Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	ceremony_n	church_n	rite_n	2,845	5	10.3412	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01094	Foure sermons, lately preached, by Martin Fotherby Doctor in Diuinity, and chaplain vnto the Kings Maiestie. The first at Cambridge, at the Masters Commencement. Iuly 7. anno 1607. The second at Canterbury, at the Lord Archbishops visitation. Septemb. 14. anno 1607. The third at Paules Crosse, vpon the day of our deliuerance from the gun-powder treason. Nouemb. 5. anno 1607. The fourth at the court, before the Kings Maiestie. Nouemb. 15. anno 1607. Whereunto is added, an answere vnto certaine obiections of one vnresolued, as concerning the vse of the Crosse in baptisme: written by him in anno 1604. and now commanded to be published by authoritie	Fotherby, Martin, 1549 or 50-1620.	1608 (1608)	STC 11206; ESTC S102529	138,851	236

He bringeth also the iudgement of diuers new writers which confirme the same Caluin who with them is Instar omnium saith that a sette forme of rites and ceremonies bee the nerues and sinewes of the Church without which it needs must be disolued And those constitutions which are made by the Church hee bindeth all the members thereof to obserue condemning not onely such as contemne and reiect them but also such as pretermit and neglect them adding this for a reason of our vniforme obedience in such outward matters Quantarum ricarum semen futura est earum rerum confusio si pro vt cuique libitum sit mutare liceat que ad comunem statum pertinent Quando nunquam futuram sit vt idem omnibus placeat sires velut in medio positae singulorum arbitrio relictae fuerint so that hee affirmeth that whereas there is not vniformity in ceremonies there can neuer bee vnity in affections but must needs bee iarres and great contentions Yea euen T.C. him-selfe expresly affirmeth that the Church hath power to make orders in these things which are not specified and precisely determined in the word And hee addeth that if they bee profitable for the Church and bee not repugnant to the word they are to bee receiued as beeing grounded vpon the word and as thinges which God himselfe by his Church hath commanded Marke I pray you what power euen this aduersary of ceremonies ascribeth to the Church enough to authorize both the crosse and surplice and all the other ceremonies which hee him-selfe impugneth none of which are repugnant vnto the word of God but all of them profitable for the Church as the Church it selfe in ordaining them determineth and therefore by his owne rule bee grounded vppon the word and so ought to bee receiued as Gods owne commandements ordained by the Church Further the practise of all Christian Churches in the worlde doth manyfestly showe that the Church hath power to ordaine Rites and ceremonies though not expresly prescribed in the word for there is no Church in Christendome without such as namely orders for sitting kneeling standing place for reader preacher and administer for the sacraments time for praiers sermons sacraments and such like Ob. But though the Church haue power to ordaine orders for conueniency and comelinesse yet hath it no power to ordaine any signes with their significations neither can there any such example be produced Resp. If the Church haue power to ordaine vnsignificant ceremonies then much more such as are significant for vnsignificant ceremonies can not edifie as I haue formerly shewed but significant may if their signification be expressed as it is in our crosse where these words be added I signe him with the signe of the crosse in token that hereafter he shall not bee ashamed to confesse the faith of Christ crucified and manfully to fight vnder his banner c. what can bee more plaine or more profitable not onely to expresse the duty of the child then presently receiued into the Church by baptisme but also to admonish euery one in the Church what profession they themselues did make at their baptisme Now that the Church hath power to ordaine such ceremonies hauing so good and profitable significations to let Tertullians iudgment passe who sayth that licet vnicuique fideli concipere et constituere quod deo congruat quod disciplinae conducat quod saluti proficiat euen T. C. his former rule doth sufficiently proue for hee sayth that those things which are not against the word and profitable for the Church ought to bee receiued as things which GOD by his Church doth commande and as grounded vpon the word of God But it is more profitable for the church to haue significant then vnsignificant ceremonies and these be no more against the word then they are and therefore by T. C. his rule such ceremonies ought to be receiued as Gods owne commandements sent vnto vs by his Church Now for examples that the Church hath ordained many such it is great ignorance in Storie if a man do doubt it To begin with Saint Paule likewise he ordained that women should come vailed or couered to the Church by that ceremonie to signifie their subiection to their husbands Which example Peter Martyr doth peremptorily alledge as a proofe that our ceremonies ought to haue their significations Let vs descend lower vnto the primatiue Church In it these significant ceremonies were generally obserued First in baptisme they were dipped three times into the water Secondly they were anoynted with oile Thirdly they were signed with the signe of the crosse And fourthly they were clothed with white garments All these ceremonies are recorded by Dionisius Areopagita in his booke of Ecclesiasticall hierarchie The significations of all which ceremonies he afterwards expoundeth in the Contemplation annexed vnto that chapter Yea and diuers other fathers both of diuers Churches and of differing ages in their writings declare that not onely these ceremonies were vntil their times continued but also their significations receiued First for that threefold dipping into the water S. Hierom saith that it was done to signifie that the sacrament was ministred in the name of the whole trinity Secondly for that anoynting with oyle Saint Augustine saith that it was done to signifie the inward anoynting of the holy Ghost 3. for that signing the forehead with the signe of the crosse S. Augustine againe saith that it was done that we should not be ashamed of the crosse of Christ. Fourthly for that change of their apparrell and putting on white raiments S. Ambrose saith that this was done to signifie that we had now put off the old man 1. the couerings of sin put on the garments of chastity and innocency Vnto these I might adde many other Christian ceremonies recorded by Basil in his booke de spiritu sancto as namely that they praied towards the east to signifie that they sought that paradise by praying which they lost by sinning That they prayed standing vpon the Sunday to signifie that as that day was the day of Christs resurrection so they were risen againe with Christ and now sought those things which are aboue with diuers other like reckoned vp in that place which he affirmeth to be apostolicall traditions All which examples doe euidently declare the iudgement of the primitiue Church that both it had power to ordaine ceremonies and also to giue them their significations and consequently the want of iudgement in those men which affirme that neither the Church hath any such power nor histories affoord any such example Herevnto I may adde the opinion of the very Reformers themselues who preferre sitting before kneeling at the communion because sitting betokeneth rest and an end of all legall ceremonies in Iesus Christ which reason they would neuer haue alleadged if they had thought that the Church had had no power to ordaine significant ceremonies and rites Therefore

the Church doth not tyrannize ouer mens consciences in ordaining significant rites and ceremonies but these men would tyrannize ouer the Church who would spoile her of that her lawfull authoritie especially they not being able to produce any Scripture whereby shee is abridged of that power Ob. But though the Church should haue power to ordaine rites and ceremonies for priuate order in it selfe yet hath it no power to appoint any out-ward signe to bee a note of our generall profession but that is GODS owne peculiar prerogatiue Gen 17 7.11 Resp. That the Church hath authority in greater matters then either in adding significations to ceremonies or outward notes to our profession very many instances doe notably declare First that whereas Christ instituted his supper at the time of supper it hath changed that time from the euening to the morning which is an altering in circumstance of Christs owne institution Secondly whereas the Apostles decreed in a generall councell that Christians should abstaine from bloud and from stranglers that hath it likewise altered and so cancelled an Apostolicall constitution The like authority they shewed in altering the ancient day of the Sabboth and administring Baptisme vnto children in this they wanting the commandement of Christ in that they changing the commandement of God From which instances we may argue as from the greater to the lesse That if they erred not in those fore-named ordinances much lesse haue they erred in adding significations vnto their ceremonies by the same reason why hath not the church as great a power to adde outward signes vnto our profession as to ordaine other ceremonies concerning our Ecclesiasticall administration Is the signe the lesse lawfull because it is a signe of our profession Why then is none at all lawfull for not onely this signe of the crosse but also all other Ecclesiasticall ceremonies as Aquinas teacheth vs are signes of our profession Hee saith that Omnes ceremoniae be protestationes quaedam fidei Tertullian being newly conuerted vnto Christianity forsooke his old habit which was a gowne and betooke him to a new which was a Cloake that so with the change of his garment hee might notifie to the world the change of his profession which certainly hee would neuer haue done if he had beene perswaded that the adding of such a signe vnto his profession had beene an incroching vpon GODS owne prerogatiue and peculiar iurisdiction The Christians likewise in the primitiue Church euer from the time of the very Apostles haue vsed this same ceremonie of the crosse which is now in question as a marke and a signe of their profession and yet did neuer either they themselues thinke it or the greatest aduersaries that they had impute it as a presumption and incroching against Gods owne prerogatiue as Saint Basil obserueth Nec his quisquam contradicit saith hee speaking of the traditions and ceremonies of the Church Quisquis sane vel tenuiter expertus est quae sint iura ecclesiastica So that this obiection of yours if it be good condemneth not onely our vse of the crosse now after it hath beene abused by the Papists but euen the vse of it in the primatiue Church before it was abused Or if it be weake it is weake against vs as well as against them For the vse of it now is no more an incrochment vppon Gods owne prerogatiue then it was in that time Ob. But you proue by that place Gen 17.7.11 that God onely hath power to adde signes vnto his couenant and by consequent that they which adde any such signes presume to enter vppon Gods owne prerogatiue Resp. But this proofe which you alledge hath two great faults in it First that it is not ad idem and secondly that it is not concludent in the cause not ad idem thus To proue that the Church may not adde any ceremoniall signe vnto our profession you produce a place of scripture which speaketh onely of sacramentall signes It is circumcision which was a sacramentall signe that God in that place did adde vnto his couenant Such signes I do yeald that God onely may institute But as for the crosse wee make it not a sacrament but onely a ceremonie And wee may truly say of it as Saint Augustine doth of the birth day of Christ Non in sacramento celebratur sed tantum in memoriam reuocatur Secondly if your proofe were ad idem and proper to the purpose yet is it inconcludent For by what rule of reason can this consequent follow God added a sacramentall signe vnto his couenant Ergo man may not adde a ceremoniall signe if God added signes vnto his couenant to assure vs of his faithfull performance of his part why may not wee adde signes vnto our couenant to assure him of our faithfull performance of our part Tertullian saith that Licet omni fideli constituere quod deo congruat quod disciplina conducat and quod saluti proficiat Dicente domino cur autem non et a vobis ipsis quod iustum est iudicatis marke et a vobis ipsis Iosua when he had heard the people make an earnest profession that they would serue the Lord not any other God he rested not in their bare profession but sealed it by this ceremonie by pitching vp a great stone vnder an oke which hee sayd should witnesse against them if they brake their couenant as Iacob before by the like ceremonie had sealed the couenant betweene him and Laban So that wee are not debarred by that place of Genesis but that we may adde signes if not seales vnto Gods couenant if Gods couenant and our profession be Synonima as you seeme to make them in your Maior proposition Now for your Minor That our profession of Christ is the couenant of God it may in some sense bee allowed to bee true although as you know the couenant betweene God and man doth passe in some-what an other forme viz. That he should be our God and we should be his people where the Prophet expoundeth our part of the couenant to bee the faithfull obeying of him and not the outward professing of him As for faith confession which you alledge out of the Rom. cap. 10.9 to be the whole sum of our profession and of our part of the couenant with God that is not true they bee partes indeede of our couenant with God but our whole part they be not vnlesse you take both faith confession in a very large signification faith not only for beleeuing with the heart but also for working with the hand And confession not onely for the speeches of the tongue but also for the gestures and behauiours of the body By which meanes though not there nominatim expressed yet our God ought to bee serued and the truth both of our faith and confession to be testified So that vnto those two points of beleeuing and confessing we not onely may but also must adde

in like sort the decent and orderly ceremonies of the Church though abused in one place yet in an other be restored vnto their right vse especially the abuse which is offered in ceremonies being but only secunda idolatria as Tertullian noteth but a second and inferiour degree of idolatry whereas that which is offered in the creatures is often-times the principall they beeing honored for very Gods Where finde you Gods creatures in this case of idolatry to haue any greater priuiledge then the Churches ceremonies If they after they haue beene made idols in the highest degree may yet haue their vse in the seruice of God why may not the other too which can be made idols but in an inferiour degree If the idolatrie with creatures do not destroy the vse of the same indiuidua why should the idolatry of ceremonies which is a lesse abuse destroy the vse of all the whole species the translators of our Geneua Bible in setting out the picture of the golden Calfe insinuate these two things First that the abuse offered to one idol of that kind though it were idolatry in the highest degree yet hath not so corrupted the whole species of it but that other may both lawfully and profitably bee vsed Secondly that though that idols were but a mans inuention had bin so notably abused vnto idolatry yet that it is not debarred from helping vs euen in the seruice of God for that must needs be the end of their figuring it in that booke Beza as you heard before goeth further for hee alloweth the very same alter which hath beene the instrument of an idolatrous sacrifice to be vsed as an instrument of our christian Sacrament In which iudgement diuers martyrs in Queene Maries time concurred who were content to vse the same Surplices and Chalices which had beene abused in adolatrous masses The like did the christians in the primitiue church they conuerted the same temples into the houses of God which had beene consecrated to the seruice of abhominable idols yet are both idolatrous Temples and Alters mans owne meere inuentions and not Gods eyther creatures or ordinances So that though our crosse were the same which was abused and but a mans inuention yet might it by these examples be defended But secondly I answere vnto your consequent That if it were granted that the signe of the crosse were but a mans inuention yet can it not bee granted with any truth that the protestants crosse is the same which the Papists haue abused ours differing from theirs both in the Agents and in the ends of the action two very great and materiall differences Thirdly I demand how those men which condemne all humaine inuentions which haue idolatrously beene abused do ag●ee with them selues when they condemne kneeling and commend sitting at the holy communion making this to bee a significant signe of our eternall rest which is both meerely an humaine inuention and hath notably beene abused vnto idolatry Ob. Perhaps you will say that sitting is agreeable to Christs owne institution and that he himselfe sat at his last Supper Resp. But that is not so hee vsed an other site of his body as distant from sitting as kneeling is He leaned and so did the rest of his Disciples according to the custome and fashion of those times Looke Clauis Scripturae in voce sinus Stuckius de ritibus conuiuialibus lib. 2. cap. 34. Ob. But happily you thinke that sitting hath not beene so wickedly abused vnto idolatry as kneeling hath Resp. Nay much more and to more horrible idolatry too For in the kingdomes of Calecute and Narsi●ga and in diuerse other prouinces of the East and West India where they worship the diuill in a most deformed image they represent him alwayes sitting and they worship him not kneeling but prostrate So that they which reiect kneeling and retaine sitting whilest they auoide the iesture of Christian idolaters they im●tate the iesture of Heathen idols Therefore where sitting is allowed I know not why either kneeling or crossing should be abolished Then to recapitulate the summe of this long answer If neit●er wee our selues nor the papits our aduersa●ies doe thinke our crosse auaileable to the driuing away of diuils nor to the sanctifying of our selues nor yet do adore it with diuine or holy worship then is not our crosse made an idoll either by our owne practise or by their opinion and therefore not to be debarred from the seruice of God by force of your first argument Againe if our crosse be either no humaine inuention but rather an Apostolicall tradition or being an humaine inuention yet hath neuer beene abused vnto idolatry then is it not excluded from the seruice of God by vertue of your second argument But the first of these is true as I haue shewed in the body of this answere Ergo the second also The fift obiection For as much as our profession of Christ is a part of the couenant Rom. 10.8.9 I haue doubted how man may appoint the signe of the crosse as a token of our profession This being Gods owne prerogatiue as to ordaine the couenant so to ordaine meete signes for it Gen. 17.7.11 Answer This fift obiection is very intricate but I gesse that ●t may be explicated thus No man may adde signes to the couenant of God Gen. 17.7.11 But our profession of Christ is the couenant of God Rom. 10.8.9 Ergo no man may adde signes to our profession of Christ. And by consequent the signe of the crosse may not bee added to our profession in baptisme In which argument the Maior must be answered by distinction That the outward signes of our profession or couenant with God bee of two diuers natures for either they bee sacramentall or ceremoniall signes For sacramentall signes wee plainely confesse that they must needs bee of Gods owne institution and haue his owne promise annexed vnto them and therefore no man hath any power to ordaine them but this as you truly say is Gods sole prerogatiue But ●or rituall and ceremoniall signes made either for the ordering of the Church within it selfe or for the distinguishing of it from other assemblies the case is farre otherwise such thinges may bee made by the Churches constitution without any incroching vppon Gods prerogatiue by the iudgement of the most Diuines both old and new I reffere you for breuities sake vnto the ninety fiue page of Bishoppe Whitgifts booke continuing vnto page 128. In which long and learned discourse hee citeth many testimonies of the ancient fathers declaring many rites ceremonies to haue beene ordained in the primitiue Church by hir owne authority without any expresse warrant of the word for them sauing onely that generall warrantize of Saint Paule Omnia decenter et ordine fiant In which rule he naming not the seuerall particulars but leauing them to the Churches discretion he giueth it power to ordaine lawes and ceremonies so that these conditiōs be not transgressed