Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
spirit_n mystical_a rite_n rudiment_n 68 3 16.1384 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
A19142 A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's vvorship. Or a triplication unto. D. Burgesse his rejoinder for D. Morton The first part Ames, William, 1576-1633. 1633 (1633) STC 555; ESTC S100154 485,880 929

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

is that the use of some Iewish rite without any Iewish opinion as Circumcision and Easter In which answer nothing is found that toucheth any terme of the Argument Yet upon the occasion of it the Def. was asked how a Iewish Rite can be used without some part of a Iewish opinion The Rejoynd answereth materially but not formally and in use But he should have remembred that the Argument is of significant rites using and the Def. his answer is of Iewish significant rites using so that in his grant ther must needes be granted some formall use for signification Beside in all using of humane mysticall rites upon due consideration ther is some part of a Iewish opinion I prove it thus All they that consideratly use carnall beggerly rudiments in Gods service have this opinion that suche rites as the Iewish set praefiguration aside which no Christian ever admitted are good in the Christian Churche But all that so use humane mysticall rites use carnall beggerly rudiments in Gods service Ergo. The assumption I prove thus All that use mysticall rites wherto there is no Spirit annexed by God as unto the Euangelicall institutions of the new Testament use carnall beggerly rudiments in Gods service But they whiche use humane mysticall rites use mysticall rites wherto there is no Spirit annexed by God Ergo. The Proposition cannot be denied untill a better definition of suche rites be given nor the assumption except an Euangelicall promise can be shewed of Spiritual blessing upon the use of humane mysticall rites Concerning Circumcision 4. Because the Def. for an example of a Iewish rite lawfull for Christians to use named Circumcision the Repl. concluded that belike he houldeth Circumcision as it is used under Prester Iohn to be lawfull The Rej. therfore resolveth us that He doth so and also chalengeth the Repl. for saying nothing to disprove him Vpon this provocation it is necessarie to say some-thing against these patrones of Circumcision Where it is to be marked that the quaestion is of Ecclesiasticall Ceremonies devized by man for signification of morall duties whether it be lawfull for a Churche repraesentative suche as our Convocation to appoint and urge Circumcision in this kinde and to this purpose upon those Christians whoe are under their power 5. Now of this quaestion in the formal state of it I finde not that scarce any doubt was amonge understanding Christians before this Def. and Rej. being urged therto by direct consequence from their principles have now found it necessarie to mainteyne the affirmative part for defence of our beggerly Ceremonies Ther was some difference betwixt Hierome Augustine about observing of legall Rites in speciall about Circumcision as appeareth out of the Epistles which passed betwixt them yet exstant but both of thē agreed on this that as well to Iew as Gentile all religious use of Circumcision for Ceremonie c. is now after due publication of the Gospel unlawfull or deadly All that have written since agree about the same trueth except Caietan in one place who is forsaken opposed therin by all Papists the Iesuites themselves not excepted Our Divines are so confident of this that from the unlawfulnesse of Circumcision they usually dispute against other humane Ceremonies and the Iesuits in answering are forced to flie unto this which must be our Def. and Rej. their answer that the Ceremonies of the olde Testament are not absolutely abrogated but onely in regard of their speciall manner end intention Greg. Valent. tom 2. disp 7. quaest 7. punct 7. Bellar. de effect Sacr. l. 2. c. 32. whiche answer is called by D. Fulke ag Saund. of images pag. 672. a beastly doctrine But because it were an infinite and needlesse labor to allege the testimonies whiche may be easily alleged against Ceremoniall Circumcision amonge Christians as unlawfull I will passe on to reasons against it that the Rej. may no more say You say nothing to disprove it 6. First The onely place in the New Testament by which all Divines as the Rejoynder speaketh pag. 75. prove a power in the Churche to constitute Ceremonies is 1. Cor. 14.26.40 Edification decencie order But the Apostle in that chapter doeth no way give leave eyther unto our or any other Churche to constitute Circumcision for a Ceremonie Therfore no Churche hath power to constitute Circumcission for a Ceremonie For Order and Decencie no man in his right wits will say that Circumcision commeth under their notion And as for Edification it hath been formerly shewed that it doeth not require new instituted significant Ceremonies muche lesse a rejected or abrogated Ceremonie but onely is the ende of orderly and decent cariage of thinges instituted by God 7. Secondly no part of the partition wall betwixt Iewes and Gentiles may by any Convocation-house or other Churche be reared up againe But Circumcision is a part nay a principall corner-stone of that partition-wall howsoever it be interpreted so it be appointed Ergo. 8. Thirdly Circumcision cannot be esteemed more lawfull to be instituted for a significant Ceremonie then a Paschall lambe and they two being brought into the Churche what shall hinder if it please our Convocation house but the greatest part of the olde Ceremoniall law may in like manner follow For the Rejoynder cap. 2. sect 6. acknowlegeth no other limites or boundes for nomber of suche Ceremonies then the judgement of those to whose discretion it belongeth to judge therof 9. In the fourth place It is not lawfull for any Churche to impose Ceremoniall burdens upon Christians But Circumcision is a great burden to them upon whome it is imposed as our Convocation men would confesse if it were imposed upon them Ergo. 10. Fiftly It is not lawfull for any Churche or Convocation-house to usurpe authoritie over the bodies of men especially unto bloud But appointing of Circumcision is usurping of authoritie over mens bodies to the shedding of bloud Ergo. Adde unto this that the Convocation-house may better appointe that all English men should have their lippes or their eares pared or theyr eares nayled to theyr Parish-Churche dore for signification of that dutie which they are bounde to performe with their eares and lippes then suche Circumcision as is in use with the Iewes and Prester-Iohn These thinges considered I thinke ther is no reasonable man but will sooner reject our Ceremonies for bringing suche a foul tayle after them as that our Convoca●ion may cause all English-men to be Circumcized then admitte of Circumsicision for love of our paultrie Ceremonies 11. Presently after the Def. had excused Iewish Rites if they were used without Iewi●h opinion he cōfesseth without distinction that all Iewish-Rites are abolished Wherin the Repl. noted a contradiction But the Rejoynder to helpe at a dead lift distinguisheth betwixt Iewish Ceremonies as they were typicall or figurative and necessarie and Iewish Ceremonies as they are morally significant and free Now for necessitie and freedome enough hath been spoken in the first part In