Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
earth_n heaven_n lord_n praise_v 10,313 5 9.4093 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
A27392 An answer to the dissenters pleas for separation, or, An abridgment of the London cases wherein the substance of those books is digested into one short and plain discourse. Bennet, Thomas, 1673-1728. 1700 (1700) Wing B1888; ESTC R16887 202,270 335

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

To bring their own Rule to the case in hand how do they know but our Lord was mov'd to Sit at the Sacrament by Special Reasons drawn from that Time and Place or the Feast of the Passover to which that Gesture was peculiar How do they know but that our Lord might have us'd another Gesture if the Sacrament had been Instituted apart from the Passover The necessity of the time made the Jews eat the Passover after one fashion in Egypt which afterward ceasing gave occasion to alter it in Canaan and how do we know but that our Lord comply'd with the present necessity and that his Example if he did Sit was only temporary and not design'd for a Standing Law perpetually obliging to a like Practice If Christ acted upon special Reasons then we are not obliged by their own Rule and if he did not let them produce the Reasons if they can which make this Example of Christ of general and perpetual use and to oblige all Christians to follow it 4. 'T is absurd to talk of Christ's Example apart from all Law and Rule and to make that alone a principle of duty distinct from the Precepts of the Gospel because Christ himself alwaies govern'd his actions by a Law For if we consider him as a Man he was obliged by the Natural Law as a Jew by the Mosaic Law as the Messias by the Gospel-Law He came to fulfil all Righteousness and to Teach and Practise the whole Will of God If therefore we look only to his Example without considering the various capacities and relations he bare both towards God and towards us and the several Laws by which he stood bound which were the Measures of his Actions we shall miserably mistake our way and act like Fools when we do such things as he did pursuant to infinite Wisdom Thus if we shou'd subject our selves to the Law of Moses as he did we shou'd thereby frustrate the great design of the Gospel and yet even this we are obliged to do if his Example alone be a sufficient warrant for our actions Thus it appears that Christ's bare Example do's not oblige us to do any thing that is not commanded I shall only add that they who urge the Example of Christ against Kneeling at the Sacrament do not follow it themselves For our Saviour probably us'd a Leaning Gesture and by what Authority do they change it to Sitting Certainly our changing the Gesture is as warrantable as theirs Nor is it enough to say that Sitting comes nearer our Saviour's Gesture than Kneeling for if they keep to their own Rule they must not vary at all The Presbyterians if one may argue from their Practices to their Principles lay very little stress on this Argument taken from the Example of Christ For tho' they generally chuse to Sit yet they do not condemn Standing as Sinful or Unlawful in it self and several are willing to receive it in that posture in our Churches which surely is every whit as wide from the Pattern our Lord is suppos'd to have set us whether he lay along or sate upright as that which is injoin'd and practis'd by the Church of England There is too a Confessed variation allow'd of and practis'd by the generality of Dissenters both Presbyterians and Independents from the Institution and Practice of Christ and his Apostles in the other Sacrament of Baptism For they have chang'd dipping into sprinkling and 't is strange that those who scruple kneeling at the Lord's Supper can allow of this greater change in Baptism Why shou'd not the Peace and unity of the Church and Charity to the Public prevail with them to kneel at the Lord's Supper as much as mercy and tenderness to the Infant 's Body to sprinkle or pour water on the Face contrary to the first Institution Thirdly kneeling is not therefore repugnant to the nature of the Lord's Supper because 't is no Table-Gesture The Sacrament is a Supper and therefore say they the Gesture at the Lord's Table ought to be the same which we use and observe at our ordinary Tables according to the custom and fashion of our Native Country and by consequence we ought to Sit and not to Kneel because sitting is the ordinary Table-gesture according to the mode and fashion of England Here by the way we may observe that this Argument overthrows the two others drawn from the Command and Example of Christ For 1. Different Table-gestures are us'd in different Countries and therefore tho' Christ did Sit yet we are not oblig'd to Sit after his Example unless sitting be in our Country the common Table-gesture 2. If the Nature of the Sacrament require a Table-gesture and that gesture in particular which is customary then God has not Commanded any particular gesture because different Countries have different Table-gestures However I shall fu●ly Answer this Argument drawn from the Nature of the Sacrament by shewing 1. What is the Nature of it 2. That it do's not absolutely require a common Table-gesture 3. That Kneeling is very agreeable to the nature of the Lord's Supper tho' 't is no Table-gesture 1. Then the Nature of the Sacrament is easily understood if we consider that the Scripture calls it the Lord's Table and the Lord's Supper The Greek Fathers call it a Feast and a Banquet because of that Provision and Entertainment which our Lord has made for all worthy Receivers 'T is styl'd a Supper and a Feast either because 't was Instituted by Christ at Supper-time or because it represents a Supper and a Feast and so it is not of the same nature with a civil and ordinary Supper or Feast tho' it bear the same name Three things are essential to a Feast Plenty Good Company and Mirth but the Plenty of the Lord's Supper is a Plenty of Spiritual Dainties and the Company consists of the Three Persons of the Trinity and good Christians and the Mirth is wholly Spiritual So that the Lord's Supper differs in its nature from civil Banquets as much as Heaven and Earth Body and Spirit differ in theirs Farther the Lord's Supper is a Feast upon a Sacrifice for Sin wherein we are particularly to commemorate the Death of Christ 'T was also instituted in honour of our Lord and to preserve an Eternal Memory of his wondrous Works and to Bless and Praise our Great Benefactour 'T is also a Covenanting Rite between God and all worthy Communicants and signifies that we are in a state of Peace and Friendship with him that we own him to be our God and swear Fidelity to him we take the Sacrament upon it as we ordinarily say that we will not henceforth live unto our selves but to him alone that died for us 'T is also a means to convey to us the Merits of Christ's Death and a Pledge to assure us thereof Lastly 't was instituted to be a Bond of Union between Christians to engage and dispose us to love one another as our Lord loved us who thought
difference must be in the Manner But are conceiv'd Prayers the more Inspir'd because the words are Extempore Did God continue the gift for no other end but that Men might ask those things Extempore which they might as well have asked in a Form Or are they more Inspired because they do generally more enlarge and express the same Matter over again in different words Was the Spirit continu'd only to vary phrases Our Saviour forbids us to use vain repetitions or as Munster's Hebrew reads it to multiply words above what is fit and seasonable thinking we shall be heard for our much speaking and therefore these enlargements are so far from being signs of their immediate Inspiration that supposing the Spirit to be of the same mind with Christ they are generally signs of the contrary 4. That extraordinary manner and way of expressing them for which they are thought to be Inspir'd ordinarily proceeds from natural causes viz. Natural Enthusiasm or present fervour of temper For 1. The Dissenters confess it comes upon them much oftner in their public than in their private Devotions And the reason is plain because the passions of the Congregation do so excite their affections and the reverence of an Auditory obliges them so much to wreck their inventions that their Spirits are many times transported into raptures 2. They are not so fluent in the beginning as when they have Pray'd a while the reason of which is this because the Spirits do not move so briskly till they are chafed and heated with Labour Then do they naturally raise the fancy and render the invention more copious and easy And certainly 't is unwarrantable to attribute that to Inspiration which do's so apparently proceed from natural causes Thus have I shewn what the extraordinary operations of the Spirit are and that they are not to be pretended to in these Times I proceed in the next place to shew very briefly what those ordinary operations are which he has Promis'd to continue to the end of the World They are therefore the proper graces and affections of Prayer such as shame sorrow hope c. But as for the expressions of Prayer they are of no account with God but as they signify to him the graces and affections of it Now can any Man imagin that those affections will be the less acceptable to God because they are presented in a Form and not Extempore Will a Father deny Bread to his Child because he askt it to day in the same words that he did yesterday Is God more taken with words than with affections Certainly his withdrawing the Inspiration of words and continuing the Inspiration of affections prove the contrary Now that God do's continue the Inspiration of Devout affections in Prayer is manifest from Gal. 4.6 Jude 20. and Rom. 8.26 where the Spirit is said to make intercession for us with groans which cannot be utter'd that is with most flagrant affections For these words do not as some persons wou'd persuade us prove the Inspiration of the Words of Prayer because the Inspiration of those things that are too big for words and cannot be uttered cannot mean the Inspiration of words but this Intercession of the Spirit signifies his exciting such affections as make our Prayers acceptable For as Christ who is our Advocate in Heaven enforces our Prayers with his own Intercessions so the Spirit who is our Advocate upon Earth begets those affections which render our Prayers prevalent And these are the standing and ordinary operations which the Scripture attributes to the Spirit in Prayer Secondly Stinting or limiting the Spirit is a phrase that is never mention'd in Scripture or Antiquity and therefore 't is a very new objection against Forms of Prayer which I have shewn to be warranted both by Scripture and Antiquity However what the Dissenters mean by it is this viz. that by confining our selves to a Form of words we stint or limit that is restrain the Spirit from giving us that assistance which he ordinarily vouchsafes in conceiv'd Prayer And now having explain'd the Two forgoing particulars the answer to this Objection will be very easy For if the Spirit be stinted or restrain'd by Forms of Prayer it must be either from Inspiring the words or from exciting the affections of Prayer But I have prov'd that Forms are so far from restraining the Devotion of Prayer that they do very much promote and improve it and as for the Words I have prov'd that since the first propagation of the Gospel the Spirit has withdrawn the immediate and Miraculous Inspiration of them And since that cannot be stinted which is not therefore the Inspiration of the Words of Prayer is not stinted by Forms 3. 'T is Objected that public Forms are a sinful neglect of the Ministerial gift of Prayer For the Dissenters say the gift of Prayer is an ability to express our minds in Prayer which God has given to Ministers as a means of public Devotion and therefore they may not omit the exercise of it by using Forms of other Mens Composure Now to this I answer 1. That supposing that 't is a fault in Ministers to omit the exercise of their ability yet the People are not to be charged with it God will not reject the People's Devotions because the Minister is to blame He only is accountable for that for the People do not join with him in his omission but in that which is acceptable to God 2. This gift of Prayer is either natural or acquir'd For certainly 't is not Inspir'd at Ordination because the Scripture do's not promise any such thing nor is there any experience of it Nay the Dissenting Ministers must own that just before their Ordination they were as able to express the Devotions of a Congregation as they were just after which shews that they had no new ability to Pray Inspir'd in their Ordination Now since this gift or ability is nothing more than a quickness of invention and speech which is either natural or acquir'd by art and practice therefore 't is no otherwise the gift of God than our natural strength or skill in History or the like All that God has Promis'd his Ministers is to concur with their honest endeavours as far as is necessary to the discharge of their Office and to suppose that this cannot be done without Praying Extempore is to take the Matter in question for granted 3. This freedom of utterance is never call'd the gift of Prayer in Scripture Praying in unknown Languages is once call'd a gift but Praying in our own Language is never call'd so Therefore 't is plain that the gift of readiness of speech is not appropriated by God to Prayer but left in common to all other honest uses that it can be apply'd to and it may as well be call'd the Gift of Pleading at the Bar or of Disputing or Conversation as the gift of Prayer Accordingly we find that those who have this gift in Prayer have it