Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	apostle_n	scripture_n	tradition_n	5,271	5	9.2621	5	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85048	Some necessary & seasonable cases of conscience about things indifferent in matters of religion, briefly, yet faithfully stated [a]nd resolved wherein the the [sic] just bounds of imposing on one hand, and of obeying on the other, are truly fixed, / by an indifferent hand.	Fullwood, Francis, d. 1693.	1661 (1661)	Wing F2517; Thomason E2270_1; ESTC R209648	43,257	226

either imposed framed or directed yet the grounds and matter thereof are plainly there and seen and acknowledged to be there well nigh by all the Churches of Christ in the world I do not find but that at the Episcopal Divines plead the Necessity so most of the moderate Presbyterians allow the lawfulness and the usefulness yea and the Imposition of forms of publick Prayers of Administring the Sacraments of Catechism Confirmation and of reading of the Scriptures as also of reprehending offenders c. All which as Mart. Bucer enumerates them and concludes Vid. M. â— lib. 1. de reg Christ c. 13. are reserved for the care and power of the Church 3. Thirdly thereunto also belongs the Ordering and managing of the publick Worship as to the time manner and parts of it when to begin how to proceed when to end in the ordinary course of Divine Service as also to appoint extraordinary times of fasting and thanksgiving all which seeing Scripture hath left them to the Churches liberty in reason they ought to be ruled and fixed by prudent Authority as we would avoid Confusion and Ataxie in the Church of Christ 2. Secondly things serving to the Comeliness and Beauty of Worship are also to be put to the same account the decency of the place of Worship the gravity of the habit of Ministers the fitness of the Vessels for both Sacraments the kind of bread and wine the places and gestures of Administration and Communion and such like which the Scripture hath taken no notice of and yet all sober men are fully convinced that very high and almost indispensable convenience exacts a settlement and prudent Regulation of them and in all which methinks Vniformity with Decency should offend no body CASE VI. Whether may the Ruling part of the Church impose upon the Church things indifferent quatenus Indifferent or meerly because they are such Resol I Humbly conceive they have no such power no such Arbitrary strangely unlimited power which if exercised with any extent is not likely to edifie but to destroy the Church For 1. If we should grant that the Governours of the Church have power to impose things as they are indifferent or because they are indifferent we grant they have power to impose any thing indifferent and consequently what indifferent things they please upon the Church and thus we make the Will of Men the Principle and Rule of decency and order in the Service of God and not the Will of God or reason and prudence in the choice of things fittest according to his Word Then they have power to clog Gods Worship with things altogether incongruous to it provided they be indifferent in general as Dauncing Bowling c. and to render it instead of a reasonable Service absurd and ridiculous Then may they add Ceremony upon Ceremony until the number is so many and the weight so great that the work will be burdensome and indeed intolerable to God and Man Thus may they improve their Dominion over our Faith until they have worn out the beauty of holiness the power of Devotion and have rendred the Christian Liberty worse As Aug. complain'd then the Jewish or Popish Bondage This Power as God did never intrust them with it so I never heard of that man or sort of men that pretended unto it or to the exercise of it every one in Authority still granting that there ought to be Reason for their Impositions acting therein as Men as wel as Governors And though many are too apt to give Flattering Titles to men in Authority I have not met with any that Write highest for Conformity and obedience to Authority in things Indifferent that allowed such a Power to men in Authority to require what indifferent things they pleased without any respects to the fitness and usefulness of them in the Worship of God For as Thomas Rogers Against Seffray Obi. 4. that notable Adversary to Non-Conformity in this Case said Authority in making Laws must alwaies respect the Common Good And though Church-Governors saith Francis Mason Authority of the Church c. p. 8 9. of the same spirit with the former may make Church-Laws yet they may not establish what they list God hath inrailed their Authority with certain bounds and limits which they may not pass Agreeing with Calvin who hath also taught us That God hath not left us effraenem licentiam such an unbridled liberty Sed cancellos circundedit in Cor. 14. ult CASE VII What then doth render things indifferent fit to be imposed Resol INDIFFERENT things though they be not commanded or forbidden particularly but left undecided in Scripture yet must they be Reducible to and Agreeable with some general Rules in Scripture to make the Imposition of them fit or warrantable This Resolution becoms Christianity neither can it be inimicous to Christian Discipline it hath the suffrage of highest conformity which affords its liberty still to challenge great consideration in all impositions of things Indifferent Clapham an earnest and Learned Opposer of Non-Conformity hath thus stated it Such things saith Chronol Discourse of the Church cap. 9. he we say to be of an indifferent nature as for the doing or not doing thereof we have no express Word of God in particular only by some general Rule we are led to use our Christian Reason Francis Mason Authority of the Church p. 8. 9. also allows That all Ecclesiastical Canons must be framed according to the general Canons of the holy Scripture In a word I never read a denial of it CASE VIII What are those general Rules of Scripture that liâ—it the Imposition of things Indâ—fferent Resol POlanus gives us a brief Syntag. Tom. 2. p. 70. and sound though a general satisfaction to this Case Things indifferent saith he ought to be reduced to that general equity which the Scriptures appoint to be the rule and measure of all our actions the Lex respicit ordineÌ„ ad bonum commune Aquinas good of our Neighbour Quatenus ad Dei Gloriam proximi salutem faciunt or the Common good as Rogers shortens it Marlorate doth more In 1 Cor. 14. ult fully explicate himself saying that the Apostle confirmeth his Traditions by the Word of God Reason Edification the Example of Churches Decency and Order and he adds With which same Arguments we â—â—ght to examine our Ecclesiastical Traditions But let us a little consider some more special Rules as we easily find them in the surface of the Scripture 1. The first shall be that Catholique Rule of Expediency All things saith 1 Cor. 6. 12 the Apostle are Lawfull for me but all things are not expedient Some lawful things it seems are not expedient Things not expedient to be done ought not to be done and things not expedient to be commanded ought not to be commanded Thus there falls before us a double lawfulness a thing may be lawful and expedient a thing may be lawful and

ought to be regarded both by the governing and governed parts of the Church according to the Rule of the Fathers 7. The last Rule is Gospel liberty this must not be invaded by any imposition though it must not be mistaken Gospel liberry can hardly be infringed if these Rules be heeded in the imposition of things indifferent 1. That nothing indifferent be imposed that any way checketh with the former Rules of expediency peace offence of the weak edification decency order and the custome of the Churches 2. That things indifferent be not imposed as if they were in themselves necessary which Divines assert to be Superstition 3. That things indifferent be not required with equal severity as things necessary 4. That such things when imposed be declared by the Imposers to be mutable in their nature and to be altered upon just occasion 5. That things indifferent be not imposed in so great a number as is really burthensome to the Church of God which was much in the care of our first Reformers Concerning the multitude of Ceremonies of idle and vain nature saith Bishop In Apol. Jewel we know that St Augustine did much complain of them in his time and therefore we have greatly diminished the number of them because we know that they were troublesome to good consciences and burthensome to the Church yet we retaine and have likeing not only of those Ceremonies which we are sure were delivered us from the Apostles but some others too besides which we thought might be suffered without hurt to the Church of God because we affected that all things in the Congregation might according to the will of the Apostle be done with comliness and good order But all such things which we perceived to lean to Superstition or to be of no use or bald or toyish or against the sacred Scriptures or else unmeet for sober and wise people whereof there is a confused Chaos in the Romish Synagogue all these we have utterly renounced and cast off because we would not have the Worship of God confounded and combred with such follies Thus that most excellent Man The summ of whose words here recited doth in effect contain and confirm all that I have said upon this Case viz. That the Ceremonies of the Church ought to be expedient decent and orderly not hurtfull to the Church not troublesome to good consciences not burdensome And he adds that our own Church in the first Reformation had regard to the said Rules Let me conclude with an humble Petition that I be not mis-interpreted to prescribe to Authority in what I have said I have onely marked the general Rules in Scripture leaving particulars to the liberty and wisedom of Superiors to whom I only take boldness to offer that they ought to walk by these Rules settle the Church and Worship of God in peace and order with all comliness and expediency CASE IX How are private persons to demean themselves under such impositions of Authority in religious Exercises Resol VVE have hitherto rather labored to discover the reason of Imposing and the due extent of Ecclesiastical Authority in things indifferent endeavouring also to draw that as narrow and straight and as much to Rule as may be yet I hope without just offence to the same We are now descending to take a view of the reason of obedience and to consider the extent of their duty who are under command Where that I may appear impartial and for peace indeed I must be consonant to my Designe and labour to dis-intangle and enlarge the consciences of private persons with as much freedom towards conformity as lawfully I may that having brought the Injunction as low and narrow and the Obedience as high and large as we may the commanders and the commanded may be happily found nearer together and in sweeter communion one with another Charity surely will not be displeased at this harmless project but will be ready with a pardon though I fail of success or too imprudently manage the Attempt especially while my Aime is levelled at so desireable an end the peace of the Church the common good and use no other Engine to draw down the one and raise the other but that from heaven the holy Scripture And to the Case in general which is this How are private persons to demean themselves under the commands of Authority or Ecclesiastical Laws in Religious Exercises I shall now the Lord assisting me betake my self with all conscience and fidelity to answer breaking it into several particular cases according as the Object of humane Injunctions may be distinguished The Object of humane Injunction or that which is injoyned or commanded may be proceeded upon by a gradation or descent of five stepps for that which is injoyned is either necessary expedient purely indifferent inexpedient or unlawfull Accordingly there may be offered five Cases viz. what a private person ought to do when things necessary or things expedient or things purely indifferent or things inexpedient or things unlawfull are required by Authority in the exercises of Religion to all which we addresse our selves to apply a several and particular satisfaction CASE X. What ought a private Christian to do when things necessary in themselves are required by Authority Resol BOth for the Intention of the present Discourse we treating properly about things indifferent as also for the very nature of the thing it self this need not be put to the Question For though some have thought they have seen reason enough not so farr to countenance an Usurpation as to do their duties when commanded thereunto by unlawfull powers from the liberty of that trite Rule Affirmative Precepts do not binde to every particular instance of time yet it were a strange perversness in any not to do that which God requires because his Vicegerent lawfull Authority requires it also even in the things of Gods Worship Optatus reckoned it a madness in Donatus that broke forth in that question of his Quid Imperatori cum Ecclesia What hath the KING to do with the Church But Optatus wisely answered The Common-wealth is not in the Church but the Church is in the Commonwealth and consequently he that is Governor of the Common-wealth is so of the Church and the Rule is The Gospel takes Non tollit praecepta naturae legis sed perficit Rom. 3. ult not away the Precepts of Nature and the Moral Law but establisheth and perfects them and rather enlargeth and confirms then any way weakens Obedience to Authority Therefore are we to pray for Kings that under their pious and religious governance we may not live in peace and honestly only but in godliness in all godliness as the Apostle directs us St Augustine upon those Contra Crescon lib. 3. cap. 51. words in the second Psalm saith Kings not onely as men but as they are Kings serve the Lord if in their Kingdomes they command that which is good and prohibite that which is evil not

by the Apostle was chiefly if not as an eminent person asserts onely unto sin And the great reason the Apostle gives why we must not use our liberty to the offence of our weak brother is lest we lay a stumbling-block Rom. 14. 13 15 20 21. 1 Cor. 8. 9 10 11 12 13. before him whereat he may fall that is least he presume after our example to do something against his Conscience and so sin against Christ and be likely to perish or to be destroyed the danger therefore the Apostle tells us lies not so much in offending our brother in the English sense as in one making him by our evil example to offend Wherefore the Apostle concludes If meat make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh c. 1 Cor. 8. 13. But now the offence that is most likely to ensue upon our conformity is quite of another nature there is litle fear of drawing our offended brethren to like the waies of Conformity by the practice of Conformists but rather they will like Conformity and the persons conforming so much the worse and grow the more bitter against them The reason of this difference I conceive lies thus In the time of the Apostle those were generaâ—ly looked upon as the strongest disciples that knew their liberty best and the others that were weak were aptest to be offended but now those that pretend offence are the strongest in their own opinion and they judge it a weakness in those that do conform and no doubt if any be likely to follow our examples in conformity out of an opinion of our ability to judg better then themselves they will as easily follow our Judgment too if we first use due means of satisfaction to them and then all the scruple is vanished and gone 2. Secondly let us weigh them one against another and compare the offence received by our weak brethren upon our obedience with that received by Authority upon our disobedience If we onely do that which we may lawfully do and which we are commanded to do we do not give our weak brother any offence though he take it there is not that perâ—se or naturally flowing out of the use of my liberty or the doing of my duty that would hurt my brother or tempt him to sin he takes occasion of himself not at all given by me But now by disobedience if the thing be lawfull that is injoined we give offence to Authority directly and properly so and as we have shewed we can hardly escape sin herein against the fifth Commandement which in every iota as well as all the rest our very liberty it self establisheth The sum is this by refusing to conform in such a lawfull case lest we should offend our weak brother seems directly to sin our selves to avoid an occasion of sin to him to offend God the King the Law the Church and conscience too by not doing our duty lest we should offend our brother by doing it Therefore we must distinguish betwixt things Indifferent that are not under the actual command of Authority and such as are before they are commanded things Indifferent are in our liberty and then the Apostles Rule holds we must not use our liberty to the offence of our brethren but what is required by Authority if it be no longer in our liberty we must minde our duty This Rule therefore greatly concerns Magistrates in thâ—ir Impositions who ought still to follow the weighty advice of Mr Calvin Let Charity submit to Faith and Liberty to Charity but Subjects must not sin that they may please their Prince much less their brother Besides we may distinguish of offence with respect to our brother offended if we offend him by doing our duty we oneâ—y tempt him to do his duty though against his conscience on the other side if we omit our duty lest we offend our brother do not we offend him more in the Apostles sence by tempting him to continue in sin and to embolden himself in sin with a worse conscience CASE The Apostle hath laid down a Rule how we are to use our liberty in things Indifferent towards our weak brother can Man by his commands alter this Rule or take off the force of it Resol THe Apostles Rule is absolutely unalterable where the reason of it holds and the object is the same that is where the matter is still indifferent 2. Man cannot make things Indifferent to become necessary in their nature yet lawful Authority may and ought to judge when the exigencies of the Church make any thing necessary as to its present use or forbearance These necessary things saith that Councel Act. 15. though v. 28. they were not all necessary in their nature yet the Councel judged them necessary as to the present good of the Church 3. In such Cases for the publick good of the Church Governours may and ought to determine the use of Indifferent things by their prudent impositions It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us 28. to lay upon you no other burthen then these necessary things And no less remarkably we finde St Pauls power put forth in 1 Cor. 11. and oâ—her places in determining many Indifferent things for order and decency in the Church of God 4. But what doth all this signifie if these Apostolical Injunctions have no force when a discontented person shall say he is offended Put case that after the decree of the Synod in Act. 15. a particular member should have been offended that his brother refused to eat meat offered to Idols pleading that it was superstition in him or a losing or betraying the Christian Liberty Or that others had been offended at those particulars of Decency and Order injoined by the Apostle to the Church of Corinth urging that they were not commanded of the Lord that therefore they were Humane Inventions New Ordinances Additions to Gods Word and Will-Worship Can any imagine that the rest of the people had been discharged of their duty either to that famous Synod or that excellent Governour the Apostle Paul or that they were bound to suspend their Obedience lest they should offend such scrapulous persons I cannot think it We must not oppose Liberty to Necessity Charity to Duty or the Offence of the Weak to the Higher Powers CASE I. But it is vehemently urged by my brethren in the Ministry that even their credit and reputation will not suffer them to conform they shall thus become vile to the people as men that will do any thing to save their Liveings and then their Ministry will be fruitless and do no good among them What is to be done in such a Case Resol 1. THis Case seems to arise from prudence and not conscience Herein we not pretend to fly from sin to suffering but from one sort of suffering to another that is judged rather to be chosen from suffering in our Reputation by Conformity to the Penalties of the Law for disobedience which when all

Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Text snippets containing the quad