Selected quad for the lemma: england_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A34754
|
The countrey-minister's reflections on the city-ministers letter to his friend shewing the reasons why we cannot read the King's declaration in our churches.
|
Countrey minister.
|
1688
(1688)
|
Wing C6561; ESTC R7155
|
9,928
|
10
|
Scruples were raised and Conscience pretended against your Orders Where does the Scriptures forbid it If it be not Forbidden the Command is plain and the safest way must be taken which is to Obey It is certain some parts of the Declaration contain very plain and necessary Truths which Church-of-England-Ministers ought to Approve If there be any thing in it which you think you may not Approve that should have been Specified it would have been more modest humbly to have Applyed to the King for a convenient Explication in that part then presently in Print to Cry the whole is Sinful and a device to ruine that you call the best Church in the World. Next You endeavour to prove That Reading the Declaration in our Churches is an Interpretative Consent Because say you By Our Law Ministerial Officers are accountable for their Actions and the Authority of Superiours though of the King himself cannot justifie Inferiours in Executing any Illegal Command With reference to the Command of Superiours we are to exercise our own Judgment and Reason and we may not obey a Prince against the Laws of the Land or the Laws of God because what we do let the Authority be what it will that Commands it becomes our own Act and we are responsible for it This sort of Arguing whatever may be in it would not a few years since be allowed by some sort of People sufficiently known in this Kingdom when urg'd in opposition to their Inclinations Then the Prince was set above Law and it was His Command and the Notification of His Pleasure made any thing which was not Malum in se Obliging Private Judgment might by no means be admitted when once the Governours had interessed themselves in it and made a Determination Is it not very Dis-ingenuous for any Men especially for Ministers to have recourse to a Principle of their Adversaries which they have for many years decried onely because they would serve themselves with it upon a particular Occasion and to forsake their own Doctrine which they Avowed so long as it would gratifie their Revenge and Ambition tho now they think it may do them some Diskindness This is to fetch Weapons out of their Adversaries Artillery not to Fight against them but to Assault their Prince and batter that Authority of which they formerly boasted They were the only Supporters The most Unjustifiable and Shameful Inconstancy is that of Altering and Changing and Closing with any thing to serve a present Turn Why may you not tell the People in his Majesties words That none of His Subjects shall be Forced by Fines and other Penalties to Submit their Judgment to others in the weightiest matters as well as to tell the Nation this in Print That Clergy-men must follow their own Judgment not only in matters of Religion but of Law also If Inferiour Officers are not satisfied that their Superiours Command is not Lawful Is it not enough for them to desist from Obeying it without making Clamours against it in Print Can they not comfort themselves in Silence with that Doctrine of Universal Passive-Obedience which they when in the height of their Ease and Authority Preached to others as Orthodox and Sound and thought they thereby Signalized their Loyalty above all other Societies of People in the World If a Prince Declares That there are some Laws in being which are greatly Injurious to many of His Subjects and that He is willing That these Inconveniences shall be redressed in a Legal Way Can any thing be more Condescending and Gracious then for him to Certifie this to his People who are to Choose those that are to Repeal such Laws as are Prejudicial and make such Others as may be for the Publick Good What hurt can there be in making known the Princes Pleasure in this as particularly as he shall think meet that His People may have time to Consider and weigh Matters that nothing be done Unadvisedly in such Important Concerns But say you Ministers of Religion have the Care and Conduct of Souls and therefore are bound to take Care that what they publish in their Churches be neither contrary to the Laws of the Land or the good of the Church If you would keep close to your own Argument you should have said That Ministers who have the Care of Souls are bound to take Care that what they publish in their Churches be not contrary to the Law of God. But Since you Speak of the Laws of the Land I can see no reason from thence Why such Orders as are given by those that are under His Majestâ— should be Enjoyned to be Observed though Conscience be really concerned in the Matter and His Majesties Orders which have far greater Authority be Denied It may be when People are well acquainted with the Kings Declaration it may have this good Effect That the Ministers of Religion shall not be compelled to Publish other Peoples Pleasures in their Churches at least not under such severe Temporal Penalties as have been heretofore insisted on You say Ministers of Religion are not looked upon as common Cryers but what they Read they are supposed to Recommend too If they have not been looked upon as common Cryers I think they have been looked upon as Worse When Bishops sent Orders made Arbitrarily by Justices of the Sessions to be Published by them in time of Divine Service Bâ—t doth not the Rubrick appoint That what the King Enjoyns as well as what the Bishops Enjoynâ— shall be Published in the Churches The Clergy of the Church of England have loudly Taught and solemnly Owned That the King of England as Head of the Church has Power to make Injunctions and Constitutions and are not Ministers every jot as much obliged to be His Majesty's Cryers as to be Instruments through which the Bishop's Eccho may sound more Audibly to the People But what they Read they Recommend too Ministers are not to be considered alike in every thing they Publish in the Church A difference arises from the Nature of the things we Publish Reading a Chapter in the Bible and Publishing the Banns of Matrimony or Citations are differently to be Considered when you Publish the Banns what do you Recommend unless it be to know Whether any of the People have any thing to Object against such Persons Marrying But seeing you say That for a Minister to Read any thing in the Church which he does not consent to or approve is to Misguide the People I would ask you this one Question Whether you do really think that the Worship which His Majesty doth Celebrate be the true and right Way of Worshipping God which Protestants ought to Pray He may be kept and strengthened in If you are for the Negative Pray consider what you Recommend to the People when you Read these Words in the Litany That it may please Thee to keep and strengthen in the true Worshipping of Thee Thy Servant James Our most Gracious King and Governour But Reading is Teaching
Very good What then I may not Read any thing in the Church but what I approve But are not the People Judges for themselves of what you Read It is not your Reading a thing in the Church that Determines the People unless they pay the Clergy a greater Deference than they deserve After all your Reading and Teaching too be it in a Sermon of your own making which no doubt you prefer much above His Majesty's Declaration Protestants will not follow your Conduct any farther than they are Convinced it is good A Man is not Determined by what he hears otherwise than by the Evidence he hath concerning it Now it would almost tempt People to believe the Declaration hath so much Reason and Light accompanying it as Our Clergy cannot well Answer and that therefore they are afraid to read it least the People should be Convinced and not follow their Conduct so servilely as they would have them But Why may I not then Read a Homily for Transubstantiation or Invocation of Saints if the King sends me such Let the Question be Whether every thing Read in the Church be a part of Divine Service And then if you Consider and Answer it sedately you will find your own Question Resolved If you can prove the Declaration to be contrary to the Word of God I will have no further Contest with you about Reading it in the Church I wish no humane Orders were imposed upon Ministers to be Read in the Church But if any Persons have right to enjoyn them to Read such Orders there certainly the KING has much more The King intends Our Reading this Declaration should signifie to the Nation Our Consent and Approbation of it What have Clergy-men to do to pry into the King's secret Intentions The Declaration speaks plainly for it self But the Dâ—claration does not want Publishing How can you tell that Must the Clergy or His Majesty judge when His Declaration is sufficiently made known But this is designed to serve instead of Addresses of Thanks which the Clergy generally refused though it was only to thank the King for His Gracious Promises Renewed to the Church of England Many of the Clergy have been looked upon a great while as Persons Addicted beyond Measure to flatter their Prince and behold all on a sudden they are become Rude towards him or worse if they may not have leave to Mischief their Dissenting Neighbours they will not thank their Prince for renewed Promises to Protect and Maintain them Was ever ill Manners and Ingratitude towards a Prince thus rudely and disingeniously boasted of Who can think these Persons apprehend themselves to be in danger of falling without Pity who brag thus openly of their Stoutness that they would not so much as give their Prince Thanks for the most Gracious Promise he could make them You say It does not become a Minister of Religion to do any thing which in the Opinion of the most Charitable Man can only be Excused In this I think you are very much in the Right I wish the Multitude to whom your Letters are sent may fix their Hearts on this pertinent Passage No Charity can Excuse at present a great many of your former Practises nor will they find any Excuse at last if not timely repented of If you had hitherto Acted by this Rule you would never have needed to fear your Fall with Contempt or without Pity You mention the Book of Sports which wâ—â— ordered to be read in Churches I will not say how strict the greatest Church-men were for Reading of it nor how well it did Comport with the Fourth Command I only enquire whether the present KING has not as much Right and Power to Order his Declaration to be Read in Churches as King Charles the 1st had to order the Book of Sports to be Read there And which of these two did Thwart the Holy Scriptures most You say It is against the Constitution of the Church of England It is to teach an Vnlimited and Vniversal Toleration which was Declared in Parliament Illegal in 1672 and has been condemned by the Christian Church in all Ages The King's Authority to make Injunctions and Orders has been heretofore cryed up as a main part of the Constitution of the Church of England How comes this Change all on a sudden But what is this Universal Toleration No more but this That no one Party of His Majesty's Subjects shall be trusted with a Power to destroy all the Rest Will nothing serve your turn unless you may continually render your selves grievous to your Fellow Subjects Must none live and enjoy the comfortable Influences of Society and Government but those who will entirely surrender themselves blindly to your Dictates Methinks Sober Understanding and good Clergy-men should be afraid lest any of that which was Levi's Reproach should be a Brand upon them The Instruments of Cruelty are in their Habitation Oh! My Soul come not thou into their Secret Gen. 49. 5 6. I will not intermeddle with Parliaments but only say They are not always of one and the same mind and Time was when many of the Clergy of the Church of England talked very contemptibly of some of them But in that you say It has been Condemned by the Christian Church in all Ages this wants Proof If it be well considered the Christian Church will be found to thrive best under such an Universal Toleration as Constantine did grant before Ease Pleasure and Wealth had Corrupted the Bishops Hence the Proverb Golden Priests and Wooden Chalices Golden Chalices Wooden Priests till the Clergy grew Negligent and Haughty under Constantines Reign It is certain the Orthodox had no Humane Penal Laws whereby to punish Hereticks Say you 1. It is to Teach my People they need never come to Church more To what an Extravagant Indecency towards both their Prince and their Church will the Affection of Tyrannizing over others Transport some Church-men Could any Enemy of the Church of England have advanced any thing more to Her Discredit than to say Her Members are under no Obligation to attend on Her Ministry but what arises from Force and Penal Laws Why may not People have your leave as well as their KING 's to go not only to Conventicles but to the Mass till they are convinc'd that they do ill in going thither It is much better becoming a Minister of Religion to Convince such by Scripture and Reason that their Worship is false then to Contend to have them cast into Prison and by Fines and Confiscations to Compel them against their Conscience to come to Church for their Presence there is no more pleasing to God nor Beneficial to their own Souls whilst their Minds are elsewhere than it would be if they were at a Conventicle or at Mass 2. It is to teach the Dispensing Power which alters what has been formerly thought the whole Constitution of this Church and Kingdom Who are they that thus thought formerly Surely none of