Selected quad for the lemma: conscience_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
conscience_n humane_a law_n obligation_n 1,134 5 9.8189 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A54406 A discourse of toleration in answer to a late book intitutled A discourse of the religion of England. Perrinchief, Richard, 1623?-1673. 1668 (1668) Wing P1593B; ESTC R36669 46,325 62

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

e. neither Commanded nor forbidden by God are therefore the proper matter for the Injunctions of the Magistrate Since we are Obliged to the things Commanded by God although the Magistrate do not Command yea though he doth Contradict and what God hath forbiden we are bound not to do though the Magistrate leave us to Our selves or Command the contrary and therefore a thing Indifferent is the most proper subject of the power of man therefore because it is so it cannot be concluded that it ought not to be enjoyn'd 2. If things long Disputed and Doubted may not be enjoyned then let them tell us what may for there is scarce any Truth which hath not had its Heresie contrary to it and therefore the Church may not enjoyn things necessary to Faith and Order which this Author in few lines before granted to her Besides Would not this Argument be as well urged by the Papists for their Cause hath been disputed even from the beginning of Luther's Reformation by several men of great Parts and Abilities that wanted not Pretensions to the Titles of Learned and Conscientious So also may the Socinians urge that the Points we hold against them have been Disputed almost from the beginning of the Reformation But yet the Author contends 't is not fit that the first should have a Toleration and I suppose he will be ashamed to pretend for the last But then he inquires What shall a man do that doubts of the things enjoyned seeing the Apostle saith He that doubts is damned if he eats because he eateth not of Faith To Doubt we answer doth suppose Arguments on both sides and in such case the Common Rule is the safest part is to be followed Now let all sober men judge whether it is not safer to keep the Peace and Unity of the Church which is so frequently and with so much Authority Commanded by Christ to be Obedient to the Higher Powers in those things which are proper matter for their Commands and wherein God himself hath determined nothing to Obey them that are over us in the Lord all which are clear and plain Duties then for a scruple or doubt of the Use of a thing that God hath left to humane Liberty which the Magistrate hath power to confine to cause Schisms in the Church Factions in the State Despise the Laws of Princes and the Government of the Church As for the Text of the Apostle He that doubts is c. It is an admonition given to the Jews that were become Christians that they should not do that in which the Church had not interposed her Authority by the Example of others which they themselves thought not lawful or did very much doubt whether it were so or no for he that did go against his own perswasion did condemn himself in that which his practice did seem to allow Therefore that Text doth not concern this Case at all The 2d attempt is That the Church not claiming an Infallibility cannot settle the Conscience by her sole Warrant but still leaves room for doubting and in prescribed Forms and Rites the Conscience that doth its office will interpose and concern it self c. I am willing to hope that the Discourser writ this in Ignorance and that he is not guilty of such portentous Malice that so he might destroy the Authority of the Church he did not fear to publish such an Opinion as would disturb all Government both in Families and in the State that would confound all Society and extirpate Feith and Justice from among the sons of men For if whosoever diselaims Infallibility cannot settle i. e. oblige for if it doth not signifie that it signifies nothing the Conscience Then neither the Laws of Kings nor the Commands of Fathers and Masters who dis●●● Infallibility are to be obeyed for Conscience sake or in the Lord but only as the power of the Superiour is able to enforce Obedience or Punishment No man likewise is obliged in Conscience to perform his Vows Promises and Contracts because when he made them he was not Infallible and being not so he cannot settle his own Conscience but leaves room for doubting and if he doubts as he applyes the Apostles Text he is damned if he does perform and therefore it will not be safe to perform them Thus this Mine that is wrought to blow up the Churches Authority will bury all Government and Common Honesty in the ruines of it Such are the goodly Doctrines whereby these men keep their Party close unto them and make them boggle at whatsoever the Magistrate requires from them as terrors to their Conscience If the Author thinks he hath secured himself from the shame of the absurd Consequences of this Opinion by that clause Her sole Warrant he is unjust and unfaithfully represents her Doctrine as if she pretended to binde the Conscience by her own Authority which is very false For when We hold That humane Laws of things not unlawful do oblige the Consciences of men subject to the Law-givers We do not refer the Obligation which is a necessity of Obedience to the matter of those Laws for that being in its nature Indifferent cannot be Necessary But to those commands of God which enjoyns us to be subject to the higher powers To obey them that are over us in the Lord. For those commands do of themselves and directly enforce a Necessity of Obedience to whatsoever humane Laws are not in themselves unlawful upon the penalty of God's displeasure For the Truth of which as it is easie to prove were it not to render the Discourse too long by interweaving Incidental Controversies so do we appeal to the Judgment of all sober Divines whatsoever We have for it the Testimony of Mr. Calvin the Founder of the Presbyterian Government and the Greatest Ornament that ever they had who though he disputes against Humane Constitutions yet meeting with the Objection raised from that Text We must be subject not only for Wrath but also for Conscience sake Answers by Distinguishing betwixt the Genus and Species For saith he although the particular Laws in themselves Cal. Institut l. 4 c. 10. sect 5. do not touch the Conscience yet are we Obliged by that General Command of God which commends unto us the Authority of Magistrates which is as much as we desire for if the Authority of Magistrates do either Directly or Indirectly in General or Particular by it self or by vertue of Gods Command bind the Conscience then must it needs be false which this Author saith that In prescribed Forms and Rites of Religion the Conscience that doth its office will interpose and concern it self c. For that Conscience which is guided by the fear of God will know its Office is to submit for God's Commands sake to what those that are over us in the Lord do carefully prescribe In the next place he brings in the Testimony of Woful Experience crying out No more of such Injunctions than needs must