Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	communion_n	hold_v	schism_n	2,955	5	9.8292	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A50329	The antithelemite, or, An answer to certain quaeres by the D. of B. and the considerations of an unknown author concerning toleration	Maurice, Henry, 1648-1691.	1685 (1685)	Wing M1359; ESTC R3722	42,710	78

this Answer to the Queres and considerations concerning Toleration I might from the same Topicks that are us'd to persuade to it proceed to shew that such a Toleration as is there demanded is consistent neither with Christian Religion right reason nor the safety and Trade of the Kingdom For what can be more unchristian than to give wicked or infatuated men license to corrupt the Gospel and Blaspheme the name of Christ under pretence of Religion What more uncharitable than to give leave to presumptious men to confirm themselves in their own rash mistakes or to seduce others into the same snare of the Devil deceiving and being deceiv'd What more absurd or contrary to sound reason then to give course to the most extravagant the most absurd Opinions under the colour of Religion and Conscience And to expose the Common People who do for the most part mean better than they understand to the Practice and Sollicitation of every tempting Imposter and lastly what more inconsistant with the peace and safety of the Kingdom than the cherishing of a Faction which has once already overthrown this Monarchy and Church and engag'd very lately in the same design And if the safety of the Government cannot consist with To leration Trade to be sure can never strive under it for Traders will quickly leave a People whose Government is at the discretion of a Faction or at leastwise so much threaten'd with apprehensions of chang as to be in probable danger But I shall wave this advantage being content to keep upon the defensive however it be esteem'd a part no less disadvantagious in controversie then it is in War nor is it necessary to pursue the debate much farther since it is sufficient ground for any reasonable man to presume that the reason and the equity of our Laws are no less firm than the Authority by which they were enacted when the shall perceive that all the exceptions made now against them are either frivolous or false wherefore since there are no sufficient Reasons alledg'd why the Laws should comply with the Dissenters I will briefly suggest some reasons why the Dissenters should comply with the Laws without entring into the merits of the Cause but keeping my self only to the Principles of the several Sects so that it must needs be highly unreasonable to plead for a Toleration of such Dissenters as might not only lawfully comply with all the Law requires if their Consciences were rightly inform'd but may yet comply for the most part even according to the Rule and the Conscience they profess And here I must treat with them a part as they are divided into several Religious Tribes and Gonventicles for when they are join'd in one Politick and Seditious Rendezvous it is no fit place to speak of Religion And 1. Why should any Presbyterian desire the Law against Conventicles should be repeal'd upon his account since if he have not departed from his first Principles he believes that separation from our Churches is not only unnecessary but unlawful Several of the old Puritans from whom our Presbyterians own their descent have written as zealously against Separation and the erecting of dissenting Congregrations as any of the Divines of the Church of England Some of them indeed pretend that they go to Conventicles for greater Edification but how can that be more edifying that according to their Principles is unlawful They may by the same way of reasoning knock an old heavy teacher on the head to make way for another that may be more powerful and edifying Therefore since a Presbyterian Conventicle is as much a contradiction to the Principle and Conscience of Presbyterians as to the Law of the Land why should any body interceed for a Toleration of that which their Principles disallow 2. Why should any Presbyterian desire Toleration for not coming to our Churches since by their Principles it is not unlawful to hold occasional Communion with our Church i. e. some time to join with us in Common Prayer and the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the last and strictest Bond of Communion which Christians hold and they have been hitherto very much to seek for reasons why that Communion may not be as lawful to be us'd constantly as it is upon occasions the most plausible excuse they make is this that they had Pastors of their own before the Re-establishment of our Church and therefore tho' they may occasionally communicate with us as those of one Parish may go to a Neighbouring Church upon occasion yet they cannot do it constantly because of their Antecedent Obligation to their own Pastors This excuse if it were admitted would not serve half the turn for if this had any force why should it not have been admitted in the cause of those Ministers that were turn'd out illegally to make Room for the Presbyterians Why were these Loyal Ministers deserted by the Presbyterians of those days when they were forc'd by usurp'd power from the exercise of their Function Besides there are but few of such Ministers now living so that the excuse serves but very few Presbyterian Assemblies and there are fewer yet upon the places where they were Ministers in the time of the late Rebellion and therefore that relation ceases which this excuse does suppose for why should a company of Presbyterians in London join themselves to one that taught in Hull or York or perhaps in Scotland upon this pretence that they ought not to forsake their former Ministers So this can be no excuse why that occasional Communion which the Presbyterians profess lawful to hold with the Church of England should not be improv'd into a constant one therefore there is no need of Toleration for those who by their own Principle may Communicate with us upon occasion especially the occasion of an Office for which they are to be qualify'd by such Communion 3. The Independants indeed hold a necessity of separating from our and all other Churches that are not of their form and so their Principles render their compliance with some of our Laws more impracticable Yet they have no reason to desire a Toleration for Conventicles since those that the Law makes such are not necessary to them according to their own Principles For The notion they have of a Church makes such Conventicles as the Law punishes to be unnecessary for Robinson affirms that where two or three people are gathered there is a Church Cotton requires a few more to make up the integrity of an Organick Church i. e. 7 or 8. Now the Law makes no Assembly to be a Conventicle that has not near this number besides the Persons of the Family where this Meeting is held Therefore if the Law punish Independant Conventicles of greater numbers it cannot truly be said that they are persecuted for Conscience for that which the Law makes their Crime i. e. their exceeding such a number is a thing in their own Opinion unnecessary 4. If they cannot join with us in Common-Prayer

Good and Evil between those things in dispute whether they are lawful or unlawful Therefore if she be in possession of the Truth she ought no more to make these Dissenters case her own than a Judge ought to make that of a Prisoner at the Bar whom he knows to be guilty to be his own and because if he were himself in the same circumstances of guilt Flesh and Blood would tempt him to desire to escape he ought not to determine therefore the Criminal before him must not suffer Obj. If this be all they that dissent from the Church of England may judge as hardly of her as she does of them confess'd but who can help all this yet the nature of things is not chang'd by their thinking one way or other in the same debate many differing Parties may be very confident and but one in the right and be too certain that he was so notwithstanding the contradiction of all the rest And besides I do not see of what great use the hard opinion of the pretenders to Toleration concerning the Church of England can be to them to obtain it one would think while they are Candidates for favour this might be better omitted I am afraid that the Presbyterians and Independants will owe them but little thanks for tacking the Papists that Abominable Antichristian name upon their Plea for Toleration for surely the Association cannot yet be so far worn out nor the Cabalistical devise of no ' Popery no Slavery be utterly forgot surely their Celebrated Commission to extirpate Antichrist and Idolatry is not yet given up If they can endure this they are much degenerated from their first principle of heat nay they must have chang'd their very species and it will puzzle Malibranche with all his Ideas to define a Protestant Dissenter when his Zeal against Popery is laid aside These are the Arguments offer'd at this time to recommend a general Toleration from the nature and the precepts of Christian Religion and let any body judge after all the odious representation of Compulsion in matters of Religion whether from all that is said it does appear that a Christian Magistrate whatever his own persuasion be is bound in conscience to allow every one the Exercise of his own way and the Profession of his own Opinion how Absurd how Blasphemous how Damnable soever it may be for this is the just Paraphrase of universal Toleration And now for my part to shew how little I am given to contradiction I am content to yield the question to the Considerer or to the Noble Person who is above consideration if their Principles will be satisfy'd with these Arguments alledg'd on their behalf let the Considerator then go back for I will not be so absurd as to send a Person of Quality upon such an Errand and consult those whom he nominates for Toleration the Presbyterians Independants and Papists and if they declare it for their Opinion that it is the Will of God that neither Restraint nor Compulsion should be us'd to Men in Religious Matters let them obtain all the Indulgence they can wish but as to the last of these I shall not need to trouble them or my Author because I cannot tell how well they may be acquainted for if a man may guess at his correspondence he seems to hold more with the Protestant Dissenters Nor is it needful to make long enquiry in a matter so well known The Judgment of the Church of Rome concerning this point is as clear and as visible as the Fire with which they use to reduce Hereticks to Ashes It must be confess'd that some Princes of that communion partly for reasons of State and partly out of the Clemency and Generosity of their temper have shielded their Protestant Subjects from the fury of the Ecclesiasticks and abhorr'd to be the Executioners of their Hypocritical cruelty who pretend that they have no power themselves to take away Life so the High Priest and the Jews declar'd it was not lawful for them to put any man to death yet forced Pilate to pass Sentence upon the Son of God because they had before judged him worthy of death Among those barbarous Pagans where men were us'd to be Sacrificed to Idols the Butchery was always accounted part of the Priests Office and I see no reason why the Dominicans or the Grand Vicar if they will have the Blood of Hereticks should not endure the Odium and the pollution of shedding it themselves I know some Princes have paid dear for refusing to destroy such as the Church of Rome called Hereticks one was murdered by a Dominican a Minister of the Inquisition by his Vow and another stabb'd into the Heart by a Disciple of the Jesuits whether because they suspected some Favours or Indulgence for Heresie might remain there or because they were impatient to wait longer for that noble part which that great Prince promised them a Legacy after his decease Since then our Considerer can have no hopes of approving his consideration to this Party and to bring them to a vow with him that it is not the Will of God that any force should be us'd in matters of Religion Let him go to the Presbyterians and enquire what is their opinion concerning Toleration it is true they have not been always in the same mind concerning this Gospel Duty before the late Rebellion when they were in their Infancy they were as tender-hearted as one could wish but when they had once prevail'd and got the power into their hands they began to limit and to distinguish and at last openly to deny the lawfulness of that which the Considerer makes to be so indispensible a Christian Duty nay they could not in Conscience consent to a Toleration even of their companions in Arms those that fought in the same Cause and approach'd nearest to their Principles all the Arguments that could be us'd were not able to reconcile the conscience of a Presbyterian to a Toleration of Independants the Debates are Printed The Grand Debate and will furnish any one that will take the pains to look into them with the Arguments then us'd on both sides of this Question The London Ministers of that time for fear the Assembly might be carryed away by importunity or dispute to yield any indulgence to their Indipendant Brethren sent them their Objections against it in a Letter dated Jan. 1. 1645. In which they declare that To get a warrant to authorise their Separation from and to have a liberty of drawing members out of it i. e. Their Church This we think to be plainly unlawful Independancy is a Schism● Now we judge that no Schism is to be tolerated in the Church Some of the Independants in their Books have openly avow'd that they plead for Liberty of Conscience for others as well as for themselves To plead for a general Toleration was then it seems argument enough not to indulge the pleaders even in their own particular way Now could