Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	authority_n	church_n	scripture_n	4,231	5	6.1426	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27954	The Reasons for non-conformity examined and refuted, in answer to a late Letter from a minister to a person of quality, shewing some reasons for his non-conformity.		1679 (1679)	Wing R497cA; Wing B26; ESTC R8497	14,618	25

a Book as lawful to be used as well as assent and consent to the use of it so that what our Author seems so passionately to wish that they had required See Mr. Falkner's Libertas Eccles c. 3. no more in conformity than use and submission is indeed all that is required of the conforming Clergy and is all that is necessary to be required to attain the end of that Act which was to establish uniformity in worship that there may be an universal agreement in the publick worship of Almighty God and to the intent that every person in this Realm may certainly know the rule to which he is to conform in Publick Worship which are the very words of the Act but it has always been the practice of these men to force another sense upon the words of Oaths and publick declarations than was ever intended by our Governours on purpose to justifie their unjust clamours and to countenance Schism and Faction Having thus in general justified the declaration of unfeigned assent and consent it is time to consider his particular exceptions against the Book of Common-prayer And his First exception is against reading the Apocrypha as Lessons for the day but he ought to have said for what day for there is not one Lesson out of the Apocrypha appointed for any Sunday throughout the year and is it not great impudence in these men to reproach the Church of England for appointing the Apocrypha to be read sometimes on the Week-days who take no care themselves that either the Holy Scriptures or Apocrypha should be read in their Conventicles all the week nor scarce on Sundays especially considering that there is always one Lesson out of the Canonical Scripture appointed to be read besides the Apocrypha and I suppose they will not assert it absolutely necessary every time we meet to worship God to read two Chapters of the Holy Scriptures for they themselves very seldom read one on their weekly Lectures whatever they do on Sundays we pay much greater reverence to the holy Scriptures than our Accusers do as never meeting together for the worship of God without reading some portion of them what is our fault then not a neglect to read the Scriptures but that sometimes we read some part of the Apocrypha together with the Scriptures and if this be all it is no other fault than what See Falkners libertas Eccl. ch 4. sect 5. the ancientest and purest Churches have been guilty of as is well known to those who are acquainted with the History of the Christian Church and there are few Protestant Writers of any note but have commended or at least allowed the reading of them But they are fabulous Legends such as of Tobit and his Dog Bel and the Dragon Judith and Baruch I suppose this Author does not know that the 5 Ch. of Tobit is left out of our Kalendar nor that many of the ancient Fathers did believe these to be true stories though he is pleased confidently to call them fabulous Legends I never saw any arguments yet to prove them Fables but what would admit of a very fair solution when this Author produces any I shall consider them But supposing them to be fables that is parabolical discourses they are never the less fit for that to be read in Christian Assemblies since they may serve for instruction or comfort or reproof as the Parables of our Saviour do But they are read under the notion of Holy Scripture for so in the whole lump together they are stiled in the order no note of discrimination to make any distinction between one and the other and has this Author then the impudence to charge the Church of England with making no distinction between the Canonical Scripture and the Apocrypha if not is it not done like a very good Christian sliely to insinuate so foul an imputation as this if he does think the Church guilty let him tell me the meaning of the sixth Article of Religion wherein our Church declares In the name of the Holy B. L. Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church And the other Books as Hierome saith the Church B. L. doth read for example of life and institution of manners but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine How is it possible for the best Church in the World to escape the envenomed Tongues and Pens of these Men who do not blush to charge her with such doctrines as are directly contrary to her own Articles Had it not been more reasonable to assert that the order takes no notice of the Apocryphal Lessons than that it includes the Apocrypha in the common title of Holy Scriptures which is the plain truth for it only mentions the Lessons out of the old and new Testament reckoning the Apocrypha so well known and so plainly discovered by the Kalendar when it was once understood that there was no need of particular directions about it There is one objection more with reference to the Kalendar that some Books of the Sacred Canon are wholly left out and never to be read some of them within a very little some of them but half to be read and many of them mutilated and curtailed as to several chapters contained in them Now to show you of what force this objection is let us first consider how much of the Holy Scripture is appointed to be read every Year by our Church The Psalms of David are read over every Month the most part of the old Testament once a Year the new Testament excepting the Revelations thrice every Year besides Epistles and Gospels And have not these Men great reason to find fault with our Kalendar who don't read the tenth part of the Bible once a Year in their Conventicles Secondly the design of publick reading the Scriptures is for publick instruction and therefore the Church may very prudently leave out such parts of Scripture as are dark and obscure and not easily understood without an Expositor or have not such an immediate influence upon the government of our lives and reserve them to be read by Christians at home or to be expounded to the People by publick Teachers and such for the most part are those omissions which this Author complains of dark and obscure Prophecies or Genealogies or such Histories as are related in some other Books which are appointed to be read And now Thirdly I would desire this Gentleman to prove that it is absolutely necessary to read the whole Scripture in our Churches if it be let our Dissenters first correct themselves before they censure those who are more just and innocent if it be not then it is no fault to omit some parts of Scripture which are least fitted to the edification of a promiscuous multitude while nothing is omitted which is necessary to their instruction in Faith and manners and when he shows any such omission I will refuse