Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
conscience_n	case_n	church_n	resolution_n	1,650	5	9.9602	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91309	Truth triumphing over falshood, antiquity over novelty. Or, The first part of a just and seasonable vindication of the undoubted ecclesiasticall iurisdiction, right, legislative, coercive power of Christian emperors, kings, magistrates, parliaments, in all matters of religion, church-government, discipline, ceremonies, manners: summoning of, presiding, moderating in councells, synods; and ratifying their canons, determinations, decrees: as likewise of lay-mens right both to sit and vote in councells; ... In refutation of Mr. Iohn Goodwins Innocencies Triumph: my deare brother Burtons Vindication of churches, commonly called Independent: and of all anti-monarchicall, anti-Parliamentall, anti-synodicall, and anarchicall paradoxes of papists, prelates, Anabaptists, Arminians, Socinians, Brownists, or Independents: whose old and new objections to the contrary, are here fully answered. / By William Prynne, of Lincolnes Inne, Esquire.	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1645 (1645)	Wing P4115; Thomason E259_1; ESTC R212479	202,789	171

Patterns deduced his Assize of surplesses and paterne of the new Altars Rules c. prescribed to be enquired of in his Visitation Articles But I hope my deare Brother can not spie out any such vision nor deduce any such conclusion from this Text nor from that of measuring the Temple Altar in the Revelation which I have elswhere answered and shall here omit The 4th Argument from Dutr. 4. 2. c. 12. 31. Proverb 30. 6. Reu. 22. 19. That God hath prohibited any addition to the Booke of sacred Scripture under a plague and heavy punishment Ergo there is a set forme of Church-government and discipline prescribed in the Gospell which none may vary from by addition or diminuition Is a meere Non-sequitur For first these Texts speake only of Additions to the Bookes Doctrine Histories Prophesies of the Canonicall Scriptures then written as my Brother acknowledgeth and the Texts infallibly prove not of any Church-government Discipline Ceremonies under the Gospell not so much as mentioned or imagined in them Therefore Brother you doe very ill for to wrest these Scriptures thus against their sence and meaning 2ly Brother you know that God himselfe after the writing of the Booke of Deuteronomie the Proveths caused divers other Bookes of Canonicall Scriptures in the old and the whole New Testament to be written for the further benefit and Instruction of his Church Yea many Additions were made to the service of God in the Temple not mentioned by Moses without infringing these Texts therefore your citing of them without any limitation is very impertinent 3ly I feare Brother that those who hold there is an absolute set forme of Church-goverment prescribed in the word to all Churches though they cannot shew it and yet cry up their Independent way as the very Government discipline Kingdome and Ordinance of Christ himselfe though they neither prove nor demonstrate it are far more guilty of this sinne of transegressing these texts by Adding to Gods word then those who deny it are of adding to or detracting from it Take heed therefore I pray of this sin your selfe which you would fasten upon others You know who are most guilty of this va●ting cry The Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord are these when yet they were but lying words which party boastes most of the Divinity of their way your whole Book sursets of this in every Page without one solid text to warrant what you so frequently over-confidently affirme Wherefore this Argument returns wholy on your self My Brothers 3. Objection is from the 1 Cor. 7. 17. So ordaine I in all Churches 1. Cor. 16. 1. Now concerning the collection the Saints as I have given order to the Churches of Galatia SO ALSO DO YE Every first day of the weeke or some one day of the weeke or weekly as some translate and the phrase will beare it let every one of you lay BY HIMSELFE in store as God hath prospered him that there be no gatherings when I come Act 14. 25. And when they had ordained them Elders in EVERY CHVRCH From which Authorities only and no other in the New Testament he inferrs That there is but ONE and the selfe same forme of Churchgovernment and Discipline prescribed to all Churches in the world in all ages without the least liberty of varying one from another or from the forme pretended to be thus prescribed But deare Brother what will you say if none of these Scriptures prove any such conclusion but the contrary have you not then injured the Readers and truth hereby Heare then how you are mistaken in them The question you know is not concerning Precepts Doctrines or Rules of faith which are the selfe same to all Persons Churches Ages and binde all alike but only of Church-Government disciplin But hath your first and principall text any relation thereunto No verily but to a meere privat case of conscience then undescided Whether a beleeving Wife might depart from an unbeleeving Husband or a beleeving Husband from an unbeleeving wife without mutuall consent if the unbeleever were willing to cohabit with the other This was the case of conscience then in question at Corinth and propounded specially to the Apostle to whom they Wrote for resolution v. 1. To this the Apostle gives a final desciton in the negative shewing sundry reasons for it v. 10. to 16. then v. 17. he concludes As the Lord hath called every one so let him walke AND SO ORDAINI IN AL CHVRCHES Now what Brother is this private case of conscience to one set forme of Church Disciplin or Government doth the Apostle say that this he ordained to be the very same in all Churches no verily there is no such mention or intention in the Text or Chapter so that the true deduction from hence will be but this absurd Nonsequitur The Apostle by the determination of Gods spirit ordained in every Church that Beleeving Wives or Husbands should not forsake their unbeleeving Consorts if they desired to cohabit with them Ergo he ordained one and the selfe-same unalterable set forme of Church-government and Discipline in all Churches whatsoever Your 2d text makes cleane against you For first the Apostle 1. Cor. 16. 1. 2. doth not say that he gave order for a collection in all Churches alike but only in the Churches of Galatia and there were many Churches else besides them Therefore this extends only to particular Churches not to all And so no proofe of any one universall Government of Discipline prescribed alike to all Secondly It was an order only upon a particular emergent transient occasion which might seldome or never happen againe to wit The present necessity of the Saints at Ierusalem in respect of a dearth and famine there To argue therefore an universall standing Church-government and Discipline from a particular transient occasion not permanent and lasting but contingent and temporany for this particular time and occasion only is very incongruous Thirdly The Apostle here prescribed no publique duty relating to Church-government or Discipline nor yet to be performed in the open Congregation for then there might have beene some vigor in the Text but but only a voluntary preparatory benevolence to be weekly laide apart in private according to Gods blessing on every mans estates as is cleane by the words Vpon the first day of the Week or wekely Let every one of you lay a part BY HIMSELFE not contribute publiquely in the Church in store as God hath prospered him that so there may be no collections when I come Therefore this Action hath no relation at all to Church-government Discipline or ought to be done publikly in the Church Fourthly This collection and the maner of it for every man to lay aside by himselfe some thing weekely according as God hath prospered him was only a preparatory extraordinary collection as the last clause that there may be

keeping the Commandements of the first and second Table the advancement of Gods Honour and Service the propagation of the Gospell the peace and well ordering of the Church State Family the performance of the externall publike or private exercises of Religion Or to avoyd scandalls Schismes Errors Innovations Corruptions in the Church or to bring men to the Ordinances and knowledge of the truth doe of themselves binde the Conscience at least in generall because they tend to the observation of the morall Law which wee are bound in Conscience to obey That particular civill and Ecclesiasticall Laws wherby the temporall Law givers not only signifie what is to be done but likewise seriously intend to command it and to obliege the infringers to an offence doe in particular and by themselves bind the Conscience under paine of sin and offence of God That other particular Lawes may bind the Conscience though not of themselves in regard of the thing commanded yet by accident when by their violation the Order Peace or government of the Church or State is disturbed the authority of the Law-givers and Magistrates dispised or just scandall given to the Church State or any weake brethren The Arguments to prove these positions follow 1. Those Laws to which men must be obedient and subject even for Conscience sake and that by Gods own command must necessarily binde the Concience But to such Ecclesiasticall and Civill Lawes as are sore-specified men must bee obedient and subject not only for wrath but even for Conscience sake Rom. 13. 1 2 5. Therefore they must necessarily binde the Conscience 2. Those Lawes whose violation drawes both a temporall and spirituall offence guilt and condemnation upon the infringers of them must needs obliege the conscience because conscience is sensible of the offence or sinne committed and dreads the punishment of it But the violating of such humane Laws as are forementioned drawes both a temporall and Civill Offence Guilt and judgment upon men as the Apostle yea every mans Conscience and experience determines Ergo they binde the Conscience Those Lawes and Ordinances which God Himselfe enjoynes us to obey even for the Lords sake must of necessity bind the Conscience to ready obedience because God Himselfe the Soveraigne and supreame Lord of the Conscience commands us to obey them But God Himselfe enjoynes us to obey the foresaid Lawes and Ordinances of men even for the Lords sake Romans 13. 1 3 5. 1 Pet. 2. 14 15 16. Ergo they bind the Conscience 4. Every Supreame Power Lawgiver Magistrate in commanding such things and making such Laws as aforesaid is but Gods owne Deputy Ordinance Minister Vicegerent in obeying whom wee obey and in contemning whose Edicts we contemne even God Himselfe from whom they derive their Authority Rom. 13. 1 2. 1 Pet. 2. 14 15 16. Ephes 6. 5 6 7. Col. 3. 22 23 24. Therefore their just Laws must needs oblige the Conscience as being in some sence the very Ordinances and Lawes of God Himselfe according to that resolution of Saint Bernard Sive Deus sive homo Vicarius Dei mandatum quodcunque tradiderit pari profecto obsequendum est cura pari reverentia deferendum ubi tamen Deo contraria non praecipit homo Which Augustine thus seconds In eare sola filius non debet obedire Patri suo si aliquod Pater ipsius jusserit contra Dominum Deum ipsius Ubi enim hoc jubet Pater quod contra Dominum non sit sic audiendus est quomodo Deus quia obedire Patri jussit Deus which he proves by Gods blessing of the RECABITES for obeying their Fathers command in not drinking Wine Jer. 25. Vpon this very ground Wives are commanded to submit themselves to their owne Husbands as UNTO THE LORD To bee subject to them in every thing as the Church is to Christ Eph. 5. 22 24. Col. 3. 8. Servants are commanded to bee obedient to their Masters according to the flesh with feare and trembling and singlenesse of heart as unto Christ Not with eye service as men pleasers but as the servants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart with good will doing service as Vnto the Lord not to men knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doth he shall receive from the Lord for YEE SERVE herein THE LORD CHRIST If servants in obeying their Masters Children their Parents Wives their Husbands lawfull commands serve and obey the Lord Christ Himselfe as the Scripture positively resolves then Christian subjects and Churches in obeying the lawfull Ecclesiasticall or Civill Lawes of their Princes and Parliaments obey and serve Christ Himselfe therein and so doe they who enact them and not commit the highest presumption that can bee against the most Highest as my Brother objects without any authority but with his Ipse dixi Fifthly Paul did endeavour and exercise himselfe to keepe a good Conscience alwayes both towards God and Man by obeying the just Laws and commands of man as well as of God as some Interprets expound it Acts 24. 16. Yea Peter commands servants to be subject to their Masters with all feare not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward and even for CONSCIENCE TOWARDS GOOD to endure griefe and suffer wrongfully from them and by the 1 Peter 3. 16. We are injoyned to have a GOOD CONSCIENCE Towards men who speake evill of us Whence thus I argue If a good Conscience must bee carefully exercised and kept as well toward the lawfull precepts and lawes of Man as of God then certainly they binde the Conscience as well as the Law of God else what had conscience to do with them But the supposition is most evident by the former texts Therefore the deduction thence Sixthly If such Lawes should not bind the conscience and inward man to the cheerfull practicall obedience of them but only the purse and outward man the obedience to them would bee lame or slavish the Lawes Nugatory and contemptible the end of the Laws which is cheerefull obedence to them for the advancement of Gods glory and the publike good of Church and State frustrated and the contempt of them no sinne at all against the fifth Commandement and the precepts of obedience to the higher Powers Magistrates and Rulers over us as all Expositors on the 5th Commandement resolve it is 7. The violating of such just Civill and Ecclesiasticall Lawes as these will cause violating whereof a tender true in lightned conscience will checke a man for and accuse him as guilty of an offence Therefore They must certainely oblige the Conscience else it would not checke at such a violation and acquit and cheere a man in case of ready Obedience as every mans experience can attest if hee narrowly watch his conscience in case it be not feared Eighthly Disobedience to the just edicts Lawes of Magistrates Governours Parents Naturall Civill or Ecclesiasticall are particularly branded both

then Heresie or hereticall Doctrin by such extravagant inferences and incoherent Arguments for fear you dishonour both your Master and your self 3. Though Christ hath left no absolute exact forme of Church-Government in Scripture for all Churches and Ages yet he hath left his Word to be a light to the feete and a Lanthorne to the pathes of all his Saints and Churches and said downe such generall Presidents rules and directions therein as may serve for ordering directing and regulating of all Churches herein yea he hath given us some more particular rules for some things which concerne the Government of his Churches The Scripture hath generall Rules for our faith life manners thoughts words actions apparell eating drinking praying preaching receiving the Sacrament c. applicable to all particular cases and occurrences concerning them though not particular punctuall rules for deciding all those cases of conscience and controversies that frequently arise concerning them yet Christ is not unfaithfull because he hath left his Church sufficient rules and meanes of salvation in generall or particular to bring it safe to heaven 4 The providing of godly and faithfull Ministers Magistrates and Governours of the Church to put good Laws Disciplin and Government in execution is a great part of Christs charge and care as well as providing his Word and a Government for his Church Will you charge Christ then with negligence and leaving his Church to six and seven because every Minister of Christ hath not the selfe-same measure of gifts and endowments to discharge his Ministery or because some Ministers are more negligent in their places then others and some sheep are left oft-times without a Shepheard or committed to a Iudas a Thiefe or to Wolve● false Teachers Seducers which teare and devoure instead of feeding them or because he set not up and maintained this forme of Church Government you now contend for as his and none else beside in all Churches for so many hundred yeares together but reserved this honour in this latter age to some of you or rather to the Anabaptists and Brownists your Predecessors herein to advance it Brother you may easily discerne by this where your owne pretended inconveniences and inferences will drive you at the last if you rely upon them I beseech you therefore as a loving Brother to forbeare them for the future 4. Whereas you object We should have a mad world of it if Civill States Magistrates Kings and Parliaments should set up such a Government 〈◊〉 they conceived to be agreeable to Gods Word and the good Lawes and Customes of their Realmes I answer 1. That it is your own position that every particular man and Church ought to walke according to the rule of their own consciences and judgement not anothers Christ only being Lord of their consciences If then a whole Kingdome Parliament Church or Realme shall conceive and be perswaded in their consciences that such and such a Church Government is most consonant to Gods Word most suiteable to their condition and therefore shall upon solemne debate after much seeking of God by Prayer and Fasting make choise of this government before another as by electing a Presbyteriall rejecting an Independent way What madnesse or inconvenience meer slavery tyranny humane inv●ntions superstitions or corruption will this introduce Shall they be Hereticks presently for such a choise as you define them Shall private men have more liberty of choise or conscience then whole Nations Synods Parliaments or more wisedome temper knowledge discretion conscience then they Indeed I have read of one Parliament stiled the Mad and another the unlearned because there were no Lawyers in it and no doubt both Parliaments Councells Synods generall Assemblies may and doe sometimes erre and that grosly as well as private persons or congregations But doubtlesse all reasonable men will and must acknowledge that two are better then one a whole Court of Iustice lesse liable to errour and corruption then a particul●r Judge a whole Parliament then a Committee an whole Synod then a private Conventicle or congregation Then tell me in sober sadnesse good Brother whether your Independent Assertion That every particular Minister hath power to gather and set up a Church of his owne Independent from any other and to choose such a Discipline Government to themselves as they CONCEIVE to be most suiteable to Gods Word though in truth it be not so but a meer CONCEITE as I feare your New way is That particular Christians have power to unite themselves into a Church and elect a Minister and Government of their owne choise most agreeable as they thinke to the Word And that every Sect and Person ought to have free liberty of conscience in the exercise of what they beleeve Or my Position be likely est to produce more madnesse in the world or mischiefes in the Church Certainely it will be a madder world and Church too indeed when every private Minister and Christian may follow their owne opinions fancies crochets waies every Sectary set up his owne congregation sect and vent his owne erronious schismaticall Opinions without control when every man shall have priviledge to doe What seemes right in his owne eyes as if there were no King in Israel no Parliament in England when every Anabaptist Enthusiast or brainsick Melancholico shall not only build Churches in the ayre different from all others but set them up openly in our Cities Counties Kingdomes without impediment in contempt of Lawes Parliaments all Civill or Ecclesiasticall Authority as too many I feare doe now and I hope the High Court of Parliament will remedy it in due time because they deem their owne fancies Gospel their owne Juventions Christs Oracles Certainly the world and Church will both be mad in good earnest when such a licentiousnesse shall be proclaimed under the Notion of Christian Liberty every mans own private way christned with the Name of Christs Kingdom c. though it hath small affinity with it The God of peace order of his infinite mercie preserve us safe from this Maniaca Insania this deadly madnesse into which we are running and hath already desperately seized upon the Braines and hearts of many My Brothers sixth Objection is this That Parliaments Councells Synods are not now infallible but subject unto errour many of them having erred and that grosly in former and late times That neither Parliament nor Assembly can now say as that Synod Act. 15. 28. It seemeth good to us and to the Holy Ghost they being not endued with an infallible spirit Therefore they can make no binding Determinations Lawes Canons Decrees in any Ecclesiasticall matters to oblige any particular Churches or christians Good Brother writes he for all your punctuall quotations of that Scripture Acts 15. you doe not all this while tell us that which is the maine of all which we finde in the 28. verse IT SEEMED GOOD TO THE HOLY

Canons of the Church in and by a Common Councell and Parliament as well of the Nobles and Commons as of the Prelates and Clergy as is evident by this passage in the Manuscript Tables of Robert Winchelsy Arch-Bishop of Canterbury WILLIELMUS Rex Angliae DE COMMUNI CONCILIO Archiepiscoporum Abbatum OMNIUM PROCERUM REGNI SUI Leges Episcopales quae non berè nec secundum Sanctorum Canonum praeceptae fuerunt sicut nec sunt his diebus OBSERV AND AS IN CONCUSSE JUDICAVERIT c. And by this his rescript to Remigius Bishop of Lincolne WILLIELMUS Gratia Dei c. Sciatis vos omnes caeteri mei fideles qui in Angliamanent quod Episcopales leges quae non berè nec secundum Sanctorum Canonum praecepta usque ad mea tempora in regno Anglorum fuerunt COMMUNI CONCILIO et consilio Archiepiscoporum meorum caeterorum Episcoporum Abbatum OMNIUM PRINCIPUM REGNI MEIEMEND AND AS JUDICAVI Proptereamando Regia authoritate praecipio ut nullus Episcopus vel Archidiaconus de legibus Episcopalibus amplius in HUNDRET placita toneant c. In the Councell of Rhoan Anno 1073. William the Conqueror sate chiefe President And decreed many things as well touching Ecclesiasticall Affaires as the benefit of his new Kingdom of England Among other things it was there decreed Judicatum est praesidente Rege Anglorum Gulielmo writes Matthew Westminster the King himselfe being president that Monkes who by force assaulted their Abbotts as the Monkes of Andoem had assaulted and slaine their Abbot at that time whiles hee was saying Masse in any Abbies should there be thrust into prison for it which before it seemes they could not be This Councell was no other then a Parliament diverse temporall Lawes as well as Ecclesiasticall being enacted therein and both ratified approved by this King who as Eadmerus stories of him would not so much as suffer the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Primate of all his Realme when hee sate President in a generall Councell of Bishops assembled together to decree or prohibite any thing but such things as were suitable to his will and had first been ordained by himselfe In the Councell of London under Lanfranks An. 1075. Concessum est Regia MUNIFICENTIA Synodali authoritate Episcopis de villis transire ad Civitates By the Kings Royall munificence and the authority of the Synod liberty was granted to Bishops to remove from the Villages wherein they resided unto Cities whereupon Herman Bishop of Schiroburne removed to Salisbury Stigand from Selescia removed to Chichester Peter from Litehfield removed to Chester the King ratifying the constitution of the Synod and ordering this removeall An. 1093. King William Rufus assembled a Councell of his Bishops Abbots and Nobility of the whole Kingdome that they might By their common assent determiue and discusse whether Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury could Keepe his faith to the King or not saving that faith reverence and obedience which he owed to the Apostolike See of Rome which he would by no means violate A weighty question surely of a loyall Prelate The Bishops Abbots and Nobility of the whole Kingdome almost Ex Regia Sanctione assembled at Rochingham Castle on the fifth day of March at one a Clocke in the afternoone to debate this businesse but the King commanded all things to be adjourned till the morrow Quia Dies Dominica erat because it was the Lords Day an unmeet time to discusse such a businesse as this was On the morrow in medio Procorum conglobatae multitudinis eos assistentem Monachorum Clericorum LAICORUM numerosam multitudinem sic loquitur c. Lo here the Nobles Commons as well as the Bishops Abbots and Clergie assembled in a Councell to wit a Parliament to determine a case of conscience and that at Anselms request This matter being long debated and Anselme continuing refractory the busines was defet●ed till after Whitsuntide In the Councell of London under Lanfranke summoned by King William Rufus Anno 1095. Vlstan Bishop of Worcester was deprived of his Bishopricke by the Kings sentence and verdict quasi homo idiota c. Ipso rege consentiente hoc dictante decernitur deponendus saith Matthew Paris the King sitting chiefe president in it In the Councell of London Anno 1102. under Anselme the King and his Nobles were present as well as the Bishops and Ahbots that whatsoever was therein decreed might be approved ratified and observed by the unanimous care and solicitud of both orders For soit was necessary A plain testimony that the Councells of England in antient times were no other but Parliaments and that their Canons ound not any unlesse confirmed by King and Parliament At this Councell write Wil. Malmesbury Eadmerus Anselme the Archbishop requesting it of the King Primates Regni the great men of the Kingdom were present quatenus quicquid ejusdem Concilii authoritate decerneretur VTRJVSQVE ORDINIS CONCORDI CVRA ET SOLJCITVDINE RATVM SERVARETVR SJC ENIM NECSSE ERAT quum multis retre annis Synodali cultura cessante viciorum vepribus succrescentibus Christiana religionis fervor in Anglia nimis reripeat which they thus preface out of Anselmes owne Copy and relation Anno 1102. quarto autem Praesulatus Paschalis Summi Pontificis tertio Regni Henrici gloriosi regis Anglorum ipso annuente celebratum est Concilium in ecclesia beati Petri in ●ccidentali parte juxta Londoniam sita communi consensu Episcoporum et Abbatum et Principum totius regni In this Councell held at Westminster therewere 26. Canons compiled some against Priests mariage and Wives which when Giraldns Archbishop of Yorks enjoyned his Clergie to observe all the Clergie of his Province refused to submit to them being unwilling to part with their Wives or to vow Chastity as some of those Canons enjoyned them to the execution whereof the great discord betweene the King and Anselme concerning the investitures of Bishops being an obstacle produced to this effect Necanones hujus Synodi legum vim ac potestatem sortirentur That those Canons should not obtaine the force and power of Lawes Anno. 1107. another Councell was held under Anselme in King Henry the first his owne Palace in which Councell The King assented and enacted that from thenceforth no man should be invested into any Bishoprick or Abbie of England by the King or any Layman by giving him a pastorall staffe or a Ring Proceres Regni the Peeres of the Realme writes Eadmerus were called to this Councell and the King assented to and ratified this Act Astante multitudine ac per Consilium Anselmi et Procerum Regni the Commons standing by him by the Councell of A●selme and of the great men of the Realme This Councell then was a Parliament and this Canon assented to both by the Commons Peeres and King ●o make it valid Not long after this King

eclesiasticall over us or passe any censures upon us but only Christ himselfe Brother if such Antimonarchicall Antiparliamentall and Anarchicall Logicke and Divinity be ever taught and beleeved in the world which cutts asunder the nerues and dissolves the very foundation of all Governments and Relations whatsoever whether naturall civill or Ecclesiasticall what an horrible confusion will be immediatly produced to the utter distruction of all Kingdomes Republiques Churches Families Societies Corporations in the World let all prudent men Judge Yet this is the dangerous Logicke this the Foundation stone whereon your whole Independent fabrick is built the absurdities and ill consequences whereof I trust all will now at last discerne Secondly I answer That though Christ be the only King and supream Law-giver of his Church yet it followes not thence that therfore no Parliament or humane power may or can make Lawes to order or governe the Churches and people of God by but onely Christ For Brother your selfe will grant 1. That Parliaments Kings and Synods may and ought to make Lawes to supposse and punish all manner of Idolatry superstition Impietie prophanenesses corruptions Heresies Doctrines Opinions and exorbitances whatsoever in their Churches Ministers people that are contrary to the Word of God the Lawes Doctrine Government of Christ or tending to the depravation disturbance or prejudice of the Church and Gospell Secondly they may publish Lawes and Canons to settle and establish the true Confession of the Christian saith the sincere Ordinances of God and such a true worship Church-Government and Discipline which is most consonant to his Word throughout all Churches in their respective jurisdictions yea compell Ministers to doe their duties and people diligently to repaire to all the Ordinances of God to sanctifie the Lords day and to observe extraordinary dayes of humiliation and thanksgiving upon extraordinary occasions Thirdly They may enact Lawes and Ordinances to settle the places and times of publike Worship and all necessary circumstances w ch concern the same not peremptorily determined in the Scriptures concerning Church assemblies Fourthly They may enact Laws for the maintenance of Ministers of all necessary Church Officers and for prayer preaching reading the Word administring receaving the Lords Supper concerning ordination Mariage siging fasting excommunication agreeable to the Word of God This I presume all will grant and my Brother will not deny which is all I contend for Therfore Christs being the only King Head Ruler and Lawgiver of his Church is no impediment to Kings Parliaments by advise of Synods to enact such Lawes as these and so the Argument a meere Independent Nonsequitur Thirdly Christ is the King Lord Head and Lawgiver of every private Christian or Member of a Congregation as well as of every particular or of the whole Catholik Church and so by your determination he is subject to no other jurisdiction then that of Christ his Spirit and Word Yet I hope you will grant that every Independent Congregation hath a true jurisdiction and power over every particular member of it yea a legislative power to prescribe a speciall covenant and such Ecclesiasticall Rules Orders as the whole Congregation shall thinke meet to which they must submit under paine of excommunication suspension Non-communion and denying baptisme to their Infants as you plainly intimate pag. 44. 45 46 62 63. Therefore these titles and Prerogatives of Christ doe not deprive particular Churches of the power of prescribing covenants Orders Rules and Canons to their Members much lesse then whole Synods Councells Parliaments of farre greater wisdom power Authority then particular Churches And if private Churches may thus oblige their Members then much more may Parliaments Councells all particular Churches within their jurisdictions And so much in answer of this grand argument The second is this Christ is the full and sole King raigning in the heart and conscience of every true Beleever He only is King over every mans Conscience so as no man nor power on earth may sit with him in this his Throne Therefore no Parliament Councell nor human power may prescribe Laws for the Government or ordering of the Church for then of necessity man should be Lord over the Conscience which is the highest presumption against the most high I answer That this argument is grounded upon a very sandy foundation and upon this controversed question both among Divines and Casuists Whether Ecclesiasticall or Civill human Laws made and ratified by the supreame civill Magistrates Parliament bind necessarily oblige us to obedience in point of conscience in case they be not contrary to Gods Word for if they be all grant they do not bind to obedience in point of Conscience My Brother here holds the Negative as an indisputable Maxime That these Laws bind not the conscience in point of Obedience to them A very dangerous false unsound Position tending to meere Anarchy and contempt of all humane Lawes and lawfull Authority in Church or State And for my own part I clearely hold the Affirmative to be an undoubted truth This question is largly debated and held affirmatively by learned Paraeus Explicatio Dubiorum in c. 13. ad Romanos Dubium 7. pag. 1413. to 1446. by Musculus Peter Martyr Marlorat and Doctor Willet in their Commentaries on Rom. 13 with other Protestants on this Text by Ursinus in Exposit secundi Praecepti p. 299. by Theodoret Ambrose Beda Anselme and generally most ancient and modern Commentators on that Text by Alexander Alensis Summa Theologiae Pars. 2. qu 120. Artic 2. 3 4. with whom all other Shoolemen generally concurre Paulus Windek Canonum Legum Consensus Dissensus cap. 4. p. 12. Stapleton in Antid p. 783. Bellarmine l. 3. c. 9. De Laicis Pererius Disp 2. Num. 8. by Saint Augustine in Epist 54. ad Macedonium and in Tit. Psal 70. by Saint Bernard Tract de Praecepto Dispensat With infinite others Indeed Master Calvin Instit lib. 3. c. 9. Sect. 15. 18. and lib. 4. c. 10. Sect. 3. 4 5. Beza in Notis ad Rom. 13. Sibrandus De Pontif Romano l. 8. c. 7. and some others seemingly hold the contrary yet not generally of all but of some particular humane Lawes I shall briefly lay downe the truth of the affirmative part out of Pareus and Doctor Willet in these insuing Propositions and then propound the Affirmative and answer the Negative arguments in their Order to vindicate this truth now most opposed when it is most necessary both to be discovered and obeyed The Propositions are these That all just Civill Ecclesiasticall or Oeconomicall Laws and Ordinances made by the King and Parliament or by lawfull Magistrates Parents Masters Tutors Superiors which concerne the duties of the first or second Table do bind the Conscience of themselves and that simply both in generall and particular That all good Laws made for the determining of any necessary circumstances of Gods Worship or necessary and profitable for

in the Old and New Testament at hainous sin● and capitall offences punishable in some cases with imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and death it selfe And on the contrary chearful obedience to them is not only commanded but commended by God Himselfe in by and for whom they rule and command as the marginall Scriptures fully manifest Therefore undoubtedly they binde the Conscience And so all Parliaments Law-givers ever held and believed else they would never take care or pains to enact or publish Lawes Finally Princes Magistrates and Parliaments may and oft-times do prescribe solemn Oathes and Covenants to their people to observe both Gods just Laws and their own to as is clear by the Marginall Texts by 28 H. 8. c. 10. 1 Eliz. c. 1. 3 Jac. c. 4. which prescribe an oath of abjuration of the Popes Authority the oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance with infinite other Acts enjoyning sundry other oathes and by the late Protestation Vow and Nationall Covenant made and imposed upon all by the present Parliament Now these oaths and Covenants do without all controversie binde the Conscience to observance and obedience in the highest degree Therefore questionlesse these their oaths Laws Covenants binde the Conscience els we might with safe Conscience refuse and violate them at pleasure which none dares affirme they may who hath any sparkle of Conscience remaining in him I shall now propound and answer the principall contrary Objections which are these 1. It is contrary to Christian liberty and a plaine tyranny that humane Lawes should obliege the Conscience Christ having freed us from all humane Ceremonies Lawes obligations and the Scripture enjoyning us to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and not to be again entangled with the yoake of Bondage Not to be the servants of men Not to be subject to Ordinances as touch not tast not handle not which all are to perish with the using after the commandements and Doctrines of men If therefore humane Lawes should binde the Conscience Christian liberty would be destroyed and tyranny over consciences introduced 1. Answer 1. That it is no wayes repugnant to but very consistent with Christian liberty to be obliged to obey al honest just necessary Lawes all decent and convenient things which may advance Gods glory worship the peace wee le or prosperity of Church State our own felicity and are consonant not repugnant to Gods Law Neither do the objected scriptures extend to such Lawes or Edicts at these 2. That Christian liberty which Christ hath purchased for us is not an exemption or freedome from the obedience of humane Laws but from the dominion and power of sinne the yoake and bondage of the Ceremonial Law abolished by Christs death from the exact performance and condemning power of the morall Law not from obedience to it and from placeing inherent holines o● any matter of Religion worship conscientiousnes in things meerely indifferent in themselves as Mr. Calvin with others who write Deliberitate christiana with most Commentators on the Galathians resolve yet Magistrates may command such things to be done or not done for 〈◊〉 order peace and other publicke ends so as they place no inherent holinesse religion or worship in them and Christians are bound to obey them therein without infringement of their Christian Liberty Thirdly As to the Texts objected The first of them is meant of the Ceremoniall Law and morrall to so farre forth as to seeke justification by it or to be under the rigour and condemning power of it Not of just humane Laws The next is intended onely of● men-pleasers who flatter men in their lusts pleasures errors or obey their unjust commands repugnant to the will of God not of obeying the just Lawes or precepts of Kings Parliaments Magistrates Parents Masters and other superiors for then there shall be no servants no subjection or obedience at all to superiors in this world and this Text should repeale the 5. Commandement with all other precepts of obedience given to subjects wives children servants if thus expounded For that of the Colossians 2. 20 21 22. it appeares by verse 14 15 16 17 c. that it is spoken onely of the Ceremoniall Law and of that Ceremonial holynes or intrinsicall uncleannes which some did put between meats and drink●s which were indifferent in themselves as is most cleare by comparing it with Acts 10. 10. to 16. Rom. 14. 2 3 to 23. 2 Cor. 8. 1 Tim. 4. 3 4 5. Therefore it makes nothing against the Ecclesiasticall or Civill Lawes of Princes and Parliaments who may command abstinence from flesh and such particular things creatures at certaine times for lawfull civill ends which we are obliged to obey though not out of any religious or superstitious respect as if the creature it selfe were unlawfull at such times by any divine precept or in its owne nature our Statutes and Homylies concerning Fishdayes define The second Objection is this That the civill power is temporall and the end of civill Lawes externall or temporall peace and order Therefore they binde not the Conscience I Answer That the end of Ecclesiasticall Lawes is not meerly temporall but spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Therefore the objection is not solid 2ly Admit the power he but temporall inregard of the object or end yet internall and outward obedience to those Laws is the principall thing intended in them which none can with safe conscience deny where the Laws are just necessary The third is That Magistrates Parliaments and their Lawes have nothing to do with mens consciences which they cannot judge or discerne but onely with th●● outward actions Therefore they cannot binde the conscience I answer that though Majestrats have nothing to do with nor can judg of mens consciences or opinions simply considered in themselves concealed yet they have to do withal their external actions flowing from regulated by their consciences and opinions Therefore they may binde the conscience as it is Practicall punish Atheists Heritickes Papists Idolaters when they openly appear to be such 2ly The very Law Of God hindes the conscience to obey all iust commands of higher powers therefore such commands even by vertue of Gods owne precept oblige the conscience to internall obedience as wel as the body to externall The 4th is That Princes and temporall Majestrates cannot inflict inward and spirituall but only temporall and externall punishments Therefore they cannot binde the conscience I Answer that men may binde and deliver others over to such punishments as they cannot immediatly inflict The Church may deliver men over even for ecclesiasticall offences to the secular power which they cannot exercise and to temporall punishment which they cannot inflict yea they may deliuer a● they hold men ever unto Sathan and to the judgement of God at the last day which they cannot actually execute Majestrates doe frequently punish the

breach of Gods Laws with temporall punishments yet by this Gods Lawes become not temporall and unobligatory to the conscience So God on the other side may and doth 〈◊〉 the violation of just humane Lawes with spirituall and eternall punishments Majestrates being but his Vicegerents Deputies and the contempt of their just Lawes a contempt of God himselfe Therefore the Argument holds not The 5th Objection is this that the conscience only respects God therefore nothing can binde it but Gods owne Law which is spirituall I Answer That the conscience respects as well men as God Act. 24. 16 therefore the just Lawes of men as I have proved as well as of God 2ly The conscience looks upon the just Laws and precepts of men not meerly as human Lawes but as proceeding from the Ministers and Vicegerents of God himselfe whom they represent and whom God himselfe frequently enjoynes us to obey The 6th Is this No one man and by consequence not all mens consciences in the world may or can Iudge another mans conscience who standeth or falleth 〈◊〉 his owne Master Rom. 14. 4. 16. Ergo they cannot make Lawes to binde the conscience I Answer first that this text speakes only of privat Christians Judging one another in things indifferent as meates holy dayes c. when and where there is neither law of God nor man inhibiting the free use or refusall of them at the whole Chapter manifests Therefore it makes nothing against necessary ecclesiastical● Laws Canons obliging men to obedience even in point of conscience 2ly The Apostle expresly concludes in this very Chap. v. 14. to 23. That in case of giving scandal and offence to weak Brethren we ought to abstaine from the very use of lawful indifferent things even out of conscience of the scandall hurt don thereby not simply of the things themselves though there be no law of God or man restraining or altering the indifferency or lawfulnes thereof that without any impeachment of Christian liberty Therefore when necessary or convenient things meerly indifferent in their nature are enjoyned by Superiors just Laws or inconvenient indifferent things prohibited for the publick good or peace they ought much more to be submitted to without impeachment of christian liberty out of Conscience of the Law and scandall which would follow the volation thereof and in obedience to the generall Law of God which commands obedience to such Lawes The 7. Objection is this There is one Lawgiver which is able to save and to destroy to wit God● who art thou that judgest another Iam. 4. 12. Ergo none can make laws to bind the conscience but God I answer 1. that there is but one supream absolut Lawgiver which is God Is 33. 2. wch excluds not subordinat ones 2ly The Apostle saith not that there is ONLY one law-giver that can save and destroy neither will the words infallibly conclude there is but one such since humane law-givers can make Lawes to save or destroy the lives bodyes and Estates of men as appeares by Scripture and the Lawes of all Nations though not their Soules as they are meare humane Lawes but only collaterally as the wilful contempts and violations of them are sins breaches of the very law of God prescribing obedience to those Lawes in which sence they may secondarily destroy the very soules of men Thirdly This Text takes not away the power of making necessary temp●rall or Ecclesiasticall Laws for then no such Lawes could possibly be made by any But the meaning of the Apostle is this That onely God the Supreame Law-giver is able by his Law to make any indifferent lawfull thing necessary or unlawfull in it selfe in point of Religion or conscience and to change the meere indifferency of it into a thing simply good or evil and not humane Law-givers Therefore we should not judge or condemne one another in the use or neglect of those things which God himselfe hath left indifferent where there is no circumstance of scandall or contempt of humane Lawes to engage us to use or not to use them But it reacheth not to such humane Lawes Civill or Ecclesiasticall which command or prohibit things agreeable to the rules of Gods Word or things necessary and expedient for Order Decency Peace avoyding of scandall and other mischiefes which Lawes as Doctor Willet himselfe who makes this objection affirmes do binde the conscience notwithstanding this objected Text. And thus much for my Brothers first generall Objection His second is this That the Scripture holds forth and Christ in the New-Testament presoribes and layes down unto us but ONLY ONE and that a most compleat and exact forme of Church government and Discipline which ought not to be altered or varied from in the least title being a part of the Gospel and must be BUT ONE and THE SAME in all Nations Churches in all ages throughout the World precisely observed by all Churches without the least variation That the Independent way alone is this divine unalterable Evangelicall platforme Therefore nor King nor Parliament though assisted with a Synod of most pious and learned orthodox Divines justly may or can of right make any Ecclesiasticall binding Lawes for the government or Discipline of the Churches of Christ within their Jurisdictions it being indeed a meere adding to the Word of God prohibited under a curse Deut. 4. 2. c. 12. 22. Prov. 30. 6. Rev. 22. 18 19. Thus my deare Brother and other Independents Argue with more confidence than evidence of Scripture To which I answer first That though Christ and his Apostles have instituted in the Gospel all necessary Church-Officers as Evangelical Bishops Elders Ministers Deacons Pastors Teachers c. and likewise given some general rules for the Government and Discipline of his Church yet he hath neither instituted nor prescribed any such unalterable compleat exact forme of Church-government and Discipline in all ages and Churches in the New Testament as is pretended by many not evidenced by any My reasons are these First Because no such exact and punctuall platforme is or can be clearly demonstrated to us nor discovered by us in the Scripture upon most diligent scrutiny Quod non lego non credo hath alwayes been reputed a solid Argument in matters of Divinity and divine institutions The Apostle Heb. 7. 13. 14. argues thus negatively even in the point of Christs Priesthood because Moses spake nothing of the Tribe of Iudah concerning Priesthood And God himselfe argues thus Deut. 9. 12. 15. Ye saw no manner of similitude therefore ye shall make no likenesse or image of me I may safely argue negatively in like sort The Scripture speaks nothing of such an exact universall Platforme and we see no image or similitude of it in the Gospel Therefore there is no such Secondly Independents have been frequently pressed to shew us any such exactform of Church-government instituted and generally prescribed to all ages