Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	common_a	prayer_n	rite_n	2,290	5	10.0209	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44019	Tracts of Mr. Thomas Hobbs of Malmsbury containing I. Behemoth, the history of the causes of the civil wars of England, from 1640 to 1660, printed from the author's own copy never printed (but with a thousand faults) before, II. An answer to Arch-bishop Bramhall's book called the catching of the Leviathan, never before printed, III. An historical narration of heresie and the punishment thereof, corrected by the true copy, IV. Philosophical problems dedicated to the King in 1662, but never printed before.; Selections. 1682	Hobbes, Thomas, 1588-1679.	1682 (1682)	Wing H2265; ESTC R19913	258,262	615

Government though no Tyrant was ever so cruel as a Popular Assembly passed by the Name of Liberty The Presbyterian Ministers in the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth did not because they durst not publickly preach against the Discipline of the Church but not long after by the favour perhaps of some great Courtier they went abroad preaching into most of the Market-Towns of England as the preaching Friars had formerly done upon working days in the Morning in which Sermons these and others of the same Tenets that had charge of Souls both by the manner and matter of their preaching applyed themselves wholly to the winning of the People to a liking of their Doctrines and good opinion of their persons And first for the manner of their preaching they so framed their countenance and gesture at the entrance into the Pulpit and their pronuntiation both in their Prayer and Sermon and used the Scripture phrase whether understood by the People or not as that no Tragoedian in the World could have acted the part of a right godly Man better than these did in so much as a Man unacquainted with such Art could never suspect any ambitious plot in them to raise Sedition against the State as they then had design'd or doubt that the vehemence of their Voice for the same words with the usual pronuntiation had been of little force and forcedness of their Gesture and Looks could arise from any thing else but zeal to the Service of God And by this Art they came into such credit that numbers of Men used to go forth of their own Parishes and Towns on working-days leaving their Calling and on Sundays leaving their own Churches to hear them preach in other places and to despise their own and all other Preachers that acted not so well as they and as for those Ministers that did not usually preach but in stead of Sermons did read to the People such Homilies as the Church had appointed they esteemed and called them Dumb Dogs Secondly For the matter of their Sermons because the anger of the People in the late Roman Usurpation was then fresh they saw there could be nothing more gratious with them than to preach against such other Points of the Romish Religion as the Bishops had not yet condemned that so receding farther from Popery than they did they might with glory to themselves leave a suspicion on the Bishops as Men not yet well purged from Idolatry Thirdly Before their S●●●ons their Prayer was or seem'd to be extempore which they pretended to be dictated by the Spirit of God within them and many of the People believed or seemed to believe it for any man might see that had judgment that they did not take care before-hand what they should say in their Prayers And from hence came a dislike of the Common prayer-Prayer-Book which is a set form premeditated that Men might see to what they were to say Amen Fourthly They did never in their Sermons or but lightly inveigh against the Lucrative vices of Men of Trade or Handicraft such as are Feigning Lying Cozening Hypocrisie or other uncharitableness except want of Charity to their Pastors and to the Faithful which was a great ease to the generality of Citizens and the Inhabitants of Market Towns and no little profit to themselves Fifthly By preaching up an Opinion that Men were to be assured of their Salvation by the Testimony of their own private Spirit meaning the Holy Ghost dwelling within them And from this Opinion the People that found in themselves a sufficient hatred towards the Papists and an ability to repeat the Sermons of these Men at their coming home made no doubt but that they had all that was necessary how fraudulently and spightfully soever they behaved themselves to their Neighbours that were not reckoned amongst the Saints and sometimes to those also Sixthly They did indeed with great earnestness and severity inveigh often against two sins Carnal Lusts and Vain Swearing which without question was very well done but the common People were thereby inclin'd to believe that nothing else was sin but that which was forbidden in the Third and Seventh Commandment for few Men do understand by the name of Lust any other concupiscence than that which is forbidden in that Seventh Commandment for Men are not ordinarily said to lust after another Man's Cattle or other Goods or Possessions and therefore never made much scruple of the Acts of fraud and malice but endeavoured to keep themselves from uncleanness only or at least from the scandal of it And whereas they did both in their Sermons and Writings maintain and inculcate that the very first motions of the mind that is to say the delight Men and Women took in the sight of one another's Form though they checked the proceeding thereof so that it never grew up to be a design was nevertheless a sin they brought young men into desperation and to think themselves damn'd because they could not which no Man can and is contrary to the constitution of Nature behold a delightful Object without delight and by this means they became Confessors to such as were thus troubled in Conscience and were obeyed by them as their Spiritual Doctors in all Cases of Conscience B. Yes divers of them did preach frequently against oppression A. 'T is true I had forgot that but it was before such as were free enough from it I mean the common People who would easily believe themselves oppressed but never Oppressors And therefore you may reckon this amongst their Artifices to make the People believe they were oppressed by the King or perhaps by the Bishops or both and incline the meaner sort to their Party afterward when there should be occasion But this was but sparingly done in the time of Queen Elizabeth whose fear and jealousie they were afraid of Nor had they as yet any great power in the Parliament House whereby to call in question her Prerogative by Petitions of Right and other Devices as they did afterwards when Democratical Gentlemen had receiv'd them into their Councels for the design of changing the Government from Monarchical to Popular which they called Liberty B. Who would think that such horrible designs as these could so easily and so long remain covered with the Cloak of Godliness for that they were most impious Hypocrites is manifest enough by the War these proceedings ended in and by the impious Acts in that War committed But when began first to appear in Parliament the Attempt of Popular Government and by whom A. As to the time of attempting the change of Government from Monarchical to Democratical we must distinguish They did not challenge the Sovereignty in plain terms and by that Name till they had slain the King nor the Rights thereof altogether by particular Heads till the King was driven from London by Tumults raised in that City against him and retir'd for the security of his Person to York where he bad not been many days

they call the rational Soul is also wholly in the whole man and wholly in every part of the man What is this but to make the humane Soul the same thing in respect of mans Body that God is in respect of the World These his Lordship calls here rational men and some of them which applaud this Doctrine would have the High Court of Parliament corroborate such Doctrines with a Law I said in my Leviathan that it is no honourable attribute to God to say he is in a place because infinite is not confined within a place To which he replies T. H. his God is not wholly every where I confess the consequence For I understand in English he that says any thing to be all here means that neither all nor any of the same thing is else where He says further I take a Circumscriptive a Definitive and a Repletive being in a place to be Heathen Language Truly if this Dispute were at the Bar I should go near to crave the assistance of the Court lest some trick might be put upon me in such obscurity For though I know what these Latin words singly signifie yet I understand not how any thing is in a Place Definitively and not Circumscriptively For Definitively comes from definio which is to set bounds And therefore to be in a Place Definitively is when the bounds of the place are every way marked out But to be in a place Circumscriptively is when the bounds of the place are described round about To be in a Place Repletive is to fill a place Who does not see that this dictinction is Canting and Fraud If any man will call it Pious Fraud he is to prove the Piety as clearly as I have here explained the Fraud Besides no Fraud can be Pious in any man but him that hath a lawful Right to govern him whom he beguileth whom the Bishop pretends to govern I cannot tell Besides his Lordship ought to have considered that every Bishop is one of the Great Councel trusted by the King to give their advice with the Lords Temporal for the making of good Laws Civil and Ecclesiastical and not to offer them such obscure Doctrines as if because they are not versed in School-divinity therefore they had no Learning at all nor understood the English Tongue Why did the Divines of England contend so much heretofore to have the Bible translated into English if they never meant any but themselves should read it If a Lay-man be publickly encouraged to search the Scriptures for his own Salvation what has a Divine to do to impose upon him any strange interpretation unless if he make him err to Damnation he will be damned in his stead J. D. Our God is immutable without any shadow of turning by change to whom all things are present nothing past nothing to come But T. H. his God is measured by time losing somthing that is past and acquiring somthing that doth come every minute That is as much as to say That our God is infinite and his God is finite for unto that which is actually infinite nothing can be added neither time nor parts Hear himself Nor do I understand what derogation it can be to the divine perfection to attribute to it Potentiality that is in English Power so little doth he understand what Potentiality is and successive duration And he chargeth it upon us as a fault that will not have eternity to be an endless succession of time How successive duration and an endless succession of time in God Then God is infinite then God is elder to day than he was yesterday Away with Blasphemies Before he destroyed the Ubiquity of God and now he destroyeth his Eternity T. H. I shall omit both here and henceforth his preambulatory impertinent and uncivil calumnies The thing he pretends to prove is this That it is a derogation to the Divine Power to attribute to it Potentiality that is in English Power and Successive Duration One of his reasons is God is infinite and nothing can be added to infinite neither of time nor of parts It is true And therefore I said God is infinite and eternal without beginning or end either of Time or Place which he has not here confuted but confirmed He denies Potentiality and Power to be all one and says I little understand what Potentiality is He ought therefore in this place to have defined what Potenality is For I understand it to be the same with Potentia which is in English Power There is no such word as Potentiality in the Scriptures nor in any Author of the Latin Tongue It is found only in School-Divinity as a word of Art or rather as a word of Craft to amaze and puzzle the Laity And therefore I no sooner read than intepreted it In the next place he says as wondring How an endless succession of time in God! Why not Gods mercy endureth for ever and surely God endureth as long as his mercy therefore there is duration in God and consequently endless succession of time God who in sundry times and divers manners spake in time past c. But in a former dispute with me about Free-will he hath defined Eternity to be Nunc stans that is an ever standing now or everlasting instant This he thinks himself bound in honour to defend What reasonable soul can digest this We read in Scripture that a thousand years with God is but as yesterday And why but because he sees as clearly to the end of a thousand years as to the end of a day But his Lordship affirms That both a thousand years and a day are but one instant the same standing Now or Eternity If he had shewed an holy Text for this Doctrine or any Text of the Book of Common Prayer in the Scripture and Book of Common Prayer is contained all our Religion I had yielded to him but School-Divinity I value little or nothing at all Though in this he contradict also the School-men who say the Soul is eternal only à parte post but God is eternal both à parte post and à parte ante Thus there are parts in eternity and eternity being as his Lordship says the divine substance the divine substance has parts and Nunc stans has parts Is not this darkness I take it to be the Kingdom of Darkness and the teachers of it especially of this Doctrine That God who is not only Optimus but also Maximus is no greater than to be wholly contained in the least Atome of earth or other body and that his whole duration is but an instant of time to be either grosly ignorant or ungodly Deceivers J. D. Our God is a perfect pure simple indivisible infinite Essence free from all composition of matter and form of substance and accidents All matter is finite and he who acteth by his infinite Essence needeth neither Organs nor Faculties id est no power note that nor accidents to render him more compleat But T. H.

out of his Writings and present them to the Reader who will easily distinguish them from healthful Plants by the rankness of their smell Such are these which follow T. H. As for the following Posie of Flowers there wants no more to make them sweet than to wipe off the Venome blown upon some of them by his Lordships breath J. D. 1. To be delighted in the imagination only of being possessed of another man's Goods Servants or Wife without any intention to take them from him by force or fraud is no breach of the Law which saith Thou shalt not covet T. H. What man was there ever whose imagination of any thing he thought would please him was not some delight Or what sin is there where there is not so much as an intention to do injustice But his Lordship would not distinguish between delight and purpose nor between a Wish and a Will This was venome I believe that his Lordship himself even before he was Married took some delight in the thought of it and yet the Woman then was not his own All love is delight but all love is not sin Without this love of that which is not yet a mans own the World had not been Peopled J. D. 2. If a Man by the terror of present death be compelled to do a Fact against the Law he is totally excused because no Law can oblige a Man to abandon his own preservation nature compelleth him to the Fact The like Doctrine he hath elsewhere When the Actor doth any thing against the Law of Nature by the Command of the Author if he be obliged by former Covenants to obey him not he but the Author breaketh the Law of Nature T. H. The second Flower is both sweet and wholsom J. D. 3. It is a Doctrine repugnant to Civil Society that whatsoever a man does against his Conscience is sin T. H. 'T is plain that to do what a man thinks in his own Conscience to be sin is sin for it is a contempt of the Law it self and from thence ignorant men out of an erroneous Conscience disobey the Law which is pernicious to all Government J. D. 4. The Kingdom of God is not shut but to them that sin that is to them who have not performed due obedience to the Laws of God nor to them if they believe the necessary Articles of the Christian Faith 5. We must know that the true acknowledging of sin is Repentance it self 6. An opinion publickly appointed to be taught cannot be Heresie nor the Soveraign Princes that Authorised the same Hereticks T. H. The 4 th 5 th and 6 th smell well But to say that the Soveraign Prince in England is a Heretick or that an Act of Parliament is Heretical stinks abominably as 't was thought Primo Elizabethae J. D. 7. Temporal and Spiritual government are but two words to make men see double and mistake their lawful Soveraign c. There is no other Government in this Life neither of State nor Religion but Temporal 8. It is manifest that they who permit a contrary Doctrine to that which themselves believe and think necessary to Salvation do against their Consciences and Will as much as in them lyeth the eternal destruction of their Subjects T. H. The 7 th and 8 th are Roses and Jassamin But his leaving out the words to Salvation was venome J. D. 9. Subjects sin if they do not worship God according to the Laws of the Common-wealth T. H. The 9 th he hath poisoned and made it not mine he quotes my Book de Cive Cap. 15.19 Where I say Regnante Deo per solam rationem naturalem that is Before the Scripture was given they sinned that refused to worship God according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Country which hath no ill scent but to undutiful Subjects J. D. 10. To believe in Jesus in Jesum is the same as to believe that Jesus is Christ. T. H. And so it is always in the Scripture J. D. 11. There can be no contradiction between the Laws of God and the Laws of a Christian Common-wealth Yet we see Christian Common-wealths daily contradict one another T. H. The 11 th is also good But his Lordship's instance That Christian Common-wealths contradict one another have nothing to do here Their Laws do indeed contradict one another but contradict not the Law of God For God Commands their Subjects to obey them in all things and his Lordship himself confesseth that their Laws though erroneous bind the Conscience But Christian Common-wealths would seldome contradict one another if they made no Doctrine Law but such as were necessary to Salvation J. D. 12. No man giveth but with intention of some good to himself Of all voluntary Acts the Object is to every man his own good Moses St. Paul and the Decij were not of his mind T. H. That which his Lordship adds to the 12 th namely that Moses St. Paul and the Decij were not of my mind is false For the two former did what they did for a good to themselves which was eternal Life and the Decij for a good Fame after death And his Lordship also if he had believed there is an eternal happiness to come or thought a good Fame after death to be any thing worth he would have directed all his actions towards them and have despised the Wealth and Titles of the present World J. D. 13. There is no natural knowledge of man's estate after death much less of reward which is then to be given to breach of Faith but only a belief grounded upon other mens saying that they know it supernaturally or that they know those that knew them that knew others that knew it supernaturally T. H. The 13 th is good and fresh J. D. 14. David's killing of Uriah was no injury to Uriah because the right to do what he pleased was given him by Uriah himself T. H. David himself makes this good in saying To thee only have I sinned J. D. 15. To whom it belongeth to determine controversies which may arise from the divers interpretations of Scripture he hath an imperial power over all men which acknowledge the Scripture to be the Word of God 16. What is Theft what is Murder what is Adultery and universally what is an injury is known by the Civil Law that is by the Commands of the Soveraign T. H. For the 15 th he should have disputed it with the Head of the Church And as to the 16 th I would have asked him by what other Law his Lordship would have it determined what is Theft or what is Injury than by the Laws made in Parliament or by the Laws which distinguish between Meum and Tuum His Lordships ignorance smells rankly 't is his own phrase in this and many other places which I have let pass of his own Interest The King tells us what is sin in that he tells us what is Law He hath authorised the Clergy to dehort the people