A93091:134
A treatise of liturgies, power of the keys, and of matter of the visible…A treatise of liturgies, power of the keyes, and of matter of the visible…
A treatise of liturgies, power of the keys, and of matter of the visible church. In answer to the reverend servant of Christ, Mr. John Ball. By Thomas Shepherd, sometimes fellow of Emanuel-College in Cambridge, and late pastor of Cambridge in New-England.A treatise of liturgies, power of the keyes, and of matter of the visible church. In answer to the reverend servant of Christ, Mr. John Ball. By Thomas Shephard, sometimes fellow of Emanuel-Colledge in Cambridge, and late pastour of Cambridge in New-England.
London: printed by E. Cotes for Andrew Crooke, 1652
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Secondly, if we consider the imposition hereof by the Prelates and late strict pressing thereof upon the people to be present and conform fully to it, as well as upon Ministers to use it. The very yielding of conformity thereto, doth miserably cast away the liberty purchased by Christ to his Churches, enthral the Churches to Antichrist, and lift up the power of Antichrist in his tyrannous usurpations upon the Churches of Christ.
Secondly, if wee consider the imposition hereof by the Prelates and late strict pressing thereof upon the people to be present and conforme fully to it, as well as upon Ministers to use it. The very yeelding of conformity thereto, doth miserably cast away the liberty purchased by Christ to his Churches, inthrall the Churches to Antichrist, and lift up the power of Antichrist in his tyrannous usurpations upon the Churches of Christ.
Thirdly, we might add the dangerous consequences and scandals that follow from admitting this Liturgy, which being touched in our answer to the first Position, we here pass over.
Thirdly, we might adde the dangerous consequences and scandals that follow from admitting this Liturgy, which being touched in our answer to the first Position, we here passe over.
These things considered, it appears, not only that there was need to disprove the first part of your disjunction, which you declined in stating the question; but also the truth of the Position it self is confirmed. Now let us consider your proof of the second part of your disjunction; which is thus,
These things considered, it appeares, not onely that there was need to disprove the first part of your disjunction, which you declined in stating the question; but also the truth of the Position it selfe is confirmed. Now let us consider your proof of the second part of your disjunction; which is thus,