Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n author_n church_n write_v 2,265 5 5.4994 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
A54082 Exceptions against Will. Rogers's cavills at J.P.'s complaint &c, taken out of his sixth part of his Christian-Quaker. Penington, John, 1655-1710. 1682 (1682) Wing P1226; ESTC R34072 11,675 18

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the Spirit so goes forth in some as in them to teach and Govern and Secondly Those that Subject to men thus qualified which is far from denying any are so Subject not to man but to the Lord. 3. A Third consequence which occurrs from the premises is that notwithstanding his endeavouring page 22. to suggest my wronging him because I tell him his Title-page imports that the drift of that part of his Book is to tye up all to an inward Government of Christ exclusive of any outward form of Government Order or Discipline yet that from thence the same is very obvious For what else can be the meaning of those words That the inward Government of Christ is not represented by persons visible by carnal eyes invested with power from him to execute outward Laws Prescriptions c. in an outward form of Government if he did not intend under the Notion of inward Government of Christ to exclude all manner of outward form of Government Order or Discipline except he would have it represented by persons invisible to carnal eyes Nor have I done with him yet upon this Subject for I must a●d one Instance more to prove he hath made Deductions and Inferences from that which he Cited of my Fathers which thought it be pretty long am willing to give my Reader for a further taste of my Adversaries false covers and in order to my own Vindication It begins thus Having now done with the Citation of what was writ in Answer to the aforesaid Book of Government and considering that in the First Section the Author wrote of a sort of Persons that would needs be Innovators and given to change and introducing new Doctrines and Practices not only differing but contrary to what were delivered in the beginning and in page 13. seems reflectingly to treat on such kind of language as this I must stay till I be convinced as if such language was knockt down in the beginning and as may reasonably be taken from the scope of the said Book to reflect on such among the People called Quakers who are not so zealously affected with the outward form of Government under the Notion of Church Government pretended to be establish'd amongst them as the Author or Approvers of his Book were We think it necessary to cite a Testimony publish'd in Print by Isaac Penington the Younger c. If in all this there be no Deduction when he gives such a large account why he thought it necessary to cite my Father opposing him and Friends in the beginning to what is received now amongst Friends then I confess I am to seek for the Etymology of the word Nay doth he not tell us that his first Motive was considering the Author wrote of a sort of Persons that would needs be Innovators and introduce new Doctrine to what was in the beginning But what then what is that to us or how doth it concern us if W. R. hath made no Deduction or Inference with relation to my Father's sense for or against it but hath left his Reader free without putting a construction on it which is not constent with telling us that upon such and such Considerations he thought necessary to cite it for this is a manifest declaring the construction he would make of it Another Consideration he draws from page 13. of the said Book upon which he thought necessary to cite my Father's words or at least some of them is That his Author as he alledgeth seems reflectingly to treat as if such kind of language as I must stay till I be convinced were knocked down in the beginning Well what of all this What have we to do with his Author if there be no reference made thereto in citing part of my Fathers words of his allowing or disallowing such kind of Language But then why was it brought here as one of the Inducives to the Citation Is not this manifest Contradiction William Dost thou not apparently thwart thy self Was not thy third part writ to another end than thou wilt own in thy Sixth But he goes on with a Third Consideration opposing scope to scope and telling us the scope of the said Book seeming to be to reflect on such among the people called Quakers who are not so zealously affected with the outward forms of Government under the Notion of Church-government we think it necessary to cite a Testimony c. Entituled The Authority and Government which Christ excluded out of Church c. And what no Deduction in all this neither Doth he not hereby endeavour to insinuate my Father's sense in those daies concurred not with the zealously affected persons now adaies especially when we consider that after he hath promised to take it all together word for word and not by parts and pieces here and there yet he left out the most remarkable passages which could no waies admit of but directly impugned such a construction as he notwithstanding his endeavouring now to palliate it sought to wrest therefrom Yet further on this occasion I would ask him one Question Whether he himself be one of those zealously affected persons to the outward forms of Government under the Notion of Church-Government or no For if he be not he hath no reason to take it ill of me that I inferred he would tye up all to an inward Government of Christ exclusive of any outward form of Government Order or Discipline and if he be he hath an ill way of shewing it when he would make Friends in the beginning to be of another mind O the changeableness of this man one while one way another while another way like the foolish Woman pulling down his House with his own Hands O that he could see whither he is run through spurning at counsel and be warned for the future But suppose saith he page 20. I had not-worded my meaning so cautiously as to have signified only a part of his Father's discourse c. Why hadst thou so done and ingeniously have confessed it I would never have trod upon thee But what if the case be otherwise and that thy design was to traduce and now thou art pinched wouldst seek a hole to creep out at must not I tell thee thy way is hedged up and this and the other passage makes against thee It would be well for thee thou couldst at length learn to distinguish between weakness and wilfulness ignorance and premeditated abuse He adds Might not all publick Preachers or Writers by the same Rule be reflected on when they have quoted by way of Testimony or Illustration a part only of another's Testimony Answ Yes if they affirm that part to be the whole and to be taken all together as it lies and not by parts and pieces and wrest that part as an instance of their opposition to their Brethren they are in unity with The like Answer may serve for his Marginal Note where from my citing but part of my Father's Testimony and not declaring 't is only