Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	act_n	church_n	power_n	4,609	5	5.2232	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16722	A learned treatise of the Sabaoth, written by Mr Edward Brerewood, professor in Gresham Colledge, London. To Mr Nicolas Byfield, preacher in Chester. With Mr Byfields answere and Mr Brerewoods reply; Learned treatise of the Sabbath	Brerewood, Edward, 1565?-1613.; Byfield, Nicholas, 1579-1622. aut	1630 (1630)	STC 3622; ESTC S106416	30,804	60

all our transgressions of the law performed not the law himfelfe with such perfect exact obedience as might answere the justice of God and the strictresse of his commandements but that something must be helped or supplied by dispensation The truth is therefore that our Sauiours obedience answered exactly and perfectly satisfied the exigence of that and all other commandements of Almighty God performing all to the vtmost that they required and therefore those easie and slender workes were no breaches of the commandement touching the Saboth But let that be admitted also first that the commandement was immediatly giuen to seruants Secondly that it was giuen touching the lightest degree of workes Let servants bee the persons and those workes the matter to whom and of which the commandement was giuen is your doctrine yet iustified hereby and subiect to no other reproofe The persons haue afforded me exceptions against it because the commandement was not giuen to seruants And the matter because it was not imposed touching that light sort of workes the time also will because it caÌ„not be vnderstood of the Lords day for what day was it of which the charge of vacation was so strictly giuen Was it not the seauenth day of the weeke The seauenth saith the precept is the Sabaoth of the Lord thy God In it thou shalt doe no worke And why the seauenth Because in sixe daies the Lord finished all the workes of creation and rested the seauenth day therefore he sanctified the seauenth day what day is it whereof we question The Lords day That 's the first day of the weeke It is therefore the seauenth day of the weeke the Sabaoth of the Iewes not the first day of the weeke the Sabaoth of Christians that was so strictly by Gods commandement destined to rest Therefore the workes done on the Sabaoth day are no transgressions of Gods commandements But you will say the old Sabaoth is abolished and the celebration of it translated to the first day of the weeke Translated by whom By any commandement of God Where is it The holy Scripture wee know to be sufficient it containeth all the commandements of God whether of things to be done or to be avoided or to be beleeued Let me heare either one precept one word of God out of the olde Testament that it should be translated or one precept one word of the sonne of God out of the new Testament commanding it to be translated I say one word of any of his Apostles intimating that by Christs commandement it was translated It is certaine that there is none Therefore it is evident that the solemnity of the Lords day was not established Iure divino Not by any commandement of God and consequently that to worke on that day is certainly no breach of any divine commandement How then hath the first day of the weeke gained the celebration and solemnity to become the Sabaoth of the Christians By the constitution of the Church and only by that yet of that most ancient Church I confesse that next followed the ascention of our redeemer But yet all this is but Ius humanum it is but the decree of men which must not equall it selfe with Gods commandement and must be content with a lesse degree of authority and obligation then the commandement touching the Sabaoth might challenge that was pronounced in the eares of men with the voice of God and written in tables with the finger of God What then doe I doubt of the iust abolishment of the Iewes Sabaoth no in no sort it is abolished and that iustly I confesse yet not by any repeale of any contrary decree but only by expiration because it is growen out of date It was established for a signe * of difference betwixt the people of God and the prophane nations the Iewes and Gentiles but this difference is ceased the partition wall is broken downe Iewes and Gentiles in Christ are made all one all are become the people of God the Sabaoth was saith the Apostle a shadow * of things to come whereof the body was in Christ the body therefore being come what should the shadow be expressed For was it the shadow of Christs resting in the graue that day That is past or was it a shadow of rest and liberty from the slauery of sinne in the kingdome of grace that is obtained or is it a shadow of the eternall rest of the blessed in the kingdome of Glory That is sure to be obtained Christ hath giuen his word and wee haue receiued the pledge of his holy spirit These things are shadowed in Sabaoth And these things are already performed in Christ. The first is past the second is present the third is assured The Sabaoth therefore that was the shadow of these things when the things themselues were come vanished of it selfe But might not the celebration of the Sabaoth which thus ceased bee justly translated by the Church to the first day of the weeke Yes certainly both might and was iustly For I consider that the generality was of the morall law of the law of nature namely that men should sequester sometime from worldly affaires which they might dedicate to the honour of God only the speciality that is the limitation and designement of that time was the churches ordinance appointing first one certaine day that in relation of Christian assemblies namely that they might meete and pray and praise God together with one voice in the congregation And secondly defigning that one day to the first day of the weeke for some speciall reasons and remembrances For first it was the day of Christs resurrection from the dead Secondly it was the day of the holy Ghosts descention from Heauen to powre infinite graces vpon Christians The first of them for our iustification as the Apostle speaketh The second for the sanctification and edification of the whole Church to omit some other reasons of lesse importance iustly therefore was the consecration of the Sabaoth translated to that day But what of that What if the consecration of the Sabaoth was by the Church translated to the first day of the weeke Was therefore the commandement of God translated also That that day ought to be obserued vnder the same obligation with the Sabaoth For if the commandement of God were not translated by the Church together with the celebration from the seauenth day to the first day then is working on the first day no violation of Gods commandement was the commandement of God then translated from the Sabaoth to the Lords day by the decree of the Church No the Church did it not let mee see the act The Church could not doe it let me see the authority the Church could not translate the commandement to the first day which God himselfe had namely limited to the seaventh For could the Church make that Gods commandement which was not his commandement Gods commandement was to rest on the seauenth day and worke on the first

therefore to rest on the first and worke on the seauenth was not his commandement For doth the same commandement of God enioyne both labour and rest on the same day Is there fast and loose in the same commandement with God Thou shalt worke on the first day saith that and worke on the seaventh saith this Can the Church make these the same commandement But say the Church hath this incredible vnconceivable power Say it may forbid to worke on the first day by the vertue of the very same precept That doth neither expresly coÌ„mand or license to worke on that day Say that the Church of God may translate the commandement of God from one day to another at their pleasure did they it therefore I spake before of their authority whether they might doe it I enquire now of the act whether they did it did the Church I say ever constitute that the same obligation of Gods commandement which lay on the Iewes for keeping of the Sabaoth day should be translated and laid vpon the Christians for keeping of the Lords day Did the Church this no no they did it not all the wit learning in the World will not proue it But you may obiect if the old Sabaoth vanished and the commandement of God was limited fixed to that day only then is one of Gods commandements perished I answere that the generality of that commandement to keepe a Sabaoth wherein God might be honoured was morall But the speciality of it namely to keepe 1 one day of seaven 2 the seaventh 3 one whole day 4 with precise vacancy from all worke were meerely ceremoniall the specialities then of the commandements are vanished But for the generality of it it is a law of nature and remaineth But as the speciality of that commandement implyeth plaine contradiction with the sabaaticall of the Lords day so the generality of it can enforce nothing for it for these are miserable consequents indeede plaine fallacies of the consequent that God hath sometime commanded vacancie for his honour therefore he hath commanded the first day of the weeke to be that time or this God hath commanded vs some time to rest therefore that time we must precisely abstaine from all maÌ„ner of workes can the Church make these good consequences If it cannot the celebration of the Lords day can with no enforcement of reason be deduced out of the morality of Gods commandement But if you will reply that the Church hath established the first day of the weeke to be the Christians sabaoth not by way of consequence as deducing it out of commandement but meerely by authority appropriating and fixing Gods morall commandement to it you may say your pleasure but I shall neither beleeue nor you proue that such authority belongs to the Church or that such an act hath beene established by the Church which I am sure you can neuer doe neither of both for seeing that all divines acknowledge that the singling out of such a day to be sanctified namely the seauenth rather then any other was meerely ceremoniall although it was Gods owne designation I hope that you will confesse the speciall designement of the first day of the weeke to that honour before other daies being made only by the Church to bee also but ceremoniall But certaine it is that no ceremonies which come not vnder the obligation of Gods morall law should oblige to the obseruation of ceremonies Therefore it will never consist with reason that the morall law of God can by any authority of the Church oblige Christians to the celebration of the Lords day It is not therefore the translation of the old commandement of God from the one day to the other which yet if it were translated can oblige servants no otherwise then it did vnder the old law but the institution of a new commandement of the Church her selfe yet guided by the spirit of God that consecrated that day to the solemne seruice of God what then doth not the constitution of the Church for the celebration of the Lords day binde equally the consciences of men as the old commandement did for the celebration of the Sabaoth Binde it doth but not equally for the Church is no way equall vnto God the authority of it is lesse then the authority of God therefore is the obligation of the Churches ordinance lesse then the obligation of Gods ordinance But yet binde the conscience it doth and that firmely and effectually even the conscience of every member of the Church to true and exact obedience For he * that heareth not the Church is no better then an heathen or a publican And neuer was Church on earth more vndefiled then that that ordained that institution He that despiseth the Apostles of Christ despiseth Christ himselfe and the Apostles were governours of that Church for acknowledged it is that the celebration of the Lords day was the ordinance of that Church and of those gouernours Therefore it is sure that that ordinance doth oblige the conscience of every Christian man but if you aske me how farre doth that constitution of the Church oblige the conscience I answere you as farre as it doth command you will desire no more further it cannot It cannot oblige further then it doth ordaine it cannot bind the conscience for guiltinesse further then it doth for obedience because all guiltinesse doth presuppose disobedience now that the Church ordained solemne assemblies of Christians to be celebrated that day to the honour of God and in them the invocation of Gods holy name thankesgiuing hearing of the holy Scriptures and receiuing of the Sacraments is not denied It is out of question all antiquity affordeth plentifull remembrance of it But that it inioyneth that severe exact vacation froÌ„ all workes on the Lords day which the commandement of God required in the Iewes Sabaoth you will never proue It relisheth too much of the Iewish ceremonies to be proued by Christian divinity For this is no proofe of it that the Lords day is succeeded in place of the Sabaoth Or as some diuines tearme it as the heyre of the Sabaoth It is I say no proofe at all except it were established by the same authority and the observance of it charged with the same strictnesse of commandement for if it succeede the sabaoth in place must it therefore succeed in equall precisenesse of obseruation So if the Pope succeedeth Peter in place must he therefore succeede him in equality of power the Lords day therefore succeedeth the Sabaoth in the point of sanctification for celebration of the assemblies for the Church hath precisely commanded that but not in the point of exact and extreame vacation from every kinde of worke for that the Church hath not commanded and so although the Lords day may well be tearmed the heire of the Sabaoth yet is it not ex asse haeres as the civill lawyers speake It inheriteth not the whole right of the Sabaoth for that right

Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Text snippets containing the quad