Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	apostle_n	church_n	elder_n	5,779	5	10.2377	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88693	Suspension reviewed, stated, cleered and setled upon plain scripture-proof. Agreeable to the former and late constitutions of the Protestant Church of England and other reformed churches. Wherein (defending a private sheet occasionally written by the author upon this subject, against a publique pretended refutation of the same, by Mr W. in his book, entituled, Suspension discussed.) Many important points are handled; sundry whereof are shortly mentioned in the following page. Together with a discourse concering private baptisme, inserted in the epistle dedicatory. / By Samuel Langley, R.S. in the county palatine of Chester.	Langley, Samuel, d. 1694.	1658 (1658)	Wing L405; Thomason E1823_2; ESTC R209804	201,826	263

of soules declaring that they gave the false Teachers no suck Commandment to preach any such doctrine v. 24. 3. The Elders and Brethren as well as the Apostles say It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us v. 28. 4. The Elders and Brethren as well as the Apostles did impose upon the Churches no other burthen then these necessary things v. 28. In all which its manifest the proof is as strong for the joynt authoritative acting of the Brethren here as it is for the Apostles and Elders I speak of a joynt act in the same kinde of power how farre the Apostles might excell the Elders or the Elders the Brethren in the degree of power in each respectively is not now enquired for All I can thinke of which may be objected against this proof is 1 That in divers places the Authors of this synodical Decree are mentioned under the name of the Apostles and Elders without joyning the Brethren with them As 1. The Antiochian Delegates are in their Instructions directed to make their address to the Apostles and Elders about their Question v. 2. And 2. the Apostles and Elders came together to consider of this matter v. 6. And 3. the Decrees of this Synod are said to be such as were ordained by the Apostles and Elders which were at Jerusalem Act. 16.4 2 That the Brethren may be named here no otherwise then as in Pauls Epistles Timothy or Sosthenes and sometimes all the Brethren with him are which denotes only their consenting thereunto To the first of these I answer 1. That its ordinary to name the whole from the predominant leading more noble part 2. These Scriptures do not say the Apostles and Elders only excluding others were Authours of this Synodical Determination and therefore they are no prejudice to those other Texts which put in the Brethren with them To the second I say Though Paul joyne others with him in his Epistles sometimes yet 1. the title of those Epistles beare his name only 2. He manifests in the Epistles themselves that they are his only speaking in the first person therein Gal. 1 2 6 9 10 c. 1 Thes 5.27 2 Thes 3.17 The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand which is the token in every Epistle so I write 3. If we had no such cleere Reasons elswhere to prove Paul only the Authour under the Holy Ghost of such Epistles the joyning others with him in the Preface would be a sufficient ground of our taking them who are so mentioned in the Preface to have been joynt Authours with him thereof But now here 's nothing can be shewed to invalidate the title of the Synodicall Decree in its strictest sense Act. 15.23 2. The Decree speakes all along in their names which are prefixed thereunto 3. Decrees and Lawes speake most strictly and properly especially in the Titles and Prefaces thereof which declare the power whereby they are made and promulgated as a Law made by Kings Lords and Commons Although in familiar Epistles there 's ordinarily more liberty of a larger expression 2. The latter part of the Minor proposition in the Argument I am upon is this viz. That these Brethren were not private Christians the Disciples or Members of the Jerusalem Church 1. This I beleeve will not be denied by our Brethren either of the Episcopall or Presbyterian judgement if they be convinced that these Brethren acted authoritatively in the Synod Which I thinke is cleerly proved above For no private Christian is allowed by them as such to have right of authoritative suffrage in Ecclesiastical Councils 2. I have only here against me the Brethren of the Congregational way who though from other Scriptures they own the Officers I dispute for yet here say that these Brethren were the members of the Jerusalem Church as such But that I humbly conceive cannot be The Apostles Elders and Brethren v. 23. are the same with the whole multitude v. 12. And the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church v. 22. Now this whole Church and whole multitude must either referre to the whole Church of Jerusalem or to the whole synodical Assembly only of that and other Churches there met together which the Reverend Mr. Cotton in his book of the Keyes p. 54 59. is pleased to call a Synod of Churches or a Congregation of Churches yea a Church of Churches It cannot referre to the whole Jerusalem Church because neither that whole Church nor the greater part thereof could meet in one house much less a private house as its probable this was to manage the synodical affaires orderly as appeares by the great numbers of that Church recorded upon count 120 Act. 1.15 3000 Act. 2.41 5000 men Act. 4.4 here are above 8000 and multitudes besides Act. 2.42 5.14 6.7 as is more largely shewed by the London Ministers and most excellently by the Reverend Assembly in their Answer to the Reasons of the dissenting Brethren where they undoe the Exceptions made against it so solidly learnedly and perspicuously that they seeme to have left no place for a colourable Reply Whereby among other Arguments they demonstrate that the Jerusalem Church was a classical Church or a Church by association of sundry particular Congregations called one Church Act. 8.1 11.22 15.4 It remaines therefore that the whole Church and multitude Act. 15. must be the synodical Assembly of the Apostles Elders and Brethren which Brethren must needs be the Delegates of the Brethren or those who represented the Brethren members of several Churches The Delegates of Antioch are expressly mentioned v. 2. and probably there were some from Syria and Cilicia v. 23. who were as much concerned in the businesse consulted about as Antioch was Thus farre it s evin●ed that some of the Brethren not preaching Elders being delegated and appointed by the Church may according to Apostolical patterne authoritatively joyne with preaching Elders in acts of external government of the Church And then if Presbyters with such delegated brethren may be the subject of Church power in higher Assemblyes and matters it will easily thence follow such brethren may have and exercise a proportion of Ecclesiastical power in lower matters and Assemblyes This Argument I humbly submit with all else I have written to the peaceably judicious I shall conclude with the 34th Psalme that these 22 Digressions may be attended with a refreshment proportionable to the 22 Chapters of the Treatise above The 34th Psalme in the original whereof the initiall Letters of the Verses proceed Alphabetically save only that the 5th Yerse beginning with He ends with Vau the next Letter and so the Psalmist omitting Vau in the beginning of the next Verse goes on with Zain c. whereby it comes to pass that the 22 Hebrew Letters being gone through and ending in the 21st Verse the last verse of the Psalme is super-numerary rendred according to the Acrosticall conceipt of the Original 1 At all times I the Lord will blesse my

his representing to his Minister Mr. W. how he was unsatisfied in the doctrine of the general admission contended for Mr. W. for the satisfaction of his Parishioner had shewed himselfe willing and desirous to admit of a collation with some Ministers of a different judgement from him therein as I have to shew under the hand of Mr. M. the Gentleman aforesaid And indeed I was cordially desirous to have the controversie search't into to the very bottome as being of great moment and my selfe sufficiently inclinable if I know mine own heart to receive any convictions Mr. W. might afford rationally to sway me to his part as the most desirable upon many outward accounts if it could but appeare to be warrantable which made me the more willing to consent to the Requests aforesaid Now when this Paper of mine by Mr. M. was communicated to Mr. W. Mr. M. hath certified me under his hand that Mr. W. in stead of returning a private answer as was expected for a candid brotherly impartiall discussion of the point as if he had gotten some mighty advantage with abundance of triumphing and insulting expressions gave out he would print it And further Mr. M. attests under his hand in these words And whereas some of Mr. W. his friends had given out on his behalf that the reason why he answered this paper of Mr. Langleys in print was because several Copies were dispersed of it in his parish and he had no way to meet with them but this of printing his answer I doe hereby declare that this is utterly untrue I was so far from giving or suffering Copies to be taken of it that to my knowledge I never shewed the paper to any in the parish but himself and there were no Copies of it extant among us I my self not so much as reserving a Copy but that which was in his own hands till they were printed and published by him T.M. Many other passages Mr. M. hath testified under his hand but I shall omit inserting the same here in respect to Mr. W. whose disparagement I seek not to the Reader to whom personall matters I know will be tedious and to the cause it selfe I defend which needs not the infirmities of its opposers to raise it selfe by When I had intimation of the resolution for printing my paper I said I would not lift up my lip to desire a forbearance I think I could have been content to have seen my self rationally confuted But when I saw the answer and how in stead of close answering the argument before him he did so pitifully extravagate and so sedulously seemed to endeavour the disgrace of my person rather than the confutation of my cause I was much confirmed thereby in the opinion I had asserted Let the equall Reader freely judge herein 22 Mr W. saith p. 150. Truly I have not done pious and renowned Timson the honour I should in omitting the many and material passages that I find in his Epistle to the Reader and every where so exactly set forth in his excellent Book It were pity but he should honour Mr. Timson as the Scholar did Zabbarel who being set to epitomize him transcribed every word saying all was so sweet he could leave out none But some Palates count mouldy cheese the best and the material passages Mr. W. hath honoured his renowned Timson with the quotation of are so unsavoury and tainted as will disgrace the judgement of the Author and Citer of them p. 37 38 99 100. He calls your Church-officers saith M. W. Intruded Elders c. This forsooth is an honourable quotation It is not my business now to discuss the Controversie whether any persons but Ministers or preaching Presbyters may be chosen and designed by the Church to joyn with the ministers in the Ecclesiasticall externall government thereof If I should speak any thing concerning it in this last Digression I should premise a distinction to be put betwixt what is appointed in Scripture by divine institution and command for all Churches at all times to observe and what is gatherable from Scripture precedents and passages to have then been lawfully used in the Church of God and therefore may still lawfully be imitated Of this later sort are Lords-dayes Collections 1 Cor. 16.1.2 Pastors and Teachers as distinct offices allotted to severall persons Rom. 12.7 8 c. Of which sort also I humbly conceive the Station of such as are now called Ruling Elders is to be accounted not meerly so an excogitation of prudence as if it had no footsteps in Scripture paterns nor yet so absolutely by divine appointment as that all Churches sin who in any times have not made use of them And this I take as a mean betwixt two extreams I shall not so much as name the Arguments commonly produced for the Scripturalnesse and Reasonablenesse of their Office I shall onely crave leave to offer one Scripture which is not so much taken notice of as I think it should be for the clearing this point having before warned the Reader that it is not the name but thing I aim at Acts 15. The Synod there mentioned wrote Decretall Letters after this manner v. 23. The Apostles and Elders and Brethren send greeting unto the Brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch Syria and Cilicia c. And then the Decree it self is recorded in the following verses That which I would have here observed relating to the point in hand is that some under the name of Brethren are joyned with the Elders or Pastors from whence ariseth this Argument viz. If these called Brethren acted authoritatively in this Ecclesiasticall Decree and yet were not privat Christians the Disciples or Members of Jerusalem Church then some select persons not Ministers did act authoritatively in Ecclesiasticall government But the former is true Therefore the later In the Consequence of the Antecedent I see nothing likely to be denied The Minor I shall endeavour to prove in its two parts 1. That these brethren acted authoritatively in this Ecclesiastical Decree is evinced by many of these strong Reasons whereby the Reverend Assembly in their Answer to the Reasons of the Dissenting Brethren concerning Presbyterial Government presented to the Honourable Houses of Parliament p. 65. do prove that the Elders did act authoritatively as well as the Apostles the which are further improved by the London Ministers in their Jus Divinum Reg Ecclesiastici p. 224. to evince that both the Elders and Brethren acted authoritatively as well as the Apostles The Elders and Brethren say the London Ministers who were as authoritatively members of the Synod as the Apostles did in all points as authoritatively act as the Apostles themselves For 1. The letters containing the Synodical Decrees and Determinations were written in the name of the Elders and Brethren as well as in the name of the Apostles vers 23. 2. The Elders and Brethren as well as the Apostles brand the false Teachers for troubling the Church subverting

this was The perusal of this phrase may be otherwayes useful which hath invited me to this strict consideration of it At present this use is to be made hereof that when we speak of private Baptisme in private houses it is not to be understood according to the sense of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it s used Act. 20.20 though it seeme there to be according to our translation opposed to publiquely But as publique baptisme is that which is now performed in the publique place where publique ordinances are usually administred the accustomed signes being given for the assembling of the Congregation there at such time when it is to be celebrated so private baptisme on the contrary is that which is done either in the place of publique Assembly when no publique notice is duly given for the Congregation to resort thither or in a private house where although many are present yet it is not free or at least its generally supposed it would not be civil for any Christian that will though uninvited to come to the ordinance of Baptisme there administred Now that we may better discern what is incumbent upon us in reference to this circumstance of administring Baptisme we shall peruse Scripture instances and see what direction they may afford us herein in these following Theses Thesis 1. The Baptisme of John was not privately administred according to the senses of private before mentioned Matth. 3.5 6. Then went out unto him viz. to the wilderness of Judea Hierusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Jordan and were baptized of him in Jordan confessing their sins So saith Mark 1.5 And there went out unto him all the land of Judea and they of Hierusalem and were all baptized of him in the river Jordan confessing their sins And v. 7. And he preached saying there cometh one after me mightier then I c. Ver. 8. I indeed baptize you with water but he with the holy Ghost Luke saith Ch 3. ver 2 3. The word of God came to John in the wilderness And he came into all the Country round about Jordan preaching the Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins And v. 7. Then saith he to the multitude which Matthew saith he said to the Pharisees and Sadduces that came forth to be baptized of him Mat 3.7 O generation of Vipers who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come It s related Joh. 1.25 28. They asked him why baptizest thou if thou be not that Christ nor Elias neither that Prophet John answered I baptize you with water c. These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan where John was baptizing c. From this harmony we may observe 1. That he baptized where he preached ordinarily and as openly 2. That multitudes came to him to be baptized to whom he preached expostulating with them and they confessed their sins when probably before they were baptized Now this was not confession before John alone as our Divines shew against the Papists who would hence inferre auricular confession but it rather was an open renouncing of former wickednesse as those did Act. 19.18 19. who being converted to the christian faith confessed shewed their deeds and some brought their books of curious arts and burned them before all men There is no other passage concerning Johns Baptisme which seemes to intimate privacy or that it was not done according to the tenor of the former Scriptures but rather comply therewith Luk. 3.12 Mark 11.30 Joh. 3.23 4.1 Luk. 7.29 Act. 1.21 22. Act. 10.37 Peter in this last Scripture speaking of the Gospel saith it was that word which you know was published throughout all Judea began from Galilee after the Baptisme which John preached Which phrase further cleeres it to us that John first preached to the people concerning the nature use of his baptisme before he baptized them which hints his baptisme as publique as his preaching There is only one instance more to be considered concerning Johns Baptisme that is his baptizing Christ Mat. 3.13 Mark 1.9 In this 1. there 's nothing against the publiqueness of it and therefore it may fairly be supposed to be administred as publiquely as in the former Instances 2. Yea there 's probable proof of the publiqueness of it For 1. Christ was pleased to come to John at Jordan Mat. 3.13 at which place John was preaching to and baptizing the multitudes spoken of in ver 5 6. of that same chap. Christ did not send for John to some private place as some now would have Ministers come to their houses and Luk. 3.21 relates Christs the peoples baptism as done together 2. At this time Christ was to be solemnly inaugurated unto the manifestation of his office as our Divines say and that declared by a voice from heaven Now it was of infinite concernment and use that his baptisme should be publique and that there should be many witnesses thereof whereby also it might publiquely appeare that Christ approved of Johns Baptism that by his example others might be moved to submit thereunto 2 The baptisme administred by Christs disciples before Christs death seemes rather to have been publique as their preaching was then private Job 3.22 After these things came Jesus his disciples into the land of Judea and there he tarried with them and baptized although Jesus baptized not but his disciples Ch. 4.2 whereupon Ch. 3.26 Johns disciples tell John of it that Jesus baptizeth and all men come unto him 3 The examples after Christs ascension are divided some administred in publique some privately and one doubtfull to which sort it is to be referred I shall begin with the publique We have a notable example of publique baptisme Act. 2.41 when the same day that they had heard Peters Sermon and probably of other Apostles there were added 3000 souls who were baptized Act 8.12 When they viz. of Samaria beleeved Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdome of God and the name of Jesus Christ they were baptized both men and women Here baptizing was as publique as preaching Now the preaching was publique where all had free admission ver 5 6. At this same time one is particularly mentioned ver 13. Simon who beleeved Philips preaching and miracles as the former persons did and was baptized at the same time so Act. 18.8 Another example occurres Act. 10.44 47 48. in like manner described That 's a notable one Act. 16.13 14. On the Sabbath saith the text we went out of the City by a river side and we sate down and spake to the women which resorted thither and v. 14 15. Lydia was there converted and its probable baptized and her houshold For after she her houshold was baptized she invited the Apostles home to her private house ver 15. Now if it had been the use to baptize ordinarily in private its likely she would have invited them to her house before that she and her houshold might there have

to the Lords Supper yet he grants if I understand him that what faith was the condition of applying Baptisme is the condition of admitting to the Communion which is all I require And therefore the visible want of that faith is a bar to his receiving which would be a bar to the baptisme of the adult §. 4. It now remaines that I prove the Minor which was this Unbeleevers by notorious disobedience to the Gospel do visibly want that faith which is necessarily required to be visibly present in them who may be lawfully admitted to Baptisme and the truth of it is thus made out If it were a visibly actuall justifying and saving faith which was necessarily reqired in Scripture as the condition of persons adult their admission to Baptisme then the last recited minor proposition is true But the Antecedent is evident therefore the Consequent must be granted I suspect not that any will deny the consequence my work will lye in demonstrating the Antecedent the which I shall thus endeavour 1. Such a visible faith as is joyned with a true and saving visible repentance is an actual justifying faith visibly But the Apostles so required such a visible faith as is joyned with a true and saving visible repentance Therefore they required a visibly actual justifying faith necessarily as the condition of admission to Baptisme Acts 2.38 Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins that was the condition Peter tendred to them and that it was visibly closed with by them is manifest upon which they were baptized ver 41. Then they who gladly received his word especially the doctrine of repentance he had preached to them for their crucifying Christ and of faith in Christ as the true Messias were baptized Here is the application of Baptisme to them upon that condition supposed to be visibly performed by them which therefore excludes them who close not visibly with this condition If any say as it s usually said who can know a sincere beleever Let them say how Peter could tell who repented yea and not only who received the word but gladly received it such as visibly did so he must take for such or deal with as such who can honour a godly man to love him or who repents to forgive him Those who are such apparently must be treated as such really as hath been before said §. 5. 2. That which Philip required in the Eunuch as a necessary prerequisite for his admission to baptisme is the necessary condition of persons adult their admission to Baptisme But a visibly actual justifying faith was required by Philip to be in the Eunuch as a necessary prerequisite for his admission to Baptisme see Acts 8. where an express account is given us of the baptismal termes ver 35 36. Philip preached unto him Jesus and as they went on their way they came to a certain water And the Eunach said See here is water what doth hinder me to be baptized And Philip said If thou beleevest with all thy heart thou maist And he answered and said I beleeve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and so he baptized him A reverend Divine hath objected two things 1. that Philip required more then was necessary to Baptisme As we require all graces to be acted in Communicants though yet we cannot deny them for coming short in some things they-ought to do And saith he we require in persons to be marryed that they give up themselves to the Lord and marry in the Lord yet cannot deny marriage to them for want of saving grace And 2. that the Eunuchs answer in which Philip acquiesced shews it was but a dogmatical saith which might be short of justifying §. 6. To these I answer 1. joyntly That one of them destroys the other For if it were only dogmatical faith the same Divine pleads that that is necessary for admission to Baptisme And then Philip required not accessories besides necessaries of necessity therefore he must renounce one of his exceptions before he can rationally pitch upon the other positively Yet 2. I shall answer severally to them And first of the latter Exc. 1. If thou beleeve with all thy heart i. e. visibly professest so to do the heart was not searched into by Philip The meaning of this should be according to this grave Divine in one of his exceptions q. d. if thou beleeve with all thy understanding with whole assent as he explicating himselfe saith the Divels do beleeve really upon cleere convictions I shall consider the like phrase used elswhere whereby we may most certainly discerne whether it is to have that sense or no. Math. 22.37 Thou shalt love the Lord with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind which is interpreted and must needs be so with the will aftections and understanding Here the whole heart denotes the whol will distinguished from the whole understanding The same we have Mark 12.30 Love the Lord with all thy heart with all thy soul with all thy mind and with all thy strength This last clause being added to what was in Matthew denoting the outward endeavours in testification and as a fruit of the inward bent and energy of the whol inward man denoted by the three former Here then againe the phrase with all thy heart denotes with all thy will and distinguished from the phrase with all thy mind denoting with all thy understanding So also vers 33. the same phrase is in like manner used for the whole will only in that verse there 's some alteration of the order before used in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that is all one as to my present purpose for which the text is quoted In the same signification is the phrase with all the heart repeated Luke 10.27 And these are all the places I take it where the phrase is used in the new Testament do a thing with all the heart besides the text under consideration Therefore sure it must be taken so here unlesse there be some manifest Reason in the context to withdraw it from its usuall and alwayes elswhere used signification which is not produced nor I beleeve can be §. 7. Besides If we look back to the original of the old Testament from whence this phrase in the new Testament is fetched It will further appear that to beleeve with the whole heart is most fitly interpreted of beleeving sincerely and affectionatly The text the Gospel refers to is Deut. 6.5 In vers 4. Heare O Israel c. Ajin the last letter of the first word and Daleth the last letter of the last word in the verse are extraordinary great letters in the Hebrew to cause heed and attention to the Commandement following which is that called in the Gospel the great Commandement as noted by its great letters and thence by the way most fitly Christ represents the less Commandements in the esteem of the Jewes by pricks or tittles least