Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
duty_n pray_v prayer_n see_v 2,526 5 3.9835 3 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A85889 A defence of A treatise against superstitious Iesu-worship, falsely called scandalous, against the truely scandalous answer of the parson of Westminston in Sussex. Wherein also the whole structure of his Antiteichisma, so farre as it concernes the po[i]nt in controversie is overthrowne, the truth more fully cleared, and the iniquitie of that superstition more throughly detected. By M.G. the author of the former treatise, published Anno Dom. 1642 Giles, Mascall, 1595 or 6-1652. 1643 (1643) Wing G46; Thomason E64_6; ESTC R16778 55,127 71

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

You first deny the Antecedent and say your bowing is specified to bee to the glory of the Father but you must first prove it from the Text Then you say we are Simonians Saturnians if wee thinke to serve God for nothing O horrible blasphemy is Jesus all and Jehovah nothing Is God to us something and God in his glorious nature nothing is it all to serve God for our selves and nothing to serve him for himselfe When I alleadge Deut. 28. 58. to prove that Jehovah is Gods glorious name you absurdly wrest me contrary to my meaning that I should say wee must serve God more for feare than love which is nothing agreeable to my words Againe you impudently wrong mee in laying to my charge that I make Iesus and Iehovah not the same God it is your selfe that doe it in making Iesus greater than Iehovah I onely distinguish the names which you here confound for your owne ends and shew that Iesus sheweth what God is to us Iehovah what he is in himselfe therefore to worship him as Iesus and not as Iehovah is abominable There is nothing else worth replying to being cleared else-where onely I thinke good to vindicate my selfe from one clamorous imputation When I say if we must bow onely in respect of salvation Devils and Reprobates should be more sincere in their service then we who must bow to Christ as he is their Lord but wee onely by the opinion of these men as hee is our Saviour here hee blesseth himselfe as if some spirit appeared before him But wee will see whether we can allay this spirit or lay him in his right place He and his friends understand the proper dutie of the Text in it selfe considered to be a Religious ceremony to bee performed in holy times and places And himselfe holds that all Angels and men just and unjust are bound to performe voluntary obedience to glory If the Devils there be so bound if they performe religious acts and observe holy times for the bowing materially is the same for all gratis when they can looke for nothing but damnation to require good for evill being a note of perfection much more to requite good for so great an evill as utter destruction they should attaine to an unmatchable perfection Therefore Sir weepe not for me but for your selfe it is your owne doctrine I would your hand might tremble in mercy and your eyes drop for the monstrous blasphemies which you have let fall in your booke SECT. VII HEre I say that Doctor Page his reason is not good that we should bow at the Name Jesus because above all other Names it minds us of Christs death First I denyed the antecedent affirming that many called God their Saviour in the old Testament yet few supposed that God should die but you say very few which I say not I deny not that it was knowne but it was not commonly and clearely knowne as appeares by Christs Disciples who though they called him Jesus yet would hardly be perswaded that redemption should bee by his blood though they were often told of it Joh. 20. 9. Therefore Jesus is not the chiefest name signifying death but the Name Christ is rather because it denotes him to be a Priest and such a Priest that did also shed his owne blood and therefore I say againe God could have beene a Jesus if he had would without becomming a Priest he could not indeed because hee would not but he never could have beene a Priest unlesse hee had beene a Jesus You have not overthrowne the consequent for first how have you proved by the Scriptures that the Name of Christs death is the Name of his Glory Secondly I goe not against the order of the Text when I say the Name above every Name leades us to Christs glory and not to his sufferings I deny not that God in the Text proceeds from humility to glory yet is it absurd to confound Christs humiliation with his exaltation and the Name of the one with the Name of the other The Name Jesus lookes to hell saith Doctor Page but we must looke for Christ in heaven Thirdly neither have I changed the Question but it is you rather for doe you bow onely to the Name because you say but prove it not that it is a suffering Name doe you not bow also to the sense of the Name because it signifieth salvation by dying This you stand upon continually therefore the ignorantia elenchi is in your selfe My marginall note stands firme against you for seeing you say you bow in the sense of the Name Jesus the sense of the Name is as well conveighed to the understanding by sight as by hearing your selfe make it all one as I have noted Part 1. Sect. 8. SECT. VIII HEre I affirme that it is no good reason to bow at the Name Jesus because the fulnesse of the God-head dwells in Christ bodily Col. 2. 9. That which you reply to the deniall of the consequence is nothing but what hath been sufficiently cleared before And that which you alleadge from Tertullian is against you For if the Names Jesus and Christ do one of them imply the other why doe you make such a difference though it be your direct opinion by the humanity to climbe up to the glorious Trinitie which I deny not yet this will not prove the consequence and I verily beleeve that God will accept our worship in and by the Name Christ as well as Jesus I say it is no Reason to affirme that we should bow at the Name Jesus rather than Christ because some say that Jesus is the Name of the Person Christ of the office because Christ by his office brings us the Father Jesus doth denote his office as well as his Person though more summarily his office Christ denotes his Person as well as his office though more clearely his office then the Name Jesus doth yea it denotes his person more properly and certainly then the name Jesus which denotes some body else but Christ none but he There is nothing else worth answering onely this I stand still to justifie that upon the foregoing reason if we must bow to the Father at the mention of the Name Jesus onely we must as well pray to the Father by mentioning of that Name onely neither have you disproved it for though Prayer bee one dutie and bowing another yet are they both parts of worship and lip-lip-prayer is no more substantiall than outward bowing the excellency of both is in the heart For the conclusive Argument the heads are but barely denyed without proofe and what I affirmed is sufficiently justified in the premises and confirmed in this reply and so I leave it But Sir I must tell you that whereas you lay to my charge that I had others assistance in my booke It is false I am not beholding to any for two words either in informing or reforming otherwise than what light I have demonstrated to have received
have the devils to doe more service then wee but wee need not then till Jesus be named So it followes that Satan shall be Lord all our time and Christ shal be Lord but two or three minutes in a week is not this sound Doctrine and then the Devils must be tied to come to Church for if they be not tied they are fooles to come thither to be subject with horrour when they might bee at their owne libertie or else they must set up a Church of their owne and choose a Priest to say Service or else upon these mens grounds how shall they ever be subject at all For if the dutie of the Text as these men say be not seasonable but in times of devotion then are not Devils capable of subjection at all except they will make them religious and devout well then if the Devils must bow but when these men doe it will follow that when Satan is not over-ruled he will rule when he is not in subjection hee will command no marvaile then if these men generally live such scandalous lives for would not you have their lives agree with their doctrine They teach it they make Satan Lord over them to rule them all the weeke but Christ shall be their Lord but two or three minutes on the Lords day yea they teach this doctrine in respect of themselves for if the ●…owing of the knee let them take soule-knees too if they will be limited to the naming of Jesus then by this Text they are not bound to bow either body or soule at any other time besides Christ indeed should be a proper King by this Doctrine to have command of his subjects a fit or two on the Lords day and all their time else to be at their owne command and at the command of his utter enemy To my fift proofe when I say this doctrine depriveth Christ of his true subjects and forceth upon him the members of Antichrist you answer how can this be can any plucke his out of his hands No Sir it cannot be but you teach it for seeing you damne all to hell that will not observe your command by this meanes you damne to hell the French Churches the Scotish the Netherland Churches and all other Churches and Persons whatsoever that obey you not and I hope Sir Churches that must be damned are not true Churches and helhounds are not Christs faithfull subjects yea you will have none to be saved but your owne faction But I suppose that if some Pagan should converse a while in England and should see the deportment of these Cringers that pretend they practise it for conscience sake and should compare them with those that for conscience sake refuse it that like the American savage whom a Fryer came to instruct at his death if he should be told that these cringers goe to heaven and the other to hell would choose to goe to hell with these then to heaven with those cringers That none should write against your opinion till T. C. I suppose you meane Mr. Cartright is extreamely false That ancient and moderne Divines agree with you it becomes none but Mr. Barton and such as he is to affirme You cannot bring any one Orthodox Father so to understand the Text And for Moderne Divines generally all Expositors that are Protestants write against you Bishop Andrewes was the first Protestant Divine that ever made it a dutie of the text and the best learned and pious in England have beene and are generally against it And though perhaps some very learned men might through the iniquity of the times yeeld to the practise of it yet I suppose few in their judgement held it by the Text To my last reason that it depriveth Christ of his Glory at the day of judgement seeing first it puts no difference betweene Christs kingdome inchoate and made perfect And secondly because it will make the full subjection of every creature to consist onely in a ceremony distinct from a substantiall dutie as Doctor Page calls it and to be the sole performance at that day when Christ shall come to be fully glorified by all his creatures You say nothing to it but what you say elsewhere and I say againe so to hold is flat blasphemy therefore you have more cause to recant for delivering such doctrine then I for censuring it as it justly deserves I was never against externall reverence but not limited at the Name Jesus SECT. XIII HEre I say that it is not probable that it is a dutie of the Text seeing it is not typified or prophesied in the old Testament You have not disproved my Antecedent to say that a truth may bee in analogy though not typified or prophesied is nothing to the Question except you meane signified to come to passe by the analogie Those places Act. 3. 3. 8. and Act. 10. 43. speake of what should come to passe in Christ that of Matth. 5. 18. speakes of jots and tittles and I shewed you that small matters were foretold in Christ This should have beene much more if it had beene the honour of Christs Kingdome But at length you will finde it in Type and prophesie but that in Gen. 37. 9. is nothing to your purpose except you could prove that Josephs brethren bowed to their Brothers name neither that of Exod. 17. 11. except you can prove that Moses bowed to the Name Joshuah Tertullian doth not speake of the bare literall Name Those Scriptures which you bring as Exod. 3. 15. Psal. 75. 1. Psal. 111. 9. Isay 45. 23. are to no purpose for because Gods name is Jehovah his name is neare his name is holy all knees must bow to Jehovah that is to God himselfe therefore that all knees must bow at or to the Name Jesus is a ridiculous inconsequent EECT XIIII HEre I say that if this bowing were a necessary command of God it is probable that there would be some examples for it but there are none Those places that I have brought for my consequent are weighty for they concerne examples of faith and the effects and fruits thereof in obedience there be examples enough in Scripture of all necessary duties and though there is no example precisely of putting off the hat yet there is of externall reverence in Gods house which you have sufficiently proved to my hand and you and your friends hold any externall reverence sufficient at the Name Jesus as putting off the hat bowing downe the body in stead of the knee but you cannot bring any example of any externall reverence whatsoever given at the mention of the Name Jesus That of Matth. 17. 6. though it concerne not the Question was no worship properly but an infirmitie of feare That which you speake of the sense of the Name makes not for you for our Question is about the name and I am sure you never bow to the sense without the Name It is strange that if this were a duty by this Text never