Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	answer_v	argument_n	prove_v	3,101	5	5.5305	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34201	Concavum cappo-cloacorum, or, A view in little of the great wit and honesty contain'd under a brace of caps, and wrap'd up in the querpo-cloak of a phanatick in some reflections on the second part of a late pamphlet, intituled, Specvlum crapegownorum, being a dialogue between True-man and Cappocloak-man / by an honest gent. and a true lover of all such.	Honest gent. and a true lover of all such.	1682 (1682)	Wing C5692; ESTC R18924	46,034	73

are afraid of the Country's coming in upon them True-man Why What 's the matter with them They are not afraid of hanging are they They know well enough they need not fear that for their old Crimes are pardoned which they cannot but know did too well deserve it for greater than they were cannot easily be committed and yet I am very confident they might communicate if they would do it quietly and orderly with most of the Churches in or near London and never so much as be put in mind of any of them if their own guilty Consciences did not accuse them But a bad Excuse you know Neighbour is better than none at all for one would think if they were truly penitent for their Faults they could not be so enraged by their being told of them Cap-cloak-man But further you 'r told pag. 7. ibid. that they will conform and that one Mr. Read hath led the way and that he tells you himself That he had advised with his Brethren of the Ministry who did acknowledge the lawfulness of using the Liturgy and that his Principles are these That Obedience to the Magistrate in things lawful is a Duty that a Form of Prayer is lawful and that Communion in such Churches is lawful True-man I should be glad to see these Principles put in practise by him and his Brethren the Ministers When I see they come to their Parish-Churches as the Law requires and do joyn in the Liturgy of our Church and in all the Acts of Communion with her then I shall have some Reason to think they have such Principles but whilst they go on to make Divisions amongst us to set up Conventicles against our Churches and Altar against Altar amongst us I cannot help it if notwithstanding all the pretences of their Principles I still believe them to be the most senseless hypocritical and perverse Schismaticks that ever the World knew for I must needs tell you these mere promises of theirs will never obtain any Credit amongst us that know how frequently they have fall'n off from much higher Obligations and how much further than barely saying and acknowledging the lawfulness of Communion with our Church some of them have proceeded and yet have continued in their Separation As for instance Mr. Baxter in his Cure of Church-Divisions hath by such Arguments as neither he nor any Dissenter can ever fully answer proved not only that it is lawful but a Duty to unite with our Church and yet instead of practising accordingly he hath ever since kept up a Schismatical Conventicle nay hath made it his business to undermine not only the Reputation of our most eminent Church-men but the very Foundation of our Church it self witness his Pamphlet against Dr. Stillingfleet 's Sermon and his whole bundle of Lies in his History of Episcopacy I might also here add your Lay-Brethren who for the sake of an Office by which they may serve their Cause and Party stick not at the highest Acts of Conformity i. e. the receiving the Sacrament according to the established Rites of the Church of England and yet as soon as ever they have done run away from our Communion with as much seeming-Zeal as though we were mere Pagans and worshipped the Devil in our Churches but this is so well known to be their common practise that I need not further mention it Cap-cloak-man If their Words and Promises will not do if you read on to pag. 10. you may find full and satisfactory Arguments that may convince you that they are real Conformists to the Laws of both Church and State True-man Aye marry Sir that would be Logick indeed the Philosopher that endeavoured in spight of his own eyes to prove that Snow was black or he that would prove there could be no such thing as motion when his Tongue wagg'd all the while I think had an easie Task in comparison of this Cap-cloak-man Well well the Wit of man is much and though your Prejudices may be great possibly if you consider his Arguments they may remove them True-man Oh! by all means let us hear them Consider them say you I will put on twice as many Caps as the famous Night-cap-Brother T. Goodwin ever wore but I will duely consider them Cap-cloak-man First then as to the Civil Law His two first Arguments pag 7. clearly prove that the Law-makers did never intend those Penalties against us that are Dissenters but against Seditious Persons for the Penalty is grounded upon the Supposition that an Insurrection may be hatch'd at such Meetings but no such thing was done Ergo. True-man The Intention of our Law-makers in that very Act was grounded upon the sense of what had been done in the late times when our Conventicles had preach'd the best of Kings out of his Throne and Life and they well knew that what hath been done may be done again to prevent which they thought it necessary to hinder all such men that under the cloak of Religion hide their Faction from all opportunities of doing the same thing over again and therefore though it was possible to be true that none of the Dissenters themselves have any factious Designs Yet because the Papists even the worst of them the Jesuits have disguised themselves under the shew of peaceable Dissenters as Dr. Oats tells us that twelve of them were particularly sent into Scotland to preach in the shape of Presbyterians all manner of Sedition they that give such Seditious Preachers all Opportunities by their separate Meetings to raise Insurrections amongst us do transgress the very intention of the Law however innocent they may be in their own designs Cap-cloak-man What then you make no difference betwixt our Dissenters and the Papists themselves True-man The Law I think makes none For by our Laws all that do not come to their Parish-Church and constantly conform to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England are called RECVSANTS whether they are Papists Brownists Presbyterians Anabaptists or Independents though perhaps some one particular Law may make a difference the Law in general makes no distinction amongst them For the Liturgy of our Church being establish'd by the Laws of our Land as is plain by the Act of Uniformity whosoever doth not conform to it is therefore guilty of the breach of the Law let his opinion in Religion be what it will and of the design of the Law too which is not only to prevent Seditions but to establish for ever an Uniformity in our Church Cap-cloak-man But you do not take notice what is too truly said p. 7. line 28. that this Law was obtain'd by some part of the Clergy for their own advantage c. True-man Take you Dissenters without an excuse for your selves and reflections upon others and hang you But it is no matter whether there is any sense or reason in them or no it is all one if they be but fairly insinuated the mobile or at least some of them will believe them and

Tradition from her Puritans to your Presbyterians I cannot tell but supposing all this to be true what follows from thence Cap-cloak-man Do you not see Is it not as clear as the nose on your face that then the Clergy of the Church of England did hold that it was lawful for old Queen Bess to behead old Queen Mall who was convicted of high Treason against her True-man That 's right and follows clearly allowing your Premises But what then what 's this to your business Cap-cloak-man Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! What then say you Ha! Ha! Ha! what 's this to my business say you Ha! Ha! Ha! The man 's mad sure is not this all that I need or desire to prove True-man By your laughing one would think you were little better Hold your gigling man and let me tell you that all this is nothing at all to your business you undertook to prove Cap-cloak-man Why is not King-killing and Queen-killing all one True-man Yes as exactly the same as the Presbyterians Doctrine and the Iesuits in that point viz. that it is lawful for Subjects whose Trustees Soveraigns are and from whom they derive their Power to call their Princes to an Account and to punish them with Deposition and Death it self if they are adjudged Tyrannical But that ever the Church of England-men taught any such thing all your Arguments from Queen Elizabeth's-Church-men fall very short of proving Cap-cloak-man How so for God's sake how so was not Mary Q. of Scots a Soveraign Princess True-man No doubt but over the Scots She was But what was that to Englishmen or to Q. Elizabeth Was Queen Elizabeth Q. Mary's Subject Cap-cloak-man No. Who saith She was True-man Then what is this to the Doctrine of the Presbyterians that Subjects may arraign condemn and execute their own Soveraign Princes All that this Instance proves is only this That the Church-of-England-Men in Queen Elizabeths time did hold that it was lawful for one Soveraign Prince to kill another if it be in his Power and if the safety of his own Person or his Subjects welfare does require it and what is this more then that it is lawful for one Soveraign to make War with another Now Neighbour Cap 's e'en go to Henry Care your Giant of Learning before you write again and learn how to make an Argument that may not be quite from the purpose that you may not spend your precious Treasure of Witticisms so much to no purpose in dressing up such idle and impertinent proofs Cap-cloak-man No. I 'll go but to one of your Sermons viz. That Preached on the Anniversary of the Murder of K. Charles I 1682. and there I shall find an Argument that will do my business vid. p. 23 and 24. True-man What 's that I pray you an Argument for King-Killing in an Invective against it Cap-cloak-man Even so and no otherwise For p. 6. ibid. he saith We do not wonder at the ruine of Zedechia nor was the ruine of him a Crime on Nebuchadnezzar 's part True-man What would you inferr from hence Cap-cloak-man Onely this that then the using a Soveraign-Prince more inhumanely then Killing him is no great matter and therefore that even according to our high-flown-Church of England-men Princes Persons are not so sacred as I thought they had been True-man You might have easily seen his meaning if you had Pleased For it is no more then this That Comparatively to our Crime who being Subjects Murdered our own Prince what Nebuchadnezzar did to Zedechia was no Crime at all in him For that in Zedechia's highest and best condition his power was but co-ordinate with the power of Nebuchadnezzar but after he was his Prisoner and Nebuchadnezzar had seiz'd his dominion Zedechia was no longer a Soveraign Prince but his Subject and therefore his endeavoring to recover his lost Crown was contrary to his fealty to Nebuchadnezzar and might be punished by him as an Act of Rebellion If Soveraign Princes have a Right of War one against another who can help it Does it therefore follow that Subjects have the same right against their own Soveraign whose Lives and Dignities they are bound by oath to maintain even with hazard of their own Cap-cloak-man Well but speak like a True-man now Is there not a little touch of nonsence in a subordinate Soveraign For there never was nor ever can be any such thing For a Soveraign p. 24. ibid. though inferior in Power is equal in Priviledges and Dignity to the most puissant True-man Well what then The nonsense is not his but your own For he doth no where in that Sermon that I know of say that Zedechia when he was taken Captive by Nebuchadnezzar did still remain a Soveraign-Prince but his very Argument doth imply the quite contrary But none are so blind as they that will not see For you your self confess that if a Soveraign-Prince becomes Tributary he is onely Titular and no Sovereign Now had not Zedechia not onely lost his Kindom but his Liberty also Where then was his Soveraignty Cap-cloak-man Even where the Authors Liberty is For in his Dedication of the said Sermon he makes himself the most abject Slave in the World to pin a piece of Flattery upon his Patron p. 26. True-man What Slavery is this you cry out of at such a rate If I mistake not it is onely this That he acknowledgeth it as an Honour not onely that he but all his Ancestors ever since the Reformation have been Chaplins to the Dukes of Sommerset and wisheth as well he may that it may continue so to all succeeding Generations Cap-cloak-man But he expresseth it as though he had renounc'd Liberty it self that draught of God's gifts to mankind onely that he might Flatter his Patron True-man For my part I think it so extraordinary an Honor to himself and his Family that there are scarcely any Scholars in England but might well be ambitious of it and did really think that he had herein passed a Complement on himself and not upon the Duke But I see Liberty is as dear to a Phanatick as nutts to an Ape and is not to be parted withal no not so much as in Civility though it be never so much to his own Honour and Advantage Cap-cloak-man If this will not pass for Flattery I 'll show you one that shall or else I 'll never study the Academy of Complements again as long as I live True-man What! In another Dedication I 'll warrant you It seems those Church-mens-Sermons are very barren of faults that you 're forced to pick Faults with every little Complement in a Dedication You tell us of Reflexions upon Sermons but we have nothing as yet but idle Reflections upon the Epistles One would think Men might have some Grains of Allowance in expressing their gratitude and Civility If it had been at a Sisters Funeral that used to bring you the refreshing-Tankard-full of Cordial after your Sabbath-Dayes great Pains and Labours an whole hours Flattery

them Printed at the ends of their Bibles as allowed to be sung in Churches though no such allowance ever could be found and so have continued in great veneration amongst your Party For it is not long since the singing of one of Robin Wisdom's Psalms was enough to make a man thought a great Saint amongst you Our Church appoints the reading-Psalms as they are pointed in our Common-Prayer-Bookes to be said or sung in our Churches and no others but hath winckt at those because some of them are tolerably-well translated as supposing that where they are used such of them would be chosen to keep the People doing of something whilst the Minister went into the Pulpit and to prevent those worse indecencies of Gossiping and gigling in the Church and therefore we do not think them so necessary to the Service of God as to trouble our selves with a new Translation of them because even the old were never authorized by the Church but were sneak'd into use in opposition to the singing of the Reading Psalms according to her order Cap-cloak-man Nay nay that 's not all You sit musing in the Vestry over the Church-wardens Half-pint till the beginning of the last Stave of all believing that God gave you your voyces onely to baul and not to Sing p. 14 in fine True-man Hold Neighbour Caps as for bauling that 's a particular gift of your Splay-mouth'd Pastors and your people do far more admire a man that keeps them awake by the strength of his Lungs then by the strength of his Reasons and he that can speak so loud as to make the Roof of the Conventicle to answer him and to make the Glass-windows tremble he 's your powerfull man he 's your able Preacher he 's your Boanerges for the Sisters Cap-cloak-man Leave your sleering and jeering and answer me why your Preachers fit in the Vestry over the half-pint till the last Stave Answer me man answer True-man What hast man how if I will not answer you or how if I think your question is not worth answering as you 're stout you 'r mercifull you will not beat me I hope will you If you had put your question thus why you of the Church of England who believe that the main of God's worship consists in joyning in the publick Prayers sit injoying your selves in the Vestrey over a Glass of Sack till they are quite ended without any regard to them This indeed had been a very necessary question and for my part I acknowledge freely that I am not able to give a satisfactory answer to it and do heartily wish that they who have given the Scandal would take it off either by giving sufficient reasons for it or else by leaving off so Scandalous a practice for I must needs confess this is a worse indecency in our Churches then any that the worst of our Enemies either have or I think can object against us But as your question is stated you seem to take off all that contempt that you had deservedly thrown upon that Ridiculous Translation of the Psalms and to undo in 2 or 3 lines all that you had been doing in 3 or 4 whole pages For you seem to make the Divine worship to consist in Singing a stave or two of Hopkins For this is the grand fault which you charge upon our Clergy that they do not come into their Pulpits when the Psalm is first named Now if this be all it is very easily answered thus That our Church prefer's the Prophet David's words before Robin Wisdom's and that therefore they think they are not bound to countenance a non-sensical practice which is contrary to her far more necessary injunctions And though they have indeed a perfect aversion to Phanatick harmony i. e. to howling and meer divisions and discord yet I doubt not many of them have as great a love for true Harmony as your worship and believe that God gave them their voices not to baul cant or sing nonsence but to speak and sing sense to his Praise and Glory not in Sternhold and Hopkins's ridiculous Metre but in the Psalms of the holy David Cap-cloak-man But you have forgotten that indecorum which I have frequently met with proceeding from the pride and vanity of several Crape-gown-men that Preach more out of ostentation then instruction i. e. Humming in the Church or Church Huzzaing pag. 15. True-man For an answer to this you send Preistlow p. 16. to the Observator and Heraclitus Cap-cloak-man Well what then True-man Why nothing but that you were strangely mistaken in the persons Cap-cloak-man Mistaken in the persons say you how I beseech you True-man Have a little patience and I 'l tell you You should have sent him to the Wisdom of the Nation and not to Heraclitus or the Observator Cap-cloak-man To the Wisdome of the Nation Who are they or where should I find them True-man I thought so wise a man as you think your self could not but have been acquainted with the Wisdome of the Nation Did you never hear of an House of Commons Cap-cloak-man Yes surely and I hope I shall live to see one again but what have they to do with humming of Sermons or Church Huzzaing True-man Why only that they began it at St. Margaret's Westminster that 's all man Cap-cloak-man That 's all say you that is more then I know how to believe what an House of Commons begin so True-man Nay have a care how you call names for Topham is a terrible man It is very true they did so out of their abundant zeal against Popery and for a need I could tell you the Preachers too who were humm'd by them but I don't think that necessary at present Cap-cloak-man But what if they who have larger Priviledges then other Congregations did so must others do the like True-man I do not understand what Priviledges they have in the Church more then any other men neither do I know why you should blame others for imitating those whom your Party cryed up for the Wisdome of the Nation But if you do really believe that this is one of the particular Priviledges of that House have a care how you Blaspheme any of their said Priviledges by terming it Church-Huzzaing Cap-cloak-man This wit I see is an Edge-tool a Man had need have a Care how he handles it for fear he cutts his own Fingers with it But however I cannot but say that this Humming is very much like Huzzaing True-man But don't you know that every like is not the same for I could tell you of one of the Highest acts of Devotion amongst the Presbyterians which is much more like Health-Drinking then this is like Huzzaing Cap-cloak-man Then will I forfeit a Twelve-Moneths Contribution What the Presbyterians who in obedience to the King's Proclamation never drink any Healths at all can they do any thing like it in their Devotion True-man Don't be so rash Neighbour to lay Wagers For if you should lay your brace of Caps