Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	ancient_a	church_n	hold_v	2,250	5	6.2009	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86003	Male audis or An answer to Mr. Coleman his Malè dicis. Wherein the repugnancy of his Erastian doctrine to the word of God, to the solemne League and Covenant, and to the ordinances of Parliament: also his contradictions, tergiversations, heterodoxies, calumnies, and perverting of testimonies, are made more apparent then formerly. Together with some animadversions upon Master Hussey his Plea for Christian magistracy: shewing, that in divers of the afore mentioned particulars he hath miscarried as much, and in some particulars more then Mr Coleman. / By George Gillespie, minister at Edinbrugh. Published by authority.	Gillespie, George, 1613-1648.	1646 (1646)	Wing G754; Thomason E317_16; ESTC R200545	44,904	65

for sparing the Towne Alexander preventeth him with an Oath that he would not doe that thing which Anaximenes should make petition for whereupon Anaximenes made Petition that he would destroy the Towne Alexander found himselfe bound by the plaine words of his Oath to doe what he intended and so did forbeare And to adde a divine Story to an humane Joshua and the Princes of Israel did sweare to the Gibeonites upon a supposition that was not true yet they found themselves tyed by their Oath So he that sweareth to his owne hurt must not change the Oath being otherwise lawfull Psal. 15. 4. yet that selfe hurt which is wrapped up in the matter of his Oath was not intended in swearing Sometimes againe that which is supposed and implyed in an Oath lyeth also in the thoughts and intention of those that sweare Now where those two are co-incident that is where the thing supposed in an Oath is both implyed necessarily in the words of the Oath and is also according to the apprehensions of those that sweare which is the case here in the Covenant and is acknowledged by the Reverend Brother I should thinke it most strange how any Divine can have the least doubt concerning the obligation of such a thing except he conceive the thing it selfe to be unlawfull His second Answer is this In my way saith he the Governments Civill and Ecclesiasticall are in the subject matter clearly distinct When the Parliament handles matters of Warre it is a Military Court when businesse of State it is a Civill Court when matters of Religion it is an Ecclesiasticall Court If this hold good then it will follow 1. That the Parliament when they deliberate about matters of Warre or matters of Religion are not at least formally and properly a Civill Court else how makes he these so clearly distinct 2. That Ministers may be called Civill Officers for consider his words in his Re-examination pag 11. I doe not exclude Mininisters neither from Ecclesiasticall nor Civill Government in a Ministeriall way doctrinally and declaratively Compare this with his present Answer it will amount to thus much That different denominations being taken from the different subject matter Ministers when they handle Doctrinally matters of Religion are Ecclesiasticall Ministers and when they handle Doctrinally matters of Civill Government which himselfe alloweth them to doe they are Civill Ministers But now to apply his Answer to the Argument How doth all this salve the repugnancy of his Doctrine to the Covenant If he had examined my Arguments he had found that most of them proove from the Covenant a Church-Government distinct from Civill Government Suctjective as well as Objective that is another Government besides Magistracy different Agents as well as different Acts different hands as well as handling of different matters I know the Christian Magistrate may and ought to have a great influence into matters of Religion and whatsoever is due to him by the Word of God or by the Doctrine either of the Antient or Reformed Churches I doe not infringe but doe maintaine and strengthen it But the point in hand is That the Covenant doth undeniably suppose and clearly hold forth a Government in the Church distinct from Magistracy which is proved by these Arguments which as they are not yet answered so I will briefly apply them to the proofe of that point which now Master Coleman sticks at 1. The Church Government mentioned in the Covenant is as distinct from the Priviledges of Parliament as the first Article of the Covenant is distinct from the third Article 2. The Church-Government in the first Article of the Covenant the Reformation wherof we are to endeavour differeth from Church-Government by Archbishops Bishops c. mentioned in the second Article as much as a thing to be reformed differeth from a thing to be extirpated so that the Church-Government formerly used in the Church of England is looked upon two waies in the Covenant either qua Church-Government and so we sweare to endeavour the Reformation of it which I hope was not meant of reforming that part of the Priviledges of Parliament whereby they meddle with Religion in a Parliamentary way Or qua Church-Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops c. and so we sweare to endeavour the extirpation of it This difference betweene the first and second Articles between Reformation and Extirpation proveth that the Covenant doth suppose that the Church-Government formerly used in the Church of England in so far as it was a Church-Government is not eatenus to be abolished but in so far as it was a corrupt Church-Government that is Prelaticall 3. Church-Government in the Covenant is matched with Doctrine Worship and Catechising Now these are subjectively different from Civill Government for the Civill Magistrate doth not act doctrinally nor catechistically neither can he dispence the Word and Sacraments as Master Coleman acknowledgeth 4. In the first part of the first Article of the Covenant concerning The preservation of the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government It is uncontroverted that Discipline and Government are Ecclesiasticall and subjectively different from Civill Government that is though divers who have a hand in the Civill Government are ruling Elders yet it is as true that divers Members of Parliament and inferiour Civill Courts are not Church Officers● and of the Ministery none are Civill Governours which makes the two Governments clearly distinct subjective Now the second part of that Article concerning the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdomes of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government cannot so farre differ from the first part of that Article in the sense of the words Discipline and Government as that the same words in the same Article of the same Covenant should signifie things differing t●to genere which will follow unlesse Discipline and Government in the second branch and forme of Church-Government in the third branch be understood of the power of Church Officers and not of the Magistrate 5. We did sweare to endeavour the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdomes of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and the example of the best Reformed Churches Now the Word of God holds forth another Government besides Magistracy for Master Coleman himselfe hath acknowledged that he findes in the New Testament Ministers to be Rulers yea instituted Rulers And the example of the best Reformed Churches without all doubt leadeth us to an Ecclesiasticall Government different from Magistracy Neither hath the Reverend Brother so much as once adventured to alledge the contrary except of the Church of Israel which as it heterogeneous being none of the Reformed Churches mentioned in the Covenant so it shall be discussed in due place From all which reasons I conclude that the wit of man cannot reconcile Master Colemans Doctrine with the Covenant I adde 6. A confutation of him out of himselfe thus No

I had rectified a great mistake of the Reverend Brother when I told him It is accidental to the ruling Elder to be of the Nobility or to Nobles to be ruling Elders there are but some so and many otherwise He is not pleased to be rectified in this but replyeth I say first it is continually so Secondly The Kings Commissioner in the General Assembly is his presence accidental Male dicis pag. 10. See now here whether he understandeth what he saith or whereof he affirmeth That which he saith is continually so is almost continually otherwise that is there are continually some Ruling Elders who are not Nobles and there are continually some Nobles who are not Ruling Elders So that if any thing be accidental this is accidental that an Elder be of the Nobility or Nobles be Elders they are neither Nobles qua Elders nor Elders qua Nobles It is no lesse accidental that the Kings Commissioner be present in the General Assembly for there have been General Assemblies in Scotland both before the erection and since the last casting out of Prelacy in which there was no Commissioner from the King And when the King sends a Commissioner it is accidental that he be of the Nobility for the King hath sent Commissioners to General Assemblies who were not of the Nobility A fourth Injury not to be passed in silence is this Master Coleman hath endeavoured to make the world beleeve that the Commissioners from the Church of Scotland came to the Assembly byassed with something adventitious from without which he calls a National determination and that we are not permitted by those that sent us to receive any further light from the Word of God I shall say no more of the byas because as I told him before the standers by see well enough which way the byas runs But most strange it is that after I had confuted his Calumny not onely from our Paper first presented to the Grand Committee but from the General Assemblies own Letter to the Assembly of Divines shewing that they had ordered the laying aside of some particular Customes in the Church of Scotland for the neerer uniformity with the Church of England so much endeared unto them yet he still adhereth to his former Calumny Male dicis pag. 20. without taking notice of the Evidence which I had given to the contrary And not content with this he still qua●relleth with my allegation of certain parallel examples which are by him so far disesteemed that he hath not stuck to passe the very same censure upon the forrain Divines who came to the Synod of Dort which the Arminians did The same he saith of Alexander his coming to the Councel of Nice and of Cyril his coming to the Councel of Ephesus All these I say he still involveth under the same Censure with us for whereas he had alleaged that I justified the byas this I denyed and called for his proof his Reply now is thus Is not the allegation of examples of the like doing a justification of the act done Male dicis pag. 20. This Reply can have no other sence but this That I justified the thing which he thinks our byas because I justified those other Divines who as he holds came also byassed in like manner I am perswaded this one particular his joyning with the Arminians in their Exceptions against the Synod of Dort would make all the Reformed Churches if they could all speak to him uno ore to cry Male audis And I am as firmly perswaded that the Confession which I have extorted from him in this place That he knoweth no adventitious ingagements those Divines had makes him irreconcileably to contradict himself for he made them but just now byassed in the same manner as he thinks us and made my allegation of their examples to be a justification of the byas charged by him upon us As therefore he doth most uncharitably and untruly judge us to be byassed with adventitious engagements so doth he judge of them Neither can he assoil them while he condemneth us for the Articles concerning Predestination the death of Christ grace freewill and perseverance were determined before the Synod of Dort by most if not by all of those Reformed Churches who sent Commissioners thither as much as Presbyterial Government was determined in the Church of Scotland before the Reverend Assembly of Divines was called And this Preingagement and Predetermination of those Reformed Churches was the main objection of the Arminians against the forrain Divines who came to the Synod of Dort To conclude this point Master Coleman himself in his Reexamination pag. 7. avoucheth roundly That the forrain Divines came to Dort not as Divines by dispute and disquisition to finde out truth but as Judges to censure all different Opinions as Erroneous CHAP. VII Calumnies confuted and that Question briefly cleared Whether the Magistrate be Christs Vice-gerent MAster Hussey in his Title page tels us he hath prosecuted the argumentative part without any personall reflections yet I could instance divers personall reflections in his Book which any moderate impartiall man will extremely dislike but what should this be to the edifying of my Reader the end which next to the glory of God and the promoting of Reformation I have proposed to my self Yet I must needs take notice of some calumnies First In his Epistle pag. 8. he offereth it to be examined whether I was not beside my Text Mal. 3. 2. when I pressed from it Reformation by Ecclesiasticall Discipline whether that refiners fire and fullers sope doth not point at another and a nearer operation upon the souls and spirits of men by the Blood Word Spirit and Grace of Christ and whether such handling of a similitude in a Text be to preach the mind of God or mens own fancy It is no discontent to me but I shall rejoyce in it that men of piety and judgement examine my Doctrine by the Word of God and hold fast what they finde agreeable to the Scriptures and no more But i● this brotherly or fair or conscionable dealing to offer my Sermon to be examined under such a notion when he hath not onely said nothing to confute any of my Doctrines as not arising from my Text or any of my applications as not arising from my Doctrines but hath also untruely represented my Sermon as coming short of or not expressing that which indeed it hath most principally and most expressely in it That of Reformation was but a part of my Sermon and that of Church-censures against scandalous sinners was but the least part of that part And why should not the fullers sope in the House of God take off those spots in our feasts Why should not the refiners fire purge away the wicked of the Earth like drosse so David calls them That Reformation is one part of the holy Ghosts intendment in that Text is Gualther's opinion as well as mine yet he thinks Gualther his own Nay I proved it from

comparing Scripture with Scripture which is the best way that I know to clear Scripture Why did he not answer my proofes But beside all that I said of Reformation had I not other three Doctrines out of that Text comprehending all that which Master Hussey hinteth as omitted by me and yet intended in the text Dare he say that I did not take in purgation by the Word though I confesse he doth not well prove it from the words which he citeth Is not my word an hammer but it is proved by the words which he citeth not Is not my word like as a fire Did I not expressely say that Christ is to us as a refiners fire and as fullers sope three wayes by reformation by tribulation by mortification Did I not handle the last two as well as the first Oh let no more any such grosse calumnies be found among those who professe to be Brethren Secondly Master Hussey in his Epistle to my self gives it out that I say We have leave from the Civill Magistrate to preach the Gospel which he interprets as if I denied that we preach the Word with Authority from Christ It was de facto not de Jure that I spake it The Magistrate hath power in his hand to hinder both Doctrine and Discipline if he be an adversary though it be the will of Christ that there be both Doctrine and Discipline and the Authority of both is from Christ When the Magistrate assisteth or countenanceth or so much as he doth not hinder the preaching of the Gospel then he gives leave to it Thirdly Master Coleman in his Maledicis pag. 1. saith I am confident the Church of Scotland sent this Commissioner to dispute down our reasons not to revile our persons Maledicis Maledicis pag. 1. Why did he not if he could give instance of some reviling word written by me against his person I have not so learned Christ The Lord rebuke every railing and reviling Spirit I have given him reason against railing he hath given me railing against reason I spake to his doctrine he speakes to my place and relation which is both the Alpha and Omega of his Maledicis Thirdly ibid. Knowledge saith he is onely with Mr. Gillespie others understand neither what they say nor whereof they affirms He will sooner bring water out of flint then prove this consequence out of my Title page Although I confesse himselfe hath affirmed divers things of the Church of Scotland which he doth not understand as I have made plainely to appeare If he take a review of the Title page of his re-examination he gives more ground for this consequence that Mr. Coleman is the onely man that denies himselfe others seeke great things for themselves Or from the Title page of his Maledicis this consequence will be as good that Mr. Coleman is the onely man that blesseth others are revilers Fourthly Thus saith Mr. Coleman O y●e Honourable House of Parliament Take you notice that you manage that great place of yours under Christ and for Christ He is your head and you are his servants And take you notice withall that Mr. Gillespy accounts this your reproach Maledicis Maledicis pag. 17. But O ye Honourable House of Parliament be pleased to take notice of my owne plaine expression of my minde in my Nihil respondes pag. 13. The Christian Magistrate manageth his Office under and for Christ that is so as to be serviceable for the Kingdome and Glory of Christ And now judge whether it be sutable to the sincerity and candor of a Minister of the Gospell to endeavour to make me odious to authority by imputing to me that which not onely I did not say but the contrary whereof I did plainly expresse The thing which I charged his doctrin with was this that by holding all government to be given to Christ as Mediatour and from him as Mediatour derived to the Magistrate as his Vicegerent he shaketh the foundation of Magistracy I am sure that which I hold that all lawfull Magistrates are Powers ordained by God and are to be honoured and obeyed as Gods Vicegerents is a firme and strong foundation for Magistracy But that which Mr. Coleman and Mr. Hussey hold viz. That the Christian Magistrate holdeth his Office of under and for Christ as he is Mediator and doth act vice Christi as Christs Vicegerent gives a most dangerous wound to Christian Magistracy which I can demonstrate in many particulars I shall now give instance onely in these few First They must prove from Scripture that Christ as Mediator hath given a Commission of Vicegerentship to Christian Magistrates and appointed them not onely to be seviceable to him and to doe his worke for that they must serve Christ and be for his Glory is not controverted nay can never enough be commended to them but also to governe vice Christi in Christs stead and that not only as he is God which is not controverted neither but as he is Mediator This I say they must prove which they will never be able to doe or otherwise they doe by their doctrine leade the Magistrate into a snare and leave him in it For how shall he be acknowledged for a Vicegerent who can shew no Commission nor warrant for his Vicegerentship Secondly Their doctrine tendeth to the altering of the surest and best knowne tenure of Magistracy which is from God for they hold that God hath put all Government and all authority civill and all into the hands of Christ as Mediatour if the tenure from Christ faile then by their doctrine the tenure from God shall faile too Thirdly The Vicegerent cannot act in that capacity nor assume that power which his Soveraigne whose Vicegerent he is ought not to assume if he were personally present So that by their principles it will follow that the Christian Magistrate can act no further nor assume any other power of Government then Christ himselfe might have assumed when he was on earth or might now assume and exercise as Mediatour if he were on earth But Christ himselfe when he was on earth neither did exercise nor was sent to exercise civill Judgement Luke 12. 14. and the temporall sword John 18. 36. nor externall observation and State Luk. 17. 20 21. and he declined to be an earthly King John 6. 15. Therefore by their principles the Christian Magistrate ought to forbeare and avoide all these A fifth Calumny is this Mr. Coleman descanting upon the Governments mentioned 1 Cor. 12. 28. chargeth me with a circular argumentation he circularly argues saith he They are civill because God placed them there and God placed them there because they are civill Maledicis Maledicis pag. 9. I neither argued the one nor the other they are both Sir of your owne forging But this is not your first allegation of this kind I sometime admire what oscitancy or supine negligence to judge it no worse this can be to fancy to your selfe that I have said what you

such Church-Government as Master Coleman casts upon an uncertainty whether the Word hold out any such thing can be by his Principles the power of Magistracy in things Ecclesiasticall but another Government beside Magistracy But the Church-Government mentioned in the first Article of the Covenant is such a Church-Government as Master Coleman casts upon an uncertainty whether the Word hold out any such thing Ergo the Church-Government mentioned in the first Article of the Covenant cannot be by his Principles the power of Magistracy but another Government beside Magistracy The Proposition he will easily admit unlesse he alter his assertions the assumption is cleare from his Re-examination pag. 15. CHAP. IIII. Master Coleman and Master Hussey their errors in Divinity MAster Hussey all along calls for Divinity Schoolrs I confesse himselfe hath much need of them that he may be better grounded in his Divinity and that if he will plead any more for Christian Magistracy he may not involve himselfe into such dangerous heterodoxies as have fallen from his pen in this short Tractate I instance in these First In his Epistle to the Parliament he hath divers passages against Synodicall Votes he will have no putting to the Vote For Votes saith he pag. 6 are of no other use but to gather parties and ought no where to be used but by those that have the power of the Sword And pag. 3. he will have the businesse of Assemblies to be only Doctrinall and by dispute to finde out truth their Disputes ought to end in a brotherly accord as in Act. 15. much disputing but all ended in accord no putting to the Vote And pag. 5. he will have things carried with strength of Argument and unanimous consent of the whole Clergy Behold how he joyneth issue with the Remonstrants against the Contra-Remonstrants to introduce not onely an Accademicall but a Scepticall and Pyrrhonian Dubitation and uncertainty so that there shall never be an end of controversie nor any settlement of truth and of the Ordinances of Jesus Christ so long as there shall be but one tenacious Disputer to hold up the ball of contention One egge is not liker another then Master Husseys Tenent is like that of the Arminians for which see the Synod of Dort Sess. 25. It was the nin●h condition which the Arminians required in a lawfull and well constituted Synod that there might be no decision of the controverted Articles but onely such an accommodation as both sides might agree to And generally they hold that Synods ought not to meet for decision or determination but for examining disputing discussing So their Examen Censurae cap. 25. and their Vindiciae lib. 2. cap. 6. pag. 131. 133. Secondly In that same Epistle to the Parliament pag. 4. he hath this passage Will-worship is unlawfull I meane in matters that are essentiall to Gods Worship which are matters of duty as for circumstantials of time and place except the Sabbath which are matters of liberty in these the Common-wealth may Vote c and this is your christian liberty that in matters of liberty yee make Rules and Lawes to your selves not crossing the ends that you are tyed to in duty And is the Sabbath onely a circumstantiall of time contra-distinct from matters of duty It seemes he will cry downe not onely the Jus divinum of Church-censures with the Erastians but the Jus divinum of the Sabbath with the Canterburians And if Will-worship be unlawfull onely in the essentialls of Gods Worship why was the Argument of Will-worship so much tossed not onely between Prelates and Non-Conformists but between Papists and Protestants even in reference to Ceremonies And whether hath not Mr. Hussey here ingaged himselfe to hold it free and lawfull to the Christian Magistrate yea to private Christians for he calls it Christian liberty not Parliamentary liberty now Christian liberty belongs to all sorts of Christians to make Lawes to themselves for taking the Sacrament anniversarily on Christmasse Good-Friday and Easter or to appoint a perpetuall Monethly Fast or Thanksgiving yea another Parliament may if so it should seeme good to them impose againe the Surplice and Crosse in Baptisme Fonts Railing of Communion Tables the reading of divers passages of Apocrypha to the Congregation Doxologies Anthems Responsories c. as heretofore they were used or they may appoint all and every one to sit in the Church with their faces toward the East to stand up at the Epistles and Gospels c. yea what Ceremonies Jewish Popish Heathenish may they not impose provided they onely hold the foundation and keepe to those essentials which he calls matters of duty by restraining the unlawfulnesse of Will-worship to the essentialls he leaves men free to doe any thing in Religion pr●ter verbum so that it appeare not to them to be c●ntra verbum any thing they may adde to the Word or doe beside the Word so that the thing cannot be proved contrary to the Word Thirdly Mr. Hussey ibid. pag 4. 5. saith That the Parliament may require such as they receive for Preachers of truth to send out able men to supply the places and that without any regard to the allowance or dis-allowance of the people Where in the first part of that which he saith there is either a Heterodoxie or a controdiction A heterodoxie if he meane that Ministers are to be sent out without Ordination a contradiction if he meane that they must be Ordained for then he gives Classes a worke which is not meerly Doctrinall But most strange it is that he so farre departeth from Protestant Divines in point of the Churches liberty in chusing Ministers He tells us pag. 14. that Mr. Herle for want of skill and Theologicall Disputations hath granted to people a right to chuse their Minister Master Herles skill both Logicall and Theologicall is greater then it seemes he can well Judge of neither can this bold arrogant censure of his derogate from Mr. Herles but from his owne reputation For the matter it selfe it is one and not the least of the Controversies between the Papists and Protestants what right the Church hath in the Vocation of Ministers Read Bellarmine de cleric and those that writ against him and see whether it be not so The Helvetick confession tells us that the right chusing of Ministers is by the consent of the Church and the Belgick confession saith We beleeve that the Ministers Seniors and Deacons ought to be called to those their Functions and by the lawfull elections of the Church to be advanced into those roomes See both these in the Harmony of Confessions Sect. 11. I might here if it were requisite bring a heape of Testimonies from Protestant Writers the least thing which they can admit of is that a Minister be not obtruded renitente Ecclesia Factum valet fieri non debet It may be helped after it is done without making null or void the Ministery but in a well constituted Church there ought to be no