Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A44304
|
The seasonable case of submission to the church-government as now re-established by law, briefly stated and determined by a lover of the peace of this church and kingdom.
|
Honyman, Andrew, 1619-1676.
|
1662
(1662)
|
Wing H2602; ESTC R4312
|
34,512
|
47
|
at London then to profess in their Paper they were not inâ—â—â—sâ—â—d to 〈…〉 in their guilt when they knew th◠〈◊〉 would take their meaning to â—e of the King Doth difference in Religion or in these inferior and lower points about Church-government loose a people from their duty in defending His Person and obeying His Authority How may forreign Princes who have Protestants in their Dominions take it if that might pass for an approved opinion amongst their protestant Subjects that their loyalty is to be limited to His beeing of their Religion and if He be not they may either cease to defend Him or invâ—dâ— Him It may be remembred that those who owned the western Remonstrance did justifie their seditious Engagments and renting proceedings which few of them have disâ—laim'd to this day upon then sensing the obligation of the Covenant as is said and that in conformity to the constant tenor of the published Declarations and Testimonies of Church judicatories since the taking of the Covenant and if sâ— sure it concerneth the Ministers of this Church to vindicate the Doctrine it hereof in the point of that respect and obedience to the Civil Magistrate which the Confessions of all Protestant Churches do own which hath been stain'd by these corrupt principles and positions and the undutifull practices slowing from the same in these years past But to say no more it would be in the fear of God considered if in the solemn Covenant the engagers therein have bound themselves to 〈◊〉 act unlawfull that may render the Covenant in some part of the matter of it sinfull the act which in the second Article now under question they have engaged themselves in is the voting out of Prelacy or the Offices c. There was no such Offices in Scotland at that time so they needed not to swear extirpation of what was not there In England their Church-government being warranted by the Laws of the King and Land it may be question'd if the swearing the extirpation or endeavouring to extirpate the same without and against the consent of the Soveraign Law giver of the land was a lawfull Act. The question is not now whether Episcopacy be lawfull or not But supposing Episcopacy to be unlawfull in it self albeit in that case the Law-givers were indeed bound to remove it and to annull Laws favouring it Yet it were unlawfull to people to bandy for forcing or frighting the Law givers to an alteration of these Laws and to tye themselves to a mutual defence with lives and fortunes for overturning what the Law alloweth agree the Soveraign or not which is the clear meaning of the Covenant Artic. 2 3 5. If once that Principle prevail that subjects may when they apprehend Laws unlawfull use forcible endeavours to obtain alteration thereof What security can there be for the best Printes in maintaining the best Laws or what peace for people When an evil spirit rusheth upon people or some Sheba bloweth the trumper they will be ready to think it is their place and calling being souldiers and men at armes however called thereto to offer violence to Magistrates and Laws even the best It is in vain some defenders of the Covenant say forcible endeavours are not meant Compare second Article and third that make mention of lives and estates and relates to the former and the fifth Article It is clearly enough seen violent endeavours are meant where lesse will not do And when the cause of the Covenant was managed in the field were not people upon account of that Article hunted out either to kill or die and terrified with the charge of Covenant-breaking if they went not Did not people conceive themselves or were taught so that it was their place and calling to take armes without and against the consent of the Soveraign Law-giver And in that calling they were to endeavour forcibly consent the King or not to carry that abolition of Prelacy Let it be considered whether engageing to such endeavours were lawfull quoad nos or whether it can be a lawfull bond that tyes to such violent endeavours against the supreme Magistrate and Laws be what they will be And let it be seriously pondred that if they who hold themselves obliged in no way to yield unto acknowledge obey nor act under the Government which the King and Law have set over them and by thus withdrawing their subjection encourage and lead others to do the like after their example thereby designing to weaken the Government which in the fairest construction cannot be judged to live peaceably If I say these will speak and act consequentially to former principles and practices not yet by them disclaimed they must also hold themselves by the same Covenant oblig'd to resist and fight against the Laws fencing Episcopacy if occasion were offered and not only to vent their animosities and discontents in their prayers and discourses in private but also to take all occasions to revile and curse that Government and their Superiours commissionated by the King in Prayers Sermons and discourses in publick and in effect to do what in them lyeth to bring it and them under the scandal and odium of the people and make them the Butt of their malice and revenge let wise men judge how far this is from the tenor of our lawfull Oaths of Allegiance Supremacy yea and Christianity and what an inlet this will give to disturb the peace and rekindle that fire which had almost consumed us to ashes To close 1. If Episcopacy be of Apostolick Institution as many learned godly men judge and it is hard to say many swearers of the Covenant had ground of clear perswasion to the contrary it would not be so banded against without grievous sin and scandal 2. If Episcopacy be of indifferent nature and only by humane constitution it would be considered what Protestants write against Papists That vows of perpetual abstinence in all cases from things in their nature indifferent are utterly unlawfull and let it be thought whether it be lawfull for any subjects to bind up themselves by Oath never to be subject to the Magistrates laws in things God hath put under the determination of his power 3. Let Episcopacy be unlawfull which is not proven by any yet it shall be unlawfull for-subjects to attempt the abrogation of the Laws favouring it by any force to be us'd on the Lawgiver which is indeed the intent of the Covenant and the proceedings thereupon were answerable The Lord give us humble and peaceable spirits to see at last and lay to heart the sin and folly of those Bonds and Combinations against the Kings Ecclesiastical Government and his will expressed in the Laws of the land which are inconsistent with that duty and loyalty which Church-men above other subjects should pay to that Supremacy in all causes and over all persons declared by the law to be an inherent right to the Crown It is high time for us in this day of our tranquillity and calm which God hath wrought to consider what belongs to our peace and to discern the way of our duty from which we have been too long transported by the tempestuous Agitations and diverse winds of Doctrines Engagements and professions in the years past Reason and Scripture Divine and Natural law seem to point out as with a Sun-beam the way we should hold namely that for publick security order and peace Ministers and people do acquiesce in the present establishment and obey every Ordinance of man whether the King as Supream or those who are commissionated by Him and that not only for wrath but conscience sake Let it be far from Ministers of the Gospel of peace to head and lead the people into divisions and offences and by their carriage and way to dispose them into disaffection and discontent with the King and his Laws as if in the account of some whether of corrupt and weak minds he were a Tyrant not a Father to the Church who maketh such Laws which His conscientious subjects cannot obey for fear of sin against God if this way of disobedience be persisted in it is easie to see what evils will follow since it must be expected that the King and Parliament will in honour and justice maintain the laws And how the whole Nation may be exposed to the reproach of a troublesome disquiet factious people delighting still in sedition and turbulency It becomes us rather to cut off occasions of stumbling in the way of Gods people and to be patterns of love to and zeal for the Honour and tranquillity of our King and Countrey of this Church and State and to shew so much tenderness for the interest of Religion Order and Unity as to put forth our selves to the utmost in our stations to promote all these which will prove the most effectual way of crushing that spirit of Athelsm and profaneness so much complained of by those who flee from the only remedy thereof Ministers are not to imploy themselves so much in considering how to maintain and uphold the interest of a party or cause they have espoused as how far they may go what they may without sin do in the practice of what the law injoyneth The God of peace and truth direct and stablish us in the way of peace and truth Amen FINIS ERRATA Pag. 15. Line 6. for others read Oaths Pag. 18. Line 2. for sect read sort
maintains that the Ministers who of old took the canonical Oath did not swear the contradictory thereto when they took the Covenant whence it will follow necessarily that they who have taken the Covenant do not contradict that Oath if they should take the Oath of canonical Obedience and indeed it will be hard to find out a contradiction either in termes or by necessary consequence But if the obligation of the Covenant as to that second article shall be found to cease whereof afterward the lawfulness of the other Oath will be clearer 3. It would be considered that the Reverened Persons intrusted by Law to call for that Promise from Ministers do not search into mens apprehensions concerning the grounds of their power all they seek is obedience to them in things lawfull and honest as being presently in power being by Law ordinary Overseers of the Ministry in their duties and chief Ordainers of them who enter into the Ministry But it is said where obedience is promised there is an acknowledgment of the lawfulness of their Power Office and Authority because obedience formally cannot be but to a lawfull Authority therefore he that in his conscience thinketh a Bishops Office unlawfull cannot so much as promise obedience to him in things lawfull and honest lest by his taking such an Oath he make himself guilty of establishing that which he accounts unlawfull But 1. it is not obedience under a reduplication and as formally obedience they call for if it be obedience materially Ministers doing their duties in things really lawfull they are satisfied 2. Suppose it were so that obedience as formally obedience were required yet it were hard to say it could not be promised or that it could not be acknowledged that they have any lawfull Authority for waving the consideration of any ecclesiastical Office wherein they may pretend to be superiour to other Ministers and giving but not granting that as Church-ministers their Office and superiority were unlawful yet looking upon them as the Kings Majesties Commissioners in Causes ecclesiastical for regulating the external order of the Church in their several bounds and impowred by the law of the land so to do they being also Presbyters and having power with others in Ordination and Jurisdiction ecclesiastical it will be hard to say that their power is not lawfull and that obedience is not due to them The strictest Presbyterians will not find ground to disown their Office in that consideration There are three things mainly which bear off Brethren of both these sorts and ranks from submitting to and concurring in their duties under the present Government 1. Their fears of future evils 2. Their present thoughts of the unlawfulness of the Office of a Bishop over Presbyters in the Church 3. Their former Engagements by the bond of the Covenant which they conceive still binds them As to the first their fears there can be no sufficient ground in these to bear them off from that which for the present is found to be their duty If evils feared should come and Brethren in conscience toward God not able to comply with them then suffering might be the more comfortable but the gracious providence of God watching over his Church the goodness and wisdom of our Soveraign and of Rulers under him considering the temper of this Nation may make all these fears vain and disappoint them and it is not for us to be too thoughtful or to torment our selves with fears before the time In the mean time it would be well considered by Brethren that bear off from concurrence if they do well in withdrawing their counsels from their Brethren and in doing that which tendeth to the loss of their enterest in and respect with persons in present Authority in regard whereof they might be exceedingly instrumental to prevent any thing that is feared 2. As to their thoughts of the unlawfulness of the Office of a Bishop something hath been said of the lawfulness of their concurrence in unquestion'd duties even upon that supposition something also hath been said of the acknowledgment of the lawfulness of their Office looking upon them as Presbyters commissionated by the King for external ordering of Church-affairs in their severall bounds and of the lawfulness of obedience to them as in that capacity It is not the purpose of this Paper to dispute much for their Church-capacity or Rule over Presbyters or anent the Office of Bishops as an order of Church-ministers Only as to this three things would be seriously pondred by Brethren 1. Where they are able to find in all Christs Testament any precept for meer Presbyters preaching and unpreaching in a full equality of power to rule the Church of Christ to give Ordination to Ministers to judge in all controversies of Religion ministerially and do all acts of Government in the Church or where they can find any example of such a Presbytery doing these acts without some superiour Officer acting with them or directing them in their actings or where there is any inhibition either expresse or by necessary consequence that no Gospel-minister should in any case have superiority in power over others in Church-affairs 2. Let it be considered if descending from the Scripture times it can be found in any Writer who lived in the first two or three ages after Christ or in any History or Record relating to these times not to speak of after-ages it can be found that there was any such Church-officer as an unpreaching Elder joyned in full equality of power with Preaching-elders in acts of Ordination of Ministers from which if they be necessary parts and members of the Presbytery they cannot be excluded and in all other acts of Jurisdiction or if there be any mention of the names or power of any such persons Or if it can be from these Writers found that there was ever any Ordination of Ministers or exercise of Jurisdiction ecclesiastical by Ministers i. e. by meer Preaching-presbyters without some one stated President over them under the name of Bishop who was to go before them in these actions and without whom nothing was to be done in these Shall not the practice of that primitive Church which followed the Apostles as it were at the heels be most able to shew us which way they went and what was their practice It is too horrid a thing to imagine and that which a modest Christian can hardly down with that immediately after the Apostles times the whole Church of Châ—â—â—t should agree to so substantial an alteration of the Government of the Church suppos'd to be instituted by Christ and his Apostles as to exclude one sâ—â—t of Officers of his appointment and to take in another not appointed by him And that it should be done so early Statim post tempora Apostolorum aut eorum etiam tempore saith Molinaeus Epist 3. ad Episcop Winton Bishops were set up in the time when some of them especially John were living viventibus videntibus non