Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	christian_a	church_n	true_a	4,006	5	4.8519	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34543	A second discourse of the religion of England further asserting, that reformed Christianity, setled [sic] in its due latitude, is the stability and advancement of this kingdom : wherein is included, an answer to a late book, entitled, A discourse of toleration.	Corbet, John, 1620-1680.	1668 (1668)	Wing C6263; ESTC R23042	29,774	53

that nature have been matter of dispute in all Ages and in all Religions but about the Orders and Ceremonies this is the only thing to be resolved Whether the Church hath power to injoin an indifferent Ceremony But there is no such difference in the case The Question of things Indifferent hath been mistaken for the Grand Case of the Nonconformists for those points which are the main reason and matter of their inconformity are by them accounted not indifferent but unlawful and therefore not to be admitted in their practice till their Consciences be better satisfied And it is not irrational to think that serious doubtings may arise in sober minds about some parts of the injoyned Uniformity and particularly about those Ceremonies which seem to draw near to the significancy and moral efficacy of Sacraments and thereupon may appear to some not as meer circumstances but as parts of Divine Worship and their Consciences may be struck with Terror by the sense of God's Jealousie about any instituted Worship which Himself hath not prescribed Moreover these Orders and Ceremonies have been matters of dispute in all times since the beginning of Protestant Reformation But under the degenerate state of the Christian Churches by the great Apostacy of the later times there could be no occasion of disputing these things when Will-worship was generally exalted and the grossest Idolatries had prevailed I question the truth of that Assertion That the Dissenters cannot name one Church besides ours in which there was a Schism made for a Ceremony For a great Rent was made in the Christian Church throughout the World about a Ceremony or as small a matter to wit the time of celebrating the Feast of Easter But whensoever a Schism is made let them that cause it look to it and lay it to heart Wo to the world because of offences and wo to that man by whom the offence cometh But we still insist upon this Argument That these Rites being at the best but indifferent in the opinion of the Imposers the observation of them cannot in reason be esteemed of such importance to the substance of Religion as the different Opinions about the Articles aforesaid are And who knows not with what animosity and vehemence the Parties that are called Arminian and Antiarminian have fought against one another and what dreadful and destructive Consequences they pretend to draw from each others Opinions Now put case the more prevalent Party in the Church of England should go about to determine those Controversies on the one side or the other and truly they were sometimes determined by a Synod in His Majesty's Dominions namely by that of Dublin in the year 1615 also by the greatest Prelates and most eminent Doctors in England in the Lambeth-Articles and what hath been may again come to pass would not that side against whom the Decision passeth be ready to cry out of Oppression Yea how great a Rent would be made by it through the whole Fabrick of this Church Furthermore in Ceremonies publikely used and matters of open practice the Church of England hath thought good to indulge Dissents as in that of bowing toward the Altar or the East unless it be required by the local Statutes of particular Societies And in this the Sons of the Church do bear with one another according to the direction of the Canons made in the year 1640. Unto which may be added That the Mode of Worship in Cathedrals is much different from that in Parochial Churches Likewise some Ministers before their Sermon use a Prayer of their own conceiving others onely as the phrase is bid Prayer If these and other Varieties be no reproach to our Church will it reproach her to suffer one to Officiate with a Surpliss and another without it SECT XVI Men differently perswaded in the present Controversies may live together in Peace IT is no vain speculation to think we may have peace if men perswaded in their Consciences that the controverted Ceremonies are superstitious or at the best but Trifles and that the Liturgy and Ecclesiastical Polity need some Reformation should be joined with men far otherwise perswaded And the preserving of Peace in that case doth not suppose or require that all these differently perswaded men will be wise on both sides to content themselves with their own opinions But it supposeth the State and the chief Guides of the Church to be wise as it is always requisite they should be and that many of Reputation and Eminency on both sides will be prudent and temperate and examples of Moderation to others and not to suppose this is to disparage and debase our present Age but above all it supposeth the Publike Constitution so well stated and setled as to be able to curb the Imprudent and Unsober and to encourage the Modest and Well-advised Surely all Dissenters upon Conscience will not be prevailed with by the same Conscience to endeavour the propagation of their own way in these differences to the depression of others If some offer to disturb the Peace can no Rule of Government restrain them It is a deplorable case indeed if there be no remedy but for those that are favoured by the Higher Powers utterly to exclude and reject those that want the like favour and countenance At this day the Church of England by Her present Latitude or at least Connivence keeps peace among Her Sons of such different Perswasions as formerly stirred up great Dissentions in this Church Who is ignorant of the Contentions raised about the Arminian Controversies in the several Reigns of Queen Elizabeth King James and King Charles the First But in the present Times the mutual forbearance on both sides but chiefly the Church's Prudence hath lay'd asleep those Controversies whereas if one side presuming upon its Power and Prevalency should go about as formerly to decry and depress the other and to advance and magnifie themselves and ingross the Preferments doubtless the like flames would break out again For there is a great dislike and abhorrency setled at the Heart-root of both these Parties against each others Opinions and a sutable occasion would soon draw it out to an open Contestation Now if the Church's Peace and Unity be already maintained in such seemingly dangerous diversity of Opinion among her Members and Officers and those not of the meanest rank why should her Prudence and Polity he suspected as insufficient to maintain Unity and Peace in the indulging of the differently perswaded in the now disputed Rites and Opinions SECT XVII Of DISSENTERS of Narrower Principles and of TOLERATION THE Latitude discoursed in the former Treatise is unjustly impeached as providing onely for the Presbyterians and relinquishing all other Dissenters for it comprehends within the Establishment those of all sorts that are of Principles congruous to stated Order in the Church so that no sort is excluded whose Principles make them capable And was this Capacity any where restrained to the Presbyterians Some Nonconformists are for

acquiescence in the Commands of Superiors and the proper matter of their Injunctions IN the former Treatise this Argument was used The Church doth not claim an Infallibility therefore the cannot settle the Conscience by her sole Warrant but still leaves room for doubting The Answerer makes this to be either a piece of ignorance or of portentous malice and an Assertion that would disturb all Government both in Families and in the State that would confound all Society and extirpate Faith and Justice from among the sons of men But this his strange Inference rather is portentous That the Church cannot settle the Conscience by her sole Warrant is it not a Principle maintained by all Protestants in opposition to the Popish implicit Faith and blind Obedience But is this person consistent with himself For after he hath a while expatiated in his imaginary hideous Consequences he comes himself to deny that the Church bindeth the Conscience by her own Authority And yet it is a lesser thing to bind the Conscience than to settle it and leave no room for doubting For Conscience may be obliged when it is not setled And if the Church cannot oblige doubtless she cannot settle the Conscience by her sole Authority How then could a man of reason draw such hideous Inferences from that Position If I may give way to conjectures I suspect that he might take check at the word Infallibility by which I intend no more then Infallible Direction and I fear not to own this Assertion That whosoever have not Infallible Direction or the certain assistance of an Infallible Guide so as to be exempted from all error in what they propound for Belief or Practice cannot settle the Conscience by their sole warrant I still aver That in prescribed Forms and Rites of Religion the Conscience that doth its office will interpose and concern it self And it is matter of astonishment that a Learned Protestant should say this Position must needs be false For Conscience guided by the fear of God will use all just means to discern his Will and cannot resign it self to the dictates of men in the points of Divine Worship If the Judgment of Discerning which makes men differ from Brutes be to be exercised in any case it is chiefly requisite in these matters wherein the Glory of God and the Saving of the Soul is so much concerned It is granted That to maintain Peace and Unity in the Church and to be obedient to the Higher Powers in those things which are proper matter for their Commands are most strictly injoined Duties But the Injunctions here considered though to the Imposers they are but things Indifferent that is neither Commanded nor Forbidden of God in the Consciences of Dissenters are Unlawful To instance in some controverted Ceremonies They think that God hath determined against them though not in particular yet in the general Prohibition of all uncommanded Worship And they reply Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto men more then unto God judg ye To restrain that of the Apostle He that doubts is damned if he eat only to things wherein the Church hath not interposed her Authority is a false gloss and a begging of the Question What human Authority can warrant any one to put in practice an unlawful or suspected Action or to make profession of a known or suspected Falshood As concerning the Rights of Superiors it is the Church's Duty and Honour to teach and command her Children to do whatsoever Christ hath commanded And it is the chiefest Glory and most proper Work of the Magistrate who is Gods Minister and Vicegerent to be custos vindex utriusque Tabulae To incourage and inforce Obedience to the Divine Laws whether written in the Bible or imprinted in our Nature and in subserviency thereunto to have power to determine such things as are requisite in the general but in the particulars are left undetermined of God and are to be ordered by Human Prudence according to the Light of Nature and the general Rules of Gods Word But things indifferent in their nature and either offensive in their use or needless and superfluous are not worthy to be made the proper matter of his Commands It is a grave and weighty saying of a Learned man of whatsoever Perswasion he were If the special Guides and Pastors of the Church would be a little sparing of incumbring Churches with superfluities or not over-rigid either in reviving obsolete Customs or imposing new there would be far less cause of Schism and Superstition and all the inconvenience that were likely to ensue would be but this That in so doing they should yeeld a little to the imbecillity of their Inferiors a thing which St. Paul would never have refused to do SECT XIII Of the alledged Reasons of the Ecclesiastical Injunctions in the beginning of the Reformation THE Answerer relates at large the proceeding of this Church in the beginning of the Reformation The sum of the Relation is That there being Two sorts of men one that thought it a great matter of Conscience to depart from the least Ceremony they were so addicted to their old Customs the other so new-fangled that they would innovate all things and nothing would satisfie them but that which was new It was necessary for the Church to interpose for Peace sake and casting off neither Party to please each to their edification and also to injoyn some things to the common observance of all and therefore she took away the excessive multitude of Ceremonies as those that were dark and abused to Superstition and Covetousness but retained those few that were for Decency Discipline and apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God We have good warrant to call in question the truth of his Narration in things of the greatest weight First It is not true that the Party that were for Ceremonies comprehended all those who staid at home and did not flye in the time of Queen Mary's Persecution For such as dissented from the Ceremonies in the time of that Persecution had their Assemblies for the Worship of God in this Land and indured among others in the Fiery Trial. And we can find but little zeal in the Martyrs of those days for this kind of Conformity Likewise it is not true that the Party that were against Ceremonies were but small as being but some few of those that fled beyond Sea There is clear evidence to the contrary An Historian zealous for Conformity even unto bitterness reports in his Ecclesia Restaurata That in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign many that were disaffected to Episcopacy and Ceremonies were raised to great Preferments Besides those that were in Ecclesiastical Dignities he observes That the Queens Professor at Oxford and the Margaret Professor in Cambridg were among the Nonconformists For the multitude of Dissenters in those dayes there is a notable testimony of a Friend of Prelacy in his Letter