Selected quad for the lemma: saint_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
saint_n	church_n	communion_n	creed_n	2,413	5	10.5759	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67022	The decency and order of church and state as now established asserted in a late visitation sermon.	Woolley, Charles.	1684 (1684)	Wing W3524; ESTC R26402	16,143	39

understandings should darken and eclipse theirs this gives a shrewd suspicion that it is rather wilfulness than weakness in them whilest they plead they are weak at one time and take it ill if you confer with them as such at another I can hardly be perswaded but those Venetian or Commonwealth Protestants for all their pretended love and even dotage upon Parliaments value them the least of all Mankind For there is never a day they rise to go to a Conventicle in which they do not break a matter of 20 or 30 of their Acts and therefore no wonder if they endeavour to pull down the power of those Laws which they fear and hate Instead of rooting out Popery which is Militant in England Triumphant in Italy and disguised in France they would reduce Episcopacy under the Mask of Tantivism to the Primitive condition of Timothy and Titus to be poor and persecuted root and branch and the same Spirit that posted so many honourable Patriots for Straffordians would now expose them as French Pensioners and Arbitrary Tools and by their Seditious and Virulent Libels sacrifice them to the odium of the Profanum Vulgus Amidst all their Clamours for Toleration I wish they would but seriously consider these following Particulars First That the Model and Constitution of any Government can never provide against all the petty Exceptions of every particular Person and to make the most of our innocent Ceremonies there are but six in all Viz. Bowing at the Name of Jesus Kneeling at the Sacrament Ring at Marriage God fathers and Godmothers Cross in Baptism and the Surplice and the two last the Laity have no more to do with than to be present and see them used by the Clergy all Decent and significant Helps and Ornaments of Devotion which I shall but just mention and proceed to tell them That it is impossible all Dissenters can be satisfied for all come in with an equal cry and loudness and that Plea will serve a Papist as well as a Protestant may tolerate Idolatry as well as Schism and little do most believe and know that His Majesties Declaration for Liberty of Conscience 15th March 1671 2 was See Pacquet of Advice to the Men of Shaftsbury p. 19. and Coleman's Letters promoted chiefly by the Lord Clifford a profess'd Roman Catholick and presently closed with by that Noble Peer of three Names And as violent as they pretend to be against the Papists I remember Dr. Pierce Dean of Sarum in his Sermon of Schism Page 46 47. in his Decad of Caveats makes a Schismatick worse than a Heretick in these words An Heretick as such does only offend against Faith and Truth and keeping his error to himself is no body's enemy but his own is a Regular Citizen and a good Subject living friendly with his Neighbours and in an Uniform Obedience to his Superiours whereas a Schismatick as such does also offend against Peace and Charity and cannot possibly keep his Schism to himself because it is publick in it's own Nature but affronts the Governours sets up Altar against Altar a Conventicle against a Church the one is an active Divider the other 's but passively Divided the one destroys a whole Society and the Legislative Power whilest the other does but violate a particular Law and a vitious Practice is naturally worse than a wrong Opinion A Schismatick is mostly an Heretick for he renounces the Ninth Article of the Creed The Holy Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints and disowns one of the Principal Doctrines of our Religion i. e. Obedience to Authority which is injoyned under the pain of Damnation and Rebellion against the Second Table is as bad as Rebellion against the First and Obedience is due to Governours as the Ordinance of God let their Practices and Opinions be what they will even to a Tiberius and a Nero and as Peace without Holiness is but adherence to a Faction so Holiness without Peace is but Hypocrisie and he that is of an Unpeaceable must needs be of an Unholy Spirit If so why may not an Heretick be tolerated as well as a Schilmatick Secondly I wish they would consider That as the Papists have been earnest Solicitours for the Indulging of Protestant Dissenters so likewise Julian the Apostate the bitterest enemy that Christianity ever had was the man that set up this way of Toleration sending for the Prelates Monebat ut civilibus discordiis consopitis quisque nullo vetante religioni suae serviret intrepidus quod agebat ideò obstinantè ut dissensiones augente licentiâ non timeret unanimantem plebem i. e. He decreed That all civil Animosities be laid aside and that every one might serve God in his own way without fear or danger hoping by that License and Toleration their Divisions would be increased that so he might have the less Reason to fear their unanimous opposing of his Grand Design which was to restore Paganism and Idolatry again as Ammianus Marcellinus one of Julian's Souldiers tells us Lib. 22. which is enough to shew That this fair and plausible Indulgence may be design'd for very bad purposes Is it not strange then that the Author of Julian the Apostate with those of the same Clan and Covey comparing Popery with Paganism should be so violent against a Successour of another Religion under whom if he should prove as they pre-judge him a second Julian they may expect the like Toleration which they now so strongly appeal for that dangerous Libel hath strangely tickled the Mobile who for the choice of Kings imagine they may come like the Tribunes of Rome with an uncontroulable Veto what can there be at the Core of this Apostate Author but a Design to make a Constantine miserable for fear that Julian may succeed to bring on a present evil which is sure and incurable to avoid one that may never come what is he but a Doleman or Robert Parsons Redivivus who in the Days of Queen Elizabeth wrote against the Succession of King James because his Religion did not please the Papists whose Maxim was That all Monarchies are de jure elective What does he but set up Lancaster against York by pleading some dubious Titles against a settled Succession according to him we must make our Kings by an Army as the Roman Emperours were commonly established or come to a Pole and HUSSA'S for them what a strange consequence must it needs be to draw an Argument from the State of the Roman Empire in Julian's time when Laws were made by Arbitrary Edicts to such an Establishment as ours is I could be more particular in examining this Diana of theirs but it would be much a Digression and Apostacy from my Text I have so far spoken of it at this time because the Author is put upon our Function to credit his Libel but whatever he has been he ought to be look'd upon as an Out-lyer and a blown Deer to be avoided by his own Herd and the preferment