Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
england_n abolish_v according_a act_n 16 3 5.1159 4 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
A65713 The Protestant reconciler. Part II earnestly perswading the dissenting laity to joyn in full communion with The Church of England, and answering all the objections of the non-conformists against the lawfulness of their submission unto the rites and constitutions of that church / by a well-wisher to the churches peace, and a lamenter of her sad divisions. Whitby, Daniel, 1638-1726. 1683 (1683) Wing W1735; ESTC R39049 245,454 419

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

lawful to Communicate with us in Prayer and hearing of the word and in Receiving of the Sacrament upon occasion stand bound in Conscience so to do as oft as by the Magistrate you are required so to do and it can only be pretence of Conscience which doth induce you to forbear such Communion with us at these times for seeing negative precepts do bind always and at all times so that no man at any time may do what is forbidden by God It follows that there can be no prohibition against doing that at other times which we can sometimes do and which cannot be more or less lawful or unlawful for being done at one time than another as clearly seems to be the case with reference to your occasional Communion It therefore is to be suspected that men only pretend Conscience against that Communion with us at all times which they at sometimes can maintain And yet I wish there were no instances of men of your perswasions who when they are presented or when they find it necessary to qualifie them for an Office or to give a vote in which they may do service to their party will attend upon the publick worship used in our Churches and will receive the Sacrament according to the order of the Church of England who before never did and afterwards neglect to do so Now whilst men do thus vary in their practice according as their interest and as their circumstances vary they tempt men shrewdly to suspect that they act rather out of interest than Conscience in these matters and that they notwithstanding all their pretence to Conscience have either none at all or a bad Conscience for if they thought Communion with us in those Ordinances unlawful by doing it in the forementioned circumstances they only must be doing evil that good may come and making Conscience and Religion stoop to interest which is the proper character of Hypocrites but if they did conceive it lawful their Separation and refusal of it cannot be excused from Schism or from transgression of the injunctions of St. Paul If it be possible as much as in you lies live peaceably with all men follow after the things which make for peace give no offence unto the Church of God obey Superiors and submit your selves Ah my Dear Brethren by doing of these things you have given greater scandal unto others than your submission to the Constitutions of the Church of England could have done and therefore if you do indeed abstain from our Commuon for fear of giving scandal to weak Brethren do you more carefully abstain from matters of this nature which carry with them such a plain semblance of Hypocrisie that no pretence can hide no Charity excuse it Under this head I cannot pass by your violence in Petitioning His Sacred Majesty against His Royal Proclamation to the contrary for be it granted that the Law did authorize or give permission to you to Petition sure I am it laid upon you no necessity to do so and so this might have been forborn in compliance with the pleasure of his Majesty And if you do Reply That then you may by Proclamations be abridged of that liberty the Law affords you Consider I beseech you what it is that you expect and call for from Superiors viz. That for your sakes and out of pity to your weakness they would abate the exercise of their own power and with what equity and justice can you expect they should do this if you at their request will abate nothing of that liberty and power which the Law allows you § 17 2. If you cannot conform let me intreat you Religiously to abstain from censuring reproaching or speaking evil of your Governours in Church or State For this undoubtedly you may do and it doth very much concern you so to do For they who being Christians do reproach and do speak evil of their Civil Governours do that which the Wiseman would not permit the Jew to think of for his command runs thus Eccles 10.20 Curse not the King in thy heart or Entertain not any light vain contemptuous or dishonourable thoughts of him Assemb Annot. wish thou no evil to his Person Crown or Dignity in thy most secret retirements They do what all good men should tremble to commit for of such men St. Peter gives this Character Presumptuous are they 2 Pet. 2.10 self-willed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they do not tremble when they speak evil of Dignities Such persons dare to offer that to Gods Vicegerents to those who bear his Name or Character on Earth which Michael the Archangel durst not offer to the vilest and the worst of Creatures Jude 8 9. for he contending with the Devil durst not bring against him a railing accusation and yet it well deserves to be observed that if this sin was capable of pardon or excuse in any case or circumstances it must have been so in the reproaching of the then present Governours they being by consent of all Historians the greatest monsters of mankind and the most bloody Persecutors of the Christian Faith Moreover they who offend in the like kind against their Ecclesiastical Superiors do that which blessed Paul when he had ignorantly done to a corrupt High-Priest acknowledged as a crime condemned in the Law of God I wist not saith he that he was the High-Priest Acts 23.5 for it is written thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people they do that which the Conscience of a Jew could not let pass without just indignation and reproof for when St. Paul had said God shall smite thee thou whited wall v. 3 4. they presently cry out Revilest thou Gods High-Priest There lies indeed no obligation on us to call evil good or flatter our Superiors in their sins or judge well of them against the clearest evidence of Sense or Reason but then we are obliged not to cherish evil thoughts or harbour groundless jealousies of our Superiors much less must we express our inward apprehensions of them by opprobrious language or disrespectful carriage towards them And yet 't is but too evident that both the Writings and Discourses of Dissenters are too often stuft with these malevolent reflections in which they take the liberty of speaking evil of the Rulers of the people and of blaspheming Dignities and representing the Reverend Bishops as Popish Antichristian and Ithacian Prelates § 18 Lastly Let me conjure you by that affection which you bear unto the Name and Doctrine of our common Lord and Saviour and to the credit of the Protestant Religion to abstain carefully from all Seditious and Rebellious Principles and Practices and to do all you can to clear your selves from all suspicion of maintaining or approving of them For to deal plainly with you this is one great fault among you that you have many of you vented and more of you have practised sutably to those Opinions which are Seditious and Rebellious and these Opinions
with respect unto the manner And therefore it is well observed by Dr. Stillingfleet That many Superstitions condemned in Scripture chiefly consist in the forbearance of things lawful Serm. of Superst p. 37. on supposition that the forbearance of them was well pleasing to God The Superstition condemned Coloss 2.22 lay in supposing God to be pleased with their Forbearance of things lawful with their not touching tasting handling them and therefore was a negative Superstition And so it was in the dispute between Christ and the Pharisees about healing on the Sabbath day they thought it unlawful and therefore did abstain Christ thought it lawful to do good on the Sabbath day and therefore did it here was no positive observance on the Pharisees part yet here was Superstition in them and therefore the true Notion of Superstition doth extend to the Forbearance of things in themselves lawful as displeasing to God § 4 Now to apply these things that the Forbearance of the Ceremonies required by the Church of England on supposition that they are lawful in themselves and yet are by Dissenters abstained from as unlawful must be superstitious will be exceeding evident 1. Because they do and must according to their Principles esteem this their refusal to submit unto them when imposed as an act of special honor to God it being a declaration of their minds that they think God dishonoured by such acts and therefore dare not comply with them it can be only fear of sinning against God which can engage them with the hazard of their Estates and Ease c. thus to refuse obedience to the Commands of their Superiours They then must look on this refusal as a product of the fear of God and as an act of true obedience to him in opposition to the unjust Commands of men or an obeying God more than man and consequently they must esteem themselves more holy acceptable and well pleasing to God on the account of this Forbearance than Conformists are 2ly Because they do and must esteem Gods Worship corrupted by the use of these our Rites as to the Purity and the Spirituality of it and so they do esteem themselves by this Forbearance Preservers of his Worship pure and spiritual and free from that Idolatry and Superstition with which they charge it upon these accounts 3ly Because they do and must according to their principles rather refuse to joyn in the external Communion of our Church and rather bound to set up separate Communions than to comply with these our Rites now surely nothing but a necessity of displeasing God by joyning in Communion with us can warrant their refusal of it nothing but a necessity by God imposed on them of setting up such separate Communions in Order to the acceptable Worship of God can justify their Separation if therefore they mistake in Judging that such necessity is laid upon them as they must do if it be lawful to submit unto these Rites and hold Communion with us notwithstanding the necessity which lyes upon them to submit unto them they must be superstitious in that Practice which follows from this grand mistake § 5 In answer to the Close of this Objection it is said That these things edify by their Signification and therefore must be good and profitable and so not like unto vain Words and Actions To this it is replyed by Dissenters that many things of a like Nature when they are used by devout and thinking men may edify by their Signification and yet the imposition of them upon that account would scarce exempt them from the appearance of vanity As v. g. Should a Church Governor command his Subjects to appear in Armor in the Church to signify their Spiritual Warfare or to put on an Helmet to signify that they would manfully fight under Christs Banner or to drink Milk in token of their desire to feed on the sincere Milk of the Word or to use Vinegar and Gall in token of their Resolution to undergo the greatest Hardships for the Sake of Christ or to put on a pair of Spectacles to signify we are dim sighted in the things of Christ tho the Signification of these things might tend to edify the things required could hardly be excused from vanity 2ly They add that Edification in the Scripture Sense is quite another thing from this obscure way of teaching by Signification To edify our Brother in the Scripture Sense is to build him up and to confirm him and help him forward in the Christian Faith 1 Tim. 1.4 Jud. 20. The things by which the Church is said to receive Edification are of a better Nature viz. Walking in the Fear of God and in the Comfort of the Holy Ghost Act. 9 31. The Preaching of the Word 1 Cor. 14.3 4 5. Christian admonition and discourse Administring Grace unto the Hearer Eph. 4.29 The Graces of the Holy Spirit descending on Christs Members Eph. 4.16 Of the Edification of any indifferent and humane Ceremony the Scripture speaketh not one Word We are then said in Scripture to edify our Brother when we forbear indifferent and unnecessary things which through his weakness do cooperate towards his ruine Rom. 14.19 20. We do it by our Charity towards him in these things for Charity edifyeth 1 Cor. 8.1 By our Promotion of unity and so by the removal of such unnecessary things as do obstruct it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Edifie your selves into one 1 Thes 5.11 Answ But were this granted that some one or more of our Ceremonies seemed to you unprofitable and unserviceable to the use of Edifying what is that to you who only are concerned to know whether what your Superiors Command may lawfully be done by you and who Transgress your bounds when you presume to judge whether the things imposed be in their own Natures profitable edifying or convenient to be imposed for if they be as you conceive the fault supposed in the imposing of them is not yours but theirs whereas the fault in not submitting to them if lawful will most certainly be yours 2ly Whatsoever they are in themselves yet your submission to them in obedience to the lawful Commands of your Superiors for preservation of the Churches Peace for the prevention of Schism and all its dreadful consequents for the obtaining freedom to joyn in the Communion of the Church will doubtless highly tend to your Edification and your Profit as being a Submission to them for such Pious Christian ends as Christianity most stirictly doth oblige us to aim at and pursue and which are in themselves sufficient to sanctifie an action otherwise unprofitable and render it a Christian Duty Lastly to Kneel at the receiving of the Sacrament to express our Reverence and Humility to sign a Child with the Cross in token to the Congregation that he is listed among Christs Members or wear a Surplice for decency or distinction cannot be proved to be vain by any of the Instances forementioned Obj. 7 We cannot say Dissenters
here not to touch the unclean thing is only to purge our selves from all filthiness of Flesh and Spirit as is evident from the context of the words for the Apostle having mentioned the promises God had made to those who did separate themselves and touch not the unclean thing viz. that God would receive them and be a Father to them he infers wherefore beloved let us cleanse our selves from all filthiness of Flesh and Spirit chap. 7.1 So that this Text cannot concern our Ceremonies unless it be asserted that whilst we use them we cannot cleanse our selves from all filthiness of Flesh and Spirit And 4ly The unclean thing here spoken of is plainly the Idolatry of the Heathens as that expression intimates what conjunction hath the Christian who is the Temple of God with Idols to touch this unclean thing is to Communicate with them in their Idolatry by eating of their Idol Feasts in the Temple of their Idols which is saith the Apostle to have Communion with Devils 1 Cor. 10.20 to partake of the Table of Devils v. 21. let us not therefore saith he who have taken upon us the Yoke of Christianity be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 drawing in a contrary Yoke with the unfaithful for that the Apostle cannot by the unclean thing mean Marriage with an Infidel is evident because he saith the unbelieving Husband is sanctified to the beliving Wife 1 Cor. 7.14 if then these Ceremonies which we use cannot be proved to be Idols they must be unconcerned in this prohibition To the Argument from the Apostle Judes exhortation to hate the Garments spotted with the Flesh Defence of Dr. Morton p. 437. it is well Answered by Dr. Burges That as a Garment spotted with the Flesh of the unclean was no longer to be hated than till it was washed and being washed might again be used so is it with Ceremonies of indifferent nature which have been defiled 2ly To hate or flie the Garments spotted with the Flesh is only to hate every thing that doth defile tho in the least degree for so the Leprous and Unclean Garments did Hate saith the Reverend Dr. Hammond all the beginnings and the least degrees of impurity and uncleanness when therefore it can be proved that there is any degree of impurity or uncleanness in the use of our Ceremonies then only may this Text be urged against them And 3ly The refusal to Submit unto them tending to Disobedience and Schism and all the dreadful consequences which do follow from them may seem more likely to be forbidden by this Text than our Submission to them in Obedience to Authority Again whereas it is Objected That Christ reproved the Church of Pergamus and Thyatira for suffering Men to teach her Children to eat things Sacrificed to Idols Rev. 2.14 20. I Answer 1. That St. Paul hath taught us that it was not necessary in it self to eat Flesh offered to Idols for the Earth saith he is the Lords and the fulness thereof 1 Cor. 10.28 and so we may sufficiently be fed by other meat and yet he tells us that this meat may lawfully be eaten by the Christian that it is clean to the clean Tit. 1.15 and that 't is only through weakness that it can defile the Conscience and only is unclean to him that thinketh it to be so Rom. 14.14 and he gives free commission to all Men to eat it asking no question for Conscience sake 1 Cor. 10.27 and bids us as it were in flat contradiction to this Objection not to enquire or be follicitous whether the meat we eat have been by others so abused to Idolatry and if the offering of Flesh to an Idol doth not debar our freedom of using it to the sustaining of our Bodies why should the Superstitious use of a Ceremony make it unlawful to be used by others without that Superstition the eating therefore of things Sacrificed to Idols and teaching others so to do which was the thing condemned in those Churches by our Lord was only eating of them in the Idol Temples and at the Feasts of Idols so as to be partakers of the Table of Devils or to commit Idolatry by the participation of them which is so evident from the Context that he who runs may read it For 1. They are there also said to teach their Children to commit Fornication and to eat things offered to Idols Revel 2.14 20. Now all Men know that Fornication in the spiritual sense imports Idolatry 2ly They of the Church of Pergamus who taught her Children to eat things Sacrificed to Idols are said to hold the Doctrine of Balaam who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before the Children of Israel that is to Sacrifice to their Gods to eat and to bow down unto them or to entice them by the Daughters of Moab to this sin Numb 25.1 2 3. Lastly The Woman who seduced the Church of Thyatira to commit Fornication and to eat things Sacrificed to Idols is called Jezabel a Woman famous for her promotion of Idolatry Proceed we now to Answer the examples propounded in the Objection And § 8 1. Gen. 35.4 To that of Jacob who caused his Family to give unto him the Ear-rings which were in their Ears I Answer 1. That these Ear-rings were say some Interpreters the Ear-rings which adorned their Gods and so were parts of their strange Gods they were say others Ear-rings in which were graven the effigies of their Gods after the manner of the Gentiles and so they were plain Idols which ought to be abolished they were say others dedicated to some Numen according to the manner of the Syrians and the Phaenicians and so were actual instruments of Idolatry Now what doth this concern the Ceremonies of the Church of England which as she useth them are neither Idols nor instruments of Idolatry 2. Dan. 1.8 To the example of Daniel who would not defile himself with the portion of the Kings Meat nor with the Wine which he drank I Answer that it is on many accounts impertinent 1. Because according to the judgment of Mr. Calvin the pollution spoken of was not a Ceremonial pollution arising from the Idolatrous use of the meats but only Moral and occasional by their being Bates and Allurements to draw him to an irreligious forgetfulness of the service of God 2ly If the pollution was Ceremonial it might arise from a mixture of Meats forbidden by the Jewish Law with others lawful to be eaten and which if he refused he would not have eaten the full portion allowed by the King 3ly Esth 3.2 To the example of Mordecai refusing to bow to Haman 1. If he himself may be believed he did not refuse what he conceived lawful in it self because it was by others abused to Idolatry but because the Worship which by Haman was required was in it self Idolatrous as being Worship proper to the God of Heaven For thus he speaks Thou knowest Lord that it was neither out of Pride nor
of any excellency in or Attribute of God but partly for distinction partly for decency and uniformity and partly for their Antiquity and lastly as being apt to put us in mind of our duty they cannot be supposed by commanding of them to these ends to make them parts of Worship 5ly External and Bodily Worship is either Substantial or Circumstantial and Ceremonial the Substantial parts of Gods outward Worship are vocal Prayer Praises hearing of the Word not as the word of Man but of God receiving of the Sacraments as they import an entering into Covenant with God and an Eucharistical Oblation of our Souls and Bodies to him Those Bodily Acts which be performed by us in pursuance of these substantial parts of Worship and whereby we do signifie either our Reverence of that God in whose presence we are or with whom we have to do as standing uncovering the head kneeling at Prayer bowing of our Body at our entrance into the place of Gods Worship prostration lifting up our Hands or Eyes to Heaven or whereby we do make profession of our Faith in God as standing up at the Creed to profession of our Faith in a Crucified Saviour on which account the Ancients used the sign of the Cross or lastly whereby we enter into Covenant with God according to his institution as by receiving of the Sacramental signs All these are Ceremonial or Circumstantial parts of Worship 6ly These Ceremonial parts of Worship are in the general commanded by God and they are natural signs of Reverence required by the second Commandment for that forbidding all outward Religious Worship to be given to that which is not God and that because it is that Worship which is due to God the affirmative part of that precept must be supposed to be this Thou shalt give unto me that outward Worship when therefore our Church Commands her subjects to Kneel at their receiving of the Sacrament with Prayer and doth exhort but not Command them to Worship God when they do enter into the place of Worship or bow unto the blessed Jesus who is God blessed for evermore when they are by his Name put in Remembrance of that great Salvation which he hath wrought for us she only doth appoint that to be done at such a time which God hath in the general Commanded to be done and so doth institute no uncommanded part of Worship 7ly When any thing is by God Commanded to be done in his own Worship which doth not primarily directly and immediately tend to express or signifie our sense or apprehension of his excellency or his Attributes the doing of it in its own Nature is no part of Worship but only the doing of it in Obedience to the Command of God for all obedience is an acknowledgment of Gods Sovereign Power and the subjection which we owe unto it Thus v. g. to receive the person that is to be Baptized to give the Bread and Wine to the Communicants are no parts of outward Worship because they are not directly and immediately designed to express any excellence of God but only done in order to the Baptising of the person to be received into the Church or the convenience of the Communicants receiving Sitting at the receiving of the Sacrament can be no part of Worship in those Churches which retain the gesture because it is retained only as a most fitting Table gesture and all those things which God enjoyned to be done in his own Temple the use of the Snuffers and the Tongs the cleansing of the Candlesticks the lighting up of the Candles the bringing in of the Wood for the Burnt offerings with infinite things of a like Nature could be no parts of Worship otherwise than as they were performed directly in obedience to a Divine Command Now hence 't is easie to return an Answer to the forementioned objections For 1st Hence it appears that the proper use of those Ceremonies of the Church of England which are not Natural or Instituted parts of Worship is not the Honouring of God by the acknowledgment of any of his excellencies which is sufficient refutation of the first Argument 2ly Hence it appears that they are not meer and immediate Acts of Religion or formally elicited from Religion as the second Argument supposes 3ly Hence it is evident that all the means that God hath appointed to teach Obedience are not Acts of Divine Worship as Preaching Reading of the Word pious Discourse good Advice and good Example which is sufficient Answer to the third Argument which also falsly doth suggest that our Ceremonies are devised to that end 4ly Hence it appears that it is no part of Gods Worship to teach his Worship teaching being an Action directed not immediately to God but Men nor are our Ceremonies devised to be means of Spiritual instruction by their Mystical signification nor are such signs necessarily essential parts of Worship unless afflictions which are signs of Gods displeasure designed to be means of Spiritual instruction be also parts of Divine Worship as the fourth Argument supposeth 5ly Hence it is manifest that the teaching and reading of the Scriptures for edification of the Church is no part of Gods Worship for the reason mentioned before on which false supposition doth the fifth Argument proceed 6ly Nor are all Actions whereby Spiritual duties are taught in Gods Solemn Worship Acts whereby God is Worshipped as is suggested in the sixth Argument 7ly Nor was the use of Jewish Ceremonies in the Solemn Worship of God any part of his true and immediate Worship unless they were such Jewish Ceremonies as did express or signifie some Divine Excellency or the acknowledgment thereof in those that used them as the seventh Argument suggest but doth not prove 8ly Nor are our uncommanded Ceremonies performed directly to God as is supposed Argument the eighth 9ly Nor are all special things done in the Service of God parts of his Worship as is asserted Argument the ninth 10ly Nor must all special Actions done in the Service of God bring special Honour to him viz. by the signification of any of his excellencies not the snuffing of the Candles not the bringing of the Wood to the Temple as the tenth Argument supposeth such Actions are indeed performed in order to those things which do bring Honour to God even as submission to the Ceremonies prescribed by the Church is done in order to the free Preaching of the Word and to the demonstration of our Obedience to Superiors and to the preservation of the Churches Peace by which things God is highly Honoured 11ly All Civil Ceremonies or all the Circumstances of them are not parts of Civil Worship not the taking of the Cup by the Cup-bearer but the Kneeling with it not the filling out of the Wine but the tendring it in that humble posture In a word only those Ceremonies whereby we do express our sense of some excellency in our Civil Superiors or which by Nature or by Custom signifie some excellency in