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	worship_n	3,910	5	7.2192	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86004	Nihil respondes: or, A discovery of the extream unsatisfactorinesse of Master Colemans peece, published last weeke under the title of A brotherly examination re-examined. Wherein, his self-contradictions: his yeelding of some things, and not answering to other things objected against him: his abusing of Scripture: his errors in divinity: his abusing of the Parliament, and indangering their authority: his abusing of the Assembly: his calumnies, and namely against the Church of Scotland, and against my selfe: the repugnancy of his doctrin to the solemne League and Covenant, are plainly demonstrated. / By George Gillespie minister at Edenburgh. Published by authority.	Gillespie, George, 1613-1648.	1645 (1645)	Wing G755; Thomason E309_9; ESTC R200413	26,848	36

along with his Re-examination pag. 14. He explaineth himselfe and me thus He should have said that I advised the Parliament to lay no burthen of Government upon them whom he this Commissioner thinks Church-Officers then had hee spoken true I thank him for his explanation And I pray who were the Church officers whom I said hee excluded from Church Government Were they not Pastors and ruling Elders And doth not himselfe think these to be Church-officers Yes of the Ministers he thinks so but of ruling Elders he seemes to doubt except they be Magistrates Well but excluding these Church-officers from Church-Government he takes with the Charge Why seeks he a knot in the rush But now how doth he explaine himselfe He will have the Parliament to bee Church-officers of which before and such Church-officers as shall take the corrective part of Curch-Government wholy into their own hands yet not to dispence the Word and Sacraments but to leave the Doctrinall part to the Ministry and their power to be meerely Doctrinall as he saith pag. 11. Thus you have his explanation But doth this salve the violating of the Covenant Nay it makes it more apparent for the Government of the Church which the first Article of the Covenant speaks of is distinguished from the Doctrinall part That we shall endeavour the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdomes of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government So that excluding Pastors and ruling Elders from the corrective part of Government and from all power which is not meerely Doctrinall he thereby excludeth them from that Discipline and Government which the Covenant speaks of as one speciall part of the Reformation of Religion Come on to the Reasons I had given foure Reasons He takes notice but of three This is the second time he hath told three for foure yet even these three will doe the businesse 1. The extirpation of Church-Government is not the reformation of it Here the Brother addeth these words following as mine which are not mine therefore he that finds no Church-government breaks his Covenant His reply is we must reforme it according to the word of God if that hold out none here is no failing He addeth a simile of a Iury sworn to enquire into the felony of an accused person but findes nor guilty and of three men taking an oath to deliver in their opinions of Church-government where by the way he lets fall that I hold the Nationall Synod to be above all Courts in the Kingdom which if he meane of Ecclesiasticall Courts why did he speak so generally if he meane above all or any Civill Courts it is a grosse calumny But now if this be the sense which he gives of that first article in the Covenant then 1. all that is in the second article might have been put into the first article for instance wee might in Mr Colemans sense have sworn to endeavour the reformation of Prelacy and even of Popery it selfe according to the word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches that is taking an oath to deliver in our opinions of these things according to the word of God and to enquire into the evills of Church-government by Archbishops Bishops Deans c. whether guilty or not guilty I strengthned my argument by the different nature of the first and second article I said the second article is of things to be extirpated but this of things to be preserved and reformed Why did hee not take the strength of my argument and make a reply 2. By the same principle of his we are not tied by the first article of our Covenant to have any either doctrine or worship but only to search the Scriptures whether the Word hold out any for Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government goe hand in hand in the Covenant 3. His owne simile hath this much in it against him If a Iury sworn to enquire into the felony of an accused person should after such an oath not only finde the person not guilty but further take upon them to maintain that there is no such thing as felony surely this were inconsistent with their oath So he that sweares to endeavour the Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government and yet will not only dislike this or that forme of Government but also hold that there is no such thing as Church-Government he holds that which cannot agree with his oath 4. This answer of Mr Colemans leaving it free to debate whether there be such a thing as Church-Government being his only answer to my first argument from the Covenant must needs suppose that the Government mentioned in the Covenant the reformation whereof we have sworne to endeavour is understood even by himselfe of Church-officers their power of corrective Government it being the corrective part only and not the doctrinall part which he casts upon an uncertainty whether the Word hold out any such thing 2. Church-Government is mentioned in the Covenant as a spirituall not a civill thing The matters of Religion are put together Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government The Priviledges of Parliament come after in the third article The Reverend Brother replies What if it be therefore the Parliament is not to meddle with it and why And here he runs out against me as if I held that the Parliament is not to meddle with Religion an assertion which I abominate Princes and Magistrates their putting off themselves all care of the matters of Religion was one of the great causes of the Churches mischiefe and of Popish and Prelaticall tyranny But is this just and faire Sir to give out for my opinion that for which you are not able to shew the least colour or shadow of consequence from any thing that ever I said That which was to be replied unto was whether doe not the materials of the first article of the Covenant differ from the materials of the third article of the Covenant or whether are they the same Whether doth the Priviledge of Parliament belong to the first article of the Covenant Whether is that Government mentioned in the first article a civill thing or a spirituall If civill why is Discipline and Government ranked with Doctrine and Worship and all these mentioned as parts of the reformation of Religion If spirituall then why doth the Brother make it civill or temporall pag. 11. To all this nothing is answered but what if it bee Then is my argument granted And to put it yet further out of question I adde other two arguments from that same first article of the Covenant One is this In the first part of that first article we sweare all of us to endeavour the preservation of the reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government where all know that the words Discipline and Government especially being mentioned as two of the principall things in which the Reformed Religion in that Church doth consist signifie Church-Government and Church-Discipline distinct both from Doctrine and Worship and from civill Government which by the way how Mr Coleman endeavoureth to preserve I will not now say but leave it to others to judge Therefore in that which immediately followeth our endeavouring the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline

and Government the words Discipline and Government must needs be understood in the same sense thus farre that it is a Church-Discipline and a Church-Government distinct from the civill power of the Magistrate and distinct also from Doctrine and Worship in the Church for we cannot make these words Discipline and Government in one and the same article of a solemn oath and Covenant to suffer two senses differing toto genere especially considering that the civill Government is put by it selfe in another article which is the third unlesse we make it to speak so as none may understand it The other argument which I now adde is this In the third part of that first article we sweare that we shall endeavour to bring the Churches of God in the three Kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in Religion confession of faith forme of Church Government Directory for worship and catechising where 1. Church Government doth agree generically with a confession of faith Directory of worship and catechising I mean all these are matters of Religion none of them civill matters 2. It is supposed there is such a thing as Church Government distinct from civill Government and therefore it is put out of all question that so farre there shall be an uniformity between the Churches of God in the three Kingdoms and otherwise it were an unswearing of what was sworn in the first part of that article but it tieth us to endeavour the nearest conjunction and uniformity in a form of Church government which were a vaine and rash oath if we were not tied to a Church government in generall and that as a matter of Religion 3 The uniformity in a form of Church-Government which we sweare to endeavour must needs be meant of corrective Government it being clearly distinguished from the Confession of Faith and Directory of Worship So that Mr Colemans distinction of the Doctrinall part and of the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments cannot here help him From these two Arguments beside all was said before I conclude that the Covenant doth undeniably suppose and plainely hold forth this thing as most necessary and uncontrover●able that there ought to bee a Church-Government which is both distinct from the Civill-Government and yet not meerely doctrinall And if so what Apollo can reconcile Mr Colemans Doctrine with the Covenant And now I go on My last reason formerly brought was this Will the brother say that the example of the best reformed Churches leadeth his way For the Covenant tieth us to a reformation of the government of the Church both according to the Word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches that as regula regulans this as regula regulata The Reverend brother replieth 1. The best reformed Church that ever was went this way I meane the Church of Israel Answ. 1. Is the Church of Israel one of the Reformed Churches which the Covenant speakes of 2. Was the Church of Israel better reformed than the Apostolicall Churches why then cals he it the best reformed Church that ever was 3. That in the Jewish Church there was a Church-government distinct from civill government and Church censures distinct from civill punishments is the opinion of many who have taken great paines in the searching of the Jewish antiquities and it may be he shall heare it ere long further proved both from Scripture and from the very Talmudicall writers 2. I desire saith he the Commissioner to give an instance in the new Testament of such a distinction Civill and Church government where the state was Christian Answ. I desire him to give an instance in the new Testament of these three things and then he will answer himselfe 1. Where was the State Christian 2. Where had the Ministery a doctrinall power in a Christian State 3. Where doth the new Testament hold out that a Church government distinct from civill government may be where the State is not Christian and yet may not be where the State is Christian Shall the Churches liberties be diminished or rather increased where the State is Christian In the third and fourth place the brother tels us of the opinions of Gualther Bullinger Erastus Aretius The question is of the examples of Churches not of the opinions of men But what of the men As for that pestilence that walketh in darknesse through London and Westminster Erastus his booke against Beza let him make of it what he can it shall have an Antidote by and by In the meane while he may take notice that in the close of the sixth Book Erastus casts down that which he hath built ●ust as Bellarmine did in the close of his five books of justification But as for the other three named by the brother they are ours not his in this present controversie Gualther expounds the fifth chapter of 1 Cor. all along of excommunication and of the necessity of Church discipline in so much that he expounds the very delivering to satan the phrase most controverted by Erastus and his followers of excommunication and the not eating with the scandalous v. 9 10 11. hee takes also to import excommunication Hee thinks also that Ministers shall labour to little purpose except they have a power of government Bullinger is most plaine for excommunication as a spirituall censure ordained by Christ and so he understands Matth. 18. 17. Aretius holds that God was the authour of excommunication in the old Testament and Christ in the New And now are these three Master Colemans way or doth not his doctrine flatly contradict theirs Peradventure he will say yet there is no excommunication in the Church of Zurik where those Divines lived nor any suspension of scandalous sinners from the Sacrament I answer this cannot infringe what I hold that the example of the best reformed Churches maketh for us and against him For first the booke written by Lavater another of the Zurike Divines De ritibus institutis Ecclesiae Tigurinae tels us of divers things in that Church which will make the brother easily to acknowledge that it is not the best reformed Church such as Feastivall daies cap. 8. that upon the Lords daies before the third Bell it is published and made knowen to the people if there be any houses fields or lands to be sold cap. 9. They have no Fasts indicted ibid. nor Psalmes sung in the Church cap. 10. Responsories in their Letany at the Sacrament the Deacon upon the right hand saith one thing the Deacon upon the left hand saith another thing the Pastor a third thing cap. 13. 2. Yet the Church of Zurike hath some

impeditive and destructive to that purity and power 8 Having told us of the proud swelling waves of Presbyteriall Goverment I asked upon what coast had those waves done any hurt France or Scotland or Holland or Terra incognita He replieth page 12. I confesse I have had no great experience of the Presbyteriall Government Why make you bold then to slander it when you can give no sure ground for that you say He tels us his feares arise from Scotland and from London The Reverend and worthy Ministers of London can speak for themselves aetatem habent For my part though I know not the particulars I am bound in charity not to beleeve those aspersions put upon them by a discontented Brother But what from Scotland I my selfe sayth he did heare the Presbytery of Edingburgh censure a woman to be banished out of the gates of the City was not this an encroachment It had bin an encroachment indeed if it had bin so But he will excuse me if I answer him in his own language which I use not page 3 and 5. It is at the best a most uncharitable slander And there was either ignorance or mindlesnesse in him that sets it down There is no Banishment in Scotland but by the Civill Magistrate who so farre aideth and assisteth Church Discipline that prophane and scandalous persons when they are found unruly and incorrigible are punished with Banshment or otherwise A stranger comming at a time into one of our Presbyteries and hearing of somewhat which was represented to or reported from the Magistrate ought to have had so much both circumspection and charity as not to make such a rash and untrue report He might have at least enquired when he was in Scotland and informed himselfe better whether Presbyteries or the Civill Magistrate doe banish If he made no such enquiry he was rash injudging If he did his offence is greater when after information he will not understand 9 He makes this to be a position of mine pag. 13. That a learned Ministery puts no black marke upon prophanenesse more then upon others A calumny For first he makes me to speake Non-sence Secondly I did not speake it of a learned Ministery but of his way page 40. How long agoe since a learned Ministery was knowne by the name of Master Colemans way His way is a Ministery without power of Government or Church Censures Of this his way I said that it putteth no black marke upon prophanenesse and scandall in Church Members more than in any others And the reason is because the corrective or punitive part of Government he will have to be only Civill or Temporall which striketh against those that are without as well as those within Put the Apostle tells us of such a corrective Governement as is a judging of those that are within and of those only 1 Cor. 5. 12. And this way which is not only ours but the Apostolicall way puts a black marke upon prophanenesse scandalous sins in Church members more then in any others 10. He saith of me page 17. The Commissioner is the only man that we shall meet with that forsaking the words judgeth of the Intentions A Calumny I judged nothing but ex ore tuo But in this thing he himselfe hath trespassed I will instance but in two particulars In that very place he saith Admonition is a spirituall censure in the Commissioners opinion Whence knowes he that to be my opinion Consistoriall or Presbyteriall Admonition given to the unruly may be called a censure And if this were his meaning then ascribing to Elderships power of Admonition he gives them some power of spirituall Censures and so something of the corrective part of Government which were contrary to his owne Principles But he speaketh it of the Ministers admonishing who are but a part of the Elderships as himselfe there granteth Now where did I ever say or write that Admonition by a Minister is a spirituall censure Againe page 4. He so judgeth me that he not only forsaketh but contradicteth my words How can you say you were unwilling 11. He saith page 16. Now the Commissioner speaks out c What! not the Parliament of England meddle with Religion A horrid calumny Where have I said it Dic sodes I never preached before 〈…〉 but I exhorted them to meddle with Religion and that in the first place and above all other things I shall sooner prove that Master Coleman will not have the Parliament of England to meddle with Civill affaires because he makes them Church Officers It s a non-sequitur Their power is Civill Ergo they are not to meddle with Religion It will be a better consequence They are Church Officers So he makes them page 14. and Christian Magistracy is an Ecclesiasticall Administration So he saith page 20. Ergo they are not to meddle with Civill Government The Repugnancy of his Doctrine to the solemn League and Covenant Mr Coleman pag. 13. acknowledgeth that to assert any thing contrary to the solemn League and Covenant is a great fault in any in himselfe more then in divers others if made out He having for his own part taken it with the first and not only so but having adminstred it to divers others Yes and take this one circumstance more In his Sermon upon Jer. 30. 21. at the taking of the Covenant Septemb. 29. 1643. He answereth this objection against the extirpation of Prelacy But what if the exorbitancies be purged away may not I notwithstanding my Oath admit of a regulated Prelacy for satisfaction to this objection He answereth thus First we swear not against a Government that is not Secondly we swear against the evils of every Government and doubtlesse many materials of Prelacy must of necessity be retained as absolutely necessary Thirdly taking away the exorbitancies the remaining will be a new Government and no Prelacy Let the Brother now deale ingenuously What did he understand by those materials of Prelacy absolutely necessary to be retained did he understand the dispensing of the Word and Sacraments which is common to all Pastors Or did he understand the Priviledges of Parliament Were either of those two materials of Prelacy And if he had meant either of these Was this the way to satisfie that scruple concerning the extirpation of Prelacy Again what was that new Government which he promised them after the taking away of the exorbitancies of the old Was it the Ministers doctrinall part that is no new thing in England Was it the Parliaments assuming of the corrective part of Church-Government as hee improperly distinguisheth wholy and soly into their own hands excluding the Ministery from having any hand therein This were a new Government I confesse But sure he could not in any reason intend this as a satisfaction to the scruples of such as desired a regulated Prelacy whose scruples he then spoke to for this had been the way to disswade them from not to perswade them to the Covenant But I goe