Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	believe_v	faith_n	point_n	1,651	5	7.2769	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78958	The papers which passed at Nevv-Castle betwixt His sacred Majestie and Mr Alex: Henderson concerning the change of church-government. Anno Dom. 1646.	Charles I, King of England, 1600-1649.; Henderson, Alexander, 1583?-1646. aut; Marshall, William, fl. 1617-1650, engraver.	1649 (1649)	Wing C2535A; ESTC R213547	25,945	67

adverse Party than to be overcome of Truth although this be the most glorious Victory 3. When I was commanded to come hither no such thing was proposed to me nor expected by me I never judged so meanly of the Cause nor so highly of my selfe as to venture it upon such weaknesse Much more might be spoken to this purpose but I forbeare 2. I will not further trouble your Majesty with that which is contained in the second Section hoping that your Majesty will no more insist upon Education prescription of time c. which are sufficient to prevent Admiration but which your Majesty acknowledges must give place to Reason and are no sure ground of resolution of our Faith in any point to be believed although it be true that the most part of men make these and the like to be the ground and rule of their Faith an Evidence that their Faith is not a Divine faith but an humane Credulity 3. Concerning Reformation of Religion in the third Section I had need of a Preface to so thorny a Theame as your Majesty hath brought me upon 1. For the Reforming power it is conceived when a Generall Defection like a deluge hath covered the whole face of the Church so that scarcely the tops of the Mountains doe appeare a Generall Councell is necessary but because that can hardly be obtained severall Kingdomes which we see was done at the time of the Reformation are to reforme themselves and that by the Authority of their Prince and Magistrates if the Prince or supreme Magistrate be unwilling then may the inferior Magistrate and the People being before rightly informed in the grounds of Religion lawfully Reforme within their owne sphere and if the light shine upon all or the major part they may after all other meanes assayed make a Publique Reformation This before this time I never wrote or spoke yet the Maintainers of this Doctrine conceive that they are able to make it good But Sir were I worthy to give advice to your Majesty or to the Kings and supreme Powers on Earth my humble Opinion would be that they should draw the minds tongues and pens of the learned to dispute about other matter then the power or Prerogative of Kings and Princes and in this kind your Majesty hath suffered and lost more then will easily be restored to your selfe or your Posterity for a long time It is not denied but the prime Reforming power is in Kings and Princes Quibus deficientibus it comes to the inferior Magistrate Quibus Deficientibus it descendeth to the Body of the People supposing that there is a necessity of Reformation and that by no meanes it can be obtained of their Superiors It is true that such a Reformation is more imperfect in respect of the Instruments and manner of Procedure yet for the most part more pure and perfect in relation to the effect and product And for this end did I cite the Examples of old of Reformation by Regall Authority of which none was perfect in the second way of perfection except that of Josiah Concerning the saying of Grostead whom the Cardinals at Rome confest to be a more Godly man than any of themselves it was his Complaint and Prediction of what was likely to ensue not his desire or Election if Reformation could have been obtained in the ordinary way I might bring two unpartiall Witnesses Jewel and Bilson both famous English Bishops to prove that the tumults and troubles raised in Scotland at the time of Reformation were to be imputed to the Papists opposing of the Reformation both of Doctrine and Discipline as an Hereticall Innovation and not to be ascribed to the Nobility or People who under God were the Instruments of it intending and seeking nothing but the purging out of Errour and setling of the Truth 2. Concerning the Reformation of the Church of England I conceive whether it was begun or not in K. Henry the 8. time it was not finished by Q. Elizabeth the Father stirred the humors of the diseased Church but neither the Sonne nor the Daughter although we have great reason to blesse God for both did purge them out perfectly This Perfection is yet reserved for your Majesty Where it is said that all this time I bring no Reasons for a further Change the fourth Section of my last Paper hath many hints of Reasons against Episcopall Government with an offer of more or clearing of those which your Majesty hath not thought fit to take notice of And learned men have observed many Defects in that Reformation As that the Government of the Church of England for about this is the Question now is not builded upon the foundation of Christ and the Apostles which they at least cannot deny who professe Church-Government to be mutable and ambulatory and such were the greater part of Arch-bishops and Bishops in England contenting themselves with the constitutions of the Church and the authority and munificence of Princes till of late that some few have pleaded it to be Jure Divino That the English Reformation hath not perfectly purged out the Roman Leven which is one of the reasons that have given ground to the comparing of this Church to the Church of Laodicaea as being neither hot nor cold neither Popish nor Reformed but of a lukewarme temper betwixt the two That it hath depraved the Discipline of the Church by conforming of it to the Civil policy That it hath added many Church Offices higher lower unto those instituted by the Son of God which is as unlawfull as to take away Offices warranted by the Divine Institution and other the like which have moved some to apply this saying to the Church of England Multi ad perfectionem pervenirent nisi jam se pervenisse crederent 4. In my Answer to the first of your Majesties many Arguments I brought a Breviate of some Reasons to prove that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same in Scripture from which by necessary consequence I did inferre the negative Therefore no difference in Scripture between a Bishop and a Presbyter the one name signifying Industriam Curiae Pastoralis the other Sapientiae Maturitatem saith Beda And whereas Your Majesty averres that Presbyterian Government was never practised before Calvin's time your Majesty knows the common objection of the Papists against the Reformed Churches Where was your Church your Reformation your Doctrine before Luther's time One part of the common Answer is that it was from the beginning and is to be found in Scripture The same I affirme of Presbyterian Government And for proving of this the Assembly of Divines at Westminster have made manifest that the Primitive Christian Church at Jerusalem was governed by a Presbytery while they shew 1. That that the Church of Jerusalem consisted of more Congregations than one from the multitude of Believers from the many Apostles and other Preachers in that Church and from the diversity of Languages among the Believers 2.

the Church in the same line of Subordination I doe utterly disclaime upon such Reasons as give my selfe satisfaction although no man shall be more willing to submit to Civill Powers each one in their owne place and more unwilling to make any trouble than my selfe Onely concerning the application of the Generalls of an Oath to the particular case now in hand under favor I conceive not how the Clergy of the Church of England is or ought to be principally intended in your Oath For although they were esteemed to be the Representative Church yet even that is for the benefit of the Church Collective Salus Populi being Suprema Lex and to be principally intended Your Majesty knowes it was so in the Church of Scotland where the like alteration was made And if nothing of this kind can be done without the consent of the Clergy what Reformation can be expected in France or Spaine or Rome it selfe It is not to be expected that the Pope or Prelate will consent to their owne ruine 8. I will not presume upon any secret knowledge of the Opinions held by the King Your Majesties Father of famous Memory they being much better known to Your Majesty I did onely produce what was profest by him before the world And although Prayers and Tears be the Arms of the Church yet it is neither acceptable to God nor conducible for Kings and Princes to force the Church to put on these Armes Nor could I ever heare a reason why a necessary Defensive Warre against unjust Violence is unlawfull although it be joyned with offence and invasion which is intended for Defence but so that Armes are layed down when the offensive Warre ceaseth by which it doth appeare that the Warre on the other side was in the nature thereof Defensive 9. Concerning the forcing of Conscience which I pretermitted in my other Paper I am forced now but without forcing of my Conscience to speake of Our Conscience may be said to be forced either by our selves or by others By our selves 1. when we stop the eare of our Conscience and will not hearken or give place to information resolving obstinately Ne si persuaseris persuadebis which is no lesse then a resisting of the Holy Ghost and the hardning of our hearts 2. Or when we stop the mouth and suppresse the clamours of our Conscience resolving rather to suffer the worme to gnaw and the fire to burne inwardly then to make profession of that we are convinced to be Truth 3. Or when we seare our Conscience as with an hot Iron that it becometh senslesse which is the punishment of the former unto which is opposed the truly tender Conscience such as Josiah had 2 King 22. 19. Againe 1. our Conscience is said to be forced by others when they obtrude upon us what is in it self evill and unlawfull which if we admit against our own Conscience we sin two waies one is by doing that which is in it self evill and unlawfull the other is by doing it against a dictate of Conscience which is a contempt of God whose Vicegerent it is 2. Or when others urge us to do that which is in it selfe good or may lawfully be done but through error of Conscience we judge it to be evill and unlawfull in this case if we do not that which is prest upon us we sin because the thing is good and lawfull And if we doe it we sin because we do against our Conscience Which in this case bindeth but obligeth not And yet there is a way to escape out of this labyrinth it being repugnant to the equity of the will of God to lay a necessity of sinning upon any man The onely way is to lay aside such a Conscience it being a part of the Old man which we are commanded to put off otherwise we being sufficiently informed and yet cleaving to our old error we rather doe violence to our Conscience our selves than suffer violence from others The Application for Answering the Quaere I leave to your Majesty Newcastle June 17. 1646. For Mr. Alex Henderson In Reply to his second Paper June 22. 1646. His MAJESTIES third Paper 1. IT were arrogance besides losse of time in Me to vie preambles with you For it is truth I seek and neither praise nor victory wherefore I shall onely insist upon those things which are meerly necessary to my owne satisfaction in order to which I desired the assistance of some Divines whereupon I will insist no further save onely to wish that you may not as I have knowne many Men doe lose time by being mistaken in the way to save it wherein I have onely sought to disburden My selfe but to lay no blame upon you and so I leave it 2. Nor will I say more of the second then this that I am glad you have so well approved of what I have said concerning My education and reason but then remember that another Mans will is at least as weake a ground to build my Faith upon as my former education 3. In this there are two points First concerning the Reforming power then anent the English Reformation For the first I confesse you now speak clearly which before you did but darkly mention wherein I shall mainly differ with you untill you shall shew me better reason yet thus farre I will goe along with you that when a Generall Councell cannot be had severall Kingdomes may Reforme themselves which is learnedly and fully proved by the late Archbishop of Canterbury in his disputation against Fisher but that the inferior Magistrates or People take it which way you will have this power I utterly deny For which by your favour you have yet made no sufficient proofe to my judgement Indeed if you could have brought or can bring authority of Scripture for this opinion I would and will yet with all reverence submit but as for your Examples out of the Old Testament in my mind they rather make for than against me all those Reformations being made by Kings and it is a good probable though I will not say convincing Argument that if God would have approved of a Popular reforming way there were Kings of Judah Israel sufficiently negligent and ill to have made such examples by but by the contrary the 16. Chap. of Numbers shewes clearly how God disapproves of such courses but I forget this Assertion is to be proved by you yet I may put you in the way wherefore let me tell you that this pretended power in the People must as all others either be directly or else declaratorily by approbation given by God which how soon you can doe I submit otherwise you prove nothing For the citing of private Mens opinions more then as they concurre with the generall consent of the Church in their time weighs little with Me it being too well known that Rebels never wanted Writers to maintain their unjust actions and though I much reverence Bishop Jewels memory I never thought him