep in thy trust II. Upon the coming out of the Act of Uniformity I was concerned with Two thousand Ministers more to examine whether no more were by it required of me than I might without sinning against God do I saw so many things made necessary to the keeping of my station that I suspected what I found and more too viz. That it was by some contrived to throw out of the Publick Ministry a sort of men and all of them who were possessed of my Principles in Doctrine and though it would not do as to all yet it did as to a very great part even all those who though they believed the same things with many that did conform in points of Doctrine yet had some stricter Notions as to Worship I was afterwards the more confirmed in this from a Reverend Minister now I doubt not but with God who lived and dyed a Conformist who told me that in discourse with a Brother of his a Member in that Parliament and lamenting to him the Turning out of so many Ministers and putting so many terms upon Ministers as they could not but know would Turn out the greater part of Ministers so and so principled as to Doctrine c. He told him It was their design to do it It is very like he did not speak the Sense of the House of Commons of which he was a Member but of many he doubtless did That for those of Puritan Principles as they call'd them Jehu might slay such as escaped the Sword of Hazael and Elisha those that did escape the Sword of Jehu But when I came more narrowly to look into the Things required I discoursed with Divines and those who were most Learned of the Episcopal Persuasion I offered my Arguments heard their Answers I read the generality of Books wrote on all sides but upon the whole judged that o● eight or nine things required I could not judge three or not above three in any degree lawful I resolved to lay down my Publick Ministry but being set apart to the Ministry having solemmly promised not to take away my hand from that Plough I could not then think my self discharged from it● further than in Publick Temples places in Superiors disposal Amongst other things I was then fully possest of the Unlawfulness of performing Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others Three or four of those Arguments truly I think I may say all but one of them were my Arguments 1662. and then freely discoursed with divers of my own Brethren and several Learned men some of whom are dead some yet alive at this time and the Heads of them by me were drawn up in writing and the most considerable Inlargements as to the proof of them From that time till 1673 they lay by me some little before that all knew at what a rude rare all Nonconformists were treated in several Books as the veriest Dunces in the world men that opposed themselves to Authority meerly out of Stubbornness judging the things lawful being able to give no Reasons for their Nonconformity Men fit for Gallies Prisons c. This made me review what I had Eleven Years before drawn up for my own private use with some Additions and particularly Answers to some Arguments which in that time I had met with and Dr. Falkner's Book coming at that time out I could not baulk what he had said Whosoever readeth what I wrote will be my Compurgator that I did not give any a Presumption that I thought my Cause weak by any uncivil treating of the Doctor I saw he was a man of some Learning that he had read many Authors nor had I ever heard an ill word of him as to Sobriety of Life or Warping in Doctrine I treated him with that Civility which I thought became me meerly answering his pretended Reason and Arguments I did indeed see that the making good the Notion I was fully possess'd of would make any further answer to his Libertas Ecclesiastica needless and am very much for the Rule of Frustra fit per plura c. III. But though I quickly concluded this sinful to me to perform my Ministerial Acts in Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others yet I never intended to trouble others with my Notion till I was challenged to it by the worlds being told We had nothing to say for our selves I never that I remember preached it in one Sermon I never affirmed it sinful for People to join with others that use Forms though by the way I do not think that People in the worship of God may lawfully do whatsoever they judge just lawful if they be commanded to do it I was a little tender my self as to Total Separation This hath made me from the Year 1662 not decline hearing Ministers that used it nor as occasion offer'd receiving the Sacrament with sober Ministers and a sober People though the Minister used the Liturgy in doing of it although withal neither have I refused to hear others and receive it with them too as I had occasion nor I think shall I be deter'd from it by the Scare-crow-word Separation I fear not separating from any with whom I am but morally persuaded by Arguments which I cannot answer that I cannot join without separating from the Will of God and further I will separate from no Christians in the world This Reader is known to as many as know me by any ocular observation of my Converse IV. Further than this my Nature disposeth me to such a Benignity as I am Enemy to none but such as are open Enemies to the Glory of God or led by their Lusts and Passions to Acts disturbing Humane Societies Upon the first account I always thought Atheists open Blasphemers professed publick Idolaters were to be punished by the Judge with the severest punishments Profane Swearers and Cursers and Violation of the Sabbath with proportionable punishments and those who detected such did a good action Yet as to these I never thought an Inquisition might be set up nor an Oath Ex Officio administred to make them to accuse themselves Nor as to Idolatry did I ever think that the Magistrate ought to punish any thing but Open Profession of it or Seduction to it Upon which account until this late Plot convinced me that nothing would serve the Papists less than the whole Government and that to get it they thought Assassinations Poysoning Lying For swearing any thing lawful

Nestorius were condemned shall have the Authority of a Law for we receive the Decrees of the aforesaid Holy Councils as Holy Scripture and observe their Canons as Laws This Constitution was made about 541. 9. But we are yet inquiring what Ecclesiastical Sanction Forms of Prayer to be Vniversally used by Ministers had by the Council of Chalcedon I observe first that the Canons of the Council of Milevis are not in the Code so not confirm d at all by it The Canon of the Council of Laodicea indeed is Let us then hear that Canon as Justellus hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is We ordain That the same Liturgy of Prayers should be made every where both at Nine of the Clock and at Evenings Thus much we agree was confirmed by the Council of Chalcedon in the year 451. 10. But what is this to the purpose It should have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same Forms of Prayers that indeed would have been something Here s nothing but an idle playing with a modern usage of the Term Liturgy which indeed we here in England of late years have appropriated to Forms of words to be publickly used in Prayer and it may be the Church of Rome before us but alas the word signifieth no such thing In regard the stress of several Arguments from Antiquity lieth upon this poor word I will once for all disabuse my Reader as to the true sense of it I will do it from a great Authority that of Melancthon and all the Saxon Divines who agreed in writing their Apology for their Confession tendred to the Emperour Charles the 5th at Ausburgh 1530 which was answered by the Popish Divines Eccius c. Eccius and his Associates had catch'd hold of this word and contended that the Mass was a Sacrifice because it is by the Ancients called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Liturgy Melancthon in that Apology printed 1535 in the beginning of the Chapter De Vocabulis Missae thus answereth The word Liturgy signifieth only a Publick Ministry and doth fitly sute what we hold That one Minister should in the Sacrament consecrate the Elements The meaning of the word Liturgy and give the Body and Blood of Christ to the people as one Minister preacheth and offereth the Gospel to all the People according to that of Paul Let a man so judge of us as Stewards of the Mysteries of God and again We are Embassadors of Christ so the term Liturgy excellently agreeth to the Ministry For the word is an old word used to express publick civil Ministries The Grecians used it to express any publick Taxes Burdens or Tributes the Charges of setting out Navies c. as may appear from the Oration of Demosthenes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Oration is wholly spent about publick Offices and Immunities from them where he saith That some unworthy men finding themselves priviledged In civil Authors studied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to decline publick Liturgies that is Services So they spake amongst the Romans as appeareth by the Rescript of the Emperour Pertinax F. de Jure immunitatis Tho saith he the number of Children doth not free Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from all Liturgies that is publick Services And the Commentator on Demosthenes saith Liturgy signifies a kind of Tribute to defray the charges of publick Plays Navies Schools and such things as the publick stock was concerned in And saith he it is plain from the diphthong 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in it that it is not derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth Prayers from whence the word Litany is derived but from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth publick Goods Thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to take care of publick things and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth such an Officer Thus far they From this account of the civil usage of the word it may easily be in Scripture gathered In Scripture what it signifies in sacred things and proved from Holy Writ It is used Luk. 1.23 to signifie all Zacharies publick Service in the Temple We there translate it truly Ministration It is used to express Pauls publick Service to the Church in suffering 2 Phil. 17. Surely that Text is not to be translated If I be offered upon the Forms of Prayer of your Faith but as we do upon the service of your Faith So the Apostle speaking of Distributions to the poor he calls it the Administration of this Liturgy we translate it Service so Phil. 2.30 to supply your lack of service to me Gr. Liturgy he speaks of Timoth's coming to him Heb. 8.6 Christ saith the Apostle obtained a more excellent Liturgy we rightly translate it Ministry Heb. 9.21 all the Vessells of the Liturgy that is of the Jewish Ministry it cannot be of the Jewish Forms of Prayer The Canon of the Council of Laodicea confirmed as being part of the Code by the 1 Canon of the Council of Chalcedon decrees That the same Liturgy that is publick Ministry of Prayers should be performed at Nine in the Morning and in the Evenings which I hope might be without Forms of words of which it speaketh nothing 11. But he tells us the next Canon in Justellus proves they understood Forms of words in Prayer I answer that is not so the next Canon indeed directs an Order of the publick Ministry viz. That after the Ministers Sermons they should pray a part with the Catechumeni then with the Penitents after this thrice with the Believers once silently twice speaking out c. but in that Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not used nor any words like it but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prayers and Oblations But Zonaras and Balsamon so interpret the Canon I doubt it not but the one lived 600 the other 700 years after that Canon was made and either of them in ages when Popery had prevailed 4 or 500 years and they knew no other publick Prayers but by Forms I doubt not but in that age 100 more would have so interpreted it to make it justifie their Practice but what is this to the purpose So many now where they meet with the Terms Liturgy Prayers Offices Litanies presently dream of a proof for Forms of Prayer which none of those words are restrained to Thus we see there was no establishment of Forms of Prayer by the Council of Chalcedon 451. 12. We must therefore come to Justinians Novellae Constitutiones I presume every one knows that great Emperours neither use to write out Folio's nor to draw Prefaces to them The Imperial Law in that Emperors time say the Centuriaters and Moxia was scattered in near 2000 Books it was time to abridge it the Emperour Justinian employed in it three Lawyers the principal was one Tribonianus Sleidan saith of him He was a covetous profane man and reported for summs of money given him fixisse refixisse leges to have made and unmade Laws at his pleasure

only further mentions Hymns and proveth the use of Hymns of Ecclesiastical composition from Pliny and Lucian no very competent Witnesses of the Christian Churches affairs The early use of the Lords Prayer is easily yielded him but it is a strange proof of a Form of Prayers composed by other Men and generally used or imposed to prove as p. 158 That they began in some Churches with the Lords Prayer and ended with the Hymns of many names which Mr. Gregory thought was the clause at the end of the Lords Prayer and he doth but guess it some other The Lords Prayer cometh not within our question be it a Form or not a Form 25. Whatsoever he saith à p. 160. ad p. 164. is rather ad pompam then ad pugnam it all referreth to the use of Forms of Prayers in the Jewish Church To it all I shall only add 2 things 1. It is very improbable and will appear so to every considerate Christian that we should have in Scripture a full account of the Jewish Church from its Cradle to its Tomb and so particular an Account of the way of Worship which God established amongst them from which they might not vary and they should have Forms of Prayers established for ordinary use and the Scripture not mention any thing of them we read in Scripture of other Books they had some of which are perished some preserved for our Instruction and Guidance We read of the Book of the Law many times but never of their Common Prayer Book nor of any person that used the 18 Prayers We read Nehemiah 8. That in a solemn day of Worship the whole Congregation met and called to Ezra for the Book of the Law he brings it they read in it from the Morning to Mid-day v. 1 2. After this we read of many Priests and Levites who read in the Book of the Law distinctly and gave the People the sense of it and made them to understand the reading thereof but we read not a word of their Book of Prayers either there or in any other part of Scripture We read in Luke that when our Saviour came into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day they brought him the Book of the Prophet Isaiah he read in it and preached out of it but neither there do we read of the Book of 18 Prayers brought forth I must confess that in ordinary cases it is not a good Argument That this or that thing was not in being or in use because there is no Sacred Record of the being or use of it But certainly concerning Gods Worship amongst the Jews it is a good Argument to prove there was no such thing established in their Worship because in the Holy Scriptures where we have the full story of that Church a full account of their Worship either by Moses or David so many charges to them not to add thereto nor to diminish there-from there is not any mention of a Book of publick Prayers which God directed for that Church we read only of a blessing which looketh like a Form tho some have been of another mind of Gods own directing tho we often read of the Book of the Law called for brought read in and often read of the Servants of God Praying publickly yet not the least mention is made of a Book or Forms by which they prayed Admit they had had Forms if God had prescribed them it had been out of our question who will freely allow God to prescribe his own Homage and Worship but to think that any of the Jews or the whole Sanhedrim had Authori●y to make any for universal use when God gave such punctual directions both to Moses for the Service of the Taberncale and all things therein and to David for the Service of the Temple that it is expresly said Exod. 39.42 3. That the very structure of the Tabernacle was according to all that the Lord commanded Moses and Deut. 4.2 there is so express a command You shall not add to the word which I command you nor shall you diminish from it which is repeated Deut. 12.32 and David saith 1 Chron. 28.11 12 13 19. All this the Lord made me to understand in Writing by his hand upon me v. 12. the pattern of all that he had by the Spirit When we read of Nadab and Abihu being struck dead Levit. 10. for but using ordinary fire in a Sacrifice and of Vzzah being struck dead for but touching the Ark when it shook in the New Cart it being Gods prescript that that Family of the Levites should carry the Ark on their shoulders Num. 4.15 7 9. I say after all this for any to go about to prove that the Jews in their Worship had Forms of Prayer not prescribed of God which their Ministers were bound to use and of which is no mention in Scripture is an undertaking fit for none but those who think they can prove Quidlibet e quolibet nor to be believed by any but such as are very credulous Our Vindicator saith their very Sacrifices were Rites of Supplications and as to them they were limited and used no such Variety Rites of Supplication and Supplications are two things and these Rites were limited by God not by the Sanhedrim I hope nor were they without some variety in them For his instance 2 Chron. 29.30 It is said They praised God with the Words of David and Asaph the Seer Asaph was a Prophet David told us he ordered nothing but by the Spirit of God what he understood by the hand of the Lord in writing upon him For Joel 2.17 which he quoteth surely Joel was divinely inspired nor is that Prayer surely of length enough for a whole Office nor was it more then a general direction for matter to be inlarged in words as the Jewish Minister thought fit For what Dr. Lightfoot Dr. Outram Scaliger Buxtorf Ainsworth tell us they have had their Intilligence from the Rabbies the eldest of which of whom we have any Record was saith Alstedius after the world was 3380 years old The Hierusalem Talmud was finished by R. Jochanan 250 years after Christ the Babilonian Talmud not till 500. The most of the Writings of their Rabbins saith Alsted appeared not to the World till 1000 years after Christ Now how competent Witnesses these are whose Books also are as full of Fables as leaves of the practice of the Jewish Church before Christ or in its incorrupt state let any judge who are men of sense 2. But admit it were a thing capable of proof that the Jews in their incorrupt times and that by Gods command ordinarily used Forms of Prayer in their Worship and that such as were neither prescribed by God nor any Prophet or Penman of Holy Writ or that in and about and since Christs time they have used such Forms of Prayer ought this to guide the Practice of the Christian Church Or will it prove that the same thing is lawful in the Christian Church I