Selected quad for the lemma: christian_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
christian_n	church_n	communion_n	schism_n	2,211	5	10.6231	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A59963	A hind let loose, or, An historical representation of the testimonies of the Church of Scotland for the interest of Christ with the true state thereof in all its periods : together with a vindication of the present testimonie, against the Popish, prelatical, & malignant enemies of that church ... : wherein several controversies of greatest consequence are enquired into, and in some measure cleared, concerning hearing of the curats, owning of the present tyrannie, taking of ensnaring oaths & bonds, frequenting of field meetings, defensive resistence of tyrannical violence ... / by a lover of true liberty.	Shields, Alexander, 1660?-1700.	1687 (1687)	Wing S3431; ESTC R24531	567,672	774

called in One Hope Professing One Lord Confessing One Faith sealed with One Baptisme Eph. 4. 3. c. And for Brethren to dwel together in Unity is good pleasant and like the precious Oyntment upon the head that ran doun upon Aarons beard Psal. 133. 1 2. A fragrant Oyntment indeed if it be composed aright of Gospel-simples according to Divine art and the Wisdom that is from above which is first pure then peacable and not made up of Adulterate Politicks that Union that hath the Spirit for its Author the Scripture for its Rule Peace for its bond beauty love for its Cement Faith for its foment Christ for its foundation and Truth holiness for its constant Companions cannot but be intensely desired enixely endeavoured and fervently followed by all the Professors of the Gospel of Peace Subjects of the Prince of Peace Which makes Division Schisme not only a great Miserie but a Grand sin But it must be in the way of Truth Duty and consistent with holiness the honour of Christ otherwise if it be in the way of Apostasie defection it is but a Confederacy Conspiracy against the Lord. And true Union can neither be attained nor retained nor recovered except the sinful Cause of Division Defection and the holy overruling Cause the Anger of the Lord be removed in turning to following him II. Thô there be not perfect Union but diversity both of judgements and practices in several Cases there may be Communion with a Church in its Ordinances and Ministrie As 1. We may have a Catholick Communion with all Christian Ministers Members of the Catholick Church considered as such holding the Head Christ and the foundation sure And so we may meet for Worship with all Devout men in every Nation under Heaven whether they be Parthians or Medes or Elamites or French or Dutch c. thô differing in Controversies of lesser moment not overturning that if they hold the Universal Testimony of the Gospel against the Common enemies thereof Iewes Turks or Pagans for there is neither Greek nor Iew if he be a Christian Christ is all and in all Col. 3. 11. But if they be Hereticks we can have no Communion with them 2. We may have a more special Communion with all Protestant Ministers Members of the Reformed Church considered as such more strictly and upon stricter conditions providing they hold not only the Universal of Christians but the General Testimony of Protestants against the Greater lesser Antichrists thô differing from us in some circumstantial points not Reformed and not contradictory unto the Protestant Testimony against Poperie all Heresie nor declining from their oun Reformation by Defection or Schisme And Consequently its Lawful to oune Communion with the Churches of the United Provinces and take Ordination from them thô they have some formes not allowable from which they were never Reformed because they are sound in the Protestant Testimony But with the Sectarians or Schismaticks or Apostates among them we cannot oune that special Communion 3. We may have a more Particular Communion upon yet stricter conditions with all our Covenanted Brethren Ministers Members of the Churches of Britain Ireland considered as such Providing they hold not only the Universal not only the more Special Protestant Testimony against the Greater lesser Antichrists but the Covenanted Testimony for the Reformation in Doctrine Worship Discipline Government against Poperie Prelacy Superstition Heresie Schisme Profanness according to the Covenant Thô differing from us in those Controversial points never Reformed and which were never the Word of Christs patience and do not overturn the Covenanted Testimony But with those that contradict counteract that we cannot oune that particular Communion 4. We may have yet a nearer Organical Communion upon stricter conditions still with all the Ministers Members of the National Church of Scotland constitute confederate under one Reformed Government according to the Rule of Christ providing they hold not only all the former Testimonies under the foresaid considerations but the Presbyterian Testimony as stated in the Ecclesiastical Constitutions and sworn to in the National Covenants Engagements of that Church founded upon the Word of God against Poperie Prelacy Erastianisme Sectarianisme Toleration Schisme Defection thô differing in some things from us never Reformed never considered in Ecclesiastical Judicatories never engaged against in our Covenants never Stated as the Word of patience and Matter of Testimony But with those that oppose suppress reproach and abandon this Testimony we cannot oune this Organical Communion in this broken State of the Church We may have yet a stricter Congregational Communion upon stricter conditions in and with the Ordinary or extraordinary Meetings or Societies of the Lords people for Gospel Ordinances with any Minister or Ministers duely truely admitted to that function according to Christs Appointment and the Call of the people whether in a fixed or unfixed relation provicing he holds the Testimony of Christ under all the former considerations and ounes and adheres unto the true received principles of the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline Government founded upon the written Word of God and whatsoever Declarations or Testimonies former or latter particular or more General are aggreable thereunto thô differing from us in some of the Integral not Essential parts of our Testimony against the Enemies of our Covenanted Reformation But with such as deny or decline from it by Schisme or Defection or Complyance with the enemies thereof we cannot oune this Congregational Communion in this broken State of the Church III. Thô there be many things in a Church to brangle lessen the Comfort of our Communion with it and the Ministrie thereof yet we may keep fellowship with a true Church thô in many things faultie and Corrupt as all Churches are in some measure in this Militant State. As the Church of Corinth had many corruptions in their practice yet no separation is enjoyned from it And the Lord did not require separation from the Churches of Perga●●● Thyatira though they had many corruptions deficiencies in Discipline in a Toleration of Hereticks and would lay no other burden upon them but to hold fast what they had as Mr Durham shewes in his Comment on the Revel chap. 2. Lect. 6. Pag. 148 149. as also Chap. 18. Lect. 1. Pag. 585. in 4 to This must be granted especially in these cases 1. In the infant State of the Church when the Reformation is only begun then many things may be tolerated before they be gradually Reformed which in an adult State are not to be suffered 2. In a growing case of the Church advancing out of corruptions then many things may be born with while they are ascending wrestling up the hill which in a Declining State when the Church is going backward must not be yeelded unto See that Objection of hearing Prelatical men in the time of

at all to be ouned or received as His Lawful Ambassadours But the Prelats their Curats have all their power from a meer usurper on Christs Prerogative who is neither Member nor officer of the Church Ergo 2. It confounds the Mediatory Kingdom of Christ with subjects it to the Kingly Government of the world removes the Seripture Land Marks Limits between civil Ecclesiastick Powers in making the Governours of the State to be Governours of the Church and denying all Church Government in the hands of Church officers Distinct from independent upon the civil Magistrat which clearly derogats from the Glory of Christs Mediatory Kingdom which is altogether distinct from not subordinate to the Government of the world both in the Old Testament in the New. For they have distinct fountains whence they flow civil Government flowes from God Creator Church Government from Christ the Lord Redeemer Head King of His Church whose Kingdom is not of this world Iohn 18. 36. though for this end He came into the world that He should have a Kingdom there vers 37. They have distinct Objects civil Government hath a civil object the out ward man Church Government a Spiritual object men considered as Christians In the Old Testament the matters of the Lord are clearly distinguished from the matters of the King 2 Chron. 19. ult In the new Testament there are matters of Church Cognizance which do not at all belong to the civil Magistrate as in the case of offence they must tell the Church not the civil Magistrate Math. 18. 15. 20. In the case of Excommunication the Church is to act by virtue of the power of our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Cor. 5. 4 5. not by the Magistrats power In the case of Absolution the Church is to Iudge what Punishment is sufficient and what evidence of repentance is sufficient to remove it 2 Cor. 2. 6. 7. So in the case of Tryal ordination of Ministers c. None of these belong to the Magistrate They have distinct Natures The civil is a Magisterial the Ecclesiastick is a Minsterial Government the one is the power of the sword the other of the Keyes The one put forth in Political Punishments the other in Ecclesiastick Censures In the Old Testament the Magistrats power was Coactive by death banishment Confiscation c. Ezra 7. 26. The Church by puting out of the Synagogue interdiction from Sacred things c. In the New Testament The Magistrats power is described Rom. 13. to be that of the sword by punishment the power of the Church only in binding Loosing Math. 16. 19. They have distinct Ends the end of the one being the good of the Common wealth the other the Churches Edification In the Old Testament the end of the civil Government was one thing and of the Church another to wit to warn not to trespass against the Lord in that forecited 2. Chron. 19. 10. In the New Testament the end of Magistratical power is to be a terror to evil works a praise te the good Rom. 13. 3. but the end of Church power is Edification 1 Cor. 5. 5. 2 Cor. 10. 8. 2. Cor. 13. 10. They have distinct Courts of officers In the Old Testament the distinction of the civil Ecclesiastick Sanhedrin is known where there were distinct causes Persons set over them to judge them respectively 2. Chron. 19. ult In the New Testament we find officers given unto the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. with no mention of the civil Magistrate at all And Church-Assemblies distinct from Parliaments or senats yea when the Magistrate was an Enemy determining questions that did not belong to the Magistrate at all Act. 15. we have Rulers distinct from the Rulers of the Common wealth 1 Thess. 5. 12. whom we are to obey and submit our selves as those who are accountable to Christ only for to whom else can they give account of souls Heb. 13. 17. we have Rulers inferiour to Labourers in word doctrine not to be honoured so much as they Sure these cannot be civil Rulers 1 Tim. 5. 17. we have Rulers commended for trying Impostors which were not Magistrats Rev. 2. 2. And others who are rebuked for suffering Hereticks ibid. vers 14 15 20. which supposes they had Authority to do it yet distinct from not depending on the Magistrate Besides from this confusion of the two Governments together and making the Supreme Magistrate to be Supreme Governour of the Church would follow many absurdities as that They who are not Church members should be Church officers even Heathen Magistrats yea women should be Church officers and none should be chosen for Magistrats but such as have the qualifications of Church officers Sic Apol. Relat. Sect. 12. pag. 190. Rectius Instruen Confut. 1 Dial. chap. 6. pag. 50. Hence they that in deriving their Authority do confound the tuo Governments civil Ecclesiastick and take it all from a meer civil power cannot be ouned as having any Authority of Christs Institution But the Prelats their Curats in deriving their Authority do confound the tuo Governments civil Ecclesiastick and take it all from a meer civil power This same Argument equally militates against hearing the Indulged Ministers who have taken a Licence warrand from the Usurper of this Supremacy because it is highly injurious to Christs Headship very contrary to to Presbyterian Principles clearly Homologatorie of the Supremacy plainly Prejudicial to the power of the people very much establishing Erastianisme Sadly obstructive destructive to the good of the Church wronging our cause ground of suffering Strengthening the Prelats hands contradictory to our Covenants Prejudging the Meetings of Gods people and heinously Scandalous offensive As is clear by unanswerably poven in the History of the Indulgence IV. There is a necessity that any man whom we may Joine with as a Minister must not only be a minister and a Minister cloathed with Christs commission then when we Joins with Him but He must also have a right to administer there where we Ioin with Him. Else we can look upon him no otherwise than a thief a robber whom Christs sheep should not hear Io. 10. 1-5 Now the Prelats Curats though they should he accounted acknowledged Ministers yet they have not a right to officiate where they have intruded themselves Hence we have several Arguments as 1. They who have no just Authority nor right to officiate fixedly in this Church as the proper Pastors of it ought not to be Received but withdrawen from But the Prelats their Curats have no just Authority or right to officiate in this Church as her proper Pastors Therefore they ought not to be received but withdrawen from All the debate is about the Minor which may thus be made good They who have entered into do officiate fixedly in this Church without her Authority Consent have no right so to do But the Prelats

for against a Lawful Magistrate that would be resistence 3 If a Tyrant hath irresistible power to kill and destroy the people he hath also irresistible power to cite summond them before him and if it be unlawful to resist his murders it must be as unlawful to resist his summonds 4 For a Church or Community of Christians persecuted for Religion to flee with Wives Children strong weak old yong to escape Tyrannical violence and leave the Land were more unlawful than to Resist For what is not possible as a Natural means of preservation is not a Lawful mean but this were not a possible mean Neither is it warranted in Natures Law or Gods Word for a Communitie or Society of Christians that have Gods Right and mans Law to the Land and the Covenanted Priviledges thereof to leave the Country and Cause of Christ and all in the hands of a Tyrant Papist to set up Idolatry upon the ruines of Reformation there A private man may flee but flight is not warranted of them as of a private single man. 2. If it be duty to disobey its duty to Resist Tyrants in defence of Religion Liberty But it is duty to disobey them Ergo The Connexion only will be stuck at which is thus strengthened If subjection be no more pressed in Scripture than obedience then if non-obedience be duty non-subjection must be so also and consequently Resistence But subjection is no more pressed in Scripture than obedience For all Commands of subjection to the Higher powers as Gods Ministers under pain of damnation do only respect Lawful Magistrats and in Lawful things and do include obedience and non-obedience to the power so qualified is a resisting of the Ordinance of God as well as non-subjection If then obedience to Magistrats be duty and non-obedience sin and obedience to Tyrants sin and non-obedience duty Then by Parity of reason subjection to Magistrats is duty and non-subjection is sin and also subjection to Tyrants is sin and non-subjection duty 11. From the Resistence allowed in all Governments it may be argued thus If it be duty to defend our Religion Lives Liberties against an invading army of Cut-throat Papists Turks or Tartars without or against the Magistrats warrand Then it must be duty to defend the same against invading home-bred Tyrants except we would subscribe our selves home-born slaves But the former is true Ergo The Minor cannot be doubted because the Magistrats power cannot be privative destructive to defence of our Religion Lives Liberties nor can it take away Natures birth-right to defend these or make it fare the worse than if we had no Magistrats at all now if we had no Magistrats at all we might defend these against Invaders and whether we have Magistrats or not we are under Moral obligations of the Law of God to endeavour the defence of these But this needs not be insisted on The Connexion of the Proposition is clear If Princes be more Tyrannical in invading Religion Liberties themselves than in suffering others to do it or hindering them to be opposed And if their invasion be more Tyrannical hurtful dangerous than the invasion of Strangers Then if it be duty to resist Strangers invading these Interests it is more duty to Resist home-bred Tyrants invading the same But the former is true Therefore the latter Resisting in the one case is no more Resisting the Ordinance of God than in the other 12. From the Motives of Resistence we may draw this Argument which might be branched out into several but I shall reduce it to this Complexe one If when we are in a Capacity we cannot acquit our selves in the duties that we owe to our Covenanted Religion and our Covenanted Brethren and Posterity and our selves nor absolve exoner our selves from the sin Judgment of Tyrants who overturn Religion oppress our Brethren impose slavery on our selves and entail it upon Posterity by a Passive subjection submission to and not opposing these mischiefs Then Resistence is necessary But the former is true Ergo The Connexion is clear for there cannot be a Medium if we cannot discharge these duties by subjection submission and not opposing then we must do them by non-subjection non-submission and opposing since they must be done some way The Assumption is thus confirmed 1. The duties we owe to Religion when it is corrupted declined from overturned are not only to Reforme our oun hearts wayes and keep our selves Pure from the Corruptions established and to rebuke and witness against the Complyers with the same and so by work doing suffering keep contend for the Word of our Testimony But further when by the Constitution of the Kingdom Religion is become a fundamental Law and consequently the Magistrate overturning it is violating everting the main grounds ends of the Government and turning grassant ingrained Tyrant especially when it is not only so Authorized Confirmed by Law but Corroberated by solemn vowes Covenants made sworn unto God by all ranks of people to maintain defend this Religion with their lives fortunes and resist all contrary errors corruptions according to their vocation and the uttermost of that power that God puts in their hands all the dayes of their lives As also mutually to defend assist one another as in the National Covenant And sincerely really constantly endeavour the Preservation of the Reformed Religion in Doctrine Worship Discipline Government the extirpation of Poperie Prelacie c and to assist defend all those that enter into the same bond in the maintaining thereof as in the Solemn League Then to defend maintain that Religion and themselves Professing it when it is sought to be razed This must be an Interest as necessary to be defended as that of our bodies which is far inferiour and as necessary a duty as to defend our Natural Civil Liberties from perpetual slaverie and as preferrable thereunto as Christ Interest is to mans and as the end of all self preservation is to the means of it the preservation of Religion being the end of all self preservation But this duty cannot be discharged without Resistence in a meer Passive subjection submission Otherwise the same might be discharged in our universal submission to Turks coming to destroy our Religion Certainly this Passive way cannot answer the duty of Pleading for Truth Isai. 59. 4. seeking the Truth Ier. 5. 1. being valiant for it Ier. 9. 3. making up the hedge standing in the Gap c. Ezek. 22. 30. which yet are necessary incumbent duties according to our Capacity Therefore we cannot answer the duties we owe to Religion in a meer Passive way 2. The duty we owe to our Covenanted Brethren is to assist defend them and releive them when oppressed as we are bound by our Covenants and antecedently by the Royal Law of Christ the foundation of all Righteousness among men toward

Maximus who was come against them with an Army because of their Religion 3. How about the year 342. the Citizens of Alexandria defended Athanasius their Minister against Gregorius the intruded Curate and Syrianus the Emperours Captain who came with great force to put him in 4. How about the year 356. the people of Constantinople did in like manner stand to the defence of Paulus against Constantius the Emperour and killed his Captain Hermogenes And afterwards in great Multitudes they opposed the intrusion of the Heretick Macedonius 5. How when a wicked Edict was sent forth to pull doun the Churches of such as were for the Clause of one Substance the Christians that maintained that Testimony resisted the bands of Souldiers that were procured at the Emperours Command by Macedonius to force the Mantinians to embrace the Arrian Heresie But the Christians at Mantinium kindled with an earnest zeal towards Christian Religion went against the Souldiers with Cheerful minds valiant Courage and made a great slaughter of them 6. How about the year 387. the people of Cesarea did defend Basil their Minister 7. How for fear of the people the Lievtenant of the Emperour Valens durst not execute those 80 Priests who had came to supplicate the Emperour and were commanded to be killed by him 8. How the Inhabitants of Mount Nitria espoused Cyril●s quarrel and assaulted the Lievtenant and forced his Guards to flee 9. How about the year 404. when the Emperour had banished Chrysostome the people flocked together so that the Emperour was necessitated to call him back again from his Exile 10. How the people resisted also the transportation of Ambrose by the command of Valentinian the Emperour And chused rather to lose their lives than to suffer their pastor to be taken away by the Souldiers 11. How the Christians oppressed by Baratanes King of Persia did flee to the Romans to seek their help And Theodosius the Emperour is much praised for the war which he commenced against Chosroes King of Persia upon this inducement that that King sought to ruine exstirpate those Christians in his Dominions that would not renounce the Gospel 3. But when Religion was once imbraced in imbodyed Corporations and established by Law and became a peoples common Interest Liberty in a Capacity to defend it with their lives other Liberties and when it was propagated through the Nations Then the Lord did call for other more Active Testimonies in the preservation defence of it Of which we have many Instances in Histories About the year 894. The Bohemian Christians Resisted Drahomica their Queen who thought to have destroyed them reintroduced Paganisme About the year 1420. they maintained a long defensive war against the Government and the Popes Legats under the managment of their brave Captain Zizca which was further prosecuted after him by the remaining Thaborites And again in this Century anno 1618. They maintained a Defensive war against the Emperour Ferdinand the Second electing and erecting a new King in opposition to him Frederick Palatine of the Rhine in which Cause many received the Crown of Martyrdom and this was also espoused by King Iames the 6. who sent to aid his Son in Law against the Emperour 4. If we look to the Histories of the Waldenses these constant Opposers of Antichrist we will find many Instances of their Resistence About the year 1194. very early while Waldo from whom they had their name was alive they began to defend themselves by Armes after the bloody Edict of Aldephonsus King of Arragon an Edict so like to many of ours emitted this day that as it would seem our Enemies have taken the Copy of it so it were very seemly for the people grieved with such Edicts to imitate the Copy of the Waldenses their practice in opposition to them Anno 1488. they resist by Armes Albert de Capitaneis sent by Pope Innocent the 8. in Pragola Frassaniere and through out Piedmont where for the most part the off-spring of the old Waldenses had their residence where very evidently through many successions of ages they shewed themselves to be the true Successors of their Worthy Progenitors valiant for the Truth That 's a famous Instance of their Resistence in opposing vigorously the Lord of Trinity in that same Piedmont at which time they so solemnly asked their Ministers Whether it were not Lawful to defend themselves against his violence Who answered affirmatively And accordingly they did it with wonderful success at that time and many times thereafter Especially it is notour in the memory of this present age how anno 1655. a vigorous defensive war was prosecuted against the D. Savoy by their Captains Gianavel Iahier c. which was espoused by many Protestant Princes And no further gone than the very last year it is known how they resisted the Armes of the Tyger and the French that helped him and that their Simplicity in trusting Popish promises was their ruine 5. If we look over the Histories of the Albigenses we find many Instances of their Defensive Resisting their Oppressing Superiours About anno 1200. They defended themselves at Beziers and Carcasson against the Popes Legat and his Crossed Souldiers under the Conduct first of the Earle of Beziers and then of the Earle of Foix and Earle Remand of Thoulouse and were helped by the English who then possessed Guienne bordering upon Thoulouse which resistence continued several years Afterwards anno 1226. they maintained a Resistence against the King of France 6. In Spain we find the people of Arragon contesting with Alphonso 3 d. and associating themselves together against him And they tell Pedro 3 d. their King that if he would not contain himself within the limits of the Laws they would pursue him by Armes about anno 1283. As also other Spaniards who rose in Armes several times against Pedro the 1 King of Castile 7. It was this which brought the Cantons of Helvetia into this State of freedom wherein they have continued many years For about the year 1260. they levied war against their oppressing nobles And anno 1308. they joined in Covenant to defend themselves against the house of Austria and anno 1315. they renewed it at Brunna in which at length the rest of the Cantons joined and formed themselves into a Common-wealth 8. If we take a glance of the Germans we will find at the very Commencement of the Reformation as soon as they got the name of Protestants they Resisted the Emperour Charles the fifth The Duke of Saxon the Land Grave of Hesse and the City of Magd●burgh with Advice of Lawyers concluded That the Laws of the Empire permitted Resistence of the Emperour in some cases that the times were then so dangerous that the very force of Conscience did lead them to Armes and to make a League to defend themselves though Caesar or any in his name should make war against them for since he attempteth to root out Religion and subvert our