Selected quad for the lemma: woman_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
woman_n	father_n	hour_n	worship_v	1,498	5	9.4721	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59784	An ansvver to a discourse intituled, Papists protesting against Protestant-popery being a vindication of papists not misrepresented by Protestants : and containing a particular examination of Monsieur de Meaux, late Bishop of Condom, his Exposition of the doctrine of the Church of Rome, in the articles of invocation of saints, and the worship of images occasioned by that discourse.	Sherlock, William, 1641?-1707.	1686 (1686)	Wing S3259; ESTC R3874	97,621	118

they Worship But how unreasonable is this when they know he is invisible and would not be a God if he could be seen And how absurd is it to Represent him by an Image when they know they can make no Image like him No worship can be natural which contradicts the nature of that Being whom we Worship and if it be not natural it must be instituted Worship and then tho it were forbid by no Law it must be commanded by some Law to make it reasonable at least if it be possible that a Law could make that an act of Honour and Worship which is a Dishonour to the Divine Perfections 6ly It is more especially contrary to the nature of the Christian worship which teaches us to form a more spiritual Idea of God and to worship him in Spirit and in Truth in opposition not only to all sensible Representations but to all symbolical Presences There are two things principally for which Images are intended to be visible Representations and a visible Presence of the Deity The first of these is so great a Reproach to the Divine Nature that it was forbid by the Law of Moses which was at best a less perfect Dispensation as being accommodated to the carnal State of that people but as to the second God himself gratified them in it for he dwelt among them in the Tabernacle and afterwards in the Temple of Jerusalem where he placed the Symbols of his Presence But now when the Woman of Samaria asked our Saviour about the place of Worship whether it was the Temple at Jerusalem or Samaria He answers The hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem worship the Father But 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 Where Christ opposes worshipping in Spirit and in Truth to worshipping in the Temple not as a Temple signifies a place separated for Religious Worship which is a necessary Circumstance of Worship in all Religions but as it signifies a Symbolical Presence a Figure of Gods Residence and Dwelling among them in which sense the Primitive Christians denied that they had any Temples For God dwelling in human Nature is the only Divine Presence under the Gospel of which the Temple was but a Type and Figure Now if the spiritual Worship of the Gospel does so withdraw us from sense as not to admit of a Symbolical Presence much less certainly does it admit of Images to represent God present to us which is so gross and carnal that God forbad it under the Legal Dispensation We must consider God as an infinite Mind present in all places to hear our Prayers and receive our Worship and must raise our hearts to Heaven whither Christ who is the only visible Presence of God is ascended and not seek for him in carved Wood or Stone or a curious piece of Painting 7ly But since M. de Maux and the Representer think it sufficient to justifie the worship of Images that they are of great use to represent the object of our worship to us and to affect us with suitable passions it will be needful briefly to consider this matter For I confess I cannot see how a material and visible Image should form a true Idea in us of an invisible Spirit it is apt to corrupt mens notions of God and Religion and to abate our just reverence by representing the object of our worship under so contemptible an appearance An Image cannot tell us what God is if we are otherwise instructed in the nature of God we know that an image is not like him but a reproach to the Divine perfections if we are not better instructed we shall think our God like his image which will make us very understanding Christians But the Representer has drawn this Argument out at large and therefore we must consider what he says of it That Pictures and Images serve to 1. Preserve in his mind the memory of the things represented by them as people are wont to preserve the memory of their deceased Friends by keeping their Pictures But I beseech you the memory of what does a Picture preserve Of nothing that I know of but the external lineaments and features of the face or body and therefore the Images and Pictures of God and the Holy Trinity which yet are allowed in the Church of Rome cannot serve this end unless they will say that God has an external shape as Man has And suppose we had the exact Pictures of Christ and the Virgin Mary the Apostles and other Saints and Martyrs this might gratifie our curiosity but of what use is it in the Christian Religion To remember Christ is not to remember his face which we never saw but to remember his Doctrine and his Life to call to mind his great Love in dying for us to remember him not as a Man but as a God incarnate as our Mediator and Advocate as our Lord and Judge and therefore the Gospel which contain the History of his Life are a much better Picture of Christ than any drawn by the most curious Pencil and I doubt the Christian Religion will not gain much by taking the Gospels out of peoples hands and giving them a Picture to gaze on Yes says our Author 2. He is taught to use them by casting his eye upon the Pictures or Images and thence to raise his heart to the Prototypes and there to imploy it in Meditation Love Thanksgiving Imitation c. as the object requires But he is a very sorry Christian who never thanks of Christ but when he sees his Picture And how can the sight of a Picture raise our hearts to the Love of Christ The sight indeed of a lovely Picture may exci●e a sensible passion but not a Divine Love The sight of his Picture can only put us in mind that there was such a person as Christ in the world but if we would affect our hearts with his love and praise we must not gaze on his Face which is all that a Picture can show us if it could do that 〈◊〉 meditate on what he has done and suffered for us which may be done better without a Picture than with it If they want something to put them in mind that there is such a person as Christ which is all that his Picture can do the name of Christ written upon the Church Walls would be more innocent and altogether as effectual to this end But Pictures are very instructive as that of a Deaths head and Old Time painted with his F●rel●ck Hour-glass and Sythe and do inform the mind at one glance of what in reading requires a Chapter and sometimes a Volume Which is so far from being true that a Picture informs a Man of nothing but what he was informed of before The Picture of a Crucifix may put a

tacite acknowledgement that Jesus was born of her and that the Son must be a very Glorious Prince when the Mother is so highly exalted upon account of her Relation to him as to have so many devout Prayers and Hymns offered up to her But does this prove that the Prayers which are immediately directed to the Virgin Mary are principally directed to Christ because Mary was his Mot●●● which is the whole Mystery of the business Suppose Christ should think himself honoured by those Prayers which are offered to his Mother yet is there no difference between praying to Christ and that Honour we do him in praying to his Mother A late Author indeed tells us that the Veneration which we give to Mary redounds to Jesus All Honour given to the Mother tending to the Glory of the Son for as he communicates with her in Flesh and Blood so also doth he partake with her in her Qualities and Perfections and therefore he is a sharer in that Homage and Observance that is made to her This is a new sort of Consubstantiation and Communication of Properties but yet how much soever we honour Jesus when we pray to Mary yet we do not pray to Jesus when we pray to Mary and therefore these Prayers are principally and immediately directed to Mary not to God or Christ and therefore to offer ten Prayers to Mary for one to God look very like honouring Mary much more than her Son or God the Father Well but she is the Mother of God and Blessed amongst Women but how does her being Christs Mother entitle her to a greater share in our Prayers and Devotions than Christ himself It is indeed a great Honour to her to be the Mother of Jesus but does this entitle her to that Worship and Homage which is due to her Son She is the happiest Mother among Women but does this advance her above Angels and Arch-Angels For my part I see no reason to think that her bearing Christ in her Womb which was a singular Favour conferred on her but has nothing of Merit in it should advance her above the most Eminent Apostles and Martyrs who with undaunted Courage and unwearied Industry propagated the Gospel throughout the World and were the great Ministers of his Kingdom I am sure our Saviour does not seem to attribute any such mighty Vertue to the Maternity of Mary when a certain Woman said unto him Blessed is the Womb that bare thee and the Paps which thou hast sucked he answered yea rather Blessed are they who hear the Word of God and keep it And in another place when some told him behold thy Mother and thy Brethren stand without desiring to speak with thee he answered and said unto him that told him who is my Mother And who are my Brethren and he stretched forth his hand towards his Disciples saying behold my Mother and my Brethren for whosever shall do the Will of my Father which is in Heaven the same is my Mother and Sister and Brother Which prefers his meanest Disciples before the Mother of his Flesh considered only as his Mother which he would not have done had the bare Maternity of Mary advanced her above all other Creatures Well but she is most acceptable to God in her Intercession for us Did the Angel tell them this too as well as that she is Blessed among Women Whence then do they learn it Is it only because she is a Mother Have all Mothers then such a natural Authority over their Sons even when they are Soveraign Princes Cannot the Eternal Son of God chuse an Earthly Mother but he must admit her into the Throne with him and govern his Kingdom if not by her Commands yet by her Importunities and Requests This is thought a great weakness in Earthly Princes and usually proves fatal to their Government and yet it is much more tolerable in Earth than in Heaven What has the Mother of his Flesh to do to intermeddle in the affairs of his Spiritual Kingdom which she is not capable of managing She had no Authority in the Church while she was on Earth which methinks her Maternity might give her as much Right to as to be Queen-Regent of Heaven When Christ was a Child he lived in Subjection to Mary and Joseph though he began early to give them a Specimen of a Superiour Power he had and such a work to do as discharged him from Subjection to Earthly Parents When he was but twelve years old he told his Mother how was it that ye sought me wist ye not that I must be about my Fathers business When his Mother at the Marriage in Cana of Galilee acquainted him that their Wine was spent and insinuated her desire that he should help them he rebukes her for it Woman what have I to do with thee my hour is not yet come She was not to direct him what to do in such matters and can we think then that now he is advanced to the Right Hand of God he will suffer her to intermeddle in the administration of his Kingdom But our Author believes it damnable to think the Virgin Mary more powerful in Heaven than Christ or that she can in any thing command him It is well the Impera Redemptori command the Redeemer is at last disowned by them though it may be some may think it a little too much to call it damnable because whatever Papists believe now there was a time when this was used in the Missals of the Roman Church and will he say that it was damnable then to use that Hymn I believe no Papist ever thought the Virgin Mary to be-Omnipotent much less that she can do more than Christ can or can command him by a direct and Superior Authority nor did any man that I know of ever charge them with this and if it be only in this sense that he denies the Virgin to be more powerful in Heaven than Christ it is nothing to the purpose for it is possible for a Subject to be more powerful than his Prince though he cannot command him and can do nothing but by his Princes favour but if he have so much the ascendant of his Prince that he can deny him nothing that he does whatever he will have him and such things as no other consideration should incline him to do but the desire of such a powerful Favourite this man is really more powerful than the Prince because he has the direction and Government of the Princes Power He has the Prince himself in his Power and therefore is more powerful than he And if this be the case of the Blessed Virgin that she has the Disposal of Christ's Grace and Mercy though not by a direct Authority yet by her Interest in her Son if he never denies that which she asks but grants that at her Intercession which he would not grant without it if the Papists believe this they believe her to be more Powerful than Christ