Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	day_n	lord_n	sabbath_n	19,256	5	10.0267	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A55142	Loyalty and conformity asserted, in two parts the first preached the seventh of August, 1681 ... : the second preached the sixteenth of October, 1681 ... / by Jos. Pleydell ...	Pleydell, Josiah, d. 1707.	1682 (1682)	Wing P2568; ESTC R17033	24,967	48

requisiteness of outward Reverence and Decency in all the solemn concerns of Religion 1. The first kind of proof I shall bring for it shall be drawn from the constant Observation of it in all the immediate Institutes of Divine Worship in the Jewish Church Time was when men could find no better colour to mask their villany and impiety A single Text out of the Old Testament was thought sufficient to justifie the worst of Crimes Murder Robbery Sacrilege Rebellion c. against the plainest rules of our Saviour and the whole design of Religion But let any thing of that kind be alledged for the subserviency of the Churches peace and the maintenance of the splendor and decency of Religion Then Quid nobis cum Mose What is the Ceremonial Law to us 1. I do readily grant in the first place That to bring any under the necessity and obedience of that Law is directly against the liberty of the Gospel virtually to deny Christ to become in the flesh The same is to impose any of the Ceremonies there enjoyned as a part of Gods worship because there commanded by immediate vertue thereof 2. I grant farther to impose these or any other Ceremonies in Religion either as essentially good and necessary in themselves or by reason of any immediate command of Gods other than such as are of Divine appointment or as universally and immutably obligatory to mens Consciences This is not to retrieve that which St. Paul contended so against in his Epistles but to erect a new Ceremonial Law But what therefore is there no use of the Mosaick Writing to us Christians why then are they continued in the Sacred Rule May they not still be considered and inforced as far as the reason and equity of them shall extend Yes no doubt though it were in the very instances of that Law as in accommodating the Laws and Rules of the Jewish Sabbath and Temple to our Lords Day and Christian Churches This being premis'd I have no more to do but to shew you that God himself did not only enjoyn so much which is true by manifold and undeniable instances but and also that it is within the equity and reason of those Precepts Never was any Religion I think more stately and pompous erected by the most superstitious pretenders thereto and they are not usually backward in what relates to the external part the Habiliments of the Priest and the Ornaments of the Sanctuary were rich even to a degree of Gawdery Which thing I would be satisfied why they may not as well signifie decency in Religious Worship whereto they are aptly and easily improvable as any of those remoter things whereto they are generally apply'd Thus much therefore we may not be deny'd that there can be no unlawfulness simply in making such provision and appointments because God himself did once direct and enjoyn as much 'T is true as to the particular instances of his pleasure he has repeal'd these from being any longer a Law and there is a great deal of reason for it and such as may render them uncapable from ever passing into a Law again because 't is apparent they had another design peculiar and appropriate namely to prefigure signifie or exhibit such and such things But this could not be the sole reason of all those Laws because that particular end suppose the coming of Christ might have been done by fewer Ceremonies and those more simple and plain which yet God did not think so fit but made choice of such as besides their peculiar relations might indicate the decency and splendor of his Service I know not what more can be added for the illustrating of this proof unless it be the general consent and universal practice of Religious men of all kinds and in all ages for though we see but little hereof in the infancy of the Jewish and Christian Churches whereof there was one and the same reason in both viz. their Poverty but this you shall observe in both that the outward grandeur of their Religion bore always a proportion to their outward State God I doubt not was well pleased with the Worship of the Israelites in Egypt but they no sooner became possessors of any thing in the Wilderness but you find a progression in the Ceremonious part of Religion And so in Solomons days which was the Crisis of that state what surplusage and increase of utensils does he make to adorn the Temple with notwithstanding what God had said Exod. 25.40 to the contrary So in the first ages of Christianity there were no Secular honors nor settled Revenues bestowed upon the Clergy they had none of those Ornaments that after-Ages brought in at the ministring of holy Offices The places of Divine Worship for such they had hallow'd and appropriate Mr. Mede has undeniably prov'd in all the most controverted Centuries they were mean and simple but this continued no longer than and was born with the rest of their afflictions Their after-practice upon their very first freedom is an unquestionable evidence that this was the effect of their necessity not of their choice and liking I 'le conclude this point with an observation of the judicious Hooker We must not think saith he but there is some ground of reason even in nature whereby it comes to pass that no Nation under Heaven did ever suffer any weighty actions whether Civil and Temporal or Spiritual and Sacred to pass without some visible Solemnities And if this do not sufficiently conclude and prove our assertion I am sure the two following do for if I can but deduce it directly from any of the ten Commandments in the Moral Law or shew it you in express terms in the Canons of the Gospel as I make no great question I shall do both there can remain no farther cause of exception or appeal First then 1. I do affirm though this be not contained in so many words in any of the ten Commandments yet is it the principal if not sole design of one of them viz the fourth For do but take away the Ceremonial part of this precept as we must allow a great part of it to be so and there remains nothing more i. e. distinct and peculiar to this from the other three preceding commands but what do amount to our present purpose for neither the special nor the particular determination of time there expressed nor yet the manner of the rest can with any pretence of reason be accounted for any moral part of that Law for then they would have been immutably and perpetually Obligatory And if so upon what else can we fix as the moral intendment of that precept but somewhat to this or the like purpose namely that God Almighty will be publickly worship'd by stated and solemn times places and manners For whereas the design of the first Commandment is to appoint and enjoyn inward worship and of the two next to order and regulate the outward manifestations and expressions of it