Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	according_a	member_n	true_a	3,485	5	4.3387	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A25667	The anti-Quaker, or, A compendious answer to a tedious pamphlet entituled, A treatise of oaths subscribed by a jury of 12 Quakers, whose names are prefixed to it, together with the fore-man of that jury ... William Penn : alledging several reasons why they ... refuse to swear, which are refuted, and the vanity of them demonstrated both by Scripture, reason, and authority of ancient and modern writers / by Misorcus, a professed adversary of vain swearing in common discourse and communication.	Misorcus.	1676 (1676)	Wing A3506; ESTC R165	32,510	58

and an help to Truth and to proof appointed by God and oftentimes very necessary we must restrain this command of Christ to wit Swear not at all to voluntary Oaths not required by them who have Authority vain frivolous and vicious Oaths seeing those things which are set down here have relation onely to such Be not righteous overmuch perverse Separatist for why shouldst thou destroy thy self i.e. as Tremelius upon the Text By thy pride and arrogancy run headlong into destruction Col 1.18 Eph. 4.15 by undergoing the penalties of the Laws here and endangering the salvation of thy soul hereafter Separation from the Church his mystical Body is a dividing from Christ the Head In the last place and for a close of all I do earnestly desire the Heads and Abettors of the Quaking party to afford me so much Charity as to believe that I had no other design in undertaking the Refutation of their Treatise put into my hands by a most religious knowing person but onely their Conviction and Conversion For when I had read what is the sixth of eleven things which they desire to be considered viz. Pag. 155 156 157. That their Refusal to Swear in all cases is a matter of Faith and whatsoever is not of Faith is Sin I pitied their mistake as to the former part of their Position and conceived it my duty with others of the Clergy to undeceive them poor mistaken souls by demonstrating that as it is usual with God to send men as the Apostle speaks strong delusions to believe a lye 2 Thes 10.11 because they received not the love of the Truth that they might be saved so They believe that to be true which is apparently false and that it is a sin to do what they though falsly believe ought not to be done i. e. To Swear by the Name of God although it may be for God's glory in the vindication of the Truth or to promote a Neighbours good My next design was which is every mans duty to prevent the Contagion which might spread amongst the poor people from their * 2 Tim. 2.17 Their word will eat as doth a Canker Gangreen-Opinion for whilst they profess Conscience for their disobedience alledg Scripture though misconstrued for their Conscience and colour all with an appearance of outward Sanctity in their lives not usually tainted with debauchery and drunnkeness it may be justly feared that the Populacy if not fortified by pregnant demonstrations of Truth against their spreading errours and Opinions will cry up their Piety they appearing for a great part of them morally Just and civilly Innocent as were some of the refined Heathens and by degrees joyn with them in their Confederacy against the Laws of the Kingdoms and the Churche's Constitutions there being sown in the hearts of the people the seeds of Rebellion Faction and Sedition which are oft-times sad effects of Conventicles or private Meetings called by alearned Greek Father from the sad experience he found of them Denns of Thieves or Robbers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphan for that the Meeting-Masters steal the hearts of Subjects from their King and Governors of Wives from their Husbands and of these from their Wives of Children from their Parents of Servants from their Masters for there can be no true love or affection where there is a difference of Opinion and Practice whilst two or three of a Family go to Conventicles and the rest to open Churches to joyn with Gods Saints and Servants in the publick Service of God as it is enjoyned by the fourth Commandment He likewise terms them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Receptacles of evil Spirits such as filled and possessed the hearts of Judas and Simon Magus and may possess the hearts of many of the Leaders and Teachers in them For a Coronis or superpondium of all hath been writ in the defence of the Legality of a Judicial and in some cases of a private Oath I desire the Treatist once more to consider what he hath said Pag. 27. of his Treatise Take away lying and there remains no more ground for Swearing He should have said there will be no ground for Perjury For suppose a man never told a Lye yet if an Oath should be required of him by the Magistrate to vindicate his own or anothers suspected Honesty and Truth he would have a good ground for his Swearing in this Case he being commanded to do it so that the Treatist's Proposal is vain as it is likewise of a thing that is impossible 1 Cor. 11 19. For as there must be Heresies i. e. they cannot be hindred so there will be as long as the world lasts lying or false-speaking with dissimulation amongst men Ergo by the Quakers own concession there will be a necessity of Swearing Thus I may retort and say the Anti-Jurist is as the Giant Goliah was wounded with his own weapon 1 Sam. 17.51 refuted by his own Argument But I shall not out of my tender pity and regard to his Soul and to the deluded Souls of his Disciples leave him gasping and bleeding under his wound but as I formerly praised him and them for their pretended awful reverence to Gods holy Name so as it becomes a merciful Soul-Physician as the good Samaritan did to the wounded Traveller Luke 10. I shall pour the oyl of my prayers into his wound beseeching God the Father of mercyes so to open his and the eye of their understandings as he did the eyes of Balaam and the door of their hearts as he did open Lydia's that they may laying aside all prejudice attend to those saving Truths which have been delivered in this Anti-Treatise Num. 21.31 Act. 16.14 and being convinced of their errors submit with a due and humble obedience according to the will of God to the wholsom Laws of the Realm and to the Churches laudable constitutions that so they and we may meet now together in love unity and concord and hereafter in the great Congregation of Heaven above into which none shall be admitted but only those who are the true and lively members of Christ their Head who are animated quickned and guided by his good Spirit the spirit of love and unity which rests not in the breast of a perverse malicious Schismatick and the spirit of Truth where with the soul of a proud obstinate Heretick who maintains and propagates opinions repugnant to the word of God is not enlightned From that Venom of Schism and this Pest of Heresie Lord preserve and defend thy Church And so sanctifie the Hearts and govern the Tongues of all profane Swearers that being aw'd by a trembling fear of those dreadful Judgments which have in all ages fallen upon such miscreants they may with thankful lips and by the holiness of their lives advance thy glory and publish thy praises O let thy mercy be glorified in their Conversion and not thy Justice magnified in their Confusion This I humbly beg in the behalf of them and all Dissenters from the Orthodox Professors of thy Truth and sound Religion for thy mercies sake and alone merits of thy beloved Son our Lord and only Saviour Christ Jesus Amen FINIS

for himself and his Brethren He cannot but know and be assured of it that if he breaks his promise by joyning in a private Conspiracy against the King or by open rebellion raising any popular commotion or tumults he will be indicted for Felony or Treason and so lose his life in an halter instead of his ears And what securitie can the King have from W. P. or any of his Tribe for his own safety and the Kingdoms Peace or be assured that he will keep his promise and not be attached for a Lye in breaking of it when he the supposed prime Penman of the Treatise makes no conscience to assert or affirm what is most false as in the Case of Bishop Sanderson and Saint Jerom hath been demonstrated to his great shame He that shall once baffle me with a bold lye I will hardly take his word or rest in his Yea and he that has invented and publickly vented one out of the Press it may be suspected he will not keep his private promise and that his bare word will not bind him to an exact performance which a solemn Oath might do whereby he calls God to be both a witness of his promise Num. 22.31 and a severe Judge to punish him both in body and soul if he be a Promissifragus An Oath like to the Angel with a glittering Sword in his hand who stopped Balaam in his way to Balak is of more force and energy than a naked word to bind a man to his duty and there is no man that has an honest heart and meaning and knows the many temptations he is exposed to from his own corrupt nature the Fles● the World and the Devil but will chearifully and solemnly take an Oath first praying to God that he may have by his grace strength and power to keep it whereby he may be the more aw'd by fear of God's vindicative Justice to be faithful and just in the discharge of his duty or any publick office which will procure to him the peace of a quiet mind or indistur'd Conscience which is a great blessing and is gain'd many times by means of a Promissory Oath in Swearing There is besides the former Proposal of the Quakers a Question put by the Author of the Treatise whom I find to be in divers shapes sometimes acting the part of a Pelagian in saying that Truth which is a grace of God is natural to him next of a perfect Jesuit as in the point of Dispensation to the Jews and his false Citations and corrupting of the Fathers and now the part of a downright audacious Quaker Pag. 14.15 Quo te Constringam vultus mutantem Protea nodo His Quaere is this Why their Yea and Nay may not be admitted instead of an Oath as well as the Lords Avouchment upon their Honour by which must be understood Vertue in the sense of the best and most ancient Philosophers what does he infer from this though he be mistaken in the proper notion of Vertue His words are Vertue needs not Swear c. and belyes too the Philosophers This is his Inference or to this effect We are Vertuous persons therefore we need not Swear much less have Oaths impos'd upon us to tell the Truth the onely use of Oaths My good vertuous Friend I must tell thee mildly this is a Thrasonical brag But to come to the Quaere My answer to it in general is That it is impertinent and incongruous For first the Quaker's Yea is onely a simple Affirmation to assert the Truth or what has been said or done a Question to this purpose having been put unto him But the Avouchment of a Lord upon his Honour is a more solemn Protestation and Asseveration of a Truth and implies an Option or wish as an Oath does an Imprecation and the sense or meaning of it being but an abridgment of his * This Form was antiently the Lords Protestation per Fidem Allegiantiam meam is this As I bear true Faith and Allegiance to my Soveraign Lord the King so is that which I say most true and if I witness an untruth or promise what I do not purpose nor will perform let disgrace and reproach fall upon my Honourable person let me listed amongst those that are disloyal and not faithful to their King let me be counted for a vile person unworthy of any honour or respect from men c. So that by Honour is not meant Vertue properly so called as the Treatist fondly imagines for Vertue or vertuous actions is onely the ground of Honour which is In honorante not in honorato as the * Aristot Philosopher attests in his Ethicks or Book of Manners which the Quaker never studied It is in the Honourer not in him that is honoured being nothing else but an high esteem and outward Reverence which men have of and exhibit to a Noble person for his Vertue for his Piety towards God and Loyalty to his King By this we may collect how the Treatist is mistaken I will not say for want of Learning to which he pretends by citing many Authors and it argues a cripple or lame Cause that needs so many Crutches I rather impute it to his Sophistical crafty industrie in laying hold on any thing though it be but one word by which and that misunderstood he may gain a little countenance to his exploded Opinion Besides this he cannot be excused for his Malapert rudeness who dares put himself into the Scales with the best of the Lords and those vertuous Persons and conclude that because in some cases they have a priviledge to attest onely upon their Honours therefore he may challenge the same for his Yea and Nay by which many credulous and well-meaning men have been deluded and drawn into Errours witness E. B. a late Brewer in Westminster who is famous rather infamous for cheating all his Creditors to the ruine of many Families Moreover I must acquaint him for a further refutation of his bold Proposal with what I have learn'd from that great Oracle of Law and Law-Cases Sir Ed. Cook in the 12 Part of his Reports p. 95 96. There he tells us that If any one who is Noble and a Peer of the Realm be sued in Chancery he ought to answer upon his Oath and if any Noble person be produced as a witness between party and party he ought to be sworn or otherwise his Testimony is of no value in these cases his attestation or Avouchment upon his Honour will not be admitted though in many others it may and ought to be accepted Furthermore I must in lieu of his Proposal to the King and Parliament propound a Question to him which is whether the King and his Lords both Spiritual and Temporal committed an hainous sin when his Majesty at his Coronation bound himself by a gracious condescension in an Oath to discharge faithfully that great Trust for the wellfare of the Church and State committed by God unto

him and they likewise obliged themselves by a reciprocal Oath to be True and Faithful to him with this close So help me God hereby invocating God to be a Witness and Judge of what they had sworn and desiring no help or mercy from him if they should ever rebell against their King Dares the Treatist or his Fellow-Quakers say that they sinned or broke Christ's command by doing it I presume they dare not nay they cannot without being guilty of a lye and to say that it is a sin to invocate or call upon God is no less than blasphemy From hence I infer that their general Thesis to wit That it is not lawful to Swear in any case is absurd false and ridiculous So it is likewise of a dangerous Consequence as tending to the subversion of Order the destruction of good Manners which they want in States Polities and Common-wealths together with the stopping of legal proceedings in Courts of Judicature as hath been proved and before Justices of the Peace In the foresaid publick Courts of Justice there is a most necessary use of an Assertory Oath to find out the Truth as to particular facts or actions of a Promissory Oath there is not so much need or use in them This is necessary in Publick and Private matters which are called by the Lawyers Extrajudicial the use of it in these is to contain Subjects in their Loyalty and Fidelity to their King for this end were framed the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance the first in the beginning of the Raign of Queen Elizabeth the last in the third of King James It is likewise morally necessary to confirm Leagues and Covenants contracted between Princes Common-wealths To the keeping of the Laws and Statutes and consequently the honour order and peace of Colledges and Societies To the binding of all publick Officers to an honest and faithful discharge of their duties To ratifie private bargains between Buyers and Sellers when it is required by any one of them who suspects the others Truth and Honesty in his dealings but in this latter case I could wish that Oaths might be forborn and rather other means used with less hazzard to Conscience such are Pawns and Witnesses Bonds and Handwritings To the former Wish I shall add another That all profane and blaspheming Rabsheka's would in this one thing imitate the so called Quakers and for which they cannot but be commended who have so great a fear of an Oath as they pretend that out of a timorous jealousie of Swearing amiss they will not Swear at all by them the other may learn to have a just abhorrence of the sin of easie trivial familiar inconsiderate and vain Swearing which brings a curse upon a man Iurandi facilitate in perjurium labimur Aug. and his family and disposeth men to that horrid Sin a sin of the first magnitude that is Perjury or false Swearing of which a Lye most abominable to God is the Ingredient besides the affront irreverence and dishonour done to God by calling upon him to witness an untruth I have a third Option it is my hearty with and desire that the Treatist and his Confederates would enter their names in the School of Wisdom Eccies 7.16 and learn of Solomon this wholesom lesson of moderation Be not righteous overmuch neither make thy self overwise why shouldst thou destroy thy self This Precept is of a great extent and latitude Mercerus but the learned Professor of the Hebrew Tongue in Paris impales and confines it within the compass of these three Words Ne sis justus nimium Be not over-righteous i.e. Be not Severe Leges moderandas docet nec severius exigendas .. ibid. be not Superstitious be not Perverse First Be not Severe so it concerns the Judge exhorting him by a mild interpretation to mitigate the rigour or the Laws and not tourge and press the bare letter of them against Offenders that break them either out of weakness or ignorance Secondly Be not Superstitious so it reaches the Romanists Iusti nimium sunt i. e videri volunt qui in suis operibus Iustificationem collocant Idem and condemns their works of Supererrogation their going on Pilgrimage their tedious and long journeys to visit the shrines of Saints whom they worship also their self-castigations their whipping scourging of themselves conceiving vainly that these acts are meritorious and fancying that they shall be justified and saved by their works Thirdly Be not Perverse this founds an alarm to the Separatists the rigid Antidisciplinarians whom this long Name well befits having continued a long time for many years in their opinions for which they have neither God's Word nor right reason for their Defendants and from whom there is little or no hope that they will be reclaimed so long as they are guided by their obstinate wills which they palliate with the specious abused name of Conscience Their Sons begot by them and their Scholars the poor Quakers first learned of them the Trade of Separatism and are in this of the same Temper with them stiffned in perverseness Of this opinion is S Ambrose l 2. Apol. pro Davide with others of the Fathers Iude 19. Exod 22.11 Solomon who died a Convert and repented of his vanities bespeaks them both though he be dead by his lively precept O vain men Be not overmuch righteous neither in doing that which the Laws of the Church forbid agreeable to the word Do not separate neither in not doing what God allows in his Word Do not refuse to take an Oath when there is a great need of it and when it is required of thee by the Magistrate who is the Kings Deputy Heb. 13.17 as he is God's vicegerent who commands you to obey them that have the rule over you in things lawful and so you obey them in the Lord both in respect of the Commander and the things Commanded To that exquisite gloss of Mercerus I cannot omit to subjoyn another of the great Scripturist Deodatus once Professor of Geneva upon the forecited Text of Ecclesiastes which in my opinion comes home to an obstinate Quaker or any other Dissenter his numerical words are these Be not bent too much upon a thing which in thy opinion is just without yielding any way either in Charity or wise integrity to the opinion of others to the necessity of times and humane frailty Surely this holy man would have told an Anti-jurist if he had discoursed with him that he was overmuch righteous by his refusing to swear at all and maintaining it to be sinful in others to swear in any case when the suspicions jealousies frauds and falsities of men require an Oath or make it necessary in Judicial proceedings The same Commentator who had an extraordinary gift from God as his name imports in expounding the Sacred word says thus in his Comment upon Mat. 5.34 The Text which is mis-interpreted by the Anabaptists Seeing that an Oath is a means