Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
doctrine_n catholic_n church_n tradition_n 2,180 5 9.3701 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
A66383 The case of lay-communion with the Church of England considered and the lawfulness of it shew'd from the testimony of above an hundred eminent non-conformists of several perswasions. Williams, John, 1636?-1709. 1683 (1683) Wing W2691; ESTC R1501 57,793 83

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

and to joyn with those of their Ministers that think it their Duty so to do and are therein of the opinion of the old Non-Conformists that did not act as if there was no middle between separation from the Church and true Worship thereof and subscription unto or practice or approbation of all the corruptions of the same For though they would not subscribe to the Ceremonies yet they were against separation from Gods Publick Worship as one of them in the name of the rest doth declare So that as great a difference as there is betwixt presence and Consent betwixt bare Communion and approbation betwixt the Office of the Minister and the attendance of a private person so much is there betwixt the Case of Ministerial and Lay-Communion And therefore when we consider the Case of Lay-Communion we are only to respect what is required of the people what part they are to have and exercise in Communion with the Church Now what they are concerned in are either The Forms that are imposed the Gestures they are to use and the Times they are to observe for the Celebration of Divine Worship or The Ministration which they may be remotely suppos'd also to be concerned in The lawfulness of all which and of all things required in Lay-Communion amongst us I shall not undertake to prove and maintain by Arguments taken from those that already are in full Communion with the Church of England and so are obliged to justifie it but from those that in some things do dissent from it who may therefore be supposed to be impartial and whose Reasons may be the more heeded as coming from themselves and from such that are as forward in other respects to owne the miscarriages of the Church as those that wholly separate from it For the better understanding of the Case and of their Judgment in it I shall consider 1. What opinion the most eminent and sober Non-Conformists have had of the Church of England 2. What opinion they have had of Communion with that Church 3. What opinion they he had of such practices and usages in that Church as Lay-men are concerned in 1. What opinion the most eminent and sober Non-Conformists have had of the Church of England And that will appear in these two things First That they owne her to be a true Church Secondly To be a Church in the main very valuable First They owne her to be a true Church Thus an Eminent Person saith of the old Non-Conformists They did always plead against the Corruptions of the Church of England but never against the truth of her Being or the comfort of her Communion And as much is affirmed of the present by a grave and sober Person amongst them The Presbyterians generally hold the Church of England to be a true Church though defective in its Order and Discipline And thus it 's acknowledged in the name of the rest by one that undertakes their Defence and would defend them in their Separation We acknowledge the Church of England to be a true Church and that we are Members of the same visible Church with them And this they do not only barely assert but do undertake to prove This is done by the old Non-Conformists in their Confutation of the Brownists who thus begin That the Church of England is a true Church of Christ and such an one as from which whosoever wittingly and willingly separateth himself cutteth himself off from Christ we doubt not but the indifferent Reader may be perswaded by these Reasons following 1. We enjoy and joyn together in the use of those outward means which God hath ordained in his Word for the gathering of a visible Church and have been effectual to the unfeigned conversion of many as may appear both by the other fruits of Faith and by the Martyrdom which sundry have endured that were Members of our Church c. 2. Our whole Church maketh profession of the true Faith The Confession of our Church together with the Apology thereof and those Articles of Religion which were agreed upon in the Convocation-House An. 1562. whereunto every Minister of the Land is bound to subscribe so far forth as they contain the Confession of Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments do prove this evidently c. So Mr. Ball Wheresoever we see the Word of God truly taught and professed in Points fundamental and the Sacraments for substance rightly administred there is the true Church of Christ though the health and soundness of it may be crazed by many errours in Doctrine corruptions in the Worship of God and evils in the life and manners of men As much as this is also affirmed in the Letters passed betwixt the Ministers of Old England and New England It is simply necessary to the being of a Church that it be laid upon Christ the foundation which being done the remaining of what is forbidden or the want of what is commanded cannot put the Society from the Title or Right of a true Church And if we enquire into the judgment of the present Non-Conformists we shall find them likewise arguing for it Thus the Author of Jerubbaal The Essentials constitutive of a true Church a re 1. The Head 2. The Body 3. The Union that is between them Which three concurring in the Church of England Christ being the professed Head She being Christ's professed Body and the Catholick Faith being the Union-band whereby they are coupled together She cannot in justice be denied a true though God knows far from a pure Church If we should proceed in this Argument and consider the Particulars I might fill a Volume with Testimonies of this kind The Doctrine of the Church is universally held to be true and sound even the Brownists own'd it of old in their calm mood who declare We testifie to all men by these Presents That we have not forsaken any one Point of the true ancient Apostolick Faith professed in our Land but hold the same grounds of Christian Religion with them See more in Bayly's Disswasive c. 2. p. 20.33 and Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness of Separation part 1. § 9. p. 31. The Presbyterians if I may so call them for distinction sake do owne it So M r Corbet The Doctrin of Faith and Sacraments by Law established is heartily received by the Non-Conformists So M r Baxter As for the Doctrin of the Church of England the Bishops and their Followers from the first Reformation begun by Edward the VI were found in Doctrine adhering to the Augustan method express'd now in the Articles and Homilies they differed not in any considerable Point from those whom they called Puritans The like is affirmed by the Independents The Confession of the Church of England declared in the Articles of Religion and herein what is purely Doctrinal we fully embrace As to the Worship they owne it for the matter and substance to be good and for Edification So
many superstitious Ceremonies the observation whereof were more strictly urged than the Commandments and Ordinances of God the Temple made a Den of Thieves the Discipline and censures shamefully abused the Doctrine was corrupt in many points yet the word tells you Christ whose example it binds you to follow and you profess your selves followers of him in all imitable things made no separation from this Church professed himself a Member of it was by Circumcision incorporated a Member received Baptism in a Congregation of that People was a hearer of their common Service and their Teachers allowing and commanding his Disciples to hear them communicated in the Passover with the People and the Priest no more did his Apostles make separation from this Church after his Ascension till their day had its Period c. By their example it appears that till God hath forsaken a Church no man may forsake it c. So that we may conclude from hence with M r Hildersham Those Assemblies that enjoy the Word and Doctrine of Salvation though they have many corruptions remaining in them are to be acknowledged as true Churches of God and such as none of the faithful may make Separation from We shall need no further proof of this Doctrine than the example of our Saviour himself c. For why should our Saviour use it if it was unlawful or why should it be a Sin in us who have not such Eyes to pierce into the impiety of mans Traditions as he had as M r Bradshaw argues The same measures were observed also by the Apostles after the establishment of the Christian Church This is not to be gainsaid and is therefore granted by one in other things rigid more than enough I do not say that every corruption in a true Church is sufficient ground of Separation from it The unsoundness of many in the Church of Corinth touching the Doctrine of the Resurrection and in Galatia touching the Doctrine of Circumcision and the necessity of keeping the Ceremonial Law were not sufficient ground of Separation from them for the Apostles held Communion with them notwithstanding these corruptions Now by parity of reason it will follow that if Separation was not to be allowed from those corrupted Churches then surely not from such as are not so corrupted as they So M r Cawdrey pleads Corinth had we suppose greater disorders in it than are to be found blessed be God in many of our Congregations why then do they fly and separate from us And if our Saviour and his Apostles did not separate from such Churches much less should we who may without doubt safely follow the advice given by an Author above-quoted When you are at a stand think how Christ would have carried what he would have done in the like case with yours and we may thereby be concluded Thirdly They further argue that Christ doth still hold Communion with defective Churches and not reject the Worship for tolerable corruptions in it and so neither ought we It is supposed by a worthy person that there is no such society of Christians in the World whose Assemblies as to instituted Worship are so rejected by Christ as to have a Bill of Divorce given unto them until they are utterly as it were extirpate by the Providence of God c. For we do judge that where-ever the Name of Jesus Christ is called upon there is Salvation to be obtained however the ways of it may be obstructed unto the most by their own sins and errors And if this may be said of Churches though fundamentally erroneous in Worship then who shall dare as another saith to judge when Christ hath forsaken a People who still profess his Name and keep up his Worship for substance according to his word though they do or are supposed to fail in circumstances or lesser parts of duty Now this granted the other will follow that then we are not to separate from such Churches Thus M r Hildersham concluded of old from the practice of Christ and observes 1. So long as God continueth his word and the Doctrine of Salvation to a People so long it is evident that God dwells among them and hath not forsaken them c. And till God hath forsaken a Church no man may forsake it 2. No Separation may be made from those Assemblies where men may be assured to find and attain Salvation but men may be sure to find and attain Salvation in such Assemblies where the Ministry of his word and the Doctrine of Salvation is contained So M r Vines The Argument saith he of M r Brightman is considerable if God afford his Communion with a Church by his own Ordinances Grace and Spirit it would be unnatural and peevish in a Child to forsake his Mother while his Father owns her for his Wife I might heap up Authorities of this kind but shall content my self with a considerable one from M r Cotton who reasons after this manner The practice of the Brownists is blame-worthy because they separate where Christ keeps fellowship Rev. 1.18 And that he walks with us we argue because he is still pleased to dispense to us the word of life and edifies many Souls thereby and therefore surely Christ hath fellowship with us and shall man be more pure than his Maker where Christ vouchsafes fellowship shall man renounce it Upon this are grounded the wholesome exhortations of many eminent Non-Conformists as that of M r Calamy You must hold Communion with all those Churches with which Christ holds Communion you must separate from the sins of Christians but not from the Ordinances of Christ. Of M r R. Allein Excommunicate not them from you excommunicate not your selves from them with whom Christ holds Communion Judge not that Christ withdraws from all those who are not in every thing of your mind and way Methinks saith a Reverend Person in his Farewel Sermon where a Church as to the main keeps the form of sound words and the substantials of that Worship which is Christs some adjudged defects in order cannot justifie separation I dare not dismember my self from that Church that holds the head I think whilst Doctrine is for the main sound Christ stays with a Church and it is good staying where he stays I would follow him and not lead him or go before the Lamb. To such we find a severe rebuke given very lately by a Reverend Person Proud conceited Christians are not contented to come out and separate from the unbelieving idolatrous World but they will separate also from the true Church of Christ and cast off all Communion with them who hold Communion with him Fourthly They argue that to separate for such defects and corruptions would destroy all Communion If this should be saith M r Bradshaw then no man can present himself with a good Conscience at any publick Worship of God wheresoever because except it should
cause of grief that such should have any thing to do in Gods matters which are so weighty and to be dealt withal in high reverence But yet before the objection is admitted it is to be premised 1. That if there be such in the Church it doth not proceed from their Conformity to it For good and pious men of this sort always were and still are in the Church What there were formerly may be read in Mr Baxter who thus delivers himself When I think what learned holy incomparable men abundance of the old Conformists were my heart riseth against the thoughts of separating from them such as M r Bolton M r Whately M r Fenner c. and abundance other such yea such as Bishop Jewel Bishop Grindal Bishop Hall c. yea and the Martyrs too as Cranmer Ridley Hooper himself c. What there are now in the Church he also tells us I believe there are many hundred Godly Ministers in the Parish-Churches of England And of his own knowledge saith I profess to know those of them whom I take to be much better than my self I will say a greater word that I know those of them whom I think as Godly and humble Ministers as most of the Non-Conformists whom I know So saith D r Bryan In some Countries I am sure there are many Sober Godly Orthodox able Preachers yet in possession of the publick places 2. It is to be premised that this argument if of any yet is of no farther force than against the Congregations where such are and so is of none against the Church it self where are good as well as bad nor against Parochial Communion where such are not So M r Baxter argues I doubt not but there are many hundred Parish Ministers who preach holily and live holily though I could wish that they were more And what reason have you to charge any other mens sins on them c. or to think it unlawful to joyn with the good for the sake of the bad this is to condemn the sound for the sake of the infected Having premised this we shall re-assume the case and consider how it is stated and resolved by them 1. It s granted that it is not unlawful to joyn with bad Ministers in some cases where they may have better So M r Rogers As it is far from me to be a Patron of such or to justifie them so yet while we may enjoy the Ministry of better I would not refuse to be partaker of the Prayers which are offered by them 2. It s granted that its lawful and a duty to hear and joyn with such where a better cannot be had that it is lawful so M r Rogers Who can blame him who desireth to pray with better than they be And yet better to joyn with them sometime than to leave the publick Assemblies altogether So M r Baxter No People should chuse and prefer an ungodly Minister before a better but they should rather submit to such than have none when a better by them cannot be had That its a duty so the old Non-Conformists The Scripture teacheth evidently that the People must and ought to joyn with them unworthy Ministers in the Worship of God and in separating from the Ordinance they shall sin against God For the Worship is of God and the Ministry is of God the Person unworthily executing his place is neither set up by some few private Christians nor can by them be removed And warrant to withdraw themselves from the Worship of God because such as ought not are suffered to intermeddle with holy things they have none from God So M r Ball To communicate with Ministers no better than Pharisees in the true Worship of God is to worship God aright to reverence his Ordinances to relye upon his Grace to hearken unto his voice and submit unto his good pleasure This they maintain by several arguments As First Such were always in the Church and Communion must never have been held with the Church if no Communion was to be where such were So the old Non-Conformists argue If the Minister make it unlawful then all Communion in any part of Gods Worship with such Ministers is unlawful and so the Church in all ages of the World the Prophets our Saviour Christ the Apostles and the faithful in the Primitive Churches sinned in holding Communion with such when the Priests were dumb Dogs that could not bark and greedy Dogs that could never have enough when the Prophets prophesied lyes when the Priests bought and sold Doves in the Temple c. when they were such and did such things they were ungodly Ministers but we never find that the Prophets our Saviour and the Apostles did either forbear themselves or warn the faithful not to communicate with such in the Ordinance of Worship So much M r Nye doth grant More cannot be objected against our Ministers that Conform than might against the Scribes and Pharisees in Christs time either in respect of their Doctrine which was loaden with Traditions their standing which was not according to Law their lives which were vicious yet Christ not only permits but requires us to attend the truths they deliver Secondly They plead that our Saviour himself did Communicate where such did Officiate So D r Bryan In some Countries I am sure there are many Sober Godly Orthodox able Preachers c. And if you know any Country where it is worse consider if Christ himself did not joyn with worse This is attested by another Reverend Person Our Saviour Christ used to attend on the publick Worship in his time notwithstanding such formalists and superstitious ones as the Scribes and Pharisees did officiate in it Thirdly They say that the sin of the Minister is not theirs nor doth bring any detriment to them though they Communicate with him So M r Baxter A Ministers personal faults may damn himself and must be matter of lamentation to the Church who ought to do their best to reform them or get better by any lawful means but in case they cannot his sin is none of theirs nor doth it make his administration null or ineffectual nor will it allow you to separate from the Worship which he administreth So the Ministers sent to Oxford do assert Some evil men may and always have de facto been Officers and Ministers in the Church c. and the wickedness of such men did not null or evacuate their Ministerial Acts for our Saviour would have the Scribes and Pharisees heard while they sate in Moses Chair c. And that the Ministrations in such a case are not invalid and that the People suffer not by it they further prove 1. Because they officiate not in their own name So the Old Non-Conformists It hath evermore been held for a truth in the Church of God that although sometimes the evil hath chief authority in the