Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	article_n	church_n	faith_n	2,312	5	5.7145	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A70371	The present separation self-condemned and proved to be schism as it is exemplified in a sermon preached upon that subject / by Mr. W. Jenkyn ; and is further attested by divers others of his own persuasion all produced in answer to a letter from a friend.	Jane, William, 1645-1707.; Jenkyn, William, 1613-1685.; S. R. To his worthy friend H. N.; Brinsley, John, fl. 1581-1624.; H. N.	1678 (1678)	Wing J454; ESTC R18614	63,527	154

England declared in the Articles of Religion and herein what is purely Doctrinal we fully embrace and constantly adhere unto Again pag. 17. We know full well that we differ in nothing from the whole Form of Religion established in England but onely in some few things in outward Worship Herein too we have the concurrence of Mr. W. himself in his Separation yet no Schism p. 60. If you take it the Church of England for such Christians onely who are of the Faith in Doctrinals with those that hold the Thirty nine Articles here the Nonconformists come in for a share also who are of your Faith therein excepting those which respect Discipline and Ceremonies And pag. 62. It is evident that some sort of Errors in a Church though but tolerated may be a just ground of withdrawing though I do not charge the Church of England with any such Errors This therefore being thus acknowledged one would have thought the Argument might be fairly dismissed and that here could be no reason found for Separation And yet when we are come thus near it is like the two Mountains spoken of in Wales upon whose tops you may exchange Discourse and almost come to shaking of Hands and notwithstanding all there is little less than a days Journey betwixt you We seem to have brought the Matter to a perfect reconciliation but when we least thought of it we are at open War again For the Author last-mentioned grants as much as we can ask but immediately thrusts in a Reason or two that he thinks will maintain their Ground and vindicate their Practice notwithstanding The Doctrine he hath nothing against but yet the Preachers are Sometimes he saith they are contrary one to another some are for the Doctrine of Predestination others against it c. and how shall he then judge of their Faith and Doctrinals pag. 60. Sometimes he saith It is conceived many of them preach contrary to the Articles ibid. Sometimes again It is conceived that several of them do not honestly believe those Articles that they have professed to believe p. 62. And to make all sure because it may be objected That the People have liberty in this case of complaining he answers To what purpose when such Errors are publickly professed in printed Books and no course taken for correcting or ejecting of the Authors pag. 61. Things as impertinently as slanderously suggested For what though the Ministers differ among themselves in some Points as he doth after his Predecessors the Brownists affirm as you may see in the Nonconformists Answer to them pag. 4. is that a reason to forsake our Communion and doth he that forsakes ours for theirs find the case much amended Do not the Nonconformists as much differ from each other as any amongst us If not from whence proceed all those Disputes about Communion and Non-communion with us about the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness the nature of justifying Faith lawfulness and unlawfulness of prescribed Forms of Prayer of God's Prescience c. And why are Mr. How and Mr. Baxter c. so much teazed by some of their Fellows and the latter called Slanderer Dictator Self-saver and accused of Profaneness Blasphemy and what not as you may see in the Antidote to his Cure 1670 Is it not because they will not swallow down the absurdest of their Principles or do go further toward an accommodation of our unhappy Differences than they will allow But what are those Points that our Ministers thus differ among themselves or from our Church in Is it about the mode in Imputation or about the Object of Predestination c. These things the Church of England is not so minute and positive in If he will not believe me I shall turn him over to Mr. Hickman who hath in several Tracts particularly concerned himself in this Argument and may be supposed to understand it He in his Latin Sermon De Haeresium origine 1659. pag. 37. undertaking to answer Tilenus about the Doctrine of our Church concerning the Object of Predestination whether massa corrupta or no saith Apage nugas Non solet Ecclesia Anglicana in mysteriis hujusmodi explicandis vagari in eas quaestiones quae nimia subtilitate popularem captum effugiunt Is it about the special Grace of God in the conversion of a Sinner or the influence of the Holy Spirit in it Then I will dare him to produce any that are herein Nonconformists to the Doctrine of the Church of England and that teach That there is no special Grace exerted in the conversion of a Sinner or That the Holy Ghost is of no further use in the conversion of Men than as he first inspired those that delivered the Doctrine of Christianity c. as he slanderously doth say He may force and scrue and wrest but he cannot do it honestly and fairly But supposing there were several that did thus teach and that such Books were Licensed where this is affirmed Doth this presently make the Church Heretical Notwithstanding this I believe that the Church of England is in it self as Orthodox as theirs was in 1646. when Shlichtingius his Comment on the Hebrews or what was little better came out thus attested by Mr. J. Downame I have perused this Comment and finding it to be learned and judicious plain and very profitable I allow it to be printed and published I doubt they would have taken it very ill to have been then charged with Socinianism because that Book came out with such an Imprimatur from him that was deputed in those Times to give it And yet I never heard that Mr. Downame was corrected or ejected for so doing And may they continue Orthodox notwithstanding and we for such an escape be counted Heretical But how far a Church is concerned in such Cases I think will appear from what is said in The Divine Right of the Presbyterial Government pag. 265. The Church of Rome setting aside those particular Persons among them that maintained damnable Errors which were not of the Church but a predominant Faction in the Church continued to be a true Church of Christ until Luther's time as the unanimous consent of the Orthodox Divines confess yea as some think till the cursed Council of Trent till when the Errors among them were not the Errors of the Church but of particular Men. Now I hope they will be as favourable to us and give our Church as much allowance in this case as that of Rome and not count it the Error of the Church till by some Decree Canon or Article it is owned so to be Sir You may by this time perceive how hard these Persons are put to it when it makes them so quick to espy and busie to rake all the dirt they can together to make our Church deformed and worthy of all that defamation they have branded it with and of that distance they observe and keep from it How do they torture Phrases hale along Expressions whithout due Process to the