Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	catholic_n	church_n	communion_n	4,092	5	10.6035	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90932	The preacher sent: or, A vindication of the liberty of publick preaching, by some men not ordained. In answer to two books: 1. Jus divinum ministerii euengelici. By the Provincial Assembly of London. 2. Vindiciæ ministerii euangelici. By Mr. John Collings of Norwich. / Published by Iohn Martin, minister of the Gospel at Edgfield in Norfolk. Sam. Petto, minister of the Gospel at Sand-croft in Suffolk. Frederick Woodal, minister of the Gospel at Woodbridge in Suffolk.	Martin, John, 1595 or 6-1659.; Petto, Samuel, 1624?-1711.	1658 (1658)	Wing P3197; Thomason E1592_2; ESTC R208851	240,824	381

Christian faith We will suppose an hundred heathens converted we demand by whom shall these be baptized not by a private Chrictian To baptize is an act of office Not by a Minister for a Minister say they cannot perform any Pastoral act such as this is out of his own Congregation Neither can these hundred converts chuse a Minister and thereby give him power to baptive them for they must first be a Church before they have power to chuse officers and a Church they cannot be till baptized neither can they joyn as members to any other Church and thereby be made capable of Baptisme by that Minister into whose Church they are admitted For in the way of Christ a man must first be baptized before he be capable of being outwardly and solemnly admitted as a member of a particular Church The three thousand were not first added to the Church and then baptized but first baptized and thereby added to the Church Ast. 2. 41. Answ 1. The difficultie of such a case if there be any in it will be found in their way as well as in ours for if an hundred heathens be converted we may ask by whom shall these be baptized not by an officer for a Minister or officer is set in the Church 1 Cor. 12. 28. not in the world suppose it be the Catholick visible Church that is there intended yet still the Church is the boundary of Office it reacheth no further then that and the hundred converted heathens are no members as yet of the Catholike visible Church because say they persons are admitted into that Church by Baptisme and these are not yet baptized What have officers who are set in the Church to do to perform an act of office to such as are no members of any Church if they have an habitual power to Act as Ministers in any place of the world yet that power extendeth no further then the Church for then they must have a threefold relation one to the Church Catholick another to a particular Church and a third to the world and all as officers 2. Christ hath left these wayes for the Baptizing such as are converted from heathenisme to the Christian faith either they may joyn as members to some Church and so be made capable of baptisme by the Minister of that Church into which they are admitted Or they may joyn together as a Church and so call an officer who may baptize them We see no inconvenience in asserting that they may be a Church before they be Baptized the onely place alleadged against it doth not say that they were first Baptized and thereby added to the Church but the words are these Act. 2. 41. Then they that gladly received his word were Baptized and the same day there were added about three thousand souls They might be added to the Church either before or after baptisme and yet all this might be said and therefore it cannot prove that they were added by baptisme Their being Baptized was rather a sign of being added then that by which they were added Christs way is expressed Mat. 28. 19. Go ye therefore and Disciple all nations baptizing them c. they are to be first discipled and then baptized and a disciple properly is one in Christs School his Church Act. 8. ver 3. compared with Act. 9. v. 1. lest any should say that the discipling of them was by baptizing them those two are plainly distinguished John 4. ver 1. Jesus made and baptized more Disciples then John Here is a difference put between making a Disciple and baptizing him And therefore such converts may orderly become a Church or Church-members before they be baptized we have proved that they are not admitted by baptisme and themselves will grant that they are Church-members immediately after it and therefore surely their admission is to be before their baptisme Object 6. Hence it will follow That a Minister Preaching out of his own Congregation cannot Lawfully and warrantably prononnce the blessing after his Sermon for to blesse the people from God is an act of Office and to be done only by an officer Nu. 6. 23 24 25 26 compared with Revel 14. 5. Deut. 10. 8. 2 Cor. 13. 14. Eph. 1. 2. Answ 1. We do not judge that the Levites did blesse as types any more then they did pray or exhort as so nor that blessing should cease now Christ is come to blesse any more then other acts in which Christ is chief but they were appointed to bless as they did minister Deut. 10. 8. 1 Chron. 23. 13. 2. Blessing is an act of office we grant and to be performed by an officer but not onely to exhort is an act of office yet some not in office may exhort as we have proved and might do so under the Old Testament without offence to the Levite Act. 13 ver 14 15. we have read that the Jewes had in their Synagogues a Pew or Seat on purpose for brethren to speak out of where they that had any thing to offer did place themselves and set until the rulers therein did give liberty of speech in which Seat Paul was noted by them and not as an Apostle but as a brother among them and they sent unto him that sat viz. in the Speakers place In like manner blessing is an act of office it was performed by the Levites but not onely David did blesse and he was no Levite 2 Sam 6. 18. 3. Though blessing were to be performed by office onely yet being an act of a common nature which all have right in who are blessed of Christ it may be put forth by vertue of communion which case hath been already spoken to by us Argu. 7. If the whole Essence of the ministerial call consisteth in Election Jus Divin Min. p. 144. without Ordination then it will necessarily follow that when a Minister leaves or is put from that particular charge to which he is called that then he ceaseth to be a Minister becomes a private person and that when he is elected to another place he needs a new Ordination and so toties quoties as often as he is elected so often is he to be ordained Ans If by Minister they mean an officer we grant the consequence thus far that if he leaveth or be justly put from that particular charge to which he is called then he ceaseth to be an officer and when he is elected to another place he needs a new Ordination we can see no inconvenience in granting this consequence If by Minister they do not mean an officer then they speak nothing to the question in hand which is onely about a call to office we deny that either election or Ordination giveth the call to gifted men to Preach But we suppose they speak of the call to office and then although we deny that an officer leaving or being unjustly put from his particular charge becomes a private person for by Christs allowance he may still act in

act as a publick person because his work is publick and so he acteth not barely as a private Christian yet not as an Officer for then he might be actually an Officer to three or four flocks or Churches because he may lawfully keep up so many Lectures constantly and without asserting Episcopacy he cannot be said to be actually an Officer to so many flocks at once As to the preaching of private men we have spoken to that before Object 3. Hence it will follow That when a Minister baptizeth a child he baptizeth him onely into his own Congregation For if he be not an Officer of the Catholick Church he cannot baptize into the Catholick Church which is directly contrary to 1 Cor. 12. 13. Answ 1. If by baptizing into a Church they mean a making one a member of a Church by baptism we deny that a Minister baptizeth in that sence either into his own Congregation or into a Catholick Church for if baptism giveth admission either into a particular or a Catholick Church then while baptism remaineth valid the party remaineth a member of that Church for so long as he hath that upon him which giveth membership he must needs be a member as Mr. Hooker saith where the form is the formatum must needs be And then either Excommunication doth make baptism a nullity and render the person who is excommunicate unbaptized or else Excommunication doth not eject a person out of the Church because it doth nullifie baptism which they say giveth membership And this may answer their Argument to prove that a Minister is a Minister of the Church Catholick visible Jus Divin Min. p. 139. They say He that can Ministerially admit or eject a member into or out of the Church-Catholick visible is a Minister and officer of the Church-Catholick visible But every Minister by baptism or excommunication admitteth or ejecteth members into or out of the Church-Catholick visible Therefore c. We deny the Minor If we grant such a Catholick visible Church yet we cannot grant that a Minister by baptism admitteth into that Church for then if Heathens be converted at a great distance from any Church or Officer whatever glorious profession they make yet they are not to be deemed members of that Catholick visible Church until they be baptized which soundeth very harsh if those belong to Satans visible kingdom who are without that Church as they intimate in their next objection And also then it will follow either that Excommunication doth not eject a man out of the Catholick visible Church and then the other part of their Minor is fals or else that Excommunication maketh baptism a nullity and then re-baptizing must be asserted because there may be a re-admission after excommunication upon repentance witness the incestuous person 2 Cor. 2. v. 6 7 8 9 10. Or else a man may have that upon him which maketh one a member of the Catholick visible Church viz. baptism and yet be no member thereof he may have that which admitteth and giveth the formal being of membership and yet be no member which is a contradiction If an excommunicate person be no member of the Catholick visible Church then he must be re-baptized if ever he be admitted a member thereof if admission into it be by baptism Also we deny that a Minister by Excommunication ejecteth out of the Catholick visible Church the person may eject himself out of it if there be such a Church by renouncing or contradicting his former profession which if any thing made him a member thereof before Excommunication and so may lose his membership in the Catholick Church before he loseth membership in a particular Church or however he may be ejected with and not by Excommunication And how a mans being ejected out of a particular Church by Excommunication should make him no member of the Catholick visible Church if being ejected out of Office in a particular Church doth not make a man no Officer to the Catholick visible Church we find not 2. We may assert that a Minister baptizeth onely in a particular Church i. e. only such as are members in some particular Church or other and yet not assert that he baptizeth onely into a particular Church much less onely into his own congregation This baptizing into his own congregation onely may seem to intimate that if he loseth his relation to that particular Church then he must also lose his baptism which it is supposed was onely into that But if that be driven at it falleth as heavy upon themselves if such a baptizing into a Church were granted for then if a man be baptized into the Catholick visible Church if he be ejected out of that which they say he may be by excommunication then he must as much lose his baptism there also 3. As for 1 Cor. 12. v. 13. It speaketh of the baptism of the Spirit into the mystical body of Christ not of water baptism into any visible Church at all for the words are these For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body Object 4. Hence it will follow That a Christian who by reason of the unfixedness of his civil habitation is not admitted into a particular Congregation hath no way left him to have his children baptized but they must all be left without the Church in Satans visible Kingdome Answ 1. We deny as before that baptism admitteth into Christs Kingdom or delivereth out of Satans visible Kingdome By vertue of the Covenant they are Co-members with their parents of the visible Church before baptism 2. Some will grant that Offiers may baptize in such cases by vertue of membership in the Catholick Church as well as they may baptize members of other particular Churches because baptizing is an act purely Ministerial in it self and doth not necessarily imply his being over or being an officer to those it is performed towards 3. We rather answer thus that a Christian notwithstanding the unfixedness of his habitation yet ought to join as a member with some particular Congregation or other and so the difficulty vanished those that joined to the Church at Jerusalem Act. 2. v. 41. 47. yet were many of them men of other Countries as appeareth vers 5. 9. 10 11. and though they had no fixed habitations there yet they listed themselves as members and were baptized at Jerusalem vers 41. when they cannot by reason of the unfixedness of their habitations enjoy such constant Communion with a Church as they would yet they are to joyn with some Church and hold as much communion with it as they can else a wide door is open to multitudes to keep from under discipline altogether for if they offend what Church can call them to an account or passe a censure upon them in case of obstinacy Object 5. According to this assertion there is no way left us by Christ for the Jus Divin Min. p. 141. baptizing of Heathens when it shall please God to convert them to the

to prove that Ordination ought to be with imposition of hands And because we have spoken briefly to that already and shewed that it is like laying on of hands was of extraordinary use for the conveyance of gifts or onely an indifferent significant Ceremony to declare who the party was that was solemnly ordained and so may without sin be omitted or the end of it may be attained without its use by some other sign it may be declared who the person is also because themselves do not assert it to be any more then an inseparable Adjunct to Ordination therefore we shall not spend time about this onely take a Rule which may serve as part of an answer to most if not all their Arguments for imposition of hands viz. That it is usual in Scripture to expresse things by that which is neither necessary nor of constant use about them So Chain is put for bondage and suffering Act. 28. 20. I am bound with this chain Jud. ver 6. Key is put for power authority Government Isai 22 ver 21 22. Rod is put for correction 1 Cor. 4. 21. Prov. 13. 24. The crosse is put for suffering and persecution Mat. 16. 24. A chain is not necessarily or constantly used in bondage nor a key in the exercise of power or Government nor a rod in correction nor a crosse in persecution yet because sometimes such instruments were used in such cases therefore the Holy-Ghost expresseth those things by them So though imposition of hands be neither of necessary nor of constant use about Ordination yet the whole of Ordination may be expressed by it hence Pauls forbidding Timothy to lay hands suddenly doth not imply that it was his duty to lay on hands or that he must necessarily and constantly use that ceremony but that it was duty to ordain men which they assert to be the thing notified by laying n of hands which answers their second Argument so the whole work of Ordination may be comprehended under the ceremony of imposition of hands 1 Tim. 5. 22. and yet it may not be of necessary and constant use about it any more then in the former instances the putting a chain for bondage and key for the whole of Government and rod for all correction and crosse for all afflictions c. will imply that they necessarily and constantly belong to them which answers their third and fourth Arguments It is sufficient that imposition of hands was sometimes used about Ordination to render the whole of it expressed thereby but it doth not prove the constant use of the ceremony to be necessary but only of Ordination which is the thing signified by that ceremony We proceed to their fourth Assertion viz. That Ordination of Ministers ought to be by the laying on of the hands of Jus Divin Min. p. 181. the Presbytery After a brief explication of the word Presbytery c. they come to that which as they tell us they especially aim at in this fourth Assertion and they give it under this following Proposition Propos That Ordination of Ministers doth belong to Church officers and not to a Church without officers And that Ordination by people without Ministers is a perverting of the Ordinance and of no more force then baptisme by a midwife or consecration of the Lords Supper by a person out of the office We shall give some Arguments to prove the lawfulness and validity of the peoples Ordination and then answer their arguments against it Our Proposition is this Pro. That in a Church which hath no officer or officers in it some believers may lawfully or warrantably ordain without officers We say in a Church that hath no officers for if a Church hath officers in it they may go before the Church in Ordination as well as in Praying on other occasions and Preaching c. that onely officers must act in it in such a case is not clear to us as suppose a Church hath but two officers in it we do not see any necessity that the whole work of the day must lie upon them onely but some believers i. e. such as have most of the spirit of Prayer being desired may lend assistance but whether that may be or not it is sufficient to our present purpose and to any case that necessarily falleth out in the congregational way if it can be proved that when a Church hath no officers of its own then some believers being deputed or chosen thereunto by the Church may ordain without the necessary concurrence of any officers And we say some believers may ordain without officers not must for we do not reckon Ordination an act of Government and therefore Churches may for ought we yet see hold communion each with other in it as well as in solemn prayer upon upon any other occasion and so officers of other Churches may act in it yet not qua officers but qua gifted and men gifted may without any officers ordain for it is a matter wherein the Church hath its liberty who it will depute thereunto when it wanteth officers and it is not necessarily confined to officers as if none else might act in it If a Church hath officers the Law of their relation to the Church putteth them under obligations to go before the Church in Ordination as well as in other duties as Preaching administring of the Sacraments c. and therefore where officers are in a Church they act as officers in Ordination as well as they do in prayer upon other solemn occasions wherein undoubtedly other Christians eminently gisted may act in Prayer yet do it not as officers This is our sense of the question yet because our brethren do account Ordination to be an act of Government yea an eminent act of jurisdiction therefore if in some of our Arguments may seem to speak of Ordination as an act of Government of officers as officers yet we do not grant it but rather prove our sense of it by denying it in that sense which they plead for it in This being premised we proceed to our Arguments Argu. 1. Whatsoever would necessarily and unavoidably infer Ordination to be unattainable that is contrary to sound doctrine and is not to be asserted But that some believers may not lawfully or warrantably ordain without officers in a Church that hath no officers in it that would necessarily and unavoidably infer Ordination to be unattainable Ergo That some believers may not lawfully or warrantably ordain without officers in a Church that hath no officers in it is contrary to sound Doctrine and is not to be asserted The major none can deny who plead for Ordination as an ordinance of Christ still continuing for if it be of Christs appointment doubtless he hath provided a way wherein it is attainable The Minor we prove thus Because there are no officers on earth authorized or appointed by Christ to ordain in case a Church hath no officers in it any more then believers without officers and therefore

be hindred from doing all acts of that office for to be an officer compleat without an office or being compleat in his office yet according to rule to be hindred from doing any thing belonging to his office implies a contradiction for its all one to say a man is implies a contradiction for its all one to say a man is bound to a rule and yet by a rule he should not do it Forma dat operari effects depend upon the form not upon extrinsecal circumstances Ans We deny the consequence Although election gives the Essentials to a Minister yet it will not follow that a Minister elected may administer the Sacraments without Ordination for Christs will is to be our Law if Christ hath required the adding but of an Adjunct before the doing some special works without sin no man can do those works without that Adjunct If Christ hath pre-required Ordination before the administration of the Sacraments what is man that he should say one may administer them without Ordination though that be but an Adjunct to the call unto office That which Master Hooker speakes is onely this that he cannot justly be hindred from doing all acts of office if he hath the Essentials of office upon him and this may be granted for if Christ requireth Ordination as Antecedaneous to the administring of the Sacraments then he is unjustly hindred who either refuseth or is denyed Ordination He is not according to rule hindred from doing what belongeth to his office but by breaking that Rule which requireth his submitting to Ordination The reason serveth to Master Hookers purpose but not to our brethrens in this Argument And upon second thoughts we suppose they will not say that one may act in administrations without such Adjuncts as Christ hath pre-required unto acting in them especially seeing themselves durst not assert imposition of hands to be more then an Adjunct to Ordination and yet urge it as a duty to receive it and endeavour to prove it a sin to refuse or omit it Argu. 6. If the whole Essence of the Ministerial call consisteth in election Jus Divin Mini. p. 137. then it will follow that a Minister is only a Minister to that particular charge to which he is called and that he cannot act as a Minister in any other place That this consequence is necessary they endeavour to prove by its being confessed by Master Hooker and the new England Ministers in some of their books Answ If the whole Essence of the Ministerial call consisteth in Ordination as our brethren judge will it follow that a Minister is onely a Minister to the Universal Church to which he is as they suppose Ordained and that he cannot act as a Minister to any other If so how can he preach to Pagans and Indians who are no members of any Church when Preaching is a Pastoral act in their sense why may not we extend Pastoral acts to them that concur not in Election as well as they may extend them to such as concur not in Ordination But they proceed to the proof of their Minor and give many reasons against that That a Minister can perform no Pastoral act out of his own Congregation they say is an Assertion Unheard of in the Church of Christ before these late Jus Divin Min. p. 138. years Answ If the Gospel holdeth forth so much surely then it is an Assertion heard of many hundred years ago if it were taken for granted and not qu●stioned in the Primitive times and through the overspreading of Popery the truth were hidden since it is a mercy that within these late years it or any other truth is come to light As many Authors may be cited who many hundred years ago asserted errors and yet this will not prove that we are to receive them as Gospel truths so if no antient Authors could be cited for this yet that will not prove it to be an error neither would the citation of many for it prove it to be a truth and therefore we must to the Law and to the Testimony for the clearing of it 2. Contrary to the practice of the brethren themselves with whom we Jus Divin Min. p. 138. dispute it is acknowledged by all of them that the administration of the Sacrament is a Ministerial act and cannot be done but by a Pastor or Teacher and yet it is ordinary both in Old England and in New England for members of one Congregation to receive in another Congregation If we may argue from our Brethrens practice we may safely conclude That a Minister may act as a Minister out of his own Congregation Answ 1. This is an Argument rather against our practice then against the assertion it is levelled at If we practice against our own principles that doth not prove that our principles are unsound 2. But we answer further Ministerial or Pastoral acts have for their Objects some things that are common some things that are special and proper Some things are common to men as men as the Word and Prayer which all men may join or have communion in unless in some particular case disinabled Some things are common to Church-members as such namely admission to the Lords Supper Rom. 16. 1. Church-councel and care to be acted towards such by a more especial obligation then towards other men seeing every new relation is a foundation to further Communion If the right of a man as a man be sufficient to claim the priviledge of hearing with a Church not considering whether he be of this or that place or Church then also may not the claim of a consederate with a particular Church be sufficient to a priviledge in breaking of bread not considering whether of this or another Church for his right is as confederate not as a member of this or that Church Some things are special and proper wherein the liberty and jurisdiction of the Church doth consist as admission of members excommunication Election of Officers c. Acts of power which issue necessarily from the gift or resignation of every one to another and to the whole whereby it is that common priviledges are by them injoyed after a special manner who have interest not onely in the good dispensed but in the power dispensing not in the objects of a Ministerial act onely but in the Ministery As suppose a Father at set times giveth instruction to his children who also is a Master and teacheth his Servants at which times the children and servants of the neighbour-hood attend upon him and receive instruction this man performeth the duty of a Father and of a Master to his own children and servants who have interest in him as so related the other partake in the good which is given forth yet not under those relations which are the grounds of those ministrations for the same man is under special obligations to give instructions to his children and to his servants by the Law of the relation of a