Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
christian_n day_n time_n week_n 2,302 5 9.6378 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A77236 Several treatises of vvorship & ceremonies, by the Reverend Mr. William Bradshaw, one of the first Fellows of Sydney Colledge in Cambridge; afterward minister of Chattam in Kent, 1601. Known by his learned treatise De justificatione. 1. A consideration of certain positions archiepiscopal. 2. A treatise of divine worship, tending to prove the ceremonies, imposed on the ministers of the Gospel in England, in present controversie, are in their use unlawful. Printed 1604. 3. A treatise of the nature and use of things indifferent. 1605. 4. English Puritanism, containing the main opinions of the ridgedest sort of those called Puritans in the realm of England. 1604. 5. Twelve general arguments, proving the ceremonies unlawful. 1605. 6. A proposition concerning kneeling in the very act of receiving, 1605. 7. A protestation of the Kings supremacy, made in the name of the afflicted ministers, and oposed to the shameful calumniations of the prelates. 1605. 8. A short treatise of the cross in baptism. Bradshaw, William, 1571-1618. 1660 (1660) Wing B4161; Thomason E1044_5; ESTC R20875 92,680 129

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

common circumstance to every action for nothing can be done but in some time the particular time is not to be observed except Christ had sanctified it to the communion as God sanctified the 7 th day on which he rested Gen. 2.2 3. or at least chosen it of purpose as he did sitting But whereas it was upon speciall Matth. 26.31.45 Luke 22.53 and necessary occasion for the Passeover must be eaten before the L. Supper could be instituted in stead thereof and presently after Supper the hour came when Christ was to be betrayed Therefore if the Jews transgressed not the Institution of the Passeover by changing a gesture at the first prescribed by God according to that their present occasion into another fitter for a time of rest much less do Christians transgress the institution of the Lords Supper by changing the time taken by Christ upon occasion but not prescribed into some other fitter in discretion for the ordinary celebration of the Lords Supper as probably the Primitive Churches did For every ●●●st day of the week viz. the Lords day the brethren came together to break bread Acts 2.42 20.7 1 Cor. 16.2 Revel 1.10 i. e. to minister the Communion So that either they never met upon the L. day but in the evening or else they celebrated the Communion at some other times But for my alteration of the gestures of sitting especially into kneeling there is the least probability It is further objected That we may kneel in regard of prayers to be used by prescription of authority at the delivering of the bread and wine viz. The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy body and soule into eternall life and take and eate this c. Here unto these answers may be returned Seeing we reject Christs example of sitting for kneeling we must not stand upon what we may do but humbly consider what we must do For if there be not a necessary and a justifiable cause both of those prayers and of kneeling in regard of them do we not presume upon Christ's patience in rejecting his example Now what necessity is there of those prayers at that very time seeing prayers go before and follow after Again must we needs kneel at every bit of a prayer Is there more necessity to obey a needless direction to kneel at those prayers than to follow the example ●f Christ in sitting when we take eat and drink things required in the same sentences prescribed And why must the people kneel when they hear those prayers rather then the Minister who pronounceth them But it is a question whether those prayers be justifiable or no. For besides that by reason of them Kneeling devised and abused by Antichrist Mat 6 7 26.26 c. doth cross the practice of Christ and his Apostles and they may seem a vain repetition Even the adding of them to the words of Institution is contrary to the mind of Christ For he did first bless or pray and after gave the Elements in a Sacramentall form of words without any addition saying take eat Mark 14.21 Luke 22.19 c. c. Which order of administration and form of words Matthew Marke Luke and Paul do so constantly precisely and sincerely related that any may perceive the meaning of the spirit to be That the sacramental form of words ought precisely to be observed without any addition And the rather because Paul beginneth his relation thus 1 Cor. 11.23 24. I have received of the Lord that which I have also delivered c. So that it may seem to be against Religion and Reason that to a sacramentall forme of speech wherein the Minister should onely supply the person of Christ there should be added a prayer as in the name of the Church This confusion is fitter for Babylon than for Sion Lastly Why is not a short prayer after other going before as well joyned to the sacramentall forme of Baptisme viz. N. I baptize thee in the Name of the Father c. Rom. 14.5.23 If then this addition of Prayer to the sacramentall forme of words be not of faith how then can we with faith and a good conscience confirm or allow the same with our kneeling 10. Lastly for justifying of Kneeling it is affirmed That it is indifferent whether we sit stand or kneel seeing Christ did sit when he did eat the Passeover Whereas God commanded the children of Israel in Egypt to eate the Passeover standing and some Reformed Churches receive standing for all that Christ did sit at his last Supper Therefore the KING may appoint Kneeling as the most reverent gesture and best beseeming so holy an action For answer whereunto howsoever that which is already said may suffice Yet it may be further considered that though it be admitted that it is indifferent to sit or to stand yet it doth not follow that Kneeling is indifferent For sitting is the example and standing is a gesture sometimes used in ordinary eating and in the objection it is said to be prescribed at a Sacramentall feast Again it doth not follow That because Christ used a gesture fitter for eating in his time instead of a gesture prescribed upon occasion it is therefore lawfull to use a gesture nothing answerable to eating 1 Cor. 14.36 and that taken out of the Synagogue of Antichrist as though the Word of God came out of it or to it onely instead of a gesture most answerable to eating and of purpose used by Christ at the Institution of the Sacrament So that notwithstanding all that is said for Kneeling His Majestie upon whom the burthen as of this gesture so of other Ceremonies 2 Chro. 29.25 is layd may remember That Hezekiah appointed Levites in the house of the Lord with Cimbals c. according to the commandement of David and Gad the Kings Seer and Nathan the Prophet for the commandement was by the hand of the Lord and by the hand of his Prophets And withall consider that if Kneeling were the most reverent gesture and best beseeming the holy Communion our Lord and Master would not have sitten down of purpose at his last supper And that Ahaz was deceived in deeming the Altar at Damascus more honourable for Gods service 2 King 16.10 12.14.15 than the Altar of the Lord. 11. Having said that which may be sufficient to a man reasonable and not contentious against the institution of kneeling for supposed reverence in regard of God it remaineth that somewhat be said against the institution of Kneeling for reverence in regard of bread and wine which need not to be much For no sound Protestant of any knowledge will affirme it but rather presently consider That if kneeling be instituted for reverence in regard of bread and wine it must be either because they represent the body and blood of Christ though remaining bread and wine touching their substance And then for like reason we may worship the