Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	commandment_n	law_n	moral_a	3,008	5	9.5759	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A51289	A brief reply to a late answer to Dr. Henry More his Antidote against idolatry Shewing that there is nothing in the said answer that does any ways weaken his proofs of idolatry against the Church of Rome, and therefore all are bound to take heed how they enter into, or continue in the communion of that church as they tender their own salvation.	More, Henry, 1614-1687.	1672 (1672)	Wing M2645; ESTC R217965	188,285	386

there is not a more material point can be controverted nor of greater necessity throughly to be understood than this charge of Idolatry upon the Church of Rome The more considerable ERRATA Correct thus Preface p. 16. l. 6. for suffering r. sufficiency p. 21. l. 12. r. inheritance PAge 17. l. penult r. as well as p. 21. l. 30. for must r. most p. 24 l. 18. for ruin ● mince p. 25. l. 21. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 25. for application ● appellation p. 32. l. 16. for empty r. imply p. 35. l. 18. r. as ridiculous p. 37. l. 12. for as r. if l. 31. for Now r. Nor. p. 43. l. 23. r. so say ● p. 65. l. 24. r. chanceableness p. 66. l. 11. for the r. that p. 69. l. 6. for none r. not p. 88. l. 3. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 89. l. 20. for thirteen r. nineteen for all r. most l. 21. for toward r. at p. 98. l. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 101. l. 10. for commemoration r. commemorative p. 142. l. 6. r. perfect p. 187. l. 23. r. on him Iohn 7. 37 38. p. 207. l. 10. ● God p. 208. l. 25. r. imbued p. 218. l. ● for it r. is l. 20. for induing r. ●nding p. 241. l. 9. r. through p. 296. l. 4. for them r. there p. 312. l. 23. r. Dialog●●s p. 314. l. 7. r. enervate THE ANTIDOTE AGAINST IDOLATRY CHAP. I. what is Idolatry according to Divine Declaration 1. THere are two ways in general of discovering what is or ought to be held to be Idolatry amongst Christians the one Divine De●laration the other clear and perspicuous Reasons Which though they may haply reach the one no farther than the other that is to say that whatsoever may be concluded to be Idolatry by Divine Declaration the same may also by unprejudiced Reason and vice versâ yet their joint concurrence of Testimony is a greater assurance to us of the Truth and two cords twisted together are stronger than either single Wherefore we will make use of both and begin with Divine Declaration first 2. The first Conclusion therefore shall ●e That as in civil Governments it is the Right of the Supreme Power to define and declare what shall be or be held to be Treason and punishable as such so it is most manifestly the Right of God Almighty who is also infinitely good and wise to define and declare to his people what shall be or be held to be Idolatry which is a kind of Treason against God or crimen laesaa majesta●is Divinae And what is thus declared Idolatry by God is to be held by us to be such though the Ludicrousness and Fugitiveness of our wanton Reason might otherwise find out many starting-holes and fine pretences to excuse this thing or that action from so foul an Imputation But as in civil affairs the declaring such and such things to be Treason does in a Political sense make them so ipso facto so God's declaring such and such things to be Idolatry they do to us ipso facto become Idolatry there●y though to an ordinary apprehension perhaps neither this would have seemed Treason nor that Idolatry without these antecedent Declarations But where the Law-giver is infallible there is all the reason in the world we should submit not onely to his Power but to his Judgement in the Definitions of things and rest sure that that is Idolatry which he has thought fit to declare so to be 3. The second Conclusion That what is declared Idolatry by God to the Iews ought to be acknowledged Idolatry by us Christians The ground of this Conclusion is fixed in the nature of the Christian Religion For Christianity being a far more spiritual Religion than that of Iudaism and therefore abhorring from all Superstition there cannot be the least Relaxation to the most rancid of all Superstitions Idolatry it self Wherefore whatsoever was accounted Idolatry amongst the Iews and so defined by a Divine Law must be reckoned much more such under Christianity there being not the least pretence for any Relaxation Besides there was nothing under the Iews or can by any people be rightly deemed Idolatry but it is carefully enough cautioned against and plainly forbid in the first and second Commandments of the Decalogue But the whole Decalogue is Moral and so declared by God in that it is said to be writ by his own finger on the Tables of stone Exod. 31. 18. which are Symbols of the permanent substance of our Souls on which all the general Precepts of Morality are ingraven as innate Notions of our Duty And therefore it is hereby intimated that the Precepts of the Decalogue are just and fitting not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not onely by an external Law but engraffed in our very Nature and Reason and that the root and ground of them will easily be fetch'd from thence To which you may add That it were a very immethodical and heterogeneous Botch unworthy of the Wisdom of God and of his servant Moses when as all the rest of the Decalogue is Moral to phansie one or two of the Commandments of another nature This is so rash and gross a Reproach to the Divine Wisdom as truly in my judgement seems unexcusable But besides this The Morality of the Decalogue is also acknowledged by the Church it making part of their Liturgy every-where and we begging an ability of obeying the Second Commandment as well as the rest and Christ also refers to the Decalogue for eternal life Mark 10. 18 19. And lastly It seems as it were singled from all the rest of Moses Laws as a lasting and permanent Law to the Church of God whence it is entred into our very Catechisms never to be abolished or rather vigorously to be kept in force for the Second Commandment's sake particularly that it might strongly bear against those Invitations to Idolatry that may seem to offer themselves in the nature of our Religion or reclaim the Church from it when they were fallen into it as well as it was to keep back the Iews from joyning in Worship with their Idolatrous neighbors round about them Wher●fore all manner of Idolatry being cautioned against by the Moral Decalogue given to the Iews there are no kinds thereof that ought to be entertained or allow'd of by any Christians 4. The third Conclusion That what-ever was Idolatry in the Heathen the same is Idolatry in us if we commit it The reason of which Assertion is this Because the Heathen had not so express a Declaration from God against all manner of Idolatry as the Iews and Christians have and therefore where-ever they are guilty of Idolatry the Iew and Christian if they do the like things are much more The fourth Conclusion The Idolatry of the Pagans consisted in this viz. in that they either took something to be the supreme God that was not and worshipped it for such or else worshipped

called one Commandment or Decree touching our duty towards God yet my charge against the Church of Rome for leaving out so great and so material a part of this Decree or of the first Commandment if you will would not be a jot mitigated thereby the understanding being the same as my Antagonist himself confesses whether it be held one Commandment or two For if it be held one Commandment yet it is plainly divisible into these two parts which we call the first and second Commandments And this that we call the second Commandment and you the second part of the first Commandment being really one and the same and you acknowledging you leave out that part of the Commandment where then is the Calumny any more then if one should accuse another that he took away two shillings six pence and he should Reply it is an unworthy slander it was onely half a crown that he took away would not this to any indifferent judge seem a very pleasant Apology to clear one of the Theft But now in the second place Though St. Austin and St. Hierome ●eter Lombard says it is Origen and Austin may differ in their Opinion about the first and second Commandment whether they be one or two Commandments yet I presume the more ancient and the more general sense of the Church is that they are two And it is well known that Origen flourished long before Austin But it is acknowledged of all hands out of the word of God that there are just ten Commandments neither more nor less Now the Church of Rome that would have the first Table consist but of three Commandments is constrained to divide the last Commandment into two which is against the Antiquity of the distinction of the Greek and Hebrew Text into verses For it is observable that both in the Greek and Hebrew Text though the length of some of the Commandments has occasioned them to be divided into more verses than one yet they no where have crouded two Commandments into one verse in so much that they make Thou shalt not kill Thou shalt not commit adultery Thou shalt not steal three distinct verses Whence it is plain that that which we call the tenth Commandment is really but one Commandment as being contained in one verse and that Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife is not a whole Commandment distinct from the rest contained in that verse Besides which is hugely remarkable if Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife be one intire Commandment viz. the ninth part of the tenth Commandment viz. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house is set before it which is not a thing credible But there is no absurdity nor inconvenience supposing it but one Commandment that Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house is set first in Exodus and Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife is placed first in Deuteronomy This methinks should be enough to the impartial to demonstrate that that which we usually call the tenth Commandment is not to be divided into two but is all one entire Commandment and that therefore the first and second Commandments ordinarily so called cannot be one Commandment but two that there may be ten To all which you may add that but even a moderate smattering in Logick may easily discover the tenth Commandment usually so called to be but one and the first and second Commandments so called to be really two namely from the consideration of their Objects Now the Object in the tenth Commandment is but one in General viz. the keeping our desires from other mens goods of what nature soever Thou shalt not covet any thing that is his That is the general of the whole Commandment plainly And House Wife Servant Oxe Asse are but particulars belonging to this general and by the same reason that you make an intire Commandment of any one of these Particulars you may of every one of them and so divide the last Commandment at least into five which is very absurd But as the Object of the tenth Commandment shows it can be but one so the Objects of the first and second plainly show they must be two Commandments because their Objects are distinctly two The first having for its Object the onely one true God whom alone to retain we are plainly taught or commanded by that Precept the second having for its Object Graven Images or whatsoever similitudes of things which we are strictly forbid any way to wor●hip So plain every way is it That that which we call the second Commandment is the second Commandment and that there is not the least show of calumny in saying They have left out the second Commandment in their Catechisms But yet it is further observable that if the first and second Commandments were to be held but one Commandment there can be no so rational ground as this That the second has a close subserviency to the first and that it is added that we may keep the first more intirely and have no more Gods in any sense than one Which implies therefore that worshipping of Images Gods does interpret as the making more Gods to our selves then one or that it is a necessary Concomitant of making to our selves more Gods then one as is too too apparent in the Religion of the Gentiles nor can be enough lamented in degenerated Christendom Which eagerness after Idol-Gods the true God most severely prohibits and show's himself so much the more solicitous and zealous here against worshipping of Images by reason of the great Proclivity of mankind to that more than to Polytheisme or the not believing that there is onely one supreme God the Creatour and Governour of all things But the great danger is that acknowledging this yet they may either defile his Worship with Images and make those Images Gods by worshipping them or Worship Doemon● and Saints in Images and Pictures and so accordding to the custom of the Heathens make more Gods than one though but one supreme and others inferiour to him There is such a pruriency and precipitant inclination in humane nature to these superstitions that to put a stop to it God addes such a rousing Commina●ion at the latter end of this second Commandment or the second part of the first as my Adversary would have it For I am a jealous God that visits the iniquities of the Fathers upon the Children to the third and fourth Generation of them that hate me As if he declared them more particularly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haters of God as well as hatefull to him who will presume so hainously to affront him as to make Images to Worship them or any Object by them Which second Commandment therefore with this direfull Commination added to it being so effectual a bar and so point blank against the Idolatry practised in the Roman Church my Adversary must give me leave to suspect that it is not as he says left out to ease the memory of the Vulgar of so long a