Selected quad for the lemma: master_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
master_n	child_n	husband_n	parent_n	3,987	5	7.8229	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69753	The generall demands, of the reverend doctors of divinitie, and ministers of the Gospell in Aberdene, concerning the late covenant, in Scotland together, with the answeres, replyes, and duplyes that followed thereupon, in the year, 1638 : reprinted in one book, by order of Parliament.	Forbes, John, 1593-1648.; Henderson, Alexander, 1583?-1646.	1663 (1663)	Wing C4226; Wing C4225; ESTC R6298	125,063	170

taken to injure or offend any man by denying to him that which is due to him and therefore we ought not for eschewing scandall causelesly taken to offend and injure our superioures in Church and Policy by denying to them that obedience which is due to them The antecedent is clear by many examples For if a man be excommunicated shall his Wife Children and servants slee his company and so deny to him these dueties which they ow to him for fear that others be scandalized by their keeping of company with an excommunicate Person And if they may not for eschewing of scandall abstaine from these dueties which they ow to a private person much lesse may we abstaine from that obedience which we ow to our superioures having publicke charges in Church and Policy for eschewing of scandalls causelesly taken by others 40. Fiftly what if the thing commanded be enjoined by the civill Magistrate under paine of death and by Ecclesiasticall Authority under paine of excommunication shall we for fear of a scandall causelesly taken which may be removed by information or for the scandall of the malicious who will not be informed at all abstaine from the doing of a thing lawfull and expedient enjoined by Authority and by so doing incurre these most grievous punishments of Death temporall and spirituall We believe that your selves who speak most of scandall would be loath to take such a yoke upon you 41. Sixtly The denying of obedience to the lawfull commandements of our superioures is forbidden in the fift Commandement and consequently it is a sin Shall we then for a scandall causelesly taken deny obedience to our superioures and so incurre the guiltinesse of sin Ye commonly answere to this that the negative part of the fift Commandement which forbideth the resisting of the power Rom. 13. verse 2. and in generall the denying of obedience to superioures is to be understood with the exception of the case of any scandall taken by others For if we see say ye that any may or will take offence at the doing of that which is cōmanded by our superioures we are not holden to obey them and our denying of obedience to them in such a case is not forbidden in that Commandement 42. But first we aske what warrand ye have to say that the negative part of the fift Commandement is to be understood with the exception of the case of scandall more then other negative precepts of the second Table Secondly As men may take offence either through weaknesse or malice at our doing of the thing commanded so they are most ready to stumble at our denying of obedience to the lawfull commandements of our superioures for they will take occasion by our carriage to doe that unto which by nature they are most enclined to wit to vilipend Lawes and the Authority of their superioures Shall we then for the eschewing of a scandall causelesly taken not only refuse to our superioures the duety of obedience which they crave of us but also incurre an other scandall and that a farre more perilous one Thirdly we have already shown that the negative part of the fift Commandement is not all wayes to be understood with the exception of the case of scandall causelesly taken For Wives Children and Servants must not deny obedience and familiar conversation to their Husbands Parents and Masters which are excommunicated for fear that others through weaknesse or malice be scandalized thereat Fourthly As ye say that the precept concerning obedience to superioures is to be understood with the exception of the case of scandall causelesly taken so we with farre better reason say that the precept of eschewing scandall causelesly taken is to be understood with the exception of the case of obedience peremptorly required by our lawfull superioures as we shall show in our next Argument Whether the Precept of Obedience to Superioures or the Precept of eschewing scandall be more obligatory 43. Last of all when a man is peremptorly urged by his superioures to obey their lawfull Commandements and in the mean time feareth that if he doe the thing commanded by them some through weakness shall be scandalized by his carriage in this case he is not only in a difficulty or strait betwixt the commandement of Man and the Commandement of GOD who forbiddeth us to doe that whereby our weak Brother may be offended but also he seemeth to be in a strait betwixt two of GODS Commandements to wit betwixt that precept which forbiddeth the doing of any thing whereby the weake may be scandalized and that other precept which forbiddeth the resisting of Authority and telleth us that whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of GOD. Now seeing GODS Precepts are not repugnant one to another neither doeth GOD by his Lawes lay upon us a necessity of sinning out of all question in this case we are fred from the obligation of one of these precepts and that which doeth not so strictly tye us or is lesse obligatory must needs give place to the other which is of greater obligation Ye commonly say that the precept of obedience to humane Authority must give place to the precept of eschewing scandall although it be causelesly taken And to confirme your Assertion ye say that the ordinance of a superiour can not make that fact to be free of scandall which otherwise would be scandalous and that a fact upon which any scandall followeth ought not to be done for the commandement of Man Whence ye collect that in such a case we ought not to regard or obey the Commandement of our Superiours 44. This your Reason can not be good because we can easily retort the Argument and say to you that in such a case we ought not to regard the scandall causelesly taken by our weak Brethren so far as to deny simplie and absolutely Obedience to our Superiours for it and that because the sin of Disobedience ought to be eschewed and no Scandall of weak brethren causelesly taken can make that fact not to be the sin of disobedience which otherwise that is extra casum scandali would bee the sin of disobedience For it is certain that laying aside the case of scandall to deny obedience to the ordinance of our Superiours enjoining and peremptorly requiring of us things lawfull and expedient is really the sin of disobedience Ye will say that the scandall of weak brethren may make that Fact or Omission not to be disobedience which otherwise would be disobedience because we ought not for the Commandement of man doe that whereby our weak brother may be offended and so the precept of obedience bindeth not when offence of a weak brother may be feared On the contrary we say that the lawfull commandement of Superiours may make that scandall of our weake brethren not to be imputed unto us which otherwise would be imputed unto us as a matter of our guiltinesse because we ought not for fear of scandal causelesly taken deny obedience to the lawfull

Souls of the guiltinesse of it The XII DUPLY. TO justifie or excuse your omission of publick disallowing and condemning the publick disorders and miscarriages of some who have subscrived the Covenant especially the offering of violence to Prelats and Ministers in time of divine Service and in the House GOD whereof we spake in our twelfth Demand and Reply ye answer first that ye acknowledge not the Service-Book for the LORDS Service Ye might say the same of any Service Book If ye allow the Reasons lately set forth in Print against the Service-Book for there a Prescript form of Prayer is condemned which directly crosseth the practise of the universall Church of CHRIST Ancient and Recent 2. Ye alleadge that ye acknowledge not the usurped Authority of Prelats for lawfull Authority For ought we can perceive by the Doctrins of those with whome ye joine ye acknowledge no lawfull Authority at all in Prelats above your selves and other Ministers and ye seem so to insinuate so much here by blaming us for calling them Reverend and holy Fathers We are perswaded of the lawfulnesse of their Office and therefore are not ashamed with Scripture and Godly Antiquity to call such as are advanced to this sacred Dignity Fathers and Reverend Fathers Neither should personall faults alleadged by you hinder our observance till what is alleadged be clearly proven For so long as things are doubtfull we should interpret to the better part Luke 6 37. And it is a rule of Law that in a doubtfull case the state of a Possessor is best and consequently of him that hither-to hath been in a possession of a good name as also that in things doubtfull we should rather favour the person accused then him that accuseth 3. If ye be of this same judgement with us concerning the lawfulnesse of their Office why doe ye not reverence them as well as we But if their very Office seem to you unlawfull we esteem your judgement contrary to holy Scripture to all sound Antiquity and to the best learned amongst reformed Divines Hear what Melanchton sayeth I would to GOD I would to GOD it lay in me not to confirm the Dominion but to restore the Government of Bishops for I see what manner of Policy we shall have the Ecclesiasticall Policie being dissolved I doe see that hereafter will grow up a greater tyrannie in the Church then ever was before And again in another Epistle to Camerarius he sayeth You will not beleeve how much I am hated by those of Noricum and by others for the restoring of Iuridiction to Bishops So our Companions fight for their own Kingdom and not for the Kingdom of CHRIST So in other places See Bucer de Regno CHRISTI Pag. 67. 4. Thirdly Ye alleadge the zeal of the People by reason whereof ye say that it was nothing strange that in such a case they were stirred up to oppose Suppone they had opposed yet that they should have so opposed as to have offered violence to sacred Persons Prelats or Ministers who are spirituall Fathers seemeth to us very strange for all that hitherto ye have said There is no zeal without the extraordinary instinct of GODS Spirit which can warrand men destitute of Authority to lay their hands on such persons Touch not mine anoynted and doe my Prophets no harme sayeth the LORD Psal. 105. Let all things be done decently and in order sayeth S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. 40. GOD is not the author of confusion or timult but of peace sayeth that same Apostle there verse 33. To this purpose Gregorie Nazianzen in his 26 Oration speaking of the chief causes of division in the Church sayeth One of them is unrulie ferventness without reason and knowledge and that another is Disorder and undecencie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 5. The Sonne should account the person of his Father sacred ff de obsequiis Leg. 9. So we ought also to esteem of our spirituall Fathers and therefore to offer injury to their persons and that in time of divine Service must needs be a grievous sin In the Novell Constitutions of Iustinian Authent Collat. 9. Tit. 6. Novella 123. de Sanctiss Episcopis c. Cap 31. there is a remarkable Law to this purpose cited upon the Margine The like Law we find in Cod. Iustin. Lib. 1. Tit. 3. de Episcop Clericis Leg. 10. Now although in these imperiall Lawes the sanction be severe yet we wish no such severity to be used amongst us but praying GOD to forgive them who have transgressed We desire them to consider that anciently amongst Christians such doings were greatly disallowed 6. Chrysostom speaking of the reverence due by people to Pastors sayeth A man may now see that there are not so great s●offs and reproaches used by the unfaithfull against the Rulers as by those that seem to be faithfull and to be joined with us Let us therefore inquire whence commeth this negligence and contempt of pietie that we have such a hostilitie against our Fathers There is nothing there is nothing that can so easilie destroy the Church as when there is not an exact jointure of Disciples to their Masters of children to parents and of them that are ruled with their Rulers He that but speaketh evill against his brother is debarred from reading the divine Scriptures for what hast thou to doe to take my Covenant in thy mouth sayeth the LORD and subjoineth this cause Thou sittest and speakest evill of thy brother and thinkest thou thy self worthie to come to the sacred porches who accuseth thy spirituall Father How agreeth this with reason For if they who speake evill of Father or Mother should dye according to the Law of what judgement is he worthie who dare speake evill of him who is much more necessarie and better then those Parents Why feareth he not that the Earth should open and swallow him or that thunder should come from Heaven and burn up that accusing tongue See him also Lib. 3. de Sacerdotio Cap. 5. 6. 7. In the next place ye say that the keeping of GODS House from pollution and superstition belongeth to Authority to the community of the faithfull and to every one in his own place and order but certainly if every one or all the community keep their own place and order they can doe nothing in this by way of force without far lesse against Authority Hence Zanchius in his first Book of Images Thes. 4. sayeth Without Authority of the Prince it is lawfull to none in this Countrey to take Idoles out of Churches or to change any thing in Religion he that doeth so should be punished as seditious This he confirmeth by reason and by the testimony of S. Augustin Tom. 10. de Sermone Domini in Monte Homilia 6. And a little after he subjoineth Augustin handleth this Argument piouslie he dehorteth his people from such a practise and sayeth That it is pravorum hominum furiosorum circumcellionum 8.