Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
earth_n	adore_v	flesh_n	footstool_n	3,392	5	15.3983	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33791	A Collection of cases and other discourses lately written to recover dissenters to the communion of the Church of England by some divines of the city of London ; in two volumes ; to each volume is prefix'd a catalogue of all the cases and discourses contained in this collection.		1685 (1685)	Wing C5114; ESTC R12519	932,104	1,468

concludes thus By the Footstool therefore is the earth Itaque per Scabellum terra intelligitur per terram autem caro Christi quam hodie quoque in mysteriis adoramus quam Apostoli in Dom. Jesu adorarunt to be understood and by the earth the Body of Christ which at this day too we adore in the Sacrament and which the Apostles worshipt in the Lord Jesus c. On the very same words St. Austin Bishop of Hippo comments and to the same purpose For thus he resolves that Question how or in what sence the earth his Footstool may be worshipped without Impiety Because he took earth of the earth for flesh is of the earth and he took flesh of the flesh of Mary And because he conversed here in the flesh and gave us his very flesh to eat unto Salvation Now there is none who eateth that Nemo carnem illam manducat nisi prius adoraverit flesh but first worshippeth We have found then how this Footstool may be adored so that we are so far from sinning by adoring that we really sin if we do not Adore In the judgement therefore of these Primitive Bishops we may lawfully adore at the Mysteries though not the Mysteries themselves at the Sacraments not the Sacraments themselves the Creator in the Creature which is sanctified not the Creature it self as a late Protestant Writer of Phil. Mornay du Plessis de Missa l 4. c. 7. p. 732. prime Quality and Learning among the French distinguishes upon the forecited words of St. Ambrose From these few Instances I think it appears evident that the Primitive Christians used an adoring posture at the Sacrament in the act of receiving It were easie to heap together many other Witnesses if it were necessary so to do either to prove or clear the Cause in hand but since there is no need to pester the Discourse with numerous references and appeals to Antiquity would but puzzle and obscure the Argument and tend in all likelihood rather to confound and disgust than convince and gratifie the Reader By what hath been alleadged the practice of our Church in Kneeling at the Sacrament is sufficiently justified as agreeable to the Customs and Practice of pure Antiquity For if the Ancients did at the Sacrament use a posture of Worship and Adoration which that they did is very plain then Kneeling is not repugnant to the practice of the Church in the first and purest Ages no though we should suppose that Kneeling was never practised among them which will appear if we cast our eyes a little upon that heavy Charge which some of the fiercest but less prudent Adversaries of Kneeling have drawn up against it They object against Kneeling as being an Adoring gesture For they affirm That to kneel in the act of Receiving before the consecrated Gillesp p. 166. 172 Altar Damas p. 801. Rutherf Divine Right of Ch. Gov. c. 1. Qu. 5. Sec. 1. 3. Bread and Wine is formal Idolatry So also to kneel before any Creature as a memorative object of God though there be no intention of giving divine Adoration to that Creature is Idolatry Now if the Primitive Christians may be supposed to prostrate themselves before the Altar upon their first approach thither in order to receive or immediately after they had received the Bread and the Cup from the hand of the Minister or if they bowed their Heads and Bodies after a lowly manner in the act of Receiving or if they received standing upright and eat and drank at the Lords Table with their Hands and Eyes lifted up to Heaven then they were guilty of Idolatry as well as we who kneel at the Sacrament in the judgement of those Scotch Casuists and consequently Kneeling at the Holy Communion according to the Custom of our Church is not contrary to the practice of the Church of Christ in the first and purest Ages For all those postures before mentioned were postures of Worship and Adoration and used as such by the Primitive Christians especially standing which is allowed by Gillesp Disp against E. Po. Cer. p. 191. Disp of kneel p. 93. the Patrons of Sitting to be anciently and most generally used in time of Divine Worship and particularly in the act of Receiving I will conclude all with an Instance in their own Case about a common Table-gesture Suppose the Primitive Christians did in some places receive the Holy Sacrament Sitting or lying along upon Beds as the ancient Custom was in those Eastern Countries at their common and ordinary Tables Put the Case that in other places they sate cross-legg'd on Carpets at the Lords Supper as the Turks and Persians eat at this day or that they received Standing in other places according to the common mode of Feasting which we will suppose onely at present Could any man now reasonably object against the lawfulness of Sitting upright at the Sacrament upon a Form or Chair according to the Custom of England as being contrary to the practice of all Antiquity who never sate at all Certainly no. For though they differ from the Ancients as to the Site of their Bodies and the particular mode of Receiving yet they all agree in this that they receive in a common Table-gesture They all use the same Gesture at the Sacrament that they constantly used at their civil Feasts and ordinary Entertainments in the several places of their abode And so say I in the present Case What though the Primitive Christians stood upright some of them at the Sacrament and others bowed their Heads and Bodies in the Act of Receiving and none of them ever used Kneeling Yet they and we do very well agree for all that because we all receive in an Adoring or Worshipping Posture It is one and the same thing variously exprest according to the modes of different Countries Query V. Whether it be unlawful to Receive Kneeling because this Gesture was first introduced by Idolaters and is still notoriously abused by the Papists to idolatrous ends and purposes ALl that is needful to be said for satisfaction in this Case may be comprized under these two Propositions which I will endeavour to make good 1 It can never be proved that Kneeling in the Act of Receiving was first brought in by Idolaters as is pretended and supposed in the Question 2 That it is not sinful to use such Things and Rites as either have been or are notoriously abused to Idolatry As to the first of these Propositions I have in my Answer to the fourth Query made it I think appear very probable That the Church of Christ in the first and purest Ages did Kneel as we do at this day in the Act of Receiving And if this be allowed then they who oppose Kneeling will be unavoidably driven upon one of these two things Either they must pronounce the Primitive Christians guilty of Idolatry or not guilty If they say they were Idolaters then the former Objection against Kneeling contained in