Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	new_a	testament_n	write_v	6,542	5	5.9777	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91875	Certain briefe observations and antiquæries: on Master Prin's Twelve questions about church-government. Wherein is modestly showne, how un-usefull and frivolous they are, how bitter and unchristian in censuring that way; whereas there are no reasons brought to contradict it. By a well-willer to the truth, and Master Prin.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.; Robinson, Henry, 1605?-1664?	1644 (1644)	Wing R1667; Thomason E10_33; ESTC R18171	10,126	16

no wayes to seeke an exemption from it under paine of being guilty of arrogancy c. The Scriptures in the margent I wonder to what end Master Prin quotes them so little to purpose looke on that place 1 Cor. 14. 32. The spirit of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets how full to the thing let all judge who know the scope of that place by the Prophets there doth he mean the civill State or the Synod or both And is not that spoken to a particular congregation for the regulating the exercise of prophesying or doth he meane by being subject that the Prophets have an authoritative power over the other Prophets I know not what he means by that place The other places Rom. 13. 1 2. of submitting to every ordinance c. If that be true then every man is bound to put out his owne eyes to yeeld to blind obedience never to search into the truth for if he search and find it contrary to the Word he must follow his judgement and to follow his judgement is to be a Schismatick to be guilty of arrogancy c. to contradict the Word to oppose an ordinance of God so that a man must inevitably sin take either part Is not this to uphold the Papist tenent of beleeving as the Church beleeveth c. I put it to Master Prin if the Parliament and Synod should set up an Episcopall government which he thinkes is Antichristian whether he would not speak a word against it Is not this a base bondage jurare in verba alterius to give up a mans faith and conscience to mens direction but if the former be true then this second must follow if no rule then you must obey what is commanded you Suppose that is commanded may prove untrue what if that way be not right if that Synod and State should erre what would you thinke of it then c. Secondly I humbly demand of Master Prin whether he and the other two holy men were not justly stigmatised and censured for speaking against the Bishops and Ceremonies c. which were stablished by so many Synods and Acts of Parliament and how h● can excuse himselfe from pride and arrogancy in such a course for by his owne rule he should have actually obeyed and not spake a word to the contrary Such divinity will overthrow all the power of Scripture over mens consciences only make that to bind which a Synod thinks good The third Quaerie contradicts the first in the first hee askes In this Quaerie hee quotes a saying in a Booke called The bloudy Tenent which was written by one as contrary to this as the Independents as he is to the Presbyterians and they utterly disavow the Booke whether there be any rule in the Word here he askes whether that government which hath sufficient if not most warrant in the new Testament is not to be chosen In this he cryes up the one government which he instanceth in the fourth Quaerie to be presbyteriall as tending to establish Christian unity peace c. that which serves most effectually to prevent Heresies Schismes c. Here is a bare affirmation and the independents No is as good as your I. Its desired Master Prin would prove what hee sayes that independent government hath not such expresse warrant from the Word another contradiction as presbyteriall prove that and you shall be Magnus Apollo as for the Scriptures you bring will little help you For the fifth it s answered by way of concession that it will overthrow all nationall Churches as not conceiving any such warrant in the Word but for any forme of civill government it will stand better with them then Presbytery can the mischiefes of Presbytery are vailed with Orthodoxnesse and preventing Schismes c But if the Saints would pry into the formality tyranny inslaving mens judgements and consciences the Presbyteriall way c. they would looke upon it as that which is most inconsistent with their spirituall liberty and with State priviledges It s politickly done of you to put the best termes on your owne way how will you have it take else I will let passe your bitter expressions that one man would be if possible a independent Church and republicke subject to no lawes I thought such language would not suit with you spirrit Master Prin especially that you would not speake so of them who were your best frinds in your sufferings which stood to you and refreshed you when most of your presbiterians Episcopall enough then were shye of you I could name the men that used you kindly whom you now implicitly reproach the independents giue more to civell power then your presbyterians doe I would faine know whether your presbyterians doe not hold that an Act of a Synod or a Nationall Assembly is as valid and binding in Ecclesiasticks as an Act of Parliament in civills and whether the Parliament can de jure contradict their proceedings whether they will affirme that the Parliament hath any jurisdiction over them in settling Ecclesiasticall matters this is not a Quaerie without ground for as far as the independents understand of the presbyteriall government in Scotland it s absolutely independent from the Parliament in respect of decreeing and inacting matters of government only this honor presbyterians give to their Magistrate they must be the executioners of their Iudgements to hang whom they condemne The summe of the sixth Quaerie is whether since the first preaching the Gospell beleevers multiplying they did not gather into Churches which had dependencie on and was subordinate to Nationall Synods c. And if not to show the place where and to name any eminent Author that ever maintained the contrary This Quaerie is very bold and daring yet I answer that beleevers did as soone as they were converted gather into particular Churches as is apparent but that they were subordinate unto Nationall Synods c. sub judice lis est And if in many Kingdomes it might be so de facto yet whether de jure and from a patterne in the Word that we desire may be proved Suppose this should be true that there cannot in any Kingdom such a Church be showne for many yeares or at least no Writer expresseth it if so be it can be made forth from the Word and consonant to the Saints practise in the Apostles times I know no such Schisme in dissenting from all mens practises to follow the cleare truth You challenge all to show you one eminent Writer who maintained the same I will not go so far back into antiquity as to bring you out a catalogue of Fathers who though they had not a cleare light in that way yet had many shrowd hints and notions in many things which are practised by these you call independent There be many latter Writers as eminent in holinesse and without disparagement in learning to many whom you can produce for the other as learned Doct. Ames in Medul theolog de eccles

Certain briefe OBSERVATIONS AND ANTIQVAERIES ON MASTER PRIN's TWELVE QUESTIONS ABOUT CHURCH-GOVERNMENT Wherein is modestly showne how un-usefull and frivolous they are How bitter and unchristian in censuring that way whereas there are no Reasons brought to contradict it By a well-willer to the Truth and Master PRIN. Printed in the yeare 1644. Certain briefe Observations and Antiquaeries on Mr. PRIN's Twelve Questions about Church-government THere is no sight so lovely and taking to the eyes of all ingeniuous and sincere hearts as naked truth these which know its excellency will study to find it out Truth is a jewell which lyes out of sight as it were in the bowels of many reasons men must search for it that wil find it out among truthes this of Church Government is not the least There are many things this age hath brought forth about it to little purpose most men beating about the bush few that I have scene have discovered it in its nature Some write so voluminous heaping up so many distinctions about it that they rather darken the truth then set it forth rather intangle a mans understanding then informe it others write so full of passion as if they writ with poyson of Aspes reckoning up mens personall failings to disgrace the Cause not urging their arguments to convince the judgement among these I have observed one Master Edwards hath the quickest pen and I have often thought that book should rather have been writ by Doct. Pocklinton Doct. Heylin or one of the Archbishops Chaplaines then Master Edwards who hath been sometimes accounted godly Master Prin hath begun another way as unsatisfactory as any though we hope there is more candor in his spirit He professeth in the beginning he hath not leasure to debate the controversie and then it s wondred why he propounds these Quaeries For either first he layes them downe as positions undisputable undeniable in respect of the clearnesse of them unto all understandings or because of his name to them for else he knowes as all know that have any light in this Controversie that all these grounds these whom he calls independents will deny and their answer would be negative to every one Or secondly he propounds them as affirmatives which he intends to prove and cleere by solide arguments and then he must have leasure to do it and as yet the others negation is as strong as his affirmation for here is no proofe for it Or else thirdly as considerations in which he desires satisfaction as one being in doubt which way to walke only these things for the present move him to be of a contrary judgement the style of the booke doth not much favour this last as being too full of confidence and bitternesse If Master Prin had such a sense of the publike divisions he would not have gone to make the breach wider by setting forth Quaeries stuft with such invectives I had thought sufferings had learn'd Master Prin a little more meeknesse Mr. Prin knowes his name is famous abroad and that the common people will all thinke that that must needs be true which he pleads for Besides hee knowes that the Reverend Assembly is now controverting of the thing and that Quaeries will do little good while Arguments are expected on both sides but since they are out let us see what are in them The summe of the first Quaerie is whether Christ hath set down in the Word any prescript forme of government for Kingdome and Churches to follow or whether seeing there be different formes of civill government in almost every Kingdome there is not a latitude and liberty left them by Christ to chuse a government sutable to their State If this were granted what absurdities would follow Answ For the Gospell would be straiter then the Law Christ more unfaithfull then Moses God set a * Exod. 25. 40. Hebr. 8. 5. patterne to Moses which he charged him not to vary frō in a title that was but a carnal Temple in comparison of this nay it was a type of the Church under the Gospsll Christ should neither be faithfull as a husband head nor King of his Church if he should give others power to order it to suit it as they pleased to their owne civill government not setting down his own Lawes for them to walk by In Revel 11. 1 2. you reade of a measuring of the Temple Now how can you measure without a rule The meaning of that according to Master Prin must be thus measured that is frame it according to your civill State a miserable measure for a Church In Revelat 20. 1 it s said the patterne of the new Ierusalem which is but the Church in her purest state the same for forme with the former Church came down from heaven Besides look in this Quaerie and you shall find a contradiction for he askes whether Church government may not be framed to any civill State if it be consonant to the Word and yet questions whether there be any rule in the Word Secondly if no prescript forme in the Word why not Episcopacy as well as Presbytery why such crying down of Bishops as Antichristian for how can that be more Antichristian then any other seeing there is no certain government in the Word Episcopacy regulated and moderated if all were knowne is more consonant and agreeable to a Monarchicall government then Presbytery Thirdly I aske of Master Prin if Church government must be suited to States whether Politicians are not more fit to consult about stablishing it And why is an Assembly of Divines called to search the Word about it Surely Statesmen know better how to fit the Common-wealth then Divines there must be something in it surely or else the Parliament did very ill to have a Synod If the Doctrine be true throw aside the Bible in this matter study the Law and then it is well done of Master Prin to write of it being his profession Fourthly Whether Master Prin thinks it more reason that the State should be subject to Christs rule or Christ to their direction that the government of his Church should be fitted to States or they to it I know his religion though his reason should stand a farre off would abhor the thought of it if you and the Presbyterians go on that principle the Saints will hardly be of your judgement for they think Christ is King alone over his Churches and hath not left them to substitutes and the politick considerations of men for to governe them These two places you urge out of 1 Cor. 14. 40. and the 11. 34. where the Apostle speehes of doing all things decently c. is far from this it being about things that are meerly circumstantiall and ordering of things in a Church already constituted not of the constitution of any Church The second Quarie in summe is whether if any government be stablished by any State upon serious debate every one is not bound in conscience to submit to it and