Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	church_n	government_n	reform_a	2,718	5	10.4681	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45319	A short answer to the tedious Vindication of Smectymnvvs by the avthor of the Humble remonstrance.; Works. 1648	Hall, Joseph, 1574-1656.	1641 (1641)	Wing H417; ESTC R4914	50,068	120

grounded upon stumbling blocks it is no marvell if it fall Those you say are laid by the Liturgie and I say removed by many So yee know they are by Hooker Abbot Hutton Morton Burges Covell and I know not how many others amongst the rest I stumbled upon a blinde man whose inward sight abundantly supplyed the want of his bodily eyes who hath in many of those points given in my opinion very cleare satisfaction but sure you could not suppose me so weak as to imagine that his lack of eyes could exempt him from errour although divers of your exceptions are if they were worth our insisting upon more groundlesse then his tenets But whiles I allowed many of his passages I never meant to justifie all It is far from mee to excuse or patronize other mens Paradoxes We know the old distinction of Scandals taken and given if there be any danger of the latter it is I say under carefull hands to remove it and however it pleases you to fall into cholerick comparisons perhaps those hands which you sleight may not bee the least active To the fourth which is the Idolizing of the Liturgie I say truly Separatists abhorre it for such never true Protestant adored it for such Show us the man that ever worshipt the Service-booke that wee may wonder at that uncouth Idolatrie Show us the man that holds it the onely worship of God in England as you unjustly pretend I tell you of some others that stick not to say Too many doe injuriously make an Idol of preaching Why should you hope I am not serious in affirming so undoubted a truth yet we may not thinke of abandoning it Even in coole bloud the argument holds firme without equalizing one with the other Some have made an Idol of their silver and gold must I therefore cast away this metall You needed not feare that I would speake ought to the derogation from my owne profession But if I compare Gods ordinance of prayer with his ordinance of preaching and this individuall Liturgie with that individuall Sermon I hope there is no danger in that collation TO the fifth The great distaste which these publick prayers meet withall is truly lamentable and the effect of that distaste separation yet more Let those mis-zealous men who have infused these thoughts into well-meaning soules see how they will answer it in that great day to the Judge of the quick and dead surely if the case were mine I should feare it would fall heavie upon my soule for if it be granted that there are divers passages in our Liturgie faulty and worthy of correction yet no wise enemie can say they are so hainous that they barre all Communion Did they containe heresie or blasphemie wee could but separate from their use now their separation can no more be without our pitie then without their owne sinne Your argument hence inferred that the partition wall of our offensive Liturgie should bee removed because some brain-sick men for that title is here merely your owne not mine are scandalized thereby will no lesse hold if this our Liturgie were either altered or abolished for are there not thousands that professe to bee no lesse scandalized with any set formes whatsoever So then if wee have any prescribed or stinted devotions at all the partition wall stands still and if that should be demolished how many more and more considerable thousands doe ye thinke would be scandalized with the want of those holy formes whereto they have beene so long and so beneficially inured Here is therefore a scandall on both parts vnavoidable and it will bee our wisedome and pietie to fall upon the least You say ye thinke nay you know that some few Prelates by their over-rigorous pressing of the Service-booke and Ceremonies have made more Separatists then all the Preachers dis-affected to the Ceremonies in England I examine not the truth of your confident assertion but will you to distinguish betwixt causes and occasions The rigour of those few Prelates might be the occasion but the mis-perswasions of those dis-affected Preachers were the causes of this wofull separation Both might unhappily concurre to this mischiefe but those more who are the direct and immediate agents in so bad a service YOur last Reason is so sleightly enforced that it merits rather pitie then refutation I doe justly averre that There is no reason why difference in Liturgies should breed dis-union betweene Churches or why union in religion should binde us to the same Liturgies distinguishing as I ought betwixt Essentiall points and mere outward Formalities How faintly you reply that It is true every difference in Liturgies doth not necessitate a dis-union of Churches But here the difference is too large to be covered with a few fig-leaves Grant it to be larger then it is is it yet Essentiall The question is not what may cover our differences but what may disunite our Churches It is not formes of Liturgies but matter of obstinate and fundamentall error that can draw on such an effect Tell not me therfore or your Reader of some Ceremonies of ours that will not downe with other reformed Churches when yee may as good cheape heare of some fashions of theirs which will not downe with us It is good reason that as we give so we should take liberty in things indifferent without any reciprocall dislike As for precedency of time in our Liturgie and of dignity in our Church they may well have this operation with us that our Liturgie could not conform to that which had no being and that other Churches should rather conforme to ours which was ever noted for more noble and eminent You desire not to eclipse the glory of this Church as you professe yet you are willing to over-shadow it somewhat darkely whiles you can say Our first reformation was onely in Doctrine theirs in Doctrine and Discipline too wherein you are double-faultie first in imputing a defect to our Church most unjustly in the extent of our Reformation What Was there no Reformation but in matter of Doctrine None in matter of Practise None in Idolatrous or Superstitious rites None in offensive Customes None in corruption of Government None in lawes Ecclesiasticall What call you eclipsing if this be none Secondly in imputing that to the reformed Churches as their perfection which is indeed their unwilling and forced defect Reformation implies the renuing of a forme that once was now show us if you can where ever in the world that form of Discipline whose erection you applaud to some neighbour Churches found place before it was in this last age provisionally taken up by those who could not bee allowed with the libertie of true religion to injoy their former government As for the comparison you are pleased to mention betwixt the Liturgies of the reformed Churches and those of other Christians Grecians Armenians c. wherein you say If you should set downe what you have read in the Liturgies of those Churches you beleeve