Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n adhere_v england_n great_a 14 3 2.1254 3 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
A64558 Remarks on the preface to The Protestant reconciler in a letter to a friend. S. T. (Samuel Thomas), 1627-1693. 1683 (1683) Wing T974; ESTC R25646 26,707 64

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

as lawful Nay I do not discern what consistency there is between one part of the Preface and another part between the allowing the fore-mentioned mutations as reasonable and necessary Pag. 82. and 93. and this passage Pag. 89. which implies they are neither necessary nor reasonable For there he says we do heartily and sincerely desire Vnion with our Brethren if it may be had on just and reasonable Terms but they must not think that we will give up the Cause of the Church for it so as to condemn its Constitution or make the Ceremonies unlawful which have been hitherto observed and practised in it if any Expedient can be found out for the Ease of other mens Consciences without reflecting on our own if they can be taken in without Reproach or dishonour to the Reformation of the Church I hope no True Son of the Church of England will oppose it Now whether the fore-mention'd dispensings with and Retrenchments of our Church-Orders and Practices upon the fore-mention'd Reason and Argument for the sake of Union with them whom he is pleas'd to call Brethren be not so far a giving up the Cause of the Church as to condemn its Constitution and to make the Ceremonies unlawful which have hitherto been observed and practised in it I leave you to judge as also whether the taking in Dissenters upon such Terms will not necessarily reflect reproach and dishonour upon the Reformation of that Church which at her first Reforming thought fit to retain and impose those Constitutions and Ceremonies as just and reasonable and as such hath ever since continu'd them without imagining that continu'd Imposition inconsistent with Christian Wisdom or with any regard that 's justly due to the Scruples and Exceptions of troublesome men relating to the Administration of Sacraments in a Christian Church To which troublesome Men the Dr. is pleased to give the Title of Brethren more than once in the later end of the Preface which is it self in my Opinion too absurd a contradiction to that Book whose main design is to prove them Schismaticks He tells us Pag. 364. That 't was the great Wisdom of our Church not to make more things necessary as to Practice than were made so at the Settlement of the Reformation but whether there be sufficient reason to alter those Terms of Communion which were then settled for the sake of such whose Scruples are groundless and endless I do not says he take upon me here to determin And I wish he had not taken it upon him in the Preface especially to determin it so much to the Reproach and Dishonour of our Church as to imply she hath hitherto been guilty of Transgressing the Obligation of Christianity in not making those Alterations for the sake of Union with such Persons whose Scruples are groundless and endless and which as himself Affirms p. 372. might be remov'd by a little Impartiality and ●lue consideration there being no depth of Learning no subtilty of Reasoning no endless quotation of Fathers necessary about them but the dispute lies in such a narrow compass that men may see light if they will And why ours or indeed any Church should be Reproached as Defective in Christian Wisdom for not complying with such humersom Persons or not altering her Constitutions for the sake of such wilfully blind and perverse Dissenters I confess I do nor understand Now these Premises being duly consider'd do I think abundantly justifie the first charge and make it too reasonable to adhere to this conclusion that the Doctors Preface hath destroyed what he had said for our Church in his Book And in reference to the other charge that the Preface has effectually destroy'd that Church of England which the Doctor had taken pains to defend in his Book The same premises do really contribute so much to the making it good that for ought I see no more need to be added to that End than the bare application of them to that Censure and to the Doctor 's own Notion of the Church of England For he asserts p. 249. of his Book that the National Church of England diffusive is the whole Body of Christians in this Nation consisting of Pastors and People agreeing in that Faith Government and Worship which are Establish'd by the Laws of this Realm And Pag. 302. All Bishops Ministers and People taken together who profess the Faith so Establish'd and worship God according to the Rules so Appointed make up this National Church of England And this is the Church of England which the Doctor has taken pains to defend in his Book If therefore the Church of England takes its denomination not only from the Profession of that Faith but also from its consent in Worshipping God according to such and such Rules he that would destroy those Rules will consequently destroy that Church which is denominated such and diversified from other Churches by its embracing and adhering to those Rules But it appears from the premises that the Doctor 's Preface would have several considerable Alterations made of those Rules and that upon such an account and for such reasons as do consequentially destroy that Order and those Rules of Worship that are Established by Law and therefore that Preface does effectually destroy that Church of England which he had taken pains to defend in his Book These are all the things says the Dr. which appear to me reasonable to be Allowed in order to an Vnion and which I suppose may be Granted without detriment or dishonour to our Church And says this Writer these are all I plead for in this Book But 1. there is this little difference between these Authors The Reverend Dean supposes they may be Granted but this Author endeavours to prove they ought to be Granted 2. Though that Author mentions only such and such things as appearing to him reasonable to be Allowed yet to make them appear so to others he urges an Argument which will infer it as reasonable to dispense with a great many other things not mention'd And so though this Author pretends that these are all he pleads for in his Book yet the Arguments he makes use of if they prove any thing prove it the duty of our Governours to dispense with a great many more Constitutions even all that enjoyn any Indifferents whereby our Brother is offended Chap. 3. And therefore whereas he adds here As for those who deny the lawfulness of Lyturgy and the right Constitution of our Churches and who would be exempted from the Jurisdiction of their Bishop and set up Congregations separate and independent upon him I know not how to plead for them without pleading for Schism Confusion and Disorder I doubt his Arguments will if they prove any thing prove it as unlawful for Governours to impose a Lyturgy and require Obedience to Episcopal Government as to impose Ceremonies For I am confident he is very sensible that a great many whom he seemed to account weak Brethren are mightily offended
Impositions nor 2. are ever like to have who 3. are like to make a most mischievous use of it to the dishonour and prejudice of the Church and yet to pretend himself most unwilling to do the least dis-service to the Church is so palpably Protestatio contra factum that hardly any thing can be more so But why talks he only of doing dis-service to the Church as if that only were concern'd when the contents and design of his Book cast as great a slur upon and tend as much to the reproach and disparagement of the State as of the Church for he knows well enough that the Laws enjoyning Uniformity and imposing our Ceremonies are made by the King and that with the Consent not only of the Lords Spiritual but Temporal also and the Commons so that this Author in thus attempting to prove those Laws repugnant to the Law of God and inconsistent with so many of the grand momentous obligations of Christianity is so far from shewing himself unwilling to do dis-service to the Church that he has spent a great deal of time and pains and employed as one may guess the utmost of his Art and Industry to do as great a dis-service to that and the State both as for ought I know he could possibly do it with his Pen for what greater dis-service can there be done in that way to any Government than to Assert and Maintain a Position from which it follows by undeniable consequence That the Governours of this or that Nation have for multitudes of Years successively agreed in Enacting Laws contradictory to the Practice and Commands the Exhortations Arguings and Examples of both Christ and his Apostles For this is the immediate consequent of this Position and his manner of proving it That Superiours ought not to impose things Indifferent and Alterable without Sin as the Conditions of Church-Communion and Ministration Besides what greater Affront could be offer'd to the King himself then to publish such a Book at that very time when His Majesty gave such demonstration of his Resolutions to uphold and defend the Act for Uniformity and of his Zeal for the Church by requiring a strict and vigorous Execution of the Laws against Dissenters This man's undertaking therefore thus manag'd in contradiction to the Laws of the Land at a time when the King himself and inferiour Magistrates were more industriously zealous in executing those Laws than they have been for many years is in my Opinion such a daring and impudent pragmaticalness as ought to be encountered and chastised with a Punishment as notorious as the Crime Especially since as was before intimated I doubt not but this very Writer could have fill'd as many sheets as this Preface contains with Testimonies justifying the Constitutions of our Church and State in matters indifferent and I am confident had I had but my own Library about me three parts whereof are still at Oxford I could have done so my self But in some of the few Books I have here I meet with such passages as abundantly confirm me in that Confidence and withall make me very much suspect this Prefacer's sincerity and ingenuity in quoting For whereas he has in this Preface quoted Beza as an Enemy to all Symbolical Rites pag. 25 and affirming that they should be entirely excluded from the Christian Church and Zanchy as an Enemy to our Ceremonies and besides pretended pag. 35. That 't were endless to set down all that Bucer Calvin Chamier Daneus Farel Povanus Vrsin and Zipper with many others have said against the Vse and Imposition of them and pag. 36. that Cassander testifies without telling us where he so testifies that most have conceiv'd them fit to be condemned and abolished as foppish ludicrous ridiculous yea as noxious and pernicious Durell has given us such a different Account of things as is very opposite to this Prefacer's pretensions For in his forementioned Book Cap. 17. He Affirms that the Christian Church from the Apostles time to this day was never without nor in the judgment of the most Learned and Famous Protestants either can or ought to be without some significant Ceremonies pag. 182. to which purpose he quoted the sentiments of Luther Melancthon and Calvin pag. 186. and then said I could here produce very many more of the most Learned and Renowned Persons in the Reformed Churches of the same Opinion with Luther Melancthon and Calvin in this point Nor says he do I remember to have read any Reform'd Writer of any Note especially of those who were at the beginning of the Reformation whose Judgment and Authority is principally to be attended to in this dispute who Condemns significant Ceremonies meerly as such if so be no supernatural vertue be attributed to them for the producing Spiritual Effects nor Religion placed in them nor Merit or Justification expected from the use of them Out of which number he do's not except Beza himself but proceeds to Vindicate him as to that very Passage which this Prefacer has quoted out of his Epistle to Bishop Grindal as if it were for his turn and manifests that it ought not to be understood of such Symbolical Rites as are design'd to signifie only mens duty but such only as are meant to signifie and exhibit Spiritual Priviledges and the Divine Grace And in his Sixteenth Chapter he largely Answers that Epistle of Zanchy quoted at large by this Prefacer pag. 28. c. against imposing Linnen Garments and most of his Answers are taken out of Calvin Bucer P. Martyr and Zanchy himself And as to our Churches retaining the Use of the Cross in Baptism its Thirtieth Canon Acquaints us that That resolution and practice hath been allowed and approved by the Harmony of Confessions of later years Now this Assertion of the Composers of that Canon and those other of Durell as to the number of Persons approving the Imposition of Ceremonies makes me very much suspect this Author's ingenuity and honesty in quoting And I doubt he has contented himself with quoting many Testimonies besides those out of Gesselius pag 38. c. only by Retale and at second hand from others without examining the quotations himself and consulting the passages as they lye in the Original Authors which is an intolerable Neglect in any man that undertakes to Write and Publish a Discourse and Preface of this Nature and Consequence And one quotation which makes me suspect this is that Pag. 45. and 46. out of Baxter's Disput of Human Ceremonies Chap. 24. it should be 14. Sect. 3. R. 2. where he says 'T is shrewdly Argued by Mr. Baxter against our Ceremonies This seems to be coming after Christ to amend his Laws correct his Works and make better Laws and Ordinances for his Church than he himself hath done for if Christ would have such Rites imposed on the Churches he could better have done it himself than have left it to man for these Rites are equally necessary or unnecessary throughout all Ages and