A63200:70
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that…A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that…
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.
London: printed by T. Paine and M. Simmons for Thomas Underhill, 1644
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
You say it is evident, many Preachers constantly use a set form of Prayer of their own making before their Sermons, with whom the people refuse not to join; And you know (we doubt not) that such set forms are disliked also. And if the grounds be examined (in our understanding) they make as much against the one as the other. View but the reasons why you admit not a stinted Liturgy and form of prayer, and see whether the two last will not in the same terms directly conclude ⟨p. 6⟩gainst both. But what ever is to be thought herein, or whether mens practises agree with their opinions we now dispute not. This is plain and manifest, that mens opinions are to be judged by their express words and reasons, not by their practises. The Brownists (as they are commonly called) can separate from no stinted Liturgy amongst us, but that which is in use, and for ought we know they may join with their own Pastors, though they oft use the same form of prayer in whole or in part, in thanksgiving before meat, or in prayer before Sermon, or the like. And yet their opinion is that all stinted Liturgies and set Forms of prayer be unlawful, humane inventions forbidden by the second Commandment.
You say it is evident, many Preachers constantly use a set forme of Prayer of their own making before their Sermons, with whom the people refuse not to joyne; And you know (we doubt not) that such set formes are disliked also. And if the grounds be examined (in our understanding) they make as much against the one as the other. View but the reasons why you admit not a stinted Liturgie and forme of prayer, and see whether the two last will not in the same terms directly conclude ⟨p. 6⟩gainst both. But what ever is to be thought herein, or whether mens practises agree with their opinions we now dispute not. This is plaine and manifest, that mens opinions are to be judged by their expresse words and reasons, not by their practises. The Brownists (as they are commonly called) can separate from no stinted Liturgie amongst us, but that which is in use, and for ought we know they may joyne with their owne Pastors, though they oft use the same forme of prayer in whole or in part, in thanksgiving before meat, or in prayer before Sermon, or the like. And yet their opinion is that all stinted Liturgies and set Formes of prayer be unlawfull, humane inventions forbidden by the second Commandement.