Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	church_n	member_n	visible_a	5,442	5	9.2031	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A56167	A fvll reply to Certaine briefe observations and anti-queries on Master Prynnes twelve questions about church-government wherein the frivolousnesse, falseness, and grosse mistakes of this anonymous answerer (ashamed of his name) and his weak grounds for independency, and separation, are modestly discovered, reselled : together with certaine briefe animadversions on Mr. Iohn Goodwins Theomachia, in justification of independency examined, and of the ecclesisticall jurisdiction and rights of Parliament, which he fights against / by William Prynne ...	Prynne, William, 1600-1669.	1644 (1644)	Wing P3967; ESTC R3868	34,873	26

you meane it of any other light that is truely such we blesse God for it and desire to walke brotherly and unanimously in it In the seventh he grants that the Law of Nature which instructs men to unite themselves into one Nationall State or civill Government doth likewise teach them to joine themselves into subject themselves unto one Nationall Church and to Nationall Synods Parliaments in point of church-government in which every particular man hath his Vote though not in proper person which hee objects is necessarie but I deny since all cannot possibly assemble yet in their deputies Knights Burgesses or selected Commissioners and though it bee t●ue that Christ hath not given Magistrates such absolute authority over mens consciences as bodies as you object yet hee hath enjoyned us to bee * subject to the higher powers and to every lawfull ordinance of man not repugnant to his Word EVEN FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE and THE LORDS SAKE too For my passage That there is no example of gathering independent Congregations not of Infidels but of men already converted to and setled in the Christian Faith unlesse derived from the private conventicles of Arrians Novatians Donatists and other Hereticks who yet w●re not independent among themselves it is not a bitter speech as you phrase it but a true one and onely bitter to you because undeniable For as it was the * common practice of those seducing Hereticks Sectaries to gather private Conventicles of their own and labour to draw other orthodox Christians from their proper Ministers to incorporate themselves into their private separated congregations as Historians informe us So no such practice of alluring and stealing away other Pastors sheep from their proper Shepheard who first coverted them to and edified them in the faith and grace of Christ can be produced but only in these Hereticks and Sectaries whose practice your Independents imitate As for those private conventicles as he phraseth them for which he saith I may blesse God that I was remembred in them with tears when others durst not name me as I do really blesse God for them and those who remembred me effectually in them so I dare not stile them Conventicles in an ill sense since not † such by Law being only lawfull Assemblies of private Christians to seek unto God by prayer fasting upon extraordinary occasions which all good Christians cannot but approve But all these meetings were farre from being then stiled reputed Independent Churches or having any affinity with them so as they make nothing for his cause 8. To the eighth Quere he gives a negative Answer First in generall next in particular to some instances First he grants that there was a Nationall Church yea Nationall assemblies Parliaments determining church-affaires of the Jewes but these saith he cannot be a pattern for us now because the covenant of the Gospell is not made with any one particular Nation as with the Jewes but to all Nations that embrace the Gospel and beleeve in Christ you have no promise nor prophesie of any Nation to be holy to God but the Jewes Nation when they shall bee called againe To which I reply first That Independents have not the least precept or example for any solemne Covenant made betwixt God and men to walke in the wayes of God c. but onely * in the old Testament and Church of the Israelites and that no private congregationall but publ●…ke Nationall covenant prescribed by the supreme temporall Magistrate and Assembly not by the Priests or private Synagogues yea the principall precepts presidents for publike or private fasts sanctifying the Sabbath c. you likewise derive from the old Testament and that Church why then should not their Nationall Church be a pattern for us and you to imitate as well as their Nationall covenant fasting sabbath-keeping the Church of God being all one as it is a Church both under the old Teastament and new and the pattern of it under the Law a better pesident for the Church under the Gospel of which it was a type and fore-runner then the pattern of the Tabernacle shewed in the Mount so frequent in your Lips and Books a president for your Independent Modell to which it hath no analogy 2. This reason is most absurd and false the Covenant of the Gospel extending not onely to particular persons but to * all Nations and people whatsoever who are both prophesied and promised to become Christs own inheritance possession people spouse church and to be an HOLY NATION A PECVLIAR PEOPLE c. to the Lord in infinite Texts both of the old and new Testament which I wonder the Respondent should either not see or forget being ten thousand fold more cleare and visible then his Independent platforme which few or none can yet espy in Scripture History or Politiques 2. He addes that I cannot sh●…w any Nation every member whereof is qualified sufficiently to make up a church which is Christs body unlesse I will take in Drunkards Whore-masters c. to be members of a church whereas the Word saith they must be visible Saints and this cannot be avoided in a Nationall church I answer that I dare not be wiser then my Master Christ who informes me that there will and must be alwayes in the visible church on earth be it Nationall parochiall presbyteriall or congregationall * goats among the sheep chaffe among the wheat which must grow together ●…ill the harvest at the end of the world to wit the day of judgment good fish mixed with the bad in the churches Net 2. I finde a a Judas a Devill among the Apostles many b grosse sinners idolaters and corruptions in the Jewish church many abuses Epicures Drunkards Wh●…re-masters L bertines unclean●… persons and false Teachers in the churches of Galatla Ephesus Colosse Pergamus Smyrna Thyatira and Laodicea yet the Scripture expresly stiles them c the body and churches of Christ and reputes such members though corrupt ones of those Churches who doe not actually cease to be members when excommunicated or suspended for a season after they are baptized and professe the Christian faith nor did any separate from these churches though they had some corruptions and evill members For you therefore to separate from and unchurch such Nationall or Parochial churches which have some such members in them is to unchurch all churches both in the old the new Testament and world it self yea your own churches too 3. The Scripture is expresse d that many are called but few chosen and saved that all must be compelled to come into the church though they want the wedding-garment There never was nor shall be here on earth any one visible church compacted wholly of reall elected Saints without any mixture of Reprobates such a church we shall meet with onely in heaven I am sure you can gather none such on earth 4. Are there no corrupt or drunken members in your independent churches

concluded thence That the Altar was measured as well as the Temple Rev. 11. 1. referring only to the * Jewish not christian Church which hath no * Temple nor Altar Ergo we ought to have an Altar yea one divine set form of Altars in all christian Churches under the Gospel which I hope you dare not aver After these three Independent Arguments he pretends my third Quere contradicts the first because I suppose a church-government may be consonant to Gods Word in the generall which is not particularly prescribed in it A pretty fancy As if nothing could be consonant to Gods Word which is not particularized or verbally enjoyned in it Are not our materiall churches garments temporall Magistrates Majors Corporations Parliaments Courts of justice Laws of all sorts yea Festivals Covenants monthly Fasts c. agreeable to Gods Word because not literally prescribed in it Are your private church-covenants unmixt Communions as you phrase them erections of Independent congregations without the licence of temporall Magistrates not consonant to the Word in your owne opinions though no where extant in it If not then all your divine pretences for them vanish and you yeeld your cause If yea you must then recant this pretence of a contradiction till you are able to prove 〈◊〉 better then yet you have done Having played the Logicians and contradictors part so well he next betakes himself to his Anti-queries to prove a set church-modell which are three 1. If no prescript forme of church-government in the Word why not Episcopacy especially regulated and moderated as well as Presbytery I answere if you meane it of Lordly Episcopacy there are abundant pregnant Texts against it to prove it opposite to Gods Word If of moderated or regulated Episcopacy the same with Presbytery if the Parliament by the Synod●… advice unanimously establish it as most consonant to the Scriptures and most agreeable to the civill Government I shall readily submit unto it without opposition and why not you and all others 2. If church-government be suited to States whether Politicians are not more fit to consult about establishing it Why is an Assembly of Divines called to search the Word about it I answer that my position is That every church-government ought to be suitable to Gods Word as likewise to the civill State Therefore Politicians and States-men are fit to be consulted with to suit it best to the civill State and an Assembly of Divines to square it likewise by and to the Word the true reason why in this our Realme and all other Christian States as I can abundantly manifest if need be Ecclesiasticall Lawe●… and formes of government have ever been setled by Parliaments with the advice of Synods Councells wherein States-men and Church-men have jointly concurred in their deliberations and votes using both the Bible and the Law to settle it and not throwing either of them aside as incompatible as ignorant or lawlesse persons deeme them but joyning both together True civill or ecclesiasticall Policy skill in Government Arts wholsome Lawes boing † Gods gift as well as spirituall graces To his third Anti-quere I answer That it is more reasonable the * State should be subject to Christs rule then Christ to its direction But this Quere is quite besides the Question till you prove infallibly That Christ hath prescribed a set unalterable divine government to which all churches Nations States must necessarily conform and clearly manifest what this Government is in all its particulars Till this be done the sole question is Whether christian Princes Parliaments States Synods under the Gospel have not a lawfull power to prescribe Ecclesiasticall Lawes and forms of Government not repugnant to the Word not to Christ himself as you pretend who is † King of Kings and Lord of Lords above the reach or command of humane power but to all particular Christian churches congregations subjects under their respective jurisdictions and whether the whole representative Church and State of England in Parliament have not sufficient authority by Gods law to over-rule and bind all or any particular members or congregatious of it as well as the major part of an Independent congregation power to * over-vote and rule the lesser part and to order yea bind any of their particular members A truth so clear that no rationall man good Christian or Subject can deny it Your prime argument then wherewith you deceive poore silly people That Kings Parliaments cannot prescribe Lawes and Canons to Christ himselfe the Soveraigne Lord and King of his Church Ergo they cannot prescrib them to their Christian subjects and Churches who by Christs owne ordinance are subject to their lawfull soveraigne authority is pure Independent Non-sence much like this A Master Father cannot prescribe Laws Rules to the King or Parliament who are paramount him Ergo not to his servants children who are subject to him As for the latter part of this Querie That the Saints thinke CHRIST is King alone over his Churches and hath not left them to substitutes and the politicke considerations of men to bee governed by If hee meanes it onely of matters of Faith or of meere internall government over the soules of men it may passe as tolerable but if hee intends it of externall Ecclesiasticall Government Discipline or order in the Church or State as Christian hee must renounce his Oath of Allegeance his late Protestation Nationall Vow and Covenant and make Rom. 13. 1 to 6. 1. Pet. 2. 13 14. Tit. 3. 1. 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 3. to be Apocryphall the Confessions of all Protestant Churches heterodox and deny christian Kings Magistrates highest civill powers to be Christs substitutes Vicars in point of Government to whom Christ hath delegated his * Kingly power as truely as Ministers are his deputies in point of instruction admonition to whom he hath bequeathed his Propheticall office 2. In his answer to my second Quere he first wilfully misrecites it then infers † a blind obedience from it to all superiours commands be they never so unjust or contrary to Gods Word whereas my Question speaks onely of lawfull decrees c. consonant to Gods Word and to the civill Lawes Government and manners of the people to which every Christian in point of conscience is bound to submit without any danger of blinde obedience by the expresse resolution of Rom. 13. 1 to 6. 1 Pet. 2. 14 15. Tit. 3. 1. Ezra 7. 26. Josh. 1. 16 17 18. Heb. 13. 17. If any man deny this verity he must renounce not onely his Christianity but his Allegeance and Humanity too But suppose saith he the whole Parliament and Synode should erre in commanding a Government that is erronious or untrue must we then submit unto it I answer first such an oversight is not to be presumed before it be actually committed and it is neither * christian charitable nor any way of Christ thus to prejudge their resolutions Secondly if the Decrees or Government

but onely reall visible Saints are there no usurers oppressors corrupt dealers covetous proud malicious uncharitable censorious persons no apparent hypocrites or dissemblers yea are there not many sinnes and corruptions in the best the choicest of all your members who cannot depart away or quite separate themselves from their * own bosome corruptions as there is and will be in the best of men during their mortality If your Independent congregations consist of such members as these of men subject to like passions sinnes infirmities as others in Presbyteriall churches what then is become of this your reason and principall ground of Independency or rather Separation or Brownism its ancient proper title you may lay it up in Lavander for another world but can make no use of it in this where you cannot so much as dream of a church of reall Saints without any mixture of corruption And therefore rather then separate or leave us in a P●…lt because you cannot have your wills in all things you should with blessed Paul as tender-conscienced no doubt as any of you and a lawfull pattern for your imitation * to the Iew become as Iewes that you might gain the Iewes to them that are under the Law as under the Law that you might gaine them that are under the Law to them that are without Law as being not without Law to God but under the Law to Christ that you might gaine them who are without law To the weake you should become as weake that you might gain the weak yea be made all things to all men that you might by all meanes gaine some Which how farre you in your new way are from let all men Judge 3. For his answers to that of Acts 15. all ages churches till this present have held it both an expresse warrant and president for the lawfulnesse usefulness of Nationall and Provinciall Synods to determine differences in Religion which particular churches persons cannot decide and making necessary Canons for church-affaires neither can all his shifts elude it To his first and second reasons or rather evasions I answer it is clear by Act. 15. 2. that the church of Antioch it selfe could not decide the question nor Paul nor Barnabas satisfactorily determine it so farre as to quiet all parties and therefore they sent Delegates to the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem there to decide it None is so ignorant but knowes that there are many controversies now on foot concerning doctrine discipline and church-government which no particular congregations nay hardly an whole Synod and Parliament together are sufficient to settle and determine therefore there is a kinde of necessity of Nationall Synods as well as of Parliaments whence all ages churches have used them To his third reason I reply that it is evident by expresse words vers. 2. 5. 6. 7. 10. 19. 20. 24. that the principall end why the Apostles went up to Hierusalem and why this Synod ass●…mbled was not to prove the false Apostles lyars as he affirmeth but to debate and consider THIS QVESTION AND MATTER wheth●…r ●…he Gen●…les ought ●…o bec●…rcumci s●…d To his fourth I say that though this meeting was occasional yet it i●… a sufficient warrant for generall meetings which are usua●…ly called only upon speciall occasions of moment In it there was a generall assembling of all the Apostles Elders and Brethren at Hierusalem where there were then divers particular congregations as our Assembly long since resolved from Acts 2. 6. 41 42 46 47. c. 4. 4. c. 5. 14 15 16 42. c. 6. 1. to 9. c. 8. 2 3 4. c. 11. 1 2. c. 12. 12 13. c. 21. 17 18 23 22. which if Independents deny then they must prove that all the Apostles and Elders at Hierusalem were Pastors but of oneand the self-same individuall congregation and then what becomes of their Independent churches which have no Apostle and onely one Pastor but scarce any Elders in them who upon this speciall and some other publike occasions met all together and that not to advise onely but determine and resolve as is evident by vers 6. to 32. c. 16. 4. c. 21. 25. which compared with the Texts of the old Testament in the Margin of my Quere where we finde frequent Nationall generall Assemblies Synods or Parliaments if I may so stile them among the Israelites prescribed appointed by God and no wayes contradicted revoked under the Gospel determining † all Ecclesiasticall controversies setling ordering all church-affaires matters concerning the Arke Temple Sacrifices Passeover Priests Nationall covenants Fasting-dayes Festivalls suppressions of Idolatry false-Worship Reliques of Idolatry and the like are an impregnable evidence of the lawfulnesse of Nationall Synods Parliaments Assemblies in all Christian Kingdomes Republikes upon the like occasions and that they are endued with equivalent authority there being no one Text in the old or new Testament nor any shadow of reason but mee●… shifts or obs●…inacy of spirit against publike govetment order and authority to controll it If any pretend they doe it onely out of consci●…nce if they will but seriously gage their owne deceitfull hearts I feare their conscience will prove but wilfulnesse having neithe●… precept pre●…dent nor right reason to direct it So as I may truely 〈◊〉 his own calumny against me on him and his that his and their own name will or opinion is their onely argument against this shining truth which all ages Churches have acknowledged ratified practised without the least dispute 9. To my ninth Quere and arguments in it he returnes nothing worthy Reply but upon this Petitio principii or begging of the thing disputed that the Scripture and Apostles have prescribed a set forme of Government in all after ●…ges for the Churches of Christ which he neither can nor endevours to prove and that Churches in the Apostles dayes were Independent though doubtlesse all Churches were then subject to the Apostles Lawes Orde●…s Edicts Decisions though no immediate Ministers or Pastors of them as appeares by their Epistles to them therefore not Independent so as my arguments hold firme and his answers weak As for his retorted argument That the Scriptures were writ in the infancy of the Church Therefore wiser and better Scriptures may be writ now it is a blasphemous and absurd conclusion they being all writ by the spirit and inspiration of God himselfe the very * A●…cient of dayes who hath neither infancy nor imperfection as the Church hath To his second objection that I would needs mak a Nationall Church State more perfect understanding and wise then a congregationall I f●…are are not to averre it●… since warranted by * direct Scriptu●…e and since your selves must grant that the Church under the Law was more perfect then that before it the Church under the Gospell more perfect then under the Law and the Churches under the Gospel at the end of the Apostles dayes when furnished with more divine knowledge Scriptures Gospels Officers and rules of Faith Manners

useth this expression onely to blame them for going to Law before Heathen not Christian Iudges for secular matters vers. 1. 6 7. Such Independent arguments will but ill support your Independent fabrick 11 To my 11. Quere he gives only a negative answer and then declaims against Presbytery without ground or reason But because I have proved the truth of what he denies in my Independency examined and in some following pages I shal not trouble you with any further proof except these two particulars 1. That Independency is in reality meer Separation and Brownism lately christened with this new title to take off its odium and if so I doubt not but it is a nursery of schisms Sectaries c. 2. That we finde by wofull experience what bloudy divisions warres schisms the toleration but of one Religion and Sect in our Realms contrary to that established to wit Popery and Papists hath produced in all our Dominions to their imminent danger and almost utter ruine what then will the free permission of many Independent different forms of Churches Sectaries do will it not produce many more troubles dangers wars schisms then we have hitherto felt Yea if every man ought to have freedom of conscience to vent what opinions set up what Governments he deems most conformable to the Word in his own private fancie you must indulge Papists this liberty as well as others and then how soone will they over-run us for the future how justly can we take up armes to suppresse them for the present Consider seriously of these and other publike mischiefes of your way and that liberty of conscience you so much contest for which in truth is nothing but meere lawlesnesse or licentiousnesse to do * what seemes good in your owne eyes as if there was no King in Israel without respect to the publike peace weale or glory of God and then happily you may in time discerne recant your errour 12 To my twelfth Quere he onely answers that I fall a jeering of my brethren a palpable untruth and that I put a nick-name on them to make them odious to wit the title of Independents which they disclaime not answering one syllable to the substance of the Question To which I reply First that the title of Independency of which you are now ashamed was at first assumed approved by your selves and many of your party doe still owne though some disclaim it of purpose to evade the titles of Separatists and Brownists with whom you really concurre in practice Besides you very well know that this title was imposed on and owned by you long before I writ therefore I could not father this brat upon you But if you be offended with this name I desire you in your next Pamphlet to discover to us your owne Christian name with the true title of your party and the government you plead for as the only way of Christs institution all which you have hitherto concealed and then God willing I shall give you a further answer to this cavill or retract this title till then I must informe you that it most proper for your party who will have every one of your owne private congregations a complete absolute corporation exempred from unsubjected to independent on any other be it a Nationall Synodall Provinciall Parochiall assembly Parliament or Kings themselves in any Church-affaires You must therefore still retaine this Title whiles you maintaine such Paradoxes both in opinion practice and that by meere Independent inferences as justly appropriated to you Conveniunt rebus nomina saepe suis being never more exactly verified then in this your suitable name But you object first That you are accountable for your actions to every neighbour Church that shall in the name of Christ require it Secondly That you stand not independent from but hold communion with all other Churches both in the Ordinances and in asking counsell and advice mutually To the first I answer 1. That if you are accountable for your actions to every particular neighbour Church t●…n why not much more to a Synod or Parliament whose ecclesiasticall jurisdiction over you or your Churches is denied by you Secondly if you are thus accountable to every neighbour Church doe you intend it of Parochiall Episcopall or Presbyteriall Churches as well as Independent or of Independent onely If of Independent onely as I suppose you doe then you appeale onely to Churches of your owne partie frame judgment and make one of them subordinate accountable to another but not to any other Church which is an apparent schisme separation from all other Churches and contradicts your second objection If of all other sorts of Churches as well as Independent you must either grant them true Churches of Christ and then you have no ground to sever from them or if false or no true Churches of Christ as you in truth repute them then by your own principles they are no competent Iudges of Ecclesiasticall affaires nor you accountable to them Thirdly How I pray doe you hold your selves accountable to every neighbour Church by way of subordination correction or just appeal that I am certain you will deny or only by way of voluntary information and satisfaction when required which I conceive you mean If so only then this is properly no account at all or but arbitrary at most which you may deny if you please and if you erre or prove faulty or refractory this neighbour Church can but admonish not enforce you to correct your errours or injustice and so this will prove but a meere mockery in stead of an account To the second I answer That if you stand not Independent from other Churches but hold communion with them in Ordinances and in mutuall counsell and advice Then 1. why doe you separate from them as no true Churches and oppose their way of Government with so much bitternesse Secondly why doe you refuse to administer Baptisme and the Lords Supper to those who are their members in your Churches unlesse they be professed members of some Independent Congregation Thirdly why do you not follow their advice counsell or the Parliaments Synods admonition and submit therto who now earnestly perswade you from your way of separation division in these distracted times the end of demanding good counsell and advice being but to follow not reject it where there is humility ingenuity or sincerity in those who ask it You must therefore either disclaime these objected concessions or become more tractable for the future 4. You tell us in the next succeeding lines That neither I nor Synods nor this Synod are infallible but as subject to errours as others and that never † more dangerous errours have been confirmed then by Synods and therfore men are not bound in conscience to their decrees upon penaltie of sinne arrogancy c. But pray Sir may not you and your Independent Ministers Churches erre as well as others Is infallibility annexed onely to your private Chaires conventicles If