A70766:333
Moderation a virtue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate…Moderation a vertue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate…
Moderation a virtue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate divines and laity of the Church of England represented in some late immoderate discourses, under the nick-names of Grindalizers and Trimmers / by a lover of moderation, resident upon his cure ; with an appendix, demonstrating that parish-churches are no conventicles ... in answer to a late pamphlet entitled, Parish-churches turned into conventicles, &c.Moderation a vertue, or, A vindication of the principles and practices of the moderate divines and laity of the Church of England represented in some late immoderate discourses, under the nick-names of Grindalizers and Trimmers / by a lover of moderation, resident upon his cure ; with an appendix, demonstrating that parish-churches are no conventicles ... in answer to a late pamphlet entitled, Parish-churches turned into conventicles, &c.
London: printed for Jonathan Robinson, 1683
Appendix: An Appendix demonstrating that Parish-Churches are no Conventicles, particularly for re…
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.
Now weak Understandings cannot see a convincing Reason for reading of the second Service at the Communion-Table, in all this: 1. Not in those Words, When other Communion cannot be had: Other than what? what's the Substantive to other? Sure not private and solitary, which goes before, and is not allowed by the Church. 2. Or when other Communion cannot be had than in Prayers only, without the Sacrament, she appoints so much of the Service as relates not to a present Communion. How as relates not of necessity to a present Communion, and that to be said at the Lord's Table? Here the Thing in Controversy is positively said, without any Proof; the first part of the Rubric clearly speaking of a Table covered, &c. which is at no other time than of a present Communion, or a Sacrament. And upon a good Reason, and with reverence to the Author, here's as bad a Reason as can be given. Doth the Church mind us of a Duty, which she requires not as often as the Communion-Service is said? She invites Guests to this Feast only when a Communion is appointed, and the Table prepared. 3. The Reason is not square, to argue from a constant reading of the Service at the Table, to a (only) frequent Access. The Access should be as frequent as the Invitation, or the Invitation is vain, when there is no provision.
Now weak Understandings cannot see a convincing Reason for reading of the second Service at the Communion-Table, in all this: 1. Not in those Words, When other Communion cannot be had: Other than what? what's the Substantive to other? Sure not private and solitary, which goes before, and is not allowed by the Church. 2. Or when other Communion cannot be had than in Prayers only, without the Sacrament, she appoints so much of the Service as relates not to a present Communion. How as relates not of necessity to a present Communion, and that to be said at the Lord's Table? Here the Thing in Controversy is positively said, without any Proof; the first part of the Rubrick clearly speaking of a Table covered, &c. which is at no other time than of a present Communion, or a Sacrament. And upon a good Reason, and with reverence to the Author, here's as bad a Reason as can be given. Doth the Church mind us of a Duty, which she requires not as often as the Communion-Service is said? She invites Guests to this Feast only when a Communion is appointed, and the Table prepared. 3. The Reason is not square, to argue from a constant reading of the Service at the Table, to a (only) frequent Access. The Access should be as frequent as the Invitation, or the Invitation is vain, when there is no provision.