Selected quad for the lemma: duty_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
duty_n	christian_a	church_n	religion_n	1,340	5	5.5492	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25216	A reply to the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls's reflections on the Rector of Sutton, &c. wherein the principles and practices of the non-conformists are not only vindicated by Scripture, but by Dr. Stillingsfleet's Rational account, as well as his Irenicum : as also by the writings of the Lord Faulkland, Mr. Hales, Mr. Chillingworth, &c. / by the same hand ; to which is added, St. Paul's work promoted, or, Proper materials drawn from The true and only way of concord, and, Pleas for peace and other late writings of Mr. Richard Baxter ...	Alsop, Vincent, 1629 or 30-1703.; Barret, John, 1631-1713.	1681 (1681)	Wing A2919; ESTC R6809	123,967	128

that any will prove Separation from the Church of Rome lawful because she required unlawful Things as Conditions of her Communion it will be proved lawful not to conform to any suspected or unlawful Practice required by any Church-Governours upon the same Terms if the Thing so required be after serious and sober Enquiry judged unwarrantable by a Man 's own Conscience Which with more you have in that Page and the Page before it cuts off your third Particular Preface p. 75. Here now I have gained so much Ground of you Such are necessitated to withdraw from your Communion who must otherwise joyn in some unlawful or suspected Practice As Chillingworth p. 269. To do ill that you may do well is against the Will of God which to every good Man is a high Degree of Necessity And say you Rational Account p. 290. Can any one imagine it should be a Fault in any to keep off from Communion where they are so far from being obliged to it that they have an Obligation to the contrary from the Principles of their common Christianity Here I assume they are bound by the Principles of common Chrisianity to keep off from Communion with you that know they should certainly sin if they held Communion with you because they should then joyn in suspected ●ractices and things which after Enquiry their Consciences tell them are unlawful Ergo you must say it cannot be a Fault in such to keep off from Communion with you Though I would grant them faulty so far as any keep off through Prejudice Error Ignorance yet so far as these are involuntary they are more excusable than to go directly cross to their own Consciences here So therefore such are necessitated to withdraw Communion from you who would certainly sin if they held Communion with you judging such Communion to be sinful 2. If you say here What is this to a positive Separation which is the present Business You shall see it is something towards it You are come a fair Step on the Way Once grant that it is lawful for Men or that Men are necessitated to deny Communion with you in unlawful or but suspected Practices which are unlawful to them and you come presently to the Point Allowing them to withdraw from yours you must allow them to joyn in some other Christian Assembly unless you would have them utterly deprived of the Worship of God and to live like Heathens As you say well Irenic p. 109. Every Christian is under an Obligation to joyn in Church society with others because it is his Duty to profess himself a Christian and to own his Religion publickly and to partake of the Ordinances and Sacraments of the Gospel which cannot be without Society with some Church or other So then Christians that cannot enjoy Sacraments with you must joyn with some other Society where they may enjoy them And further take notice of that remarkable Assertion in your Rational Account p. 335. and apply it here as far as there is Cause Our Assertion therefore is that the Church and Court of Rome are guilty of this Schism by forcing Men N. B. if they would not damn their Souls by sinning against their Consciences in approving the Errors and Corruptions of the Roman Church to joyn together N. B. for the solemn Worship of God according to the Rule of Scripture and Practice of the Primitive Church and suspending I suppose it should have been and to suspend Communion with that Church till those Abuses and Corruptions be redressed And I observe further Ibid. p. 291. you would not have Men bound to Communion with a particular Church but in Subordination to God's Honour and the Salvation of their Souls Yea you say Men are bound not to communicate in those lesser Societies where such things are imposed as are directly repugnant to these Ends. And where Men should be forced to damn their Souls by sinning against their Consciences would not this be directly repugnant And yet are not such bound to joyn together for the Solemn Worship of God c. You see now how far I have brought you even on your own Grounds how you will get off I know not Then might it not have been expected that you would have been more favourable and charitable towards the Assemblies of those Ministers and Christians that are kept off from you by unlawful Terms or at least such unnecessary Terms as are to them unlawful You speak more temperately Rational Account pag. 331. Here let me use some of your own Words there which something favour those Assemblies you now engage so zealously against By their declaring the Grounds of their Separation to be such Errors and Corruptions which are crept into the Communion of your Church and imposed on them in order to it they withal declare their readiness to joyn with you again if those Errors and Corruptions be left out ☞ And where there is this readiness of Communion there is no absolute Separation from the Church as such but only suspending Communion till such Abuses be reformed This they 'l say is very good But now in your new Impartial Account Preface pag. 46. you speak in another Dialect Would they have had me represented that as no Sin which I think to be so great a one or those as not guilty whom in my Conscience I thought to be guilty of it Would they have had me suffered this Sin to have lain upon them without reproving it c. What that which is as plain a Sin as Murder pag. 209. which is really as great and as dangerous a Sin as Murder and in some respects aggravated beyond it Preface p. 45. And yet on the other hand would you have them conform to you though against their Consciences Would that be no Sin Would God be wel-pleased with such Service as was done but to please Men while their Consciences in the mean while condemned them for it Can you say bonâ Fide that it is better more pleasing to God that Men conform to your Modes and Ceremonies though they have real Doubts of Conscience that they are unlawful or better they should live without God's publick Worship and Ordinances then to joyn with such as the Non-conformists That this is as the Sin of Murder Dare you go or send to all the Dissenters in your Parish supposing you take them to belong to your Charge and give 'm it under your hand that though they are still unsatisfied after all you have said and written though they believe they should offend God if they joyned with you upon such Terms yet I say durst you give it under your hand that they would do better to joyn in your way of Worship than in that of the Non-conformists though they have no more doubt of joyning with the latter than you had heretofore If you are clear in the Point have you done this Or why do you neglect your Duty towards them Why do you not endeavour to bring them in

abroad how did it shake the Heavens and darken the Skies O Lord my Heart trembleth to think upon it how many godly and worthy learned Preachers were silenced deprived and greatly disgraced How were the holy Ministers divided and distracted How were the Christian Subjects grieved and offended and the Papists and wicked Men encouraged and emboldened What a damp brought it to all Godliness and Religion and since that time what horrible Wickedness Whoredom Drunkenness and all shameless Filthiness and what grievous Plagues of God one succeeding another have followed evey good Christian Subject must needs see and lament So he who was no Separatist And I hope Sir you and I are agreed that these things last spoken of were no part of England ' s Reformation And now Sir give me leave to tell you in some of your own Words Preface p. 47. We were in a lamentable case as to the Defence of the Reformation if we had no more to plead for it than we have indeed to plead for such mischievous Impositions And this seems to have been the sence of the Queen's Council in that Letter which the modest Enquiry p. 16 17. lays before you Therefore Sir I beseech you as you would not blast the Credit and Honour of the Reformation place it not in such things as rather brought a Deformation on us Here I know not well how to reconcile you to your self For p. 365. You say It was the great Wisdom of our Church not to make more things necessary as to Practice than were made so at the Settlement of our Reformation but whether there be sufficient Reason to alter those Terms of Communion which were then settled for the sake of such whose Scruples are groundless and endless I do not take upon me here to determine And Preface p. 53 Although the Arguments are very plausible one way yet the Objections are very strong another The Union of Protestants the Ease of scrupulous Consciences the providing for so many poor Families of ejected Ministers but not a word of providing for so many poor Congregations and dark corners of the Land that have need of them Are great Motives on one side But the weighty Considerations on the other side pag. 54. And double in number too as you reckon So here I see your Mind as you hold the Scales you might and would determine that there is no sufficient Reason to alter those Terms of Communion which in the great Wisdom of our Church were setled for the sake of such whose Scruples are groundless and endless For certainly those Arguments that are only plausible with you would not weigh down such as are strong and cogent nor a few Motives weigh down more weighty Consid●rations But then what did you think of when you put that Question Preface p. 81. Is there nothing to be done for Dissenting Protestants Do we value a few indifferent Ceremonies and some late Declarations and doubtful Expressions beyond the satisfaction of Mens Consciences and the Peace and Stability of this Church And how happy had England been if such things had not been so over-valued As to this material Question you deliver your Opinion you say freely and impartially How Sir what Are you for altering what was setled in so great Wisdom by Men of so great Integrity such indefatigable Industry such profound Iudgment Is this for the Honour of our Reformation Is not this to blast the Credit of the Reformation I shall not take upon me to animadvert upon the whole of your Answer to this material Question presuming it will be scann'd by some of better Judgment Only one or two things I cannot but take notice of So I heartily thank you for that P. 82. 3. Notwithstanding because the use of Sacraments in a Christian Church ought to be the most free from all Exceptions and they ought to be so administred as rather to invite than discourage scrupulous Persons from joyning in them I do think it would be a part of Christian Wisdom and Condescension only here I would say Duty in the Governours of our Church to remove those Bars from a Freedom in joyning in a full Communion Now thanks for thus much and hold to it Sir Tho I have two great and learned Men of the Church of England worthy of Note with you just at hand that grant as much of other parts of God's Worship as you do of Sacraments scil that they should be free from all Exceptions See Hales of Schism in Miscel. p. 216 217 218. And you were once of his Mind Irenic p. 120. And Chillingworth p. 180. If all Men would believe the Scripture and freeing themselves from Prejudice and Passion would sincerely endeavour to find the true Sence of it and live according to it and require no more of others but to do so nor denying their Communion to any that do so would so order their publick Service of God that all which do so may without Scruple or Hypocrisy or protetestation against any part of it joyn with them in it who does not see that c. Again I cast my Eye on that p. 87. where you would have indulged Persons to pay Twelve pence a Sunday for their absence from the Parochial Churches which you say cannot be complained of as any heavy Burthen Which such will not thank you for You would have them indulged and not indulged And is Twelve Pence a Week no burden to those that with hard Labour have much ado to maintain their Families can scarce clear Twelve Pence per Week See what it is to be rich in this World that makes some insensible of the low Estate others live in And would you have Servants th● pol●●d too tho their Wages may not amount to so much But now at last I come to that which I said makes you hardly reconcileable to your 〈◊〉 Preface p. 92. Such a Review made by wise and pe●●●able M●n not given to Wrath and Disputing may be so far fro● being a Dis●on●ur to this Church that it may add to the Glory of it And the lik● you 〈◊〉 say of removing those Bars to Communion in Sa●●●ments bec●●● it would be a pa●t of Christian Wisdom Now lay things together Dr. Stilling says Preface p. 53 54. T●ere are strong Objections and weighty Considerati●●● against the Alteration of the established Laws And p. 364. would not take upon him to determine Whether there be sufficient Reason to 〈…〉 terms of Communi●● settled And yet Dr. S●lling says Preface p 82 92. That an Alteration would be a part of Christian Wisdom and so far from being a 〈◊〉 to this Church that it would add to the Glo●● of it And 〈◊〉 on I put this Query Whether Man are justly charged as bl●sting the Honour of the Reformation for dissenting in such things which it would be the Churches Glory to alter 3. Are you Imp●rtial in the Account you give of the old-Non-Conformists as if it was their general Sence that Ministers were to forbear all