Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	church_n	false_a	true_a	2,707	5	5.6928	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77724	A publick disputation sundry dayes at Killingworth in Warwick-shire, betwixt John Bryan, doctor in divinity (minister at Coventry) and John Onley, pastor of a church at Lawford. Upon this question, whether the parishes of this nation generally be true churches. Wherin are nine arguments alleged in proof of the affirmative of the question, with the answer of I. O. thereunto, together with Doctor B. Reply. Also an addition of ten arguments more in further proof of the question, with an answer adjoyned in disproof thereof. Published by both their consents, as appears by the ensuing epistles.	Bryan, John, d. 1676.; Onley, John.	1655 (1655)	Wing B5245; Thomason E823_9; ESTC R207672	61,370	75

trespass against thee go and tell him of his fault betwixe him and thee alone and if he will not hear thee take with thee one or two more and if he will not hear them tell it to the Church and if he neglect to hear the Church let him be to thee at a Heathen and Publican and thus the Apostle was carefull to keep the Church visible purer Purge out from you the old Leaven saith Paul know you not that a little Leaven leaveneth the vvhole lump see and consider Haggai 1. 11 12 13 now you being such as are and ever were for the most part visibly nought cannot Answer those Parables if understood of the Church true it is that many Churches in the Apostles times had amongst them visibly bad they being degenerated from what he was but they were to remain but for a considerable time of tryal to see if they would be restored and if they would not be reclamed but prove contumacious they are to be delivered to that Kingdom from whence they For those which you so harp upon that was bad in the Apostolicall Churches and as bad as you say as yours these were not fit matter for a Church as such for such they were commanded to excommunicate 1 Cor. 5. 5 6 7. and forbad to have Communion with ver 11 12 13. sure was unfit matter for the Church came and for the objection that you say is so easily answered the Church being called Saints the denomination being taken from the better part I answer if you mean this if a Church at its first constitution it s abundantly false and you have spoken it without the least colour of Scripture or reason I challenge you or any Man in the World to produce one example in all the New Testament of any one Church that at its Constitution received one visible wicked Man and if not but all appeared Saints then undeniable it is that the denomination arose from the visibility of sanctity that appeared in all and so it was as the Scripture plainly declares to all that are willing to see If you mean it of a Church when degenerated from what they were it s nothing to your purpose because you for the most part were never visibly Regenerated it appears that the Churches after corrupted retained the name of Saints from that visible sanctity once they had and yet not past recovery to their former Estate for after they appeared past recovery see what they may be called Mat. 18. 17. all you say should be answer true therefore those that are not are as they should not be Some you say are true but that doth not shew that those that never were are to be accounted so nor that those that never were are to be accounted Church Members though amongst the other for then Babylon is a Church and a society of Saints for some Saints may be and have been there Rev. 18. 4. Those societies from which it is a Sin to separate are true Churches Arg. 16. D. B. but it is a Sin to separate from our Assemblies Ergo. That Church for separation from which there is as little reason as there was for separating from the Church whereof Christ professeth himself a Member John 4. 22. and so from the Church of Corinth it is a sin to separate from but there is little reason to separate from our Assemblies compare our Churches with the Church of the Jews in Christs time for Teachers and Rulers and you shall find as bad of both as with us if you say these Churches had a right Constitution and gathering I have proved ours have both The Minor of the first and also of the second Syllogism is denyed Answer 1. 0. and were our separation from you onely for the evilness of you it might easily be made appear that there is more reason to separate from you then either the Church of the Jews or Corinthians You have been so far from proving that Constitution true that after you had indeavoured it and see my answer to it you then deny that you were to prove any such thing see page the 2d Argument 2. and then page 6. at the Reply but the truth is you yet never were a Church at all you never having had any Gospel Constitution and where you say you have proved it there I have disproved it and proved it false where unto I refer the Reader being unwilling needlesly to multiply words Those Churches that have brought forth a multitude of Martyrs Argument 17. Dr. B. for the Causes of Christ against Anti-Christ are no Anti-Christian but true Churches that ours have so is superfluous for me to prove Sir I desire you in your next to prove that the bringing over Answer 1. 0. of men to yield up their lives in the defence of some truths for these did no more is sufficient to prove the societies that so taught them true Churches go throughout all the diversities of Religions almost in the world and you shall find some so taught as were they called to it would yield up their lives and Seal some truths of Christ with their blood Rome it self I am confident would yield many Martyrs for the Cause of Christ in many real truths and though they could not be concluded Anti-Christian in that yet they might in many other things that they might hold that might be erronious Here are many societies in England that deny the Baptism of water to be practised upon any subject without which no society in the world can be accounted a visible Church and yet I am confident had they occasion rather than they would deny they would seal many precious truths of Christ with their blood and now upon your Argument they in so doing might be proved true Churches if what you say be true though they deny that without which no men can be esteemed so Secondly I desire to see it proved for yet you have not that the Parishes of this Nation did bring forth these Martyrs I rather think that the Parishes of this Nation were as willing to have them Martyred as those bloody men themselves that did it for that Parish that brought forth some that were Members of her to profess and dye for some truths must needs profess the same things themselves and so they should all have been Martyred for such was the blood-thirstiness of those men that all that would not submit to their abominations must dye But we see no such thing for only some few in some Parishes and in any one were Martyred and the rest not toucht which shews that the Parishes except some few were of the mind of those bloody men and so the edge of the Argument may be turned into your own Neck thus Those Churches that have consented to the Martyrdom of a multitude of those that dyed in the defence of the Cause of Christ are no true Churches but the Parishes of this Nation have so consented Ergo. Thirdly were all

positively affirm they did consist for the most part of visible wicked men abhominable disobedient and to every good work reprobate for which you give no proof but your own conjecture yet thereupon pass sentence upon all my discourse that it is not at all to the purpose but I presume every unprejudiced man will judge you have clearly lost your cause if it can be made good that the member of our Parishes are such as the Apostolical Churches were even in their state of degeneration which you so much harp upon you deny not but they were true Churchrs and their Members called Saints notwithstanding therefore if our Members appear to be as good Saints as they were their matter then is undoubtedly right let them come into comparison there were amongst them very many in some of these Churches by far the greater number Schismatical Heretical Carnal Proud Lovers of Preheminence Supercilious Censurers Contentious Abusers of Christian Liberty Prophaners of the Lords Supper Gluttons Drunkards Pelly-Gods disorderly Walkers Idle Busie-bodies such as had not repented of the Vncleanness and Fornication and Lasciviousness which they had committed Enemies to the Cross of Christ Minders of earthly things Contemners of the holy Apostle their spiritual Father having a Form of Godliness but denying the power of it prof●ssing to know God but in their works denying him Abominable Luke warm c. you cannot I suppose find worse then these in our Assemblies What they were at their first forming it makes no matter to me at present yet some being really Saints such as you describe the whole Churches are acknowledged Societies of Saints the denomination being taken not from the greater but better part so a Field where good Corn hath been sowne and some grows is called a Corn field a Wheat heap though most Chaff Gold Oare though more Dross than Gold You say there may be some in Gods favor in our Congregations but if an Holy Humble Wise Exact Gracious conversation argue men to be in the favor of God an impartial Eye may easily discern more such in a few of our Assemblies than in most of the Seperate Societies Yea if you be ingenious you will acknowleage that the Holiness which m●st of all your Members have saving in two or three new Opinions they learnt it in and had it from our Parechial Congregations a little Practical holiness serves the turn of too many when they have forsaken us and joyned with you you spend but might as well have spared a multitude of words in declaiming against our peoples profession of the true Faith without works the stress of the Argument is not laid upon verbal profession though let me tell you if it were it might sink your Cause for as true Faith gives being to the invisible Church so does prefession of the true Faith and not Moral Obedience give being to the visible Do you no read of many who upon their verbal Prosession were Baptized by the Apostles themselves and incorporated into the Church Did not Obedience of Faith make the Gentiles Churches Rom. 1. 5. 8. And if Obedience to the Commandements be so necessary to the life and first being of a true Gospel Church that question would be resolved What difference there is between the Covenant of Grace and of Works That which I affirm stands firm upon a sure foundation that where a whole Society professeth all fundamental Truths though the greater part be naught yet if soms of them be Saints indeed Christ owns it for his Church for their sake the Church of Sardis had a name to live i. e. consisted of verbal Professors but it was dead The generality were void of Grace and wicked Members yet for the sakes of a few names that had not defiled their Garments Christ owns it for his Church You say God had some such thing in Babilon If you will say Babilon profosseth the true Faith I will say and prove it a true Church for the sakes of Gods People in it the reason of whose Evocation may easily appear to be their devilish Doctrins pertinaciously held for which their damnation was at the door But you frequently urge the wicked ones in Sardis and other Gospel-Churches were visible Saints at first and yet you bring no proof at all besides your own presumption that they brought more than a verbal profession to make them so or if you could evince they did no prejudice would come thereby to my Argument which proceeds not upon that which you call first constitution that our 8432. Parishes as you number them were at their first constitution for the most part abominable c. is also void of proof I might moreover add that our members may bee called visible Saints because they bear the badge of holy Baptisme and so are sacramentally holy every one of them as Je●usalem when it was worser than Sodom was called the holy Ci●●● bu● I forbear to press this because you hold our baptisme a null●●ie I may happily ere long prove yours to bee so besides the sanct●●y of that doctrine which wee profess may give us the name of S●ints comparatively or in respect of Heathens in opposition to whom the Apostle calls tho●e to whom he writes Saints I perceive the name of Pa●ish is extream distasteful to you and all of your way which yet is nothing else in signification but the confining of Churches within convenient local limits were is not that I finde sundry learned godly men whose treatises are or may be in your hands abundantly vindicating both the name and thing among others Mr. Hollingworth in his rejoynder to Mr. Eaton and Mr. Taylers Reply chap 2. shewing how Parishes are jure divino and how not and Mr. Cawdin in his Review of Mr. Hookers survey who gives six satis●actory Answers to that first Negative Conclusion viz. That Parish precincts do not give a man Right or make him more fit for a visible Congregation Chap. 2. p. 87. c. I should spend some pains and time to stop your mouth from quarrelling with the term and make it appear that there is no reason why the number of these bounds by whomsoever measured should offend any to their writings I refer you and follow you from the matter to the form of a visible Church viz. Combination or Conjunction in Covenant which is in our Assemblies and is manifested by their constant meeting every Lords day c. You say you denied a Covenant to be the form of a Church which I remember not I am sure some of the seven that took your part in the dispu●ation who were Anti-pedo baptists and were lookt upon by many hearers as Herods taking part with Pilate against Christ did expresly own it and the Argument proceeded with your Approbation and you now shew your gratefulness to them by a tender touch of their name and justifie their mutual Covenanting and consederating in the fellowship of the Faith as that which gives being and constitution to a

Visible Church From the two ends of it neither of which you say are attained by our Peoples constant meeting c. which is untrue for first our Assemblies are hereby known from all other Societies in the world Heathenish jewish Mabometan Popish c. who joyn not together in Gods true Worship 2. The Godly of our Congregations declare themselves hereby ingaged to watch over each other and actually do so yea the whole Body come to be instructed reproved and watcht ever by their Pastors and are admonished of their duty which they yield assent unto and are convinced though the most fail in performance But let our Brethren whose cause you manage speak and they readily acknowledge that we have the same Covenant for substance which themselves have and consequently are as true Churches Read reverend Mr. Hookers survey Chap. 4. thus the People of England in their Parishes constantly hold them to the fellow ship of the People in such a place attend all the Ordinances submit thereto c. by such actions c. they declare by their practises which others by open profission an implicite Covenant preserves the true Nature of the Church because it carries the formalis ratio in it by which a Church is constituted animplicite Covenant in some cases may be fully sufficient as if it consist of such who were children to parents confederate deceased c. The like and fuller acknowledgement you shall finde of all the Elders of New England in their Treatise of Church Covenant where they give the same Reason which you so slight Quoting Mr. Parker whose words in his third Beck of Ecclesiastical policy are these Non abest ea r●alis Et substantialis quamquam Magis quam par erat implicita Coitio in foe tus eaque professio fidei substantialis quae Deo grata essentialis Ecclesiae idque visibilis huc usque sartam rectam in Anglis conservavit You see how little you have gained by undertaking anothers Cause which though you disclaim as yours in this yet you seem clearly to own in your Answer to the next Argument whichas to gratifie you who cry out sovehemently against the gathering of our Churches concluding that we are no true Churches because we cannot prove that we were at first rightly gathered whereas it is clear enough that we might be true Churches though it could not appear that we were at first rightly gathered as men may be true Christians of whose Baptism and first conversion there can no clear accempt be given and some socities may be named who were doubtless true Churches of whose first gathering nothing can be found in Scripture The Argument proceeds thus Our Churches had a right gathering both out of Heathenism and out of Popery therefore they are true Churches Argu. 3 1. Out of Heathenism we were gathered 500. years before Austin the Monk by the preaching of the Gospel and not at all Dr. B. by compulsion this is proved out of approved Antiquaries 2. Out of Popery I thus reason If the Churches of this Nation were gathered or rather recalled out of Popery into the true Religion by the means that are approved and appointed in the word of God then they were rightly gathered out of Popery But the former is true which is thus made good the means approved and appointed by God to gather or recall a back slided People are preaching and the command of the Civil Magistrate this latter is evident by sundry examples of good Kings 2 Chron. 14. 4. 15 12 13 30 34 32 33. that these were the means of recalling our people out of Popery is acknowledged by all Answ It s true I say you are no true Churches because you cannot prove you were at first rightly gathered and I say it s also Answ as true some may be true Churches of whose first gathering nothing can be found but what is this to your purpose the question I. O. is not whether they be true Churches whose first original cannot be known but whether those be true who can know and finde it and yet are unable to prove it true I question not but was it to your advantage you could quickly tell us of the first original of your Parishes To the first branch of your Argument that these 8432. Parishes of which the whole land is were gatheted by the preaching of the Gospel I desire to see proved I deny not but here might be Churches gathered but I desire to see it proved that they were gathered as now they stand a whole Nation divided into Parish Churches generally If they were thus gathered by the Preaching of the Gospel then they were called from the World after a sort from themselves and united together as one body as all the Churches in the Gospel were Now this whole Nation was never called out of the World visibly what was the World out of which they were called when they were all accounted Members And for others in other Nations they were never amongst 2. The World the lusts thereof they retained in their hearts coveteousness pride malice every evil work visibly seen in many of them 3 So far were they from being united as one Man as that they were many of them deadly enemies one to another sure if the Gospel did gather its effects would be seen To the second branch This Argument is the same with your former only you alter the term from constituting to gathering which in effect is all one for you apply it to your first gathering out of Heathenism which might be understood of constitution so that I do not well know whether it be added as a proof of the former or as an Argument of it self but to follow you in your scope First I cannot see that you have had any constitution at your coming from Popery for there was no alteration of either matter or form which are the essential constitutive principles and if you had any constitution you had it from Papists for before you had none as now you stand or if you had it could do you no good as I shall shew Popery had so deeply infected those that had been true Churches and this among the rest which was one with Rome that the name and nature of your Church was lost yea past recalling for where the Church was called the Spouse the wife the body the house the garden the Temple the Zion of Christ they come to be called A whore a mother of harlots a Babylon an habitation of Divels an hold of every foul Spirit and a cage of every unclean and hareful bird and whereas before the Church was peaceable and meek and kindly affectionate gentle c. Now they come to be a blood thitsty adulterous whore drunk with the blood of Saints for in her was found the blood of all that was slain upon the earth insomuch that the Lord cries out Come out of her my people Now we know whilst that People are in a capacity of

dexterous dividers of the Word of Truth in our Assemblies and of such whose Ministery God hath blessed with Conversion of Souls it might suffice to prove Gods approving the Ordination which you so vehemently inveigh against you will not own one of all our Ministers to be sent of God how able and holy and successfull soever which shewes your miserable shifting off the force of the Argument because the word General is in the question which you as miserably Misunderstand as if it included all The Text in Timothy cleerly shewes that by dividing the Word of Truth aright Gospell Ministers approve themselves to God and that such as do so are called of God And that in 2 Cor. 3. is a like manifest declaration of a lawfull mission for as much as the Apostle brings it to prove his extraordinary calling of Apostleship to which I add Gods own Word Jer. 23. 22. Nor can you give an instance of Gods honouring any Prophets or Ministers not sent by him whose labours he ever blessed with the winning of souls Those Christian Congregations that seeing their defects and Arg. 9. Dr. B. Corruptions labour after Reformation are Christs true Churches but so do the Congregations of England Ergo I deny your Minor I deny that the Parishes of this Nation Generally Answ I. O. see their defects and Corruptions For first there is amongst all diversities of Religion in the World but one that is onely right Secondly There is in this Nation a great many perhaps half of the Ministers and Parishes that stand in their hearts for the Goverment of Bishops that is now put down and the reason why both these Ministers and People are not so active as others is not for want of will but power to execute their will for had they power according to their will you should find the Parishes of this Nation so far from being generally for that which you call Reformation as I believe you should see Presbytery as well as all others besides their own as soon put down as their Common Prayer Surplice Hood Tippit and Altar c. This being so evident that it needs no proof Common sense proves it from whence against your Minor I thus Reason● although I utterly deny that Presbyterian Government which you would establish to be right yet in this place I will give it to you to see of what advantage it will be to you thus that which you would reform those defects and Corruptions that you would mend are such as prevailed in the time of Prelacy when Bishop were in their pomp and as you would reform it to that which is commonly called Presbytery now those that were commonly called by the name of Cavalliers of which there were many whole Parishes Genera●●y these think which you Reform from is Truth and that which you Reform to is false your Reformation is their deformation and that which you count to be Corruption and defect that they count to be truth and would as willingly have all that they have had as you to have the contrary this being evident your Minor is apparently false for how can the Parishes of this Nation Generally see their defects and corruptions and endeavour a right Reformation Generally when that which one Parish would reform from that another Parish would reform to if it be said that many whole Parishes really see their defects and desire to mend I answer whatsome Parishes of this Nation see is nothing to our purpose the Question in dispute is of the Parishes of this Nation generally You discover much Ignorance in making every diversity of Replie Dr. B. Judgment and Practice in point of Church-Goverment a diversity of Religion difference among Christians in higher matters and much neerer the foundation hinders not but they may be of one and the same Religion and so Episcopal men Presbyterians and Independents nor do any of these cast off Antipoedobaptists as men of another Religion but pitty their folly in cutting themselves from Gods Churches by denying all besides their own Societies to be true Churches You mistake much if you think I intend in my Argument the desire and endeavor of the whole body of our People in all our Parishes for a right Reformation the greater part in all times have been backward to good but if you go thorow all the Parishes of England you will find very few where there are not some whose faces are Sion-ward and these with a very great number of Ministers in all quarters earnestly desire that in every Congregation there might be set up a Gospell-government You seem to me cleerly to grant my Major proposition and to yield that there are some of our Parishes who see their defects and corruptions and labour after Reformation If you will acknowledge that these yea but one of these are true Churches I will say it argues ingenuity in you and farther give you satisfaction that through the tender mercy of our God it is with England at this day as it was with those fields our Saviour speaks of John 4. 35. That they are white already to harvest ready to receive a Gospell-Reformation and had been ere now in a more blessed case had not those of your way hindred the work which I pray that God would lay it to your heart that it may not be layd to your charge Drawn from Cant. 1. 7 8. They that walk in the footsteps of Arg. 10. Dr. B. Answ J. O. Christs antient flock are true Churches but ours do so Ergo. If you mean Christs antient flock recorded in the holy Word of God your Minor is denied this is the cause we separate from you because you have and do tread in such steps and pathes as we cannot find in Scripture but in by-paths of the inventions of man and I cannot but wonder why you left your Minor destitute of all proof seeing you cannot but know that it is always denied whether you think it is without dispute or whether you think if you should have compared the Parishes of this Nation with the Churches of Christ mentioned in the Scripture your proof would appear weaker than your bare affirmation or whether you thought barely to affirm was best that so a bare deniall might be returned truly I cannot judge sure I am those that write to satisfi● do not in disputable matters only say it is so without proof for to me a bare affirmation without Scripture or reason is proof but weak had you but proved your Minor the Controversie had been ended but seeing you have not I must yet say they that walk not in the footsteps of Christs Antient Flock are no true Churches this is your own by Rule of Contraries but the Parishes of this Nation walk not c. Ergo as is already proved from Acts 2. I thought it superfluous here to compare our Churches with Reply the Churches of Christ mentioned in Scripture having done it already if you look upon the Flock of Christ