Title: The ivstification of the independant chvrches of Christ being an answer to Mr. Edvvards his booke, which hee hath written against the government of Christ's chvrch and toleration of Christs, publike worship : briefely declaring that the congregations of the saints ought not to have dependancie in government upon any other : or direction in worship from any other than Christ their head and lavv-giver / by Katherine Chidley.
Author: Chidley, Katherine.
Collection: Early English Books Online
Now if Christ may be said to be the Author of evill, then you may say that Toleration of true Religion is the cause of this di∣vision.Againe you say, (O how) this will occasion disobedience.To this your Lamentation I answer. O that you would re∣member the rule1 Tim. 6. that every servant ought to count his Master worthy of all honour; and in the judgement of charitie be∣leeve, that persons professing the Gospel will learne that les∣son.Next you say O! how will this take away that power & authority which God hath given to Husbands, Fathers, and Masters, over wives, chil∣dren, and servants.To this I answer, O! that you would consider the text in 1 Cor. 7. which plainly declares that the wife may be a beleever, & the husband an unbeleever▪ but if you have considered this text, I pray you tell me, what authority this unbeleeving husband hath over the conscience of his beleeving wife; It is true he hath au∣thority over her in bodily and civill respects, but not to be a Lord over her conscience; and the like may be said of fathers and masters, and it is the very same authority which the Sove∣raigne hath over all his subjects, & therfore it must needes reach to families: for it is granted that the King hath power (accor∣ding to the Law) over the bodies, goods, and lives of all his sub∣jects; yet it is Christ the King of Kings that reigneth over their consciences: and thus you may see it taketh away no authority which God hath given to them.The next thing you say is, that they cannot be certaine, that their ser∣vants and children sanctifie the Lords day.To which I answer, that indeede unbeleeving Masters take as little care of this▪ as they that have given liberty to prophane the Lords Day; but beleeving Parents and Masters, may easi∣ly know (if their children or servants be of any Congregation) what their life and conversation is, and therefore this can hin∣der no duties, or workes of Families (as you falsely affirme) nor crosse the good and peace of Familes.By this you may see, that this your groundlesse affirmation, is no good Reason against Toleration.And therefore the Court of Parliament (to whom you sub∣mit for judgement) may easily see that good members both for Churches and Common-wealths, may issue out of such Fami∣lies, that live under Christs government, and that such Fami∣lies may be good Nurseries, both for Church and Common∣wealth.Thus much for your third Reason.