Selected quad for the lemma: power_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
power_n	ceremony_n	church_n	rite_n	2,845	5	10.3412	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63266	An apology for the non-conformists shewing their reasons, both for their not conforming, and for their preaching publickly, though forbidden by law : with an answer to Dr. Stillingfleet's sermon, and his defence of it, so much as concerneth the non-conformists preaching / by John Troughton ...	Troughton, John, 1637?-1681.	1681 (1681)	Wing T2312; ESTC R1706	102,506	125

were indeed some appointed by K. Edward to collect a body of good and useful Rules out of the Canon Law to be the Rule of Discipline for this Church but he dying that work was never finished so that the Rule now is the whole Canon-Law or so much as every Bishop pleaseth to use in his own Diocess The Bishops made a few Canons of their own 1603. but they are such as only strengthen their own power in imposing and enforcing those things which the Non-Conformists had long desired might be amended As to the Officers that Administer the Discipline They are Chancellors and Commissaries and Civilians by Profession no Ecclesiastical Officers yet these Rule over the Ministers of Christ Admonish Suspend Deprive them of their places and Excommunicate both them and the People when they please This they have no power to do nor can the Bishop delegate his pewer of Governing to them any more then his power to Preach the Word and Administer the Sacraments both being parts of the Ministerial Office This they thought was to change the Constitution of Christs Church at pleasure They were also offended at the Administration or use of the Discipline That being such as the Officers were because the Church in its Constitution and frame kept so near the Roman model Therefore the Bishops have ever found it necessary to exercise Church Discipline mostly against those that disliked or dissented from the Liturgy and Government and to connive at the loose and prophane to hold them in some external obedience to them Hence it came to pass where one Minister hath been admonished suspended deprived for Heresie in Doctrine or Un-godliness of Life ten have been so dealt with for Non-Conformity and where one of the People have been censured for scandalous sins an hundred have been troubled and punished for going to hear a good Minister out of their own Parish when they had an ignorant drunkard at home for not having their Children Crossed in Baptism for scrupling to kneel at the Sacrament and such other great Crimes against the Liturgy What was this but to alienate the Church of Christ to the Governours and to make it to serve them more then him and only to use his Name and Authority to press their own Laws and maintain their own power R. 4. They were dissatisfied at the Ceremonies imposed in the Liturgy In the general they acknowledge that it was lawful for any Church to consent to and lay upon her self necessary Rites and Customs such as Circumstances of time and place and other emergencies might make necessary for the present time but that such Ceremonies should be such whose necessity was apparent to all and whose lawfulness might be scrupled justly by none of common understanding and that should be taken up by the general Consent of the People as well as commanded by Rulers as the Feast of Purim was by the Jews Esther 9.23.27 And those necessary things enjoyned Acts 15 23.25.28 And that when the necessity ceaseth those Customes should cease also But they thought it utterly unlawful to devise Rites or Ceremonies for which there was neither apparent necessity nor usefulness or to impose those upon the people which from the beginning were doubtful and offensive especially to make them parts of Divine Worship or additions to it as it were to render it more edifying beyond the natural and common Civil circumstances of Order Method or Decorum and such they thought it manifest our imposed Ceremonies were which are declared to be retained some because they served for decent order in the Church for which they were at first devised others for edification Pref. to the Common Prayer Book And again that the imposers were content with those Ceremonies which do serve to a decent order and Godly Discipline and such as be apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and special signification whereby he might be edified Three Ceremonies were at first imposed The Cross in Baptism The Surplice in Reading the Service And Kneeling in Receiving the Lords Supper Against these they excepted severally 1. Against the Crosse that it was abused to great superstition and Idolatry in the Church of Rome and particularly when it was used in Baptism having Divine power ascribed to it of driving away the Devils giving grace c. Therefore being neither commanded of God nor used in this manner in the primitive Church viz. To admit Members into the Church by it it ought to be rejected Also that it did reflect very dishonourably on Baptism it self as if that were not full and plain enough to set forth the blood of Christ and Remission of sins by it or our engagement to Christ and therefore it was needful to adde a more plain and direct sign of his death and suffering for us and of what we must be willing to suffer for him above all that the Cross was made and here used as a Sacrament being declared to be a token of the Childrens owning the Faith of Christ Obedience to him and perseverance to the end Is not this the nature and end of Receiving Baptism it self Why is not that sufficient but the Cross is presently added without any note of distinction as it were to signifie the same things more plainly and fully and to lay a greater obligation on the Child then what was laid on it in Baptism and this is a Sacrament as much as man can make Indeed it wanteth the promise of Divine Grace but this also is presumed upon forasmuch as this seems cheifly to be intended in those words of some of the Ceremonies being apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty by some notable and special signification whereby hemight be edified 2. Against the Surplice they object that was a Ceremony on purpose devised to add decency and splendour to the Worship of God and therefore it must be used in that Worship only and such Ceremonies are unlawful additions to Gods Worship And those circumstances or accidents of the Service in their absolute nature yet relatively in as much as they better the Worship and increase Edification they are made moral parts of Worship even as it was a part of Worship for the Preists of old to put on their Sacred vestments to sacrifice in though the vestments themselves absolutely and naturally considered were but circumstances of the Worship Also that the Surplice seemed to be taken from the Ceremonial-Law and to be at least an imitation of those Preists Garments As many other Ceremonies used in the ancient Church were either taken from the Jews or devised to imitate and be like them Now our Saviour having abolished the old Ceremonies gave no leave to his Church to devise new ones neither did he abolish them as Types and Shadows of himself only but also as Yokes and Burthens as carnal Ordinances and servile Customs wherein his People were kept in great Bondage

concerning the Divine right of Bishops above Presbyters which they so expresly disavowed both in their printed books and in the Manuscript of divers questions decided by them the account whereof we owe to this Learned man Irenic p. 2. and last All this therefore from the honour of our Reformers is but a flourish But now Sect. 3. We have three Reasons given why our Reformers left such Ceremonies in the Church 1. He saith it was out of Reverence to Antiquity they being of use in the Primitive times long before Popery and yet three of the chief Men Peter Martyr Martyn Bucer Paulus Fagius who were sent from beyond Sea to assist in the Reformation promoted no such continuance of these venerable Antiquities in the Churches abroad where they had been made use of before to help to reform And how Ancient were these Ceremonies Why the Surplice he saith was used in Augustine and Hieroms time that was 400 years after Christ and Superstition came in apace Images in Churches and praying for and to the Dead and such like And Ceremonies were so many that Augustine complained of the condition of the Church in his time in that regard was worse then that of the Church under the Law The Sacrament he saith was received about Constantines time in a posture of Adoration That was standing Sc. from the time of Easter to Whitsuntide as all other publick Worship was then performed in remembrance of Christs Resurrection But did they kneel The Dr. will not say so nor can he produce any evidence that kneeling at the Communion was commonly used till divers Hundred years after Popery had defiled the Western Church The Cross he saith was much Ancienter and used with much Superstition even in Tertullian 's time but the Dr. saith not it was used in Baptism nor is there any proof of it and that was only to our case When he pleads that we need not reform beyond the example of the Primitive times viz those soon after the Apostles and saith it gives great advantage to the Papists to to reject the Customs of those times upon pretence that the Mistery of Iniquity was working even in the Apostles daies I desire to know where we shall stop and what Church shall we take for our pattern Do all did any of the Churches for the first 300 years use our Ceremonies in their publick Church Service or if they did were not others also used in many Churches now generally disallowed by Papists and Protestants As giving the Communion to Infants sending the Eulogies or consecrated Bread to those that were absent from the Sacrament and the like Mr. Mead no Non-Conformist hath proved that Saints and Image Worship in remoter and smaller degrees began very early in the Church amongst which he reckons the most Ancient use of the Cross in Tertullian's time with which they use to fortifie themselves against the Devil and all evil Accidents There were never more Heresies and Divisions in the Church Apost of the latter times then in the Primitive times Yea before the Apostles were dead there have been no Errours or Corruptions since but the like were then and must we not go beyond or pass by all these times and appeal only to Scripture as the only Rule for Constituring and Governing the Church Did the Judges or Kings of Judah that reformed their Church before the Captivity or Zerubbabel and Nehemiah after it ever make former times their President Did they not alwaies appeal to the Law of Moses If we must suppose the times next the Apostles had their Customs and Ceremonies from the Apostles because they lived so near them This opens a door to all Popish Traditions and overthrows the perfection of the Scripture Or if we suppose the present Church in every Age hath not as much Power of self-Government as the Primitive Church had or to appoint and alter their own Customes and Ceremonies we shall contradict our 20th Artic. and bring our selves into unsupportable slavery to all the Cannons and Customes of all former times and so the Christians as well as the Jews will need a Talmud besides their Bible It is probable our first Reformers seeing they must retain some Ceremonies retained those they thought most Ancient and least offensive and this was the Reason why they were retained and not laid aside 2. The Dr. saith These Ceremonies were retained for fear of the Popish Bishops who were some of them Learned Men least they should reproach the Reformers with innovation against the Primitive as well as the Popish Church Answ This was indeed the true and chief reason why our Reformations was no more compleat because the Popish Bishops that were joyned with the Reformers hindred them and the Popish People would not endure a through Reformation Mr. John Elliot a worthy Gentleman in the Parliament Ann. 3. Car. 1. said That he had seen in a Diary written with K. Edw. 6th own hand Rushw Colec part 1. pag. 661. these words That the Bishops at that time some for Ignorance some for Sloath some for Pride and Luxury and some for Popery were unfit for Discipline To which we must add that some of the good Bishops Bishop Ridley in particular being but late Converts from Popery had yet a Zeal for the old Customes and Ceremonies those that could be retained without manifest Superstition And so much they themselues acknowledge in the Preface to the Service Book before cited Now what Obligation is this upon us not to endeavour a further Reformation 3. He saith They had respect to the Lutheran Churches who retained the same and more Ceremonies Answ They might consider that seeing they must retain some of the old Customes it would be more excusable to retain these because some other Protestant Churches did retain them But that they did it in imitation of those Churches there is no ground to believe seeing till now our Church was alwaies charged to be too much addicted to Calvin and influenced by him and Beza both in K. Edw. and Queen Eliz. time Nor is there any Reason why the Lutherans themselves retained so much many Popish Ceremonies but because Luther being almost wholy intent upon reforming the Doctrine of the Church neglected matters of Discipline and Ceremonies which his Followers interpret his judgment So hard is it to make any Progress in any good design especially in matters of Religion beyond the first Efforts when mens first Affections and Zeal are cooled and the World with carnal self doth afterwards intangle their minds It is strange overlashing when the Dr. saith that our first Reformers dyed Martyrs for our Church They dyed indeed for the Doctrine and Worship of our Church as it is common to all Churches and grounded on the Word of God in opposition to the Idolatrv and Superstitions of Rome and particularly that Idol of the Mass But the disputable things of our Lyturgy as to Government Rites and Ceremonies were never in question then nor did

help their People and in the mean while Popery Arminianism Atheism and prophaness break in like a torrent now whether there is as much reason that the present Non-Conformists should keep as private as the former did the Reader must judge Obj. But the Dr. saith the old Non-Conformists earnestly opposed the Brownists Answ And so do many of the present Non-Conformists also the Brownists had two dangerous Positions or Principles peculiar to themselves 1. That there was no true Church in England nor indeed in the whole world but that all Churches in respect of their Doctrine Worship Ceremonies Constitution and Order or some of these were Idolatrous and Antichristian and that therefore no man that minded his Salvation ought to continue a member of them or to hold Communion with them as Churches though they might Communicate with particular Members or with the Society as a Company of private men Praying or otherwise Worshipping God together provided nothing was then used or done which they disliked 2. The Brownists taught that the people had the whole power of Government of the Church and that the Ministers were but the Peoples Deputies in Preaching the Word Administring the Sacraments or exercising of Discipline and must be accountable to them These Principles destructive of all Churches the Non-Conformists earnestly opposed especially the first sc separation from all the Reformed Churches as Antichristian For by preventing of this they would prevent the other mischiefs but in maintaining the Churches of England to be true Churches did they the Prelaticall Nationall Church in respect of the Established constitution which themselves had so often called Antichristian It is manifest by their Books and what is forequoted of their opinions that they meant it of the several Parishes or Congregations in England that they were true Churches both in respect of their Constitution and also in respect of their Doctrine and Worship and that there was in them no such intolerable corruptions as that all Christians should fly from them nevertheless when the Ministers in particular Parishes were more then ordinary defective and unprofitable they allowed and encouraged the people to resort to Neighbour Parishes for better means of edification which Mr. Hildersham defends to be Lawful Lect. upon John Page 227. All this is the sence of the present Non-Conformists and I do verily believe there are no more Brownists among the present Non-Conformists Ministers then there were amongst them in those days for some there were then that went further then the rest in Principles of Separation and so it is in all times and all matters of controversie and what considerable difference is there betwixt their allowing people to go to other Parishes or Gentlemens Chappels and our allowing them to go to private Meetings seeing one takes them off from their own Pastor and Church as much as the other The Dr. saith they still kept the same Liturgy and so they held Communion with the National Church nay but many times they did not that for some the Old Puritan Preachers used it not in their Parishes or Chappels others but little of it others would Baptize without the Cross give the Sacrament without kneeling Marry without the Ring c. which made people resort to them who could not have such Liberty at home and so they varified from if not omitted the Liturgy of the Church but can a man be a Member of the National Church of England and hold Communion with it without being a Member of a particular Parish and if they be allowed to continue members of their own Parishes and not to make a Schism who did in cases of necessity and pro tempore mostly Communicate with Neighbour Parishes why may not the same be said now yea it is said and beleived by most of the Non-Conformists that the Parishes are true Churches of Christ and they do not separate from them or break off Membership though pro tempere and for the present necessity they do ordinarily Communicate in private Meetings where the same Doctrine and Worship is used only some circumstances and ceremonies omitted but no contrary or new ones used in their room or in opposition to those in the Parishes and thus much for the Old Non-Conformists from whom I do not conceive those that are now living do considerably differ in judgment or practise but only as time and circumstances do direct them only they that are dead are out of the way and so best spoken of and they that are living crossing the humours or interests of their opposites are always ill spoken of Obj. 2. The Dr. next objects that we contradict the Principles of the Assembly of Divines who did disapprove and gave reasons against the toleration desired by the Congregational Brethren as tending to endless Separation Answ The Toleration desired was that all men should have liberty to joyn with what Congregation and Pastor they pleased without respect to Parish or place of abode or any other civil distribution or settlement of men amongst us Their chief reasons was that Christians being not originally bound to Nations places or any other Civil Distribution but left free to joyn with those Congregations that they should find most convenient and edifying and now Episcopal Government in England being dissolved and no other set up in its room the People were again free and therefore might make what Congregations or Societies they found most for their own edification see Dr. Owen of Schism This the Assembly thought not reasonable that things should be unravelled into their first Principles and that we should begin to lay the Foundation of Churches again seeing our Parishes at least those that have good Ministers have all things necessary to a Church and it is most convenient for Christians Living in a Vicinity and under the same Civil Officers to make the same Congregation for Worship nor did they think the former Relation of Parishes to be dissolved by the dissolution of the Hierarchy who were no essential parts of the Parishes but general Supervisors or Visitors over them of the same mind are the most part of the Non-Conformists still and all the Congregational men went not that way some allowing all those Parishes that had good Ministers and some Christians fit for all acts of Church Communion to be true Churches Mr. Cotten adds way of the Churches of New-England that it is great presumption to say that the Church of England was faulty in its first Constitution and therefore to be pull'd to pieces and new-built seeing all Histories agree that some of the Apostles or Apostolical men were the first Planters of the Gospel in England who did certainly constitute the Churches in a right manner But where is the Consequence to our purpose that because the Assembly and we as well as they maintain that the Parishes of England are true Churches and not to be subverted therefore when Thousands of their Ministers are violently thrust out from them without any cause given and if they had