Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	ghost_n	holy_a	scripture_n	5,819	5	6.0509	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69535	The grand debate between the most reverend bishops and the Presbyterian divines appointed by His Sacred Majesty as commissioners for the review and alteration of the Book of common prayer, &c. : being an exact account of their whole proceedings : the most perfect copy.	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Commission for the Review and Alteration of the Book of Common Prayer.	1661 (1661)	Wing B1278A; Wing E3841; ESTC R7198	132,164	165

The reserving of Confirmation to the Bishop doth argue the Dignity of the Bishop above Presbyters who are not allowed to Confirm but does not argue any excellency in Confirmation above the Sacraments St. Hierom argues the quite contray ad Lucif cap. 4. That because Baptism was allowed to be performed by a Deacon but Confirmation only by a Bishop therefore Baptism was most necessary and of the greatest value The mercy of God allowing the most necessary means of Salvation to be administred by inferiour Orders and restraining the lesse necessary to the higher for the honour of their Order Reply O that we had the Primitive Episcopacy and that Bishops had no more Churches to oversee than in the Primitive times they had and then we would never speak against this reservation of Confirmation to the honour of the Bishop But when that Bishop of one Church is turned into that Bishop of many hundred Churches and when he is now a Bishop of the lowest rank that was an Arch-bishop when Arch-bishops first came up and so we have not really existent any meer Bishops such as the Antients knew at all but only Arch-bishops and their Curates Marvel not if we would not have Confirmation proper to Arch-bishops nor one man undertake more than an hundred can perform But if you will do it there is no remedie we have acquit our selves Prayer after the Imposition of hands is grounded upon the practice of the Apostles Heb. 6. 2. Acts 8. 17. Nor doth 25. Article say that Confirmation is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice but that the 5. commonly called Sacraments have ground partly on the corrupt following the Apostles c. which may be applied to some other of those 5 but cannot be applied to Confirmation unless we make the Church speak contradictions Reply But the question is not of Imposition of hands in generall but this Imposition in particular And you have never proved that this sort of Imposition called Confirmation is mentioned in those Texts And the 25. Article cannot more probably be thought to speak of any one of the 5. as proceeding from the corrupt imitation of the Apostles than of Confirmation as a supposed Sacrament We know no harm in speaking the language of holy Scripture Acts 8. 15. they laid their hands upon them and they received the Holy Ghost and though Impositions of hands be not a Sacrament yet it is a very fit sign to certifie the persons what is then done for them as the Prayer speaks Reply It is fit to speak the Scripture language in Scripture sense But if those that have no such power to give the Holy Ghost will say Receive the Holy Ghost it were better for them to abuse other language than Scripture language After Confirmation There is no inconvenience that Confirmation should be required before the Communion when it may be ordinarily obtained that which you here fault you elsewhere desire Reply We desire that the credible approved profession of Faith and repentance be made necessaries But not that all the thousands in England that never yet came under the Bishops hands as not one of many ever did even when they were at the highest may be kept from the Lords Supper for some cannot have that Imposition and others will not that yet are fit for Communion with the Church The Ring is a significant sign only of humane institution and was alwayes given as a pledge of fidelity and constant love and here is no reason given why it should be taken away nor are the reasons mentioned in the Roman Ritualits given in our Common-Prayer-Book Repl. We crave not your own forbearance of the Ring but the indifferencie in our use of a thing so mis-used and unnecessary These words in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if they seem to make Matrimony a Sacrament may as well make all sacred yea civil actions of weight to be Sacraments they being usual at the beginning and ending of all such It was never heard before now that those words make a Sacrament Reply Is there no force in an argument drawn from the appearance of evil the offence and the danger of abuses when other words enow may serve turn They go to the Lords Table because the Communion is to follow Reply They must go to the Table whether there be a Communion or not Consecrated the estate of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery c. Though the institution of Marriage was before the Fall yet it may be now and is consecrated by God to such an excellent mystery as the representation of the spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church Eph. 5. 23. We are sorry that the words of Scripture will not please The Church in the 25. Article hath taken away the fear of making it for a Sacrament Reply When was Marriage thus consecrated If all things used to set forth Christs offices or benefits by way of similitude be consecrated then a Judge a Father a Friend a Vine a Door a Way c. are all consecrated things Scripture phrase pleaseth us in Scripture sense The new married persons the same day of their marriage must receive the Holy Communion This inforces none to forbear Marriage but presumes as well it may that all persons marriageable ought to be also fit to receive the Holy Sacrament And marriage being so solemn a Covenant of God they that undertake it in the fear of God will not stick to seal it by receiving the Holy Communion and accordingly prepare themselves for it Is were more Christian to desire that those licentious Festivities might be supprest and the Communion more generally used by those that marry the happiness would be greater then can easily be exprest Unde sufficiat ad enarrandum felicitatem ejus Matrimonii quod Ecclesia conciliat confirmat oblatio Tertul. lib. 2. ad Uxorem Reply Indeed will you phrase and modify your administrations upon such a supposition that all men are such as they ought to be and do what they ought to do Then take all the World for Saints and use them accordingly and blot out the doctrine of Reproof excommunication and damnation from your Bibles Is it not most certain that very many married persons are unfit for the Lords Supper and will be when you and we have done our best And is it fit then to compell them to it But the more unexpected the more welcom is your motion of that more Christian course of suppressing of licentious festivities When shall we see such Reformation undertaken Visitation of the Sick FOr as much as the condition c. All which is here desired is already presumed namely that the Minister shall apply himself to the particular condition of the person but this must be done according to the Rule of prudence and justice and not according to his pleasure therefore if the sick person shew himself truly penitent it ought not to be left

to the Ministers pleasure to deny him Absolution if he desire it Our Churches direction is according to the 13. Can. of the venerable Council of Nice both here and in the next that follows Reply But the question is whether he shew himself truly penitent or not If we have not here neither a judgment of discretion for the conduct of our own actions What do we with reason Why are we trusted in the Office and Whose judgment must we follow The Bishop cannot have leisure to become the Judge whether this man be penitent It must then be the Minister or the man himself And must we absolve every man that saith he repenteth Then we must believe an incredible profession which is against reason Some are known Infidels and in their health profess that they believe not the Scripture to be true and make a mock at Jesus Christ and perhaps in a sickness that they apprehend no danger in will send for the Minister in scorn to say I repent and force him to absolve them that they may deride him and the Gospel Some of us have known too many of those that have for twenty or thirty years been common drunkards seldom sober a week together and still say when they came to themselves that they were sorry for it and did unfeignedly repent and as they said in health so they said in sickness dying with in a few daies or weeks after they were last drunk must we absolve all these Some dye with a manifest hatred of an Holy Life reviling at those that are carefull to please God yet saying they hate them not as holy but because they are all Hypocrites or the like And yet will say they repent of their sins Some forbear not their accustomed swearing and cursing while they profess repentance Some make no restitution for the wrong which they say they repent of And must we take all these for truly penitent If not the Minister must judge What you mean by your saying Our Churches direction is according to the 13th Canon of the venerable Council of Nice both here and in the next that follows we know not the second Council of Nice you cannot mean its Can. being uncertain and the 13th is of no such sense And the 13th Can. of the first Council of Nice is only that lapsed Catechumens shall be 3 years inter and ientes before they pray again with the Catechumens This shews they then took not up with every word of seeming penitence as true repentance but what it is to your purpose we know not nor is here any other Can. in that Council for you The 11th Can. is sufficiently against you The lapsed that truly repented were to remain among the penitent for three years and seaven years more if they were fideles c. Ab omnibus vero illud praecipue observetur ut animus eorum fructus poenitentiae attendatur quicunque enim cum omni timore lacrimis perseverantibus operibus bonis Conversationem suam non verbis solis sed opere veritate demonstrant cum tempus statutum etiam ab his fuerit impletum orationibus jam coeperint communicare licebit etiam Episcopo humanius circa res aliquot cogitare We know this rigor as to time was unjust and that to the dying it was abated but you see here that bare words that were not by seriousness and by deeds made credible were not to be taken as sufficient marks of penitence of which it was not the person himself that was to be the Judge The form of Absolution in the Liturgy is more agreeable to the Scriptures then that which they desire it being said in St. John 20. Whose sins you remit they are remitted not whose sins you pronounce remitted and the Condition needs not to be expressed being alway necessarily understood Reply It is a Controversy among the Learnedst Expositors how much of that of John 20. was proper to the Apostles and such others as were then to have the spirit in an extraordinary manner who did remit sin effectively by remitting the punishment of it by casting out Devils healing the sick c. according to that of Jam. 5. 14 15. Is any sick among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray for him and anoint him with Oyl in the name of the Lord And the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him If besides this remitting them effectively the rest be no other then a Ministerial pronouncing them forgiven by God according to his Covenant in the Gospel then you cannot plead the phrase of a Text which respecteth another way of Remission then we pretend to But must phrase it according to the nature of the thing and the sense of other Scriptures also that fullier open it There are three waies of pardoning 1. By grant or Guift whether by a general Act of pardon or a particular 2. By sentence 3. By execution that is preventing or taking off the penalty The first of these is done already by God in the Gospel The Second God doth principally and his Ministers instrumentally as his Messengers The third the taking off the penalty they can do no otherwise in the Case before us then by praying that God will take it off and using his ordinary means So that it is most evident that this Absolution that Ministers are to perform can be no other then to pronounce the penitent Believer to be absolved by God according to his Covenant And if there be no other should we not speak as intelligibly as we can Indeed there is more in absolving the excommunicate for then the Church both judiciously and executively remitteth the penalty of excommunication to which also the Text John 20. may have much respect but the penalty of damnation can be no otherwise remitted by us then as is expressed And indeed the thing is of such exceeding weight that it behoveth us to deal as intelligibly and openly in it as we can And therefore we admire that you should say the Condition needs not be expressed being always necessarily understood by necessarily do you mean necessitate naturali irresistibili so that all the wicked men in the world cannot chuse but understand us to speak conditionally Surely this is none of your meaning if it were it were far from truth Or do you mean not de necessitate vel actitudine eventus but de debito ex obligatione no doubt but it is necessary as a duty and also ad finem as a means And therefore it is that we desire it may be expressed And doubtless you think not that all men do their duties and understand all that they ought to understand no not in this particular If you mean that all sick men may be rationally supposed to understand it this can never be believed by us that are acquainted personally and have been with