Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	apostle_n	church_n	creed_n	1,331	5	10.2664	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A26859	Richard Baxters answer to Dr. Edward Stillingfleet's charge of separation containing, I. some queries necessary for the understanding of his accusation, II. a reply to his letter which denyeth a solution, III. an answer to his printed sermon : humbly tendred, I. to himself, II. to the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor and the court of aldermen, III. to the readers of his accusation, the forum where we are accused.; Answer to Dr. Edward Stillingfleet's charge of separation. 1680	Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1680 (1680)	Wing B1183; ESTC R10441	92,845	104

would be so bad in us but also to accuse us so publickly to Magistrates for not forbearing to preach the Gospel when we were solemnly devoted to it and pleading against the toleration of it when Non-toleration must be by Imprisonment Banishment or Death or such Disablement against such as believe they are bound to preach while they are able § 5. Yet you can tell that they are ill Men that reported you stir up Magistrates to Persecution If that much will prove it it 's like they will be emboldened to call you an ill Man too for such faults are so common that we may say as Seneca Quid ulcus leviter tangam omnes mali sumus Indeed they do not well that use that word Persecution when your words are but against Toleration and the Church of England ' s endeavour after Vniformity which are publickly known § 6. And no wonder if they are ill Men when you are but finding out a certain Foundation for a lasting Vnion which is impossib●e to be attained till Men are convinced of the evil and danger of the present Separation c. That is you are but proving our Union impossible for I have elsewhere proved that the Conviction which you speak of is morally impossible to become the terms of a common Union It is impossible that we should all be convinced that none of the Particulars imposed are sinful which I have named in my first Plea And secondly 't is as impossible that we should all be convinced that it is any more lawful for us to forsake our Ministry to which we were vowed in our Ordination than to break our Oath of Allegiance and deny our Duty to the King So that you do no worse than for Union to prove our Union impossible and who is it that makes it so § 7. And this Impossibility you infer from this Principle That it is lawful to separate on a pretence of greater Purity where there is an agreement in Doctrine and the substantial parts of Worship Answ 1. Was there not this Agreement in the case of Cyprian and the Council who persuaded the People to separate from Martial and Basilides And is not Union possible with such as Cyprian and the Carthage Bishops 2. We that are accused by you do not say that we differ not from you in Doctrine absolutely viz. in the Doctrine about Diocesan Church-Forms or their imposing Power we never denied this difference But we say in the Doctrine of the 39 Articles as distinct from the Form of Government and imposed Abuses we agree And suppose that we agreed in such Doctrine and Worship with a Church that yet held only that the Pope is jure divino the Constitutive Vicarious Head of the Vniversal Church and would take none that confess it not for Christians were it a Sin to separate from that Church 3. Suppose that Usurpers should thrust out the Bishops and you and make themselves our Pastors against our wills is it unlawful to separate from them though they agree with us in Doctrine and Worship And if the Churches and Councils have been in the right which for 700 yea 1000 years held that the calling of a Bishop was null that had not the Clergies Election and the Peoples Election or Consent I need not tell you how far this will reach 4. What if a Church that you agree with in Doctrine and Worship will not receive you unless you will deliberately profess or subscribe an Untruth or covenant against some Duty or commit a known Sin is it intolerable for you rather to separate from them than to sin And must we have no Union till we can in all things think as you do § 8. I think you need not expect the Censures of the chief makers of our Divisions And as to the inferiour Sectaries if you are a Sacrifice it will be an unbloody one You well admonish us in the end not to complain too much when we are silenc'd impoverished and imprisoned The counsel is good But for the Dean of Pauls c. that is deservedly loved and honoured by us all whom you thus deal with and by those great Men whose esteem he deservedly more valueth while he liveth in this Plenty and Honour to call himself a Sacrifice if a few poor Men say He wrongeth them when he pleadeth against the Magistrates enduring them or against their Judgment that think they should be endured Doth not this seem to another greater tendency than for me only to say de facto I was laid in the Common Gaol and fain to make away my Goods and Library to save them from Distress But so much to your Epistle The Sermon followeth § 9. And what could a Man have desired more to end the main differences among us than the serious consideration of your Text in its very plain import and drift 1. That the Text speaketh for Unity and Concord is past question 2. And that it speaketh both to the Pastors and the Flocks 3. And that it speaketh to all Christians though of various degrees of Attainment And therefore requireth all to live in Concord that are Christians notwithstanding other differences 4. All the doubt is what is meant by the same Canon or Rule And there are these several Expositions pleaded for 1. That by the same Rule is meant only the General Concord idem velle nolle to agree and live in Peace and to mind the same things 2. That by the same Rule is meant the Essentials of Christianity received by all Christians which they should have concordantly practised notwithstanding other differences 3. That by the same Rule is meant the Doctrine which the Apostles had concordantly delivered to all the Churches 4. That it was the Churches Creed which is supposed then to be in use as the Symbol of Christians 5. That it is the Canonical Scriptures in the times that they were written and delivered to the Churches 6. That it is the Example of S. Paul before described or the matter of it● that is to hold fast what he had attained and press forwards towards the heavenly perfection by desire hope diligence and patience 7. Some take the one Rule to be the end as it is to be attained by the means that is the common good of the Church and furtherance of the Gospel and our Salvation Let all be done to edification 8. Some say that it is the great Duty of Love which is made the Rule for our undetermined actions or that the fundamental duties are made a Canon to the Superstructures as it seemeth to be meant Gal. 6. 15 16. And by Christ Go learn what that meaneth I will have mercy and not Sacrifice To tell you which and how many of these I take to be meant in the Text and why is none of the work which you call me to but to tell you that which-ever of these it is or if all these we fully consent All these Canons we must all walk by 9. But some say

that by the same Rule is meant the Tradition and Custom of the Vniversal Church 10. And some that it is the Canons of the Bishops in General Councils and under them in National or Provincial Councils 11. And some tell us that the Rule of Christian concord is Obedience to the Bishops of all the World or Universal Church who are a College Governing not only divisim per partes in their several Precincts but unitedly as One Regent College ordinarily per literas formas and by General Councils when they sit 12. And some tell us that it is the Law or Will of the Civil Christian Magistrate which is this Rule As to these four last Rules we must put in our Exceptions As to the 9 th the Traditions and Customs then in use were Apostolical Institutions and so are coincident with some of the former But other Traditions and Customs we take not for this Rule And as to the tenth we give Councils though wrongfully called General their due honour as we do to inferiour Councils and every particular Pastor in his place but take not this for the Rule here mentioned And as to the 11th we know of no such Government in being And as to the 12th it was not then existent and therefore could not be that meant in the Text But we take our selves bound to obey Magistrates as we have elsewhere at large explained and professed In short either you think it is a Divine or a Humane Rule or Law which is here meant or both If a Divine we shall not differ from you of any thing unless it be of the meaning of it If a Humane either it is an act of true Power received from God or not If not you will grant us that it obligeth us not as this Rule in question If yea then we agree that we are to obey it So that all that will be useful to our Conviction will be 1. That you prove the Persons authorized to their Office and of our Magistrates there is no doubt 2. And that they have authority to make all the Canons and Laws which you call the Rule And without this your labour is all lost to us § 10. But which of all these it is that you take for the Rule meant in your Text we must conjecture 1. You well say p. 11. It was such a Rule which they very well knew which they had given them before Therefore it was none that was not then in being but to be made by Bishops afterward And p. 14. you seem to include the Canon made Acts 15. whatever the sense of this Text is we willingly also stand to that and to the Holy Ghosts decision that nothing be imposed but necessary things And p. 15. I find you say that the preserving the Peace of the Church and preventing Separation was the great measure according to which the Apostle gave his directions And this is all that I can find of your determination what is that Rule And if Peace be the Rule we all agree with you in declaiming against the violation of it But is there no more in your Application § 11. I remember it is said in the Life of Joh. Bugenhagius Pomeranus the Pastor of the Church in Wittenberge and the Presbyter that ordained the Bishops and Presbyters of Denmark and many other places how much John Frederick the Elector of Saxony was pleased to hear him open the Reasons why Magistrates have power to make Laws but not Pastors armatum 〈◊〉 potestatem politicam authoritate condendi leges non pugnantes cum Decalogo de his traditam se verissimum praeceptum necesse est obedire propter conscienti●n sed pastoribus expresse prohiberi condere proprias leges eum dicatur Ne●o 〈◊〉 arguat in cibo in potu nec posse hanc libertatem ullius creaturae authoritate tolli But I had rather stretch my Obedience to the utmost consistent with Conscience and Obedience to God than speak for any needless Liberty § 12. It is certain that by the same Rule is not meant 1. Any Rule that tied Christians to subscribe or declare that there is nothing in our three Books Liturgy Ordination and Articles contrary to the Word of God● For none of them were then extant nor are they 200 years old 2. Nor any Rule that tied them to any one humane Liturgy which all the Churches i● the Nation must agree in For there was none such 3. Nor was it any Rul● that imposed on them any dubious unnecessary Opinions Covenants or Practices nor in a word our Conformity or any like it This is easily proved 1. Because the Rule which they were all to wall by was somewhat then existent 2. It was a Divine Rule 3. It was th● which all Christians were to have concord in But experience telleth us that all Christians that is that consent to the Essentials of Christianity ●●●ver had nor can have their Concord in any of the fore-mentioned Conformity as I have proved in my Book of Concord § 13. We will go therefore no further than your Text for the Terms 〈◊〉 our Agreement and for our Defence against your Accusation What●● you will prove to us by any such evidence as should convince a Man of reason 〈◊〉 impartiality to have been THE RVLE which the Apostle did here mean 〈◊〉 bid all that are Christians walk by we earnestly desire to agree thereto An● we will joyn with you against any that refuse it It will be a way more co●gruous to your Function and cheaper to your Consciences to condescend 〈◊〉 these Terms and prove to us what this same Rule was than to tell the Magistrates that it is no sin not to endure us § 14. Pag. 16 17 18 19. you come to tell us what Separation it is no● which you speak of viz. not of the Separation or distinct Communion of 〈◊〉 Churches from each other c. Answ You know it 's like your self what 〈◊〉 mean by these words if you would have us know it I must crave yo● Answer to these Questions Qu. 1. Do you make Separation and distinct Communion the same thing 〈◊〉 divers Qu. 2. What distinction of Communion is it that you mean When there are 〈◊〉 many things which may distinguish 1. Communion in distinct places you take 〈◊〉 for Separation 2. Nor Commnion under distinct Presbyters or Bishops 3. Therefore I suppose neither under distinct Princes or Aristocracies in Cities as such 4. Nor under distinct Laws meerly as such of the same Prince 5. Nor distinct in allowed or indifferent accidents Why any of these should be called Separation I know not unless as the word doth signifie but Diversity or Distance Q. 3. Do you take Separation here in the same sence as before and after or Equivocally If Equivocally why did you not tell us what you here meant besides the difference of Subjects If univocally then Q. 4. Is not the Separation of whole Churches much worse than of single Persons from

go to seek him in another Parish where he dwells when ever we need a Pastor's Councel were he at Leisure and willing he could not have time to speak to one of an Hundred that might at once wait to speak with him So that we have none of this necessary Pastoral Help when we greatly need it Yea not the Sixth or Tenth Part of the Parish can come to Hear him in the Church And when We that most desire it get in it troubleth us to think that we thereby keep out those that least desire it but most need it who knowing the Difficulty of getting Room do stay at Home and never seek it So that Five Parts of Six of our Neighbours use not to go to any Church at all no more than Infidels And if in pity we perswade them to go to any Nonconformist's Meeting they say the Clergy will Damn them as Schismaticks The Question now is Whether Ten Thousand or Twenty Thousand in a Parish are bound to live without all Private Pastoral Help and Councel yea and to forbear all Publick Worshipping of God and Hearing of his Word And if they seek Relief of Nonconforming Ministers Publickly and Privately Whether it be Sinful Separation If Men can spare the Ministry Why are they Maintained If they are needful for the Safety of Mens Souls Must so many Thousands hazard their Souls for want of needful Help lest they be called Separatists If the Dean of St. Pauls be called the Parson of the Parish and Preach to others that can Hear him Will that serve the Needs of all the rest XX. In Moscovie where a Christian Prince and the Laws forbid all Preaching and Publick Worship save the Reading of Homilies and Liturgies Is it Separation and Sinful Schism to Disobey this and otherwise to Preach and Worship God XXI Is it Schism in France and such other Countries for the Protestants to Meet to Preach and Worship God against the Wills of the King and Bishops It 's true that great Sin is necessarily thus avoided by them which are not Imposed upon us But if it prove that any Sin is made necessary to Communion the Degree will not much vary the Case as to the Point of Separation XXII In divers Countries the Prince is of one Religion or Mode of Religion and the Bishops of another The Question is Who are the Schismaticks the People that in their Assemblies and Mode of Worship do ●ollow the Prince or they that follow the Bishops Some great Writers for Conformity tell me That if the King Command one Liturgy Translation Version Ceremony c. and the Bishop another I must obey the Bishop before the King Others say I must Obey the King before the Bishop of which before Bishop Goodman of Glocester a Papist complaineth of the King that would not consent that Clergy-Men should be Chancellours And I speak with no Bishop that disowneth not Lay-Chancellours Use of the Keys The Helvetian Magistrates are Erastians against the Clergies Power of Excommunication Many of the Pastors are of the Contrary Judgment The Duke of Brandenburgh is a Calvinist His Bishops and Clergy are Lutherans Which Party are the Schismatick XXIII Were all those Separating Schismaticks who from the Apostles Dayes did Meet Preach and Worship God against the Will and Laws of Princes sometimes of Heathen Princes and sometimes of Christians Constantine Valens Theodosius the Second Anastasius Zeno Justinian c. If so most Christian Bishops have been such Separatists I have in my First Plea and my Church-History given Instances enough XXIV Is it Schism or Sinful Separation to Disobey a Command about Religion which no Man hath true Authority to Give Authority is the Objectum Formale of Obedience and where there is no Authority there is no Disobedience in a formal Sense or privative Most Politicks say That Princes have no Authority against the Common Good All Power of Princes and Pastors is of God and is for Edification and not for Destruction God giveth no Power against Himself or his Laws nor the Souls of Men. If the King should Command me to Marry a Wife whom I know to be intolerably unmeet for me or to Feed my self and Family with Food which I find to be against our Health or to use a Physician whose Ignorance or Negligence or Untrustiness would endanger my Life I am not bound to Obey him both because it is a Matter that is without the Verge of his Governing Authority and because it is against the End of Government Regal Power destroyeth not Family-Power nor Personal Interest and Self-Government No Man hath Power to Destroy or Endanger the Souls of Men nor forbid them seeking their own Edification and Salvation I Repeat Bishop Bilson's Words p. 236. of Subjection Princes have no Right to Call or Confirm Preachers but to Receive such as be Sent of God and give them Liberty for their Preaching and Security for their Persons And if Princes Refuse so to do God's Labourers must go forward with that which is Commanded them from Heaven Not by Disturbing Princes from their Thrones nor Invading their Realms as your Father doth and defendeth he may do but by mildly Submitting themselves to the Powers on Earth and meekly Suffering for the Defence of the Truth what they shall Inflict Pag. 399. The Election of Bishops in those Dayes belonged to the People and not to the Prince And though by plain Force he placed Lucius there yet might the People lawfully Reject him as no Bishop and cleave to Peter their Right Pastor On this I further ask XXV If the Nonconforming People can prove That notwithstanding the times of Civil Usurpation and Bishops Removal their Pastors had a Lawful Call and title to their Office over them and they were truly obliged to them as in that just Relation Whether the Magistrates or Bishops Acts have made those Relations and Obligations Null That the Temples and Tythes are in the Magistrates Power we doubt not But more than Bishop Bilson even many Councils deny it of the Office and Pastoral Relation Yea the Universal Church was of the same mind And if so how prove you e. g. that the Relation of the Ejected London Ministers and their Flocks was Dissolved and that the Succeeders were true Pastors to the Non-consenting Flocks XXVI That there are Alas Multitudes of Young Raw Injudicious besides Scandalous Priests no Man can deny that knoweth England and hath any Modesty If then honest People that are not willing to be Damned shall say We best know what is suitable to our Needs and what Teachers profit us and what not And we find that some are so Ignorant that they are unmeet as Plowmen to resolve the most concerning Cases of Conscience and their Conversation savoureth not of any serious belief of Christianity and the World to come and they do but Read a few dry words like School-Boyes saying a Weak Oration without Life or Seriousness and we can but little profit by them How prove you