FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   532   533   534   535   536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556  
557   558   559   560   561   562   563   564   565   566   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   >>   >|  
Parliament, when they deliberate about matters of war or matters of religion, are not, at least formally and properly, a civil court, else how makes he these so clearly distinct? 2. That ministers may be called civil officers, for consider his words in his _Re-examination_, p. 11: "I do not exclude ministers, neither from ecclesiastical nor civil government, in a ministerial way, doctrinally and declaratively." Compare this with his present answer, it will amount to thus much: That different denominations being taken from the different subject matter, ministers, when they handle doctrinally matters of religion, are ecclesiastical ministers; and when they handle doctrinally matters of civil government, which himself alloweth them to do, they are civil ministers. But now to apply his answer to the argument, How doth all this solve the repugnancy of his doctrine to the covenant? If he had examined my arguments, he had found that most of them prove from the covenant a church government distinct from civil government, subjective as well as objective; that is, another government besides magistracy; different agents as well as different acts; different hands as well as handling of different matters. I know the Christian magistrate may and ought to have a great influence in matters of religion; and whatsoever is due to him by the word of God, or by the doctrine either of the ancient or reformed churches, I do not infringe, but do maintain and strengthen it. But the point in hand is, that the covenant doth undeniably suppose, and clearly hold forth a government in the church distinct from magistracy, which is proved by these arguments (which, as they are not yet answered, so I will briefly apply them to the proof of that point which now Mr Coleman sticks at): 1. The church covenant mentioned in the covenant is as distinct from the privileges of parliament, as the first article of the covenant is distinct from the third article. 2. The church government in the first article of the covenant, the reformation whereof we are to endeavour, differeth from church government by archbishops, bishops, &c., mentioned in the second article, as much as a thing to be reformed differeth from a thing to be extirpated; so that the church government formerly used in the church of England is looked upon two ways in the covenant, either _qua_ church government, and so we swear to endeavour the reformation of it (which I hope was not meant of reforming
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   532   533   534   535   536   537   538   539   540   541   542   543   544   545   546   547   548   549   550   551   552   553   554   555   556  
557   558   559   560   561   562   563   564   565   566   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

government

 
covenant
 

church

 

matters

 

ministers

 

distinct

 

article

 

religion

 

doctrinally

 

endeavour


reformed

 

differeth

 

handle

 

mentioned

 

answer

 

magistracy

 

reformation

 

arguments

 

doctrine

 

ecclesiastical


proved

 

sticks

 

Coleman

 

briefly

 

answered

 

suppose

 

churches

 

ancient

 
infringe
 

undeniably


strengthen

 

maintain

 
privileges
 

looked

 

England

 

reforming

 

extirpated

 

Parliament

 

whereof

 

formally


properly

 

parliament

 
bishops
 

archbishops

 

deliberate

 
influence
 

examination

 

exclude

 

alloweth

 
argument