Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
religion_n church_n doctrine_n england_n 6,989 5 6.3346 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A47191 Truths defence, or, The pretended examination by John Alexander of Leith of the principles of those (called Quakers) falsly termed by him Jesuitico-Quakerism, re-examined and confuted : together with some animadversions on the dedication of his book to Sir Robert Clayton, then Mayor of London / by G.K. Keith, George, 1639?-1716. 1682 (1682) Wing K225; ESTC R22871 109,893 242

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

in Brittain as by us And I judge that I. A. should hold himself a Member of th●s Episcopal Church seeing he himself Officiates as Reader and Presentor at at Leith under Iohn Hamilton an Episcopal Preacher who hath also recommended his Book And therefore seeing I. A. hath undertaken the Vindication of the Church of God in Brittain as he alledgeth against the Quakers he must either acknowledge that the Episcopal Church in Brittain is not the Church of God whereof he is a professed Member or else have proved out of the the Episcopal Church now in Brittain that she avoweth and owneth such principles all and every one as he asserteth and that those Eminent and Noted persons both in England and Scotland who dissent from him and agree with us in those principles already mentioned are Hereticks and renouncers of true principles of Religion stifling the faculties of reason such as among others in England R. Cudworth and H. More accounted great Doctors also William Sharlock and I. A. his Reverend and much admired Rich Baxter whom he particularly opposeth in the matter of Justification And in Scotland Bishop William Forbes in his Treatise called Considerationes modestae pacificae Controvers As also divers other persons of Note yet living whose Names I need not to mention all which I suppose and thousands more in the Episcopal Church in Brittain of all Qualities and Ranks will be loath to acknowledge I. A. for a Patron or Defender of their Faith but rather find ●ault with him in those things as an Enemy of their Faith and in other things a bewrayer and betrayer of it rather then a Defender In his Preface to the Reader he excuseth himself that he hath not Cited any humane Testimonies meaning Authorities of Ancient and Modern Writers against us Seeing these saith he they do not value except when they think they make for them especially ad hominem And with this slender pretext I suppose he thinketh to evade the many Testimonies I brought to confirm the Truth of our principles in my Book called Quakerism no Popery even out of Writters both Ancient and late of great esteem among them none of which he hath once so much as touched But to Answer to his Charge I say we value the Testimonies of all Writers whether Ancient or late which are true and agree with the Scriptures as much as any Protestants do or more than he doth And seeing he imputeth it as a fault to us that we will not own the Testimonies of others against us I ask him if he would own or value any Testimonies of Authors that make against him or his Judgment If he say nay then his excuse is removed and he hath nought to say for this omission But the matter seemeth to be in effect that those Testimonies adduced by me in the foresaid Treatise he knew not how to Answer unless by saying that those persons erred in those principles as much as we which he was loath to acknowledge lest he should seem to weaken the Charge of his Title against us and acknowledge his own party and those that are more worth of Credit than himself equally guilty of Iesuitism with the people called Quakers wherewith he doth falsly accuse them And here I shall give a List or Catalogue of divers gross Perversions and Calumnies whereby he seeketh to abuse his Reader in the very Preface of his book against us As 1. That we reject all manner of External Ordinances Which is notoriously false as all who have the least knowledge of us can witness that we are for Meeting together and that frequently and when we meet to Preach Exhort Pray and give Thanks to God in Audible words as the Spirit of the Lord doth help us And can I. A. say that none of these are External Ordinances or Appointments and we challenge him to instance any one External Ordinance or Appointment of God that is truly so which we are against For it is but only humane Institutions and Abolished shadows set up as Divine Ordinances which we oppose as in the Sequel of this Treatise doth appear 2. He saith We do directly strike at the Foundation of all with one blow overturning so far as we can the whole rule of Faith and Duty setting a new one of our own Invention in the room thereof But why doth he charge us so highly in this matter because we cannot own the Letter or External Testimony of the Scriptures as the primary Rule or Foundation of Faith but only Christ Jesus the first and last concerning whom Paul hath writ That another foundation no man can lay then that which is laid already which is Christ Iesus And said the Lord behold I lay in Zion an Elect precious Corner stone a sure foundation Which to be sure is not the Letter but Christ and his Spirit Light and Life revealed in the heart And I Query this Accuser I. A. whether if to acknowledge Christ in his immediate Teachings by his Spirit in mens hearts is to set up a false Foundation or overturn the true one the Apostles are guilty of this Charge as to their own particulars seeing I. A. will not deny but that the Apostles had Christ immediatly to Teach them and speak in them And was it not the Apostle Paul his labour to build the Churches upon Christ that their Faith might not stand in men though sent and moved of God but in the power of God And though I. A. blame us for setting up the Light within for the Rule yet Christ taught people to believe in the Light and that this Light was not the Scripture which he bid them believe in is clear that he said While ye have the Light believe in the Light that ye may be the Children of it This clearly Imports that this Light should not long remain with them if they did not believe in it as he said in the foregoing Verse Yet a little while is the Light with you walk while ye have the Light lest darkness come upon you see Iohn 12. 35 36. And indeed the gracious Visitation of Light did not long after remain with them who did reject it although the Scriptures did remain with them And therefore the Light which he bid them believe in was not the Letter of the Scripture but Christ himself who said I am the Light of the World 3. He saith This Heresie so he calleth our Faith is a very Sink or an Vniversal System of almost all the gross Errors which hitherto have annoyed the Church of God And herein he doth imitate I. Brown and the Author of the Postcript to S. R. his Epistles who have so charged us but how unjustly we hope our Answers do sufficiently evince And surely this I. A. in the Art of Slandering and false Accusing may pass muster for a Lieutenant to those aforesaid Champions who have led the way before him in this enterprise It is not unknown how the Papists loaded the Protestants at their
Defence of the Episcopal Church and Faith that Ioh. Alexander undertaketh but the Presbyterian and yet I. A. is a Member of the Episcopal Church and Officiates therein under Iohn Hamilton an Episcopal Preacher who hath recommended his Book at the Order of the Bishop of Edenburgh But I suppose the Episcopal Church in Brittain will give Iohn Alexander or his Patriot Iohn Hamilton little Thanks for his Service seeing many Episcopal Teachers in Brittain differ widely in Doctrin from the said Westminster Confession And had I. A. no other Confession of Faith or Catechism to commend but that of the Presbyterians whom his Episcopal Brethren commonly call Fanaticks and is it turned to that that they commend their Confession of Faith as the only Confession of the Church in Brittain But I can find no mention in the said Confession that Episcopacy is Iure Divino However since I. A. has undertaken the defence of the Presbyterian Church and Faith in all its Articles and Definitions as very Gospel Rule and Scripture Sentence he must then acknowledge that all these Definitions and Articles of his Presbyterian Brethren are at left materially considered infallible Oracles ●nd seeing he confesseth they are not all expresly contained in Scripture but many of them only deduced by consequence therefrom by what infallible consequence can he convince any rational man that his and their consequences are just and right since he laies no claim to the least measure of that kind of direction of the Holy Spirit teaching him and his Brethren to draw those consequences which Christ and the Apostles had whereby they argued and did draw consequences from places of Scripture formerly writ And seeing not only Papists and Protestants but the Episcopal and Presbyterian draw contrary consequences from the Scriptures what evidence can I. A. give us why we should receive the consequences of the one more than the other Or can we think the Lord hath left his people so in the dark as to give no other knowledge of his Will in a great many things whi●h are Articles of Faith but what can be searched out by long and tedious consequences of the bare natural understanding of man as it is left to it self to fish and hunt in the dark after such consequences without any such special direction and conduct of the Holy Spirit in the least measure which Christ and the Prophets and Apostles had Nay I do not find that I. A. doth acknowledge so much as the least absolute necessity of any sort of operation or illumination of the Spirit so ●uch as that they call effective or subjective order to draw their consequences from the ●cripture But if this way of drawing consequences without the help of the Holy Spirit were so safe and sure how is it then that so many of all sorts draw contrary consequences from the same Scriptures Is not the great reason of all this because men are departed from that holy Spirit which gave forth the Scriptures and can only give the true understanding of them And therefore is it not plain and manifest as the Light at Noon-day that man's natural Spirit and Reason and Wisdom in its highest perfection is altogether unable to meddle with Divine Truths or to search after them as it remains alone hunting in the dark And certainly this is no small part of that cursed self-conceit and exaltation of mind that Rules in the degenerated nature of man that they think they can be wise enough without God's Spirit they need no direction or assistance or illumination to help them to search into the Scriptures they can do that well enough with their natural reason and a little School-craft of Artificial Logick and Grammar and Natural Philosophy but that blessed man David was of another mind when he prayed unto the Lord saying Open my Eyes that I may see the wonderful things of thy Law And as for consequences which men draw as they are directed and taught by the Spirit of God as Christ and the Apostles were when they drew any consequence from what was formerly writ we do own them and receive them and none else But yet as to the most weighty and necessary things to wit such as are the general principles of the Christian Faith and Doctrine and which as such are generally to be received by all Christians as well these of the meanest capacity as others of the greatest we see the Lord hath not left it to mans industry to search after them by consequences long or short but hath delivered them to us in plain express words and terms and that many times over and over again as in respect of many of them in the Holy Scriptures And why is it that the Scriptures are so full and large in their Testimony to the Doctrines and Principles of Religion but to let us understand that all the Principles and Doctrines of the Christian Faith which God requireth in common of all Christians are expresly their delivered and recorded and put as it were in a puplick Register And therefore for my part what I cannot find expresly delivered in Scripture I see no reason why I should receive or believe it as any common Article or principle of the Christian Faith or Life and for such to whom God hath given that Divine skill to ●ive or dip into the depth of the Scriptures 〈◊〉 out of the reach of other men who may ●e true Christians so as to collect or gather by just and true consequences other things that lie out of the view of their weaker Brethren they ought not to obtrude them upon any to be received as principles of Faith but in that case to have Faith to themselves and receive them as peculiar discoveries or Revelations of the Spirit to them and such others as God hath so enlightened the which by the Apostle Paul is called The Word of Wisdom to wit such a peculiar degree of Wisdom or Understanding in the depth of the Scriptures as others who yet were true Christians did not reach unto and concerning such a peculiar gift of Divine Wisdom he said We speak Wisdom among the perfect this certainly could be no common Article of Faith else he should have Preached it to all And this by the same Apostle is elsewhere called The knowledge of Mysteries as distinguished from the common Faith and knowledge of the whole Church Now if this were but received among those called Christians that nothing should be required by one sort from another as an Article of Faith or Doctrine or principle of the Christian Religion in common to be believed but what is expresly delivered in the Scriptures in plain express Scripture terms of how great an advantage might it be to bring a true reconcilement among them and beget true Christian Unity Peace Love and Concord And as for the consequential part of peculiar Doctrines whether true or false to leave every one a freedom or latitude without imposing upon them the affirmative or negative as
Minister of Christ then they should never have required more of any man in order to his admission to that Office but his alone sufficient skill in Grammar and Logick which the Adversaries themselves know to be most false To this I Answer That not the Questionist but I. A. doth pervert the state of the Question for the Question was not Whether Grammar and Logick and the many Tongues c. was the only infallible Rule to make a Minister of Christ but whether it was an infallible Rule c. Now that may be conceived to be an Infallible Ru●e which is not the Infallible Rule Nor doth I. A. his consequence follow that then they should never have required more of any man in order to his admission to that Office but his alone sufficient skill in Grammar and Logick an example in other cases will show the weakness of this Consequence It is reported that Plato made it an Infallible Rule to receive none into his School but he who had some skill in Geometry doth it therefore follow that he required no more of any man in order to his admission to be his Scholar but that he had some skill in that Science Another Instance may be this in divers Incorporations and Cities it is an Infallible Rule That none may be admitted to be a Magistrate in the said City or Incorporation but he that is a Freeman therein doth it therefore follow that nothing is more required of any man in order to his being a Magistrate but that he be a Freeman in that City Now suppose the Church of Scotland make it not the one only Rule to make a Minister of Christ that he hath Grammar Logick and the Languages yet it may be very fairly Queried I hope whether she makes it not an Infallible Rule Seeing for many years by-gone she hath made no Ministers but some as at least pretend to have Grammar and Logick and Languages and are called Masters of those Arts howbeit many of them have but a very small scantling of them for all the stress that seems to be laid on them And I Query whether it be not one of the Canons of the Church that none be admitted into the Office of the Ministry but who have those aforesaid Arts And if there be no infallible or absolute Rule or Canon in the case then why do they not frequently allow men wanting those Arts who possibly may have all the other Qualifications required to enter into the Ministry And it is further Queried Whether I. A. or the Church that he doth own doth establish and avow that Doctrine of Iames Durhame positively asserted in his Commentary on the Revelation that Grammar Logick or the like acquired Arts are necessary to the esse or being of a Minister of Christ and consequently much more necessary than true Piety and Godliness which he maketh only but necessary to his bene esse or better being and only accidental to his being a Minister of Christ. And this Question which is indeed the main design of the first Question as is obvious to any ordinary understanding I. A. for all his glorious pretence hath not in the least Answered which is therefore returned upon him to be further considered And whereas I. A. saith That Grammar and Logick are ordinary means of Knowledge exceedingly requisite in a Minister If by Grammar and Logick he mean not those innate gift● which may be well called natural as common to all men having the ordinary use of understanding and which I acknowledge to be in some degree necessary unto all but the Systems of those Arts as they are artificially composed of a great many Rules and Precepts and commonly taught in the Schools I ask I. A. Why are they more requisite in a Minister than in the rest of the Church Ought not all the Church to have the knowledge of God and of the Principles of Christian Religion as well as the Minister And may not some of the people come to have as much true knowledge of God as their Teachers yea may they not become wiser than their Teachers as David said concerning himself and whereby did David become wiser than his Teachers was it by the humane Arts of Grammar and Logick I trow not but by the Law of God wherein he did meditate both day and night May not therefore people come to have as much knowledge of God at this day without those aforesaid Arts only by meditating in the said Law or Word and praying to the Lord as also waiting upon the Lord to have their understandings more and more opened to understand the Scriptures as I. A. hath with all the help of his Arts And if I. A. think that those Arts are necessary to attain Divine Knowledge so as he who wants them may not know as much of Divine things as he who has them I am not of his mind nor ● hope are many others in his Church who believe they may both know the Lord and daily grow in the knowledge of Him till they have as much and perhaps more of true Divine Knowledge than I. A. ever had without all I. A. his Arts which he doth so highly magnifie But I. A. saith The Infallible rule to make a Minister of Christ is set down in 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. Answ. It is very well But I cannot find in these places or any where else in all the Scripture that Artificial Grammar and Logick are made any one part of that Infallible Rule or that God hath any where appointed them as ordinary means of attaining Divine knowledge And if they be the ordinary means of Divine knowledge then it must needs follow that all who have the least measure of true Divine knowledge have also humane Arts or else they are extraordinarily taught none of which I judge I. A. will readily grant Now the Infallible rule set down by the Apostle in these places already cited requireth That Bishops and Deacons and consequently Ministers should be blameless sober just holy temperate And I Query I A. if this one only qualification viz. To be Holy be as much made an Infallible rule to make a Minister of Christ in the Church he owneth as to have Grammar and Logick and Tongues And how is this consistent with the foresaid Doctrine that real Holiness is not necessary to the esse or being of a Minister of Christ For is not that which is the infallible rule to make a Minister of Christ necessary to his very esse or being In the following part of his Examination of this first Query I. A. doth further wrong the people called Quakers As if they did hold that Grammar Logick and Languages were unlawful among Christians And upon this idle and false Supposition he disputeth for the lawfulness of those Arts which none of these people so far as I know deny And for a proof to the contrary that people have Schools wherein Grammar and the Languages viz. Hebrew Greek and Latin are