Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	church_n	receive_v	time_n	3,111	5	3.8577	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69202	Generall demands concerning the late covenant propounded by the ministers and professors of divinitie in Aberdene, to some reverend brethren, who came thither to recommend the late covenant to them, and to those who are committed to their charge. Together with the answers of those reverend brethren to the said demands. As also the replyes of the foresaid ministers and professors to their answers.	Henderson, Alexander, 1583?-1646.; Forbes, John, 1593-1648.; Hamilton, James Hamilton, Duke of, 1606-1649.	1638 (1638)	STC 66; ESTC S100396	26,442	56

thing of that nature but by such a fair and legall way as shall satisfie all his subjects And thence we do collect that which we affirmed before to wit That there is no such extraordinary or extreme case as might give occasion to subjects to make such a band as is directly forbidden by the foresaid act of parliament and to contraveen it in such a manner as may seeme to import a resisting of Authority by force of armes THE IIII. DEMAND COncerning that interpretation of the negative confession which is urged upon us and wherein the articles of Pearth and Episcopacie are declared to be abjured as well as all the points of Poperie which are therein expresly and distinctly mentioned Quaeritur Who are the interpreters of that confession that is Whether all the subscribers or only those Ministers conveened in Edinburgh in the end of February who set it down If all the subscribers then what reason have we to receive an interpretation of that confession from la●cks ignorant people and children If only those Ministers conveened then in Edinburgh then seeing no man should take an honour to himself but he who is called of God as Aaron Heb. 5.4 what power and authority had they over their brethren to give out a judiciall interpretation of these articles of faith and to inforce their interpretation of these articles upon them ANSWER THe subscribers are here mis-interpreted in two points very materiall One is that they presume upon power or authority which they have to give out a judicial interpretation of the articles of the confession and to enforce the same upon others whereas they only intended to make known their own meaning according to the minde of our Reformers and in charity to propound and recommend the same to others who might be made willing to embrace it Although it be true also that very great numbers of Ministers were conveened and testified their consent as that time And although the private judgment of those who are called laicks ought not to be mis-regarded For it is confessed That an interpretation which is private ratione personae may be more than private ratione medii The other which being observed will answer diverse of the following demands That the articles of Pearth and of Episcopall government are declared to be abjured as points of Poperie or as Popish novations where as the words of the Covenant put a difference betwixt two sorts of novations one is of such as are already introduced in the worship of God and concerning those whatsoever be the judgement of the subscribers which to every one is left free by the words of the Covenant they are onely bound to forbear the practise of them by reason of the present exigence of the Kirk till they be tried and allowed in a free Generall assembly The other sort is of such novations as are particularly supplicated against and complained upon as the Service book and Canons c. which are abjured as containing points of Poperie And this we avouch from our certain knowledge to be the true meaning of the controverted words of the Covenant And therefore humbly intreat That no man any more upon this scruple with-hold his testimony REPLY AS for the first of these two mistakings If you have not given out that interpretation of the negative confession judicially but only have made known your own meaning according to the minde of the Reformers as you alledge then first your interpretation hath no obligatory power over others and consequently you ought not to obtrude your interpretation upon us more then we doe our interpretation thereof upon you Neither ought any man to be molested or threatned for not receiving your interpretation chiefly seeing all who are of your confederation have so solemnly vowed and promised to be good examples to others of all godlinesse sobernesse and righteousnesse and of every duety which you owe to God and man Secondly As for the minde or judgement of our Reformers we know no evidence of it having publick authority to oblige the subjects of this Kingdome except that which is expressed in our nationall confession of faith ratified in Parliament twenty years before the negative confession was penned wherein we finde no warrant or ground of such interpretation as you bring Thirdly The interpretation of the negative confession set down in your covenant as it is not publick ratione personae so also not ratione medii for it hath no warrant for ought we could ever perceive either from the word of God or from the testimony of the ancient Church or from the consent of other reformed Churches or from our nationall confession registrated in Parliament As for the second mistaking or mis-interpretation of the words of the late covenant first we marvell that a generall Covenant appointed to be subscribed by all learned and unlearned should have been set down by you in such ambiguous termes For truly all men here even the most judicious do so take your words as if the articles of Pearth were in them abjured 2. We have again more attentively examined the words of the late Covenant and do evidently perceive by them That in the said Covenant the articles of Pearth and Episcopacie are condemned and abjured as erroneous and damnable corruptions For where you professe and before God and his angels and the world solemnly declare That you shall labour by all means lawfull to recover the libertie and puritie of the Gospel as it was established and professed before the foresaid novations We ask you what is that period of time to which your words have reference when you promise to labour to recover the puritie and libertie of the Gospel as it was professed and established before the foresaid novatitions If you mean that period of time when the Service book and Book of Canons were urged upon you to wit the last year by-past in Summer then you acknowledge That all that time you enjoyed the puritie and libertie of the Gospel and consequently That you yet enjoy it for no new thing hath since that time been publickly received and practised in this Church If you mean as undoubtedly we think you do the time praeceding the bringing in of Episcopacie and the acts of Pearth then you comprehend both Episcopacie and the acts of Pearth under these novations for the removing whereof you promise to labour according to your power and consequently do dis-allow and condemne them even before they be tried in a free assembly and before they be heard who maintain and approve them as lawfull 3. We may evidently demonstrate this argumento ad hominem as we say in the schools For those rites and ceremonies which are abjured in the negative confession are also abjured in your late Covenant which as you say is all one with the negative confession or with the Covenant made 1581. But the rites and ceremonies which were concluded in Pearth assembly are abjured as you say in the Covenant made 1581. and therefore they

some cases not indeed necessitate medii as if Gods grace were tyed to the externall means but as we say in the schools necessitate praecepti because we are commanded to use these means 2. This late Covenant leadeth and bindeth us to the old Covenant made 1581. and that old Covenant bindeth us perpetually to that discipline which was then that is as ye alledge to the whole policie of the Church comprehending all the externall rites of it and so à primo ad ultimum this late Covenant bindeth us to the whole policie of the Church which was then and consequently maketh a perpetuall law concerning externall rites of the Church as if they were unchangeable All parts of this argument are sure For by your late Covenant you professe your selves bound to keep the foresaid nationall oath as you call it inviolable And that oath or Covenant bindeth us to continue in the obedience not onely of the doctrine but also of the discipline of this Kirke Where by the discipline of the Kirke ye understand as ye have in all your writings professed especially of late in your booke entituled A dispute against the English Popish ceremonies Part 4. Chap. 8. Sect. 6. the whole externall policie of the Church as it was at that time to wit Anno 1581. Yea you confesse That no other thing can be understood by the discipline of the Kirke but that which we have said already and consequently we shall be tyed by that oath which you require of us to admit and practise no other rites and ceremonies but such as were then received in our Church We can no wayes passe by this seeing ever since the assembly of Pearth in your publick sermons and printed books ye have most vehemently accused us of perjurie as violating the oath or covenant made Anno 1581. and that in respect we have admitted into the Church some rites or ceremonies which were not in it the foresaid year of God Is not this to make a perpetuall law concerning the externall rites of the Church as if they were unchangeable and to abjure the practice of all rites introduced in the Church since that time and consequently the practise of the articles of Pearth and that not for a time onely but for ever 3. Seeing the negative confession according to your minde and conception of it maketh the whole externall policie of the Church as it was Anno 1581. to be unchangeable and on the contrary the confession insert into the acts of Parliament declareth That the rites belonging to the externall policie of the Church are changeable how can you escape a contradiction if ye receive both these confessions 4. Whereas by that distinction mentioned in your answer of things necessary to be observed and of things variable in particular congregations ye insinuate that by the keeping of the discipline of the Kirke as it was then to which we are bound in the old Covenant ye understand the observation of those things which are necessary to be observed in every kirke and not of things variable in particular congregations We ask Into which of the members of this distinction ye refer Episcopacie and the articles of Pearth That is Whether they must necessarily be omitted in all Churches and at all times or not If ye say that they must be necessarily omitted and that the negative confession confirmed with an oath doth tye us to the omission of them then both ye would make us to swear and subscribe against our consciences for we are perswaded That these things are lawfull as also ye would make us to abjure Episcopacie and the articles of Pearth in perpetuum which is flatly contrary to your declaration in your answers 1.5 c. If you say on the other part That we are not tyed by the negative confession to the omission of these things then why have ye in all your writings against us exprobrate to us perjurie in violating of the oath contained in the negative confession 5. We would gladly have known your minde concerning the lawfulnesse of such rites as are not of divine institution expressed in Gods word For we ingenously professe That none of your answers which hitherto we have seen to the instances or examples brought by us in our fift Demand of rites used by your selves in your Churches as lawfull without divine institution to which we could adde many moe do give us any satisfaction nor yet as we think can give satisfaction to any indifferent man As for example Is blessing of marriages a meer circumstance Who can be so impudent as to say so Or if it be a ceremonie what precept or practise have ye of it in Gods whole word if it be alledged That we have a warrant from that blessing pronounced Gen 1.28 upon m●n and woman after their creation we ask By what consequence can that solemnity of blessing of marriages used in our Churches with all the ceremonies of it be drawn from that effectuall and operative blessing of our first parents or rather of whole mankinde Is there here an institution of a perpetuall observance or rite to be used in the Church more than in the 22. verse of the same chapter when God blessed the fowls and fishes and said Be fruitfull and multiple and fill the waters in the seas c. If again it be answered That pastorall benediction is mentioned in Scripture first VVhat is that to blessing of marriages And secondly VVhy are not all other pactions as well as marriages blessed in the Church chiefly seeing matrimoniall blessing hath been and is abused in the Romane Church which holdeth That marriage is a sacrament and consequently matrimoniall benediction ought as it would seem to be secluded from the Church rather than other blessings THE VI. DEMAND WHether or no it be fit to subscribe such an interpretation as in matters of lawfulnesse and unlawfulnesse and consequently in matters of faith contradicteth the judgement of so many Divines most famous of the reformed Church both ancient and modern who did and do hold that these rites and ordinances brought into this Church by the assembly of Pearth are in their own nature lawfull and such as ought not to make a stir in the Church of God and also condemneth the venerable practise of the ancient Church and the most eminent lights of it even in those purest times unto which we appeal against the Papists in our disputes ANSWER WE trust That no sound Divine ancient or modern would in this case deny the expedience of the forbearance of the practise of Pearth articles And further than this nothing at this time is required REPLY YOur silence in not answering that which we affirmed concerning the judgement of Divines ancient and moderne of the reformed Church anent the lawfulnesse of the rites and ordinances which were received in our Church by the ordinance of the assembly of Pearth as also concerning the judgement and practise of the ancient Church doth make us think that ye

are also abjured in this your late Covenant The first proposition is evident For in your late Covenant speaking of the oath contained in that old Covenant which was made Anno 1581. you professe That the present and succeeding generations in this land are bound to keep the foresaid nationall oath as you call it and subscription unviolable The second proposition also cannot be denied by you For these twenty years by-past you have accused those who conformed themselves to the ordinances of Pearth of perjurie and that because they had violated the oath made Anno 1581. in the which those articles as you alledge were abjured But perhaps you will say to us That we think those things not to be abjured in that oath made Anno 1581. and therefore we may swear and subscribe your late Covenant and notwithstanding of our oath and subscription be tied only to the forbearance of the practice of Pearth articles for a time We answer first The words of an oath should be clear and plain or if they be any wayes ambiguous the true sense of them should be so declared and manifested that all may know it 2 An oath is to be given according to the minde and judgement of him that requireth it And therefore seeing you who require this oath of us think the rites or ceremonies concluded at Pearth to be abjured in that oath made Anno 1581. how can we swear and subscribe your Covenant which reneweth the foresaid oath and bindeth us to it 3 If we should swear and subscribe the negative confession as it is included in your covenant then ye who think the articles of Pearth to be abjured and condemned in the negative confession will think us tied by our own personall oath to condemn the articles of Pearth 4 Seeing this covenant was penned by you who have hitherto not conformed your selves to Pearth assembly and have opposed Episcopacie and seeing you all condemn Episcopacie as if it were that popish or wicked Hierarchie mentioned in the negative confession as also esteem the things concluded in Pearth assembly to be idolatrous or superstitious how can we think that you in your solemn vow made to God for reformation of this Church and resisting in times to come the novations and corruptions of it have passed by these things which are the only novations already introduced by authority and from which as you affirm the Church hath so great need to be purged chiefly seeing ye think them as popish superstitious and idolatrous as ye do these other novations which are not as yet introduced 5 If in all your supplications plaints and protestations ye have only sought the removing and discharging of the Service book Book of canons and the new high commission not complaining of any other novations and seeing his Majestie hath discharged the first two and hath promised to rectifie the third or last of them Then what reason have ye to think that his Majestie hath not satisfied your supplications For all the novations upon which you complained are removed by his Majestie and ye have his princely promise That no further shall be urged upon us but by such a fair and legall way as may satisfie all his subjects 6 As for that which your Covenant by your own confession requireth of us to wit The forbearance and abstinence for a time from the practising the articles of Pearth We professe sincerely and in the sight of God That our c●nscience will not suffer us to subscribe that part of your Covenant and that because laws being standing for them and our lawfull superiours requiring obedience from us by practising them to swear forbearance of the practise of them is to swear disobedience and to wrong their authority 7 How can we with a good Conscience abstaine presently from private baptisme and private communion being required thereunto by sick persons and those parents whose children cannot be carried to the Church commodiously with their lives seeing we think it a thing very unlawfull in such cases to refuse to administrate those Sacraments in private houses Not that we think that God hath tyed himself or his grace to the Sacraments but because he hath tyed us unto them by his precept and not to use the means appointed by God when our people or their children stand in need of them is a contempt of the means and a tempting of God THE V. DEMAND WHether or no we can sincerely and with a good conscience subscribe the negative confession as it is expounded and interpreted by the contrivers or authors of the late Covenant seeing it maketh a perpetuall law concerning the externall rites of the Church which God hath not made as if these rites were unchangeable And how they who both swear the positive confession and the negative thus interpreted can eschew contradiction seeing the positive confession Chap. 21. evidently declareth That these rites are changeable according to the exigencie of time and consequently that no perpetuall law may or ought to be made concerning them Likewise we would know how it can stand with truth to abjure all these rites as Popish which are used in the Church without divine institution expressed in Gods word seeing even these who urge the Covenant practise some ceremonies which are not mentioned in Gods word as the celebration of marriage before the Church in the beginning or at the end of divine service with all the particulars of it and the stipulation of Fathers and God-fathers for the childe in baptisme which are not meer circumstances as they use to distinguish but also ceremonies properly so called ANSWER THe late Covenant maketh not a perpetuall law concerning the externall rites of the kirke as if they were unchangeable but as we have said before onely bindeth us for a time to forbear the practise of innovations already introduced and doth not determine whether they ought to be changed or not 2. According to this true interpretation all appearance of contradiction betwixt the confession of faith insert in the act of Parliament and the latter confession is removed beside that the article 21. of the confession of faith giveth power to the Kirke in matters of externall policie and order of the worship of God is expounded in the first booke of Discipline distinguishing between things necessary to be observed in every Kirke and things variable in particular congregations 3. We declare again That the Covenant doth not abjure Pearth articles as Popish and thinketh not time now to dispute of significant ceremonies or other holy rites and whether the two particulars named be ceremonies or not since the confession condescended upon on both sides abjureth rites which are added without the word of God REPLY FIrst VVe have already told you That we cannot subscribe your oath of forbearance of the practise of the articles already introduced without violation of authority and of wronging our own consciences who think private baptisme and communion not to be indifferent but also necessary in

Covenants in the judgement of Jurisconsults are to be esteemed and judged of according to their diverse ends good or bad which made King James of happie memorie to take it for an undoubted maxime That pro aris focis pro patre patriae the whole body of the Common-wealth should stirre at once not any more as divided members but as one consolidate lump REPLY IN that second part of that act of Parliament holden at Linlithgow Anno 1585. are forbidden All leagues or bands of mutuall defence which are made without the privitie and consent of the King under the pain to be holden and execute as movers of sedition and unquietnesse c. Wherefore we can no wayes think that any bands or leagues of mutuall defence by force of armes are there permitted that is not forbidden seeing first the words of the act are so generall for in it are discharged All bands made amongst subjects of any degree upon any colour whatsoever without his Highn●sse or his Successours privitie and consent had and obtained thereunto Next all such bands are declared to be seditious and perturbative of the publick peace of the Realme or which is all one are appointed to bee esteemed so And therefore we cannot see how any bands of that kinde can be excepted as if they were not seditious 2. We doubt not but the late Covenant being considered according to the main intention of those pious and generous Gentlemen Barons and others our dear countreymen who made it especially our reverend brethren of the holy ministery is a Covenant made with God and proceeding from a zealous respect to Gods glory and to the preservation of the puritie of the Gospel in this Church and Kingdome But we cannot finde a warrant in our consciences to grant That such Covenants in so farre as they import mutuall defence against all persons whatsever none being excepted no not the King as it seemeth unto us by the words of your Covenant but far more by the words of your late Protestation the 28 of Iune wherein you promise mutuall defence against all externall or internall invasion menaced in his Majesties last Proclamation are not forbidden by any band nor justly yet can be forbidden For first we have alreadie shown That they are forbidden in the foresaid act of Parliament Anno 1585. 2. No warfare and consequently no covenant importing warfare is lawfull without just Authoritie which we are perswaded is onely in the supreme Magistrate and in those who have power and imployment from him to take armes yea so farre as we know all moderate men who duely respect Authority will say That it is so in all Kingdomes and Monarchies properly so called of which nature is this his Majesties most ancient Kingdome And that it is altogether unlawfull to subjects in such Kingdomes to take armes against their Prince For which cause that famous and most learned Doctour Rivetus in a late Treatise called Iesuita vapulans speaking of the judgment of Buchanan and others who taught That subjects might take armes against their Prince in extraordinary cases and extreme dangers of the Religion and Common-wealth professeth first That he and all other Protestants condemne such doctrine Secondly That this errour did proceed from a mistaking of the government of the Scotish Kingdome as if it were not truely and properly Monarchicall Thirdly That the rashnesse of those writers is to be ascribed partly to the hard and perilous times of persecution wherein they lived and partly Scotorum praefervido ingenis ad audendum prompto Thus he writeth in the 13. Chap. of the said book Pag. 274. and 275. answering to the Recrimination of a Iesuit who had affirmed That Buchanan Knox and Goodman had written as boldly for the rebellion of Subjects against Princes as any of their order at any time had done A thing much to be noted by us at this time lest we any more give that advantage to Iesuites to make Apologie for their rebellious doctrines and practises 3. Not only making of Covenants but also all other actions are to be esteemed and judged of first by the equitie of the subject and matter then by the end for if the matter pactioned that is which the parties mutually do promise be justly forbidden by a lawfull Authoritie and consequently be unlawfull in it self then the goodnesse of the end or project cannot make the paction or Covenant to be good or lawfull THE III. DEMAND IF it be alledged That in extreme and most dangerous cases such acts of Parliament may be contraveened Quaeritur Whether there be now such extreme case seeing we have his Majestie in his former Proclamations avowing protesting declaring and in this last Proclamation taking God to witnesse that he never intended any innovation of Religion and also seeing he hath removed alreadie all that which made men fear novations to wit Service book book of Canons and the alledged exorbitancie of the new high Commission ANSVVER IF the removing of the Service book book of Canons and the limitation of the vast power of the high Commission containing so much superstition and tyranny of Prelates be a benefit to this Kirk and Kingdome we ought under God to ascribe the same to the peaceable meetings humble supplications and religious covenanting of the subjects which have given information to his Majestie and have procured from his justice and goodnesse so great favour as is thankfully acknowledged in the last Protestation which doth also expresse the many particulars wherein his Majesties late Proclamation is not satisfactorie And therefore the Lords of his Majesties privie Councel upon the supplication and complaint of his Lieges were moved to rescind the act of the Approbation of the foresaid Proclamation and to rend the subscribed Missive which was to be sent therewith to his Majestie We are confident that the Declaration wherewith his Majesties Commissioner was so well pleased will also give satisfaction to our reverend brethren and that they will not think it convenient for them to give further approbation to the Proclamation than the Councel hath done although all of us ought with thankfulnesse to acknowledge his Majesties benignitie REPLY WE will not here dispute what hath been the maine or principall cause moving his sacred Majesty to discharge the Service booke and other things which occasioned the present perturbation of our Church nor yet whether or not his Majesties proclamation may give full satisfaction to all the feares and doubts of his subjects For our selves we professe that upon his Majesties declaration and gracious promise contained in his Majesties last proclamation we beleeve first That his Majesty never intended innovation in religion Secondly That he will maintain the true Protestant religion all the dayes of his life which we pray God to continue long Thirdly That all acts made in favours of the Service boook c. are discharged Fourthly That he will never urge the receiving of the Service book Book of Canons c. nor any other