Selected quad for the lemma: state_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
state_n	government_n	king_n	monarchy_n	1,384	5	9.4516	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57861	A true representation of Presbyterian government wherein a short and clear account is given of the principles of them that owne it, the common objections against it answered, and some other things opened that concern it in the present circumstances / by a friend to that interest.	Rule, Gilbert, 1629?-1701.	1690 (1690)	Wing R2228; ESTC R28113	15,541	24

Spiritual Censures Their work is to enquire into and declare controverted Truths to censure Scandalous Sinners to try and ordain Ministers to absolve the penitent by applying the comforts of the Gospel to them and such like Wherefore there is no Ground of Fear that they should Clash or Cope with the Magistrate unless they go beyond their line in which case they fall under the Magistrats coercive power 16 The way how men come into any office or power in the Church is by Election of the People which designeth the Person in which Election as in other things they are to be under the conduct and Regulation of the Church Guides and ordination by laying on of the hands of the Presbytery which is the meane of communicating authority to him and the former of these ought to preceed the latter For we find no warrand for a Ministerium Vagum in the Church seeing even in times of great trouble and Persecution we read of none ordained by the Apostles but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the suffrages of the People 17 Though superintendency that is a power of inspection delegated from the Church to one used in case of necessity when a qualified Minister could hardly be had in a Province he might for a time be appointed to oversee them who could do little more then read the word publickly that is no warrant for bringing qualified Ministers under that subjection in a constituted Church where there are through the mercy of God competent number of Ministers If our Principle be rightly understood we confidently hope they will sugest grounds of answer for most of the objections made against us to the minds of the intelligent and unbyassed Yet we shall endeavour to afford some farther light this way also 1 It is objected or rather we are reproached with by some that Presbyterial Church Government is inconsistant with civil Government Answ. 1. A simple denial is enough to stop the mouth of such bold Asserters Neither hath the World yet seen any topick except calumnies whereby this could be pretended to be proved 2 Experience proveth the contrary Civil Government is advantageously managed in several of the most eminent of the reformed Churches with that discipline of Christs House that we plead for And our own land is a confounding instance that might stop the mouth of impundence it self wherein Presbytery commenced with the Reformation from Popery and continued with much Peace till an bitious Men by labouring to unsettle it did disturb and at last overturn the State 3. We have already shewed how we give to Caesar that which is Caesar's And to God that which is Gods neither can our Adversaries make any Power appear to be due to the Magistrate but what we allow Him Indeed Errastians do require for the Magistrate some Power that the Presbyterians cannot approve of But this is not peculiar to us but common to all that assert a Government in the Church distinct from that of the State Which is the principle of Papists Prelatists that are only such and Independents as well as it is ours 4 Our obedience to Magistrates in all their Lawful commands and our peaceful sufferings of unjust violence are no●●our to all that can behold us with an unprejudiced Eye And if instances can be given to the contrary the disloyalty of some is not to be impured to all for what party of men hath not afforded such instances and where the peace was broken by Men of our way which were but a few it was the fruit of such insupportable Severities and Hardships as even they could not have born who blame others for that practise As late Instances do make manifest 2 It is next objected that Presbytery and Monarchy are inconsistant No Bishop no King at least it is not so adapted to Monarchy as Pre lacy is and the Government of the Church should be so moulded as it may best sure that of the State Answ. 1 The falshood of the Assertion and maxim is evident from what hath been said Presbytery and Monarchy have well consisted in our own Land and in France 2 None maintaine more loyal Principles towards Kings then Presbyterians do who think themselves oblidged to feare God and Honour the King And were alwayes ready to obey him in the Lord. 'T is true they cannot give him unlimited Obedience But this is not as they are Presbyterians but as they are men of Conscience and will obey God rather than Man which I hope the Objecters will not say is peculiar to Presbyterians If they do and plead for the publick Conscience as some of them have done to the laying aside the use of particular Consciences in the actions that are moral which is to introduce practical Atheism They do not hurt our cause but their own 3. Our practice hath also been Loyal in abhoring the Murder of King Charles the first and in contributing the most effectual endeavours to restore His Son And in owning and submitting to a King of a contrary Religion so long as our Religion and Liberties were in any tolerable safety or the Laws that were the measure of our Obedience were any way regarded and what was then done was not by us alone 4 It is boldly alledged but not proved that the Church Government should be fram'd according to that of the State for that may be various but this is one And was so under the old Testament though the Civil Government varied 3 'T is said that Presbyterians encroach on the Authority of the Magistrate by medling with state Affairs Answer 1 Our principle in this is already declared And whatever Instances of former times this allegation may seem to be built on had their rise from Statesmen taking the advice of Church Men in their assemblies Who sometimes gave advice contrary to the inclination of the leading Men of the State And if their zeal for a good Interest led them at any time to press their advice with Reasons and Threatnings from the word of God And if some excess did happen this way the blame lay on them who gave the first rise to it Besides this when the actings of Rulers have a manifest and direct tendency to lead People into sinful Courses such as imposing of unlawful Oaths and engaging people in a false Religion who could be silent without unfaithfulness to God and cruelty both to to the Souls of Rulers and People Another answer may be by retorting this Argument on the prelatick Clergy Do not Bishops fit in the Counsels and interpose directly and formally in affairs of state which Presbyterians never pretended to 4 The rigidity of Presbyterians is objected Answ. 1 Can any man have the brow to compare the rigidity of Presbyterians with that of either Papists or Prelatists either in bearing with no dissent from their way even in the least matters and which themselves count indifferent or in the Bloody and cruel way of Persecuting such as dissent by

the constant practice of the Church was to give such deference to ●●em as they were Generally satisfyed with the Elections And they may still be perswaded that it will be the care of Elderships and Presbytries to do nothing that they can Justly complaine of Besides that it may be presumed that no Minister who regardeth his being useful or his own Peace and Comfort will enter into a place with the dislike of any considerable part of the People either for Number or Quality If it be objected that there were great Divisions and Tumults about Elections in and about the Year 1650. Answer 1. So there were in the primitive Church which the Advocats for Patronages use as an Argument against our Opinion And yet that Church did not think of such a Remedy as puting the Election in the hand of one single Person nor of taking it from the People 2. At the time mentioned there was a lamentable Schism in the Church about other Matters and therefore it was no wonder it appeared in this Matter also People were for choosing Ministers that were of the same Sentiment with them about the things then in Controversie and this Schism was Industriously kept up and promoted by the Rulers that then had enslaved this Nation by force of Armes and made use of Our Factions to wreath their Yoake on our Necks It is a wide consequence to infer from this that the priviledge of choosing their own Pastors should alwise be taken from the People of God 3. When divisions appear in this matter the controversie is to be decided by the Session or Presbytery Synod or General Assemblies And if it amount to the breach of the Peace the Magistrate is to interpose his Authority These are the proper remedies of such divisions and not to deprive both parties of that which is their Right and Christs grant to them because they cannot agree about it It were a strange way of composing Civil contendings about Meum and Tuum if that which they con end about should be taken from both and given to a third Person the better way is the judge competent is to decide in favour of him who is found to have the best Right if Arbitrators cannot compremise the matter So it is here Another Objection the 10 Is concerning a question that ariseth from the present circumstances of this Church under which it is Judged Necessary that the Goverement of the Church should be in its first setlement in the hands only of them who are known to be truely Presbyterian Before we consider what is objected against this It may be nedful to lay down the case And the grounds of the necessity of what we desire resulting from it It is then to be considered That the Church of Scotland hath almost ever been Presbyterian It received that Government with Christianity and retained it while the Antichristian Doctrine and Government prevailed in other parts as hath been of late made appear And after it had been overrun by Popery it was reformed by Presbyters and that Government as it is founded on Scripture so it hath continued in this Church ever since the reformation save that it had some short interruption which did alwayes breed disquiet in the minds of People and troubles in the Nation and sufferings to some of the most Sober and best of the Ministers and People And when in the Yeare 1662 That Government was suppressed and Prelacy set up by an Act of Parliament this deed was never consented to by the National Church but Presbytery as it had been settled by the Authority of the Church and State so continued and doeth continue settled by the Authority of the Church Whence it may rationally be deduced that the Ministers that entred by and under Prelacy neither had nor have any Right to be Rulers in the Presbyterian Church they having had no call nor Authority given them from her whatever they might have in another Church that the State set up in the Nation beside the Church that then was in being from which a great Body of Ministers and People did dissent which Authority they were never suffered to exercise even in their own Church It is also to be considered that on this happy Revolution the King and Parliament have been pleased to abolish Prelacy And have declared their Resolution by their Authority to settle Presbyterian Government From this it followeth that the Prelatick Clergy should not be admitted to a share in this Government Except such of them as shall by the Presbyterian Church be found qualified for the Ministry and such from whom there is no hazard of overturning that Government that now is intended to be established For they being more in number than the Presbyterians is it to be imagined that Presbyterian Government can be safe in their Hands or that they will not erect a prelacy in the Church or something instead of it or some way that is inconsistant with Presbytery in its purity And there being many among them known to be Insufficient Scandalous or erroneous It is not possible that the Church can be purged of such if they have the Government but rather there is an hazard that the best Men should be cast out and that by Church Authority least they should stand in the way of their Designs Wherefore as they have no just Right to such power So Necessity which quicquid coegit defendit doth barr their Exercise of such power in the present juncture Mean while Presbyterians do declare that they do not desire that all these Men should be restrained from the parochial exercise of their Ministry And that who ever among them as soon as the Church can be in case to purge her self is not proved to be Insufficient Scandalous Erroneous or extremely negligent shall be cordially received into Her Society And have the full Exercise of their Ministry And that where uncontroverted Scandals cannot be charged on them none shall be dealt with as Scandalous because of their having had a Hand in this late publick Defection These things thus laid down let us hear what is objected against this course 1 st This is to set up Prelacy among Ministers even while it is so much decry'd that a few should have Rule of the Churches and the rest excluded Answ. It is no Prelacy but a making distinction between Ministers of one Society and th●se of another Though they be Ministers they are not Ministers of the Presbyterian Church they have departed from it we have continued in the good old way that they and we professed It is not then unreasonable that if they will return to that Society they should be admitted by it and not be Imposed on it to overturn it At the Reformation from Popery was it a Prelacy in the few Protestant Ministers that they were not willing to let the Popish Priests govern the Church Or did Nehemiah and the Iews pretend to any power over Tobiah Sanbaliat and their party that they would not suffer them to build with them Pardon these Comparisons they are not intended to parallel our Brethen with either of these sorts of Men except in this that they are not of the Presbyterian Church more than those others were of the Protestant or Iewish Church and that there is hazard from them to our way as well as there was from the other to their wayes Obj. 2. By this means the lesser party in the Church of Scotland shall exclude the greater from the Government Ans This is not absurd where the greater party have left the Church they were of and the lesser hath abode in it or rather are left as the constituent Members of it And when that greater party hath set up another frame of a Church which they are now forced to part with when they would return to the former way they cannot Incorporate again with them who abode in it without their consent especially where this consent is ready to be given on any tolerable Security for the way that the lesser party doth o●●e and the other departed from Obj. 3. What warrant is there for leaving to these men the Parochial exercise of their Ministry and to deprive them of the other part of if seeing the exercise of the Ministry in Teaching and Ruling is Quid Indivisum Answ. There are two Reasons for this one is the necessity of the Church which for such a critical interim as our lot is fallen into may warrant that which out of such an exigence and for a constant continuance in the Church were unwarrantable It is necessary on the one hand that the Parishes be not deprived of their Labours l●st a great part of the Country should be destitute of all Gospel Ordinances It is as necessary on the other hand that they have not Ruling Power in the Church with the P●esbyterians left that Government which Christ hath instituted and which is now designed to be Settled be over-turned And we know that many things may be done in turbato Statu Ecclesiae such as we now are in which ought not to be allowed in paccato Ecclesiae Statu Another reason is we do neither deny their Teaching nor their Ruling Power Yet Teaching being common to the one Church way with the other we may well allow to them the exercise of that among us while Ruling being different in their way and ours and the principle that they hold in it being eversive of our way it is rational to deny them a share among us Not to insist on farther Objections whatever inconveniences may seem to follow on this conduct may be answered by the force of Necessity already held forth and objected by the speedy settling the Church upon its right Basis. FINIS LICENSED Aprile the 18. 1690.