Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	civil_a	magistrate_n	matter_n	3,433	5	6.0251	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86003	Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy of his Erastian doctrine to the word of God, to the solemne League and Covenant, and to the ordinances of Parliament: also his contradictions, tergiversations, heterodoxies, calumnies, and perverting of testimonies, are made more apparent then formerly. Together with some animadversions upon Master Hussey his Plea for Christian magistracy: shewing, that in divers of the afore mentioned particulars he hath miscarried as much, and in some particulars more then Mr Coleman. / By George Gillespie, minister at Edinbrugh. Published by authority.	Gillespie, George, 1613-1648.	1646 (1646)	Wing G754; Thomason E317_16; ESTC R200545	44,904	65

for sparing the Towne Alexander preventeth him with an Oath that he would not doe that thing which Anaximenes should make petition for whereupon Anaximenes made Petition that he would destroy the Towne Alexander found himselfe bound by the plaine words of his Oath to doe what he intended and so did forbeare And to adde a divine Story to an humane Joshua and the Princes of Israel did sweare to the Gibeonites upon a supposition that was not true yet they found themselves tyed by their Oath So he that sweareth to his owne hurt must not change the Oath being otherwise lawfull Psal. 15. 4. yet that selfe hurt which is wrapped up in the matter of his Oath was not intended in swearing Sometimes againe that which is supposed and implyed in an Oath lyeth also in the thoughts and intention of those that sweare Now where those two are co-incident that is where the thing supposed in an Oath is both implyed necessarily in the words of the Oath and is also according to the apprehensions of those that sweare which is the case here in the Covenant and is acknowledged by the Reverend Brother I should thinke it most strange how any Divine can have the least doubt concerning the obligation of such a thing except he conceive the thing it selfe to be unlawfull His second Answer is this In my way saith he the Governments Civill and Ecclesiasticall are in the subject matter clearly distinct When the Parliament handles matters of Warre it is a Military Court when businesse of State it is a Civill Court when matters of Religion it is an Ecclesiasticall Court If this hold good then it will follow 1. That the Parliament when they deliberate about matters of Warre or matters of Religion are not at least formally and properly a Civill Court else how makes he these so clearly distinct 2. That Ministers may be called Civill Officers for consider his words in his Re-examination pag 11. I doe not exclude Mininisters neither from Ecclesiasticall nor Civill Government in a Ministeriall way doctrinally and declaratively Compare this with his present Answer it will amount to thus much That different denominations being taken from the different subject matter Ministers when they handle Doctrinally matters of Religion are Ecclesiasticall Ministers and when they handle Doctrinally matters of Civill Government which himselfe alloweth them to doe they are Civill Ministers But now to apply his Answer to the Argument How doth all this salve the repugnancy of his Doctrine to the Covenant If he had examined my Arguments he had found that most of them proove from the Covenant a Church-Government distinct from Civill Government Suctjective as well as Objective that is another Government besides Magistracy different Agents as well as different Acts different hands as well as handling of different matters I know the Christian Magistrate may and ought to have a great influence into matters of Religion and whatsoever is due to him by the Word of God or by the Doctrine either of the Antient or Reformed Churches I doe not infringe but doe maintaine and strengthen it But the point in hand is That the Covenant doth undeniably suppose and clearly hold forth a Government in the Church distinct from Magistracy which is proved by these Arguments which as they are not yet answered so I will briefly apply them to the proofe of that point which now Master Coleman sticks at 1. The Church Government mentioned in the Covenant is as distinct from the Priviledges of Parliament as the first Article of the Covenant is distinct from the third Article 2. The Church-Government in the first Article of the Covenant the Reformation wherof we are to endeavour differeth from Church-Government by Archbishops Bishops c. mentioned in the second Article as much as a thing to be reformed differeth from a thing to be extirpated so that the Church-Government formerly used in the Church of England is looked upon two waies in the Covenant either qua Church-Government and so we sweare to endeavour the Reformation of it which I hope was not meant of reforming that part of the Priviledges of Parliament whereby they meddle with Religion in a Parliamentary way Or qua Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops c. and so we sweare to endeavour the extirpation of it This difference betweene the first and second Articles between Reformation and Extirpation proveth that the Covenant doth suppose that the Church-Government formerly used in the Church of England in so far as it was a Church-Government is not eatenus to be abolished but in so far as it was a corrupt Church-Government that is Prelaticall 3. Church-Government in the Covenant is matched with Doctrine Worship and Catechising Now these are subjectively different from Civill Government for the Civill Magistrate doth not act doctrinally nor catechistically neither can he dispence the Word and Sacraments as Master Coleman acknowledgeth 4. In the first part of the first Article of the Covenant concerning The preservation of the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government It is uncontroverted that Discipline and Government are Ecclesiasticall and subjectively different from Civill Government that is though divers who have a hand in the Civill Government are ruling Elders yet it is as true that divers Members of Parliament and inferiour Civill Courts are not Church Officers● and of the Ministery none are Civill Governours which makes the two Governments clearly distinct subjective Now the second part of that Article concerning the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdomes of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government cannot so farre differ from the first part of that Article in the sense of the words Discipline and Government as that the same words in the same Article of the same Covenant should signifie things differing t●to genere which will follow unlesse Discipline and Government in the second branch and forme of Church-Government in the third branch be understood of the power of Church Officers and not of the Magistrate 5. We did sweare to endeavour the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdomes of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches Now the Word of God holds forth another Government besides Magistracy for Master Coleman himselfe hath acknowledged that he findes in the New Testament Ministers to be Rulers yea instituted Rulers And the example of the best Reformed Churches without all doubt leadeth us to an Ecclesiasticall Government different from Magistracy Neither hath the Reverend Brother so much as once adventured to alledge the contrary except of the Church of Israel which as it heterogeneous being none of the Reformed Churches mentioned in the Covenant so it shall be discussed in due place From all which reasons I conclude that the wit of man cannot reconcile Master Colemans Doctrine with the Covenant I adde 6. A confutation of him out of himselfe thus No

that calling nor admit of any ruling Elders who are not Magistrates A distinction which was used by Saravia and Bilson in reference to the Jewish Elders and by Bishop Hall in reference to the Elders of the ancient Church who were not Preaching Elders Assert of Episcop by divine right pag. 208 209 221. And now forsooth Mr. Hussey in his Epistle to the Parliament doth earnestly beseech them to set up Classes consisting onely of Ministers whose worke should be onely to Preach the Word c. Such Classes I dare say the Prelates themselves will admit of Sure the Scottish Prelates when they were at their highest yeelded as much 5 Master Coleman and Mr. Hussey hold that ruling Elders and a Church-Government distinct from the civill Government in the times of Persecution and under Pagan Magistrates can be no warrant for the like where the State is Christian This plea for Christian Magistracy was Bishop Whitgifts plea against the ruling Elders Answ to the Admon pag. 114. 6 Master Hussey pag. 22. saith that granting the incestuous Corinthian to be Excommunicated the decree was Pauls and not the Corinthians and that it no way appertained to them under the notion of a Church This is Saravia his answer to Beza De tripl Epist. genere pag. 42 43 yea the Papists answer to Protestant Writers by which they would hold up the Authority and sole Jurisdiction of the Prelates as the Apostles successors to Excommunicate They doe not more agree with the Prelaticall Principles then they differ from the Votes and Ordinances of Parliament which is the other point that I have here undertaken to discover and I shall doe it by the particular instances following First The Ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament for the calling of an Assembly of Divines beginneth thus Whereas among the infinite blessings of Almighty God upon this Nation none is or can be more deare unto us then the purity of our Religion and for that as yet many things remaine in the Liturgie Discipline and Government of the Church which doe necessarily require a further and more perfect Reformation then as yet hath been attained And whereas it hath been declared and resolved by the Lords and Commons as●embled in Parliament that the present Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops c. is evill and justly offensive c and that therefore they are resolved that the same shall be taken away and that such a Government shall be setled in the Church as may be most agreeable to Gods holy Word and most apt to procure and preserve the peace of the Church at home and nearer agreement with the Church of Scotland and other reformed Churches abroad Afterward it was resolved and Voted in both the Honourable Houses of Parliament and sent as one of the Propositions to the Treaty at Vxbridge That many particular Congregations shall be under one Presbyteriall Government Now therefore what can be more contrary to the Votes and Ordinances of Parliament then that which Mr: Coleman and Mr. Hussey hold that there ought to be no Ecclesiasticall Government beside civill Magistracy except we please to take Preaching and Baptisme under the name of Government as if forsooth the Parliament had meant by Presbyteriall Government Parliamentary Government or as if by the purity of Religion in point of the Discipline of Government of the Church they had intended nothing but their civill rights and priviledges or as if the wise and Honourable Houses had understood themselves no better then to intend that for a nearer agreement with the Church of Scotland and other reformed Churches which is the widest difference from them to wit the Erastian way Secondly In the same Ordinance of Parliament for the calling of an Assembly of Divines it is Ordained that the Assembly after conferring and treating among themselves touching the Lyturgie Discipline and Government of the Church or vindication and clearing of the Doctrine of the same shall deliver their opinions or advices of or touching the matters aforesaid to both or either of the Houses of Parliament yet Mr. Hussey Epist. to the Parliament pag. 3. 6. will not have Classes and Assemblies to put any thing to the Vote but to hold on the Disputes till all end in accord and in unanimous consent of the whole Clergy But how can the Assembly after Disputes expresse their sence and deliver their opinions and advice to the Parliament as they are required except they doe it by putting to the Vote Mr. Coleman himselfe hath consented yea sometime called to put things to the Vote And as for Classes will any man imagine that when both Houses of Parliament did Vote that many particular Congregations shall be under one Presbyteriall Government their meaning was that the Classicall Presbitery shall onely Schoole-wise Dispute and put nothing to the Vote Or that the Classicall Presbitery shall in common dispence the Word and Sacraments to many Congregations and that either the Classicall Presbitery shall goe to the severall Congregations successively or the many Congregations come to the Classicall Presbitery for Preaching and Baptizing I admire what opinion Mr. Hussey can have of the Parliamentary Vote concerning Presbyteriall Government Thirdly Mr. Hussey Epist. to the Parliament pag. 4 5. will have Ministers placed without any regard to the allowance and dis-allowance of the people yet the Ordinance of Parliament for giving power to Classicall Presbyteries to ordaine Ministers doth appoint that he who is examined and approved by the Presbitery shall be sent to the Church or other place where he is to serve if it may be done with safety and conveniency there to Preach three severall daies and to converse with the people that they may have triall of his gifts for their edification and may have time and leasure to enquire into and the better to know his life and conversation after which the Ordinance appointeth publike notice to be given and a day set to the Congregation to put in what exceptions they have against him Fourthly Mr. Hussey in that Epistle to the Parliament pag. 5. saith Oh that this Honourable Court would hasten to set up Classes consisting onely of Ministers whose worke should be onely to Preach the Word and weekly meet in Schooles of Divinity Here 's a double contradiction to the Ordinances of Parliament for in the directions of the Lords and Commons for chusing of ruling Elders and speedy setling of Presbyteriall Government it is appointed that ruling Elders shall be Members both of Classes and Synodicall Assemblies together with the Ministers of the Word Againe the Ordinance about suspension of scandalous Persons from the Sacrament appointeth other work to Classes beside Preaching and disputing namely the receiving and judging of appeales from the Congregationall Eldership Mr. Coleman in Maledicis pag. 12. professeth that he excludeth ruling Elders from Church Government yet he can hardly be ignorant that as the Parliament hath Voted That many particular Congregations shall be under one Presbyteriall