Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
conscience_n	bind_v	law_n	power_n	7,916	5	5.8661	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78958	The papers which passed at Nevv-Castle betwixt His sacred Majestie and Mr Alex: Henderson concerning the change of church-government. Anno Dom. 1646.	Charles I, King of England, 1600-1649.; Henderson, Alexander, 1583?-1646. aut; Marshall, William, fl. 1617-1650, engraver.	1649 (1649)	Wing C2535A; ESTC R213547	25,945	67

satisfie your Majesty may have more or the same further cleared 5. Secondly I doe humbly desire Your Majesty to take notice of the fallacy of that Argument from the practice of the Primitive Church and the universall Consent of the Fathers It is the Argument of the Papists for such traditions as no Orthodox Divine will admit The Law and Testimony must be the Rule We can have no certaine knowledge of the practice universall of the Church for many years Eusebius the prime Historian confesseth so much the learned Josephus Scaliger testifieth That from the end of the Acts of the Apostles untill a good time after no certainty can be had from Ecclesiasticall Authors about Church matters It is true Diotrephes sought the preheminence in the Apostles times and the mystery of iniquity did then begin to work and no doubt in after-times some puffed up with Ambition and others overtaken with weaknesse endevoured alteration of Church Government but that all the learned and godly of those times consented to such a change as is talked of afterwards will never be proved 6. Thirdly I will never think that Your Majesty will deny the lawfulnesse of a Ministery and the due administration of the Sacraments in the Reformed Churches which have no Diocesan Bishops sith it is not only manifest by Scripture but a great many of the strongest Champions for Episcopacy doe confesse that Presbyters may ordaine other Presbyters and that Baptisme administred by a private Person wanting a publick Calling or by a Midwife and by a Presbyter although not ordained by a Bishop are not one and the same thing 7. Concerning the other Argument taken from Your Majesties Coronation Oath I confesse that both in the taking and keeping of an Oath so sacred a thing is it and so high a point of Religion much tendernesse is required and farre be it from us who desire to observe our owne Solemne Oath to presse Your Majesty with the violation of Yours Yet Sir I will crave your leave in all humblenesse and sincerity to lay before Your Majesties eyes this one thing which perhaps might require a larger discourse that although no humane authority can dispense with an Oath Quia Religio juramenti pertinet ad forum Divinum yet in some cases it cannot be denied but the obligation of an Oath ceaseth As when we swear homage and obedience to our Lord and Superiour who afterwards ceaseth to be our Lord and Superiour for then the formall cause of the Oath is taken away and therefore the obligation Sublata causa tollitur effectus sublato relato tollitur Correlatum Or when any Oath hath a speciall reference to the benefit of those to whom I make the promise if we have their desire or consent the obligation ceaseth because all such Oaths from the nature of the thing doe include a condition When the Parliaments of both Kingdomes have covenanted for the abolishing or altering of a Law Your Majesties Oath doth not binde You or Your Conscience to the observing of it otherwise no Lawes could be altered by the Legislative Power This I conceive hath been the ground of removing Episcopall Government in Scotland and of removing the Bishops out of the Parliament of England And I assure my selfe that Your Majesty did not intend at the taking of Your Oath that although both Houses of Parliament should find an alteration necessary although which God Almighty avert you should lose your selfe and your Posterity and Crowne that you would never consent to the abolishing of such a Law If Your Majesty still object that the matter of the Oath is necessary immutable that doth not belong to this but to the former Argument 8. I have but one word more concerning Your Piety to Your Royall Father and teacher of happy Memory with which Your Majesty does conclude Your Majesty knows that King James never admitted Episcopacy upon Divine Right That His Majesty did sweare and subscribe to the Doctrine Worship and Discipline of the Church of Scotland that in the Preface of the latter Edition of Basilicon Doron His Majesty gives an honourable testimony to those that loved better the simplicity of the Gospel than the pomp and Ceremonies of the Church of England and that he conceived the Prelats to savour of the Popish Hierarchy and that could his Ghost now speake to your Majesty He would not advise your Majesty to run such hazards for those Men who will chuse rather to pull downe your Throne with their own ruine than that they perish alone The Lord give your Majesty a wise and discerning Spirit to chuse that in time which is right June 3. 1646. For Mr. Alex Henderson A Reply to his Answer to My first Paper June 6. 1646. His MAJESTIES second Paper Mr. Henderson IF it had been the Honour of the Cause which I looked after I would not have undertaken to put Pen to Paper or singly to have maintained this Argument against you whose Answer to my former Paper is sufficient without other proofs to justifie My opinion of your abilities but it being meerly as you know for my particular satisfaction I assure you that a Disputation of well chosen Divines would be most effectuall and I believe you cannot but grant that I must best know how my self may be best satisfied for certainly My Taste cannot be guided by another Mans Palate and indeed I will say that when it comes as it must to Probations I must have either Persons or Books to cleare the Allegations or it will be impossible to give Me satisfaction The fore-seeing of which made Me at first for the saving of Time desire that some of those Divines which I gave you in a List might be sent for 2. Concerning your second Section I were much too blame if I should not submit to that saying of S. Ambrose which you mention for I would be unwilling to be found lesse ingenuous than you shew your selfe to be in the former part of it wherefore my Reply is that as I shall not be ashamed to change for the better so I must see that it is better before I change otherwise inconstancy in this were both sin and shame and remember what your selfe hath learnedly enforced that no mans Reason can be commanded by another mans Will 3. Your third begins but I cannot say that it goes on with that Ingenuity which the other did for I doe not understand how those Examples cited out of the Old Testament do any way prove that the way of Reformation which I commend hath not been the most perfect or that any other is lawfull those having been all by the Regall Authority and because Henry the Eights Reformation was not perfect will it prove that of K. Edward and Q. Elizabeth to be unperfect I believe a new moode and figure must be found out to forme a Syllogisme whereby to prove that but however you are mistaken for no man who truely understands the English Reformation will derive it from

That all these Congregations were under one Presbyteriall Government because they were for Government one Church Acts 11. 22 26. And because that Church was governed by Elders Acts 11. 30. which were Elders of that Church and did meet together for Acts of Government And the Apostles themselves in that meeting Acts 15. acted not as Apostles but as Elders stating the Question debating it in the ordinary way of disputation and having by search of Scripture found the will of God they conclude It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us which in the judgement of the learned may be spoken by any Assembly upon like evidence of Scripture The like Presbyterian Government had place in the Churches of Corinth Ephesus Thessalonica c. in the times of the Apostles and after them for many years when one of the Presbytery was made Episcopus Praeses even then Communi Presbyterorum Confilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur saith Jerome Episcopos magis consuetudine quam Dispositionis Divinae veritate Presbyteris esse majores in Commune debere Ecclesiam regere 5. Farre be it from me to think such a thought as that your Majesty did intend any Fallacy in your other maine Argument from Antiquity As we are to distinguish between Intentio operantis Conditio operis so may we in this case consider the difference between Intentio Argumentantis Conditio Argumenti And where Your Majesty argues That if Your Opinion be not admitted we will be forced to give place to the Interpretation of private Spirits which is contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle Peter and will prove to be of dangerous consequence I humbly offer to be considered by Your Majesty what some of chief note among the Papists themselves have taught us That the Interpretation of Scriptures and the Spirits whence they proceed may be called private in a threefold sense 1. Ratione Personae if the Interpreter be of a private condition 2. Ratione Modi Medii when Persons although not private use not the publique meanes which are necessary for finding out the Truth but follow their owne fancies 3. Ratione finis when the Interpretation is not proposed as Authenticall to bind others but is intended onely for our owne private satisfaction The first is not to be despised the second is to be exploded and is condemned by the Apostle Peter the third ought not to be censured But that Interpretation which is Authenticall and of supreme Authority which even mans conscience is bound to yeild unto is of an higher nature And although the Generall Councell should resolve it and the Consent of the Fathers should be had unto it yet there must alwaies be place left to the judgment of Discretion as Davenant late Bishop of Salisbury beside divers others hath learnedly made appeare in his Booke De Judice Controversiarum where also the Power of Kings in matter of Religion is solidly and unpartially determined Two words onely I adde one is that notwithstanding all that is pretended from Antiquity a Bishop having sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction will never be found in Prime Antiquity The other is that many of the Fathers did unwittingly bring forth that Anti-christ which was conceived in the times of the Apostles and therefore are incompetent Judges in the Question of Hierarchy And upon the other part the Lights of the Christian Church at and since the beginning of the Reformation have discovered many secrets concerning the Anti-christ and his Hierarchy which were not knowne to former Ages And diverse of the learned in the Roman Church have not feared to pronounce That whosoever denies the true and literall sense of many Texts of Scripture to have been found out in this last Age is unthankfull to God who hath so plentifully powred forth his Spirit upon the Children of this Generation and ungratefull towards those men who with so great paines so happy successe so much benefit to Gods Church have travailed therein This might be instanced in many places of Scripture I wind together Diotrephes and the Mystery of Iniquity the one as an old example of Church-ambition which was also too palpable in the Apostles themselves And the other as a cover of Ambition afterwards discovered which two brought forth the great Mystery of the Papacy at last 6. Although your Majesty be not made a Judge of the Reformed Churches yet you so farre censure them and their actions as without Bishops in your judgment they cannot have a lawfull Ministery nor a due Administration of the Sacraments Against which dangerous destructive Opinion I did alledge what I supposed your Majesty would not have denied 1. That Presbyters without a Bishop may Ordaine other Presbyters 2. That Baptisme administred by such a Presbyter is another thing than Baptisme administred by a private Person or by a Midwife Of the first your Majesty calls for proofe I told before that in Scripture it is manifest 1 Tim. 4. 14. Neglect nor the Gift that is in Thee which was given Thee by the Prophesie with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery so it is in the English Translation And the word Presbytery so often as it is used in the New Testament alwaies signifies the Persons and not the Office And although the Offices of Bishop and Presbyter were distinct yet doth not the Presbyter derive his power of Order from the Bishop The Evangelists were inferiour to the Apostles yet had they their power not from the Apostles but from Christ The same I affirme of the 70 Disciples who had their power immediately from Christ no lesse than the Apostles had theirs It may upon better reason be averred that the Bishops have their power from the Pope than that Presbyters have their power from the Prelats It is true Jerome saith Quid facit exceptâ ordinatione Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter but in the same place he proves from Scripture that Episcopus Presbyter are one and the same and therefore when he appropriates Ordination to the Bishop he speaketh of the degenerated custome of his time 2. Concerning Baptisme a private Person may perform the external Action and Rites both of it and of the Eucharist yet is neither of the two a Sacrament or hath any efficacy unlesse it be done by him that is lawfully called thereunto or by a Person made publique and clothed with Authority by Ordination This Errour in the matter of Baptisme is begot by another Errour of the Absolute Necessity of Baptisme 7. To that which hath been said concerning Your Majesties Oath I shall adde nothing not being willing to enter upon the Question of the subordination of the Church to the Civill power whether to King or Parliament or both and to either of them in their owne place Such an Headship as the Kings of England hath claimed and such a supremacy as the Houses of Parliament crave with Appeales from the supreme Ecclesiasticall Judicature to them as set over

the Church in the same line of Subordination I doe utterly disclaime upon such Reasons as give my selfe satisfaction although no man shall be more willing to submit to Civill Powers each one in their owne place and more unwilling to make any trouble than my selfe Onely concerning the application of the Generalls of an Oath to the particular case now in hand under favor I conceive not how the Clergy of the Church of England is or ought to be principally intended in your Oath For although they were esteemed to be the Representative Church yet even that is for the benefit of the Church Collective Salus Populi being Suprema Lex and to be principally intended Your Majesty knowes it was so in the Church of Scotland where the like alteration was made And if nothing of this kind can be done without the consent of the Clergy what Reformation can be expected in France or Spaine or Rome it selfe It is not to be expected that the Pope or Prelate will consent to their owne ruine 8. I will not presume upon any secret knowledge of the Opinions held by the King Your Majesties Father of famous Memory they being much better known to Your Majesty I did onely produce what was profest by him before the world And although Prayers and Tears be the Arms of the Church yet it is neither acceptable to God nor conducible for Kings and Princes to force the Church to put on these Armes Nor could I ever heare a reason why a necessary Defensive Warre against unjust Violence is unlawfull although it be joyned with offence and invasion which is intended for Defence but so that Armes are layed down when the offensive Warre ceaseth by which it doth appeare that the Warre on the other side was in the nature thereof Defensive 9. Concerning the forcing of Conscience which I pretermitted in my other Paper I am forced now but without forcing of my Conscience to speake of Our Conscience may be said to be forced either by our selves or by others By our selves 1. when we stop the eare of our Conscience and will not hearken or give place to information resolving obstinately Ne si persuaseris persuadebis which is no lesse then a resisting of the Holy Ghost and the hardning of our hearts 2. Or when we stop the mouth and suppresse the clamours of our Conscience resolving rather to suffer the worme to gnaw and the fire to burne inwardly then to make profession of that we are convinced to be Truth 3. Or when we seare our Conscience as with an hot Iron that it becometh senslesse which is the punishment of the former unto which is opposed the truly tender Conscience such as Josiah had 2 King 22. 19. Againe 1. our Conscience is said to be forced by others when they obtrude upon us what is in it self evill and unlawfull which if we admit against our own Conscience we sin two waies one is by doing that which is in it self evill and unlawfull the other is by doing it against a dictate of Conscience which is a contempt of God whose Vicegerent it is 2. Or when others urge us to do that which is in it selfe good or may lawfully be done but through error of Conscience we judge it to be evill and unlawfull in this case if we do not that which is prest upon us we sin because the thing is good and lawfull And if we doe it we sin because we do against our Conscience Which in this case bindeth but obligeth not And yet there is a way to escape out of this labyrinth it being repugnant to the equity of the will of God to lay a necessity of sinning upon any man The onely way is to lay aside such a Conscience it being a part of the Old man which we are commanded to put off otherwise we being sufficiently informed and yet cleaving to our old error we rather doe violence to our Conscience our selves than suffer violence from others The Application for Answering the Quaere I leave to your Majesty Newcastle June 17. 1646. For Mr. Alex Henderson In Reply to his second Paper June 22. 1646. His MAJESTIES third Paper 1. IT were arrogance besides losse of time in Me to vie preambles with you For it is truth I seek and neither praise nor victory wherefore I shall onely insist upon those things which are meerly necessary to my owne satisfaction in order to which I desired the assistance of some Divines whereupon I will insist no further save onely to wish that you may not as I have knowne many Men doe lose time by being mistaken in the way to save it wherein I have onely sought to disburden My selfe but to lay no blame upon you and so I leave it 2. Nor will I say more of the second then this that I am glad you have so well approved of what I have said concerning My education and reason but then remember that another Mans will is at least as weake a ground to build my Faith upon as my former education 3. In this there are two points First concerning the Reforming power then anent the English Reformation For the first I confesse you now speak clearly which before you did but darkly mention wherein I shall mainly differ with you untill you shall shew me better reason yet thus farre I will goe along with you that when a Generall Councell cannot be had severall Kingdomes may Reforme themselves which is learnedly and fully proved by the late Archbishop of Canterbury in his disputation against Fisher but that the inferior Magistrates or People take it which way you will have this power I utterly deny For which by your favour you have yet made no sufficient proofe to my judgement Indeed if you could have brought or can bring authority of Scripture for this opinion I would and will yet with all reverence submit but as for your Examples out of the Old Testament in my mind they rather make for than against me all those Reformations being made by Kings and it is a good probable though I will not say convincing Argument that if God would have approved of a Popular reforming way there were Kings of Judah Israel sufficiently negligent and ill to have made such examples by but by the contrary the 16. Chap. of Numbers shewes clearly how God disapproves of such courses but I forget this Assertion is to be proved by you yet I may put you in the way wherefore let me tell you that this pretended power in the People must as all others either be directly or else declaratorily by approbation given by God which how soon you can doe I submit otherwise you prove nothing For the citing of private Mens opinions more then as they concurre with the generall consent of the Church in their time weighs little with Me it being too well known that Rebels never wanted Writers to maintain their unjust actions and though I much reverence Bishop Jewels memory I never thought him