Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	divine_a	holy_a	person_n	6,347	5	5.4510	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04528	The lavvfulnes of hearing the publick ministers of the Church of England proved, by Mr. Philip Nye and Mr. John Robinson, two eminent Congregational divines. Together with the judgment of Dr. Goodwin, Dr. Owen, and other independents, as well ancient as modern, concerning forms of prayer, parish-churches, and communion with them: and the judgment of other nonconformists about kneeling at the sacrament.	Nye, Philip, 1596?-1672.; Robinson, John, 1575?-1625.	1683 (1683)	Wing N1496; ESTC R203023	37,350	46

loseth them in all the rest and therefore if a Man do take what is good of all sides he is apt to lose them all but he pleaseth Christ by it and so will I for this particular Dr. Owen pag. 177. of Evangelical Love saith That it is pleaded indeed the Substance of the Worship of God ought to be no other than what Jesus Christ hath appointed yet the Manner and Mode of performance of what he doth command with other Rites and Ceremonies for Order and Decency may lawfully be instituted by the Rulers of the Church let it therefore at present be granted says he that so they may be by them who are perswaded of the lawfulness of those Modes and of the things wherein they consist Indeed he very much condemns Communion with such Apostatical Churches who are guilty of Idolatry and require unscriptural Terms of Communion but what Churches those are remains to be proved I am sure he asserts that many Errors in Doctrine Disorders in Sacred Administrations irregular walking in Conversation with neglect and abuse of Discipline in Rulers may fall out in some Churches and yet not evacuate their Church-State or give sufficient warrant for any Person to leave their Communion and to separate from them Pag. 76. Evang. Love And pag. 176. We wholly deny that the Mistakes of Christians in joining themselves unto such Churches as have no warrantable Institution ought to be any cause of the diminishing of our Love towards them for they may be Persons born of God united to Christ partakers of the Spirit and belong to the Church Catholick Mystical which is the first principal Object of all Christian Love and Charity notwithstanding their Errors and Wandrings from the Truth in this Matter And the said Dr. Owen who in his Discourse of the Work of the Spirit in Prayer writes against the making or composing of Forms of Prayer for our selves to be used privately desires the Reader p. 200. to observe that he doth not argue against Forms of Prayer as unlawful to be used And pag. 222. he grants that Men or Churches may agree upon a prescribed Form by common consent as judging and avowing it best for their own Edification Again pag. 228. Whether they are approved or disapproved of God whether they are lawful or unlawful we do not consider but only whether they are for Spiritual Benefit and Advantage for the good of our own Souls and the Edification of others as set up in competition with the Gift before described So that it seems the Doctor doth not judg such Forms of Prayer unlawful which are for the good of our own Souls and the Edification of others and which are not in competition with the Gift before described And therefore p. 231 232. supposing that those who make use of and plead for Forms of Prayer especially in Publick do in a due manner prepare themselves for it by holy meditation with an endeavour to bring their Souls into a holy frame of Fear delight and reverence of God let it also be supposed that they have a good End and Design in the Worship they address themselves unto namely the Glory of God and their own Spiritual Advantage the Prayers themselves tho they should be in some things irregular may give occasion to exercise those Acts of Grace which they were otherwise prepared for And I say yet further that whilst these Forms of Prayer are cloathed with the general Notions of Prayer that is are esteemed as such in the minds of them that use them are accompanied in their use with the Motives and Ends of Prayer express no Matter unlawful to be insisted on in Prayer directing the Souls of Men to none but lawful Objects of Divine Worship and Prayer the Father Son and Holy Spirit and whilst Men make use of them with the true design of Prayer looking after due assistance unto Prayer I do not judg there is any such Evil in them as that God will not communicate his Spirit to any in the use of them so as that they should have no holy Communion with him in and under them Much less will I say that God never therein regards their Persons or rejects their praying as unlawful For the Persons and Duties of Men may be accepted with God when they walk and act in sincerity according to their Light tho in many things and those of no small importance sundry Irregularities are found both in what they do and in the manner of doing it Where Persons walk before God in their Integrity and practise nothing contrary to their Light and Conviction in his Worship God is merciful unto them altho they order not every thing according to the Rule and Measure of the Word So was it with them who came to the Passover in the days of Hezekiah They had not cleansed themselves but did eat the Passover otherwise than it was written 2 Chron. 30.18 And p. 235. he grants That such Forms of Prayer have not any intrinsecal Evil in the composition of them but argues against the setting up and prescribing such Forms of Prayer universally in opposition and unto the exclusion of free Prayer And p. 236. If they appear not contrary unto or inconsistent with or are not used in a way exclusive of that Work of the Holy Spirit in Prayer which we have described from the Scripture nor are reducible to any Divine Prohibition I shall not contend with any about them Much more might have been collected even out of the Writings of the Congregational Ministers concerning these weighty Matters but this is sufficient I know the Reader will be sollicitous to know their Judgment about the Lord's Supper and kneeling thereat but I must confess at present I cannot find they say any thing particularly about it only the practice of some of them in receiving the Sacrament according to the manner of the Church of England does evince that all of them do not deny the lawfulness of it but that they may sometimes communicate there tho ordinarily they do with their own particular Churches for better-Edification as they judg Mr. Tombs a learned Minister and a great Anabaptist wrote a Book to prove it lawful both to Hear and Communicate with the Church of England and his practice at Salisbury was conformable thereunto Indeed the Nonconformists that are called Presbyterians both Ancient and Modern do generally allow the lawfulness of Communicating with the Church of England tho at the same Time they held the Ceremonies to be burthen some and therefore would avoid them if they could but if they could not have the Sacrament otherwise they took it as they could have it Thus says Mr. Baxter in his Christian Directory pag. 859. First Edition Had I my choice I would receive the Lord's Supper sitting but where I have not I will use the Gesture which the Church useth And it is to be noted that the Church of England requireth the Communicants only to receive it kneeling but not to eat and drink it kneeling when they have received it And his Resolution of this Case ought to be considered viz. Quest May the Communion-Tables be turned Altar-wise and railed in And is it lawful to come up to the Rails to Communicate Answ 1. God hath given us no particular Command or Prohibition about these Circumstances but the general Rules for Unity Edification Order and Decency Whether the Table should stand this way or that way here or there c. he hath not particularly determined 2. They that turn the Table Altar-wise and rail it in out of a design to draw Men to Popery or in a scandalous way which will encourage Men to or in Popery do sin 3. So do they that rail in the Table to signify that the Vulgar or Lay-Christians must not come to it but be kept at a distance when Christ in his Personal Presence admitted his Disciples to communicate at the Table with himself 4. But where there are no such Ends but only to imitate the Ancients that did thus and to shew reverence to the Table on the account of the Sacrament by keeping away Dogs keeping Boys from sitting on it c. The professed Doctrine of the Church condemneth Transubstantiation the real Corporal Presence c. as ours doth In this Case Christians should take these for such as they are indifferent things and not censure or condemn each other for them nor should any inforce them on any that think them unlawful 5. And to Communicate is not only lawful in this Case where we cannot prove that the Minister sinneth but even when we suspect an evil Design in him which we cannot prove yea or when we can prove that his personal Interpretation of the Place Name Situation and Rails is unsound for we assemble there to communicate in and according to the professed Doctrine of Christianity and the Churches and our own open Profession and not after every private Opinion and Error of the Minister As I may receive from an Anabaptist or Separatist notwithstanding his Personal Errors so may I from another Mans whose Error destroyeth not his Ministry nor the Ordinance as long as I consent not to it yea and with the Church profess my dissent 6. Yet caeteris paribus every free Man that hath his choice should chuse to Communicate rather where there is most Purity and least Error than with those that swerve more from regular Exactness FINIS