Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	according_a	church_n	doctrine_n	2,019	5	6.0761	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86484	A rejoynder to Master Samuel Eaton and Master Timothy Taylor's reply. Or, an answer to their late book called A defence of sundry positions and scriptures, &c. With some occasionall animadversions on the book called the Congregational way justified. For the satisfaction of all that seek the truth in love, especially for his dearly beloved and longed for, the inhabitants in and neer to Manchester in Lancashire. / Made and published by Richard Hollinworth. Mancuniens.	Hollingworth, Richard, 1607-1656.	1647 (1647)	Wing H2496; Thomason E391_1; ESTC R201545	213,867	259

effect Sect. 4. When I tel you that New-England men wil not allow a Presbyteryan Church nor a new Independent-Church against the wil of the Magistrates You Reply P. 8. The Questian is not what they would allow but what a company of people planted there which cannot without unfaithfulness to their own light be subject to any other government save the Presbyterian ought to do Whether if their livelihood lie there and that they cannot remove they are not bound to keep Faith and a good Conscience what ever it be that they suffer for it Our beliefe of New England is this that they would suffer the godly and peaceable to live amongst them though they differ in point of Church-government from them Because so far as we could ever learn they never banished any but unpeacebleness together with desperate erroneousness was the cause of it Rejoynder Yes the Question is what they would allow for 1. It may be presumed they do not transgress the charter they have from old England nor the due power of the Magistrate in the opinion of the Churches there 2. That they do to others as they would be don unto 3. Your selves intimate that if Presbyteryans have no livelyhood there then they should remove 4. A course hath bin taken that they should have no livelyhood there for when some of them being persecuted for non-conformity writ into N. E. desiring that they might be a sister-Church and have the liberty of their Consciences N. E. bretheren would not then tolerate them though now the case is altered and the difference is pretended to be so smal that one party ought to tolerate the other 5. They that now plead for liberty of Conscience and toleration wil and if they hold Presbyterian government to be Antichristian as some do must endeavour to the utmost to root it out if ever they have ability and opportunity for such a designe these times shew much and after-times wil shew more to the grief and shame of the luke-warme or as they would be called moderate Presbyterians Sect. 5. To omit that it is plain notwithstanding what you say in your reply that the chiefest Independents in London did think it unseasonable to gather Churches at that time that you did gather yours and that so far as any thing is unseasonable so far it is unlawful When I sayd that it may be Brownists Anabaptists Antinomians Familists and other gross Heretiques and Schismatiques do also pretend the doctrine and practise of the Apostles You reply They must be found to be lyers but those which not in pretence but in truth have the doctrine and practise of the Apostles with them may lawfully practise according to it though they want the commandment of man to warrant it The Church of Ephesus found the false Apostles lyars and rejected them Rejoynder 1. You here omit a fair opportunity of bearing witness against those Heretical and Schismatical conventions saying only what themselves would say that they should be found lyars 2. They are found lyars both when in disputations and conferences they are solidly confuted as they often are or when they are subdued or constrained to yedd at least feigned and dissembled obedience Deut. 33.29 Psal 18.44 As they ought to be 3. Sure you would not have them let alone by the Magistrates and ministers til they confess themselves to be lyars do not all Heretiques and Schismatiques say that they in truth and not in pretence have the doctrine and practise of the Apostles with them and it may be they think so too being given up to beleeve lies and therefore by your argument they may yea are bound to erect Churches in their own way Did the false Apostles of Ephesus did those opinions of N. E. whom neither preaching nor conference nor the assembly of the Churches could cure confess they were lyars though the Churches knew them to be so no no they went on in their former course not only to disturb the Churches but miserably to interrupt the civil peace and pour contempt upon Courts and Churches and therefore the Magistrates did convent and censure them and if the Magistrates had not so don they had bin guilty of those Heresies Schisms Seditions and of the bloud of so many soules as should perish thereby as he that willingly suffers men to go about to poyson all waters in a country is guilty of the death of those which are thereby poysoned nor had they bin nursing fathers to the Church nor had discharged the trust reposed in them by that Plantation yea should they have tolerated Hereticks and Schismaticks for their own profit or some Politique end as the Pope doth Jews and Curtizans their sale of Religion truth and the soules of men for money or worldly interest would have made them abominable to God and all good men CHAP. 4. What number makes a Church Sest 1. WHen I alledg that the case of Adams family and Noahs was extraordinary there being then no more in the world And that Adam and his wife and first son were the Church if then there was any and that Cain lawfully married his own Sister you reply P. 9.1 That I grant in that extraordinary case that 7. 8 or 9. may make a Church That the Church is Christs body and every body consists of members if all were one member where were the body and therefore one Adam could not make a Church That we have a manifest Prohibition of a mans marrying with his sister but what scripture say you is there against this that what number of beleevers have formerly bin a Church such a number may yet be a Church and no greater number is required to the simple being of a Church And that God hath not percisely determined what number do make a Church Rejoynder 1. I no more grant that seven or eight then that two or three did then make a Church much less that they may now make a Church but that two or three may now make a Church though it be the opinion of some congregational men as white Summer Ilands P. 23. is rejected upon good grounds by Mr. T. and Mr. M. against Mr. H. and by M. Cotten P. 53. For if thy brother offend thou must tel him his fault between him and thee and if he heare thee not take one or two with thee now they are three or four yet this was but the 2. admonition which if he did not heare then they were to tel the Church now as the second admonition was to be given by more then the first so the third admonition was to be given by more then the second and therefore the Church must of necessity consist of more then two or three 2. If one Adam could not make a Church it is nothing to my answer for I only say that Adam was the Church before Eve was made and Adam and Eve before their first sonne was born if then there was any and this you know is most true 3. The Apostles

of the Catholique Church there ariseth to every particular Church and person such a relation to and dependance on the Church Catholique as parts have to the whole and neither of them are to work as several divided bodyes by themselves which is the ground of all Schisms but as parts conjoyned to the whole and members of the Common-wealth for the edification of it having care of and exercising their power to other as their call occasion and necessity doth require Eph. 4.11 Epaphras Pastor of Coloss had a zeal and therefore a care also for them in Laodicea and Hierapolis Col. 4.13 3. Your argument is a meer non sequitur it runns thus If Colonels in a Councel of war may exercise some acts of power over the whole army then one Colonel should teach train and lead up the souldiers of other Regiments as wel as he with the rest may rule them Now this inference is evidently weak and so is yours for as the Colonel doth not singly and severally by himself govern the whole army but joyntly with others and therefore cannot be expected to train every Regiment so a Pastor which is a member of a national assembly doth not separatim govern all the Congregations but joyntly with others and therefore it cannot be concluded that he should separatim feed them 4. All that can be concluded wil be but this that he must feed them by Doctrine as wel as by the rod of Discipline and so he doth he with the rest do lawfully as you confess upon occasion put forth Doctrinal power to bring light to the Churches 5. Seeing Mr. Burroughes not only as his own opinion but as the judgment of other Congregational men doth hold that Elders in a Synod are to be looked upon as the officers of Iesus Christ your argument may be thus retorted upon your selves The question is whether each be not an Elder or officer of Iesus Christ to every purpose as to one they as officers may feed by do●trine as you acknowledg and why not by discipline They may you say by authority from Iesus Christ admonish men or Churches and this admonition is a censure why then may they not proceed to other acts of censure 6. Elders receive their power for the whole Church of Christ and may having a call preach administer the Sacraments or rule in any Congregation or do one of these and not the other where their call and necessity of the Church requireth one and not the other Your selves as Elders do administer the Sacrament to some of other Churches which you have no power to censure and so you become a Pastor to them for one purpose and not for another 7. Acts the 15. doth hold out the authoritative power of a Synod as you may see in the next section and then your arguments against it are nothing worth CHAP. VIII Of Councels especially of that Acts 15. Sest 1. THere is a pattern of a Synod of Churches Acts 15. of two evidently and probably of many more as of the Churches of Syria and Cilicia which were alike troubled and their soules subverted and the letters of the councel directed to them rather then to other Churches as more peculiarly binding them which intimates they had commissioners there but if there were but 2 Synod of two Churches Ierusalem and Antioch for those that were sent from Antioch were certainly members of that meeting Acts 15.12.22 a Synod of two Churches warranteth a Synod of three foure or five Churches for where must it stay even of as many as sh●l combine and associate Synodicatry else it could not be proved hence that Synods are an ordinance of Christ and that the assembly of the Elders of the Churches in N. E. was a lawful assembly 2. This meeting is not to be looked upon as Apostolical but as Synodical for though the Apostles were present and acted in it yet they acted not as Apostles Paul as an Apostle needed not to have gone up to Ierusalem to the Apostles and Elders Gal. 1.16 17. Peter Iames and Iohn added nothing to him Gal. 2.6 much less ordinary Elders I Paul say unto you had bin enough Gal. 5.2 And all preachers of another Gospel should have bin accursed Gal. 1.7 8. Nor had the Church of Antioch any power to send out Paul as he was an Apostle but only as an Elder and member of their Presbytery there Acts 13.1 15.1 2. Had they acted as Apostles they needed not to have stated the question and debated it from scripture in an ordinary way having deliberative discourses before the decisive suffrage v. 7. Nor should the ordinary Elders have gone hand in hand with them as they did for the Elders were sent unto as wel as the Apostles v. 2. They came together to consider of the matter v. 6. The Decrees were ordained by the Elders Acts 16.4 The Elders did write and conclude Acts 21.25 where the word Eld●rs may and ought to include the Apostles but cannot include any un-officied men though it be supposed that some such were present and did joyn in the inscription of the Synodical Epistle as Sylvanus and Timotheus did in the Inscriptions of some of Pauls Epistles 1 Thes 1.1 2 Thes 1. 1. The Apostles may be pretended to act as Apostles in other cases as wel as this and then nothing done by them is to be drawn by us into imitation 3. This Synod was an authoritative Synod not only consultative they put forth doctrinal power confuting the heresy vindicated the truth v. 1 7 8 9. And this power was above the power of a single Pastor or the Presbytery of a single Church 2. They made a practical canon for avoiding the Scandal and the occasion of it v. 20.29 and they ordeined Decrees Acts 16.4 not doctrines but decrees or laws for so the word dogma is taken in the new testament Luk. 2.1 Acts 17.7 Ephe. 2.15 Col. 2.14 Of these decrees they say It seemeth good to the holy Ghost and to us as any Synod upon assurance of scripture warrant may say to impose upon you no other burthens now it is an act of the binding power of the keyes to impose burthens and this binding power ariseth not only materially from the weight of the matter imposed though that ought to be warranted by the word of God but also formally from the authority of the Synod which being an ordinance of God bindeth more for the Synods sake 3. They put forth an act of Critick power v. 24. Branding them with the black mark of lyars subverters of soules troublers of the Church They needed not to summon the false teachers for they were present at least some of them to whom else doth Peter say v. 10. Why tempt ye God Neither was it necessary they should make mention of excommunication it being a clear case of it self that those Hereticks and Schismaticks which could not by admonition and other due means be reclaimed were to be excommunicated Tit. 3 1●.11 Rev.

seperation from the then Jewish Church at least not a totall one they had yet Church Communion with her if you mean not Church Communion which is properly and peculiarly such then it did not shew that they counted her a true Church Though the Apostles being Jews and formerly members of that Church might become Iews to the Iews 1 Cor. 9.20 That they might ga●n the Iews and give no offence Acts 21. which is unlawful to do to those that are within or without the Church 1 Cor. 10.32 Might give great respect to the Jewish Church and worships even after they were then dead as in some places by way of funeral pomp the honour done to great personages by their attendants while they lived is in measure continued to them after their death till they be buried as uncovering the head carrying maces and scepters before them c. Lastly Vnless you can solidly prove 1. That the Jewish Church was then a true Church by a morall trueness 2 That there is or ought to be such a change of our Ministry Sacraments and service of God in the Churches gathered from amongst us as was then of the Jewish Priesthood Sacraments and service of God in those Churches which were gathered from amongst them 3 That the Reformed Churches and Ministers may as lawfully be forsaken as the then Jewish Church and the Priests thereof 4 That you have authority to gather Churches amongst us as wel as the Apostles had for gathering Churches from amongst the Jews 5 That men are bound to become Independents when they hear you preach as the Jews were to become Christians when they heard the voyce of the great Prophet Deut. 18.18 19. Vnless also you can invalidate my other fore-mentioned exceptions against this instance I would advise you to lay it aside and to pass to another argument Sect. 2. Reply P. 2. Secondly if the Apostles never taught nor practised such a thing what warrant then have our brethren for their Presbyterian Church which is gathered out of many Churches For they interpret Mat. 18.17 Tell the Church of a Presbyterian Church which consists of the Elders of many Churches Rejoynder What do you hence conclude that the Apostles taught and practised to gather some Christians from others one part of this true Church c This is it which P. 18. of your last Book you profess to shew at large in this and the subsequent particulars then belike you acknowledg that the gathering of Presbyterian Churches is according to the doctrin and practise of the Apostles 2 Between a Presbyterian Church and your gathered and seperated Church there is most difference For 1 A Presbyterian Church is not a particular congregation nor are al her members accounted to be members of a particular congregation much less covenanted members such as yours are 2 She doth not refuse the communió of those congregations out of which you say it is gathered and therefore cannot be called a seperated Church 3. She is gathered with the consent of her societies 4 She doth not cast off the care of government of those societies but her gathering makes much for the better government of them and for setling of truth and peace in them as the convening in Parliament of the principall patriots out of severall Counties doth make for the good government of the State Lastly their gathering is warranted as hereafter Pos 3. 4. may appear by the Doctrin● and practice of the Apostles which you cannot shew of yours Interim you may take notice that Mr. Cotton himself as he doth assert that Synods rightly ordered and classes and conventions of Presbyters of particular Churches are all one keyes P. 42. So he doth call a Synod a Congregation of Churches or a Church of Churches which is as much as to say there is a Presbyterian Classical Church but of this and of Mat. 17. I shal speak more hereafter Sect. 3. Reply p. 2. Thirdly why may not one Church be gathered of the members of many Churches as wel as many Churches consist of the members of one Church For we read that the Church at Jerusalem was scattered upon Stevens persecution and we read not that they returned again but fell into membership with other Churches as is probable which were planted in severall parts of the world Rejoynder Yes they may in these troublous times one family hath oft bin divided into more families part of them at Manchester another at home and one family hath consisted of the members of many families possibly the heads of several Country families have taken one house and dyeted together yea it may be in times of persecution wives may live apart from their husbands and their husbands live together apart from their wives yet it were strang boldness to say that the Apostles taught and practised the seperation of several husbands and gathering them into a distinct family from their wives and it is no less unreasonable from the necessitous condition of a scattered persecuted Church to infer that the Apostles taught and practised to seperate some Christians c. Your selves do intimate P. 14. That one Church may meet in many places in some time of hot persecution may we thence conclude that the Apostles taught and practised the meeting of one Church in many places 2. You read as much of the return of the scattered disciples to Jerusalem as you read of their falling into membership with other Churches if therefore it be probable as you say it is that they fell into membership with other Churches I am sure it is as probable that they ere long did return to Jerusalem seing there was the first Church the chief Church in which the Apostles continued as officers whose doctrin and government all that were members of that Church could not but much desire and the persecution was but short though sharp Acts 9.31.3 Your selves do in effect acknowledg that this argument doth not necessarily if it do probably conclude the undertaken conclusion 4. They that fell into membership with other Churches did not nor do you think they did separate from the Church of Jerusalem or refuse communion with her or with the godly of her aiming at a purer Church and unless you had shewn this you have not performed what you say you have performed When the scattered Disciples left the Church of Jerusalem it was their affliction not their choice much less was it their duty as you pretend your separation to be Sect. 4 Reply p. 2. Fourthly such a Church which consists of the members of many other true Churches hath formerly bin without exception in the days of the Prelates how comes it now to be questioned For at least fourteen years since such a Church was extant in Wirrall in Cheshire the vocal covenant being only wanting which consisted of the choicest Christians of many parishes And we think it cannot be denied but Mr. Iohn Angiers Church at Denton in Lancashire hath of long time been such and many other

Congregation no Minister above another Minister though the major part of them as of Congregational members though equall one to another be above the minor part where every Elder is left to enjoy the office of an Elder and each Congregation left to the freedome of the Congregation in what belongs to them and they able to perform The Prelates power was altogether extrinsecal to those Congregations that were under it they did not consent unto it nor sent Commissioners to assist or concur in it but Classes and Synods are aggregates made up out of their mutuall associations into one and do in matters of common concernment strengthen and help particular Congregations walking according to rule and reduce such as walk not in truth and peace but are leavened with error and variance The Prelates urged Subscription Ceremonies had civil power to imprison fine were Barons and so had votes in Parliament they had their Chancellors Commissaries Surrogates Deans Chapters Archdeacons Rural Deans Proctors Apparitors Singing-men Choristers Summoners Their Courts were remote from many of the people they were expensive oppressive by exaction of Fees they or some of them promoted Tyranny Popery Arbitrary government suffered ignorant profane Popish Arminian Socinian Ministers which the Presbyterian Government where it is in full strength as in Scotland doth not Sect. 4. Reply p. 8. You might more properly have said that John did not blame him simply for usurping or exercising preheminence for accepting presupposeth an offer made of the thing accepted now it is more then probable that the Church never offered him that preheminence nor if shee would had shee any such power exorbitant preheminence usurped over the whole both the Elders his equals and the fraternity which yet have a share and interest in the passing of Excommunication is here spoken of not any lawfull preheminence for then a moderate and well-tempered love of it were lawfull By the same reason that Diotrophes is excused in regard of the materiality of his action may the corrupt Princes of whom it is said Isai 1.23 Every one loveth gifts be excused from their bribery and corruption 3. You say It is probable that John writ somewhat concerning Discipline as the receiving of certaine brethren a businesse in which the fraternity had some interest as well as Diotrophes and the rest of the Elders and therefore he wrote not to Diotrophes or to the Elders alone but to the whole Church But Diotrophes riseth up he alone commands forbids excommunicates and yet say you or else you say nothing to purpose be is not blamed for it If Diotrophes were not to blame being a particular Elder to take upon him the power of the whole Eldership yea and the whole Church why may not a brother do that which belongeth to the fraternity an Elder do that which belongs to the Presbytery or to the Classis or Province and yet blamelesse Rejoynd 1. You grant Diotrophes was an Elder of the Church of Corinth and is it not probable he had a primacy of order or some preheminence amongst the Presbyters by reason of parts or age c whereunto he was chosen by his brethren and whereupon he made answer when John writ to the Church as Presidents Moderators use to do when Colledges Synods Societies are writ unto and if so the word accepting is not an unmeet expression 2. That the text speaks of an exorbitant preheminence usurped over the whole you assert but prove not the expresse words of the text are loving preheminence or primacy not having preheminence the word I used not usurping it the word you use The preheminence might be lawfull and yet the love of it be blamed in Scripture as money pleasure uppermost roomes long clothing salutations may be lawfull Prov. 21.17 Mat. 23.6 Mark 12.38 as your selves confesse yea the Prophet doth not reprove Princes for receiving of gifts or rewards notwithstanding your instance to the contrary but for corrupt inordinate loving or receiving of them Saul did lawfully receive gifts and they were men of Belial that brought him none 1 Sam. 10.27 though to love gifts or rewards or to receive them so as to delay or pervert judgement be a great sinne Isa 1.23 3. By what logick do you conclude Diotrophes is not here blamed ergo he is excused from the guilt of solitary excommunication in regard of the materiality of the action or he is not here blamed therefore he is not to blame c. Are all men in Scripture blamed yea and simply blamed for that was my word for every thing in which they were to blame 4. I indeed had no thought of excusing him from guilt in solitary excommunication or exercise of any Ecclesiastical authority which I have publikely witnessed against both lately and long since nor well know I whether he was solitary or only principall in that work nor how far the Church was guilty of it That he alone did rise up and command and forbid and excommunicate the Scripture saith not neither did I say it or think it much lesse did I say he is not to blame if he did so They for ought I know might joyn with him and yet he only be blamed by name as being the head of the faction and they doing it by his inducement and instigation as the rebellion of many yea in a sort of all the congregation of Israel is from the principal actor called the gainsaying of Corah Jud. v. 12. for how one man in the very Apostles times could excommunicate members out of a Church so great well gifted and fully furnished with officers as Corinth was if the Elders and people had been against him or have hindred John from comming to them I cannot see Might they not have received John and have some one or all of them writ to him to that purpose whether Diotrophes would or no seeing the Elders certainly had and you say the fraternity also had a share in those weighty businesses But possibly this was one of those false teachers which brought the Corinthians into great dislike of the Apostle Paul their spirituall father 1 Cor. 4.13 14. 2 Cor. 10.1 and was of an ambitious spirit v. 12.18 your selves take it for granted he was of that Church and if so then he might very easily bring them into dislike of John 5. Suppose any Church-power which you esteem most lawfull should have loved preheminence should not have received John nor the brethren and have forbidden them that would and have cast them out of the Church might not John have writ on this manner and sharply have rebuked them without any intent on his part of reflecting upon the lawfulnesse of their power but only upon their ambitious and corrupt use of it CHAP. XXVII Of Independents likenesse and unlikenesse to Corah Dathan and Abiram Sect. 1. WHen I desire you calmly to consider whether investing Non-Elders with Ministerial power placing Church-power in the body of the Congregation complaining of the Elders that rule over