Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
religion_n good_a king_n subject_n 3,003 5 6.4581 4 false
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
A94295 The due way of composing the differences on foot, preserving the Church, / according to the opinion of Herbert Thorndike. Thorndike, Herbert, 1598-1672. 1660 (1660) Wing T1048; Thomason E1838_3; ESTC R210159 28,326 70

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

course be taken that all Christians may frequent that which shall appear to be indeed the service of God instead of the Masse Let no Preachers flatter themselves with an opinion that they shall ever make Christians so perfectly Jewes as to perswade them to dress no meat on the Sundayes If Servants must stay at home to dress meat on Sundayes and for other occasions they must stay at home besides that will not the way to repair that breach be to injoyne several Assemblies in all Parish Churches upon all Sunday mornings that several Persons of several Estates and qualities may have opportunity to attend the publick service of God at several hours of the same Sundayes and Holy-dayes For though I understand very well that this would impose upon the Church that is upon my hrethren of the Clergie a greater burthen than an afternoons meal of a Sermon which all men know is furnished of the cold meat of the forenoon yet I would have the Word cleared of this imposture that reigneth that two Sermons every Sunday is the due way of keeping the Sabbath among Christians or of advancing Gods publick service I will not here dispute that the Lent-Fast was instituted by the Apostles But this I maintain to be evident that the Fast afore the Resurrection of Christ is and was as antient as the Feast of his Resurrection and that more antient than the keeping of all Lords dayes in the year being meerly the reflection of that one all the weeks of the yeaar Nor will any man that knows what he sayes ever question that the inlarging of it to forty dayes is a just Law voluntarily undertaken by the whole Church not to be condemned without the like mark of Schisme For since the World is come into the Church is there not manifest reason that more time should be taken for the expiating of more sins which are the sins of more people to prepare as well the Elder to renew their Christianity by communicating at Easter as the yonger to be confirmed and come first to the Communion at Easter now they are baptized Infants Which in former ages was the time of their first coming to Baptism As for the Wednsdayes and Fridayes if we shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven unless our Righteousness exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharises And if it be evident as evident it is that the Scribes and Pharises prescribed Mundayes and Thursdayes for dayes of less solemne Assemblies then the Sabbath How shall we enter into the Kingdom of Heaven if in despite of the whole Church which hath hitherto used Wednesdayes and Fridayes in lieu of Mundayes and Thursdays used by the Synagogues we void the Law of England by which they are in force Of the Ceremonies the same is to be understood Not because it can be within the compass of common reason to imagine that the same Ceremonies have continued from the time that the Church was persecuted into holes and caves of the Earth to this time in which the question is of setling Christianity by the Law of this Kingdom It were want of common understanding to think that the same could serve But because so few and so innocent as we use cannot be condemned without condemning not only Gods whole Church but also Gods antient people who will evidently be found in the same cause One thing hath been cast forth in barre to all this which we must not swallow whole unless we mean to impose upon our selves It is the pretense of complying with the Reformed Churches For it is evident that there are four forms of Reformation extant One according to Luther another according to Calvine the third is that of the Church of England and in the last place though first for time because least known and protected by no Soveraign I name that of the Union in Bohemia For we are to know that the followers of John Husse having sent Deputies to the Council of Basil they accorded to reunite the Nation upon four Articles The chief whereof was the Communion in both kinds They that stood to the accord are to this day called thereupon Calixtin or sub utraque in Latine But another part of those that were at distance thinking themselves betrayed by their Deputies in that accord proceeded to settle themselves in a form of Religion and the service of God by that which they held the pure truth of God in all points that had been disputed The Emperour Ferdinand I. King of Bohemia having subdued his subjects there that rose with the Protestants in Germany cast a good part of these out of the Country who finding shelter in Polonia and Prussia there planted and propagated their form till the troubles of our time when by the Emperours victory in Bohemia and the late troubles in Poland they seem to be at a loweble though they impute it to the decay of their first discipline They that would reform the Church of England professing already that Reformation which it found best will they not first show us reason why we are to leave Luther for Calvine For if they mean his form when they talk of conforming us to the reformed Churches because of the Scotts Presbyteries they must have better arguments then either the learning or the Christianity of the Scottish Presbyterians will yeild to perswade us They say those that framed the Reformation in England beeing bred under Melancthon among the Lutheranes followed them much an end in the order and form which they prescribed But is that any reason for any change before it appear which is in the right I freely profess I find Melancthon the better learned and the more Christian spirit But the Church of England which in divers points differeth from both why should it be thought to follow either for any reason but as either agrees with the Catholick Church And for that I prefer the Unity of Bohemia before both For they had the rule of Vincentius given them to take their measure by the consent of the Catholick Church and these things which have allwayes and every where been professed and practised in it And had they done nothing but what is justifiable by that Rule I should not blame them for that which I blame in them most But where they agree not with Luther and Calvine wherein do they not agree with the Church of England In particular they sent all over the World to inform themselves of a visible succession of Bishops whose profession was such that they might derive the Ordination of Bishops for their Churches from their hands They took the superstitions of the Greekes to be such that they could not own it from them In that I think they were in the wrong For I doubt not the Greekes would have granted them Ordination onely under the profession of the Catholick Church and that had been enough But thinking themselves in a strait of necessity they chose twelve by lots And hearing that the Waldenses lived in
became possessed of them scraped over their Altars being Tables of wood in detestation of them as Apostates persecutors while the Catholicks called them brethren and acknowledg'd them rightly baptized and received them that were converted from that Schism in their respective Orders The unity of the Church is of such consequence to the salvation of all Cristians that no excess on one side can cause the other to increase the distance but they shall be answerable for the souls that perish by the means of it And therefore not departing from the opinion which I have declared concerning the termes upon which all parties ought to reconcile themselves untill I shall have reason showed me why I should do it I shall now go no further then the matters that are actually questioned among us not extending my discourse to points that may perhaps more justly become questionable then some of those which have come into dispute Professing in the beginning that I believe they may and ought to be setled by a Law of the Kingdom obliging all parties beside Recusants But that the matter of that Law ought to be limited by the consent and Authority of the Church respective to this Kingdom And withall that I think it ought to be held and shall for mine own part hold it an act meerly ambulatory provisionall for the time For though there is no hope of reconcilement with the Church of Rome as thinges are yet is there infinite reason for all sides to abate of their particular pretensions for the recovering of so incomparable a benefit as the unity of the whole If ever it shall please God to make the parties appear disposed to it Now the errors which we are to shut out if ●e will recover the unity of a visible Church that is of Gods whole Church are two in my judgment First though some things have been disputed in other parts from whence the same consequence may be inferred yet England is the place and ours the times which first openly and downright have maintained that there is no such thing as a Church in the nature of one visible Communion founded by God But it is maintained by severall parties among us upon severall grounds For some do not or will not understand that there can be any Ecclesiasticall Power founded by that act of God which foundeth Christianity where there is Secular Power founded also by those acts of God whereby he authorizeth and inforceth all just Soveraignties Though all times all parts all Nations of Christendom since Constantine profess to maintain the Church in that Power in which they found it acknowledged by Christians when he first undertook to maintain that Christianity which he professed all this must be taken either for meer hypocrisy or meer nonsense Others there are that do not think themselves obliged to the unity of Gods Church upon farre different Principles There are of our Enthusiasts such as are themselves every one a Church to themselves and by themselves as being above Ordinances and the Communion of the Church provided only for proficients But all Independent Congregations make the same profession and are manifestly grounded upon the same For how can they imagine themselves members of one visible Church who profess that they cannot be obliged to hold communion with any Congregation but their own And yet with favour the same consequence insuing upon so different pretenses there must be some supposition common to both upon which both do ground themselves And it is easily visible what that is Both opinions must suppose that a man may be heir to Christs Kingdom and indowed with Gods Spirit without being or before he be a member of Gods Church And the Independents indeed do manifestly profess that knowing themselves and others to be Gods Children and indowed with his Spirit they are in a capacity to joyn in Ecclesiasticall Communion with those whom they know to be such So they become members of a Church being Gods Children before without considering how they shall be members of the Whole Church The others are satisfied that by being members of a State which professeth Christianity they are also members of that one Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church which by our Creed we profess to believe A ground which holdeth accidentally so long as that State constituteth a visible member of the Whole or the Catholick Church But not imaginable to serve the turn when States differ in point of Christianity and may every day appeal to force whither is the true Church and whither the false For is it not manifest that the professions of the Lutheranes the Calvinists the Greekes the Abyssines are protected by Soveraign Powers as well as the profession of the Church of Rome or the Church of England Is it not manifest that the Powers that profess them maintain them respectively to be Gods truth Why then do we dispute any longer which is the true Religion and which is the false if it be enough for Christians to resolve all the doubt they can have concerning Religion into the command of their Soveraigns only professing Christianity Is it not manifest that Soveraigns do use to punish their Subjects that conform not to their Lawes concerning Religion but follow that Religion which is in force under other Soveraignties Is it possible to imagine that Subjects can be obliged by one and the same will of God to follow contrary Lawes under severall Soveraigns Or that Soveraigns can be inabled by one and the same Law of God to punish their Subjects for serving God according to contrary professions True it is Subjects that suffer in a good cause shall be gainers thereby gaining Heaven by their losses of this world But what shall become of the Soveraigns that persecute them being in a good cause Or how shall not some of them bepersecuted in a good cause who are persecuted in contrary causes I know not whither this peremtory difficulty was the cause But I am sure recourse hath been had to a more desperate answer that every Subject is bound to profess the Religion of his Soveraign yea though it injoin him to renounce Christ with his mouth remaining bound all the while to believe in him with his heart and that by this belief he shall be saved as a Christian Neither is this position tenable but upon this answer nor doth this answer import any less than the utter renouncing of Christianity I know that in the records of the ancient Church those who only professed to believe Christianity who were called Catechumeni or Scholars to the Church are sometimes called by the name of Christians But I know withall that they were never counted in the state of Salvation till they had taken upon them the profession of Christianity by being admitted to the Sacrament of Baptisme I know also that this Baptisme though it was not counted void when it was Ministred in due form yet it was never counted effectuall to Salvation but when a man is baptised
not supposing that he undertakes and performs the profession of a Christian renounces the Article of his Creed concerning one baptisme to remission of sins But the being of Gods visible Church consisteth in that Unity which ariseth upon the agreement of all Christians to hold communion in the visible Offices of Gods service And therefore though it be an Article of our Creed to believe one Catholick Church yet can it not concern the Salvation of every particular Christian to understand the nature of that Society or Corporation which the bond of this Unity createth Nay even they who are best seen in that Government by which this Unity is preserved may well fail in comprehending the reason thereof by reflecting their discourse upon it In the mean time it is necessary for all that believe their Creed to think themselves tied by this Article to maintain the Unity of the Church according to their estate That is for every ones part not to be accessory to any Schism that dissolveth it And therefore to deny the crime of Schism is to deny this Article The consequence of this observation will be the difference which the Church hath reason to use in reconciling parties at distance from it to the unity thereof according to the difference of those pretenses upon which they are at distance For those who have only disputed against the being of the Church upon misunderstanding the right of secular Power which they think the being of the Church inconsistent with shall be sufficiently reunited to the Church by conforming to the Law by which the Church is and was and may be established For that there ought to be provision against such disputes for the future it concernes not me to give warning Only where willfullness hath proceeded so farre in maintaining a false position as to make no bones of denying Christianity and teaching Atheism by obliging to renounce Christ if the Soveraign command it it concerneth the Christianity of the Nation to see reparation made But where the Hereticall positions mentioned afore have notoriously been maintained especially where Congregations have been framed and used for the exercise of Religion upon pretense of them there will it be absolutely necessary that they be expressly renounced and disclaimed either by persons in particular or in Body by Congregations To this head I reduce all Anabaptists and Congregations of Anabaptists Those of the fift Monarchy and Congregations of the fifth Monarchy Quakers and Congregations of Quakers Nay all Independent Congregations in my opinion ought to be reduced under this measure Not only because their profession is grounded upon the denial of one visible Church But because they suppose themselves Children of God and indowed with his Spirit before they be members of Gods Church That is setting aside their Baptism and the Covenant which is solemnly inacted by it between God and each soul And though I do referre my self to the wisdom of Superiors in what form this reconciliation be solemnized yet I must express my opinion thus far that there can be none so fit as that which the wisdom of the Catholick Church from the beginning hath allwayes frequented By granting them the blessing of the Church with Imposition of hands renouncing for their part their severall Sects and errors That is by the prayers of the Church for the spirit of God to rest upon them who have barred their baptism to give it by opposing the peace of the Church which now they retire unto For how shall the unity of the Church be secured but by declaring them who violate the same accursed of God Nor let it be thought that our Sectaries of their own accord retiring themselves unto the Communion of this Church it will be requisite for the Church to admit them without taking notice of any thing that hath passed For neither is it to be presumed that they who have made their own wills their Law for so many yeares will so much as profess conformity to the Rule of the Church And if they did profess it there is no reason to think that they should stand to it having a dispensation dormant of the Spirit to stand to their profession as the interest of their faction shall require So their coming to Church would be only an advantage for them to infect others And how should that Communion be counted a Church which intertains Hereticks as Hereticks and Schismaticks as Schismaticks that is without renouncing positions destructive to the Faith without obliging themselves for the future to hold Unity with the Church Certainly there is no just answer for this if the Church of Rome should object it for the reason why they refuse to hold communion with us Certainly S. Augustine when he was charged by the Donatists that the Church received their Apostates without rebaptizing them and in their respective Orders could have had no answer if he had not had this That the Church received them not as Donatists but as converted from being Donatists they not refusing to profess so much Certainly it may be and perhaps is justifiable for the Secular power to grant them the exercise of their Religion in private places of their own providing under such moderate penalties as the disobeying of the Laws of a mans Countrey might require For persecution to death for that cause the whole Reformation condemneth in the Church of Rome And I conceive there is no reason for that which will not condemn persecution to banishment But this would require the like moderation to be extended to Recusants of the Church of Rome True it is in mine opinion those Papists that think themselves tied by the Bull of Pius V. against Queen Elizabeth or that they may be tied by the like Acts of his Successors against hers are justly lyable to the utmost of penalties as professed enemies to their Countrey But besides that it is manifest that all Papists are not of that opinion which the said Bull presupposeth The State may easier he secured of Papists against all such power in the Pope than of our Sectaries against that dispensation to their Allegiance which the pretense of Gods Spirit may import when they please And whereas it is manifest that many Papists hold against those equivocations and reservations which destroy all considence of the Soveraign in his Subjects allegiance How shall a State be secured against that infamous falsehood of the late Usurper in any man that pretends Gods Spirit upon his terms which I mentioned afore Besides the Recusants being for the most part of the good Families of the Nation will take it for a part of their Nobility freely to professe themselves in their Religion if they understand themselves whereas the Sectaries being people of mean quality for the most part cannot be presumed to stand upon their reputation so much So if they cannot be tolerated in the exercise of their Religion it must be provided upon what terms they may be received by the Church And by that which