Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	john_n	spirit_n	worshipper_n	1,614	5	12.0333	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59899	A vindication of both parts of the Preservative against popery in an answer to the cavils of Lewis Sabran, Jesuit / by William Sherlock ...	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1688 (1688)	Wing S3370; ESTC R21011	87,156	120

annexed to them the conveyance of Grace from them to the Soul by meer external applications as by lighting up or carrying a consecrated Taper by sprinkling Ashes on our heads by sprinkling our selves with Holy Water by wearing an Agnus Dei or some Relicks about us c. look as if it was done not by a moral but a natural efficacy for what moral efficacy can such things have upon our minds But let it be done how it will it seems such divine Vertues and Powers are naturally or morally annexed to inanimate and senseless things and naturally or morally conveyed from them to the Soul by external applications and I desire him to shew me the difference between such Observances and Pagan Charms He has confessed enough and as much as we could desire of him when he adds Or any Vertue to be now-a-days communicated otherwise by insensible things than it was to the woman that touched the hem of Christ's Garments for Christ felt Vertue to pass from him and therefore it was a very real Communication or by the handkerchiefs of St. Paul or shadow of St. Peter And here were real and sensible effects without any moral but only natural or rather supernatural efficacy upon the Patient And if Holy Water and Agnus Dei's convey Grace at this rate I assure you they are very notable things His undertaking at last to prove Whenever required that they use no other blessings or Consecrations of such inanimate things to such spiritual purposes but what they find in the Records of the Primitive Church to have been ordered by the Apostles is bold and brave and I here challenge him to make it good but I hope he will produce better Records for it than his Homily of St. Austin of the Assumption of the blessed Virgin. 5 ly I observed farther that all this encouraged men to trust in an external Righteousness For 1. Such external Rites are very apt to degenerate into Superstition Especially 2. When they are recommended as very acceptable to God as satisfactions for our sins and meritorious of great Rewards And this is that use they serve in the Church of Rome They assert the necessity of humane satisfactions and what are these satisfactory works Fastings Whippings Pilgrimages c. all which men may do without the least sorrow for sin without any true Devotion to God without mortifying any one Lust. To make this a Mis-representation he repeats it thus They account satisfactory works Fastings Acts of Penance Prayers Alms though done without the least sorrow for sin c. Whereas I say they account these satisfactory works and they may be done without the least sorrow for sin Now are not these satisfactory works That he dares not deny May not all these be done without sorrow for sin That he dares not deny neither And this is all I said but then he will not allow that they are satisfactory works without sorrow for sin I would to God he could perswade all the Members of his Church of the truth of this But let me ask him one Question Are these Acts of Penance in the Church of Rome intended as expressions of sorrow for sin or as satisfactions for the punishment due to it Are they necessary before Absolution to qualifie men to receive the pardon of their sins as the signs and demonstrations of a sincere repentance or to be performed after the sin is forgiven not to express our sorrow for sin but to undergo the punishment of it Are they always the voluntary choice of the sinner as the expressions of a hearty sorrow are or the sentence of a Judge imposed by the Priest upon Absolution or by the fears of Purgatory Now if such Acts of Penance are only intended to satisfie for the punishment I think to undergo punishment whether with or without sorrow for sin does satisfie for the punishment of sin Sorrow may be necessary to Absolution but when the guilt of sin is pardoned if men can undergo their penance without sorrow the satisfaction is never the less and should he promote this Doctrine that the works of Penance avail nothing unless they be done with a hearty sorrow for sin men would not be so easily perswaded to undergo their Penances especially if the Priest be fevere I observed farther that the true reason why any thinking men are so fond of an external Righteousness is to excuse them from true and real Holiness of Life All men know that in the Offices of Piety and Vertue they can never do more than is their duty and therefore as nothing can be matter of merit which is our duty So the true intention of all merits and works of Supererogation are to supply the place of Duty and to satisfie for their sins or to purchase a Reward which they have no title to by doing their duty that is because they do not their duty But then the Jesuit represents it as if I said They could have no reward for doing their duty and therefore they add works of Supererogation which is Jesuit like they may be rewarded for their duty if they would do it though they cannot merit by doing their duty 3ly I observed that to make these meritorious and satisfactory Superstitions more easie one man may satisfie for another and communicate his Merits to him this the Jesuit confidently says is a sham for each man is bound to satisfie for himself fulfilling the Penances imposed on him Now suppose that men are bound personally to perform those Penances which are imposed on them by their Priests in Confession what I said was not confined to Penances imposed in Confession and I presume he will grant there are other satisfactions and penances necessary besides these Did he never hear of men who have been hired to whip themselves for some rich and great sinners to say such a number of Ave-Maries for them If one man cannot satisfie for another what becomes of their Indulgences which are the application of the Merits of Supererogating Saints to those who need them Another Mis-representation is that I say They pay for Indulgences with Money and buy Satisfactions and Merits But though Indulgences are not to be had without Money it is a sad Mis-representation to call this Buying which should only be called Alms-deeds but the thing is the same let them call it what they will Alms-deeds if they will call them Alms-deeds and that at a set rate and down-right Bargain are the price of Indulgences and Satisfactions and if this were the reason of giving Alms were there such an express Bargain and Sale in the case I am of his mind that every Alms-giver might with as much justice be accused to have bought of God his Grace and Pardon for a sum of money From hence I proceeded to shew what kind of Worship Christ has prescribed to his Disciples and the general account we have of it 4 John 23 24. But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall

worship the Father in spirit and in truth for the Father seeketh such to worship him God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth In which description of Gospel-Worship there are three things included 1. That we must worship God under the notion of a pure and infinite Spirit 2. under the character of a Father 3. With the Mind and Spirit But he has found little here to except against only two or three Fanatical Principles which shall be briefly considered The first God being a Spirit must not be sought for in Houses of Wood and Stone because he must be worshipped in Spirit as a Spirit it should be which differ greatly he must not be worshipped by any material or sensible Representations by material Images and Pictures those words except your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of Scribes and Pharisees you shall in no wise enter into the Kingdom of Heaven cuts off every thing that is external in Religion Here he has jumbled things together of a different nature I shall begin with the last first because it concerns what I have already accounted for That the Christian Religion admits of no external nor ceremonial Righteousness the great design of the Gospel being to make us truly good that we may be partakers of the Divine Nature There is nothing our Lord does more severely condemn than an external and Pharasaical Righteousness Except your Righteousness exceed the Righteousness c. Now this not these words meerly but this rejecting an external Righteousness cuts off every thing that is external in Religion at a blow because it cuts off all hopes and reliances on an external Righteousness and I believe men will not be fond of such Superstitions when they know they will do them no good Now what is the fault of this do not these Principles remit all Christians to the silent Meetings of Quakers exclude singing of Psalms that is because it excludes an external Righteousness it excludes all external Acts of Worship Well rhymed Father Brains and Stairs Since God will be worshipped as a Spirit he will now confine his peculiar Presence to no place as he formerly did to the Temple at Ierusalem for though for typical reasons he had a typical and symbolical presence under the Iewish dispensation yet this was not so agreeable to his nature who is a Spirit and will now be worshipped as a Spirit and therefore must not now be sought for in Houses of Wood and Stone This says he excludes the use of Churches rather than Barns That is because God does not confine his presence to one place because he has no symbolical presence therefore there must be no places set apart from common uses for Religious Worship Thus God will be worshipped as a Spirit and therefore not by Images or material Representations which are so unlike a Spirit that is says he not by such material Representations as singing of Psalms Well guess't for a Jesuite The second Fanatical Principle is this God and Christ are not present in the Assemblies of Christians by a figurative and symbolical Presence There is no symbolical Presence of God under the Gospel Though God fills all Places it is a great absurdity to talk of more symbolical Presences than one for a symbolical Presence confines the unlimited Presence of God to a certain place in order to certain ends as to receive the Worship that is paid to him and to answer the Prayers that are made to him now to have more than one such Presence as this is like having more Gods than one To which he answers to say nothing of the absurdity of this Discourse which makes that Christian an Adorer of two Gods who by Faith adoring God in Heaven and in his own Soul worships him in both places Truly he had better have said nothing than nothing to the purpose for is God symbolically present in Heaven or in the Souls of Men in Heaven he is really present in the Souls of Men he is present by his Grace and Spirit but in neither by Symbols and Figures of his Presence as he was present in the Temple But he has a terrible Argument to come Doth not this destroy the very essence of your Sacrament the Bread and Wine in the Lord's Supper which you own to be a symbolical Presence of Christ but no Place nor Object of Worship And yet though we grant the Eucharist is a Symbol and Figure of Christ's Body and Blood it is no Symbol of Christ's bodily and personal Presence unless it be a Symbol of Christ's bodily Presence on the Cross for it is a Symbol only of Christ's broken Body and of his Blood shed for us and the intention of it is not to represent Christ bodily present with us but to be a Memorial of him in his bodily absence and therefore it is no symbolical Presence of Christ for the Figures and Symbols of his Body and Blood if they be a symbolical Presence must be the Symbols of his bodily Presence His third Fanatical Principle is this If God be better worshipped before an Image than without one then the Worship of God is more confined to that place where the Image is I cannot see how to avoid this whereas there is no appropriate place of Worship under the Gospel and 't is the same case tho' the Image be not appropriated to any place but carried about with us for still the Image makes the Place of Worship Most of these are my words but he has transplaced them so as to lose the Argument The force of the Argument is this If the Worship of God must not be confined to any Place or symbolical Presence then he must not be worshipped by an Image for an Image is a representative Presence of God or of the Saints and Men go to Images as to Divine Presences to Worship so that where-ever the Image is which is a symbolical Presence whether fixt in a Church or carried from one place to another it makes it a peculiar place of Worship as having a symbolical Presence So that the whole force of the Argument lies upon an Image being a symbolical Presence And this he tells us is an Argument for all Dissenters against a Liturgy or Set-Form of Prayer I suppose he means the Book of the Liturgy or Forms of Prayer for if God be better worshipped by a Set-Form of Prayer than without it then the Worship of God is more confined to that place where that Set-Form of Prayer that Set-Liturgy is used and 't is the same tho' no set place be appointed for that Set-Form of Prayer The Parallel is exact It is so indeed if he can prove the Common-Prayer-Book to be a symbolical Presence of God as an Image is but till then it is ridiculous At the conclusion of this Section I observed that to worship God in Spirit is to worship him with our Mind and Spirit And from hence I shewed the