Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	prove_v	sense_n	true_a	4,551	5	6.4241	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62125	A defence of the peaceable and friendly address to the non-conformists against the ansvver lately given to it. In which the obligation to conform to the constitutions of the established church is maintained and vindicated. The answerers objections solv'd; and his calumnies refuted.	Synge, Edward, 1659-1741.	1698 (1698)	Wing S6377; ESTC R221946	57,215	64

to be extended than as I had set the bounds and limits of it But what follows in the next Paragraph is designed to shew that allowing my notion of Christian Liberty to be just and good yet still our Ceremonies are destructive of it because they are made essential parts of Religion and necessary to Salvation which if he can but prove as clearly as he has confidently affirmed it then indeed and not otherwise he might have reason to say that my Answer is not sufficient to the Objection even as I my self had framed it Now here I must desire the Reader to take notice what a poor and disingenuous piece of Sophistry our Author endeavours to put upon the world To convince the Non-Conformists that our Ceremonies were no infringement of Christian Liberty I gave them to understand in my Address that our Church did not impose them as essential parts of Religion and necessary to Salvation In opposition to which he undertakes to prove that they are by us made essential parts of Religion and necessary to Salvation and therefore destructive of Christian Liberty But when he comes to produce his Arguments he cunningly conceals the main and fundamental part of the conclusion which he was to prove and as for the other part of it which was but an appendage to or superstructure upon the former he perverts and plainly alters the sense and meaning of it The fundamental part of the conclusion which he undertakes to prove is that our Ceremonies are by us made essential parts of Religion But in order to make this good he does not so much as offer the least word or syllable The other part is that we make them necessary to Salvation which indeed he attempts to prove but in a clear different sense from that in which I denied it My meaning was plainly this that our Church did not pretend that her Ceremonies were immediately derived from the essence of Religion or upon that account necessary to be observed which I grant would be an encroachment upon Christian Liberty But all that his Arguments can pretend to prove is that our Ceremonies being imposed by the Laws of the Church the use of them is esteemed necessary to Salvation not as being essential parts of Religion or so reputed by us but only as they are the matter wherein we ought to shew our conformity and obedience to the commands of lawful Authority In Answer therefore to all his Arguments at once I shall only tell him that obedience to the lawful commands of lawful Authority is one of those Duties which God has made necessary to Salvation And as far as any Ceremony is the matter of such obedience so far it is by consequence in its proper degree also necessary altho' it be no essential part of Religion Nor is there any thing herein which is any way destructiue of Christian Liberty But that which he should have proved was that we esteem our Ceremonies to be necessary to Salvation even antecedently to the commands of the Church and the Law That therefore our Author's Arguments which he here urges are all of them wide from the point in Controversie is as evident as may be But because in some of them he has a sly design not so much to prove what he had just before undertaken as to render the Established Church as black and odious as may be in the eyes of his Party It will be necessary before I proceed to wipe off that dirt which here he rakes together to throw at her In the first place then I must tell him that what I have hitherto read of his Book has not begot in me such an opinion of his veracity as upon his bare word to make me give credit to what he supposes viz. that the bare omission of Ceremonies tho' out of tenderness of Conscience is by us judged Schism Sedition and Rebellion and made worthy of Fining Imprisonment and Excommunication Nor have I any reason to think his good nature towards us to be so abundant as that he would have omitted to quote some passages of our Laws or Canons if any such there had been to make good this charge to the utmost which he thus aggravates against us That Consciences which are truly tender ought ever to be used with the greatest gentleness is the unanimous opinion of all sober and good men that ever I remember to have met with either of our own or any other of the Reformed Churches And altho' in the Letter of Humane Laws an exception or dispensation for tender Consciences is no way proper to be expressly inserted because every man being able to make this pretence and none but God who knows the hearts of men being able to confute it where it is falsely but craftily made this would be the way wholly to enervate the sanction and force of all such Laws and so to leave it at every mans pleasure whether he would observe them or not yet in the execution of them at least of all such as concern Religion and the Worship of God I freely grant that a due regard ought to be had to the invincible mistakes of all such as appear to be well-meaning men because it ought ever to be presumed that the intention of the Law-makers was not or ought not to have been that such sort of men as they should be severely dealt with And if any particular men have ever prest the Execution of our Ecclesiastical Laws beyond this Let them answer for themselves for I am sure I shall never appear in their defence But where there are most strong presumptions that it is not real tenderness of Conscience but some other principle which prompts a man not only himself to refuse obedience to lawful Authority but also to perswade as many as he can to join with him therein Where a man can without remorse or scuple break some of the most known Laws of God can confidently vent such slanders and calumnies as are not only contrary to charity but also to truth it self and can pervert and misquote not only the Writings of a Man but even the Word of God and yet all this while shall refuse to obey such commands of Authority as he cannot shew to be either expressly or by good consequence contrary to any Law or Command of God which I have plainly shewn to be our Authors case If such a Man as this shall yet plead the tenderness of his Conscience for refusing conformity to the Laws of the Land which yet it seems is tough enough to dispense with the violation of the above mentioned Laws of God I would gladly know whether such a plea and in such a case is to be admitted And if the penalty of the Law be not put in execution against a man who plainly appears to be of this temper I think he has more reason to thank the mildness of the Government than to attribute it to any justice which he may pretend to be on his side or

unlawful or if not for what reason ours are so For my part I know no other mysticalness in any or our Ceremonles save only that we use them as apt and proper marks of what we inwardly intend We uncover our heads and kneel on our knees in the Worship of God for no other reason but to denote that profound Reverence which we ought always to have for his Majesty and something of the like nature we design in all the rest of our Ceremonies And if he will call this a Mystery yet I think he ought c● early to prove the thing to be unlawful And not take it for a sufficient contutation of us that he has improperly applyed a hard word upon this occasion without any distinct explication of its meaning But time place person c. which are Circumstances of humane actions cannot says he be called Rites or Ceremonies I pray why so were not the time of the Jewish Sabbath and other Festivals the place Jerusalem and the ●e●●●● where they kept their Feasts and performed much of their Worship And the persons of the particular Tribe of ●evi who were immediately appointed to minister to God in their publick Service were not the observation of all these I say parts of the Ceremonial Law of Moses And if they were why may not the particular 〈◊〉 pl●●e and pe●●● appointed ●or the performance of an action be called Ceremonies of it as well as the p●●i●● I●●dy or the 〈◊〉 in which the same is to be do●● But if Ceremony and Circumstance do thus in a manner signifie the same thing Ceremonies should be necessary and not indifferent seeing it is impossible to do any thing without Circumstances I Answer That tho' to do an action without all Circumstances be impossible yet this or that particular Circumstance may b● indifferent and not necessary because it may be changed for another ●nd if we will be nice in distinguishing these words Ceremony and Circumstance one from the other all the difference that I know between them ●●●●is viz. That as every thing which is a concomitant of an action is ordi●●●ily called a Circumstance of it so those Circumstances which by any Law or Custom generally observed are particularly determined and a●●exed to the performance of that action are usually termed the 〈◊〉 of it And accordingly there may be Ceremonies of Divine Civil Ecclesiastical or b●re customary Determination and Appointment as I have but now said But if a Ceremony in Worship which I a●●rm to be but a Circumstance be not natural and necessary for a decent performance of the action nor comprehended in any general Law of Christ it must be an addition to his Institutions and contrary to that precept Deut. 12. 32. But here again is a great stress laid upon doubtful expressions without so much as one word offered toward ●●ea●ing the meaning and removing the ambiguity of them For neither has he told us what he means by these words Natural and Necessary which sometimes are taken in a strict Sense to denote such things as are absolutely and indispensably required or dictated by the meer instinct ●● 〈◊〉 and sometimes in a larger Sense to signifie such things as are only very proper and convenient Nor has he informed us what 〈…〉 by b●ing Comprehended ●n a General Law of Christ For ● th●●g may be thus comprehended in a general Law either immediately and 〈◊〉 as every dire●t Act of Sin is comprehended under some ge●●●● p●●hilition and every positive and direct Act of Duty under some of the General Commands or else more remotely and reductively as the means of performing a Duty or resisting a Temptation and also some of the most Congruous and proper Circumstances of Action which tho' variable in themselves according to the various cases which fall out yet according ●● the rules of Prudence and Congruity are often Reducible tho' more ●●mot●ly and not so directly to some of the general rules of Duty because from such things as these the goodness of Actions may be enhans●● 〈…〉 aggravated Nor lastly has he fixed the signification of this 〈…〉 An Addition to Christ's Institutions By which if he 〈◊〉 the doing any thing more in the performance of a Duty than what strictly and ex●●●ly Christ has Commanded Either he must prove that Christ has Comm●nded every Punc●●●●● of what is prescribed in the Directory or else he must condemn that as well as the Liturgy as an Addition to Christ's Institutions But if by this Expression he means the enjoyning and enacting an uncommanded thing as if God himself had immediately Commanded it and so counterfeiting and stamping the Divine Authority upon that which is no more but a humane Tradition or Institution which to me seems the very utmost intent of that part of the Precept which he quotes Deut. 12. 32. He cannot but know that no manner of guilt can be fastned on our Church upon this account Because she plainly and fully distinguishes between the unalterable Commands of God and her own Ecclesiastical institutions which she acknowledges to be alterable and not of Eternal Obligation Towards the end of that Paragraph o● my Address which we are still upon I had desired to know since Cerem●●●s might be used without Superstition how we could more effectually d●scl● 〈…〉 the use of them than we already do To which he returns me th●● 〈…〉 more effectual way is to disclaim all use of them Which is just as if 〈…〉 said that the best way to use Ceremonies without Superstition is 〈…〉 at all And if that be not a Contradiction I know not what is But here I must tell him that as there is no manner of Superstition either in prescribing or practising a thing which God has le●t in it sel● indifferent as long as we retain and profess the true Opinion of its indifferency so to disclaim wholly the use of any thing which in it self is lawful as if it were forbidden by God when really it is not so is in my apprehension a gross piece of Superstition And therefore to disclaim all use of Ceremonies is not so effectual a way to avoid Superstition as our Author would have us believe but rather the quite contrary For to lay any Weight upon and to be guided by groundless imaginations of our own in matters relating either to God's Providence or Religion is what I take to be the proper and true notion of Superst●●●●n And as this Practise of disclaiming all our Ceremonies in the Worship of God would Evidently be Superstition so the Principle upon which our Author presses it is as plainly as can be no less than the Addition of a Negative Precept to the Law of God For he tells us that whatever i● not Commanded by God and is required by Men as a means of the Worsh●p of God is forbidden by God Upon which he would have us lay all our Ceremonies aside But no such Prohibition as this appears in the Law of God either