Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	according_a	bishop_n	church_n	2,848	5	4.3599	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44304	The seasonable case of submission to the church-government as now re-established by law, briefly stated and determined by a lover of the peace of this church and kingdom.	Honyman, Andrew, 1619-1676.	1662 (1662)	Wing H2602; ESTC R4312	34,512	47

performance of what is sworn is like to hinder a greater good that might be attained by not keeping the Oath that in that case an Oath bindeth not at all Protestant Casuists as Bishop Sanderson do deny this principle without limitation thus expressed yet do grant that it is true when there concurreth some other thing as usually there doth which may render the Oath void or the keeping of it unlawfull or looseth from it the impeditiveness of greater good there hath weight But we may say albeit other things did not concur to the nulling or voiding of an Oath yet if the standing to it be found impeditive of a greater good to which we are bound by a prior obligation then the Oath being an obstacle of such a greater good ceaseth to bind the swearer If a man should swear never to go near such a river or water having once been in hazard there yet where he seeth at some distance from it his brother like to perish in the water and it is probable to him that he could be able to save his life the prior and greater bond of char●ty and of God's Law commanding that bindeth him to go help his brother and looseth him from his Oath And as to our case besides what hath been said for the clearing upon other grounds of the non-obligation of the Covenant in that second Article the matter thereof still supposed as indifferent and Episcopacy not forbidden by any divine Law may we not clearly see that there is by adhering to that Oath as still binding an obstacle put to the attainment of a greater good and of greater necessity and to the seeking after that greater good which we are pre-obliged by former Bonds to labour after Is not that great duty of preaching the Gospel of peace lying upon Ministers wo to us if we preach not and lying upon many Ministers antecedently to the ●aking of this Covenant and upon adhering to that Covenant in the second Article proveth a hindrance to that greater duty whereto we are pre-obliged shall it still be thlought to bind so that rather then we will acknowledge God's loosing us by a former obligation to a greater duty we will by adhering to it put our selves in incapacity according to Law to serve any longer in the Ministry Do there not also ly upon us all pre-obligations to obey the Magistrate in things not against God's Law such as now Episcopacy is supposed to be to procure the publick peace and good of Church and State and prevent horrid confusions which as matters go cannot be avoided by sticking at that Article in the Covenant Shall not the peace of conscience that shall arise from tendring these great interests be as much and more then any peace of conscience pretended to be in keeping the Oath which though we should not be ready to judge any may perhaps upon examination be found rather a piece of satisfaction to the will then peace of the conscience God having loosed and set free conscience from that Bond in hoc rerum statu But to the second thing which we observed anent Oaths or Covenants it would be remembred that a Covenant or Oath though lawfull and binding even in the strict interpretation of it yet doth not bind in the rigid interpretation which some either through weakness or scruples or design may put upon it Sometimes souls may make snares of Oaths to themselves by overstretching them and so do run themselves into the perplexities they needed not Concerning the Covenant different interpretations and senses have been given of it according to the several interests of persons of contrary judgments combined in it But as to the second Article now in question it may be doubted if it be broken by submission to or owning the present Episcopacy established by Law in Scotland or whether it be not an over-rigid straining of that Covenant to bend it against the present Episcopacy established in Scotland For clearing of which it would be considered first that at the time of the taking of that solemn League and Covenant there were no such Church-offices in Scotland as are mentioned in that Article there needed not as to Scotland a swearing to extirpat Offices that were not in it at that time and some Offices there mentioned never were in it 2. It would be remembred that an Oath is to be interpreted according to the sense of the givers of it Timorcus pag. 16. giveth us assurance that the Parliament of England intended nothing less in imposing the Covenant then the extirpation of all kinds of Prelacy and Bishops in the Church and that it was resolved in Parliament with consent of the Brethren of Scotland that it was only intended against Episcopacy as then established in England and Pr●f p. 23. we do not saith he think the Covenant to be against the primitive Episcopacy which there he descrives to be a presidency of one Minister over others so that without him nothing is to be done in matters of Ordination and Jurisdiction and when he explaineth the second Article of the Covenant he saith it is only tyrannical Bishops that are covenanted against which Baxter also calls the sinfull species of Prelacy in his Preface to the Disputations of Church-government which he sayes was abjured only and not Episcopacy And in that same dispute pag. 4. he declareth that most of the godly Ministers since the Reformation did judge Episcopacy some of them lawfull and some of them most fit and addeth that almost all of these that are of the late Ass● at Westminster and most throughout the Land did conform to Episcopal Government as not contrary to the Word of God and that he believs that many of them are yet so far reconciliable to it moderated that if it were only established they would submit to it as they did for he heareth as he saith but of few of them who have made recantation of their former conformity and contrarily hath known divers of them professing a reconciliableness as aforesaid as Mr. Gataker doth in one of his Books profess his judgment Thus Mr Baxter by whom we may see their error or folly who think there can be no godly Ministers owning Episcopacy and also how reconciliable godly Divines in the Ass were to a regulated Episcopacy So that it seemeth the great grievance aim'd at in the Covenant to be redressed was the Bishops claim of a sole Ordination and Jurisdiction and the multitudes of Courts of lay Chancellors c. set over Ministers in matters of Government and not the Office of Bishops concurring with Synods of Ministers and their presiding and being Superiors in Church-meetings If it be said that every one of the particular Offices mentioned under the name of Prelacy in the Covenant are abjured and therefore Bishops are abjured Mr. Vines in his Considerations upon the Kings Concessions at the Isle of Wight will for loosing this tell us of a sense of the Covenant which he inclines to viz. that as to

were good that these former principles were better remembred and used in the present case Further the Presbytery of Edinburgh in their Paper printed Octob. 5. 1659. pag. 8. of that Paper speak very soberly disclaiming it as none of their principles that no difference of opinion can be suffered by them We are say they clear that in many things of common practice in a Church there may be agreement by accommodation though differences of judgment remain c. Again say they we readily yield that as we prophesie but in part men in a Church may compose debates by putting end to contentions though they be not all of one judgment and therein we judge the Apostle hath set the rule before us 1 Cor. 11. 16. A Golden Rule indeed the practice whereof in its just sense might bring us much sweet peace But not to insist upon the judgments of learned men concerning the Case of submission to and acting in duties with Meetings anent the constitution whereof or members there may be some difference in judgment If we will hearken to a man greatly learn'd and known to be no great friend to Bishops we shall hear him perswading to obedience and submission to them in things lawful Theodore Beza being written to by some Ministers in England who excepted against some customes in the discipline and order of that Church their controversie had not then risen so high as to strike at the Office of Bishops only some customs in discipline and ceremonies in external order were most stood upon He Beza Epist 12. though disliking these things yet plainly averres to them that these customes are not tanti momenti as that for these they should leave their ministry and by deserting their Churches give advantage to Sathan who seeketh occasion to bring in greater and more dangerous evils He wisheth them there to bear what they cannot amend to beware of all bitterness And albeit they could not come to be of the same mind with others yet with a godly concord to resist Sathan who seeketh all occasions of tumults and infinit calamities And he doth most gravely obtest the Ministers with tears as he saith Vt Regiae Majestati omnibus Praesulibus suis ex animo obsequantur Beza pleads for hearty obedience in things lawful to the Bishops of whom he speaks honourably in that Epistle not hinting at the unlawfulness of their Office nor offering to perswade the Ministers to do against their Office Sunt maximi viri saith he qui singulari Dei Opt. Max. beneficio papisticis Episcopis successere He accounts not them nor their Office popish but saith By the singular mercy of the most great and good God they have succeeded the popish Bishops or come in their place even as by the singular mercy of God protestant Ministers have come in the place and room of popish Priests And how well he esteems of the Office and of the men in the Office likely abating somewhat of his peremptoriness in the heat of dispute with some as he had cause may appear not only by what he saith in that Epistle exhorrescimus ut contra Regiae Majestatis Episcoporum voluntatem ministri suô ministeriô fungantur But from his Epistles to Grindal Bishop of London Epist 23. commending Grindals Christians patience and lenity addeth Majori posthac paena digni erunt qui authoritatem iuam aspernabuntur closing his Epistle Deus te custodiat intan●● commisso tibi munere sancto suo spiritu regat magis a● magis confirmet And in his 58. Epistle to that same Bishop he saith Dominus te istic at London speculatorem judicem constituit By all which it may appear that it would have been far from Beza's mind that Ministers should give no obedience to Bishops established by the Laws of a Kingdom not so much as in things undoubtedly lawful or that they should have refus'd concurrence with Bishops in ordering the Church and acting in unquestionable duties 2. The present Question concerns the case and carriage of two kind of Ministers 1. Some refuse to come to Synods although called by the Kings Majesties command signified by His most honourable privie Council where Bishops do preside They refuse also to come to Presbyteries where a Moderator pretending no more power then any of themselves presides being nominated by the Bishop in the Synod to continue till the next Meeting of the Synod Such Meetings they withdraw from albeit nothing be required of them but to act in unquestionable duties for regulating the Church and suppressing according to their power of sinful disorder albeit there be no imposition upon their judgments nor subscription required nor declaration that they allow any thing they count amiss in the constitution of these Meetings or any constituent members thereof Yea where it might be permitted to them if they intreated for this to case their conscience by signifying their scruples which they cannot overcome anent the constitution of these Meetings or anent the members thereof so be they would do this with that inoffensive modesty humility and respect to the supreme Authority and the Laws of the Land and to such Meetings and the members thereof that becomes and after that to concur in their undoubted duties Concerning such Ministers the question is whether they may and ought to concur with such Meetings of their Brethren in carrying on their undoubted duties or if it be unlawful so to do 2. The other rank of Ministers are these who falling within the compasse of the Act of Council at Glasgow and of Parliament whereto it relates do rather choose to part with their Ministry then to seek a Presentation from the Patron and Collation thereupon from the Bishop yea who will quit their Ministry rather then that they will once come in terms of treating with a Bishop to try upon what conditions they may have the liberty to enjoy their Ministry and to serve God therein for the good and salvation of his people 3. As to the case of Brethren of the former sort several things are worthy their most serious consideration which may render them somewhat jealous of the unwarrantableness of their present way 1. Hath not the Supreme Magistrate even according to their own principles an undoubted power to convocate Synods when he sees it needfull Never were there any protestant Ministers no nor christian Ministers before this time who being convocated to a Synod or Church-meeting by the Soveraign Christian Magistrate did refuse to come at his command Nor is there any rank or degree of Subjects that can without the stain of sinful disobedience refuse to meet upon His Majesties command and Ministers cannot plead exemption from the common duties of Subjects 2. Brethren would consider whether it would prove a sufficient ground to justifie their not-coming to the Synod upon His Majesties command by His Council because that command to come to the Synod is joyned with another commanding to concur dutifully c. And the