Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	person_n	son_n	true_a	14,186	5	5.5218	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26853	An accompt of all the proceedings of the commissioners of both persvvasions appointed by His Sacred Majesty, according to letters patent, for the review of the Book of common prayer, &c.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1661 (1661)	Wing B1177; ESTC R34403	133,102	166

them for not doing it 2. And therefore to the second Reason we answer 1. If the things had been different yet so was Pauls Injunction different from our request for Paul goeth so high as to command them to deny their own Liberty in not eating lawful meats themselves least they offend and hurt their Breth●en whereas we are now but desiring you that you would not force others to do that which they take to be a sin and that with penalties that fall heavier on the Church then on them They had on both sides fairer pretences then you have The Cases before us to be compared are four the Case of the refusers of meats and observers of dayes then The Case of the users of those meats and not observers of those dayes The Case of our imposers And the Case of non-conformists The pretence that their refusers of meats had in 1 Cor. 8. was that being offered to Idols they thought it made them partakers of the Idolatry and so they sinned through weakness in being offended at others and censuring them that used their Liberty And had they not here a fairer pretence for their offence and censures then you for your impositions You cannot shew half so great an appearance of good in the things commanded as they could do of Evil in the things for which they were offended And the offended censurer in Rom. 14. had this pretence that the thing was forbidden in Gods own Law even the meats which he refused and the dayes cōmmanded which he observed And he knew not that the Law in these matters of Order and Ceremony was abrogated which Peter himself was ignorant of when he refufed to eat things common and unclean But you have no pretence of Gods own command for the matter of your impositions as these men had for the matter of their offence and censure so that here you are on the worser side And for the other party that in 1 Cor. 8. abused their Liberty and Rom. 14. despised their Brethren they had a double pretence one was that it was their Liberty and if every scrupulous party should drive them from their lawful meat and drink they knew not whither they might drive them Another was that the Law was abrogated by Christ and therefore if they complyed in practice with the scrupulous or did not shew their difference they might seem to be guilty of the restoring of the Law and complying with the Jewes and the Hereticks that both then were enemies to the Church and agreed in this had not these men now a fairer pretence for eating 1 Cor. 8. and for the dissent shewed Rom. 14. then you ever yet produced for forcing others from Ministry and Church or into sin and Hell if they will obey you against their Consciences and all for that which you never pretended to shew a command of God for And others shew you as they think Scripture and Councils and Custom against To tell us then that Paul spake of things not Decent and Significant is pardon our plainness to say much less then nothing For it was not against imposing that Paul spake but using and not using censuring and despising and their Arguments were suitable to their Cause of another kind of moment than Decency or Indecency Significancy or Insignificancy even from supposed Idolatry rejecting Gods Law and complying with Jews and Hereticks in restoring the Law and casting away the Liberties purchased by Christ even in their private eating and drinking To be no more tedious now we humbly offer in any way convenient to try it out with the Reverend Brother that so confidently asserted the disparity of the cases and to prove that these Scriptures most plainly condemn your impositions now in qnestion though we should have thought that one impartial reading of them might end the controversie and save the Church and you from the sad effects As to that 1 Cor. 11. 16. we answer 1. It is uncertain whether the word Custom refer to the matter of Hair or to contention so many Expositors judge q. d. the Churches of God are not contentious 2. Here is no Institution muchless by fallible men of new Covenanting Dedicating or Teaching Symbols or Ceremonies nor is here any unnecessary thing enjoyned but that which nature and the Custom of the Country had made so decent as that the opposite would have been abusively indecent This is not your Case A Cross or Surplice is not decent by nature or common reputation but by Institution that is not at all for if it be not instituted because decent it will not be decent because instituted nor are these so decent as the opposite to be indecent The Apostles worshipped God as decently without them as you do with them The Minister prayeth in the Pulpit as decently without the Surplice as in the Reading place with it 3. Paul doth but exhort them to this undoubted Comeliness as you may well do if men will do any thing which nature or common reputation makes to be slovenly unmannerly or indecent as being covered in Prayer or singing Psalms or any such like about which we will never differ with you But even here he talks not of force or such penalties as tend to the greater hurt of the Church and the ruin of the person Sect. 12. That these Ceremonies have occasioned many Divisions is no more fault of theirs than it was of the Gospel that the Preaching of it occasioned strife betwixt Father and Son c. the true Cause of those Divisions is the Cause of ours which St. James tells us is Lust and inordinate desires of Honour Wealth or Licentiousness or the like were these Ceremonies laid aside there would be the same Divisions If some who think Moses and Aaron take too much upon them may be suffered to deceive the People and to raise in them vain fears and jealousies of their Governours but if all men would as they ought study peace and quietness they would find other and better fruits of those Laws of Rites and Ceremonies as Edification Decency Order and Beauty in the Service and Worship of God Repl. Whether the Ceremonies be as innocent as to Divisions as the Gospel a strange Assertion will better appear when what we have said and what is more fully said by Dr. Ames Bradshaw and others is well answered If the true Cause of our Divisions be as you say Lust and inordinate desires of Honour or Wealth or Licentiousness then the party that is most lustful ambitious covetous and licentious are likest to be most the Cause And for Lust and Licentiousness we should take it for a great attainment of our ends if you will be intreated to turn the edge of your severity against the Lustful and Licentious O that you would keep them out of the Pulpits and out of the Communion of the Church till they reform And for our selves we shall take your Admonitions or Severities thankfully when ever we are convicted by you of any