Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	day_n	observe_v	sabbath_n	3,417	5	9.5510	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30907	William Michel unmasqued, or, The staggering instability of the pretended stable Christian discovered his omissions observed, and weakness unvailed : in his late faint and feeble animadversions by way of reply to a book intituled Truth cleared of calumnies : wherein the integrity of the Quakers doctrine is the second time justified and cleared from the reiterate, clamorous but causeless calumnies of this cavilling cetechist [sic] / by Robert Barclay.	Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690.	1672 (1672)	Wing B742; ESTC R37062	60,482	82

truely apply the instance in his Epistle to himself that he is sailing in one boat with Papists though his face seems to look a verse from them Pag. 100 He saith Whatever inward call the Elders mentioned Tit. 1. 5. Act. 14. 23. had yet they had not an imediate call which is by the imediate command and voyce of God without the intervention of men but for this he adds no proof at all nor is there any Inconsistancy betwixt being imediatly called by command from God and afterwards being aproved of men or that being aproved and set apart by man excludes having an imediate call from God Sect. 1. Pag. 101. He sayes That Eph. 4. 13. is a pregnant and pertinent proof for the continuance of the Ministry which I never denied But this doth not answer my saying that it is impertinent as to them who deny perfection seeing that place sayes the Ministry is for the perfecting of the Saints now to this he answers nothing but that it cannot be gathered that this perfection is on Earth which is but his own assertion yea by himself there after overthrown saying That the Ministry is given that we may press after an absolute full Perfection even of degrees for it is folly to press after this if there be no hopes of attaining it He wholly passes by my objections against their Ministry Pag. 59. especially in that they make not the Grace of God a necessary quallification to the esse or being of a Preacher without so much as making any mention of it where I also show how contrary it is to the order delivered by the Apostles in Scripture Therefore his conclusion is false to say we cast off such a Ministry seeing he was not able to prove theirs to be such else he would not have wholy past in silence my reasons shewing it not to be so His Thirteenth Head Pag. 102. Is concerning the Sabbath or first day of the weeks being so as to which I desire the Reader first to take notice that as we believe the Apostles and primitive Christians did meet this day to worship God so we as following their example do the like and forbear working or useing our lawful occasions upon that day as much as our Adversaries so that the debate is onely whether there be any inherent Holiness in this Day more then in another or if there be any positive command for it from Scripture Particularly if the fourth command bind us to the observation of it And here W. M. notwith-standing of his great pretences to the Protestant Churches doth wholly disagree from them in this thing who are of our mind as to it the generality of all the Protestants both in Germany France and else where out of this Illand do look upon the supposed morrallity of the first day of the week as altogether ridiculous which may be seen in Calvin upon the fourth command lib. inst 2. cap. 8. Sect. 34. where he explains the signification of it as we do Viz. Typifiing a Spiritual Rest wherein leaving our own works the Spirit of God may work in us he there refuts W. Ms. notion as a Jewish Opinion saying Some false Doctors have abused ignorant People with it adding as we do That the Apostle Paul reproves such superstitions likewise he plainly asserts That the keeping of the first day is onely for conveniency and to preserve order in the Church that the Saints might have a fit time set apart to meet together to Worship which we also say hence doth appear the folly of that impertinent story mentioned by him Pag. 105. seeking to infer That we agree with Papist in takeing away the fourth Command as they have done the second for by this he might conclude the first and chiefest Reformers guilty of Popery whereas himself agrees with papists both against the Protestants abroad us in pleading for this imaginary holiness of the first day of the week which in his Dialogue he sought to prove because Christ did rise upon it but to my answer showing he might from thence infer the rest of the Popish holydaies of His Birth Ascention Conception c. he replies not one word he summarly passes over what is said by me concerning this thing Page 59 60 61 and 62 which the Reader by looking unto may observe He aledgeth The fourth command speaketh not precisly of the Seventh day in order from the Creation and that the beginning and ending of it mentions the Sabbath day and not the Seventh quid inde c. What then is not the middle of the command as observable which saith expressly But the Seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord there God himself expounds the Sabbath to be the Seventh day and W. M. must not think we will reject this exposition to accept of his proofless glosses My argument drawn from Coll. 2. 16 17. Let no man judge you in respect of a holy day or Sabbath dayes and Rom. 14. 6. which sheweth all dayes to be alike and Gal. 4 10 11. Ye observe dayes and months times and years He answereth aledging These reprove not morral dayes but ceremonial adding That the fourth command binds to this and therefore it cannot be more abrogate then any of the rest of the ten commands but this is no proof at all onely a meer begging the question he should have more convincingly proved that the fourth command binds to the observation of this day Now the Apostle in these places sayeth not I am afraid of you because ye observe ceremonial dayes W. M. hath no bottom for this distinction he confesseth that Christ Mat. 24. 20. speaketh nothing of the first day of the week and therefore overthrowes the inference he makes in his Dialogue from it and what I further add to show the folly of this inference from the Scripture He hath wholly omited which the Reader may see Pag. 59 60. of my last Pag. 106. He sayes Oh! the conscientious keeping of the Sabbath is a comfortable evidence of those that shall be admitted to this Rest viz. the rest of the Lamb. But seeing these words are without any proof they are only like to have credit with such silly superstitious Bigots as Calvin in the place above mentioned reproves and not with any solid serious Christians Sect. 2. Pag. 107. To prove that the first day of the week is set apart for the service of God by Divine Authority he citeth Rev. 1. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Lords day but whereas I told him this did no way prove that day to be the first day of the week because the day of the Lord or the Lords day in Scripture is not limited to any particular day He answers That these two ought not to be confounded for all dayes wherein the Lord executeth judgement are dayes of the Lord but the Lords day mentioned Rev. 1. is but one For this he bringeth no proof but his own meer assertion As Ignatius calling the first day of the

owne bare assertion though any may observe this to be his constant course when other Arguments fail him As he proceeds to prove the continuance of this practice he sayes It cannot be denied there was once a command for it and there is no repeal of it but the same recurs in washing one-anothers feet and anointing the sick with Oyl Jam. 5. 14. which were as expressly commanded and never repealed and yet W. M. can easily find a gloss to evict these rechoning it a small matter to forbear them he addeth That coming of Christ till which the Apostles were injoyned to be in the use of the outward Supper must be meant of his outward comming so many years after because such to whom Christ was come in the Spirit were found in the practice of it but this proves no more its continuance necessitate Precepti as he wordeth it then the Circumcising and being Circumcised under the Gospel will prove Circumcission to be binding upon us He concludes saying That surely we are great enemies to our Souls that oppose this Ordinance But answereth not one word of Page 56. where I shew how great reason we have to forsake it as also the many abuses where with they have corrupted it it suffiseth him to say That it is meeter to pass it by then to reply unto it for part of it being about the quallifications of Persons W. M. is loth to tell his Judgment least he should harp upon the old Independant controversy it is dangerous to touch this string especially while he injoyes his hire under the shadow of Episcopacy Head 12. Concerning the Ministry Pag. 96. He hath nothing to say against my affirming that the Quakers own the Ministry of the Word Pag. 97. speaking of Eph. 4. 11. where Paul saith Christ gave some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers He saith The first three are Extraordinary and Tempory the last two Ordinary and Perpetual for this he brings no Proof at all but that frequent Argument his own bare Assertion And whereas I tould him Pag. 58. of mine That the former three were not ceased citing for Proof Calvin who Inst. lib. 4. cap 3. avers That in his day God raised up Apostles and Evangelists to this he answers not one word As he goes on he repeats my words where I say That though we own the Ministry not to be common yet that doth not hinder but that any may speak as the Saints are met together according to 1 Cor. 14. 31. asking How I can make out that In that place is meant an ordinary Office though it might suffice for answer to ask what reason W. M. hath to frame here his distinction of Ordinary and Extraordinary yet it is obvious that the Apostle is here presenting the ordinary order of the Church he needed not present an order to extraordinary Offices for such as are extraordinarily sent are also instructed how to go about their Office and not limited to set Rules else it were not extraordinary Pag. 98. He goeth about to prove this distinction of Mediate and Immediate asking If the Prophets and Apostles were not called imediatly And if Timothie was not set apart to the work imediatly by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery What then as the Apostles being called by the Lord did not hinder them from receiving the approbation and Testimony of the Brethren yea laying on of hands as did Paul who without doubt was as imediatly sent as any of the rest Act. 9. 17. So Timothes having the hands of the Presbytery laid on him doth not prove he wanted an inward imediate call in himself it is without any proof at all what he subjoynes That Paul saying he was an Apostle not by man doth oppose himself to Ordinary Ministers He adds That seeing I say That those who come Preaching the Gospel not in speach onely but also in Power and in the holy Ghost and in the evidence and demonstration of the Spirit give sufficient proof that they are called of God he thinks I should have favorable thoughts of Protestant Ministers who have given such proofs of their Call Answ. He should have tould me what these Protestant Ministers are whom he sayes we impiously censure or by what Rule he or his Brethren would be laying such claim to be Protestant Ministers so as to exclude the Quakers from being such Pag. 99. Though he quarrel me for saying that with Papists he pleads for Miracles he is so far from vindicating himself from this charge that he giveth again new ground for it saying That such as assert an imediate call ought to give tokens of it by Miracles c. adding That though John did no Miracles yet his call was attended with extraordinary things at his Conception and Birth Now this was the very objection which the Papists made against the first Reformers to whom Luther and Calvin replyed That though they had an imediate call yet there was no need of Miracles and this objection of W. M. is no other then that which almost in totidem verbis in as many words was objected to Beza at the conference of Poizy in France by Claudius Dispensus Doctor of the Sarbone who urged this very argument of John the Baptist confirming his call by the Testimony of Maláchy c. Alledging That they ought to confirm there call by Miracles to whom these are Beza his express words Hist. Eccles. of France Pag. 581. And as to what dispence thou Alledge that extraordinary Vocation is allways aproved by Miracles or by the Testimony of the Prophets I deny that it is allwayes so verified but if we must come to Miracles do you not think that the changing of the Life the fruit which is seen to proceed from this Doctrine in our time by Persons so contemptable and so much persecuted by the greatnest of the world are not sufficient Miracles as said the Apostle to the Corinthians that they were the Seals of his Apostleship So the rational Reader may observe that notwithstanding of W. Ms. so often laying claim to the Protestant Churches and Protestant Ministry and crying out against us as opposers of them he so directly makes use of Popish arguments against us and how we defend our selves by no other but the very same answers the Protestants gave unto the Papists yea of late W. Rett present Preacher of Dandy in his Book against Papists printed but the last year at Aberdeen doth plead That Miracles are not needful instancing that John the Baptist did none And so W. M. though he compare us to the Jesuites in his Epistle is so far one with them himself that if his evasion may be esteemed of worth whereby he seeks to overturn this example of John when brought by us he will rather furnish the Jesuites with it to fight against his Brother W. Rett or rather borrow it out of their atillery whereby they fight against Protestants then miss to have a hit at the Quakers may we not