Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n ceremony_n church_n rite_n 3,560 5 9.9325 5 false
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
A26853 An accompt of all the proceedings of the commissioners of both persvvasions appointed by His Sacred Majesty, according to letters patent, for the review of the Book of common prayer, &c. Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. 1661 (1661) Wing B1177; ESTC R34403 133,102 166

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

frigescente devotione cum negligerentur jei●nia inductum Quadrag à Sacerdotibus But when you come to describe your Fast you make amends for the length by making it indeed no Fast To abstain from meats and drinks of delight where neither the thing nor the delight is profitable to further us in our duty to God is that which we take to be the duty of every Christian all the year as being a part of our mortication and self-denial who are commanded to crucifie the flesh and to make no provision to satisfie the lusts of it and to subdue our bodies but when those meats and drinks do more help then hinder us in the service of God we take it to be our duty to use them unless when some other accident forbids it that would make it otherwise more hurtful And for fasting till Noon we suppose it is the ordinary way of dyet to multitudes of Sedentary persons both Students and Trades-men that find one meal a day sufficient for nature If you call this fasting your poor Brethren fast all their life time and never knew that it was fasting But to command hard Labourers to do so is but to make it a fault to have health or to do their necessary work We beseech you bring not the Clergie under the suspition of Gluttony by calling our ordinary wholsome temperance by the name of fasting Sure Princes may feed as fully and delightfully as we yet Solomon saith Wo to thee O Land when thy King is a Child and thy Princes eat in the morning Blessed art thou O Land when thy King is the Son of Nobles and thy Princes eat in due season for strength and not for drunkenness For meer sensual delight it is never lawful And when it is for strength it is not to be forbidden unless when by accident it will i●fer a greater good to abstain Eccl. 20. 16 17. so Prov. 31. 4 6. It is not for Kings to drink wine nor Princes strong drink Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish and wine to those that be of heavy hearts Nor does the Act of Parliament 5 of Eliz. forbid it We dare not think a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded Nor does the Act determine any thing about Lent Fast but onely provide for the maintenance of the Navy and of Fishing in order thereunto as is plain by the Act. Besides we conceive that we must not so interpret one Act as to contradict another being still in force and unrepealed Now the Act of 1 Eliz. confirms the whole Liturgie and in that the religious keeping of Lent with a severe penalty upon all those who shall by open words speak any thing in derogation of any part thereof and therefore that other Act of 5 Elizab. must not be interpreted to forbid the religious keeping of Lent If when the express words of a Statute are cited you can so easily put it off by saying it does not forbid it and you dare not think that a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded and you must not interpret it as contradicting that Act which confirms the Liturgie we must think that indeed we are no less regardful of the Laws of the Governours than you But first we understand not what authority this is that you set against the King and Parliament as supposing they will not forbid what it commands You call it Christs Church we suppose you mean not Christ himself by his Apostles infallibly directed and inspired If it be the National Church of England they are the Kings Subjects and why may he not forbid a Ceremony which they command or why should they command it if he forbid it If it be any Forreign Church there 's none hath power over us If it be any pretended head of the Church universal whether Pope or general Council having power to make Laws that bind the whole Church it is a thing so copiously disproved by Protestants against both the Italian and French Papists that we think it needless to confute it nor indeed dare imagine that you intend it We know not therefore what you mean But whatever you mean you seem to contradict the forecited Article of the Church of England that makes all humane Laws about Rites and Ceremonies of the Church to be unchangeable by each particular National Church And that it is not necessary that Ceremonies or Traditions be in all places one or utterly like We most earnestly beseech you be cautious how you obtrude upon us a Forreign Power under the name of Christs Church that may command Ceremonies which King and Parliament may not forbid whether it be one man or a thousand we fear it is against our Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacie for us to own any such Power And not presuming upon any immodest challenge we are ready in the defence of those Oathes and the Protestant Religion to prove against any in an equal conference that there is no such power and for the Statutes let the words themselves decide the Controversie which are these Be it enacted That whosoever shall by Preaching Teaching Writing or open Speech notifie that any eating of Fish or forbearing of Flesh mentioued in this Statute is of a●y necessity for the saving of the Soul of man or that it is the Service of God otherwise than as other politick Laws are and be that then such persons shall be punished as the spreaders of false News are and ought to be And whereas you say the Act determines not any thing about Lent Fast it speaks against eating Flesh on any dayes now usually observed as Fish-dayes and Lent is such And the sense of the Act for the Lyturgy may better be tryed by this which is plain than this reduced to that which is more obscure The Observation of Saints dayes is not as of Divine but of Ecclesiastical Institution and therefore it is not necessary that they should have any other ground in Scripture than all other Institutions of the same nature so that they be agreeable to the Scripture in the general end for the promoting ●i●ty and the observation of them was ancient as appears by the Rituals and Lyturgies and by the joint consent of Antiquity and by the antient Translations of the Bible as the Syriack and Ethiopick where the Lessons appointed for Holy dayes are noted and set down the former of which was made neer the Apostles times Besides our Saviour himself kept a Feast of the Churches Institution viz. the Feast of the Dedication St. John 10. 22. The chief end of these dayes being not Feasting but exercise of Holy Duties they are fitter called Holy-dayes than Feastivals and though they be all of like nature it doth not follow that they are equal the People may be dispensed with for their work after the Service as Authority pleases The other names are left in the Calender not that they should be so