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	rule_n	word_n	3,970	5	3.8240	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91875	Certain briefe observations and antiquæries: on Master Prin's Twelve questions about church-government. Wherein is modestly showne, how un-usefull and frivolous they are, how bitter and unchristian in censuring that way; whereas there are no reasons brought to contradict it. By a well-willer to the truth, and Master Prin.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.; Robinson, Henry, 1605?-1664?	1644 (1644)	Wing R1667; Thomason E10_33; ESTC R18171	10,126	16

Certain briefe OBSERVATIONS AND ANTIQVAERIES ON MASTER PRIN's TWELVE QUESTIONS ABOUT CHURCH-GOVERNMENT Wherein is modestly showne how un-usefull and frivolous they are How bitter and unchristian in censuring that way whereas there are no Reasons brought to contradict it By a well-willer to the Truth and Master PRIN. Printed in the yeare 1644. Certain briefe Observations and Antiquaeries on Mr. PRIN's Twelve Questions about Church-government THere is no sight so lovely and taking to the eyes of all ingeniuous and sincere hearts as naked truth these which know its excellency will study to find it out Truth is a jewell which lyes out of sight as it were in the bowels of many reasons men must search for it that wil find it out among truthes this of Church Government is not the least There are many things this age hath brought forth about it to little purpose most men beating about the bush few that I have scene have discovered it in its nature Some write so voluminous heaping up so many distinctions about it that they rather darken the truth then set it forth rather intangle a mans understanding then informe it others write so full of passion as if they writ with poyson of Aspes reckoning up mens personall failings to disgrace the Cause not urging their arguments to convince the judgement among these I have observed one Master Edwards hath the quickest pen and I have often thought that book should rather have been writ by Doct. Pocklinton Doct. Heylin or one of the Archbishops Chaplaines then Master Edwards who hath been sometimes accounted godly Master Prin hath begun another way as unsatisfactory as any though we hope there is more candor in his spirit He professeth in the beginning he hath not leasure to debate the controversie and then it s wondred why he propounds these Quaeries For either first he layes them downe as positions undisputable undeniable in respect of the clearnesse of them unto all understandings or because of his name to them for else he knowes as all know that have any light in this Controversie that all these grounds these whom he calls independents will deny and their answer would be negative to every one Or secondly he propounds them as affirmatives which he intends to prove and cleere by solide arguments and then he must have leasure to do it and as yet the others negation is as strong as his affirmation for here is no proofe for it Or else thirdly as considerations in which he desires satisfaction as one being in doubt which way to walke only these things for the present move him to be of a contrary judgement the style of the booke doth not much favour this last as being too full of confidence and bitternesse If Master Prin had such a sense of the publike divisions he would not have gone to make the breach wider by setting forth Quaeries stuft with such invectives I had thought sufferings had learn'd Master Prin a little more meeknesse Mr. Prin knowes his name is famous abroad and that the common people will all thinke that that must needs be true which he pleads for Besides hee knowes that the Reverend Assembly is now controverting of the thing and that Quaeries will do little good while Arguments are expected on both sides but since they are out let us see what are in them The summe of the first Quaerie is whether Christ hath set down in the Word any prescript forme of government for Kingdome and Churches to follow or whether seeing there be different formes of civill government in almost every Kingdome there is not a latitude and liberty left them by Christ to chuse a government sutable to their State If this were granted what absurdities would follow Answ For the Gospell would be straiter then the Law Christ more unfaithfull then Moses God set a * Exod. 25. 40. Hebr. 8. 5. patterne to Moses which he charged him not to vary frō in a title that was but a carnal Temple in comparison of this nay it was a type of the Church under the Gospsll Christ should neither be faithfull as a husband head nor King of his Church if he should give others power to order it to suit it as they pleased to their owne civill government not setting down his own Lawes for them to walk by In Revel 11. 1 2. you reade of a measuring of the Temple Now how can you measure without a rule The meaning of that according to Master Prin must be thus measured that is frame it according to your civill State a miserable measure for a Church In Revelat 20. 1 it s said the patterne of the new Ierusalem which is but the Church in her purest state the same for forme with the former Church came down from heaven Besides look in this Quaerie and you shall find a contradiction for he askes whether Church government may not be framed to any civill State if it be consonant to the Word and yet questions whether there be any rule in the Word Secondly if no prescript forme in the Word why not Episcopacy as well as Presbytery why such crying down of Bishops as Antichristian for how can that be more Antichristian then any other seeing there is no certain government in the Word Episcopacy regulated and moderated if all were knowne is more consonant and agreeable to a Monarchicall government then Presbytery Thirdly I aske of Master Prin if Church government must be suited to States whether Politicians are not more fit to consult about stablishing it And why is an Assembly of Divines called to search the Word about it Surely Statesmen know better how to fit the Common-wealth then Divines there must be something in it surely or else the Parliament did very ill to have a Synod If the Doctrine be true throw aside the Bible in this matter study the Law and then it is well done of Master Prin to write of it being his profession Fourthly Whether Master Prin thinks it more reason that the State should be subject to Christs rule or Christ to their direction that the government of his Church should be fitted to States or they to it I know his religion though his reason should stand a farre off would abhor the thought of it if you and the Presbyterians go on that principle the Saints will hardly be of your judgement for they think Christ is King alone over his Churches and hath not left them to substitutes and the politick considerations of men for to governe them These two places you urge out of 1 Cor. 14. 40. and the 11. 34. where the Apostle speehes of doing all things decently c. is far from this it being about things that are meerly circumstantiall and ordering of things in a Church already constituted not of the constitution of any Church The second Quarie in summe is whether if any government be stablished by any State upon serious debate every one is not bound in conscience to submit to it and

Master Ains●… Master Cotton with many of this age knowne unto you to whom you will not deny eminency in learning which have stood for this way besides doth Master Prin think we have no more light discovered in these dayes about Church-government then the godly had in former dayes or must all the Saints be regulated by former patternes then should Episcopacie be more followed then Presbytery it being as anciently practised as learnedly writ for as it Your seventh Quaerie is the same in forme with the first and sixth and as little in it as in any for first he askes whether the Law of Nature that teacheth men to subj●ct themselves to one publike forme of government in a State doth not teach to subject to a National or Provincial Synod in matters of Church-government This is answered in the first beside the independents think that it s as sutable to the law of nature rectified reason c. for every particular man to have his vote in that which most concernes him not to give away his reason to another not to subject his conscience to any but Christ reason and politicks will show Master Prin that there is a sutablenesse to the Law of Nature in a Democraticall and Aristocraticall government for this way of Church-government is made up of both these as in Monarchicall or meere Aristocraticall besides Christ hath given to men no such power over mens consciences as he hath to Magistrates over mens bodies To let passe your bitter speeches saying that there is no example for particular Congregations which you can Independents except derived from the conventicles of the Arrians Donatists and other Heretickes Leave off these names of Heretickes Master Prin you have been paid enough with that title you may blesse God for these conventicles in which you were remembred with teares when others durst not name you Master Prins eaghth and ninth Quaeries are in summe all one thus whether the concession of one Catholike Church the Nationall assembly of the Israelites the Synodall assembly of the Apostles be not an infallible proofe of National Churches of a common Presbytery c. It s answered negatively And though he say that the Independents answers are but evasions wee shall judge them solide arguments till we see the contrary The Nationall Church of the Jewes cannot be a patterne for us now because the covenant of the Gospell is not made with any one particular Nation as with the Jewes but to all persons that embrace the Gospell and beleeve in Christ You have no promise nor prophesie of any Nation to bee holy to God but the Jewes Nation when they shall be called againe Secondly Neither can Master Prin show any Nation every member whereof is qualified for to make up a Church which is the body of Christ unlesse Master Prin will take in all drunkards whore-masters c. to be members of a Church whereas the Word sayes they must be visible Saints and this cannot be avoided 1 Cor. 1. 1. Phil. 5. 1. in a Nationall Church Neither is that Assembly in Acts 15. which you call a Synod any proofe for a Presbyteriall government For first I demand whether that Church had not power within it selfe to debate the businesse and settle the controversie seeing there was a great strife among them about it Secondly I demand of Master Prin whether Paul and Barnabas had not power being Apostles to determine the matter Act. 15. 1. as well as the Synod of Elders Thirdly Whether they went not up principally to prove the false Apostles that werr among them lyers for they told them they were sent by the Apostles to make known that they must be Vers 24. Circumcised Now to give testimony unto this that they came not from the Apostles they send chosen men to Jerusalem about it Fourthly Whether this was not an occasionall meeting not a Synod which is a collection of the Elders of divers Churches into a body but onely some of the Church chosen out and sent to the other Church at Jerusalem for advise Master Prin may think as slightly of the arguments given by the Independents as he calls them from this head yet notwithstanding his word hee must give them leave to judge they are sufficient unlesse the authority of Master Prin's name be argument the Scriptures quoted serve to fill up the margent nothing else unlesse you open them and argue from them for these texts are used by the contrary side against you and as validly still as yours before more be showne The ninth Quaerie Whether the Independents challenging the Presbyterians to show a National Church in Christs time be not an irrationall and unjust demand Ans no if the Scripture hath a forme of government for the Churches of Christ in after ages to walke in but to you it may seeme irrationall who thinke Church-government must be ordered according to civill State and be cast into that mould Master Prin from his Quaeries fals to his Logick and demands whether a Syllogisme framed from the former viz No Nationall Church in the Apostles time Ergo None ought to be now be not as absurd as these There was no meeting of Christians in publike Churches but in caves corners c. Therefore they ought not to meet in publike Churches now but in caves c. I thought that Master Prin's Logick would have distinguished between the forme of a thing and the circumstance of place in the exercise of it which is left to every Churches discretion would this be a good argument in his Logick that because the ordering of circumstances of time and place are in the Churches power therefore the making of new formes of government is when the congregation men argue frō the not being of a national constitution of a Church in the Apostles dayes to the denying of any now they argue on this ground being able to make it appeare that the forme of the constitution of Churches in the Apostles time is a patterne for all Churches to follow and in no kind to vary from it Againe he demands whether that way of arguing be not as absurd as this There was no Nation Kingdome City Republike Catholike Congregationall or Parochiall Church in Adam's younger dayes before people were multiplied but a family government Ergo There ought to be none but a Family government now no man would be so void of reason no truly Sir neither did the Independents think you would be so void of reason as to father such an absurdity on them who are as rationall as your selfe As for Civill government let men alter it as they will and if God will alter the government of the Church as he did from a Family into a Nation among the Jewes and if againe from a Nation God will alter it unto a oeconimicall or congregationall we must yeeld Thirdly Againe whether it be not as absurd as this Every man in his infancy is born destitute of religiō reason

no wayes to seeke an exemption from it under paine of being guilty of arrogancy c. The Scriptures in the margent I wonder to what end Master Prin quotes them so little to purpose looke on that place 1 Cor. 14. 32. The spirit of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets how full to the thing let all judge who know the scope of that place by the Prophets there doth he mean the civill State or the Synod or both And is not that spoken to a particular congregation for the regulating the exercise of prophesying or doth he meane by being subject that the Prophets have an authoritative power over the other Prophets I know not what he means by that place The other places Rom. 13. 1 2. of submitting to every ordinance c. If that be true then every man is bound to put out his owne eyes to yeeld to blind obedience never to search into the truth for if he search and find it contrary to the Word he must follow his judgement and to follow his judgement is to be a Schismatick to be guilty of arrogancy c. to contradict the Word to oppose an ordinance of God so that a man must inevitably sin take either part Is not this to uphold the Papist tenent of beleeving as the Church beleeveth c. I put it to Master Prin if the Parliament and Synod should set up an Episcopall government which he thinkes is Antichristian whether he would not speak a word against it Is not this a base bondage jurare in verba alterius to give up a mans faith and conscience to mens direction but if the former be true then this second must follow if no rule then you must obey what is commanded you Suppose that is commanded may prove untrue what if that way be not right if that Synod and State should erre what would you thinke of it then c. Secondly I humbly demand of Master Prin whether he and the other two holy men were not justly stigmatised and censured for speaking against the Bishops and Ceremonies c. which were stablished by so many Synods and Acts of Parliament and how h● can excuse himselfe from pride and arrogancy in such a course for by his owne rule he should have actually obeyed and not spake a word to the contrary Such divinity will overthrow all the power of Scripture over mens consciences only make that to bind which a Synod thinks good The third Quaerie contradicts the first in the first hee askes In this Quaerie hee quotes a saying in a Booke called The bloudy Tenent which was written by one as contrary to this as the Independents as he is to the Presbyterians and they utterly disavow the Booke whether there be any rule in the Word here he askes whether that government which hath sufficient if not most warrant in the new Testament is not to be chosen In this he cryes up the one government which he instanceth in the fourth Quaerie to be presbyteriall as tending to establish Christian unity peace c. that which serves most effectually to prevent Heresies Schismes c. Here is a bare affirmation and the independents No is as good as your I. Its desired Master Prin would prove what hee sayes that independent government hath not such expresse warrant from the Word another contradiction as presbyteriall prove that and you shall be Magnus Apollo as for the Scriptures you bring will little help you For the fifth it s answered by way of concession that it will overthrow all nationall Churches as not conceiving any such warrant in the Word but for any forme of civill government it will stand better with them then Presbytery can the mischiefes of Presbytery are vailed with Orthodoxnesse and preventing Schismes c But if the Saints would pry into the formality tyranny inslaving mens judgements and consciences the Presbyteriall way c. they would looke upon it as that which is most inconsistent with their spirituall liberty and with State priviledges It s politickly done of you to put the best termes on your owne way how will you have it take else I will let passe your bitter expressions that one man would be if possible a independent Church and republicke subject to no lawes I thought such language would not suit with you spirrit Master Prin especially that you would not speake so of them who were your best frinds in your sufferings which stood to you and refreshed you when most of your presbiterians Episcopall enough then were shye of you I could name the men that used you kindly whom you now implicitly reproach the independents giue more to civell power then your presbyterians doe I would faine know whether your presbyterians doe not hold that an Act of a Synod or a Nationall Assembly is as valid and binding in Ecclesiasticks as an Act of Parliament in civills and whether the Parliament can de jure contradict their proceedings whether they will affirme that the Parliament hath any jurisdiction over them in settling Ecclesiasticall matters this is not a Quaerie without ground for as far as the independents understand of the presbyteriall government in Scotland it s absolutely independent from the Parliament in respect of decreeing and inacting matters of government only this honor presbyterians give to their Magistrate they must be the executioners of their Iudgements to hang whom they condemne The summe of the sixth Quaerie is whether since the first preaching the Gospell beleevers multiplying they did not gather into Churches which had dependencie on and was subordinate to Nationall Synods c. And if not to show the place where and to name any eminent Author that ever maintained the contrary This Quaerie is very bold and daring yet I answer that beleevers did as soone as they were converted gather into particular Churches as is apparent but that they were subordinate unto Nationall Synods c. sub judice lis est And if in many Kingdomes it might be so de facto yet whether de jure and from a patterne in the Word that we desire may be proved Suppose this should be true that there cannot in any Kingdom such a Church be showne for many yeares or at least no Writer expresseth it if so be it can be made forth from the Word and consonant to the Saints practise in the Apostles times I know no such Schisme in dissenting from all mens practises to follow the cleare truth You challenge all to show you one eminent Writer who maintained the same I will not go so far back into antiquity as to bring you out a catalogue of Fathers who though they had not a cleare light in that way yet had many shrowd hints and notions in many things which are practised by these you call independent There be many latter Writers as eminent in holinesse and without disparagement in learning to many whom you can produce for the other as learned Doct. Ames in Medul theolog de eccles

c. Therefore he ought to continue so when growne a man The Christian Church in the Apostles time while in her infancie was not National but so and so what I pray not Independent How know you that Master Prin we will not take your word Ergo It ought not to be Nationall now Here observe Reader Master Prin accounts the Church in the Apostles time a poor weak Church that had not so much reason for things then as we have now the Apostles the stablishers of it weake men whereas there was more light of the Gospell and gifts of the Holy Ghost powred out then then ever since even private Christians being as able to deale in the things of God as most of our Schollers and Ministers are now yet Master Prin compares the following that patterne the following of a child in his infancy that hath neither reason nor religion Master Prin follow you your perfect Church wee will follow this infant patterne and I beseech you is not this argument you bring to fasten an absurdity on them as absurd as this The Scriptures were writ in the infancy of the Church therefore wiser and better Scriptures may be writ now the Church being growne up into a Nation having so many reverent Divines in it Secondly You would needs make a Nationall Church State more perfect understanding and ripe Church then a Congregationall we would thinke so too if we had a Word for it And whereas you say the History of the Acts showes that as beleevers multiplied their Church goverment and discipline varied it s answered if you meane by varying that things before established by the Apostles in any Church was altered it s denied and pray show the place if you meane by varied that they added rules for goverment as occasion served we grant it for as they received not the knowledge of the Gospell at once so neither of discipline neither had the Churches need of all the rules at once but as God fitted occasions so he made knowne rules yet so as at length to discover the whole forme of his House as he did the whole mystery of divinity to be as rule to all generations afterwards you see what your logicke is come to Master Prin draw better consequences next Your tenth Quaerie is the same in summe with your secord only there you speake in generall here you perticularise and you aske of the independents whether in cōscience they are not bound to submit unto presbyteriall goverment in case that the Parliament and Synod should establish it and whether it would not be a high degree of ob●…nancy singularity selfe end c. to oppose this forme of government I Ans If you require this of them charge them so highly in not submiting I hope you will show your authoritie either you would have them submit because what they comand is of divine institution or because commanded by their authority if in the former sence they must haue eyes to see it as well as the Synod or else their obedience will be hypocriticall most displeasing to God if in the latter then the Popes councel decreeing any thing must out of as much conscience be obeyed by these that be under his authority as the best things commnded by a Godly Synod for a quatenus ad omne valet consequentia if because they command then what ever they command must be done I put the case to M. Prin whether when he challenged all the Divines in England to make good against them that Episcopacy was not jure de vino whether if the King had called a Synod and had concluded it as the most Divines thought he would have given up his judgments to their votes and submited to their determination it had beene hight of arrogancy selfe ends schisme in Master Prin not to do so so in point of law when most of the Judges had given in their judgements contrary to M. Prin why did not hee submit because the contrary was cleere to him and he had sinned against his own conscience if he had gone back one jot from his opinion what if independency should be set up what if the Synod should maintaine the errours of Antinomians c. was Master Prin bound in conscience to say as they did to speake against it would be shisme faction arrogancy c Master Prin how is your spirit changed what wil you now submit to any thing are you become a time server have you given up your faith to other men when Synods can say as they Acts 15. it seemeth good to the Holy Ghost and us to lay these things on you then wee will thinke we are bound in conscience to submit else you must helpe us with new eyes In your eleventh Quaerie you go on in your way of bitternesse and aske whether that independencie be not a wombe to all schismes heresies c. it s Answered no it s a seminary of holynesse a nourisher of love a way to build up unto the fulnesse of Christ your presbyterial way is a way inflauing mens cōsciences crushing the parts of these Saints which you ●all Lay-men is a way to depresse truth to hinder growth in grace and Spirituall communion with Christ the Saints shall soone find it so In the last Quaerie M. Prin falls a jeering of his brethren He would needs father a child on them of the presbyterians begetting they have put a nickname on them to make them odious and now he asketh whether it be not an insolent proud name c. unfit for any Christian to arrogat your presbytereans have pretty slights to defame these that are of a contrary opinion as if one should call an honest man theefe and aske a man whether it were not a shamefull thing for him to be given to stealing Know Master Prin these men scorn the name they have disavowed it in * See M. Simpsons Anatomie anatomised print the terme is more fit for you these whom you stand for a terme fit for your provinciall and nationall Synods from whom there is no appeale but to whose judg ments all must submit as to an ordinance of Christ though but to question what is done by them is to be guilty of faction schisme arrogancy these you call independants confesse that they are accountable for their actions to every neighbour Church that shall in the name of Christ require it they stand not independent from others but hold communion with all other Churches both in the ordinances and asking counsall and advise mutually to let your other loose language passe much with what is in the former take some Christian advise remember you have not your hand in darkening the glory of any of the Saints take heed of defaming a way which for ought you know may be a way of Christ it will cost you many a sigh afterward if God should convince you you know Christ will never owne bitternesse in maintaining any way though consonant to his Word Remember neither you nor the Synod are infalliable but as subject to errors as others never more damnable Heresies confirmed then by Synods I speak not this to cast Concil Trent any blot on Synods or this Synod espcially in which there are many holy and learned men but to show that a man is not bound in conscience to follow their decrees upō penalty of sin arrogancy c. and not to seeke the least exemption from what they determin whose decrees may be subject to as great errors as any Oh that a spirit of love were maintained among these which are brethren though men differ in judgment must they needs differ in affection M. Prin if you will needs be busie in this controuersie leave off your Quaeries for we will deny them all state your question set forth your arguments open the Scriptures you quote to fill up the margent be as breefe as may be call in your passion and consider and doubt not of an answer to what you shall modestly set forth FINIS