Selected quad for the lemma: body_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
body_n	blood_n	break_v	shed_v	10,145	5	9.7147	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25216	A reply to the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls's reflections on the Rector of Sutton, &c. wherein the principles and practices of the non-conformists are not only vindicated by Scripture, but by Dr. Stillingsfleet's Rational account, as well as his Irenicum : as also by the writings of the Lord Faulkland, Mr. Hales, Mr. Chillingworth, &c. / by the same hand ; to which is added, St. Paul's work promoted, or, Proper materials drawn from The true and only way of concord, and, Pleas for peace and other late writings of Mr. Richard Baxter ...	Alsop, Vincent, 1629 or 30-1703.; Barret, John, 1631-1713.	1681 (1681)	Wing A2919; ESTC R6809	123,967	128

ours 'T is impossible for you to assign any Reason for the Cross in Baptism c. à natura rei now but what would have been as pleadable even in the Apostles times and at all times since Then is it not most probable that Christ would have made an universal Law for them that should equally respect all Churches had it been his Mind to have such things in his Church Indeed we find Christ hath instituted what religious Rites and Ceremonies he would have observed in the Sacraments of the New Testament And where he hath determined the matter himself what have Men to do more than to submit to his Determination What can Men do that come after the King None are like to do his work better or know his Mind better than himself 6. If the exerting such a Power be found contrary to many express Commands in the Word how can we imagine such a Power conveyed to Church-Governours in any general Command there The Scripture is no where contrary to it self Consult Rom. 14. 1 2 3 4 5 13 14 15 v. 17 to the end of the Chapter And Chap. 15. 1 2. Are there such plain Commands in Scripture for mutual Forbearance and against judging and despising one another for such things as God hath not commanded and against offending the weak or casting a stumbling-Block in others way and for preserving the Peace and Unity of the Church and can we think it probable or a thing credible that Christ would have all such Commands set aside meerly for the sake of things called indifferent Ceremonies Or that the Commands or Determinations of Church-Governours about such Matters should be of Force against the standing Rules and Laws of Christ who is King of his Church Matters of Order and Decency are things of another Nature necessary in genere as I have said before and yet Men cannot oblige us to this or that particular Order when it is repugnant to that whereunto it should be subservient Then much less is it the Will of Christ that meer indifferent things if no worse should take place of great and necessary Duties Such indifferent things must either be made necessary or else you must say it cannot be avoided That the Churches Peace may be broken sound Ministers and Christians that scruple the lawfulness of them may be ejected and cast out of Communion or their Consciences may be ens●●red unnecessarily And yet one that ever read his Bible might know so much that the Governours of the Church have other work to do And as the second Book of Homilies says p. 3. Better it were that the Arts of Painting Plaistering Carving Graving and Founding had never been found nor used than one of them whose Souls in the sight of God are so precious should by occasion of Image or Picture perish and be lost So indeed better it were that no such Ceremonies had ever been appointed by Men than one Soul should be ensnared by them ●r one Minister or Member of Christ suffer 7. I query If Christ had not appointed the Sacraments of the New-Testament whether it had been in the power of Church-Governours to have appointed washing with Water in token and to put us in mind of our being washed and cleansed by the Blood of Christ and by the sanctifying influence and operation of his Spirit and so likewise to have appointed the eating and drinking of Bread and Wine as signifying that our Souls are to feed upon Christ whose Body was broken and whose Blood was shed for us Had not these been of the same Nature and as lawful as the significant Ceremonies which the Church hath taken on her to appoint Then let the People understand the Power of the Church that if Christ had never instituted Baptism and the Lord's Supper she could yet have in part supplied that want with those significant Ceremonies that would have been something like them 8. If Church-Governours have power to appoint such a Ceremony as the Cross in Baptism for Instance then they have power to add to the thing which God hath commanded and to make new parts of Worship But Deut. 4. 2. 12. 32. forbids that You grant p. 337. That for Men to make new parts of Divine Worship is unlawful For that is to suppose the Scripture an imperfect Rule of Worship and that Superstition is no Fault c. The Cross in Baptism is an Addition Tho you seem to understand the prohibition of adding to the Word of things directly repugnant yet that is not so properly an Addition as an Abolition As one says Prohibetur hîc additio non tantùm contrarii quae non tam additio est quàm abolitio sed etiam diversi v. M. Poli. Synops. Crit. in Deut. 4. 2. Methinks we may know what it is to add if we understand what it is to diminish then as they might not diminish or take away from God's Worship one significant Ceremony which the Lord had instituted by a Parity of Reason it would seem to follow that they might not introduce or add one significant Ceremony to the Worship God had instituted The Cross in Baptism is made a new part of Worship For that which is used in God's Worship in such a manner and to such an end that there needeth nothing but Divine Institution or God's appointing it to be used in that manner and to that end to make it a part of the true Worship of God that is made a part of God's Worship tho falsly for want of Divine Institution Had Christ appointed the Cross in Baptism as the Church hath appointed it to be used in token that we should not be ashamed c. had Christ appointed it by that Badg to dedicate us to the Service of him that died upon the Cross no doubt it had thus become a part of God's true Worship Here you speak short p. 348. The Canon says It is an honourable Badg whereby the Infant is dedicated to the Service of c. And what is that but a Sign from Men to God to testify their Subjection Which by your own Confession there is an Act of Worship and yet you will have it no such thing P. 355. you say If Christ had instituted it with such Promises then no doubt c. And I say If Christ had instituted it only in token that we ought not to be ashamed to confess him which is less than that hereafter we shall not be ashamed had he appointed it only to signify our Duty it would yet no doubt have been made a part of Worship And I hope upon second thoughts you will say the same Some other Passages relating to this Matter I would have glanced at but it is time to hasten to an end of this Conclusion I have been so long upon Yet methinks your slighty Exposition of the second C●mmandment p. 141. calls for one glance here Can you find no more in the Affirmative part of it than a Command to worship God without

from the Church of Rome upon account of that highest Censure of Excommunication with an Anathema and her pronouncing us uncapable of Salvation if we do not return to her Communion as you here suppose why then do you allow a Protestant to joyn in some parts of Worship in the Roman Church as in hearing Sermons c. as is plain you do pag. 108. 2. I shall not oppose you in this that the general Excommunication ipso facto in the Canons lays no Obligation till it be duly executed As you say pag. 368 369. General Excommunications although they be latae sententiae as the Canonists speak do not affect particular Persons until the Evidence be notorious c. And the Question is whether any Person knowing himself to be under such Qualifications which incur a Sentence of Excommunication be bound to execute this Sentence upon himself Yet another Question may come in here viz. supposing such a Sentence unjust though that alone would not justify Separation whether yet it may not something extenuate it You are not for extenuating at all I can bear you witness 3. And may I not say that this is answering but by Halves It never reacheth the Case of so many Ministers who have been wholly cast out of their publick Ministry It reacheth not the Case of many private Christians who have been formally and actually excommunicated for such Causes as can never be proved by Scripture to deserve such a Censure and Sentence You know that Canon of the Council held at Agatha Can. 2. Carranza fol. 159. that if Bishops excommunicated any unjustly they were to be admonished by other neighbouring Bishops And might not the Admonishers have received such into their Communion whom the other had unjustly cast out As the Council at Wormes Carrenza fol. 388. Can. 2. cut short there as I suppose Can. 14th is cited in Mr. B's Church History p. 275. § 56. saying That if Bishops shall excommunicate any wrongfully or for light Cause and not restore them the Neighbour-Bishops shall take such to their Communion till the next Synod And to my weak understanding you say nothing here to what you have Iren. p. 119 120. where you fairly clear Non-conformists but lay the Imputation of Schism upon those who require such Conditions of Communion as they cannot conform unto for Conscience-sake The very requiring of such Conditions you would have there to be no less than an ejecting Men out of Communion And therefore I should wonder if by being wholly cast out of Communion you then meant only being excommunicated with an Anathema As I doubt not but Separation is as necessary where one cannot have Communion with-out joyning in unlawful or suspected Practices as where one is formally excommunicated yea and if an Anathema were annext to the Sentence too You add 3. That Author could not possibly mean that there was an equal Reason in these Cases when he expresly determines that in the case of our Church Men are bound in Conscience to submit to the Orders of it being only about Matters of Decency and Order and such things which in the Judgment of the Primitive and Reformed Churches are left undetermined by the Law of God Here 1. Be pleased to note that as much as you seem taken with and hug this Conceit of yours as you have it once and again here and likewise in your Conferences p. 171. as if you thought it would do you Knights Service yet it remains wholly unproved that the things imposed are only Matters of Decency and Order Still I conceive that if Man only had ap●ointed such a use of Bread and Wine to signify and put us in remembrance of Christ's Body broken and his Blood shed for us it had been something more than a meer matter of Decency and Order or something worse And whether the same may not be said of the Sign of the Cross I am in doubt for they seem to be parallel And so it neither is nor ever can be proved that such Imposition of such things in the Iudgment both of the Primitive and of all Reformed Churches is allowable by God's Law and that Men are bound to submit to them whether they are satisfied about them or not 2. When you say The Author of Irenicum could not possibly mean that there was an equal Reason in these Cases I would fain know what those Words mean Irenic p. 119. cited Rector of Sutton p. 21. Let Men turn and wind themselves which way they will by the very same Arguments that any will prove Separation from the Church of Rome lawful because she required unlawful things as Conditions of her Communion it will be proved lawful not to conform to any suspected or unlawful Practice required by any Church-Governours upon the same Terms if the things so required be after serious and sober Enquiry judged unwarrantable by a Man 's own Conscience Did you not here suppose some Equality in these Cases And which way did you wind and turn your self to get off from those Arguments 3. And let me say this further How could you then possibly mean that Men should be bound in Conscience to submit to significant Ceremonies as meer Matters of Order and Decency when you so plainly distinguished them Iren. pag. 67. And say of such Ceremonies that their Lawfulness may with better ground be scrupled p. 68. cited Rect. of Sutton p. 16. Could you then possibly mean that such Ceremonies and Matter of Order and Decency were all one certainly you could not any further than you might possibly contradict your self Preface p. 76. And so much shall serve to clear the Agreement between the Rector of Sutton and the Dean of St. Paul's But if this be all you have to say they are not yet well agreed And whether there be not the like Disagreement betwixt your Rational Account and this your Impartial Account where I have compared them let the Indifferent and Impartial Reader judg Thus I have gone thorow so much of your Preface as I am concerned in As you take little notice of me in your Book I have little more to say I would not take others Work out of their hands who are by so great odds fitter for it The first place where I find Rector of Sutton cited is p. 95. There you take notice how far I say we agree with you but you over-look what follows upon it that it seems very hard that notwithstanding you break with us for things you count but Trifles yet would be Sins to us Will you grant that such as agree with you in all things necessary may not should not be debarred Communion by imposing things unnecessary Or will you assert the contrary and prove it Again pag. 98. You cite Rector of Sutton p. 35. All the Parish-Ministers a●e not near sufficient for so populous a City And can you say they are sufficient Is there no need of more Why then do you say This is but a Colour and Pretence The case