Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	spirit_n	worship_n	worship_v	18,725	5	9.9357	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65972	Arguments against bowing at the name of Iesvs proving the unlawfullnesse and injustice of imposing that posture in Gods worship, which is neither injoyned by word of God, nor by the canon of the Church ... / composed abovt five years since by a reverend minister of the city of London.	Reverend minister of the city of London.; Wickins, William, 1614-1699.	1641 (1641)	Wing W2083; ESTC R24555	15,346	22

materiall and lesse principall part of it But such is this worship of bowing c. Ergo The Major I conceive needs no reliefe from any truth clearer then it selfe The Minor is thus proved If only the outward act the bowing of the body be from God but the bowing of it at such a time and upon such an occasion be from Man then it is a compound worship yea and that which is formall and principall in it is from Man and only that which is weake and lesse regarded is from God But the antecedent is true namely that the bowing of the body only is from God but the bowing at such a time and upon such an occasion is from Man Therfore the consequence or Counclusion is true also viz. That that worship is a mixt and compound worship and that which is principall and most esteemed from Man and onely the neglected and lesse principall part of it from God the Consequence is evident in both the parts and members of it 1. That which hath a plurality and diversity of ingredients in it must needs be a thing compounded And secondly for the latter part of it that which is from God if any thing at all be in it from him viz. the bowing of the body is but the materiall and lesse principall part of it but that which is from Man namely to do it at such a time and upon such an ocasion is the formall and principall part of it appeares thus Beecause let the Body be bowed never so diligently and frequently upon the mention of all other names of Christ as Lord Saviour c yet this is not regarded no more then a dead carkasse when the life is departed from it nor taken for the worship commanded Therfore that which gives the life and essence to it is not that which makes it an act of adoration neither is it the exhibiting of it to the person for whom it is claimed as pretence is made but it is the exhibition of it sub tali signo upon such a sound This is that which gives it the speciall nature and makes it to b● accepted and acknowledged for the worship commanded Therfore this is the life and soule and all in all of this worship Now for the Minor Proposition That this Circumstance or point in it that it should and must be given precisely at such a time is purely from man and not from God hath sufficiently bin demonstrated already and the Argument that evinceth it beyond all contradiction is soon repeated there is not the least intimation from God at all in the Scripture that any thing more should be done in this kind too or upon the name Iesus then to any other name or title whether of God or of Christ Therfore to found an act of worship upon the mention or sound of the name Iesus is purely and absolutely from Man and not from God ARGUMENT 6. IT is a thing unlawfull to lay a stumbling blocke in the way of the weake or blind Then it is unlawfull to require such worship at the mention or sound of the name Iesus or to countenance any such Command But this is simply unlawfull Levit. 19.14 Ergo. The Consequence wil be reduced to a lightsome truth by reasoning thus to injoyne any worship of God in such away or upon such termes whereby the weake and simple yea and the wiser also may e●sily be insnared drawn and provoked to commit Idolatry at least to commit absurdity and give divine worship to that which is not such is an unlawfull injunction and it is sin to countenance it But that injunction to bow at the name of Iesus is such an injunction Ergo c. The Major I conceive is rich in evidence of cleare truth The Minor likewise is not of any difficult proofe viz. that the injunction and practice of bowing is in the nature of it apt to mislead the simple either into Idolatry or absurdity That which directly occasions men to worship those who were but meere men or to bow upon the mention of their Names directly and in the nature of it leads men either to commit Idolatry or in the best interpretation a grosse absurdity in the service of God But this Command and practice of b●wing at the name Jesus directly tends to one or both of these Ergo The Minor is cleare because the name Iesus is a name common to others besides the Lord Jesus as to Josua who is called Jesus Heb. 4 8. And Iesus the Son of Syrach and Bar-Iesus a Conjurer Acts 13.6 Now how easie it is for the simple to mistake one person for another that goeth in the same name with him without any distinction or note of difference in the sound none can be ignorant of ARGUMENT 7. NO outward Ceremony or act of worship that tends to the prejudice and interruption of the worship and service of God which is more inward and spirituall is to be received and yeelded unto But such is the practise of bowing at the name of Jesus Ergo. The Major Proposition is evident because duties of inferiour nature and consequence when greater are in place and cannot be performed in their due manner when these are thrust upon them are no duties in such a case but all their obligatory vertue and power is suspended for that time And for the other Proposition that bowing at the name of Iesus is such a worship or outward act that cannot stand with the due performance of that which is greater and more spirituall it is clearly demonstrable from hence Because attentive hearing and minding the Word of God either read or preached is such a duty that cannot but be interrupted and suffer distraction and diversion of the mind if the other duty of bowing be attended also The mind of man finds a marvelous difficulty and insufficiency in it selfe to give that diligent and deep intention to the Word of God which belongs to it when it hath its full strength intire and unbroken with any other collaterall occasions when it is in the greatest freedome that may be from all other thoughts Ergo If it shal be burdened in the time of hearing with the care and purpose of bowing when such a word or sound comes forth this cannot but much break and weaken the intenti●n of it If it be said But there is no necessity of thinking of bowing till the time come and the name be in the Eare. I Answer he that really and seriously intends to bow when the sound comes can hardly forbeare thinking of it againe and againe before hand and will have much adoe to keep the sound out of his imagination before it comes at his Eare. Let any man make a narrow experiment in himselfe and ingenuously confesse what he finds I make no doubt but his confession hath been already drawn to his hands in this Argument ARGUMENT 8. THat worship which intends to exalt one name of God or of Christ before others and to bring all the rest

the name Iesus directly tendeth hereunto and hath nothing at all to counterpoyse such a danger therfore it is not to be introduced or assented unto The Major carryeth its own light with it The Minor is thus clearely proved That which directly tendeth to induce men to think or beleeve that Iesus and Christ are two different persons and that Iesus is more excellent then Christ directly tendeth to revive an old and dangerous Heresie viz. that of Corint … and others who held that Iesus and Christ were two persons and the one greater then the other But this boweng at the name of Iesus other names being passed over without the like reverence done at the mention of them directly tendeth to induce men to think c. Ergo. The reason of the Minor is because reverence argueth excellency upon whomsoever its cast or conferred and where either it is denyed or not exhibited it implyeth a person or condition of lesse excellencie ARGUMENT 4. ALl worship of God that is not grounded upon the Morall Law is Adulterous worship and not to be tendered or exhibited But this bowing at the name Iesus is a worship not founded upon the Morall Law Ergo. The Major I conceive unquestionable Because the worship of God being a Morall duty and that of the chiefest and highest ranke it can have no other rule or foundation but the Morall Law and the same Author that hath power to exact a new worship must have power also to make a new Law or further it because there is no act especially Religious justifiable but by some rule where by the rectitude or goodnesse of it must be tryed and demonstrated If it be said This bowing is no worship but a pious ceremony or signe or outward expression of worship or the like I Answer to deny bowing the body unto God to be truly and properly worship is to overthrow the whole species or kind of that which we call externall worship for what outward act of the body is rather to be called worship then bowing down the body prostration happily or falling flat on the ground may be conceived a further degree of this worship But if prostration before God be worship properly so called then must bowing down of the body towards the earth unto him be of the same kind of worship also because it is a degree or part of the same act Secondly if bowing the knee to Christ be no worship of him it must needs be a mocking of him as it is said of the Roman Souldiers Mat 27.29 They bowed their knees before him and mocked him c. he that boweth the knee to the Lord Chr●st and do●h not intend to honour and worship him in it doubtlesse mocketh him thereby Thirdly there is nothing more apparent from the Scripture then that bowing the knee is worship properly so called yea the worship of God is often signified by bowing the knee before him Isa 45.23 I have sworne by myselfe saith God that every knee shall hew unto me The Minor is thus declared That worship of God which is built upon an Ecclesiasticall Constitution is not founded upon the Moral Law But this worship of bowing is built upon an Ecclesiasticall Constitution Ergo c. The Major I explicate and demonstrate thus Two Laws which are not subordinate I meane w●th a logicall subordination but contradistinguished one against the other cannot be together the ground of one and the same duty But the Law Morall and Law Ecclesiasticall are Laws of a different kind not subordinate but contrad●stinguished Ergo c. The reason of the Minor is Because Ordinations or Constitutions Ecclesiasticall respect matters of circumstance and things indifferent the Morall Law only treateth of and obligeth to things of absolute necessity If it be here Objected and said though The subject matter of Ecclesiasticall Laws and Constittuions be in the generall matters of indifferencie and decencie about the worship of God yet if such Constitutions take in any part of the Morality of it this maketh it not will worship because it is the will of man it should be done supposing it to be the will of God first To this I Answere True if this were the case then were there no exception to be taken against the thing it selfe but onely against the methodicall proceeding of the Constitution promiscuously imposing things of meere indifferencie with things of absolute necessity But it hath not yet bin proved that this worship hath any other Mother but either the Constitutions or Customes of men the Word of God or Morall Law cannot yet be compelled to owne or to acknowledge it so then it being the Son of a stranger it is not to be brought into the Temple of the Lord. If it be further Objected That this rule makes as strongly against kneeling at the Communion as against bowing at the name of Jesus because it hath no other foundation but the like Ecclesiasticall Constitution To this I Answer No It is farre otherwise in this In the duty of receiving of the Sacrament there is a con●urrence of sundry spirituall and inward acts or duties of the soule whereunto the outward gesture of kneeling is naturall and sutable and sufficiently licenced and warranted in the Scripture though it be no where indeed determined to be of absolute necessity in the performance of the same As for example there is an act of thanksgiving in the duty of receiving which being a branch of prayer largely taken there can be no outward gesture more natural and sutable to it then kneeling Besides there is an act of prayer strictly taken c. But there is no such speciall duty in hand or performance when the name Jesus is mentioned upon which this gesture of bowing should be rounded but only the duties of hearing and attending the Word of God whereunto all other gestures of standing or sitting are much more convenient and have approbation from the Scriptures The former of standing Nehe 8.5 Mat. 13.2 and elsewhere the latter of sitting Ezek. 20.1 33.31 Mar. 3.34 c. So that to injoyne bowing still upon the pronunciation of the name Jesus in the middest of the Service whether it be in the hearing of a Chapter or Gospell read wherein those other gestures of standing or sitting are by the same Authority allowed besides that it wants a speciall foundation to build it upon it dissolves for the time those other gestures which the Scriptures allow substituting another in their stead unknown to them and further it condemnes that which it allows by censuring men for sitting or standing then when they have allowed both as lawfull ARGVMENT 5. THhat which at the best is a compound worship to the framing and making up wherof there is a concurrence partly of the will of God partly of the will and wisdome of men is an unlawful worship especially when that which is from man is the form spirit and life of the worship and that which is from God is but the