Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	call_v	day_n	sunday_n	1,626	5	11.2192	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96399	The real Quaker a real Protestant, and the spirit of popery directly struck at in answer to a most malicious and scandalous book, entituled, The papists younger brother, by a disguised author under the titles Misoplanes and Philalethes, but on the contrary proved Philoplanes, Misalethes / by a servant of Christ, G. Whitehead.	Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.	1679 (1679)	Wing W1952; ESTC R42838	97,690	135

Answ Here the Priest makes an Objection against all the King's Subjects which he himself cannot Answer but only askes If it be not rare Quaking stuff He argues neither as a Christian nor like a rational or sober Man as if he would bear us down from a Practice or Custom among many of the King's Subjects and thereupon Argue That because many of the Kings Subjects Swear by a Law of Man therefore Christ's prohibition is thereby abolisht and Whatsoever is more than Yea Yea Nay Nay comes not of the Evil one it s but Quaking stuff to say as Christ says that it so cometh of Evil or of the Evil one as the Priest himself has given the Interpretation of Christ's words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And yet opposeth and derides the thing where conscientiously obeyed by us not with Disrespect to King or Government but with respect to Christs Command not to Swear Pr. Ibid. St. Paul might have known this new Light Doctrine that Christ ended the Dispensation of Oaths where Strife was if this be not Abominable Doctrine delivered by this Quaker let the wise Readers ●udge Answ What knows he but Paul knew this Doctrine that Christ ended the Dispensation of Oaths among his Followers the true Christians He does not say that an Oath for Confirmation is an End of Strife among Christians but among MEN and such Men were the Jews under the Law that were in the Strife which was the occasion of Oaths and Swearing And however where Strife and the Nature of it is removed and ended by Christ Jesus there need no Swearing to end it among such Men a●d Christians But that Solemn Oaths as he calls them are as bad now as Vain Oaths are none of our words but the Priests unnatural Inferrence for there is a difference between an Oath taken solemnly though under a misguided Conscience or Judgement Oaths used vainly and frequently by Prophane Persons who therein often sin against manifest Conviction of Conscience Yet that Swearing was lawful under the old Dispensation but unlawful now as is inferr'd upon us I grant and this the Priest has not removed he has made more Objections for us in this case than he either doth or is able to Answer And seeing he has handled the point so very shallowly against us I refer him and the Reader to a Book Entituled The Case of the Quakers concerning Oaths Defended as Evangolical and another Book more large and full Entituled A Treatise of Oaths wherein both by Scripture Reason Authorities of many Authors our Case is defended in our not Swearing § XX. Qr. p. 46 57. If thou observest a Day observe it to the Lord The Name Sunday is from the Heathens who Celebrated that Day to the Sun and called it Sunday Pr. p. 57. When the King and Parliament made the late Act for the better Observation of the Lord's Day then they did nothing but make a Law to establish Will-Worship according to this Quaker Answ We do not Reflect upon King or Parliament for making such an Act nor judge their Intention or Design to be to establish Will-Worship therein Here the Priest still persists in his old Course of Hectoring to incense the Powers against us which is no Rational Argument nor Christian Confutation but still shews that his Religion and Worship have their Dependence upon men He is for that Way Method and Religion that is the uppermost imposed by the Magistrate and that 's his chief Argument But what 's this to Confute our Friend's saying The Name Sunday is from the Heathens who Celebrated that Day to the Sun And dare he deny this or say that the Name Sunday Munday Tuesday Wednesday c. did not spring from the Heathen in Relation to their Gods whom they Worshipped And did not the Primitive Christians call that the first day of the Week which you professed Christians call Sunday after the Heathens Example And in our Meeting on the First Day of the Week as the Primitive Christians did we do not superstitiously observe the Day or place an Esteem or Sanctity upon that day simply consider'd more than others but observe it to the Lord. The Apostle did not impose the Observation of Days upon the Primitive Christians nor were they to judge one another in that matter One man esteemeth one day above another another esteemeth every day alike Let every man be fully perswaded in his own mind He that regardeth the day regardeth it unto the Lord c. see Rom. 14.4 5 6. Pr. p. 58. Doth not this Quaker's Ignorance in effect count all holy Dayes Apostatical Are not these the Festival Days c P. 59. Real Quakers do not observe holy dayes as this Church appoints Answ The Real Quaker owns the Apostle's Doctrine Col. 2.16 Let no man judge you in Meat or in Drink or in respect of an holy Day or of the New Moon or Sabboth Days which are a Shadow of things to come but the Body is of Christ Certainly Christ is the Substance and End of the Shadow But this Priest is now for Festival Days and Holy Days as the Church appoints Observe how like a Church-man of Rome he here talks as if he were directly steering his Course to Rome The Church is his Rule here and not Christ nor the Scriptures he is for Festivals and Holy Days as the Church commands that is He is for the Observation of Saints and Angels Days and doubtless for Mass-Days too which if he would have us observe he should plainly tell us whence the Observation of such dayes sprung and whether they are not enjoyned in the Mass-Book and from Rome Pr. Ibid. Whither do the Quakers come when they are gotten over the Observation of Days for my part I cannot tell Answ Seeing he cannot tell whither we are or do come he should have let us alone and not revil'd nor abus'd us as men in such deep Ignorance because we can neither keep up the Names of Heathen Gods in Dayes nor Popishly observe Festival Days Holy Days Mass Days c. So here I must leave him in this point with his Face towards Rome not towards Zion nor New Jerusalem § XXI The Priest's next Quarrel is against James Parnel on the Collection of his Writings He is offended to hear That they are given forth from the Spirit of the Lord or that James Parnel should be counted a Servant of God as in the Title of the said Collection and therefore proceeds as followeth Pr. Ibid. This Quaking holy Man of God was in the Quakers Account no less inspired by the holy Ghost than the holy Pen-men of Scripture Answ We make no such Comparison of his being inspired yet though we do not equalize him with those holy Pen-men he was in some degree inspired by the same holy Spirit and bore a Faithful Testimony in his Day and in his Suffering against the Corruptions of those Times both of the then Persecuting Priests Rulers and People Pr. Ibid. The Quakers are

at a high Rate he thinks he has paid it off and run down the Qr. and the Doctrine of Perfection with his Hectoring Insulting Scoffing and Deriding and yet he would have People believe he does not plead for Sin for he says 'T is the Devil that pleads for Sin and let that man's Mouth be stopt forever that doth so A plain Confession which shall rise up against him to his own Condemnation that out of his own Mouth he may be judged Pr. Ibid. This Qr. was not rightly instructed to distinguish well betwixt the Being and ruling Power of Sin Answ He is here mistaken still concerning the Quak●r for he is so far instructed in Christ's School as to know that the same Seed which bruiseth the Serpent's Head breaks his strength and power subdues and destroyes his Kingdom doth in due time both remove and destroy the very being of Sin in all who receive believe and abide in Christ Jesus the promised Seed for granting that the ruling Power of Sin is taken away and removed by Christ what sincere Soul or upright Follower of Christ Jesus who thus far feels his Power to bruise the Serpent's Head and break his strength to the subduing of sin will yet suffer the Being and In-dwelling of Sin all his Life time to remain in him seeing he that is begotten of God keeps himself that the Wicked one toucheth him not 1 John 5.18 when he faithfully follows the Conduct of such a powerful and victorious Prince Captain and Conqueror as our Lord Jesus Christ who is able to do the Work that God has sent him to do and even to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him who also is he that is greater in us than he that is in the World and as the Author to the Hebrews prayed Now the God of Peace that brought again from the Dead our Lord Jesus that great Shepherd of the Sheep through the Blood of the Everlasting Covenant make you PERFECT in every good Work to do his Will working IN you that which is well-pleasing in his sight through Jesus Christ te whom be Glory forever and ever Heb. 13.20 21. § XXIX Pr. pag. 108. As for Infant-Baptism used in all Ages of the Christian Church this Qr. like an Anabaptist saith there is no Scripture nor Example for it Answ That Infant-Baptism or rather Sprinkling was used in all Ages of the Christian Church I plainly deny and it remains for this Priest to prove or else confess his Ignorance or false Assertion in this point as also since he upbraids the Qr. for saying there is no Scripture Example for it why does not he produce Scripture or Example thence for it that would end the Controversie And that it was imposed or settled by any general Council in the Christian Churches before Popery entred or before there was a Pope or Universal Bishop so called at Rome it remains for him to prove And since the Church of Rome pleads for Infant-Baptism and imposeth it upon the account of Tradition and not Scripture as it s said of Claudius Espontius a Popish Bishop at a Council at Pysoy in France 1500. That he ordained that Infants Baptism should be received by Tradition because it could not be proved a Command from the Scriptures The Question hereupon is Whether this Tradition he derived from the Church of Rome and so intended or from the Primitive Church in the Apostles Dayes For its being imposed by the Church of Rome cannot be binding to us Protestants because thereof And if they pretend Authority from the Primitive Christian Church in the Apostles Dayes then they should shew us this from Scripture especially these who are our present Opposers who profess the Scripture to be their Rule and not the Church of Rome For in vain is their Worship who teach for Doctrine the Traditions of men and whose fear towards God is taught by mens Precepts Notes by another hand on this Subject 'T is recorded that about the Year 248. lived a Priest called Fidus Cyprian who willed People to Baptize Young Children according to the manner of Circumcision About which Thing Cyprian with Sixty six Bishops and Elders gathered together ordained That Children should timely be baptized as well before as after the 8th day It seems the Doctrine of Fidus concerning Dipping or Sprinkling of Children was New and seem'd strange to Cyprian seeing he would not ratifie nor confirm the same without the Sentence and Advice of Sixty Six Bishops Had it been commanded by Christ practised by the Apostles and continued in matter and manner to Cyprian's days there had not been a necessity for the Concourse of so many Bishops concerning the same And though Cyprian here enjoyned Baptizing of Children yet a few Years before he was for the Dipping or Sprinkling of aged People see his Epistle to Magnus Cassander in his Book de Infantum Baptismo saith Cassander Pado-Baptisms rise That Baptism of Infants came to be much used by the Fathers who lived some three hundred Years after the Apostles He excludes it from being Christ's Command or practised by the Apostles Johannes Bohemius saith That Baptism of old was administred to none unless upon urgent necessity but to such as were before instructed in the Faith and catechised but when it came to be judged necessary to Everlasting Life it was ordained that Infants should be baptized and that they should have God-fathers and God-mothers who should be Sureties for Infants and should renounce the Devil in their behalfs It grew to this in the Roman-Catholick-Church that at the Baptizing of a Child the Priest First Blows three times in the Infants Face Secondly He anoints his Eyes Ears and Nostrils with Earth moistned with his Spittle Thirdly He Names him and Marks him with the Sign of the Cross upon his Breast and Back with Hallowed Oyl Fourthly He dips him into the Water or pours Water upon him three times in the form of a Cross Fifthly Dipping his Thumb in the holy Chrism as they call it he signs the Childs Fore-head with the sign of the Cross Sixthly He covers him with a White Garment Seventhly He puts into his hand a burning Candle Lib. 2. de Gentium Moribus For a farther Information about Baptisms I refer the Reader to Thomas Lawson's Treatise Entituled ΒΑΠΤΙΣΜΑΛΟΓΙΑ Or a TREATISE Concerning BAPTISMS Pr. p. 113. Behold is this the Chirstian Charity that thinks no Evil Is this the Christianity that speaks Evil of no man Answ Well this shall remain as Universal a Testimony against much of this man's Malicious and Scurrilous Work in this Pamphlet of his as his confessing that its the Devil who pleads for Sin and let that Mouth be stopt forever that doth so If he had well observed That Christian Charity thinks no Evil and that Christianity speaks Evil of no man he had not brought forth this large Uncharitable Pamphlet against the People called Quakers nor yet pleaded for Sin 's Continuance in the best

of men in this Life as he hath done § XXX Pag. 115. Qr. And are made Partakers of the Divine Nature of Christ by which they are made Christians Pr. The Priest Answers In these few words this Qr. hath given a most Blasphemous account of all Qrs. for he saith that they are made Partakers of Christ's Divine Nature that they are Christians thus made Answ His telling of a Blasphemous account of All Qrs. is a Falshood to abuse us for the matter here opposed by him as it is in James Parnel's Book p. 176 177. Collect. is not placed in these words as that All Qrs. are made Partakers of Christ's Divine Nature but the words are more general relating to the Church of Christ and his Members who live by the Faith of the Son of God who are New Creatures in Christ Jesus set free by the Law of the Spirit of Life and are made Partakers of the Divine Nature of Christ by which they are made Christians and such now witness the effect of the Blood of Christ wrought within them and the End of his Coming and the Benefit of his Death who are dead with him c. Thus far J. Parnel Observe well here that I shall not let this Priest pass as only making Exception against all the Qrs. being made Partakers of Christ's Divine Nature but also I must take him as opposing the thing it self that his Quarrel is not only against the Persons Quakers but against the thing i. e. the partaking of Christ's divine Nature wherein his gross Ignorance both of Christianity and Scripture will farther appear in what follows Pr. p. 116. Behold here is our Saviours Godhead shared amongst the Quakers behold here are the Quakers made more than Co-heirs with Jesus Christ no less God than himself is Answ Behold here the Priest hath not only shewn his lamentable Ignorance but his false as well as blasphemous Inference for us to own a being made partakers of Christs Divine Nature He counts this not only a sharing of our Saviours Godhead among us but also a making our selves no less than God himself which is a sad and most Ignorant Inference that new Creatures in Christ and his Members may not partake of his Divine Nature unless they be God and Christ himself What sad and miserable blindness and Irrational Work is this As if the Member of a Body must not partake of the Nature of the Body unless that Member could be the whole Body Heb. 3.14 We are Members of Christ in particular joyn'd to him partakers of Christ having his Spirit and Life manifest in us as all real Saints and true Christians have And can all this be can any be so nearly related and joyn'd to Christ and not Partakers of his Divine Nature Can they be Partakers of Christ of his Power Heb. 3.14 Rom. 11.16 17. Spirit Virtue Life Faith Divine Image Holiness and have him therein form'd in them and yet not be Partakers of Christ's Divine Nature What strange Inconsistency is this Though the Priest will not own this of the Qrs. we impose it not so upon him yet will he own it of any of Christ's Members No See what follows as his Consequence on the Assertion and farther Evidence of his great Blindness and Ignorance both of Scripture and Christian Experience pr. Ibid. Every Real Qr. is truly Godded with God and Christed with Christ according to this Abominable Quaking Assertion they are all Partakers of that same Divine Nature which Christ hath Quaking Blasphemy Intolerable Blasphemy Answ See now how it is the Assertion itself that this Priest opposes viz. The Partaking of the Divine Nature which Christ hath this he puts these black Characters Quaking Blasphemy Intolerable Blasphemy upon We will not contend whether all called Qrs. partake thereof or no for I don't affirm it because its possible for some to be Unfaithful under that Profession and may hold the Truth in Unrighteousness but whether any Saints Members of Christ or New Creatures be Partakers of the Divine Nature of Christ I affirm they are as every true Branch that is grafted in the true Root partaketh of the Root and Fatness of the Olive Tree Rom. 11.17 And saith Christ I am the true Vine and ye are the Branches he that abideth in me and I in him the same bringeth forth much Fruit for without me or severed from me ye can do nothing John 15. Now doth not every such Branch partake of the Nature Virtue of the Vine Did you ever hear of a Branch in any Vine that beareth Fruit without partaking of the Nature Virtue or Sap of the Vine But it seems here is a Priest a Teacher that would be counted a Member of Christ a Christian a Believer a True Fruitful Branch no doubt and yet altogether Void and Destitute of the Nature Virtue and Life of the true Vine which can be neither true in Spirituals nor in Temporals And for a Final Confutation of his folly in this Great Point take one Scripture more 2 Pet. 1.3 4. According as his Divine Power hath given unto us all things that portain unto Life and Godliness through the Knowledge of him that hath called us to Glory and Virtue whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious Promises that by these you might be PARTAKERS of the DIVINE NATURE having escaped the Corruption of the World which is through Lust Mark here how plain it is that the Apostle did confess how they were Partakers of the Divine Nature which our Adversary has counted such an Abominable Assertion and Intolerable Blasphemy Thus he hath Reproached and Blasphemed the Primitive Christian Doctrine and Attainment in and by Christ his Divine Power and Nature which the Saints were made Partakers of Qr. pag. 117. Here is the true Church where there is but One Teacher One Lord One Faith One Baptism One Light One Life One Way One Shepherd and One Sheepfold One Priest over the Houshold of God One Hope One Language One Family One God and Father of all Pr. To this the Priest Answers viz. In these Quaking Lines we have such an account given of the true Church of God as was never heard nor read of till within these Thirty Years by past such an account as no Age of the Primitive Church can render the like except in a Qrs. Conventicle this true Church is not to be found on Earth Answ What a stranger to the true Church and the Unity thereof hath our Adversary shewn himself to be He has here such an Account of the true Church of God as it seems he never heard nor read of before he knew the People called Quakers But he falsly presumes in saying that no Age of the Primitive Church can tender the like and that this true Church is not to be found on Earth by which he has rendred his own Church no such true Church But why is it such a strange Account of the true Church Is it strange that