Selected quad for the lemma: work_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
work_n	holy_a	lord_n	sabbath_n	5,103	5	9.4103	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49123	Mr. Hales's treatise of schism examined and censured by Thomas Long ... ; to which are added, Mr. Baxter's arguments for conformity, wherein the most material passages of the treatise of schism are answered.	Long, Thomas, 1621-1707.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691. Mr. Baxter's arguments for conformity against separation.	1678 (1678)	Wing L2974; ESTC R10056	119,450	354

the Scruples and suspicions of private Christians concerning the lawfulness of Actions required by their Superiors cannot warrant their separation Because their obedience to Superiors in things not unlawful is their duty and to omit a certain duty upon a bare suspicion is dangerous and sinful And for a full answer to this error I desire it may be considered what a scrupulous Conscience is which I take to be such an act of the practical understanding as resolves what is or what is not to be done but with some fear and anxiety lest its determination be amiss And it differs from a doubting Conscience which assents to neither part of the question but remains unresolved as doubting of the true sense of the rule in which case it is resolved that in all things doubtful we are to take the safest course And doubtless that wherein the generality of wise and good Men as well Ancient as Modern are agreed is much more safe than that in which a few less knowing prejudicated and guilty persons pretend to be doubtful But where there are only groundless fears and scruples concerning some circumstance annexed to a known duty it is the sense even of our Non-conformists That if we cannot upon serious endeavours get rid of our Scruples we ought to act against them And this is so lawful and necessary that we cannot otherwise have either grace or peace See more to this purpose in a Sermon at Cripplegate on Acts 24. 26. p. 18 19. And if scruple and suspicion were a just plea for Separation then every discontented Person that is resolved to contemn his Superiours every one that is affectedly ignorant and lazy or refractory to better information every one that hath melancholy humours and temptations or wants true Christian Humility or Charity may make separation and yet be guiltless So that this Opinion of our Author's would be an Apology for all Separatists which being allowed there neither was nor can be any such sin as Schism For I suppose it is sufficiently known that neither the Doctrine or Worship of any Church is so well constituted but some unquiet spirits have raised scruples and suspicions concerning them And unless the Church have power to command things lawful and no way repugnant to the Word of God though some giddy Persons may scruple at them it is impossible that it should preserve it self from confusion The Apostles I am sure did practise this in the Synod at Hierusalem Acts 15. And St. Paul silenceth the objections of contentious and scrupulous Persons with the Custome of the Churches of God 1 Corinth 11. 16. Every Congregation that pretends to have the face of a Church requires the obedience of its Members to all Orders for publick Worship as well as their consent to their Articles of Faith and without this it could not subsist I shall conclude this with Mr. Baxter's advice in his Dispute of Ceremonies Ch. 15. S. 3. That the Duty of obeying being certain and the sinfulness of the thing commanded being uncertain and only Suspected we must go on the surer side And the Author of the Sermon on Acts 24. 16. gives a good reason for it saying If a Christian should forbear praying or receiving the Sacrament every time his scrupulous conscience tells him he had better wholly omit the duty than perform it in such a manner he would soon find to his sorrow the mischief of his scruples And he adviseth In all known necessary duties always do what you can when you cannot do what you would Our Author p. 202. falls on an Ancient controversie concerning the observation of Easter of which he gives us this imperfect account That it being upon error taken for necessary that an Easter must be kept and upon worse than Error if I may so speak for it was no less than a point of Judaism forced upon the Church thought further necessary that the ground for the keeping the time of that Feast must be the rule left by Moses to the Jews there arose a stout question whether we ought to Celebrate with the Jews on the 14th of the Moon or the Sunday following This matter though most unnecessary most vain yet caused as great a combustion as ever was in the Church the West separating from and refusing Communion with the East for many years together An impartial relation of the ground of this controversie as it lies in Church History will sufficiently discover how odiously it is represented First then whereas he says it was upon error taken for necessary that an Easter must be kept I answer if it were an error the Church had it from the Apostles themselves for although the contending parties differed among themselves in the day yet both agreed on the necessity of observing Easter in Commemoration of our Saviour's Resurrection And the Controversie concerning the day puts it out of controversie that there ought to be a day observed Some learned men have thought the setting a-part of an Easter day to be grounded on 1 Cor. 5. 8. where S. Paul speaking of the Christian Passover says Let us keep the Feast and Grotius observes that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answereth to the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to abstain from all work for the offering up of holy things to God If the observation of any day be necessary unto Christians this of Easter is because it is the Mother and ground of our weekly Sabbath and is supposed to be the same which S. John calls the Lords day Rev. 1. 10. But we need not seek express authority from Scripture to make it necessary the practice of the Apostles testified by such early and authentick witnesses and the continued celebration of it in all the Churches of God do evince that it was not taken up on an Error no more than the observation of the Weekly Sabbath Mr. Hales says enough to resolve this objection in his Golden Remains set forth by Mr. Garthwait 1673. p. 260. on the question how we may know the Scriptures to be the word of God When saith he we appeal to the Churches testimony we content not our selves with any part of the Church actually existent but add unto it the perpetually successive testimony of the Church in all Ages since the Apostles times viz. since its first beginning and out of both these draw an argument in this question of that force as that from it not the subtilest Disputer can find an escape For who is it that can think to find acceptance and credit with reasonable men by opposing not only the present Church conversing in earth but the uniform consent of the Church in all ages So that the Church in all Ages agreeing that an Easter must be kept it was not taken up upon Error Nor secondly was it upon worse than error i. e. as our Author affirms a point of Judaism grounded on the Law of Moses to the Jews that the observation thereof was by some Churches solemnized

own work amiss and therefore the thing in it self being lawful I would obey him and use that garment if I could not be dispensed with Yea though secondarily the whiteness be to signifie purity and so it be made a teaching sign yet would I obey And I see no reason to scruple the lawfulness of the Ring in marriage for though the Papists make a Sacrament of marriage yet we have no reason to take it for any Ordinance of Divine Worship more than the solemnizing a contract between a Prince and People All things are sanctified and pure to the pure And for Organs or other Instruments of musick in God's worship they being a help partly natural and partly artificial to the exhilarating the Spirits for the praise of God I know no argument to prove them simply unlawful but what would prove a Cup of Wine unlawful or the tune and metre and melody of singing unlawful Of Holy-days Nor do I scruple to keep a day in remembrance of any eminent Servant of Christ or Martyr to praise God for their Doctrine or Example and honor their memorial I am resolved if I live where such Holy-days Christ's Nativity Circumcision Fasting Transfiguration ascension and such like are observed to censure no man for observing them But if I lived under a government that peremptorily commanded it I would observe the outward rest of such a Holy-day and I would preach on it and join with the Assemblies in God's Worship yea I would thus observe the day rather than offend a weak Brother or hinder any man's salvation much more rather than I would make any division in the Church Of the Cross in Baptism I dare not peremptorily say that the Cross in Baptism is unlawful nor will I condemn Ancients or Moderns that use it nor will I make any disturbance in the Church about it more than my own forbearance will make I presume not to censure them that judge it lawful but only give the reasons that make me doubt and rather think it to be unlawful though still with a suspicion of my own understanding Of Ceremonies Certain things commonly called Ceremonies may lawfully be used in the Church upon Humane imposition and when it is not against the Law of God no Person should disobey the commands of their lawful Governors in such things It may be very sinful to command some Ceremonies which may lawfully yea must in duty be used by the Subject when they are commanded Mr. Baxter's judgment concerning Confirmation agreeable to the practice of the Church of England may be seen in a particular Treatise on that Subject Of Conventicles Q. 172. Are all religious and private Meetings forbidden by Rulers unlawful Coventicles Answ 1. It is more to the Honor of the Church and of Religion and of God and more to our safety and edification to have God's worship performed solemnly publickly and in great Assemblies than in a corner secretly and with few 2. It is a great mercy where Rulers allow the Church such publick Worship 3. Caeteris paribus all Christians should prefer such publick Worship before private and no private Meetings should be kept up which are opposite or prejudicial to such publick Meetings And therefore if such Meetings or any that are unnecessary to the ends of the Ministry the service of God and good of Souls be forbidden by lawful Rulers they must be forborn And it must be remembred that Rulers that are Infidels Papists Hereticks or Persecutors that restrain Church meetings to the injury of mens Souls must be distinguished from pious Princes that only restrain Hereticks and real Schismaticks for the Churches good 2. And that times of heresie and schism may make private meetings more dangerous than quiet times And so even the Scottish Church forbad private meetings in the Separatists days of late And when they do more hurt than good and are justly forbidden no doubt in that case it is a duty to obey and to forbear them It is a dangerous thing to be insnared in a Sect it will before you are aware possess you with a seaverish sinful zeal for the Opinions and interest of that Sect it will make you bold in bitter invectives and censures against those that differ from you it will corrupt your Church-communion and fill your very Prayers with partiality and humane passions it will secretly bring malice under the name of Zeal into your minds and words In a word it is a secret but deadly enemy to Christian love and peace Let them that are wiser and more Orthodox and godly than others shew as the Holy Ghost directeth them James 3. 13 14 c. out of a good conversation their works with meekness of wisdom But if ye have bitter envying or zeal and strife in your hearts Glory not and lye not against the truth This wisdom descendeth not from above but is earthly sensual Devilish Of Communion in the Lords Supper Qu. 2. May we communicate with unworthy persons Answ It is your duty to communicate with that Church which hath a true Pastor and where the denominating part of the members are capable of Church-communion though there may some Infidels or Heathen or uncapable Persons violently intrude or scandalous Persons are admitted through the neglect of Discipline in case you have not your choice to hold personal communion with a better Church and in case also you be not guilty of the corruption but by seasonable and modest professing your dissent do clear your self of the guilt of such intrusion and corruption Qu. 3. But what if I cannot communicate unless I conform to an imposed gesture as kneeling Answ I never yet heard any thing to prove kneeling unlawful there is no Word of God for or against any gesture Christ's example cannot be proved to oblige us in this and his gesture was not such a sitting as ours The nature of the Ordinance is mixt And if it be lawful to take a Pardon from the King upon our Knees I know not what can make it unlawful to take a Sealed Pardon from Christ by his Ambassador upon our Knees As for this Ceremony of kneeling at the Sacrament especially since the Rubrick is inserted which disclaimeth both all Bread-worship and the bodily real-presence my judgment was ever for it God having made some gesture necessary and confined us to none but left it to humane determination I shall submit to Magistrates in their proper work I am not sure that Christ intended the example of himself in this as obligatory but I am sure he hath commanded me obedience and peace Mr. Perkins was for kneeling and Mr. Baines in his Letters writes for it and answers objections against it Qu. 4. But what if I cannot communicate but according to the administration of the Common-prayer book Answ 1. That it is not unlawful to receive according to the administration of the Common-prayer book because it is a form