Selected quad for the lemma: day_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
day_n	sabbath_n	week_n	weekly_a	7,103	5	13.3790	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26911	The defence of the nonconformists plea for peace, or, An account of the matter of their nonconformity against Mr. J. Cheney's answer called The conforming nonconformist, and The nonconforming conformist : to which is added the second part in answer to Mr. Cheney's Five undertakings / by Richard Baxter.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1680 (1680)	Wing B1238; ESTC R10601	97,954	194

Sabbath as I have proved in a peculiar Treatise Men may set apart one day in a year for special Thanksgivings or Commemorations and one day in a week e. g. in a time of Plague and danger to fast and pray c. But if any should make another weekly day of holy observance to commemorate the same work of Christ's Resurrection or our Redemption which Christ did separate that day to commemorate I think he would be both an unjust accuser of Christ's Law as insufficient and an unjust usurper of his Prerogative 4. And it is considerable to me that though Christ so extraordinarily Commissioned and Qualified his Apostles to record his Words and Acts in Scripture and settle Church-Orders and Inferiour Offices and teach the Nations to observe all that he had Commanded them yet even them did did he never Commission to make a new Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace nor did they ever make one but contrarily rebuked those that would but have kept up some of the old Ceremonies Divine or Humane And was not the Cross a stumbling and foolishness to the World in the Apostles Days and yet they never made such a Sacrament And who hath equal Power with them § 2. If any say the Church doth not make it a Sacrament I answer 1. It is not the Name that we contend about but the thing 2. I have before proved it by the Constitutive parts which you answer not 3. If Christ had Instituted the Cross as the Church doth as a Badg of our Christianity dedicating the Child to God as a solemn Covenanting Figure by which the Minister in God's Name and in the Persons pronounceth him Consecrated and engaged as signifying both God's part or Grace of the Covenant and Mans part or Duty I ask Whether you would not have c●●led this a Sacrament And if it want but Divine Institution and Benediction it wanteth indeed a due Efficient but it is still a Humane Sacrament though not a Divine and therefore an unlawful Sacrament I would but know whether Men may make New Sacraments of the Covenant of Grace or not If yea how many and Quo jure § 3. And God's Prohibition Deut. 12. of adding or diminishing is not washt away so easily as your words would make Men believe You say It reacheth to the whole Duty of Man and Government of the Church c. Ans. There be some things in the Duty of Man and Church-Matters that God hath left to Man To do those is no addition to God's Laws But to do the like work that God by his Law hath done which he never left to Man seemeth to me the Addition there forbidden e.g. If Men had made another Tabernacle another Ark of the Covenant another holy Vestment for Aaron another Sacrament like Circumcision or the Passeover he that so reproved their worshiping in the High Places would have reproved these § 4. But the sum of your defence is ad Hominem to my self for granting the lawfulness of humane private professing Signs and of the Cross as such It 's strange to me that you that are so judicious can discern no more difference between 1. Private and publick Church-actions And 2. Between a bare professing Sign in genere and a Sacramental Covenanting-dedicating Symbolical Sign in specie 1. Every Sacramental Symbol is a professing Sign But every professing Sign is not a Sacramental Symbol a solemn Sacramental Celebration of a Mutual Covenant by an investing signification of the parts of both the Covenants Doth it follow then that because Men yea any Man may make a professing Sign of his Mind that Man yea every Man may make a new Sacrament An Israelite might have lift up his Hand to signifie consent to a Duty or to answer a Question But might he therefore have imitated Circumcision or the Passeover When a Man is Baptized if you ask him whether he consent he may signifie it by Bowing lifting up his Hand by Writing which are all but to the same use as Speech But he must Sacramentally signifie it by the reception of Baptism as the instituted solemn Covenanting Symbol of his Religion But for any to make to the Church of Christ a new Sacramental Symbol for such a Covenanting use is another Matter A Man that at the Lord's Supper is asked whether he consent to Christ's Covenant may signifie it as aforesaid But he may not therefore joyn to the Sacrament such another Covenanting Symbol of Christianity e. g. To make or consent to and approve and use a Law that all Christians shall solemnly after the Eucharist have their Heads anointed with Oyl to signifie that they are Members of Christ and hereby Covenant with him and the Holy Ghost as signifying his Grace received and their Duty performed and promised and this applied by a Minister Officiating as by his Commission § 4. I perceive by your mistaking Inferences that you understood not my distinction of Private and Publick and thought I had meant Secret or Open or before Few or Many Whereas I speak in the sense that these words are commonly used in Politicks e. g. When they distinguish Index publicus privatus Res publicae privatae Actiones publicae privatae c. Publick is that which either belongeth to the Society or a Publick Officer as such As a meer Subject is Homo privatus so his Actions and Affairs meerly as his are private The Aerarium of the Commonwealth though kept secretly is the publick Treasure The judgment of a publick Judge when few are present in his Chamber is Iudicium publicum and the judgment of a meer Arbitrator before thousands is Iudicium privatum A private Man's arbitrary Words or Actions in Westminster-Hall at the Bar are Actiones privatae § 5. I have more reverence for the Ancient Christians than to be a bold condemner of all their Actions which I wish they had not done and had they foreseen the Consequents they would not have done And I must Fide humanâ give some credit to those ancient Writers specially such as Augustine who tells us of Miracles adjoyned to some use of the Cross And considering how they used it I find it was when those things were done as a private arbitrary professing Sign such as it would have been to say by words I am a Christian or I trust in Christ or I am not ashamed of a Crucified Saviour And if when one asked them of their Faith or derided them for trusting in a Crucified Man they answered by crossing I judge them not for so doing The occasions and Persons might excuse such a private professing Action But if they would turn this into a publick Church-Ordinance by a Law and into a Humane Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace requiring all to receive it as the common Badge of Christianity I reproach not the approvers but I dare not approve it or so use it § 6. You say We must reduce what is said in the Canon to the words in the

Administration of the Sacraments and no other IX And the Can. 27. saith No Minister when he celebrates the Communion shall wittingly administer the same to any but to such as kneel under pain of suspension Can the Church more plainly speak the sense of her Liturgy You say It is against Schismaticks Yes 1. That is the end and the words express the means 2. And it is expository calling those Schismaticks that scruple and refuse to kneel X. Those that say the Liturgy hath any thing contrary to the Scripture or that the Ceremonies are such as he may not use approve c. are excommunicate ipso facto And therefore as Schismaticks not to be admitted to the Sacrament till they repent of that their wicked Errour Can. 4 5 6 7. XI Can. 14. All Ministers shall observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common-Prayer as well in reading the holy Scriptures and saying of Prayers as in administration of the Sacraments without either diminishing in regard of Preaching or in any other respect note that or adding any thing in the matter or form thereof XII Can. 29. No Parent shall be urged to be present nor be admitted to answer as God-father for his own Child nor any God-father or God-mother shall be suffered to make any other answer or speech than by the Book of Common-Prayer is prescribed in that behalf If yet the Church have not declared her sense of the Liturgy but that I may Baptize without Cross or God-fathers and give the Sacrament to them that sit rather than refuse them I can understand no mans words And what can constrain an unwilling person to understand XIII Yet I say again If I practice on any pretence of mercy according to your Rule the Judges will condemn me the Justices will send me to the common Gaol among Rogues to lie six months and will fine me twenty pound and forty pound a Sermon as I have tryed and the Bishops or their Courts will excommunicate me and prosecute me to lay me in Gaol as you have tryed who fly to escape it And are not these made Judges of the sense of the Law and will not all this convince us what it meaneth Because you have put three of the chief matters of my Non-conformity here together I have answered all together If you will prefer the judgment of the Bishops before all this I pray you do not pretend that some honest Bishop that had no hand in our Changes and Silencing saith to you in private but get it us under the hands of many of them if you can that because mercy is to be preferred before sacrifice we may Baptize without the Cross and God-fathers and may give the Sacrament to them that kneel not if they dissent through consciencious fear of living CHAP. XVII § 1. IN your sixteenth Section you profess your liking of sitting at the Lord's Supper rather than kneeling How then can you declare Assent Consent and Approbation to the Liturgy expounded by the Canons which in plain words and by sharp penalties on Dissenters so much preferreth kneeling before sitting § 2. Your preferring the preaching and hearing of the Word and Prayer and Praise as more excellent than the carnal you mean the outward part in the Lord's Supper is very far from Conformity to the common sense of the Bishops who ordered the Altaring of the Communion Tables and commended bowing towards them and suspended so many Ministers on such accounts even far from the sense of Arch-Bishop Laud expressed in his life by Dr. Heylin and of the whole Church of England expressed in the Canons of 1640. § 3. I answered before your conceit that the Liturgy alloweth you to give the Sacrament to them that kneel not and your distorting the Canon because the Title is against Schismaticks when they mean that those that kneel not shall be taken and excluded as Schismaticks and so excommunicated as I have proved and not that the word is distinguishing and limiting allowing you to admit those to sit that are not Schimaticks The Bishops will deride that Exposition They that heard us at the Savoy can tell you who that Dr. now a Dean was who craved leave to have disputed the Case against me and to have proved That it is an Act of mercy to those that scruple and refuse to receive the Sacrament kneeling to deny them the Communion of the Church therein CHAP. XVIII § 1. YOur seventeenth Section is for the Cross in Baptism I distinctly proved that the Church imposeth it As a Symbol of our Christian Profession and as a consecrating dedicating sign by which 1. God's part of the Covenant is signified even the Grace by him given and the duty by him imposed on us 2. And the Receiver's part is signified and by solemn Engagement there professed even his Faith in Christ crucified and his resolution and self-obliging Consent or Covenant to be the Lords as dedicated to him and to perform all the future duties of the Covenant And that this is the true description of a Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace The word Sacrament larglier taken may signifie no more than man may institute But a Sacrament strictly taken as thus described I suppose man may not institute 1. Because Christ hath instituted two as an act of his Royal Prerogative And if any Institution be proper to his Kingly and Priestly Power it must be such No other can be named excluding this And if none be proper what is it for him to be Great and One Law-giver to his Church If Legislation the chief part of Supreme Government be common to him and Bishops why is not that Royally Common 2. And if Christ would have had any more Sacraments of the Covenant of Grace he would have somewhere expressed his Commands and Directions to his Ministers to make them But he that hath given them full Commands and Directions for Preaching Prayer Baptizing and his Supper and for their other duties for the Flocks hath not said a word to them of this either biding them make new Sacraments or telling them how many or directing them what or how to do it nor how to use them when made nor promising to bless them 3. To make more seemeth to accuse Christ's Law or Institution of Imperfection Subordinate actions do not so But to make Ordinances ejusdem generis with those which he made not as a meer man nor as a meer Minister but as Mediator or King of the Church doth seem to say That Christ left half his work undone Did he institute Baptism and his Supper as a meer Man or a meer Minister then à quatenus ad omne any Man or any Minister may do the like and make more Sacraments But if as King of the Church and as Saviour then none but our King of the Chuch and Saviour may do the like Christ hath instituted one day of each week to commemorate his Resurrection as God the Creator instituted a weekly